Long message: PIAT; Sherman; Panther; Iltis; War memorials; CFB Borden
Museum's vehicles
OK, OK - Regimental pride gets the better of me here. The sole surviving
Canadian Victoria Cross winner is PRIVATE "Smokey" Smith of my regiment, the
Seaforth Highlanders of Canada. He got his VC for using a PIAT (Projector
Infantry Anti-Tank or PITA to our Aussie friends). I have met him on a
couple of occasions and he is an interesting fellow.
Sherman vs. Panther: - My wife's uncle, George Inglis, commanded a DD
Sherman (Duplex-Drive i.e. amphibious with propellers and flotation screen.)
in the First Hussars I believe it was. He took his tank ashore on D-Day June
6, 1944. By the end of the war he was on his third tank. One had an enemy
round punch through the turret without exploding. He ordered the crew to
bale out as he knew the next round was being loaded and he did not have time
to fight back. The next tank was lost when he saw a German Observation Post
setting up across a valley. He was ordered NOT to fire. The Germans had no
such orders and an artillery round soon landed right in front of his tank
and shattered the front housing. I only got to meet him once, but the story
stuck.
The war vet and famous Canadian author Farley Mowat (I believe it was him)
said that we should be making our war memorials out of Panther and Tiger
tanks, not Shermans. When Canadians looked at them, they would think "Holy
S$#t! My Dad (Uncle, Granddad etc.) had to fight against THIS MONSTER! The
above is his sentiment, but not Farley's words.
Personally I believe that war memorials should include a good helping of
SHOT-UP vehicles, aircraft etc. A nice mint Sherman tank sitting in the
sunshine does not convey the same impression that the same Sherman does with
"air conditioning". I am an Infantry officer. I will never forget climbing
into a target range Sherman tank and looking out through all of the holes.
As one of the US WWII cartoon characters Willy and Joe said, "A moving
foxhole attracts the eye." I think it is great when a tank for example that
has been unearthed in Normandy, or pulled out of the ocean just offshore, is
preserved as a monument. I am saddened when they the battle damage is
repaired - kind of like hitting reboot on a war game on the computer and
getting a second life. It takes away the reality of war. Sadly, I heard that
the Panther at Overloon in Holland was being restored (they found a live
mortar bomb inside it I believe during this process). It had been knocked
out by a PIAT ON THAT VERY SPOT! The museum was built around it. Sadly the
tank was moved indoors for rebuilding and they were looking for tracks to
replace the rusted originals. Pity, it loses much of its originality and
poignancy. I wish they had simply PRESERVED it in situ (in place), perhaps
with a roof over it or a building around it, and a PIAT and PIAT bomb
displayed nearby.
In the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa, they have an Iltis (made by Bombardier
of Canada) on display. It served in the former Yugoslavia on Peacekeeping
duties, painted white. Sounds safe enough, not like being in a REAL war.
This particular Iltis is all shot up. The mannequins in it portray the two
Canadian soldiers who were in it at the time and who were both wounded. The
CWM even went tot he extent of making face casts of both men, so the
mannequins LOOK just like them!
The above mentioned Farley Mowat brought a Panther tank back to Canada
(along with a WHOLE SHIPLOAD of WWII German vehicles, cannons, rockets,
etc.) and the story is at the end of his book MY FATHER'S SON. An incredible
book to read! We believe that the Panther at Canadian Forces Base Borden
(north of Toronto, Ontario) is that Panther V Aus A. He probably also
brought over the Wirbelwind (early Panzer with four gun 20mm open-topped
turret) which is also at Borden. That museum is well worth visiting by the
way! (from an old list) Matilta Mk. II, Staghound, Shermans (M4A4, M4A2E8 ),
Fiat M13/40, Churchill Mk. IV, Bobcat APC prototype; Sherman M4A4 Crab
(flail), Firefly, Ram II (early), Ram II (late), Chaffee M24, FT-17, Whippet
WWI tank, Centurion III, Hetzer, Grizzly (two), Valentine Mk. III, Vickers
Light Tank Mk. VI B CMPs, Stuarts M5A1 etc.
I for one was VERY impressed with the Panther I saw at Borden and the two I
saw in Paris many years ago. I understand that these Panther tanks had
running gear reliability problems, but other than that were very, very good
tanks.
Colin Macgregor Stevens
cmstevens@telus.net
or (as second choice)
seaforth72@hotmail.com
LOST MESSAGES: Due to technical problems, many messages have been lost by
colin@pacdat.net address. My apologies for any inconveniences this may have
caused. Several hundred messages were lost at various times in the Fall of
2001.
MVPA #954 (since 1977)
Editor: "Maple Leaf Up!" newsletter & Webmaster
of Western Command Military Vehicle Historical Society
(Established 1977) http://www.westerncommand.com
Pitt Meadows (East of Vancouver but not beyond Hope)
British Columbia, CANADA
Owner of:
1944 Willys MB jeep (ex-Norway)
http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/colin_stevens'_1944_willys_mb_photos.htm
1942 BSA airborne bicycle
http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/bsa_airborne_bicycles_(aka_parabike).htm
1942 Ford GPA amphibious jeep http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net/gpa.htm
Personal web site: http://bcoy1cpb.pacdat.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Grammont" <islander@midmaine.com>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MV] Overseas purchases?
> Geoff,
>
> >But did it, REALLY?
>
> Hehe... you have no idea how long I could make a thread regarding WWII
> armor and tactics. This has been my 60 hour a week bread and butter job
> for the last 4 years, not to mention the 10 or so unpaid ones before that
:-)
>
> >So how come they lost so many?
>
> Er... because they were fighting a three front war against forces which
> dwarfed it in all respects while being governed by one of the most inept
> governments, not to mention one of the worst industrial production plans
> ever seen in the 20th Century? That has a wee bit of something to do with
> it :-) If you look at relative losses in tank vs. tank battles and the
> German tanks come out looking pretty good. Much better in fact than
> Allied tanks. Not many Allied tankers were able to do what German
> tankers were, regardless of how favorable the circumstances were.
> Training can only do so much, so the machines must have something to do
> with it too.
>
> Quick test... find a WWII Allied tanker and ask him if he would have
> rather been sitting in a Panther or in something like a Sherman or
> Cromwell. Then as a WWII German tanker what he would rather be in. I
> suspect the answer would be the same and for the same reason. Soviet
> stuff is a whole 'nother ball of wax.
>
> >And how did it come to pass
> >that your average, pissed-off Commonwealth Lance Corporal with a PIAT
> >could have
> >Panthers for breakfast if he had the Big Brass Ones to get close enough?
:-P
>
> Any tank could be knocked out by someone with Big Brass Ones, so that
> proves nothing. On the other hand, a 14 year old German kid could knock
> out *any* Allied tank at 100m with a disposable pop gun called a
> Panzerfaust while his PIAT counterpart bounced round after round off of
> the bigger German tanks like trowing popcorn at a brick wall. German AT
> capabilites at all levels were superior to Western Allied ones, and to a
> large degree Soviet ones as well.
>
> >The Panther was seriously overrated, IMHO, a legacy which survives to
> this day
> >for some strange reason. They were far from invincible regardless of
> >circumstance.
>
> I totally agree with this, and have tried to beat this into many people's
> skulls over the years. But do not confuse being vulnerable with being
> inferior or no better than another. The Panther, in many respects, was
> the finest tank produced by any nation in WWII. At the same time that
> does not mean that all other tanks sucked, because that too would be
> wrong to say.
>
> > The simple fact of the
> >matter is that if it were THAT good, the Allies would have
> >reverse-engineered it
> >after the war and continued its manufacture. They didn't.
>
> This is an oversimplification of reality. The truth is that some Allied
> thinkers wanted to do exactly that, just as some German thinkers in 1941
> wanted to simply copy the T-34 (which was how the Panther started out).
> The reasons WHY the Allies didn't build Panther knock offs is realated
> to the same reason they didn't reverse engineer/produce things like a
> better LMG, disposable AT rocket, improved Bazooka, better AT guns, etc.
> Hell, it took the Allies a super long time to upgun and uparmor the
> Shermans, even though they knew damned well they could not stand toe to
> toe with much of anything the Germans had. Read Belton Cooper's "Death
> Traps" for one view of this from the front.
>
> The reasons for this are highly complicated and subject of much debate.
> But the fact is that the Western Allies pursued an industrial policy of
> "make more of whatever we got" for most of the war. It worked, IMHO, but
> it cost many more lives in the end.
>
> >Having said that, it's one hell of an impressive tank viewed close-up,
but
> >nothing our Lance Corporals can't handle... :-)
>
> Assuming that a Lance Corporal could run 2000m through enemy infantry to
> get a shot off at a moving Panther while all his armored support was
> going up in flames without being able to score hits. Reality and theory
> are two different things :-) In reality VERY few German tanks were
> knocked out by PIATs compared to standoff weapons like AT guns, tanks,
> TDs, and aircraft.
>
> Steve
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 11:49:30 PST