CM:N Safe to say 2011?

[dan/california]

So penetration was virtually guaranteed for the Germans top line stuff. Apparently so was a barbecue.

[Volltreffer]

Did I miss something....can we pre-order Normandy already?

The first module is going to be the commonwealth IIRC. Any idea on the second? I take it with each module they will include some Axis equipment.....or will there be separate Axis modules.

Still have my fingers crossed for an Xmas release!! I like the idea of pre-orders getting the copy a tad earlier

[JonS]

Here are some statistics from Tank Tactics by Jarymowycz.

That is a badly mangled (and appallingly referenced) interpretation of No.2 ORS Report No.12 : Analysis of 75mm Sherman Tank Casualties Suffered Between 6th June and 10th July 1944

One of the conclusions of the report was that - rather than additional armour - the Shermans would be better off with a harder hitting gun. In the words of the report, extra weight on the Sherman would be better spent to "make German tanks more vulnerable rather than to attempt to decrease our own vulnerability." It also noted that in the period covered the British were invariably attacking, and the Germans therefore held the advantage of concealment. The report is also quite circumspect about the proportion of brewups, noting that while the numbers they recorded did seem high, incomplete analysis of BLUECOAT appeared to show a much lower brew rate, possibly because the unit concerned didn't carry any ammn outside the armoured bins.

Some pertinent data that Jarymowycz chose not omit was:

Avg No. hits to knockout a Sherman: 1.62

Proportion of hits which knockout tank: 62%

That is; ~ 2/3 hits suffered in Normandy KO'd a Sherman. Bear in mind that the vast majority of guns firing at Shermans - especially British Shermans - was made up of long 75mms and 88mms. On the other hand, 1 in three hits did not KO the Sherman it hit.

[Tactical Wargamer]

Did I miss something....can we pre-order Normandy already?

no pre-orders yet

We are still waiting even for a forum or web info page. We were just speculating on a 2010 release or not. I would think not from the above. Pre-orders I would think are at least a 4-6 weeks away at the earliest.....

[Barkhorn1x]

Here is a higher def. link to that first Sherman picture above posted by Michael Emrys.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/M4-Sherman_tank-European_theatre.jpg

The enlarged shot enables one to see that:

- These are 14th AD tanks - unique star markings

- This shot is probably from Feb-Mar '45 as the second tank is a late model M4A3E8

- That tank has extra welded on armor on the glacis and a chunk of bolted on armor on the turret

- Yet those stars are still there - inviting a German AT round.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

And what would appear to be a pintle mounted .30 instead of a .50.

[Pak40]

Could be. Also the fact that the Allies painted a big white star over it to act as a handy aiming point might have had something to do with it.

Yea, but the Germans had big crosses so it evens out.

[Michael Emrys]

Yea, but the Germans had big crosses so it evens out.

The crosses were probably less visible at a distance due to less contrast. In fact, US tankers often smeared mud over the stars to dull them as much as they could. Also, were the crosses painted over the ammo bins? I don't recall them as such.

Michael

[The Warrior]

So when do we get M-26s in the game? Just want to know.

[YankeeDog]

The M-26 first arrived in Europe in January, 1945, and didn't actually see combat until February 25, 1945.

So we won't see them at all in the CM:Normandy game, which AIUI is only covering action up through the end of Market Garden or thereabouts. M-26s would probably be in a module to the CM:Bulge game or sumfink like that.

[JonS]

Also the fact that the Allies painted a big white star over it to act as a handy aiming point might have had something to do with it.

Presumably, then, there must be an awful lot of photographic and anecdotal evidence, along with contemporary analysis, all of which shows that a very high proportion of knocked out Shermans (or, rather all knocked out Allied vehicles) have holes in or very near the stars.

Right?

[The Warrior]

The M-26 first arrived in Europe in January, 1945, and didn't actually see combat until February 25, 1945.

So we won't see them at all in the CM:Normandy game, which AIUI is only covering action up through the end of Market Garden or thereabouts. M-26s would probably be in a module to the CM:Bulge game or sumfink like that.

That will work for me. As long as we get them.I know they didn't see much action but it's still cool to have them and have an American tank that can take on a Tiger I.

[Michael Emrys]

Presumably, then, there must be an awful lot of photographic and anecdotal evidence, along with contemporary analysis, all of which shows that a very high proportion of knocked out Shermans (or, rather all knocked out Allied vehicles) have holes in or very near the stars.

Right?

That assumes that the Germans always hit the exact point they were aiming at. Are you prepared to make that assumption?

Michael

[JonS]

That assumes that the Germans always hit the exact point they were aiming at. Are you prepared to make that assumption?

Michael

touche ... but where does that leave us? Any hit anywhere on a vehicle might have been aimed at the cross, or it might not? That's not very satisfying as a working hypothesis. At the very least there should be an increasing density of hits as you move closer to one of the circles, but FWIW I've seen no evidence that that is the case.

And, honestly, I just don't think the star would compromise camoflage all that much. I remember an old lesson, Why Things Are Seen: Shape, Surface, Shadow, Silhouette, Spacing, and Movement.

Colour - perhaps surprisingly - barely comes in to it. If anything the white star could help with silhouette since it would help break up the outline, at least a little. But even then, the overwhelming decider of whether something is seen* is down to Movement - you can have all the others working against you, but stay still and there's a reasonable chance you won't be noticed.

Unfortunately, the option of staying still wasn't a luxury the Allied tankers often had.

Jon

* or, rather than 'seen' perhaps 'recognised'. The photos of light from the object still fall on your eyes either way, so you do 'see' it in the literal sense, but whether your brain recognises those photons for what they are is the key issue.

[Alchenar]

Presumably your best bet would be post-war interviews with German gunners explaining what they were aiming at.

[Lanzfeld]

Presumably your best bet would be post-war interviews with German gunners explaining what they were aiming at.

There cant be too many of those left around.

[Earl Grey]

There cant be too many of those left around.

And those that still are wouldn't remember it properly anyway - after all it's been about 70 years now. And those that still claim to remember might not even have been there at all...

[JonS]

Presumably your best bet would be post-war interviews with German gunners explaining what they were aiming at.

You could do a survey of photos of KO'd tanks, recording where the holes are.

That's fraught with all sorts of methodological issues though. Like: multiple photos of the same vehicle; multiple hits on the same vehicle; hits not incurred during combat (veh used for target practice); difficulty in gauging how representative sample is; etc.

[dan/california]

I am not sure a definitive answer to this question was available in 1946, I am very nearly certain one is unattainable now. Unless there is a 1940's document that hasn't come to light yet in this discussion.

[JonS]

I am not sure a definitive answer to this question was available in 1946 ...

I agree, and it indicates to me, at least, that it wasn't much of an issue.

[Gromit]

Presumably your best bet would be post-war interviews with German gunners explaining what they were aiming at.

There cant be too many of those left around.

And those that still are wouldn't remember it properly anyway - after all it's been about 70 years now. And those that still claim to remember might not even have been there at all...

Oh- I don't know about that... you can always ring up Otto Carius at his Tiger Apotheke in Herschweiler-Pettersheim if he has a spare moment or two from filling prescriptions!

Or maybe a polite letter by post? Rumor has it he still has a very sharp mind for detail.

p.s. note the historical section

[Lanzfeld]

ummm...okay....thats one.

like I said...not too many left.

but thanks for the link!

[Rayak47]

Every German vet I ever met suspiciously claimed to only have fought on the Russian Front. Maybe they'd comment on red stars as an aim point!

[Praetori]

Now I'm no expert but I do have an old Tiger manual at home (modern copy). And it states (in rhyme, guess it was thought easier to remember) that Shermans are fail because they're cast metal rather than welded plates (mind you this was instructional propaganda).

It also claims the top/or/head (turret) of Shermans are hard while a shot to the flank, rear or lower front will make them burn (sic).

I'm not sure it's legal to scan it so I can't show any pictures but it also depicts Shermans and Cromwells and the target reticule seems to be (in frontal display) aimed at the lower left (from target POV lower right) part of the hull, actually below the frontal armor slope.

Now if this was actually something that german tankers held as true there should be lot's of cases with Shermans with low front hull penetrations.

[Earl Grey]

Oh- I don't know about that... you can always ring up Otto Carius at his Tiger Apotheke in Herschweiler-Pettersheim if he has a spare moment or two from filling prescriptions!

Good point - you wouldn't believe how many men claim to have been members of a Tiger crew once you drive around with an R/C model of one... memory is a fickle thing.