it was reported that at one battle not sure which one 2 king tiger tanks took out 50 shermans before the sherman rounds finaly penetrated the back of the tanks

Historians haven't been very good about clearing things up either. I just stated David Halberstam's "the Coldest Winter" about the Korean War. In the preface he gives weapons descriptions. The book says the BAR was a 2 man crew served weapon. What? Fifteen pages into the second chapter he write about bazooka rounds "bouncing off of the sloped armor of Russian made A-34 tanks." How's that?
Halberstam won a Pulitzer and there are errors like this in his book? Sure, I am a weapons nerd but don't they have a weapons nerd on the staff to check this stuff?

Shaun

Stats vary according to who is doing the counting but about 180 Israeli tanks held the Golan Heights in 1973 against 1400 Syrian tanks.

I read a story much like this one years ago where a Tiger II...wiped out a Russian armored unit of T-34's on the Berlin front...over 200 destroyed,

Quoted Text

---

Stats vary according to who is doing the counting but about 180 Israeli tanks held the Golan Heights in 1973 against 1400 Syrian tanks.

---

In the book DUEL FOR THE GOLAN: The 100-Hour Battle That Saved Israel by Eric Hammel & Jerry Asher, we find that the Syrian artillery opened up on the IDF postions with more divisional-caliber (122mm +) tubes than the IDF had troops! An incredible, fascinating book.

Quoted Text

---

I read a story much like this one years ago where a Tiger II...wiped out a Russian armored unit of T-34's on the Berlin front...over 200 destroyed,

---

I recall that too. It reportedly happened on the Seelow Heights. There the grossly outnumbered Germans smashed the first Soviet assaults. The Tiger would have had a commanding view of the 3-4 Km of plains the Reds attacked over, and the Reds had to attack over soggy ground soaked by rain, channeled into narrow routs of approach; no where to hide, no where to manuver, the hull-down Tiger outranging the Soviet's tank guns, with plenty of resupply from the protected side of the ridge...plausible. Much like the slaughter of the RTR during Operation 'Goodwood', 18 July 1944, only with a few tanks instead of a PaK Front.

it was reported that at one battle not sure which one 2 king tiger tanks took out 50 shermans before the sherman rounds finaly penetrated the back of the tanks

it was reported that at one battle not sure which one 2 king tiger tanks took out 50 shermans before the sherman rounds finaly penetrated the back of the tanks

Quoted Text

---

Stats vary according to who is doing the counting but about 180 Israeli tanks held the Golan Heights in 1973 against 1400 Syrian tanks.

---

In the book DUEL FOR THE GOLAN: The 100-Hour Battle That Saved Israel by Eric Hammel & Jerry Asher, we find that the Syrian artillery opened up on the IDF postions with more divisional-caliber (122mm +) tubes than the IDF had troops! An incredible, fascinating book.

Quoted Text

---

I read a story much like this one years ago where a Tiger II...wiped out a Russian armored unit of T-34's on the Berlin front...over 200 destroyed,

---

I recall that too. It reportedly happened on the Seelow Heights. There the grossly outnumbered Germans smashed the first Soviet assaults. The Tiger would have had a commanding view of the 3-4 Km of plains the Reds attacked over, and the Reds had to attack over soggy ground soaked by rain, channeled into narrow routs of approach; no where to hide, no where to manuver, the hull-down Tiger outranging the Soviet's tank guns, with plenty of resupply from the protected side of the ridge...plausible. Much like the slaughter of the RTR during Operation 'Goodwood', 18 July 1944, only with a few tanks instead of a PaK Front.

Although, the Shermnan was alot more dependable than any of the German tanks making cross country journeys that the Germans could only dream of.

Mike T.

I don't know KOhman. Although I have stepped on it at least once in this thread already I have to agree with Telson about the maintainability of the Sherman versus anything the Germans had.
You say "not all."
Name one.
Andras has a great point as well. Although the Soviets were known for throwing people and tanks into the fray with no consideration for the "butcher's bill" the Americans and maybe more so the British, because of the horrendous losses they suffered in the First World War, tended to be more cautious and let the artillery and the air power do their work before sending in the armor and the infantry. I don't have the figure in front of me but I think the Soviets had a gun tube every 10 meters along a 12 kilometer front when they got with it in April of '45 and attacked across a broad front on their way to Berlin.
Regards,
Shaun

/Not getting up to reference "Armageddon" by Max Hastings for the numbers
//Do know the Soviets had a metric butt load of arty

I don't know KOhman. Although I have stepped on it at least once in this thread already I have to agree with Telson about the maintainability of the Sherman versus anything the Germans had.
You say "not all."
Name one.

The million sherman vs one lone KT scenario is not very plausible if you take a look at the fact that the Western Allies (and Russians, too) had absolute air superiority, and overwhelming artillery support. The Russians were sometimes pressed into charges, but on the Western Front whenever strong opposition was met, the armor retreated, and let the artillery/fighter-bombers take care of the problem. This sort of mindless assault was never adopted by the Western Allies. So even if the 88 guns on the KTs could shoot so many projectiles without wearing down/overheating in so little time, the simple fact that the Allies would have not lingered on the scene long enough makes it unlikely.