Busting Panzers: Why U.S. Tank-Destroyers Deserve More Credit in WWII History

during World War II the battlefields of Europe were dominated by The Fearsome German panzers striking fear into Allied Forces with their formidable Firepower and armor In the Heat of the war the US Army rolled out an ambitious strategy to counter the German Panzer Force the tank destroyer concept designed to be Nimble and lethal these specialized units were supposed to be the Silver Bullet against enemy armor but as the dust settled and history was reviewed questions arose about their effectiveness did these specialized Vehicles live up to their promise were they truly necessary or was their impact on the War overestimated join us as we delve into the history and effectiveness of the US Army's tank destroyer units uncovering the Strategic decisions Battlefield realities and Lasting Legacy of these controversial machines in the wake of Germany's Lightning Fast advances in Poland and France in 1939 and 1940 the US Army faced a daunting reality the Panzer divisions with their sheer force and Swift maneuvers were proving Unstoppable concentrating over a 100 tanks on narrow fronts they swept through defenses plunging deep into enemy territory by 1941 the Army recognized the urgent need for a countermeasure against these armored juggernauts traditional toad anti-tank guns were simply too sluggish to deploy swiftly in the chaos of battle and predicting the exact location of the Em's attack was a daunting task the solution enter the mobile anti-tank units rather than waiting passively for the enemy's Advance self-propelled anti-tank battalions lay in wait behind friendly lines poised for Action when the inevitable breakthrough occurred these battalions emerged like silent Predators swiftly and decisively ambushing the advancing tank columns but here's the twist the Army didn't Envision its own tanks primarily encountering enemy panzers instead the new armor Branch aimed to emulate the Bold armored defensives that the Germans had become renowned for in September 1941 the Army put the tank destroyer concept to the test in war games conducted in Louisiana surprisingly the tank destroyers performed exceptionally well against tanks prompting speculation that the umpire rules may have been unfairly biased in their favor tanks were restricted from eliminating anti-tank units with direct fire and could only do so by physically overrunning them with the backing of Lieutenant General lesie McNair the Army's chief of training and Doctrine tank destroyers were established as the their own Branch alongside armor and artillery a dedicated tank destroyer Training Center was set up at Fort Hood Texas initially 53 battalions each comprising 842 men were mobilized with ambitious plans to expand the force to 220 battalions the first tank destroyer units had to make the most of hastily improvised Vehicles one such example was the m6 essentially a repurpose 37 mm anti-tank gun mounted on a 3/4 ton truck another makeshift solution was the M3 gun motor carriage or the GMC this vehicle was an overloaded M3 half trck featuring wheels at the front and tracks at the rear with a French 75 mm Howitzer mounted on top despite their Ingenuity both types of vehicles were characterized by light armor and the absence of turrets while certain M3 GMC's put up resistance against the Japanese invasion of the Philippines tank destroyer battalions entered their first major combat in the North African deserts in 1942 one of their pivotal moments occurred during the Battle of elar in Tunisia on March 23rd 1943 here the M3s of the 600 and first tank destroyer Battalion faced off against the entire 10th Panzer Division in a crucial engagement that would test their metal and strategic prowess positioned in defense of the first Infantry Division just beyond the crest of kab Ridge the 6 first deployed 31 half tracks armed to the teeth these agile vehicles advaned to unleash barges at the oncoming panzers along Highway 15 swiftly retreating to seek new firing positions they received additional support from divisional artillery and a meticulously laid Minefield by their engineers in a last minute reinforcement two companies from the 899 tank destroyer Battalion rushed to their aid with one company enduring significant casualties during their approach despite the intense confrontation the panzers pushed within a mere 100 m of the 61st position before reluctantly retreating leaving a trail of 38 wck tanks in their wake however Victory came at a steep cost the 61st suffered the loss of 21 of its M3s while the 899 saw seven of its newly acquired M10 Vehicles destroyed regrettably these heavy casualties failed to earn the admiration of Allied commanders General George Patton himself labeled the tank destroyers as unsuccessful highlighting the challenges and complexities faced on the battlefield in fact the Battle of elar stands out as a unique instance in which US tank destroyers were used precisely as intended mobilized as an entire Battalion to Halt a concentrated German armor defensive on a narrow front as the German Army shifted predominantly to a defensive stance in the latter half of World War II the era of sweeping armored breakthroughs witnessed in Poland France and Russia came to an end consequently the US Army adjusted its strategy reducing the number of tank destroyer battalions to6 52 of these were deployed to the European theater while 10 were assigned to the Pacific another challenge arose from the tank destroyer Doctrine which assumed that these units would move into Ambush positions only after German tanks had already overrun defending infantry however in practice commanders were hesitant to subject their infantry to such a vulnerable position as a result tank destroyers often found themselves deployed closer to the front lines for forward defense deviating from the intended strategy the first true tank destroyer was the M10 Wolverine which combined the hull of the M4 Sherman tank with a newly designed pentagonal turret General Motors and Ford collectively produced 6,400 m10s the M10 was equipped with a long barrel High Velocity 76 mm gun which was believed to have excellent armor piercing capabilities however its high explosive shells were less effective against enemy infantry compared to the 75 mm shells fired by Sherman tanks as a result tank destroyer units primarily stocked armor-piercing shells whereas tank units carried a larger proportion of high explosive shells Germany Italy Japan and Russia also fielded tank destroyer Vehicles during World World War II some of these like the Martyr and Su 76 were essentially anti-tank guns mounted on lightly armored chassis others such as the yag Panther and the JSU 152 were heavily armored behemoths equipped with enormous guns none of these foreign tank destroyers feature turrets which were considered expensive and unnecessary for their primarily defensive anti-tank tank roles in contrast American Doctrine and vision tank destroyers playing a more active role on the battlefield thus the inclusion of turrets however the m10s turret was hand cranked and notoriously slow taking a full 80 Seconds to complete a rotation while Sherman tanks boasted three machine guns the M10 Wolverine was limited to a single pental mounted 50 machine gun which required the commander to expose himself over the turret to operate it the m1's most glaring shortcoming was its armor protection its open toop turret left the crew vulnerable to shrapnel and Small Arms fire from above and overall its armor was thinner than that of the Sherman there were reasons for these design choices even the Sherman's heavier armor could be reliably p penetrated by the long 75 mm guns of the standard German Panzer 4 not to mention the more formidable guns on German Panther and tiger tanks therefore the m10s thinner armor made little practical difference against these powerful opponents while it did render the M10 more susceptible than the Sherman to lighter anti-tank weapons such threats were becoming increasingly rare on the battlefield on the other hand the m10s open top also offered an advantage it enhanced the crews visibility increasing their chances of spotting enemy tanks first a critical factor in determining the outcome of armor engagements this designed Choice posed minimal issues when the M10 was used against tanks as intended but it became a vulnerability when facing enemy infantry and artillery rolls designated for the Sherman tank by 1943 the M10 had fully replaced the M3 GMC but its Superior gun fell short of being the solution the Army had envisioned The Wolverine 76 mm gun was theoretically capable of penetrating the frontal armor of German heavy tanks however combat experience revealed a critical flaw at ranges greater than 400 m the gun of often failed to penetrate this issue known as shatter Gap occurred when the tip of the 76 mm shell deformed upon hitting face hardened armor plate at long distances causing it to explode prematurely without penetrating this inability to effectively neutralize the best enemy tanks further tarnished the tank destroyer branches already negative reputation during the Italian campaign that began in 1943 German armor was rarely encountered in large numbers as a result m10s were frequently tasked with providing fire support for infantry and were even employed as indirect fire artillery despite firing lighter shells a tank destroyer Battalion had twice as many gun tubes as a 105 mm artillery Battalion along with a longer range instead of keeping tank destroyers and core Reserve commanders increasingly attach tank destroyer battalions to Frontline infantry divisions this shift in strategy meant that rather than operating as unified battalions companies or platoon of tank destroyers were often detached to provide direct support to infantry and combined arms task forces in practice tank destroyers fired 11 high explosive rounds for every anti-tank round reflecting their evolving role on the battlef field traditionalist officers voiced concerns that the m10s vehicles that closely resemble tanks were being utilized as if they were indeed tanks in response General Omar Bradley proposed an alternative approach employing heavy toed anti-tank guns which could be better concealed in dense terrain and potentially offer greater Effectiveness consequently half of the tank Destroyer battalions transitioned to utilizing toad 76 mm M5 guns which were comparable in Effectiveness to the m1's own gun these supplemented the companies equipped with lighter 57mm guns that were integrated into each Infantry Regiment as tank destroyers were increasingly tasked with infantry support roles they became more exposed to artillery and infantry fire in response their Crews resorted to field modifications for added protection they piled sandbags on top of the vehicles to preemptively detonate Panzer fost anti-tank Rockets other modifications included adding extra machine guns and installing armored panels to cover the vulnerable open tops of the tank destroyers the introduction of new Sherman tanks in 1944 equipped with their own 76 mm gun guns further blurred the line between tank destroyers and tanks with Sherman tanks now boasting comparable Effectiveness in tank hunting roles the distinction between the two types of vehicles became less clear-cut tank destroyers played crucial roles in two major engagements in Normandy alongside numerous smaller skirmishes one significant encounter occurred on July 11th 1944 when three Panzer battalions from the Panzer Lair division supported by mechanized infantry launched a Counterattack to relieve Allied pressure on the city of St low the German attack encounter dispersed M10 platoon from the 799 and 823rd tank destroyer battalions near the village of Lou desert with ample air support bolstering the American defenses in the tight confines of the Normand hedro corridors intense engagements unfolded the Panzer Lair division suffered significant losses with 30 Panther tanks falling victim to the determined resistance of the tank destroyers 3 weeks later during the mortine counter offensive four Panzer divisions attempted to cut off the Allied breakout from Normandy they encountered the toad guns of the 823rd tank destroyer battalion in the dense early morning fog of the initial Clash the 823rd was forced to fire at the muzzle flashes of equally blind Panther tanks despite being unable to withdraw their entrenched weapons the 823rd managed to destroy 14 panzers though they lost 11 of their own guns in the process self-propelled tank destroyer battalions quickly moved in to support the defense the US forces successfully held Mortin leading to the collapse of the German armies in northern France and their subsequent full retreat in September 1944 new tungsten core High Velocity armor-piercing ammunition was introduced for the 76 mm guns these Advanced rounds could reliably penetrate German armor at longer ranges significantly enhancing the effectiveness of the M10 although each Wolverine received only a limited supply of this rare ammunition it provided them with a fighting chance against the mighty German heavy tanks in 1944 two additional tank destroyer models were introduced Buick developed the M18 Hellcat with a primary focus on speed lightweight and powered by a radial aircraft engine it boasted an impressive top speed of 50 mph an exceptional feat in an era where tanks rarely exceeded 35 mph however the hellcat's armor was minimal with just an inch of protection and its Armament consisted of a 76 mm M1 gun which offered little improvement over the Firepower of the M10 some unit stationed in Italy declined the transition to the M18 prioritizing armor over speed in the rugged mountainous terrain nevertheless the M18 gained popularity within General Patton's aggressive third Army due to its ability to keep Pace with their fast-moving tactics while speed undoubtedly holds value in quickly deploying armored vehicles to critical locations opinions vary regarding the Practical advantages it conferred upon the M18 at the Tactical level an Army study concluded that speed was of minimal significance in tactical combat [Music] scenarios however alternative perspectives argue that the hellcat's remarkable speed facilitated its utilization of Hit and Run tactics enabling it to swiftly engage and disengage from enemy forces with agility and efficiency the M36 Jackson also known as the the Slugger represented a substantial upgrade from the M10 while retaining the hull of the M10 it featured additional armor and boasted a formidable heavy 90mm gun this enhanced Armament provided a significant Improvement in Firepower the heavy shells fired by the 90 mm gun proved highly effective against tiger and panther tanks even at long ranges in remarkable instance a single shot from the M36 Jackson knocked out a Panther Tank nearly 4 km away moreover these shells were also much more effective against infantry further enhancing the M36 versatility and combat capabilities the new tank destroyers Pro their worth in combat notably during the Battle of aort in this engag two platoon of hellcats comprising a total of eight vehicles from the 74th tank destroyer Battalion demonstrated their effectiveness taking advantage of the cover provided by a low Ridge on a foggy day they swiftly maneuvered into Ambush positions with only their turrets protruding over the rise ready to strike at the enemy as a battalion of Panther tanks from the 113th Panzer Brigade came in into view they swiftly neutralized 19 of the enemy tanks while enduring the loss of three of their own along the SE freed line M36 showcased their prowess by effectively demolishing fortifications and playing a crucial role in repelling tiger tanks that had previously inflicted heavy casualties on Sherman tanks from the ninth armor division the Battle of the Bulge a Monumental German counter offensive amidst the icy Arden Forest marked the Final Chapter for us tank destroyers during this crucial phase the hellcats belonging to the 75th tank destroyer Battalion played a pivotal role in supporting the 101st Airborne Division as they successfully repelled Relentless German armored assaults at Bastone in noville a detached platoon of M18 providing escort for team Doo played a crucial role in eliminating 30 German tanks meanwhile during a vital delaying action at St vith the M36 Jacksons belonging to the 84th tank destroyer Battalion bravely engaged the enemy despite suffering 50% casualties remarkably they managed to knock out 30 Panther tanks during the intense battle while the self-propelled tank destroyer battalions demonstrated resilience the toad counterparts faced significant challenges many battalions were forced to abandon their guns in the face of the Relentless German Advance While others became immobilized in the treacherous mud and snow during the ill- fated defense of elsenborn Ridge the m10s of the 644 tank destroyer Battalion managed to dest destroy 17 tanks over the course of 2 days however the toad guns of the 81st fighting in the same battle suffered heavy losses with 17 guns lost in the fighting in the Battle of the Bulge 86 of the 119 tank destroyers lost were toad guns yet amidst this loss the tank destroyers achieved significant success destroying 306 enemy tanks recognizing the limitations faced by the toad units a strategic decision was made in January 1945 to reconvert them into self-propelled battalions aiming to bolster their mobility and combat [Applause] Effectiveness as the war Drew to a close it became increasingly evident that the days of the tank destroyer were numbered especially with the emergence of the early M26 persing tanks these tanks were armed with the same formidable 90 mm guns as those found on the M36 and began to see action in early 1945 this development foreshadowed the shifting landscape of armored Warfare and signaled the impending obsolescence of the tank destroyer concept tank destroyers essentially mirrored tanks in many aspects boasting Superior Firepower but compromised armor in practice commanders often task them with similar roles as regular tanks diverging from established Doctrine this raised questions about the rationale behind investing in an entirely separate branch of the army and distinct class of vehicles when equipping tanks with the same powerful guns could potentially suffice merely 3 months following the conclusion of World War II the Army took the decision to disband the tank destroyer Branch despite the subsequent development of a few more specialized anti-tank Vehicles such as the m56 onus Army Doctrine would firmly assert that the best means of taking out a tank is another tank this strategic shift reflected a re-evaluation of the role and efficacy of dedicated tank destroyer units in modern warfare World War II did not Mark the end of the road for us tank destroyers 5 years later during the Korean War the M36 Jackson and its formidable 90mm gun were quickly pressed back into service to counter the North Korean t3485 tanks furthermore surviving tank destroyers found new homes across the globe as they were resold to various countries worldwide showcasing their enduring utility and adaptability beyond their initial deployment the limitations of us tank destroyers are evident they were designed to operate in a specific context that didn't fully materialize their armor protection was inferior and aside from the M36 they often struggled to effectively engage the most formidable enemy tanks post-war Army historians harshly criticized them for these shortcomings however operational records paint a different picture despite their flaws tank destroyers proved to be surprisingly effective in combat situations active self-propelled tank destroyer battalions were evaluated to have destroyed an average of 34 tanks each along with approximately half as many guns and pill boxes remarkably some units like the 61st reported destroying more than 100 enemy tanks this resulted in an impressive average kill ratio of two or three enemy tanks destroyed for every tank destroyer lost interestingly the ultra lightly armored M18 despite its unremarkable gun boasted the best kill to loss ratio of any vehicle type in the Army the key to their success May lie in the way tank destroyers were utilized deviating from the intended doctrine of army strategists while Sherman tank units often engaged in daring assaults and unsupported rapid advances tank destroyers typically operated in support of combined arms task forces alongside infantry this approach allowed tank destroyers to maximize their effectiveness and contribute significantly to combat operations by collaborating closely with friendly forces tank destroyers were positioned strategically enabling them to spot the enemy first and initiate the first shot in the context of armored engagements during World War II being the first to fire often proved decisive regardless of the quality of the vehicles involved this proactive approach allowed tank destroyers to gain a crucial advantage and significantly influenced the outcome of battles tank destroyers served as a valuable lesson for the Army emphasizing the importance of avoiding over specialization the idea of having multiple classes of Tanks each excelling in certain aspects but lacking in others was deemed unnecessary instead the post-war concept of the main battle tank embraced a more Bal approach incorporating the lessons learned from the tank destroyer experience this shift towards a versatile and adaptable main battle tank reflected a strategic Evolution aimed at maximizing Effectiveness across various combat [Music] scenarios therefore the US tank destroyer Branch stands out as one of the most intriguingly successful failures in US military history

Channel: FactBytes

Views: 290,073

Keywords: tank destroyer, us ww2 tank destroyer, ww2 us tanks, us army

Id: gLLN22Zo_Jo

Length: 29min 28sec (1768 seconds)

Published: Sat May 25 2024