Any dispute about interpreting the BofB?

[Juha]

Hello Tony
I were surprised on your quote on Russian oppinion on Matilda, because it was contrary to what I have learn earlier, but looking your link, straight after your quote are the normal Russian complains on Matilda:

The main complaint of the Soviet tank crews arrived on the chassis. The smooth solid surface, it behaved perfectly on the roads as quickly broke down. In Russia, revealed a more specific one drawback: the fall and spring mud, which clogs day between the bulwarks and hull at night at low temperatures froze and deprived tank able to move. In fairness it should be noted that the tank was created without considering the peculiarities of Russia’s climate, to another army, and not for the Russian ( “barbarian” from the standpoint of the British) the operating conditions . However, the low reliability of the chassis and complained about the British tankers. Assign the same to the shortcomings of a small speed “Matilda” is impossible – a tank designed to accompany the infantry and in that capacity should have been applied. All cases of “Matilda” for other purposes (which is very often occurred on the Soviet-front) led to unnecessarily high losses.

Read more: http://socyberty.com/military/infant...#ixzz10P9P5imb

In fact the reliabilty of Matilda II was also problem in France 1940. The only British tank which Russians liked and demanded more was Valentine. But we are now quite far away from BoB.

Juha