I don't think the British results were soelely due to the supply of good american tanks. As a starting point check the results of the Batholomew committee .Henri Winkelman wrote:Good point, British results weren't that great until US supplies arrived.Sheldrake wrote:
There is a tendency to over estimate British Army capabilities because of the result of the Battle of Britain and eventual victory. The BEF did not face the German schwehrpunkt in 1940. The British track record until 1942 was not good, losing many battles that, on paper, they might have won. BEF became known as = Back Every Friday. Contemporary records and memoirs reflect a lack of confidence in the British Army doctrine and culture. The British Army was sufficiently shaken by 1940 that it carried out radical structural reforms, such as the decentralised brigade and battle groups. Many of the brightest and best young Britons rejected institutions epitomized by "Colonel Blimp" and set up their own private armies - SAS Commandos etc. It is telling that the military authorities supported these alternative organisations that sapped many regular formations of talented junior leaders.
I am not so sure about the lack of confidence in the army, you can probably find an equal amount of records which show a very positive-minded side of the story. Anecdotal evidence is always dangerous. Do you have examples of these records?
https://defenceindepth.co/2016/06/17/19 ... nity-lost/