Busting Tank Myths: T-34, M4, and MkIV Compared
Some good points made by Torplexed and Neutrino 123
The vertical side walls of the Sherman fitted with the tactical doctrine that tanks would be used to break a frontal barrier and then would go after the (relatively) soft target. Hence a strong frontal armour plate, a low velocity gun in a fast moving turret. Enemy tanks would be dealt with by fast moving lightly armoured and heavy armed tank destroyers from ambushes. This design fitted perfectly with shipping requirements: 12 Shermans would fit in one hold of a Liberty ship.
The reality of tank versus tank battles early on in WW II forced the Americans to design a completly new tank, heavy powered with very good off-road capabilities and a heavy 90 mm. gun, the M-26. Seven would fit in a hold that could hold 12 Shermans. The tank was ready for full scale production in January 1944, but then SHAEF decided to notify the Ordonance Board in Washington to deemphasize the production of M-26 and keep concentrating onthe M-4. This decision was forced upon SHAEF by Patton, who stuck to the letter of the Aurmoured Corps doctrine and maintained that tanks should not fight tanks...
So, instead of arriving in England in February '44 the first M-26's arrived in Europe in February '45. The story how the Sermans fared in the meantime is well known.
|