SHERMAN TANKS OF THE RED ARMY PREVIEW

Peter Samsonov is a Russian-Canadian military historian with a focus on Second World War-era armoured warfare. In addition to running the renowned Tank Archives blog, he writes articles for various online and print publications based on English, Russian and German language primary documents.

SHERMAN

TANKS OF THE RED ARMY

Peter Samsonov

First published in Great Britain in 2021

by Gallantry Books an imprint of Mortons Books Ltd. Media Centre Morton Way Horncastle LN9 6JR www.mortonsbooks.co.uk Copyright © Gallantry Books, 2021 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording, or any information storage retrieval system without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

ISBN 978-1-911658-47-4 The right of Peter Samsonov to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Typeset by Burda Druck India Pvt. Ltd. Printed and bound in Great Britain by The Magazine Printing Company

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Yuri Pasholok, Pavel Borovikov, Dmitriy Ukryukov, and Yevgeniy Profiryev for their contribution of photographs and documents that made this book possible, as well as H. G. W. Davie for help with making the maps. I would also like to thank Maryse Beuregard for proofreading the finished work.

4

Contents • Introduction

7

• Chapter 1 - America’s War-Winning Tank 8 • Chapter 2 - The First Lend-Lease Customer

19

• Chapter 3 - The Sherman Goes East 27 • Chapter 4 - The Foreign Favourite 32 • Chapter 5 - Old Tank, New Gun 40 • Chapter 6 - ‘Emcha’ with Big Feet 46 • Chapter 7 - Lend-Lease Substitute 50 • Colour Profiles

56

• Chapter 8 - Westward on the Eastern Front

60

• Chapter 9 - Kursk Salient and Beyond 68 • Chapter 10 - Closing the Korsun Pocket 80 • Chapter 11 - Heavy Cavalry 86 • Chapter 12 - Over the Mountains 93 • Chapter 13 - Berlin Bound 101 • Chapter 14 - March through Manchuria 107 • Chapter 15 - Conclusion – Legend or Death Trap? 112 • Glossary

114

• Notes

115

• Index

120 5

Introduction In 1954, the Soviet Ministry of Defence published a book on tank technology aimed at the general public, describing the history of tank design and the operation of various components and assemblies used by tanks at the time. Only a handful out of more than 600 pages are dedicated to foreign tank development during the Second World War. Although the text describes the Medium Tank M4 as the most common American tank of the war, there are few specifics. Not even a photograph of this vehicle is included.

This brevity was not out of a lack of information. More than 4000 M4A2 tanks and two M4A4 tanks were shipped to the Soviet Union during the war. Thousands of pages of documents with impressions from the specialists who tested the tanks, crews who fought in them, and commanders who directed them in battle were written – only to be buried in the ideological battle of the Cold War. More than half a century later, the popular history of the Sherman tank in service with the Red Army is based largely on memoirs, rumours, and guesswork. This book will attempt to give the reader a glimpse through the decades-long information barrier at the experience of Soviet crews recorded in the moment, untarnished by political pressure and uneroded by time.

7

Chapter

America’s War-Winning Tank

The United States had few modern tanks when war broke out in Europe on September 1, 1939. News from the front lines revealed that the Germans fielded a medium tank with a 75mm cannon. Despite the limited information at hand, the army decided that its newest tank, the Medium Tank M2, was no match for the new German tank. Since it was only a matter of time before the US was pulled into the war, a new American tank had to be developed 8

1

ABOVE: A Medium Tank M3 with a British-designed turret on display at IWM Duxford. These tanks were named ‘Grant’ in the British army. The tank’s 75mm M2 gun was powerful for its time, but its position in the sponson reduced its effectiveness.

America’s War-Winning Tank

that could defeat it. The work put into the Medium Tank M2 served as a foundation for a new medium tank that could be competitive in the current war.

The United States already had a candidate for the gun. The T6 was a promising AA gun developed from the 75mm M1897 field gun and had the semiautomatic breech that a tank gun required. It was developed into the T7 tank gun. Since no turret large enough to accommodate such a gun was available, the 75mm gun was installed in a sponson mount.

This concept was previously tested in the Medium Tank T5E2, an earlier experimental tank. Due to the rush, the new medium tank was accepted into service as the Medium Tank M3 on July 11, 1940, before the first

example had even been presented.

The army was not thrilled about the vehicle’s unconventional layout, but it was regarded as sufficient for a temporary solution.1 Characteristics of a tank that would have its main gun in a turret were drawn up on August 31, 1940. Engineers began working on this new tank on February 1, 1941, as soon as the design of the Medium Tank M3 was finished. This design was approved on April 18, 1941. For the sake of expediency, the lower hull, engine, drivetrain and suspension would be taken from the M3. As many components as possible were reused to speed up the design and development process. The 69in turret ring specified gave the tank a number of options for armament:

ABOVE: A Medium Tank M4A1 named ‘Michael’ on display at the Bovington Tank Museum, United Kingdom. This is the earliest surviving Sherman tank. The tank originally had the same M2 gun as the M3, but in a rotating turret, which greatly increased its effectiveness. The suspension bogeys are an early type with the return roller in the middle.

9

Sherman Tanks of the Red Army

ABOVE: ‘Michael’ from the front showing features of early Sherman tanks: direct vision ports for the driver and assistant driver, two fixed machine guns in the front hull, a narrow gun mantlet that does not cover the coaxial machine gun port, differential cover made of three parts bolted together, and smooth T41 rubber tracks.

the same 75mm M2 gun used in the Medium Tank M3, a 105mm howitzer, two 37mm M6 guns, a British 57mm 6-pounder, or three .50 calibre machine guns. All options but the last included a .30 calibre coaxial machine gun. The first option was selected as this gun had already proven itself in the Medium Tank M3.

Some historians interpret the consideration of a British gun as evidence that the Canadian Ram tank, also based on the M3 chassis, influenced the design of the new American tank. This is unlikely: the Ram tank arrived at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in July, by which time the choice of armament was already made. Additionally, the Canadian tank that arrived at Aberdeen 10

ABOVE: One half of the GM 6046 tank engine used by M4A2 tanks on display at the Ontario Regiment Museum in Oshawa, Canada.

America’s War-Winning Tank

ABOVE: A complete GM 6046 engine at the Musée des Blindés in Saumur, France. Each half has its own set of accessories, including two air filters. Issues with the filters were common in early M4A2 tanks.

ABOVE: A cutaway tank showing the layout of the GM 6046 engine and its accessories in an M4A2(76)W HVSS tank.

Canadian War Museum, Ottawa, Canada. The engine fitted perfectly into the existing compartment without any need to enlarge the tank’s hull.

11

Sherman Tanks of the Red Army

ABOVE: Clutch adjustment procedure in the Medium Tank M4A2. This operation had to be performed quite frequently, as clutch problems were common. (Library and Archives Canada).

carried a 2-pounder gun, which was never considered as an option by the Americans.2 A wooden model of the new tank was built in May of 1941. After inspection of the model, approval was given for the assembly of two prototypes: a tank with a welded hull built at Rock Island Arsenal and a tank with a cast hull built at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds. On September 5 the Ordnance Committee recommended the standardization of these two tanks as the Medium Tank M4 and M4A1 respectively. Production of the M4A1 began in February 1942; production of the M4 began in July. There was only one small problem: Continental Motors could not keep up with the demand for R-975 engines to satisfy the needs of the American tank industry so a new source of engines 12

was needed. Thankfully, the Americans had plenty of alternatives.

A General Motors 6-71 two-stroke diesel engine was first tested in the light tank M2A2E2 on February 2, 1939. Other nations also specified GM’s engines for tank production. A Valentine tank with a GM 6-71 engine was sent to Canada in the autumn of 1940 and became the template for production of the Valentine VI and VII tanks.3 By the end of October 1941, GM’s diesel engine division had expanded its capacity to 1000 diesel engines per month.

These engines were a tempting option to solve the Medium Tank M4’s engine shortage, but some work had to be done in order to make them suitable for the task.

For one, the M4 was quite a bit heavier than

America’s War-Winning Tank

ABOVE: A Medium Tank M4A2 at the Musée des Blindés in Saumur, France. This is a later model dry stowage small hatch tank with the wide gun mantlet and applique armour to protect the ammunition racks. The tank carries markings of the Free French forces. M4A2 tanks were used by many nations during the Second World War, but they were chiefly sent to the UK and USSR.

the Valentine, so a large boost of power was needed. The solution was simple: two engines were combined into one unit, with their output coupled together and connected to one drive shaft. The resulting engine was named GM Model 6046.4 The maximum power output was 410hp at 2900rpm, but 375hp could be provided at a more sustainable speed of 2100rpm, which was still sufficient for a medium tank. The only downside was increased weight: the new engine weighed 2323kg compared to 517kg for the R-975.5 An experimental diesel engine was installed in a Medium Tank M3 in October 1941. The tank performed well in trials and production was authorized. There were two variants of the M3 tank with diesel engines: the M3A3 with a cast hull and the M3A5 with a welded hull. Production of both variants began at Baldwin Automotive Works in January 1942.6 Production of diesel engines was ramped

up in anticipation of the increased demand: the expansion of the General Motors Detroit Diesel Engine Division to produce 2000 twin diesel engines per month for medium tanks was approved by the Office of the Undersecretary of War on January 23, 1942.

On March 7, 1942, the General Staff decided that the diesel-powered tank would only be produced until sufficient production capacity for gasoline engines was developed.

There was no plan to send the diesel tanks abroad – they would remain in the United States and only be used for training, while the gasoline-powered tanks that they freed up could be sent to fight overseas instead.

It was soon discovered that Great Britain and the Soviet Union were quite fond of diesel-powered tanks. With an ample market available, the tanks remained in production long after the US Army’s requirements could be met with gasoline-powered tanks alone.

13

Sherman Tanks of the Red Army

ABOVE: A 76mm M1A2 gun from the Musée des Blindés. This gun allowed the Sherman tank to defeat the armour of most German tanks from a considerable distance. The muzzle brake has been removed and the threading can be seen.

The success of the M3A3 and M3A5 made it clear that the next generation American medium tank should also be built with a diesel engine. Work on this variant began in late 1941. In December of 1941 the tank was designated Medium Tank M4A2.7 A prototype of the M4A2 was built and sent to the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in April of 1942. Despite its increased weight, the tank performed well in trials. A top speed of 30mph (48kph) was attained. The engine had good torque, which gave it better performance than gasoline engines with a similar power rating. There were also downsides: the prototype exhibited issues with the cooling system, clutch, and air filters. The tank’s mass increased to 73,114lb (33 tons) due to the heavier engine, which strained the suspension.8 Trials of 12 pilot tanks with the Desert Warfare Board confirmed that these issues were 14

widespread.9 However, there was no time to iron them out: production had already begun.

Although they were imperfect, these tanks were desperately needed overseas.

Nearly a year later the reliability of the Medium Tank M4A2 was tested in wide scale trials. Ten each of the M4A1, M4A2, M4A3, and M4A4 attempted to complete a 4000 mile trek over the course of 400 hours.

A tank was only disqualified when an internal component of the engine broke down; any other part or assembly could be replaced during the trials. By April 23, 1943, the M4A2 tanks had travelled for 16,215 miles in total: 8229 on a highway and 7986 off-road.

Compared to other tanks, the M4A2 came first in fuel economy at 1.1mpg (214 litres per 100km) on roads and 0.5mpg (470 litres per 100km) off-road.10 The average speed of this variant was also the highest of the competitors: 9.5mph (15.3kph).11 However,

America’s War-Winning Tank

ABOVE: As the Sherman tanks gained weight, attempts were made to improve their off-road performance. This was one solution: extended end connectors. These extensions made the track wider, lowering the vehicle’s ground pressure, but could easily break off on rough terrain. Museum of the Battle of Normandy, France.

reliability left much to be desired. The tank was judged to have come third in this regard, beating only the M4A1. The first engine was disqualified after 75 hours of running, and only two made it to the 400 hour mark, one of which was badly worn and the other in good shape. On average, the engines lasted for 225 hours. The M4A2 came second in total servicing time, and the M4A4 equipped with the Chrysler A57 Multibank engine came in first.12 The tanks were put through even more gruelling tests later that year. Six M4A2 tanks were tested in the Californian desert.

These trials showed the negative effects

of extra weight: 16 suspension springs, 45 tyres, one road wheel, three rollers, and five track connectors had to be replaced over the first 15 days of trials alone.13 More reliability trials were held as of the end of 1943. The trials were completed on May 18, 1944, and showed that reliability had improved: out of the four M4A2 tanks taking part, three were disqualified after 276, 278, and 353 hours of running respectively.

One M4A2 ran for 403 hours, having travelled for 4295 miles. The M4A2 came second in reliability this time, but at the cost of maintenance time: the average tank required 594.5 hours of maintenance to run 15

Sherman Tanks of the Red Army

ABOVE: Up close view of an HVSS suspension bogey. The volute springs and shock absorber are arranged horizontally.

The road wheels are doubled up, allowing for a wider track to be used which improved the tank’s performance in mud and on other difficult terrain. Musée des Blindés, Saumur, France.

for 327 hours with the engine and drivetrain causing the most trouble.14 The first significant upgrade made to the M4A2 improved its firepower. The 75mm M3 gun was sufficient to defeat the armour of any German tank when it was introduced, but such advantages are often temporary.

It was clear that the enemy would not take long to deploy a tank with thicker armour, and so the development of a more powerful gun was a high priority. A new gun was developed based on the 3in T12 anti-aircraft gun, initially called 75mm Gun T13, but quickly renamed to 76mm gun T1 to avoid confusion. The length of the barrel was reduced from 57 to 52 calibres. Special ammunition was produced to maintain 16

muzzle velocity with the reduced barrel length. The gun was installed in the standard Combination Gun Mount M34, along with the M51 (T60) telescopic 3x sight. This powerful sight allowed the crew to engage targets at a range of up to 3km.

Two T1 guns arrived at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds by August 1, 1942. One was installed in the tank with registration number USA W-3060572, another was first fired in a test rig, then installed in tank USA W-3015305. A recoil length of only 12in (305mm) provided impressive elevation and depression: from -12.5 degrees to +25 degrees.

The decision to produce the tank was made soon after. The Armor Board gave its recommendation to adopt the tank as a

America’s War-Winning Tank

ABOVE: An M4A2(76)W VVSS tank (serial number S64465) next to a demilitarized M4A2(76)W HVSS tank-turnedtractor (serial number S64669) on display in Murmansk. This photo shows the differences between the two suspensions. (Dmitriy Ukryukov)

limited standard under the index Medium Tank M4A1 (76 M1). A series of 1000 units was planned, but this was not to be. Trials at Fort Knox revealed that the installation of the gun left much to be desired. It made the turret front-heavy, and required a 363kg counterweight to be installed in the bustle.

Similarly, a 310kg counterweight had to be installed on the gun breech. The recoil guard made it difficult to exit the tank quickly, it was difficult to aim the gun, and the travel clamp blocked the driver’s view. The Armor Board rescinded its recommendation on April 5, 1943, and only two M4A1 (76 M1)

tanks were kept. The rest were converted into ordinary 75mm gun tanks.

Despite these setbacks, the idea of a 76mm gun in a medium tank persisted.

The 3in Gun M7 was successfully used on the Gun Motor Carriage M10, and both the M7 and aforementioned M1 guns were considered an option during the development of the new T20 series of tanks. Development of these tanks dragged on for much longer than expected.

Ultimately the programme did not result in a tank that would replace the M4, but the development work did not go to waste as 17