The ten best machines and ten best Small-arms of WW2

Izaak
Actually, it's based on the Russian sounds for M4 (Em-Cha, or something like that).

By the way, we can call the M3 medium tank 'Pilot' as well

Christian

 

4 is spelled in Russian like "chetiere" and the 4 is "chetvyorty".

 

4- chetyre, the 4th- chetvertyj - spelled. Pronounced: 4 - chetyre, 4th - chetvyortyi. Very close, PanzerMeister. You must have learned some Russian, I guess?
Yemkha would precisely - "The M letter". Doesn´t matter.

 

Thanks. Yes I have learned it for almost two years. I know how to write and pronounce it in Russian, but writing Russian words in English is a bit hard for me and I have to rely on my instinct and intuition.

 

BTW Izaak, was your grandfather X Y-ovitsh Stern ( X X-obumw CmepH, hahaa dunno how to write cyrillic alphabet ) ?

 

you can´t write it without the cyrillic ch and sh. It spelled ... ovich Shtern.

 

Oops! That's the way it goes in Finnish.

 

The book is called "Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks", by Dmitri Loza.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... ce&s=books

 

That is the book.

The Russians found it luxuries to be sitting in a Sherman after have been sitting in an T-34. Just the pulstering of the seats was luxury by USSR standards ! ( They should have tried sitting in a German tank, then they would pass out out because of the unrealitically luxury of these interior's compared to their own ! )

Yeah I know Roel, "Don't overdo it"

KBO

 

Don´t take it personally, KBO. This is not just you. It is more general in the “West”. But, I am afraid, I am tempted to say - mostly ”typisk Dansk”. The deference for all things German, and “western” in general, accompanied by sort of contempt for the eastern Europe. The poor, grey, not very bright people.
Now I am dead serious. Sometimes you have to.
Even if it is “only” a discussion on the internet. Why not be serious and say what you really mean ? Not to offend but to show how it can feel from the other side. That is not funny, as “sneering smilies” might indicate. It is sort of subtle contempt, isn´t it? One can look the other way round: my Grandfather was suffering a regime that was more deadly than the German. He could get a death penalty for a minor offence both before, under and after the War. He was sometimes more afraid of his political deputy than of the Germans. His family died, who knows where. He fought in the severest of circumstances one can imagine. My Mothers family were transported in cattle wagons form their beloved Lvov to the harsh desert-like Kazakhstan, just because. Survived due to a miracle.
And now, sitting in a cozy armchair, sipping good coffee, in a land which was far from the horrors of totalitarian regimes of psychopats and unbelieveble destruction, it is easy to stamp sneering smilies and philosophize on the relative comforts of tanks.
Please, understand, that those poor soldiers who, if history went some other direction, could sit in your armchair. And YOU might have been forced to march in a penal company right into the fire of a red hot machine gun. And you would have done it, because if you turned round, you would have been shotdead by a NKVD soldier creeping behind the lines. Or to charge straight into some well hidden Tigers. Same penalty if you turned round.
Please, understand, that such things as comfort in a “Emcha” were secondary, insignificant to people who suffered these things.
They wanted to survive the horror, no more.
I can understand them, because I have heard many stories about those times from people,whom I loved and who had been through all that hell.

Sorry to everybody for the outbreak, but sometimes it is just too much. I enjoy discussions with many of you, but not all. I hope that straight talk is not forbidden here.
Thanks for the reference, Roel.

 

Straight talk is not forbidden here.
All that is forbidden is being deliberately offensive, which I do not see in your post.

However, a slight counter-argument.

Yes, life in Commuist Russia was far from pleasant (understatement).
But I'm not sure why this would stop the troops from appreciating their tank having a comfy seat and plenty of 'elbow room'.
I can see that early Sherman varients would be less well regarded by the Soviet troops than the T-34, but later models with the 76mm gun were actually on a par/better than corresponding T-34/85 tanks. Aside from the HE shells, AFAIK.
Plus there was an Amercan advisor with them who reported all the problems back to America, who sent solutions. Like the lack of track grip in ice/snow.

I do wonder if units who had served with foriegn equipment were viewed with more suspicion by Stalin?

 

"I do wonder if units who had served with foriegn equipment were viewed with more suspicion by Stalin?"

Especially if they had contact with American advisors/troops/mechanics who came with the equipment.

I can imagine that their was a lot os empapthy between the opposing troops about the simple things which they missed or came across occasional.

comfy seats, good food, warm bed, reliable weapon etc

FNG

 

Fatigue is as dangerous to a soldier as bullets sometimes, and lack of comfort is very much related to fatigue. Did you know that the USAAF pilots main argument against using the P-47 Thunderbolt for long range escort missions in the Pacific was that the cockpit wasn´t roomy enough ?

 

The same P-47 of which it was said that you could avoid being hit by cannon shells by running around the cockpit?


Bet those guys are glad they never flew a Bf109...

 

Hey, that Loza was interviewed by www.battlefield.ru., very interesting:
http://www.iremember.ru/tankers/loza/loza1.html

 

Loza:
- On Shermans. We called them "Emchas", from M4 [in Russian, em chetyrye].

 

The P-47N could stay in the air for more than 12 hours, not a problem with the Bf 109.

Those reactions was to missions lasting for "only" 8 hours btw, "such missions should be scheduled only when it is a case of extreme necessity against a very important target" ( Memo, Subject : 'Operations - P-47', by Captain W.H. Strand ).

 

I think your missunderstanding me here, I was in no way trying to bash Russian equipment, and the smilies kinda pointed that out.

However the T-34's interior was far from as well finished as in German or U.S. tanks, and the Russian tankers who actually got to drive a tank from either country, would remark this.

Also may i ask, how come your so good at Danish ? and how is it typical that Danish peaople like German equipment better ?

I must admit I get a bit pissed off when being accused by someone of being something i am not !

Let me remind you that the horrors the Danish people had to go through, at the time where the Germans had invaded our country wasnt at all pleasant either !

I have family who got shot by the Nazi's !

No'one is Pro-Nazi's here (Atleast not that im aware of), and for good reason !

KBO

 

Hold on for a second here before the accusations start flying.

Izaak: if anyone around here has shown any ardent Nazi tendencies they will have been promptly banned by the forum admin, so you can be certain that such types are not around on the board. I think that calling all Danish people Germanists in terms of WW2 equipment is a low blow based on nothing but the fact that we have two members here from Denmark who both seem to favour German equipment - aim your arguments at them specifically if you must.

Meanwhile, KBO, it must become gradually apparent to you that people think of you as a Germanist, no matter what your real opinions are, because here we have another example of someone presenting you with this judgment. I'm not condemning you on these grounds, I'm just making it clear to you that your "image" here is obviously not what you seem to want it to be, and it's up to you to change that.

 

Sorry, KBO. I didn´t know about your Family.
To tell it straight: I´ve got pissed off. By the “smilies” and the general attitude. Maybe I shouldn´t have responded, but I couldn´t just leave it. My temper and the way many in the West view Russians now reminds me sometimes of the pre-war and wartime German propaganda.
I was not just about Denmark some places on this Forum, but you may agree (or not) that XX century was good to the country, relatively. Defending DK in 1940 would be futile, no more.
I hope we will continue talking.

Ah, my “Danish”. I have been in Koebenhavn during my studies for a couple of months. Know some Danes. Have learned basics of Danish being there. I am not sure, if we were able to talk it after all those years. But I still have my dictionary – the red one: the short udtryk come from it, btw.

Now – ad rem!
This “memories of Emcha tanker” smells to me. I dunno, maybe everything was so nice where he was, but my impression is, that the man is telling an engineered, sweet story for a western reader. How did his soldiers got all these syfilis etc. if not by raping, f. ex. Not a word about it. Just care for the poor Romanian gardens, happy, grateful peasants, feeding a good Hungarian etc.

As I happen to know, the same army was responsible for such horrors that the people were very lucky if they could fly or hide. A part of it can be attributed to the inhuman system and the inhuman war that produced SOME inhuman humans (one of which – Zhukov himself), part – to propaganda: remember the criminal Ilya Ehrenburg, Soviet Goebbels or worse. “Take their women, revenge! They and all they posses is your booty, you brave red knights!”. The knights had sometimes difficulty telling German women from SOVIET WOMEN PRISONERS in Germany and raped both categories, just in case. The poor men were victims not less than their victims.

He writes himself: “When someone says to me that this was a bad tank, I respond, "Excuse me!"
One cannot say that this was a bad tank.” So, the opinion was there, somehow…..
“How the hell could we get warm? There were such strong drafts of air! Perhaps there was heat coming from the engines, but I will not tell you that it was warm.” Another problem.
And don´t forget the T-34 shooting the Shermans. They were few, after all and in the heat of a battle, you shoot anything, you are not 100% familiar with. One place he writes of his surprise, how quickly the spare parts arrived. In itself an evidence that they have not just been at hand. And T-34 was everywhere, easy to repair or fix. Even if you had to rip parts from some wrecks.

As to the “Emcha” name: the man himself says Emcha, sometimes just Sherman. I guess there were even more such nicknames. This “Yemkha” was a qualified guess from ny Father, to be true. “Emcha” sounds somehow strange, not like a Russian word to me. Whatever. It doesn´t matter, does it?
Vi snakkes ved, don´t we?