0:33 What do you think the future of the Abrams tank and US armor is for the next 10 years 1:57 DO you think the Abrams will ever be equipped with an auto loader? 2:45 Did engineers of anti tank obstacles and anti tank defenses purposely build obstacles to force tanks to expose the underside for anti-tank weapons? 3:25 Did Russia and Japan develop any personal anti tank weapons? 5:13 Given the tendency of more modern APC/AFVs to be designed with a V-shaped hull, why hasn't the M2 Bradley been upgraded with such a thing? 6:19 During the Afghan war were there any specific desert modifications to vehicles similar to the engine deck Troppen(?) modifications on Panzers? 6:45 How and why did the West "fall behind" the USSR in regards to armour and gun technology? USSR used composite armour and smooth bore guns since the early 60's but the West frst introduced tanks with those features in late 70's/ early 80's. 9:34 Where in the name of good God did you come up with the significant emotional event line? 10:09 Was the Type 95 a decent tank in the idea of island hopping that the Japanese did a lot of? 11:37 How did the crews of the M26 Pershing feel about the tank in comparison to the Sherman 12:36 Given that the Sherman was designed to operate in all theaters of war and was extremely tested for that, how did the T-34 fare in the different theaters in comparison? 12:57 How effective are flamethrowers against tanks? 13:52 What is, or was, the fastest vehicle in the world that you can call a tank with clear conscience? 14:56 Have you ever considered looking at tanks from the receiving end of the barrel of the gun(s)? 15:13 Would the Canadian Ram Mk II tank have been any good had it seen combat? 16:16 What's the story of how you got started working for Wargaming? 17:54 What started the Inside the Chieftan's Hatch series? 18:43 I had never seen anything about the BARV before, any chance of some more information? 19:47 Is there any evidence of the Black Prince being used in Korea?
The current research related to chemical explosive propellant is focused on liquid or gel, automatically expressed into a firing chamber after the projectile is loaded .... which would require auto loading, but for the predictable future manual loading is going to stay with us.
14:14 I recall during my time at Ft Stewart in the early 90's that 'third shop' ran a turretless M1 down the strip at well over 90mph but that the track stretched so bad that the sprockets were popping over the end links on the tracks. It could have gone faster, but the mass of the tracks was such that it expanded too much for the sprockets to grip it properly.
As a retired Engineer one of the criteria we were taught in defensive design was to try to canalise the vehicles into kill zones, that meant using AT ditches, obstacles or minefields or all three. All obstacles had to be covered by fire so breaching is harder. As for design to expose the belly, a berm may do that. Also going into the ditch nose first should expose the top armour. You can't promise that to the Commander, but definitely trying to stop forward movement or move into the kill zone to improve hit probability was key. We commonly used to build them using 2 dozers in a T cut, one to clear the slot and push spoil up ovre the end and the second dozer across the top end to build the berm on the near side.
Time Stamps 0:31 What do you think the future of the Abrams tank and US armour is for the next 10 years? Could you see Abrams be fitted with an autoloader? 2:42 Did engineers of anti tank obstacles and anti tank defences purposefully build obstacles to force tanks to expose the underside for anti tank weapons? 3:20 Did Russia and Japan develop any personal anti tank weapons? 5:12 Given the tendency of more modern APC/AFVs to be designed with a V-shaped hull, why hasn't the M2 Bradley been upgraded with such a thing? 6:15 During the Afghan War were there any specific desert modifications to vehicles, similar to the engine deck tropen modifications on panzers? 6:40 How and Why did the West "fall behind" the USSR in regards to armour and gun technology? 9:32 How did you come up with the "significant emotional event" line? 10:07 Was the Type 95 a decent tank in the idea of island hopping that the Japanese did a lot? 11:37 Given the Sherman was designed to operate in all theatres of the war and was extensively tested for that, how did the T-34 fare in different theatres in comparison? How did the crews of the M26 Pershing feel about the tank in comparison to the Sherman? 12:55 How effective are flamethrowers vs tanks? 13:50 What is the fastest tank in the world? 14:55 Have you ever considered looking at tanks from the receiving end of the barrel of the gun(s)? 15:12 Would the Canadian Ram II tank been any good had it seen combat? 16:15 What's the story of how you got started working for Wargaming? Also, What started the inside the Chieftan's Hatch series? 18:43 I have never seen anything on the BARV before. Any chance of some more information? 19:47 Was there any evidence Black Prince was used in Korea?
09:32 "Significant Emotional Event" comes from Dr. Morris Massey, a "marketing professor/sociologist, and producer of _training videos_ " according to his Wikipedia page. I would suspect the latter is how it found its way into the US military; if anything the military _loves_ its training videos. Dr. Morris defines an SEE as: _"an experience that is so mentally arresting that it becomes a catalyst for you to consider, examine, and possibly change your initial values or value system"_ . Getting shot at by a main battle tank certainly qualifies as that. :D
Why did Germany choose to pursue two separate medium tank chassis the Panzer III and Panzer IV. Now I understand they wanted both a 50mm anti tank gun, and the 75mm support gun. But why not produce one tank chassis, and just fitted two different guns. Even if you need two different turret production lines that seems more manageable than two different tank production lines. This ideally would make supply of additional parts and servicing the tanks much easier as evident by what some other nations ended up doing.
As far as I recall, the early 3 and 4 were fairly interchangeable. Also the panzer iv fulfilled a break through roll for quite some time. I'll have to find a book for it but I think that it had thicker armour than the 3 in the designs. Considering that they were designed in 1935, The most common tank you're gonna come up against in the quest for living room is gonna be a variant of the vickers 2 Ton. If there's gonna be a problem with a vehicle, wheel an anti tank gun down there which will probably be what you have on Hand in the first place rather than a tank. And of that can't deal with it, doctrine would have artillery and air power on call and the average infantry man can do a lot to piss off a tank and make it leave.
Considering the production methods used by Germany, I don't think they considered it that important to standardize on just one tank. And to be fair, no one else picked just one tank.
@@markcorrigan3930 the super ap ammo was only to be used in emergencies and was not a common round. The gun is superior on paper but it's high trajectory lead to issues at long ranges involved in some tank battles especially in North Africa. The 37 was also doing just fine in its role and there was no rush to replace it. Germany was still practicing break through tactics and the panzer 4 was a breakthrough tank at its conception.
Thanks for another talk video! Please release more, even independent of patron questions. You are fun to listen to! A few unrelating and slightly unrelenting questions here: 1. In your opinion what are the top 5 most interesting modern MBTs around the world looking at the past 25 years? 2. Do you have plans to visit new tank museums around the world which you have never been to before, and which? 3. Would you consider having Anti-Air Fire&Forget missiles on top of backline command vehicles a smart idea in any way? 4. It seems separate anti-tank missile launcher devices are not really implemented upon anti-tank vehicles such as tanks and wheeled tank destroyers in this age. Am I right and why is this? 5. Are there any emerging innovations around the world to make use of a drone in the battlefield launched from somewhere like the top back hull of an MBT that you know of? 6. With the appearance a little while back of depleted uranium armor plates, do angled armor slopes come into play again today? Where does an economy obtain DU to put on and in tanks normally? 7. As national tank manufacture plans for inland use are largely determined by the terrain that the vehicle needs to operate on, can you explain all possible variables and is there any specifc place like a database where an amateur can gain information on a particular geographical area? 8. Is there a protection system against top down missiles? Aside from a special environment. 9. Are there any plans by any company or foundation or whatever to restore the Churchill Gun Carrier that, if I know correctly, parks outside The Tank Museum, Bovington? 10. Can you list a large and complete roster of foreign vehicles used by Italy during WWII and the Korean War period? Thinking about purchased, leased, captured, received. 11. Can you please explain to me why was the rifled gun phased out in favor of the smoothbore? 12. Did you manage to hit anyone with your sword while being on top of a tank? :)
@@rudolphantler6309 i presumed that you were a non-patron asking for freebies, but that was probably projection on the part of my own guilty conscience.
Projection? Yes. Patron? Personal information. Freebies? No. Chieftain likes to read some questions here, as he does say in his videos. Sometimes he answers them here. If he decides to make videos out of them, it is as much his own decision as before, naturally. Though he may, because I think my questions are good. Who are we to argue?
Question Chieftain good sir: Can we talk about the M4A3E2, aka Sherman Jumbo? With many different variants of the M4 Sherman it seems that the variant that answered the tanker's want for the M4 to have more armor, also a variant that was welcomed by the US troops, is a variant that looks to be less talked about or discussed in great detail. Even in your "US AFV Development in WW2, or, "Why the Sherman was what it was"" video talk, you were going to mention the Jumbo but you were unable to do so due to time consternates. So, will there be a video talking about the M4A3E2, the features that it has that other Shermans don't have, the gun selections, how it did in battle, anything that you can remember from the archives on it, etc.? Also, the flamethrower version of the Jumbo, the T33, the tank to invade mainland Japan, any information on that tank as well?
Answer to the firsts question: M1A2D is already planned, and a new gun has been claimed to be placed on this. It is called the XM360, and it is supposedly going to be fitted on the new vehicle like how the L/55 was to the Leopard 2A6. It will also get a trophy system, which the C was supposed to get but a lot of them have not gotten one, and thus the project was moved back to get more from the shipments and thus have enough to fit to all the tanks. All M1A2 sep v2’s will attempt to be made up to the standards of M1A2C’s but we don’t know how they’ll be done or even when. That’s all I wanted to say :D
I suspect no-one's gonna see any of those canister rounds, though. If the 11Bs found out, they'd start pounding on the door demanding to actually get the 40mm grenade can rounds, and then maybe automatic shotguns. www.gd-ots.com/munitions/medium-caliber-ammunition/40mm-hvcc/
The Russian phosphorus in a glass bottle grenade you mention at 3:45! My Dad recalled using something very similar to that, as a hand thrown anti tank weapon in the later stages of the liberation war in jugoslavia. He reckoned the partisans raided a German train that was carrying a shipment of those glass bottles east thru jugoslavia around 1944-45. He reckoned that when successfully thrown on a tank it would melt the armour white hot & the crew would be cooked inside..please bear in mind he was likely engaging obsolete French & Czech built armour.
Thank you for the channel and the great videos. Three Q: 1. How many factories actually build tanks over time? I know that there is currently one facility (?) making the Abrams. During the second world war, there were many factories making the T-34, M4 Sherman types and etc. 2. In many videos it was noted that most tanks during WW2 fired HE and not antitank armor piercing rounds. Is that still true during more recent conflicts? 3. Follow up on Q2 - were proximity fuses used for HE rounds during WW2 or later on? For many "softer" targets, a close nearby air burst might be more effective. Thanks again and great channel!
I was stationed at Ft. Knox, KY when a turretless (there was a "basket" of sorts for the TC to stand in and of course there was no gunner or loader on board) XM-1 was clocked by MP radar at around 80mph....Oddly, somebody had failed to notify the MPs of the 194th Armored Brigade (Separate) that a vehicle of ANY kind was to be tested on the hardball that day and the MPs were not amused to say the least. Later, another XM-1 with a turret, full crew, and bags of lead shot stacked around the turret to simulate an ammo loadout was clocked, again by 194th MPs (that time they knew what was coming) using traffic radar at about 75mph. Shortly after that second "test" rumor had it that the Post Commander was, shall we say, pissed off, that 2/6 Cav (the unit assigned to the "Test to Destruction" portion of the XM-1 Program at Ft. Knox) was tearing up the hardball in front of HIS HQ and ordered that SOMETHING be done to end that damage to HIS hardball....I have no idea if the Post Commander ever actually issued such an order or had anything directly to do with the installation of a governor on the Lycoming or not but, when I transitioned to the M-1 (the data plates ALL had XM-1 stamped into them in Germany as did the ones I served on at Ft. Hood, TX even later) the average "flat out, loaded for bear" speed of the M-1 had dropped to a "mere" 55mph over relatively flat terrain.
Belgian Scimitar CVR-T still "holds" the top speed record on german highways ! 130km/h ! Picture from the radar and the ticket are displayed in our HQ block ! This is some weird "proud" of our Battalion !
When I was in Conneaut this year for the D-day re-enactments, I saw you were recording a video regarding the halftrack there, when can we expect to see this video? Love your content and look forward to future videos
Well I saw you video on Hetzer and also the interview with the director of the Munster museum and it had occurred to me that nobody had mentioned the idea of the hetzer project. It comes from Romania, as they were in great need for a armored vehicle that could take the Russian T 34 on eastern front. The biggest problem they were facing was the lack of industrial power to build this project. So they turned to Germany for help. Germans offered a hotchkiss engine and engineers to help them with the problems and to make this vehicle as fast as possible ready for production. The Romanian project was a two man crew tank destroyer named Mareşal/Marshall. The germans saw the design and adapted for the chassis of Pz 38t. More details are in the book of Mark Axworthy, Third Axis , Fourth Ally.
I think the use of Churchill in Korea was explained by David Fletcher during operation think tank, because they left the crocodile trailers behind. Also he has just done a tank chat on Black Prince prototype they have got, basically the answer to all questions was centurion.
@@energeticbombom328 it does, just not very well the US needed a tank to assault fixed positions, meaning it needed thick armour they had shermans in the field, so just welded plate onto the front basically, and gave it a new turret
There were two assault tank projects, the British A33 Excelsior and the US T14,although both has their US-UK variant. The British wanted a new infantry tank to replace the Churchill,which had some major problems at the time and the Americans wanted an assault vehicle. Both tanks failed. The Churchill was eventually fixed enough to be fit for it's role, and the US also decided to work with what's currently in hand and can be produced easily. So they chose to add more armor to M4A3s and gave them new turrets,thus the M4A3E2 was born. It was only as fast as the early M4s and M4A1s, but is was generally liked, because that was the only US tank in disposal that could withstand a direct hit from an 88 from the front. So they often put them in front of the columns. That's the long story short,but feel free to correct me.
Contrary to most of the comments here, the Sherman Jumbo was actually conceived in March 1944 by the Americans who wanted a more heavily armored assault tank for the Normandy invasion. The Brits didn’t have anything to do with it. It did okay - but it was now a 42 ton tank on a chassis designed for 30 tons hence had a lot of reliability issues.0
@@dukenukem8381 oh yeah I had firgotten all about the fact that germany foresaw the invention of ATGMs and HEATFS and decided the maus had no place in combat.
Is hard 4 me to admit it, but i have never played WOT... And i don't think my 4 years old doughter apretiate that i start to do so and get her out from the pc... But i see your work FAR above and beyond a mere video game... I love tanks and i have build many scale models and stuff but the information that you give about those vehicles is much more wider than 1 can usualy get from others sources... To the point that the triangle of armor-firepower-mobility is not quite cut it 4 me anymore when i have to judge a tank... So, if i can make a question it would be: Why we don't get to see more ''Inside the chieftain's hatch'' videos as often as we used to? I learn more with those than reading 5 books or watching 10 documentarys... Glad to see our TAM is good at something...
I was attached to an armored unit fer a KeyUp (sp?) at NTC in the late '80s. I was put in a Sheridan 'BIMP' as a gunner. It was a great experience being an OPFOR there and I learned a lot. One thing I discovered is how much the Sheridan bounced around... It lead to me being motion sick and tossing my breakfast in my gas mask and over the side of the tank... :) A proud military moment... Does that happen with any frequency in other tanks, understanding that the M1 is a heavier tank and may rock less. BTW One of the reasons I got queasy is since I was an 11 bravo add -on I had only my personal promask andnot the vehicle one which wasn't as claustrophobic :)
I feel although it's not an SI unit Not quite long enough for me to try it is the perfect unit of measurement for that stick, kinda like the Davy Crockett, cool it exists but I'll watch from over there...
@@SnowmanTF2 I was a combat engineer, that idiot t-shirt that says try to keep up if I'm running has truth to it. Like Military History Visualised when he was running down the list of tank on fire SOP. It was number 5 I think, ammunition: get out, run.
Thank you for all the hard work. And thanks for visiting CFB Borden, if you ever venture further east we have a military history museum 5CDSB Gagetown in New Brunswick that has a couple of interesting things.
As an Argentinian suscriber I want to thank you for mentioning the TAM. Wich by the way have an automatic gearbox what make it reach 75 kmh both in forward as in reverse. My question as a Wargaming employee is that have you heard about the inclusion of South American tanks in the near future. Several sources point of a certain interest in doing it but nothing in concrete. Once more, thanks for the good job and information.
Good evening! A while back, I was assisting on a shooting match where people had fun time shooting their rifles at pieces of hardened steel trying obviously to knock them down or otherwise repel their merciless onslaught.. The interesting bit for me was hearing rifle rounds striking a steel target at such close proximity, as the sound as we heard it could be described more accurately with the word BOOM rather thank a CLANG as is registers from the shooters position. For the sake of quick resetting of the stage, we were in an open shelter (opening, as some might have guessed, to the opposite direction where the shooter is positioned,) right below the targets, with just a slab of concrete separating us from the plates. As many tank crews have survived hits from enemy cannon fire, have you come across of anyone ever describing, what a cannon shell ricochet/non-penetration sounds like from the receiving crews perspective? Thank you and have wonderful autumn, if you happen to occupy a location which provides such seasonal enjoyment!
6:06 Oh yeah, those "blast chimneys" are cool. But, the problem is that sometimes, you can't really put a "blast chimney" wherever you want it (for example where the heck are you supposed to put chimneys on turreted tanks?). I think there is a design (I think they've actually made a working prototype, and tested it several times) that sort of mitigates this problem, but it does it in a.......shall we say, unique way. Yeah....."unique". Anyways, it involves putting powerful rocket motors on top of the vehicle. When a blast occurs underneath the vehicle, the rockets trigger, and fire upwards into the air. Which pushes the vehicle down to the ground. The downwards force acting on the vehicle (generated by the rockets) counteracts the upwards force generated by the explosive blast from underneath the vehicle. This counteractive force reduces the sudden acceleration exerted by the explosion (underneath the vehicle), and thus reduces harm caused by severe acceleration (or any blunt trauma associated with said acceleration). Just to be clear, the design does not have a blast chimney, and it's more of an "active" form of protection, because of the rockets. Also, while the rockets may help against sudden acceleration, I think the hull still needs to be reinforced to withstand the explosive blast.
Scouts Out sir. Great series of videos. Seams like a new resurgence in medium tank development in the world any thoughts. The US Army has finely realized the need for a medium tank
In Soviet Union there was a project of light recoilless gun which could be potentially used later as kind of rpg weapon, but it was never adopted, also there was a problem with rdx production, as a result making effective shaped charge was problematic.
I think FM 5-102 is implying that the soviet tank will end up stuck or at least held up by this obstacle. Ah, so “Significant emotional event” is the army version of “Rapid Unplanned Disassembly” from rocket science.
Former engineer here. There is a very specific type of engineer resource that attacks the underside of a tank. It is called an anti-tank mine. You can mix them into an obstacle to disable or destroy a tank attempting to breach. The methods employed vary based off of time, resources, and intent.
intent = war, reasons various, where mine is hidden... TBD. Hey why do we use Live track rather than Dead track? i've always preferred dead track it just lasts longer
@@rat_king- Because these things don't happen in a vacuum. Popping a track and killing everyone inside is good, but injuring several people and making the OpFor use up limited resources to get them and their vehicle out is better. The dead can wait. The wounded need immediate help.
@@clivedoe9674 i was trying to talk about tank track types (live vs dead), you went and made this about the affects and effects of war and penetration of tanks and saving of the crew.
Well then let me try some interesting questions: -Tank camouflage. What are the common practices for hiding a giant lump of steel in the battlefield? -How do you make sure you don't accidentally shoot at an ally vehicle during a war or somesuch? Do modern day tanks have a sort of IFF system or is it all down to communication still? -Are there any pros for a towed artillery piece besides price and reliability over a self propelled one? -How common is it for tanks to get up close and personal to each other as opposed to trying to shoot from an actual safe distance? -Which military vehicle did you enjoy driving the most, and which one would you try but haven't gotten the chance? Hope some are good enough even without being on patreon. Or maybe someone on there also has the same question.
I remember going about 30 mph in a MLQ-34 (EW variant of the M548) down a highway in northern Kuwait during the first Gulf War. OMG, that was a scary ride! Loud as hell and it kept drifting all over the road. I can't imagine doing twice that speed in an Abrams or any other tracked vehicle.
Following up the fastest tank question. What performance did the Irish Army get when they replaced the 360bhp Vauxhall flat12 i one of their Churchills with an ex Seafire Merlin engine?
One thing that you missed mentioning in your discussion of the design of the Type 95 is that the Army Technical Bureau was not thinking about any island-hopping campaigns during its design phase. The IJA and the IJN were almost completely separate creatures up through at least until the middle of WWII. The "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere," A.K.A the theaters of operation of Japanese forces, was not a joint operation the way the SWPA and the POA were for the Americans. The IJA handled China and related areas while the IJN worried about the Philippines, Dutch East Indies, and other island bases. The Type 2 Ka-Mi was the tank designed for use by the Special Naval Landing Forces specifically for amphibious landings but only used the Ha-Go as a basis for expediency. The SNLF wound up using the Ha-Go mostly because of the limited success of the Ka-Mi program but its design criteria were never based on SNLF requirements.
The Japanese success in the early part of the war is all the more remarkable given that the IJA and IJN often seemed to regard each other with a hatred only slightly less than they had for the Chinese, Americans, British, etc.
Regarding the future of the Abrams: There has been some talk of replacing the turbine with a 2-stroke diesel of all things, as well as some experimenting with hydrogen fuel cells (whether the tech is ready by the time the tank enters service only time will tell). There have been some talks of fitting a Horstmann suspension to the M1A2D as well. Furthermore, the army is working on the XM360E1 gun, which can handle much higher pressure to the M256 (It's still 120mm though). I've heard rumors that they're planning to put that in a brand new 2-man turret with an autoloader.
Some correction about gun-launched missiles in USSR service: they weren't made to compensate for lack of accuracy (I would argue that T-64B with 1A33 FCS was the most accurate tank of its time), but to compemsate for lack of reach when dealing with enemy ATGM carriers.
Sir,You talk about your videos as being an advertisement or recruiting tool for the gaming company "World of Tanks". As an ex tanker, Vietnam Veteran as well as a retired and disabled Veteran I have tried several times to install your game, failing miserably absolutely every time! As I'm confined to bed for about 80% of the time I sure would like to be able to pass the time of day with this activity. I currently own what passes for an I-pad on the Verizon network (which is to say it's not an Apple brand product so it works off the other system) I also have a lap top but it's a cheap one without slot of memory. Am I just ignorant? I still enjoy your content as I am also a WWII history fanatic and I love to read. Thankyou.
I have heard (and read) that but I am not convinced. Perhaps I have got my maths wrong but it seems a few tonnes too heavy for that. So the premis is wrong, or my maths is wrong or the data was wrong. That said it could be any two or all three.
Yep the XM1 being test at Aberdeen Proving Grounds was doing speed testing ungoverned on the closed circuit 1-Mile loop. It exceeded 75 MPH while attempting to make the southerly turn of the oval track. The steering brake packs were unable to turn the tank properly due too the excessively high speed and weight of the tank and it veered off the track, dug in the side of it's track links and promptly threw both tracks in a fit of annoyance at its' crew. Needless to say not a stellar showing, to which it was decided that the governor would be set at 45 MPH maximum for the time being fast as needed and still be controllable on level ground.
If in the area, check out the Evergreen air museum in McMinnville OR, Has some armor and mostly planes and the Spruce Goose, even a water park in a 747.
4:32 Just to add, the Soviet AT hand grenades continued to evolve even after WW2, and in 1950 came the RKG-3, which was widely supplied to pretty much every friendly nation, including Iraq, where those were used against American vehicles as late as 10 years ago. Also, Soviets did put a lot of captured Panzerfaeuster and RPzB 54's to good use later in the war. This is why their own design, RPG-1, which offered very small effective range, wasn't put into production.
In 1941? M4 production didn't even begin until Feb 1942, so my advice would actually be to stick with the M3 Lee for a few more months, while developing a more radical T22/T25-style tank armed with a 76mm L/70. Having M3's for the fighting in North Africa shouldn't make much difference, but then for the main show we'd get a highly mobile tank that can punch through anything even without HVAP and which should remain relevant into the 1960's (and which can be uparmored as engines improve).
Please get WG to put out more inside the hatch videos, I stopped playing a while back because I had already played all the tanks in the inside the hatch series. I would love to see some more like the T14, or a KV2 and get me back interested into the game again.
Were there attempts to address the issue of the Final Drive on the Panther? The more I think, the more I wonder why nobody spoke up at the design table. Perhaps that is just the "designer slash operator" mentality at play.
To clarify what I mean, I mean the whole interweaved Road wheel design and how that could be a nightmare for the crew to fix. Was it the best they had to work with?
Dear Chieftain/Mr. Moran, Would you consider doing a maintenance “ walk-around” type video, showing/pointing out the maintenance requirements and tasks done by a tank crew? Not talking major maintenance/repairs, but what does a tank crew do (maintenance) on a day-today, weekly or longer basis.🤔 What was that? At last! a chance to FINALLY show/discuss track tensioning in-action.........pause for “ significant emotional event” .😀
I just finished reading "By Tank into Normandy" by Stuart Hills, which I enjoyed immensely. I've also heard you to be critical of Cooper's "Death Traps." Given that, what memoirs have you read that you recommend?
Were there any sort of procedures/trainning given to WW2 crews when there was a mobility kill? For example having the tracks of a tank blown during combat with other tanks. Were they simply taught to abandon it?
2:35 he was about to mention the main advantage of a human loader: a 4th person to do all the work. Can you imagine a U.S. tank platoon with just 12 assigned?... on a good day?... minus the platoon leader and platoon sergeant!... leaves 10 - the horror.
There was a proposal to assign two crews to each vehicle and rotate. Given personnel expenses and need to cut costs, I doubt it will ever happen. Geoff Who is a well known Skeptic.
The canceled Crusader SPG was intended to use a Honeywell-GE LV100-5 gas turbine that used fewer parts and was claimed to use 50% less fuel. This was in 2013, the engine has been deeloped continually since then. Regarding the T-34 versus environment. Northern Russia has arctic conditions and areas of southern Soviet Union has desert like conditions and high heat. Ram with 57mm/6lbr would probably have been upgraded with ROQF 75mm. At that point how different is it from a Sherman.
Hmmmm. as I understood it, the M1 without the governor reached a speed of 112mph in Warren, MI. but that was when it threw off a track. so they really don't know how fast. This information was told to me by a Civilian Tank Tech when I was Stationed at Rock Island Arsenal in the early 90's.
@@gordonlawrence4749 I think he meant the American T14 project. I think the problem T14 encountered was it came out so late, its main buyer (British) had built enough Churchills that T14 was no longer needed, and US Army was already working on a bigger heavy tank (M6).
In your comments about the Japanese tanks, you mentioned that it was pretty good against forces which didn't have their own tanks, and presumably poor anti-tank doctrine&equipment. In 'Eastern Epic', Compton Mackenzie's book about the Indian Army in WW2, he points out several occasions during the retreat down the Malay Peninsula where the small force of Japanese tanks was able to essentially roll through the British & Indian defenses, which contributed markedly to their defeat. So - it doesn't have to be the best tank to do the job when your opponent isn't prepared to deal with them.
From my quest soon from last time, what do you think of entwicklung tanks? What do you think the turret would look like? Do you know any random facts about it? Is there any surviving pieces of the e100?
Because it has limited visibility, very limited arch of fire and requires a separate crew member to operate. Have you seen the Fury movie? Through all the movie the guy was being useless.
What are your thoughts on crew numbers in the various tank types throughout history? What do you believe is ideal, what is overkill, and at what point does a crossover of effectiveness and and crew size occur.
For the next one: Any chance of seeing you do an inside the hatch of Tiger 131? Or if not an inside the hatch, maybe do one if possible when you next time visit Bovington...
@@Lisandro-ym1sc Yes, but that's not with Chieftain, but that other guy, Challenger. Chieftain is more fun to watch, and way more interesting to listen to.
in dessert storm and us ops in afganistan and iraq? black hawks had what i think those things over the exorst was sand covers did ground forces ie tanks have same attachments as they used turbines in abrams?
Nick! By any chance that this question get to the next Q&A. Is there a chance that you can get the files/videos that you have with WG that were never shown on their channel, and if so, you can or may get help in editing it and post it on your channel instead? :D
Question: What about sleeping arrangements? How do sleeping arrangements differs from tankers and regular infantry and why? I know you've made allusions to this before, but do tankers always sleep on top of their tanks, do they sleep outside on the ground or inside.
How does Abram’s hydraulic traverse work? Why does it work smoothly when the ones in Tiger, Panther, Tiger II requires the tank to be in neutral and the driver to coordinate with the gunner in changing revs?
I am going to guess that the M-1's hydraulic pump uses one of the constant flow systems such as veritable displacement cylinders or the controls automatically compensate for differing input pressure.
Panthers pump/turret speed depended on engine revs, it did not have to be in neutral to turn the turret. At full revs in neutral it took around 20 seconds to turn the turret 360 degrees, when driving with engine at low revs or stationary at tick over it took around a minute. Could be due to a lack of sufficient or any accumulator for the hydraulic oil pressure, so turret turns directly from pump pressure.
chaz8758 very interesting. It’s strange how German engineers overlooked accumulator, as it solves both the need for a more powerful engine to turn turret faster and the need for fast rotation independent of engine rev.
It is just easier to build a new tank designed from scratch around a autoloader design. This also enables the tank to have a smaller turret. The hull and turret of the current of existing M-1s just can't be easily modified to a auto design.
Have you ever considered a series on tanks movies, tv and anime? What they got right, what they got wrong, and things they came up with that sounded interesting?
Seeing that you mention the TAM, what do you think about it? I heard the concept of a "light tank" is floating around again, would it be useful or you rather see something like the Centauro 120?
0:33 What do you think the future of the Abrams tank and US armor is for the next 10 years
1:57 DO you think the Abrams will ever be equipped with an auto loader?
2:45 Did engineers of anti tank obstacles and anti tank defenses purposely build obstacles to force tanks to expose the underside for anti-tank weapons?
3:25 Did Russia and Japan develop any personal anti tank weapons?
5:13 Given the tendency of more modern APC/AFVs to be designed with a V-shaped hull, why hasn't the M2 Bradley been upgraded with such a thing?
6:19 During the Afghan war were there any specific desert modifications to vehicles similar to the engine deck Troppen(?) modifications on Panzers?
6:45 How and why did the West "fall behind" the USSR in regards to armour and gun technology? USSR used composite armour and smooth bore guns since the early 60's but the West frst introduced tanks with those features in late 70's/ early 80's.
9:34 Where in the name of good God did you come up with the significant emotional event line?
10:09 Was the Type 95 a decent tank in the idea of island hopping that the Japanese did a lot of?
11:37 How did the crews of the M26 Pershing feel about the tank in comparison to the Sherman
12:36 Given that the Sherman was designed to operate in all theaters of war and was extremely tested for that, how did the T-34 fare in the different theaters in comparison?
12:57 How effective are flamethrowers against tanks?
13:52 What is, or was, the fastest vehicle in the world that you can call a tank with clear conscience?
14:56 Have you ever considered looking at tanks from the receiving end of the barrel of the gun(s)?
15:13 Would the Canadian Ram Mk II tank have been any good had it seen combat?
16:16 What's the story of how you got started working for Wargaming?
17:54 What started the Inside the Chieftan's Hatch series?
18:43 I had never seen anything about the BARV before, any chance of some more information?
19:47 Is there any evidence of the Black Prince being used in Korea?
*MVP!*
The current research related to chemical explosive propellant is focused on liquid or gel, automatically expressed into a firing chamber after the projectile is loaded .... which would require auto loading, but for the predictable future manual loading is going to stay with us.
"A not quite long enough for me to try it, stick"
It was a single use weapon.
As was the dude who wielded it.
Now I'm picturing someone doing 70MPH down the highway, looking in their mirror, and seeing a tank gaining on them.
And it's going in reverse
With the Chieftain waving his sabre!
@@richardboll8763 With a giant bayonet attatched to the gun too 😂
what if its a Japanese Type 10 going in reverse at 70kph?
"Objects in mirror are closer than they appear" will never be read the same way again :D :D :D
14:14 I recall during my time at Ft Stewart in the early 90's that 'third shop' ran a turretless M1 down the strip at well over 90mph but that the track stretched so bad that the sprockets were popping over the end links on the tracks. It could have gone faster, but the mass of the tracks was such that it expanded too much for the sprockets to grip it properly.
As a retired Engineer one of the criteria we were taught in defensive design was to try to canalise the vehicles into kill zones, that meant using AT ditches, obstacles or minefields or all three. All obstacles had to be covered by fire so breaching is harder. As for design to expose the belly, a berm may do that. Also going into the ditch nose first should expose the top armour. You can't promise that to the Commander, but definitely trying to stop forward movement or move into the kill zone to improve hit probability was key. We commonly used to build them using 2 dozers in a T cut, one to clear the slot and push spoil up ovre the end and the second dozer across the top end to build the berm on the near side.
Time Stamps
0:31 What do you think the future of the Abrams tank and US armour is for the next 10 years? Could you see Abrams be fitted with an autoloader?
2:42 Did engineers of anti tank obstacles and anti tank defences purposefully build obstacles to force tanks to expose the underside for anti tank weapons?
3:20 Did Russia and Japan develop any personal anti tank weapons?
5:12 Given the tendency of more modern APC/AFVs to be designed with a V-shaped hull, why hasn't the M2 Bradley been upgraded with such a thing?
6:15 During the Afghan War were there any specific desert modifications to vehicles, similar to the engine deck tropen modifications on panzers?
6:40 How and Why did the West "fall behind" the USSR in regards to armour and gun technology?
9:32 How did you come up with the "significant emotional event" line?
10:07 Was the Type 95 a decent tank in the idea of island hopping that the Japanese did a lot?
11:37 Given the Sherman was designed to operate in all theatres of the war and was extensively tested for that, how did the T-34 fare in different theatres in comparison?
How did the crews of the M26 Pershing feel about the tank in comparison to the Sherman?
12:55 How effective are flamethrowers vs tanks?
13:50 What is the fastest tank in the world?
14:55 Have you ever considered looking at tanks from the receiving end of the barrel of the gun(s)?
15:12 Would the Canadian Ram II tank been any good had it seen combat?
16:15 What's the story of how you got started working for Wargaming? Also, What started the inside the Chieftan's Hatch series?
18:43 I have never seen anything on the BARV before. Any chance of some more information?
19:47 Was there any evidence Black Prince was used in Korea?
Thanks 👍
Appreciate kind sir
Nice work
*Japanese soldier holds up a lunge mine*
"This is my boomstick!"
Jay you win
Nah the sadder version is when they sent Okinawan school kids with a 10kg of TNT in a crate strapped on their backs to crawl under a tank.
@@ledichang9708 russian did that with dogs...
@CipiRipi00 it was only few dogs anyway so didnt change much... but american pigeon guided bombs apparently did work. not sure why didnt use those
WITNESS HIM!
09:32 "Significant Emotional Event" comes from Dr. Morris Massey, a "marketing professor/sociologist, and producer of _training videos_ " according to his Wikipedia page. I would suspect the latter is how it found its way into the US military; if anything the military _loves_ its training videos.
Dr. Morris defines an SEE as: _"an experience that is so mentally arresting that it becomes a catalyst for you to consider, examine, and possibly change your initial values or value system"_ .
Getting shot at by a main battle tank certainly qualifies as that. :D
Why did Germany choose to pursue two separate medium tank chassis the Panzer III and Panzer IV. Now I understand they wanted both a 50mm anti tank gun, and the 75mm support gun. But why not produce one tank chassis, and just fitted two different guns. Even if you need two different turret production lines that seems more manageable than two different tank production lines. This ideally would make supply of additional parts and servicing the tanks much easier as evident by what some other nations ended up doing.
Never wondered that before. But I'm wondering now! Nice one.
As far as I recall, the early 3 and 4 were fairly interchangeable.
Also the panzer iv fulfilled a break through roll for quite some time. I'll have to find a book for it but I think that it had thicker armour than the 3 in the designs. Considering that they were designed in 1935, The most common tank you're gonna come up against in the quest for living room is gonna be a variant of the vickers 2 Ton. If there's gonna be a problem with a vehicle, wheel an anti tank gun down there which will probably be what you have on Hand in the first place rather than a tank. And of that can't deal with it, doctrine would have artillery and air power on call and the average infantry man can do a lot to piss off a tank and make it leave.
Considering the production methods used by Germany, I don't think they considered it that important to standardize on just one tank. And to be fair, no one else picked just one tank.
Funny thing the panzer 4 75 mm l/24 had superior penetration than the german 37 mm gun. Also the l/24 used apcbc ammo.
@@markcorrigan3930 the super ap ammo was only to be used in emergencies and was not a common round. The gun is superior on paper but it's high trajectory lead to issues at long ranges involved in some tank battles especially in North Africa.
The 37 was also doing just fine in its role and there was no rush to replace it. Germany was still practicing break through tactics and the panzer 4 was a breakthrough tank at its conception.
God I hope this channel keeps up. I love the content you make and it'd be amazing to see it continue into the future
Thanks for another talk video! Please release more, even independent of patron questions. You are fun to listen to!
A few unrelating and slightly unrelenting questions here:
1. In your opinion what are the top 5 most interesting modern MBTs around the world looking at the past 25 years?
2. Do you have plans to visit new tank museums around the world which you have never been to before, and which?
3. Would you consider having Anti-Air Fire&Forget missiles on top of backline command vehicles a smart idea in any way?
4. It seems separate anti-tank missile launcher devices are not really implemented upon anti-tank vehicles such as tanks and wheeled tank destroyers in this age. Am I right and why is this?
5. Are there any emerging innovations around the world to make use of a drone in the battlefield launched from somewhere like the top back hull of an MBT that you know of?
6. With the appearance a little while back of depleted uranium armor plates, do angled armor slopes come into play again today? Where does an economy obtain DU to put on and in tanks normally?
7. As national tank manufacture plans for inland use are largely determined by the terrain that the vehicle needs to operate on, can you explain all possible variables and is there any specifc place like a database where an amateur can gain information on a particular geographical area?
8. Is there a protection system against top down missiles? Aside from a special environment.
9. Are there any plans by any company or foundation or whatever to restore the Churchill Gun Carrier that, if I know correctly, parks outside The Tank Museum, Bovington?
10. Can you list a large and complete roster of foreign vehicles used by Italy during WWII and the Korean War period? Thinking about purchased, leased, captured, received.
11. Can you please explain to me why was the rifled gun phased out in favor of the smoothbore?
12. Did you manage to hit anyone with your sword while being on top of a tank? :)
Independent of patron questions? Ahem.
@@clazy8 Huh?
@@rudolphantler6309 i presumed that you were a non-patron asking for freebies, but that was probably projection on the part of my own guilty conscience.
Projection? Yes. Patron? Personal information. Freebies? No.
Chieftain likes to read some questions here, as he does say in his videos.
Sometimes he answers them here.
If he decides to make videos out of them, it is as much his own decision as before, naturally.
Though he may, because I think my questions are good. Who are we to argue?
Thank you for using personal time to help make these videos, I am sure there go on to be part of the history lore on tanks for a long .
Question Chieftain good sir: Can we talk about the M4A3E2, aka Sherman Jumbo? With many different variants of the M4 Sherman it seems that the variant that answered the tanker's want for the M4 to have more armor, also a variant that was welcomed by the US troops, is a variant that looks to be less talked about or discussed in great detail. Even in your "US AFV Development in WW2, or, "Why the Sherman was what it was"" video talk, you were going to mention the Jumbo but you were unable to do so due to time consternates. So, will there be a video talking about the M4A3E2, the features that it has that other Shermans don't have, the gun selections, how it did in battle, anything that you can remember from the archives on it, etc.? Also, the flamethrower version of the Jumbo, the T33, the tank to invade mainland Japan, any information on that tank as well?
I really miss your inside the hatch videos. I would really like to see a panzer 4, stug 3, and jagpanzer 4 video. But any tank would be good.
4:43 to put it another way, “I wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole.”
😝 and yes, that sounded great in my head.
Answer to the firsts question: M1A2D is already planned, and a new gun has been claimed to be placed on this. It is called the XM360, and it is supposedly going to be fitted on the new vehicle like how the L/55 was to the Leopard 2A6. It will also get a trophy system, which the C was supposed to get but a lot of them have not gotten one, and thus the project was moved back to get more from the shipments and thus have enough to fit to all the tanks. All M1A2 sep v2’s will attempt to be made up to the standards of M1A2C’s but we don’t know how they’ll be done or even when.
That’s all I wanted to say :D
I suspect no-one's gonna see any of those canister rounds, though. If the 11Bs found out, they'd start pounding on the door demanding to actually get the 40mm grenade can rounds, and then maybe automatic shotguns.
www.gd-ots.com/munitions/medium-caliber-ammunition/40mm-hvcc/
The Russian phosphorus in a glass bottle grenade you mention at 3:45! My Dad recalled using something very similar to that, as a hand thrown anti tank weapon in the later stages of the liberation war in jugoslavia. He reckoned the partisans raided a German train that was carrying a shipment of those glass bottles east thru jugoslavia around 1944-45.
He reckoned that when successfully thrown on a tank it would melt the armour white hot & the crew would be cooked inside..please bear in mind he was likely engaging obsolete French & Czech built armour.
Thank you for the channel and the great videos.
Three Q:
1. How many factories actually build tanks over time? I know that there is currently one facility (?) making the Abrams. During the second world war, there were many factories making the T-34, M4 Sherman types and etc.
2. In many videos it was noted that most tanks during WW2 fired HE and not antitank armor piercing rounds. Is that still true during more recent conflicts?
3. Follow up on Q2 - were proximity fuses used for HE rounds during WW2 or later on? For many "softer" targets, a close nearby air burst might be more effective.
Thanks again and great channel!
I was stationed at Ft. Knox, KY when a turretless (there was a "basket" of sorts for the TC to stand in and of course there was no gunner or loader on board) XM-1 was clocked by MP radar at around 80mph....Oddly, somebody had failed to notify the MPs of the 194th Armored Brigade (Separate) that a vehicle of ANY kind was to be tested on the hardball that day and the MPs were not amused to say the least. Later, another XM-1 with a turret, full crew, and bags of lead shot stacked around the turret to simulate an ammo loadout was clocked, again by 194th MPs (that time they knew what was coming) using traffic radar at about 75mph. Shortly after that second "test" rumor had it that the Post Commander was, shall we say, pissed off, that 2/6 Cav (the unit assigned to the "Test to Destruction" portion of the XM-1 Program at Ft. Knox) was tearing up the hardball in front of HIS HQ and ordered that SOMETHING be done to end that damage to HIS hardball....I have no idea if the Post Commander ever actually issued such an order or had anything directly to do with the installation of a governor on the Lycoming or not but, when I transitioned to the M-1 (the data plates ALL had XM-1 stamped into them in Germany as did the ones I served on at Ft. Hood, TX even later) the average "flat out, loaded for bear" speed of the M-1 had dropped to a "mere" 55mph over relatively flat terrain.
Belgian Scimitar CVR-T still "holds" the top speed record on german highways ! 130km/h ! Picture from the radar and the ticket are displayed in our HQ block ! This is some weird "proud" of our Battalion !
Oh, I'd be proud of that, too!
When I was in Conneaut this year for the D-day re-enactments, I saw you were recording a video regarding the halftrack there, when can we expect to see this video? Love your content and look forward to future videos
Tuesday, I think. Keep an eye on the Military History Not Visualized channel.
The_Chieftain Thanks!
Well I saw you video on Hetzer and also the interview with the director of the Munster museum and it had occurred to me that nobody had mentioned the idea of the hetzer project.
It comes from Romania, as they were in great need for a armored vehicle that could take the Russian T 34 on eastern front. The biggest problem they were facing was the lack of industrial power to build this project. So they turned to Germany for help. Germans offered a hotchkiss engine and engineers to help them with the problems and to make this vehicle as fast as possible ready for production. The Romanian project was a two man crew tank destroyer named Mareşal/Marshall. The germans saw the design and adapted for the chassis of Pz 38t. More details are in the book of Mark Axworthy, Third Axis , Fourth Ally.
I think the use of Churchill in Korea was explained by David Fletcher during operation think tank, because they left the crocodile trailers behind. Also he has just done a tank chat on Black Prince prototype they have got, basically the answer to all questions was centurion.
Yep the answer is still "Centurion" in a few places. Those thigs were an absolutely superb bit of design.
Gordon Lawrence Yes arguably the best tank design ever produced to date.
@@DC9622If you take the date it was designed into account IE Centurion in the late 40's M! in the 80's etc then absolutely no doubt.
how and why was the sherman jumbo concieved, what was its performance and what is your opinion on it?
Assault tank to attack bunkers and emplacements
Neil Rosh well that doesnt really answer any of my questions
@@energeticbombom328 it does, just not very well
the US needed a tank to assault fixed positions, meaning it needed thick armour
they had shermans in the field, so just welded plate onto the front basically, and gave it a new turret
There were two assault tank projects, the British A33 Excelsior and the US T14,although both has their US-UK variant. The British wanted a new infantry tank to replace the Churchill,which had some major problems at the time and the Americans wanted an assault vehicle. Both tanks failed. The Churchill was eventually fixed enough to be fit for it's role, and the US also decided to work with what's currently in hand and can be produced easily. So they chose to add more armor to M4A3s and gave them new turrets,thus the M4A3E2 was born.
It was only as fast as the early M4s and M4A1s, but is was generally liked, because that was the only US tank in disposal that could withstand a direct hit from an 88 from the front. So they often put them in front of the columns.
That's the long story short,but feel free to correct me.
Contrary to most of the comments here, the Sherman Jumbo was actually conceived in March 1944 by the Americans who wanted a more heavily armored assault tank for the Normandy invasion. The Brits didn’t have anything to do with it.
It did okay - but it was now a 42 ton tank on a chassis designed for 30 tons hence had a lot of reliability issues.0
What do you think of the E 100 chassis that the british found? What of the E 100 in general?
nope that was chassis for Ostwind 2
@@dukenukem8381 oh yeah I had firgotten all about the fact that germany foresaw the invention of ATGMs and HEATFS and decided the maus had no place in combat.
@@damnedjuggernaut1051Hitler did note that bmp and object 120 was the reason he just stopped with panther 2 development
The British evaluated it and said it was basically useless due to mechanical issues.
@@dukenukem8381 Quad 88mm mount
I alredy liked this vid within the first minute. Also it says it has 420 views... nice Chieftain, very nice
Is hard 4 me to admit it, but i have never played WOT... And i don't think my 4 years old doughter apretiate that i start to do so and get her out from the pc... But i see your work FAR above and beyond a mere video game... I love tanks and i have build many scale models and stuff but the information that you give about those vehicles is much more wider than 1 can usualy get from others sources... To the point that the triangle of armor-firepower-mobility is not quite cut it 4 me anymore when i have to judge a tank... So, if i can make a question it would be: Why we don't get to see more ''Inside the chieftain's hatch'' videos as often as we used to? I learn more with those than reading 5 books or watching 10 documentarys...
Glad to see our TAM is good at something...
I was attached to an armored unit fer a KeyUp (sp?) at NTC in the late '80s. I was put in a Sheridan 'BIMP' as a gunner. It was a great experience being an OPFOR there and I learned a lot. One thing I discovered is how much the Sheridan bounced around... It lead to me being motion sick and tossing my breakfast in my gas mask and over the side of the tank... :) A proud military moment... Does that happen with any frequency in other tanks, understanding that the M1 is a heavier tank and may rock less. BTW One of the reasons I got queasy is since I was an 11 bravo add -on I had only my personal promask andnot the vehicle one which wasn't as claustrophobic :)
Greetings from Scotland.
Thank you for an interesting, insightful and funny Q&A
I feel although it's not an SI unit Not quite long enough for me to try it is the perfect unit of measurement for that stick, kinda like the Davy Crockett, cool it exists but I'll watch from over there...
My favorite take by a historian on the Davy Crockett, the only worse idea for deploying a nuclear warhead would be a hand grenade.
@@SnowmanTF2 I was a combat engineer, that idiot t-shirt that says try to keep up if I'm running has truth to it. Like Military History Visualised when he was running down the list of tank on fire SOP. It was number 5 I think, ammunition: get out, run.
@@SnowmanTF2 Or the nuke demolition device, basically the warhead of the Davy Crocket in a backpack
Thank you for all the hard work. And thanks for visiting CFB Borden, if you ever venture further east we have a military history museum 5CDSB Gagetown in New Brunswick that has a couple of interesting things.
As an Argentinian suscriber I want to thank you for mentioning the TAM. Wich by the way have an automatic gearbox what make it reach 75 kmh both in forward as in reverse.
My question as a Wargaming employee is that have you heard about the inclusion of South American tanks in the near future. Several sources point of a certain interest in doing it but nothing in concrete.
Once more, thanks for the good job and information.
Been proposed from time to time, does not seem to have gained much traction.
@@TheChieftainsHatch thanks for answer, would love to send you a model of TAM for your collection!
Who makes them, out of interest?
A company called «Tactical Models»
www.tacticalmodels.com.ar/index.htm
Good evening! A while back, I was assisting on a shooting match where people had fun time shooting their rifles at pieces of hardened steel trying obviously to knock them down or otherwise repel their merciless onslaught.. The interesting bit for me was hearing rifle rounds striking a steel target at such close proximity, as the sound as we heard it could be described more accurately with the word BOOM rather thank a CLANG as is registers from the shooters position. For the sake of quick resetting of the stage, we were in an open shelter (opening, as some might have guessed, to the opposite direction where the shooter is positioned,) right below the targets, with just a slab of concrete separating us from the plates. As many tank crews have survived hits from enemy cannon fire, have you come across of anyone ever describing, what a cannon shell ricochet/non-penetration sounds like from the receiving crews perspective? Thank you and have wonderful autumn, if you happen to occupy a location which provides such seasonal enjoyment!
6:06 Oh yeah, those "blast chimneys" are cool. But, the problem is that sometimes, you can't really put a "blast chimney" wherever you want it (for example where the heck are you supposed to put chimneys on turreted tanks?).
I think there is a design (I think they've actually made a working prototype, and tested it several times) that sort of mitigates this problem, but it does it in a.......shall we say, unique way. Yeah....."unique". Anyways, it involves putting powerful rocket motors on top of the vehicle. When a blast occurs underneath the vehicle, the rockets trigger, and fire upwards into the air. Which pushes the vehicle down to the ground. The downwards force acting on the vehicle (generated by the rockets) counteracts the upwards force generated by the explosive blast from underneath the vehicle. This counteractive force reduces the sudden acceleration exerted by the explosion (underneath the vehicle), and thus reduces harm caused by severe acceleration (or any blunt trauma associated with said acceleration).
Just to be clear, the design does not have a blast chimney, and it's more of an "active" form of protection, because of the rockets. Also, while the rockets may help against sudden acceleration, I think the hull still needs to be reinforced to withstand the explosive blast.
epiiiiic! a TAM mention! question: 13:52
Thanks again! 20 minutes well spent here.
'Itty bitty commie pieces' is a wonderful turn of phrase.
Scouts Out sir. Great series of videos. Seams like a new resurgence in medium tank development in the world any thoughts. The US Army has finely realized the need for a medium tank
In Soviet Union there was a project of light recoilless gun which could be potentially used later as kind of rpg weapon, but it was never adopted, also there was a problem with rdx production, as a result making effective shaped charge was problematic.
the inside the hatch worked on me, i played the game a long time ago but those videos inspired me to play again and spend some money.
I think FM 5-102 is implying that the soviet tank will end up stuck or at least held up by this obstacle.
Ah, so “Significant emotional event” is the army version of “Rapid Unplanned Disassembly” from rocket science.
Former engineer here.
There is a very specific type of engineer resource that attacks the underside of a tank. It is called an anti-tank mine. You can mix them into an obstacle to disable or destroy a tank attempting to breach.
The methods employed vary based off of time, resources, and intent.
intent = war, reasons various, where mine is hidden... TBD.
Hey why do we use Live track rather than Dead track? i've always preferred dead track it just lasts longer
@@rat_king- Disabled Track draws in soft bellied troops to retrieve disabled track.
@@clivedoe9674 i meant the types of track, rather than turning 1 target into 4
@@rat_king- Because these things don't happen in a vacuum. Popping a track and killing everyone inside is good, but injuring several people and making the OpFor use up limited resources to get them and their vehicle out is better.
The dead can wait. The wounded need immediate help.
@@clivedoe9674 i was trying to talk about tank track types (live vs dead), you went and made this about the affects and effects of war and penetration of tanks and saving of the crew.
The RCD’s getting a little love is a nice touch.
Well then let me try some interesting questions:
-Tank camouflage. What are the common practices for hiding a giant lump of steel in the battlefield?
-How do you make sure you don't accidentally shoot at an ally vehicle during a war or somesuch? Do modern day tanks have a sort of IFF system or is it all down to communication still?
-Are there any pros for a towed artillery piece besides price and reliability over a self propelled one?
-How common is it for tanks to get up close and personal to each other as opposed to trying to shoot from an actual safe distance?
-Which military vehicle did you enjoy driving the most, and which one would you try but haven't gotten the chance?
Hope some are good enough even without being on patreon. Or maybe someone on there also has the same question.
Re: towed artillery. You don't have to dig such a big hole to hide it. Yes, I have.
I remember going about 30 mph in a MLQ-34 (EW variant of the M548) down a highway in northern Kuwait during the first Gulf War. OMG, that was a scary ride! Loud as hell and it kept drifting all over the road. I can't imagine doing twice that speed in an Abrams or any other tracked vehicle.
Following up the fastest tank question. What performance did the Irish Army get when they replaced the 360bhp Vauxhall flat12 i one of their Churchills with an ex Seafire Merlin engine?
"How much will you get paid?"
"More than my current job."
And the rest is history. That's usually how it works with wives.
We appreciate what you do.
One thing that you missed mentioning in your discussion of the design of the Type 95 is that the Army Technical Bureau was not thinking about any island-hopping campaigns during its design phase. The IJA and the IJN were almost completely separate creatures up through at least until the middle of WWII.
The "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere," A.K.A the theaters of operation of Japanese forces, was not a joint operation the way the SWPA and the POA were for the Americans. The IJA handled China and related areas while the IJN worried about the Philippines, Dutch East Indies, and other island bases.
The Type 2 Ka-Mi was the tank designed for use by the Special Naval Landing Forces specifically for amphibious landings but only used the Ha-Go as a basis for expediency. The SNLF wound up using the Ha-Go mostly because of the limited success of the Ka-Mi program but its design criteria were never based on SNLF requirements.
The Japanese success in the early part of the war is all the more remarkable given that the IJA and IJN often seemed to regard each other with a hatred only slightly less than they had for the Chinese, Americans, British, etc.
Yes!! Owr tam is the fastest tank!!!
Cheers from argentina men! Love your videos
Regarding the future of the Abrams: There has been some talk of replacing the turbine with a 2-stroke diesel of all things, as well as some experimenting with hydrogen fuel cells (whether the tech is ready by the time the tank enters service only time will tell). There have been some talks of fitting a Horstmann suspension to the M1A2D as well.
Furthermore, the army is working on the XM360E1 gun, which can handle much higher pressure to the M256 (It's still 120mm though). I've heard rumors that they're planning to put that in a brand new 2-man turret with an autoloader.
Love the Q&A video (the first I have seen)!
Some correction about gun-launched missiles in USSR service: they weren't made to compensate for lack of accuracy (I would argue that T-64B with 1A33 FCS was the most accurate tank of its time), but to compemsate for lack of reach when dealing with enemy ATGM carriers.
Brilliant, thanks
Sir,You talk about your videos as being an advertisement or recruiting tool for the gaming company "World of Tanks". As an ex tanker, Vietnam Veteran as well as a retired and disabled Veteran I have tried several times to install your game, failing miserably absolutely every time! As I'm confined to bed for about 80% of the time I sure would like to be able to pass the time of day with this activity. I currently own what passes for an I-pad on the Verizon network (which is to say it's not an Apple brand product so it works off the other system) I also have a lap top but it's a cheap one without slot of memory. Am I just ignorant? I still enjoy your content as I am also a WWII history fanatic and I love to read. Thankyou.
Are you on Facebook? Go to my page, send me a message, I'll see what we can do to work with you. facebook.com/TheChieftainWargaming/
Isn't TAM basically just a Marder IFV chassiss with a turret with 105mm gun?
Yes.
I have heard (and read) that but I am not convinced. Perhaps I have got my maths wrong but it seems a few tonnes too heavy for that. So the premis is wrong, or my maths is wrong or the data was wrong. That said it could be any two or all three.
No, its a medium tank based on the TH300 prototipe developed by Henshel plus 1500 modifications to comply Argentine Army requeriments.
The same chassis is used for Argentina’s infantry fighting vehicle.
@@gordonlawrence4749 From what I've read, the (early) TAM is even lighter than the later versions of the Marder.
Please make this weekly
The chieftain playing world of tanks would be amazing and a great watch
Yep the XM1 being test at Aberdeen Proving Grounds was doing speed testing ungoverned on the closed circuit 1-Mile loop. It exceeded 75 MPH while attempting to make the southerly turn of the oval track. The steering brake packs were unable to turn the tank properly due too the excessively high speed and weight of the tank and it veered off the track, dug in the side of it's track links and promptly threw both tracks in a fit of annoyance at its' crew. Needless to say not a stellar showing, to which it was decided that the governor would be set at 45 MPH maximum for the time being fast as needed and still be controllable on level ground.
Ah yes, insightful, informative, and dry enough to rival a June Tucson (AZ) day at 14:00.
If in the area, check out the Evergreen air museum in McMinnville OR, Has some armor and mostly planes and the Spruce Goose, even a water park in a 747.
Gotta love TH-cam's automatic subtitles. At 16:45, they say "Well after the tour, de staff took all the players down to the local diarrhea"...
What are the five or six videos coming? I enjoy them for the details about the chosen subject and the interior layouts.
Love the "inside the chieftains hatch"
14:07 that sounds terrifying for all party's involved or just anyone in the general area
Hi Nick. Just a thought. Considering your Chieftain moniker do you reckon you ought to have a model of one on your desk?
4:32 Just to add, the Soviet AT hand grenades continued to evolve even after WW2, and in 1950 came the RKG-3, which was widely supplied to pretty much every friendly nation, including Iraq, where those were used against American vehicles as late as 10 years ago.
Also, Soviets did put a lot of captured Panzerfaeuster and RPzB 54's to good use later in the war. This is why their own design, RPG-1, which offered very small effective range, wasn't put into production.
If you could give the US army armor force 1941 any one piece of advice, what would it be? My guess is get the troops an HVAP round ASAP.
In 1941? M4 production didn't even begin until Feb 1942, so my advice would actually be to stick with the M3 Lee for a few more months, while developing a more radical T22/T25-style tank armed with a 76mm L/70.
Having M3's for the fighting in North Africa shouldn't make much difference, but then for the main show we'd get a highly mobile tank that can punch through anything even without HVAP and which should remain relevant into the 1960's (and which can be uparmored as engines improve).
I saw you at D-Day Ohio, My mates and I were filling sandbags and all that when ya’ll walked by.
Please get WG to put out more inside the hatch videos, I stopped playing a while back because I had already played all the tanks in the inside the hatch series. I would love to see some more like the T14, or a KV2 and get me back interested into the game again.
Just ordered a shirt. Thanks for all the hard work :)
The models on your desk, nice, where did you get them....?
cpawp bro amazon has everything
Were there attempts to address the issue of the Final Drive on the Panther? The more I think, the more I wonder why nobody spoke up at the design table. Perhaps that is just the "designer slash operator" mentality at play.
To clarify what I mean, I mean the whole interweaved Road wheel design and how that could be a nightmare for the crew to fix. Was it the best they had to work with?
Dear Chieftain/Mr. Moran, Would you consider doing a maintenance “ walk-around” type video, showing/pointing out the maintenance requirements and tasks done by a tank crew? Not talking major maintenance/repairs, but what does a tank crew do (maintenance) on a day-today, weekly or longer basis.🤔
What was that? At last! a chance to FINALLY show/discuss track tensioning in-action.........pause for “ significant emotional event” .😀
That is not a bad idea at all. I have a -10 I can use....
04:13 "...as far as you could *hoik it* . "
I have learned a new expression today!
I just finished reading "By Tank into Normandy" by Stuart Hills, which I enjoyed immensely. I've also heard you to be critical of Cooper's "Death Traps." Given that, what memoirs have you read that you recommend?
Were there any sort of procedures/trainning given to WW2 crews when there was a mobility kill? For example having the tracks of a tank blown during combat with other tanks. Were they simply taught to abandon it?
2:35 he was about to mention the main advantage of a human loader: a 4th person to do all the work. Can you imagine a U.S. tank platoon with just 12 assigned?... on a good day?... minus the platoon leader and platoon sergeant!... leaves 10 - the horror.
There was a proposal to assign two crews to each vehicle and rotate. Given personnel expenses and need to cut costs, I doubt it will ever happen. Geoff Who is a well known Skeptic.
The canceled Crusader SPG was intended to use a Honeywell-GE LV100-5 gas turbine that used fewer parts and was claimed to use 50% less fuel. This was in 2013, the engine has been deeloped continually since then.
Regarding the T-34 versus environment. Northern Russia has arctic conditions and areas of southern Soviet Union has desert like conditions and high heat.
Ram with 57mm/6lbr would probably have been upgraded with ROQF 75mm. At that point how different is it from a Sherman.
It has sick-looking machine gun turret
Hmmmm. as I understood it, the M1 without the governor reached a speed of 112mph in Warren, MI. but that was when it threw off a track. so they really don't know how fast. This information was told to me by a Civilian Tank Tech when I was Stationed at Rock Island Arsenal in the early 90's.
Tank God. Has a nice ring to it.
When and why did you start doing the "OMG the tank is on fire" drill?
And how far did the T14 project go as we know they at least made one prototype.
The Russian T14 if you mean the recent one is in production.
@@gordonlawrence4749 I think he meant the American T14 project. I think the problem T14 encountered was it came out so late, its main buyer (British) had built enough Churchills that T14 was no longer needed, and US Army was already working on a bigger heavy tank (M6).
@@ledichang9708 You are probably correct. That's the problem with multiple tanks having the same name.
Speaking about speed, T-72B3s of Kazakhstan and Russian teams at Tank Biathlon 2019 managed to reach 74 and IIRC 77~78 km/h.
In your comments about the Japanese tanks, you mentioned that it was pretty good against forces which didn't have their own tanks, and presumably poor anti-tank doctrine&equipment. In 'Eastern Epic', Compton Mackenzie's book about the Indian Army in WW2, he points out several occasions during the retreat down the Malay Peninsula where the small force of Japanese tanks was able to essentially roll through the British & Indian defenses, which contributed markedly to their defeat.
So - it doesn't have to be the best tank to do the job when your opponent isn't prepared to deal with them.
I read on the tanks encyclopaedia and few other sites saying the King Tiger was planned to be fitted with a stabiliser and night vision. Is this true?
From my quest soon from last time, what do you think of entwicklung tanks? What do you think the turret would look like? Do you know any random facts about it? Is there any surviving pieces of the e100?
Why did the hull machine gun port fall out of favor after WW2?
Because it has limited visibility, very limited arch of fire and requires a separate crew member to operate. Have you seen the Fury movie? Through all the movie the guy was being useless.
What are your thoughts on crew numbers in the various tank types throughout history? What do you believe is ideal, what is overkill, and at what point does a crossover of effectiveness and and crew size occur.
Are for or against automating armored forces? Drone tanks.
For the next one: Any chance of seeing you do an inside the hatch of Tiger 131? Or if not an inside the hatch, maybe do one if possible when you next time visit Bovington...
There is an Inside the Hatch episode of Tiger 131, and it has 5 parts.
@@Lisandro-ym1sc Yes, but that's not with Chieftain, but that other guy, Challenger. Chieftain is more fun to watch, and way more interesting to listen to.
@@haraldlorentzen40 yes, but I dont think Wargaming want to make similar episodes.
@@Lisandro-ym1sc That is exactly why I said he could do one of his own next time he's at Bovington, and thusly not connected to WG.
in dessert storm and us ops in afganistan and iraq? black hawks had what i think those things over the exorst was sand covers did ground forces ie tanks have same attachments as they used turbines in abrams?
The British adopted the chimney on vehicles, not to channel an IED blast, but to expel the smoke from the log-burning stove when they're brewing up.
Nick! By any chance that this question get to the next Q&A. Is there a chance that you can get the files/videos that you have with WG that were never shown on their channel, and if so, you can or may get help in editing it and post it on your channel instead? :D
Question: What about sleeping arrangements? How do sleeping arrangements differs from tankers and regular infantry and why? I know you've made allusions to this before, but do tankers always sleep on top of their tanks, do they sleep outside on the ground or inside.
Have you considered a more catchy name for this series? (Preventive Maintenance Checks, Tank depot or something)
How does Abram’s hydraulic traverse work? Why does it work smoothly when the ones in Tiger, Panther, Tiger II requires the tank to be in neutral and the driver to coordinate with the gunner in changing revs?
I am going to guess that the M-1's hydraulic pump uses one of the constant flow systems such as veritable displacement cylinders or the controls automatically compensate for differing input pressure.
Panthers pump/turret speed depended on engine revs, it did not have to be in neutral to turn the turret.
At full revs in neutral it took around 20 seconds to turn the turret 360 degrees, when driving with engine at low revs or stationary at tick over it took around a minute.
Could be due to a lack of sufficient or any accumulator for the hydraulic oil pressure, so turret turns directly from pump pressure.
chaz8758 very interesting. It’s strange how German engineers overlooked accumulator, as it solves both the need for a more powerful engine to turn turret faster and the need for fast rotation independent of engine rev.
It is just easier to build a new tank designed from scratch around a autoloader design. This also enables the tank to have a smaller turret. The hull and turret of the current of existing M-1s just can't be easily modified to a auto design.
I've seen some concept art of using an M-1 chassis with a new (drop-in) autoloader turret. Cdr and gunner are usually seated in the turret basket.
I do have to keep you around having you all these years and been able to watch he was I’ve played the game has been so awesome
Have you ever considered a series on tanks movies, tv and anime? What they got right, what they got wrong, and things they came up with that sounded interesting?
Seeing that you mention the TAM, what do you think about it? I heard the concept of a "light tank" is floating around again, would it be useful or you rather see something like the Centauro 120?