|
Posted on 02/10/2004 12:00:11 AM PST by SAMWolf
|
|
 are acknowledged, affirmed and commemorated.
|
| Our Mission: The FReeper Foxhole is dedicated to Veterans of our Nation's military forces and to others who are affected in their relationships with Veterans. In the FReeper Foxhole, Veterans or their family members should feel free to address their specific circumstances or whatever issues concern them in an atmosphere of peace, understanding, brotherhood and support. The FReeper Foxhole hopes to share with it's readers an open forum where we can learn about and discuss military history, military news and other topics of concern or interest to our readers be they Veteran's, Current Duty or anyone interested in what we have to offer. If the Foxhole makes someone appreciate, even a little, what others have sacrificed for us, then it has accomplished one of it's missions. We hope the Foxhole in some small way helps us to remember and honor those who came before us.
|
|
M3, M10, M18, M36 and M56   In summer 1940, fast, hard-hitting German Panzer forces caused the quick collapse of France and demonstrated the offensive capabilities of the tank. This caused a sense of urgency, and stopping of tanks became one of the most serious problems facing the United States Army. In November 1941, the War Department ordered activation of a Tank Destroyer Center and Board at Fort Meade, MD. By the end of 1942, 80 Tank Destroyer Battalions were active and 64 more planned. Known as TD units, these forces were taught to fight tanks with lightly armored vehicles, with mounted cannon, with towed anti-tank guns and as dismounted tank hunting parties using anti tank grenades.  Initially, a TD battalion was armed with half-tracks with 75 mm guns. Combat experience in North Africa, however, was unfavorable. The high silhouette of the halftrack led to the preference of towed guns that could be more easily hidden. As a result, many self propelled TD units in the US were then converted to towed gun units. Following requests from combat theater commanders, half the battalions were converted back to self propelled units. They were armed with the full track M-10 "Wolverine" Tank Destroyer carrying a three inch cannon. As enemy armor increased, tank destroyers also improved. The M-18 "Hellcat", carrying a higher velocity 76 mm gun, was developed, and later the M-36 "Jackson", mounting a 90 mm gun was used. Some versions of the M-36 consisted of the M-36 turret, mounted on the M-4 Sherman tank chassis, known as the M-36B1. Tank Destroyer units were fast, hard hitting units and were among the most heavily armed and mechanized units in the Army. A Tank Destroyer Gun company consisted of a command post, maintenance section and three gun platoons. The gun platoon was divided into two sections of two tank destroyers and a security section in an M-20 armored car.  Tank Destroyers were extremely vulnerable due to their open topped turrets which provided no crew protection from snipers or air burst artillery. In addition, tank destroyers, unlike tanks, had no machine gun-mounted coaxial with the main gun for defense. Tank Destroyers, although resembling tanks, were very lightly armored and not suited for a tank vs. tank battle. The basic concept and design of the tank destroyer sacrificed armor for speed and agility. Tank Destroyer units were individual, specialized units attached to larger units for tank defense and had no direct commander. Many losses and casualties suffered by TD units were the result of commanders using tank destroyers as tanks.  Nevertheless, Tank Destroyer units with their "Seek, Strike, Destroy" motto became powerful formations strong in firepower and mobility, and the TD men were renowned for their courage and tenacity. Initially, 222 TD units were mobilized in 1942. Since massed armor used in early 1940, was rarely used after 1943, the number was reduced. Due to personnel shortages, additional battalions were inactivated and re-designated self-propelled artillery, tank, and quartermaster, or used as infantry replacements. In 1944, only 78 tank destroyer battalions remained. In late 1945, it was determined that the best defense against a tank was another tank and the Tank Destroyer Force was disbanded. Tank Destroyer units were converted to tank or towed artillery units.  Reloading 90mm ammunition in an M36 Tank Destroyer units hold a high place in military history. Although out-gunned, under-armored, and misused in many ways, they took a high toll of enemy tanks and many other combat vehicles on all fronts. After action reports from most tank destroyer units at the end of World War II indicated over 2,600 enemy tanks and other armored vehicles were destroyed by TD units. An impressive tally of enemy anti tank guns, armored cars and half tracks, pill boxes, machine guns and aircraft shot down by tank destroyer forces showed that in spite of their severe limitations, tank destroyer forces performed their primary mission well. With the advent of World War II, and as a result of the successes of the German Blitzkrieg, it was special units with tank-hunting and killing capabilities. Leaders decided early on that towed anti-tank guns would not get the job done. A more mobile force was needed. Originally anti-tank units, the name was soon changed to "tank destroyer." This gave the unit an aggressive nature and not a defensive one. Their role would often be a defensive one, however, lying in wait for approaching enemy tanks.  The very first TD battalions were nothing more than modified halftracks, carrying 37mm anti-tank guns or old French 75mm guns. They were used first in the Tunisian campaign with varying degrees of success, but their lack of protective armor made them easy targets. Some were sent to the Pacific, where they enjoyed better results. By 1943, they were discontinued and for that year, the army went back to the idea of towed antitank guns, imitating the German practice. Then someone had the foresight to realize that Germany used this type of weapon out of necessity.  The preference of the Wehrmacht was for self-propelled antitank weapons. The experience of the United States proved that the day of towed weapons such as these had indeed passed. They were totally unsuitable in a modern mobile environment. They served best in fixed defenses and were of little use in tank vs. tank battles, where they were needed the most.  M18 in the ruins of Brest, france, 12 September 1944 So it was that in 1944, the TD battalions in Europe were being converted back to mobile tank destroyers, or SP guns. This time however, technology and innovation had produced some formidable weapons. One was the M-10 Wolverine tank destroyer. Built on a Sherman chassis, it had an open-topped turret (nearly all US tank destroyers had this feature. Its purpose was increased ability to see the enemy) and a top-notch 75mm or 76mm gun. Its success prompted the manufacture of the M-18 Hellcat, a much lighter tank, with a minimum of armor protection, but great speed and agility. It sported a powerful 76mm gun that was an equivalent of the 75mm gun on the Panther.  M10 and M36 Then came the M-36, which would be the most powerful of all the tank destroyers. Utilizing the M-10 and M-18 as the basis, the M-36 had speed, armor and power. It also carried a 90mm gun, which with the introduction of the HVAP anti-tank round, could kill anything the Germans had, with the exception of frontal hits on a few of the later monsters. Strangely, perhaps due to the lack of German armor toward the end of the war, these tank destroyers were never used in mass for that for which they were created. In some instance, TD battalions were disbanded, their troops sent to other armored units, or converted to infantry status. Wild Bill Wilder
|
The Spitfire took all the glory in the Battle of Britain but it was the Hawker Hurricane that was the backbone of the RAF at that time.
F/Sgt Antoni Glowacki and P/O Stefan Witorzenc of 501 Sqn - two of many Polish Battle of Britain aces
A Hurricane of 303 Sqn being patched up after battle
Polish Airmen memorial at Notholt, which served as Polish fighter base throughout the war
First, George Walsh in his book "Damage Them All You Can" accuses George Pickett of being a coward during Pickett's charge. No proof is given. No back up to this charge. He just lets the accusation hang there on the page...
George Pickett may have been a perfumed dandy... He may not have been the sharpest knife in the drawer, but George Pickett was no coward. No, sir... not at all.
The 2nd rant has to do with what I read last night in Stephen Sears book, "Gettysburg." Sears has the audacity to defend Ewell's decision not to take Culp's Hill on the afternoon of the first day of battle by stating (hold on to your hat)... "Not even the great Stonewall Jackson would have thought to do so."
I kid you not... Stonewall would have never instigated the battle in the first place because he would have gotten his troops to Harrisburg faster than Ewell... He would have never allowed Stuart to try to ride around Hooker (which Lee gave Stuart permission to do) and he certainly wouldn't have let Harry Heth go looking for shoes, especially after one of his generals told him that there was dismounted Calvary in Gettysburg.
Furthermore... Jackson wouldn't have quit chasing the Yankees once he broke them. No, sir... not Old Jack.
Sears' assumption shows that he doesn't understand the characters of the men he writes about.
Rant off... I feel better.
I agree, as did his wife. I ran across something from her years ago about Pickett's Charge to that effect.
Furthermore... Jackson wouldn't have quit chasing the Yankees once he broke them. No, sir... not Old Jack.
His men loved him for a reason, and he got the job done. IMHO, 'Stonewall' was the finest soldier to ever live.
He knew that Jackson would have taken the hill... and possibly more.
I think Walsh should have offered some proof too. But, when you listen to the commentary of the movie "Gettysburg", the commentators address it. They say that Pickett was accused of cowardice in the charge... but they go on to say that in truth, when Pickett was thrown from his horse (artillery struck near by), he was very far forward. Probably too far forward for a Major General.
Now that's starting to put the entire picture together for me. Thanks.
I should receive (hopefully today) Henry Kydd Douglass' book "I Rode With Stonewall." Critics say that it is a fine book about Jackson at war.
Have you read "Lost Victories - The Military Genius of Stonewall Jackson." It is a great book. I highly recommend it.
There was another TD, the M 6, a 37mm gun mounted on the back of a 3/4 t Dodge Wc51/52 truck. Towed TDs could be effective , but often as not, become targets themselves. The TD concept was defensive in nature, and inappropriate for an Army that prized offense doctrinaly and in practice
Me too. I learned something ;o)
But I knew if I unburdened myself around people who understood why I would get fired up over something that happened 140 years ago... It would be alright...
:)
OH YEAH! I had a model kit of that one.
The M6 GMC, a Dodge weapons carrier armed with the 37mm M6 anti-tank gun, proved quite inadequate when used in combat in N.Africa.
Bump on all accounts.
Have you read "Lost Victories - The Military Genius of Stonewall Jackson." It is a great book. I highly recommend it.
Thanks for the recommendation. Noted.
The model still gets re released periodically. There's a French company called CGM putting out the best 37mm I've ever seen in scale, by the way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
