Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: farmfriend
The author loses credibility when refering to the Sherman as a great tank.
3 posted on 05/13/2003 10:18:27 AM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Dead Dog
Don't go by me. I know what a tank is when I see it but that is about all I know when it comes to tanks. Just thought others might be interested in this story.
6 posted on 05/13/2003 10:24:37 AM PDT by farmfriend ( Isaiah 55:10,11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Dead Dog
I don't see where the author refered to the Sherman as a "great" tank, he list's it as an important one, which IMHO is true. It was there in the right quantity when it was needed, it was reliable and was adaptable enough to serve in WWII, Korea and even the Arab-Isreali wars.

I agree it was not a great tank, under armored, under-gunned most of the time, although the Brits and Israeli's did a good job of upgrading the main gun, and it's silhouette was way to high.

That said, It took the US long enough to design and field a great MBT. IMHO,the Abrams is the best MBT in existance today.
9 posted on 05/13/2003 10:31:43 AM PDT by SAMWolf ((A)bort (R)etry (K)nock it off, I read the *message*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Dead Dog
The author loses credibility when refering to the Sherman as a great tank

The word the author uses to descrive the Tiger, the T-34 and the Sherman was "important" not great. The Sherman was not a great tank and had all of the armor of the GIs SPAM can; however, it could be cheaply and easily manufactured in quantites that eventually overwhelmed the German tank corps with their high-quality tanks. The shear numerical superiority of Shermans made the tank strategically important and not just a footnote of history.

As we both can acknowledge, the down side of this approach is that many American tank crews died because they did not have the best equipment on the battlefield.

"Quantity has a quality all its own" - Joeseph Stalin

10 posted on 05/13/2003 10:34:46 AM PDT by jriemer (We are a Republic not a Democracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Dead Dog
The author loses credibility when refering to the Sherman as a great tank.

Agreed. A few other observations.

The few Abrams disabled in Iraq were hit from the rear with Kornet missiles, not RPG's. So far as I know no Abrams has ever been destroyed with an RPG. The manufacturer rushed out a kit to protect the M-1 from ATGM fire at it's grillwork.

The push is on to develop armor that can be deployed by C-130. DOD claims the Stryker armored car is C-130 deployable, but critics say it can't be deployed that way to offload into combat without "some assembly required."

The Future Combat Vehicle in development would be less than half the weight of an M-1, but it's armor hasn't yet been invented. I'm suspicious the FCV will be as survivable as an M-1. The FCV arty piece on the drawing board is a 105mm because a 155 won't fit on a chassis that light. FCV is an exciting concept, particularly as to some of the precision guided over the horizon weapons in development. I hope the whole package comes together.

The dirty little secret of the futurists who want to put the tank on a diet is that there isn't enough airlift for light tanks, either. Bottom line is we need more lift.

Yes the M-1 is vulnerable to air power, but light tanks are even more so. Bottom line is air superiority is key and we own the keychain right now.

The futurists said the M-1 was obsolete after Kosovo, but they were wrong. With axels of evil like N. Korea, Iran and Syria out there with potent armor forces, we'll need to keep the M-1 force razor sharp until the engineers figure out how to build a survivable FCV and suceed in doing so.

13 posted on 05/13/2003 10:43:28 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Dead Dog
The author loses credibility when refering to the Sherman as a great tank.

It was, though. A light tank with a gasoline engine, equipped with rubber tires: ideal for getting around the steppes.

30 posted on 05/13/2003 11:32:05 AM PDT by RightWhale (Theorems link concepts; proofs establish links)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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