Part II . . . 😀

Justin, you’re not alone in trying to figure out how different armies allocated / organized tank destroyer assets. The Germans had tank destroyer battalions (panzerjäger abteilung), while tanks were in panzer regiments / battalions / companies, but their StGs were originally allocated also to the artillery (as British AT assets were) as “batteries.” This is part of what made StuGs so damned effective, their whole crew was a GUNNER first, AFV crewman second. Panzer crews were reversed. I have sources that say that German tank crews usually needed five rounds to “walk” a shell onto a new target, while the artillery-trained StuG could do it in three with superior “bracketing” practices you see in artillery training.

Later, StuGs were pressed into tank destroyer battalions and eventually the tank battalions themselves, as resources dried up. But yes, every army handles this kind of thing differently. The British Army was always been the most confusing to me (even more so than the Soviets, who use completely different echelon hierarchies for different branches in WW2, and were always changing them).

Also, Justin, starting at 5:20 or so, you basically “stumble” into one of Rommel’s favorite tricks in 1941-42. Reach out and slap the British tanks with your Panzer IIs and IIIs. Fall back behind a ridge. The British are chasing you in their Crusaders, Grants, and possibly early Shermans. Behind that ridge, in a reverse slope position, a line of 88s stands ready (out of range of British 25-pounders) to skewer the tanks as they advance.

6:00 – Indeed later variants of the PzKpfw IV (G, H, etc.) still had a harder-hitting gun L43 and L48 series of guns than the original 75mm on the “vanilla” Shermans. The range was about the same, though, so at least they Shermans didn’t have that awful “death gap” illustrated above. Also, the PzKpfw IV remained pretty vulnerable, even with additional armor plating and schurzen (In Panzer Leader, the late Pz IV has an attack of 14 vs. Sherman’s armor of 10 for a +4 differential, while the Sherman’s attack 11 applies against a Pz IV’s defense of 8, for a +3 differential. Both guns have a range of 8 = approximately 800-1000 yards).

12:20 “When you’re putting your transfers on, watch this again, let John’s gibberish wash over you, and put on whatever you like.” – NO! Don’t do this! Pay close attention to John and other sources. 😀 Even when winning my Golden Button for my Leopard 2s I had to take grief from someone for the wrong, get this . . . the wrong “tonnage decal on the mud guard?” Yeah, I know. Welcome to my life.

All these stories about units arguing over 17 pounders and missing Shermans “sunk in bogs” . . . my time in the military was very un-glorious, basically I was THAT guy (Supply NCO) sitting behind the supply counter telling people “Yes, we have it. Yes, you need it. No, you can’t have it.” We also had our fair share of what we used to call “D9Z forms”, to report / record a “miscellaneous loss.” Supply items that are broken, lost, stolen, whatever, just vanish from the battalion supply pool in a “miscellaneous way.” We used to call them “Pawn Shop Receipts,” because when the suspicion was that when something like this came up missing, it was hocked at a local shop for some fast weekend beer money. =(

On the cramped conditions of the Sherman tank, they were described as “hotels” by Soviet tank crewmen who were used to T-34s. Then Lend-Lease Shermans would come in, with a little padding on the seats, “roomy” interiors (by comparison), all kionds of “luxurious” creature comforts. Yeah the exact phrase from the veteran in my book of interviews and memoirs was: “I sat in the American Sherman, I felt like I’d just checked into a hotel!”

Yeah, yeah, I know you guys love the Firefly in comparison to the American Easy Eight. Everyone’s gotta “root for the home team.” We certainly do so here in the US, where the Easy Eight usually ranks higher than the Firefly in “casual estimation.” They’ll even have statistics that back it up, but even as a loyal American . . . I find these a little skewed. The fact is that Easy Eights were usually deployed in platoons of five, while Fireflies were usually only one tank in a TROOP of FOUR. So when American (ahem) historians compare Firefly kill rates vs. Easy Eight kill rates , they don’t always take into account that what they’re really reporting on is a platoon of five Easy Eights against a single Firefly and three “vanilla” Shermans. Yes, the American tan UNIT it much more effective. But that doesn’t really mean the Easy Eight is superior to the Firefly on a one-to-one basis.

I’ve read in passing (I’ve never checked on this) that the M1A1 76.2mm on the Firefly was more accurate, while the Firefly’s 17lbr hit harder. Again, I don’t know if that’s accurate. There are also questions on the supply / quality of American ammunition in larger calibers, including the 76.2mm M1 and M1A1, and the later 90mm. Published performance ratings might be relating to the “intended” enhanced ammunition of these weapons, which were not always available in actual wartime 1944-45.