Who would win the western allies or Russia?

[plan_D]

The Sherman M4 was not out-classed by the T-36/76 Model 1941. The Sherman (76W) was the MBT of the U.S forces by May 1945. The various models were thrown into production in early 1944. Production totals for the 76mm armed Shermans are;

M4A1 (76W) - 3,396 by Pressed Steel between Jan. 1944 and June 1945.
M4A2 (76W) - 1,594 by Grand Blanc between June - December 1944 (That's six months! An average of 266 tanks a month.) and 21 by Pressed Steel between May - June 1945. Total: 1,615

M4A3 (76W) - 1,400 by Detroit Arsenal between Feb. - July 1944* and 525 by Grand Blanc between Sept. - Dec. 1944. Total: 1,925

M4A3 (76W) HVSS - 1,445 by Detroit Arsenal between August - December 1944.

*Ceased in July to gear up for production of the HVSS. The tooling up took just under a month.

These numbers are more than enough to make it the MBT of the U.S forces. Especially since the U.S had designated it as such and the M4 Shermans were being converted to other roles at the time. The production of Shermans far out-paced the production of T-34s. 53,582 T-34s were produced from 1941 - 1945. Starting over a year later Shermans had been produced in numbers exceeding 40,000. Imagine an extra year for Detroit Arsenal producing an average of 226 Shermans a month, Detroit alone could produce another 2712 in one year.

The Sherman was designed as a combat tank. It was designed when the Pz.Kpfw IV F/2 was introduced. With which it could combat, especially since the production in the U.S could provide much more Shermans than Germany could Pz.Kpfw IVs. When they came up against the greater German designs, they were left to exploit the situation when the tank destroyers had destroyed the enemy armour. It's a reasonable tactic when tank destroyers were present. The Western Allied tank destroyers took a heavy toll on German armour. The Archer, M36 and M18 were all remarkable designs, although the Archer was merely a Valentine with a OQF 17pdr but we all know that 17pdr packed a punch. And if you're packing a good enough punch to out-range your opponent ...your armour could be paper for all it mattered.

The Western Allied air forces slaughtered German ground forces. The Typhoons and Thunderbolts roaming the skies of North-West Europe would smash anything they saw ...if not the tank itself, they would destroy the train or truck sent to supply it.

And the Soviets are going to still get the Bazooka when the U.S is at war with them?

Wait a second, you go from mocking the Comet because it had 30mm armour ...which it didn't. Then you try and say armour protection over 100mm was useless? I'm quite shocked ...why do I bother? The A34 Comet was a remarkable combat machine, reliable, fast, well-armoured and packed a decent punch. 109mm at 500 yards, 30 degrees to be precise.

The Soviet Navy could have kicked off? Are you saying they could produce a navy capable of combating the biggest navies in the world (USN, RN and RCN) in a matter of months?

...are you calling the British Commonwealth cowards? The Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Indians and East Africans just to name a few were remarkable fighting soldiers. The Commonwealth would easily out-produce the Soviet Union. I'd advise you learn a little bit about the Commonwealth contribution before you spout off like that.

The Soviet Union could not exist with the mere October revolution. They had to defeat the White Russians first.

What the hell are you going on about? Are you saying the Indians didn't aid the Allies during World War II? My word, you are amazingly disrespectful aren't you? The majority of those fighting in Burma were Indian.

What are you going on about? The Stalinist regime killed around 20 million in it's entire time of existance, not just in World War II. 13.6 million of that 23 million are combat losses against the Wehrmacht, the rest are civilian losses either by enemy action or ...Stalinist actions.

I don't like saying it ...but it seems I have to keep saying it when "discussing" with you. Since you don't provide anything in the way of evidence.

The debate of Zitadelle succeeding or not has nothing to do with the fact that the Soviet Union was on it's last legs in terms of manpower. The Soviet Union attacked Berlin with around one million men ...you call that a lot in a total, global war?

No, all of Poland would. The majority of Poland are what got it the worst. You think that the Soviet Union was actually communist by nature? You're living in a dream world ...it was a fascist, Stalinist dictatorship of brutal proportions. The only way Stalin's leadership could have become more Tsarist is if he'd named himself Tsar Iosef Stalin ...Poland was under the iron boot ...the whole lot of it ...and all of them hated it.

[plan_D]

The Comet was a good opponent against the IS-2, Panther and Tiger. I wouldn't rank it along side an IS-3, no way. The IS-3 is impressive in armour protection and cannon power but it still wasn't the greatest, in my opinion. Lacking all kinds of vital aspects of a tank it was let down ...it was also let down by it's crews.

We must remember when discussing a continuation of the war that the U.S was going to gear up for the production of the M26E4 'Super Pershing' which had the T15E2 90mm cannon. 25 had been built by May 7th and an order of 1000 had been made. One 'Super Pershing' served in north-west Europe. It served in the 33rd Armored Regiment of 3rd Armored Division. It destroyed a King Tiger and Panther in Dessau, in one day.

[schwarzpanzer]

Originally Posted by Glider

Have to disagree withyou both on the JS3 against the M26 and Comet.

He said A41, that means Centurion, I knew what he meant, sorry Glider.

The Sherman M4 was not out-classed by the T-36/76 Model 1941

Yes it was, inferior (by far) on: armour, manouverability, ground pressure, speed, fuel consumption, range, protection, gun, the list just goes on!

The Sherman (76W) was the MBT of the U.S forces by May 1945.

I was thinking '44 for some reason!

Starting over a year later Shermans had been produced in numbers exceeding 40,000.

Yes but it cost a lot of tankies they're lives as it excluded the production of heavies to concentrate on the Sherman.

I think it was Patton that said "the war will be either won or lost by that tank"?

it was designed when the Pz.Kpfw IV F/2 was introduced. With which it could combat

When they came up against the greater German designs, they were left to exploit the situation when the tank destroyers had destroyed the enemy armour.

And if you're packing a good enough punch to out-range your opponent ...your armour could be paper for all it mattered.

Right, >PzIV F2 = JgdPzIV/70 or Panther +? vs Archer, M36 and M18 = in that situation the Allied tanks would have no chance!

However a 76 Sherman could kill a Panther, though the gun was supposed to penetrate the glacis.

Also the Hornisse proved to be a deathtrap at most times (except for Vitbesk etc).

if not the tank itself, they would destroy the train or truck sent to supply it.

Good point, forgot that was the main part.

And the Soviets are going to still get the Bazooka when the U.S is at war with them?

Copy it, like the did with the 'Faust.

Wait a second, you go from mocking the Comet because it had 30mm armour ...which it didn't. Then you try and say armour protection over 100mm was useless? I'm quite shocked ...why do I bother?

Well the 102mm was on the turret IIRC, the hull's was around 60mm @ vertical (though the prototype had sloping armour & no hull gun)

Though the glacis was only 30mm (but @ 17 degrees).

Even an 85mm is gonna spank that @ 1km.

109mm at 500 yards, 30 degrees to be precise.

So at half a mile and under it could kill a T34 or IS2? - very impressive!

Sorry, I shouldn't, I know how much you love that Comet (you can still buy them BTW)

The A34 Comet was a remarkable combat machine, reliable, fast

Yes, very.

well-armoured and packed a decent punch.

Against Soviet armour, pathetic.

The Soviet Navy could have kicked off? Are you saying they could produce a navy capable of combating the biggest navies in the world (USN, RN and RCN) in a matter of months?

Probably not, but irritating gradually?

The Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, Indians and East Africans just to name a few were remarkable fighting soldiers.

I know, I had uncles in Dunkirk and I said retreat not surrender/run/collabarate. You have to admit though that the oceans saved the Allies hides for a lot of the war.

My respect for Anzac and particularly Canadians in the 2 WW's is very high. I heard about the East Africans, but not much.

What were the Boers doing at this time?

The Indians? Hah they fought for anyone!

The Gurkhas though...

The majority of those fighting in Burma were Indian.

Who were they fighting for though?

I admit though a lot did fight against Nazi'ism, but a similar number fought with.

My word, you are amazingly disrespectful aren't you?

No, but unlike most Englishmen I'm just not terrified of the PC Brigade.

The Stalinist regime killed around 20 million in it's entire time of existance, not just in World War II

I understand that is accepted, though it is more like 50 million.

The Kulak figures in the UK are kept modest, for obvious reasons.

The Soviet Union attacked Berlin with around one million men ...you call that a lot in a total, global war?

Not bad for just 1 city! -Albeit Berlin.

I know Stalin was a monster, I don't deny it.

[schwarzpanzer]

A part of what I said is unfair; the data you give for the 77mm penetration seems to be for plain AP and APCBC would do more damage, not to mention SV/APDS!

The 77mm's AP penetration is similar to the 85mm (whose optics are very accurate BTW)

The HVAP of the 85mm is better than the 77mm's APCBC.

We can conclude though that APDS would be used in '45?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Hey Schwarzpanzer the Enzian Missles that you are talking about while they were revolutionary for there time, they would have made little impact on massive B-29 raids over Russia. They were just not accurate eneogh.

[plan_D]

I don't think I even want to continue a discussion with someone that is so disrespectful of the Commonwealth. Go look up India's contribution to World War II schwarz ...if you read up a little bit then you'd find that the Indian forces fighting for the Axis never went into the tens of thousands ...while millions upon millions fought for the Allies. You're a disgrace ...and it's not a matter of the PC brigade at all...you're just a disgrace.

[schwarzpanzer]

Hi DerAdler,

I was actually thinking the Allies would have them.

A few of the missiles carried good prox fuses, so why not the Flak shells?

IIRC there was a German missile or airborne-mine that 'listened' and when it heard the sound of a Wright or P&W engine it exploded or sought it out?

I forget the name and details, anyone else know?

Originally Posted by PlanD

You're a disgrace

Why thank you!

and it's not a matter of the PC brigade at all

It is, don't lie to me. I can smell your fear from here.

Though to be honest, I can't blame you.

[Medvedya]

Originally Posted by schwarzpanzer

I understand that is accepted, though it is more like 50 million.

Not quite as bad as that - the official figures put the total casualties (civilian and military) around 30 million, but the truth is - we don't really know, or ever will know.

[plan_D]

You haven't the slightest idea about the Indian contribution to the war against the Axis powers. I'm actually ed you even carry on when you have already proven you don't have a clue.

Read about Burma - get a clue, then apologise to all those people that fought in the jungles. And not just the Indians but those that relied on the Indians and were grateful of the Indians fighting alongside them one such person being my grandfather. You haven't the slightest ounce of a clue to disgrace the Indian troops and workers. You'd quickly receive a slap from all those who fought in Burma spouting that ****.

[schwarzpanzer]

Originally Posted by Medveya

Not quite as bad as that - the official figures put the total casualties (civilian and military) around 30 million, but the truth is - we don't really know, or ever will know.

That is unfortunately so true.

PlanD:

How about commonwealth troops who had to fight them, or were stabbed in the back when they trusted them?

My gran is still upset by what happened t her uncle at the hands of those 'brave Allies'.

I can see we are at different ends of this and I do not want to hurt you with this, I see your point and respect it but you must do the same with me?

This topic can obviously make us both bitter.

Funnily a colleagues dad was also in Burma and slagged every foreigner off.

I think that was definately the worst place to be, I repect anyone who fought there, I could manage Siberia, but not there, no way.

[marconi]

I think that was definitely the worst place to be, I respect anyone who fought there, I could manage Siberia, but not there, no way.

I'm not sure what is better: 40 degrees Celsius below or above zero.

I think we are using wrong arguments for explaining our points of view.It doesn't really matter whether Sherman was equal to T-34 or not.More important how many troops both sides had,how were they equipped, where were they at that time.

By the way, why are you thinking that it would be Russians who would have started the war?I've heard that Americans were planning a nuclear attack against USSR (plan called "Totality").

[Medvedya]

Well, the Soviet Union would have much less of a logistical problem in that it could keep shipping war material to the front without there being oceans in the way. A T-34 could be still made in Chelyabinsk and simply loaded on a train all the way to Germany.

Also - I think there would be enormous public pressure from people in the west to call it off and negotiate, even if such negotiations were to the Soviets favour.

[plan_D]

Unlike the Germans, the Western Allies could bomb the Soviet factories though.

And schwarz, there were a small number of murders that I already knew about. And in fact those were mostly the Burmese, not Indians and it's no excuse to go tarring the Indians contribution.

[Medvedya]

From Germany to the Urals and back? Nyet.

[Glider]

We could of course just clobber the railway yards and depots.
I know the Germans tried it but to compare the power of the German bombers to the 1000 bomber raids available to the allies on a dedicated basis. Next to nothing will move.