macelena 1,070 Posted June 25, 2014 Starring a Sherman and a few guys 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slartibartfast 153 Posted June 25, 2014 Also Starring the working Tiger from Bovington Tank Museum... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted June 25, 2014 Great Stuff - I have always loved Tank movies especially Kelly's Heroes. Looking forward to this. Thanks for posting macelena Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+CrazyhorseB34 937 Posted June 25, 2014 OH MY GOD! My favorite movie before I even see it. Bout time somebody makes a real TANK movie. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macelena 1,070 Posted June 25, 2014 Actually, the first thing i thought was "Wait till CHB34 sees that" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+russouk2004 6,958 Posted June 25, 2014 Didnt bovington supply stugIII pzkfw half track and panther for band of brothers?...among other tanks... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lexx_Luthor 57 Posted June 25, 2014 My fave was Beast of War, odd story, but interesting tank movie, they are so rare. What I want to see is a British-German made North Africa tank movie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wrench 9,846 Posted June 25, 2014 long barreled 76??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,235 Posted June 25, 2014 Looks good. Interesting choices for the cast, but all good actors. And thats ALL Crazyhorse has to say? seemed a rather quiet response Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,322 Posted June 26, 2014 Oh yes I will see this movie. It looks damn good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted June 26, 2014 Tanks More Tanks Blowing stuff up Swearing Action Mayhem Tigers More blowing stuff up Screaming and Yelling More mayhem A few more tanks Yet more blowing stuff up More screaming and yelling Even more tanks A bit of a story line Big guns A load of film extras who don't mind being blown up Loud bangs Lots of explosions A couple of actors Blowing stuff up even more Yet more Tanks Explosions,Tanks, blowing stuff up, screaming and shouting, big guns, Tigers, loud bangs - all happening at the same time. These are the key ingredients of a good WW2 Tank movie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+CrazyhorseB34 937 Posted June 26, 2014 Yes the tank "Fury" in the movie is an M4A3E8 76mm Wet Storage. Which is accurate as a replacement tank in early spring 45. The gun is the 76mm. Totally correct. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted June 26, 2014 M4A3E8 - also known as 'Easy Eight' 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+CrazyhorseB34 937 Posted June 26, 2014 The letter "E" in the old phonetic alphabet was "Easy" thus E8 pronounced "Easy Ate." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted June 27, 2014 CrazyhorseB34, with you being a Tanker can you explain why the nickname 'Easy Eight' or 'Easy Ate' was given to this variant of Sherman? Was it something to do with the new suspension system and the wider tracks fitted to this variant which afforded a much Easier ride, or was it a reference to the longer 76mm gun which had more penetrating power than the standard short barelled 75mm gun making for an Easier kill ? I have heard both explanations, but from different sources! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macelena 1,070 Posted June 27, 2014 Able, Baker, Charlie, Dog, Easy? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+CrazyhorseB34 937 Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) The E8 designation was given to the vehicles fitted with the Horizontal Volute Suspension or HVSS. E8 was just the designation given for that improvement. Easy was the code for the letter E in the old pre-NATO phonetic alphabet. So the proper way to say E8 would be "Easy Ate." True the new suspension gave a more comfortable ride for the crew, but the really reason for the HVSS was to increase the width of the track, thus lowering the ground pressure of the track and distributing the weight of the tank more easily over softer ground. Kind of like a snow shoe does when you wear them while walking in snow. HVSS equipped tanks bogged down in soft ground less frequently than tanks equipped with VVSS (Vertical Volute Suspension System) tanks. An E designation usually denotes an improvement that is considered "Experimental." E usually gives way to an additional "A" designation, but in the case of the M4 the E8 just was a reference to all the numerous M4's that where fitted with HVSS because post war many older tanks where retrofitted with the HVSS suspension. E8 had nothing to do with the gun. Edited June 29, 2014 by CrazyhorseB34 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted June 30, 2014 CrazyhorseB34, if you had been a Tanker during the latter stages of WW2 and you had been offered a M4A3E8 or a British Sherman Firefly which would you have chosen as your ride? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted July 1, 2014 (edited) I thought that with you being a Yank you would have gone for the M4A3E8. However - a pleasant suprise! Would that have anything to do with the performance of the 17 Pounder Gun on the Firefly! Edited July 1, 2014 by RUSTYMORLEY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+CrazyhorseB34 937 Posted July 1, 2014 Yes 17pdr. SABOT was the Tiger Slayer. Sherman Vc Sherman Ic Sherman Ic Hybrid Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+pcpilot 181 Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) Oh man! Wont be missing this one. Looks to be outstanding. Liked how they were working the flank of that tiger at close range, sounds pretty realistic from what I have heard and read. Easy 8, definitely my favorite American tank of the war. Id dare say the definitive version of the faithful Sherman. Decent armour, especially with field additions, reliable, relatively easy to work on, good turn of speed, excellent cross country mobility, high rate of fire with the 76mm, gyroscopic stabilized gun and sight, fast turret, and good view range. Edited July 2, 2014 by pcpilot Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) I have read a couple of books about the exploits of some of the allied tank crews following the Normandy breakout and the subsequent drive to the Rhine. Some of the Tank versus Tank engagements were carried out at medium to long ranges which favoured the Tiger, but some were also carried out at extremely short ranges, as depicted in the film. This would be almost suicidal for the Sherman and it's crew, but perhaps mixing it up close would give the more manouverable Sherman an opportunity to get in behind the larger and heavier Tiger to execute a kill shot into the engine compartment. Unfortunately the odds were stacked in the Tiger's favour which enjoyed a kill ratio of about 8 to 1 against allied tanks on the western front. Shocking when you really think about it !!! Despite this, I am looking forward to the film. I have to confess that I didn't really think much of Brad Pitt as an actor until I saw the film TROY in which he played the Greek warrior Achillies. I was amazed by his portrayal of the troubled, almost demonic Greek warlord. Ever since then I have had more respect for him as an actor. Let's hope he can pull this one off Edited July 2, 2014 by RUSTYMORLEY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macelena 1,070 Posted July 2, 2014 Talking about Achilles, the name of another 17 pdr "pimped up" Sherman variant (m10) by the British. Personally, my kind of favourite american armor was the M18 Hellcat, i wonder what kind of a beast it could have been with a 17pdr, while i don´t know if it would have been able to take it (turret design issues, stability, and other considerations, curious about that) Btw, i´ve been reading a bit since i´m not quite knowledgeable about armored warfare...i´ve read that one of the arguments found against giving the Sherman the 76mm gun is that, while it was better against tanks, its HE shells were not as powerful, and it was meant to be clearing infantry and defensive positions while the tanks were, in theory, to be delat with by tank destroyers. If the 75mm could have more explosives, and shaped charged ordnance is chemically, not kinetically based for its effects...was there any attempt at using a HEAT like shell for them? If Bazookas could have that tech, it could have been useful for tanks, specially in a 75mm proyectile over a 60mm rocket Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted July 3, 2014 (edited) macalena, not sure about that, but going back to the 76mm versus the standard 75mm gun argument, I am currently reading a Sherman pocketbook in which it states that it is desireble to have both 76mm armed Shermans and 75mm armed Shermans in the same troop as this provides a range of options for the response to a given situation. The 76mm armed Shermans would be in a better position to deal with enemy armour whilst the standard 75mm Sherman could more effectively deal with fortifications, emplacements and infantry attacks as it had a slightly higher rate of fire and a marginally bigger explosive HE charge. Edited July 3, 2014 by RUSTYMORLEY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
