DOCSLIB.ORG

{TEXTBOOK} Polish Armor of the Blitzkrieg

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

POLISH ARMOR OF THE BLITZKRIEG PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Jamie Prenatt, Henry Morshead | 48 pages | 22 Sep 2015 | Bloomsbury Publishing PLC | 9781472808240 | English | Oxford, United Kingdom Polish Art Center - The Polish Armor Of The Blitzkrieg On 14 September , Poland bought 38 tanks Vickers Mk. E Type A, with spare parts and a manufacturing licence. At the end of , because of the liquidation of WIBI and establishing of the Design and Testing Centre of the Armoured Forces reporting directly to the Armoured Forces Command, most of the "A la Christie" project documentation was destroyed under the supervision of a special commission. Only a few hand- written notes and calculations were left. On 10 March design work on a new model called 10TP was started. Despite the fact that in the vehicle design was not completely finished, it was included in the programme of Armoured Forces that was a part of a general projection of growth and upgrade for the Polish Army for The 10TP tank was specified on the list of the equipment scheduled for four tank battalions in the new motorised units. Around this time a large number of the Polish FTs were sold fictitiously to Uruguay and China, and in fact went to Republican Spain. Factory in Ursus near Warsaw , where all Polish tanks were produced in the period of At the same time two motorised cavalry brigades were formed with the intention that they would be equipped with the tank. Building of the tank was completed in July It took so much time because some basic assemblies that were not produced in Poland had to be acquired abroad like an engine of a sufficient output. It was not before 16 August that the 10TP tank rolled out for a first longer ride. Captain Leon Czekalski. The trials were kept secret because the activities of the German Abwehr and the members of the " Fifth Column " were then getting more and more intensive in Poland. Successive trials being stopped by minor faults lasted until the 30 September and then the tank was sent to the WD where design modifications were made. In May, the refurbished tank was demonstrated to generals and other top ranking military authorities. The designers, having analysed their experiences came to the conclusion that a tank of this type should be a purely tracked vehicle and any equipment needed for driving it on wheels was just an unnecessary weight. Getting rid of this weight allowed them to increase the armour thickness significantly while vehicle weight remained unchanged. Thus another development step of the 10TP was to be the 14TP tank. Its construction was started in the end of but it was not completed due to the war. Before the tank could enter mass production , German invasion of Poland in September ended the independent existence of the Second Polish Republic. Another route the Polish army took was to purchase some of the British designed Carden-Loyd Mark VI two man tankette Poland ordered 10 or 11 of those two man tankettes on 29 June After the fall of Poland Polish units that made it to France used those two man tankettes in From this designed evolved the TK-3 tankette based on TK-1 and TK-2 tankettes, about built and TKS tankette based on TK-3 tankette, about built which were the only versions built in significant numbers. About tanks were produced between and the outbreak of the war, plus four iron prototypes. The designation 7TP meant "7 Tonne, Polish" in fact its weight increased to 9 tonnes after the initial prototype. The 7TP was fitted with the degree tank periscope which was of Polish design and was first used in the Polish 7-TP light tank. It was a development of the earlier 7TP tank , it was to replace its predecessor in Polish service in Due to the outbreak of the war, only a limited number of early prototypes and development versions took part in battles of the Invasion of Poland. After a series of tests it was found that the design was completely unreliable and the Poles decided to buy the French SOMUA S35 tanks instead, a proposal that was later refused by the French government. However, as the threat of war became apparent and the production rate of the new Polish 7TP tank was insufficient, in April it was decided to buy a hundred R 35 tanks as an emergency measure. The first fifty other sources lower the number to 49 arrived in Poland in July , along with three Hotchkiss H35 tanks bought for testing. During the Invasion of Poland 45 tanks formed the core of the newly created 21st Light Tank Battalion that was part of the general reserve of the Commander in Chief. The unit was to defend the Romanian Bridgehead , but was divided after the Soviet invasion of Poland of 17 September. Six tanks were also attached to the 10th Motorized Cavalry Brigade. Jakubowicz formed on 14 September in Kiwerce , Poland. The unit joined the task force "Dubno" and lost all of its tanks during the marches and fighting with German and Soviet armies and Ukrainian insurgents. A comparison of both armed forces clearly indicates the problems faced by Poland. An army group led by von Rundstedt attacked from the south while another army group led by von Bock attacked from the north with large mechanised forces. Before the war, between and , Poland invested heavily in the Central Industrial Region. Preparations for a defensive war with Germany were ongoing for many years, but most plans assumed fighting would not begin before To raise funds for industrial development, Poland sold much of the modern equipment it produced. The Polish military had fewer armored forces than the Germans, and these units, dispersed within the infantry, were unable to effectively engage the enemy. The tank force consisted of two armored brigades, four independent tank battalions and some 30 companies of TKS tankettes attached to infantry divisions and cavalry brigades. Their number of over vehicles constituted formally a significant tank force. Unfortunately, they were not fully capable tanks, and, apart from few cannon-armed ones, could not fight against other armoured fighting vehicles. The combat usefulness of FT tanks in was very limited, since they were obsolete and extremely slow by the standards of the day, but they participated in the defense of Poland in September ; the 2nd Armoured Battalion formed three light tank companies numbers: , , , equipped with Renault FT tanks. A standard tank of the Polish Army during the invasion of was the 7TP light tank. Poland had also a few relatively modern imported designs, such as 50 Renault R35 tanks and 38 Vickers E tanks. During the mobilization in August , the Vickers tanks were used in two light tank companies of Polish only two motorized brigades. During August and the first two weeks of September , the Brigade was being organized and trained, and stayed on the right bank of the Vistula. The first combat action, against the German bridgehead over the Vistula near Annopol. The Germans managed to destroy 7 Polish tanks with artillery, but just after, they lost five of their Panzer tanks. After receiving several more direct hits and losing two more large Panzer tanks, the German tank crews simply ran away. Polish 7TP tanks pursued and kept beating the rest of the tanks off. The German soldiers now met the Polish infantry and attacked, but they were repelled by the Polish tanks. However, the Battle of the Border did not gain the Poles enough time to fully mobilise the reserves. While most of Polish Army had been successfully mobilised prior to 1 September , on that date many sub-units of Prusy Army were still being formed or transported. By 4 September , when the German forces broke through the overstretched Polish defences, the Prusy army was far from battle-ready. It is unclear how many of the new Polish 9TP tanks were actually produced, although it appears at least 11 9TP tanks were delivered and used by the Polish Army at the start of hostilities as most Polish forces had the 7TP. The 11 tanks could have been either standard 7TP or 7TP with some of the modifications included, but not all of them. In September , Polish Army had only 7TPs 24 dw, 97 jw and 11 jw produced in September along with 4 prototypes made of regular plate , which equipped two Polish light tank battalions each with 49 tanks and other units. The Poles had placed great value on the River Vistula to act as a natural barrier to any form of military advance. The Germans crossed the river on Day 5 of the attack. By this time, the Polish air force had been defeated and this had stripped the Polish Army of any form of air cover — it also meant that the Polish tanks and army were easy targets for the Luftwaffe which was free to operate in Poland after September 2. When the Russians invaded eastern Poland on September 17, the defeat of Poland was sealed. On September 24, Warsaw was bombed by 1, German aircraft. Ironically, many point to the impact of German tanks during the campaign. Yet it is known that many of the tanks used during the attack were equipped only with machine guns or small calibre guns rather than cannons as compared to later tank designs. What did the damage was the constant onslaught of all parts of blitzkrieg, including large numbers of tanks, that never allowed the Polish Army to gather its breath and re-group. Complete air superiority gave the Germans every opportunity to attack the retreating Polish forces and destroy their tanks.
Recommended publications
  • M6 Heavy Tank the Newly-Formed Heavy Tank Platoons Are Lieutenant Giving a Good Account of Themselves

    M6 Heavy Tank the Newly-Formed Heavy Tank Platoons Are Lieutenant Giving a Good Account of Themselves

    HEAVY TANK PLATOON Lieutenant M6 HEAVY TANK The newly-formed heavy tank platoons are Lieutenant giving a good account of themselves. DEVELOPMENT Heavy Tank Platoons are rated as: Confident Trained At the outbreak of World War II the US Army DESIGN FEATURES possessed few tanks, and no heavy tanks. In OON May 1940 the US Army Ordnance Department When the specifications were laid down PLatooN T for the M6 heavy tank it was normal for Command M6 heavy tank started to work on the T1, 50-ton heavy LA heavy tanks, such as the Soviet T-35, HQ Tank multi-turreted tank. This was similar in 3 M6 heavy tanks ...... 510 points P concept to the Soviet T-35 and other 1930s to follow the ‘land battleship’ model, ‘land battleship’ designs. By October 1940, having multiple turrets mounting a 2 M6 heavy tanks ...... 340 points Sergeant CorporalSergeant the Department reached the same conclusions variety of guns and machine-guns. The 1 M6 heavy tank ....... 170 points of excessive size, difficulty in crew co- T1 heavy tank specification featured a ordination and high production cost that had slightly more modern arrangement with led to the abandonment of the land battleship both of its guns mounted in the same REPLACING StANDARD EQUIPMENT concept in Europe. turret and its twin .50 cal machine- Any US company may replace a Tank Platoon guns in a relatively conventional bow M6 heavy tank M6 heavy tank A new T1 heavy tank design was laid down with mounting. taken as a Support platoon with a Heavy a single turret retaining the mixed armament Tank Platoon.
  • Biuletyn Informacyjny ITS

    Biuletyn Informacyjny ITS

    ISSN 1732-0437 Biuletyn Informacyjny ITS 4-2008 Zeszyt 4 (28) ® DWUMIESIĘCZNIK INFORMACYJNY INSTYTUTU TRANSPORTU SAMOCHODOWEGO WARSZAWA Spis treści str. Uwarunkowania i tendencje rozwoju rynku usług transportowo- logistycznych w Polsce. I. Balke. ................................................................ 5 Infrastruktura drogowa północnej Lubelszczyzny. B. Zakrzewski. ............ 13 Module close to – nowa metoda w szkoleniu kandydatów na kierowców. J. Wacowska-Ślęzak, A. Wnuk, D. Jankowska. .......................................... 20 Relacja z ogólnopolskiego sympozjum ,,Historyczny rozwój konstrukcji pojazdów”. P. Pawlak, C. Krysiuk, A. Kulesza, B. Zakrzewski. ................ 26 Fakty i opinie................................................................................................ 32 Nowe przepisy.............................................................................................. 38 Z życia ITS................................................................................................... 39 Przegląd dokumentacyjny............................................................................. 45 Redaguje: Kolegium Redakcyjne w składzie: Andrzej Damm, Anna Dzieniowska (sekretarz redakcji), Wojciech Gis, Edward Menes (redaktor naczelny), Dariusz Rudnik, Anna Zielińska Adres redakcji ,,Biuletyn Informacyjny ITS” Instytut Transportu Samochodowego ul. Jagiellońska 80, 03-301 Warszawa tel. (+22) 675-47-35, 811-32-31 do 39 wew. 172, pokój nr 214 fax (+22) 811-09-06 [email protected] www.its.home.pl
  • Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army's Ground Combat Vehicles

    Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army's Ground Combat Vehicles

    Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army’s Ground Combat Vehicles © MDart10/Shutterstock.com APRIL | 2021 At a Glance The Army operates a fleet of ground combat vehicles—vehicles intended to conduct combat opera- tions against enemy forces—and plans to continue to do so. Expanding on the Army’s stated plans, the Congressional Budget Office has projected the cost of acquiring such vehicles through 2050. Those projections include costs for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) and for procurement but not the costs of operating and maintaining the vehicles. CBO’s key findings are as follows: • Total acquisition costs for the Army’s ground combat vehicles are projected to average about $5 billion per year (in 2020 dollars) through 2050—$4.5 billion for procurement and $0.5 billion for RDT&E. • The projected procurement costs are greater (in constant dollars) than the average annual cost for such vehicles from 2010 to 2019 but approximately equal to the average annual cost from 2000 to 2019 (when spending was boosted because of operations in Iraq). • More than 40 percent of the projected acquisition costs of Army ground combat vehicles are for Abrams tanks. • Most of the projected acquisition costs are for remanufactured and upgraded versions of current vehicles, though the Army also plans to acquire an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, which will replace the Bradley armored personnel carrier; an Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, which will replace the M113 armored personnel carrier; and a new Mobile Protected Firepower tank, which will be lighter than an Abrams tank. • The Army is also considering developing an unmanned Decisive Lethality Platform that might eventually replace Abrams tanks.
  • COMBAT DAMAGE ASSESSMENT TEAM A-10/GAU-8 LOW ANGLE FIRINGS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL SOVIET TANKS (February - March 1978)

    COMBAT DAMAGE ASSESSMENT TEAM A-10/GAU-8 LOW ANGLE FIRINGS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL SOVIET TANKS (February - March 1978)

    NPS56-79-005 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California COMBAT DAMAGE ASSESSMENT TEAM A-10/GAU-8 LOW ANGLE FIRINGS VERSUS INDIVIDUAL SOVIET TANKS (February - March 1978) R.H.S. Stolfi J.E. Clemens R.R. McEachir August 1979 Approved for public release; distribution unlimited •7 Prepared for: A-10 System Program Office Wright Patterson Air Force Base Ohio 45433 FEDDOCS D 208.1 4/2:NPS-56-79-005 r NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California Rear Admiral Tyler F. - Dedman Jark R Rnrct1 nn Superintendent Borsting jjj^J' he r ed he rein P was supported by the A-10 System Program OfficI Wr?nht p fl r 9 ,T r F° r " BaSe Ohio ' The " ' reproduction of allai\ oror'oarpart of thisf"reportt' is authorized. UNCLASSIFIED SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whan Dili Bnlarad) READ INSTRUCTIONS REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM NO 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER t. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NPS56-79-005 S. TYPE OF REPORT ft PERIOD COVERED 4. TITLE (and Subtltlt) Special Report for Period Combat Damage Assessment Team A-10/GAU-8 February - March 1978 Low Angle Firings Versus Individual Soviet 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER Tanks (February - March 1978) B. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBERf*.) 7. AUTHOR^; R.H.S. Stolfi None J.E. Clemens R.R. McEachin 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS AREA ft WORK UNIT NUMBERS Naval Postgraduate School F 47615-78-5209 and Monterey, California 93940 FY 7621-78-90220 12. REPORT DATE II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS A-10 System Program Office January 1979 Wright Patterson Air Force Base 13.
  • Download The

    Download The

    THEME Finnish soldiers examine a Soviet tank destroyed by a mine during the Winter War of 1940. © SA-kuva S THE BATTLE OF HONKANIEMI THE FIRST AND LAST Finland only fought one tank battle in the Winter War of 1939-40, at the strategically important town of Honkaniemi (now called Lebedevka). At this point in late February 1940, the Russians had broken through the Mannerheim line at Summa and were pressing toward Vyborg, only 7 km distant. This was the last chance that the Finns would have to stop the Soviet hordes before they broke out of the Kare- lian Isthmus and into the Finnish heartland. By David Davies 1 Wargames, soldiers & strategy 94 fter breaking through Summa on 15 February, the front lines before being relieved by the Soviets halted at Honkaniemi to build up their 2nd and 3rd Battalions, who would reserves before a final push toward Vyborg and press on into the town. The at- then deeper into Finland. This salient had to be tack was launched on the morn- blunted if the Finns were to stand any chance of ing of 26 February. Adefeating or even delaying the Russian advance. Defending the town were It was decided to commit Finland’s only tank forces to the lead elements of the the operation; they had been held in reserve up until 84th Division, supported this point. The tanks were the Vickers-Armstrong 6-Ton by T-26 and T-28 tanks. export, of near-identical design to the Soviet T-26 (the Soviets copied and mass produced the Vickers design) THE OPPOSING FORCES and to the Polish 7TP (built under licence).
  • PB Polish 1 & 2

    PB Polish 1 & 2

    First to Fight, Never to Surrender: PB Polish 1 & 2 By Byron Henderson There have been several map of Europe at this time to designs for the Polish army see what a boon for for PanzerBlitz ; mine is only Poland’s security it would the latest. I use the word have been to be formally “mine” only in the sense that allied to both Czech- I put together the initial unit oslovakia and Lithuania. designs. I am indebted to Instead, Poland signed non- the numerous individuals for aggression pacts with Russia additional information and a in 1932 and Germany in variety of challenging viewpoints that 1934. Neither was worth the paper helped to bring about the final shape they were printed upon and when war of the counter set. Chief contributors did break out in 1939, it was Germany are Tomasz Moder, Greg Moore, and and Russia who conquered and divided Glen Coomber. the Polish state. Some History Non-vehicular units After 123 years of non-existence, an Polish Infantry was some of the best in independent Poland returned to the Europe in 1939. Their arms were maps of Europe in 1918. With little in equivalent to those of their German the way of defensible geography and counterparts but they were short in borders which antagonized her antitank weapons (the new ATRs, avaricious neighbours, Poland was hidden in boxes entitled “Rifles for under siege almost immediately. After Uruguay” would not be issued prior to a series of border wars, the nation’s the invasion) and they lacked boundaries were finalized after its significant motorization.
  • Załącznik Nr 14 Opis Merytoryczny I Scenariusz

    Załącznik Nr 14 Opis Merytoryczny I Scenariusz

    Wystawa "Morzem, lądem i powietrzem - historia transportu” Wytyczne merytoryczne, koncepcyjne, stylistyczne, założenia scenograficzne wystawy oraz wymagania konstrukcyjno-technologiczne Opis ogólny_________ str. 03 Transport lądowy_________ str.10 Transport powietrzny_________ str.69 Transport wodny _________ str.108 Zbiorczy wykaz eksponatów _______str. 123 Krótka charakterystyka najważniejszych nazwisk z zachowaniem chronologii___ str. 128 Wstęp Trzyczęściowa wystawa "Morzem, lądem i powietrzem - historia transportu” w czytelny i przystępny sposób przedstawi historię rozwoju transportu na przestrzeni kilku tysiącleci. Ekspozycja złoży się z trzech niezależnych części, z których każda zostanie przypisana innemu rodzajowi środków transportu: lądowemu, powietrznemu i wodnemu. Poszczególne części zachowają charakter chronologiczny, począwszy od najstarszego ze wszystkich środków transportu, czyli czółna wydrążonego z pnia drzewa, a kończąc na urządzeniach współczesnych. Wystawę kieruje się do szerokiej rzeszy odbiorców, od małych dzieci, po osoby w wieku emerytalnym, ale największy nacisk zostanie położony na walory edukacyjne, skierowane do młodzieży. Z podziałem na transport lądowy, powietrzny i wodny spotykają się już uczniowie w III klasie szkoły podstawowej, więc trzyczęściowy charakter projektu pokryje się z programem nauczania. Przewiduje się prowadzenie lekcji muzealnych. Charakter narracyjny całości zapewnią opisy związane z poszczególnymi zagadnieniami tematycznymi. Ich celem będzie rozbudzenie ciekawości zwiedzającego i zachęta
  • Polska Myśl Techniczna W Ii Wojnie Światowej

    Polska Myśl Techniczna W Ii Wojnie Światowej

    CENTRALNA BIBLIOTEKA WOJSKOWA IM. MARSZAŁKA JÓZEFA PIŁSUDSKIEGO POLSKA MYŚL TECHNICZNA W II WOJNIE ŚWIATOWEJ W 70. ROCZNICĘ ZAKOŃCZENIA DZIAŁAŃ WOJENNYCH W EUROPIE MATERIAŁY POKONFERENCYJNE poD REDAkcJą NAUkoWą DR. JANA TARCZYńSkiEGO WARSZAWA 2015 Konferencja naukowa Polska myśl techniczna w II wojnie światowej. W 70. rocznicę zakończenia działań wojennych w Europie Komitet naukowy: inż. Krzysztof Barbarski – Prezes Instytutu Polskiego i Muzeum im. gen. Sikorskiego w Londynie dr inż. Leszek Bogdan – Dyrektor Wojskowego Instytutu Techniki Inżynieryjnej im. profesora Józefa Kosackiego mgr inż. Piotr Dudek – Prezes Stowarzyszenia Techników Polskich w Wielkiej Brytanii gen. dyw. prof. dr hab. inż. Zygmunt Mierczyk – Rektor-Komendant Wojskowej Akademii Technicznej im. Jarosława Dąbrowskiego płk mgr inż. Marek Malawski – Szef Inspektoratu Implementacji Innowacyjnych Technologii Obronnych Ministerstwa Obrony Narodowej mgr inż. Ewa Mańkiewicz-Cudny – Prezes Federacji Stowarzyszeń Naukowo-Technicznych – Naczelnej Organizacji Technicznej prof. dr hab. Bolesław Orłowski – Honorowy Członek – założyciel Polskiego Towarzystwa Historii Techniki – Instytut Historii Nauki Polskiej Akademii Nauk kmdr prof. dr hab. Tomasz Szubrycht – Rektor-Komendant Akademii Marynarki Wojennej im. Bohaterów Westerplatte dr Jan Tarczyński – Dyrektor Centralnej Biblioteki Wojskowej im. Marszałka Józefa Piłsudskiego prof. dr hab. Leszek Zasztowt – Dyrektor Instytutu Historii Nauki Polskiej Akademii Nauk dr Czesław Andrzej Żak – Dyrektor Centralnego Archiwum Wojskowego im.
  • Tank Gunnery

    Tank Gunnery

    Downloaded from http://www.everyspec.com MHI Copy 3 FM 17-12 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FIELD MANUAL TANK GUNNERY HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NOVEMBER 1964 Downloaded from http://www.everyspec.com PREPARE TO FIRE Instructional Card (M41A3, M48, and M60 Tanks) TANK COMMANDER GUNNER DRIVER LOADER Commond: PREPARE TO Observe looder's actionr in Cleon periscopes, Check indicotor tape for FIRE. making check of replenisher in. lower seat, close proper amount of recoil oil Inspect coaxial machine- dicotor tope. Clean nd inspect hoatch, nd turn in replenilher. Check posi- gun ond telescope ports gunner s direct-fire sights. Check on master switch. tion of breechblock crank to ensure gun shield operaoion of sight covers if op. stop. Open breech (assisted cover is correctly posi- cable. Check instrument lights. by gunner); inspect cham- tioned ond clomps are Assist loader in opening breech. ber ond tube, and clote secure. Clean exterior breech. Check coxial lenses and vision devices. mochinegun and adjust and clean ond inspect head space if opplicble. commander's direct-fire Check coaxial machinegun sight(s). Inspect cupolao mount ond odjust solenoid. sowed ammunilion if Inspect turret-stowed am. applicable. munitlon. Command: CHECK FIR- Ploce main gun safety in FIRE Start auxiliary Place moin gun safety ING SWITCHES. position if located on right side engine (moin en- in FIREposition if loated If main gun has percus- of gun. Turn gun switch ON. gin. if tank has on left side of gun. If sion mechanism, cock gun Check firing triggers on power no auxiliary en- moin gun hoaspercussion for eoch firing check if control handle if applicable.
  • Heroics & Ros Index

    Heroics & Ros Index

    MBW - ARMOURED RAIL CAR Page 6 Error! Reference source not found. Page 3 HEROICS & ROS WINTER 2009 CATALOGUE Napoleonic American Civil War Page 11 Page 12 INDEX Land , Naval & Aerial Wargames Rules 1 Books 1 Trafalgar 1/300 transfers 1 HEROICS & ROS 1/300TH SCALE W.W.1 Aircraft 1 W.W.1 Figures and Vehicles 4 W.W.2 Aircraft 2 W.W.2. Tanks &Figures 4 W.W.2 Trains 6 Attack & Landing Craft 6 SAMURAI Page11 Modern Aircraft 3 Modern Tanks & Figures 7 NEW KINGDOM EGYPTIANS, Napoleonic, Ancient Figures 11 HITTITES AND Dark Ages, Medieval, Wars of the Roses, SEA PEOPLES Renaissance, Samurai, Marlburian, Page 11 English Civil War, Seven Years War, A.C.W, Franco-Prussian War and Colonial Figures 12 th Revo 1/300 full colour Flags 12 VIJAYANTA MBT Page 7 SWA103 SAAB J 21 Page 4 World War 2 Page 4 PRICE Mk 1 MOTHER Page 4 £1.00 Heroics and Ros 3, CASTLE WAY, FELTHAM, MIDDLESEX TW13 7NW www.heroicsandros.co.uk Welcome to the new home of Heroics and Ros models. Over the next few weeks we will be aiming to consolidate our position using the familiar listings and web site. However, during 2010 we will be bringing forward some exciting new developments both in the form of our web site and a modest expansion in our range of 1/300 scale vehicles. For those wargamers who have in the past purchased their Heroics and Ros models along with their Navwar 1/300 ships, and Naismith and Roundway 15mm figures, these ranges are of course still available direct from Navwar www.navwar.co.uk as before, though they will no longer be carrying the Heroics range.
  • LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Master's Thesis the M26 Pershing

    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.
  • {TEXTBOOK} Panzer III Vs Somua S 35: Belgium 1940

    {TEXTBOOK} Panzer III Vs Somua S 35: Belgium 1940

    PANZER III VS SOMUA S 35: BELGIUM 1940 PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Steven Zaloga,Richard Chasemore | 80 pages | 18 Nov 2014 | Bloomsbury Publishing PLC | 9781782002871 | English | Osprey, United Kingdom Panzer III vs Somua S 35 - Osprey Publishing Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. The armor clashes in May were the biggest the world had yet seen, as the German advances of that period came to epitomize Blitzkrieg. Nonetheless the Wehrmacht's Panzer III was well matched by the French Somua S35; the two representing very different design philosophies and yet ranking among the best designs in the world at the time. Get A Copy. Paperback , 80 pages. More Details Other Editions 4. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. This book brilliantly illustrates the weakness of all French tanks of World War Two. Even though French tanks were more heavily armored and in many cases had more powerful guns they still were defeated in battle due to their design flaws the commander also fired the main gun and the lack of tactical radios. Their employment in penny-packets rather than in armored divisions sealed their fate. Chris rated it liked it Jan 03, Big A rated it really liked it Jan 03, Duncan King rated it liked it Jan 10, Thomas M. Holsinger rated it really liked it Dec 19, Tony rated it really liked it Nov 05, John Somers rated it really liked it Sep 12, Garrett Olinde rated it really liked it Feb 19, Apr 23, Jeff rated it liked it.