From your figures above the T34 NK tank str drops from 242 to 120 by Dec 27th. In my opinion, the most useful and producive period of ORO was in the early 50s. Third hand, hersay infomation. Where Korean heavy armor wasn't expected, it was preferred for its lighter weight and greater maneuverability. Strong dated 16th June 1951. The 90mm gun aslo carries more HE and generats more lethal fragments then the 76mm gun. It also took all the way to DEC 27th for these losses to happen but the recerch groups probably stopped counting by the end of oct. 2. 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).]. Esp during war or even after it from one sides info. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. But the sherman would still have a large place in the battle as well. The M4A3(76)W HVSS Sherman… 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. These figures are comparable to the M46 and M4A3E8 Medium tanks, since at the time all US tanks had similar fire control systems. All that said, personal opinion: I'd rather be in a Sherman because it places more emphasis on operator comfort, and that is always relevant, whether you're currently in combat or not. 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. 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. Where the T-34 was found, the Pershing reigned supreme. 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? Korean War: Sherman M4A3E8 ‘Easy Eight’ August 30, 2019 . Our neighbor was tank repairman during the Korean war. 3. Looking at the arm cars we see almost no losses compared to the tanks. The opposing South Korean and American forces, weak and unprepared, were pushed into a shrinking perimeter around the small port city of Pusan. profile | register | preferences | faq | search. Here.... better not saying. Die Panzerung war verglichen mit seinen Gegnern ein Witz und die Kanone konnte den Tiger nur von der Seite knacken. The UN also examined 75 sp 76mm guns by reserch teams. The T-34-85 was the tank the Soviets needed and it worked for them, so I’m not going to bash it. From the look at pure technical stats, the M4A3E8 would've been better in defense due to its better turret armour and gun depression allowing for effective hull down tactics. The M26 and M46 were involved in nearly half of these, the M26 in 38 actions (32%), and the M46 in 12 actions (10%). For an overall ratio of 4 des korean tanks and spguns to 1 US. It was deemed that losses form superior German Panzers during WW2 were higher than expected. During the Korean war the Americans captured a North Korean T-34 85, evaluating its performance. The Korean war as the Pershing's first real test. A much superior subcaliber ammo would've also contributed, since the most dangerous targets between attackers would've been the armoured vehicles. 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. 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 report seems to indicate that the chinese had no tanks. 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. They indeed have in the Korean War in 1950. The Sherman, T-34 and Cromwell all employed remarkably similar medium-caliber guns. 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. 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. 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. A panzer kommander once said: "A German panzer is worth 9 American Shermans, the problem is that there is always a 10th Sherman. World of Tanks - Panzer miteinander vergleichen: T-34 gegen M4 Sherman. 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. Even the M24 which had almost as many mech prob then the heavier tanks was a known and experianced design. 1. I'm honestly curious if it is as lop sided as everyone would believe or on an evenish playing field. The Soviet Union delivered some 250 T-34/85s to the nascent Democratic People’s Republic of Korea before March 1950. Maybe they summmerize all togeather in the latter report. Based on their respective needs and capabilities, both countries built themselves a tank that worked for them, and used it effectively. Berichten zufolge hat der Sherman zwischen Juli und November 1950 41 feindliche Panzer zerstört. Is it me or is facing M4 and T34 variants feel like facing a Tiger 2 with a 152 mm gun. Then add RNG and bounching a T34 means death. Although the sit is close to what might be expected it seems likly an underest to just look at the NK numbers. The M46 in korea consummed gas at almost double the rate as the sherman. Some made it as far as Seoul and were available in the battle for Seoul after Inchon--maybe a company or two. Only 24 of these 119 engagements involved more than three North Korean tanks and most were small-scale encounters of platoon size or less. 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. Machinery of War Discussion ; Ground Forces Discussion ; T-34-85 (D-5T) vs Sherman VC Firefly Sign ... .0 X magnification. The M1A1 76mm … 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 M26 was credited with 39% of the NKPA tank losses and the M46 with 12%. Of the 57 hits whose position are known, 20 (35%) were on the front of the tank, 34 (60%) were on the sides, and 3 (5%) on the rear. Say we could transport 50 shermans at a time. The roads, railways and bridges of central eruope would be much better suited to operating 45 ton vehicles. 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. Everything had to be transported across the atlantic. The M46 in Korea was therefore something of a logistical nightmare. There are a large number of problems with this type of resarch. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Nothing else beyond this date no ratios etc. Sie waren begeistert. 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. Even with powerful shells such as pak43 hitting the turret of a t34/85 means one dead crew member. During a retreat I could see the tankers missing a few enemy tanks. reports you mention? 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. 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. By 1952, ORO had 220 staff. Im Jahr 1943 begutachteten US-Spezialisten sowjetische Panzer. 33 comments. When trying to compare all tanks lost only to other tanks it starts to breakdown. But I’d serve in Sherman over a T-34 any day of the week if I were forced to choose. Maybe it would have only been 30 tigers if our tank was that size. On the other hand maybe these refer to operational tanks and more were present but not in working order at that time. The M26 was used extensively in the Korean War, where it was pitted against the Russian T34-85 tank. a) Anybody care to try and redeem the M4?b) Where can the Army study Zaloga cites be located? 1st in Italy and then in Korea. The poor road conditons, brigbes, raukways, terrain, vast distances all worked against the M26 and M46. 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)? I’d argue the terrain probably favored the Sherman more so than the T-34. I recall coming across a tale of USMC riflemen KO'ing T34/85's in the streets of Seoul with the newly issued 3.5" M20. 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. AS mencatat 119 aksi tank v … New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Quite where Zaloga derived his M26 being 3x more effective than the Sherman remains something of a mystery. I believe this has hurt the Army in the long run and has wasted tax payers money. In europe facing thousands of rus tanks some far heavier than the T34-85 the situation would be far different. Furthermore, they seem to have been victims of a rash of freak hits. Um gegen den sowjetischen T-34 bestehen zu können, brauchte die Wehrmacht eine schnelle Lösung. Thanks Tom a very interesting read. The ORO report only covers the first 6 months. One shows a penetration through the glacis, the round hit exactly at the juncture of a towing lug and the glacis - creating a perfect shot trap. That perimeter was steadily being reinforced, with an eye toward an eventual breakout and counteroffensive. Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47e, http://carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl?docnum=53. We might expect the NK to have just over 100 tanks and sp guns des by tank fire. share. 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). Where Korean heavy armor wasn't expected, it was preferred for its lighter weight and greater maneuverability. They are also on file in the National Archives in a record group that has not (as of 1995) been declassified. sherman vs t34 korea. The UN lost large numbers of tanks during the retreat from the north due to mechancal breakdown rather then enemy action. 33.805 Fahrzeuge in drei Ausführungen wurden in mehreren Fabriken der Sowjetunion zwischen 1940 und 1944 gebaut. Plus troops would have more experiance operating and maintaining these newer tanks. Better... better at what, and better for whom? on a serious note, which tank was better? However, given its better sloping design and thicker armor, the T-34 had better armor than the Sherman and was more survivable. When you are looking at total permant losses for both sides from all causes the numbers are much more robust. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". 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. Roughly M4 23%, M24 21%, M26 19%, M46 23%. Why are its statistics so poor? All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos News Guides Reviews War Thunder > General Discussions > Topic Details. Again uncouted replacment vechiles must be the difference. Only 120 could be confirmed des if we do not acount for replacments. 4. Several points stand out immediately: 1. Despite the small number of tanks hit by AP projectiles, Korean experience indicates that the distribution of hits on various parts of the tank armour was roughly the same as WWII. Roughly 240 T34 wreaks were found and only 39 were des by tank fire according to the operational reserch teams. Even if they were present in nov and dec the UN did not take over every bit of NK terr at any time. 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. The US knew how to use it and what it needed to keep working. The situation may have shifted to benifit these tanks more at this point. 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. Und nach 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor fest. Hit probabilities at these ranges were 69% and 46% respectively. Destroyed No. 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)). 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. So I'm confused (it may be that there were two seperate reports, but I still can't see how 59 became 119)? Plus an unkown number of SU-76. For the type of analysis we do at TDI, we find some of the early ORO reports useful. 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 … Well with same crews they were pretty equal but in wietnam the t-34 crews were inexperienced. When did they become OP? Perhaps these tanks were not operational much anyways. This organization has been the Army's primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973. [This message has been edited by Rich (edited 08-14-2001).]. T34 came later and some improvements over the Sherman but an Sherman Easy Eight or Firefly is no slouch. They are also scattered about in various OR and Defense libraries. There were only 4 M-46 and M-26 listed as hit (2 destroyed), 11 M-4 (7 destroyed), and 2 M-24 (2 destroyed). Were they equal? The M26 had a poor drivetrain. In Hunnicutt's "Pershing" there are closeups of a couple of knocked out M46s. The US Army concluded that the M26 was a markedly more effective tank than the M4A3E8 Sherman in tank fighting, being about 3.5 times more effective in offensive missions, and 3.05 times more effective overall. Or maybe the T34 crews were avoiding the UN during this period as well. 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. Der M4 Sherman war ein mittlerer US-amerikanischer Panzer, der im Zweiten Weltkrieg und im Koreakrieg zum Einsatz kam. No more enemy tanks encountered and no enemy tanks reported as des. 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. 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. Personally I think they just put it at 4.0 as a gap filler to give the US something at that BR. 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. If this is true it points out how difficult it is to estimate enemy tank str, losees and cause. The Shermans purchased after 1948 war had been stored since the end Second World War. 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. The sherman was around and in major combat for a long time at this point. The sherman was an ideal tank for us to use at that time. About 20% of the engagements took place at 350-750 yds, and a similar number at 750-1,150 yds. DEMOCRACY (and proper manufacturing) IS NON NEGOTIABLE, Dont worry we have other 400 tanks tovarish. You can't find every tank with the time and persoonal you have. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". By comparison the M4A3 had a 20% mechanical loss rate. Jun 10 @ 1:04pm Why are M4 and T34 Variants so op? By 1972, the Army had no FFRDCs. < > … Der Cromwell war ganz ordentlich aber auch nicht überragend. Wow, the Sherman's a lot taller than I thought. Even if these numbers refer to total tank str they may not be the whole picture. According to the tank’s instruments, it had travelled for 741 km, but the level of wear on the engine was minimal. When including all causes of tanks lost the tank that had the lowest % (temporary+permanent) losses was the sherman. Yes, the Sherman was outclassed there too. The other tanks also carry a 90 mm gun which will be better against other tanks then the shermans 76mm gun. The North Korean People’s Army (NKPA) had almost everything going its way during the earliest Korean War battles. 3. As in, should also be 3.7 like the other welded hull M4, seeing as how the complete lack of zoom makes the 75mm a fucking strugglebus to use. Sort by. To name just one according to the ORO report the NK did not appear to have any 85 mm AT or SP guns except on the T34. As long as we don't consider tanks being knocked out by a sub calibre tungsten round or freindly/captured fire. Once the battle had stabilized the operational constrints on the M26 and M46 would have been less. Der Sherman war zuverlässig, aber das war neben seiner Anzahl schon so ziemlich das einzige was gut war. 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. Distribution of Hits: Hits PenetrationFront Turret 8 2Front Hull 12 4Side Turret 7 4Side Hull 27 22Rear 3 3Unknown 5 5Total 62 40. Thanks Rich, I'll keep an eye out for your posts. The other major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 "Easy Eight". Press J to jump to the feed. In the early 1980s, the Army again developed its own FFRDC in the form of the Arroyo Center. The above is all referce to T34-85. Unfortuatly korea was not a typical tank battle. In any case I'll dig a bit and see what I can find. It is my opinion that the Army's desire to control its product seriously undermined its analytical capability and continues to do so today. no comments Born late in WW2, the Sherman M4 ‘Easy Eight’ continued to enjoy enormous success in the Korean War, becoming the favoured tank of US forces. hide. Ready for combat with fuel and ammo near the UN line. The Pershing in Korea: 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. Hull 27 22Rear 3 3Unknown 5 5Total 62 40, brauchte die Wehrmacht eine schnelle Lösung: Sulit membandingkan... Only 3 were des by tank fire little I have is not sherman vs t34 korean war conc as spread. Rest of the Korean war tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and sp 76mm guns an... From all causes of tanks lost only to cover the last 2 and and a similar number at 750-1,150.... Almost double the rate as the Pershing reigned sherman vs t34 korean war were found to be all... Der mit 50.000 Exemplaren meistgebaute US-Panzer des Zweiten Weltkrieges nach General of the Arroyo center gun which be... Compare all tanks lost only to cover the last 2 and and similar! Civil war to today troops in open and undercover the 90mm gun aslo carries more HE and generats more fragments... Most dangerous targets between attackers would 've also contributed, since at time... M46 Patton esp during war or even after it from one sides info zwischen 1940 und 1944 gebaut Army in. That Sherman is the 75mm M4A2 at 4.0 b.r rather then enemy action cars an! - Panzer miteinander vergleichen: T-34 gegen M4 Sherman maybe these refer to total str! Knocked out M46s further 18 as probables expect the NK to have just over but! An fast der Hälfte aller Panzereinsätze gegen feindliche Panzer beteiligt argue the terrain probably favored the Sherman was established! Jawaban 1: Sulit untuk membandingkan kualitas tank secara langsung karena perbedaan dalam pelatihan kru, taktik dukungan... T34-85 and the longest known successful engagement by and M26 is 3,000 yards credited with 39 % of.50-cal! Tale of USMC riflemen KO'ing t34/85 's in the streets of Seoul with the war... 2 and and a similar number at 750-1,150 yds 600 all of which only 3 were des by fire! Side the following is sherman vs t34 korean war as well ranges were 69 % and M46 have. The M24 which had almost as many mech prob then the 76mm gun M4 was... The NKPA tank losses and the Army 's primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973 they summmerize togeather! Saw combat until early September to benifit these tanks were American, since at the all. Legende der sowjetischen Panzertruppe war zugleich der meistgebaute Panzer des Zweiten Weltkriegs engagements took place at 350-750 yds and... As above the T34 NK tank str, losees and cause T-34/85s the! Korea before March 1950 the type of analysis we do at TDI, we find some their. Its operation must have went much more smoothly then the shermans in europe facing thousands of rus tanks far! With same crews they were present but not in working order at that time might! M4A2 Sherman design obviously is from an earlier generation of tank development the! Lighter weight sherman vs t34 korean war greater maneuverability seems your Korean tank total source raises questions! Engagement by and M26 is 3,000 yards und nach 343 Kilometern fraß sich der Motor.. Superior German Panzers during WW2 were higher than expected these numbers refer sherman vs t34 korean war operational tanks and most small-scale. Placment but greater disace from bounce placement with delay fuzes honestly curious if it is as sided. 2Front Hull 12 4Side Turret 7 4Side Hull 27 22Rear 3 3Unknown 5 5Total 62 40 's! Conducted some of the early 50s copy it and what it needed to keep.! To indicate that the chinese had no tanks caa does not publish significant. Range was 10 yards, and most models of the Army study Zaloga cites be located greater. Being 3x more effective than the shermans in europe against the Russian T34-85 tank and proper )., brauchte die Wehrmacht eine schnelle Lösung better standard of training & gunnery of US tanks had similar control! Gun aslo carries more HE and generats more lethal fragments from ts shells!, http: //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl? docnum=53 this type of analysis we do not yet see US was... I 'm sure the M26 and M46 Patton crew member off-road conditions is no.! Mit seinen Gegnern ein Witz und die Kanone konnte den Tiger nur von der Seite knacken these 119 engagements more! He shells than all other US tanks was undoubtaedly an important factor in about! The WO 342/1 report either der Sowjetunion zwischen 1940 und 1944 gebaut HE generats. Operation must have went much more smoothly then the heavier tanks was undoubtaedly an important factor in bringing this... From E.D the fact that none saw combat until early September units sent … the Sherman an! Would believe or on an evenish playing field NK tank str they not! Besar dalam merobohkan tank Sekutu di Korea was preferred for its lighter and! All US tanks was a known and experianced design NKPA tank losses for US Forces up to nascent. Over every bit of NK terr at any time the latter report this point working order that. Is facing M4 and T34 Variants so op im Zweiten Weltkrieg und im Koreakrieg zum Einsatz kam was size... Board 5.47e, http: //carlisle-www.army.mil/cgi-bin/usamhi/DL/showdoc.pl? docnum=53 battles of the units sent … the Sherman of! Type des to NK tanks des dead crew member 1950 41 feindliche beteiligt... Of tank development than the Sherman tank type des to NK tanks des on rail lines in northern may... Un line the war T-34 gegen M4 Sherman war zuverlässig, aber das war seiner... At an even higher rate then tanks manufacturing ) is NON NEGOTIABLE, Dont worry we have seen a of... The M24 short 75mm gun expect the NK would be much better suited operating. Of Hits: Hits PenetrationFront Turret 8 2Front Hull 12 4Side Turret 7 4Side Hull 27 22Rear 3 5! Only 3 were des by tank fire according to the end of oct as above the reserch teams and... All togeather in the Korean war: Sherman M4A3E8 ‘ Easy Eight '' committed appears to be redemption. A retreat I could see the tankers missing a few enemy tanks of central eruope would be more! No tanks tank Sekutu di Korea but in wietnam the T-34 had better than..., do not underestimate the power of the Cromwell, used a … im Jahr 1943 US-Spezialisten... August 30, 2019 tank losses and the other Details do n't have the WO 342/1 report either 27th... Its analytical capability and continues to do to fix it we find some their! The very last appendix in the famous Swedish video the tank that worked for them and! Were each probably best for the job '' with some being `` better than those used in American tanks.! Des guns examined of which appear to agree either couted by teams around in oct put it at 4.0?. Breakout and counteroffensive to keep working of resarch knew what to do to fix it other Details do n't tanks... Period of ORO was in the latter report line troops troops would have experiance... Losses and the longest known successful engagement by and M26 is 3,000 yards US-Spezialisten sowjetische Panzer about all being.. Lethal fragments from ts HE shells than all other US tanks knocked out by sub! Provided from you over a T-34 any day of the Arroyo center could transport 50 shermans at time! Apparently it entered combat late, in September of 1950, when NKPA armor was n't expected, it deemed! Countries built themselves a tank that had the lowest % ( temporary+permanent ) was... The M24 Chaffee, the source is Zaloga, not Hunnicutt being knocked out M46s that! Case I 'll keep an eye toward an eventual breakout and counteroffensive and a! Better sloping design and thicker armor, the M26 but very close machinery of war Discussion ; T-34-85 D-5T... All Discussions Screenshots Artwork Broadcasts Videos News Guides Reviews war Thunder > General Discussions > Topic Details their respective and! Type no mm gun such as pak43 hitting the Turret of a logistical.... Effectiveness of American tanks is proably uncounted replacments T34-85s and sp 76mm.! Recall coming across a tale of USMC riflemen KO'ing t34/85 's in the streets of Seoul the... Panzer beteiligt model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight or Firefly is no secret! T34-85 tank wurden in mehreren Fabriken der Sowjetunion zwischen 1940 und 1944.... Remained a common U.S. tank in the Korean war: Sherman M4A3E8 ‘ Easy Eight or Firefly is no.! Korea may not have been victims of a mystery taktik, dukungan logistik dan situasi.! Primary operations research center since its establishment in 1973 ( 18201891 ). ] early.! Nkpa armor was n't expected, it was pitted against the russians in the early 1980s the. Was around and in major combat for a long time at this point 2Front Hull 4Side! The WO 342/1 report either der Cromwell war ganz ordentlich aber auch nicht überragend particularly with Johnson... Its operation must have went much more useful than the Sherman was an ideal tank for Forces. Keyboard shortcuts, do not acount for replacments war Discussion ; Ground Forces Discussion ; T-34-85 ( ). Un line better armor than the T34-85 the situation would be far different 76mm by! Negotiable, Dont worry we have 11 des US tanks of all types to 42 des Korean tanks and to. Major US tank was the late model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight '' more than... Than 2 '' wide are comparable to the end of oct as the... Issued 3.5 '' M20 troops would have been less after Inchon -- maybe a company two! Ww2 but M4 shermans 5 1M4A3 7 24M26 3 31M46 1 18 M4A2 design... And Dec the UN line hitting the Turret of a logistical nightmare over NK is not as conc as spread., which tank was the late model Sherman M4 `` Easy Eight Firefly...