I met David a few years ago at Bovington when I took my lads there. I have to say he was a wonderful enthusiastic guide and had so much charisma and knowledge. A real privilege to spend time with him.
This man could be explaining the inner workings of a washing machine and I'd still listen to him talk lol Excellent little series you have going here ^^
Well, as a matter of fact, (except Fletcher) I did work for a musical, singer singing the program of a washing machine with a lot of sound effects, was modern of course, but very joyful and humanistic !
It's not appropriate to lump the Czechoslovaks and Poles in the same camp, most of the Czechs were not considered fit for frontline duty whereas Polish fighting units were coveted by British commanders, also the Poles were far more numerous.
The low profile (compared to a Sherman or Grant) certainly makes it look lighter and sleeker. However, the very boxy turret with the flatt front and no gun mantlet (the lack of a gun mantlet in tanks like the Cromwell or the Churchill is something I never understood, as it makes the turret more vulnerable to enemy fire) kinda ruins the looks. I like the looks of the Comet more. Also, since I drove them both in WoT, I prefer the Comet over the faster Cromwell because it gives me twice the gun depression...
Yea first he making statment that crew was not able to stand 40Mph then he is talking how great suspension this tank have... "very honest perspective on British armor", especialy when he is cryticizing good non british tanks and prizing evrything that was made in Britain. Best example was his: "Churchill tank was propably one of the best tanks of WW2" very "very honest perspective on British armor" indeed. :P
Biały He’s a British historian, not without bias. Even then, he famously criticizes every nation’s tanks equally, for every kind of flaw. As for your example, the Churchill was most definitely one of the best tanks of the war FOR ITS INTENDED ROLE, which was infantry support. Its mobility was amazing, being able to negotiate terrain that nobody else could, it was very reliable and versatile, it was quite well-armored, and the gun (on later models at least) was nothing to be laughed at. The first Tiger ever knocked out by the British was killed by a Churchill. It’s not a bad vehicle by any means.
Tanks (and military vehicles in general) almost always look smaller than they are, and then you realize how big they are when you’re standing next to them.
My Dad (5th Tanks) quite liked the Cromwell, although he was in one that got blown off a pontoon bridge and ended up in the Rhine. Being a very hot day the 'lid' was open and he managed to get out as he was the commander, and swim to shore..... no one else did get out, they all drowned..... He was demobbed in 1947 I think, and his Regiment was virtutally wiped out in Korea....they had Centurions by then.....
Damn. It must have been quite something to take in for him, when he realised he was the sole survivor. :-S " his Regiment was virtutally wiped out in Korea....they had " What did they have, pray tell?
Thank you! I'm very glad that David Fletcher is doing these even post retirement. It's immensely valuable to get his personality and charm combined with his immense lifetime of knowledge immortalized in this way for the future.
There is a anecdote of two cromwells that stumbled into a field which had at the other end an antitank gun and a machine gun nest, they both quickly reversed but not before they were liberally sprayed with machine gun rounds, they escaped by taken a run up and jumping a small canal, the second cromwell didn't fare so well as it forgot to take itself out of gear for the landing and nearly turned itself on its back, The first cromwell on examining their tank afterwards found that the entire armour was covered in machine gun rounds half sticking out so it looked like a hedgehog, apparently they had inadvertently issued with a training tank which just had a mild steel skin, they were offered a replacement tank but the crew refused, convinced this was a 'lucky' tank and went through the rest of the war with it, without incident.
02:25 - this Cromwell they're showing has got Polish insignia, which means it probably seen action in the Polish Armoured Core of Gen. Maczek. That unit (initially just of a size of one division) was engaged in the Battle Of Falaise and afterwards it went on liberating a big "chunk" of the Netherlands, and (and as far as I remember) finished its service by taking Wilhelmsafen.
Aye. After retreating to Britain the division eventually consisted of about 18,000 men, and was attached to the First Canadian Army and assisted them in their campaign.
My Dad joined the 17/21st Lancers in 1946, Got the tattoo's and on completing his training he was transfered to the RSG to re-role on the Centurion. After several years on Cents he was posted to run the Glasgow Yeomanry who had Comet's. So one Saturday morning he was at work and they had an electrical issue with a Comet, and the maintenance depot was on the other side of Glasgow. So off they set to drive across to the repair depot. Not realising it was a match day in the city. My old man wwas driving, looking out through the drivers round porthole hatch, he stopped at the Policeman controlled traffic lights in a very busy match day city centre. The Cop on point duty was enormous, long coat and white gloves. The traffic held as the Cop looked around, he then started to walk across toward the waiting Comet tank. My old man thought what is up, whats wrong. The Cop walked up to the front of the tank, and leaned toward my Dads face in the drivers hatch and said in best Glaswegian "Are you going to the match" with a big grin on his face.
when i see pictures of the cromwell flying through the air i wonder how the crew didnt break their spines or smash their heads on the roof upon impact unless the seats all have their own suspension?
Dukes of hazard! I have heard a report of three of these escaping from a German thrust by leaping over a 20ft canal. First driver remembered to hold the clutch in, second one didn't, and almost stood the thing on its nose when he landed. Third one only half made the jump but managed to crawl out. All three escaped.
David Fletcher actually reminds a bit of a tank, standing there, talking with one arm tucked and the other extended a bit like a turret gun. "An effective little weapon".
I love the Cromwell it just looks so beautiful and ready to be a super tank. Also When I see it I feel like it’s our version of a Sherman or a panzer 4
Ah! Proper Second Floor! Those strange American types call the Ground Floor the First Floor (or so I'm told) and hence the proper Second Floor is their Third Floor. They will be mispronouncing Worcestershire next, the heathens.
Great video and very interesting history of the Cromwell tank. Many thanks David for sharing this with us and sharing your knowledge with us too. Have a great week in Bovi, Joe
I sure enjoyed this presentation I'm willing to bet some of the British tank crews who had some automotive knowledge took the governor off the engine to give it a lot more get up and go I am willing to bet that this gentleman could take a simple potato and give an hour-long discussion and make it very interesting a very good presenter he is well loved and respected here in America
They made it slower because the crew could not stand the speed?! Maybe they were afraid that their tea would spill if the tank goes any faster than a Churchill. My terrible attempt at British humor.
Its because tracked vehicles produce heavy vibrations which fatigue and damage the health of the crew. They're running on metal not rubber tyres. At 40mph, it would be impossible for the human body to function.
I love the Cromwell, it's an iconic British tank of the early war years and did a decent enough job during its years of service. It has a bit of a "barn door engineering" look about it but, as it was pretty nimble, it had a lot going for it.
MikhailZavarov Yes! Although small correction: it's the 1st Polish Armoured Division. There was a lancers reginent in it, but this being a Cromwell it probably rather belonged to the 10th Mounted Rifles Regiment (10 pułk strzelców konnych), which served as a vanguard. It could also belong to the division's command, maybe even gen. Maczek himself.
A model of this Cromwell mk4 (T190003) is on my desk. First time I've noticed that the model is that very one and I've watched these videos on repeat numerous times
fact to remember. the crommwell tracks will look will look considerabely similar for those who have researched the BT5 and BT7 because these 2 sports tanks used the suspension and also had similar track suspension
Hello all. David Fletcher & The Tank Museum , ThX for this Video about a Way Underrated Tank in WW2. 3:58 Just check the Height Difference between a Sherman and a Cromwell. Being able to Flank Enemy more undetected ect. Id rather play with a Cromwell ,than with a Sherman Firefly,because of the lower detection. Sacrifice Power,for Speed and Stealth Attacks,that need more shots to kill the Enemy . Greetings !
Why did they not use any type of faceplate such as the German "Saublende" to protect from shells fired at the gun mantled? It looks like this part is extremely vulnerable.
One thing I'd like to know about the Cromwell is when they started up-armouring them to Mk. VII/VIII standard. Some sources seem to suggest at the end of '44, about the same time as the Comet was being introduced, other sources suggest it was a post-war modification.
You really must do more videos, David and crew. I really enjoy your videos, especially how go from a very obscure WW1 Combat Taxi to my favourite British tank :) Would there be a chance of getting Tank Chats on an M18 Hellcat or Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer?
The British 75 mm gun on these tanks as well as on late war Churchills was basically a QF 6 pounder (57 mm) gun bored out so that it could fire the same American 75 mm AP and HE rounds as the standard Sherman. While this made the tanks more effective against entrenched infantry and soft targets, it was not an improvement in terms of anti-tank abilities, the 6 pounder gun, particularly with APDS ammunition (in wide availability by mid 1944) having much superior penetration potential to the underpowered 75 mm AP round. Consequently, some of the late war Churchills in every unit retained the 6 pounder armament for anti-tank work. Apparently nearly all the late war Cromwells on the battlefield mounted the 75 mm gun, though the speed and maneuverability of this vehicle may have seen to obviate the need for a more competent anti-tank capability.
I'd like to imagine that the British War Department borrowed inspiration from the Tiger I's box shape (likely from studying the captured Tiger 131 in 1942) to develop the Cromwell, which would later influence the design of the world's 1st MBT, the Centurion.
I wonder if the Cromwell was worth the effort - since it was no better in most key characteristics than a Sherman and must have cost a lot to develop and produce. There does not seem to have been a shortage of Shermans at any point in 1944. Of course, given the lead time to design, tool up factories and mass produce a tank maybe they didn't know at the outset that they would not really be needed. I'm glad it was built and used anyway. One of my favorite WW2 tanks.
I heard that story too. They didn't understand why their Cromwell was faster than the others until they found out they had mild steel instead of armor plates.
and interestingly a very similar tank, the Cromwell Snakebite, exists on the WoT Console, a T6 cromwell Light-tank with LTTB speed/mobility at the cost of a bit thinner armor vs regular Cromwell
Also regarding the 57mm/75mm gun choice, 75mm also retains energy better at range, so better at longer ranges, whereas the 57mm would be excellent at close to mid range.
Really enjoy these videos, would it be possible for David to do a video on the Valiant ? I'd like to see how he would describe 1 of the worst tank designs ever.
