I wonder if anyone will catch the part where I say "a large standard by any number" instead of "a large number by any standard." I figured it wasn't enough of a goof to warrant re-recording.
@@thetanksofworldwarii-tanka4368 Heh, I noticed that, was wondering if anyone else had, and found your comment. So yeah, some of us are noting little details. :)
The Renault FT (or FT-17) is the first modern tank, and formed the basic layout for what we understand as tanks today. The FT was the first to introduce a mobile turret with 360º rotation at the center of the vehicle. The engine was located in the rear for better balance. Their production system was also revolutionary in being designed from the outset for mass production and, by using a monobloc structure instead of stringers, anticipated not only the future of military vehicles as the standard for civilian automobiles; being manufactured according to the techniques of mass production, with the same speed and quality of a model of car or truck. With this in mind, the Renault FT was designed from the start contemplating a diverse family of models on the same chassis. After World War I, the name "FT-17" began to appear in publications, but this was never an official name. Different from what one imagines, the FT does not have a meaning with respect to the type of vehicle. People started believing that FT meant "Faible Tonnage" (small tonnage), "Faible Taille" (small size), "Franchisseur de Tranchées" (trench crosser), or "Force Terrestrial" (land force). In reality, FT was just an internal Renault production code. The model prior to the Renault FT tank was designated FS and the later FU (a truck to carry the Renault FT). On WWII, the Renault FT was used in desperation by the French in the final phase of the Battle of France (1940) and later by the Germans in airbase defense and anti-partisan operations. The French still used the Renault FT in their war with Thailand in 1941, and in their second war with Japan in 1945, when the Japanese moved in a surprise attack to destroy the French governament in Indochina. The Renault FT would still see combat after WWII, with at least one being used by the Democratic's Republic of Afghanistan up to 1988, making the Renault FT the longest serving tank ever. Those Renault FTs in Afghan service were given to them by the Soviet Union, of the Renault FTs captured from the Polish Army in the 1920's.
To be viable, an old tank does not have to be competitive with new, enemy tanks, especially one on one and especially since most tank combat was not tank on tank. An old tank only needs to be better than nothing, than being in the infantry. And another of these videos noted that tanker casualty rates were far lower than infantry, and certainly aircrew, so it is pretty clear to me that any armor is better than no armor and nearly any tank is better in combat than no tank, very unlike aircraft.
Huh, that detail on the engine's priming cups was interesting. Priming cups like that were commonplace on many automobile engines of the World War One era; you can see them in videos of such cars in Jay Leno's Garage, for instance.
The FT was envisioned as some kind of Mech: An armoured infantryman armed with a machinegun (or infantrygun) being able to cross the no man's land. Due to the restrictions of available technology a driver was necessary. ;-) Speed and range were considered adequate to lead the infantry and to penetrate the deep German defences.
I Have a Different Idea Re: Quality of Tanks French Vs. German...The Quality of the Tanks Was Nearly IRRELEVANT....What Beat the French, was a Lack of RADIOS, From Regiment Level DOWN...In the Face of Air Power Etc....Had They Been Able to Coordinate FASTER, at That Level, and With Available Air Asset....The Picture would've Looked Very Different, and Thier Tanks Would've Been JUST FINE.....
The Germans took a gamble and won at the time. They were lucky in the sense that there had been occasions that the French could have cutoff the relatively few panzer units of the German spearhead, it was just that circumstances happened and the Germans got away with it. The Germans tried it again later and it turned out that an unarmoured US parachute division was able to stop their armoured thrust with much better equipments than their first attempt.
Great video. I ended up here my watching a video on half-tracks that completely ignored the French contribution to the concept, and yours was the first comment that pointed out that omission. I hope your channel continues to grow as your data is excellent, and with time your delivery will improve to match.
I heard that an MC Renault was burned out and found in a remote area Aghanistan.Most likely dispatched from syria.Poland Russian civil war.malaysia,indochina,philipines,Russo nippon war.And don't forget Iraq iran,Palestine Sinai and heavly used north African plain.gashead priming heavy compression, 2nd culminative compression building geared ratio. some need priming powder gun to help in startup on cold cold morns.known as" shure fire method"410 gauge primer starter.early air planes fockers12cylinder center drive strocker.propeller balanced.
5:18 I don't think so. Since the Germans didn't use the term "blitzkrieg" for their combined arms operations, they certainly wouldn't have used the term "sitzkrieg". Still gonna give you a thumbs up though
That is a nice looking book. I have seen some of those Trackstory books before but unfortunately don't have any in my collection. I'll be sure to add the Trackstory series to the "Further Reading" section of my next video.
Hello and great video. If you do see this, could you answer this question: what is the source for the image in your background starting from 0:18? For a little context I am trying to document the Estonian forces from 1917 to 1940 and, at the moment, I am trying to find out about their Renault FTs. From Wikipedia it says there are 12, of which I could only find references to 11 in Wikipedia pages, while a post I found on a vague website from 2011 from an anonymous user said that all 12 were brought from France in 1919 and arrived in 1920, with any captured during the Estonian War of Independence being returned to Finland because apparently they donated them to the Northwestern Army. Anyway, I found that same image on Pintrest with the caption, 'Estonian Renault FTs'. Do you know if they are indeed Estonian?
I don't know much about that particular picture other than I borrowed it from the Tank Archives blog. They had an article on the FT at tankarchives.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-first-classic-tank.html
An instance of "Pardon my French" being used in the correct setting!
I wonder if anyone will catch the part where I say "a large standard by any number" instead of "a large number by any standard." I figured it wasn't enough of a goof to warrant re-recording.
@@thetanksofworldwarii-tanka4368 It was, I shall never forgive you.
@@thetanksofworldwarii-tanka4368 Heh, I noticed that, was wondering if anyone else had, and found your comment. So yeah, some of us are noting little details. :)
The Renault FT (or FT-17) is the first modern tank, and formed the basic layout for what we understand as tanks today. The FT was the first to introduce a mobile turret with 360º rotation at the center of the vehicle. The engine was located in the rear for better balance. Their production system was also revolutionary in being designed from the outset for mass production and, by using a monobloc structure instead of stringers, anticipated not only the future of military vehicles as the standard for civilian automobiles; being manufactured according to the techniques of mass production, with the same speed and quality of a model of car or truck. With this in mind, the Renault FT was designed from the start contemplating a diverse family of models on the same chassis.
After World War I, the name "FT-17" began to appear in publications, but this was never an official name. Different from what one imagines, the FT does not have a meaning with respect to the type of vehicle. People started believing that FT meant "Faible Tonnage" (small tonnage), "Faible Taille" (small size), "Franchisseur de Tranchées" (trench crosser), or "Force Terrestrial" (land force). In reality, FT was just an internal Renault production code. The model prior to the Renault FT tank was designated FS and the later FU (a truck to carry the Renault FT).
On WWII, the Renault FT was used in desperation by the French in the final phase of the Battle of France (1940) and later by the Germans in airbase defense and anti-partisan operations. The French still used the Renault FT in their war with Thailand in 1941, and in their second war with Japan in 1945, when the Japanese moved in a surprise attack to destroy the French governament in Indochina. The Renault FT would still see combat after WWII, with at least one being used by the Democratic's Republic of Afghanistan up to 1988, making the Renault FT the longest serving tank ever. Those Renault FTs in Afghan service were given to them by the Soviet Union, of the Renault FTs captured from the Polish Army in the 1920's.
To be viable, an old tank does not have to be competitive with new, enemy tanks, especially one on one and especially since most tank combat was not tank on tank. An old tank only needs to be better than nothing, than being in the infantry. And another of these videos noted that tanker casualty rates were far lower than infantry, and certainly aircrew, so it is pretty clear to me that any armor is better than no armor and nearly any tank is better in combat than no tank, very unlike aircraft.
"Germans captured 1,704 FT tanks"
And even they couldn't figure out anything useful to do with them aside from defending airfields.
Same goes for even some of the more modern French tanks.
@@thetanksofworldwarii-tanka4368 They also used the Renault FTs in anti-partisan operations.
great video series. The amount of research you must put in to writing these scripts is impressive.
I've been building my library of resources for years. The internet helps greatly as well.
Huh, that detail on the engine's priming cups was interesting. Priming cups like that were commonplace on many automobile engines of the World War One era; you can see them in videos of such cars in Jay Leno's Garage, for instance.
The FT was envisioned as some kind of Mech:
An armoured infantryman armed with a machinegun (or infantrygun) being able to cross the no man's land.
Due to the restrictions of available technology a driver was necessary. ;-)
Speed and range were considered adequate to lead the infantry and to penetrate the deep German defences.
Speaking of tanks am I the only one that finds it funny that many tanks in the 30s and many the 40s are faster then the fastest cars at the time
Great presentation!
RIP Cadet de Rouge
Excellent series, thanks!
Really interesting, thank you for your time, research and efforts to bring this to the web.
I Have a Different Idea Re: Quality of Tanks French Vs. German...The Quality of the Tanks Was Nearly IRRELEVANT....What Beat the French, was a Lack of RADIOS, From Regiment Level DOWN...In the Face of Air Power Etc....Had They Been Able to Coordinate FASTER, at That Level, and With Available Air Asset....The Picture would've Looked Very Different, and Thier Tanks Would've Been JUST FINE.....
German forces were photographed by britisch scout planes at the Ardennes.
It is beyond me why they didnt bombed them.
The Germans took a gamble and won at the time. They were lucky in the sense that there had been occasions that the French could have cutoff the relatively few panzer units of the German spearhead, it was just that circumstances happened and the Germans got away with it.
The Germans tried it again later and it turned out that an unarmoured US parachute division was able to stop their armoured thrust with much better equipments than their first attempt.
Great information . Thanks for sharing.
Great video. I ended up here my watching a video on half-tracks that completely ignored the French contribution to the concept, and yours was the first comment that pointed out that omission.
I hope your channel continues to grow as your data is excellent, and with time your delivery will improve to match.
I heard that an MC Renault was burned out and found in a remote area Aghanistan.Most likely dispatched from syria.Poland Russian civil war.malaysia,indochina,philipines,Russo nippon war.And don't forget Iraq iran,Palestine Sinai and heavly used north African plain.gashead priming heavy compression, 2nd culminative compression building geared ratio. some need priming powder gun to help in startup on cold cold morns.known as" shure fire method"410 gauge primer starter.early air planes fockers12cylinder center drive strocker.propeller balanced.
Thank you for the video.
The British escape was paid for with the French blood.
So excited to watch this in a bit... Have a couple FT-17 models I'm about to build up!
Good luck on the build!
Yea right. iS-2 against Reno. T-34-85 against anything today.
Pardon me .Just don't step on those blue suede shoes.
5:18 I don't think so. Since the Germans didn't use the term "blitzkrieg" for their combined arms operations, they certainly wouldn't have used the term "sitzkrieg". Still gonna give you a thumbs up though
You are correct. I don't even know why I put that in there, I don't think it was in my script. The dangers of add-libbing.
@@thetanksofworldwarii-tanka4368 They called it Bewegungskrieg (maneuver warfare) so they could still call it "sitzkrieg" if they wanted.
Tres bien!
to add to the book list Trackstory Renault FT, best source for FT imho www.minitracks.fr/renault-FT17.htm
That is a nice looking book. I have seen some of those Trackstory books before but unfortunately don't have any in my collection. I'll be sure to add the Trackstory series to the "Further Reading" section of my next video.
Rotating turret inovative advantage.
I think that the French and British thought were good match for the German armored force
Yes, the French actually took WW1 guns out of WW1 tanks and put them in their WW2 tanks
Hello and great video. If you do see this, could you answer this question: what is the source for the image in your background starting from 0:18? For a little context I am trying to document the Estonian forces from 1917 to 1940 and, at the moment, I am trying to find out about their Renault FTs. From Wikipedia it says there are 12, of which I could only find references to 11 in Wikipedia pages, while a post I found on a vague website from 2011 from an anonymous user said that all 12 were brought from France in 1919 and arrived in 1920, with any captured during the Estonian War of Independence being returned to Finland because apparently they donated them to the Northwestern Army.
Anyway, I found that same image on Pintrest with the caption, 'Estonian Renault FTs'. Do you know if they are indeed Estonian?
I don't know much about that particular picture other than I borrowed it from the Tank Archives blog. They had an article on the FT at tankarchives.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-first-classic-tank.html
The French WW2 tanks were much worse than they appeared on paper.
What was the tank at 2:10
Schneider CA1
@@opaluklik2395 thank you!
You have to put youre monitor higher, looks more profi
Your hand moving