Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That?s what I meant - Sherman comes first when regarding losses. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc James Small" <marcsmall@comcast.net> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 11:54 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] There's something about German design ... > At 04:42 PM 1/15/2007, Raimo K wrote: > >Yeah, it was the ammo that caught fire - no consolation - the later > >variants > >were not deployed until 1944. > >In his memoirs Belton Y. Cooper who served in the 3rd Armored Division > >and > >was in charge of retrieving destroyed and damaged tanks says that from > >the > >nominal strength of 232 Shermans 1348 were lost in combat, a loss rate of > >540%. And it is representative, I?m afraid. > >All the best! > > One unit, Raimo, does not make a war. Look at the overall stats for armor > loss, broken down by causes, for all forces. The Sherman comes in a > strong first, followed by the later British designs, then by the PZKW IV. > The Panther and T-34/85 tail behind by quite a bit. > > Marc > > > msmall@aya.yale.edu > Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir! > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information