Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “Up-Armoring the M4 Sherman” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/up-armoring-the-m4-sherman/.
Up-Armoring the M4 Sherman
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Cedric
Custom
1. My main critique (as usual) is the notion that the Sherman was solely for infantry support. It was not. It was designed for offensive actions whether part of an armored division or as an independent tank battalion supporting an infantry division. That is the reason why the gun was called "AP" meaning all -purpose.
2. The infantry anti-tank threat and anti-tank guns did become the primary threat as the article says. This is why some tank units retained their 75mm gun Shermans rather than adopt the high velocity 76mm because the 75 had one of the best HE rounds in the war. In fact, the 6th Armored Division kept all of their 75mm Shermans and refused to accept the 76mm.
3. Combined arms is the key. Just because infantry leads in certain situations doesn't mean the Sherman was relegated to an infantry support role.
2. The infantry anti-tank threat and anti-tank guns did become the primary threat as the article says. This is why some tank units retained their 75mm gun Shermans rather than adopt the high velocity 76mm because the 75 had one of the best HE rounds in the war. In fact, the 6th Armored Division kept all of their 75mm Shermans and refused to accept the 76mm.
3. Combined arms is the key. Just because infantry leads in certain situations doesn't mean the Sherman was relegated to an infantry support role.
Talyn
SAINT
While the article describes the benefits of the added armor types, when it comes to defending against the HEAT warheads it was really not about the actual "lower velocity" of the of the Panzerfaust-type weapons.
It touched upon what was important was to detonating them at a greater stand-off distance, rather than right up against the main steel armor, which then degraded or broke up the molten HEAT jet that actually penetrated the steel vs. the high-velocity projectile from a tank or anti-tank gun.
All in all the article is pretty good about focusing the topic, vs. other articles/authors.
And the battle between armor protection & the weapons designed to defeat it continues to present day.
It touched upon what was important was to detonating them at a greater stand-off distance, rather than right up against the main steel armor, which then degraded or broke up the molten HEAT jet that actually penetrated the steel vs. the high-velocity projectile from a tank or anti-tank gun.
All in all the article is pretty good about focusing the topic, vs. other articles/authors.
And the battle between armor protection & the weapons designed to defeat it continues to present day.
USMC6094
Custom
I have a book around here somewhere with pictures of a knocked out trio of Sherman's that lost a fight with a King Tiger. All three took through and through hits head on in their final drive assembly, passed through the interior under the fighting compartment floor, through the firewall, the engine, and out the rear bulkhead.
Surprisingly, none of them burned.
Surprisingly, none of them burned.