Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Redmen4ever

We used Grants through much of North Africa. Germans relied on AT guns after they lost vast amounts of armor. The Allies had tons of units pouring into Africa while Rommel was limited because the Med was a British lake. My dad was in North Africa in the war.
Shermans were greatly improved by adding the 76mm but tank destroyers were the hammer.
The 90mm AT was a boss.
The Tank Museum in Danville Va is worth the trip.


32 posted on 09/28/2013 5:53:43 PM PDT by AppyPappy (Obama: What did I not know and when did I not know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: AppyPappy

Tank Destroyers. Yes! Concept was light-skinned but up-gunned tank destroyers would be fast to where needed to deal with enemy tanks. During my time in the army, the tank destroyer was supposedly succeeded by the TOW anti-tank missile. In the constant leap-frogging of tank design, modern tanks used composite armor and stand-off to defeat the shape-charge in missiles. So, today, it’s just about the case that it takes a tank to beat a tank. From what I can tell from a youtube video, the tank museum at Danville is quite impressive.


33 posted on 09/28/2013 6:48:55 PM PDT by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson