Re: The "Best tank" of WW2 ?

From: edremy@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Remy)

Date: Fri, 06 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0000

In article <450frb$nme@ucthpx.uct.ac.za>,
D.Hamp-Adams <rgolden@engmlab.uct.ac.za> wrote:
>The T-34 or the Panther ?
>
>David
>

Depends on how you ask.

Best overall: the Panther, probably, although some of the later
monsters were pretty amazing.

Best in terms of impact- the T-34 series without a question.  This
tank won the Eastern Front- very durable, reliable, well armored,
fast.  Crude as all hell, but it worked.

For those who claim that the T-34 is overrated, keep in mind that the
US didn't have weapons capable of stopping T-34/85s at the start of
the Korean War.  (See Task Force Smith)

The Sherman was a sick joke of a tank- tall, underarmored, gas engine,
and a gun that was toatally incapable of penetrating German tank's
armor.  At least the Russians managed to upgun to something good- the
85mm was a nice gun.  The 76mm upgun for the Sherman was pathetic.

Since then the US has gotten better about tanks- the M48/60 series was
long lived and durable, the M1's are quite nice, although way too
thirsty on fuel.  The Russians still go with the  cheaper, more
durable versions.  Experiements such as the T-64 didn't work out well.

Now you've done it- I want my tank back.  Waaanh.

So, what's this doing on r.g.pbm?  Sci.military would be a better
suggestion.
--
Eric R.   ***edremy.xrcc@xerox.com*** Address in header is incorrect
"Any desired property can be calculated from the Schrodinger equation of the
system. The solution is left as an exercise for the reader." JIR, 3rd ed.
        TEAM HAMILTON '95- Tomorrow's technology yesterday!

References

The "Best tank" of WW2 ?
"D.Hamp-Adams" <rgolden@engmlab.uct.ac.za>
Thu, 05 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0000