DogDodger

"...We had to say farewell to the Emchas. It would be a sad moment. We had wished it would be otherwise. A funeral parting, a great pain.
"Finally, an order arrived. But with other, stunning contents, that sent chills running up and down our spines: 'Remove the turrets and hull machine guns from the Shermans. Warehouse them. Deliver the armored hulls--as tractors--to civilian enterprises.' We had to report compliance with this order within five days.
"Why, for what reason, from where did such an abrupt change in the subsequent fate of the foreign tanks come? What forced Moscow to take such a final ['murderous' in the original text] decision?
"For days after the receipt of the 'death certificate' [as the tankers nicknamed the order], work proceeded on a broad front. All the brigade, corps, and army maintenance units were thrown into the demilitarization of the tanks, making 'tractors' out of them.
"I cannot forget the total dejection of the crews as they stood on the sidelines with heads bowed. The death of each tank showed on their faces. At one time the Emchisti had signed hand receipts for the tanks from the brigade command. We all were heavy-hearted. Many choked back tears, and some, not holding back, cried bitterly. How could this be? How much effort and energy had been given to them--the Shermans--there in the dry Mongolian steppe, in the silent desert sands of the Gobi, in the rugged southern reaches of the Grand Khingan? And how many obstacles had been overcome on the cenrtal Manchurian plain? These men had cared for them, cared for them like the apple of their eye. And now this final humiliation. Farewell, Emcha! Each inomarochnik will have good memories of you for the rest of his life.
"An epitaph came out of these mournful days (how could it not): 'Yesterday it was a menacing tank, and now, by order--they took off the turret--it has become a tractor. Front-line comrade, how painful to witness the death of the Emcha. Try not to cry!'"
Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks, Dmitriy Loza, trans. James F. Gebhardt

"...We had to say farewell to the Emchas. It would be a sad moment. We had wished it would be otherwise. A funeral parting, a great pain.
"Finally, an order arrived. But with other, stunning contents, that sent chills running up and down our spines: 'Remove the turrets and hull machine guns from the Shermans. Warehouse them. Deliver the armored hulls--as tractors--to civilian enterprises.' We had to report compliance with this order within five days.
"Why, for what reason, from where did such an abrupt change in the subsequent fate of the foreign tanks come? What forced Moscow to take such a final ['murderous' in the original text] decision?
"For days after the receipt of the 'death certificate' [as the tankers nicknamed the order], work proceeded on a broad front. All the brigade, corps, and army maintenance units were thrown into the demilitarization of the tanks, making 'tractors' out of them.
"I cannot forget the total dejection of the crews as they stood on the sidelines with heads bowed. The death of each tank showed on their faces. At one time the Emchisti had signed hand receipts for the tanks from the brigade command. We all were heavy-hearted. Many choked back tears, and some, not holding back, cried bitterly. How could this be? How much effort and energy had been given to them--the Shermans--there in the dry Mongolian steppe, in the silent desert sands of the Gobi, in the rugged southern reaches of the Grand Khingan? And how many obstacles had been overcome on the cenrtal Manchurian plain? These men had cared for them, cared for them like the apple of their eye. And now this final humiliation. Farewell, Emcha! Each inomarochnik will have good memories of you for the rest of his life.
"An epitaph came out of these mournful days (how could it not): 'Yesterday it was a menacing tank, and now, by order--they took off the turret--it has become a tractor. Front-line comrade, how painful to witness the death of the Emcha. Try not to cry!'"
Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks, Dmitriy Loza, trans. James F. Gebhardt

"...We had to say farewell to the Emchas. It would be a sad moment. We had wished it would be otherwise. A funeral parting, a great pain.
"Finally, an order arrived. But with other, stunning contents, that sent chills running up and down our spines: 'Remove the turrets and hull machine guns from the Shermans. Warehouse them. Deliver the armored hulls--as tractors--to civilian enterprises.' We had to report compliance with this order within five days.
"Why, for what reason, from where did such an abrupt change in the subsequent fate of the foreign tanks come? What forced Moscow to take such a final ['murderous' in the original text] decision?
"For days after the receipt of the 'death certificate' [as the tankers nicknamed the order], work proceeded on a broad front. All the brigade, corps, and army maintenance units were thrown into the demilitarization of the tanks, making 'tractors' out of them.
"I cannot forget the total dejection of the crews as they stood on the sidelines with heads bowed. The death of each tank showed on their faces. At one time the Emchisti had signed hand receipts for the tanks from the brigade command. We all were heavy-hearted. Many choked back tears, and some, not holding back, cried bitterly. How could this be? How much effort and energy had been given to them--the Shermans--there in the dry Mongolian steppe, in the silent desert sands of the Gobi, in the rugged southern reaches of the Grand Khingan? And how many obstacles had been overcome on the cenrtal Manchurian plain? These men had cared for them, cared for them like the apple of their eye. And now this final humiliation. Farewell, Emcha! Each inomarochnik will have good memories of you for the rest of his life.
"An epitaph came out of these mournful days (how could it not): 'Yesterday it was a menacing tank, and now, by order--they took off the turret--it has become a tractor. Front-line comrade, how painful to witness the death of the Emcha. Try not to cry!'"
Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks, Dmitriy Loza, trans. James F. Gebhardt

"...We had to say farewell to the Emchas. It would be a sad moment. We had wished it would be otherwise. A funeral parting, a great pain.
"Finally, an order arrived. But with other, stunning contents, that sent chills running up and down our spines: 'Remove the turrets and hull machine guns from the Shermans. Warehouse them. Deliver the armored hulls--as tractors--to civilian enterprises.' We had to report compliance with this order within five days.
"Why, for what reason, from where did such an abrupt change in the subsequent fate of the foreign tanks come? What forced Moscow to take such a final ['murderous' in the original text] decision?
"For days after the receipt of the 'death certificate' [as the tankers nicknamed the order], work proceeded on a broad front. All the brigade, corps, and army maintenance units were thrown into the demilitarization of the tanks, making 'tractors' out of them.
"I cannot forget the total dejection of the crews as they stood on the sidelines with heads bowed. The death of each tank showed on their faces. At one time the Emchisti had signed hand receipts for the tanks from the brigade command. We all were heavy-hearted. Many choked back tears, and some, not holding back, cried bitterly. How could this be? How much effort and energy had been given to them--the Shermans--there in the dry Mongolian steppe, in the silent desert sands of the Gobi, in the rugged southern reaches of the Grand Khingan? And how many obstacles had been overcome on the cenrtal Manchurian plain? These men had cared for them, cared for them like the apple of their eye. And now this final humiliation. Farewell, Emcha! Each inomarochnik will have good memories of you for the rest of his life.
"An epitaph came out of these mournful days (how could it not): 'Yesterday it was a menacing tank, and now, by order--they took off the turret--it has become a tractor. Front-line comrade, how painful to witness the death of the Emcha. Try not to cry!'"
Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks, Dmitriy Loza, trans. James F. Gebhardt

"...We had to say farewell to the Emchas. It would be a sad moment. We had wished it would be otherwise. A funeral parting, a great pain.
"Finally, an order arrived. But with other, stunning contents, that sent chills running up and down our spines: 'Remove the turrets and hull machine guns from the Shermans. Warehouse them. Deliver the armored hulls--as tractors--to civilian enterprises.' We had to report compliance with this order within five days.
"Why, for what reason, from where did such an abrupt change in the subsequent fate of the foreign tanks come? What forced Moscow to take such a final ['murderous' in the original text] decision?
"For days after the receipt of the 'death certificate' [as the tankers nicknamed the order], work proceeded on a broad front. All the brigade, corps, and army maintenance units were thrown into the demilitarization of the tanks, making 'tractors' out of them.
"I cannot forget the total dejection of the crews as they stood on the sidelines with heads bowed. The death of each tank showed on their faces. At one time the Emchisti had signed hand receipts for the tanks from the brigade command. We all were heavy-hearted. Many choked back tears, and some, not holding back, cried bitterly. How could this be? How much effort and energy had been given to them--the Shermans--there in the dry Mongolian steppe, in the silent desert sands of the Gobi, in the rugged southern reaches of the Grand Khingan? And how many obstacles had been overcome on the cenrtal Manchurian plain? These men had cared for them, cared for them like the apple of their eye. And now this final humiliation. Farewell, Emcha! Each inomarochnik will have good memories of you for the rest of his life.
"An epitaph came out of these mournful days (how could it not): 'Yesterday it was a menacing tank, and now, by order--they took off the turret--it has become a tractor. Front-line comrade, how painful to witness the death of the Emcha. Try not to cry!'"
Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks, Dmitriy Loza, trans. James F. Gebhardt

Noticed this on Amazon while surfing for books.  Might be interesting.  Comes out in August.
Fallen Giants: The Combat Debut of the T-35A Tank
 

Finished Alaric Searle's Armoured Warfare: A Military, Political and Global History tonight. From the title, I expected something interesting and unorthodox in the vein of Patrick Wright's Tank, but alas it turns out to be mostly a shallow history of armored battles throughout history that is laden with small errors. In the preface Searle notes that he's a college professor who teaches a class on the history of armored warfare (whatever level 5 means), and felt that he could not recommend to his students a reputable single-volume text on the subject that covered multiple timeframes and countries. Hence, this book. The "global" part comes from the fact that, besides the usual topics like the World Wars and Desert Storm, he talks (sometimes quite briefly) about other conflicts like the Iran-Iraq war and French experience in Indochina. The "political" aspect of the subtitle, and the main reason I ordered the book, is limited to a 15-page chapter penultimate to the conclusion. There are numerous small errors throughout, e.g., gun caliber, introduction dates, confusing the T-64 and the T-62, etc., and for what is described in the preface as a book for teaching, he often throws around names of vehicles with no description of their form or purpose. E.g., when talking about the formation of the Bundeswehr: "The first American AFVs the Germans received in 1956 were 1,110 M47s, 152 M41s, 100 M39s, and 300 M74s." The only machine in the list he had previously discussed was the M47, and the only one to be mentioned later in the text is the M41. I suppose students are expected to look up on their own what their textbook does not define. Or maybe Armoured Warfare (level 5) students are expected to know. Anyway, bottom line is that I anticipated some unconventional analysis, but ended up with a short, meh attempt at an overall history. I do like the mustache on the cover, though.

There are very few things on the M4 that cannot be fixed with a crescent wrench, a pair of slip joint pliers, and a flat blade screwdriver.
That, is called "engineering". And at the time the U.S. was making things, there was no equal.
 
As opposed to what Germany offered (and continues to) where you need "WH tool No 1299873422323" to remove the bolt on a MG mount, just because.
 
Edit-
 
Y'know, I spent almost a decade wrenching on Kraut cars. Had a taco wagon the size of a small hatchback full of German tools for said cars.  Of all the Kraut shit I dealt with, the ONLY one I liked was the 912 Porsche.
Because it was simple and elegant.  And for all that, it was  half the "car" the simplest of Japanese imports was.
 
People idolize Kraut tanks, undeservedly. Because they don;t understand them, and only see the facade. . They see them in a vacuum of  single tank Vs tank combat, instead of them being unreliable, absurdly made attempts to counter what their opponents already had. The Czech 38, the T-34 and KV-1, then the M4 Sherman. 
None of their efforts were pioneering save minor factors related to tactical use, rather their major efforts were in "oh dear god how do we keep this thing from killing all of us before we see it or poke a hole in it?"..
It's even worse with their aircraft. Much as I love the Bf 108/Bf 109, that is as a PRIVATE plane. A Taifun is a really wonderful light private plane.  But...
  If I had to take a  bird into combat in WW2, I'd want a fucking F86F. (Or at least a late P-51)...

I'd have to root around for the originals, but my data is all collected here: http://tankarchives.blogspot.ca/2014/06/lever-forces.html

Pasholok's T-34 and SU -152 books are available in English. I can't vouch for the translation but I have both in Russian and they're pretty good. http://worldoftanks.com/en/news/general-news/wot-ebooks/

He gets into the acquisition of the Centurion, the dearth of training with various infantry units, the initial thoughts that armor would not be useful in the theater, the activities of the first APC troop sent to Vietnam, the haphazard and quick preparations the armored troops undertook upon learning (from a radio report!) that they were to be sent to Vietnam in 3 months despite being understaffed in Australia, and further actions of the APCs and of the tanks once they were sent. If you're looking for just info on Australian Cents in Vietnam, though, the aforementioned Canister! On! Fire! is the one to get: a two-volume study solely concentrated on Australian armor operations in Vietnam.

Careful now, I don't think Aussies and Kiwis like to confused for each other.
 

Yesterday, I finished The United States Cavalry: Time of  Transition 1938-1944, Horses to Mechanization by Gary Palmer, who was an E-2 Hawkeye pilot in Vietnam and a sheriff's deputy and National Guard tanker after the war. I found it while trolling Amazon for books on mechanization, and from the numerous subtitles I had some decent hopes. Unfortunately, I was a bit disappointed. This really isn't a scholarly work; Palmer does go through some history of cavalry mechanization, but tends to cite a single source once or twice a page for several pages at a time until he moves on to another source for the next several pages. He says his idea for the book was as a rewrite of the 106th Cavalry Group's unit history, since his dad was a member, and it's more effective in this vein as it has a lot of excerpts from trooper memoirs (and even a school paper biography by a 15-year old relative of one of the troopers). He intends to publish further books detailing other periods of the 106th's history (this book ends when the unit is deployed to Europe), so the subtitles make better sense when this is realized. I was hoping for something on the order of Hofmann's Through Mobility We Conquer or Morton's Men on Iron Ponies, but Palmer's book (which uses the former two as sources) doesn't measure up to the scholarly history. Also, despite being an NG tanker, Palmer apparently got JEB and Jimmy confused, as he exclusively uses the latter's last name when referring to the cavalry's light "Stewart" tanks. Overall, the book did have some enjoyable accounts, but the title confused me as to the book's ultimate purpose: a relatively minor focus on scholarly history using a few sources, and a major focus as a first issue of a series of books recounting the actions and thoughts of members of the unit.

Next up is Australian Armour: A History of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps 1927-1972. This should be good, as author Maj-General RNL Hopkins, CBE, notes in the preface that, "I had been sent to Great Britain in 1937 to gain experience with the Royal Tank Corps and other armoured organisations. At the commencement of the 1939-1945 War I was the only Regular officer in Australia fully qualified in this arm. Late in 1940 the large-scale development of armoured training and the urgent formation of an armoured division became largely my responsibility."

Slippers are supposed to keep your feet warm, though...

Slippers are supposed to keep your feet warm, though...

Slippers are supposed to keep your feet warm, though...

Wonder how much more fertilizer one needs to ensure a healthy crop of L/48s instead of sickly L/24s...

Wonder how much more fertilizer one needs to ensure a healthy crop of L/48s instead of sickly L/24s...

Wonder how much more fertilizer one needs to ensure a healthy crop of L/48s instead of sickly L/24s...

Indeed. Hunnicutt relates: "As the tactical situation grew worse with the German advance [through the Ardennes in December 1944], the 740th [Tank Battalion] moved to the Ordnance Vehicle Depot at Sprimont, Belgium to draw whatever combat vehicles were available...Two brand new M24 light tanks were at the depot by mistake. Part of the original shipment of 20 M24s to Europe, two had ended up at Sprimont through a shipping error...The M24 light tanks were particularly popular despite their low slung appearance that caused some recognition problems with the accompanying infantry. On several occasions they were stalked by bazooka teams from the 30th Infantry Division and the 82nd Airborne Division who mistook them for German Panther tanks. As a result, the two little tanks were nicknamed 'Panther Pups' by the battalion."

I'll have to pick up that book about TF Baum; beyond the tragic mission there was a lot of politicking going on as well. Currently reading Deborah and the War of the Tanks about the Cambrai-veteran Mk.IV unearthed not too long ago in France. The author goes into detail of the crewmen of the various D51 tanks, and it's quite engrossing 100 pages in.

Porsche was a member of the industrial group whose Leopard design was chosen for production. Likewise, they worked on an armored recovery vehicle starting in early 1962, their design for the Leopard bridgelayer was chosen in August 1970, and they were involved with the "gilded Leopard" improvement concepts in the mid-late 1960s.

VT 1-2?

A relative of mine was a Sherman tanker killed in Cologne, there's some famous footage of his tank commander bailing out with a severed leg and the Panther that had hit them being taken out by a Pershing. Little over a year ago a German historian put out a book and documentary about the battle and specifically about those in the combat footage. It had been my understanding that Julian (my relative) was the driver but the morning reports shown in the documentary list his MOS as 616 (gunner) among other evidence that crew members may have been out of position. I just can't find any source material that lists these older MOS codes, which I'm told would be AR 615-26.