MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Armour Forum

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #13  
Old 21-01-22, 17:26
Ed Landstrom Ed Landstrom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: south-west Ontario
Posts: 63
Default

Another illusion shattered. As far back as I can remember, the conventional wisdom has been that:
The Sherman's vulnerability was due in part to its high profile.
The high profile was necessitated by the radial engine initially used.
The radial engine was used because it was the only engine powerful enough that was available in quantity at the time the Sherman was being designed.
When other engines became available, the Sherman design wasn't modified to reduce its height because that would have delayed production.

Now that the first premise has been debunked (Is it possible that nobody bothered to look up the actual dimensions until now?) does anyone know if the others are also myths?
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Studebaker US6 info sought David Doyle The Softskin Forum 18 11-04-20 23:56
F60S Tanker Info Sought DaveBuckle The Softskin Forum 5 28-01-20 02:14
MLVW info sought servicepub (RIP) Post-war Military Vehicles 30 06-12-13 15:07
M-100 trailer info sought Marc Montgomery Post-war Military Vehicles 28 23-10-11 00:27
BCATP info sought Tony Smith Your Relatives 5 13-09-09 23:04


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016