A poorly designed one, but yes a tank. Optics aside, if you wanted to make it into a practical tank, you'd need to do something about that "shoot me here" spot the driver uses as a vision port. Same for the commander's vision port in the turret. It also probably wouldn't hurt to give it at least a couple of machine guns for the reasons stated in the video.
@@hhale Assume there's another plate the driver can put over the larger window. Real tanks often had larger openings that got closed down to a vision slit.
@@bob_._. It doesn't even need to be a military rifle, just any rifle shooting 5.56 and up could probably go through it if it was mild steel and not overly thick. It's not like military rifles are necessarily more powerful than their civilian counterparts. Civilian guns are often chambered in the same calibers as military rifles and, in some cases, military calibers are derived from civilian cartidges.
I love how they built a fully operational tank complete with working cannons for a chasing part, then left the war machine parked behing the studios like a common car
@@AverageOhioan1903 "So, we built an armored vehicle capable of moving and with three 6 pounder guns, what do we do with it?" "Just park it back there"
This is by far one of my most favorite tanks. To me, it doesn’t matter if it doesn’t have machine guns. It doesn’t matter if it’s horribly under-crewed and designed. It’s an impressive monument to visual effects artists. Back when things weren’t done with computers. Plus, periscope or no periscope. It looks absolutely smashing.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Actually, There was thought of giving the Mark V and lV Tanks of the Great War a turret for the obvious advantage of having 360 degrees of rotation to aim and fire at the enemy, without having to fully or partially turn the entire hull of the tank to aim if surrounded. However, because of the tank's short length compared to the Tadpole Tank or the Mark 8, It was considered to be "Too Top Heavey" for the terrain the tank was designed for and would've easily tipped over any crater or terrain that was at an angle for the tank to cross over. Therefore, making the Indiana Jones Tank design with its turret a built-in "Already made" design and not something modified by the country as the idea was already conceived by the British.
@@JackDrinkn2DollarJim In the late 1970's I delivered industrial freight to San Fernando Valley studios. I was always surprised and pleased to see large props, including 25 foot WWII warships, parked here and there.
@@janblake9468 What else did you see if I may ask? Did you ever see other Prop tanks or tanks to be disguised as other vehicles? (Such as T-34's being disguised as Tiger 1 Tanks like in the film of Saving Private Ryan)
@@rcrawford42 I can see this tank being used against rioters or small tribal militias, and maybe even by itself, with no accompanying infantry or anything. The sheer terror (and big gun shooting) of this beast would solve any problems.
The tank feels like it makes a lot of sense to me if you imagine it like a project of fancy by a rich, largely ignorant ruler of a small despotic kingdom. It was originally a surplus obsolete British tank that he had modified and "upgraded". The poor ergonomics are not particularly surprising for something of that era and the undercrewing sounds like something that would be done either out of not appreciating the importance of having it staffed or just because of it's current mission. The sultan might have wanted to impress the Nazis with his pet project and they just kind of went along with it, taking what they could get.
I agree a lot, though I'd add that it's not impossible that the tank was supposed to be some form of artillery battery on wheels, for taking out massed infantry and armored machine gun cars in skirmishes with other minor nations.
Scrapped? I saw it plunge off a precipice, fall 1000ft, crash into the valley floor and burst into flames with a Nazi Commandant on board. It must have been destroyed!😁
Given the design aspects you've mentioned, you could say that "Hatay" built this thing out of "boilerplate" as a propaganda stunt rather than expecting it to actually fight. "Look, people! Your enlightened and powerful State has built a tank the envy of the world!"
This is just the sort of hodge podge that top tier countries would sell to.. err.. others... Sir.. buy our tank... more powerful... how about a third cannon.... too hot for driver... ok we cut big hole in front... cannot see.. that's ok we have some war surplus vision devices we can .. err.. use..err...
that is close to what i figured. that they probably cobbled it together from an old WW1 tank chassis refitted with whatever stuff they could obtain. and that it (and any others of the type they built, since multiple were offered) were basically a stopgap effort at obtaining tanks, because having tanks make the country look more powerful to its own people. this would help explain the odd features.. the turret is grafted onto a non-turreted chassis, so it lacks a proper interior basket. the large viewing ports and hatches is due to not knowing of or being able to obtain armored glass viewing blocks which would normally fill such ports. it is likely the ones on the side doubled as firing ports for rifles or light MG's. the periscope was probably added in an effort to give a tank commander a better viewing option, since the turret is a one man affair and under full crew would probably not have room for the commander and a full gunner. i have generally assumed that the crew seen is a minimum crew, used because it is operating over a long distance across what should be friendly territory. and that under normal crewing conditions there would be loaders for the sponson guns, additional mechanics to run the engine, etc.
I mean, just look at the T-35. Completely impractical on the battlefield by the time it was in production, and more of a propaganda piece that ended up being forced into service. I can totally see some middle-eastern country buying an old British Mark VII, tossing a turret on it along with some modifications, and parading around in it for the sake of making the current regime look good. The periscope is useless? The driver/gunner hatch is far too big? The tank lacks any machineguns? Not a problem! It will never actually fight anything more than some flintlock-armed militiamen, if even that.
Hatay was a real country tho it existed for a year and was created to transition the French government to the Turkish government in other words it's not gonna try saying it's a glorious state in the regard
I'm honestly surprised wargaming hasn't put this in world of tanks, they make shit up all the time now. This could make an interesting tier 3 premium tank
If they do something like adding fictional tanks, there is a world of it for them to add. Another tank that I would love to see added into the game would be the spider tank wich is another iconic tank from ghost in the shell.
"Somewhere in the region of Turkey". But we know exactly where Hatay is, it hasn't moved :D It's the southernmost tip of Turkey, bordering Syria. It was briefly an independent state, 1938-1939, matching the time period of the film :) It never had a sultan though, just a president instead, Tayfur Sökmen. So the sultan is, indeed, fictional :)
the movie never states he is a sultan, maybe the script calls him that, but it is not mentioned. Donovan calls him 'Highness' which would be incorrect unless he was a prince or other member of royalty. what I am saying is, who is to say that the guy is not actually the president and everyone just wrongly assumes he is a sultan due to his fancy clothes?
This is truly an incredible example of fictional movie tanks and general excellent prop design. Even though it's fictional, the designers did their best to make it a believable tank to exist pre-war and even went through the trouble of collaborating with Bovington Tank Museum to get its proportions correct. It works really well in the film, and the massive flat top with moving tracks makes for a great set piece for action scenes, something clearly thought of as it was designed. For being built from the ground up and being driven through desert mountains and canyons, it held up remarkably well and kept the production alive. The Hatay Tank's attention to detail keeps it believable to the audience, even if not all of it makes sense. IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM!
Pretty much. Hell, with only slight modification (reducing the size of the driver's viewport, adding optics for aiming the main guns, installing a couple of machine guns for anti-personnel work, and maybe adding a radio) and a couple more crew members this wouldn't be half-bad for a late 1910s-early 1920s heavy tank.
Movie studios used to do stuff like this all the time. Look up the crazy truck thing from "Damnation Alley" sometime. I think they blew most of the film's budget and like a year building it, lol.
The front viewport is clearly to allow cinematographers to get reaction shots of the crew. This is extremely important on the field of battle, at least in movies.
Being kinda into tanks as a kid, I recognized the Crusade tank was some kind of amalgamation, ww1 chassis and ww2-ish turret and gun. I always wondered. Thank you!
There was a similar tank in existence in WW2 named the TOG "The Old Gang" consisting of former WW1 TANK DESIGNERS and Experts namely Harry Richardo,Gen Henry Wilson and others 2 prototypes were built for testing but it was never in production as the design was outmoded, photo's exist in Bovingdon,Dorset,UK.
I think youre being slightly unfair on this tank. I have no problem believing that some rich Sultan bought a few tanks to show off right after WW1, upgraded them with turrets as they became popular, had heard of periscopes being used in tanks. In that situation, I don't think the actual military utility would have been the highest concern, rather, just being able to show off. The Sultan was obviously a petrol head, I have no problem believing this is more plaything than weapon of war.
It also would have been very useful as a policing vehicle against tribal rebels and raiders which were still commonplace in many countries like "Hatay" whose own leaders were often just a generation removed from tribal nomads themselves. It is not as if anti-tank rifles or cannons were a dime-a-dozen in places like this, so even a half-armed Liberty International with a lot of local "improvements" would be more than enough to ensure control of any place you happened to sit one down. For sure, this was not very efficient, but efficient and effective are not the same thing, and this Hatay Heavy would have been plenty effective.
Here's the story on its propulsion: I was still working third shift as an area mechanical (electrical) at what was Disney/MGM back in 92' when the actual self-propelled prop was acquired for a full-scale diorama built by the gift shops at the exit of the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular attraction. It didn't have sufficient power to make it up the back of the berm it was positioned on without the help of a cable from a back-hoe pulling at the top so it was almost morning before the job was done and the crew left. As soon as they were gone a coworker and I unbolted whatever got in our way and we checked out the inside of it. What we found rather astonished us. The front section under the turret was completely separated from the rear where the engines were by an enormous hydraulic tank. There was what looked like a tractor seat on a pedestal in front of a couple of levers and gas pedals, and a rudimentary automotive gauge panel showing water temp, and oil pressure gauges, plus a couple of tachs behind the open front port. The barrel of the turret gun was balanced with a weight and tied off at its present elevation; but the turret could freely be panned with the rotation of a hand crank. None of that was too interesting to us but the engines certainly were. We had to go back outside and un-bolt a large deck-plate on the top to get to them. From the look of them we deducted that they must have been English Ford V8s because they were labeled as Ford; but they each had two crisscrossed SU carburetors (like an old MG or Datsun 240Z would have) mounted on their intake manifolds. We had thought we might scarf a couple Holley 750s until we saw that; but neither one of us had ever seen anything like that before. Both engines had manual transmissions with the gear selectors cut off and wired in what we guessed was 3rd or 4th with no clutch disengagement apparatus whatsoever on either. The output shafts were directly coupled to a couple of big-assed hydraulic pumps which were plumbed with large lines from the center tank to the hydraulic motors for the treads in the back on each side. I don't recall seeing any condenser with fans; but we weren't really looking for any. Obviously there was enough power to move the behemoth on flat ground but nothing as steep as the berm it was perched on (which had a grade that was easily in excess of 45 or 50 degrees). The prop tank was still there twenty years ago or so; but I don't know if they still have it or not. I was shocked the attraction lasted over 20 years; but considering what they spent on it, I'm certainly not surprised they milked it as long as they could. LOL
For a tank of its size, shape and era, it was going at an impressive speed of 40-50 km/h. The tank could probably have been designed for a larger crew and multiple MGs, but that's uncomfortable in a small room with poor ventilation in the sun, so no wonder they preferred to have less people when they were not expecting a battle. And the periscope could easily have been very useful. We just don't conclusively know the maximum altitude to which it could be raised. Maybe it could have had a telescopic shaft, allowing it to rise above the turret? The terrain in the area had all sorts of hills taller than the tank, so that would have been a tactical advantage to spy on enemy movements from a stationary tank behind a hill. I've seen another analysis that pointed out that the tank had very thin armor. So thin in fact, that it would have been barely bullet proof. This can help explain the low mass needed to achieve the excellent speed. 9:49 - Notice the sort of handle bar at the edge. These were present on both sides of real tanks. Their purpose was to allow the tank to use a large wooden beam (that would have been attached to the tracks) to get itself unstuck when in excessive mud. The beam would have been moved over the commanders penthouse by hand. The reason why I'm pointing this out is that the equipment storage frame on the engine deck is higher than these rails, thus making them useless.
Even if the periscope could extend above the turret, there's still the issue of where it could get hit by the gun when the turret rotates due to the placement of said periscope.
@@Riceball01 In that situation the turret would also be concealed by the same hill. It would be to improve vision in the so-called "turret down" position.
They still are pretty often. The tanks in the shitty remake of Red Dawn were Chieftain tanks dressed up to resemble a more modern tank. Two more real tanks were used in The Walking Dead. The same Chieftain, minus the dressing, and an M60A1 Patton.
This actually resembles a tank known as the TOG ( The Old Gang ) tank. It was developed in the early days of WW2, when a return to trench warfare was predicted. It was originally designed with the exact same layout as the Hatay tank in this movie.
I think it was the best fictional tank ever built despite glaring issues like extra large vision ports, an oversized hatch and a submarine like periscope and a nearly dancing hall inside and otherthings and I must say that it had a lot of attention for details both outside and inside. Despite all this I really liked the fight out scenes between Indiana Jones and the bad guys! I think that somebody could restore it...
@@Mr_Fancypants oh, that's nice but forgive me if I don't remember your name! I liked very much Google + and had lots of contacts also with aviation group too. I had really good friends but very unfortunately I have lost all of my contacts because I ended in hospital the last day of Google + and not happy my computer got a virus so after more than a month waiting for a new computer and a tablet I lost everybody. Sad indeed....
@@paoloviti6156 That's ok, i saw your username and pfp and remembered it instandly. I find it great to still see some people from that time. I hope you are all ok and healthy now tho!
@@Mr_Fancypants yes I'm much better after receiving two major surgery on my leg that was destroyed in an accident and I was not driving! In future I wish to drive only a tank preferably a Sherman to stay on the safe side 😆! Thanks for your concern 👍👍
I always thought if WW1 went beyond 1918 or if during WW2 some countries were forced to reuse old equipment this tank would be a result of it. A Mark hull with guns on the sides with a turret slapped on top. My favorite fictional tank ever.
Early ww2, ww1 equipment was used more often than not. During the invasion of France, they put up the Renault FT tanks against the Germans. Most countries didn't take tanks seriously in the interwar period. A quote from Winston Churchhill "tanks are a passing phase and the next war, we will get back to real soldering" The Germans took them seriously and built thousands secretly.
Hey, I was in a Armor Brigade when this Movie came out & everybody I talked to swore that it was a MK VIII with a Matilda Turret. That's a pretty good build when Tankers didn't even know.
Thanks for this. I've long been interested in working out what this machine really was - and a Mk 8 Liberty was my own starting point. Fascinating to see the lengths that movies will go to, and the care which is involved with making these 'props'. I'd guessed it would be a model which falls off the cliff - when it breaks up on hitting the floor it rather gives the show away. Er, who said that the camera can't lie? It does it all the time!
You guys are absolutely awesome for doing this video! (Wish I had found it earlier) Just a couple months ago I was wondering about The Last Crusade Tank myself. Since the pandemic I have been binging tank videos from The_Chieftain's Hatch and the Tank Museum in Bovington, UK. Thanks!
Very cool. I build RC tanks and am an Indy geek and have thought about building this tank. Thanks for the video, very good work and glad the Indy prop survived
If this was a real life tank I feel like the history of it would go something like this, the panzer heavy tank was constructed in 1931 as vehicle that was supposed to serve as the German temporary heavy tank until the panzer line was developed enough to give Hitler the heavy tank he desired. The tank was based off one of the most advanced tanks at the time, the British MK 8 international and used some design cues from the panzer I, most notably the rotating turret. The tank was used in some operations most notably the invasion of France in 1940 where they were used along side Panzer I and II. They were faced out when the Panzer III and IV began rapid production, though were used in 1945 in Berlin. Sorry this is so vague.
I'd instead suppose that the Hatays bought a few MK8 tanks during or after WW1 to bolster their national army. Then, during the interwar period, they decide that the MK8 is starting to become outdated, but they don't have the economic means to replace it outright. Instead, they have it refitted with a turret to become a sort of SPG which can strike at massed infantry and vehicles from a distance while riflemen and machine gunners range ahead.
yeah that would not happen,it would be not built by the germans, would make no sense what so ever, they where under strict restrictions after the Versailles so didn't build any tanks... the design is very much so something the british and americans built, so it would only make sense it was either license built or an export variant that ended up with the Hatay with the turret either being stock or a later "upgrade"
It would fit in nicely with the Neubaufahrzeug, a German attempt to rebuild their panzer army. Maybe like a test, a one-off. Like a build tought experiment: _"What if we rebuild the tank that won our enemy WW1? And see what it got right? Might also be a good back-up plan, for you know, if our blitzkrieg turns in a trench heavy sitzkrieg..."_
@@fuckinantipope5511 no he wasn't, but he didn't start the tank programs. Most secret projects started before Hitler came into power, he took the credit. He did masivly increase funding tho.
Awesome episode! Can we expect something like this again in the future? Maybe the Tiger from Saving Private Ryan or the mockup Shermans of the german movie „Die Brücke“ (the bridge), just to give some examples...
Hello Fuxs! We do have two more Fake Tank articles in the pipeline. Unfortunately, we will be treating fictional tanks only rarely, we prefer to focus on history. As for movie vehicles and Vismods, that is a topic for the future, but definitely possible.
A while ago I rewatch The Last Crusade with some friends. A thought that ran through my head was "I know a lot more about tanks than I did when I was a kid so I'll be able to recognize what kind of tank that is in the movie." Nope I still couldn't place it. Now I know why, thank you very much.
10:00 We always carried a roll of razor wire on the front of our APC as standard equipment. I’ve seen forces from a lot of different countries do so, too.
It certainly made an astonishing sight at first appearance in the film. The Mk VIII was my first thought,yet it just looked too ‘modern.’ Your film revealed and explained all. It’s a pity it’s a now just a static display piece
Yeah how is it stupid to carry so much when your on the move they have to carry their stuff somehow so lets put it on the tank that has alot of space for it.
@@hauntedhouse7827 Idk setting up camp defenses if they really go from Hatay to Petra they are going through French territory so makes sense to set up some defenses
@@pascalstrijker3985 Yeah that makes sense,,, wait this is youtube. Your supposed to call me an idiot who understands nothing not give a reasonable answer!!!!
The interior views clearly show the inward and up opening shutters for the vision ports; I'm guessing that the one for the driver's position would have a small slot for vision in battle.
You can often see this parked outside the sandwich bar on Kilburn High Road, although I think it may have been converted to rhd since appearing in the film.
I love this design, and truly wish the Brits had stuck a turret on one of their Rhombus tanks. Also I swear this had to be part of the inspiration for Warhammer 40K's Leman Russ
This Actual Tank is on display at Disney Hollywood Studios, outside of the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular, stunt show. There are pictures of the construction of it inside the Backlot Express Restaurant next to the stunt show and directly on the opposite side of the stunt show from the tank. Also the Sandcrawler Tank from the Star Wars movies was also based on an actual WW1 tank, although on a much grander scale.
First video of yours I've seen ever! I loved watching Indiana Jones as a kid and when "The Crystal Skull" came out, a got a LEGO Indiana Jones set from "The Last Crusade" and it was the Dogfight scene where Indy's father, played by Sean Connery aka the very first James Bond, shot off the tail of the Biplane they were escaping from the Zeppelin in. The turret now kinda reminds me of a Cromwell IV's turret, and I'm saying this six years after I've built a 1:72 scale Cromwell IV out of Cardstock #110. I wonder how the Vehicle would've looked if it had been based on the Mark IV Tank of the First World War and had the Turret design of either the Churchill Mk. VII or the Cromwell IV tanks from the following Second World War? Probably something that would be like a TOG II Tank understudy, right?
I love the beautiful note of it roaring along lol.👌 Plus it was 1 of the best action adventure movies ever! To this day I can easily put it in and enjoy every minute of it just like when I was a kid lol.😃
For the record, Hatay is a real place. It's a province of southern Turkey, bordering Syria (a French colony at the time the movie takes place). Notable cities include Antakya and Iskenderun (formerly Antioch and Alexandretta respectively). That said, considering that the location of the Grail is clearly based on Petra, that's quite a journey from the south of Turkey all the way to Jordan to make in a tank of the time period (and across territory controlled by the French and British at the time by German troops, not something that would've been taken lightly in the build-up to World War II if they were discovered).
@@Ulvetann Yep, must've had a LOT of work done on the engine and transmission to get up to that kind of speed, especially to be able to sustain it without breaking down for so long in the desert.
Every objection you raised is easily explained; Hay obtained a Royal Army surplus MkVIII and added the turret, the equipment was added knowing this would be without full support so more gear had to be expanded, the _"suicidally large"_ driver's view port was primarily for policing civilians, for fighting other vehicles a smaller plate could be installed, and the crew was reduced because this wasn't an actual combat op. Also, there's Imperial measurements and pig measurements. No *_human_* understands pig measurements.
Most funny thing in the movie its when that german commander says: "SCHNELL! SEHR GUT, JA!" to the driver, and the tank rammed the truck with their fellow german soldiers. xDDD I always laughing hard on that moment. xD
God a vaguely remember seeing the tank when I saw the Indiana Jones show back in 2013. I didn’t really pay it much attention as I thought it was a lower quality prop just made to sit in the display. I had no idea it was the honest to goodness tank from the movie.
Okay, fanfic time: The Sultan of Hatay is quite clearly a huge petrolhead, given that he's willing to support the Nazi's expedition simply in exchange for a cool car. What petrolhead wouldn't want a tank of his own? So he clearly purchased a Mk VIII when they were being scrapped, and has had his military 'improving' it ever since. New tracks, because the old ones got clogged with sand; new engine, because the old one wasn't fast enough; hey, I see these new tanks have turrets now, that looks cool! etc.
Whatever engine they used to power the prop tank, IRL, must have been powered by an engine very similar to that found in a humvee. I say this, because I noticed one time while doing motorpool Monday in the US Army, when we revved up our humvees it sounded exactly like the tank when it first comes chasing after Indiana at its top speed and when the engine wailing.
The engine sounds like a 2-stroke Detroit Diesel. The 6-71 version came out in 1938, so the Hatay military would have repowered their tanks with these in addition to all the other changes they made to the original design.
Cool video! I do give "IJ:TLC" credit for having a vehicle that could have existed in 1938. Always hated that they had Jones aiming an RPG at the Ark, in the 1st movie, which took place in 1935. Do not think the RPG would make a debut for about another 12 years. Think I can explain how they managed to scrap inside the tank: it was built using trans-dimensional engineering.
"The rear of the tank is of an unknown build" there is the tadpole which is very long, the tank mostly makes sense for a very rich dictator who didn't think very far ahead aside from a new transmission and the turret modifications. Except obviously the churchill turret without the basket or even just a hanging seat bolted down from the roof of the turret, no optic for the gun, the drivers massive vision port, or MGs. Maybe it's supposed to be a support tank, as they didn't seem to have any natively built transport trucks for infantry.
I think it was clever for them to re use a ww1 tank with added armor and a top turret Since after ww1 some tanks WERE still used and modified in smaller or in un wealthy countries like Italy , Japan and even at the battle of France in 1940
When i was a child i remember i read on the book version that the turret in fact was a brit cannon added with a turret in the tank, not an original feature. But maybe im remembering it bad, im sure that was i read when indi describes the tonk...
9:55 tanks do carry barbed wire. At least US tanks do. Look for crossed signposts, which hang two spools of "concertina" or "constantine" barbed wire across the back. The Abrams engine exhaust does not melt it.
Him:this tank was operated by a crew of "4" Meanwhile the periscope operator & that guy holding a pistol & that loader located in the turret :am i a joke to u?
These were definitely real tanks and are 100% historically accurate in every way. When I visited my dear friend the Sultan of Oman only the other week, he showed me 5000 of this particular model. He was kind enough to give me 3 of these tanks and an escort of 500 of his elite palace guards armed with sabres and Lee Enfield rifles. This was to aid me on my quest to liberate a holy relic from a long forgotten tomb.
If there were a zombie apocalypse and I had to make 1 vehicle, this tank would be my vehicle of choice, despite it being fictional, I would build the tank to have thicker armor against the zombies, put spikes on the tank tracks, and have bigger guns.
@@legogenius1667 right, I get that, but there's also anti personnel rounds for big guns like the Abrams tank is an example of this, how? Well it can carry an anti personnel canister shell Here's what it looks like: images.app.goo.gl/ZHiQVW9cWvobWowD8
@@bobross923 Those are super cool, though getting the computer chips and other tech to make them work would be....difficult. But hey, if you make it work I'll be the first to volunteer to man one of the guns!
Yes, the Mk. VIII tank didn't have a turret, but the TOG tank did!. And, the TOG was built in the late 30's!. What is a mystery to me is, why didn't they just use the TOG that is in one of the armour museums???.
You can see from the tank interior that the crew can actually close of the vision ports ! But they seems to be no other way to have a view from the outside of the vehicle.. except the submarine periscope if course. So they can close them and protect the crew inside, but they loose all vision of the outside world wich is really bad when you need to aim a WW1 gun.
I'm astounded that he didn't mention that the tank, while a Mk8 in build and Churchill like in turret, looks similar to a Char B1 in summary, which was a mere concept in the 1920's, if a bit more German in the angles...
"This is a prop tank"
"All of the guns are real guns"
HMM YES PROP TANK
P R O P
its american...
They use non projectile shell (only making boom sound and smoke)
dont let alec baldwin anywhere near it!
a prop so real they just made a real tank
Well I guess if it has working guns and working tracks and is made from steel armor.... this is technically a real tank.
Indeed...with that top turret it would be superior to most WW1 Tanks...all it needs is some Optics :D
A poorly designed one, but yes a tank. Optics aside, if you wanted to make it into a practical tank, you'd need to do something about that "shoot me here" spot the driver uses as a vision port. Same for the commander's vision port in the turret. It also probably wouldn't hurt to give it at least a couple of machine guns for the reasons stated in the video.
@@hhale Assume there's another plate the driver can put over the larger window. Real tanks often had larger openings that got closed down to a vision slit.
But it's made from steel, not armor steel - they're two different things. Military rifles would probably cut right through it.
@@bob_._. It doesn't even need to be a military rifle, just any rifle shooting 5.56 and up could probably go through it if it was mild steel and not overly thick. It's not like military rifles are necessarily more powerful than their civilian counterparts. Civilian guns are often chambered in the same calibers as military rifles and, in some cases, military calibers are derived from civilian cartidges.
I love how they built a fully operational tank complete with working cannons for a chasing part, then left the war machine parked behing the studios like a common car
Kinda sad
arent you supposed to be helping the turtle team?
@@scrembirb6685 I was looking for a new tank
@@AverageOhioan1903
"So, we built an armored vehicle capable of moving and with three 6 pounder guns, what do we do with it?"
"Just park it back there"
Momo Kawashima Hello fellow gup enjoyer, 4th time I've seen your comments
This is by far one of my most favorite tanks. To me, it doesn’t matter if it doesn’t have machine guns. It doesn’t matter if it’s horribly under-crewed and designed. It’s an impressive monument to visual effects artists. Back when things weren’t done with computers. Plus, periscope or no periscope. It looks absolutely smashing.
Tank-wise, eh.
As a prop, it is amazing in its detail and the effort taken to build it and make it look the part!
The movie studios are finally realizing that you don't just scrap the props anymore.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Actually, There was thought of giving the Mark V and lV Tanks of the Great War a turret for the obvious advantage of having 360 degrees of rotation to aim and fire at the enemy, without having to fully or partially turn the entire hull of the tank to aim if surrounded. However, because of the tank's short length compared to the Tadpole Tank or the Mark 8, It was considered to be "Too Top Heavey" for the terrain the tank was designed for and would've easily tipped over any crater or terrain that was at an angle for the tank to cross over. Therefore, making the Indiana Jones Tank design with its turret a built-in "Already made" design and not something modified by the country as the idea was already conceived by the British.
@@JackDrinkn2DollarJim In the late 1970's I delivered industrial freight to San Fernando Valley studios. I was always surprised and pleased to see large props, including 25 foot WWII warships, parked here and there.
@@janblake9468 What else did you see if I may ask? Did you ever see other Prop tanks or tanks to be disguised as other vehicles? (Such as T-34's being disguised as Tiger 1 Tanks like in the film of Saving Private Ryan)
The problems with the Hatay Heavy Tank look like real problems that a small nation building its first tank might do.
Or they bought something and modified it for their use -- which would primarily be putting on a show to quiet down little revolts.
@@rcrawford42 I can see this tank being used against rioters or small tribal militias, and maybe even by itself, with no accompanying infantry or anything. The sheer terror (and big gun shooting) of this beast would solve any problems.
The tank feels like it makes a lot of sense to me if you imagine it like a project of fancy by a rich, largely ignorant ruler of a small despotic kingdom. It was originally a surplus obsolete British tank that he had modified and "upgraded". The poor ergonomics are not particularly surprising for something of that era and the undercrewing sounds like something that would be done either out of not appreciating the importance of having it staffed or just because of it's current mission. The sultan might have wanted to impress the Nazis with his pet project and they just kind of went along with it, taking what they could get.
I agree a lot, though I'd add that it's not impossible that the tank was supposed to be some form of artillery battery on wheels, for taking out massed infantry and armored machine gun cars in skirmishes with other minor nations.
@@odinlindeberg4624 and a good parade vehicle to show the strength of the military
Exactly!
Ghana does this IRL, they have a military parade featuring "futuristic vehicles" that look like they drove off an Asylum back lot :) look it up
@@odinlindeberg4624it the in the middle of the desert I don’t think many armoires cars are out there
Nice to know that this iconic "tank" wasnt scrapped, i was fearing that at the end
Scrapped? I saw it plunge off a precipice, fall 1000ft, crash into the valley floor and burst into flames with a Nazi Commandant on board. It must have been destroyed!😁
Given the design aspects you've mentioned, you could say that "Hatay" built this thing out of "boilerplate" as a propaganda stunt rather than expecting it to actually fight. "Look, people! Your enlightened and powerful State has built a tank the envy of the world!"
To be fair, the first tanks had worse armor than even a boilerplate. They had barely enough to stop machinegun bullets from penetrating.
This is just the sort of hodge podge that top tier countries would sell to.. err.. others...
Sir.. buy our tank... more powerful... how about a third cannon.... too hot for driver... ok we cut big hole in front... cannot see.. that's ok we have some war surplus vision devices we can .. err.. use..err...
that is close to what i figured. that they probably cobbled it together from an old WW1 tank chassis refitted with whatever stuff they could obtain. and that it (and any others of the type they built, since multiple were offered) were basically a stopgap effort at obtaining tanks, because having tanks make the country look more powerful to its own people.
this would help explain the odd features.. the turret is grafted onto a non-turreted chassis, so it lacks a proper interior basket. the large viewing ports and hatches is due to not knowing of or being able to obtain armored glass viewing blocks which would normally fill such ports. it is likely the ones on the side doubled as firing ports for rifles or light MG's. the periscope was probably added in an effort to give a tank commander a better viewing option, since the turret is a one man affair and under full crew would probably not have room for the commander and a full gunner.
i have generally assumed that the crew seen is a minimum crew, used because it is operating over a long distance across what should be friendly territory. and that under normal crewing conditions there would be loaders for the sponson guns, additional mechanics to run the engine, etc.
I mean, just look at the T-35. Completely impractical on the battlefield by the time it was in production, and more of a propaganda piece that ended up being forced into service. I can totally see some middle-eastern country buying an old British Mark VII, tossing a turret on it along with some modifications, and parading around in it for the sake of making the current regime look good. The periscope is useless? The driver/gunner hatch is far too big? The tank lacks any machineguns? Not a problem! It will never actually fight anything more than some flintlock-armed militiamen, if even that.
Hatay was a real country tho it existed for a year and was created to transition the French government to the Turkish government in other words it's not gonna try saying it's a glorious state in the regard
This tank is why 10 year old me fell in love with great war tanks.
I'm honestly surprised wargaming hasn't put this in world of tanks, they make shit up all the time now. This could make an interesting tier 3 premium tank
stole the words man!
If they do something like adding fictional tanks, there is a world of it for them to add. Another tank that I would love to see added into the game would be the spider tank wich is another iconic tank from ghost in the shell.
@@capscaps04 Literally any tank from 40k.
@@JeanLucCaptain I was never interested in any content about 40k. I always though those characters looked very goofy.
@@capscaps04 Probably Because you haven't seen anything newer then 3rd edition.
they practically made an actual new tank just as a prop for a movie
"Somewhere in the region of Turkey". But we know exactly where Hatay is, it hasn't moved :D It's the southernmost tip of Turkey, bordering Syria. It was briefly an independent state, 1938-1939, matching the time period of the film :) It never had a sultan though, just a president instead, Tayfur Sökmen. So the sultan is, indeed, fictional :)
the movie never states he is a sultan, maybe the script calls him that, but it is not mentioned. Donovan calls him 'Highness' which would be incorrect unless he was a prince or other member of royalty. what I am saying is, who is to say that the guy is not actually the president and everyone just wrongly assumes he is a sultan due to his fancy clothes?
This is truly an incredible example of fictional movie tanks and general excellent prop design. Even though it's fictional, the designers did their best to make it a believable tank to exist pre-war and even went through the trouble of collaborating with Bovington Tank Museum to get its proportions correct. It works really well in the film, and the massive flat top with moving tracks makes for a great set piece for action scenes, something clearly thought of as it was designed. For being built from the ground up and being driven through desert mountains and canyons, it held up remarkably well and kept the production alive. The Hatay Tank's attention to detail keeps it believable to the audience, even if not all of it makes sense.
IT BELONGS IN A MUSEUM!
This is one of the most cursed tanks I have ever seen. It’s like a Churchill and a Commonwealth WW1 tank had a baby!
Cursed in a good way.
@@dragon_ninja_2186 Blursed
¿And?
Or a Cromwells ammunition blew causing the turret to fall on WWI tank
When the tank goes over the cliff , its turret breaks away then in the next shot the turret is back in place with the German in the hatch.
I spotted that a few weeks ago.
YES, I thought no one else noticed that!
Is it just me or does this tank look gorgeous
So basically their prop tank worked like a real, though inefficient, tank. They just made their own home made tank
Pretty much. Hell, with only slight modification (reducing the size of the driver's viewport, adding optics for aiming the main guns, installing a couple of machine guns for anti-personnel work, and maybe adding a radio) and a couple more crew members this wouldn't be half-bad for a late 1910s-early 1920s heavy tank.
Now I want the iconic "Killdozer" to be reviewed.
Movie studios used to do stuff like this all the time. Look up the crazy truck thing from "Damnation Alley" sometime. I think they blew most of the film's budget and like a year building it, lol.
The front viewport is clearly to allow cinematographers to get reaction shots of the crew. This is extremely important on the field of battle, at least in movies.
Being kinda into tanks as a kid, I recognized the Crusade tank was some kind of amalgamation, ww1 chassis and ww2-ish turret and gun. I always wondered. Thank you!
There was a similar tank in existence in WW2 named the TOG "The Old Gang" consisting of former WW1 TANK DESIGNERS and Experts namely Harry Richardo,Gen Henry Wilson and others 2 prototypes were built for testing but it was never in production as the design was outmoded, photo's exist in Bovingdon,Dorset,UK.
So they made a really functional ww1 tank in a really short amount of time.
I think youre being slightly unfair on this tank.
I have no problem believing that some rich Sultan bought a few tanks to show off right after WW1, upgraded them with turrets as they became popular, had heard of periscopes being used in tanks.
In that situation, I don't think the actual military utility would have been the highest concern, rather, just being able to show off. The Sultan was obviously a petrol head, I have no problem believing this is more plaything than weapon of war.
It also would have been very useful as a policing vehicle against tribal rebels and raiders which were still commonplace in many countries like "Hatay" whose own leaders were often just a generation removed from tribal nomads themselves. It is not as if anti-tank rifles or cannons were a dime-a-dozen in places like this, so even a half-armed Liberty International with a lot of local "improvements" would be more than enough to ensure control of any place you happened to sit one down. For sure, this was not very efficient, but efficient and effective are not the same thing, and this Hatay Heavy would have been plenty effective.
@@genericpersonx333 Plus, it would be plenty effective against an armored car with a machine gun, or even two.
Here's the story on its propulsion: I was still working third shift as an area mechanical (electrical) at what was Disney/MGM back in 92' when the actual self-propelled prop was acquired for a full-scale diorama built by the gift shops at the exit of the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular attraction. It didn't have sufficient power to make it up the back of the berm it was positioned on without the help of a cable from a back-hoe pulling at the top so it was almost morning before the job was done and the crew left. As soon as they were gone a coworker and I unbolted whatever got in our way and we checked out the inside of it. What we found rather astonished us. The front section under the turret was completely separated from the rear where the engines were by an enormous hydraulic tank. There was what looked like a tractor seat on a pedestal in front of a couple of levers and gas pedals, and a rudimentary automotive gauge panel showing water temp, and oil pressure gauges, plus a couple of tachs behind the open front port. The barrel of the turret gun was balanced with a weight and tied off at its present elevation; but the turret could freely be panned with the rotation of a hand crank. None of that was too interesting to us but the engines certainly were. We had to go back outside and un-bolt a large deck-plate on the top to get to them. From the look of them we deducted that they must have been English Ford V8s because they were labeled as Ford; but they each had two crisscrossed SU carburetors (like an old MG or Datsun 240Z would have) mounted on their intake manifolds. We had thought we might scarf a couple Holley 750s until we saw that; but neither one of us had ever seen anything like that before. Both engines had manual transmissions with the gear selectors cut off and wired in what we guessed was 3rd or 4th with no clutch disengagement apparatus whatsoever on either. The output shafts were directly coupled to a couple of big-assed hydraulic pumps which were plumbed with large lines from the center tank to the hydraulic motors for the treads in the back on each side. I don't recall seeing any condenser with fans; but we weren't really looking for any. Obviously there was enough power to move the behemoth on flat ground but nothing as steep as the berm it was perched on (which had a grade that was easily in excess of 45 or 50 degrees). The prop tank was still there twenty years ago or so; but I don't know if they still have it or not. I was shocked the attraction lasted over 20 years; but considering what they spent on it, I'm certainly not surprised they milked it as long as they could. LOL
Nice insight!
For a tank of its size, shape and era, it was going at an impressive speed of 40-50 km/h. The tank could probably have been designed for a larger crew and multiple MGs, but that's uncomfortable in a small room with poor ventilation in the sun, so no wonder they preferred to have less people when they were not expecting a battle.
And the periscope could easily have been very useful. We just don't conclusively know the maximum altitude to which it could be raised. Maybe it could have had a telescopic shaft, allowing it to rise above the turret? The terrain in the area had all sorts of hills taller than the tank, so that would have been a tactical advantage to spy on enemy movements from a stationary tank behind a hill.
I've seen another analysis that pointed out that the tank had very thin armor. So thin in fact, that it would have been barely bullet proof. This can help explain the low mass needed to achieve the excellent speed.
9:49 - Notice the sort of handle bar at the edge. These were present on both sides of real tanks. Their purpose was to allow the tank to use a large wooden beam (that would have been attached to the tracks) to get itself unstuck when in excessive mud. The beam would have been moved over the commanders penthouse by hand. The reason why I'm pointing this out is that the equipment storage frame on the engine deck is higher than these rails, thus making them useless.
Even if the periscope could extend above the turret, there's still the issue of where it could get hit by the gun when the turret rotates due to the placement of said periscope.
@@Riceball01 In that situation the turret would also be concealed by the same hill. It would be to improve vision in the so-called "turret down" position.
Modern engines are a lot more powerful per size than 1920s/30s engines.
I mean when the tanks attacked by the brotherhood there aren’t any bullet holes, so it’s probably bulletproof
The good ol' days when film props were functional real vehicles instead of CGI.
They still are pretty often.
The tanks in the shitty remake of Red Dawn were Chieftain tanks dressed up to resemble a more modern tank.
Two more real tanks were used in The Walking Dead. The same Chieftain, minus the dressing, and an M60A1 Patton.
ik right?
At least we don't have to see CGI props being thrown into the boneyard and left to rot away, no matter how cool they are
When I first saw it I thought it was a grooßtracktor, then I thought it was a mk8 with a Churchill turret on it, then I watched this.Thank you!
Tallarn Regiment converted Land Raider, gifted to them by the Howling Griffons during the Badab War, Colourised
So was the land raider and leman russ stc just a copy of Indiana Jones and the last crusade?
Lol, glad I wasn't the only one thinking WH40K.
This seems like it may have been at least partially the inspiration behind the Leman Russ from 40K
I see the resemblance it looks like a stretched out Leman Russ.
@@brentwhite7150 so was the leman russ stc just a copy of Indiana Jones and the last crusade?
GW will not confirm or deny.
That was my first thought.
"The Leman Russ is real?"
This actually resembles a tank known as the TOG ( The Old Gang ) tank. It was developed in the early days of WW2, when a return to trench warfare was predicted. It was originally designed with the exact same layout as the Hatay tank in this movie.
i kid you not i was just gonna comment saying it looks like the tog2
So they built a tank which, with only minor modifications (machine guns, periscopes, vision slits) would have been effective in WW1.
Yes but this isn't unlike most tanks during the end of the Great War. Check out the later "mark" tanks of Great Britain.
Honestly love this aesthetic of tanks. The Char 2C and such just look so silly and I love them!
I think it was the best fictional tank ever built despite glaring issues like extra large vision ports, an oversized hatch and a submarine like periscope and a nearly dancing hall inside and otherthings and I must say that it had a lot of attention for details both outside and inside. Despite all this I really liked the fight out scenes between Indiana Jones and the bad guys! I think that somebody could restore it...
Hey! I remember you from the google+ tank group!
@@Mr_Fancypants oh, that's nice but forgive me if I don't remember your name! I liked very much Google + and had lots of contacts also with aviation group too. I had really good friends but very unfortunately I have lost all of my contacts because I ended in hospital the last day of Google + and not happy my computer got a virus so after more than a month waiting for a new computer and a tablet I lost everybody. Sad indeed....
@@paoloviti6156 That's ok, i saw your username and pfp and remembered it instandly. I find it great to still see some people from that time. I hope you are all ok and healthy now tho!
@@Mr_Fancypants yes I'm much better after receiving two major surgery on my leg that was destroyed in an accident and I was not driving! In future I wish to drive only a tank preferably a Sherman to stay on the safe side 😆! Thanks for your concern 👍👍
@@paoloviti6156 i'l be waiting for you with a 7.5 cm Pak 40 at the end of the road :)
I always thought if WW1 went beyond 1918 or if during WW2 some countries were forced to reuse old equipment this tank would be a result of it. A Mark hull with guns on the sides with a turret slapped on top. My favorite fictional tank ever.
Early ww2, ww1 equipment was used more often than not. During the invasion of France, they put up the Renault FT tanks against the Germans.
Most countries didn't take tanks seriously in the interwar period. A quote from Winston Churchhill "tanks are a passing phase and the next war, we will get back to real soldering"
The Germans took them seriously and built thousands secretly.
Hey, I was in a Armor Brigade when this Movie came out & everybody I talked to swore that it was a MK VIII with a Matilda Turret. That's a pretty good build when Tankers didn't even know.
Thanks for this. I've long been interested in working out what this machine really was - and a Mk 8 Liberty was my own starting point. Fascinating to see the lengths that movies will go to, and the care which is involved with making these 'props'. I'd guessed it would be a model which falls off the cliff - when it breaks up on hitting the floor it rather gives the show away. Er, who said that the camera can't lie? It does it all the time!
You guys are absolutely awesome for doing this video! (Wish I had found it earlier) Just a couple months ago I was wondering about The Last Crusade Tank myself. Since the pandemic I have been binging tank videos from The_Chieftain's Hatch and the Tank Museum in Bovington, UK. Thanks!
Very cool. I build RC tanks and am an Indy geek and have thought about building this tank. Thanks for the video, very good work and glad the Indy prop survived
If this was a real life tank I feel like the history of it would go something like this, the panzer heavy tank was constructed in 1931 as vehicle that was supposed to serve as the German temporary heavy tank until the panzer line was developed enough to give Hitler the heavy tank he desired. The tank was based off one of the most advanced tanks at the time, the British MK 8 international and used some design cues from the panzer I, most notably the rotating turret. The tank was used in some operations most notably the invasion of France in 1940 where they were used along side Panzer I and II. They were faced out when the Panzer III and IV began rapid production, though were used in 1945 in Berlin. Sorry this is so vague.
I'd instead suppose that the Hatays bought a few MK8 tanks during or after WW1 to bolster their national army. Then, during the interwar period, they decide that the MK8 is starting to become outdated, but they don't have the economic means to replace it outright. Instead, they have it refitted with a turret to become a sort of SPG which can strike at massed infantry and vehicles from a distance while riflemen and machine gunners range ahead.
yeah that would not happen,it would be not built by the germans, would make no sense what so ever, they where under strict restrictions after the Versailles so didn't build any tanks...
the design is very much so something the british and americans built, so it would only make sense it was either license built or an export variant that ended up with the Hatay with the turret either being stock or a later "upgrade"
It would fit in nicely with the Neubaufahrzeug, a German attempt to rebuild their panzer army. Maybe like a test, a one-off. Like a build tought experiment:
_"What if we rebuild the tank that won our enemy WW1? And see what it got right? Might also be a good back-up plan, for you know, if our blitzkrieg turns in a trench heavy sitzkrieg..."_
Hitler wasn't in power in 1931
@@fuckinantipope5511 no he wasn't, but he didn't start the tank programs. Most secret projects started before Hitler came into power, he took the credit. He did masivly increase funding tho.
It's so incredible that not only was this tank not scrapped, but that the very same one from the film finally found a permanent home back with Disney.
Awesome episode! Can we expect something like this again in the future? Maybe the Tiger from Saving Private Ryan or the mockup Shermans of the german movie „Die Brücke“ (the bridge), just to give some examples...
Hello Fuxs!
We do have two more Fake Tank articles in the pipeline.
Unfortunately, we will be treating fictional tanks only rarely, we prefer to focus on history.
As for movie vehicles and Vismods, that is a topic for the future, but definitely possible.
Tanks Encyclopedia thx for replying TE🙂
In truth I didn't like very much the T-34/Tiger and I found it absurd that our "hero" could shoot the armored visor and killing the driver...
I saw the fake tiger at Duxford, worth a look
A while ago I rewatch The Last Crusade with some friends. A thought that ran through my head was "I know a lot more about tanks than I did when I was a kid so I'll be able to recognize what kind of tank that is in the movie." Nope I still couldn't place it. Now I know why, thank you very much.
10:00 We always carried a roll of razor wire on the front of our APC as standard equipment. I’ve seen forces from a lot of different countries do so, too.
It certainly made an astonishing sight at first appearance in the film. The Mk VIII was my first thought,yet it just looked too ‘modern.’ Your film revealed and explained all. It’s a pity it’s a now just a static display piece
The extra "stuff " makes sense given the expedition
Yeah how is it stupid to carry so much when your on the move they have to carry their stuff somehow so lets put it on the tank that has alot of space for it.
Exactly
I suppose, but what would you need barbed wire for?
@@hauntedhouse7827 Idk setting up camp defenses if they really go from Hatay to Petra they are going through French territory so makes sense to set up some defenses
@@pascalstrijker3985 Yeah that makes sense,,, wait this is youtube. Your supposed to call me an idiot who understands nothing not give a reasonable answer!!!!
My headcanon is that Hatay originally received an actual Mark VIII, but over time it was repaired and updated because Hatay had no other heavy tank.
Probably not even any other tanks period
The interior views clearly show the inward and up opening shutters for the vision ports; I'm guessing that the one for the driver's position would have a small slot for vision in battle.
You can often see this parked outside the sandwich bar on Kilburn High Road, although I think it may have been converted to rhd since appearing in the film.
I meant Gray's Inn Road, sorry!
If it doesn't exist I expect it to appear in world of tanks
honestly they should. It wouldn't be the worst like random fictional tank they've put in it.
_World of Tanks Blitz_ more likely
exactly
Yeah. Where the hell do they come up with things like the Gravedigger or Annihilator?
I love this design, and truly wish the Brits had stuck a turret on one of their Rhombus tanks.
Also I swear this had to be part of the inspiration for Warhammer 40K's Leman Russ
Indeed, I wonder why modern tanks don't have side sponsons. Something about having more than one gun is too much for the commander
Nice to know it survived and not scrapped
This Actual Tank is on display at Disney Hollywood Studios, outside of the Indiana Jones Epic Stunt Spectacular, stunt show. There are pictures of the construction of it inside the Backlot Express Restaurant next to the stunt show and directly on the opposite side of the stunt show from the tank.
Also the Sandcrawler Tank from the Star Wars movies was also based on an actual WW1 tank, although on a much grander scale.
Was the basis for the Sandcrawler the glorious Bob Semple?
you guys are the ones that taught me every thing i know about ww2 panzers
First video of yours I've seen ever! I loved watching Indiana Jones as a kid and when "The Crystal Skull" came out, a got a LEGO Indiana Jones set from "The Last Crusade" and it was the Dogfight scene where Indy's father, played by Sean Connery aka the very first James Bond, shot off the tail of the Biplane they were escaping from the Zeppelin in. The turret now kinda reminds me of a Cromwell IV's turret, and I'm saying this six years after I've built a 1:72 scale Cromwell IV out of Cardstock #110. I wonder how the Vehicle would've looked if it had been based on the Mark IV Tank of the First World War and had the Turret design of either the Churchill Mk. VII or the Cromwell IV tanks from the following Second World War? Probably something that would be like a TOG II Tank understudy, right?
This absolutely kicks ass and it's about time someone done it
Interesting video thanks.....I think the TOG 1 proto type along with the mk8 was a big influence
I love the beautiful note of it roaring along lol.👌 Plus it was 1 of the best action adventure movies ever! To this day I can easily put it in and enjoy every minute of it just like when I was a kid lol.😃
Worth every penny. Such a good film!
It's quite Char-B-like, though, isn't it, leaving the side guns apart.
For the record, Hatay is a real place. It's a province of southern Turkey, bordering Syria (a French colony at the time the movie takes place). Notable cities include Antakya and Iskenderun (formerly Antioch and Alexandretta respectively).
That said, considering that the location of the Grail is clearly based on Petra, that's quite a journey from the south of Turkey all the way to Jordan to make in a tank of the time period (and across territory controlled by the French and British at the time by German troops, not something that would've been taken lightly in the build-up to World War II if they were discovered).
Ah. That explains why this tank had a much, much higher speed than the Mk. VIII's lousy 10Mph.... ^_^
@@Ulvetann Yep, must've had a LOT of work done on the engine and transmission to get up to that kind of speed, especially to be able to sustain it without breaking down for so long in the desert.
Every objection you raised is easily explained;
Hay obtained a Royal Army surplus MkVIII and added the turret, the equipment was added knowing this would be without full support so more gear had to be expanded, the _"suicidally large"_ driver's view port was primarily for policing civilians, for fighting other vehicles a smaller plate could be installed, and the crew was reduced because this wasn't an actual combat op.
Also, there's Imperial measurements and pig measurements. No *_human_* understands pig measurements.
Most funny thing in the movie its when that german commander says: "SCHNELL! SEHR GUT, JA!" to the driver, and the tank rammed the truck with their fellow german soldiers. xDDD I always laughing hard on that moment. xD
I can imagine that such a tank could actually exist, especially if it was Recycled & such…
God a vaguely remember seeing the tank when I saw the Indiana Jones show back in 2013. I didn’t really pay it much attention as I thought it was a lower quality prop just made to sit in the display. I had no idea it was the honest to goodness tank from the movie.
that little RC tank for the cliff scene would be so cool to play with
It was driving me crazy, 4 minutes of talking about the mark VIII before FINALLY showing a picture of one.
Okay, fanfic time: The Sultan of Hatay is quite clearly a huge petrolhead, given that he's willing to support the Nazi's expedition simply in exchange for a cool car. What petrolhead wouldn't want a tank of his own? So he clearly purchased a Mk VIII when they were being scrapped, and has had his military 'improving' it ever since. New tracks, because the old ones got clogged with sand; new engine, because the old one wasn't fast enough; hey, I see these new tanks have turrets now, that looks cool! etc.
Whatever engine they used to power the prop tank, IRL, must have been powered by an engine very similar to that found in a humvee. I say this, because I noticed one time while doing motorpool Monday in the US Army, when we revved up our humvees it sounded exactly like the tank when it first comes chasing after Indiana at its top speed and when the engine wailing.
The engine sounds like a 2-stroke Detroit Diesel. The 6-71 version came out in 1938, so the Hatay military would have repowered their tanks with these in addition to all the other changes they made to the original design.
Two 3.5-litre Rover V8s were used to power it
Cool video! I do give "IJ:TLC" credit for having a vehicle that could have existed in 1938. Always hated that they had Jones aiming an RPG at the Ark, in the 1st movie, which took place in 1935. Do not think the RPG would make a debut for about another 12 years. Think I can explain how they managed to scrap inside the tank: it was built using trans-dimensional engineering.
When a studio custom built tank functions better and more reliably than a real one. . .
Should be in Warthunder. Since it technically is a real tank.
"The rear of the tank is of an unknown build" there is the tadpole which is very long, the tank mostly makes sense for a very rich dictator who didn't think very far ahead aside from a new transmission and the turret modifications.
Except obviously the churchill turret without the basket or even just a hanging seat bolted down from the roof of the turret, no optic for the gun, the drivers massive vision port, or MGs.
Maybe it's supposed to be a support tank, as they didn't seem to have any natively built transport trucks for infantry.
If it was "historically" accurate it would probably be a Neubaufahrzeug.
The imperial guard be like:
Now show me the Real Life Baneblade!
I think it was clever for them to re use a ww1 tank with added armor and a top turret
Since after ww1 some tanks WERE still used and modified in smaller or in un wealthy countries like Italy , Japan and even at the battle of France in 1940
Im talking about the fictional nation in the movie
The House of Mouse ought to donate it to the Tank Museum at Bovington, where it could get some real TLC.
The Republic of Hatay existed by the way. It was a small border state between Turkey and Syria in the late 30s when the movie takes place.
Looks like a mix of the Mark IV and Tog II.
It is like a leman russ tank from warhammer 40,000, another fictional tank.
TOG. TOG 2 look that one up..
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that at least the front half of this thing served an inspiration for the Leman Russ.
When i was a child i remember i read on the book version that the turret in fact was a brit cannon added with a turret in the tank, not an original feature.
But maybe im remembering it bad, im sure that was i read when indi describes the tonk...
9:55 tanks do carry barbed wire. At least US tanks do. Look for crossed signposts, which hang two spools of "concertina" or "constantine" barbed wire across the back. The Abrams engine exhaust does not melt it.
Once again the TH-cam algorithm shows me gold.
Him:this tank was operated by a crew of "4"
Meanwhile the periscope operator & that guy holding a pistol & that loader located in the turret :am i a joke to u?
It could be argued that the rank is a Hatay design, based on previous tank developmebts.
It's just like the a longer version of a mark-1 heavy
So this tank can breakthrough the battlefield as good as well when this tank invented in real war
"In 1989..." *Oh my, I can't believe so much time has passed since I saw the first Indiana Jones...
"...was coming to an end..." *Ouch, that hurts!
You didn't mention the British 6pdr ammunition boxes visible on the top of the chassis, and bolted to the outside flanks. C238mk2
I assume the tank at D.W. Hollywood is the vehicle from the movie , in person it looks very cool .
These were definitely real tanks and are 100% historically accurate in every way. When I visited my dear friend the Sultan of Oman only the other week, he showed me 5000 of this particular model. He was kind enough to give me 3 of these tanks and an escort of 500 of his elite palace guards armed with sabres and Lee Enfield rifles. This was to aid me on my quest to liberate a holy relic from a long forgotten tomb.
A friend of mine was the soldier called Nick Guillard who had the fight with Indiana inside the Tank.
It is officially named:
The new and much improved Leman Russ Mk2
Declared Techno-heresey
With a few modifications it would have been a great WW1 tank
If there were a zombie apocalypse and I had to make 1 vehicle, this tank would be my vehicle of choice, despite it being fictional, I would build the tank to have thicker armor against the zombies, put spikes on the tank tracks, and have bigger guns.
Machine guns
@@connormclernon26 don't forget that lol
Big guns would take more resources to make the ammo for, might as well put some commonly found rifles instead so you can easily restock.
@@legogenius1667 right, I get that, but there's also anti personnel rounds for big guns like the Abrams tank is an example of this, how? Well it can carry an anti personnel canister shell Here's what it looks like: images.app.goo.gl/ZHiQVW9cWvobWowD8
@@bobross923 Those are super cool, though getting the computer chips and other tech to make them work would be....difficult. But hey, if you make it work I'll be the first to volunteer to man one of the guns!
This is similar to how TOG II was supposed to look, with sponsons.
But, the hull is definitely a Mark VIII.
Yeah, a TOG II would have stretched movie-goers' ability to suspend disbelief. "An armored bus? With a turret? Really?!"
Yes, the Mk. VIII tank didn't have a turret, but the TOG tank did!. And, the TOG was built in the late 30's!. What is a mystery to me is, why didn't they just use the TOG that is in one of the armour museums???.
You can see from the tank interior that the crew can actually close of the vision ports ! But they seems to be no other way to have a view from the outside of the vehicle.. except the submarine periscope if course. So they can close them and protect the crew inside, but they loose all vision of the outside world wich is really bad when you need to aim a WW1 gun.
OMG, it's Leman Russ!
"You don't understand, your Honor-- it's a _prop,_ I don't understand why the gentleman from the *ATF* is so upset!"
I'm astounded that he didn't mention that the tank, while a Mk8 in build and Churchill like in turret, looks similar to a Char B1 in summary, which was a mere concept in the 1920's, if a bit more German in the angles...
I wondered what tank that was. Interesting. It really wasn't any particular tank.
Always wondered - now I know - cheers! Thumbs up!