The Commander Series Forum

Am building a US battlegroup for the Normandy campaign and I have no clue which Shermans to buy: M4A1's, M4A3's? 75mm 0r 76mm guns? Could anyone offer advice....

Thanks in advance!!!

Well, as far as I know there was the maximum of one platoon of 76s in a company. The ratio might have even be lower than that. The BKC army list (1st edition) for an armoured battalion NWE 44/45 states 3 Stuarts, 3 76s Shermans, 6 75s Shermans and one 105 Sherman...

I have battalions for NWE arranged as above. Generally, I would say use 75mm Shermans and occasionally throw in a 76mm for something different.

I am no where near any of the books, so this based off of memory only, so I can be off.

The 76mm did not get deployed until after the Normandy campaign. Maybe in August? But where for sure in units in Sept. (The Central France and Lorraine campaign.)

Most/All of the units that were stationed in England in '42-'43 had the M4A1's when deployed to France. Also, some of the units that arrived in early '44 drew M4A1's that were surplus stock that was placed in the UK in '42-'43. Most/All units that deployed in the UK in '44 then to France were issued M4A3's.

As the earlier "UK deployed" BN's lost tanks, the replacements were the M4A3's.

The French 2nd Armor Division mainly had the M4A2's with some A1's. They operated off of the US supplies and did also support US infantry from the 90th Div. in the closing of the Gap. So there also that option if you want.

Mark has the offical levels, ie M4A3, at most 1/3rd 76's. Pictorial evidence tends to contradict that - with cast and fabricated hulls visible in the same platoon. In effect thats what Sapper is saying. 76's, there seem to have been some in Normandy, but very few. As the 76 had a very poor HE round, the 75 was still prefered.

By late 1944, newly arriving divisions would be fully equiped, those that came in in December also had Chaffees.

The other add on is the 105, initally the Tank Battalions had 3 M8 SCOTT HMC. There were replaced quite quickly, I think by August, but as always could be wrong. Once the Scotts went the 105 appeared at comapny, and I have (Tiger LIsts) it as in all tank companies by 1/45. This I suspect was to provide the HE effects lost with the widespread use of 76's. If you are looking at platoon bases, I'd have 2 105's. (Ok Pete I know could use a single but).

My own 1-1 US armoured Btn is 2/3rds 76, 1/3rd 75, I must get round to getting the other company of 75's some time.

I believe that Sherman 76s were introduced for the Cobra breakout operation as a result of discovering that 50% of German tank battalions had Panthers!

My most recent source for this is the FoW "Cobra!" supplement but I believe that I first read something similar in Tank Battles in Miniature: North West Europe by Bruce Quarrie.

I would be cautious about using wargaming references in determining historical deployment.

from what i recall hearsay and without reference.
all the us shermans on d-day itself were 75s
the 76mm sherman was in england in july but not with troops and they hadent done the change over.
pattons group was the first 76 armed group to be deployed and from that time on depending on your regiment army group it was 76 or 75.
having said that 76 tanks were shipped in as replacements as were 75s these were distributed as available so there was a bit of cross over in units.

For normandy i would go as follows
June only 75s
july 1 76 per 6 75s max one
august 1 76 per 4 75s max one

just because the replacement tanks would generally end up mixed in platoons with 75s and one additional 76 isnt going to make a huge difference in game terms

a lot of 76s were shipped over but you have to consider the relative % verses the 75 mm tanks.

I think FOW may be over exadurating the 76 in cobra.
and misinterpretring the distribution of 76's

matt

The other question that you should ask, Muggy, is do you want your armor group to represent the Tank BN's in the Armored Divisions or the Independent Tank BN's attached to the the Infantry Divisions.

The Arm. Div. had priority for the 76mm, so they would have the greater % of 76mm to 75mm's. Where as the Ind. Tank BN's had priority on the Jumbo Sherman (and I could be wrong, but I think none of the Arm. Div. had Jumbos - again I will not be anyway near my books for several days.)

During the Metz campaign and on, the armor in Patton's army also tended to have welded on more plate armor on to the front of their M4's (in addition to the official modification of armor over the ammo bins on the sides and turret). This additional plate armor also included welding front armor taken off of Panthers(!) Patton did not like the concrete filled sandbags that units from the 1st & 7th Armies were using and had official orders to prevent them from being used.

Well, I did give references! Lol!

JUles - the FOW stuff is well researched, although the TOE stuff is somtinmes adapted at least one of the authors post frequently on the Yahoo TOE group. Look for original sources if you can. US stuff is normally well served, on .US.MIL sites (sorry cant recall the actual URL).

As to relative percentages of 76mm in Divisons and Independant Tank Btn, again it comes down to the use - the indepndant btn needed better HE, bieng used in an "infatry tank" role, rather than explotation as the divisions were supposed to be. Look for a copy of "Company Commander" by MacDonald for a good account of fighting at low level in the US army. MacDonald later ran the US Army history department, so its a fair bet it is reasonably accurate.

IanS

Hi guys

Ian, I'm also a member of the TOE Yahoo group, I would highly recommend it to anyone wanting info on TO&Es.

The following is just my personal opinion and is not meant to offend or upset in any way.

All this 'quote your reference' stuff is ok, and I fully understand it being a graduate myself. But, are we going to end up with 'official references' only if we keep this up?

At the end of the day it's just a hobby, and at basic level it is just about playing games with toy soldiers! Many players just want enough info to play a GAME - not the detailed TO&E of every US tank battalion in the ETO! Nor do they want to conduct graduate or post-graduate level research on WW2 TO&Es. On the other hand some of us DO want that detail - that's why we join TO&E sites!

Cheers

Jules

PS I frequently see full strength Tiger and Panther battalions on wargames tables (despite the fact that 'full-strength' TO&Es hardly ever exist anywhere, let alone full-strength German units during 'late WW2'!).

I think it is certainly 'possible' (but perhaps not reasonable in every game) for someone to field a full-strength entirely 76mm gunned Sherman battalion - that certainly is what the US Army initially proposed to do in Nort West Europe post D-Day! After all the points system should still produce a relatively balanced game even if TOEs are a little 'inaccurate'.

JUles - as to offical referances - I certainly hope not !

It is a truism that there are three armies, the the politicans think they have, the one the Generals think they have organised, and what is actually there, I was just giving a guide line. I could, but am not going to, discover the strenght returns for a particular unit at a particular time.

76mm Shermans and Firflies are a major problem, as I tried to point out before, there were aguments, and good ones, for reatining the 75, due to the poor HE performance of both those guns. Unfortunatly this is not reflected in any set of rules that I know of. There is also US doctrine, honoured in the breach by wargamers, that tanks didn't fight tanks...

IanS