|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895 |
The Sherman needed a better gun. Like the 17 pounder on a british fireflys. What folks don't realize, the 17lb gun used the Firefly was actually a better, more powerful gun than the 88mm used in the Tigers, and the Firefly could defeat the armor on the Tiger's and that the gunners sights on the Sherman was better than on many versions of the various Panzer's. The Sherman was an evolutionary design that had been a long time on the drawing board and as a project, was not without it problems..The same could be said for the M26 Pershing which did not fair well in Korea a few years later and was later upgraded/developed into the Patton.. Us Brits had similar problems developing the Cromwell and the Comet and while both eventually became good tanks, and in some respects slightly better than the late model Shermans, they simply weren't available in numbers like the Sherman.. The German Panzer IV was their version of the Sherman, not perfect, but a work horse that continued to evolve through the war. As noted by others, until it was up gunned mid way through the war, it struggled to penetrate the armour on the better Allied tanks.. In the end, Allied air power so serious disrupted German industry she was forced to "down grade" to simpler production models to try to keep up with losses in the field..
Last edited by Pete E; 04/15/13.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895 |
To my mind, the STEN was the clear winner in the best SMG category of WW II.
I've always wondered how the STEN and the M3 compared, given they were both "cheap and cheerful" by design..I've used a STERLING SMG, the "delux" successor to the STEN and even that was pretty spartan..
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,044
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,044 |
Liberator Pistol
A Doe walks out of the woods today and says, that is the last time I'm going to do that for Two Bucks.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895 |
Liberator Pistol Not sure I'd want to pull the trigger on that!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,965
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,965 |
The Sherman needed a better gun. Like the 17 pounder on a british fireflys. What folks don't realize, the 17lb gun used the Firefly was actually a better, more powerful gun than the 88mm used in the Tigers, and the Firefly could defeat the armor on the Tiger's and that the gunners sights on the Sherman was better than on many versions of the various Panzer's. The Sherman was an evolutionary design that had been a long time on the drawing board and as a project, was not without it problems..The same could be said for the M26 Pershing which did not fair well in Korea a few years later and was later upgraded/developed into the Patton.. Us Brits had similar problems developing the Cromwell and the Comet and while both eventually became good tanks, and in some respects slightly better than the late model Shermans, they simply weren't available in numbers like the Sherman.. The German Panzer IV was their version of the Sherman, not perfect, but a work horse that continued to evolve through the war. As noted by others, until it was up gunned mid way through the war, it struggled to penetrate the armour on the better Allied tanks.. In the end, Allied air power so serious disrupted German industry she was forced to "down grade" to simpler production models to try to keep up with losses in the field.. All accounts I've read of the Sherman Firefly was that it's gun was effective against German Tanks. So much so that that the Germans prioritized killing it over other Sherman Tanks. But the biggest threat to German armor in Western Europe was our artillery, and tactical fighter-bombers with rockets and napalm.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895 |
But the biggest threat to German armor in Western Europe was our artillery, and tactical fighter-bombers with rockets and napalm. I totally agree..From a perspective of war rather than just interesting discussions, it always the "big picture" that's important...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1 |
To my mind, the STEN was the clear winner in the best SMG category of WW II.
I've always wondered how the STEN and the M3 compared, given they were both "cheap and cheerful" by design..I've used a STERLING SMG, the "delux" successor to the STEN and even that was pretty spartan.. The STEN and M3 were both perfection of the simple blowback SMG design. Both were models of manufacturing efficiency and low cost design. Both were open bolt, both fired from double column single feed magazines. Double column single feed magazines were VERY reliable if you kept the magazine clean, but became problematic in heavy dust or sand. Still dust and sand were rarely a problem because spare magazines were always in a pouch. Both guns had a heavy bolt reciprocating back and forth, but obviously the M3�s bolt was heavier. I�ve shot both quite a bit and I�ll say flat out, the STEN is the superior weapon. Both were extremely reliable, two of the most reliable SMG�s of the war. But the M3 had horrible ergonomics and the rate of fire was so slow that full auto fire wasn�t very effective. The STEN actually balanced rather well. The STEN even though it had a higher cyclic rate, was more controllable than the M3, lighter weight, and generally easier for the user to employ effectively. The Brits were really onto something with the side magazine, a design curiously overlooked by most everyone else. When fire is incoming, a soldier can�t seem to get close enough to the ground, and the side mag really helps there. For CQB I�ve never found the magazine to be a hindrance at all. It never catches on doorways as its detractors claim it would and it doesn�t make the weapon want to roll in your hands. In short, it works very well. At $9.00 per copy it was the most brilliant SMG created. And of course, it would later be refined into the Sterling, which is without a doubt the finest SMG ever built. There�s a reason why there were more Sterling�s built than any other sub gun in the world.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,739
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,739 |
Sam Hughes historical reputation in WWI was sullied by poor decisions on procurements for the force. For instance, perhaps his most controversial decision was the purchase of the MacAdam shield-shovel, a device which Hughes patented under his secretaries name, purported to act as both a shovel (for digging trenches) and a shield against bullets. In fact, the shield-shovel was too heavy for use as a shovel, and it was incapable of stopping bullets. All purchased units were quickly discarded upon arrival in Britain.
Sir Sam's reputation has been unjustly sullied in the past two decades due to the feud between the "Turner-Hughes" and the "Currie" factions in The Great War. Some popular historians, who lionize Currie, a common thief, for all his other virtues, have denigrated Hughes and in a vicious and foolish manner. With his various issues addressed, it is the factual truth that Sir Samuel Hughes, D.S.O. was THE man who founded and largely built the basis of the Canadian Expeditionary Force, that became the finest military force of WWI, as the legendary "Canadian Corps". He blustered, badgered, browbeat and bullschitted the creation of "The Old Red Patch", the First Canadian Division, to get to France and become, as one British general called them, "the pride and honour of the British Army". Hughes, is an important figure in our history and his family still serve in Canada's Forces to this day. He was my maternal great-grandmother's first cousin and my grandfather, Lt. D.N. McCallum, wounded at Courcelette and, badly, at Passchendaele, was his "nephew" and served in the 21stBatt.C.E.F, under Sam's younger brother, later Brig.-Gen. William St. Pierre Hughes,D.S.O. After, 50+ years of reading history, I have learned that much of what is written about any figure is largely a result of the biases of the author, Churchill comes to mind and was, himself, guilty of a lot of this sort of "history".
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,166
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,166 |
Sam Hughes historical reputation in WWI was sullied by poor decisions on procurements for the force. For instance, perhaps his most controversial decision was the purchase of the MacAdam shield-shovel, a device which Hughes patented under his secretaries name, purported to act as both a shovel (for digging trenches) and a shield against bullets. In fact, the shield-shovel was too heavy for use as a shovel, and it was incapable of stopping bullets. All purchased units were quickly discarded upon arrival in Britain.
Sir Sam's reputation has been unjustly sullied in the past two decades due to the feud between the "Turner-Hughes" and the "Currie" factions in The Great War. Some popular historians, who lionize Currie, a common thief, for all his other virtues, have denigrated Hughes and in a vicious and foolish manner. With his various issues addressed, it is the factual truth that Sir Samuel Hughes, D.S.O. was THE man who founded and largely built the basis of the Canadian Expeditionary Force, that became the finest military force of WWI, as the legendary "Canadian Corps". He blustered, badgered, browbeat and bullschitted the creation of "The Old Red Patch", the First Canadian Division, to get to France and become, as one British general called them, "the pride and honour of the British Army". Hughes, is an important figure in our history and his family still serve in Canada's Forces to this day. He was my maternal great-grandmother's first cousin and my grandfather, Lt. D.N. McCallum, wounded at Courcelette and, badly, at Passchendaele, was his "nephew" and served in the 21stBatt.C.E.F, under Sam's younger brother, later Brig.-Gen. William St. Pierre Hughes,D.S.O. After, 50+ years of reading history, I have learned that much of what is written about any figure is largely a result of the biases of the author, Churchill comes to mind and was, himself, guilty of a lot of this sort of "history". Wasn't ol' Sam the main sponsor of those wonderful Ross rifles used by the CEF?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,411 Likes: 66
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,411 Likes: 66 |
Lots of tank talk - they don't "always" improve...
Me
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 12,895 |
Lots of tank talk - they don't "always" improve... Broken pull through will cause that!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 31,652 Likes: 8
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 31,652 Likes: 8 |
Lots of tank talk - they don't "always" improve... Gunsmith version,,,,, "I loaned my tank to my brother in law this past weekend and,,,,,,"
Founder Ancient Order of the 1895 Winchester
"Come, shall we go and kill us venison? And yet it irks me the poor dappled fools, Being native burghers of this desert city, Should in their own confines with forked heads Have their round haunches gored."
WS
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,411 Likes: 66
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 39,411 Likes: 66 |
I got a Krieger I'll sell them for replacement.
Me
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1 |
Lots of tank talk - they don't "always" improve... Caption... "I don't know L-Tee, we all went out for a beer, and when we got back, it was just like that." Or better yet... "See L-Tee, it was the cross-eye'd guy from Arkansas. He said hold my beer and watch this..."
Last edited by KevinGibson; 04/15/13.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,550
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,550 |
Lots of tank talk - they don't "always" improve... Glock makes a tank?
Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense. Robert Frost
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24,675 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,159 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 17,159 Likes: 5 |
Wasn't there a POJ 45 cal single shot pistol made out of stampings? Maybe it wasn't an issued weapon but were they dropped for the French Resistence or something?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,739
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,739 |
Sam Hughes historical reputation in WWI was sullied by poor decisions on procurements for the force. For instance, perhaps his most controversial decision was the purchase of the MacAdam shield-shovel, a device which Hughes patented under his secretaries name, purported to act as both a shovel (for digging trenches) and a shield against bullets. In fact, the shield-shovel was too heavy for use as a shovel, and it was incapable of stopping bullets. All purchased units were quickly discarded upon arrival in Britain.
Sir Sam's reputation has been unjustly sullied in the past two decades due to the feud between the "Turner-Hughes" and the "Currie" factions in The Great War. Some popular historians, who lionize Currie, a common thief, for all his other virtues, have denigrated Hughes and in a vicious and foolish manner. With his various issues addressed, it is the factual truth that Sir Samuel Hughes, D.S.O. was THE man who founded and largely built the basis of the Canadian Expeditionary Force, that became the finest military force of WWI, as the legendary "Canadian Corps". He blustered, badgered, browbeat and bullschitted the creation of "The Old Red Patch", the First Canadian Division, to get to France and become, as one British general called them, "the pride and honour of the British Army". Hughes, is an important figure in our history and his family still serve in Canada's Forces to this day. He was my maternal great-grandmother's first cousin and my grandfather, Lt. D.N. McCallum, wounded at Courcelette and, badly, at Passchendaele, was his "nephew" and served in the 21stBatt.C.E.F, under Sam's younger brother, later Brig.-Gen. William St. Pierre Hughes,D.S.O. After, 50+ years of reading history, I have learned that much of what is written about any figure is largely a result of the biases of the author, Churchill comes to mind and was, himself, guilty of a lot of this sort of "history". Wasn't ol' Sam the main sponsor of those wonderful Ross rifles used by the CEF? Yup, and we bought ammo from sources that we should not have, plus the English ammo did not fit the Ross's chambers, IIRC. There were not enough Lee-Enfields at first, so, there are all sorts of theories as to why the Ross was chosen. It was much like the US Army with no artillery, no transport, no ships, etc and they had to use whatever the Brits. and French would spare although their commander, Pershing, kept them out of actual combat for most of the time any US soldiers were in France. Nobody, except the French and the Germans, were prepared for the huge "war of attrition" that soon evolved in western "Yurp" and everyone made some serious errors, BUT, Sam, got us into the fight forthwith and he deserves a LOT more credit than he has been given. Most Canadians, now, know more about the US Civil War than the feats of their own men,due to the excessive presence here of US media, another serious issue in itself.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 31,652 Likes: 8
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 31,652 Likes: 8 |
"Most Canadians, now, know more about the US Civil War than the feats of their own men,due to the excessive presence here of US media, another serious issue in itself."
Hey what are neighbors for???? Consider it our little gift you you guys!
BTW, spot on about the US Army! But Pershing was nice and offered the French The entire US Marine expeditionary force including the 2nd US Inf Div as well as the 36th Division! I don't think Johnny P wanted to mess with them....
Last edited by kaywoodie; 04/15/13.
Founder Ancient Order of the 1895 Winchester
"Come, shall we go and kill us venison? And yet it irks me the poor dappled fools, Being native burghers of this desert city, Should in their own confines with forked heads Have their round haunches gored."
WS
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 38,943 Likes: 12
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 38,943 Likes: 12 |
Wasn't there a POJ 45 cal single shot pistol made out of stampings? Maybe it wasn't an issued weapon but were they dropped for the French Resistence or something?
George, I believe that was the Liberator that has been covered.
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.
Happily Trapped In the Past (Thanks, Joe)
Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well.
|
|
|
|
579 members (10gaugeman, 12344mag, 1234, 160user, 10ring1, 163bc, 58 invisible),
2,196
guests, and
1,101
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,560
Posts18,531,582
Members74,039
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|