British Tanks
- From: Biggs <biggs27@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:43:15 -0400
Why did the British have this ever present problem in designing and
building poor tanks. This even after the experience of facing the
superior German Tanks. The Valentine and Matilda where painfully slow,
yes I know they are classed as infantry tanks. The Crusader poorly
armed. The Churchill a strange design, performed well in its varous
forms engineering, flame thrower etc, but as a battle tank, not up to
it. The Cromwell, again out gunned at the late stage of the war, The
American built sherman otherwise known as the Tommy Cooker, speaks for
itself, though good for mass production. The British did add the 17
pounder for the Sherman Fire Fly and this faired better againt the
German tanks, but not well armoured enough. So the question is why??
Alsowas the T34-85 the best tank of World War Two? orthe Panther,
Tiger thought they were too complicated a design for mass production.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: British Tanks
- From: David Thornley
- Re: British Tanks
- From: eunometic
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Geoffrey Sinclair
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Bruce Burden
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Rich Rostrom
- Re: British Tanks
- From: John Anderton
- Re: British Tanks
- Prev by Date: Re: Hitler's attitude towards the Japanese
- Next by Date: Re: Occupation Zones in Germany (was Re: UK treatment of China in WW2)
- Previous by thread: Conspiracy Theories
- Next by thread: Re: British Tanks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|