Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:33 AM 1/15/2007, Bill Smith wrote: >Marc: > > Obviously you are more informed about this subject than me--thanks >for your comments. About all I know is what I see on The Discovery >Channel. They've pointed out the complexities of the Tiger tank and as >I recall the 88mm howitzer as opposed to the simple (but deadly to the >crew) Sherman and 105mm field howitzer. > > Their parts supply/ maintenace problems they had remind me of the 9 >miserable years I owned a 1971 BMW 2002. 1971 was a miserable year for BMW, as they were concentrated on moving "up market". Those were the years when the selling price of their cars rose by twice the factor caused by the Deutschmark re-evalution -- and, in the end, their sales trebled, so they did something right by going to the high end of the spectrum. Patton was once asked whether he would have preferred to fight with Panther tanks and he laughed and pointed out that none of his tanks would have made it out of Normandy without a Depot rebuild. German gear suffered from a number of problems but poor maintenance doctrine and a lack of quality material dogged them from 1942 to the end. Yes, their gear was complex but then so was some of ours: around half of the P-38 pilots had to be given remedial training on their aircraft and one of the great names in The Old Warbirds recently was killed when he seems to have forgotten the order for using his fuel tanks in a P-38. The M4 Sherman has received a lot of hostility from the Disdain and Hysteria Channels in recent years but this is undeserved. It was a solid vehicle capable of solid work. Sure, it had limitations but one part of doctrine is to teach soldiers how to make the best of their gear and, in the end, the Sherman turned into a real workhorse which effectively crushed German armor by early 1945. To put it a different way, if the Panther and the Tiger were so great, and the Sherman so lousy, how then did we win the War? If the Messerschmidt and the Focke-Wulf were so superior, and the P-47 and P-51 so bad, why did the Germans have no air cover left by the time of OVERLORD? The true answer, of course, is that our gear worked better, all in all, than did theirs, and our doctrine was superior, so that we were able to grind them into little bitty pieces by early 1945. The German 88 was a great gun and, in two different designs in both Wars, served well as an anti-aircraft gun and for ground defense purposes. But our 90mm AA gun was equally capable and cost a lot less to make. In that regard, you are right. Marc msmall@aya.yale.edu Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!