Question about PzIII

[Wilhammer]

To sum it up,

Naval aviation is to battleships as air superiority is to tanks.

[Skipper]

Front aviation was not such a good tank killer, by the way. Share of ships sunk by planes is definitely much higher than that of tanks. Aviation was very effective against soft targets, though - and i just so happened that without support by those soft targets tanks were almost as good as dead.

[Triumvir]

There wasn't much point in sending PzIIIs into close country when it was quite possible that they'd be forced out into open country. And 50L60 would have been good enough for Shermans, but PzIII armour was relatively light AFAIK.

Incidentally, if you want a good troll -- and I don't believe this one, by the way -- one of the classic trolls is to compare and contrast the USMC against another highly disciplined para-military force -- the Waffen SS. After all, both were created by decree of government and both have a reputation for fighting long after it's obvious to anyone with two cells to rub together that the battle is lost.

<Note -- I _don't_ believe the above. But it's a helluva troll, and most people can't help but leap to the defence of the Corps.>

[Username]

I think the PIII had as good as armor, if not better , than the PIV. Its mostly a "what if?", but the 50mmL60 in the confines of the bocage would have made a really good weapon. The rate of fire, ease of logistics (smaller ammo than 75mm weapons and lighter fuel consumption) and very small height and good gun depression all add up to a pain in the ass for the shermans.

Maybe a couple of PIIIMs with 75mm wouldnt have been out of place (to help with HE and smoke). A couple of stugs would round out the 'Bocage Panzertruppen'.

Perhaps Germany should have sprinkled 'mini-panzerdivisions' all across the coast to act as a quick reaction/delay force.