Re: British Tanks
- From: "Tero P. Mustalahti" <termusta@xxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:35:05 -0400
David Thornley wrote:
In article <1182048572.038560.239220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Walt <Walterm140@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Taken as a whole, the Brits had very poor tanks.They weren't all that impressive up until the end of 1944, but
"very poor" seems quite an exaggeration. Why do you think that?
I think many who people believe that the Crusader was really bad fail to realize, that the poor performance of Crusader equipped units against the Germans had as much to do with inproper tactics as with the actual tanks.
In actuality, the only major nations with "very poor" tanks were Italy and Japan, and even they managed to develop somewhat better tanks towards the end on the war.
Tero P. Mustalahti
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Louis C
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Haydn
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Andrew Clark
- Re: British Tanks
- References:
- British Tanks
- From: Biggs
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Walt
- Re: British Tanks
- From: John Anderton
- Re: British Tanks
- From: Walt
- Re: British Tanks
- From: David Thornley
- British Tanks
- Prev by Date: Re: Why no souvenirs?
- Next by Date: Re: Ju 87G rear machine guns
- Previous by thread: Re: British Tanks
- Next by thread: Re: British Tanks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|