美國國家軍用車輛博物館 副館長講解美軍M26“潘興”重型坦克

It's bigger, it's better, and it's too much for the Tiger I But if that was the case, then why weren't these all over the place in 1945? Well, that's actually a long story, a complicated one that includes behind-the-scenes conflicts, tactical disputes, battlefield experience and complacency on behalf of the United States government as they believed at the time that the Sherman was considered the best use of resources What does all this mean? Is it good? Is it bad? Well, to be honest, I can't really answer that question But maybe you'll be able to after we dive into the weirdly complicated history of this vehicle, the M26 Pershing The genesis of the Pershing begins in 1942, way back in the deserts of North Africa You see, newer German tanks there appeared to have an upward trend in greater firepower and armor protection Now, the Sherman at the time is entering full-scale production But it was believed that a successor needed to be planned so that America could stay ahead of the curve in comparison to German tank innovation Enter the T20 series The initial pitch involves redesigning the medium tank from the ground up We had a lower box-like hull, for example, on this new type of vehicle which would overall reduce the surface area and add more armor while at the same time keeping it within the same weight range as an M4 Sherman The lower hull would also accommodate the low silhouette of the Ford GAN and later the GAF V8 engine It's basically a pancake version of the GAA used in the M4A3 Another thing about the flatter hull of this vehicle Is that everything that would normally be stowed inside of an M4 Sherman Now has to be stowed on the exterior of this vehicle We're kind of taking a lesson from other countries here In how they use the stowage space on their tanks But this time placing essentially storage lockers on the exterior of the vehicle And they run all the way back to the back end of the M26 So again, something that we have to do by making this vehicle flatter We just got to move more stuff to the outside But that's also because the interior of this vehicle is incredibly cramped You've got about 70 rounds of ammunition in there And to make matters worse, that 90mm cannon that we'll get to later Is absolutely huge, taking up the majority of the interior of this turret Initially expected to accommodate a 76mm cannon Later the T20 series began to experiment with larger and larger American anti-tank armaments As the 76 later proved to be slightly subpar With the exception of some ammunition types So needless to say, all of it was going to change quite rapidly Check out some of these brief descriptions if you're interested Now detailing the guns, the suspension systems, the powertrains The armor protection and all the other details Regarding the 13 different some odd T20 variants Would probably take me too long What I'll try to do is generalize the development history So that you understand how we ended up at this But by no means take this as a comprehensive summary If you want that, I suggest reading RP Honeycutt's Excellent tome on the whole thing, simply called Pershing Now, we get to army infighting Which is already hindering the tank development behind the scenes The moment that we start building the T20 series American tank doctrine begins to conflict with it You see, the army ground force believed that tanks needed to be mobile So that they could be suitable for what we call an exploitation role That is to move through large gaps in the enemy line And continue with armored advances But at the same time, tanks had to have firepower and protection So that they could operate in support of the infantry It was also the army ground force's belief that tactically Most anti-tank warfare would be handled by tank destroyers and artillery Of course, these kinds of tactics went out the window The moment that we met a tank on the front line For the same reason though, the army ground force Rejected the 90mm gun as a medium tank armament They didn't want medium tankers dealing with other tanks It was believed that that was the responsibility Of tank destroyers and artillery Medium tanks, as far as the army ground force were concerned Were a maneuvering element Now if you're thinking to yourself Well, jeez, THEF has no idea what they're talking about Trust me, many front line tankers had the exact same opinion Especially when they came face to face with a tiger Somewhere out in Europe So here's an example of such a production request being rejected Again, the army ground force turning down The production of early T20 variants In October of 1943, General Gladion M. Barnes Who is the leader of the U.S. Army Ordnance Department Ordered 500 each of the T-23, T-25E1 And T-26E1 T-20 series tanks Due to his anticipation of the threats America would come to face in Europe in 1944 However, his request was turned down for two reasons First, the armored force, interestingly enough The literal tank command for the United States military Wanted the 90mm gun on tanks But not actually in a new chassis They didn't want a brand new vehicle They wanted the 90mm to be adapted into a mount That could be placed on the considerably reliable M4 Sherman Also, the army ground force Did not want the 90mm cannon on medium tanks in general Notice I didn't say tank destroyer, by the way Of course, the 90mm would later make its way into the M36 But they believed, again, that tactically Other assets could handle that kind of anti-tank combat Overall, again, artillery tank destroyers Of course, it was hard battlefield experience Against the Tiger and Panther tanks in Italy That would break this behind-the-scenes deadlock Within the U.S. military But I've gotten a bit off track Let's get back to that overview Of how we got to the Pershing that you see behind me Unlike the army ground force's doctrine The armored force and ordnance department Wanted tanks that could deal with other tanks Because they believed the tank to be the best anti-tank weapon Yeah, pretty logical, right? But that means that the T20 series Started out with 76mm guns, good anti-tank weapons And then later moved on to the 90mm anti-tank guns But some even experimented with lighter guns Like the 75mm But actually added autoloaders Which were complicated but also really cool So eventually the 90mm cannon Makes its way into the T20 series And it provided a variant known as the T25E1 With a great balance of firepower, mobility and protection As Honeycutt said, quote, in that order of importance Later the T26 T20, however Tries to match heavy German armor thickness Without increasing engine power Which resulted in reduced mobility It was essentially an upgraded version of the T25 variant I just spoke about With slightly thicker armor But still mounting that 90mm cannon Of course this is because at the time Overseas our tankers were dealing with Higher power German tank and anti-tank guns And they wanted a tank with more armor Which results in the T26E3 variant Also known as the M26 being adopted The T26E5 which was supposed to actually succeed The T26E3 was also planned with even more armor But at the end of the day with the T26E3 being favored The T25E1 was thrown to the wayside Which means the more balanced tank In terms of synergy between mobility, firepower and armor Was lost Now the T26E3, again later the M26 Has a lot of interesting technical specifications Which I'll give you a quick rundown of here It of course mounts the 90mm M3 anti-tank cannon With 70 rounds of ammo Stocked within the turret and underneath the turret It has three machine guns, two .30 calibers One down in the hole and one as a coaxial Mounted up next to that 90mm cannon And then a .50 caliber anti-aircraft gun Mount up on the top of the turret It mounts that Ford GAF gasoline 8-cylinder engine With a max road speed of 30 mph on level ground And 25 mph basically everywhere else Remember this is of course because of that heavier armor The vehicle overall is slower Unlike most American tanks of the era It also featured a rear drive sprocket And a rear transmission Which is unusual for an American WWII tank overall It was also 45 tons And considered a heavy tank in 1944 and 1945 Although that was definitely pushing the limit And that designation would later change Its name Pershing of course came from General John J. Blackjack Pershing Who was the commander of the Army Expeditionary Force In WWI By the way it was the first American tank To actually get a name from Americans And not from the Brits overseas Who we can credit for most of our creative names For our vehicles Here we are in 1944 And the Pershing is about to make its combat debut in Europe Or is it? You see the infighting has now returned behind the scenes And unfortunately the T-26E3 Is going to be delayed again Before it reaches Europe So the production of the T-26E3 Begins in fall of 1944 Major General Barnes proposed The first 40 vehicles off the production line Should be split With half sent to the front And the other 20 sent to Fort Knox For armor board testing Now this is where the Army Ground Force Rears its ugly head again They wanted the European shipment to be delayed Until the Knox testing was completed General Barnes at the time is convinced That the timing was simply too short Our men would be engaging German heavy tanks The moment that they left The beaches of Normandy So his request now gets backed up By his friend Major General Russell Maxwell And despite the Army Ground Force's objections The 20 T-6E3s Are immediately going to be shipped over To Antwerp, Belgium in 1945 Notice I'm still saying T-26E3 This is because the Pershing Wasn't standardized as the M-26 Until March of 1945 But for simplicity Let's just call it the Pershing from now on Now the technical mission That accompanies these tanks Was led personally by General Barnes And it was codenamed Zebra All 20 Pershings are first assigned To the 1st Army And then later divided equally Between the 3rd and the 9th Armored Divisions The 3rd Armored Division Will be the first into combat Which is why I'll be talking about Their combat experience primarily And I'll leave the 9th out So don't get mad at me down in the comments Now that being said Zebra consisted of experts In the tank's weaponry and technical aspects It was hoped that they could provide expertise To the new crews who were training To work with this vehicle And that would mean that the Pershings Would reach the battlefield faster One of the experts That was alongside the Zebra mission Was L.R. or Slim Price Now Mr. Price was an expert In the 90mm gun And its mounting in the Pershing behind me He emphasized proper boresighting To retain the incredible accuracy Of this weapon He originally found that Of the tanks given to the 3rd Armored Only one of the 20 Met his boresighting standards Which he then personally corrected That means he went around To 19 other tanks And fixed them himself Price, who himself was a civilian Would in fact later in the mission Impress tankers of Patton's 3rd Army By shooting at singular German helmets With the 90mm And hitting them at a range of 625 yards You can see how small this helmet is You can imagine how accurate A gun that big has to be To knock these off of a fence Now during his time with the 3rd AD He demonstrated similar feats Although unfortunately They are not as well recorded As those with Patton's tankers Let's get into some story time With the 3rd AD's Pershing tanks On February 25th, 1945 The 3rd's tanks were committed to battle And yet on the 26th The first of their Pershings Was knocked out in combat She was called Fireball by her crew And she was unfortunately positioned At a roadblock in Elsdorf, Germany Where the surrounding fires Of the burning town Allowed her to be seen at night A nearby concealed Tiger tank Fired 3 rounds at 100 yards Disabling the vehicle And killing 2 crew members Only one of those 8.8 cm rounds Penetrated Fireball, however Through the coaxial machine gun port The other destroyed the tank's muzzle brake And the last glanced off Of the upper right side of the turret This is actually pretty impressive Considering how close That massive weapon was to this vehicle The fact that she was just disabled And not outright destroyed Is again kind of showing How good that additional armor On the M26 Pershing was At least in some scenarios The Tiger by the way Then backed onto some debris She was immobilized And promptly abandoned And in fact the Tiger's loader Was then later captured by the 3 AD And confirmed that his vehicle Was the one that did the firing Now interestingly Fireball was promptly recovered Then sent back to division maintenance And actually returned to service On March 7th So I guess we could maybe call that a draw Again kind of shows you The power of American logistics Behind the scenes To bring that vehicle back Into combat service Now shortly after Fireball was disabled Another 3 AD Pershing Avenged Fireball at Elsdorf By taking down a Tiger at 900 yards And two Panzer IVs At around 1200 yards Fully knocking out And burning all 3 tanks And then later in the Battle of Cologne, Germany On March 6th, 1945 Pershings of the 3 AD Were credited with destroying a Panther A Tiger and a Panzer IV The 90 mm high explosive rounds Fired by the Pershing During these battles Also proved devastating To dug in 8.8 cm positions To these static anti-tank guns Now of course this is only a sampling Of the Pershing's European combat history I'm not even mentioning The exploits of the 9th Armored Division Which had similar successes Really I'm just giving you the bare minimum The highlights of the service Of this vehicle overseas But it wasn't without struggles In addition to sometimes being Taken out by enemy tanks Pershings had trouble crossing bridges Due to width and weight Often special barges had to be constructed To ship them across rivers Which sometimes left them lagging behind The armored regiment That they were assigned to Despite this though The initial success of Zebra Mission Caused the flow of Pershings To continue into Europe Until VE Day Victory in Europe Day Right at the time There was roughly 310 Pershings in theater And another 200 issued to the troops That hadn't yet made it into combat So let's talk about Its service in the Pacific If you can call it that I'll be honest When I talk about the service Of the Pershing in the Pacific It is kind of a joke But hey At this point It was more of a crude coincidence Than anything Not actual infighting Behind the scenes So the need for the Pershing In the Pacific comes at Okinawa Tank losses here Were higher than expected Due to Japanese 47mm guns And their high velocity ammunition Some tankers were welding Extra pieces of armor To the sides of their M4 Shermans In hopes of increasing Their chances of survival But overall They wanted a vehicle With thicker armor 12 Pershings were ordered To be shipped to the island And they were now standardized As the M26 One of the leaders Of Zebra Mission Captain Elmer Gray Actually went alongside These Pershings To introduce to the tanks To these Pacific tankers Due to his European experience Now the Pershings were delayed Basically the moment That they left the United States And they did so On May 31st of 1945 But actually didn't arrive Off shore from Okinawa Until July 21st of 1945 Well after the fighting Had subsided But there were very crude Unloading facilities Here at Okinawa Which meant that these Pershings Only actually made it To the beach on August 4th One of those intermediate delays By the way was a literal typhoon A force of nature That prevented the Pershings From now reaching the front line The first classes to train personnel For piloting the M26 Pershings Was conducted on August 10th At Okinawa But later that night Japan signaled that they may In fact surrender So training was suspended Literally five days later On August 15th, 1945 VJ Day or Victory in Japan Day Was declared And that naturally barred The Pershings from combat And subsequently ended The World War II combat history Of the M26 Needless to say Pacific Pershings never got To really duel with the Japanese But there weren't really Any tanks on Okinawa For them to fight In the first place So let's fast forward a little bit Five years after World War II At the beginning of another war This time on the other side of the world It's here in Korea in 1950 It's off to a bad start For the United States And our tankers Because we started with M24 tanks Being shipped rapidly from Japan And that was all we had at the moment They were no match for the Soviet T-34 Now being used by the North Korean military In fact even heavy tank battalions from Japan Were using only light tanks So we're looking for heavier vehicles To rush to the front Pershings were some of the first to arrive Alongside M4A3 Sherman tanks So once again Both of these older vehicles went to war During Korea The M26 was re-designated as a medium tank Due to its weight and its power plant On a tank on tank basis Versus the T-34 The M26 almost always had the upper hand With its 90mm cannon That really all normal combat ranges But it was the T-34's power to weight ratio That gave it the upper hand in mobility It was much faster And more maneuverable overall And the M26 Pershing That again was a bit slower However while much action did occur Between T-34s and M26s The major tank work during the Korean War Was actually in infantry support Using everything from Recoilless rifles to rocket launchers While the Pershing served widely In the first six months of the Korean War The most widely used tank During that entire conflict Was actually the old M4A3 This was due to the latter's better movement In mountainous country Where its lighter weight Was most certainly preferred And of course the M26 Would later be slowly phased out By the more advanced M46 Patton Really America's first main battle tank When the Pershing first arrived in Europe With Zebra Mission Captain Elmer Gray Was asked by tank crews To compare the Pershing to the Tiger II Of which there were very few around And also the Panther tanks The general question was Is the Pershing on equal footing Gray's response was a practical one Quote Hell no But it's the best tank we have yet developed And we should have had it a year earlier So let's recap That T-20 program It had actually served as a test bed For technologies that Occasionally made their way Into other American tanks And it even borrowed From other tanks too Like the Pershing behind me Has the suspension system From the M18 tank destroyer Or the 90mm cannon That again made its way Into the M36 tank destroyer But anyway that's just a small sample More importantly though The philosophy behind the Pershing While not necessarily perfected By the vehicle itself Was later reflected upon In the development of Modern main battle tanks That is future tanks Would always need a balance Of the best possible firepower With good mobility And armor protection scaled As to not interfere With both of those latter points But at the same time Still provide Decent armor protection So there we have it The Pershing A tank which was by no means A bad vehicle But it certainly Was one that never really Came into its own Sadly by the time It was able to really prove Its worth Much of its combat importance Had waned She's a good vehicle But one that's hindered By behind the scenes squabbles That are hard to make sense of Even today In the end I personally Really like this vehicle But if someone were to ask me The age old question Was it any good I'd probably respond It's complicated Thanks for watching