Posted on Jul 5, 2022
Sergeant Dean Kenney and the M10 Tank Destroyer
379
20
6
10
10
0
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
The tank-destroyer branch of the U.S. Army was possibly the shortest-lived of all the Army’s branches in World War II. By the end of the conflict, the War Department had decided that the tank could take over the mission of defeating enemy armor and that there was no future need for the tank destroyer or any other combat-arms branch. The demise of the TDs did not come easily, but they were partly doomed by the fact that the development of the tank as tank killer during the war—arguably beginning with the heavier Pershing and its 90mm gun—made the future of the tank destroyer superfluous.
Kenney’s platoon advanced with the rest of the American forces to the Rhine when the still-intact railroad bridge at Remagen was captured. There were no more tank targets for his platoon to engage before the unit itself crossed the river. The tank destroyers, therefore, once again fired in conjunction with the American artillery to deliver indirect fire in support of the troops who had first crossed the Rhine on March 7 and beyond
Kenney’s platoon advanced with the rest of the American forces to the Rhine when the still-intact railroad bridge at Remagen was captured. There were no more tank targets for his platoon to engage before the unit itself crossed the river. The tank destroyers, therefore, once again fired in conjunction with the American artillery to deliver indirect fire in support of the troops who had first crossed the Rhine on March 7 and beyond
(4)
(0)
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
Ironically, after the NKPA was defeated in the Korean War, there was so little enemy armor remaining that U.S. armor in theater was employed primarily in the indirect fire role there.
(1)
(0)
Excellent share and detailed info on tank destroyers armaments and capabilities. Thanks for the share MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D..
(1)
(0)
Read This Next