EricM Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 Did a quick search and did not find this question. As far as I have researched there never was a Sherman Croc, there were Sherman flame tanks but none that towed a trailer. Also I have never read about the Sherman flametanks being used in the ETO. Now my question is with CMBO such a great historical game why did BTS add a vehicle that did not exist or serve in the ETO? Don't get me wrong, I love it when I can flame something. If I am wrong could someone point me to a book that shows the US used flame tanks in the ETO. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagdcarcajou Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 Hey, Exactly 4 of these were built (coverted). There were other Sherman flame tank variants (mostly in the Pacific) but 4 were converted to use the Croc trailer in Europe. BTS also modeled the Flammpanzer even though only 20 were ever converted (for the Ardennes Offensive). It just shows a very thorough completeness! Chris ------------------ What the hell is a Jagdcarcajou? CM Recon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 My father in law said they used them some in Europe. But I never asked him if it was a Croc. Pacific theater appears the most used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 I forgot to mention he was in mech inf. ------------------ WESTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY HILLTOPPERS - 2000-01 SUN BELT CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted March 11, 2001 Share Posted March 11, 2001 Although it was highly rare (four built, as mentioned), BTS said it was relatively simple texture to do up. They just slapped a croc trailer on it, tweaked a bit of code, and it was done. I like it because I use it to represent all the other flame tanks which didn't make it into the game. ------------------ "Za Rodentia!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Yeide Posted March 12, 2001 Share Posted March 12, 2001 See "Churchill and Sherman Specials" (Chamberlain and Ellis, Profile Publications) for poop on the four Sherman crocodiles, which were ultimately fielded by the 739th Tank Battalion (Special) (Mine Exploder). Many battalions fielded a less effective flamethrower, beginning with the 70th and 741st in September 1944. This model replaced the bow machine gun with the nozzle, and the fuel and compressed air tanks were mounted in the vehicle behind the assistant driver. Jensen, in "Strike Swiftly!", suggests that tankers in the 70th thought the hardware was fairly effective. The After Action Report of the 741st for September, however, complains that you had to get the flamethrower tank within 20 yards of a pillbox before it could do much of anything, and that the effects were unsatisfactory in any event. There was a fascinating exchange in early 1945 between the 3rd Armored Group Hq and higher authority that strongly suggested that the tank battalions found the things to be fairly useless. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Yeide Posted March 12, 2001 Share Posted March 12, 2001 See "Churchill and Sherman Specials" (Chamberlain and Ellis, Profile Publications) for poop on the four Sherman crocodiles, which were ultimately fielded by the 739th Tank Battalion (Special) (Mine Exploder). Many battalions fielded a less effective flamethrower, beginning with the 70th and 741st in September 1944. This model replaced the bow machine gun with the nozzle, and the fuel and compressed air tanks were mounted in the vehicle behind the assistant driver. Jensen, in "Strike Swiftly!", suggests that tankers in the 70th thought the hardware was fairly effective. The After Action Report of the 741st for September, however, complains that you had to get the flamethrower tank within 20 yards of a pillbox before it could do much of anything, and that the effects were unsatisfactory in any event. There was a fascinating exchange in early 1945 between the 3rd Armored Group Hq and higher authority that strongly suggested that the tank battalions found the things to be fairly useless. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts