Tank Chats  

Adding flummox to my vocabulary.

I'm still not sure which end is the pointy bit

@Dave Ad I thought the pointy bit went bang when it hit something. This is all beyond me. I'm just going watch Rick Astley videos

I've found something that helps here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dQw4w9WgXcQ.html

"Alright boys, pointy bits forward!"

Its typically known as a shell but if HE said it then yes I agree its "The 17-pounder pointy bit".

This is why David Fletcher is a British national treasure

it's always good to have the presenter use the proper terminology.

@@santaboy4818 Strictly speaking, the term 'shell' was usually only used to refer to an explosive projectile. Solid armour-piercing projectiles were called 'shot'.

@@CharlesStearman And in small arms, "shot", of course, refers to a charge of multiple lead balls of a caliber smaller than the bore of a smoothbore shotgun all discharged at once from a single powder charge. Gotta love the complexities of firearms nomenclature.😁

Frosty bright welsh afternoon here

facking freezing up here in the north of uk.

It’s not exactly toasty down here in Georgia!

now think how much your downstairs neighbors need this.

Don´t care about the cold but really needed a smile... Greetings from Germany

Considering how late in the war that happened, it is indeed understated.

Debatable. Efforts toward Welded Construction had started with A13 E3, but it wasn't until A27M Cromwell that the infrastructure was there. Retraining & retooling takes time after all; time that was in short supply post-1940.

@@jimtaylor294 It is a bit amazing how one of the most advanced industrial nations of the time did fall behind with such an important technology as is welding. Especially compared to runner-ups like Soviets and Germans.

@@azgarogly Not really. Welding was still a new technology at the time, and far from perfected. Case in point: the Germans went heavily into its use in the 1930's... only to find out that weld defects in many of their warships' construction had rendered them more frangible in action than should've been the case. (the Bismarck's stern literally breaking off before she sank being the most well known) The USA had a similar issue, for Liberty ships were well known for structural faults - as bad as coming apart in heavy seas - as a result of relatively green welders being the task of mass producing ships. Fortunately such issues were ironed out over time, but there's a reason so few of them lasted into modern times. Being a trained welder myself; I can attest that it's difficult enough when working with civi' grade metal. When Gas or ARC Welding inches thick military grade steel - such as RHA Steel - the slightest mistake can cost a fortune, or worse if not caught by quality control. As such to fully re-equip entire factories to produce Tanks - for example - isn't just swapping equipment, but training up personnel, and halting production whilst both are achieved. Its much harder to do this when a large established industry (as most of the UK's were), than when starting from scratch; as various US facilities essentially were, and basically everything the Germans had post-WWI. (except in design terms; for the Germans were behind the British in various aspects of warship design) As such to achieve industry wide change-over in Tank construction from all riveted in 1940, to all welded by 1943/44, is no small feat; especially for a country who's prime focus was always the Navy. The Russians are a bit of a convoluted one. In shipbuilding they tried to build four modern Battleships in the mid' '30's, only to have to largely dismantle one of them upon the discovery of thousands of defective rivets (their quality control being abysmal). The advent of war in 1941 ensured none of them were completed, and indeed until the 1970's Russia had no modern Capital Ships.

@@jimtaylor294 My primary focus here is a tank building industry. Russians completely phased out riveting tanks somewhere by 1935. Germans welded tanks from the very beginning. Both nations where in a very bad shape economically in 1930s compared to British Empire. So it must be failure to recognise welding as a way to go with tanks for brits.

Best tank Britain produced in WW2 = The American Sherman

@@Angrybogan Lovely American humor haha

@@galahad-history I didn't think the yank's did sarcasm XD. Comet crews unilatterally preferred the latter's performance over the Shernan.

@@jimtaylor294 probably enough room in there for a tea pot...

Centurion technically was the first to come with a BV, but yes there was ;-) .

The Chieftain did go into great detail explaining how much wood a woodchuck could chuck in a Q and A.

Don't call me a nerd

Challenge denied. I know an unwinnable bet when I see one.😋

Not gonna try...

Sounds like they would’ve had a great time! Thanks for sharing👍

My Grandad drove one in the army, albeit after the war for conscription

@Dumisani Nkosi thanks brother, but honestly don't be, just learn something from it.

@@pottierkurt1702 My family life was complicated growing up, I really like and appreciate your mindset!

G'day, Cloned, were ye ; or was it a feat of Parthenogenesis, perhaps ? Spontaneous Germination..., or possibly Immaculate Conception...; or was y'r Mutha-Figure a Radical Feminist with a Turkey-Baster & a Secret Admirer stuck in Friend-Zone...? Perhaps it might sow less confusion if you said that your Father & Grandfather were not around to contribute any Parental Input towards your upbringing - for whatever the reason was..., rather than claiming that they never existed...? Just(ifiably ?) a suggestion... Such is Life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

@@WarblesOnALot Really? You think people might be confused by what he said? When people say "I never had a childhood" does that mean they were born an adult?

@@bunky8077 it probably does mean that

I hope you get a chance to see it

never say never blake

@@Dockhead I sincerely hope I do get to see it, and lots of places in Europe, but it's a long and expensive trip across the pond to see.

@@Masada1911 I do as well

@@blakebaker830 ah right yeah its a tough time for all, id love to get to some places in the US to see, it seems a whole different scale in some aspects to what we can achieve in the uk.

As long as it had a brewing bit we were happy lol.....

@@wideyxyz2271 Yes - so, Lads this is your new tank - Oh great Sarge - does it have a boiling vessel?

were you QDG?

@@umt1cardiff REME but attached to QDG's 80-81 in Omagh with Fox. Also with SEE, 2 Tanks & 1WFR

@@martingardener90 I was 73to 79 . Different Martin Gardiner 🙂

The Tank Museum's running Comet is ex Irish Army, hence its name "Spud".

There's a dead comet on a beach, Lincolnshire I think. It had broken down during exercises and couldn't be recovered before the tide came in. And there it still lies, slowly rusting away.

One day we'll get centurions.... or chieftains as hand me downs.... maybe...

The S-Irish Army liked the A34 so much they kept her in service into the late-1970's, a fair bit over a decade after the UK had ceased operating them. (from 1966 a wide range of Tanks were retired / sold off, to try & standardize the Tank fleet with the new Chieftain) @@howardchambers9679 Better fate than the breakers though. Tanks being the invention of the Navy after all.

A lot of them went to Finland, and served until recently.

Ouch!!!!!I,ve seen the same on a Cent glow cherry red!

That was my introduction to British cruiser tanks.

Same here

Ah... Happy days ,as l recall the Match Box Comet came mounted on a shell crater?

Ah yes, the old 1:76 scale kits with added vignette. Build quite a few as a youngster.

Nice profile picture 👍

@@blade5896 Yep that's my girl. She's an excellent Chicken herd and buddy. For whatever reason she is incredibly photogenic too. Had dogs indifferent to me growing up, but now I have nothing but fantastic dogs that would have absolutely fit as sidekicks in a coming of age novel material. The one thing I'd not skip a beat to send myself if I could gift my younger self the best thing for me.

I'd noticed that too.I used to garden for a old Gentleman who told me that he had been a driver on a A30 and fought around Cleve's.

Oh that must of been fascinating. Accounts of them fighting other tanks etc would make for great reading.

i want the tank museum to make this tank chat

@@drbedlam9786 He told me that his unit had halted at a bridge.When the order to advance came he couldn't start the engine, much to the commanders annoyance, he had to wave the tank behind him to go first.That tank went across the bridge took a left off the road across some rough ground and it ran over an anti tank mine,it killed one of the crew and injured one other.He told me that if his tank had gone first, that they'd probably would've ran over that mine.

Ironically Germans did that on some variants of the Panzer II, specifically Ausf. F and L. Then again, German AT guns could just shoot the Comet in the face and get through the normal way.

@@builder396 depends what size AT gun of course

@@umt1cardiff And the variant of Comet. A later one with 102mm frontal armor could mean trouble for an older Pak 38, but I doubt too many of them were in service at that point, and even if, crews would know better than to expect the gun to damage a tank from the front.

Don’t you ever, don’t you ever, stop being dandy, showing me you’re handsome...

Wrong song. He used it for 'Stand and Deliver', why else do you think he was such a successful highwayman?

@@rayjennings3637 I'm honored that you think I'm British but I'm not. 🙃

@@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623 How about a little grace and politeness then? He's only pointing out that we British call a tank crew person a Tankie, not a Tanker.

@John Cornell Yeah, but there was like 1 Firefly per tank platoon, if EVERY tank had a gun like that I imagine things could have gone different.

@John Cornell although in that one engagement with the Cromwell that was "head to head", if the Cromwell had been fitted with the 6pdr instead of the QF75, it may have been a different result for Wittman as his own tank was disabled by a towed 6pdr so it's not like the 6pdr couldn't hurt a Tiger........

@John Cornell I certainly have no issues with ANY of what you said. Wittman's bold move certainly caught the lead elements of 7th Armd with their pants down, that's for sure (in the case of one crew, quite literally, as the gunner had gone to "spend a penny" according to the commander of the tank!!) BTW, I have FINALLY managed to order Vol1 of Market-Garden Then & Now, as it has come back into print. Hopefully, it arrives early next week. Now to get my hands of The Desert War Then & Now, but alas, it's out of print with no date for reprinting at this stage!

IIRC the Ardennes offensive was what stopped the Comet's entry into action, ironically. The Centurion was already well in development by the time this rolled out, that is very much the proto MBT - Comet was really what the Cromwell should have been from the start & a bit of a stop-gap. Always did like the Comet, shows what could have been.They're good enough to still be in service now, too! ( there's some in Myanmar ).

The comet did see action.

It all stems back to the fact we left most of our kit behind at Dunkirk..We had to rebuild with the stuff we had at the time,which put us 2 years behind with develpoment

Actually the British armoured units who were involved in the Bulge had only just handed over their Shermans and were about to be issued with Comet and begin training on them over the Xmas and New Year period. When the battle started they were ordered to collect their old Shermans once more and head south to assist the Americans.

@@paddy864 Montgomery said after the battle , that if the Germans had had British tanks they would have reached the sea . Meaning that the German Tanks were not suitable for the task , too big , too heavy.

Indeed. Had an engine as good as the RR Meteor been available a few years prior, which it nearly was with the Napier Lion (curse you Lord Morris of Nuffield!!), a Tank like Comet might have resulted sooner.

@@jimtaylor294 Nuffield should have been incarcerated for crimes against the nation, IMHO.......

@@sean640307 Amen. I mean Lord Nuffield was Offered the license to build RR Meteor engines... and said no... -_- . Thankfully *Rover* of Coventry had more sense. (the latter even had a Jet Engine devision by wars end)

That's why all my family left. Originally from Manchester, we're now spread out around the globe.

They've done a lot better than many, the plant is still producing, DAF branded lorries these days.

It's a pity their cars weren't as reliable and as well built as their tanks were

@@brucelamberton8819 You are confusing Leyland Motors with the ramshackle BMC operation which they took over to create British Leyland. There was never much wrong with Leyland's buses and trucks until they became a virtual monopoly and started trying to dictate to their customers instead of listening.

You can thank the EEC for that one... prevented the government from helping bail them out in the 1970's and 80's...

Not again!

I can never not think of the Comet as the tank that the Chieftain would procure for Elbonia, as "something that looks attractive post-WWII, but was actually hardly fit for the post-war era."

Better to be in a Comet that's on fire, than a Panther, Tiger or M3 Medium :P . The German duo in particular, as they never had any form of wet stowage, packed in ammo' everywhere it'd fit, and sometimes set Themselves on fire XD.

Certainly Villers Bocage could have gone very differently and Operation Goodwood with these zigzagging toward German AT line at 30mph+ could have been a game changer. What-ifs hey ...

@John Cornell Cromwells hit the Tigers at Villers Bocage *many* times yet you are saying that had they been Comets it would have made no difference. The deluded ramblings of a German fanboy.

Exactly. Even the Russians had relatively few that could 1 shot one, at least head on. That said the *A22 Churchill VII* had thicker frontal armour than a Tiger I, and a smaller frontal hull profile overall that made her slightly harder to hit.

Forgetting about 76mm M4 Shermans and the M26 Pershing with its 90mm gun? If you include TDs you can even include M10, M18 and M36.

^ The Pershing didn't make it to Normandy in any relevant quantity, thus counts barely more than the Centurion MK-1. The US's 76mm's effectiveness against the heavier German armour remains debatable. The UK also never used it.

Russian guns had good pen on paper but were hugely inaccurate and unreliable, Americans had good reliable guns but their tanks were as big as a barn, and British had too few and far in between good guns at the time

@@jimtaylor294 Pershing did make it to front lines though and did square off against heavy German armor though, just not right on the beaches of Normany (and neither did 76 Shermans).

Not to mention the beloved little Valentine.

@@lewisirwin5363 The russians in particular loved the valentine, reliable, low silhoutte, decent armour for its date.

The Centurion was not only late, it was too late to show up in WW II

@@rheinmoses29 it most certainly did turn up during the war, the six prototypes just didn't make it to the front in time.

It's not just the track gauge, but also the tunnel width, clearness on platform edges. That sort of thing are very tight on Britain's railways. Due to the early Victoria start when trains were quite small.

Brunel wanted a 7' gauge..the standard 4'8" was based upon the Roman chariot axle width!

In the US and Canada our trains tend to be pretty large by comparison, likely because we had a fresh start and didn’t have to contend with old infrastructure.

@@fuzzyhead878 we also had a different problem. In the 40s there were few railcars that could move even the pershing tanks.

@@fuzzyhead878 russian trains are huge ! Very wide , when i return to blighty i carnt get over how small our trains and stations are !! Still love em thou !

Bit like the spitfires, where the stopgaps actually turned out to be the answer for the superior threats they suddenly had to deal with "necessity is the mother,...."

Yes.I think they were still being used into the early 60's

Most of the radial arm drills in Comet shop, Leyland Motors, were made in Yorkshire.

they were paid for,not given. the Headless coachman was built by an engineering officer who had no budget to work with so he had little or materials except scrap to try and make a viable tank with. It was a good idea, but in the Irish Army of the time, it was going nowhere.

Pansarvärnspjäs 1110 's can penetrate a Centurion. It was up to date in terms of weaponry, maybe the tank body wasn't but for moving it would have been alright and in an engagement it would just need to lay low. The Cubans, South Africa and even the Finns used the Comet until they couldn't like the Irish. Because spare parts weren't much available at the time.

"Pocket Battleships": >exist< WWI Battlecruisers: *Pathetic* Seriously though: the Graf Spee scuttled itself; as soon as it got wind of *HMS Renown* being on-route, a ship they could neither fight nor even hope to outrun.