From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

Tank Design

With the western allies always one if not two tank designs behind the
Germans, did they ever have a T-34 delivered to them to evaluate it
against what was coming off their production lines?

If they did...was it ever a possibility they could have adopted it
(improved on it) and churned it out like the Soviets did?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

alo <alo@btinternet.com> wrote:

Tank Design

With the western allies always one if not two tank designs behind the Germans, did they ever have a T-34 delivered to them to evaluate it
against what was coming off their production lines?

If they did...was it ever a possibility they could have adopted it
(improved on it) and churned it out like the Soviets did?

The T-34 was basically equivalent to the M4 Sherman.

The T-34 came into service a little earlier, and had a
slightly more powerful gun (76.2mm vs 75mm; later the
Sherman mounted a 76.2mm while the T-34 was upgunned
to 85mm). However, AP performance was very similar.

The T-34 had wider tracks which was better for mobility
on soft ground, i.e. mud.

However, the Sherman had a more reliable engine and
transmission. The Soviets used Shermans to equip
Guards Tank Corps for deep breakthrough operations,
where they needed tanks that could drive long distances
without breaking down.

The Sherman also had better ergonomics than the T-34. The
Soviets skimped on crew comfort, which is understandable,
but did have costs in crew effectiveness.

Finally, the Sherman had a gyro-stabilized main gun which
could fire on the move.

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdos.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

Rich Rostrom <rrostrom@comcast.net> on Mon, 27 Jan 2020 19:43:10 -0600
typed in soc.history.what-if the following:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

--

--
pyotr filipivich.
For Sale: Uncirculated Roman Drachmas, feature Julius Ceaser's Portrait, several dated 44 BCE. Comes with Certificate of Authenticity.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> on Tue, 28 Jan 2020 21:23:49
-0600 typed in soc.history.what-if the following:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

Yep That last was an important factor.

I recall a war game set on the eastern front You got to roll for reinforcement's replacements. As I recall, the Germans rarely got
replacement tanks, but the Red got T-34s just about every round.
--
pyotr filipivich.
For Sale: Uncirculated Roman Drachmas, feature Julius Ceaser's Portrait, several dated 44 BCE. Comes with Certificate of Authenticity.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

Speaking of Russian tanks, here's one that I had to see to believe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAHrkK2IzmI
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On 1/29/2020 12:12 PM, Byker wrote:

Speaking of Russian tanks, here's one that I had to see to believe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAHrkK2IzmI

Real world steampunk!!
--
"You need to believe in things that aren't true. How else can they become?" --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On 1/28/20 7:23 PM, Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

ZZyXX wrote:

Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On 1/29/20 5:49 PM, Ned Latham wrote:

ZZyXX wrote:

Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

ZZyXX <zzyxx@CampSoda-Restoration-Project.tv> on Thu, 30 Jan 2020
18:29:18 -0800 typed in soc.history.what-if the following:

On 1/29/20 5:49 PM, Ned Latham wrote:

ZZyXX wrote:

Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a >>>>> better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton

Attributed to various Soviet Leaders, it seems that it may have originated in the late 70's early 80's in the US military defense
complex, as a way to boost military budgets.
--
pyotr filipivich.
For Sale: Uncirculated Roman Drachmas, feature Julius Ceaser's Portrait, several dated 44 BCE. Comes with Certificate of Authenticity.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 18:29:18 -0800, ZZyXX <zzyxx@CampSoda-Restoration-Project.tv> wrote:

On 1/29/20 5:49 PM, Ned Latham wrote:

ZZyXX wrote:

Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a >>>>> better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 >
Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the
Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton

Both Google and Wikipedia attribute the quote to Stalin which is how I
remember it as something said to FDR and Churchill at Teheran or Yalta
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

The Horny Goat wrote:

ZZyXX

Ned Latham wrote:

ZZyXX wrote:

Ned Latham wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Rich Rostrom wrote:

So the idea that the T-34 was a vastly superior tank that
the US or UK should have copied is a myth.

I suspect that the Myth came from the fact that the Germany Army
was surprised by it when it showed up in 41/42, that it was if not a
better, at least an equal to the German Panzers III, So, T-34 > Panzer III becomes T-34 > all German Tanks, we know how tough the Panzer 4 et seq were in 1944, ergo T-34s were the best tank.
Umm, not so sure about that.

What the T-34 had was sloped armour and huge numbers.

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton

Both Google and Wikipedia attribute the quote to Stalin which is how I remember it as something said to FDR and Churchill at Teheran or Yalta

Its meaning is well known (Napoleon is said to have said "give me the
big battalions"), but that pithy expression of it *has* to have come
from someone whose first language was English. Patton, not Stalin.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"The Horny Goat" wrote in message news:npk93f5sld3l5ellnm81qm44gdd66hn7mr@4ax.com...

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton

Both Google and Wikipedia attribute the quote to Stalin which is how I remember it as something said to FDR and Churchill at Teheran or Yalta

Can it be traced back prior to 1979? http://klangable.com/blog/quantity-has-a-quality-all-its-own/
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 13:51:13 -0600, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:

"The Horny Goat" wrote in message >news:npk93f5sld3l5ellnm81qm44gdd66hn7mr@4ax.com...

quantity has a quality of it's own

LOL. I presume that's not your own original, but it's a goodie.

I forget who said it, possibly Patton

Both Google and Wikipedia attribute the quote to Stalin which is how I
remember it as something said to FDR and Churchill at Teheran or Yalta

Can it be traced back prior to 1979? >http://klangable.com/blog/quantity-has-a-quality-all-its-own/

Given that all the figures cited were WW2 era and that FDR Stalin and
Churchill all died 1945, 1953 and 1965 respectively....
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2