Hello Tank Nuts! This week David Willey is talking all about our newly donated Swiss Centurion. Enjoy and do let us know your thoughts in the comments.
At 9 minutes you state that the world is a very dodgy place . It still is, but no longer do we have the Vickers Newcastle factory, and our latest tanks are retreads of old stock. I think this is dodgy.
!!! RIGHT NOW THE GERMAN TANK MUSEUM 'S CURATOR IS DOING A SERIES OF ANALYSES OF THE TANKS ON THE UKRAINIAN BATTLEFIELD ON THEIR YT-CHANNEL, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF VIEWS MEAN THERE IS IN THE GERMAN SPEAKING WORLD SERIOUS AND URGENT DEMAND FOR IN-DEPTH INFORMATION ABOUT THE ARMOURS BEING USED IN THIS CONFLICT, PLEASE LEAVE THE HISTORY FOR WHAT IT IS FOR THE MOMENT AND DO THE SAME FOR THE ANGLO PUBLIC, THANK YOU!!!
This was great to watch. I know the Abrams tank is on Bovington's list of tank for the collection. Why don't you try Borrowing the Abrams tank from the American heritage museum in Massachusetts?
That tank is in " as new " condition. Well maintained by the Swiss military. The whole time I'm watching this, I'm thinking how much I miss, and enjoyed David's "Curator at Home" - especially the ones outside with Finn the dog.
@@samholdsworth420 The whole idea of the Swiss Army is deterrence. If we get to fight, then it means we have failed on the primary mission! You have a wish WW3 would have happened? If you want to have a pretty interesting look at the Swiss Army of that time, watch that video, it's really a good one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fBQUjEhoMlM.html Do these guys look like cowards?
As a Swiss history student I feel obliged to elaborate on what David Willey said about Switzerland in WWII. First off, he is absolutely correct in what he says. However, I feel like it may give off the wrong impression that Switzerland was clearly pro-Axis, when in reality things were a lot more complex (as they so often are). It could actually be argued that until the fall of France, Switzerland was much more closely aligned with the allies than with Germany. Indeed, Switzerland and France had signed a secret pact, wherein France essentially agreed to help defend Switzerland against a German attack. Such a treaty did not exist with Germany or Italy. This bias becomes abundantly clear when one examines Swiss fortifications throughout the war. Leading up to the fall of France, Switzerland had built the so called "Limmatlinie" or "Limmatstellung". This was basically an extension of the Maginot-line through Swiss territory, with the obvious goal of preventing the Wehrmacht from maneuvering around the French fortifications. Once again, there was no equivalent to this on the French border. Forts there were far more light and sporadic. They were more for keeping up appearances of neutrality than anything else. Moreover, the Swiss airforce shot down a number of German planes that were attempting to attack France through Swiss airspace in the opening stages of the war, but no French planes shared their fate as far as I know. Things changed significantly after France fell, of course. Switzerland was now completely surrounded by the Axis on all sides. Moreover, they were completely dependent on Axis powers economically and food supply, as Switzerland was far from a state of autarchy. In essence, Switzerland was almost completely at the mercy of the Axis. Switzerland did try to lessen its reliance on Germany, particularly in terms of food, to at least somewhat reduce the massive amount of leverage Germany and the Axis had over Switzerland, but it was never enough. Germany always had the long end of the stick, by quite a margin. So, sensibly I would argue, the Swiss government felt that the only way to ensure the continued existence of their country was to give in to a lot of German demands. Of course, this wasn't the only factor in why Switzerland acted the way it did, and there *was* a significant amount of profiteering and in some cases outright support for the Germans. And Switzerland certainly deserves a lot of blame for some of its actions in WWII. But it's not as simple as "Switzerland was clearly pro-Axis and therefore deserves to suffer the consequences", which seems to have been a popular POV among Americans. In fact, Switzerland was also accused of being clearly pro-Allies by Germany, particularly since the Swiss airforce shot down a lot more German planes than Allied ones. Such is the struggle of trying to stay neutral in a world at war I suppose. It must also be mentioned that there were and still are significant political differences between the various language groups. Ultimately the prime concern for the Swiss government was the safety of its people, and they determined that this cause was best served by cooperating with Germany. Germany and the Axis were an acute, existential threat. Meanwhile, the allies were far, far away. Being overtly on their side would likely have been suicide. It would have meant endangering the lives of the vast majority of the country's population, subjecting them to the horrors of a war that could have been avoided, followed by the brutal oppression of Nazi rule. Note, by contrast, that the American homeland (and therefore the American populace) was never under any serious threat of invasion and the horrors associated with that. So frankly, I think that view is not very well reflected. Lastly, note that this is my opinion and people are free to disagree or prove me wrong, and I encourage anyone to do their own research and not take my word for it. And once again, I am not disagreeing with David Willey, simply elaborating on what he said. I also completely understand that he didn't have the time to give a detailed account of the issue. In any case, thank you for reading this and have a lovely day wherever you are :)
Many Allied aircrew had long internment in Switzerland. Germans did not. You conveniently left that out. Bottom line, Swiss collaborated and horded blood gold.
@@UmHmm328 I also left out the fact that the USAF bombed a Swiss city, Schaffhausen. Moreover, I have yet to see any evidence to suggest that Germans were not interned. Care to share your source? In fact, according to HLS, American air crews were actually treated far better than other interned soldiers. Nor did they do much to stop allied soldiers who fled from rejoining the war effort unlike other interned personnel. There also doesn't seem to be a clear bias in numbers of interned personnel. If there are any soldiers who were repatriated rather quickly it was the 34'500 French (absolutely dwarfing the 1'600 Americans and 5'800 Brits btw) after an accord was reached with Vichy France. Lastly, it seems to me that you didn't even read the whole comment. I never denied that Switzerland collaborated. Nor do I claim that Switzerland does not deserve criticism. I merely explained why they did what they did and why I believe the overly simplistic view that the Swiss were simply Nazi collaborators and hoarders of Jewish gold is poorly reflected and completely neglects the complexity of the situation.
@@witchkinglp An accidental bombing also a detail left out. They could’ve picked a side in such an obvious war. They instead bet on the Axis prevailing. So did WC Fields, so they have company. I’m pretty sure the US paid reparations to Switzerland. They were scared, I get it. I’m no particular hero.
@@UmHmm328 They did pay reparations and yes it was an accidental bombing, I assumed that was clear - my bad. Had it been deliberate, it would have been a major war crime and an open act of war against a neutral country. It would likely be far more widely known had that been the case. Not that the US were above war crimes, let alone the Japanese concentration camps, if we really wanna point fingers... but that's a different topic entirely. My point is that their partial cooperation with Germany was at least in large part borne out of necessity. It was about survival. As I said, they were almost completely dependent on Germany. Germany had the long end of the stick by a lot. Besides, what was Switzerland realistically going to do? Start war with the Axis and risk the bloody occupation of the whole country? While being surrounded and far away from help? The government's job was to prevent just that from happening. And what good would it have done realistically? I would contend that the only period in the war when joining the allies made any sense was when the war in Europe was practically over. Of course that doesn't excuse everything the Swiss government did. And not everything they did was out of self-preservation. There was also a significant degree of profiteering involved, as I said in the original comment. And yes this needs to be called out and Switzerland deserves to be criticized for it. But in my opinion, the view that Switzerland was simply a Nazi enabler if you will, is just not in accordance with the facts. It is easy to sit over there in mighty America, where there was no real threat to the civilian population and point fingers. But when the whole existence of your (very small) country is at stake and you're surrounded by potential enemies on all sides, on whom you also depend to keep your population fed, things are a bit more difficult. That's all I'm saying.
@@witchkinglp We’re talking about Swiss actions in WW2 or American war crimes? War crimes usually involve being involved in a war. It would be nice if some of your animosity towards America was pointed at Nazi Germany as opposed to “Nazis? Well what could we do?” Switzerland made a deal with the Devil. Perhaps be angry that the Nazis put Switzerland in such a position. As for no danger to America. Maybe you’ve heard of ICBMs? We’ve faced nuclear annihilation for 60 yrs. Especially here in NYC. We’d be wiped off the map from Go. Sorry for the rant. I’m a big supporter of NATO & believe in American defense of Europe. But accusations that the US doesn’t care or doesn’t do enough? I don’t have to stand for that. Perhaps Russia is making better offers these days? May Switzerland never face such a dire decision again. No one wants their home threatened.
Had the pleasure of interviewing Mr Willey for a University project about Tanks in around 2014. He is a very welcoming dude and keen to share his knowledge. I got around 45 minutes of conversation but could only fit 5 in!!!!
In the 90 ties. Sweden got some Swiss centurion ARV. I was lucky to visit and climb inside. They were extremely clean inside. No broken parts. Swedish army used them for some years.
This tank when you look at it: just a slightly different version of a neat tank This tank when Mr. Willey talks about it: a short and interesting lecture ranging from geograpy, to engineering, to economical history Truely marvelous
You guys accidently provide exceptionally better history lessons than I got in high school. while I shouldn't say accidently because you put in a lot of hard work and passion into the subject but we're primarily talking tanks and I learn about post war geopolitics. Love it.
Switzerland was realy hedging its bets in this matter. While they were evaluating and eventually buying foreign tanks, they were also developing their own capabilities to build armoured fighting vehicles and did design and field their own home-grown design. This resulted in the swiss military having multiple MBTs of different age and origin serving alongside each other. At the end of the 1980s, the swiss military would field 4 different MBTs: The Centurion (officialy withdrawn from service in 91), the Panzer 61 (withdrawn in 94), the Panzer 68 (served until 99) and the Leopard 2 (enterd service 87).
Just look at the American "Paladin" Self-Propelled Howitzer. The same mass, speed, protection, bore, firing rate, and magazine capacity as the Swiss 155mm SPH of _1955!_
Very interesting video & what a crisp looking Centurion. Maybe biased because I'm British & grew up reading history books & making models? But I've always thought that the Centurion is what a tank should look like, as if someone was writing a definition of tanks for an encyclopedia & said this is the picture we'll use to show what we mean. [They just look "Tanky"].
There is a lot of back story as to why Switzerland would even buy armored tanks in the first place. Thank you for providing that “back-story”. It explains a lot.
thank you very much for this great episode. to bad you didn't show the cent more. i was in swiss military boot camp 88/89 as a tank soldier - one of the last boot camps on the cent. maybe i had my hand on the tank showed in the episode.
Hard to go wrong with either the Centurion or the M48. Both ended up serving with distinction in the Arab-Israeli conflicts in the hands of Israeli crews, and could be found in the inventories of several nations for decades.
Interestingly enough, both Egypt and Jordan had Centurions too by the Six Day War. And Jordan received 197 M48 and 200 M48A1 tanks beginning in the mid-1960s.
My Father taught on the M-26 , I believe. He was at Aberdeen in the 50's . I have always been intrigued with Tanks even though I was in the U.S. Air Force , but myself and my brother and sister were born on a small U.S. Army Post in the Southwest of France
@@davewolfy2906 Not really, as the USA kept bases all over NATO to service the flow of men and equipment to the frontlines in the event of a war, especially before the Bundeswehr was ready. Aberdeen was a major port equipped with heavy cranes capable of lifting larger tanks placed perfectly to ship those tanks to Norway, Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands as needed. Also meant that if NATO was driven off the Continent, there were American bases to help defend Britain, so preserving it as a launching point for a future liberation effort.
When the Centurion was withdrawn from service, there were plans to use the turrets in fixed pillboxes. Luckily, the Wall came down so only 10-20 were built. I have a friend who becomes quite misty-eyed when thinking of his old “char 55”.
Best tank ever be seen ever! Talk about a beauty! These tanks should be in production this moment! I’ve seen junk being used in Ukraine with Russians 72’s look like crap! Upgrade these centurions! Absolutely beautiful
Can't wait to come see this cent in the summer. I've always loved the Cent, even though I was challenger 2. There use to be a cent on Erin Road in allenby barrack by the hq building. I use to stop and look at it sometimes after a day on the all weather circuit. Arguably the first real MBT. Whenever I've spoken to vets of the Cent they've never had a bad word to say about it, chieftain on the other hand 🤔😆😆.
In order to understand the Swiss position during WWII, you have to first look at the situation. Switzerland has no oil, no coal, and is heavily reliant on food imports, being mostly mountainous terrain. Until 1933, the biggest problem was the fascistic Mussolini regime in the south, which openly propagated to annex the southern region of Ticino; but after the annexation of Austria and the fall of France, Switzerland was surrounded by the Axis on all sides, and although a lifeline existed through Geneva and Vichy France for a time, from 1942 onwards everything going in or out was controlled by Nazi Germany. And our tank force at the time consisted of 24 Czech tanks, known elsewhere as the T38
That's something a lot of people don't seem to take into account: The strategic situation. This whole "Reduit Nationale" thing was primarily propaganda. If he'd wanted to, Hitler could have subjugated switzerland without firing a single shot or setting foot into the country. Simply by closing the borders for import, switzerland would have slowly been starved out of everything needed to keep a nation going.
Switzerland also purchased a number of Centurians from Canada in the late 1970s, after the Canadian Armed Forces started acquiring Leopard tanks from Germany.
The Centurion was pretty effective on difficult terrain, if I recall correctly? I know the IDF preferred the Centurion for defending the Golan Heights over their American tanks for this reason.
Centurions had better survivability rate, so after one of the Arab/Israeli wars when that fact became known, Israeli mother's were insisting that their sons serve in Centurions. Strange little story that I picked up from one of several documentaries on the Arab/Israeli conflicts, most probably one on the tank battles.
That was an interesting bit of history about the Swiss changing their defensive strategy from protecting a smaller, alpine redoubt to protecting a larger area that included a plateau of industrialized, populated areas. I knew a Swiss who said that Hitler called Switzerland "that damned little hedgehog." I'm an American, but I think the Swiss made the right decision to go with the Centurion.
Of course since 1987 the Swiss are using Leopard 2s which came out victorious in their evaluation process. In the end it was between that and the Abrams but the Abrams kept throwing it's tracks when turning tightly on hard ground and used way too much fuel drastically limiting it's operational range.
Interesting historical back-story on the purchase and Britain's urgent need for hard currency. Many forget that fighting WWII (early years more or less alone) bankrupted Great Britain. There was rationing into the 1950's.
They were so desperate they stole Polish National Bank gold reserves, that were moved to UK for safekeeping when Germany and Russia invaded... shame on them!
Sorry this is a bit off topic but every time I see a Centurian it's goodbye Tiger2, Britain jumped a generation with this tank that only just missed the end of ww2
You should have a hall dedicated only to Centurion, as it´s really is the tank of the (20th) century. To show all the versions and present all the nations using it.
During the 6 day war Centurions slaughtered T55's and T64's despite huge numerical differences. I wonder if they might do quite well today. The 105mm rifled gun became the Nato standard and was even used by the Navy (it might be even now). I have driven a cent - Gawd what fun - I was 16.
