@@gastonbell108 There's no moulding process that could adequately represent his razor sharp wit either. That'd be a nice lifetime modelling project though: make one of everything the Tank Museum has in its collection.
Well...when you're 6'5" like Nicholas Moran, you might need to remove the steering wheel to get both in & out. Oh bugger, the steering wheel is on fire!
I think it would be easily solved with one of those “push the shape through and turn 90’” type locks. You often find them on kids toys. It’s solid once locked and all you’d have to do to get it off is turn the thing a right angle and pull.
"worth a............spit" XD I think he had the first two letters of that word differently in his head there before his mind pulled the emergency break :D
Haha, he was probably thinking of some soldier's statement about it since they would go about describing gun performance that way, and did a quick mental rephrase :D
@Charles Yuditsky Well, according to Mr Fletcher, it was done so the driver could get into his seat....just like an F1 car of today. Hence the comment. ;-)
This Tank vids are the best, David Fletcher knowledge is second too none . Please Jeremy Clarkson or someone from Grand Tour do a video on Sir David Fletcher .
@@unexpectedcaveman6573 At 6'5" or 196cm, I should say not... :) At a husky 6'1", I often get claustrophobic heebie-jeebies just watching his videos... :/
This armored car does look nice. I think it has that contemporary look to it. It looks not too dissimilar to modern versions, or rather AFV's as they are known now. Maybe outdated, but it still looks kinda modern.
Merci pour ce commentaire, hommage à mon père qui a combattu dans cet engin en Indochine en 1946/48, et qui a beaucoup apprécié l'utilisation de cet armoured car et surtout la mitrailleuse Besa qui lui a sauvé la vie maintes fois. Cordialement JJ
2:02 that s funny..that is exactly how a tamiya driver figure is going to enter a tamiya 1/35 scale tank and jeep model : Paint the figure, paint the jeep/car...leave the steering wheel out..until the very last moment when all is put in place..
I was having a not so good day and then... David's smiling face greeted me today as I tuned in to watch the latest Tank Chat! Thank you for having this man talk about one of our favorite topics! :)
At 5:30 and on... showing the two side views, transposed on top of one another, to then help see the slight differences, was neat, that really makes a difference in helping my small brain see the topic at hand... Thank you for taking the time to add that bit of video slide comparison, I am sure it took so time to align them just right for the effect.... It was neat to see that...
It may not have been as good ad its contemporaries but it was a good looking vehicle, and with a seventy five it would pack a fair wallop, if we had run short of Humber's and Daimler's then I think the Coventry's history may well have been different. While the two pounder may have been a bit lacking as an anti tank gun by then, there was plenty of other targets both lightly armoured and unarmored to shoot at, which is why the Daimler carried on using it to beyond the wars end, the Hercules engine was an interesting choice but as far as it being petrol, just about everything was run on it at the time so that should not be viewed as a negative point, the fact that the turret ring could take a seventy five was worthy of note as up gunning to that degree would have been a problem in many armoured vehicles, a Matilda with a seventy five would have been rather potent as would a Crusader. As I say if not for the Humber then it would have been seen in a different light.
Seems like a good size and good fighting shape. The vehicle shape doesn't look obsolete the gun might be, if the suspension tires upgrade would be great for that fighting weight
This is my first video of yours that I have watched. And even with the good World War II content aside, just your personality, and the way you presented your video, was more than enough to have me like and subscribe. Keep up the good work, cheers and tally ho.
Hey the idea is that you're not exactly sending this against Tigers, and the German's own lighter stuff like half-tracks and their own armoured cars would still be vulnerable to a 2-pounder
Yeah but there were usually Panzer 3, 4 and Panthers around too, flak 88's and antitank guns, panzer Faust's... Germans were good at destroying impotent thinly armoured English armour by this stage.
As for stuff like Panzerfausts if the crew weren't in a position to run away from those too and had no infantry escort to deal with the operators, they were dead ANYWAY and would likely have been in ANY Allied vehicle
@@MostlyPennyCat the speed, thin armour and 2 PDR combo had universally been proved in- optimum by this stage of the war. I think the reason they said it was obsolete was they had better armour options available, hence obsolete.
@@indyrock8148 That was why it was small, fast, quiet, hid easily and had the ability to be driven backward at speed without the need of turning. The vehicle was for reconnaissance, not trading blows with enemy armors. Nobody used a lumbering noisy heavy tank for reconnaissance.
I always liked brits arm. Cars especially the WW2 Humber and my No.1 the Ferret and No.2 the Saladin, we had many times per year the brits in our Villages, Field and Forrests and i enjoyed it as a young boy to play inside this Cars
Employment was in everyone's mind to knock out a "enemy tank", if they would have made a HE round it would have been a good support for advancing infantry against soft skin vehicle's and dug in troops, other tank killers were in use and the full use of the Coventry was not put to the test in Europe after 1944. Great Video Sir David
The AEC and the Staghound were heavier than the Coventry. The Coventry is about the same weight as the Saracen. The American engine was used because Britain did not have a petrol engine of suitable power. The 158 hp AEC diesel would have been OK but there was a preference for petrol at the time.
The odd thing is that the Coventry was regarded as a failure. Often, when something looks right, it is right, and the Coventry looks right. The size is fine. It is bigger than the Daimler and the US M8, both very successful designs, but it is smaller and lighter than the very successful US built, Commonwealth used, Staghound and the British AEC, also regarded as a successful design. The engine is the US Hercules RXLD of around 175 horsepower. This was used because the Brits simply did not have a suitable petrol engine available at that time. The RXLD was a proven and reliable, pre-war design, inline six; nothing wrong with it. The suspension was independent all-round and, as can be seen on the video, with excellent wheel-travel. I am not sure but I believe that the Coventry did not have the H-type drive line lay-out of the Daimler but rather had a central differential on each axle. Nothing wrong with that either. Still today the most common type of independent suspension used today. The two pounder gun was silly though. It was obsolete by the mid-forties, was no longer effective against the tanks at that time and, even worse, did not have an effective HE shell. IMO ithe car should have been built in 2 configurations: ons armed with a Polsten gun, or even the 15 Besa, and the other with the 6 pounder or 75mm. I think the main problem with the Coventry was that it came at the wrong time. The war is Europe was winding down and the smaller armoured cars then in use were seen as adequate for the reconnaissance role. The European war had also become a tracked vehicle war. Big armoured cars were neither fish not fowl: big enough to be easily seen and hit, yet poorer mobility and armament than tanks, and lightly armoured. A slightly reworked Coventry would have been an excellent competitor to, for instance, the Panhard AML during the post war years when armoured cars became more popular again. It was simpler and cheaper to build than the excessively complex Saladin and it could take a larger turret ring.
@G G The 90mm F1 gun of the Panhard AML only weighed 400kg; substantially lighter than the 6 pounder and the similar 75mm gun. It was a low velocity gun with much lower recoil than the 75mm gun installed in the mark 2 version of the Coventry. During sixties and seventies the F1 was offered as an upgrade for the WW2, 8 ton US M8 armoured car. The Coventry would have been more than big and stout enough to be fitted with this gun. It could easily have coped with the more powerful F4 version of the French gun which was fitted on the Panhard Sagaie, also an 8 ton car. It might have been possible to fit the entire Panhard turret, with 90mm gun, to the Coventry, if the turret ring diameters matched. I think the Coventry turret ring was slightly smaller than that of the Panhard though. The Coventry was however a British car. The above mentioned stuff is all French. If a Coventry derivative was produced after the war, it would probably have been armed with the 75mm gun developed for the Saladin. The question is how a 1955 model of the Coventry would have compared to the Saladin and how it would have compared to the Panhard AML which was the main competitor to the Saladin, and totally outsold it, on the international market.
nice one diddy ,i been wantin to know about that coventry ,cas i got george fortys book on armoured cars an it tells you nuttin about service of that ,only in french service nuttin about british service !
Since aluminium/aluminum metal was first discovered (smelted from the common compound alum) by Danish and German scientists, I think that earns them the naming rights. That makes “aluminium,” the preferred Danish and German spelling, the preferred one.
Don’t know why all the commenters are freaking out. It’s a simple matter of training the driver to get his nut off quickly. I dare say most of us learn that by the time we are teenagers.
I’d really, really like to have David Fletchers voice as my tank commander in World of Tanks: Blitz instead of the anonymous stock type voice on there now that calls out penetration/bounce and that announces when certain components of tanks take damage. Please World of Tanks: Blitz make this an option. I know you’re reading this.
It seems to me that you can add a slat cage, swap the gun for an automatic grenade launcer, and that would make it ideal for the low intensity conflicts going on nowadays.
