Tanks post-2022: what now?

[Jagdflieger]

Hi,
I'm not trying to make the claim that the M3's were overall better tanks than the Panzer IVs, but rather the main point I was trying to show is that since the Panzer IV Auf F2's were not available in North Africa until later in 1942 (with only 27 having been delivered by August of that year), while the M3 Grants were in service and operational in North Africa from May of 1942 there was a period of time where the M3s were likely more powerful than any tank that the German's had available in North Africa for several months of that year, as appears to be borne out by the reference from the book by Hans von Luck.

As such, I am just trying to clarify that a statement along the lines that "Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers." is not necessarily 100% correct, as there was a discernable period of time during the battles in North Africa, where the Panzer IV was only available in its short barrel low velocity 75mm gun versions, while the M3 Grant was fielding its higher velocity 75mm gun and a 37mm gun as well.

Regards

Pat

PS. As for the M3's after the M4'sbecame available, I believe that they remained in service in North Africa for some time, with the similar M3 Lee also serving alongside the M4's in the US Army during Operation Torch (Nov 1942) and following battles in North Africa.

You are aware that 50% of all Grants were destroyed at Gazaala? would you know by how many Africa-corps tanks?
Yes the couple of 88's certainly also paid off
It all comes down to numbers - unless one sets the terms for a comparison at even odds, any comparison is just meaningless

Regards
Jagdflieger

 

[Admiral Beez]

It's funny that this thread has somehow morphed from post-2022 to post-1942.

 

[PFVA63]

You are aware that 50% of all Grants were destroyed at Gazaala? would you know by how many Africa-corps tanks?
Yes the couple of 88's certainly also paid off
It all comes down to numbers - unless one sets the terms for a comparison at even odds, any comparison is just meaningless

Regards
Jagdflieger

Hi,
Yes the British lost a lot of tanks at Gazala.

However, my contention is that the statement that "Valentines, Crusaders, Mathilda's, Grants. all inferior against Panzer IV or a T-34/76 if fielded in equal numbers." is not necessarily 100% correct.

As noted above there were periods when the Grant was in fact actually superior in capability to the Panzer IV, specifically with regards to how the M3's were able to outrange the 50mm armed Panzer IIIs and short barrel 75mm Panzer IVs in North Africa, prior to the arrival of sufficient numbers of Panzer IV Aus F2, to make them operational in the August (or perhaps Sept 1942 timeframe).

As noted previously this is supported by written comments from some German officers of the time such as Mr. von Luck. In addition, it is even said that Rommel was quoted as saying "Up to May of 1942, our tanks had in general been superior in quality to the corresponding British types. This was now no longer true, at least not to the same extent."

Additionally, since the statement noted above specifically stated that "...if fielded in equal numbers", then the latter statement that "It all comes down to numbers - unless one sets the terms for a comparison at even odds" appears contrary to the initial assertion.
Like I said before, it's not a big deal, and I am definitely not saying that the M# was a better tank overall than the Panzer IV, but rather just that since there was rapid technological advances during the war, coupled with the fact that it often took time to bring updates into service and make them operational, that a statement along the lines that the Panzer IV was superior to the M3 is not necessarily 100% accurate, as there was a discernable period of time when the M3 not only appeared to be more capable but also that some German officers have stated so in their writing.

 

[PFVA63]

It's funny that this thread has somehow morphed from post-2022 to post-1942.

Ooops, Sorry about that. You are right, the focus should be on modern day stuff.

 

[GrauGeist]

It's funny that this thread has somehow morphed from post-2022 to post-1942.

It is interesting, though, to see how armor concepts shifted during the course of the war.

Much like world airforces and their preconceived notions how an air war would/should be fought in the late 30's, world armies had a different concept as to how armored warfare was going to be used on the battlefield during that same time.

Most tanks were light, fast and designed to charge infantry with heavier tanks designed to be mobile artillery in support of infantry and the smaller tanks.

By the end of the war, an entirely new breed of tank had emerged and with it, a shift in how they should be used.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Back to today, is there any MBT not from Russia that Ukraine can quickly acclimatize to?

 

[wlewisiii]

Quickly? No. Tank training after basic, to learn the minimum to go to your unit takes 3 months. Say 2 months for experienced & motivated troopers. But retraining unit level and direct support level maintenance will take considerably longer, especially for turret mechanics. Those tasks.are complex and require special tools and techniques.

 

[GrauGeist]

Also, any tanks provided to the Ukraine would need to be compatible with their current inventory of ammunition, or else ample ammunition would need to be provided.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

sloped armour not ww2

View attachment 665059

I don't think anyone said it was invented for the second war.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

As noted previously this is supported by written comments from some German officers of the time such as Mr. von Luck. In addition, it is even said that Rommel was quoted as saying "Up to May of 1942, our tanks had in general been superior in quality to the corresponding British types. This was now no longer true, at least not to the same extent."

Yeah, von Luck mentions the see-saw nature not only of the battles but of the technological introductions in his book. However one rates Rommel, I think he did good work with smaller numbers and at times inferior gear. The Grant was an ugly surprise for them, as was the Sherman, for a bit.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Much like world airforces and their preconceived notions how an air war would/should be fought in the late 30's, world armies had a different concept as to how armored warfare was going to be used on the battlefield during that same time.

I wonder how much rethinking of the armored concept is going on as we write given the success of cheap, semi-automated drones in taking out AFVs? This is clearly the, repeat the, new threat to MBTs. I wonder if we won't see the resurrection of light AA onto tanks either as secondary weapons (a la WWII), or in the form of light, tracked accompanying vehicles? Tiny is actually pretty hard to fight, I bet.

As I wrote above, i think tanks sill have a solid place in combined arms, but I'd hope and imagine that this war is providing lessons in what to do and more importantly what not to do.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I wonder how much rethinking of the armored concept is going on as we write given the success of cheap, semi-automated drones in taking out AFVs? This is clearly the, repeat the, new threat to MBTs. I wonder if we won't see the resurrection of light AA onto tanks either as secondary weapons (a la WWII), or in the form of light, tracked accompanying vehicles? Tiny is actually pretty hard to fight, I bet.

As I wrote above, i think tanks sill have a solid place in combined arms, but I'd hope and imagine that this war is providing lessons in what to do and more importantly what not to do.

Update the capabilities of active anti-ATGW systems and the MBT is back in charge…. when used properly.

 

[wlewisiii]

I'd bet on either laser or railgun defense against drones probably using multiple sensors (audio, thermal, ladar) to target them. Laser is plausible because you don't need the power output to blind a drone that you would to destroy an aircraft or missile.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Update the capabilities of active anti-ATGW systems and the MBT is back in charge…. when used properly.

Proper use is a good point even though it's not a new lesson.

Upgrading defense against MANPATS -- and more importantly against drones -- is my line of thinking. Those will be the changes going forward, I believe.

 

[GrauGeist]

It may be time to resurrect the M247 (was to be designated M3) Sergeant York system.

When the M1 Abrams and M2 Bradly were in development, they were supposed to be a component battlefield system where all three (M1, M2 and M3) supported each other on the battlefield.

Issues arose with the M247 and it was dropped from the system.

But now, almost 40 years later, technology has advanced lightyears beyond what the Sergeant York was capable of (as planned) and would present a deadly system (better than originally planned).

 

[Snautzer01]

I don't think anyone said it was invented for the second war.

When mentioning the T-34 for the most people it is if it was the first that it was used. It wasnt. And while we were on the subject i thought i mentioned it. Carry on.

 

[Macandy]

Gun based tracked Air Defence systems are outranged by the missiles of the aircraft they are supposed to be defending against

 

[Admiral Beez]

Gun based tracked Air Defence systems are outranged by the missiles of the aircraft they are supposed to be defending against

Yes, but we can't assume that one side will stay still while the other innovates. The next gun based, tracked air defence systems may use electromagnetic railguns to win over the missile armed aircraft.

Armys Pursuit of Electromagnetic Railguns Heats Up

Armys Pursuit of Electromagnetic Railguns Heats Up

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

IDEF 2019: Turkish-made Electromagnetic Rail Gun unveiled by Yeteknolo

Turkish Company Yeteknoloji unveils its project of Electromagnetic Rail Gun technology dubbed SAHI 209 during IDEF 2019, the International Defense Exhibiti

www.armyrecognition.com

 

[Greg Boeser]

Won't that play havoc with the crew's cell phones?

 

[WARSPITER]

Won't that play havoc with the crew's cell phones?

What a dilemma. Use the railgun and lose reception or get hit and lose reception.