Evening star., 1950-07-30
Heavies Now Mediums

Heavies Now Mediums
BY World War n standards the
Pershing, and subsequently the
Patton, were regarded as heavy
tanks, but they now are listed as
mediums, in anticipation of the
heavier weapons which eventually
will go into production.
American tank theory has re-
volved consistently around COM
promise between three factors
mobility, fire power and armor-
with the Patton tank representing
the most desirable combination of
all three.
1t has been and still is the con-
viction of American military plan
ners that the prime factor in tank
operations should be maneuvera-
bility and speed, with less armor
and maximum practical fire power
rather than much heavier armor,
diversified guns and slower speed.
This. no doubt. resulted from the
terrain in Europe and North Al
rica, where the United States
fought the last war, and the fact
that World War II was a war Of
movement rather than a battle
against strongly fortified positions.
We are devoted fundamentally
as military power to the prin-
ciple of fast, penetrating attack
with immediate exploitation Of
holes that might be driven in the
enemy line, rather than slower
movement of masses of heavier
armor over a whole front.
That is the reason American
tacticians have leaned so heavily
on the fast, light tank, which is
capable-as Gen. Patton demon
strated-not only of penetrating
the enemy line but also of exploit
ing those penetrations with deep
drives into enemy held territory.
Their Functions
The primary function of the
tank, according to American mill
tary theory, is not to fight another
tank although tank-vs.-tank
combat frequently occurs. The
prime function of the light tank is
reconnaissance and protection of
t1anks, while the chief job of the
heavier vehicles is to smash enemy
defenses-gun emplacements, for
tlflcationS, etc.-and to spearhead
deeper penetration of the broken
line. That is why the Patton tank
is such a valuable weapon, be-
cause it not only can penetrate
but can also exploit.
The defeat of enemy tanks is
the primary function of special
lied anti-tank weapons-the 3.5-
inch bazooka, artillery, landmines
and tank traps. Thus, we have
never built our own tanks for the
primary purpose of knocking out
enemy tanks of the Cotton variety.
In tank-vs. tank battle, the
more heavily gunned and more
heavily armored machine, of
course, has the advantage, for it
can stand out of range of the
lighter tank and pound it to pieces.
However, it is possible for two
lighter tanks to pounce on q heavy,
and while one maneuvers in front
to attract fire the other can hit
from the flank, aiming at the
tracks and other vulnerable spots.
The heavy tank, if it is slow, is
vulnerable to direct action by
troops, who can steal up in its
blind spots and immobilize it by
direct action. 1t is also a sitting
duck for gunfire of all kinds, in
Guiding artillery of the larger cali
bers.
The forthcoming addition of a
heavy tank to the American arm
ored arsenal had to be based on
speed comparable to that of the
Patton tank-that is 30 miles an
hour-as well as heavier arnor
and greater f1repower than is at
present in use.
This became a problem of de-
veloping more powerful yet COM
pact engines, a problem which was
solved in the new Patton tank. The
developments worked into the Pat
ton presumably will be carried
even further in the perfection of a
fast Cotton arrnored vehicle.
A nilOt model of q 6O-tor took