Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This guy goes to great lengths to debunk the alleged superiority of German tanks versus Soviet tanks. Yet you have the documented gross disparity between kills in favor of the Germans throughout the war. This, imo, can't be entirely attributable to superior crews and tactics.

From the Operation Barbarossa series:

Quote:

According to the head of the Armored Directorate of the Red Army N.Fedorenko, the average mileage of the T-34 to overhaul during the war, did not exceed 200 kilometers. This was considered adequate since the T-34’s service life at the front was considerably less. For example in 1942 only 66km. In that sense the T-34 was indeed ‘reliable’ because it was destroyed before it had a chance to break down on its own.

Quote:

The T-34 is possibly the only weapon system in history to be rated by most commentators as the finest all round weapon in a century of warfare, and yet never consistently achieved anything better than a one to three kill-loss ratio against its enemies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, after reading a few of the items I realized that it represented a perhaps sincere effort to set the record straight by a person or group of folks who are not quite up to the job. This is typical of hobbyists who are trying to act as historians (and sometimes historians who are trying to act as historians). History is both a science and an art and the field is covered with pitfalls, minefields, and snares for the unwary. It should be approached the same way one would approach a dragon, bravely but cautiously with due respect for the hazards of the task. Particularly among military gaming hobbyists the field is littered with the carcasses of those who have read a book or two and think they know all there is to know about a subject.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy goes to great lengths to debunk the alleged superiority of German tanks versus Soviet tanks. Yet you have the documented gross disparity between kills in favor of the Germans throughout the war. This, imo, can't be entirely attributable to superior crews and tactics.

From the Operation Barbarossa series:

Quote:

According to the head of the Armored Directorate of the Red Army N.Fedorenko, the average mileage of the T-34 to overhaul during the war, did not exceed 200 kilometers. This was considered adequate since the T-34’s service life at the front was considerably less. For example in 1942 only 66km. In that sense the T-34 was indeed ‘reliable’ because it was destroyed before it had a chance to break down on its own.

Quote:

The T-34 is possibly the only weapon system in history to be rated by most commentators as the finest all round weapon in a century of warfare, and yet never consistently achieved anything better than a one to three kill-loss ratio against its enemies.

Ofcourse, we all know that the Sherman was the best all around...

Link to post
Share on other sites
had no problem? This is a grossly inaccurate statement.

I had to wonder about that statement myself. I was under the impression that even with a longer 76mm gun it was still inadequate against the Panther and Tiger. Now the question is did the APCR rounds make a difference and were Sherman crews issued a lot of these types of rounds or just a few.

I thought the tank destroyer units has the tank with the better guns and more silver bullets to fire with. I've been told by other players what makes the M-18 so dangerous is the 76mm gun and ammo it carries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
...were Sherman crews issued a lot of these types of rounds or just a few[?]

Most often none at all. Production did not ramp up until late in the war and the few that were available were issued to the TD battalions. Sometimes the tankers could mooch a few off of the TD guys in some kind of trade, but most of the time they were just SOL for APCR.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

The combat myths aren't even the most harmful ones to me. The most harmful myths of the war were the political ones that we hear today. The Wehrmacht was innocent of war crimes, and that the Nazis-whatever you thought of them-fixed Germany's economy!

It's a testament to how effective a liar Joseph Goebbels was that people unknowingly spout his nonsense 70 years later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trying to act as historians (and sometimes historians who are trying to act as historians). History is both a science and an art and the field is covered with pitfalls, minefields, and snares for the unwary.

So is there anyone the frequents this forum that is a true Historian?

With published works and such.

I figure so, but I really do not know?

And if so, instead of their tag name, what is the published name

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...