How the First Tanks CONQUERED the Trenches 

Can we just appreciate for a moment how RU-vid channels are giving us 1000x the quality of content that History Channel ever did?

My grandfather was a tank mechanic in world war I. American 301st Comp C. He fought from September 1918 to November of 1918. He was in five battles, was gassed, lost an eye and was assigned to a British company when he was in France.

Hello Tank Nuts! Let us know what you thought of our latest video.

My paternal grandfather started off in the cavalry and ended up in the Tank Corps in WW1. Unfortunately his military records were lost in the Blitz in WW2 but I do know he was in a Mark IV ~ probably a Female version ~ when his tank was destroyed by a German field gun, possibly 7.7cm. The warhead detonated in the engine and he was covered in burning engine oil and fuel. He later named his house Morlancourt and I’m not sure if it was because there was a tankodrome there that he might have been based at or whether he was in an action nearby there. He passed away in 1967 and although I was only 7 then I can remember the burn scars. I always regret that he didn’t live longer so I could really talk to him about his experiences. Those early tankers were real trailblazers, working in pretty horrendous conditions. I have the greatest respect for them all.

Great video again. I've been in Guy Martin's Mk IV. My old man took me out for the day, and where it was being kept in Norfolk was just up the road from where he lives. It was an insane piece of machinery.

Another interesting and high quality video. Thanks.

That the FT was very forward-looking is shown by it seeing some service in WW2, and the Japanese Type 95 light tank being an improved FT-17.

The park in waltham cross, England has a replica wwi tank in it. It's a replacement for an original wwi tank that was placed there after wwi to thank the town for raising funds for one. It was scrapped in wwii for the metal.

That was good. You covered all the salient points. These early tanks are quite fascinating. A bit like early naval ironclads, they didn't know how they were going to develop,, an they were feeling their way. In a longer video you could have mentioned some of the funnies they came up with. Troop and stores carriers, radio tanks, gun carriers. Good video though.

Outstanding video! Even my roommate who has zero interest in this type of content watched and really liked it.

Now THIS is epic!!!!!!

Poland also used around 17 FTs during WW2 when Germans entered Warsaw to block tunnel leading to central square

One thing missing here is the role of Winston Churchill in the development of the tank. Initially, the idea was rejected by the army, but Mr. Churchill provided financing for a 'land ship' through the Admiralty.

Great vid. Would love to see the inter war years as well as WW2 in this format

"It is very unstable and prone to fall over on rough ground, which is, to my way of thinking, not an ideal tank characteristic" I nearly choked on my cup of tea!

Splendid to see this more in depth coverage of the Great War armored vehicles and the genesis of tank warfare. Looking forward to visiting the American Heritage Museum Trench Warfare Exhibit, along with the restored M1917, our first mass produced tank based on the Renault FT. Another outstanding video production, kudos to Tank Museum staff, keep 'em coming and thanks very much!

Excellent presentation! Thank you for posting such a clear presentation. I would like to see more of the experimentals especially from this era.

This was excellent. Thank you Tank Museum. 👍

I'm guessing there is still no heating in The Great War exhibition as Chris has donned a warm coat! As usual another great video, looking forward to Tankfest 2024.

it is always interesting that there was the tank made for ww1, the tanks that won ww2, and then everything thats come after

Very amused that a tank crew called their tank frey bentos. Cos its a tin can full of meat right? War humour.

Very interesting video. The spanish civil war made both germans and soviets understand how to operate tank units and the need to upsize them ( firepower, protection and mobility). The germans tested also combined operations (artillery + airplanes + tanks + infantry)

excellent video. Really interesting looking at the contrasting developments and well presented. Thank you.

I never knew they were planning to fit a rotating turret on Little Willie. I wonder why they didn't do it to the Mark I and up?

This is me telling the math robot that I liked this content

The FT was a little beast.

Chris heart gold 💛 ❤

I find land leviathans incredibly romantic. Thank you for your scholarship.

Only on the western Front. In the East it was still mobile warfare with some modern weapons added. The French built more tanks during WW1 than Britain had. I've read of a tank German WW2 veteran who never mentioned his war service. He had been assigned to drive a Renault FT on occupation duties and never saw action. He was to embarrassed to mention this.

Great stuff, thanks to all who produced this

Many thanks for this great quality content

Many tanks for the informative content

This video from The Tank Museum, as always, excellent!

Tank goodness!

Fantastic video! Thanks!

Great production as usual. Copson again in good form!

Good video on an interesting topic.

Great stuff! Thank you.

Always a treat to watch your videos (:

Great video. Loved hearing the history. Any chance of a video about inter war development Cheers

This is a very impressive video. Well done The Tank Museum

Very nice Video. Thank you

Over 50,000 casualties in one day.... The generals or whoever was in charge must have really thought that the Germans would run out of bullets eventually since they just kept sending men in after the first 8 or 10,000 wounded. Insane!

I've been inside the A7V at the Queensland museum in Brisbane .

Awesome video, as always. Thank you! O think it is interesting that tanks were invented as a breakthrough weapon against the stalemate of the western front...than became a mobil element in WW2 to bring fast n quick havoc to overrun the enemy. From a vehicle designed to support infantry to a vehicle infantry is designated to support it.

0:10: Not just "Europeans". How about Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, even the US who arrived just in time for "last drinks" lost a sizeable chunk of that generation. Also in what about the Austro-Hungarian Motorgeschütz designed by Günther Burstyn but admitted not built.

David Fletcher said one of the Mark's they had ideas to use it as a mobile MASH unit or something like that. Sounded really interesting idea

Fascinating to see the World War 1 origins of a weapon that we now take for granted. Excellent presentation, as we've come to expect from the Tank Museum!

A superb insight, great overview of the iron clad horse.

I love the tank museums videos

Very well done.

Awesome...

Good summary

Very interesting military weapon history, thanks! @16:20, I never heard of a Chinse Labor Corps before, interesting!

One of the earliest problems, and one that dogs the Russians currently, was the lack of understanding of the necessity for combined warfare. The co-ordination of tanks and infantry was difficult because there was no lightweight radio communications. Officers often guided their tanks from the outside. At Bullecourt attacks were launched according to the clock, thus infantry launched without tank support & vice-versa. My wife's grandfather (Ernest William Hayward DCM, MM) fought at Bullecourt and was invalided back to the UK after that battle.

I was also aware that Japan also saw the effective use of tanks as a way to provide cover and support for their infantry, starting with the I-Go tank.

Please do more evaluation of tank doctrine videos

My great grandfather served in WW1 in a specialist armoured mime unit using sign language to communicate inside the vehicle When asked, he never spoke about what he did in the war

Thank you. Very informative. My brother, now, lives close to Bovington & although I've not been since toddler/childhood I will visit again (along with RNAS Yeovilton & Haynes Sparkford) ASAP.

As the French & British were first in the field of tank design in a totally new industrialised war, they had nothing to guide them. Thus what they did produce was pretty good considering the circumstances.

Came here for the great video. Stayed for the looney farm comments. Wasn't disappointed in both cases. For those interested in the French side of WWI armoured warfare, there is a little book published in 1931 and tittled "Ceux des chars d'assault" (Roughly translated into "Those of the assault vehicles"). A pretty grim read on the combat conditions faced by the crews - as bad as the British had it -, though it's pretty much on an "unobtanium" level at this point. Only seen two other copies and that was ten years ago while doing a google search. Cheers.

LOL the Germans only built very unimpressive 20 x A7V tanks in WWI, they were largely equipped by captured British and French designs. Apart from the little Renault Ft-17, British designs dominated with the Lozenge Tanks MkI - MkV having the superior mobility and the Whippet the speed and endurance.

top upload guys

When the Germans capture British tanks, did any of those ever see tank combat against them elsewhere in the war? Was there ONLY the one tank battle?

Lincoln still commemorates Tritton by the naming of one of the major roads in the lower part of Lincoln, Tritton Way. There is a MK4? tucked away in the Museum of Lincolnshire Life on top of the Cliff on the approach to the Cathedral.

I absolutely love WWI tanks - they have such a steampunk look to them :)

I think their tanks rolling over on rough ground was an excellent characteristic for German tanks. Not from the German point of view obviously...but I'm sure the British soldiers loved it.

Nice

I look at the first British and French tanks as if they were the modern siege towers. siege towers in medieval times had mobility (WHEELS) and protection (arrow-protection) and firepower (archers) and could deliver an infantry team to the top of the castle walls. That forced the defenders to dig more ditches to stop those siege towers. In medieval times wider ditches meant using engineers (sappers, pioneers, miners, and cannon) to create pathways for infantry, cavalry and siege towers. The Whippet and the Reneau were actually second-generation tanks.

As far as innovation the French have that title they came up with the turret

To hear Nicholas Moran tell it (and I don't doubt your expertise, but I think he also has some idea of what he's talking about) the Germans most certainly were not the only ones to appreciate the potential importance of the tank. The Germans certainly went through the least troubled interwar armor doctrine development of any of the powers that would play a part in WW2. And, unlike the British and the French, they incorporated tanks into a maneuver warfare doctrine (though the British did experiment with the idea of using mechanized maneuver forces). But the British, French, and Soviets all clearly understood that tanks were going to be very important in the next war.

In an alternate WW1 timeline, the French developed a Renault FT Grosse. Longer and wider overall, with a larger turret ring and turret. The two man turret, with a 37 mm Infantry Gun Model 1917 main gun, and an inverted Lewis gun mounted in a commander’s cupola (the magazine disc would effectively be above the commander’s head). Capable of great speed (for the time), accurate and deadly fire against troops, emplacements and vehicles.

Gentlemen, you have never produced a poor content video.

please more videos 1 in every 2 weeks is not enough

6:38 are these Bullet Holes inside the Tank

Why would I join the patreon if I can’t? Wouldn’t it make more sense for me to join if I CAN?

i love how ww1 tanks immediately established the stereotypical roles of each nation when it cams to tank design. British: creates the first one full of flaws that are eventually weeded out at great cost. french: fails utterly the first 2 times gets it perfect on round 3 just in time to end the war. germany: "just make ours bigger ja?"

Stuck inside a steel box with an engine pumping carbon monoxide out would as dangerous to the crew as it is the enemy

When i first time seeing the mark tanks I thought they can also be flipped and keep moving upside down😅

What about the Motorgeschütz?

I would say that the first world war had quite a lot in common with the current Russian attempted annexation of Ukraine; trenches, fieldworks and static warfare are back in vogue.

The first tanks date to ancient Egypt and the reign of Mentuhotep the 2nd. Constructed of stone and timber with rudimentary tracks fabricated with flax and reeds with copper plates these vehicles were powered by a column of slaves that propelled the vehicle forwards. Archers within the stone armor chassis provided offensive power. They were used extensively during the battle of Avaris against the Canaanites the seige of Buhen in 130 BC.

👍👍

Schneider is pronounced Schnyder (EI in German is closer to Y in English, IE is pronounced like the I in machine), not Schnieder. Apart from that a good comparison.

Stosstruppen was a tactical solution to a technological problem. And it worked even better than the tank.

The maxam gun ignored .by 19 century generals . 1904 Austrian emperor armed car scared the horses . And the generals were still in the 19th century

BRO NEEDS TO LAY OFF THE SPACE BAR!! HOLY SHEEEEET! I THOUGHT THE VIDEO WAS GLITCHING!! THIS.....ACCENT.....IS.....BRITISHHHH.........PLUS! 🤣

funny how the Burstyn prototype is absolutely forgotten...

For all the many flaws of the British Heavy Tanks, I think they still hold the record for trench crossing & obstacle climbing.

It seems the British were able to scale up manufacturing very quickly. Any insight on how they did this?

I have seen Mephisto in Person, it would have been hell trapped in there under fire.

If sponsons are good enough for the Imperium of Man in the 41st millenium, they're good enough for us and should make a comeback.

And I´ll bet the Aristocratic Donkey Wallopers of the Cavalry had a hand in stopping the development of the Tank? I believe Churchill had to threaten quite a few with Disbandment if they didn´t get on plan and ditch their horses. The reason the Germans built so few Tanks, easy really, their Kriegsmarine or Navy had all the steel, it was left over from their Dreadnought push pre WW1, that helped start the War itself. When the Army wanted the Steel they were politely told to do one! No Steel no tanks, then as you say BeutePanzer, a habit that was carried on in WW2 when hundreds of armoured vehicles were abandoned after Dunkirk, The Breb Gun Carrier, or Universal Carrier was often used with the 37mm artillery piece. WW1 ended when the German civilians were starving to death due to a Royal Navy Embargo and the German sailors refused to fight at the Front and mutinied, end of WW1, what Hitler called the Dolchstoss! Or stab in the back.

Simply an excellent video.

Big surprise was Haig supported tanks over his horse cavalry

this museum will probably never see a real a7v inside it's doors but at least you guys have a convincing replica/

To little about the french tanks

The Germans did plan on an improvement to the A7V ~ and frankly almost ANYTHING was in improvement on the A7V - in the form of the A7V-U which was a rhomboid design that looked remarkably similar to the British heavy tanks. This seems a bit redundant, given that the Germans had on hand 400 captured British MkIV tanks. Incidentally, the British realised that their tanks were being captured in large numbers and so the Mk.V had a gun-cotton demolition charge built into the design situated next to the gearbox and there are no records of Mk.V being captured and used by the Germans. Better late than never I suppose…. It does seem that the fatal German fascination with mega tank projects was already firmly in place long before WW2 with the 1917 designed Großkampfwagen / K-Wagen. 13 metres long, 6 metres wide and 2.7 metres tall, this monster weighing in at a not insubstantial 100-120 tonnes depending on which engines were fitted ~ and that was a reduction from the original 150 tonnes design for an even longer vehicle. Originally planned to be powered by 2 x 200hp engines, these were given the boot as being FAR too underpowered and were replaced with 2 x 650hp Daimler-Benz marine diesel engines with electrical, communications and control equipment copied from U-boats. 40mm front armour composed of 2 x 20mm plates, 30mm on sides and rear, 20mm on the roof and 10mm floor armour, this absolute beast may have been capable of a top speed of 4.66mph / 7.5kph with a 4 metre trench crossing capability. The heavy armament was watered down from 8.8cm guns to 7.7cm ~ and these had to be specially sourced from the Idstein Fortress as they had a highly desirable short recoil of 40cm. So, 4 x 7.7cm in sponsons as per the British rhomboid designs but ~ of course ~ a LOT bigger. Seven x 7.92 mm Maxim MG08/15mg rounded out the armament. The K-Wagen even topped the A7V crew complement. The A7V got by with a mere 18 crew. The K-Wagen? 27! All of the sensible reasons NOT to proceed with this beastie were similar to those to be found 28 years later in late WW2 Germany, but they persisted and two K-Wagen were in a fairly advanced state of construction as WW1 drew to a close. On the other hand, the German designed ‘light’ tanks LK 1 and 2 that owed quite a bit to the British Whippet concept were built in small numbers and post-war, Sweden purchased sufficient parts for 10 LKs which were smuggled into Sweden as ‘agricultural equipment and boiler plates’ and were renamed as Stridsvagn m/21. It must have been an acceptable design, as five were rebuilt in 1929 as the Strv M/21-29 which remained in service until 1938!

The British used Bullock track not Holt. The British also used armored road trains in South Africa prior to WW1. And the track laying vehicles shown just prior to 4:29 are not even Holts anyways. The UK had be using track layers for artillery as far back as 1902.