Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 5
Posted: 9/8/2013 7:11:25 PM EDT
Who would win in such a scenario assuming the battle is occurring  

-On flat, Western European farmland. Perfect visibility

-Unlimited fuel but battle is occurring in an invisible dome, 5 miles from boundary to boundary

-All tanks are afforded a full compliment of munitions (save for the Abrams which is allocated 600 rds in total, held in a reserve depot off-limits to the Shermans)

-The classic incarnation of the Sherman & most modern Abrams variant do the fighting (Sherman gets 75mm M3 main gun & 40's era HEAT rds + 3 in. armor at max. thickness)  

-Conversely the Abrams is armed with 120mm M256 smooth bore cannon w/ modern projectiles including M829 discarding sabot rds. & is armored with DU strikeplates, Reactive, Chobham & Kevlar mesh  

Who comes out on top

1 of
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/Abrams-transparent.png/640px-Abrams-transparent.png
VS 500 of
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110626153630/empiresandallies/images/4/49/2637170956_a4cde78265.jpg
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:13:08 PM EDT
Quantity has a quality of its own. The Shermans by shear number.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:13:49 PM EDT
Shermans...Abrams runs out of ammo.

(ETA) to clarify...crew gets killed trying to reload.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:13:54 PM EDT
being that the shermans will never get in range, and the abrams is pretty much one shot one kill and likely wont miss.... id say his chances are pretty good.  except... abrams wont be able to reload fast enough to keep them from closing :(
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:14:23 PM EDT
OP seems familiar.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:14:39 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:14:46 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quantity has a quality of its own. The Shermans by shear number.
View Quote


Yup. Same thing with a machine gun nest and 500 guys with muskets.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:15:00 PM EDT
I think after the first couple dozen shermans the tankers would give up... unless they are cyborgs then ehhh
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:15:35 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
being that the shermans will never get in range, and the abrams is pretty much one shot one kill and likely wont miss.... id say his chances are pretty good.
View Quote



He'll need gas, LOTS of gas to out-maneuver 500 Shermans.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:16:41 PM EDT
If it has enough fuel and ammo, Abrams does a fighting retreat, shoot 3-4 times, sprint a mile, shoot 3-4 times, sprint a mile...



Shermans are too slow, and don't shoot on the move like the Abrams can.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:16:44 PM EDT
The loader in the M1 will likely die of exhaustion.  
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:16:44 PM EDT
The Shermans are going to win the same way the Russians won the Eastern Front: there's just too damn many of them.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:16:59 PM EDT
Abrams crew surrenders after running out of ammo, and many many of the Sherman crews are shell shocked from watching all their buddies in other tanks getting taken out.





The M1 could just keep backing up and stay out of range and keep picking off the Shermans.





 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:17:46 PM EDT

SEP targeting package for the win.  The Abrams can move and shoot and kill at 3000m.  I know someone is going to tell me farther but I am talking reliably.  

Still 500 is a lot.......be a great workout for the loader.....
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:17:48 PM EDT
If the 500 Shermans all charge at once then they win. I doubt that the Abrams is well armored in the rear where the engine breathes and the 75mm can take out the track system. They get a mobility kill and the surviving Shermans wait out of range for the Abrams crew to die of starvation.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:17:53 PM EDT
I'll be the first:
Bye, OP.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:18:38 PM EDT
The Abrams has to skilled and lucky 500 times.
One Sherman has to be lucky once.

Result: Sherman onslaught wins.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:20:40 PM EDT
OP's username is fitting.

What's the initial placement of the 501 tanks?

An Abrams can only kill one tank at a time.

If the Shermans can gang up effectively they have an excellent chance.

A mobility kill on the Abrams will turn into a complete loss.

Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:21:08 PM EDT
Would replacing the Shermans with Tiger II's make a difference?

Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:21:44 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Would replacing the Shermans with Tiger II's make a difference?



http://www.battletanks.com/images/PzKw_VI_Tiger_II-1.jpg
View Quote


They'd break down after rolling 100meters.



 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:22:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



He'll need gas, LOTS of gas to out-maneuver 500 Shermans.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
being that the shermans will never get in range, and the abrams is pretty much one shot one kill and likely wont miss.... id say his chances are pretty good.



He'll need gas, LOTS of gas to out-maneuver 500 Shermans.

Maneuver?

Yes on the fuel part, no on the maneuver part. He'd just sit there and plink them at distance until he ran out of main gun rounds, then retreat to his No-Sherman reload zone to start it over again.

An Abrams is a pretty scary vehicle, especially at night.

Now, I think the Abrams would break down before he completed his task. Something would go wrong. The power pack might go, the gun might stop functioning, just... something. 500 targets is a lot to service in one go.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:23:32 PM EDT
Tiger 1's didn't fear Sherman tanks.

The Abrams loader arm would fall off and the driver would die of laughter driving at speed through the mass of M4's.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:25:11 PM EDT
No fuel or ammo resupply?  Shermans wins.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:25:28 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





Maneuver?



Yes on the fuel part, no on the maneuver part. He'd just sit there and plink them at distance until he ran out of main gun rounds, then retreat to his No-Sherman reload zone to start it over again.



An Abrams is a pretty scary vehicle, especially at night.



Now, I think the Abrams would break down before he completed his task. Something would go wrong. The power pack might go, the gun might stop functioning, just... something. 500 targets is a lot to service in one go.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:

being that the shermans will never get in range, and the abrams is pretty much one shot one kill and likely wont miss.... id say his chances are pretty good.






He'll need gas, LOTS of gas to out-maneuver 500 Shermans.


Maneuver?



Yes on the fuel part, no on the maneuver part. He'd just sit there and plink them at distance until he ran out of main gun rounds, then retreat to his No-Sherman reload zone to start it over again.



An Abrams is a pretty scary vehicle, especially at night.



Now, I think the Abrams would break down before he completed his task. Something would go wrong. The power pack might go, the gun might stop functioning, just... something. 500 targets is a lot to service in one go.


I think from what I understand, that the USA is the only nation in the world that can really run a long term/sustained armor attack. Because the logistics are so great, we are the only ones that can afford it and have the men and material for it.



I can figure how complex Abrams is, it would require alot of maintenance hours.

Something along those lines.



 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:25:37 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Tiger 1's didn't fear Sherman tanks.



The Abrams loader arm would fall off and the driver would die of laughter driving at speed through the mass of M4's.
View Quote


75mm HE could still probably track the Abrams and fuck up the optics.



 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:25:54 PM EDT
Abrams-






After 3 dozen M4's completely blow the fk up from a few thousand meters away and after seeing perhaps the first 50 hits do absolutely nothing to the Abrams, they will get the fk out of there.

 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:25:59 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
An Abrams can only kill one tank at a time.
View Quote

ummmm...

line two Shermans up side by side and have a go with the Abrams.
i think a saboted DU round would come out the side of the second one.

ar-jedi
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:27:11 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Abrams crew surrenders after running out of ammo, and many many of the Sherman crews are shell shocked from watching all their buddies in other tanks getting taken out.

The M1 could just keep backing up and stay out of range and keep picking off the Shermans.
 
View Quote


Not to mention, firing on the move while the shermans can not.

Oh yeah....Thermal, and Night vision as well.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:27:44 PM EDT
It's a numbers game.  The Abrams is superior to the Sherman in every way you can imagine.

Having said that, what I've read and watched about the Abrams (and playing around with it in SB Pro PE) makes me believe that even a 1980s vintage M1A1/HA would be a wonder weapon against all but the latest and greatest tanks from the rest of the world.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:28:04 PM EDT


Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
75mm HE could still probably track the Abrams and fuck up the optics.


 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





Quoted:


Tiger 1's didn't fear Sherman tanks.





The Abrams loader arm would fall off and the driver would die of laughter driving at speed through the mass of M4's.



75mm HE could still probably track the Abrams and fuck up the optics.


 



If it's on an open plain and the Abrams has a full tank of gas, he can just stay outside of their range. Hell, probably beyond the Sherman crew's visual range.



An Abrams is better then most MODERN tanks.





 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:31:02 PM EDT
Can the M1 maneuver so that the Shermans have to enter a choke point?    Do they both get unlimited fuel?

If the Shermans can attack from all points, and if they are fearless, they win.

The loader, driver and gunner would have to trade off loading duties.

M1 conducts a fighting retreat and knocks out ~100 until nightfall.

Then it conducts a surprise counter attack at night and knocks out 200 more using thermal.

Does the same thing the next day.

Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:35:47 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

SEP targeting package for the win.  The Abrams can move and shoot and kill at 3000m.  I know someone is going to tell me farther but I am talking reliably.  

Still 500 is a lot.......be a great workout for the loader.....
View Quote

At a reload rate of one round per 7 seconds (standard for reloaders) that comes out to almost a complete hour of shooting. 58 minutes and 20 seconds.

Of course, the A2 SEP can only carry, what 22 rounds ready, 22 semi-ready, and 8 in the hull (never used), something like that?

So a loader who does the standard for all 44 that are actually available is loading for 5 and some minutes straight.

That'd be a bitch.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:37:13 PM EDT
In before you're familiar.





Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:40:18 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

At a reload rate of one round per 7 seconds (standard for reloaders) that comes out to almost a complete hour of shooting. 58 minutes and 20 seconds.

Of course, the A2 SEP can only carry, what 22 rounds ready, 22 semi-ready, and 8 in the hull (never used), something like that?

So a loader who does the standard for all 44 that are actually available is loading for 5 and some minutes straight.

That'd be a bitch.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

SEP targeting package for the win.  The Abrams can move and shoot and kill at 3000m.  I know someone is going to tell me farther but I am talking reliably.  

Still 500 is a lot.......be a great workout for the loader.....

At a reload rate of one round per 7 seconds (standard for reloaders) that comes out to almost a complete hour of shooting. 58 minutes and 20 seconds.

Of course, the A2 SEP can only carry, what 22 rounds ready, 22 semi-ready, and 8 in the hull (never used), something like that?

So a loader who does the standard for all 44 that are actually available is loading for 5 and some minutes straight.

That'd be a bitch.



M1 and M1IP (the 105mm versions) carried 22 rounds in the ready rack behind the loader, 22 stored behind the TC in the semi ready rack, 8 rounds down in the hull, and a further three rounds in a spall proofed rapid-reload rack next to the gun.

The M1A1 and derivatives were built for 17 ready, 17 semi-ready, and 6 in the hull.  I understand that the racks got redesigned at some point (With either the /HC 'Common' or the A2) to squeeze in an extra round in the ready and semi-ready racks.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:41:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

They'd break down after rolling 100meters.
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would replacing the Shermans with Tiger II's make a difference?

http://www.battletanks.com/images/PzKw_VI_Tiger_II-1.jpg

They'd break down after rolling 100meters.
 


Or run out of fuel.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:42:49 PM EDT
Bye OP
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:43:11 PM EDT
Well lets just pray the FUPP in the Abrams doesn't go...those things cost around $500k
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:43:19 PM EDT
This is stupid.  Abrams wins if the crew isn't stupid.

Abrams' knocks out as many shitty Shermans as it has ammo for at a range that the Shermans can't even see at.  Then once out of ammo, the Abrams out paces the remaining Shermans to a resupply point to refuel and rearm.  Rinse and repeat.

I doubt any Sherman could even penetrate the Abrams armor.  Their only hope is to track the Abrams and force a surrender after the Abrams kills an ammo racks worth of Shermans.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:48:21 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



M1 and M1IP (the 105mm versions) carried 22 rounds in the ready rack behind the loader, 22 stored behind the TC in the semi ready rack, 8 rounds down in the hull, and a further three rounds in a spall proofed rapid-reload rack next to the gun.

The M1A1 and derivatives were built for 17 ready, 17 semi-ready, and 6 in the hull.  I understand that the racks got redesigned at some point (With either the /HC 'Common' or the A2) to squeeze in an extra round in the ready and semi-ready racks.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

SEP targeting package for the win.  The Abrams can move and shoot and kill at 3000m.  I know someone is going to tell me farther but I am talking reliably.  

Still 500 is a lot.......be a great workout for the loader.....

At a reload rate of one round per 7 seconds (standard for reloaders) that comes out to almost a complete hour of shooting. 58 minutes and 20 seconds.

Of course, the A2 SEP can only carry, what 22 rounds ready, 22 semi-ready, and 8 in the hull (never used), something like that?

So a loader who does the standard for all 44 that are actually available is loading for 5 and some minutes straight.

That'd be a bitch.



M1 and M1IP (the 105mm versions) carried 22 rounds in the ready rack behind the loader, 22 stored behind the TC in the semi ready rack, 8 rounds down in the hull, and a further three rounds in a spall proofed rapid-reload rack next to the gun.

The M1A1 and derivatives were built for 17 ready, 17 semi-ready, and 6 in the hull.  I understand that the racks got redesigned at some point (With either the /HC 'Common' or the A2) to squeeze in an extra round in the ready and semi-ready racks.


Thank you.

I kept trying to remember what I was told last time I hung out with the tankers. I wanted to say 16, then 18, then settled on 22.

I remember them saying the hull storage almost never happens, though.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:49:57 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:52:12 PM EDT
Sherman's win, they surround the Abrams and rev their engines killing the Abrams crew with the heat.  
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:55:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 7:57:28 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I remember them saying the hull storage almost never happens, though.
View Quote


It would be a bitch to get to.  I talked to one M1 crewman who told me that he thinks that they only have hull storage so that in the event the turret ammo storage were to be lit up and the panels blown off, you could still have just a few rounds.

He also said that you wouldn't normally think about getting to those last six unless you were bored or desperate for ammo.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:05:03 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


OP's username is fitting.



What's the initial placement of the 501 tanks?



An Abrams can only kill one tank at a time.



If the Shermans can gang up effectively they have an excellent chance.



A mobility kill on the Abrams will turn into a complete loss.



View Quote




 
That's the big question.  If they can't attack all at once, the Abrams could probably hold them all off, and win, as it could easily stay out of gun range.




The location and ability to get to it's reload point is the complication  if the Shermans can cut him off or keep him from approaching, he's done for.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:05:54 PM EDT
IBTB
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:18:11 PM EDT

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





 
That's the big question.  If they can't attack all at once, the Abrams could probably hold them all off, and win, as it could easily stay out of gun range.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:

OP's username is fitting.



What's the initial placement of the 501 tanks?



An Abrams can only kill one tank at a time.



If the Shermans can gang up effectively they have an excellent chance.



A mobility kill on the Abrams will turn into a complete loss.





 
That's the big question.  If they can't attack all at once, the Abrams could probably hold them all off, and win, as it could easily stay out of gun range.




The location and ability to get to it's reload point is the complication  if the Shermans can cut him off or keep him from approaching, he's done for.


Good luck. No way in fuck Sherman can outrun Abrams.



 
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:20:04 PM EDT
i would go with the m1 they have the range, but the loader dies from exhaustion
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:30:18 PM EDT
If there isn't any time limit and his resupply area is completely off limits to the Shermans, then there is no contest.  Abrams stays at the resupply during the day (or simply avoids engagement, if it's not allowed to hide there except when reloading), and then performs skirmishes at night, when the Shermans can't even see the Abrams.  It'd probably take a week of careful night engagements and resupplies, with rest/avoidance during the day, but the 24 hour capability and mobility advantage of the Abrams means that it can engage while its targets are completely helpless, and deny a fight when its not convenient.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:30:46 PM EDT
Seems like a Bradley would be better for that scenario.

That Bushmaster cannon would put the hurt those M4s. The 120mm would be ridiculous overkill, with a lot fewer rounds.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:34:39 PM EDT
Given unlimited fuel and ammo --M1A2 runs hides hits and runs till dark, then goes on the offensive. Only needs HEAT rounds to deal with Shermans. Both gobble fuel but the Sherman is probably more efficient in that respect but the Abraham's can turn that fuel into speed the Sherman cant cope with. The M1a2 can cross terrain that would get the Sherman stuck and cope with hills and stream fording better. M1A2 fire control and accuracy far outrange and outgun the Sherman. Just like German tanks in WWII the Sherman 76mm would have a hard time punching through the Abraham's especially at the ranges they would get shots at --ranges the M1A2 can easily make kills from while the Sherman's might eventually get lucky and trap or overwhelm the M1a2 it would only be because the M1a2 lost mobility or managed to get ambushed at close range by multiple tanks
500-1 the Sherman eventuallly wins but not becuase its a better tank.
Link Posted: 9/8/2013 8:48:14 PM EDT
There is a story of an M4 tracking a King Tiger and shooting it in the turret with HE over and over again til the turret stopped moving. The tiger crew all died of concussions. They were never pend. Not saying the M4s could ever get a shot off but something to think about.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 5
Top Top