The Centurion was used for letter dropping. Read fire a 20 pounder HE shell through the slit of a pillbox. The museum in Seoul was worthy of a visit. Because I am over 65 the museums in Korea don't charge an entrance fee. Just show an ID like your driver's license.Well, the M26 Pershing, never become all that great of a tank as I recall, when it went to Korea, it had reliability issues. I think I read that the tankers preferred the up gunned sherman that was used there also in that conflict.
But there was also the fact that there was no tank duels in that conflict except for one event. So nether tank had to prove itself really to enemy armor.
I've wondered if this could be replicated in CM somewhat, you buy five Panthers but only three show up because the other two broke down trying to get to the battlefield - I can imagine it wouldn't be a popular change!
It explains a Pz IV missing in the Peiper Campaign. We got off easy thenI actually have thought that mechanism in one of my campaign designs -- before the reinforcing Panther(or Tiger) company arrives on the map a "breakdown die roll" is made to see how many actually arrive on the battlefield.
I actually have thought that mechanism in one of my campaign designs -- before the reinforcing Panther(or Tiger) company arrives on the map a "breakdown die roll" is made to see how many actually arrive on the battlefield.
Them's the break(downs)I imagine there will be some bad words when someone rolls snake eyes.
Better, Tank vs Tank better than the T34/85 too. The 76 mm Sherman had the same 76 mm as the Hellcat. However, the Hellcat had HVAP shell in its racks. In Korea, the Sherman was the superior, also better-trained crew.Was the 76.2mm of the Sherman equal to the Russian 76.2mm, in so far as tank killing (armor penetration)?
Versus 4 ID's 700% casualty rate?Look at your average map in CM and first shot hit probability you need a range of five hundred meters or less. Like the Chieftain pointed out all those guys complaining all survived the war. He quoted the casualties of US tankers around 1500. I agree 1500 too many/
I don't know what you mean. Total loss of life for the military in Western Europe was 276000 (estimated). The Chieftain quoted 1500 for the armoured forces. I don't think they had the infrastructure in place to manufacture a different type of tank in quantity. Only in Korea, they had the weapons they should have had during WW2Versus 4 ID's 700% casualty rate?
I think also that Chieftain has mentioned that the 17 pounder Shermans were a tight fit in the turret. Could that have impeded escape in the event of a hit?incidentally, in one of the Chieftain's excellent vids, he compared the casualty figures between British and US Sherman crews and found that the Brits had higher casualties - which he took to be because they only wore berets, whereas the Yanks had their helmets to protect them. But still, being a tank crewman was much preferable to being a foot soldier.
At least for the loader, that man worked in extremely cramped conditions.I think also that Chieftain has mentioned that the 17 pounder Shermans were a tight fit in the turret. Could that have impeded escape in the event of a hit?