Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Locked
User avatar
EKB
Member
Posts: 712
Joined: 20 Jul 2005, 18:21
Location: United States

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#166

Post by EKB » 02 Mar 2019, 05:17

Christianmunich wrote:
01 Mar 2019, 18:44
I may sound like a broken record but people thought it was interesting enough to record Jumbos ( or pseudo jumbos ) which withstood frontal impact somebody would have done the same for one of the so many Shermans. In my opinion, as stated in the OP, the lack of empiric evidence tells me it is likely either the Sherman plate did not perform as well as calculated or the German guns better than calculated in this specific case.
Curious panzer troops and technical officers would have made the pictures you seek. Allied soldiers were more concerned about documenting weapons effect on enemy tanks. If you cannot find photos of test firing and damage from German weapons, the likely reason is explained here:

Book Quarrie - Panzers in Russia 13 copy.jpg
https://mxdoc.com/waffen-ss-in-russia-w ... no-03.html

User avatar
MarkF617
Member
Posts: 582
Joined: 16 Jun 2014, 22:11
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#167

Post by MarkF617 » 02 Mar 2019, 16:53

Richard Anderson said:
Or, to put it another way, perhaps 1,200 firing 7,5 cm PzGr 39 operational in all of Ob.West in early February 1945, facing about 8,000 British and American medium tanks, of which perhaps one-in-four are the type we are searching for.
Don't forget the OPs insistence that no additional protection have been added by the crews and that the shot be direct at the plate, no angle allowed at all, we are again lowering the number of possible candidates again. On top of all this the crew and tank need to survive the fight they were in and that evening be bothered to take a photo, a photo that then has to be published somewhere for us to see it.

I simply don't think a photo meeting all of the requirements exists and it has nothing to do with how effective Sherman armour was.

Thanks

Mark.
You know you're British when you drive your German car to an Irish pub for a pint of Belgian beer before having an Indian meal. When you get home you sit on your Sweedish sofa and watch American programs on your Japanese TV.


Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#168

Post by Yoozername » 02 Mar 2019, 17:32

A picture of a Panther D from Kursk being tested by the Soviets (apparently in winter), using a Ferdinand 88mmL71 and the very rare tungsten carbide ammunition. This is not judged to be a penetration but a ricochet (and probably shattering the bolt).

Image

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#169

Post by Christianmunich » 02 Mar 2019, 18:17

MarkF617 wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 16:53


Don't forget the OPs insistence that no additional protection have been added by the crews and that the shot be direct at the plate, no angle allowed at all, we are again lowering the number of possible candidates again. On top of all this the crew and tank need to survive the fight they were in and that evening be bothered to take a photo, a photo that then has to be published somewhere for us to see it.

Nobody said this. The only exceptions are glancing blows, like going through the edge of the armour et cetera. Nobody said anything about normal angles. In theory, a near 90° impact would be useless for the discussion but hard to tell the difference anyways.

Obviously, no applique armour since we search for a Sherman withstanding a hit, putting an extra plate on the front and then withstanding a hit shouldn't be a surprise. Plain old Shermans, and Mr Anderson seems to be confused about what we are looking for, could be any Sherman whatsoever that was not armoured. The M4A3 is the supposed "best Sherman" but pictures of other Shermans are welcomes as well. Thousands of Shermans were destroyed in combat, thousands of Shermans hit in combat any picture of the front withstanding such hit is welcomed, doesn't have to be a M4A3 with latest welded armour. Also, this is not limited to 75mm anything above as well.
I simply don't think a photo meeting all of the requirements exists and it has nothing to do with how effective Sherman armour was.
The frontal armour of a tank is the strongest part of a tank and you think that for one of the most produced tanks in history the lack of empiric evidence that the armour withstood even the most basic enemy AT is no sign for the effectiveness of the armour?

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#170

Post by Christianmunich » 02 Mar 2019, 18:21

EKB wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 05:17
Christianmunich wrote:
01 Mar 2019, 18:44
I may sound like a broken record but people thought it was interesting enough to record Jumbos ( or pseudo jumbos ) which withstood frontal impact somebody would have done the same for one of the so many Shermans. In my opinion, as stated in the OP, the lack of empiric evidence tells me it is likely either the Sherman plate did not perform as well as calculated or the German guns better than calculated in this specific case.
Curious panzer troops and technical officers would have made the pictures you seek. Allied soldiers were more concerned about documenting weapons effect on enemy tanks. If you cannot find photos of test firing and damage from German weapons, the likely reason is explained here:


Book Quarrie - Panzers in Russia 13 copy.jpg

https://mxdoc.com/waffen-ss-in-russia-w ... no-03.html
We have hundreds of British photos detailing impacts on British tanks in late war it is not as there is no documentation of impacts.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#171

Post by Yoozername » 02 Mar 2019, 20:18

Interesting picture even if it does not meet the 'criteria' needed. Supposedly the antitank fire came at the turret from about the 7 o'clock position. Extreme obliquity shows some ricochets, and at least two penetrations along with two bolts from it.

In Death Traps, Cooper describes his impression that almost every 75 mm hit was damaging. Of course, his experience was with very close terrain indicating close range early in France, followed by greater penetrating weapons later.

Anecdotal evidence (from my reading), details that even with penetration, it was not a conclusive knock-out or kill. Some do not describe any functioning of the HE. Cooper describes repairing one sherman using the spent Pzgr itself and welding it in the hole it made.

Do I believe a M4A3 was Pak 40/KWK 40/StuK 40/Pak/39 proof from the front (7,5 cm Pzgr 39)? Nope.
shermpzgr39.jpg
shermpzgr39.jpg (97.56 KiB) Viewed 594 times

critical mass
Member
Posts: 740
Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 15:53
Location: central Europe

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#172

Post by critical mass » 02 Mar 2019, 20:24

Yoozername wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 17:32
A picture of a Panther D from Kursk being tested by the Soviets (apparently in winter), using a Ferdinand 88mmL71 and the very rare tungsten carbide ammunition. This is not judged to be a penetration but a ricochet (and probably shattering the bolt).

Image
Judging by the chalked kyrillic it’s 88mm pzgr39.
Litterally transkribier 88 njem (njemezkij -german) Br (Bron. -AP). APCR would require 88 podkalibr.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#173

Post by Christianmunich » 02 Mar 2019, 21:12

Yoozername wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 20:18
Interesting picture even if it does not meet the 'criteria' needed. Supposedly the antitank fire came at the turret from about the 7 o'clock position. Extreme obliquity shows some ricochets, and at least two penetrations along with two bolts from it.

In Death Traps, Cooper describes his impression that almost every 75 mm hit was damaging. Of course, his experience was with very close terrain indicating close range early in France, followed by greater penetrating weapons later.

Anecdotal evidence (from my reading), details that even with penetration, it was not a conclusive knock-out or kill. Some do not describe any functioning of the HE. Cooper describes repairing one sherman using the spent Pzgr itself and welding it in the hole it made.

Do I believe a M4A3 was Pak 40/KWK 40/StuK 40/Pak/39 proof from the front (7,5 cm Pzgr 39)? Nope.

shermpzgr39.jpg
I have seen the picture as well, I believe in Zalogas Armored Champion.

My interpretation was the shots didn'T get "deflected" per se but mostly moved through the armour, they were just not heading towards the interior. My picture interpretation is not unfailable quite the opposite so I want to say this just my opinion but I believe the shots were not deflected but the projectile was just glancing the armour.


You are correct in your assumption about none penetrating hits that knock out. I have studied the British late war sample in-depth, nearly any hit immediately knocked out a Sherman even glancing blows. My interpretation was that soldiers in general tend to leave the vehicle if under fire and hit which was exacerbated by knowing you were in a zero protection vehicle. The British sample was really quite enlightening to me, nearly any hit and the Sherman was out of combat. This goes so far that sometimes the tank was left before impact or when another tank was hit.

The sample also shows the "shoot until it burns" myth to be false, Shermans in this sample in most cases got a single hit, multiple hits were rare. The Sherman was tank basically offered no protection and hits were the end of the mission for the crew, not all of those were eventually destroyed but Sherman crews remaining in combat after sustaining a hit was really rare. Quite a bummer that no such data exists for German vehicles, I would assume the urge to survive was strong in every soldier of any army but I wonder if knowing your tank is downright garbage in terms of protection changed the behaviour of the occupants. Even non-penetrating hits prompted the crews to abandon the tank frequently.

This goes along my general claim of ripple effects in performance due to protection. I can only assume how different crews tend to operate in a vehicle that offers some protection versus one which offers none. Most of the evidence for the German side is anecdotal in nature and biased due to sampling very experienced soldiers but you get the feeling that crews in German heavy tanks more often remained combat alert when sustaining a hit.

Very hard to tell but the British late war sample most certainly shows where the rift between empiric evidence ( 10k destroyed Shermans, slow advanced ) and recent opinions ( war winner ) lays.

Peasant
Member
Posts: 798
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 18:21
Location: Ukraine

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#174

Post by Peasant » 02 Mar 2019, 21:32

critical mass wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 20:24
Judging by the chalked kyrillic it’s 88mm pzgr39.
Litterally transkribier 88 njem (njemezkij -german) Br (Bron. -AP). APCR would require 88 podkalibr.
I was about to comment this, but then saw the circular impression on the armour around the hole, from the APCR carrier that pancaked on it. Am I the only one seeing this?

Image

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#175

Post by Michael Kenny » 02 Mar 2019, 21:49

EKB wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 05:17
Christianmunich wrote:
01 Mar 2019, 18:44
I may sound like a broken record but people thought it was interesting enough to record Jumbos ( or pseudo jumbos ) which withstood frontal impact somebody would have done the same for one of the so many Shermans. In my opinion, as stated in the OP, the lack of empiric evidence tells me it is likely either the Sherman plate did not perform as well as calculated or the German guns better than calculated in this specific case.
Curious panzer troops and technical officers would have made the pictures you seek. Allied soldiers were more concerned about documenting weapons effect on enemy tanks. If you cannot find photos of test firing and damage from German weapons, the likely reason is explained here:


Book Quarrie - Panzers in Russia 13 copy.jpg



https://mxdoc.com/waffen-ss-in-russia-w ... no-03.html
Quarrie used to make a really big deal out of the fact that he, as a 'bona fide author', was in the magic circle and had access to the photos while his readers (the great unwashed) had to make do with the crumbs he scattered. He really loved repeating this over and over again in his many books and it used to really get up my nose. Now that I can check him out It is shocking to see how many basic errors this 'bona-fide author' made and how little he really understood. When I look back at the people who were considered the experts in the 1960s-1970s its shocking how ill-informed most of them were. Today they would not last 5 minutes on AHF or Missing Lynx. Times really do change.

spannermann
Member
Posts: 599
Joined: 23 Aug 2006, 21:07
Location: UK

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#176

Post by spannermann » 02 Mar 2019, 21:57

Hi,
yes, it was very frustrating in those earlier years to see that Quarrie had the access to the photos, but was hopeless at interpretation and identification of a photos content, his excuse, in a written reply to me, ".......was not enough time between getting the photos and publishing the book, to look at everything..........." a poor excuse.

cheers paul

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#177

Post by Christianmunich » 02 Mar 2019, 21:57

Michael Kenny wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 21:49
EKB wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 05:17
Christianmunich wrote:
01 Mar 2019, 18:44
I may sound like a broken record but people thought it was interesting enough to record Jumbos ( or pseudo jumbos ) which withstood frontal impact somebody would have done the same for one of the so many Shermans. In my opinion, as stated in the OP, the lack of empiric evidence tells me it is likely either the Sherman plate did not perform as well as calculated or the German guns better than calculated in this specific case.
Curious panzer troops and technical officers would have made the pictures you seek. Allied soldiers were more concerned about documenting weapons effect on enemy tanks. If you cannot find photos of test firing and damage from German weapons, the likely reason is explained here:


Book Quarrie - Panzers in Russia 13 copy.jpg



https://mxdoc.com/waffen-ss-in-russia-w ... no-03.html
Quarrie used to make a really big deal out of the fact that he, as a 'bona fide author', was in the magic circle and had access to the photos while his readers (the great unwashed) had to make do with the crumbs he scattered. He really loved repeating this over and over again in his many books and it used to really get up my nose. Now that I can check him out It is shocking to see how many basic errors this 'bona-fide author' made and how little he really understood. When I look back at the people who were considered the experts in the 1960s-1970s its shocking how ill-informed most of them were. Today they would not last 5 minutes on AHF or Missing Lynx. Times really do change.
This is kinda true for many fields, isn't it? Once you become a bit more knowledgeable in a topic you see how flexible the term expert really is. Same with other stuff depending on the field you work in, once you know stuff you notice how little others sometimes know. In a niche field like history, I feel this is even more pronounced. A good chunk of your success is presentation the majority of "consumers" couldn't tell your mistakes anyway...

But I agree being considered an expert in this field here is not much worth on its own.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#178

Post by Yoozername » 02 Mar 2019, 23:00

Peasant wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 21:32
critical mass wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 20:24
Judging by the chalked kyrillic it’s 88mm pzgr39.
Litterally transkribier 88 njem (njemezkij -german) Br (Bron. -AP). APCR would require 88 podkalibr.
I was about to comment this, but then saw the circular impression on the armour around the hole, from the APCR carrier that pancaked on it. Am I the only one seeing this?

Image
I may have mixed up the firings...I believed the Panther was fired at the Ferdinand and vice versa. The Panther may have fired APCR at the Ferdinand.

It looks like chalk has been used to highlight any cracks, etc.
I have seen the picture as well, I believe in Zalogas Armored Champion.

My interpretation was the shots didn'T get "deflected" per se but mostly moved through the armour, they were just not heading towards the interior. My picture interpretation is not unfailable quite the opposite so I want to say this just my opinion but I believe the shots were not deflected but the projectile was just glancing the armour.
Really? There are ricochet marks that clearly didn't penetrate, and two holes, and a guy with two clearly used Pzgr spent projectiles that are missing the caps. Where did he get them from? The inside of the tank. You are quite creative.
You are correct in your assumption about none penetrating hits that knock out.
I am correct about what? "assumption about none penetrating hits that knock out"? Maybe you think I am correct about something but I didn't say or think.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#179

Post by Yoozername » 02 Mar 2019, 23:02

https://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/2948520.html

Supposedly translated as...
Armour
The Panther tank is armoured with rolled homogeneous chrome-nickel-molybdenum steel, cast chrome-molybdenum steel. The armour screens are made from low carbon (less than 0.1%) pot metal. Compared to Tiger, PzIII and PzIV tanks, the Panther's armour contains more nickel up to 0.6%-1.7%
The armour is harder on the outside than the inside, which indicates surface hardening or cementing.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Picture of a Sherman withstanding a clean hit of a pak40 or better

#180

Post by Christianmunich » 02 Mar 2019, 23:09

Yoozername wrote:
02 Mar 2019, 23:00


Really? There are ricochet marks that clearly didn't penetrate, and two holes, and a guy with two clearly used Pzgr spent projectiles that are missing the caps. Where did he get them from? The inside of the tank. You are quite creative.

At this angle, any minimal movement from the firing gun makes the difference between penetration and glancing blow. The penetrations were just a tiny bit more towards the centre of mass so they managed to move into the armour the other hits moved through the armour but were to far off in terms of aiming.
somethinglikethis.png
Like this maybe?

Take a look at the lowest of the failed penetrations, it is pretty small, I would imagine the projectile merely brushed on the Turret.

Locked

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”