The curious case of Ronson, Part 3.

Statistical analysis


   There are many more personal accounts and other circumstantial evidence about Sherman tank catching on fire easily, which could be easily dismissed, however this occurence could also be traced and easily shown in works of a more "academic" nature, where it persisted until the end of World War 2. 

   A report from April 1945 claims that 60-90% of Sherman tanks are lost by burning, and practically all of them catch on fire when hit by a panzerfaust. Report also states that, according to the Ninth US army, as opposed to the usual rate of burning between 60-90% in typical Sherman tanks, M4 (76)s equipped with wet stowage only burned in 5-10% cases, however, First US army could not support such figures.[1] This report, quoted only partly and popularised by Steven Zaloga in mainstream literature, and used by people sometimes as an evidence that this problem was solved,actually reveals the disturbing persistence of fires even as late as 1945, and present the solution, wet stowage, as uncorroborated between american formations. 


   A far bigger study, ORO-T-117 - ORO-T-117 Survey into Allied tank casualties in WW 2, reveals  more valuable information, and reveals a few strange differences, that perhaps are the corroborating evidence for the usefulness of wet stowage. And while the data is considered to be "weak" and ambiguous, it is still considered to be useful[2] and generally agrees with other sources.



   
   One can observe that the previous assumptions seem to apply. As the caliber and velocity increases, so does the incidence of fires, a marked difference between US sample in ETO and everything else is also noted, which might prove the effectiveness of wet stowage, or the often cited  What is missing however, is a clear definition of what "burned" means, as this tended, as shown in a different survey, to mean anything from radios burning to total brew-ups. [3] Sherman also performs poorly in limited samples compared to either Tigers and Panthers, or smaller german tanks.[4]



42 tanks out of 72 destroyed by gunfire  burned, or 58%.


12 out of 30 tanks destroyed by gunfire burned, or 40%.


20 out of 59 burned, which is 34%.

   Sherman surprisingly behaves even worse than Panthers at Kursk, notorious for combustion in their earlier model, In the sample of 22 Panther tanks studied by NIIBT comission between 20th and 28th July 1943, it was noted that only 10, or 45% burned, and it was noted this was mostly due to penetrations of engine compartment (mainly from 85 mm guns) that subsequently set the fuel on fire [5], which runs contrary to the theory that majority of fires are caused by ignited ammunition. This also surprisingly applies to Sherman, as the WO 205/1165 proves once again, where in the sample of 62 Sherman tanks, Comets and Cromwells that were knocked-out by guns, only 10 fires could be traced to ammunition going off first out of 37 tanks that caught on fire.

   It is very hard to establish what exactly was the core problem with Sherman, but the overrepresentation with allied force, later battlefields saturated with 88 mm guns and long 75 mm guns, a perceived flammability based on a minor increased effect of APHE shells compared to the solid shot used by the US 75 mm gun, and an unknown problem of casings separating from the shell in the ammunition used by this gun. Dry stowage Sherman tanks also pay for the increased rate of fire afforded by a ready rack by yet another source of possible fire in the turret.



[1] - A visit to a ETO - Report by representatives of A.M.R.L
[2] - ORO-T-117 - ORO-T-117 Survey into Allied tank casualties in WW 2, p. 29
[3] - WO 205/1165, Capt. H. B. Wright RAMC and Capt. R. D. Harkness RAMC, A survey of casualties amongst armoured units in Northwest Europe
[4] - ORO-T-117 - ORO-T-117 Survey into Allied tank casualties in WW 2, p. 21 - 23 , p. 100 - 104
[5] - Maxim Kolomiets, Panther Heavy tank,  p.182, p.185-187




   
   

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bad history weekend No.1 : The case of (not so) one-shot Tiger II

Image
   It always turns out the same when one starts discussing the German tanks. It inevitably turns to Tigers and Panthers, which inevitably turns to either their reliability, or actual quality of their armor. Which will naturally lead to what people consider the holy grail on this subject, the test of Tiger II published on the English speaking side of the internet by the tank archives blog. It can be found here -  http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/03/is-2-vs-german-big-cats.html  .    What is it about? Well, it is a rather "scathing review" based on a test of various guns performed on a Tiger II hull and turret, along with a different test of a Panther, which is not relevant now. What is relevant, is a rather large number of visual and contextual peculiarities for a comparatively short text. One hit Knock-out?     Author of the blog goes out of his way in setting-up a particular picture about this particular Tiger and this particular test. One can argue whether or not the placeme
Read more

Motorisation in Wehrmacht, Foreign acquisitions and first combat experiences.

Image
Loot Force One begins    In the previous article, I jumped a fair bit ahead, and I nearly forgot about one very interesting aspect of Wehrmacht's procurement - common thievery. Or rather, the use of captured equipment, surely the most extensive in WW II, and perhaps the most extensive ever. Austria: First steps    Anschluss gave Germans a great opportunity to practice mobile operations outside of combat, and they also acquired a modest number of austrian weapons and factories for their own use. Bofors 40 mm AA guns that continued production after the Anschluss in Vienna Arsenal, along with a small number of Oerlikon 20 mm guns, several thousand artillery pieces and small arms . Most important, for the motorpool atleast, was the addition of Steyr company, and several other small companies that provided space and production capacities to manufacture many competitive truck types, like Steyr 640, a 1,5 ton, 6x4 vehicle, which was one of the first foreign truck used by Wehr
Read more

German tank losses on the Eastern front, report from the Inspector of Panzertruppen

Image
"German tank losses on the east between 22.6.41 and 21.12.1944 Russians report 70 366 german tanks destroyed from 22.6.41 to 31.12.1944    For the same time period,  the following actual losses of armored fighting vehicles were reported  by GenStdH/Gen.Qu. :"    Table is organized in collumns for tanks, StuGs, Self-proppeled artillery and Sp. AT-guns, halftracks and armored cars and "other". Panzers include - Pz I - VI, 38(t), command tanks, observation tanks and flamethrower tanks. StuGs include - StuG III, StuH, Sturmpanzer, jagdpanzer IV and 38(t), Jagdpanther and Elefant. Self-proppeled artillery and Sp. AT-guns inc. - AT-guns on Pz II and 38(t), Nashorn, Wespe, Hummel and Sp. guns on 38(t). Other inc. - munnition panzer III and IV, Bergepanzers III, IV and 38(t), flakpanzers on 38(t) and panzer IV chassis and Borgwards .
Read more