TeaSea
SOH-CM-2014
The U.S. Army did not consider the M-18 a "Tank", hence the designation Tank Destroyer.
Might seem to be a minor point in retrospect, but at the time it was not. Armies fight and equip based on doctrine. U.S. Army doctrine held that the tank was an offensive weapon used for exploitation in the offense and strong point in the defense. It was to be supplemented by Artillery, air support, infantry, as well as direct fire anti-tank weapons.
The M-18 was a direct fire artillery gun, adapted specifically for the anti-tank role. In offense, it was used for screening and reconnaissance. In defense, it was used to provide retrograde fires to slow an offensive down by forcing the threat into a tactical formation as opposed to a march column, this allowing the "Tanks" to assume a hardened position. The tank destroyers would then bound back behind the tanks and prepare for the next retrograde, or offensive operation as results of the defense dictated.
Due to that doctrine, armor was sacrificed for speed. The big radial engine was chosen to it's ability to run up fast and allow the platform and crew to displace rapidly.
Important to remember that U.S. Army doctrine was that all forces were mutually supporting. While the Wehrmacht theoretically had a similar doctrine, in reality their ground forces broke down into components very rapidly, partly because their weapons systems were not acquired with their own doctrine in mind. I personally attribute that to the inherent corruption of the Nazi acquisition system, but that's my opinion.
I mention this because I'm often told how superior the Tiger Tank was to the Sherman. Which in a one on one engagement it plainly was. Of course, there weren't that many one on one engagements, as there were some 67,000 Sherman's fielded during the course of the war, and only about 3000 Tiger's made. The average Sherman crew never saw a Tiger Tank.
In any case, the M-18 served a key role in the Battle of the Bulge as a section of M-18's brought a much larger formation of Tigers to a screaming halt, buying much needed time.
Might seem to be a minor point in retrospect, but at the time it was not. Armies fight and equip based on doctrine. U.S. Army doctrine held that the tank was an offensive weapon used for exploitation in the offense and strong point in the defense. It was to be supplemented by Artillery, air support, infantry, as well as direct fire anti-tank weapons.
The M-18 was a direct fire artillery gun, adapted specifically for the anti-tank role. In offense, it was used for screening and reconnaissance. In defense, it was used to provide retrograde fires to slow an offensive down by forcing the threat into a tactical formation as opposed to a march column, this allowing the "Tanks" to assume a hardened position. The tank destroyers would then bound back behind the tanks and prepare for the next retrograde, or offensive operation as results of the defense dictated.
Due to that doctrine, armor was sacrificed for speed. The big radial engine was chosen to it's ability to run up fast and allow the platform and crew to displace rapidly.
Important to remember that U.S. Army doctrine was that all forces were mutually supporting. While the Wehrmacht theoretically had a similar doctrine, in reality their ground forces broke down into components very rapidly, partly because their weapons systems were not acquired with their own doctrine in mind. I personally attribute that to the inherent corruption of the Nazi acquisition system, but that's my opinion.
I mention this because I'm often told how superior the Tiger Tank was to the Sherman. Which in a one on one engagement it plainly was. Of course, there weren't that many one on one engagements, as there were some 67,000 Sherman's fielded during the course of the war, and only about 3000 Tiger's made. The average Sherman crew never saw a Tiger Tank.
In any case, the M-18 served a key role in the Battle of the Bulge as a section of M-18's brought a much larger formation of Tigers to a screaming halt, buying much needed time.