John Langdon MC was the commander of 1 Troop A Squadron and wrote a book called 'The Sharp End'. It is now well out of print and only a small number were produced. Fortunately I have a copy. A quick check shows nothing about that incident. I also have a copy of the War Diary which I will check - please be patient and remind me if necessary!
Much appreciated! No hurry, whenever you can! While you're there, I'll pick your brains! In the photo of Cherub (attached), there is a number in the tactical square (I think it's a 7), what exactly does it refer to? I read somewhere that numbers inside the tactical signs were troop numbers, but I thought they only had four troops per squadron.
According to a copy I have of the Bovington transcript of the 3RTR War Diary, a B Squadron tank was hit by a 'bazooka' on 1st May 1945. There are no other details. I'll check a scanned copy of the War Diary when I get a chance - this is clearly a better approach as it includes various details re losses that aren't present in the transcript version.
By the way, just came across some interesting comet pics here: Comet cruiser tank A34 | World War Photos No doubt you've probably seen them, but just in case.
Not my specialty but I do know that, at various times, the Troops were numbered sequentially for the whole Regiment in which case 7 Troop would have been in B Squadron. Don't assume this is a definitive comment - as I say it's not my specialty.
There appears to be 'family history conflation' - totally understandable and very common - if I've read things correctly. If the photo including Charlie was taken in Bad Segeburg and/or Charlie was killed on the last day of he War then Charlie can't have been killed on 1st May 1945 (the War hadn't finished - 3RTR hadn't yet reached Bad Segeburg).
Does this say "an infinitely better tank than the Sherman"? I tried looking at Kevin Tucker's spreadsheet of vehicle names and I don't see Cestus or Cherub. But maybe I overlooked them.
I've checked Langdons book in more detail; it does mention the incident but provides no more details.
Fred Preston. Care home in Gravesend. I spoke with his daughter a couple of years ago ( her husband used to work at my place) so I’ll update you with any news. She sent me some pics of him in 3RTR
Yep, Grandad was not at all impressed with Shermans, remember clearly how they used to call them Ronson lighters, 'just one tap and they're alight', or something along those lines! Told me the Germans called them 'Tommy burners'. Just goes to show, with that reputation, I wouldn't get into one, knowing you've probably got a couple of 88s up ahead somewhere. He did say that mechanically they weren't bad, but the Comet were better. One of the stories he did tell me, when we were talking about this, was an overnight advance into Germany, not sure exactly where, but they were going all for it along a main road. The commander would have been asleep and Grandad was keeping watch out of the turret. During the advance, another road joined theirs, and another column of vehicles which was going in the same direction mixed in with them. They carried on till dawn, Grandad dozily looking ahead when he realised the hushed voices he heard coming from the lorry ahead of him were in German! Needless to say, they opened fire and so on. He said that the Comet was so fast on roads that they had caught up with the retreating German units, something they couldn't have done with Shermans.
Small World! Met Fred and family - Sharon and Dan. Was also present when he got his Legion d'Honneur and was party to him getting a ride on a restored Comet tank (marked up as my late father's Comet T335335 Celerity).
Appreciate this thread is not the place for a Sherman discussion but IMHO its poor reputation is undeserved. Tendency to burst into flame was generally due to crews overloading the turret with ammunition, particularly cordite charges. Once this was gripped things improved greatly, and improved even more when wet storage low in the hull was fitted. The Sherman was mechanically reliable and quantity is a quality in its own right. That'll do for now!
Well, as someone or other said, "A lie gets halfway around the world before truth puts on its boots". Rumour has its own way of spreading. Getting back to the subject at hand, I love seeing Comet photographs new to me because there aren't that many to see, to my mind it is quite attractive, and I think there's a strong argument that it was the best Allied tank of the war. And also pictures and stories related to 3RTR as I have read a couple of books about the unit.
The problem with the Sherman was that it wasn't designed for an anti-tank role, but as troop support, hence the armour wasn´t designed to withstand much more than small arms fire (according to Jane's). To take on enemy tanks the Americans had the M10 tank destroyer. What's more, the Americans seriously underestimated German tank armament back in 1942, when the first Shermans came out. When we put the 17 pounder on it (Firefly) then it wasn't a bad tank (the Germans certainly feared it), much better, as far as mechanical reliability was concerned, than British tanks of the time, until, that is, the Comet arrived. The fact that they kept on 'brewing up' didn't enamor them to tank crews, that's all! Apparently, according to Mark Lynton, in his book 'Accidental Journey', this was partly due to the Guards Armoured Division's habit of polishing the interior of their Shermans with petrol and paraffin!