Monthly Archives: February 2016

#50 Computer Games That Have Sherman Tanks in Them: The Sherman Has Been In A Lot Of Games

Computer Games that have Sherman Tanks in them:  WWII and or Sherman Tank games

There have been far more games with Sherman tanks in them than I can really cover here, I’ll just try and cover the ones currently available.  I’ll start with the biggest tank game of all time.


World of Tanks: The best Tank Arcade Game on the Market

World is a great game. I could be accused of being biased, I do have over 20k games in the beta, and a little more than 15K since release. I’ve been playing computer games since I was a kid, in the 80s, on an old Apple II. Since my dad was also a military history nut, and like computer games as well, I got to play an awful lot of games involving tanks, going as far back as SSI’s Panzer Commander game, and Kampfgruppe games, and then SSI’s last Hurrah, Steel Panthers.

Random in game shot with interface turned off.

World of Tanks is a different type of tank game, since it is really arcade based, but it’s very fun.  The problem with most simulator type tank games is they take to long, and then you finally make contact, miss the camping sniper tank and die. They claim to be realistic, but really, when they get past the set PVE scenarios, are not more realistic in PVP play then the arcade games, because of the limitations of the platform.  War Thunder suffers from this along with a lot of other problems.

An M7 medium on fire, in game shot, interface off, as you can see the HD game is very nice looking.

Having played WOT from the almost the beginning, having started in the early closed beta, before there were any other tech trees than the German and Russian lines, I really know the game. I saved up free exp and gold (you got like 200 gold a day) before the American Tank release, so I have a T29 the first day it came out.   This was back in the old days when if you ran over a dog house, (since removed) a dog yelped, before the whiners got them to soften it up.

An M3 Lee and A-20 light that killed each other in a live game, interface turned off

I clearly still like the game, since I still play, though Clan Wars nearly burnt me out. I am glad I was in a clan good enough to get the special tanks for the first three campaigns.  PBKAC was a great clan, and they kept me around long after my skills had become low rung in the clan.  The real problem with clan wars is the time it takes.  Now compared to games like Worlds of Warcraft or other MOLRPG games, the CW in WOT is great, and far less time consuming, but it’s still an hour or two 3 to 5 nights a week, or more of the clan was really active. They also went a long way to make being active give you some in game extras.  As for all the whining about CW sucking etc., or the game in general, especially from the elite class of players, whining is the in thing, talking shit about something you’re good at and play all the time seems to be the thing with elite gamers. I’ve seen in in every PVP game I’ve played, and I’ve played a lot.

This is what Clan Wars in World of Tanks looks like, this pic has the full interface in place. This is not the stock interface, I use Webium’s Modpack

My thoughts? Negative whiners suck, if you don’t like something, don’t bore us with the crying and moaning, leave and find something else to do.  Does the game have issues? Sure, what game doesn’t? Do they make the game less fun? Yes, Arty I’m looking at You, but they do not make it so bad, you need to dbase yourself and whine about it like a little wimp. State your case to the people who mater, and then either move on and or deal with it until fixed. No one wants to hear you cry.

A nice glamour shot of an M24 Chaffee shooting, in game footage, interface off

How this all relates to Shermans? Well, as a PVP tank versus tank Arcade game, where you start with old, weak tanks, and by killing other players, win exp and credits to unlock and buy new tanks. The game is free to play. Though there is a play element, it really only makes advancing in the game easier and quicker, and really offers no in game PVP advantage.  You start running into Sherman tanks or Lees really, at Tier 4.  You get the Basic M4 Sherman at Tier 5 and the M4A3E8 and Jumbo at Tier 6.  There are some other Shermans in the game, The British line has an M4A2 Sherman III at T5, and the Firefly IC Composite hull at T6.  There is also an M4A2E4 Sherman as a rare tank given out to beta players with more than 3000 games. The latest Sherman to be added is the French M51 105mm Sherman tank, as a premium.  I’ll discuss each tank and it’s model below.

M3 Lee: The Combat RV in WOT, Tier 4, US Medium Tank

shot_1078 shot_1079 shot_1080

The M3 Lee got an HD update early in the HD update process, but it’s still a fairly decent HD model. The biggest flaw I can really see is they have the points on the sprocket stabbing through the track end connectors, instead of between them. The model is an early production M3, with the 37mm gun lacking the counter weight needed to work with the stabilizer for that gun.  It still has hull side doors, another sign of an early model. It has the two fixed forward firing hull machine guns that were eliminated early on as well.

The tank in game has a reputation for being poor. There are a few reasons for this, one, it’s a holdover from when the games matchmaking spread was larger, so the M3 would see T7 tanks, and it’s one shotable to many of these. That has been fixed.  Another reason is the large crew, for the tank to shine, it needs a 100% crew, and many of the advanced crew skills help this tank. With a almost three skill crew, a rammer, binocs, and enhanced gun laying drive, I was in the top 50 players in the Lee the last I looked, and with this crew and setup, in a T4 match, the tank is a monster, and not as a sniper TD wanabee.  It high damage for tier, high rate of fire gun, make it deadly even up close at T4, and it can shoot fairly well on the move!

Both the model, and tanks in game performance are very good.

M3 Grant: The Combat Caravan, Tier 4, British medium Tank

shot_1074 shot_1076 shot_1073

This HD model was added a little later than the M3 Lee, and they fixed the problem with the tracks. They put the Grant specific turret on it, without the machine gun cupola, and added sand shields.  The 37mm gun lacks a counter weight, and the hull has the paired machine guns, and I’m not sure if that was the case with the Grants, I’ll have to look. It’s still a very nice model of the Grant.

In game, it plays like a Lee, but you can put the 6 pounder on it in place of the 75mm. I don’t like the swap, and do not actually play this tank much, though I have one in the garage. When I want a T4 tank, I play the Lee since it’s crew is better.

Overall the tank and model are both good in game.

M4 Sherman: The M4A1 Mishmash, T5 US Medium.


shot_874 shot_691 shot_687

What can I say about this model, well other than it’s a mess, it’s also historically impossible.  If you put the 75mm turret, the and M3 gun on it, it’s almost passible, but still has later heavy duty suspension on a direct vision hull with fixed hull machine guns and three piece differential that would not have had that suspension, and should have the suspension on the M3 Lee. There are also many little accuracy problems with the model, the driver and co drivers hatches are off a little, the suspension units are not spaced evenly. The model only gets more accurate if you put the top turret and gun on. Since it’s a small hatch M4A1, it should not get the T23 turret.  These were only installed on M4A1, A2 and A3 large hatch hulls.

What they need to do to fix the model is, remove the T23 turret, add a later 75mm turret with full gun mantlet at the upgrade turret, and allow the M1A1 gun to be the top gun on that turret. They also need to fix the mantlet of the 105 model on this turret, it’s all wrong, but would be easy to fix on the full mantlet 75mm turret, though it really needs a second ventilator, and no 105 M4A1s were ever made.

Anyway, in game, it’s a very good T5 Medium. At one point, before the HEAT nerf, the M4 was actually very OP, as were all the 105 derp tanks, like the Panzer 4. Since, it’s been balanced, and a decent tank. You can run it will all guns and still contribute to your teams win. Even it’s basic 75mm gun can take on a KV an pen it from the front. Derping in it is more art than science now, but still viable, but the best gun overall is the M1A1.

The tank is good in game but the model is subpar as the HD models go. It is supposed to get a model update soon, so hopefully they fix it.

M4A2 Sherman III: This Model, as First Unlocked is Very Pretty and Accurate, T5 British medium

shot_1066 shot_1068 shot_1069 shot_1070

This model, as unlocked is one of the best HD models in the game. The model is a M4A2 Sherman III, with a 75mm M3 with the shorty, no ear mantlet, DV ports, fixed hull MGs, sand skirts, and the proper turret box the Brits added. It also has the proper, early Lee style suspension bogies.  The hull may be a touch to long since the wheel spacing looks a little wide. One final flaw may be the antenna bracket near the co-driver. It looks like a type not installed on M4A2 tanks with the fixed hull guns, but that’s a detail only the geekiest of Sherman geeks would get so faulting Wargaming on it is a tad unfair.

The Model goes south when you add the upgrade turret, a T23 turret, that is wrong for a small hatch hull. They could solve this the same way I suggested with the M4, or they could update the M4A2 hull to a large hatch hull and ad a later set of T5mm turrets to fix it.  It is a fine looking T23 turret though, and it’s not like it couldn’t have been built, and there are a few Franken Shermans around with the T23 turret on the wrong, small hatch hull, this is not something Wargaming needs to put on the critical fix list.

It plays in game just like the American M4 T5 Sherman. It can hold its own in any match with any of its guns.

M4A2E4:  One of the Oldest Models in the Game, and not Very Pretty, T5 US Premium Medium

shot_486   shot_490

This tank is fairly rare on the US Server, since it was a Beta Reward tank. If I recall right, it is purchasable as a premium tank on the Euro an Russian Servers. It is a classic Premium tank, in that it is not as good as it’s fully upgraded T5 piers, but its slightly better than a stock T5 tank.  This was an experimental M4A2 with torsion bar suspension, and they now have all the parts to make a very nice model for this tank, but who knows when they will.

They could fix it by taking the Sherman III hull, and the turret off the Firefly IC minus the 17 pounder and loaders hatch.

The tank in game is a pretty decent T5 medium tank. The gun is decent, the armor is decent, the mobility is decent if it’s flat or you start on a hill. Honestly, I play it because it’s rare, and I like tanks that are not the ‘best’, and it can play my best crew.  It will never go on sale again though, since it has improved match making, and that makes up for its flaws, since it will not see T7 matches at all.  I’ll never sell mine.

A premium tank in WOT is a tank you can buy for gold, or real money through the WOT website. You can also win them through events and missions. They allow you to put any crew from the same class tank into it without retraining, and they get an experience bonus from the tank. This makes the tanks nice for training a crew, but also nice for making extra cash, using your best crew.  Premium tanks also make more money than regular tanks.  There are a lot of premium tanks in the game, and they range from T2 to T10, and a few over the years have been considered overpowered and removed from sale, but not the game. Most are balanced on the weak side.

M4A3E8:  Ugly Old Model, But Still A Great Tank, T6 US medium

shot_1063 shot_1064 shot_1065

This tanks model was one of the original models in the game, well, it has been unchanged since the American line was released in beta and the model shows it. It’s plain ugly and looks out of place in a game that has come really far graphics wise since its release.

In game once fully upgraded this tank is everything a medium tank should be, mobile over all terrain types, decent armor, and fairly good gun. It has good gun handling, and can shoot well on the move. Some like the Cromwell better, since it’s a little faster, and has a slightly better gun, but I think the Easy8 still holds its own.  The thing really keeping this tank rare, and probably holding back the HD model is the Fury Premium tank, basically a E8 with a stock turret and slightly slower, with an ok HD model based on the Movie tank.

M4A3E8 Fury: An American Premium Medium, Just Like the Tank in the Movie Fury, T6 US Premium Medium

shot_051 shot_050 shot_045

Turrets can be blown off, if you get hit in the ammo rack, or hit someone there


Fury was a big deal in the WOT community; it had a lot of tie ins with the game and War gaming, including this premium tank. The model is HD, but not the best one around but it’s still better than the Model on the T5 M4 Sherman. I’m not sure if it’s still for sale, but since it’s basically a slightly nerfed E8, it will probably be available on and off for years.

The Model does show off what a late war Sherman looked like from a storage perspective, and has all kinds of junk draped on the tank.  You can see the same kind of thing in period photos. The Model has the wrong sprockets though, showing they based it directly off the tank in the Movie that was NOT an M4A3 76  HVSS tank, but it was an M4A2 76 HVSS tank made by FTA, not CDA.

It plays just like the E8, but it makes very good money. It came with a crew with the same names as the movie crew as well. Everything said about the E8 above applies to this tank,  meaning it’s a pretty good medium tank too.

M4A3E2 Jumbo: A Good HD model, but a Confused Tank In Game, T6 US Medium


shot_935 shot_946

The Jumbo model is very good. It just has a few minor flaws, the first being it has CDA not FTA sprockets. ONLY FTA made Jumbo tanks so their plain sprockets were the only ones used. It also has sand skirts, and they were removed before being deployed into combat. The other problem with the model comes with the upgraded turret, basically a T23 turret, with the Jumbo mantlet, IE a fantasy turret.  Very few tanks have completely fabricated configurations like this, and I suspect they did this for balance reasons, since the M1A2 gun in the full armor turret may have tipped this tank just a tad to the OP side. This leaves you with a choice, good armor, or good firepower, since if you chose the top turret and gun, you can be easily penned anywhere on the turret but the mantlet, thus defeating the whole purpose of the jumbo.

I run mine with the 105 derp gun, not historically correct, but not impossible either. At T6 the 105 Derp is really at the bottom end of its effectiveness, and I would run the M1A2 if they let you put it in the stock turret, but nope…  The Jumbo is a good tank, it’s armor can bounce a lot, with good angling and clever terrain use you can really bounce a lot of stuff.  I’ve got almost 300 battles in mine, but really prefer a more mobile tank.

All Wargaming needs to do to fix the model is remove the second turret, and make the top gun the M1A1 off the T23. They could then remove the skirts and put plain sprockets on it and the model would be perfect. Oh, they also need to swap out all the road wheels for the stamped plain ones.

Sherman IC Composite Firefly: This Model is all Kinds of Good, T6 British Medium




shot_964 shot_968

This model is good overall in both the stock, and fully upgraded configurations, but does have a few minor problems. Someone should really send the modelers, who do the Shermans at Wargaming a copy of Son of a Sherman, but really, these models are very nice, and some of the best of the Sherman models.  Problem one, these composite hull M4 tanks, were large hatch hulls, built by CDA, by this point, they should have the fancy CDA sprocket, like wrongly used on the Jumbo.  The next model problem involves the turret, the stock turret has no loaders hatch, and all if not the vast majority of M4 Composite hull tanks had a loaders hatch.  There may have been a batch early on that didn’t but I’m trying to confirm this. In any case, by the time production really got going the M4 Composite production tanks were getting late production 75mm turrets with loaders hatches cast in, or were using older turrets left over from the ARV program and updating them by adding cheek armor and cutting a loaders hatch in. This means the upgraded turret on the IC Composite Firefly should have a oval loaders hatch not the British square one.

Other than these minor things the model is beautiful, and may have been based on a post war restoration with the wrong sprockets.  It has many very fine details and is toped with a very nicely modeled M2 .50 machine gun. I think this is the prettiest Sherman model in the game at this point.

It plays in game more like a TD than a Medium tank.  It has a very nice gun that can pen just about anything you’re going to see, but it’s got a slow ROF. It’s slow for a Sherman, and is not good in a close in knife fight.  I do not have a large number of games in this tank and am only average in it at this point. It’s play style is not really one I enjoy so I rarely play it.

M4A1 Revalorise: The Most Awesome Sherman of them All, T8 French, premium Medium

shot_386 shot_389

shot_544 shot_541

This is a T8 Sherman tank. That’s two tiers higher than any other, and in some ways it shows, the tank is slow, has no armor and really only has one thing going for it, a gun with nice pen. The model is a little odd. It’s an M4A1 76W VVSS hull, and it’s well modeled.  This is the only M4A1 large hatch hulled tank in the game so the hull model was new, and they did a great job with that part. The turret looks a little fat, but it was modified, with new parts welded to the front and back, but the all-around vision cupola looks a little off.  It is supposed to be a limited Premium, so it will only be sold on special event weekends and stuff, and it’s a fun tank.  I have not played it much though, simply because I have so many T8 Premium tanks to choose from, I usually pic something I have a really good crew for.

The Tank plays like the classic glass canon. The gun is decently accurate and handles ok, but is really slow on the rate of fire. This is a sit back and snipe and anoy tank. It does make good money if you get some good damage in.  I really bought it because it was a Sherman, and I must have all things Sherman.

I’ll add the Tanks based on the Sherman Chassis later.

. . .

World of Tanks has come a long way from its release, and unlike most games it’s really only gotten better. As a 15 on 15 tank based PVP Arcade game, there is really nothing that can touch it. I think what’s really kept me playing is the companies push to improve and add to the game, even years into its release. For example a new physics system and sound system are about to be implemented.  The biggest advantage to the causal played, and as much as I  play, I’m now just a casual, is a battle can take no more than 15 minutes, and most of the time it’s less than 10.  If you want more action you can stack games, playing tank after tank, rack up the games, exp, and credits, but you don’t have to. As a casual with a huge tank base, I can play tanks I like, and burn a little real money on gold to keep premium and convert exp, and get any tank I want in a short time. I can jump on for three games after work, and even if everyone is a loss, still have a little fun.  Many a night after a hard day at real world work, when I’m dead tired, dehydrated, and hungry, I’ll play a game or two before I go to bed, sometimes on weekends, I can crank the games out like the old days, or get on with a few pals, and platoon up and spread T1 Conan tank Terror through T5. For the type of gaming I do now, this is just about the best game I could ask for.

4.5 out of 5 stars

A variety of Heavy Tanks fighting it out on a ridge, in game shot, no interface.
M4 Sherman in game shooting into a Valley, in game shot, interface off.
Another shot of those heavies on the ridge

Combat Missions:  The Originals, Beyond Overload, Barbarossa to Berlin, and Africa Corps, Oldies But Goodies

So these games are pretty old at this point and can be purchased from the Battlefront Website for fifteen bucks each. They will run on very low power computers so for the price, if you like turned based, tactical combat simulations based in WWII, but these games. The guys who make the games are a small team, and I’m sure can use any cash the old games generate, and they are well worth the price.


Combat Missions: Beyond Overlord was the first game in the series. Each one stands by itself, and incorporates improvements to the basic game engine. Africa Corps came last, and is the most polished of the three.  The games work in a interesting way, not like RTS games, these games work in 1 minute of battle turns, were between each minute, you can give units orders.  They focus on squad level, and individual vehicle level battles, but you can have some really huge battles with more than a battalion of troops on each side.  The interface is a tad clunky but easy enough to learn and you can modify any of the scenarios and campaigns that come in the game.  In these versions troops are available from the Germans, British, Americans and Russians, depending on the game version.


Game play is great, each game has a huge number of premade battles and campaigns to play, they can be modified, and many actual battles are in the game. The unit selection is very good.

The main difference between each version is the setting, Beyond Overlord covers from D-Day until the end of the war in north west Europe, Barbarossa to Berlin Covers the beginning to end on the eastern front, and Africa Corps covers North Africa and Italy.  This may be the biggest flaw, as three standalone games, to get all the features of the interface, you have to buy the latest game, and they do not update the older ones.  This is a limitation of how these games were designed, and is a fairly minor thing.


The game is fully 3d, and you can spin the map and zoom in and out to fixed points. For their day they were really great, and they are not so dated now that they are not fun. I find I play Beyond Overlord the most, simply because it has M26 Pershings in it, and I really like the tank.  My second favorite is Africa Corps, because it’s fun to kick German but in the M3 Lee.

I’m going to give these games a collective 4 out of 5 stars, since I still play, and the only game that really pulled me away was World of Tanks.

Combat Missions:  The Updated ‘Improved’ Version, Battle For Normandy


War Thunder: An ok Copy/Twist of WOT with an Air Element

Ok, I’m going to admit it, I had some bias going in, but the game was better than I thought. I’m still playing it, though really not enjoying it, much like I tried it when it was in early Beta and just had planes, but I will play it enough to give it a fair shake. Back when I tried it the first time the plane models were very nice, and still are, though many are inaccurate in big ways it was nice to see them go to the trouble to put cockpits in the game, it never struck me as all that much more realistic than WoWP, though it was clearly the superior product of the two. I have high standards as far as airplane games that want to be considered simulators, and WT really doesn’t cut it, simply put, their flight models in many cases just suck and don’t match history. I also know some people involved with the game modeling who said they strait up picked and chose their sources for model info based on how they wanted the game to work. When I want a online flightsim with realistic models, I’ll go back to the best, AcesHigh, by Hightech Creations. The game may be ugly, but the flight models are top notch, not some BS based on a bad Russian flight ‘sim’, or the whims of WT staff.

So then ground forces came out, and I heard so many unkind things about it, coupled with a very toxic forum experience, I never felt the need to try it. All the stories about how bad it was were enough for me. This became a slight problem when I couldn’t get one of my comrades to do the review for me. So, I decided to download it and have a look.  The game is easy to jump into; the looks, interface, and controls are all pretty much the same as WOT.   WT does have more game modes then WOT, and offers “realistic battles”, and “Tank Simulator battles”, but one thing I’m sure of so far, is none of it is as fun as WOT.  The game has some nice features that WOT does not, in some cases, these features highlight the WT teams lack of attention to detail though.

The cool features that stand out are the ability to look at internal modules on the tanks in the ‘garage’, and being able to preview anything on the tech tree. Something WOT took years to do.  The other is the window that pops up to show the damage done when round penetrated the tank, an interesting, if not a tad bit distracting. Some of the models are very pretty, and the game overall looks pretty good, though a lot like a few year old FPS game. Yes, this is with every option set to max. The game also looks a bit cartoony to as well. Popping off the co-ax and roof machine guns can be fun though. The multiple turret/gun support is nice. The customization options for your tank are pretty nice, and the WT system offers more variety and options to make your tank stand out. This is a good and bad thing; some tanks can get pretty garish.

The things I don’t like are glaring; the way the game plays is annoying. Driving the tanks around feels like work. It’s not a smooth fun thing to do in like in WOT. It’s a frustrating effort, often requiring more correction than is fun, and makes it hard to maintain any speed. The faster the tank is the worse it is.  This was described as ‘cow on ice’ syndrome by more than one friend, and until you’ve played it, it’s hard to image just how bad the tanks in War Thunder drive. This was an instant turn off when your test driving a tank, and when in an actual game, and there is some lag, it is a game killing disaster.  I want the tanks to be fun to drive, and since WOTs latest physics update, they made the tanks realistic enough to make driving just challenging enough, but kept the fun factor very high. The way the tanks in WOT drive feels right to me, granted I’ve never driven a tank, but I have spent a lot of time four wheeling jeeps, and the way WOT feels when one track has better traction feels right. I know someone who’s played WOT, WT and driven real tanks, and he came up with the ‘cow on ice’ term for WT and mainly plays the air portion of the game.

Another thing I don’t like is respawns, I like the short WOT battles. I like running a game, getting knocked out and then writing something, or fixing dinner, or watching TV with my wife, I don’t like to have to commit more time to the game. This was one of the things that really made me fall in love with WOT, 15 minutes at most, and my average is like 5 minutes, I’m aggressive.

So War thunder is doing better than I thought, and even though I don’t really enjoy it, I bought the Firefly bundle, so I’ll play it enough to get a really good feel for the game, but it’s not something I’ll jump into for a relaxing thing to do after work. I will continue to play it though, if for nothing else, to give it a fair review, but unlocking all the cool Shermans in the game is sounding somewhat fun.

Ok, so now onto the Sherman tanks and Vehicles based on the chassis, and like WOT, there are a lot of them, and a lot of model problems, just like WOT.

War Thunder Lee/Sherman Models.

Medium Tank M3 Lee:

This model is pretty good, nothing glaring stands out, the base model has the shorter M2 75mm gun with counter weight, so its modeled as if the stabilizer is there, and the counterweight is also on the 37mm gun mount indicating it had the stabilizer for that gun installed as well. I love how the site for the 75mm gun actually moves with the canon like it should; showing at least whoever modeled this tank understood how it worked. I love how you can use both guns and the 37mm turret is fully functional.  It has both bow .30 calibers installed, indicating an early production Lee, and other than the suspension seeming to be a little squished down, the model looks great. The WOT Lee is an early HD model, and is not as good, but they are close. There are no real problems with the x-ray view with this model either. If I have a minor complaint, it’s the tracks not fitting the sprocket very well.


X-ray view of the M3 Lee showing internal modules and crew


Medium Tank M4A1 Sherman:

This model is not as good as the M3 Lee, the final and transmission housing looks off a little, and the welds on the lifting hooks on the front of the hull are overdone. Some of the tools don’t look right and the rear hull proportions seem off, but it’s not a bad model. It is much better than the WOT M4(M4A1), since theirs doesn’t even really make sense. They get away with that being an arcade game with all kinds of what if and inaccurate tanks, mostly German granted, but all nations have a few. The X-ray view has no glaring flaws as either, so this model is another win for WT.





Medium Tank M4 Sherman

This model is great on the outside, it shows an D-Day era M4, really the same tank as the M4A1, but with a welded upper hull instead of cast, with all the quick fix upgrades to help resolve some of the problems the tank had with ammo fires and known weak spots.  It has the cheek armor on the turret, the armor added in front of the drivers hoods, and the armor over the sponson ammo racks. In real life these additions had some internal changes that went with them. The ready rounds around the base of the turret were removed, and are still present in the x-ray view. There should also be a small exhaust deflector mounted in the rear and the things just look a little off there. WOT has no corresponding Sherman really, so we can’t really compare, but this is a nice model for sure.





Medium Tank M4A2 Sherman

This model is pretty good but has more glaring problems as well. Fisher produced many small hatch M4A2 tanks that would look the M4 more than this later production M4A2. This model is of a late production M4A2 75 dry tank with a large hatch hull, but with the old improved dry ammo setup.  The turret should also have at least the cheek armor cast in, and probably a high bustle, and the turret in the model doesn’t seem to have either.  Then there is the X-Ray on this one, it shows the radiator in the completely wrong place, and still has the ready rounds around the base of the turret. In real life, most of these tanks went to the Soviet Union as lend lease.



You can see the misplaced radiator in this image.
Another shot, showing the radiator in the wrong place. The radiator should be behind the motor.

Medium Tank M4A1 (76)W Sherman

This model is really well done, with just a few flaws. It should have rubber chevron tracks, and the fenders are wrong, like the wrong ones Dragon used on their M4A1 76W model. It also has a cover over the hull blower vent between the hatches, that shouldn’t be there. It also has all the steel bar stock welded to the mantlet for the canvas cover, which was not done until much later in the war. The .30 caliber co-ax machine gun is sticking to far out as well. Still, great model on the outside and no problems with the x-ray model either. In real life this tank saw widespread use starting with Operation Cobra.

No real major flaws, though the suspension seems to be compressed to much, or maybe scaled a little small, overall, this is a very pretty digital Sherman.





Medium Tank M4A2 (76) W Sherman

This model has some issues, first off the huge glaring ones, it’s a wet storage tank, all factory 76 tanks were, yet this model has the sponson ammo rack armor in place, when it was not installed on these tanks. It has the mantlet cover the M4A1 (76)w model has the mounting bars for, and some tanks sent to the Soviet Union apparently had them so this is a nice feature, though the color seems, off.   They got the motor type right in the x-ray view, but the radiator location is hilariously wrong. Other than these glaring problems, it’s a nice looking tank.

This model has some glaring flaws. It is also a model that was not used by US forces pretty much at all. The flaws start with the welded on armor over the hull ammo racks, but since the tank is a wet tank, there were no racks in the hull sponsons anymore, so they stopped putting those plates on. That should have been an easy one to fix, since no T23 turreted tanks had these extra plates added.



Radiator placement is the other flaw on this one.

Medium Tank M4A3 76 W HVSS Sherman

This model is really nice on the outside, representing a great example of a Korean War era Easy 8. The model looks great except for the package shelf, it doesn’t look right. The real problem with this model is the engine compartment in X-ray view. They have the twin diesel 6046 in place, when it should be a Ford GAA V8. They did get the radiator in the right place, but it’s a tad small. This is a more accurate M4A2 (76)w then the modeled M4A2 (76)w. Since the WOT M4A3 (76)w HVSS tank has not gone HD, this one wins hands down. It even has the post war torsion bar assisted engine bay grill doors.

Such a pretty model, but they got the motor completely wrong!




No M4A3 ever came with the 6046 twin diesel as shown.

  Medium Tank M4A3 (105)

This model is messed up pretty bad. The Hull is ok, but it has the post war engine deck hinges that should not be there. The place this model really goes wrong is the turret. They have a poorly modified low bustle turret, whoever modeled this didn’t know all M4/M4A3 105 tanks has special turrets with two ventilators, and they were all high bustle turrets final general 75mm turrets.

On the X-ray view they got the size and location of the 105 ammo storage all wrong, and the tank has an GM 6046 twin diesel instead of the proper Ford GAA, though, they did get the radiator in the right place for a change, though it’s still to small!


Better radiator placement, still the wrong motor though.


Take a close look at the back of the turret, it should be almost flat, since it should be a high bustle turret, but its not, they just added a second ventilator to the low bustle turret and slapped the 105 gun mount on it. Sloppy.

Assault Tank M4A3E2 Jumbo/M4A3E2 76

A decent model, though the suspension appears to be a little to compressed, it may just be me but all the Shermans WT seem to be a little compressed, maybe they don’t like the environment.  The only glaring thing wrong with the model that stands out to me is the little machined spots in the gun mount on the turret are flared back, when they shouldn’t be, but this is minor. The only flaw is the tracks seem to be spaced to far out from the hull, almost like it has the E9 mod. It’s also missing the exhaust deflector, and the rear hull area is not a strong point on any of the Shermans in the game. X-ray view still has a GM 6046 in place of the correct GAA, and the radiator is the right size and in the right place! The 76 version is the same model with a different gun.

Other than the wrongly modeled machined holes in the turret, a pretty decent model.



Will the same wrong motor problem.
Jumbo with M1A1 gun, same model same flaws, longer tube. Threaded barrel is also wrong, the guns used were all unthreaded.

3-inch Gun Motor Carriage M10

This model looks like a pretty decent model of a mid-production M10 TD. It has the proper 6046 exhaust at the rear hull. The X-ray model is where the issues show and this is an amusing problem, this model has the Ford GAA when it should have the 6046, and the radiators are to small.

A pretty nice M10 model, with an amusing flaw.




Look at that, a Ford GAA, so they have the right motor modeled, they just can’t get it into the right tanks!

90-mm Gun Motor Carriage M36

This model is not as good as the M10, the turret doesn’t look quite right. On X-ray this did finally get the right motor in, but the radiator is still to small.



Right motor, in the right tank, with the radiator in the right spot, but still to small.

17pdr M10 Achilles 65th Reg

This model looks pretty good, though I would have to really look over Achilles Photos to find any major flaws on the exterior. The X-ray model has one amusing flaw, it has the Ford GAA that should be in all the M4A3 tanks, and their GM6046 should be in this tank!



So this tank should have the GM6046, but has the GAA, is this stuff really that confusing?

Sherman IC Firefly (Premium)

There is nothing really wrong with this model, at least nothing major, the armored cover for the hull machine gun looks a little off, but not to bad. Everything else seems right at first glance, even the X-ray view everything is correct. This is a very nice looking IC Firefly, the rarest version of the C tanks. I liked it enough to buy it. It has the add on armor for the sponson ammo racks, the add-on on cheek armor, and all the extra boxes the British added to their Shermans, it is missing the extra hull mounted fire extinguishers.

A nice solid Ic Firefly, and everything’s in the right place, I liked this one enough to buy it.




Sherman VC Firefly

This model is a little off, they got the wheel spacing for the longer hull right, but it has a lot of crap on the hull I’ve never seen in pictures before. It does have the external fire extinguishers the Ic lacks.  It also does not have the proper A57 Multibank motor, and the radiator is in the wrong spot, even though they put the bulge in the upper rear deck for it. Other than these flaws, the model is ok.

I really like the Sherman V/M4A4, so I was disappointed to see they didn’t bother to get the right motor in it. That and the weird things on this model are it’s only big flaws, well, plus it has the wrong sprockets.




. . .


I would say, after looking the models over, the modelers have never heard of the Sherman Minutia site. I would also say they don’t know the difference between the high bustle and low bustle 75mm turrets. They also don’t know the actual sizes of any of the components inside the tanks.

My overall take on War Thunder has changed a little, I still think they borrowed far more than most rabid fans will admit, from WOT. They game also has serious flaws if you like fun, but that’s just my initial impression, I’ll play several  hundred games and see how I feel then.

Now considering some of the amusing comments I got from my glossary entry on Warthunder, keep in mind this is a game review, IE opinion based, so try and keep calm, the world isn’t ending because someone on the Internet thinks WT is subpar.





#49 The Tank Divisions: US Armored Divisions

The Armored Divisions: The US Armored Divisions, What They Were and A Brief History Of Each One.

There were two types of US Armored Division during WWII.  The Light type and the Heavy type, I will detail out the differences between the two below. Armored Divisions were not meant to be assault troops, that was left to the Regular Infantry Divisions, the Armored Divisions were meant to rush through an breakthrough and romp and stomp as far into the enemy’s guts as they could, hopefully taking key objectives and cutting off large amounts of enemy troops.

A light US Armored Division was made up of three Tank Battalions, three Armored Infantry Battalions, and three Armored Field Artillery Battalions. These were broken up into three Combat Commands, A, B, and R. Each of these had a Tank Battalion, an Armored Infantry Battalion, and an Armored Field Artillery Battalion and each one was commanded by a Colonel.  Commands A and B were the primary combat force of the Division and R was the reserve. The Battalions could be swapped around between A, B, and R(sometimes called C) depending on strength and fatigue levels.

The Light Armored Division would also have a large number of service battalions and smaller units attached to make the Division as self-sustaining as possible:

One Armored Engineer Battalion

One Armored Medical Battalion

One Armored Reconnaissance Battalion

One Armored Ordnance battalion

One Armored Signal Company

A CIC Detachment

A Division Supply Train (made up of trucks)

A Division Artillery Battalion

A MP Platoon

A Tank Destroyer Battalion Could be assigned

An Armored AA Battalion Could be assigned


These units could be broken down into smaller, usually company sized sub units and assigned to the Combat Commands depending on the needs of the missions. The Armored Division was intended to be a self-contained unit with all the assets needed to support and move itself around a theater.  A light Armored Division had an authorized strength of just about 11,000 men, the Heavy Division had 14,500.

The main difference with a Heavy Armored Division was they had eight Medium Tank Battalions, instead of just three. They also had more light tanks, with two full light tank battalions, instead of three companies.  Only a two Armored Divisions retained the heavy designation and organization through the whole war, the 2nd and 3rd.  I have not been able to find a TO&E for a Heavy Armored Division that included an Authorized strength, but it would have to be several thousand men more than a normal AD.  I’m not 100% sure on this, but I’m pretty sure the Heavy Armored Division was done away with in a 1942 revision of what an Armored Division was, but a pair retained the Heavy TO&E for reasons I’m not sure of yet, but I will find out.

. . .

The Armored Divisions were meant to exploit a major breakthrough won by the regular Infantry Divisions.  In many cases they were not used this way, and often got thrown into the lines as the enemy was faltering, using a single Combat Command to help secure the breakthrough while the rest of the Division rushed through the breach.  No Armored Divisions saw use in the Pacific, but the Sherman sure did.  The Sherman was really the heart of the US Armored Division, and its mobility and reliability really served it well there, it allowed US Armored Divisions to make very long runs once broken through, and it would limits on fuel supplies, not the tanks mechanical reliability that slowed it down.


1st_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg1st Armored Division: Old Ironsides

 Active 1940-1946, Reactivated 1951-Present

The oldest US Armor Division. It saw a lot of action in WWII, born on July 15 1940 at Fort Knox.

The 1st AD spent its early years figuring out what an Armored Division was going to be, and when they figured that out, they trained in the US until mid-summer of 1942 before shipped off to Northern Ireland, after a short stay they were off to England.  They were not there long, before they were shipped off to northern Africa for participation in Operation Torch.  The 1st AD would be the first US Armored Division to see combat.

They would participate in the capture or Oran, and the infamous Kassirine Pass, and then would fight to the end of the war in Italy.  The primary tank early on would have been the M3 Lee and M3 light. By the Italian campaign it was the M4 and M4A1, small hatch 75 tanks, with M5 lights. Late in the Italian campaign they would have gotten second gen 76mm Shermans.

1st AD Subunits:  1st Tank Battalion,  4th Tank Battalion,  13th Tank Battalion,  6th Armored Infantry Battalion,  11th Armored Infantry Battalion,  14th Armored Infantry Battalion, 27th Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 68th Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 91st Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 81st Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron, 16th Armored Engineer Battalion, 47th Armored Medical Battalion, 141st Armored Signal Company, 501st CIC Detachment.

Campaigns: Tunisia, Naples-Foggia, Rome-Arno, North Apennines, Po Valley.  

The 1st AD had 1194 men KIA, 5168 WIA, and 234 DOW.  They captured 41 villages or urban centers. 108,740 Germans gave up to the 1st AD.  The 1st AD earned 1 Distinguished Service Cross,  1 Distinguished Service Medal, 794 Silver Stars, 2 Legion of Merit, 35 Soldiers Medals, 1602 Bronze Stars, and 3 Air Medals.  They were moved to Germany Shortly after the war to serve as part of the occupation forces and were disbanded in 1946. They were reactivated in 1951 and are still an active duty division to this day.


150px-2nd_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg 2nd Armored Division: Hell on Wheels 

Active 1940-1995

The second US Armored Division put together and it saw just about as much as the first. This was one of only two Heavy Armored Divisions; all others were converted to the later ‘light’ TO&E. Formed at Fort Benning on 15 July 1940, on the same day as the 1st.

They shipped out for use in Torch, but were kept in reserve until the invasion of Sicily. They saw a fair amount of action on Sicily, and after were shipped back to England to be used in the Normandy landings.  The 2nd AD was landed on Omaha Beach on June 9th and fought in northern Germany until the end of the war, including the Rhineland, Ardennes and Central European Campaigns.

2nd  AD Subunits:   41st Armored Infantry Regiment, 66th Armored Regiment, 67th Armored Regiment, 17th Armored Engineer Battalion,  82nd Armored Recon Battalion,  and the 142cnd Signal Company. 

There was also the 14th Armored Field Artillery Battalion,  78th Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 92nd Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 2nd Ordnance Maintenance Battalion, and the 48th Armored Medical Battalion.  

Campaigns: Sicily, Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes, Rhineland, and Central Europe.

The 2nd AD Combat statistics: had 1102 KIA, 5331 WIA, 253 captured, 7116 non battle casualties, for a total of 13,867 casualties.  They were in combat for a total of 223 days and earned 21 DCS, 13 Legions of Merit, 1954 Silver Stars, 131 Soldiers Medals, 5331 Bronze stars and 342 Air Medals. They took a grand total of 76,963 POWs.

150px-3rd_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg 3rd Armored Division: Spearhead

Active 1941-1945, reactivated 1947-92

Also maybe known as the Third Herd, but may be post WWII.  The 3rd saw combat from Normandy to the end of the war in Europe.  They were formed on 15 April 1941 at Camp Beauregard in Louisiana.  They trained in California at Camp Young, until January of 1943, when they moved to Indiantown Gap Military Reservation in Pennsylvania. They would train on there while waiting to deploy overseas.

The 3rd AD arrived in Europe on September 15th 1943, they debarked in the Liverpool an Bristol area and trained there and on the Salisbury Plain preparing for the invasion.

They would first see combat almost a month after the June 6th landings in Normandy.  They would fight in the hedgerows, including at Saint Lô. Later in the same campaign they would help close the Falaise Gap.  They participated in both the Battle for the Hurtgen Forrest and the Battle of the Bulge. They would continue to fight into Germany, helping with the taking of Cologne, and Paderborn, and with reducing the Ruhr Pocket.  They liberated the Nazi Death Camp at Dara-Mittelbau, and finished with the battle of Dessau. They went into reserve to the end of the war.  It did a short stint as an occupation force before being deactivated in November of 1945.  It was later reactivated in 1947.

3rd AD Subunits: 36th Armored Infantry Regiment, 32nd Armored Regiment, 33rd Armored Regiment, 23rd Armored Engineer Battalion, 83rd Armored Recon Battalion, 143rd Armored Signal Company, 391st Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 67th Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 54th Armored Field Artillery Battalion, 3rd Ordnance Maintenance Battalion, and the 45th Armored Medical Battalion.

WWII Campaigns:  Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes, Rhineland, and Central Europe. 

The 3rd AD WWII Combat Data: spent a total of 231 days in combat, with 2540 KIA, 7331 WIA, 95 MIA, and 139 captured. They had a total number of Battle Casualties of 10,105, Non-Combat Casualties 6017, and a combined total of 16,122.  They took 76,720 POWs. They earned 17 Distinguished Service Cross, 23 Legion of Merit, 885 Silver Stars, 32 Soldiers Medals, 3884 Bronze Star, 138 Air Medals, and 3 Distinguished Flying Cross.


150px-4th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg4th Armored Division: The no name AD! 

Active 1941-1972

One of the few Armored Division that never adopted a name, it also developed a reputation. The 4th was often used as the spearhead for Paton’s Third Army and it was a tough outfit.  Their motto was ‘They Shall Be Known By Their Deeds Alone’. Activated on April 15th 1941 at Camp Pine (Later named Fort Drum), New York.  It would train at Camp Forrest in Tennessee, and then was shipped to California for further training at the Desert Training Center. They would be housed at Camp Ibis, near Needles California during this period.  By June of 1943 they would be at Camp Bowie, Texas, for more training in the Piute Valley. They were then off to Camp Myles Standish in Massachusetts for winter training.  Finally, in December of 1943, they were on their way to Europe, England specifically to prepare for the June of 44 invasion of Normandy.

The 4th AD debarked in Normandy on July 11th 1944, at Utah beach and was in combat by the 17th.  They saw action in  Operation Cobra,  and rampaging across France, they would see action in the Battle of the Bulge, spearheading Patton’s 3rd Army’s attack north to hit the Germans attacking Bastogne.  They would see action in all the major fights in the ETO to the end of the war. They did a tour as occupation forces before being shipped back to the ZI to be deactivated.

The 4th AD spent 230 days in combat and lost 1238 KIA, 4246 WIA, 503 MIA, and 1 man captured.  This totaled out to 5988 Battle Casualties, they also had 4508 Non Battle Casualties, and total of 10496. The 4th took 90,364 POWs.


 150px-5th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg5th Armored Division: Victory

Active 1941-1945, reactivated 1950-1956

Another Divisions that saw combat from Normandy to the end of the war in Europe.  The 5th AD was activated at Fort Knox, in Kentucky.  Like many units after forming and some initial training, the shipped out for Camp Cooke California.  They spent a lot of time on Alert for Japanese attacks in their early training there. Next up was training in California’s Mojave desert.  They were on their way to Tennessee by March 24th for more maneuvers.  They would be there until July, and then they moved to Pine Camp N.Y. for some winter training. The 5th last stop before deploying to England was Indiantown Gap, PA, where they left their vehicles and were trucked to Camp Kilmer NJ, to wait for their ship.

The 5th were in England by February 24, 1944, and they were stay there until they deployed to Normandy on July 26. They were assigned to Patton’s Third Army, as “General Patton’s Ghost Troops”,  and would fight in Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes, Rhineland and Central Europe Campaigns.

Paths of Armor: The history of 5th Armored Division. 396 high quality pages of history on the 5th AD. NEW BOOK!

The 5th AD was in combat 161 days, and had 547 KIA, 2768 WIA, 177 MIA, and 62 captured for a total of 3554 battle related casualties. The 5th also had 3592 non-battle casualties, for a total of 7146.

150px-6th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg6th Armored Division: Super Sixths

Active 1942-1945, reactivated 1950-1956

The 6th was activated at Fort Knox on February 15th 1942.  The 6th spent time at Camp Chaffee, Arkansas training then went on Maneuvers in Louisiana and then they were off to sunny California for training at the Desert Training Center in Mohave CA, and then off to Camp Cooke also in Ca. They were shipped by train to the east coast and loaded onto ships for transport to England, arriving in February of 44.

The 6th was landed on Utah beach on July 18th as part of Paton’s 3rd Army. They participated in the Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes-Alsace, Rhineland and Central Europe Campaigns.

The 6th spent a total of 226 days in combat. They had 1169 KIA, 4198 WIA, 152 MIA, and 7 captured for a total of 5526 battle casualties, they also had 7290 non battle casualties.

The Combat history of the Super Sixth:  182 pages, ok scan with a lot of very good info.  NEW BOOK!


150px-7th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg7th Armored Division: Lucky Seventh Active 1942-1945, reactivated 1950-1953

This AD started combat in northern France and ended it in Germany.  They were a part of Paton’s third Army


150px-8th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg8th Armored Division: The Thundering Herd Active 1942-1945

The 8th AD has a very nice website linked above.  I spend a lot of time on the Thundering Herds website, and it’s good stuff.

150px-9th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg9th Armored Division: The Phantom Division Active 1942-1945

This AD came in toward the end and only fought in three major campaigns. They did help secure some key bridges over the Rhine River though.

150px-10th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg10th Armored Division: The Tiger Division Active 1942-1945

They saw combat for a short time, three campaigns, but had a pretty cool nickname.

You can read their unit history here: Impact, the battle history of the Tenth Armored Division   NEW BOOK!

150px-11th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg11th Armored Division: Thunderbolt Active 1942-1945

Another late comer they saw enough action to see how disgusting the Nazi Germans were when they liberated Mauthausen Concentration Camp

150px-12th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg12th Armored Division: The Hellcat Division Active 1942-1945

This AD came in late in the war but saw a good amount of action.

A history of the 12th Armored Division: Hellcats   98 pages, good scan.  NEW BOOK!

150px-13th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg13th Armored Division: The Black Cats Active 1942-1945

These guys were in combat for 16 days, and fought in two major campaigns.

They put out a nice history book, the 13th Armored division: A history of the Black Cats from Texas to France, Germany and Austria and back to California  NEW BOOK!


150px-14th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg 14th Armored Division: The Liberators Active 1942-1945

15th Armored Division:  This AD was a Phantom Division, not a real AD

200px-16th_US_Armored_Division_SSI.svg16th Armored Division: Armadillo Active 1943-1945

#48 Jungle Tanking: The Sherman Saw Combat In Almost All Terrain, Including The Steaming Jungles Of The Pacific.

Jungle Tanking: The Sherman Did Just Fine As A Jungle Killing Machine

Army M4A1 tanks with the 603rd Tank Battalion, Biak Island, in the Pacific, (thanks to Russ Amott for the info on the photo!)

Conventional wisdom often states, Jungles are no place for tanks, but that wisdom is wrong. It is very difficult to operate a tank in the jungle, that is true, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. In many cases it requires the close work of heavy engineers and their bulldozers.  In at least one case engineers had to put in a corduroy log road to get the tanks up to the fight when the Marines used them on Cape Gloucester. When a tank can be brought up though, when used correctly, it was a very useful tool in destroying enemy bunkers and strong points that could not be flanked.

Another Marine M4A1 on Cape Gloucester, this one made by (Pacific Car & Foundry) West Coast Best Coast Baby!

Tanks have to be used in a different way than they would in just about any other terrain when fighting in the jungle, and more so than any other terrain, are dependent on their infantry support to protect them and be their eyes. They also cannot be employed in large numbers, fighting in the jungle is a very up close and personal affair, and from two to six tanks are all that are needed or can really be employed.  In most cases it will only be two or three, because most jungle fighting is limited to certain paths due to terrain restrictions.  If the area was wide enough, a tank was only behind a bulldozer in off road ability, but large trees and rocks will stop any tank.

an LST delivering an M4A1 Sherman to Cape Gloucester
An LST delivering a Marine M4A1 Sherman to Cape Gloucester

The Tank could be useful for clearing some of the jungle terrain, through the use of its machine guns, cannon with canister rounds or HE, and even its tracks.  It would take a fairly large tree to stop a tank, the bigger the tank, the larger the tree would have to be, and the tracks are very good at tearing up underbrush.  In some cases tanks were used to pull loaded trucks up roads normally impassible due to mud.  They could be used to haul in supplies to troops and in some special cases used to retrieve wounded troops pinned down by enemy fire, by driving over them and pulling the wounding in through the bottom escape hatch.

Were calling this M4 Composite Hull on Okinawa, named “Aida” with the 763rd TB (thanks to Russ Amott for the info on this photo)

To successfully employ tanks a thorough recon of the area the tanks are going to operate in was needed.  A specific set of objectives, preferably, ones that could be seen from the jumping off point were needed to effectively use tanks, or they just got in the way.  With established objectives, specific infantry squads would be assigned to work directly with individual tank, to baby sit it and keep enemy infantry away.  The platoon leader would be encouraged to either ride on the tank his men were protecting, or stay very close to it so he could talk to the tank commander. The tanks would hold back with their protecting infantry, until the leading grunts made contact, then as needed they would move slowly forward and engage targets pointed out by the grunts.  Moving slow and staying with the men protecting the tank was very important, if they fell behind or got run off by flanking fire, the tank became very vulnerable to close infantry attack.  This is why the platoon leader staying close to the tank was important, so it could be told to start backing up the fire was too heavy.  If an attack failed, the tanks were advised to never attack over the same path, especially if the Japanese had time to bring up AT guns or mines.

Marines supporting an M4A2, in almost jungle, or jungle after lots of shore bombardment.

The pace of these attacks was purposely slow, they needed to make sure they were not bypassing an AT gun or tank killer team hiding in the brush.  Various methods were used, from hand signals to tracers and smoke to designate targets to the tank.  Smoke worked ok, but someone on the phone on the back of the tank telling the TC exactly where to look worked the best.  Once the bullets were flying the tank crews buttoned up and would not open up until asked by the supporting Doughs, or the intense part of the fighting was over.  Sometimes the tanks would need to be given a break in very hot weather, operating at low speed could cause overheating and vapor lock, and was hell on the crews too.  In the tropical heat, the interior of an M4 was not a pleasant place to be.

A pair of M4’s being supported by infantry, on Guam

Once the objectives were achieved for the day or the attacks were stopped, the tanks pulled back far enough behind the lines to refuel, repair and, rearm the tanks. They would also take out as many wounded men as they could carry on their way to the rear. In the morning they may haul extra ammo and other supplies forward to the units who held the line.  Tanks, unless under the most dire circumstances were not used in the line at night, or used in night attacks.  Tanks, blind enough during the day, are so blind at night they are a threat to everyone around them, friend or enemy in the jungle.

USA1 (1)
These M4 Composite Hulls were  lost on Guam, near Yigo, after they got to far ahead of the Infantry. (Another photo caption save by Russ Amott!)

The Army and Marine learned a lot of lessons about employing tanks in Jungle terrain, they recorded and disseminated these lessons in the very interesting: Combat Lessons, The Rank And File, What They Are Doing and How They Are Doing it. This was a series of nine, 50 to 90 page pamphlets, put out by the  DOD and sent out to all the troops I have 8 of the 9 hosted in the downloads section, and they are all interesting reads,  they do not cover Armor exclusively, or even in every issue, but they are still a very interesting look at how the US Army and Marines worked during WWII.  When the Sherman was employed using the lesson the Army and Marines learned on the job, they proved to be a crushing and very hard to deal with part of the Allied Arsenal in use against them. The Japanese really had few options in dealing with a Sherman once it was in the fight, the rare 47mm AT gun, hard to employ in heavy jungle, magnetic mines and suicide squads, and the occasional oddball tank trap were the only tools in their arsenal that could deal with the Sherman and none of these was as good as the basic Panzerfaust or German Pak 40 75mm AT gun. The Japanese tanks were so bad they are not worth mentioning in this section.

Check these links out for further reading.

US Army Tanks in the Jungle Part, 1: This pair of Hatch’s are by guest writer, Harry Yeide, the author we know from the books section.

US Army Tanks in the Jungle Part, 2: This is part II by Harry Yeide.

M4 Shermans in the jungle or swamp, I’m going to guess Bougainville HAH! I got this location right! Thanks to Russ Amott, we also know that this tank is with the 754th TB.

#47 Gallery VI, More Photos, More Captions.

Gallery VI, More Photos, More Captions

An M4A1 76w from the 2nd Armored Divisions, 66th Battalion, tank D13, transporting doughs. 
3rd_AD_Mons_ blow_up
M4 small hatch 75 Sherman with the 3rd AD In Mons France, this tank was made by American Locomotive Company. Image courtesy of The Sherman Minutia site.
3rd Platoon, Company A, 812th Tank Battalion Easy 8 tanks, 1945. This was most likely taken post war on occupation duty.  The tanks are so clean and in very good shape. 
3rd AD M4A1 76w tanks crossing a pontoon bridge. Note the number of missing end connectors. This is a fairly late production M4A1 it has a muzzle brake. 
M3 Lee crew with some 75mm Ammo, note this M3 has an M2 gun. 
M32 Armored Recovery Vehicle on display somewhere. 
This is a late production M4A2 75 tank with large hatches but still with the dry ammo storage.
American soldiers of Patton's Third Army standing in front of their M36 TD while rolling up a Nazi flag they have taken as a trophy after the capture of Bitberg.
American soldiers of Patton’s Third Army standing in front of their M36 TD while rolling up a Nazi flag they have taken as a trophy after the capture of Bitberg.
This tank is an M4A2 with a Firefly turret installed for testing by the US Army. The tank survives to this day as part of the US Army’s collection. 
M4A3 76w HVSS Sherman that was on display at Fort Knox. It is now in storage on Fort Bragg.  
M10 3 inch GMC moving down an alley.
M4 Sherman with extra wide grousers fitted.
M4A1 76w named Gila Monster. This was the type of Sherman introduced for Operation Cobra
Another Shot of Gila Monster, now it has fenders and an M1A1 gun with muzzle brake. 
Late production M4A1 76w.
An M4A1 75 tank being unloaded from a train. Image courtesy of the Sherman Minutia site.
Early M4 tanks on the production line.
M4A1 76w HVSS tank, these tanks just missed the war in Europe. 
M4A3 105 probably a post war publicly shot. Note the dough on the infantry phone, and the muzzle cover on the 105. 
M10 TD in action
A captured M4 Sherman in Nazi servitude during the battle of the bulge.
M4A3 75w captured by the Nazis. 
Another Captured Sherman, this one an M4A2. 
A knocked out 1st AD M4A3E2 Jumbo, February 1945.
Nazi prisoners being watched by Sherman crews during the Bulge.
The fascist crew of a M4A2 Sherman captured on the eastern front. This was a large hatch dry storage tank. 

1407d 1407c 14993