Worst Pices of Crap 3: Tanks

2dold4this said:
That is a straw man argument, Ollie. No one has claimed that the M4 was not inferior to other tanks, only that it was superior to some. That would exclude it from being the "worst piece of crap tank."

I agree...but I just wanted to show how SHAEF viewed the subject. It might be better to explain why states produced the tanks that they did and why. Just condemning something as crappy because it was slow or undergunned seems difficult.

If I remember correctly, a few people did use the "victory thesis", however. I have also seen it used time and time again. Not really a straw argument...but, granted, a little bit.

Anyway, I was talking about Anglo-Saxon tanks in general. Ie. most everything used during WWII. The tank crews were constantly complaining. Maybe we should accept the criticisms of the men who used the tanks...they called them moreorless crappy.

I have seen the visible difference between German/Soviet/Anglo-Saxon tanks. Standing beside them gives you a good "feel" for the subject. Soviet tanks, forget everything but size, were HUGE.
 
I think that Doppleganger said it best. The M-4was not the worst, but it was the worst of the best... or something like that. (Hmmm. M-4 tank... M-4 Rifle... best of the worst... coincidence? I think not!) At any rate, I am now asking for your nominees: What is the worst???

Dean.
 
Other tanks with major issues include India’s Arjun, which was been in development for over 20 years and is just now entering series production – twenty years behind schedule. It’s also turning into a maintenance nightmare, requiring more maintenance personnel than the T-72s already in Indian service. It is also proving to be incompatible with current tank transporters in the Indian Army. It is also overweight (at 58.5 tons), and the Indian army still cannot get a decent engine for this tank. To be fair to this tank, it is still in development. However, the chances of these problems being fixed can only be described as slim.The French AMX-30 also has had issues. In combat it did reasonably well (destroying 50 Iraqi tanks in Desert Storm), but one also needs to note the problems. The AMX-30 often was a third choice when countries could not acquire German Leopards or American M60s. The Saudis have generally kept their AMX-30s in depots, hardly using them. It should be noted the French have had a hard time selling their used AMX-30s – a problem that Germany and the United States are not having. Often countries with the AMX-30 are discarding them for used Leopard 1s (which had some issues with armor protection).The winner of the worst tank competition has to be the T-72. This is a tank that not only has serious design flaws, but it also has a very poor track record in combat. The T-72 is a compact tank, but the compactness creates serious issues in the area of crew survivability. Often, the ammunition is stored next to the fuel tanks. The autoloader often requires the presence of a live round in the crew compartment. In other words, if the tank is hit, it is going to blow up, and it will probably kill the crew in the process. Oh, and production quality is highly iffy, not only for the tanks, but for the ammunition their main guns used.Desert Storm proved that those faults matter on the battlefield. In essence, battles like 73 Easting were one-sided turkey shoots – where larger numbers of T-72s would be wiped out by smaller units of M1A1 Abrams tanks. Conversely, T-72s were unable to do much – shells were known to have bounced off the Abrams despite being fired from as close as 400 meters. T-72s were often blown apart at the welds when Hellfire missiles hit them, and on at least one occasion, T-72s were destroyed by American 120mm tank shells that had passed through obstacles (a sand berm or another T-72). Often their crews were taken out with them. In Iraqi Freedom, the story did not change much, despite the acquisition of systems to upgrade these tanks. In essence, unlike the Arjun, AMX-30, or M60A2, the T-72’s faults have been shown decisively on the battlefield, making it the biggest lemon in the world of tanks.
 
top 10 worst tanks:
1. Cheiftain AVRE particularly the Willich variant ( there is no need to explain).
2. Crusader (a 60 tonne nightmare)
3. Sherman (Zippo lighter that it was).
4. Wippet
5. T-62 (very crap replacement for T-55 that didn't work).
6. A-7 (German WW1 Tank).
7. Valentine (moved at 4 MPH and had a pop gun).
8. Jagd Tiger (not technically a tank buy 80 tonne mechanical nightmare).
9. KV-1 (Russian early war behemoth that the Germans totalled in seconds).
10. Maus (100 tonne mechanical nightmare again from our Aryan cousins 1945 vintage)
 
then again:
Conqueror (Heavy tank of the 60’s – so bad that Chieftain was a great improvement.)
Tortoise (80 ton monster that was too big and heavy for most bridges)
Covenanter (Cruiser tank made with low grade materials and only used for training.)
A9 (Early wartime cruiser tank with paper thin armour and a gun that wouldn’t penetrate panzers)
A13 (Ditto)
Mk 6 Light Tank. Chronically unreliable recce vehicle – my father had one shot from under him in Greece ’41)
M 103 (US Heavy tank of the 1960s built to counter the Soviet JS 3. The Army wouldn’t accept it so the Marines got it. Never used in action.)
M551 (US tank with a 152mm low pressure gun that that shook the wagon to pieces when it fired. The gun also fired missiles)
Neubaufahrzeug (German inter-war tank that had a 75mm gun, coax 37mm and MG in the turret and two little MG turrets on the front corners. Unfortunately the Germans developed the Panzer 3 and 4 as parallel programmes)
M11/39 (Italian tank with a 37mm gun in the hull. Paper is too thick to describe the armour)
 
icecold....Said
Conqueror (Heavy tank of the 60’s – so bad that Chieftain was a great improvement.)
Tortoise (80 ton monster that was too big and heavy for most bridges)

My you have been doing some reading, The British Conqueror never made it into service as it cancelled at the end of WW2 and only a few of these tanks still exist. The Tortoises was mainly designed to block bridges and control sections of the battlefield. You can still see this beastie in Bovington Tank Museum
 
I don,t think Conqueror as bad,
actually that tank has bad mobility
but at first,Operation method of that tank is just Sniper.
Centurions fight forward and Conqueror suppor them from back.
 
LeEnfield said:
icecold....Said
Conqueror (Heavy tank of the 60’s – so bad that Chieftain was a great improvement.)
Tortoise (80 ton monster that was too big and heavy for most bridges)

My you have been doing some reading, The British Conqueror never made it into service as it cancelled at the end of WW2 and only a few of these tanks still exist. The Tortoises was mainly designed to block bridges and control sections of the battlefield. You can still see this beastie in Bovington Tank Museum

The Conqueror was certainly not a bad tank, just that its intended role became obsolete with the advent of the Main Battle Tank concept. Futhermore, the 1st generation of post WW2 tanks definately had mobility as the most important factor from the 3 classic tenets of tank design, something that wasn't designed as being the Conqueror's strong point.
 
Zander..... there was only a limited number of the Conqueror tanks ever made, I don't think that they ever fired a shot in anger.
 
Last edited:
To answer your question Zander the answer is no, as the Centurion came out just afterwards and the British settled on this Tank as its main Battle Tank.
 
I was doing some thinking, (rare for me, but it does happen sometimes) and I realized that my personal worst tank of all time, the Sherman, actually outclassed its Japanese opposition. Could anyone enlighten me on the subject of Japanese WW 2 tanks and why they were so bad?

Dean.
 
Wad ype of Japanese tanks, cause the Japanese did not use tanks in most warfare! I only remember them using the small three men tanks!
 
Dean said:
I was doing some thinking, (rare for me, but it does happen sometimes) and I realized that my personal worst tank of all time, the Sherman, actually outclassed its Japanese opposition. Could anyone enlighten me on the subject of Japanese WW 2 tanks and why they were so bad?

Dean.


Interesting question.
 
Back
Top