World War 2 In Review No. 58: Medium Tank M4 Sherman

By Merriam Press

Merriam Press World War 2 In Review Series. The following articles on the Medium Tank M4 Sherman of World War II are in this issue: (1) Medium Tank M4 “Sherman” (2) U.S. Variants (3) Shermans in Foreign Service. Cover its design, production, service, armament, armor, and variants. The M4 Medium Tank was the primary battle tank used by the United States and the other Western Allies in World War II, and proved to be a reliable and highly mobile workhorse, despite being outmatched by heavier German tanks late in the war. 675 B&W/color photos/illustrations.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Feb 1, 2019
• ISBN: 9780359400539

Book preview

World War 2 In Review No. 58: Medium Tank M4 Sherman

World War 2 In Review No. 58: Medium Tank M4 Sherman

F:\Working Data\Merriam Press Logo CS.jpg

Hoosick Falls, New York

2019

First eBook Edition

Copyright © 2019 by Merriam Press

Additional material copyright of named contributors.

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews.

The views expressed are solely those of the author.

ISBN 978-0-359-40053-9

This work was designed, produced, and published in the United States of America by the Merriam Press, 489 South Street, Hoosick Falls NY 12090.

Notice

The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000.

Mission Statement

This series presents articles and pictorials on topics covering many aspects of World War 2. In addition to new articles and pictorials on topics not previously covered, future volumes may include additional material on the subjects covered in this volume. The volumes in this series will comprise a single source for innumerable articles and tens of thousands of images of interest to anyone interested in the history and study of World War 2. While no doubt some of these images and other materials could be found online, countless hours could be spent searching thousands of web sites to find at least some of this material.

The Images

These photos are seventy-plus years old, were taken under less than ideal conditions, and some were taken by individuals who were neither professional photographers nor using professional equipment. Thus, the quality of the original image may be less than perfect. While Merriam Press tries to obtain the best quality images possible, the quality of the images in this publication will no doubt vary greatly.

This series of publications utilizes the editor’s collection of tens of thousands of photographs and other illustrative material acquired since 1968. Hundreds of sources over the years have been searched for material on every subject.

Photographs Needed

Merriam Press welcomes any contributions of photographs

of this or any subject for future volumes in this series.

How to Use This Publication

To get the best viewing experience, the use of the Adobe Digital program is highly recommended. This free program is available from Adobe.

This publication was designed to allow for larger images than most eReaders will accommodate. When the publication was created, the images were inserted in a fixed size (6.2 inches wide and up to 8 inches high) and cannot be resized in the program. The text, of course, can be enlarged and reduced as desired.

Viewing on a computer or other device with a large enough screen will allow viewing of the photos and other illustrations in their entirety. Viewing this publication on most eReaders will result in the images not being shown in their entirety.

To view the images properly, adjust the program’s viewing window’s right side edge accordingly. If the viewing window is too wide, images may overlap, and moving the right side edge will fix this.

•

Welcome to No. 58 of the World War 2 In Review Series

The following articles are in this issue of World War 2 In Review:

(1) On the Cover

(2) Medium Tank M4 Sherman

(3) U.S. Variants

(4) Shermans in Foreign Service

with 677 B&W and color photographs, maps and illustrations.

Watch for future issues of this series with more articles on the history of World War II.

On the Cover

F:\Working Data\WW2 In Review\WR Published\WR - 058 - Sherman - WORKING\WR058-LE1_files\image004.jpg

One of the flamethrower versions of Sherman fitted with the American E4 series flame gun in place of the hull machine gun mount. There were three variants: E4R2, 3 and 4. Fuel was carried within the vehicle. Another similar device was the E6 which could be fitted above the co-driver’s hatch. Both E4 and E6 flamethrowers were issued in kit form for fitting in the field. An E7 could be mounted in the turret.

Medium Tank M4 Sherman

F:\Working Data\WW2 In Review\WR Published\WR - 058 - Sherman - WORKING\WR058-LE1_files\image006.jpg

M4A3 Medium Tank.

The M4 Sherman, officially the Medium Tank, M4, was the most numerous battle tank used by the United States and some other Western Allies in World War II. It proved to be reliable and mobile. In spite of being outclassed by German heavy tanks late in the war, the M4 Sherman was cheaper to produce and available in greater numbers. Thousands were distributed to the Allies, including the British Commonwealth and the Soviet Union, through the Lend-Lease program. The tank was named after the American Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman by the British.

The M4 Sherman evolved from the interim M3 Medium Tank, Also known by the British service names Grant and Lee, which had its main armament in a side sponson mount. The M4 retained much of the previous mechanical design but put the main 75 mm gun in a fully traversing turret, with a gyrostabilizer enabling the crew to fire with reasonable accuracy while the tank was on the move. The designers stressed mechanical reliability, ease of production and maintenance, durability, standardization of parts and ammunition in a limited number of variants, and moderate size and weight. These factors combined with M4 Sherman’s then-superior armor and armament outclassed German light and medium tanks of 1939–41. The M4 went on to be produced in large numbers. It spearheaded many offensives by the Western Allies after 1942. A similar vehicle was developed at the same time in Canada, the Ram tank, however greater Sherman production and availability meant that the Ram was never used in action.

When the M4 tank arrived in North Africa in 1942, it was superior to the lighter German long-barrel 50 mm-gunned Panzer III and short-barrel 75 mm-gunned Panzer IV. For this reason, the US Army believed the M4 would be adequate to win the war, and no pressure was exerted for further tank development. Logistical and transport restrictions, such as limitations imposed by roads, ports, and bridges, also complicated the introduction of a more capable but heavier tank. An Army Ground Forces policy statement of November 1943 concluded thus: The recommendation of a limited proportion of tanks carrying a 90 mm gun is not concurred in for the following reasons: The M4 tank has been hailed widely as the best tank of the battlefield today ... There appears to be no fear on the part of our forces of the German Mark VI (Tiger) tank. There can be no basis for the T26 tank other than the conception of a tank-vs.-tank duel-which is believed to be unsound and unnecessary. Tank destroyer battalions using vehicles built on the M4 hull and chassis, but with open-topped turrets and more potent high-velocity guns, also entered widespread use in the American army. Even by 1944, most M4 Shermans kept their dual purpose 75 mm M3. By 1944 and 1945, the M4 was inferior to German heavy tanks but was able to fight on with support from growing numbers of fighter-bombers and artillery pieces.

The relative ease of production allowed huge numbers of the M4 to be produced, and significant investment in tank recovery and repair units paid off with more disabled vehicles being repaired and returned to service. These factors combined to give the Americans numerical superiority in most battles, and many infantry divisions could be provided with their own M4s and tank destroyers. By 1944 a typical U.S. infantry division was attached to an M4 Sherman battalion, a tank destroyer battalion, or both. By this stage of the war, German panzer divisions were rarely at full strength, and some U.S. infantry divisions had more fully tracked armored fighting vehicles than the depleted German panzer divisions did, providing an advantage for the Americans. The Americans also started to introduce the M4A3E8 variant, with improved suspension and a high-velocity 76 mm gun as used on the tank destroyers. As well as equipping the Allies during the war, Shermans - including updated versions - saw combat in many post-war conflicts, including the Korean War, Arab-Israeli Wars, and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.

The U.S. Army Ordnance Department designed the Medium Tank M4 as a replacement for the Medium Tank M3. The M3 was an up-gunned development of the M2 Medium Tank of 1939, itself derived from the M2 Light Tank of 1935. The M3 was developed as a stopgap measure until a new turret mounting a 75 mm gun could be devised. While it was a big improvement when tried by the British in Africa against early German tanks, the placement of a 37 mm gun turret on top gave it a very high profile; and the unusual side-sponson mounted main gun, with limited traverse, could not be aimed across the other side of the tank.

Detailed design characteristics for the M4 were submitted by the Ordnance Department on 31 August 1940, but development of a prototype had to be delayed while the final production designs of the M3 were finished and the M3 entered full-scale production. On 18 April 1941, the U.S. Armored Force Board chose the simplest of five designs. Known as the T6, the design was a modified M3 hull and chassis, carrying a newly designed turret mounting the M3 ‘s 75 mm gun. This became the Sherman.

The Sherman’s reliability resulted from many features developed for U.S. light tanks during the 1930s, including vertical volute spring suspension, rubber-bushed tracks, and a rear-mounted radial engine with drive sprockets in front. The goals were to produce a fast, dependable medium tank able to support infantry, provide breakthrough striking capacity, and defeat any tank then in use by the Axis nations, though it would later fall short against the much heavier tanks developed by Germany.

The T6 prototype was completed 2 September 1941. Unlike later M4s, the hull was cast and had a side hatch, which was eliminated from production models. The T6 was standardized as the M4 and production began in October.

As the US approached entry in World War II, armored employment was doctrinally governed by Field Manual 100–5, Operations (published May 1941, the month following selection of the M4 tank’s final design). That FM stated that:

The armored division is organized primarily to perform missions that require great mobility and firepower. It is given decisive missions. It is capable of engaging in all forms of combat, but its primary role is in offensive operations against hostile rear areas.

The M4 was therefore not originally intended as an infantry support tank; in fact, FM 100-5 specifically stated the opposite. It placed tanks in the striking echelon of the armored division, and placed the infantry in the support echelon. The field manual covering the use of the Sherman (FM 17–33, The Tank Battalion, Light and Medium of September 1942) devoted one page of text and four diagrams to tank versus tank action (out of 142 pages). This early armored doctrine was heavily influenced by the sweeping early war successes of German blitzkrieg tactics. By the time M4s reached combat in significant numbers, battlefield demands for infantry support and tank versus tank action far outnumbered the occasional opportunities of rear-echelon exploitation.

U.S. doctrine held that anti-tank work was primarily to be done by tank destroyers. Speed was essential in order to bring the tank destroyers from the rear to destroy incoming tanks. This doctrine was not entirely followed in practice as it would create an interval of vulnerability in the armored battalion until tank destroyers moved to the front. Obviously this would make it harder for an armored force to achieve a breakthrough,