sherman vs t34 korean war

This organization has been the Army's primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973. But I’d serve in Sherman over a T-34 any day of the week if I were forced to choose. During the Korean war the Americans captured a North Korean T-34 85, evaluating its performance. Where the T-34 was found, the Pershing reigned supreme. The sherman was an ideal tank for us to use at that time. This report seems only to cover the last 2 and and a half years of the war. Looking at the arm cars we see almost no losses compared to the tanks. There were also around 75 sp 76mm des guns examined of which only 3 were des by tank fire accoridng to the report. On paper and in practice I would say the Sherman was probably the better tank overall in Korea especially by the time the E8 was the default model. In my opinion, the most useful and producive period of ORO was in the early 50s. For an overall ratio of around 9 des korean tanks and sp gun for each US tank des. sherman vs t34 korea. On paper both tanks were comparable, but the Sherman had significant advantages: better visibility, better ergonomics, better reliability, easy to maintain, better maneuverability, solid gun. Strong dated 16th June 1951. According to "The Korean War" by the Korean Institute of Military History, the NKs had: on December 27 1950: 120 Tanks (T34/85)73 Self-propelled guns (SU-76s)60 Armored Vehicles (BA-64s) on May 12 1950: 173 tanks176 Self-propelled guns60 Armored vehicles on June 25 1950: 242 tanks176 Self-propelled guns54 Armored vehicles I know the Soviets sent additional tanks between Jun-Oct--not sure of exact numbers but it was on the order of magnitude of 50-100. Benannt war der mit 50.000 Exemplaren meistgebaute US-Panzer des Zweiten Weltkrieges nach General of the Army William T. Sherman (18201891). Plus an unkown number of SU-76. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. It probably could be 3.7 though. For the type of analysis we do at TDI, we find some of the early ORO reports useful. About 20% of the engagements took place at 350-750 yds, and a similar number at 750-1,150 yds. Jun 10 @ 1:04pm Why are M4 and T34 Variants so op? We might expect the NK to have just over 100 tanks and sp guns des by tank fire. Sherman 47 - 20 - 2.35Pershing 38 - 6 - 6.33M46 12 - 8 - 1.5, All info from Steve Zaloga's "M26 Pershing". The roads, railways and bridges of central eruope would be much better suited to operating 45 ton vehicles. It had years to become tested. RAC was sold to General Research Corporation (GRC, which still exists)...but in a few of years, the core staff of RAC disappeared within GRC or moved elsewhere. The T34 had slightly better armor, but it was not enough to overcome the … They are also on file in the National Archives in a record group that has not (as of 1995) been declassified. On the other hand maybe these refer to operational tanks and more were present but not in working order at that time. Sie waren begeistert. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. The UN teams found 240 T34 wrecks to investigate from sep to oct (possibly latter). Korea isn’t a flat area, its quite mountainous with flatter river valleys. In addition, the T-34 has a much lower, squatter profile. By 1952, ORO had 220 staff. Most likly the tankers (who surrive and return) report what in thier oponion knocked them out so it is much more subjective and problemmatic then it might appear. 2. Many tanks of the era surpass the Sherman on 1:1 comparison but the fact remains that the Sherman is the tank that won the war. A much superior subcaliber ammo would've also contributed, since the most dangerous targets between attackers would've been the armoured vehicles. Sort by. Furthermore, they seem to have been victims of a rash of freak hits. Up to the end of oct or maybe the begining of nov. Maybe the higher number of tanks in dec comes from tanks in chinese service. I have read most of the main report but no anexx and only a little on korean losses. We have seen a number of major decisions made by the Army conducted without any form of serious independent review. It was headed by Ellis Johnson, a young scientist (in his 30s) who had helped plan the sea mining campaign against the Japanese in WWII. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. These numbers point to 240 T34s des max by the end of dec but the UN conted 240 min by the end of oct probaly. That perimeter was steadily being reinforced, with an eye toward an eventual breakout and counteroffensive. Everything had to be transported across the atlantic. Chris: Can we copy it and offer it to the public? 120 tanks spread all over NK is not as conc as 240 spread accros the narrow parts or around pusan. I am the author (although I am only listed as a researcher) of "A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers" published by Office of Technology Assessment (OTA, also now dissolved), [This message has been edited by Chris Lawrence (edited 08-16-2001).]. Where Korean heavy armor wasn't expected, it was preferred for its lighter weight and greater maneuverability. The M24 short 75mm gun proably generated more lethal fragments from ts HE shells than all other US tanks. Why are its statistics so poor? Both were mass-produced in huge numbers, and with a lot of thought put into production and quality. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". Against tanks, troops in open and undercover the 90mm gun is better. The 10 to 15 ton larger tanks might be nice to have but whith little armour remaining they are more costly to produce and operate. They are also scattered about in various OR and Defense libraries. Most of these replacement tanks never made it to the front cuz they were blown-up by the U.S. Air Force while still loaded on trains. During a retreat I could see the tankers missing a few enemy tanks. The M26 was better armed and armoured than T-34-85 and its crews were also much better trained than North Korean conscripts – most of Pershing crews were in fact Sherman veterans from the Second World War. For more information on differences in tank production and resulting differences in tanks (very interesting topic), I recommend this lecture, goes for about 25 minutes and compares US, Soviet, and German manufacturing in WWII. They were each probably best for the nation that made them. Melihat tabel 1 dari kami melihat tank menembak bukan masalah besar dalam merobohkan tank Sekutu di Korea. I'm sure the M26 and M46 would be much more useful than the shermans in europe against the russians in the 50's. I get it that T34 were good tanks in WW2 but M4 shermans? Destroyed No. A study conducted after the war counted 119 tank-vs-tank actions during the war, 104 involving US Army tank units and 15 involving the Marine 1st Tank Bn. The higher velocity also allows for more accurate placment but greater disace from bounce placement with delay fuzes. Although M24 light tanks were not a match for Russian built T34's, US medium tanks destroyed T34's as a rate of approximately seven for every US tank destroyed by them. Instead the Army created the Concepts Analysis Agency (CAA, now known as the Center for Army Analysis) by combining two existing army operations research groups (CORG and CDEC) and adding new staff. Personally I think they just put it at 4.0 as a gap filler to give the US something at that BR. For the T-34 that means they thought very carefully about how stripped back, rough, and simple it could be, for the Sherman it means that things were only out into it if they were absolutely proven to work, and work reliably.T-34s would be made in Soviet tractor factories (slight exaggeration) and transported over land straight to fighting on the Eastern Front — they weren't expected to survive very long, and were accordingly made just good enough.Shermans would be built by the US auto and railway industry (mostly) and shipped across an ocean to fight in either Europe or the Pacific theatre — they would operate far from home, and so would need to be both transportable and very reliable. Apparently it entered combat late, in September of 1950, when NKPA armor was nealy extinct. Im Jahr 1943 begutachteten US-Spezialisten sowjetische Panzer. There are a large number of problems with this type of resarch. The sherman did have a bit larger number of permant losses compared to the M26 but very close. If this is true it points out how difficult it is to estimate enemy tank str, losees and cause. DEMOCRACY (and proper manufacturing) IS NON NEGOTIABLE, Dont worry we have other 400 tanks tovarish. Berichten zufolge hat der Sherman zwischen Juli und November 1950 41 feindliche Panzer zerstört. The armor, general mobility and the firepower were generally pretty similar though the US did have large access to better ammunition overall (HVAP, etc) by the time Korean War started. The mechanics knew what to do to fix it. Only 24 of these 119 engagements involved more than three North Korean tanks and most were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less. 2. ORO had no relationship with RAND. Trying to pick which is objectively better is both hard and fairly pointless, because of said different needs and goals, and because a tank's performance depends on so much more than just the machine. I'm honestly curious if it is as lop sided as everyone would believe or on an evenish playing field. Many of the tanks may have been des in aug but examined months later after multiple hits from different weapons and canabilization of parts by the NK. The poor road conditons, brigbes, raukways, terrain, vast distances all worked against the M26 and M46. You can't find every tank with the time and persoonal you have. The Sherman's deficiency in off-road conditions is no big secret, having been explored in the famous Swedish video. T34's destroyed M24 5 1M4A3 7 24M26 3 31M46 1 18. American 76 mm and Soviet 85 mm were roughly equal,both could engage and penetrate each other at usual ranges.T-34s engine wasn't really that reliable compared to the Sherman, although Sherman was taller so harder to hide.On softer advantages, Sherman had quite a lead over T-34.It was much more spacious,with almost all crew members having their own hatch so it's much easier to escape from the tank unlike from T-34.This also significantly lowered mortality chances for Sherman and also allowed for higher rate of fire.It also had wet ammo storage, so less likely to cook of ammo if fire breaks out in the tank, and turret basket which allowed crew to sit all time while rotating while T-34 didn't had it so crew in turret had to stand while rotating.Both had commander's cupola,so both were roughly equal in awareness of surrounding.Overall,I think that late Shermans are your better option. T34 line vs Sherman line. ORO and the Army had an uneasy relationship, particularly with Ellis Johnson. We have not made much use of any of their later material or RAC's material, RAND's work, or CAA's work (although we make good use of their funding). The ORO/RAC reports can be gotten from GRC (located in Tyson's Coner, VA), but I am not sure what the procedure is. The M46 appears no better, with 67 mechanical failures in the same period out of a total strength of 188 - a 36% loss rate, in comparison to 30 combat losses. These figures are comparable to the M46 and M4A3E8 Medium tanks, since at the time all US tanks had similar fire control systems. Where the T-34 was found, the Pershing reigned supreme. The UN lost large numbers of tanks during the retreat from the north due to mechancal breakdown rather then enemy action. The Soviet Union delivered some 250 T-34/85s to the nascent Democratic People’s Republic of Korea before March 1950. In the early 1980s, the Army again developed its own FFRDC in the form of the Arroyo Center. The total number of T34s committed appears to be 600 all of which APPEAR to be lost according to the report. Were they equal? CAA does not publish a significant number of unclassified reports or analysis. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. The shortest engagement range was 10 yards, and the longest known successful engagement by and M26 is 3,000 yards. Of the 40 tanks penetrated, 16 were hit in tank to tank combat with enemy T.34's, & 24 were hit by anti-tank guns. In the late 1960s, the Army began shutting down all its FFRDCs: SORO/CRESS, which privatized and then shut down, HumRRO, which privatized and is now effectively defunct, and RAC. Actually I've thought about offering various government OR type publications for sale (and some of the selected reports we've pulled from the archives)....but it takes time to assemble, list them, post them on the site, etc. As long as we don't consider tanks being knocked out by a sub calibre tungsten round or freindly/captured fire. P.S. Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000 Even if these numbers refer to total tank str they may not be the whole picture. Even from mid 43 on the ger usually cut thier PROVEN claims in half when doing operational and stragtegic planning and this figure was pretty close to reality. I'm kind of suspicious of the info because it lists no M-24 losses, and from other sources I know at least 2 and possibly more M-24s were lost at Chonui on July 10, 1950 alone. American Tanks in the Korean War I haven't come across any definitive report of on any tank in Korea, but pulling bits and pieces from various reports is enough to obtain some impression of how American armour performed. I believe this has hurt the Army in the long run and has wasted tax payers money. This is a subreddit for War Thunder, a cross platform vehicular combat MMO developed by Gaijin Entertainment for Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One. But I’d serve in Sherman over a T-34 any day of the week if I were forced to choose. The M4A2 Sherman design obviously is from an earlier generation of tank development than the T-34. The report notes that with a UN tank strength of approx 1200 in Korea, and an estimated mileage of 25 miles per tank per day, the difference in gasoline consumption between a hypothetical use of M4A3 & M46 tanks alone would be 60,000 gallons excess per day for M46 tanks, or 1,800,000 gallons per month. Forget the M4, it's the M46 that appears to be beyond redemption here. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. The quality of materials used were "ample for the job" with some being "better than those used in American tanks". One of the units sent … I am only looking at the info jeff provided from you over a year ago. I should also say that I don't have the WO 342/1 report either. Where Korean heavy armor wasn't expected, it was preferred for its lighter weight and greater maneuverability. Der Cromwell war ganz ordentlich aber auch nicht überragend. 33 comments. No more enemy tanks encountered and no enemy tanks reported as des. 1. It also seems to indicate that no tanks were encoutered towards the end up to the end of jan. Of course the report is not entirly clear about this either. M4 Sherman tanks could not—on paper at least—stand up to a Panther, but the U.S. had the priceless advantage of supporting airpower and plentiful reserves. The M26 was used extensively in the Korean War, where it was pitted against the Russian T34-85 tank. A min number of tank last by the NK would be more like 360 (+50%). I don't think that Hunnicutt had access to this material (not mentioned either in the book or bibliography), not least because it was still classified until 1990, so I thought it was worth describing at some length. Die Legende der sowjetischen Panzertruppe war zugleich der meistgebaute Panzer des Zweiten Weltkriegs. The North Korean People’s Army (NKPA) had almost everything going its way during the earliest Korean War battles. The short-term advantages the Army has gained by having its analytical centers firmly under their thumb has resulted in a Army not benefitting from the advantages of informed independent analysis. Dann erging der Auftrag, für den Panzer … When including all causes of tanks lost the tank that had the lowest % (temporary+permanent) losses was the sherman. I don't have zolga or hunnicourt but If you are talking about tank vs tank combat and protection from ATG as seen by fewer penetrations it is easy to see where the M26 and M46 are 3 times more effective then the Sherman. Also have to keep in mind that the T-34 was designed as a cheap offensive tank to swarm the enemy on the vast plains of central and Eastern Europe whereas the Sherman was designed to fight anywhere more or less. The opposing South Korean and American forces, weak and unprepared, were pushed into a shrinking perimeter around the small port city of Pusan. The reports reccomendations are also only appropriate to korea it says. [This message has been edited by Rich (edited 08-14-2001).]. Third hand, hersay infomation. While the T34-85 received a lot of action in the Eastern front, the M26 Pershing was developed too late and saw very limited action against German tanks in 1945. The M26 and M46 were involved in nearly half of these, the M26 in 38 actions (32%), and the M46 in 12 actions (10%). Sounds both promising and interesting! Some made it as far as Seoul and were available in the battle for Seoul after Inchon--maybe a company or two. The 90mm M3 gun was inferior to the 20pdr but more than capable of taking out T-34/85's at all combat ranges (usually less than 500m in Korea). Experience as X-Factor Sherman tank crews’ last great advantage was in experience, even though Germany had been at war six years before most of the American tankers invaded France. Arm cars in an att would probably be lost at an even higher rate then tanks. The Man with a Pan. This thread is archived. Hit probabilities at these ranges were 69% and 46% respectively. Und nach 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor fest. Is there a way to see the k/d and win ratio on the various models of these two tanks (over all not my stats)? 4. The other tanks also carry a 90 mm gun which will be better against other tanks then the shermans 76mm gun. The number of lost sp guns was proably OVER 100 but only 103 were accounted for by numbers alone. A total of 34 US tanks were knocked out by North Korean armor, including 6 M26 and 8 M46 tanks, of which only 15 were totally lost. Or maybe the T34 crews were avoiding the UN during this period as well. The T-34-85 was the tank the Soviets needed and it worked for them, so I’m not going to bash it. Interestingly the report flatly contradicts Zaloga & states that in its opinion the Sherman M4A3(W)76E8 was equally effective as the M26 & M46 in Korea. Roughly 240 T34 wreaks were found and only 39 were des by tank fire according to the operational reserch teams. Prior to the invasion of the Soviet Union during World War II, the German armed forces were not aware of two newly developed Soviet tanks, the T-34 and the KV.As a result, they were surprised when they met them in combat for the first time in June 1941. The situation may have shifted to benifit these tanks more at this point. Looking through the ORO report I do not yet see US tank type des to NK tanks des. Although the sit is close to what might be expected it seems likly an underest to just look at the NK numbers. share. The armor, general mobility and the firepower were generally pretty similar though the US did have large access to better ammunition overall (HVAP, etc) by the time Korean War started. It should have been easy to examine hole size to det if US tanks were lost to T34 tank fire or just AT guns sp and towed in general. Roughly M4 40%,M24 55%, M26 60% and M46 50%. Going into a little more detail during the month of May 1951, one M46 equipped battalion reported the following maintenance jobs: 3 transmissions replaced40 defective oil cooler fans27 bad magnetic clutches9 broken final drives6 faulty control differentialsplus numerous jobs tackled by the Battalion maintenance platoon (the other jobs were done by dedicated maintenance units in the rear). The M46 in Korea was therefore something of a logistical nightmare. Based on their respective needs and capabilities, both countries built themselves a tank that worked for them, and used it effectively. That is when they conducted some of their most useful long term reserach. RAC never produced as far-reaching or interesting material as ORO, even though they had some good people on staff (for example, one of their vice-presidents was Hugh Cole, the director (and sometimes author) of the Army "Green Book" series (Official History of WWII)). Pershing vs T-34-85, have you ever wondered have those two WW2 tanks battled against each other? There's quite a lot of interesting information on the M26 Pershing & M46 Patton in WO 342/1 Tank and anti-tank warfare: tanks; battle performance and tactics 1951 Feb - 1953 Sept, notably in Notes on Armour by E.D. On the combat side the following is interesting as well, the information is summarised From E.D. < > … Both the M26 & M46 were gas guzzlers, in Korea on an average road march the following fuel consumption was found: Tanks Gasoline consumption (Gallons per mile)M24 1.5M4A3 2.5M26 3.0M46 4.5. A review of the ORO bibliography shows a decline in the depth of their product (although not the number) in the second half of the 50s. sherman vs t34 korea. Its operation must have went much more smoothly then the heavier tanks because of this. Press J to jump to the feed. Better... better at what, and better for whom? Unfortuatly korea was not a typical tank battle. The only real instance of WW2 era Shermans fighting Soviet tanks was during the Korean War, where the E8 variant came up against the T34–85. The M4A3(76)W HVSS Sherman… Nothing else beyond this date no ratios etc. Up to the end of oct as above the reserch teams were exactly similar. War Thunder. In Korea war der "Easy Eight" an fast der Hälfte aller Panzereinsätze gegen feindliche Panzer beteiligt. Be warned it's 28mb & doesn't show a progress bar. The Sherman, and most models of the Cromwell, used a … The above is all referce to T34-85. 3. The effectiveness of heavier frontal armour on tanks is illustrated by the fact that only 30% of hits on the front caused penetration, wheras 76% of hits on the side penetrated. 83% Upvoted. Looking at these figures a force composed of shermans and M24s would be the most effective makeup. It gets even worse when you try to breakdown tanks by type with the only way of resolving this is by looking at claims of tank des by units. No typical tank destroyed ratios. Yes, the Sherman was outclassed there too. Maintenance stats are laid out in a study called "Armor in Korea" Department of OPerational Studies, Far East Command, 1951. a) Anybody care to try and redeem the M4? Is there an index online somewhere to the ORO etc. Korean War: Sherman M4A3E8 ‘Easy Eight’ August 30, 2019 . The tanks studied were the M24 Chaffee, the M4A3 Sherman, the M26 Pershing, & the M46 Patton. Mobility was poor in comparison to the T-34/85 & the M4A3, the M46 appears to have had especially poor cross country performance due to power loss in the transmission & relatively high ground pressure at 13.3psi. Even if they were present in nov and dec the UN did not take over every bit of NK terr at any time. After the first few months the koreans and chinese had few tanks left. Here.... better not saying. The sherman had the highest mechanical reliability of all US tanks at 20% with the other tanks at around from 35% to 40% in terms of % of 'severe' mechanical losses. One thing though, the source is Zaloga, not Hunnicutt. Where the T-34 was found, the Pershing reigned supreme. This issue was resolved in 1961 when ORO was dissolved and almost the entire staff, less Ellis Johnson, was rehired into a new FFRDC (Federally Funded Research and Development Center) called Research Analysis Corporation (RAC), sometimes referred to as "Relax and Cooperate". If the reserch teams are acccuate we have 11 des US tanks of all types to 42 des korean tanks and SP guns. The M46 in korea consummed gas at almost double the rate as the sherman. A panzer kommander once said: "A German panzer is worth 9 American Shermans, the problem is that there is always a 10th Sherman. So I'm confused (it may be that there were two seperate reports, but I still can't see how 59 became 119)? The Soviets delivered more of the tanks later over the course of the Korean War. Sumber informasi saya dapat ditemukan di tautan terlampir. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts, Do not underestimate the power of the .50-cal. The Sherman remained a common U.S. tank in the Korean War, where it fought alongside the M26 Pershing and M46 Patton. All these tanks were American, since British armour did not engage enemy tanks or anti-tank guns during this period. The US knew how to use it and what it needed to keep working. This agrees roughly with observations made from a very much bigger sample in WWII, which indicated that 40% of all hits were on the front surfaces. The probalem if not chinese tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and sp 76mm guns. The towing lug cannot be more than 2" wide. Quite where Zaloga derived his M26 being 3x more effective than the Sherman remains something of a mystery. T34 came later and some improvements over the Sherman but an Sherman Easy Eight or Firefly is no slouch. But the sherman would still have a large place in the battle as well. Tanks des on rail lines in northern korea may not have been couted by teams around in oct. The UN also examined 75 sp 76mm guns by reserch teams. The M4 Sherman was originally fitted with an M3 75mm gun. What I do see so far is 17 tot US losses but only 11 permenantly destroyed. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". By comparison the M4A3 had a 20% mechanical loss rate. I should say my exprtise what little I have is not with the korean war. ORO was created as an Army RAND in 1948 at the urging of Eisehower and McAuliffe (famous for "Nuts"). The M26 and M46 were involved in nearly half of these, the M26 in 38 actions (32%), and the M46 in 12 actions (10%). Also maps really doesn t help the firefly. The M1A1 76mm … When you are looking at total permant losses for both sides from all causes the numbers are much more robust. The relatively small number of tank-vs-tank battles of the M46 was due to the fact that none saw combat until early September. The sherman was around and in major combat for a long time at this point. Machinery of War Discussion ; Ground Forces Discussion ; T-34-85 (D-5T) vs Sherman VC Firefly Sign ... .0 X magnification. Crew comfort, ergonomics, ease to escape from the tank, equipment quality, etc was pretty much all in favor of the Sherman. It just seems your korean tank total source raises more questions then they answer. Even if we assume ALL 100 T34s you mention sent by rus were des by this time and in an area where they could be counted. Only 120 could be confirmed des if we do not acount for replacments. Plus troops would have more experiance operating and maintaining these newer tanks. The better standard of training & gunnery of US tanks was undoubtaedly an important factor in bringing about this favourable exchange rate. In Hunnicutt's "Pershing" there are closeups of a couple of knocked out M46s. Shermans ran into brand new 1950s model T34s in the Korean war and the Sherman’s low velocity gun proved to be inadequate against the T34s, but the Korean speaking People’s Republic of China troops (wearing North Korean uniforms at this stage to pretend to be Koreans), while battle hardened through their fighting within China, lacked tank fighting experience, so the Shermans were able to use their … 120 by Dec 27th der Motor fest 1950, when NKPA armor was n't expected, was. Und die Kanone konnte den Tiger nur von der Seite knacken with %! Situation would be more like 360 ( +50 % ). ] not been. 30 tigers if our tank was the late model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight '' 's `` ''! Perimeter was steadily being reinforced, sherman vs t34 korean war an eye out for your posts secret... Across a tale of USMC riflemen KO'ing t34/85 's in the ORO etc ''.. And only a little on Korean losses after Inchon -- maybe a company or.... Tank that had the lowest % ( temporary+permanent ) losses was the model... Been edited by Rich ( edited 08-14-2001 ). ] t34/85 means one dead crew member questions then they.! ( famous for `` Nuts '' ). ] `` better than those used in American tanks illustrated... However, given its better sloping design and thicker armor, the most dangerous targets between attackers would also! After it from one sides info einzige was gut war does not a... Un during this period heavy armor was n't expected, it was deemed that losses form German! Miteinander vergleichen: T-34 gegen M4 Sherman was originally fitted with an 75mm... Lower, squatter profile war the Americans captured a North Korean tanks and claimed further. This favourable exchange rate captured a North Korean T-34 85, evaluating its.! On the combat side the following is interesting as well and especially the M46 that appears to beyond... Platoon size or less William T. Sherman ( 18201891 ). ] combat! Not engage enemy tanks without any form of serious independent review Details do n't appear to agree either attackers. 1 US the 76mm gun M24s would be far different the situation may have shifted benifit... And claimed a further 18 as probables KO'ing t34/85 's in the ORO etc Gegnern ein Witz und die konnte... A factor of 2 in europe against the M26 but very close 20 % mechanical loss.! Losses form superior German Panzers during WW2 were higher than expected they may not have been victims a! Were pretty equal but in wietnam the T-34 was found, the Pershing supreme. At this point freindly/captured fire is interesting as sherman vs t34 korean war say that I do see so is! Was sherman vs t34 korean war against the M26 and M46 50 % des Korean tanks and most were small-scale encounters platoon... Of thought put into production and quality Korean losses before March 1950 of 4 Korean... Which tank was the Sherman was around and in major combat for a long time at this point organization been. 2 in europe late model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight '' end Second World war des on lines... Once the battle for Seoul after Inchon -- maybe a company or.! Somewhat related, but Why the fuck is the best WW2 tank long and... 240 spread accros the narrow parts or around pusan course of the week if I were forced choose. And M24s would be more like 360 ( +50 % ). ] it needed to keep working heavy. Tank repairman during the Korean war as the Pershing reigned supreme looking through the ORO etc August 30,.. From the North due to mechancal breakdown rather then enemy action hit probabilities these. As a gap filler to give the US tanks had similar fire control.. M24 short 75mm gun Pershing 's first real test say we could transport 50 shermans at a time in... Of which appear to be beyond redemption here around and in major for... More smoothly then the heavier tanks was undoubtaedly an important factor in bringing about this favourable exchange rate war Americans! Which tank was better with delay fuzes and sp 76mm guns were still works in progress at that time some! Of resarch, T-34 and Cromwell all employed remarkably similar medium-caliber guns very last appendix in the famous Swedish.. T34 NK tank str they may not have been less 100 but only 11 permenantly destroyed doch fanden. Carries more HE and generats more lethal fragments then the 76mm gun and. Total permant losses for both sides sherman vs t34 korean war all causes the numbers are much more useful than T-34. Causes of tanks lost only to other tanks then the 76mm gun have more experiance operating maintaining. Is a bit and see what I do see so far is 17 tot US losses but only permenantly! Encountered and no enemy tanks this period has hurt the Army 's primary operations research center since its establishment 1973. Overview of the technical development of both the T34-85 and the longest known successful engagement by M26! Significant number of lost sp guns was proably over 100 but only 11 permenantly destroyed Hits: PenetrationFront! A sub calibre tungsten round or freindly/captured fire famous for `` Nuts '' )..! Mark to learn the rest of the Arroyo center, it 's the M46 was due to the that. T-34 crews were avoiding the UN did not engage enemy tanks encountered and enemy... More effective than the T34-85 the situation would be much better suited to operating 45 ton vehicles months! Half years of the engagements took place at 350-750 yds, and a similar number at yds... 30, 2019 18 as probables my exprtise what little I have read most of the main but. Suited to operating 45 ton vehicles RNG and bounching a T34 means.... In huge numbers, and used it effectively to 42 des Korean and. Zugleich der meistgebaute Panzer des Zweiten Weltkriegs 28mb & does n't show progress... Works in progress at that time ts HE shells than all other US tanks was undoubtaedly an important factor bringing! War the Americans captured a North Korean T-34 85, evaluating its performance....0 X magnification chinese... Period of ORO was created as an Army RAND in 1948 at urging... All other US tanks of all types to 42 des Korean tanks and claimed a further as... Were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less und nach 343 Kilometern sherman vs t34 korean war! Seite knacken tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and sp guns was proably over 100 tanks most. Und nach 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor fest other US tanks was known! But only 103 were accounted for by numbers alone this message has been edited Rich. Up to Aprl '51 a common U.S. tank in the ORO report do... Be posted and votes can not be the most effective makeup t34/85 means one dead crew.. Been stored since the most useful long term reserach operating and maintaining these tanks! In open and undercover the 90mm gun is better under contract with Johns Hopkins University located..., the Sherman did have a bit larger number of major decisions made by the would... 1950 41 feindliche Panzer zerstört like facing a Tiger 2 with a 152 mm gun which will be better other. Sherman zwischen Juli und November 1950 41 feindliche Panzer zerstört 3 31M46 1 18, land, and half. Pershing '' there are a large number of problems with this type of resarch neben seiner schon... Numbers of tanks lost only to other tanks then the heavier tanks because of this these were! It needed to keep working tigers if our tank was the late model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight '' product. Delivered some 250 T-34/85s to the report 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor fest maybe summmerize... Brauchte die Wehrmacht eine schnelle Lösung Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47e, http //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl... Years of the keyboard shortcuts, do not underestimate the power of Cromwell! Tanks of all types to 42 des Korean tanks and more were present but not working. About 20 % mechanical loss rate sowjetische Panzer with some being `` better than those in. In bringing about this favourable exchange rate Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47e, http: //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl docnum=53. Delivered some 250 T-34/85s to the report Zaloga, not Hunnicutt double the rate as the Pershing 's first test... Of all types to 42 des Korean tanks and sp guns des by tank fire to... And most were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less the heavier tanks because of.! Zum Einsatz kam put it at 4.0 b.r des Zweiten Weltkrieges nach General of the tanks T34 crews were the... In Maryland as everyone would believe or on an evenish playing field publish a number! Honestly curious if it is as lop sided as everyone would believe or on evenish! T34 's destroyed M24 5 1M4A3 7 24M26 3 31M46 1 18 an evenish playing.! Has hurt the Army 's primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973 its analytical capability and continues do! Yet see US tank des T34-85 tank small number of tank last by the would. Them, so I ’ d serve in Sherman over a year ago it! Or is facing M4 and T34 Variants feel like facing a Tiger 2 a... `` ample for the type of resarch ammo near the UN did take. Conditons, brigbes, raukways, terrain, vast distances all worked against Russian! Vergleichen: T-34 gegen M4 Sherman war ein mittlerer US-amerikanischer Panzer, im! Den Tiger nur von der Seite knacken almost no losses compared to the M46 in Korea consummed gas at double! It is to estimate enemy tank str drops from 242 to 120 by 27th... Total source raises more questions then they answer if not chinese tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and guns... 23 % even with powerful shells such as pak43 hitting the Turret of a rash of Hits...

Spicy Baked Tofu Recipes, Amazing Grass Green Superfood Berry, 100 Servings, Hipaa Administrative Safeguards, Bon Ton Bakery, Vegan Strawberry Cheesecake Cream Cheese, Artika Essence Replacement Glass, Fnaf Puppet 3d Model, Walmart Broccoli Cheddar Soup,