A unique comparison between the two most numerous British and German tank types from 1941 to 1943. Although much has been written about the Panzer III, little attention has been given to the equally prominent Valentine tank. This work compares the respective strengths and weaknesses of these iconic tanks, which frequently went head-to-head in brutal battles across Europe, Libya, Egypt, and Tunisia. It documents the upgrades made to each AFV type over three years, as up-gunned and up-armoured variants – ever more lethal, ever more survivable – arrived in North Africa. Dr Bruce Newsome explores the two tanks’ encounters, from the first Valentine vs Panzer III clashes in 1941, to the Axis drive into Egypt, and on to the Tunisian fighting of 1942–1943. Colour artworks include profile, weaponry and gunsight, and battlescene views of both tanks, while maps chart the campaigns in which they met. Each AVF’s performance is also covered, along with their technical details, design evolution, and crew histories.

Why do the combat capabilities of individual soldiers vary so much? This book seeks to provide an answer to this and other questions about variability in combat performance. Some soldiers flee quickly from the battlefield, while others endure all hardships until the bitter end. Some combat units can perform numerous types of missions, while others cannot keep themselves organized during peacetime. Some militaries armed with obsolete weapons have out fought enemies with the latest weapons, just as some massively outnumbered armies have beaten back much larger opponents. In this first social scientific study of the effectiveness of combat troops, Newsome evaluates competing explanations for the varying combat capabilities and performances. There are four main explanations, each emphasizing the influence of a single factor. The first focuses on material endowments. How well funded are the troops? Do they have the latest protective gear and the most advanced weaponry? Second, some analysts claim that democracies produce better commanders, superior strategies, more motivated personnel, or better-managed personnel; others, however, associated those characteristics with more authoritarian forms of government. Third is the idea that giving more power to the troops on the ground in individual combat units empowers them with decision-making capability and adaptability to fast-changing situations and circumstances. Newsome presents evidence that decentralized personnel management does correlate with superior combat performance. Fourth, soldier capabilities and performance often are assumed to reflect intrinsic attributes, such as prior civilian values. Newsome argues that the capabilities ofcombat soldiers are acquired through military training and other forms of conditioning, but he does not entirely discount the role of a soldier's individual character. In the age-old nature vs. nurture argument, he finds that intrinsic qualities do count, but that extrinsic factors, such as training and environment, matter even more.