Tank Chats #90 | M26 Pershing | The Tank Museum 

who needs santa claus and his measly gifts, when we have Tank Chats by Mr. Fletcher.

The worst feature of the M26 Pershing during WWII was its absence from the battle field.

David Fletcher should be put in the British Museum when he retires, as he is a national treasure

David Fletcher is the David Attenborough of tanks.

Fletcher asking for subs is adorable. Change my mind.

"It was more acurate than the 17pdr, most guns are." LOL that humor is as dry as Beefeater gin

He looks so spooked when he has to do the "youtube stuff" at the start but then he's so calm with the actual tank chat.

Love the smooth cast design of the Pershing.

Just finished a book called 'Spearhead' which is a story of a crew which went from a Sherman to a Pershing. V good book.

First one I caught within a minute of being posted! Hello from Texas!

The perfect tank will shoot enemy seeking, globe circumnavigating AP rounds in bursts of 100, have 6 feet of armor, only weigh 5000 pounds, reach speeds of 100 + mph., have a spacious crew compartment with a pool table, AND automatically drive itself to the Bovington museum when the war is over.

Upgraded for operations in Korea and that sort of thing. Another classic ;)

Just sit the man down in a comfy arm chair, start a livestream and let him waffle about tanks for 12hours. People will watch it.

When Mr Fletcher is done with his work he goes home to his tiny house in The Shire

If I was ever insulted by Mr. Fletcher: I'd wear whatever he called me as a name-tag and thank him for the honor.

you know, he's got a solid perspective on tanks.

I would like David Fletcher to adopt me as his grandson. He is the universal grandfather.

The one consistency through every machine ever made. "It was always a little underpowered". Tanks, aircraft, ships, doesn't make any difference, they were always designed with engines too small for purpose. This philosophy still holds to this day.

The M26 was a great upgrade to the M4. More accurate than the 17 pounder, and accuracy means all. This vehicle had an adequate engine, not terribly underpowered. This vehicle has more armor, too. The M26 also has a shorter profile.

I have been waiting for Mr fletcher to review the Pershing, certainly not disappointed.”equal to the Panther, which is not saying very much” awesome.

David Fletcher: "The Tiger was quite old by comparison." And such is WWII when 2 tanks fielded 2 years apart and one is considered quite old. WWII started with tanks that were riveted together and had machine guns ended 6 years later with cast bodies and upwards of 120mm guns. The philosophies garnered in WWII spurred tank designs for the next 40 years.

I’ve been waiting for them to do the M26 Pershing. It’s one of my favorite tanks.

What a cool guy mr fletcher is, knows his stuff could listen to him for hours what a hero

The A100 Fletcher Tank. Gun: 150mm, firing armour piercing shells created from weaves from moustache hair of the man himself. Armour: Pykrete that doesn't dare melt, for fear of inciting Fletcher's wrath. Engine: Mini Cooper engine running on NOS. Top Speed: irrelevant. Can teleport (and time travel) Most tank victories throughout the 20th century are wrongly attributed to other tanks. Including the T34 and the Challenger 2.

"Ruddy nuisance." He kills me.

"Which isn't saying very much" I can hear the wehraboos typing in anger right now.

Thank you David Fletcher. I enjoy watching your informative videos.

Mr. Fletcher we LOVE your Tank Chats!!!! I've watched almost all of them!!!

I like it from the field maintenance point of view. If it's easy to get to everything, it's easy to keep it going.

Used extensively in Korea, the M-26 took on some Russian T34-85s. The 90 MM went in the fronts of the T34, (with salutary effect on the crew of the -34s) out the side of the T34 and off into the distance. The solid shot impacted near an unsuspecting US infantry outfit over 1200 yards away who called up the tankers saying "Hey, whatd'ya think your trying to do to us???" The tankers replied " Oh Gee we're sorry: next time we'll let you guys stop the t-34's"

I can't get enough of these tank chats , this series of informative videos is unmissable

Im always watching videos like this in my house. But my sons and I all truly appreciate you in particular Mr. Fletcher. My 3yr old asks to watch your tank chats by name. He actually asked me this morning to watch "David fletcher, the big pershing tank" video. Awesome. Thank you for what you do sir.

Fun Fact: Mr. Fletcher's mustache is thicker than the armor on a Pershing. 👍✌️

The Chieftain covered the M26 Pershing at one point. He said that part of the reason it was so late, was that the T26 Prototype was chosen over a more desired version. Once M26 Pershing was accepted, the officials in charge went to work to get it ready for production. Not only were the Gun and Drive Systems a concern, but apparently there were a couple of dozen other faults of various kinds that concerned the various departments and boards involved. M26 Pershing was expected to be needed. The US Army had set out once the M4 Sherman was in production to find a replacement, expecting the M4 Medium Tank to reach obsolescence by 1945/46. So they wanted another Tank, one with a bigger gun, faster mobility, and better armor in production by 1944. Sadly for the M26, nothing actually worked out. The Chieftain broke down all of the issues that ended up plaguing the program. But eventually everything started to get done the right way by 1944. The program looked to be lagging only by months, but M26 was selected and promptly ordered prepared for mass production. A few pilot models were built. Find all the issues, learn how the vehicle behaves, and develop all requirements from doctrine to logistics for it. By that time, the M4 Sherman was proving to be just what the US Army wanted. Quick to make, easy to operate, simple to maintain, and still be able to be upgraded to meet new battlefield demands as they came along. The M4 Sherman was doing everything asked of it and more. There was an increasing appearance that the only the M4 couldn't do, was read. I'm paraphrasing from the top of my head here. So these aren't the Chieftain's words. Go watch the video! Sadly, the Battle of the Bulge rolled around. The Tiger B was a shock to American troops. Intel hadn't noticed it and the Soviets hadn't mentioned it. Fortunately, less than 1,000 Tiger B's and variants with the hull would be made. Unfortunately, the only thing that could stop them with any reliability in Europe and on hand at the time, was something with a 17-pdr (not in US Inventory) or the M18 Hellcat MGC/TD. And even that was up in the air at best. The US Army scrambled. Their move was the M36 Jackson. In a rush to get as many as they could, Sherman hulls were pressed into being quickly reworked to carry the M36's Turret and 90mm gun. These were designated M36B Jackson and rushed to the frontlines. Thank God for American Standardization, or that would have taken too long. M36Bs have been shown painted white and covered in snow in Europe, so they arrived before Spring 1945. The M36 would prove itself, such as one encounter an M36 punched through the front slope of a Tiger B's Turret to lodge the round in the back of the Turret several weeks later during an ill-fated German localized counterattack. M26 Pershing was ordered to the front in response. Despite there being too few vehicles available. The Zebra Mission was equipped with the first M26s that could be made available, either from existing stocks or produced in a hurry. The US Army dragged its heels though. The M26 had faults. Too many of them. The departments and boards in charge declared it unfit for combat. They didn't want to send it, believing that threat had passed and there were good enough vehicles until they could finish the refinements. Unfortunately, they got overruled and the M26 was rolled out. Problems with the 90mm were known. By the end of the war, an M26 Super Pershing had been built. It had a much more powerful 90mm that was far longer and more robust than the previous 90mm guns. Testing in the field commenced and was apparently successful. But the war ended and Pershing was not in demand for the Pacific at the time. Which was good. It's doubtful the engine would have held up at the time. The M46 Patton wasn't just a rearmed and reengined M26. Every fault in the M26 was corrected. The M46 was to be the M26 as it was supposed to be, going into Europe in WW2. The M26 ended up getting some upgrades and went on for a longer service period than had been expected for what had essentially became an Interim Tank Design. As for the designation, the M26 was designated Heavy Tank because of its Gun. The 90mm was to be equipped only to Heavy Tanks. The 75mm to Medium Tanks and 37mm to Light Tanks. The US Army actually had a listing of what guns would enter the three areas. By 1945, the Army had yet to find the time to adjust its system.

Thank you, Mr. Fletcher. Much respect from Missouri.

Thank you Mr. Fletcher. Joy to listen and watch. All the best.

The U.S Army Ordinance tested the M3 90mm and the QF 17lb. The M3 was the superior tank gun. More accurate, better HE, and adequate armor penetration.

Having driven Shermans and run a Pershing, I can say that just sitting in the M26 you can feel you're in a more capable tank. Less mobile, but when you can shoot at a target through a building, who cares? It really 'barks' when it starts... FUN. Also, didn't the M46 have the 'wobble stick' driver's control, rather than laterals?

Mr. David reminds me of my grandpa so much i love him!

Oh wow... Any of the Tank Museum's videos are awesome (especially presented by David Fletcher MBE) and a pleasure to watch - But the appearance of The History Guy doing the outro made my day!

The notion that the 17lbr was more devastating than the 90mm seems ridiculous to me. Even if we're talking solid shot for both, typically the higher diameter round causes more damage and transfers more energy, the 17lbr being an extra high velocity 75mm gun not dissimilar to the Panther's gun. Their advantage over the Pershing's 90mm is a slight increase in penetration, but the amount of damage caused by that 90mm round, especially given the extremely good American APHE round, would be more devastating than even the 88 of the tiger series with about 20% more explosive filler.

It would be great if you'd do one about the Super Pershing and the infamous action it had caught on film at the end of WW2.

This is by far one of the coolest people to ever do a conversation on tanks. Hats off to you, sir.

Thank you David Fletcher. I so enjoy your knowledge and frankness.

Disappointing that he failed to note that during WW2, it was called the T-26. The M-26 designation came later when the Army redid tank designations and got rid of the T series; that it had a fast electric turret transverse and gyroscopically stabilized barrel that allowed it to acquire targets and be more accurate than anything else field at the time; and no mention of the 2 super-pershings.

"the 17 pounder, if it hit , did a lot of damage"... Classic

So happy I found this channel I’ve been watching episode after episode and just can’t get enough 😉

New talk by Mr. Fletcher to start the morning off great 😁

They certainly faired well against T-34s in Korea.

David does not speak highly of the 90mm, yet it served the US and particularly the IDF, quite well. Note that the IDF had both the 17 pounder and the 90mm, yet they stuck with the 90mm. Ah well, David appears to miss this fact, but then again, this is a British production........ Note the neat twin-.50cal arrangement @ <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="224">3:44</a> and then again @ <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="265">4:25</a> and even @ <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="310">5:10</a>. neat!

Another wonderful presentation. Thank-you.

I appreciate you taking the time to make a video to share your education on this tank. A beautiful tank. A beautiful thing America new country forming and starting its own path.

I love how this guy talks. Just says it like it is. Way more informative then some overly formal dorknozzle.

On a separate note, can you place mr fletcher in a library with a chimney,, get him to sit in a confy couch, light a pipe and talk about tank history for 30 minutes as a series?

This wonderful Mr.Fletcher said a rememberable thing in a Think Tank:"its not the tank that does it, its the guys in them"! - and that applies i think to most here in life, its not the machines, its us

Another excellent video! Thank you!

The 90mm was a version of a high velocity antiaircraft cannon.

This guy is a legend.

He says how the 90 mm wasn’t really as good as the 17 pdr. Is that true? With HVAP ammo this thing was super powerful despite already packing quite a punch.

Listen to fletch all day! He'd make a fantastic teacher

Ah, yes...the Pershing....the "German" tank in just about every Hollywood movie in fhe 60s. Just paint it gray and slap a German cross on it, and you have yourself a "King Tiger"

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="280">4:40</a> It had a Ford engine, that's why it could drive through water.

And that sort of thing.....I love it that's engrained in my speech now david

Thank you , Mr Fletcher .

Heavy means that it is at the upper end of in terms of weight & dimensions that the American logistics system could handle. It's ability to negotiate bridges etc in Europe as also a major consideration. Also the opposition to the tank wasn't unreasonable. Slotting a new weapon into the logistical train isn't a trivial exercise, particularly considering that the Sherman was doing a good job and was reliable & efficient. It should be noted that the Pershing didn't meet the Armour Schools standards for being an efficient fighting vehicle.

You really really underrated this tank

"The tank was not very heavy " (-tank weighs more than any other British or American tank that saw combat in WW II-Lol) If comparing with the standard ammo mostly supplied to M36 crews, it is probably fair to say the 90mm wasn't quite as powerful as 17pdr. With the T33 and HVAP ammo supplied to the Zebra Mission tanks, the 90mm was more accurate and packed a bit more punch. Really enjoy these videos. Thank goodness for tank chats!

Subscribed. Thank you kind sirs, your knowledge is key to me.

The American 90mm gun started out the same way as the German 88mm gun. Both were originally intended to be AA guns. The American shell was designed with a bigger bursting charge, so it was very useful against soft targets, but as an anti-tank gun it just wasn't as good. Interesting story about the Ford V-8. It was originally Fords intention to build a V-12 with 1000hp to compete with the Packard V-12 which powered some American aircraft. But the upgraded Packard produced 1250 HP and won the contract. So, Ford reduced the number of cylinders and offered it to the Army as a V-8 tank engine with 500 hp. They even considered putting it into a re-designed Sherman but no one wanted to stop the production lines so they put it in the Pershing. I'm thinking that if they had put a turbo charger on it it might have produced 600hp. But they stuck with what they knew, and had, so they wound up with an under powered tank.

Love Fletcher... kinda down plays how good this tank was... very few saw combat so it played no real part in the outcome but it was the most advanced tank to see combat in the war on either side. Was also the best tank (with some improvements) to see combat in the Korean War... the prototype modern tank for decades... very underplayed in this video, should give it a little more credit.

I see Mr Fletcher in the thumbnail, and i click thumbs up before i press play; even if he was to simply stare silently at the camera for 8 minutes.

Great tank chat thank you.

I DO FIND THAT I LIKE TANK CHATS!!! I DO!!! I REALLY DO!

McNair made tough choices. He got most of them right. A broken down maintenance nightmare with a wonder gun of the war is worse than a squad of operational M4s.

do love seeing these videos pop up

When I was a kid I kept scratching my head wondering why my model tank had rear drive sprockets

Pershing’s tash is almost as fine as Fletchers!

The M26 was an answer that the allies needed really from DDay , to many good Sherman crews were lost to German heavy armour.

Love the M26! It’s definitely my favorite tank

You finally post about my favorite tank.

When it comes to tank chats, I basically have a timer on hand for how long it takes for the 17 pounder the be mentioned. It's a bit like Godwin's Law, all discussions about tanks undertaken by a Brit will inevitably lead to the 17 pounder.

Under-rated tank. The few that made it to the frontline did well securing the Rhine bridges. If it hadn't of been held up by bureaucrats the allies would have cruised into Berlin.

Pershing one of my personal favorite American tanks ever along with the Patton's especially the M60A3

Superb video from Mr Fletcher and learned something from the intro. I had always assumed the Sherman was named after General Sherman who marched through Georgia in the civil war but didn't realize it was British origin.

M4 was named after an American Civil War general: William Tecumseh Sherman.

A tank that can take 3 hits from a Tiger I and be made serviceable again, is not just another tank. The M-26 went on to excellent service in Korea. It was the basis for the M-47, M-48 and in ways the M-60. And it was better than any tank Britain would field for the next 10 years.

Holy f the pershing is bigger than I expected

That is a huge machine!! 💪💪💪

I do enjoy Mr. Fletcher's work, and his onscreen presence. However, I find it amusing that he praises the Comet (which I myself am a fan of), yet calls the Pershing "just another tank". I'm not sure why he finds it strange the Pershing is classified as a heavy. The typical British or American tank in WW II weighed about 30 to 35 tons. The Pershing weighed 46 tons. The only tank used in regular combat by the English speaking Allied countries with heavier armor (if one excludes the Sherman Jumbo) was the Churchill VII, but the Churchill's armor was not sloped. The Pershing's that saw combat with the 3rd armored were all equipped with T33 and HVAP ammo. So equipped, the 90mm was certainty not inferior to the 17pdr in AT capability, and fired a more effective HE than the 17pdr. In addition to it's much improved frontal protection, the Pershing had 76mm side armor, much improved over the typical British or American tank, and better than the Panther. Slightly less than Tiger I. This would make the Pershing less vulnerable to side shots than many Allied tanks, and better suited to the heavy role than anything else used in combat by Britain or America before the end of WW II. The only German tank with significant superiority to Pershing in both firepower and armor was the Tiger II, and not very many of those were used on the Western front. Given it's small numbers, great weight and poor mobility, it is debatable whether or not the Tiger II could be labeled a "success", in any case. How often was an Allied tank called upon to actually fight a Tiger II? Always enjoy the videos, and the comments. I hope there are many more to come.

I want to see fletcher design a tank.

This was the most versatile heavy tank. I would definitely take advantage to fight in that!

Hey David could you guys please talk about the different Variants of the tanks in Tank chats, it would be amazing Would really love it!

Ww2 armor is fixing up one of these

I'm surprised there was no comparison to the Centurion. Both designs of the same time, both much larger than their predecessors. But the results are fairly different.

I always enjoy the way he dismisses the absurd. A man who says what he means.

"It’s a ruddy nuisance at the best of times".....Brilliant!

I thought the Sherman was named after General Sherman of the Civil war

Its always heart warming to see david fletcher asking for subscriptions and likes, its like a granpa trying to figure out how to use the internet....

Brilliant video thank you ❤️👀😎👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

Great show, surprised it doesn’t have more subscribers.