Sherman Tank

[CharlieDoan]

I hate the white star!! I dentify ..oh..US tanks or Allies tanks and enemies aim to the tanks much easier with that white star!!! 

[militarymuseumvol]

@CharlieDoan look through the panoramic sights...not as easy to aim for that white star as you think...

[CharlieDoan]

Soviet in the scales 15:1 tanks to decide to total kill German tanks, German tanks so powerfull , They shot 88mm which is the bullet can go thru 2 tanks (T-34) at 1 shot....My God...unbelieve able about German Technology!!! and maybe around 1.5 Kms, The German can aim and shoot T-34 or Sherman tanks easy to kill and US or Soviet tanks must come closer in order to BBQ the German tanks!!

[CharlieDoan]

The piece of steel in front of the tank driver are too thin. In Vietnam, we modify a little bit and put 3x thicker and the "net"to Anti-RPG7" which is B-40 and B-41 called in Vietnam and this design modify are very successfull, I think American tanks saw this and they did same things later shipment to VN..they did that from tank factory in blue print, they also said Vietnam's modify to anti-B-40.

[CharlieDoan]

Also the BIG WHITE star for??? enemies learn to aim to the target, I Vietnam, we used paint to paint over and put tree...leaves..all over the tank...

[CharlieDoan]

Why in that time, American not design somethings to stop German tanks?

[CharlieDoan]

T-34 is a piece of shit made from Russia With Love and sent to stop Adolf Hitler....(I hope)

[martin1226]

Most overlook the fact that the US needed to fit the most tanks per cargo ship possible whilst making their Atlantic run to the UK. You could simply fit way more M4's on a ship than the experimental heavies. Also, take into account that the factories were already tuned to produce the M4. Quantity beats quality in this case. Doesn't mean I don't love GER tanks, I do, but they couldn't match production of the US and USSR. Massive strategic failure on the part of the lil' corporal

[CharlieDoan]

@martin1226 If Hitler knew the US sent tanks, they sent warships to cut suppy...kkk You try to Imagine what happen to come!!!

[militarymuseumvol]

I was told that the fires were started in the Shermans when the ammunition was ignited, and that the fuel wasn't close to the cause of them burning. I find this hard to believe when all of the footage of Shermans with dry ammo storage that had just been hit showed the flames emmiting from the fuel tanks. Last time I checked, the ammo wasn't stored in the fuel tanks. But then again, what do I know? I'm 16 years old. (please no ass hole comments)

[Spitbowler]

Sherman is the best tank to of ever been produced during the war

[TheEldoradoKid]

No...if the Germans has as many Tigers and Panzers as there were produced of Shermans, the world would be very different now. The advantage was numerical and versatility. Toe to toe a Panzer would make mincemeat of a Sherman. But then again The Sherman was an infantry support weapon not a tank killer.

[vasiliygh3]

the T 34 would have blown this tank to pieces!!!!

[Knotje]

The Sherman isn't overrated at all. Its "strength" was its ease of production in vast numbers. As great as the German tanks were, the many Shermans did them in, and rightly so.

[omairiqbal889]

in my opinion sherman is damn overrated!!!

[MokomaSusi]

Sherman tank was very much liked by the british in desert. Ronson? German tanks burned equally well when they did get fatal hit.

[MokomaSusi]

Most german heavy tanks used Maybach HL230 engine. And they burned quite well too like most other tanks. Shermans used many difrent engines not only one type.

German tanks burned too if they got hit.

[OriginalBlace]

to be honest, the t34 was the greatest medium tank of ww2. the only good thing about the sherman was that they could pump them out like skittles. They were very much infirior to tanks like the panzer IV and stug assualt gun. Not to mention panther and tiger tanks. sure when they first entered combat they were pretty good but by D-day they were begining to be found wanting

[oherregud]

Omg, did that guy just say that sherman was the tank who made the allies win?. The t-34 made the allies win.

[F4Wildcat]

@oherregud the sherman also, but not as much then the sherman

[CharlieDoan]

@oherregud Without help, Soviet already speak German.... So don't say anything to bent over the history! (former communist and now learn to do Capital) It's too late or never. Russian With Love!!

[chocdor10]

but they are also quite easy to drive,but  the russian t-34 tank was the best

[chocdor10]

the thing about shermans is they catch fire when hit by a shel extremely quickly

[Gabpopp]

Sif have asian subtitles

[rokarok7]

Awsome upload!

[RoninTXBR549]

People have to remember that the Sherman was made to counter the Panzer I, II, III's, and the Japanese tin cans. By the time we, the U.S., were confronting German tanks, Germany (partly in response to the Russian T-34's) had spawned a new generation of tanks, from the Mark IV, to the Panther D and G, and the Tiger which is a heavy tank.

So, it's not an accurate criticism to directly compare the Tiger and Sherman as if they were designed as specifically direct competitors to each other.

[aribenzane]

Not true! It was a rushed design and the flaws where well known. The Panzer I and II were never intended to see real combat and the Panzer III was obsolete in 1940. The Sherman's predecessor, the M3, appeared in '42 when Germany was already fielding Tigers and upgunned IVs. It too was a rush job, but it at least brought a high-cal (but hull-mounted) gun to Africa. The British did not like these tanks, nor did the Russians. The cruiser tanks were better but we could not make enough of them.

[RoninTXBR549]

You're basically parroting what you said early, and completely miss my point. Let me simplify... The Sherman was not built as a competitor to the Tiger. The Sherman is a Medium tank. The Tiger is a Heavy Tank. Just because they met in combat does not mean the Sherman was a faulty design. So, while they can be compared and contrasted, they are not "directly comparible".

Criticism for the sake of criticism just serves as disinformation. What I'm asking is that you be more objective.

[aribenzane]

"The Sherman was not built as a competitor to the Tiger"

I never claimed it was. The Sherman was designed and fielded before the allies encountered their first Tigers in Tunisia. It was a bad design long before that. The ammo and fuel lines were poorly armored and they liable to go up in flames very easily (Germans called them Tommy Cookers). The drive chain was of 1920s vintage with poor offroad performance. Not even christie suspension.

[aribenzane]

Whether or not it was 'designed' with the heavy tanks in-mind is irrelevant because those were the opponents it was pitted against and would ultimately be compared. We didn't want those tanks, nor did the Soviets. They were coffins. But the Americans refused to build foreign tank designs in their factories. The British had to do the same thing as they had with the Grant; remove the turret and fit their own gun into it (firefly). It was allied airpower, not tanks that won the war in the west.

[RoninTXBR549]

Believe what you want. Armchair generals always think they know better...

[aribenzane]

State of the art technology?! Carefully considered design?! hah! The M4 was a rush-job. It still uses levers for steering! And no power steering like the German tanks. The armor was paper-thin, the high profile made it an easy target and the gun was useless against Tigers and Panthers. Absolutely useless, ugly, crap tank.

[hatakashi1900]

hehehe yes it's the "state of the art" comment that made me laugh =D

[FatherJudgement]

Great show thanks for sharing