Development of the American Tank-Infantry Team During World War II in Africa and Europe
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Evolution of British Tactical and Operational Tank Doctrine and Training in the First World War
The evolution of British tactical and operational tank doctrine and training in the First World War PHILIP RICHARD VENTHAM TD BA (Hons.) MA. Thesis submitted for the award of the degree of Master of Philosophy by the University of Wolverhampton October 2016 ©Copyright P R Ventham 1 ABSTRACT Tanks were first used in action in September 1916. There had been no previous combat experience on which to base tactical and operational doctrine for the employment of this novel weapon of war. Training of crews and commanders was hampered by lack of vehicles and weapons. Time was short in which to train novice crews. Training facilities were limited. Despite mechanical limitations of the early machines and their vulnerability to adverse ground conditions, the tanks achieved moderate success in their initial actions. Advocates of the tanks, such as Fuller and Elles, worked hard to convince the sceptical of the value of the tank. Two years later, tanks had gained the support of most senior commanders. Doctrine, based on practical combat experience, had evolved both within the Tank Corps and at GHQ and higher command. Despite dramatic improvements in the design, functionality and reliability of the later marks of heavy and medium tanks, they still remained slow and vulnerable to ground conditions and enemy counter-measures. Competing demands for materiel meant there were never enough tanks to replace casualties and meet the demands of formation commanders. This thesis will argue that the somewhat patchy performance of the armoured vehicles in the final months of the war was less a product of poor doctrinal guidance and inadequate training than of an insufficiency of tanks and the difficulties of providing enough tanks in the right locations at the right time to meet the requirements of the manoeuvre battles of the ‘Hundred Days’. -
Errors in American Tank Development in World War II Jacob Fox James Madison University
James Madison University JMU Scholarly Commons Masters Theses The Graduate School Spring 2013 The rW ong track: Errors in American tank development in World War II Jacob Fox James Madison University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019 Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Fox, Jacob, "The rW ong track: Errors in American tank development in World War II" (2013). Masters Theses. 215. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019/215 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the The Graduate School at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Wrong Track: Errors in American Tank Development in World War II Jacob Fox A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of History May 2013 ii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................... iii Introduction and Historiography ....................................................................... 1 Chapter One: America’s Pre-War tank Policy and Early War Development ....... 19 McNair’s Tank Destroyers Chapter Two: The Sherman on the Battlefield ................................................. 30 Reaction in the Press Chapter Three: Ordnance Department and the T26 ........................................ -
The M1A2 Abrams: the Last Main Battle Tank?
The M1A2 Abrams: The Last Main Battle Tank? by Stanley C. Crist With its superb integration of fire- Although Longbow Hellfire was de- is expected to enter production around power, mobility, and armor protection, signed for the AH-64D Apache heli- 2015, replacing the M1-series tanks. the M1A2 Abrams is very nearly the copter, there is no obvious reason it Since the next generation armored ultimate incarnation of the main battle couldn’t be fired from an armored ve- fighting vehicle is no longer referred to tank (MBT). Although more advanced hicle. Indeed, at least one nation is ap- as an MBT, can it be inferred that the design concepts have been published in parently developing a similar system. future combat system need not be a recent years, it will likely prove quite According to the August/December tank as we know it today? difficult to produce an MBT suffi- 1993 issue of ASIAN MILITARY RE- If self-guided missiles are chosen for ciently superior (to the M1A2) to jus- VIEW, India has developed the NAG, a tify the cost, so why not look for a bet- fire-and-forget antitank missile with a the primary armament of the FCS, a ter idea? range of six kilometers. It was planned number of advantages present them- that the NAG would be the armament selves. For one, it ought to be possible to eliminate the turret assembly; this The Missile Option for a tracked combat vehicle. With would greatly simplify construction, ground surveillance radar (GSR) incor- When Egyptian Saggers surprised Is- porated into its fire control system, with a corresponding decrease in pro- duction cost and vehicle weight. -
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Master's Thesis the M26 Pershing
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Master’s Thesis The M26 Pershing: America’s Forgotten Tank - Developmental and Combat History Author : Reader : Supervisor : Robert P. Hanger Dr. Christopher J. Smith Dr. David L. Snead A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master’s of Arts In the Liberty University Department of History May 11, 2018 Abstract The M26 tank, nicknamed the “General Pershing,” was the final result of the Ordnance Department’s revolutionary T20 series. It was the only American heavy tank to be fielded during the Second World War. Less is known about this tank, mainly because it entered the war too late and in too few numbers to impact events. However, it proved a sufficient design – capable of going toe-to-toe with vaunted German armor. After the war, American tank development slowed and was reduced mostly to modernization of the M26 and component development. The Korean War created a sudden need for armor and provided the impetus for further development. M26s were rushed to the conflict and demonstrated to be decisive against North Korean armor. Nonetheless, the principle role the tank fulfilled was infantry support. In 1951, the M26 was replaced by its improved derivative, the M46. Its final legacy was that of being the foundation of America’s Cold War tank fleet. Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..1 Chapter 1. Development of the T26 …………………………………………………..………..10 Chapter 2. The M26 in Action in World War II …………...…………………………………40 Chapter 3. The Interwar Period ……………………………………………………………….63 Chapter 4. The M26 in Korea ………………………………………………………………….76 The Invasion………………………………………………………...………77 Intervention…………………………………………………………………81 The M26 Enters the War……………………………………………………85 The M26 in the Anti-Tank Role…………………………………………….87 Chapter 5. -
France Historical AFV Register
France Historical AFV Register Armored Fighting Vehicles Preserved in France Updated 24 July 2016 Pierre-Olivier Buan Neil Baumgardner For the AFV Association 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................4 ALSACE.................................................................................................................5 Bas-Rhin / Lower Rhine (67)........................................................5 Haut-Rhin / Upper Rhine (68)......................................................10 AQUITAINE...........................................................................................................12 Dordogne (24) .............................................................................12 Gironde (33) ................................................................................13 Lot-et-Garonne (47).....................................................................14 AUVERGNE............................................................................................................15 Puy-de-Dôme (63)........................................................................15 BASSE-NORMANDIE / LOWER NORMANDY............................................................16 Calvados (14)...............................................................................16 Manche (50).................................................................................19 Orne (61).....................................................................................21 -
The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare
No. 109 JUNE 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare Michael B. Kim The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER No. 109, June 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim Major Michael B. Kim currently serves as the Squadron Executive Officer for the 8th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 2d Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2d Infantry Division. Prior to his current position, he graduated from the Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and completed the Art of War Scholars Program. -
The T-34-85 in Detail
ASSEMBLY GUIDE STEP 1 THE T-34-85 IN DETAIL The three-man turret on the T-34-85 was one of several significant innovations that greatly enhanced its combat effectiveness in comparison with its earlier versions. Here is a view of the turret seen from above, and this is the part with which you start when you come to assemble the model. he turret roofs on the T-34-85 varied depending on scope. The most important diference between the turret the factory at which they were manufactured. Its designs was the location of the commander’s cupola. T turret armor thickness was 20 mm, as compared to In 1944, cupola production was increased, and the early 16 mm, on, for example, the German “Panther” tank. versions were given a small ledge on the left side of the All T-34-85 roofs had two covers above the ventilators. At turret intended for this cupola. The turret roof took the the end of 1945, one of the ventilators was placed in front form of an armored plate that rotated on a ball bushing. of the loader’s hatch. There were two diferent periscope It comprised two parts, one of which was hinged and able designs: some T-34-85s had a high PTK-5 periscope from to open. On the early version of the T-34, both parts of this 1943, but the majority were equipped with a low MK-4 peri- hatch could be opened. In 1944 this Т-34-85 was equipped with a commander’s cupola, for which a ledge was provided on the side of the turret. -
The Soviet-German Tank Academy at Kama
The Secret School of War: The Soviet-German Tank Academy at Kama THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Ian Johnson Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2012 Master's Examination Committee: Jennifer Siegel, Advisor Peter Mansoor David Hoffmann Copyright by Ian Ona Johnson 2012 Abstract This paper explores the period of military cooperation between the Weimar Period German Army (the Reichswehr), and the Soviet Union. Between 1922 and 1933, four facilities were built in Russia by the two governments, where a variety of training and technological exercises were conducted. These facilities were particularly focused on advances in chemical and biological weapons, airplanes and tanks. The most influential of the four facilities was the tank testing and training grounds (Panzertruppenschule in the German) built along the Kama River, near Kazan in North- Central Russia. Led by German instructors, the school’s curriculum was based around lectures, war games, and technological testing. Soviet and German students studied and worked side by side; German officers in fact often wore the Soviet uniform while at the school, to show solidarity with their fellow officers. Among the German alumni of the school were many of the most famous practitioners of mobile warfare during the Second World War, such as Guderian, Manstein, Kleist and Model. This system of education proved highly innovative. During seven years of operation, the school produced a number of extremely important technological and tactical innovations. Among the new technologies were a new tank chassis system, superior guns, and - perhaps most importantly- a radio that could function within a tank. -
M27 Medium Tank American Tankers Are Well Trained and Lieutenant Learning Their Trade in the Hard Fighting of Italy
M27 TANK PLATOON Lieutenant M27 MEDIUM TANK American tankers are well trained and Lieutenant learning their trade in the hard fighting of Italy. DEVELOPMENT M27 Tank Platoons are rated as: The M27 medium tank was born out of the T20 programme. After the M4 series of tanks went into Confident Trained Command M27 medium tank production, consideration immediately turned to its successor. The US Army Ordnance Department was given the go-ahead to start work on an improved medium tank in May 1942. Broad outlines REPLACING STANDARD EQUIPMENT called for a 32-ton tank armed with an automatic 75mm gun with HVSS suspension and capable of a Sergeant Sergeant speed of 25mph. Any US company may replace all of its Tank Platoons with M27 Tank Platoons. If it is The T20 was developed first, but transmission problems led to the tank being cancelled and the a Tank Company, it must also purchase the LATOON best ideas transferred to the T22. This was essentially a T20 with the five-speed transmis- tanks in the Company HQ as M27 medium tanks P sion from the M4 Sherman. The solutions proved unsatisfactory and this led to the project being for 290 points. M27 medium tank M27 medium tank cancelled as well. At the same time as the T22 was authorised, Platoon ANK work began on the T23. It was essentially a T T20 fitted with the tried and tested vertical DESIGN FEATURES 5 M27 medium tanks .... 710 points M27 medium tank M27 medium tank 27 27 volute suspension (VVSS) as used on the M4 Tank Section Tank Section The M27 is as advanced in concept now as 4 M27 medium tanks ... -
T14 Assault Tank the New T14 Assault Tank Gives British Infantry Tank Battalions Their First 75Mm Gun Tank
REPLACING StaNdaRD EQUIPMENT IN BRITISH SERVICE T14 ASSAULT TANK The new T14 assault tank gives British infantry tank battalions their first 75mm gun tank. OON Any British company may replace all Infantry Tank Platoons equipped with Churchill tanks with DEVELOPMENT at Assault Tank Platoons. If it is an Infantry Tank Company it must also purchase all tanks in When America entered the war in late 1941 they and the British immediately got together to the Company HQ as T14 assault tanks for 135 points per tank. L consider tank designs. The Americans learned from the British tank combat experience, while the P British examined American tank designs to see how they fit their requirements. Subaltern In September 1941 the British had expressed interest in a heavier tank after their experiences ASSAULT TANK PLatOON NK in the desert and teething problems with their new Churchill tank. At the same time the US The assault tank platoons have won the Subaltern A Ordnance Department had been advocating the adoption of heavier tanks for the US Army. The T14 confidence of the infantry they support. T assault tank was seen as the solution for both these needs. T Assault Tank Platoons are rated as: The US Ordnance Department started design work on a tank that shared many features with the Confident Trained M6 heavy tank, but incorporated British requirements. With design work on the new M4 Sherman UL Command A medium tank nearing completion, the design shared many features of this tank. The new tank had PLatooN T14 assault tank the transmission of the M4 Sherman and the standard Ford GAZ tank engine. -
Exmoor Tanks Pack
North Hill in World War II Minehead, Somerset SCHOOLS RESOURCE PACK for Key Stages 2 & 3 This pack has been created by Sarah Butterworth and Caroline Barnes of Emerald Ant C.I.C. Emerald Ant is dedicated to engaging communities in their local history and heritage through exciting arts projects and interactive education. Community Interest Company 9608594. www.emeraldant.com Contents >> ACTIVITY >> >> CURRICULUM AREA >> 1. Tank Missions and Top Trumps Science / Engineering, Geography, History 2. Designing a Tank Training Ground Art & Design, Maths, Geography, History 3. Camouflage Design Art & Design, Geography 4. Radar Station: A Very Hush Hush Building Language & Literacy, Creative Writing, History 5. Radar Detection: Creating an Invisible Plane Art & Design, History, Science Credits Cover Painting by Year 5 pupils at Minehead Middle School. Photograph credit Caroline Barnes. Top Trump cards >> Crusader Miller, David – An Illustrated Guide to World War II Tanks and Fighting Vehicles, 1981 CRUSADER MARK III - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ACrusader_tank_III.jpg http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/Cruiser-MkVI_Crusader.php >> Stuart M3 Image - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AM3-Stuart-Fort-Knox-1.jpg >> Sherman Image - “M4 Sherman tank - Flickr - Joost J. Bakker IJmuiden” by Joost J. Bakker - M4 Sherman tank. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:M4_Sherman_tank_-_Flickr_-_Joost_J._Bakker_IJmuiden.jpg#/media/File:M4_Sherman_ tank_-_Flickr_-_Joost_J._Bakker_IJmuiden.jpg Miller, David – An Illustrated Guide to World War II Tanks and Fighting Vehicles, 1981 >> Churchill Infantry Tank Image: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Tanks_and_Afvs_of_the_British_ Army_1939-45_KID1265.jpg Activity 2 Legend reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO. -
British Armoured Regiment
MOTIVATION AND SKILL RELUCTANT CONSCRIPT Britain fielded two armoured brigades, one from the Royal Tank Regiment, and one of CONFIDENT TrAINED cavalry regiments converted to tanks. Both are trained and ready for action. An Armoured FEARLESS VETERAN Regiment is Confident Trained. (TANK COMPANY) Colonel S Major R HEADQUARTERS You must field one platoon from each box shaded black and may field one platoon from each Colonel TE R box shaded grey. Major British companies can have French troops (marked ) as support options. Remember that these platoons retain their own rules and ratings, and count as Allied Platoons (see page 183 Company Command 2iC Command Light Mk VI B 118 of the rulebook). Command A13 Mk II A13 Mk II A10 Cruiser Mk II Light Mk VI B HEADQUA Regiment HQ Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV Regiment HQ Armoured Regiment HQ A9 Cruiser Mk I CS A9 Cruiser Mk I CS Light Mk VI B tanks maybe upgraded to Light Mk VI C ArMOUR RECONNAISSANCE INFANTRY 125 HQ Platoon tanks for +5 points per tank. Rifle Platoon (Territorial) 129 Subaltern LATOONS LATOONS LOC Platoon OMPANIES 123 P P C Divisional Cavalry 149 T T Carrier Platoon R 119 Fusiliers Portés Platoon Armoured Company 127 CHARGE! Scout Car Patrol Command A13 Mk A13 Mk II A13 Mk II UPPO OMBAT OMBAT S II Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV Cruiser Mk IV British armoured regiments displayed a distinct ‘cavalry’ C WEAPONS WEAPONS Cruiser Platoon ArMOUR AIRCRAFT attitude, even on occasion launching charges in tradi- 167 Subaltern tional cavalry style. Due to their light armour and inabil- Air Support ISIONAL ISIONAL ity to successfully engage anti-tank guns, the armoured V I regiments fighting in France lost large numbers of tanks D 119 Command Light Mk VI B Light Mk VI B in their attacks.