JohnB

Probably the best people to judge would be the crews who experienced all the types mentioned. Doubt if any such exist but 29 Armoured Brigade (3 RTR, 23 Hussars, 2 Fife and Forfar Yeomanry) used both Shermans and Comets. From 'Black Bull: Patrick Delaforce' "The Fifes discovered the new Comet was cramped compared to the Sherman. The sixty rounds of AP/HE per tank was increased to eighty-five and machine gun ammo by over 50 per cent. The Comet also bogged down more in soft ground than the Sherman." Major Bill Close of 3 RTR, who must have experienced near every W.Allied tank in the inventory, thought. "We were all involved in getting to know our new tank, the Comet. We found it to be an excellent tank. It was better armed than the Sherman, had a much lower profile, was very fast and manoeuvrable and the 77mm was an extremely efficient weapon. We had hoped that the Comet would be armed with the seventeen-pounder, as on the Sherman Firefly, but it had not been possible to fit it in the turret.

Oh for fecks sake I just posted yesterday If interested one can find the war diaries of three of the tank regiments (2nd Royal Gloucestershire Hussars, 3rd County of London Yeomanry and 4th County of London Yeomanry) who formed part of the 2nd Armoured Division here http://www.warlinks.com/armour/index_diary.html. On 30 September 1939 4 CLY contained 36 Officers and 417 ORs and were the probably not overproud possessors of one Rolls Royce Armoured Car, 1 Light tank, 4 Morris Portee & 5 Commers (15 cwt trucks) and 4 Panther Motorcycles. By 31st May 1940 vehicle strength had increased to:- 5 Commers, 4 Morris Portees, 4 Guy trucks, 11 training cars, 1 Morris 6-wheeler, 1 Morris dual control, 1 Bedford horse box, 10 BSA M/Cs, 6 Matchless M/Cs, 1 Triumph M/C, 7 Medium tanks, 9 Light tank, 4 Dragons, 2 utility tractors, 8 push bikes, 21 hired vehicles, 1 Commer, 1 Leyland 39 seater coach and 9 civilian coaches. 2 RGH on 14th September '39 possessed 1 light tank, 5 30cwt WD lorries, 10 rifles and 6 pistols with a strength of 24 officers and 397 other ranks. On 30th April 1940 they reported that 'The strength of the Regiment on 30 Apr 1940 was as follows:- 36 officers and 570 ORs. Individual training was carried on throughout the month. The number of officers and ORs passing through the principle courses were as follows:- Gunnery and D&M Bovington and Div School Retford - 18 officers and 24 ORs. Regimental D&M - Elementary 108, Advanced 74 Regimental Gunnery - Elementary 43, Advanced 53 Bovington and Regimental Wireless - 1 officer and 93 ORs.' D&M - Driving and Maintenance And of course they were not conscripts but, in the main, Territorials.

Oh what bollocks, you're the only one who assumed date of creation = combat ready status. I posted the creation dates of 1st and 2nd Armoured Divisions partly to refute your equally crass "Tanks need crews, and crews need tanks to train on. Production numbers do not equate to instant combat-ready units, especially when youare starting with untrained conscripts " statement.

If it made it clear that that was when the divisions corporate identity began ... except I'd spell it organised. If interested one can find the war diaries of three of the tank regiments (2nd Royal Gloucestershire Hussars, 3rd County of London Yeomanry and 4th County of London Yeomanry) who formed part of the 2nd Armoured Division here http://www.warlinks.com/armour/index_diary.html. On 30 September 1939 4 CLY contained 36 Officers and 417 ORs and were the probably not overproud possessors of one Rolls Royce Armoured Car, 1 Light tank, 4 Morris Portee & 5 Commers (15 cwt trucks) and 4 Panther Motorcycles. By 31st May 1940 vehicle strength had increased to:- 5 Commers, 4 Morris Portees, 4 Guy trucks, 11 training cars, 1 Morris 6-wheeler, 1 Morris dual control, 1 Bedford horse box, 10 BSA M/Cs, 6 Matchless M/Cs, 1 Triumph M/C, 7 Medium tanks, 9 Light tank, 4 Dragons, 2 utility tractors, 8 push bikes, 21 hired vehicles, 1 Commer, 1 Leyland 39 seater coach and 9 civilian coaches. 2 RGH on 14th September '39 possessed 1 light tank, 5 30cwt WD lorries, 10 rifles and 6 pistols with a strength of 24 officers and 397 other ranks. On 30th April 1940 they reported that 'The strength of the Regiment on 30 Apr 1940 was as follows:- 36 officers and 570 ORs. Individual training was carried on throughout the month. The number of officers and ORs passing through the principle courses were as follows:- Gunnery and D&M Bovington and Div School Retford - 18 officers and 24 ORs. Regimental D&M Elementary 108 Advanced 74 Regimental Gunnery Elementary 43 Advanced 53 Bovington and Regimental Wireless - 1 officer and 93 ORs.'

1st Armoured Division, was created on 12th October 1937, 2nd Armoured Division on 15th September 1939. Both in the UK. The Germans were quite impressed by the Territorials they fought in France and Flanders in 1940 too.

Tank production was increasing quickly however, the second quarter of 1940 would see 280 Cruiser and Infantry tanks delivered. By May monthly production was more than Germanys. The BEF on very well off in Artillery though. By May 10th there were 40 Field, 14 Medium, 3 Heavy and 3 Super Heavy artillery Regiments for a force of 10 divisions.

But, except against the feeblest of opponents, these enemy troops left behind by the Tigers will be shooting the follow up formations. In any close country the Tigers then become the hunted.

On John Salt's WW2pen file that was floating about and already referred to, Monty, in a letter to Brooke from Jan. '43, stated that "You cannot put too heavy a gun in a tank" and suggested a gun with good HE and an ability to penetrate 150mm of armour at 30º and 1500 yards. Good points, also 8th Army may have only had AP and APC for the 6pdr but APCBC for the 75mm which would make a difference.

Well the Tigers would hardly be able to conduct operations deep into the enemy line without the support of infantry. How could they take prisoners and how could the 'B' echelon vehicles get forward to resupply them.

Good one, and of course I tanks were frequently there to defend the infantry, particularly in NA 1941-42 but that also reflects the mobile nature of much the campaigning. The battle of Thompsons Post is a classic 'bite and hold' attack. For a classic defensive battle, Medenine springs to mind where few (if any?) of the KO'd Panzers fell to tanks.

But it was the 'I' tanks expected to lead the attack not the infantry, so I dunno if that counts as infantry support. On the defence the 'I' tanks were not to be tied to the infantry. Indeed. Partly of course because of the technological limitations at the time, tf a heavily armoured tank was desired it would necessarily be slow, if a faster tank was desired it would necessarily be lightly armoured.

No, Infantry Tanks were not intended for infantry support but as breakthrough tanks, the Char de Rupture in French.

Probably helps if you've had a few. In 1940 the Pz IV fired HE, the Pz III AP (mainly), not unlike British thinking with CS tanks. The difference being the Matilda was then invulnerable to the German anti-tank weapons. The Pz. III and IV were not infantry tanks, the first German panzer for that role was the Tiger. As for numbers, IIRC, the British mobilisation plan was for 11 armoured/tank brigades (5 'I', 6 Cruiser) in the field by Sept. 41 against what 20 Panzer regiments(?).

Uh, no they don't! and No! the Brits plan to make a lot more of them anyway!

The thinking, quite rightly, was the Royal Artillery delivering most of the HE. Or a 4-inch naval gun mounted on a truck.