Let's start a sequence of Swedish tanks at the start...the first Swedish tank, and our first Tier 1. NA forum thread: forum.worldofta... Asia/Down Under: forum.worldofta...
All my life my dad has told me that thinking is highly dangerous and usually gets you into accidents. Best to leave it to the horses, they have big heads. It's great to finally see someone share this wisdom.
Minor notes from someone with a skosh of antique vehicle/machine experience... The conical headed fasteners likely have a square shank that mates with a similar cutout in the plate. Basically an armored carriage bolt. Such fasteners were very common at the time. The pedal layout (throttle bracketed by clutch and brake) was probably the most commonly encountered, til the current standard you mentioned, established by Cadillac. For their seeming primitive nature, leather faced cone clutches were amazingly effective, and cone clutches are still found (albeit with modern friction materials) in many applications. The drive belt for the water-pump and fan could be leather, or canvas, or a rubberized/impregnated canvas/linen material. Such drive belting is still found in service with innumerable older machine tools because of it's sheer durability. One does need to coddle them far more than more modern V belts or flat/cog drive belting though, as they can slip annoyingly if one lets the facing get glazed or some stray oil on the pulleys.. Alemite fittings have gone through a number of variations, it's just the "Zerk" pattern that really survives to present day. The ones found on the suspension of this vehicle were likely the similar, but pre '29 "button head", as the Zerk pattern was not common til post 1930. Also, if one looks at the water-pump, there is the old hand-screw "grease pot" style lube fitting, that remained in service on may vehicles in that application til well into the 1950's. All in all, that the vehicle did not have a form of constant loss lube system is fairly advanced. The lighting fuel tank is likely for an acetylene ("prestolite") system. Interestingly bizarre in it's own right. Thanks for your efforts!
TheChieftainWoT If you are still in Sweden you must go the The Swedish War Museum in Stockholm. Seriously the have a couple life size displays that are both spectacular and horrifying. Someone did a amazing job there
Excellent synopsis sir. Well defined, well executed. Very informative without being boring. Thank you entirely for this series sir, I eagerly await the next episode.
"So we were thinking, and yes I realize that's a dangerous thing to do" You guys are the best. Cheers Chief and all those behind the camera and editing.
Pretty sure the cotter pins are simply snipped off with cutters or even cut off a rotary cutoff tool, and replaced. It is easier than unbending them, and they are cheap and plentiful. It is like saving used nails, not really any point. Of course, that would be on the rare occasions when you had to disassemble the entire track. Usually, you only need to remove a single pin to break track, or two of them if an entire segment needs replacement. In that case, depending on where you are and what tools you have right to hand, it is probably easier to just use pliers and/or s hammer to unbend the cotter pins instead of finding a cutting tool. So I dont see the cotter pins being much of a real inconvenience. I mean, probably a lot of these tracks are never taken apart at all in their service lives, beyond breaking track and random segments. So who is going to have to remove a couple hundred cotter pins? Even if they do, hell thats what maintenance branch is for. It is still better than a muddy hole and wet boots and bullets and shells all night long..
Maybe the wooden "firewall" was actually more a heat isolator than fire spreading preventer? So at least tre crew would not be directly exposed to the engine?
New Inside the Hatch video...and the crowd goes YAAAAAYYY!!! It's about Swedish Tanks....YAAAAAAAAYYYY!!! There will be more coming...YAAAAAAAAAYYY!!! Hurray for you, Chieftain!
It is a partition or a bulkhead. A firewall is a firewall, fire resistant by definition. it is a special subtype of bulkhead or partition, serving a specific purpose. they are so common on engines now that most people assume that it is a word for the bulkhead behind an engine, but it is not.
I think that chain and hook may actually be more intended for tearing up barbed wire, though no doubt you could tow a comrade with it in emergency. It looks like a poor shape for a tow hook though, it would fall off easily with any slack.
the driver "not having much to monitor" i believe is incorrect in a sense. much like many WW1 aircraft, much of the engine status is kept track of solely by sound (fuel mixture is a good example) i'd assume it'd be much the same for a tank of the era
Yeah, your right. My father always told me a really good driver doesn't need any gauges, he has eyes to see and ears to hear and knows which gear his vehicle's gearbox is in. So he has everything he needs to estimate speed and RPMs . . .
Too bad you couldn't make it to Stockholm on the 26th, as that means there's a missing autograph slot on my goodie bag t-shirt next to that of your colleague Richard "The Challenger" Cutland's :) Love your videos!
TheChieftainWoT Well, np, I wouldn't have had time to go into the city anyway, and don't use FB on my phone. I'll just have to keep an eye out in the future :)
Cool work Nicholas & WG, and Arsenalen :) ..didn't the Germans capture a few/some Whippets in WW1? I could've sworn over the years of my own general interest in military & engineering histories, that I read somewhere in soft/hard-back format, that due to combat damage, a few Whippets were captured without being destroyed by artillery or their crews.
I think you might find the funny conical bolts are made on a similar system to the bolts that hold armour plates onto battleships. The shaft of the bolt under the head is a long cone and the roots of the screw thread are equal to the smallest diameter of the cone. There are two effects from this - one is that the bolt does not break off at the start of the thread when hit, sending the nut and remaining bolt shaft flying around inside to the inconvenience of the crew. The other one is that when the bolt is tightened it locks into the conical hole in the plate and won't rotate - look up 'Morse Taper' - so it would be relatively easy to undo the nut - you would then need to use a punch to hammer the bolt out of its hole - there is usually a conical hole in the end of the bolt for the punch to go in - the more modern US approach would be to stick a couple of ounces of C4 on the threaded end of the bolt and blow it out, like on the torsion bar suspension of an M60.
Chieftain, we miss watching how someone would actually get into all of the crew positions, you provide a good representation. Could you go back to showing us again?
Depending on the wood, it could work. you don't need to keep the flames out forever, just long enough to get the crew out. Of course having the gaps on either side wouldn't really help too much.
I wonder if the armour would have been enough for the .50 BMG "anti-tank rifle" cartridge. (Yes I know that BMG stands for Browning Machine Gun, and that it was never really used in a dedicated anti-tank rifle, but prototypes exist)
15:10 What do you mean? The first Swedish tank design, the L-10 had a separate machinegunner in the hull. Later models of Swedish tanks got rid of the hull machinegun completely.
great vid as ever :-D Looking at the inside you see just how many bolt heads there were to break off and rattle around when hit. Ouch! l prefer the old intro but personal taste......
Not much worry about that. That armor is only for stopping small arms fire. Any artillery - any at all - is going to punch clean through it like paper, so there is little reason to fear the absorbed force of the projectile will break off any bolt heads. Bolt heads break off when shot BOUNCES off the armor. Roughly the same reason a hit on a person wearing a bulletproof vest will often knock them over, but the same doesnt happen with an unprotected person (although hollow point projectiles attempt to create a similar effect).
TheChieftainWoT Please make a video of the Stridsvagn 103 soon, i got many people calling it as Self propelled AT gun and/or Tank Destroyer now, claiming the turretless design being the trademark of a tank destroyer.
Speaking of World War 1 era tanks, are you planning on doing an episode on one of those? FT-17 would be the easiest to find, I suppose. British Mark I-VIII tanks, I'm not sure if there are ones that are still fully intact. As for a German A7V, there's only one remaining example in an Australian museum.
The A7V is currently on show for a few months at the Australian War Memorial in Canberra instead of at the Museum in Brisbane. The AWM also has a Mk.IV Hermaphrodite (it was used for a War Bond drive in Australia with its Australian crew during WW1) and a FT-17 (Gift of the French people after WW1).
Great video again, but the new intro is really off, especially that you kept the old theme music of the show, which I'm happy about that at least that remained.
Not sure if you knew about this already, but an artist on Pixiv drew some fan art of you driving a Chieftan that is commanded by GuP's Darjeeling. I can link it if you would like.
Yeah, it's missing the Armor on the hull. i hopped onto Status Report and WG does infact plan on giving the Caernarvon it's old turret back and giving us the Super Conqueror at some point.
id say this armour is about the minimum requirement to have on a tractor in a Moose infested enviroment. Also Springtime plowing needs tracked instead of wheels on most occasions. Best regards.
I doubt they ever carried more than 3 crewmen, there is no point. It is very unusual for you to be facing enemies in multiple directions at the same time, and you would usually be operating with other tanks even if you did end up in that situation, so you could cover all sides. 99% of the time, you will be firing towards the front, and one gunner can easily move to meet a threat appearing in front or behind, especially since he actually has a turret, unlike the Whippet. More men would just get in the way. It is not a breakthrough tank like the Mk I-IV, etc, expected to be wading through a battlefield surrounded by enemies and machine gun nests. 3 crew is ideal: driver, gunner, and commander, who serves any extra guns when needed, and maybe loads and fetches ammo for the gunner. 3 crew also allows for redundancy if one is wounded.
I think the gearing is primary. Less power means you have to gear it lower to move at all. Just putting a more powerful engine in wont help if you just hit redline in top gear at the same speed as before. Suspension limits spee more indirectly, as it becomes mostly a matter of how abuse much the crew can stand.
@@justforever96 I guess I understand better now when people dislike me answering their old comments. I don't mind! but I don't really have any clear idea what I was thinking. As you say, there are many factors involved here. I really wish I had been just a little more verbose when I made that comment.
I desperately believe the old tech tree needs to come back plus a few extra tiers..... be cool to go from ww1 era to almost modern day. I understand they can't do Abrams n such due to chobhams classified status....
Vagnens korrekta benämning är m/21, inte fm/21. Dock benämnendes fm/22 inledningsvis, men detta korrigerades ganska snabbt till m/21 efter påpekan från Burén.
So that if a bullet or piece of shrapnel hits them, the pointy-ness is more likely to bounce the impacting object than a normal flat bolt-head/nut, which most would likely crack, shear or break off without the angling and the extra material of the point.
To be fair, since the older videos, I think they have turned the music down a notch when the Chieftain is speaking. The older ones were properly unwatchable because of the musical loop.
