T34s in Normandy (with US of UK markings)

Why do you all think the T-34/76 was worth copying?

I believe the late model Panzer IV or even the Sherman was a better all around vehicle. The T-34 worked for the Russians because their ideas were that the vehicle's entire life was measured in days or weeks. Crew comfort and efficiency wasn't important because their crews didn't last all that long either. The 76 mm gun on the T-34 wasn't particularly powerful.

As for the best tank of the war, my preference is the late model Panther. It was very fast, had a wonderful gun (better than the 88 mm in the Tiger I) and had good armour all around and very heavy armour in front. The Tiger I wasn't all that bad either with better armour all around. For a lighter vehicle, the Easy 8 Sherman was pretty decent.

Another point to consider is that every nation was building tanks to their own operational theories and practices. An Infantry tank had different requirements and purpose than a Cruiser tank....

- Ivan.

And both of them broke down at the least possibility for them to do so, while the Sherman and T-34 were quite powerful, well-armored, and most crucially actually were reliable machines. German armor was overengineered and tended to break down far too much to be viable at a warfighting level.
 
Another point to consider is that every nation was building tanks to their own operational theories and practices. An Infantry tank had different requirements and purpose than a Cruiser tank....

- Ivan.

Indeed, and Britains Infantry tanks did the job well. Ther were things that could have been better particularly speed and turret ring size but no real need for a change. The Cruiser tanks on the other hand were so bad that almost anything would have been an improvement. This is where a Western T34 would have fitted in, provided it came early enough. This means that rather than Stalin handing over the blue prints British Inteligence would have to obtain the plans one way or another.

If you wanted another option for a British Medium/Cruiser Tank have Vickers build the Vallentine big enough to take a 6pdr in a three man turret and with an engine large enough to give it a reasonable top speed. Say 25 mph road speed with 15 - 20mph cross country. By 1944 a Comet analogue should be ready to enter service.
 
The Soviets actually did want the U.S. to produce the T-34 for them and provided a sample vehicle as well as some engineering documents to the Ordinance labs at Aberdeen. The T-34 that was provided is still in the Ordinance Museum's collection. It is the 'cut open' T-34/76 that I used to show when conducting tours of the Museums collection at Aberdeen (before the vehicles were moved to Ft Lee as part of BRAC :-()
The U.S. convinced the Soviets that the difficulties of converting the T-34 to be built in American factories would delay production and that they should accept Shermans instead. There is a good book about Shermans in Soviet use Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks by Dmitri Loza. They were well liked and considered the equal of the T-34. They had different features that were liked but were considered good tanks.
 
Could the allies have got blue prints from Stalin if they had pushed.

If so would it have made the war in the West go any better?

Yeah, the Western Allies would have been so much better served by a tank that killed 3 crew members when k/o'd instead of just one.

On average when a Sherman was k/o'd one crewman was a casualty, when a -34 was k/o'd, one crewman survived. The rear mounted transmission required the fuel tanks be mounted in the crew compartment.

Let's recap, worse armor then the Sherman, a worse gun, less reliable, more crew casualties. Yep, perfect tank for the WAllies.
 
Don't forget the petrol engine as well!

The Petrol engine was NOT the problem. The problem was a combination of the ammunition storage and the fact the Germans had a very effective APHE round with an HE filler that exploded after it penetrated the armor. The British did not use an HE filler in their Ap rounds. Even the AP rounds they received from the U.S that were designed for an HE filler were delivered without a filler or with an inert filler (I have found both reported) So that when the British did penetrate a German tank there was less of a chance of causing ammunition to detonate.
 
Also, the T-34 is wider than the M4, which makes it too big for existing British rail infrastructure.
 
Last edited:
You know you've been playing too much World of Tanks when I thought of this first.

scaled.php
 
WW2

Personally I'd say that the Centurion and T-55 were the best tanks of the war - they were just a little too late to actually be used in it, that's all...

The T55 was a long way away. There was the T44, that was being tested in 45, but the T54 was only introduced, in what might be termed as preproduction models, in 1946. The first definitive T54 was the 1949 model and the first to be in really large scale production was the 1951 model. Then came the T55, but I assume you were talking about the whole T54/55 family in your post.
The first six preproduction Centurion I were only delivered in May45, so if we regard them as WW2 tanks we also consider the Panther II.
When people talk about WW2 tanks most are talking about tanks that actually were used in WW2.
 
Over engineered?

And both of them broke down at the least possibility for them to do so, while the Sherman and T-34 were quite powerful, well-armored, and most crucially actually were reliable machines. German armor was overengineered and tended to break down far too much to be viable at a warfighting level.

If we compare tanks with similar weights, we must recognise that the PzKfw III and IV were very reliable since their early models. The later german tanks were overweight rather than over engineered. The panther gained ten tons during it's development process, overstresing the engine and transmission. When the US turned the T25 into the T26, adding an extra 10tons in a process that mirrors the Panther complicated development history, they turned what was a very reliable machine into an unreliable one.
The Russian tanks were not unreliable once the T34 got sorted out in 42, but were very maintenance intensive. Since they were used in "bursts"rather then sustained actions there were enough pauses for overhauls. A lot of the german tanks reputation for unreliability comes from overuse, without the time to have them properly overhauled.
 
Also, the T-34 is wider than the M4, which makes it too big for existing British rail infrastructure.

It was narrower at 9ft 10 than the Centurion at 11ft 1 and the Comet at 10ft 1 so the loading guage could have been worked around.

Come to think of it a Cromwell was only 3 1/2 inches narrower than the T34. With sloped armour would have been a superiour tank to the early T34s but as usual by the time it reached the troops thanks to official and industrial foot draging it was already obsolecent, mainly due to its inadequate gun and vertical armour.
 
Last edited:
It was certainly one of the excuses, how valid an excuse it was may be a different question. I have to admit to being sceptical.
 

Sior

Banned
It was narrower at 9ft 10 than the Centurion at 11ft 1 and the Comet at 10ft 1 so the loading guage could have been worked around.

Come to think of it a Cromwell was only 3 1/2 inches narrower than the T34. With sloped armour would have been a superiour tank to the early T34s but as usual by the time it reached the troops thanks to official and industrial foot draging it was already obsolecent, mainly due to its inadequate gun and vertical armour.

They changed to road transport of tanks in 1941-2 with the Scammells and Thorneycroft Antars.
 
Personally I'd say that the Centurion and T-55 were the best tanks of the war - they were just a little too late to actually be used in it, that's all...
As AdA said, whilst technically correct since they appeared right at the end and didn't really see any serious service they're generally not counted as WW2 tanks. Plus whilst a major fan of the Centurion she didn't really hit her full stride until a few Marks into her development.
 
They changed to road transport of tanks in 1941-2 with the Scammells and Thorneycroft Antars.

So in other words the loading gauge issue was an official smoke screen to allow the government to avoid spending the money to get first rate equipment, and they only bothered to find a solution after men began dieing. Typical.
 

Sior

Banned
So in other words the loading gauge issue was an official smoke screen to allow the government to avoid spending the money to get first rate equipment, and they only bothered to find a solution after men began dieing. Typical.

Mostly down to Nuffield's strangle hold on what he thought the Army should be getting i.e. the substandard crap he assured the government was the match of any enemy.
 
Top