[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_VIH_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. E "Tiger" Heavy Tank, 1942, Panzer-Abteilung 501

The plans to create a new medium tank began in Germany as early as 1937. The tank was initially envisioned as a 30-ton vehicle with 50mm of armor and a short-barrel 75mm main gun. The initial design work was performed by Henschel. The first prototypes were tested between 1938 and 1941, designated DW1, DW2 and VK 3001(H), all of which had little in common with the future Tiger. The same was the case with the experimental VK 3001(P) from Porsche, which joined the competition in 1939.

By May of 1941, Hitler came up with a new heavy tank formula. In his opinion, it was to be an armored vehicle with a powerful gun, capable of penetrating the armor of all current and any potential adversaries, and at the same time heavily armored in order to withstand any hits from the enemy. On May 26, 1941, Henschel and Porsche were ordered to design prototypes to meet the new requirement. Initially, the Henschel prototype was to be equipped with a 75mm L/70 main gun, which had proven armor penetration capabilities.

Each of the design teams used existing prototypes in their work, significantly altering them to accommodate the increased armor and armament.  The 75mm gun eventually had to be deleted from the design, due to the critical shortage of tungsten used in its shells. As a result, the first prototypes of the new VK 3601(H) tank had no armament, and Henschel had to urgently redesign the hull to accommodate a Porsche-designed turret with a 88mm gun. By April of 1942 the two prototypes, VK 4501(H) and VK 4501(P) were presented to the Führer. Having similar performance, both vehicles significantly differed in design. Porsche’s prototype had an original engine installation and transmission made up of two air-cooled engines, two generators and two electric motors. The prototypes had different wheel and track arrangements as well.

Initially, both designs were supposed to go into production. Hitler seemed to favor the Porsche prototype, which was ordered into production even before the competition was completed. However, a series of tests in May of 1942 showed that the Henschel design was more reliable, maneuverable, and had a longer range. Subsequently, the Henschel design was accepted for service, and the 90 Porsche tanks that had already been built were modified into Ferdinand SPGs. However, one of the Porsche Tigers did see combat in 1944.

Serial production of the Tigers began in August of 1941, and proceeded very slowly. Only 72 were made in all of 1942. Nevertheless, as early as the end of August of 1941 the first four Tigers were sent into action near Leningrad, Russia. 

The Tiger was a very well-designed armored vehicle. By 1943, when it began to be used in significant numbers, its main gun easily took out any Allied tank. Only the frontal armor of the British Churchill tank could withstand a hit, and only under favorable conditions. At the same time, the Tiger’s thick armor made it virtually invulnerable on the battlefield when facing the most common 37mm and 40mm anti-tank guns. Armor-piercing 57mm shells could only penetrate the side armor at very close range; the same was the case with the British 25-pdr guns. When facing American 75mm anti-tank guns, the Tiger was only vulnerable to hits at shallow angle from a distance of 500 yards or less. The frontal armor of the Tiger could only be penetrated by the American 76mm gun, installed on the M10 Wolverine tank destroyer, and the British 17-pdr gun. Tigers were also vulnerable to large-caliber AA guns and field howitzers using HEAT rounds.

The Tiger was not without disadvantages. The vehicle was difficult to maintain, and needed constant attention. Its heavy weight meant that it was limited in where it could go, and towing damaged tanks was a challenge.

Schwere Panzer-Abteilung 501, the special heavy tank battalion, was formed on May 19, 1942, and sent to Tunisia in November of 1942. The Tigers used by the 501 were practically pre-production models, and differed slightly from the later series. Several details even differed between models  in the same battalion, for example between the tanks of the 1st and 2nd companies. The emblem of the battalion was a sneaking tiger.

The 501st was constantly engaged in combat starting in late November of 1942. The appearance of the Tiger tanks was an unpleasant surprise to the Allies in Tunisia. The 501st was reorganized in February of 1943, being attached to 10th Panzer Division (having at that time 16 Tigers and 13 Pz IIINs on hand). It played an important part in German operations in Tunisia, including operations Frühlingswind and Ochsenkopf. Initially, Tigers had great success, for instance on the14th of February alone, 20 Sherman tanks were knocked out. However, by late February, the 501st’s losses began to mount, in large parts due to anti-tank mine damage and inability to tow damaged vehicles. The remaining tanks continued to fight until the German surrender in North Africa in early 1943.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IVF1_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf.F1 Medium Support Tank

The last Pz IV variant, armed with a short-barrel 75mm KwK L/24 gun, went into production in April of 1941. The new variant had improved 50mm armor, protecting the frontal parts of the hull and turret, and 30mm side armor. The tank’s weight grew to 22.3 tons, which required widening the tracks from 380 to 400mm, with subsequent changes to all wheels.

The tank proved quite capable during combat in Russia and North Africa. Face hardening steel armor was effective against most Allied 40mm and 45mm anti-tank weapons. Considering the fact that 76mm AP shells were in short supply in 1941 and early 1942, it was not uncommon for Soviet troops to fire HE and shrapnel shells at tanks, against which the Ausf.F1 was also adequately protected. The tank’s short gun was quite accurate and effective against the most common targets a support tank usually has to dace, such as machine-gun and artillery positions. Most Soviet light tanks, such as the T-26 and BT, could be easily knocked out with AP shells. To engage heavier Soviet T-34 and KV tanks, a HEAT shell was used. Nevertheless, by early 1942, the weapon’s effectiveness was becoming less than desirable, which led to the up-gunned Ausf.F2 variant, essentially an F1 with a 75mm KwK 40 L/43 gun. A total of 462 Pz.IV Ausf.F1 were produced until the end of production in March of 1942 by the combined forces of Krupp, Vomag, and Nibelungenwerk; 25 of them were immediately converted into Pz.IV Ausf.F2.

The bulk of the fighting thatr this model took part in was on the Eastern Front between the fall of 1941 and summer of 1942, where they suffered heavy losses. Many of these tanks were also used in North Africa, especially in 1941 and early 1942. By late 1943, some short-gun Pz.IV still remained in service, for example the Großdeutschland Division had 7 battle-ready Ausf.F1s on July 4th 1943, even though it was by then hopelessly obsolete. The new Soviet 45mm M-42 anti-tank guns could easily penetrate its armor, and 76mm AP rounds were also widely available. In North Africa, problems were encountered even earlier, with the appearance of the British 6-pdr (57mm) anti-tank gun, and the US M3 and M4 Sherman tanks. However, some individual examples of the Ausf.F1 continued to see sporadic action until the end of the war.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IVF2_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf.F2 Medium Tank

By the summer of 1941, it was becoming clear that the Pz.IV armed with a short 75mm KwK L/24 gun was ineffective against Soviet T-34 and KV tanks. Use of HEAT rounds made the problem somewhat manageable, but it was evident that a better armed tank was needed, capable of penetrating thicker armor. A gun fit for the task was the 75mm KwK 40 L/43. By March of 1942, Pz.IV Ausf.F2 began to roll off assembly lines, which were basically up-gunned Pz.IV Ausf.F1s. Other than the new main gun, there were practically no differences between the variants

Pz.IV Ausf.F2 was manufactured by Krupp, Vomag, and Nibelungenwerk, with a very short production run. After producing only 175 F2s (with 25 more F1s converted to the new gun), the production ended in July of 1942. The manufacturers switched over to the new Pz.IV Ausf.G variant, which initially had only minor differences from its predecessors. 

The bulk of the action for this model took place on the Eastern Front in the summer and fall of 1942, where it immediately became popular with the crews due to the effectiveness of its main gun. With its introduction, Soviet T-34 and KV tanks virtually lost all their advantages, and the Germans were finally on par with the Russians in terms of tank armor and armament. The model was also used in North Africa, where its appearance was an unpleasant surprise to the Allies, whose tanks were now being knocked out at long range. However, by 1943, the variant all but lost its superiority. Its armor was not very effective against the British 6-pdr anti-tank gun, and 75mm guns of the US M3 and M4 Sherman tanks, which were generally on equal terms with the Ausf.F2. Nevertheless, the variant continued to see action in Tunisia and Libya until early 1943. By the time of the Battle of Kursk, few tanks of this type remained in active service. Since the improved armament was not accompanied by improved armor, the tank’s frontal armor could not hope to stop anything beyond a 45mm shell, which led to heavy losses. Nevertheless, some individual examples of the Ausf.F2 continued to see sporadic action until the end of the war

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IIIJ_L42_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf.J mit 5cm KwK L/42 Medium Tank with a 50mm KwK L/42 gun

The final Pz III variant to be armed with a short 50mm KwK L/42 gun went into serial production in March of 1941. The new version had improved frontal armor, 50mm in the front, and a thicker gun mantlet. The hull was also slightly redesigned, with a new driver’s visor and a ball mount for the machine gun. 

Tanks of this variant ended up being the most mass-produced of all Pz III models. By the time serial production ended in December of 1942, the factories at MAN, Daimler-Benz, Henschel, Alkett, Wegmann, MNH and MIAG produced a total of 1,549 Pz III Ausf.J with KwK L/42. This type saw the bulk of its action on the Eastern Front in 1941 and 1942. It proved quite capable in combat. High-quality homogenous steel armor was effective against most Allied 40mm and 45mm anti-tank weapons. Considering the fact that 76mm AP shells were in short supply in 1941 and early 1942, it was not uncommon for Allied troops to fire HE and shrapnel shells at tanks, against which the Ausf.J was also adequately protected. The tank’s short gun was quite accurate and effective against machine-gun nests and mortar and artillery positions. Most Soviet light tanks, such as the T-26 and BT, could also be easily knocked out with AP shells. However, the T-34’s armor presented a problem, and the KV heavy tank could not be penetrated at all. Availability of APCR rounds (Pzgr.40 with tungsten core, and Pzgr.40/1 with steel core) made the problem less noticeable. Still, by late 1941 this model was clearly obsolete. Subsequently, an up-gunned Pz.III Ausf.J with a longer 50mm KwK L/60 gun went into production, and some regiments with the short-gun variants were upgraded in the field. 

Several tanks of this type saw service in North Africa. Initially it performed rather well, with its frontal armor able to withstand hits from British 2-pdr guns, while its main gun could knock out most Allied light tanks. With the appearance of the Matilda and Valentine tanks, and then the 6-pdr anti-tank guns and US M3 and M4 Medium tanks in 1942, the situation was quickly reversed. The tank was hopelessly outgunned. Nevertheless, a few Pz.III Ausf Js remained in active service until the German surrender in Tunisia.

While the Pz.III with KwK L/42 was obsolete by 1943, they could still be found with some regiments. For instance, the Großdeutschland Division had 2 battle-ready Ausf.Js on July 4th 1943

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IIIJ_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf.J mit 5cm KwK 39 L/60 with 50mm KwK 39 L/60 gun

During the Battle of France, German tank crews encountered rather well-armored British and French tanks, including the S35, B1bis, and Matilda I and II. Engagements showed that the German 37mm tank guns were ineffective against such opposition. As a result, by August of 1940, the German High Command ordered the development of new Pz.III variants with a longer 50mm gun, which had much better armor penetration capability. However, satisfying the requirement took some time. Integrating a longer gun into existing turrets turned out to be a difficult task, while a short-barrel 50mm gun could go in easily. As an interim solution, the Pz.III Ausf.G, Ausf.H and Ausf.J received the short main gun.

Encounters with Soviet T-34 and KV tanks, and British Matilda and Valentine tanks in the summer of 1941, made the task of refitting Pz.IIIs with 50mm guns even more crucial. New Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf.J mit 5cm KwK 39 L/60 began to roll off the assembly lines in December of 1941. Some existing Pz.IIIs were also upgraded. Initial engagements in early 1942 proved promising; however it quickly became apparent that while the gun was adequate, the tank’s armor was not. The Russians overcame initial logistic difficulties and by then had 76mm AP shells in ample supply, while the Allies in North Africa began using 6-pdr anti-tank guns, and M3 and M4 Medium tanks with 75mm guns. By July of 1942, after a production run of 1,067 tanks, production of the Pz.III Ausf.J was stopped. They were replaced with the better armored Pz.III Ausf.L. Nevertheless, many Ausf.Js remained in active service throughout 1943.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IIIN_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen III Ausf.N Medium Support Tank, 1942

The Pz.III Ausf.N tank went into serial production in June of 1942. This was a support tank, filling a niche vacant after the production of short-gun Pz.IVs and StuG.IIIs ended. Despite the 75mm gun’s poor armor penetration capabilities, it still had its advantages. The low muzzle velocity led to improved accuracy, which meant it was well suited for attacking fixed emplacements such as machine-gun nests and artillery and mortar positions. Stock Pz.IIIs armed with a 50mm gun were quickly becoming obsolete, and it was decided to use some of them to create a specialized support tank, which was designated Pz.III Ausf.N. A large number of Ausf.Ns were made by converting incomplete Ausf.L and Ausf.M Pz.IIIs on the assembly line.

The tank’s main weapon was a 75mm StuK L/24 gun, of which there was a surplus after the StuG III SPG was upgraded to a better weapon. The Ausf.N had split frontal armor, with an additional 20mm armor plate installed 120mm ahead of the main armor plate. Some vehicles had additional armor on the gun mantlet. Late-series examples had armor skirts, and a new commander’s cupola with thicker armor and a single hatch. Some tanks were covered in Zimmerit, an anti-magnetic paste. The Ausf.N ended up being the final production variant of the Panzer III. When production ended in August of 1943, 700 Ausf.Ns were produced, including 3 converted Ausf.Js, 447 converted Ausf.Ls and 213 converted Ausf.Ms; 37 additional examples were made from other types of Pz.III, converted after needing factory repairs. Altogether the Pz.III Ausf.N was a rather successful tank for 1943, despite its shortcomings in the armor department.

Pz.III Ausf.N was actively used on all fronts until the end of the war, with very few remaining in service by 1945. It saw action in Africa, Italy, France, and Eastern Europe. Some saw action with panzergrenadier divisions, and alongside heavy Tiger tanks in special battalions.

In North Africa, the Pz.III Ausf.N became most famous for being a part of the 501st heavy tank battalion, which, for example, had 16 Tigers and 14 Pz.III Ausf.Ns in February of 1943. With the 501st, the Ausf.N participated in heavy fighting in Tunisia starting in November of 1942, and continued to fight until the end of the North African campaign.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/ger/Pz_IIF_afrika]
Panzerkampfwagen II Ausf.F Light Tank

The Pz.II Ausf F was the last mass-produced Panzer II variant. Lessons learned in the course of fighting in Poland and France were applied to its design, which mainly led to strengthened 30-35mm frontal armor. The FAMO company began mass production of the new variant in March of 1941, which ceased in December of 1942, with a total of 524 Ausf.Fs produced.

Tanks of this type saw active service on the Eastern Front in 1941-1942, and in North Africa during the same period. Light and maneuverable, the tank was perfectly suited for fast maneuvers in the enemy rear. Its 20mm cannon with good ballistic performance was quite capable of taking out light tanks and armored cars, whose armor was only designed to stop small-arms fire. The Panzer II’s frontal armor could often stop a 45mm shell, especially on the Eastern Front where quality ammunition was a problem in 1941.

Nevertheless, by early 1942 the type was clearly obsolete. The Russians solved their 45mm shell woes, and the Panzer II armor was no longer a problem. The Red Army also had a large number of anti-tank rifles readily available, which could make Swiss cheese out of the tank’s 15mm side armor. Increasingly, more T-34s began to appear at the front, against which the Pz.II was impotent. In North Africa the situation was equally dire. There, new Allied tanks easily outclassed the Pz.II; even the American M3 Stuart, ostensibly in the same class as the Pz.II, outperformed it in every category.

As a result, in 1942 the Panzer II began to disappear from the front, instead being relegated to rear echelon guard duties. An increasing number of tank hulls were also used to create self-propelled guns, although for some reason production of the stock Pz.II continued until the end of 1942. By early 1943, few Pz.IIs remained in Africa, although they could still be occasionally encountered. For instance, the 10th Panzer Division, sent to Tunisia in November of 1942, had 21 Pz.II Ausf.Fs. A few tanks of this type even participated in the Battle of Kursk. By 4th of July 1943, German Army Group South had 54 Pz.IIs, including 4 with the Großdeutschland division. By July 31st five of their Pz.IIs were written off as lost, all from 6th and 7th Panzer Divisions. Single examples of this model remained in service until the end of the war. By March of 1945, the Wehrmacht counted 15 Pz.IIs with front-line units, and 130 more in the reserves. The successor to the Ausf.F was the Panzer II Ausf.L, produced in very small numbers, which however had a completely different design.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/usa/M3_(Lee)_afrika]
М3 Medium Tank

The American M3 Medium tank was a further development of the M2 medium tank. By late 1940, the progress of the war in Europe clearly showed that a 37mm gun was no longer an effective tank weapon. The most logical decision was to reequip existing tanks with 75mm guns. But that would require a drastic redesign of the turret, which would take some time, due to US engineers having no prior experience creating turrets for weapons of this caliber. However, the US did not want to wait until the redesign was completed, and wanted to continue producing tanks in the interim. As a result, a very unusual design was proposed, a redesigned M2 tank with a 75mm gun in an archaic sponson mounting, and still retaining its original 37mm gun in the main turret. The resulting tank looked unusual to say the least. However, despite the design’s clear shortcomings, a prototype was ordered in June of 1940. Several large tank factories were also being built at the time. First prototypes of the new M3 tanks were ready for testing by the spring of 1941. In August, serial production began at five factories simultaneously.

The tank was of a very unusual design, with the armament positioned at three levels. The first level consisted of the 75mm gun in the right sponson and two fixed .30-cal machine guns in the front armor plate. The second level was the turret with a 37mm gun and a coaxial .30-cal machine gun. The final level was a rotating commander’s cupola with its own .30-cal. Both the 37mm and 75mm guns were stabilized in elevation only. The tank crew consisted of six men.

The tank’s unique appearance led many observers to immediately form a negative opinion. However, other than a limited coverage for the 75mm gun, the only other shortcoming was its tall silhouette. The tank’s armor was superior to German tanks of 1941-1942, although it was slightly worse than that of the Russian T-34. The M3’s armament was extremely powerful for its time period. Two stabilized main guns with excellent ballistic performance could confidently engage all Axis tanks. The 75mm gun could penetrate a Tiger tank’s side armor. The tank was reliable and durable, comfortable for the crew, and both the driver and commander had good visibility.

Several variants of the M3 were produced, differing in hull manufacturing method (riveted, cast, welded), and engine type (gasoline and diesel). A variant specifically for the British had a cast turret without the cupola, designated Grant I. By the time production ended in December of 1942, 6,230 M3 tanks of all variants were produced, including 1,685 Grant Is.

M3 saw action on all fronts. Both the British Grants, and the American M3s, which the British called “Lee”, served in North Africa, where they were well respected by the crews, thanks to the powerful armament. According to some data, M3s also saw action with the Polish units in 1944 in France. M3s saw action in Burma, and other Pacific locations, both with US and Australian forces. After landing in Africa in November of 1942, US forces were mainly equipped with the M4 Sherman and the light M3 Stuart, except for the 1st Armored Division, which was mainly equipped with the medium M3 Lee/Grant. With the Old Ironsides, the M3 was involved in heavy fighting in Tunisia, including the Battle of Kasserine Pass, where the 1st suffered heavy losses. By May of 1943 the division still had fifty-one M3s operational.

The USSR received 976 M3s in 1942-1943 via the lend-lease program, redesignating the tank M3s (for Sredniy, or Medium). With Soviet tank brigades and separate tank regiments the M3 saw a lot of action in 1942-1943, participating in the Battle of Kursk and continuing to fight sporadically in 1944. By July 4th of 1943 the Voronezh front had 75 M3s tanks, 31 of them with the 192nd Tank Brigade, 32 with 230th Separate Tank Regiment, and 12 with the 245th STR. The 245th took the brunt of the German attack, and by July 11th its M3s and M3l tanks took part in the Battle of Prokhorovka.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/usa/M4_(Sherman)_afrika]
М4 Sherman Medium Tank

The M3 tank, due to its unusual design, was clearly an interim solution. Soon after the work on the M3 commenced, the design of a completely new tank began. The vehicle was envisioned as the continuation of the M3 design, addressing the predecessor’s shortcomings. Large-scale design work began on February 1st of 1941, and by June a wooden mock-up was complete, which was designated T6. By the 2nd of September, 1941 a prototype was ready, which differed from later production examples in several details, including a side access hatch and a commander’s cupola. Very quickly, by September 5h, the tank was recommended for production. The first serial run commenced in November. On December 11th, 1941 the tank was accepted for service as the M4 Medium Tank, and dubbed General Sherman after a Civil War Union general. The first major variant of the tank, M4A1, went into mass production in February of 1942.

The M4 was a tank of standard design with front transmission housing. The frontal section of the hull was well sloped at 56 degrees, making it quite capable of stopping all contemporary shells; but the side armor was vertical. The hull compartment contained the driver and his assistant, who also fired the ball mount machine gun. The turret housed the commander, gunner, and loader. The tank’s armament consisted of a 75mm M3 gun stabilized in elevation only, as well as a .50-cal machine gun in a flexible AA mount and two .30-cal machine guns (coaxial and in right bow). Several variants of the tank existed, differing in hull manufacturing method (cast or welded), engine type (three gasoline and two diesel types), suspension (late-war variants even had a wide-tracked “horizontal” HVSS suspension), and armament, with many late-war examples housing a more powerful 76mm main gun. In addition to that, examples with the same formal designation produced at different factories or at different times could also differ in some details.

The Sherman became the workhorse US battle tank, like the T-34 with the Russians. The Sherman was designed with mass production in mind, which made it easy to set up manufacture at factories that never dealt with military hardware before. When properly cared for, the vehicle was very reliable, and required minimal maintenance. The tank also offered comfortable crew arrangements. Crew survivability was gradually improved by moving fuel tanks into separate compartments, and later moving ammo stowage into separate water-filled jackets in the hull floor. The tank had a superb radio transmitter, excellent sights, and a stabilized main gun (an exclusive feature of US-made tanks at the time). The main gun had a low muzzle velocity, due to its design originating with an ancient Mle1897 French division gun. However, great quality of ammunition led to better overall effectiveness compared to the newer Soviet F-34 gun. Unfortunately, when engaging German heavy tanks such as the Tiger, or the frontal armor of later Panzer IV variants, the 75mm gun was clearly inadequate. The situation improved only with the installation of the 76mm M1A1 gun; however these variants became available en masse only very late in the war. Another serious disadvantage was the lack of an APCR shell. The tank’s armor was quite good, generally equal to those of the Pz.IV and the T-34. Another disadvantage of the Sherman was its high silhouette, which made it quite vulnerable.

Tanks of the initial M4 variant had a welded hull and a Continental R-975 gasoline engine. This variant was designed for production at factories with no equipment to cast iron, and as such, serial production began in July 1942, later than the M4A1. M4s served with the 1st and 3rd US Armored Divisions, which were a part of the force that landed in North Africa in November of 1942. The Sherman was the most numerous US tank in Tunisia, and generally performed well, although the inexperience of crews and field commanders often led to unnecessary losses. Subsequently, Sherman tanks saw action in Italy, Western Europe, and the Pacific. 2096 M4 Sherman tanks were sent to the British, which rearmed it with a powerful 17-pdr gun, a modification designated Sherman Firefly. A total of 6,748 Sherman tanks of the M4 variant were produced between July of 1942 and January of 1944, and an additional 1,641 M4(105) variants armed with a 105mm howitzer were produced between February of 1944 and March of 1945.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/usa/M4a1_(Sherman)_afrika]
М4А1 Sherman Medium Tank

The M4A1 was the first variant of the Sherman to go into production in February of 1942, and the first Sherman to see action. This model differed from the stock M4 by having a cast upper hull. This detail made manufacturing much quicker, but it also led to the tank being somewhat less survivable, especially with the first production series that had problems with armor quality. The tank was powered by a Continental R-975 gasoline engine. 

The first Sherman tanks saw action not with the US Army, but with the British. In September of 1941, brand new Sherman tanks were delivered to North Africa via the lend-lease program, including M4A1s and some M4A2s. By late October, the new tanks, finally accepted by the British after some changes, saw action at the Second Battle of El Alamein, helping the British attain a decisive victory. The Sherman first saw combat with the US Army in Tunisia in December of 1942. Large numbers of Sherman tanks were used in fighting for the Faid pass and the Kasserine pass; in the latter battle it suffered heavy losses, due to the US having little experience with armored warfare, and the Germans using the heavy Tiger tanks, against which early Sherman tanks could do very little. Subsequently, the M4A1 saw action in Italy, Europe, and the Pacific. 942 M4A1s were sent to the British, which rearmed it with a powerful 17-pdr gun, a modification designated Sherman Firefly. 1990 were sent to Russia via the lend-lease program, where the Sherman was well-liked by its crews.

A total of 6,281 M4A1s were produced between February of 1942 and December of 1943, followed by an additional 3,426 M4A176(W) variants, armed with a 76mm gun. Additionally, Canadians set up their own production of the Sherman, manufacturing 188 M4A1s in late 1942 – early 1943, designated Grizzly I. 

[EncDescription_data/Units/Tanks/Usa/M3A1_afrika]
М3А1 Stuart Light Tank

The American M3A1 Stuart light tank entered production in June of 1942. It was a further modification of the M3 Light Tank. The main changes included the deletion of the commander’s cupola, changes to the turret shape and turret traverse mechanism, and an installation of a gun stabilizer.  During the production run some additional changes were made; early production variants had a riveted hull with sponson machine guns, and later examples had a welded hull with machine guns deleted. Most examples were powered by the powerful Continental-Wright radial engine, with 211 M3A1s having diesel engines.

The tank was ideally suited for recon duties, or pursuit and harassment of retreating enemy forces, possessing great driving performance and reliability. At the same time, attempts for front-line use were usually unsuccessful. The armament and armor of the Stuart were inadequate for such a role. By all other parameters, the tank was superior to comparable Allied tanks, such as the Soviet T-70, due to its superior speed and better defined crew roles; and it was greatly superior to the German Panzer II. 

Geographically, the use of M3A1 spanned the entire globe. US armed forces used the Stuart in the Mediterranean and the Pacific. For example, the 1st Armored Division, upon landing in North Africa in November of 1942, had 158 M3 and M3A1 light tanks. However, first engagements with German panzers quickly exposed the tank’s shortcomings, making it clear that it had little chance in the field. Especially heavy losses were suffered at the Battle of the Kasserine Pass. When used by the British, lend-lease M3A1s (designated Stuart III) fought in North Africa starting in November of 1941, and saw action in Burma and in Normandy. Soviet Union received 1,232 M3 and M3A1 tanks between January of 1942 and April of 1943, most of them the latter model. Most of the units had gasoline engines, although some had diesel. In the USSR, the tanks were designated M3l, to differentiate them from the M3 Lee/Grant Medium Tank, which the Russians redesignated M3s. Both the M3l and M3s were used alongside each other in tank brigades and separate tank regiments. Most of these tanks fought with the Transcaucasian Front. The brunt of the fighting for the tank took place in 1942, some also happening in 1943, and individual models taking part in combat even later. In the course of the Battle of Kursk, by July 4th, 1943 the Voronezh front had 51 M3l tanks, 24 of them with the 192nd Tank Brigade, and 12 with the 245th Separate Tank Regiment. The 245th took the brunt of the German attack, and by July 11th its M3s and M3l tanks took part in the Battle of Prokhorovka.

By the time serial production of the M3A1 ended in early 1943, a total of 4,621 were built. The M3A1 was then replaced by the next variant, the M3A3.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/uk/A15_(Valentine_II)_afrika]
Mk III Valentine II Infantry Tank

Design work on what was to become the Valentine tank began early in 1938, with the development starting as a private venture of the Vickers-Armstrong corporation. The tank was a hybrid of sorts between an infantry and a cruiser tank; from the former, the vehicle received formidable armor plating (which however was much weaker than that of the Matilda II), and from the latter it inherited some essential design elements. Initially the War Office showed little enthusiasm for the prototype, for example complaining about a cramped two-man turret. However, the approaching war in Europe caused the army brass to reconsider, and the tank was ordered into production on April 14, 1939. Serial production proved troublesome. First production examples rolled off the production line only in May of 1940, and thus were too late to participate in the Battle of France. The first variant of the tank, Valentine I, was powered by the AEC A189 gasoline engine; only 300-some of these tanks were built. The same year a new Valentine I
I variant was introduced, powered by the AEC A190 diesel engine, as well as a Valentine IV with the US-made GMC 6-71 diesel engine and a slightly different transmission. Their most apparent difference from the Valentine I was an external fuel tank. 

By 1940 and 1941 standards, the Valentine was an adequate tank. The main gun could penetrate most German armor, except for the frontal armor of the Pz.III and Pz.IV; at the same time, Valentine’s armor could withstand multiple hits from German 37mm and early 50mm guns. By 1942 however the situation began to change. Under some conditions newer long-barrel German 50mm guns could and did penetrate Valentine’s armor, and the appearance of the new 75mm German guns made the situation even worse. By mid-1942, German tanks were also undergoing improvements that increased their frontal armor, making them invulnerable to the Valentine’s 40mm gun from the front. The British responded by introducing a three-man turret, and mounting more powerful 57mm and even 75mm guns on the Valentine. Alas, this was done at the expense of side armor reduced from 60mm to 43-50mm. Nevertheless, multiple variants of the Valentine remained in service until late 1944, becoming the most mass-produced British tank of the war. In its category, the Valentine is considered one of the best tanks of the war.

The brunt of the action for the Valentine took place in North Africa in late 1941 – early 1942, when it made up the bulk of the British armored regiments. British tank crews liked the tank’s armor, small size, and especially admired its reliability, which was problematic with most other British tanks at the time. The tank’s shortcomings included a cramped two-man turret and the high workload for the commander, who also had to double as the loader. A common problem with the British 40mm and 57mm guns was the lack of a high-explosive shell.

By late 1942, the 8th Armored Brigade, advancing on Libya and Tunisia from the East, had few Valentines left in service. The bulk of the tanks were US-made M4 Sherman and M3 Grant tanks. At the same time, the 6th Armored Division that landed in North Africa during Operation Torch had a large number of Valentine and Crusader tanks, which saw a lot of combat in Tunisia, including the Battle of the Kasserine Pass in February of 1943. A large number of Valentines of various models were sent to Russia via the lend-lease program, including practically all the Valentines manufactured in Canada. The first Valentines were received in late 1941, and the last in 1944. The Russians generally liked the Valentine, which were especially common with Soviet cavalry regiments. 

A total of 8,275 Valentines of all variants were produced during the war, 1,420 of them in Canada. 3,782 were sent to USSR. Valentine II production numbered 1,590. Several vehicles were created on the Valentine’s chassis, including the Bishop SPA and the Archer self-propelled anti-tank gun.
[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/uk/Valentine_IX_afrika]
Mk III Valentine IX Infantry Tank

Design work on what was to become the Valentine tank began early in 1938, with the development starting as a private venture of the Vickers-Armstrong corporation. The tank was a hybrid of sorts between an infantry and a cruiser tank; from the former, the vehicle received formidable armor plating (which however was much weaker than that of the Matilda II), and from the latter it inherited some essential design elements. Initially the War Office showed little enthusiasm for the prototype, for example complaining about a cramped two-man turret. However, the approaching war in Europe caused the army brass to reconsider, and the tank was ordered into production on April 14, 1939. Serial production proved troublesome. First production examples rolled off the production line only in May of 1940, and thus were too late to participate in the Battle of France. The first variant of the tank, Valentine I, was powered by the AEC A189 gasoline engine; only 300-some of these tanks were built. The same year a new Valentine I
I variant was introduced, powered by the AEC A190 diesel engine, as well as a Valentine IV with the US-made GMC 6-71 diesel engine and a slightly different transmission. Their most apparent difference from the Valentine I was an external fuel tank. 

By 1940 and 1941 standards, the Valentine was an adequate tank. The main gun could penetrate most German armor, except for the frontal armor of the Pz.III and Pz.IV; at the same time, Valentine’s armor could withstand multiple hits from German 37mm and early 50mm guns. By 1942 however the situation began to change. Under some conditions newer long-barrel German 50mm guns could and did penetrate Valentine’s armor, and the appearance of the new 75mm German guns made the situation even worse. By mid-1942, German tanks were also undergoing improvements that increased their frontal armor, making them invulnerable to the Valentine’s 40mm gun from the front. The British responded by introducing a three-man turret, and mounting more powerful 57mm and even 75mm guns on the Valentine. Alas, this was done at the expense of side armor reduced from 60mm to 43-50mm. Nevertheless, multiple variants of the Valentine remained in service until late 1944, becoming the most mass-produced British tank of the war. In its category, the Valentine is considered one of the best tanks of the war.

The brunt of the action for the Valentine took place in North Africa in late 1941 – early 1942, when it made up the bulk of the British armored regiments. British tank crews liked the tank’s armor, small size, and especially admired its reliability, which was problematic with most other British tanks at the time. The tank’s shortcomings included a cramped two-man turret and the high workload for the commander, who also had to double as the loader. A common problem with the British 40mm and 57mm guns was the lack of a high-explosive shell.

By late 1942, the 8th Armored Brigade, advancing on Libya and Tunisia from the East, had few Valentines left in service. The bulk of the tanks were US-made M4 Sherman and M3 Grant tanks. At the same time, the 6th Armored Division that landed in North Africa during Operation Torch had a large number of Valentine and Crusader tanks, which saw a lot of combat in Tunisia, including the Battle of the Kasserine Pass in February of 1943. A large number of Valentines of various models were sent to Russia via the lend-lease program, including practically all the Valentines manufactured in Canada. The first Valentines were received in late 1941, and the last in 1944. The Russians generally liked the Valentine, which were especially common with Soviet cavalry regiments. 

A total of 8,275 Valentines of all variants were produced during the war, 1,420 of them in Canada. 3,782 were sent to USSR. Valentine II production numbered 1,590. Several vehicles were created on the Valentine’s chassis, including the Bishop SPA and the Archer self-propelled anti-tank gun.

[EncDescription_data\units\tanks\uk\a12_(matilda_ii)_afrika\]
Mk II Matilda II (A12) Infantry Tank


The colossal failure of the Mk I Matilda did not come as a surprise to British General Staff.  Even before the war they realized a replacement would be needed, and quickly.  Therefore, the Mk. II Matilda II was unveiled in 1938 as a faster, more heavily armed, and thicker armored version of it's previous version. 

Although only 24 of these tanks were in operation in France in 1940 they posed a huge problem for German forces.  Their thick armor couldn't be pierced by their anti-tank weapons or any of the German tanks of the day.  Only the 88mm anti-aircraft guns had the capacity to puncture and disable the tank.  On the other hand, the 2 pound cannon on this tank could pierce the armor of any German tank in battle at that time.

The Mk II Matilda II's last days for British forces came in North Africa in 1942.  The open terrain gave the Afrikakorps a significant advantage in using the 3.5in anti-aircraft guns.  Attempts to mount a 6 pound gun on this tank failed due to it's small turret ring.  It spent the rest of it's life with the British Forces as a mine sweeper and other specialty duties until production ceased in 1943.

Most of these tanks ended up in the Red Army as part of the Soviet Lend-Lease program.

[EncDescription_data/units/tanks/uk/a22f_(churchill_iv)_afrika]
Infantry Tank Mk IV (A22) Churchill NA 75

Churchill III / IV with upgraded weaponry using the turret and mantlet from a destroyed or scrapped Sherman (known as NA 75 from North Africa where the conversions took place), or having their current gun rebored to 75 mm (III* / IV (75 mm) ) (84 rounds). More IVs were modified than IIIs, and their performance is virtually identical to the VI. To fit the Sherman mantlet required cutting away the front of the Churchill turret before it was welded in place, then the mantlet slot had to be cut away to give sufficient elevation. The Sherman 75 mm gun was designed for a left hand loader and the Churchill in common with British practice had a right hand loader. The gun was therefore turned upside down and the firing controls adapted. 