tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post3181180862531535376..comments2024-03-28T14:35:30.147-04:00Comments on Tank Archives: Oskin's Award OrderPeterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09622237223229485503noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030145265861917845.post-33515069404706984392015-03-22T11:18:13.555-04:002015-03-22T11:18:13.555-04:00Heh. I noted:
Calmly and surely, he opened fire a...Heh. I noted:<br /><br /><i>Calmly and surely, he opened fire and ignited three enemy tanks. The others routed under comrade Oskin's deadly fire and fell back. </i><br /><br />I recently watched the movie "Fury". As well as being a load of (I feel) Iraq War atrocity-justification (i.e., the movie protrays that it's "justified" to kill captured POWs and wantonly destroy German towns) it also got the usual mechanics of tank warfare wrong.<br /><br />Case in point: a group of Shermans (five?) in the film get ambushed by a Tiger under cover. The Shermans, once one brews, charges the Tiger, which then *comes out from its cover into a an open field* to engage the Shermans, where eventually one gets behind it and destroys it. Very Hollywood, and pretty unreal.<br /><br />I told friends that real tank vs tank warfare is usually a proposition of "hide, shoot and then scoot" once shells start coming your way. Also, if your tanks drive out into the open and one or two blows up, the rest (like those Tiger IIs in this story) usually get the hell away. You don't stick around to try to find what's doing the damage. <br /><br />The other thing the movie didn't show accurately is support or overwatching fire. In short, there was none. Tanks and infantry in the movie just marched out into the field towards German positions and started shooting. "Fire and manuver?" There was none. Gah.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com