Hello,
i made a excel list for tanks which was build during the ww2.
You can find their performanche and victim vaulues.
Excel list
Maybe there is someone who is interessted in it.
Tank performanche (Excel)
8 May 2017, 13:45 PM
#1
Posts: 2243
8 May 2017, 14:40 PM
#2
Posts: 2066
Interesting! Where did all the shermans go?!
Kappa
8 May 2017, 15:41 PM
#3
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Moving to the Library.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
8 May 2017, 16:02 PM
#4
Posts: 862
nice work.
you have the SU-76 but no Marders? (c. 3,000 Marders)
you have the SU-76 but no Marders? (c. 3,000 Marders)
9 May 2017, 05:56 AM
#5
Posts: 2243
Interesting! Where did all the shermans go?!
I dont know..thats the question i ask myself.
Have anyone an answer?
9 May 2017, 05:59 AM
#6
Posts: 2243
nice work.
you have the SU-76 but no Marders? (c. 3,000 Marders)
Hi,
i think the Marder was build on the chassie from the Pz2. There was no new-building for that tank destroyer, right?
27 Nov 2017, 15:22 PM
#7
Posts: 862
I dont know..thats the question i ask myself.
Have anyone an answer?
Aside from the losses, etc, I am sure a lot were also sold to allies. The US Army only kept M4A3 versions in use after the war, so the rest would have been considered obsolete and/or put into "mothballs" (along with no longer needing them as the US demobilized). The Sherman was already recognized as not a modern tank after the war so keeping them, particularly the older variants, probably didn't make a lot of sense.
The same goes for a lot of other equipment. The US had huge stockpiles of surplus for years which were used for scrap metal.
27 Nov 2017, 18:02 PM
#8
1 
Posts: 2885
USA may have paid for 50 000 shermans, but they surely didn't produce that many. Neither there was a need for that many in europe, nor in pacific. This figure was probably written in the reports just to scare soviet army that was much stronger than allied forces in europe by the end of war.
27 Nov 2017, 21:43 PM
#9
Posts: 862
USA may have paid for 50 000 shermans, but they surely didn't produce that many. Neither there was a need for that many in europe, nor in pacific. This figure was probably written in the reports just to scare soviet army that was much stronger than allied forces in europe by the end of war.
You are sounding like WW2 era German intelligence.
Here is the Wiki article with links to 3 different sources for totals (all coming to that total):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman
If you want really astounding differences, look at the production disparities in non-cool tech like trucks.
Just one example is that the US alone produced almost 3 million trucks and lorries compared to less than 400,000 by the Germans. To pick just one very sepcialized model, the DUKW (2.5 ton amphibious) they produced "only" 21,000 during the war. Great Britain, who was freed from having to produce these things because the US did it so well, still produced almost the same amount as the Germans (347,000 to the German 387,000) and did it with one country, not including France, Italy, Czechoslovakia, etc.
Sexy kit might win an engagement, but it is the non-sexy stuff that will win you the war.
27 Nov 2017, 21:49 PM
#10
Posts: 862
I should add that the US also produced 28,000 light tanks (Stuarts and Chaffees), 11,500 tank destroyers and 4300 "Priests" (as compared to 700 Hummels)
And of course we haven't added up the British or Soviet tank production.
And of course we haven't added up the British or Soviet tank production.
27 Nov 2017, 22:18 PM
#11
1 Posts: 2885
I'm not even trying to compare the numbers of equipment that the USA produced to german ones. Its obvious that germany produced way less. Still, it doesn't make american sources credible. They may have produced 30 000, maybe 35 000, but the number of 50 000 is definitely too much. There is actually no good reason for giving out real information in such reports, as well as there is no good reason in beliving in them blindly. There was good reason to tell american citizens that they had to build that many and that this is the reason why the treasury is empty.
As for the wiki article mentioned, the table with production variants doesn't even sum to its "totals"... The plurality of sources doesn't help either as all in all they all have to end in official reports of the government or producers. Having many sources does nothing when all of them are derived from same information.
As for the wiki article mentioned, the table with production variants doesn't even sum to its "totals"... The plurality of sources doesn't help either as all in all they all have to end in official reports of the government or producers. Having many sources does nothing when all of them are derived from same information.
9 Jun 2018, 08:35 AM
#12
Posts: 173
I think the Marder was based on the case from the Pz2. There was no new-working for that tank destroyer
Аctually, it depends on model. Marder I was based on chassis of captured french tanks and halftracks. Second model was on Pz II chassis, and third one was built on a Czechoslovakian LT-38, more known as Panzer 38.
And even more shitstorm caused the main gun - on some models it was PaK40, on others - Puma-like 50-mm cannon,a lot of captured Soviet 76,2 ZiS was used as well.
It is more like of ersatz-tank, those with Hetzer and other easy-to-produce and cheap tanks kept Germany floating during last years.
9 Jun 2018, 10:51 AM
#13
Posts: 464
USA may have paid for 50 000 shermans, but they surely didn't produce that many. Neither there was a need for that many in europe, nor in pacific. This figure was probably written in the reports just to scare soviet army that was much stronger than allied forces in europe by the end of war.does it include the E8????
9 Jun 2018, 14:57 PM
#14
Posts: 571
Pretty much almost the entirety of the Marder series is combining old/ near obsolete tanks with some sort of anti-tank gun, either German made or captured and calling it a TD.
9 Jun 2018, 20:20 PM
#15
Posts: 2145 | Subs: 2
Sexy kit might win an engagement, but it is the non-sexy stuff that will win you the war.
Here is the next thing you need in COH3, transport vehicles. Pick up troops/wounded, and transport them back to base faster than they could walk. Maybe have some fall back spot laid down by commander or units so they can partially retreat. They run fast for short burst towards retreat spot then must move slowly for a bit. Then a truck COULD pick them up and transport back/forth to base. Would add another layer of micro. Good /Bad...Who knows.
23 Nov 2019, 19:12 PM
#16
Posts: 888
USA may have paid for 50 000 shermans, but they surely didn't produce that many. Neither there was a need for that many in europe, nor in pacific. This figure was probably written in the reports just to scare soviet army that was much stronger than allied forces in europe by the end of war.
No the US did not produce 50,000 Shermans. It was 49,234 with the last one rolling off the assembly line in July 1945 before tank production was scaled way back and only the Perishing continued to be produced.
11 Jul 2020, 00:08 AM
#17
Posts: 1954
USA may have paid for 50 000 shermans, but they surely didn't produce that many. Neither there was a need for that many in europe, nor in pacific. This figure was probably written in the reports just to scare soviet army that was much stronger than allied forces in europe by the end of war.
I'd bet that the commonly quoted 49k is pretty accurate. Not only were they widespread in the US forces, we gave or sold them to our allies by the thousands. I watched once documentary on one of the Canadian's worst single-day defeats. They lost something like 400 Shermans when they tried attacking across a large stretch of open ground into a bunch of 88's. It didn't matter. The Canadians changed tactics and overran the Germans a few days later with the other 300 Shermans.
Ullumu's numbers look correct. As for the Sherman question, remember that the production was ramping up, so it wouldn't be surprising if tens of thousand's of Sherman's hadn't made it across the Atlantic at the end of the war. There was probably something like 15k Shermans lost in Europe. Also, some of the Shermans went to the Pacific theater.
You can find some totalized data here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_losses_in_World_War_II
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
251 | ||
 |
|
|
11 | ||
 |
|
|
8 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.600215.736+15
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1107614.643+8
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.273108.717+24
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.261137.656+2
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1235
Board Info
750 users are online:
750 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM