Fury - another WWII movie

[sgm11z]

Despite the user name I spent my 1st few years as a tanker (M60's)in the late 1960's and went from loader to driver to gunner before cycling out to track commander of our M577 command post track.

That said the movie was, from my perspective a pretty accurate portrayal of life as a tanker, noisy, dirty, dangerous; not only in combat but around the clock with lots of big moving parts just waiting to hurt you. the tactic used to engage the Tiger; at least three on one when possible, was what some of our "old guys" remembered as how they engaged Tigers and Panthers, in order to have a chance to kill the other tank and survive.

I have to give the movie a thumbs up and from what I could see the weaponry and equipment as well as how the crew interacted was well done. That plus the initial response to the new crew member when he came on board. Tankers tend to live together and also to die together. Frankly I was glad to transfer to the infantry for the rest of my career but I can still get nostalgia to the smell of diesel smoke on a wet cold day.

Just my two bits thrown in.

[M1Tommy]

I saw the movie and want to ask a question... without giving away movie plot and such.

Would Sherman tanks actually attack a Tiger, like they did in the movie? It seemed a bit hookey to me, and not what I'd figure good tactics would call for. Then again, I've never been 'there' and this former TMT2 doesn't really know tanks.

Tommy

[dave]

Yeh, good 'ol Brad said he learned a lot about war!!

[Embalmer]

I saw the movie and want to ask a question... without giving away movie plot and such.

Would Sherman tanks actually attack a Tiger, like they did in the movie? It seemed a bit hookey to me, and not what I'd figure good tactics would call for. Then again, I've never been 'there' and this former TMT2 doesn't really know tanks.

Tommy

Was a known fact that the tactic to take on tigers and Panthers, were to attack them in groups. Why my grandfather camehome after battle of bulge in essentially a full body cast after his tank was knocked down a hill by a panther while trying to flank it. Said of the 4 Sherman's against it 2 were knocked out and or fire, and his was on its side

[M1Tommy]

Was a known fact that the tactic to take on tigers and Panthers, were to attack them in groups. Why my grandfather camehome after battle of bulge in essentially a full body cast after his tank was knocked down a hill by a panther while trying to flank it. Said of the 4 Sherman's against it 2 were knocked out and or fire, and his was on its side

Movie spoilers..............



I would have expected them to split in different directions and try to flank, with one or tow staying in the trees for some cover. THen again, I am nor ever was a tanker.
Thanks for that reply. I have never known any armor folks from WWII. My own grandfather never returned from there, and is buried in Margraten Cemetery.

Tommy

[PhillipM]

I saw the movie and want to ask a question... without giving away movie plot and such.

Would Sherman tanks actually attack a Tiger, like they did in the movie? It seemed a bit hookey to me, and not what I'd figure good tactics would call for. Then again, I've never been 'there' and this former TMT2 doesn't really know tanks.

Tommy

The actual doctrine was for the Shermans to be infantry support and let tank destroyers, M10's and the fabulous M18 Hellcat, tangle with the Tigers or let artillery blot them out. But then that was the theory and then there was reality.

[M1Tommy]

The actual doctrine was for the Shermans to be infantry support and let tank destroyers, M10's and the fabulous M18 Hellcat, tangle with the Tigers or let artillery blot them out. But then that was the theory and then there was reality.

I would think as such, both about the doctrine and the reality.

The movie showing them lining up abreast and charging like horse cavalry in an old Western movie was a bit odd, in my formerly squidly mind anyways.
Thanks for that reply.

Tommy

[Col. Colt]

But none of those assets are available, or are going to be, in time. War is terrain and circumstances, minute to minute. Your platoon is the only one available - there is no one else to call on. You break thru the trees and into the open and you are engaged! And if you have to get to your objective to prevent a disaster, and you have a chance - then you have to try. You go with what you've got and pray it will be enough. That would appear to be the reality in place here. CC

[Guamsst]

The movie showing them lining up abreast and charging like horse cavalry in an old Western movie was a bit odd......

Ideally ANY OTHER ANTI TANK WEAPON would go after the tanks. Artillery being the best option. Then tank destroyers, then tanks and anti tank infantry. Reality was that time and again Americans, Canadians and Russians just ran headlong into the Germans with the Sherman. Ideally, when attacking with a Sherman you would want 5 Shermans against a Tiger as that was the loss rate. Then you would want to flank at high speed so that someone always has a side or rear shot. Again, reality being that there were usually less than 5 Shermans and they were luck if any of them got a good shot. The Shermans best weapon was gas mileage. Many unharmed Shermans drove past unused Tigers and Panthers that had been abandoned after running out of gas...... 4mpg seems awful until you consider the Tigers 4 GALLONS to the mile.

Let it never be said the American military lets the odds rule their actions.

[Art]

The Sherman "Firefly" which was a British variation armed with the very powerful Brit. 17 pdr. anti tank gun could destroy Panther and Tiger tanks at almost any angle and at decent ranges. The Germans regarded the Firefly as the most lethal variant of the Sherman when it came to tank to tank fighting. On August 8, 1944 Michael Wittmann, one of the leading Nazi Tiger Tank aces was killed when his Tiger I was destroyed by a Firefly (see picture.) Unfortunately we didn't have any fireflies.

[p246]

The Sherman "Firefly" which was a British variation armed with the very powerful Brit. 17 pdr. anti tank gun could destroy Panther and Tiger tanks at almost any angle and at decent ranges. The Germans regarded the Firefly as the most lethal variant of the Sherman when it came to tank to tank fighting. On August 8, 1944 Michael Wittmann, one of the leading Nazi Tiger Tank aces was killed when his Tiger I was destroyed by a Firefly (see picture.) Unfortunately we didn't have any fireflies.

To add to Arts comment when Wittmans Tiger attacked the British 7th at Villers Bocage he had his gunner hit the parked Fireflys first.I believe there were 3 fireflys parked together. Wittman obviously had a healthy respect for the long barreled HV Firefly.

[p246]

Having been fortunate to have a Grandfather who talked some to me as a boy I'll add a couple other tidbits I remember. He started the war in North Africa. Very early on in a Grant but quickly got an early Sherman with the three piece cast front nose. It was in North Africa that he first dealt with or saw a Tiger. At that point the Mark 3 was the main adversey with some Mark 4's mixed in. The Tiger was a shock to them when first encounter. Interestingly the only Mark 2 he ever saw was in North Africa. The first Sherman he got was abandoned when the undercarrage was shot destroying several bogies and breaking the track. Sherman no 2 was traded out when the 75mm main gun was hit and cut off 2 feet in front of the turrent.

Sicily. Mainly saw Mark 3 and 4's along with TD's. Sherman 3 hit land mind blowing him clear as he was standing in commanders hatch, the rest of his crew was lost.

Italy. First Panthers observed. Remembered one Tiger 2 broke down and abandoned. Sherman number 4 handed in when round struck at base of turrent jammimg turrent ring

Sherman number 5 was first long barreled 76. Finished war with number 5 and second crew. Both loaders were nicknamed Shorty. Both crews called him Gramps. In 1941 he was 28 years old and finished the war at 32. To the 18 to 19 year old he was ancient.

That's some of my rambling memories an old war horse shared with a young stary eyed kid many years ago.

[Guamsst]

....... Sherman no 2 was traded out when the 75mm main gun was hit and cut off 2 feet in front of the turrent.....

Was that in North Africa? The exact scenario was portrayed on "Greatest Tank Battles" I think that was the show at least....

[TSimonetti]

I guess I'll be the lone naysayer here for now. I saw this movie tonight and give it 1.5 out of 4 stars.

MILD SPOILER:

If it wasn't for the great special effects, I would have rated it even more poorly. The beginning scene was laughable, and the ending scene very unbelievable. the parts in between were often cringe-worthy from an historical perspective. The main characters for the most part were utterly boorish, unlikeable and unsettling with zero chemistry between them, and the tactical elements missed the mark from my perspective.

The director seemed to be trying a bit too hard not only to show that Americans could be as brutal as their enemies but also portrayed them as enjoying and relishing that role for the most part.... I found that aspect very distasteful. Ironic that the only act of compassion and chivalry shown on either side was by an SS trooper near the end of the movie towards a defenseless enemy..

I could go on, but I think you get my drift.

[PhillipM]

I guess I'll be the lone naysayer here for now. I saw this movie tonight and give it 1.5 out of 4 stars.

MILD SPOILER:

If it wasn't for the great special effects, I would have rated it even more poorly. The beginning scene was laughable, and the ending scene very unbelievable. the parts in between were often cringe-worthy from an historical perspective. The main characters for the most part were utterly boorish, unlikeable and unsettling with zero chemistry between them, and the tactical elements missed the mark from my perspective.

The director seemed to be trying a bit too hard not only to show that Americans could be as brutal as their enemies but also portrayed them as enjoying and relishing that role for the most part.... I found that aspect very distasteful. Ironic that the only act of compassion and chivalry shown on either side was by an SS trooper near the end of the movie towards a defenseless enemy..

I could go on, but I think you get my drift.

Was it not chivalry when the assistant driver did not fire on the child with the pazerfaust?