Comments by "John Burns" (@johnburns4017) on "British Armour Doctrine \u0026 Tactics World War 2 with David Willey of @thetankmuseum" video.

  1. Many Miles Away " I don't doubt his expertise on british doctrine but his knowledge of US doctrine in this particular instance" The vid was about British doctrine not US. David only fleeting mentioned US doctrine. I am sure he does know it.
    4
  2. Excellent. The_Chieftain, it was about British tank doctrine. ;) What came out was how on the fly they had to introduce totally new equipment (by the month) and learn to adapt battlefield tactics to suit. Nice of David to mention the 1919 plan. This was so far ahead of anything at the time to be out of sight.
    4
  3. Blah B The M10s in British service had the US guns ripped out and 17-pdrs fitted - renamed the Achilles. They were used mainly with Churchill infantry tanks, which were not pitted against tanks. The turret traverse was unpowered and slow. The US forces in Normandy mainly had an infantry role, so the US M10s would rarely be meeting tanks. From a distance they looked like tanks with the long gun making them a target.
    2
  4. I recall my old uncle, who was on the 1st wave on D-Day and onwards. He recalled US soldiers looking at the Firefly in envy, and saying why weren't their forces issued with them.
    2
  5. Doug Spencer Until the US forces met heavy German armour en-mass, then they were lacking seriously.
    2
  6.  @Betrix5060  US tankers wanted better tanks and bigger guns.
    2
  7. purpleanex Britain has soft power in the world. Look it up. The USA has to borrow heavily to keep its military rolling along.
    2
  8. Ben Naylor In both of those break outs there was little German resistance in front of them.
    1
  9. Ben Naylor In the Bulge the tank destroyers were in a defensive position. When attacking their effectiveness was greatly reduced.
    1
  10. Ben Naylor The idea of the tank destroyer in attack was to call it up from the rear. But when they needed one of course one was never there. In defence they obviously performed better, being literally self propelled guns.
    1
  11. Paul Hoogwater What special role did this tank perform?
    1
  12. TREY RIVER thanks. It states: "b. Three methods of attack may be used: (1) Tanks in the initial assault, followed by other troops whose mission will be that of consolidating the position won" Tanks? Well relying on the not fit for purpose 75mm Sherman, US forces would be in trouble. And they were.
    1
  13. TREY RIVER In Normandy US forces met little German armour. The most concentrated was probably around St.Lo. You are right, the 17-pdr would not have been a great advantage for US forces in Normandy, but better against German 88s would have been thicker armour for tanks..
    1
  14.  @Betrix5060  The Americans knew about German tanks before D-Day.
    1
  15. Robert Li "I didn't know the British still had an empire in the 21st century" It morphed into the British Commonwealth. At the request of the empire members.
    1