Login

russian armor

USF Sherman sandbag upgrade

25 Nov 2015, 00:27 AM
#1
avatar of Skabinsk

Posts: 238

Do anyone else think that either through VET or purchase the USF Sherman should get Sandbags all around the vehicle for durability?

It wouldn't be as good as the german armor skirts ofc but would give it a little something, like an armor boost or some HP or something. Plus it would look cool :D

(oops USF, not UFH, typo)
25 Nov 2015, 00:44 AM
#2
avatar of IGOR

Posts: 228

its not a bad idea ... vcoh shermans had this through vet , but i don't remember in what the sandbags really helped.
25 Nov 2015, 00:55 AM
#3
avatar of Francis

Posts: 61

Sandbags didn't have any effect vs panzerfausts or other shells, what they did was stress even further the sherman transmission, and was being constantly banned by High Command Regulations
25 Nov 2015, 01:00 AM
#4
avatar of Bananenheld

Posts: 1593 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 00:55 AMFrancis
Sandbags didn't have any effect vs panzerfausts or other shells, what they did was stress even further the sherman transmission, and was being constantly banned by High Command Regulations

It looks cool thought
25 Nov 2015, 01:02 AM
#5
avatar of F1sh

Posts: 521

I though sandbags were just so bullets wouldn't ricochet and hit the turret gunner.
25 Nov 2015, 01:07 AM
#6
avatar of Ulaire Minya

Posts: 372

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 00:55 AMFrancis
Sandbags didn't have any effect vs panzerfausts or other shells, what they did was stress even further the sherman transmission, and was being constantly banned by High Command Regulations

Sandbags had plenty of effect versus Panzerfausts for the same reason that wire mesh side skirts on axis vehicles helped against bazooka rounds. It created standoff by causing the warhead to detonate early, thus limiting the effectiveness of the main charge. The practice continues to this day with the much more modern active armor.
25 Nov 2015, 01:09 AM
#7
avatar of Francis

Posts: 61

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 01:02 AMF1sh
I though sandbags were just so bullets wouldn't ricochet and hit the turret gunner.


Well, first off, noone in they're right mind would shoot their rifles and/or mgs at a tank. One, it would certainly have no effect, and two, it would reveal you're position for the Sherman to shoot at you.

Second, the sandbags, wire mesh, chicken wire and armor plates we're all improvised defense vs the german infantry AT weapons, mostly panzerfausts and faustpatrones, which despite very low range, had a pretty good shot at knocking out any tank (panzerfaust 60 could go through 200 mm of armor). The sandbags wer're put with the purpose of stopping the HEAT warhead to punch through the armor, but off all the cases I've read, heard and saw documented, no upgrade installed on both Sherman or T-34 could prevent the HEAT warhead of going through, which is why in 44-45 all tank regiments going in close quarter combat, like street fighting for example, had to be escorted by infantry, snipers and even some times flamethrowers to smoke out the panzerfausters so that the tanks could shoot at the intended targets (like blockhouses turned fortresses) from safety.

Cheers.
25 Nov 2015, 01:16 AM
#8
avatar of Ulaire Minya

Posts: 372

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 01:09 AMFrancis


Well, first off, noone in they're right mind would shoot their rifles and/or mgs at a tank. One, it would certainly have no effect, and two, it would reveal you're position for the Sherman to shoot at you.

Second, the sandbags, wire mesh, chicken wire and armor plates we're all improvised defense vs the german infantry AT weapons, mostly panzerfausts and faustpatrones, which despite very low range, had a pretty good shot at knocking out any tank (panzerfaust 60 could go through 200 mm of armor). The sandbags wer're put with the purpose of stopping the HEAT warhead to punch through the armor, but off all the cases I've read, heard and saw documented, no upgrade installed on both Sherman or T-34 could prevent the HEAT warhead of going through, which is why in 44-45 all tank regiments going in close quarter combat, like street fighting for example, had to be escorted by infantry, snipers and even some times flamethrowers to smoke out the panzerfausters so that the tanks could shoot at the intended targets (like blockhouses turned fortresses) from safety.

Cheers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_armour
not that hard to find
25 Nov 2015, 01:19 AM
#9
avatar of BeefSurge

Posts: 1891

Why would it make sense for tanks to build sandbags for infantry?
25 Nov 2015, 01:24 AM
#10
avatar of medhood

Posts: 621

I'd want it, I think all USF tanks die too easily compared to their counterparts especially when Axis have way better AT (Elephant, Jagdpanther, Pak 43, Shreks, Panther) so it'd be awesome if Shermans could get some sort of unlockable armour or health buff either through Vet or Munitions
25 Nov 2015, 03:26 AM
#11
avatar of Contrivance

Posts: 165 | Subs: 2

There's just as many sources stating that they worked versus ones stating that they failed.

The reason I've read for it failing to work against HEAT warheads was that early HEAT warheads weren't designed correctly to detonate at their optimal distance, and that the extra distance provided by sandbags actually helped the molten stream to converge at the right point.

Another reason I've read is that the sandbag helped 'catch' the Panzerfaust so that it detonated more perpendicular to the plate's facing, whereas some impacts might have hit at more shallow angles and failed to burn through. In this case the sandbag ended up neither helping or hindering, since it still added extra distance the molten stream had to pass through, but now the molten stream was aimed more directly at the plate so had less thickness to burn through.

I honestly don't know which side to believe, the arguments do make sense for both sides. Modern day slat armour functions a bit differently from WWII spaced armour though, so even there we don't have a direct comparison to draw from.

What we do know for certain is that German spaced armour (Schürtzen) was designed to protect the vulnerable side hull and suspension/wheels from 14.5mm anti-tank rifle fire, and it did that job effectively. The bullet would penetrate the 8mm armour but get sufficiently slowed down and/or fragmented so that it could not do any further damage.
25 Nov 2015, 05:52 AM
#12
avatar of medhood

Posts: 621

Give me side log armour!
25 Nov 2015, 06:02 AM
#13
avatar of Gbpirate
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 1153 | Subs: 1

When reading Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's book "Brothers in Arms: The Epic Story of the 761st Tank Battalion", I clearly remember Abdul-Jabbar distinctly addressing the tendency for Sherman crews to put sandbags, trees, anything they could on the front of their Sherman tanks. After realizing it didn't do anything, he said that the crews felt safer.
Just to note, he interviewed living members of the 761st when conducting his research.
25 Nov 2015, 06:25 AM
#14
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 00:55 AMFrancis
Sandbags didn't have any effect vs panzerfausts or other shells, what they did was stress even further the sherman transmission, and was being constantly banned by High Command Regulations


This is correct.
It is also the fact that Germans loved to put replacement tracks on their tanks at 'important' positions which was also banned by the German Army.
They did it nevertheless because they reported that they felt safer. Many tanks in CoH added this feature.
25 Nov 2015, 07:05 AM
#15
avatar of Switzerland
Donator 33

Posts: 545

American paratroopers acquired and used the panzerfaust whenever they could. Was abit perplexed that they didn't have a Faust ability. Truly though amazing what elite infantry units did.
25 Nov 2015, 08:16 AM
#16
avatar of jugglerman

Posts: 92

When reading Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's book "Brothers in Arms: The Epic Story of the 761st Tank Battalion", I clearly remember Abdul-Jabbar distinctly addressing the tendency for Sherman crews to put sandbags, trees, anything they could on the front of their Sherman tanks. After realizing it didn't do anything, he said that the crews felt safer.
Just to note, he interviewed living members of the 761st when conducting his research.


Kareem Abdul-Jabar? The NBA player?
25 Nov 2015, 08:28 AM
#17
avatar of Kreatiir

Posts: 2819



Kareem Abdul-Jabar? The NBA player?


25 Nov 2015, 08:36 AM
#18
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 4314 | Subs: 7



This is correct.
It is also the fact that Germans loved to put replacement tracks on their tanks at 'important' positions which was also banned by the German Army.
They did it nevertheless because they reported that they felt safer. Many tanks in CoH added this feature.


Also many tank models have this because it looks more cool then you have it ;)
25 Nov 2015, 08:36 AM
#19
avatar of Jespe

Posts: 190

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 05:52 AMmedhood
Give me side log armour!


Russian used logs on top of their tanks.
Not guite sure was it against that magnetic AT mine that germans used. or did they just believe that Sabot/HEAT cannot penetrate it. Or to protect their diesel fuel tanks.
25 Nov 2015, 08:42 AM
#20
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Nov 2015, 08:36 AMJespe


Russian used logs on top of their tanks.


Russians used infantry on top of their tanks :snfPeter:
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

985 users are online: 985 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49101
Welcome our newest member, Dorca477
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM