![]() ![]() The data also indicates that the defender had a distinct advantage, since they usually got to fire first. tank battles were small, involving only 4-9 tanks on each side. Contrary to what readers conditioned to war movies or computer games might expect, the author notes that actual statistical data indicates that most tank vs. "The real lessons of this book are delivered in the concluding sections on statistics and analysis. So that good copula that people have made off-hand reference to might not have been flashy but would actually be a major concern. That means a lot of factors, battlefield mobility and awareness, target aquisition, HE and machinegun firepower and the ability to work with infantry. ![]() Far far and away the most important thing for tank survival in combat is how it's going to deal with non-tank targets. This really debunks the whole notion that front armor is of more then marginal importance, it's just one factor of a fraction tanks role. So tank combat wasn't the big threat for a German tank, it barely edged out bazookas! If we accept Darkrenowns premise that German tanks weren't dealing more tank to tank casualties then they were taking, that means that for western allies, tank losses to tank were basically a nonentity because you are talking about maybe a couple thousand tanks lost out of 20k vehicles lost. I can't vouch for this but I found a few reference to a postwar British War Office report 291/1186 giving a breakdown of german tanks killed: So after the war people are looking at the topline figures and see the number of american tanks lost is so much higher and make the obvious conclusion. More targets means more damaged and destroyed vehicles. ![]() Since the greatest threat to tanks is non-tank ground forces, more tanks means more targets for german anti-tank weapons then allied anti-tank weapons. There were a ton more shermans around then german tanks on the western front a problem compounded by the german tanks left by the side of the road. It's not hard to see how this situation would lead to the current perceptions. ![]()
0 Comments
![]() ![]() The special operations platoon leader says he was wrongly accused and that fellow SEAL team members testifying against him, several under grants of immunity, are disgruntled subordinates who fabricated allegations to force him from command. The proceedings are being conducted at US Naval Base San Diego. ![]() If convicted, he could face life in prison. ![]() Gallagher has pleaded not guilty to all charges, including obstructing justice in the case, which stems from his latest tour of duty in Mosul, Iraq, in 2017. Gallagher, 39, a decorated career combat veteran, is charged with murdering a wounded Daesh fighter in his custody, and with attempted murder in the wounding of two unarmed civilians - a school girl and elderly man - shot from a sniper's perch. Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher, who the presiding Navy judge freed from pre-trial base confinement last week, is due to go on trial in San Diego on June 10 in a case that has drawn the attention of US President Donald Trump. The lead prosecutor in the court-martial of a US Navy SEAL charged with war crimes was ordered removed from the case on Monday because he electronically tracked email communications of defense lawyers without a warrant, a Navy spokesman said. ![]() |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |