lol and I also forgot to mention its one of the Shermans with a gun that is 105mm's got your fire and your brimstone! The tank is really designated POA-CWS-H5. And also this variant actually saw ...
This image with the title of "A Sherman with a coaxial flame thrower being tested in Hawaii, July 1945" is one of a large collection of pictures from the category Tank . We collect quality images, from a social network website reddit.com
Source: To view the original source also read the full comments of the original poster as well as from other redditor, you can click on the following Link.
Some random comments on reddit about A Sherman with a coaxial flame thrower being tested in Hawaii, July 1945
- lol and I forgot to mention its one of the Shermans with a 105mm gun
- It's got your fire and your brimstone!
- The tank is actually designated POA-CWS-H5. And this variant actually saw some action in Korea. But yeah it is based upon the M4A3(105). Oh and to clarify what the designation means: POA stands for Pacific Ocean Area, CWS stands for Chemical Warfare Service, the H stands for Hawaii, and the 5 indicates that this is the 5th tank designed and tested by the POA-CWS team under Colonel George F. Unmacht. The POA-CWS-H1 is the Sherman that is usually seen in footage of the war with the flamethrower equipped in place of the main gun.
- I came here to smash jungle and fack women... And they just shipped me to an island 2,000 miles away from any women.
- Roast 'em, shoot 'em, blow 'em to bits. We won't stop till Hans calls it quits!
- Because the Sherman needed to be more flammable!
- The Sherman was not unusually flammable for a WW2 tank. All tanks during the war were prone to brewing up when knocked out.
- The US Army version of the Sherman if memory serves used a Gasoline Engine; considering its armor was somewhat light thats a dangerous mix. German tanks also used gas engines but they had much better protection.
- The main cause of fires in all tanks during the war was poor ammunition storage in the tank. Early versions of the Sherman for instance had much of its ammunition stored in the sponsons and that just so happened to be where it was hit the most, as a result there were a lot of fires. But as I said, all tanks during the war caught fire when knocked out more often than not and the Sherman wasn't even the worst. The Panzer 4 burned even more readily than the Sherman did as an example. With the introduction of wet storage though the Sherman became just about the safest tank on the battlefield. Only about 15% of those equipped with wet storage brewed up when knocked out while the average for most other tanks was in the 70-80% range. German tanks also used gas engines but they had much better protection. Some German tanks had better protection, like the Tiger I and II for instance. But tank like the Panzer 4 weren't even as well armored as the Sherman, and the flank armor of the Panther could be penetrated even by obsolete Russian anti-tank rifles from around 100 meters as well as most 50mm AT guns from greater than 1000 meters. Late war German tanks had great frontal armor but that only saved them from a portion of enemy fire.
- The whole "Ronson" fallacy has to be one of the most frustrating things I come across regularly in WW2 tank discussions. Also, the statement that it took 5 Shermans to kill a Tiger is blood boiling when taken out of context and used as a symbol of the M4's supposed obsolescence.
- Also, the statement that it took 5 shermans to kill a Tiger is blood boiling when taken out of context and used as a symbol of the M4's supposed obsolescence. There is just no context that that was true, it is a complete myth! 😛 As far as I can tell it came from Death Traps, which while a fun read is full of very bad history. But I agree with you, the "ronson" myth is one of the most annoying and pervasive myths relating to WW2 tanks. Read more comments