- 14
- 64 422
War History with Jay
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 22 พ.ย. 2012
The history of the British FV4101 charioteer tank - Tank history # 12
In todays video, We are going to be taking a look at one of the immediate post war designs meant to counter the Soviet IS-3 and T-34 tanks
If you want to support me, Patreon - www.patreon.com/WarHistoryWithJay
If you want to support me, Patreon - www.patreon.com/WarHistoryWithJay
มุมมอง: 1 868
วีดีโอ
The history A38 Vickers Valiant, One of the most disappointing tank in history
มุมมอง 1425 หลายเดือนก่อน
In todays video, We are going to be taking a look at one of the most disappointing tanks in history that would be the closest thing for hell to any tank driver If you want to support me, Patreon - www.patreon.com/WarHistoryWithJay
The design and history of the British WW2 tank, The A30 Challenger tank
มุมมอง 1.2K7 หลายเดือนก่อน
The design and history of the A30 Challenger tank, An British tank that was modified to be mounted with a 17 pounder main gun
The history of the dicker max german WWII tank destroyer
มุมมอง 2889 หลายเดือนก่อน
the history of german bunker buster tank that was repurposed later in the war to a role of a tank destroyer
The history of the T-43, the soviet medium tank design that preceded the T-34/85
มุมมอง 7Kปีที่แล้ว
The history of the T-43, the soviet medium tank design that preceded the T-34/85
The history of the Sturer Emil, A tank destroyer with a 128mm main gun
มุมมอง 17Kปีที่แล้ว
The history of the Sturer Emil, A tank destroyer with a 128mm main gun
The history of the TV-8 concept tank that was envisioned being mounted with nuclear powered engine
มุมมอง 2.6Kปีที่แล้ว
The history of the TV-8 tank what was considered with having a nuclear reactor engine mounted as it's main powerplant (PS, due to the tank being a concept design, there is few pictures available out there so it is more a slideshow on this video)
The bizarre story of the final navy engagement in WW2 that was fought with sail ships
มุมมอง 245ปีที่แล้ว
a story about the final WW2 naval battle that was fought with chinese sail ships (apologies for the lack of photos, no kind of photographs exist of the ships that were used in the battle, only examples of similar ship designs)
The time a U-boat was sunk by its own captain with a toilet - Type VIIc U-1206
มุมมอง 27K2 ปีที่แล้ว
the time a German U-boat was sunk by its own captain using a toilet
The history of the M65 Atomic cannon, only test firing of an US artillery nuclear shell
มุมมอง 5482 ปีที่แล้ว
The history of the US first and only artillery piece that test fired a nuclear shell
The history of the Chi-To Japanese Medium tank
มุมมอง 8552 ปีที่แล้ว
the history of the Chi-To, Imperial Japan's Attempt at making a better Medium tank in WW2 (apologies for the mini hiatus, this video has been re done several times with scripts rewrites, but now i will try to upload at least on a schedule of at least twice a week)
history of the soviet 2B1 Oka 420mm
มุมมอง 6K2 ปีที่แล้ว
the history of one of the soviets attempts at making a nuclear capable artillery
The history of the Japanese O-I Super heavy tank
มุมมอง 8393 ปีที่แล้ว
the history of the failed Japanese attempted at making a super heavy tank sources for the video axis history forum forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=220771 tanks encyclopedia tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/jap/O-I.php Twitch - tinyurl.com/yxfh3w98 TH-cam - tinyurl.com/2pk47hzb minds - tinyurl.com/yh3taf64
Did you mean Atomic Annie?
It's called a Turret, not a Turrent
Fat Max 👍🏼👍🏼
Birmingham Railway Carriage and Wagon Company not the Birmingham Railway Carriage and Cart Company
Very good sir very extensive,could their be any chance you will cover sighting systems, cheers 😊
I have added this to my list, though it will be some time as I am rather unfamiliar with the history of most sighting equipment development at this moment apart from small titbits of information
Good vid bud
I'm surprised to learn it had as long a service life as it did; David Fletcher of The Tank Museum ranked it the 5th-worst British Tank.
How could a failure like this ever see the light of day, I wonder? Was it incompetence of a single designer that had no actual experience with tanks but no one dared to say "no" to, or was this some result of "design by commission" where no one looked at the big picture when pushing their ideas?
The Comert hardly had a weak gun - it was a version of the 17 pounder and was a better gun than the famous 88mm fitted to the Tiger I.
I am aware of the comets gun being better in some regards but for the time period of the 1950s, the British and everyone else were pretty much of the opinion that sub 80mm calibre guns mounted on tanks wasn't going to cut it for the future especially when the allies themselves were designing more heavily armed tanks like the conqueror that mounted the a 120mm gun or Patton tanks with 90mm gun, plus the British themselves were replacing many of the 17 pounder gun equipped on centurions with a 20 pounder gun.
@@jaylarkin2000 The 17 pounder was better than the much vaunted 88mm on the Tiger 1 and better than the 90mm on the Patton. You cited the 1944 design T34/85 as a reason for needing a bigger gun. The 17 pounder was easily capable of dispatching a T34/85 at battle range. Putting a big gun in a lightly atmoured vehicle is making the same mistake that Jackie Fisher did with Couragious and Furious. The 17 pounder on early Centurions [used as a stopgap] was replaced in 1949 long before the design that you favour came on the scene. The Centurion was an altogether heavier tank than the 17 pounder equiped Comet and that caused mobility issues where bridges were not strong enough to bear its weight.
@@gnosticbrian3980 I cited the IS-3 and T-34-85 for the reason that they were the main tanks that were fielded by the soviets, this is what the British had if the 1950s gone hot would have to faced, I never disputed that the 17 pounder gun wasn't able to take out a T-34, but if it was facing a IS-3, even with APDS it would be somewhat of a struggle engaging the tank from range. The Courageous, Glorious and Furious are funny when your own guns do more damaged to your ships than the enemy, but it is slightly missing point, Charioteer was meant as a stop gap design to supplement British forces with more tanks with 20 pounder guns, Was it lightly armoured? For the time and even more so in the future, Yes but as i said in the video they were far more concerned about getting 20 pounder guns to their units which were operating the older tanks
@@jaylarkin2000 The T34/85 and the IS3 both date from 1944; the Soviets were adopting the T54/T55 as their MBT in the fifties. My father graduated from Donkey Walloper to tanker in WW2. He thought that the Comet had a pretty good balance of the three requirements of a tank - mobility, firepower and armour. Could the Charioteer's "armour" stop a 50 cal BMG AP round?
Cope
If you have any questions, vehicles or recommendations for future videos that you want to see, post in this pinned comment down below
I knew a guy who served in one on the western front he said it wasn't a bad tank once the crew got used to it had good speed and the gun laid decent. He said it was better than many gave it credit, he was a really good guy I miss our talks together💥
Frontal armour was the same basis as the late war welded Cromwells: 101mm frontal turret. They were issued to the Cromwell recce regiments of the armoured divisions. Like the Firefly, they were initially issued on a 1 in 4 basis, but as the war went on in late '44 and into '45, that number was, for both Firefly and Challenger, increased as new vehicles were delivered. By the end of the war, most of the gun tank regiments used 2 Shermans and 2 Firefly per platoon in NW Europe and the recce regiments matched that with 2 Challengers & 2 Cromwells. The Guards Division, which used the Cromwell as their gun tank in the tank regiments never got as many Challengers as the recce regiments.
Man, your videos are pretty underrated, continue like this
Turrent
Great to see you finally comeback :)
soviet doom stick
TANKS, alot😉👍!!!
Atomic reactors use water. Its just water. It turns into steam. Just like a coal power pant uses water. The steam turns a generator. You get electricity this way. There is no glowing green goo. Just two types of unstable metals and water to cool the heat which also turns to steam. So, yes your electricity in your home still comes from steam either way.
3:05 what is that whistle noise?
Well, that's a crappy way, to go🚽(yeah, yeah, I know)🙄!!
Thumb nail WHAT ARE THOSE!
probably the most ridiculous looking cannon ever
The MkIV as initially intended as an infantry support tank or heavy tank. It carried the short barreled 75mm infantry howitzer and intended to support infantry. The Mk III carried a 37mm anti tank gun was intended to take on other tanks. After fighting French Tanks, the MkIII's 37 was seen as being too light so it was upgraded to a 50mm gun. After running into T34's and KV1's in Russia, The germans decided to replace the short barreled guns with long barreled hight velocity guns. This led to the tank killer models of both tanks. Sadly even with the long barreled 50mm, the MkIII was seen as being too light a tank so the hulls were converted to use as assault gun tanks. The long barreled MkIV was more successful and continued on in the war. However, while the Germans increased the firepower, and armor of the MkIV, they never improved the engine transmission or suspension of the tank. Which lead to a slower tank that broke down more often. This ended up with the Sherman tank being superior to the MkIV in many ways.
You are dooing a good job but ....mate you speak at a snail speed...
That was interesting! Why did the Soviets try so hard to recover the KV1 though? Was it new enough at the time that they didn't want it retrieved by the Germans?
Heavy tanks like the soviet KV-1, IS tanks are quite resource heavy to manufacture and to transport to the frontlines. It is far cheaper to recover a damaged KV-1 to either get it repaired to a working state or cannibalise it for spare parts than it is to be sent a fresh KV-1, Generally once your unit get your delivery of fresh tanks, it will be a while until you will get another batch come through so the more longer you can keep some of your tanks running the better chance that you would then be allocated with new tanks
germans did much waste to loose the war
Cool tankdestroyer, I could use it in a war film about the tank battle at Overloon.
No matter the size of their guns... they still lost most bigly... Yeah!!!
Good.
Nao reappearing with the Russians... 😆
The 5 inch shell is overkill, a 75mm would do the job almost as well with a shell much lighter.
it is overkill for the purpose of taking out 1941-1944 era tanks but the main gun was originally a large calibre anti air flak cannon that was modified to be used as an anti fortification gun, the sturer emils and dicker maxes were pressed into service as tank destroyers as germany wanted as many tanks on the eastern front that could be useful in taking out russian tanks
Interesting content on a fascinating subject, but the presentation style was monotonal, making it difficult to maintain interest.
Thumb up. Tnx for the vid!
This is a great channel, your explanation is clear and in deeep without futility!
A very interesting account of an armoured vehicle of which I’d never heard - many thanks.
Repeats the same information multiple times.
"Maj' in oo" Line. The "t" on the end is silent.
Right on.
Good effort mate. I learned something new.keep it up.
The dude with brains less than bug's is talking about something that he even does not understand. Funny.
Look it up yourself.
Great content. Keep it up. Still a fan of the T43. It had strikes against it due to the invasion and need to concentrate on what could be produced in the highest numbers without retooling, so T34 was what the Soviet Red Army had, rather than that which it wished to have. I feel T43 it was the better vehicle. It specifically addressed flaws in T34's hull and suspension design, and added that efficiency improving dedicated loader to the turret. T34/85 did not address the well known existing T34 chassis issues, which were significant, especially with the bigger, taller, turret adapted from the T43. Flight of fancy. Were I a young nation struggling against her nearby enemies I might've preferred purchasing T43 tanks over US M3 and M4, UK Crusader, or Panzers III und IV. Obviously, they can be upgunned at need. And the F34 could manage against any of those competitors. Wish I knew if they'd improved turret layout on the 25pdr armed AC Sentinel, 'cause that'd be worth looking into, also. Considering the later US M45 (Pershing armed with a 105mm gun/howitzer) it might've been useful for its HE effect.
What did you do in the war, daddy? I was in charge of flushing toilets.
Wow, he really dropped a deuce, didn't he??
Needed thousands of these great weapons to smash the reds and the British
Lol! The Germans smashed the British Expeditionary Force using Panzer I & II's...
What a Schlitt way to lose a Submarine. 😰🙄
no problems with voice here
Use a limiter or normalisation on your VO to bring it up to level mate, its very quiet compaerd to the other audio elements in the video. Great content though!
Good shit, I'm glad I've found this channel. Keep it up bro
420 nice
The last photo looked like the gun was loaded onto a barge moored at a pier. Awesome pics. We are very lucky it only fired once. Lolol 🤞🤠👍Keep your fingers crossed. Lol
Well done!