Are British-made tanks better at evasive action?

[CombinedArms]

I've been experimenting with British-made tanks lately (not Shermans in British service but Cromwells, Churchills, Challengers, etc.) and my experience is that they seem considerably more likely, when they see themselves at a tactical disadvantage, to pop smoke on their own initiative and back away than Shermans are.

Shermans will sometimes pop smoke--though not often enough for my taste- -but they will rarely back away without orders. I've also seen many a lone vanilla Sherman bravely firing away at an AT pillbox or at Panther frontal armor that it has no chance of killing, until the crew and tank are suddenly barbequed. In many cases, a timely dose of smoke mortars and a quick reverse might have saved the tank.

In short, I think this tendency to pop smoke and back out of harms way is a desirable trait and I'm wondering if others have noticed that it seems more characteristic of Brit-made tanks.

[bTW, I can cite one test result. I once tried a test of Regular Cromwell VIIIs with the 95mm howitzer vs. Panthers and they were quite consistent at firing all their "c" charges (effective against Panther frontal armor) then immediately popping smoke and backing away. They seemed to recognize instantly that their remaining HE rounds were useless against Panther frontal armor, and they sought safety. Happened every time. Wish vanilla Shermans would do that, but they seem to place unnatural faith in their 75mm AP.]

[ March 11, 2002, 12:40 PM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[Gen-x87H]

It probably has something to do with the U.S. commanders telling their troops the Sherman is the best tank in the war hehehehehe. The British know better and pop smoke while the poor Americans just take it in the cheeks.

Gen

[Kingfish]

Hmm, I wonder how Canadian tanks would fare?

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by CombinedArms:

[bTW, I can cite one test result. I once tried a test of Regular Cromwell VIIIs with the 95mm howitzer vs. Panthers and they were quite consistent at firing all their "c" charges (effective against Panther frontal armor) then immediately popping smoke and backing away. They seemed to recognize instantly that their remaining HE rounds were useless against Panther frontal armor, and they sought safety. Happened every time. Wish vanilla Shermans would do that, but they seem to place unnatural faith in their 75mm AP.]

I think the Sherman 75mm AP round would have a high enough Kill % (esp. via a weak spot) than 95mm HE. Perhaps the 95mm HE has zero chance, even with the weak spots.

I don't have any complaints abouts Shermans not being scared enough of German armor. I just had 3 American vanilla Shermans popping smoke and reversing from 1 StuG IIIG at about 750m. In another battle my two Sherman II platoons did the same very consistantly, though the opposition there was tougher- 3 KTs, a Jpz V, Hetzer, etc.

I wonder if tests would show that UK Shermans back off less than US Shermans. Holding my breath....now.

[Bruno Weiss]

So, your basically saying that the Brit tanks beat feet faster?

Run away! Run away!

[ March 11, 2002, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: Bruno Weiss ]

[Lordfluffers]

Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:

So, your basically saying that the Brit tanks beat feet faster?

Run away! Run away!

I know I bloody would if my Cromwell chanced upon a Panther! I think they call that survival Bruno!

Are you saying that you'd stick it out? True American bravado

[ March 11, 2002, 05:40 PM: Message edited by: Lordfluffers ]

[Michael Dorosh]

SMOKE DISCHARGERS

Guys, read the specs. Brit tanks had smoke dischargers, US ones did not.

This included Shermans in British service.

[HVAP]

Just like a grog to bring facts into this discussion

[Mattias]

looking through the November 44 list I can only see two British vehicles with smoke dischargers, the Wolverine and the Stuart. On the American side all three TD's have them. Later on the Pershing comes along with dischargers, and that seems to be it.

Not sure what the difference is between smoke mortars and dischargers but it does not seem to be "it" for the purpose of this discussion. My experience is that there is no particular bias beyond the "threat analysis", which of course includes the chance of over reacting to incorrectly identified vehicles.

M.

[CombinedArms]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

SMOKE DISCHARGERS

Guys, read the specs. Brit tanks had smoke dischargers, US ones did not.

This included Shermans in British service.

Aren't smoke dischargers the same thing as smoke mortars? If so, then pretty much all Allied tanks in CM have them. At least the 4 different US Shermans I just checked had them in Nov '44, along with all the British tanks, Shermans, Churchills, Cromwells and Challengers.

Meanwhile, I just ran a test on this question of Brit/Ami evasion with interesting if somewhat inconclusive results. I set up seven open lanes on a flat 800x800 board, separated by woods. On the Allied side of each lane I placed a church, about 450 m from a waiting Panther. I stripped the Panthers of all AP rounds and smoke. All they had was HE. This is so the Allied tanks could survive long enough to show their evasive stuff.

For my British test I placed a Cromwell VII with a normal issue of AP/HE/smoke behind each of the churches and gave it a forward hunt order so that it would suddenly discover it was facing a Panther head on at 450 meters (and not knowing the Panther had only HE). The church building allowed for the surprise and also provide a structure to back up behind. For the American test I used the same map and command order with seven Shermans.

Results: First of all, the Cromwells, on spotting the Panther, almost always began firing smoke rounds from their main guns at the Panther (only one Sherman did this.) Most began to back up aggressively and most popped their smoke mortars very quickly. Significantly, this did not always save them. In three rounds of tests (7 tanks each): 21 Panthers emerged undamaged whereas 4 Cromwells were killed and 3 immoblized by Panther HE alone.

How did the Shermans fare? As I said, only one actually fired smoke rounds at the Panther. Most eventually discharged their smoke mortars and a few began to back up, but they seemed to me to do this a few seconds later than the Brits. (I'd need a stopwatch to really check it out precisely.) Kill results after three rounds of tests (seven tanks each): 21 Panthers OK. 4 Shermans were killed, 2 immoblized (one of these gun damaged) and two more shocked.

Almost more interesting to me than the evasion results, which suggest to me that the Brit tanks are slightly quicker to take evasive action, though perhaps not quite so much quicker than I thought, is the fact that even a Panther firing only HE is a better killer of Shermans and Cromwell's with short 75s than they are of Panthers even when armed with AP. I had expected virtually all of the Allied tanks to survive, but that was far from the case. On the other hand, all 42 Panthers emerged w/o a scratch.

[CombinedArms]

Oops. Double post.

[ March 12, 2002, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[Mattias]

Well I, on the other hand, lined up 4 Cromwell VII and 4 Shermans, all regular and standing together on a line facing 2 Conscript King Tigers at 920 meters. I ran the test a few times.

All tanks began evasive maneuvers at the same time. When smoke mortars were popped and fired smoke grenades fired and who did it had no apparent relationship to the model of the tank and, thus by extension, nationality.

The all appeared very keen on firing the mortars as soon as there was LOS to the KT's. On question that springs to mind is, how many volleys could actually be fired before reloading was

necessary?

--

If anything the "smoke dischargers" seem less effective than the "smoke mortars"...

--

M.