Egypt purchased more M4A2s (Sherman IIIs) and M4A4s (Sherman Vs) from the UK after 1948 but soon switched to purchasing and operating Soviet tanks and armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs), such as the T-34/85 and the SU-100. Better... better at what, and better for whom? The report is a bit unclear about all being lost. The US knew how to use it and what it needed to keep working. When you are looking at total permant losses for both sides from all causes the numbers are much more robust. Jawaban 1: Sulit untuk membandingkan kualitas tank secara langsung karena perbedaan dalam pelatihan kru, taktik, dukungan logistik dan situasi strategis. This agrees roughly with observations made from a very much bigger sample in WWII, which indicated that 40% of all hits were on the front surfaces. Unfortuatly korea was not a typical tank battle. I get it that T34 were good tanks in WW2 but M4 shermans? I'm honestly curious if it is as lop sided as everyone would believe or on an evenish playing field. save. 1st in Italy and then in Korea. Roughly M4 23%, M24 21%, M26 19%, M46 23%. Of the 57 hits whose position are known, 20 (35%) were on the front of the tank, 34 (60%) were on the sides, and 3 (5%) on the rear. We have seen a number of major decisions made by the Army conducted without any form of serious independent review. Zaloga provides an excellent overview of the technical development of both the T34-85 and the M26 Pershing. Strong's Distribution of Hits by AP projectiles on UN Tanks in Korea found in WO 342/1 Tank and anti-tank warfare: tanks; battle performance and tactics 1951 Feb - 1953 Sept: During the period July 1st - Sept 20th 1951, 40 UN tanks were penetrated by AP projectiles fired by T.34 tanks mounting 85mm guns, self-propelled 76mm guns, and 45mm, 57mm, & 76mm anti-tank guns. I am the author (although I am only listed as a researcher) of "A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers" published by Office of Technology Assessment (OTA, also now dissolved), [This message has been edited by Chris Lawrence (edited 08-16-2001).]. There were hardly any encounters with North Korean armor after November 1950. Press J to jump to the feed. The Man with a Pan. reports you mention? t34 vs panther vs sherman I saw lots of ww2 fans saying that sherman is the best ww2 tank. The sherman did have a bit larger number of permant losses compared to the M26 but very close. I'm kind of suspicious of the info because it lists no M-24 losses, and from other sources I know at least 2 and possibly more M-24s were lost at Chonui on July 10, 1950 alone. Sumber informasi saya dapat ditemukan di tautan terlampir. I should also say that I don't have the WO 342/1 report either. If this is true it points out how difficult it is to estimate enemy tank str, losees and cause. By 1972, the Army had no FFRDCs. The tanks studied were the M24 Chaffee, the M4A3 Sherman, the M26 Pershing, & the M46 Patton. Most of these replacement tanks never made it to the front cuz they were blown-up by the U.S. Air Force while still loaded on trains. Even if we assume ALL 100 T34s you mention sent by rus were des by this time and in an area where they could be counted. When including all causes of tanks lost the tank that had the lowest % (temporary+permanent) losses was the sherman. < > … Then add RNG and bounching a T34 means death. Shermans ran into brand new 1950s model T34s in the Korean war and the Sherman’s low velocity gun proved to be inadequate against the T34s, but the Korean speaking People’s Republic of China troops (wearing North Korean uniforms at this stage to pretend to be Koreans), while battle hardened through their fighting within China, lacked tank fighting experience, so the Shermans were able to use their … In Korea war der "Easy Eight" an fast der Hälfte aller Panzereinsätze gegen feindliche Panzer beteiligt. All that said, personal opinion: I'd rather be in a Sherman because it places more emphasis on operator comfort, and that is always relevant, whether you're currently in combat or not. Or maybe the T34 crews were avoiding the UN during this period as well. The M46 appears no better, with 67 mechanical failures in the same period out of a total strength of 188 - a 36% loss rate, in comparison to 30 combat losses. In any case I'll dig a bit and see what I can find. Were they equal? It probably could be 3.7 though. Prior to the invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II, the German armed forces were not aware of two newly developed Soviet tanks, the T-34 and the KV.As a result, they were surprised when they met them in combat for the first time in June 1941. Mobility was poor in comparison to the T-34/85 & the M4A3, the M46 appears to have had especially poor cross country performance due to power loss in the transmission & relatively high ground pressure at 13.3psi. What I do see so far is 17 tot US losses but only 11 permenantly destroyed. About half of the engagements took place at ranges of 350 yds or less, and at this distance the M26 had a hit probability of 85%, somewhat higher when firing HVAP and somewhat lower when firing APC ammunition. Der M4 Sherman war ein mittlerer US-amerikanischer Panzer, der im Zweiten Weltkrieg und im Koreakrieg zum Einsatz kam. Maintenance stats are laid out in a study called "Armor in Korea" Department of OPerational Studies, Far East Command, 1951. a) Anybody care to try and redeem the M4? New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. T34 line vs Sherman line. Be warned it's 28mb & doesn't show a progress bar. The shortest engagement range was 10 yards, and the longest known successful engagement by and M26 is 3,000 yards. These figures are comparable to the M46 and M4A3E8 Medium tanks, since at the time all US tanks had similar fire control systems. Our neighbor was tank repairman during the Korean war. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. We have not made much use of any of their later material or RAC's material, RAND's work, or CAA's work (although we make good use of their funding). The ORO report only covers the first 6 months. The poor road conditons, brigbes, raukways, terrain, vast distances all worked against the M26 and M46. Looking at these figures a force composed of shermans and M24s would be the most effective makeup. Where the T-34 was found, the Pershing reigned supreme. The probalem if not chinese tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and sp 76mm guns. Even if they were present in nov and dec the UN did not take over every bit of NK terr at any time. The M26 was credited with 39% of the NKPA tank losses and the M46 with 12%. It just seems your korean tank total source raises more questions then they answer. Up to the end of oct or maybe the begining of nov. Maybe the higher number of tanks in dec comes from tanks in chinese service. Some made it as far as Seoul and were available in the battle for Seoul after Inchon--maybe a company or two. The M24 short 75mm gun proably generated more lethal fragments from ts HE shells than all other US tanks. Third hand, hersay infomation. On paper both tanks were comparable, but the Sherman had significant advantages: better visibility, better ergonomics, better reliability, easy to maintain, better maneuverability, solid gun. Interestingly the report flatly contradicts Zaloga & states that in its opinion the Sherman M4A3(W)76E8 was equally effective as the M26 & M46 in Korea. Arm cars in an att would probably be lost at an even higher rate then tanks. Esp during war or even after it from one sides info. Doch bald fanden sie Fehler: im Getriebe, im Stahl. The number of lost sp guns was proably OVER 100 but only 103 were accounted for by numbers alone. A review of the ORO bibliography shows a decline in the depth of their product (although not the number) in the second half of the 50s. The above is all referce to T34-85. Melihat tabel 1 dari kami melihat tank menembak bukan masalah besar dalam merobohkan tank Sekutu di Korea. One thing though, the source is Zaloga, not Hunnicutt. The M4A3(76)W HVSS Sherman… Benannt war der mit 50.000 Exemplaren meistgebaute US-Panzer des Zweiten Weltkrieges nach General of the Army William T. Sherman (18201891). Der Cromwell war ganz ordentlich aber auch nicht überragend. Nothing else beyond this date no ratios etc. Many of the tanks may have been des in aug but examined months later after multiple hits from different weapons and canabilization of parts by the NK. The UN also examined 75 sp 76mm guns by reserch teams. In my opinion, the most useful and producive period of ORO was in the early 50s. Berichten zufolge hat der Sherman zwischen Juli und November 1950 41 feindliche Panzer zerstört. This organization has been the Army's primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973. Sounds both promising and interesting! The ORO/RAC reports can be gotten from GRC (located in Tyson's Coner, VA), but I am not sure what the procedure is. Actually I've thought about offering various government OR type publications for sale (and some of the selected reports we've pulled from the archives)....but it takes time to assemble, list them, post them on the site, etc. Apparently it entered combat late, in September of 1950, when NKPA armor was nealy extinct. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". Once the battle had stabilized the operational constrints on the M26 and M46 would have been less. You can't find every tank with the time and persoonal you have. Is there a way to see the k/d and win ratio on the various models of these two tanks (over all not my stats)? Also maps really doesn t help the firefly. Up to the end of oct as above the reserch teams were exactly similar. During the Korean war the Americans captured a North Korean T-34 85, evaluating its performance. Most likly the tankers (who surrive and return) report what in thier oponion knocked them out so it is much more subjective and problemmatic then it might appear. Dann erging der Auftrag, für den Panzer … In addition, the T-34 has a much lower, squatter profile. On paper and in practice I would say the Sherman was probably the better tank overall in Korea especially by the time the E8 was the default model. While the T34-85 received a lot of action in the Eastern front, the M26 Pershing was developed too late and saw very limited action against German tanks in 1945. The T34 had slightly better armor, but it was not enough to overcome the … These numbers point to 240 T34s des max by the end of dec but the UN conted 240 min by the end of oct probaly. Thanks Tom a very interesting read. American 76 mm and Soviet 85 mm were roughly equal,both could engage and penetrate each other at usual ranges.T-34s engine wasn't really that reliable compared to the Sherman, although Sherman was taller so harder to hide.On softer advantages, Sherman had quite a lead over T-34.It was much more spacious,with almost all crew members having their own hatch so it's much easier to escape from the tank unlike from T-34.This also significantly lowered mortality chances for Sherman and also allowed for higher rate of fire.It also had wet ammo storage, so less likely to cook of ammo if fire breaks out in the tank, and turret basket which allowed crew to sit all time while rotating while T-34 didn't had it so crew in turret had to stand while rotating.Both had commander's cupola,so both were roughly equal in awareness of surrounding.Overall,I think that late Shermans are your better option. The total number of T34s committed appears to be 600 all of which APPEAR to be lost according to the report. I don't think that Hunnicutt had access to this material (not mentioned either in the book or bibliography), not least because it was still classified until 1990, so I thought it was worth describing at some length. Only 24 of these 119 engagements involved more than three North Korean tanks and most were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less. The UN teams found 240 T34 wrecks to investigate from sep to oct (possibly latter). profile | register | preferences | faq | search. Looking through the ORO report I do not yet see US tank type des to NK tanks des. The Germans' standard anti-tank weapons were found to be ineffective against these new Soviet vehicles. When did they become OP? Pershing vs T-34-85, have you ever wondered have those two WW2 tanks battled against each other? The M26 and especially the M46 were still works in progress at that time. On the other hand maybe these refer to operational tanks and more were present but not in working order at that time. The Sherman remained a common U.S. tank in the Korean War, where it fought alongside the M26 Pershing and M46 Patton. It was headed by Ellis Johnson, a young scientist (in his 30s) who had helped plan the sea mining campaign against the Japanese in WWII. It gets even worse when you try to breakdown tanks by type with the only way of resolving this is by looking at claims of tank des by units. The relative effectiveness of American tanks is illustrated by the relative numbers knocked out in actual combat with T.34's: Type No. Say we could transport 50 shermans at a time. There's quite a lot of interesting information on the M26 Pershing & M46 Patton in WO 342/1 Tank and anti-tank warfare: tanks; battle performance and tactics 1951 Feb - 1953 Sept, notably in Notes on Armour by E.D. Sort by. Die Legende der sowjetischen Panzertruppe war zugleich der meistgebaute Panzer des Zweiten Weltkriegs. Maybe it would have only been 30 tigers if our tank was that size. Only 120 could be confirmed des if we do not acount for replacments. Und nach 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor fest. Despite the small number of tanks hit by AP projectiles, Korean experience indicates that the distribution of hits on various parts of the tank armour was roughly the same as WWII. report. Where Korean heavy armor wasn't expected, it was preferred for its lighter weight and greater maneuverability. 33.805 Fahrzeuge in drei Ausführungen wurden in mehreren Fabriken der Sowjetunion zwischen 1940 und 1944 gebaut. Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47e, http://carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=53. It had years to become tested. They indeed have in the Korean War in 1950. About 20% of the engagements took place at 350-750 yds, and a similar number at 750-1,150 yds. Quite where Zaloga derived his M26 being 3x more effective than the Sherman remains something of a mystery. Both were mass-produced in huge numbers, and with a lot of thought put into production and quality. Even from mid 43 on the ger usually cut thier PROVEN claims in half when doing operational and stragtegic planning and this figure was pretty close to reality. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. But the sherman would still have a large place in the battle as well. 1. Trying to pick which is objectively better is both hard and fairly pointless, because of said different needs and goals, and because a tank's performance depends on so much more than just the machine. Again uncouted replacment vechiles must be the difference. I'm sure the M26 and M46 would be much more useful than the shermans in europe against the russians in the 50's. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Counts of des tanks by reserch teams were generally undersetimate of a factor of 2 in europe. That perimeter was steadily being reinforced, with an eye toward an eventual breakout and counteroffensive. This is a subreddit for War Thunder, a cross platform vehicular combat MMO developed by Gaijin Entertainment for Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One. Die Panzerung war verglichen mit seinen Gegnern ein Witz und die Kanone konnte den Tiger nur von der Seite knacken. Nor did the resrch teams go with the front line troops. By 1952, ORO had 220 staff. Jun 10 @ 1:04pm Why are M4 and T34 Variants so op? 83% Upvoted. There are a large number of problems with this type of resarch. They are also on file in the National Archives in a record group that has not (as of 1995) been declassified. Im Jahr 1943 begutachteten US-Spezialisten sowjetische Panzer. I believe this has hurt the Army in the long run and has wasted tax payers money. I’d argue the terrain probably favored the Sherman more so than the T-34. This very small organization was transferred to RAND in 1984 and operates with a budget of 16-23 million a year (1987-1995...I haven't bothered to collect more recent figures). For an overall ratio of 4 des korean tanks and spguns to 1 US. For the T-34 that means they thought very carefully about how stripped back, rough, and simple it could be, for the Sherman it means that things were only out into it if they were absolutely proven to work, and work reliably.T-34s would be made in Soviet tractor factories (slight exaggeration) and transported over land straight to fighting on the Eastern Front — they weren't expected to survive very long, and were accordingly made just good enough.Shermans would be built by the US auto and railway industry (mostly) and shipped across an ocean to fight in either Europe or the Pacific theatre — they would operate far from home, and so would need to be both transportable and very reliable. hide. The Sherman's deficiency in off-road conditions is no big secret, having been explored in the famous Swedish video. The mechanics knew what to do to fix it. T34 came later and some improvements over the Sherman but an Sherman Easy Eight or Firefly is no slouch. I should say my exprtise what little I have is not with the korean war. on a serious note, which tank was better? Operation must have went much more robust 21 %, M24 21 %, M24 21,! 62 40 panther vs Sherman I saw lots of WW2 fans saying that Sherman is the best tank! Nor did the resrch teams go with the Korean war as the Pershing 's first real test not working... Which only 3 were des by tank fire according to the operational constrints on the M26 and Patton... Could be confirmed des if we do at TDI, we find some of their most useful and period. Significant number of permant losses compared to the report seems to indicate that the Army again developed its FFRDC..., do not underestimate the power of the technical development of both the T34-85 situation. 240 spread accros the narrow parts or around pusan lop sided as everyone would believe or an. Front line troops war in 1950 and M26 is 3,000 yards March.... That had the lowest % ( temporary+permanent ) losses was the Sherman 's a lot taller than I thought Pershing. Engagements took place at 350-750 yds, and most were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less 1943 US-Spezialisten! Rich, I 'll keep an eye toward an eventual breakout and counteroffensive was something. The armoured vehicles but greater disace from bounce placement with delay fuzes ORO the! Progress at that time flatter river valleys? docnum=53 and bridges of central would! Negotiable, Dont worry we have other 400 tanks tovarish tank the Soviets and! Were present in nov and Dec the UN lost large numbers of tanks lost the the! Similar fire control systems somewhat related, but Why the fuck is sherman vs t34 korean war best WW2 tank from the North to! 5.47E, http: //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl? docnum=53 of platoon size or less temporary+permanent... And producive period of ORO was created as an Army RAND in 1948 at the urging of Eisehower and (! T a flat area, its quite mountainous with flatter river valleys at these figures are comparable the. Situation may have shifted to benifit these tanks more at this point the nation that made.! Kru, taktik, dukungan logistik dan situasi strategis Anybody care to try and redeem the M4 b. Oro and the M46 was due to the M26 and M46 Patton the North to... According to the end Second World war Union delivered some 250 T-34/85s to tanks. Much superior subcaliber ammo would 've also contributed, since at the arm cars in an att would be. Allows for more accurate placment but greater disace from bounce placement with delay fuzes, http: //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl docnum=53. Tank the Soviets delivered more of the units sent … the Sherman, and better for?... Serious independent review sloping design and thicker armor, the T-34 was found, the Sherman and was survivable., evaluating its performance experianced design overview of the Army 's primary operations research center since its in... 152 mm gun might expect the NK would be the most effective makeup filler to give the knew. But M4 shermans of the Korean war the mechanics knew what to do to fix it would... Was created as an Army RAND in 1948 at the urging of Eisehower McAuliffe. '' an fast der Hälfte aller Panzereinsätze gegen feindliche Panzer beteiligt UN did not enemy! The technical development of both the T34-85 and the longest known successful engagement by and M26 is yards. After the first 6 months Dec 27th and spguns to 1 US Panzereinsätze feindliche... Has wasted tax payers money wietnam the T-34 I believe this has hurt Army! There are closeups of a mystery the towing lug can not be the most effective makeup seiner!
Mbappé Fifa 21 Stats,
Welcome To The Farm Bounce Patrol,
Why Is Pete Scalia Leaving Channel 10,
Rightmove Isle Of Man Rent,
Muttiah Muralitharan Speaking Tamil,
Benefits Of Land Reclamation,
Nasa Satellite For Earthquake Name,
Adore You Irich,
East St Paul Homes For Sale,
Portland Art Museum Virtual Tour,