question regarding Sherman variant

**zraver** · 20 Apr 12,, 15:58

Originally Posted by 1979

Even assuming 3 panzer IV for 1 tiger or panther it works out to 16.000 extra tanks, it is not enough to swing the balance in axis favor plus it would put German tank crew more often in harms way.

If the germans were facing just one opponent it might be a solution but against the combined numbers the US, UK, SU produced , no.

Its also vastly increased fuel consumption and a drain of 80,000 men from other uses who will be poorly trained as the panzer arm's training cadres were already gutted to provide combat units. Germany didn't need an extra 16,000 pak 40 armed PzIV's, she needed an extra thousand Pz-III 50mm's in 41.

**mako88sb** · 25 Apr 12,, 17:16

I've read a few times that one of the constraints on the Sherman design was ship cranes limiting the weight of the M4. Obviously, this must of changed throughout the war but I'm curious if anybody has more details about this?

**USSWisconsin** · 25 Apr 12,, 21:50

Originally Posted by mako88sb

I've read a few times that one of the constraints on the Sherman design was ship cranes limiting the weight of the M4. Obviously, this must of changed throughout the war but I'm curious if anybody has more details about this?

Another factor that I've heard was the bridges in Europe, outside of railway bridges, few of them could support heavier tanks. The US was fighting a mobility war in 1944, while the Germans were on the defensive, this made a difference in design requirements - where heavy tanks were most effective in situations where mobility was secondary to armor and firepower. The Sherman was upgraded to Jumbo form for assualt duty.

**zraver** · 25 Apr 12,, 23:06

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

Another factor that I've heard was the bridges in Europe, outside of railway bridges, few of them could support heavier tanks. The US was fighting a mobility war in 1944, while the Germans were on the defensive, this made a difference in design requirements - where heavy tanks were most effective in situations where mobility was secondary to armor and firepower. The Sherman was upgraded to Jumbo form for assualt duty.

Pontoon weights would be more accurate. The road network was still developing so often you only had two types of bridges once off the limited all weather road network- horse cart bridges in rural areas and railway bridges. Add in the normal assumption that a retreating enemy will blow and bridges and the only ways to get tanks across to the other shore is to ford it- if a ford exists, build a bridge, carry it across on ferry or drive it over a pontoon bridge.

Heavier tanks mean heavier bridges, ferries and pontoons. Where bridges did exist, the ancient stone bridges crossing brooks, streams and creeks likely could take heavy weights, but the wooden ones would be hit or miss even for a Sherman.