Great Tank Battles & Lessons Learned
 

McMaster recounts: “What struck me was how quickly it occurred. And if you’re able to get the jump on the enemy in the desert and fire first with 9 M1A1 tanks that don’t miss, fire a round every 3 seconds, very rapidly you can break the enemy’s back to the point where he just can’t recover it.” Source: amp.dailycaller.com


* Michael Wittmann: Greatest Tank Ace
Michael Wittmann - the most decorated tank ace in history - fought at Kursk and in Normandy - and in many of the greatest tank battles of all time.

My list of great tank battles:

5. The Battle of Tunisia
Two of history's most-famous commanders go head-to-head in a North African battle.


4. The Battle of Kursk: Southern Front
SS troops battle Russian defenders in the Russian village of Prokhorovka in the largest tank battle.


3. The Battle of Arracourt
The largest tank to tank battle of WWII, as Hitler is desperate to halt Patton's advance.

2. The Battles of El Alamein
Rommel's Desert Afrika Corps faces off against Montgomery's Eighth Army.


1. The Battle of 73 Easting
The most studied tank battle, the Battle of 73 Easting during the Gulf War.

See in the forum

=====

Re: Great Tank Battles & Lessons Learned
 

Any time you catch your opponent unaware and have more accurate and longer range weapons is it any surprise it's a massacre?

Re: Great Tank Battles & Lessons Learned
 

ONE OF THE......not "The largest tank to tank battle of WWII"

Re: Great Tank Battles & Lessons Learned
 

True. And sometimes we learn from the mistakes or miscues of the adversary. Here, when McMaster crested a ridge and saw what laid before him, well we all know what he did with his troop, his 9 M1A1s and Bradleys. But, what is striking here and instrumental, is the Iraqi commander failing, this is especially galling given Iraq tank crews had spent 8 years in a slug fest with Iran, that he failed to put somebody on that very same ridge to surveil the area in front of his force. Since, he had not detailed his scouts in such a manner, he got jumped by an audacious McMaster, who "took his head off and handed him his hat."


Yes, DRG is correct by merely numbers of tanks involved, Arracourt pales to say Battle of Kursk. However, in this battle we find Abrams and his audacious action on, I believe the third night, he attacked, something not done at the time. Furthermore, the out-gunned and poorly armored Sherman tanks had to rely on tactics that exploited their speed and the audacity of their commanders. Firing, then moving, then firing on the flanks of the German tanks. Using smoke rounds, then moving to the German flanks and many other such daring and bold tactics earned in my mind this battle as the largest (at least in the Western Front) between the United States Army and the Wehrmact. Some, and arguably so, may point to the Battle of the Bulge not Arracourt as the largest tank battle between USA and German forces.

But, I maintain, after looking at what was learned, the daring tactics used, the coordination of air, armor, and artillery combined to enable Patton's Army too, "...successfully defeat[ed] two Panzer brigades and parts of two Panzer divisions. Of the 262 tanks deployed by the Germans, over 86 were destroyed, with another 114 damaged or broken down. The Americans, by contrast, lost just 25 tanks. An amazing accounting."(Dvorsky,George "The 10 Greatest Tank Battles In Military History" http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-10-greate...ory-1681355416.

These are my five tank battles. Maybe, and I am sure others do, have another list of five.

=====

Re: Great Tank Battles & Lessons Learned
 

Unfortunately for the Iraqi commmander, his experience in Iran-Iraq War meant nothing (and probably was detrimental to him). The reason is that this war, for many reasons, quickly evovled into a war closely resembling WW1 but with better gear. Tactics also were similar in many cases. Tanks were used as static direct fire artillery, artillery itself could not fire at targets other than predetermined ones, vast networks of trenches covered the battlefield etc. These worked against the poorly equipped Iranians (barely), but against one of the two leading superpowers, trained to fight a high intensity mechanized war in Europe, tactics like these were suicidal.
In addition to that, Iraqis had problems with conducting proper reconnaisance even against Iranians. Which is interesting, given that the former had significant equipment (and later manpower) advantage over the latter. In the Iranian counteroffensives of 1982 they managed to bypass and eventually destroy large detachments of Iraqi troops, since the latter even failed to conduct proper patrolling. It is intersting that the army that had the clear advantage in mechanized assets was the more static one as well.
All these combined to give the eventual outcome of the battle and the Gulf War in general.