You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

[sillygoose]

No, I have until December 1941 to get large numbers of Shermans to the Philippines, Wake and Guam. I'm not going to fuck around with plans while the Japanese are killing my peopIe.

Too bad then, because the M4 Sherman wasn't ready by then.

But you know what was and was more than enough to fight the Japanese? The M3 Lee.

Frankly even the M2 was more than enough given the lack of quality Japanese armor.

But if you want to fight in the Philippines you need to fix a lot more than just tanks, because tanks aren't worth a damn thing without supplies. Not only that, but we can only fix doctrine and designs, not war strategy and IOTL the strategy was to basically abandon the Philippines.

I know the M4 Sherman works reliably and can be made in numbers with common industrial components in time to make a difference. I don't know if the T20 would work or not, since it never did. I would strive to do better, to run a design team without the usual REMF army tards meddling and have something great to replace the M4 with by 1943, but you fight with what you have and we truly had nothing in January 1939. The M4 took 10 months from final design to rolling tracks. If I could hand the factory the Sherman drawings in early 39 and have the M4 training in the Phillipines by march 1941 then that's what would happen no matter who got shot.

You do you then. I would go for the T-20. Agree to disagree.
The M4 couldn't be ready in any quantity or quality by March 1941 even with a start on January 1st 1939 BTW.

Before the M4 was the M3, a true piece of shit that was a waste of metal but served to get industry organized for military AFV production. It actually went into battle and served as a great nuisance throughout the war. I would build the M4 in its place for the insurance before meddling with fate. The Ideal Tank To Be Named Later could go to Europe while the M4 did an island tour if all was well. But if IT was a temperamental and unreliable dog that was often incapable of movement, then the crappy old long running reliable Sherman could still save the day.

What? It was a fine tank given what it faced. The M4 was just better.
If you just rush the M4 then you're begging for problems. But as I said you're entitled to your opinion.

The Soviets could afford to have bad running tanks. They could have two new transmissions per tank per week trucked or railroaded direct from the factory without a long double run through torpedo alley. Same with the Germans. US equipment on two very distant fronts had to work or be abandoned.

Huh? US equipment had the best supply and repair service in the world during WW2, spare parts were extremely plentiful, so two extra transmissions would be a downgrade compared to what was shipped to Europe IOTL.

 

[BlackDragon98]

the M2A4 light tank and M3 Stuart were more than enough to handle what little armor Japan deployed in the Pacific.
The bulk of IJA armor was in Manchuria and China, Pacific had few tanks in comparison.

Honestly, I'd just hand out more bazookas and call it a day.
No point sending tanks to do a job a bazooka can handle with ease.

 

[Sixgun McGurk]

the M2A4 light tank and M3 Stuart were more than enough to handle what little armor Japan deployed in the Pacific.
The bulk of IJA armor was in Manchuria and China, Pacific had few tanks in comparison.

Honestly, I'd just hand out more bazookas and call it a day.
No point sending tanks to do a job a bazooka can handle with ease.
[/QUOT

Too bad then, because the M4 Sherman wasn't ready by then.

But you know what was and was more than enough to fight the Japanese? The M3 Lee.

Frankly even the M2 was more than enough given the lack of quality Japanese armor.

But if you want to fight in the Philippines you need to fix a lot more than just tanks, because tanks aren't worth a damn thing without supplies. Not only that, but we can only fix doctrine and designs, not war strategy and IOTL the strategy was to basically abandon the Philippines.


You do you then. I would go for the T-20. Agree to disagree.
The M4 couldn't be ready in any quantity or quality by March 1941 even with a start on January 1st 1939 BTW.


What? It was a fine tank given what it faced. The M4 was just better.
If you just rush the M4 then you're begging for problems. But as I said you're entitled to your opinion.


Huh? US equipment had the best supply and repair service in the world during WW2, spare parts were extremely plentiful, so two extra transmissions would be a downgrade compared to what was shipped to Europe IOTL.

In 1939, you, with all of your current knowledge and the ability to look things up on wikipedia via some ROB's intervention are in charge of <insert country here>'s AFV development and doctrine, with complete carte blanche to develop it to your satisfaction.

The limitations are you are limited to the technology that exists in 1939, but you can mix and match it to fit your own vision of armored warfare.

 

[stevep]

But if you want to fight in the Philippines you need to fix a lot more than just tanks, because tanks aren't worth a damn thing without supplies. Not only that, but we can only fix doctrine and designs, not war strategy and IOTL the strategy was to basically abandon the Philippines.

Slightly off-topic but that was because the US had realised that barring something very drastic the Philippines were indefensible. At least not without putting such amounts of forces and supplies there that your going to trigger an earlier Japanese attack as they can't afford a Philippines that can be defended across their primary supply lines for raw materials.

A US controlled Philippines that can hold out until survivable supply lines and reinforcements can reach it is like an Irish Republic controlled by Nazi Germany into which the latter is sending large amounts of forces. It would force all bar an insanely pacifist UK to go to war.