A critical study of French, British, Russian and American tanks was published on 27 June 1943 in
the German weekly newspaper Das Reich. It is interesting to note that the author does not
attempt to minimize the merits of American tanks, particularly the General Sherman, and that he
concedes that German soldiers "know the dangers represented by these tanks when they appear in
large numbers." A translation of the Das Reich article follows:
* * *
The German High Command maintains a museum of captured tanks -- or one
might say a kind of technical school where some of our most highly skilled
engineers and a number of officers specially chosen for the purpose are testing
those monsters of the enemy's battle cavalry, testing their adaptability to the
terrain, their power of resistance to attack, and their special qualities suiting
them for employment in attack. These tests are carried out in a forest region of
central Germany where the terrain up-hill and down-hill is intersected by ravines
and all manner of depressions of the ground. The results are embodied in long
tabulations not unlike those prepared by scientific laboratories, and in recommendation
to the designers of German counter-weapons, who pass them on to the tank factories
and armament shops. The type of combat actually carried on at the front is
reenacted here in make-believe encounters worked out to the last point of refinement.
The officer in charge of these experiments has developed a thesis which is
extremely interesting, even though higher headquarters are not, without
exception, in agreement with him. He contends that the various types of tanks
reflect psychological traits of the nations that produced them.
The French have produced a number of unmaneuverable but thickly armored "chars" embodying
the French doctrine of defense. They are conceived as solid
blocks of iron to assist the troops in rendering the solidified defensive front even
more rigid. The Renault and Hotchkiss types of tanks have indirectly contributed
toward stagnation of the military situation. It was out of the question for these
French tanks to swarm forth in conquest into the plains of enemy territory, dashing
madly ahead for distances of hundreds of kilometers. Their crews normally
consisted of only two men each. It was impossible for these tanks to cooperate
as members of a complex formation. Communication from one tank to another
was limited to the primitive method of looking through peepholes in these cells of steel.
The French still have, from the period shortly after the first World
War, a 72-ton dreadnaught, the weight of which is distributed over the length of three
to four railroad undertrucks; it carries a crew of thirteen; but its armor is of a
type that simply falls apart like so much tin under fire from a modern cannon. As
late as 1940 there were those in France who demanded increasing numbers
of these rolling dry-land ships and wanted them to be of stronger construction
than ever before. But German troops encountered these 72-ton tanks only in the
form of immobile freight shipments not yet unloaded in the combat zones.
In the opinion of experts, English tanks of the cruiser class come much
nearer to satisfying requirements of a proper tank for practical use in the present
war. The name in itself indicates that the basic idea was carried over from naval
construction. These tanks are equipped with a good motor and are capable of
navigating through large areas. The amount of armor was reduced for the sake
of higher speed and greater cruising radius. Tactically these tanks are more or
less a counterpart of torpedo destroyer formations, out on the endless spaces of
ocean. They are best adapted -- and this is quite a significant factor -- to the
hot and sparsely settled areas of the English colonial empire. The English tank
is an Africa tank. It has a narrow tread chain. It did not come much into the
foreground on the European continent. A tank for use in Europe, apparently, is
something for which the English don't show so much talent.
On Soviet territory the English tank was a failure; and it shares this fate
with the North American tanks, which were not appreciated very much by the
Soviet ally. These North American tanks include, for instance, the "General
Stuart," a reconnaissance and rear-guard tank, bristling with machine-guns,
as well as the "General Lee." Although the latter possesses commendable motor
qualities, its contours are not well balanced, and its silhouette is bizarre and
too tall.
This criticism does not apply, however, to the most recent North American
development, the "General Sherman." The latter represents one of the special
accomplishments of the North American laboratories. With its turtle-shaped
crown rising in one piece above the "tub" and turret it must be regarded as quite
a praiseworthy product of the North American steel industry. The first things
to attract attention are serial construction and fulfillment of the almost arrogant
requirements of the North American automobile industry as regards speed, smooth
riding, and streamlined contour of the ensemble. It is equipped with soft rubber
boots, that is with rubber padding on the individual treads of the caterpillar
mechanism. It seems largely intended for a civilized landscape or, to put the matter
in terms of strategy, for thoroughly cultivated areas in Tunisian Africa and for
the invasion of Europe. It represents the climax of the enemy's accomplishments
in this line of production. But we cannot gain quite the proper perspective until
we examine also the tank production of the Soviets.
The T-34 used by the Russians at the opening of hostilities in 1941 was at
that time the best tank produced anywhere -- with its 76-mm long-barrelled gun
its tightfitting tortoise-shaped cap, the slanting sides of its "tub," the broad cat's-paw
tread of its forged caterpillar chains capable of carrying this 26-ton tank
across swamps and morasses no less than through the grinding sands of the steppes. In
this matter the Soviet Union does not appear in the role of the exploited proletarian,
but rather as an exploiter of all the varied branches of capitalistic industry and
invention. Some of the apparatus was so closely copied after German inventions
that the German Bosch Company was able to build its own spare parts unmodified
into the Soviet-constructed apparatus.
The Soviet Union was the only nation in the world to possess, even prior to
the approach of the present war, completely perfected and tried-out series of tanks. The
Soviets had such tanks, for instance, in the autumn of 1932. Basing their
procedure on experience gained in maneuvers, the Russians then developed
independently additional new series, building to some extent on advances abroad,
like those embodied in the fast Christie tank (speed 90 to 110 km.) of the North
Americans.
Like Germany and England, the Soviet Union thereupon hit upon a tank
constructed for employment in separate operational units. Groups of these tanks
operate in isolation in advanced zones of combat, at increasing distances from the
infantry. Only a minor tank force is thrown into action for tactical cooperation
with infantry forces. Such, at least, was the idea. And in fact, the T-34 was found
suited for this type of action -- though in many instances only by way of covering
a retreat. But even for this type of tank, positional warfare has in many instances
had the result of narrowing the designer's and the strategist's operational conception
to the narrower range of tactical employment.
The Soviet Union also has constructed an imitation -- in fact two imitations -- of
an amphibian tank built by Vickers-Armstrong. Another variant of Soviet
thought on the subject came to the fore when the Russians constructed
a 52-ton land battleship with 3 turrets, a vehicle of quite impressive appearance but
provided with walls that were not stout enough to serve the purpose. The first
of these monsters broke down in the mud a short distance behind Lemberg, in
1941. After that they were found more and more rarely; and at last they dropped
out altogether.
In order properly to evaluate the most recent tank creations, such as the
North American "General Sherman" or the German "Tiger", one must learn to
view a tank as embodying a combination of firing power, speed, and resistance or,
to express the same idea more concretely, as a combination of cannon, motor, and
armor. In this type of construction, the paradoxes involved in the ordinary problems
of automobile body building are raised to their highest potential. A mere addition
to one of the above-indicated dimensions, let us say the motor by itself or the
armor by itself, is not apt to be of value.
A fast-moving tank must not weigh much, and heavy armor does not ride well. The
caliber of the cannon affects the size and weight of its ammunition; and a
difference in the latter is usually multiplied about a hundredfold, since tanks
usually carry about 100 rounds as reserve ammunition. Taking all these things
into consideration, we look upon the "General Sherman" as embodying a type of
strategy that is conceived in terms of movement: it is a "running" tank, all the
more since the Americans most likely expected to use it on readily passable
terrain, that is on European soil. The caliber of its principal weapon is slightly
in excess of the maximum so far attained by the foreign countries. It is spacious
inside. Its aeroplane motor is of light weight. It is a series product, the same as
its cast-steel coat, the latter being modeled into an almost artistic-looking contour, in
such manner as to offer invariably a curved, that is a deflecting surface to an
approaching bullet.
In Tunis, German soldiers have demonstrated their ability to deal with this
tank; but they know the danger represented by these tanks when they appear in
large herds. An imposing innovation is the stabilization equipment of the cannon. This
equipment is connected with a system of gyros and permits even and smooth
laying of the gun. This system was taken over from naval artillery and applied to
the shocks incident to swaying over uneven terrain, where stabilization, of course,
represents a far more difficult problem. This is the first attempt of its kind ever
to be made anywhere.