They say any publicity is good publicity, so thank you Kennie Bass for your article about Nitro, West Virginia, the Arlington VFW, and a WWI tank. We appreciate having more people find out about the National Museum of Military Vehicles and watch one of our TH-cam videos. With respect to the details of the article, they make no sense and have no bearing on our museum. Mr. Bass says in his article that a VFW in Arlington, Virginia got a tank on loan from the U. S. Gov’t. As people who collect military vehicles know, any vehicles loaned by the U.S. Gov’t to a private party are done under loan documents that are temporary, subject to ongoing Gov’t audit, and require return to the gov’t at the end of the loan. A borrower has no rights to transfer a loaned vehicle to another party. I bought my M1917 tank from a company in The Netherlands with all appropriate documentation as one might imagine for a purchase of more than $1.2 million. How anyone not involved in the transaction and who has no knowledge of the documentation could misconstrue that as a theft is beyond me. I have never been to Nitro and have no idea if Nitro had a tank up until 19 years ago or if that tank has anything to do with mine. If the story is true and legitimate, Nitro would have loan documents from the U.S. Gov’t transferring rights to Nitro. I assume no such document exists or Mr. Bass would have mentioned it. The article says Nitro doesn’t own a WWI tank, never owned it, and doesn’t want it. As a critical thinker, it seems to me that some guy who has no standing, no authority, and very little first hand information about critical facts saw my TH-cam video along with me saying how much I paid for it. He then reached out to me to say that although he doesn’t own the tank, now that he sees what I paid for it, he would like to discuss a “mutually beneficial arrangement”. Is this an attempt at extortion? I don’t know but I have no interest in responding. This same individual then stirs up an investigative reporter. If everything the reporter says in the article is accurate, Nitro had a tank 19 years ago it didn’t own and did not receive legally. It agreed to have someone remove it for 30 days and then return it. When the agreement was broken, that began tolling the one (or two?) year statute of limitations under West Virginia law. For reasons not known to me, Nitro opted not to pursue a claim ( No legal basis? Some new agreement consummated? Money subsequently paid? Gov’t release to the buyer? Other?) More importantly, we all are about to vote in a national election. To those of you who left hostile comments after reading Mr. Bass ‘s article, I hope you put more critical thinking into your vote than you did into your comment. At the National Museum of Military Vehicles, we are educating next generations on the history of Anerican freedom while making everyday both Veterans Day and Memorial Day. The M1917 tank I bought for slightly more than $1.2 million is right where it should be to help advance our mission.
I don't give any credence to the "stolen tank" story, but I have a question. You said you bought this M1917 from a company in the Netherlands, I presume it's that one restoration company. But this tank has the exact same camouflage pattern as the one that was at the Ropkey Armor Museum and then later the House of Tanks; it's otherwise completely identical, so it's definitely the same tank. Do you mean that Fred Ropkey is the one who bought it from the Netherlands?
@@HaroldBiondo Interesting observation. The explaination above talks about whether or not Nitro has documents. Then follows a lot of specultion as to the disposition of the tank after it wasn't returned to the town. Wasn't the government's release to the Nitro buyer copied in the documentation of the tank's trail of ownership? I cannot imagine custody of a tank is something that just passes from hand to hand.
@@NMMV_USA I understand now. Someone else I work with looked into the history of the tank and he was able to clarify the ownership history. Sorry to hear you're getting harassed now on behalf of people who never even owned it. They tried this against Ropkey back in 2007 too. The journo pushing the story is just an outrage merchant. Anyway, while I've got you here, there's something I wanted to make sure you know. The Japanese tank you have in your museum that's labeled as a Type 97 Te-Ke Prototype, it's actually a Type 97 Chemical Vehicle. They were built on the basis of the Te-Ke, but incorporating Type 94 TK parts. There was about 100~150 of them built, and yours is the last known to exist.
@@dogstar7 "I cannot imagine custody of a tank is something that just passes from hand to hand." It kind of does. Legally speaking a tank with no weapons is no different to a tractor. Jack Moody was the original owner of the tank who bought it as surplus. It was sold when it was still on display at the VFW in Virginia, which is odd, but it's apparently what happened. It seems that Moody used $5000 dollars collected from the people of Nitro to pay for the tank, in return for allowing the town to display it. When he died his sons inherited ownership of it, they removed it from Nitro (the so-called theft) and sold it to Fred Ropkey. The 2007 newspaper article written the last time they claimed the tank was stolen indicates Ropkey had the surplus purchase paperwork that proved Moody owned it.
I saw on the News that 1917 M1 tank may have been stolen about 20 years ago from the city of Nitro, West Virginia, Historical Commission and they want it back. Any comment ?
@@braddl9442 Maybe because it's not the same tank? Regardless the town of Nitro never realistically "owned" it, and their mayor wants nothing to do with it. So, if anyone is to blame for this confusing mess it's Moody's sons that moved it to begin with.
Things are never quite what they seem. Gray areas are usually pretty common in stories like this. I would think all parties involved would like to get the facts straightened out regarding this tank. The gentleman in Nitro seems very reasonable to me , so at the very least someone at the museum should reach out and communicate the details of how the museums tank ( especially if it’s a different example) came into the museums possession so he can at least move on from this ( yes I read your explanation). The tank in Nitro went somewhere. Maybe it’s not this tank in the video, but a civil and kind critical thinker should at least give Mr. Wills a personal response..
The museum was the highlight of our trip out west 3 years ago. Yellowstone was great but finding the museum that had just opened outside of Dubois was was the best. Thanks for keeping our history alive. I let everyone I come in contact with know about the Simpson rifle that you have on display.
The Patton Museum in Ft Knox had a fully operational one when I was a kid. Got to see it run every 4th of July. This one belongs to a Museum in Nitro West Virginia.
Thank you for the time and effort to share your knowledge in such a lively and enjoyable fashion! And congrats to your new addition to your collection 🎉
Another great video sharing incredible items in a fantastic collection! Thank you, Dan Stark. A primary use of the steel face mask was to protect the wearer from "spalling" when all the hatches were closed. With the primitive steel used in early tanks, rifle shot impacts could blast away little bits of steel on the inside of the tank, even without penetrating. It's pretty tough to continue with a severe laceration to the face, and nearly impossible if you take a wound to the eye. It's also one of the reasons for the leather Jerkin - torso defense against spalling - historically similar to primitive leather armor against a sword blade. This is fantastic content, so happy to have found it!
Thank you for sharing. Please continue your TH-cam series. I came to your museum a year ago and plan to come again. Not all of us can collect such pieces but your ability to share is invaluable.
What a fantastic museum. You sir have done a great service for this country. We tank fans will forever be in debt to you and your staff. I hope to visit your Museum soon. Thank you for these efforts. Wow just Wow!
I'm an old Cavalryman, and am part of a bunch of my mates that were (and are) AFV afficionados. We had an exclusive day in the Armor & Cavalry Collection at Ft Moore, GA and thought we had died and gone to tanker heaven. I think we need to raise our sights and get out to Wyoming! Dan's enthusiasm is the same as we share as men that lived and fought in these sorts of armored beasts.
There is a lot of focus on the "big star" tanks like the Tiger or something like the T28 or a KV2. But these M1917 are also rare and unique in their own right, perhaps even more so than the popular ones.
8 หลายเดือนก่อน +4
Nice Video. I was wondering how much that tank cost :) Compared to a Panther or even Tiger that is even relatively "cheap". In any case it is nice for your museum to have the beginning of american tanks on display.
another visual difference between the ft17 and m1917 are the shape of the angled plates on either side of the drivers top hatch cover. on the ft theyre roughly square, on the m1917 theyre triangular. and the ft (and presumably the m1917) were the heaviest armored entente tanks with 22mm frontal armor. other entente tanks had between 8 to 16mm. great artifacts. awesome to see such a running survivor! now all you need is a ford 3ton m1918!
In 1932 Patton used some M1917 tanks to disperse the "Bonus Army" of veterans in DC. I don't remember how much shooting there was but could it be possible that this tank was used in that event and some of the angry veterans took a few shots at it?
Hello Mr. Starks, thank you for sharing this news and providing us with a great mini history lesson. I've been privileged to visit the NMMV from my home in SLC on three occasions since October 2021. Each time I go, I spend an entire day and marvel at your vision and generosity. Every visit, it seems you have expanded the museum substantially in terms of new exhibits, design, and curation. NMMV is a national treasure. When the snow begins to melt, I'm looking forward to seeing the rehabilitation and restoration facility and this groundbreaking early tank. Patton just might have sat in that same seat (if he had a shoehorn for his ~6'1" frame).
There is an unrestored FT17 in the museum of the National WW1 Memorial in Kansas City, MO. It was found in a scrap yard in Iran (I believe), and it bears battle damage in the form of shell holes from the artillery that knocked it out, but otherwise is in remarkably-solid shape. The first time I saw it up-close, I was surprised by how large it really does; in old photos, they don't look much bigger than golf carts.
20:00 Hi Dan, these markings are very similar to the French markings on their Renault FT, with some variation. The playing card suits would denote the section (platoon in this case) while the background geometric shape would determine company. The Americans would add onto this marking system by including a number which would denote the specific tank in the platoon. So the M1917 here is the 7th tank in 1st platoon, 3rd company. The US Tank Corps symbols have the Ace of Spades denoting 1st platoon while the background diamond denotes 3rd company. A neat way to tell the difference between an American operated Renault FT and a French Renault FT is through these markings as American FTs would have their markings on the turret while French FTs would only have their markings on the two rear plates on the hull. Loved the museum when I was there as an intern, and will definitely come back soon now that you got a variant of my favorite tank. - Jaycee
Good video. Only sugestion I have. Slow down, especialy the younger fellow. If he is not used to talking on video, it just may just come more natural as he gets more expierence.
Great video! But I have to disagree in a particular and perhaps petty way, that this was the first American manufactured tank. I consider it to be the Ford 3 ton M1918. The reason I think so is simply that it was completely designed independently though obviously partially inspired by the ft, while the m1917 is just an ft converted to standard measurements with very little detail changes and power plant. In another way it's like 2 variants of a leopard, 1 to fit German needs 1 to fit American (we considered a leopard before the m1) and a leopard vs an Abrahams. Obviously that's not the most accurate analogy but it gets the point across. MBTs are very similar to each other compared to ww1 tanks.
Give the town of Nitro back their tank you thief. There is absolutely no way a PROPERLY run museum would not have done a background check on all acquisitions. The fact that you are refusing all contact with the town when they try to reach out is atrocious.
Fancy meeting you here, Phil. Utah Dave (DavidK7324) from the WW2TV sidebar. Have you been able to visit the NMMV? If not, come to SLC and I'll take you!
A lot of tanks that were gifted to citys after WW2 where "acquired" after cities failed to maintain the gifted tanks , that usually sat outside in the weather , so they may ght not be as public but at least they are getting better care for a historical vehicle.
some pigeons were decorated with the Dickin Medal for their service, but one US pigeon named Cher Ami received the Croix de Guerre for his heroic service in WWI that included delivering a message from the Lost Battalion, although he had been severely injured.
While I hate to critique, the .30 mg for M1917 was definitely not the M1919 browning since it was not developed until 1919. It started out with the Marlin Rockwell M1917 tank mg.
Actually, John Browning finished the prototype for the Browning Machine Tank Machine Gun, Model of 1919 in September of 1918, before WWI ended. This work took place at Colt's Hartford, CT facility. By September 25th it was being tested by Capt. John S. Butler at the new Tank Training Center at "Camp Colt" (near Gettysburg) before various U.S and British tank officers. Lt. Cols Julian S. Hatcher and Bascom Little of the War Dept. formally adopted it on September 30th, and an immediate Dept. conference produced an order to New England Westinghouse to produce between 1000 and 3000 Tank Machine Guns by year's end. Browning himself visited the Locomobile Company to inspect their new Mark VIII tank, and by October the mounting and accessories were being drawn up. First production guns were ready by November 16th and the fittings for the 1917 Tank were to be ready within three weeks. Just missed the war, of course. The info provided comes from Department records as told in Dolf Goldsmith's The Browning Machine Gun Vol. I.
@@NMMV_USAI read the comment at the top. It is a lame attempt at justifying keeping what appears to be stolen property. The tank was basically stolen, you overpaid for it and are now in possession of property that looks to rightfully belong to Nitro. But whatever let’s you sleep at night I guess…
@@ASennaFan I am puzzled that it does not mean anything to you that Nitro itself says it doesn’t own the tank, has never owned the tank and doesn’t want it. Did you see in the replies that Jack Moody owned the tank and that when he died, his sons sold it to Fred Ropkey. With your comprehension and analytical skills, you must struggle. Did you vote for Biden?
@@ASennaFan Blame the Nitro major for allowing it to be moved and the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It's their fault they lost it to begin with, shunning someone that paid actual money for something to display make no sense and gets nothing accomplished.
Yes, those bullet pock marks are from steel core rifle bullets. This tank was made at a time prior to Brinel hardness testing. So, the only way for a maker to prove the armor was "bullet-proof" was to shoot each plate, or casting. and since the M1917 is made up of riveted plates on a frame, every plate had to be shot in order to pass before being excepted for use.
@@NMMV_USA you are very welcome. it is wonderful to see that M1917 so well preserved for all to enjoy. FYI, of note, Camp Roberts in California is named for WWI American tank driver (French built FT) Corporal Harold W. Roberts, a World War I Medal of Honor recipient who perished saving the tanks commander when their tank fell into a 10-foot-deep water filled shell crater. Good luck.
It would be... Interesting I would say, to be rolling slowly along barely able to see out or see what you're doing inside or hear anything around you. All while you're attracting all the rifle fire in the world.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
I was on the team at Ropkeys that restored the M1917 would be glad to give you all the info I have . I will leave an email and voice message on the museum contacts. Will in Indiana
The British "Heavy" tanks had no turrets by design, it was impractical to have a turreted tank that could use an un-ditching beam. They were superior to light tanks in trench crossing capability and crushing barbed wire. light tanks were simple incapable of crossing no man's land until heavy tanks broke the German front lines. Only after this did light tanks become usable so respect all the AFVs of WW1 used correctly for their intended purpose.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
Muddy "ownership" be damned. This relic belongs in a museum and everyone here knows it. It's far better off indoors on display where it can educate future generations rather than in some grass lawn in front of a town square rotting away.
Shame on you for spreading a false rumor. See comment at top above along with replies from people who heard the same roar years ago when it was dispelled the first time. If you have integrity, you will retract now that you know the truth. Nitro itself say it doesn’t own the tank, never owned it, and doesn’t want it.
You should read their explanation, and that lawsuit happens this museum is likely going to win, considering they have all the documentation for it and the harassment being tossed their way because of the lack of information the journalists did, the town of Nitro never "owned" it and its mayor doesn't want it back, if you're looking for someone to blame, go after the town of Nitro's at time major or the Moody's sons that moved it to begin with. Not someone that actually paid for a lot of money to put something on display.
Shame on you for repeating a false rumor, especially after all correct facts have been published. Nitro acknowledges it doesn’t own the tank, never did, and doesn’t claim it. The same rumor was disproven in 2007.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
![เปิดบ้าน พี่ตูน Bodyslam หลังใหม่คนแรก ที่ภูเก็ต l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/flFwcmyDQSk/mqdefault.jpg)
They say any publicity is good publicity, so thank you Kennie Bass for your article about Nitro, West Virginia, the Arlington VFW, and a WWI tank. We appreciate having more people find out about the National Museum of Military Vehicles and watch one of our TH-cam videos. With respect to the details of the article, they make no sense and have no bearing on our museum. Mr. Bass says in his article that a VFW in Arlington, Virginia got a tank on loan from the U. S. Gov’t. As people who collect military vehicles know, any vehicles loaned by the U.S. Gov’t to a private party are done under loan documents that are temporary, subject to ongoing Gov’t audit, and require return to the gov’t at the end of the loan. A borrower has no rights to transfer a loaned vehicle to another party. I bought my M1917 tank from a company in The Netherlands with all appropriate documentation as one might imagine for a purchase of more than $1.2 million. How anyone not involved in the transaction and who has no knowledge of the documentation could misconstrue that as a theft is beyond me. I have never been to Nitro and have no idea if Nitro had a tank up until 19 years ago or if that tank has anything to do with mine. If the story is true and legitimate, Nitro would have loan documents from the U.S. Gov’t transferring rights to Nitro. I assume no such document exists or Mr. Bass would have mentioned it. The article says Nitro doesn’t own a WWI tank, never owned it, and doesn’t want it. As a critical thinker, it seems to me that some guy who has no standing, no authority, and very little first hand information about critical facts saw my TH-cam video along with me saying how much I paid for it. He then reached out to me to say that although he doesn’t own the tank, now that he sees what I paid for it, he would like to discuss a “mutually beneficial arrangement”. Is this an attempt at extortion? I don’t know but I have no interest in responding. This same individual then stirs up an investigative reporter. If everything the reporter says in the article is accurate, Nitro had a tank 19 years ago it didn’t own and did not receive legally. It agreed to have someone remove it for 30 days and then return it. When the agreement was broken, that began tolling the one (or two?) year statute of limitations under West Virginia law. For reasons not known to me, Nitro opted not to pursue a claim ( No legal basis? Some new agreement consummated? Money subsequently paid? Gov’t release to the buyer? Other?) More importantly, we all are about to vote in a national election. To those of you who left hostile comments after reading Mr. Bass ‘s article, I hope you put more critical thinking into your vote than you did into your comment. At the National Museum of Military Vehicles, we are educating next generations on the history of Anerican freedom while making everyday both Veterans Day and Memorial Day. The M1917 tank I bought for slightly more than $1.2 million is right where it should be to help advance our mission.
I don't give any credence to the "stolen tank" story, but I have a question. You said you bought this M1917 from a company in the Netherlands, I presume it's that one restoration company. But this tank has the exact same camouflage pattern as the one that was at the Ropkey Armor Museum and then later the House of Tanks; it's otherwise completely identical, so it's definitely the same tank. Do you mean that Fred Ropkey is the one who bought it from the Netherlands?
@@HaroldBiondo No - I bought the tank from B.A.I.V.
@@HaroldBiondo Interesting observation. The explaination above talks about whether or not Nitro has documents. Then follows a lot of specultion as to the disposition of the tank after it wasn't returned to the town. Wasn't the government's release to the Nitro buyer copied in the documentation of the tank's trail of ownership? I cannot imagine custody of a tank is something that just passes from hand to hand.
@@NMMV_USA I understand now. Someone else I work with looked into the history of the tank and he was able to clarify the ownership history. Sorry to hear you're getting harassed now on behalf of people who never even owned it. They tried this against Ropkey back in 2007 too. The journo pushing the story is just an outrage merchant.
Anyway, while I've got you here, there's something I wanted to make sure you know. The Japanese tank you have in your museum that's labeled as a Type 97 Te-Ke Prototype, it's actually a Type 97 Chemical Vehicle. They were built on the basis of the Te-Ke, but incorporating Type 94 TK parts. There was about 100~150 of them built, and yours is the last known to exist.
@@dogstar7 "I cannot imagine custody of a tank is something that just passes from hand to hand." It kind of does. Legally speaking a tank with no weapons is no different to a tractor. Jack Moody was the original owner of the tank who bought it as surplus. It was sold when it was still on display at the VFW in Virginia, which is odd, but it's apparently what happened. It seems that Moody used $5000 dollars collected from the people of Nitro to pay for the tank, in return for allowing the town to display it. When he died his sons inherited ownership of it, they removed it from Nitro (the so-called theft) and sold it to Fred Ropkey. The 2007 newspaper article written the last time they claimed the tank was stolen indicates Ropkey had the surplus purchase paperwork that proved Moody owned it.
I saw on the News that 1917 M1 tank may have been stolen about 20 years ago from the city of Nitro, West Virginia, Historical Commission and they want it back. Any comment ?
Please see comment at top.
@@NMMV_USA Papers can be faked. Why did you not respond to this BEFORE the story went live. If you had such a clean history for the tank.
@@braddl9442because they are lying through their teeth to save their 1.2 million he seemed pretty adamant to flex
@@braddl9442 Maybe because it's not the same tank? Regardless the town of Nitro never realistically "owned" it, and their mayor wants nothing to do with it. So, if anyone is to blame for this confusing mess it's Moody's sons that moved it to begin with.
Things are never quite what they seem. Gray areas are usually pretty common in stories like this. I would think all parties involved would like to get the facts straightened out regarding this tank. The gentleman in Nitro seems very reasonable to me , so at the very least someone at the museum should reach out and communicate the details of how the museums tank ( especially if it’s a different example) came into the museums possession so he can at least move on from this ( yes I read your explanation). The tank in Nitro went somewhere. Maybe it’s not this tank in the video, but a civil and kind critical thinker should at least give Mr. Wills a personal response..
I agree, too many other people in the comments harassing the museum without understand their side of the story and jumping to conclusions.
Can’t wait to visit the museum and see the M1917 in person. Keep up the great work!!!
The museum was the highlight of our trip out west 3 years ago. Yellowstone was great but finding the museum that had just opened outside of Dubois was was the best. Thanks for keeping our history alive. I let everyone I come in contact with know about the Simpson rifle that you have on display.
I've seen the M1917 at the Pennsylvania Military Museum. Tiny doesn't do these machines justice. It's hard to fathom to go to war in one.
No seats, barely any armor, and what would become "pop guns". Count me out, I ain't got cajones that big. I'll take my DU and 120.
The Patton Museum in Ft Knox had a fully operational one when I was a kid. Got to see it run every 4th of July. This one belongs to a Museum in Nitro West Virginia.
Thank you for the time and effort to share your knowledge in such a lively and enjoyable fashion! And congrats to your new addition to your collection 🎉
I am lucky enough to have played with that tank when Fred had it. He had an amazing collection.
Small world.
Another great video sharing incredible items in a fantastic collection! Thank you, Dan Stark. A primary use of the steel face mask was to protect the wearer from "spalling" when all the hatches were closed. With the primitive steel used in early tanks, rifle shot impacts could blast away little bits of steel on the inside of the tank, even without penetrating. It's pretty tough to continue with a severe laceration to the face, and nearly impossible if you take a wound to the eye. It's also one of the reasons for the leather Jerkin - torso defense against spalling - historically similar to primitive leather armor against a sword blade. This is fantastic content, so happy to have found it!
Thank you for sharing. Please continue your TH-cam series. I came to your museum a year ago and plan to come again. Not all of us can collect such pieces but your ability to share is invaluable.
Hey bud how about giving this tank back to Nitro west Virginia
The rumor is false. Please see info at top.
Congratulations on your latest and greatest acquisition! I look forward to seeing it on my next visit to Dubois. Thank you for sharing!
What a fantastic museum. You sir have done a great service for this country. We tank fans will forever be in debt to you and your staff. I hope to visit your Museum soon. Thank you for these efforts. Wow just Wow!
I'm an old Cavalryman, and am part of a bunch of my mates that were (and are) AFV afficionados. We had an exclusive day in the Armor & Cavalry Collection at Ft Moore, GA and thought we had died and gone to tanker heaven. I think we need to raise our sights and get out to Wyoming! Dan's enthusiasm is the same as we share as men that lived and fought in these sorts of armored beasts.
What a gem, beautifully restored and a great presentation video. Thanks
Very cool, what a treasure. Thanks for sharing it by making the video.
Will be visiting you with my grandsons this summer. Can't wait. My dad drove tanks in Korea.
There is a lot of focus on the "big star" tanks like the Tiger or something like the T28 or a KV2. But these M1917 are also rare and unique in their own right, perhaps even more so than the popular ones.
Nice Video. I was wondering how much that tank cost :) Compared to a Panther or even Tiger that is even relatively "cheap". In any case it is nice for your museum to have the beginning of american tanks on display.
great presentation. cant wait to get up there sometime to see the musuem.
Really great tank, and the work you're doing there is really impressive!!!
That is impressive :)
Hope to get out to the museum again some time soon!
I believe that mask was for spall protection, to be worn inside the tank.
Head slap. Sure. You have to be correct.
another visual difference between the ft17 and m1917 are the shape of the angled plates on either side of the drivers top hatch cover. on the ft theyre roughly square, on the m1917 theyre triangular.
and the ft (and presumably the m1917) were the heaviest armored entente tanks with 22mm frontal armor. other entente tanks had between 8 to 16mm.
great artifacts. awesome to see such a running survivor!
now all you need is a ford 3ton m1918!
Nothing like expertise. Thx for the additional info.
In 1932 Patton used some M1917 tanks to disperse the "Bonus Army" of veterans in DC. I don't remember how much shooting there was but could it be possible that this tank was used in that event and some of the angry veterans took a few shots at it?
Hello Mr. Starks, thank you for sharing this news and providing us with a great mini history lesson. I've been privileged to visit the NMMV from my home in SLC on three occasions since October 2021. Each time I go, I spend an entire day and marvel at your vision and generosity. Every visit, it seems you have expanded the museum substantially in terms of new exhibits, design, and curation. NMMV is a national treasure. When the snow begins to melt, I'm looking forward to seeing the rehabilitation and restoration facility and this groundbreaking early tank. Patton just might have sat in that same seat (if he had a shoehorn for his ~6'1" frame).
There is an unrestored FT17 in the museum of the National WW1 Memorial in Kansas City, MO. It was found in a scrap yard in Iran (I believe), and it bears battle damage in the form of shell holes from the artillery that knocked it out, but otherwise is in remarkably-solid shape. The first time I saw it up-close, I was surprised by how large it really does; in old photos, they don't look much bigger than golf carts.
20:00 Hi Dan, these markings are very similar to the French markings on their Renault FT, with some variation. The playing card suits would denote the section (platoon in this case) while the background geometric shape would determine company. The Americans would add onto this marking system by including a number which would denote the specific tank in the platoon. So the M1917 here is the 7th tank in 1st platoon, 3rd company. The US Tank Corps symbols have the Ace of Spades denoting 1st platoon while the background diamond denotes 3rd company. A neat way to tell the difference between an American operated Renault FT and a French Renault FT is through these markings as American FTs would have their markings on the turret while French FTs would only have their markings on the two rear plates on the hull. Loved the museum when I was there as an intern, and will definitely come back soon now that you got a variant of my favorite tank.
- Jaycee
Great info Jaycee. Thx.
Good video. Only sugestion I have. Slow down, especialy the younger fellow. If he is not used to talking on video, it just may just come more natural as he gets more expierence.
One of my top ten tanks. All "tanks' followed this set up, a turret.
Great video! But I have to disagree in a particular and perhaps petty way, that this was the first American manufactured tank. I consider it to be the Ford 3 ton M1918. The reason I think so is simply that it was completely designed independently though obviously partially inspired by the ft, while the m1917 is just an ft converted to standard measurements with very little detail changes and power plant. In another way it's like 2 variants of a leopard, 1 to fit German needs 1 to fit American (we considered a leopard before the m1) and a leopard vs an Abrahams. Obviously that's not the most accurate analogy but it gets the point across. MBTs are very similar to each other compared to ww1 tanks.
please talk about the track/suspension
Give the town of Nitro back their tank you thief. There is absolutely no way a PROPERLY run museum would not have done a background check on all acquisitions. The fact that you are refusing all contact with the town when they try to reach out is atrocious.
Your info is wrong. Please see comment at top.
Love the pigeon SOP
Where is the museum located? Country, state ?
Wyoming, U.S. 80 miles east of Jackson Hole. Near Yellowstone, Grand Tetons, and lots of other attractions to make a trip worthwhile. See NMMV.org.
Great explanation and walkaround.
Fancy meeting you here, Phil. Utah Dave (DavidK7324) from the WW2TV sidebar. Have you been able to visit the NMMV? If not, come to SLC and I'll take you!
@@davidk7324 Yo Dave from Woody. This is a great museum. Bit stuck in the UK sadly, but thank you
It’s sad that this tank was obtained under questionable circumstances from Nitro, WV prior to your ownership.
Your info is wrong. Please see comment at top.
Seems like you bought a Stolen Tank which is rightly owned by Nitro, WV
The rumor is false. Please see comment at top.
Where is this museum?
Dubois, Wyoming. 80 miles east of Jackson Hole. See NMMV.org.
Looks like some pretty shady dealing was done to get this tank.
Please see comment immediately below.
Thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿
Did you get some scorpion tanks from Mr. Brad a year or so ago?
A lot of tanks that were gifted to citys after WW2 where "acquired" after cities failed to maintain the gifted tanks , that usually sat outside in the weather , so they may ght not be as public but at least they are getting better care for a historical vehicle.
That M1917 tank was stolen from a museum in Nitro, West Virginia. You need to return it.
Your info is wrong. Please see comment at top.
.
Will someone ID the model number of the WWII cargo trucks that had a lift bed used to load/unload C-54's?
I know forklifts were used at some bases.
some pigeons were decorated with the Dickin Medal for their service, but one US pigeon named Cher Ami received the Croix de Guerre for his heroic service in WWI that included delivering a message from the Lost Battalion, although he had been severely injured.
#STOLEN
RETURN TO Nitro,West Virginia the rightful owner
Your Museum should be ashamed!!!!!!!!!!!
Your info is wrong. Please see comment at top.
How many other tanks in your collection are stolen? Give Nitro West Virginia back their tank.
The rumor is false. Please see comment at top.
@@NMMV_USA okay 👍
I wanted to drive a tank but my Staff Sergeant said I was too big at 6’7”… but it’s how he said it that was funny.
While I hate to critique, the .30 mg for M1917 was definitely not the M1919 browning since it was not developed until 1919. It started out with the Marlin Rockwell M1917 tank mg.
Thank you for the correction. Makes sense of course.
Actually, John Browning finished the prototype for the Browning Machine Tank Machine Gun, Model of 1919 in September of 1918, before WWI ended. This work took place at Colt's Hartford, CT facility. By September 25th it was being tested by Capt. John S. Butler at the new Tank Training Center at "Camp Colt" (near Gettysburg) before various U.S and British tank officers. Lt. Cols Julian S. Hatcher and Bascom Little of the War Dept. formally adopted it on September 30th, and an immediate Dept. conference produced an order to New England Westinghouse to produce between 1000 and 3000 Tank Machine Guns by year's end. Browning himself visited the Locomobile Company to inspect their new Mark VIII tank, and by October the mounting and accessories were being drawn up. First production guns were ready by November 16th and the fittings for the 1917 Tank were to be ready within three weeks. Just missed the war, of course. The info provided comes from Department records as told in Dolf Goldsmith's The Browning Machine Gun Vol. I.
I got to climb into a 1917 at the Cantigny museum in Wheaton, IL. They have a huge display at Cantigny
Give the tank back to Nitro.
The rumor is false. Please see info at top.
Give them their tank back. Its not yours and you have no right to display it. Give it back. You bought stolen property and you need to make it right.
The rumor is false. Please see comment at top.
@@NMMV_USAI read the comment at the top. It is a lame attempt at justifying keeping what appears to be stolen property. The tank was basically stolen, you overpaid for it and are now in possession of property that looks to rightfully belong to Nitro. But whatever let’s you sleep at night I guess…
@@ASennaFan I am puzzled that it does not mean anything to you that Nitro itself says it doesn’t own the tank, has never owned the tank and doesn’t want it. Did you see in the replies that Jack Moody owned the tank and that when he died, his sons sold it to Fred Ropkey. With your comprehension and analytical skills, you must struggle. Did you vote for Biden?
@@ASennaFan Blame the Nitro major for allowing it to be moved and the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It's their fault they lost it to begin with, shunning someone that paid actual money for something to display make no sense and gets nothing accomplished.
Glad you love stolen property
Yes, those bullet pock marks are from steel core rifle bullets. This tank was made at a time prior to Brinel hardness testing. So, the only way for a maker to prove the armor was "bullet-proof" was to shoot each plate, or casting. and since the M1917 is made up of riveted plates on a frame, every plate had to be shot in order to pass before being excepted for use.
very interesting. Thank you.
@@NMMV_USA you are very welcome. it is wonderful to see that M1917 so well preserved for all to enjoy. FYI, of note, Camp Roberts in California is named for WWI American tank driver (French built FT) Corporal Harold W. Roberts, a World War I Medal of Honor recipient who perished saving the tanks commander when their tank fell into a 10-foot-deep water filled shell crater. Good luck.
keep your info coming. I am happy to get smarter. Dan Starks@@ditzydoo4378
It would be... Interesting I would say, to be rolling slowly along barely able to see out or see what you're doing inside or hear anything around you. All while you're attracting all the rifle fire in the world.
That tank belongs to Nitro WV. How about negotiating its return!
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
I was on the team at Ropkeys that restored the M1917 would be glad to give you all the info I have . I will leave an email and voice message on the museum contacts. Will in Indiana
The British "Heavy" tanks had no turrets by design, it was impractical to have a turreted tank that could use an un-ditching beam. They were superior to light tanks in trench crossing capability and crushing barbed wire. light tanks were simple incapable of crossing no man's land until heavy tanks broke the German front lines. Only after this did light tanks become usable so respect all the AFVs of WW1 used correctly for their intended purpose.
Bruh,just give their tank back.
Dude - read the article and comments above again. Nitro acknowledges it doesn’t own the tank, never did, and doesn’t want it. Be fair here.
Will The Chieftain fit in that?
Give it back, no excuses.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
Muddy "ownership" be damned. This relic belongs in a museum and everyone here knows it. It's far better off indoors on display where it can educate future generations rather than in some grass lawn in front of a town square rotting away.
West Virginia never found?
Shame on you for spreading a false rumor. See comment at top above along with replies from people who heard the same roar years ago when it was dispelled the first time. If you have integrity, you will retract now that you know the truth. Nitro itself say it doesn’t own the tank, never owned it, and doesn’t want it.
Hey, this tank is stolen!
The rumor is false. Please see comment at top.
Boycott the Museum
Your info is wrong. Please see comment at top.
Awful proud to show off stolen property.
Please see comment below from the museum.
WHO ELSE IS HERE FOR THE STOLEN TANK DRAMA! 🍿 😃 😂
So you just gonna flex a stolen vehicle on the internet? I smell a wild lawsuit.
You should read their explanation, and that lawsuit happens this museum is likely going to win, considering they have all the documentation for it and the harassment being tossed their way because of the lack of information the journalists did, the town of Nitro never "owned" it and its mayor doesn't want it back, if you're looking for someone to blame, go after the town of Nitro's at time major or the Moody's sons that moved it to begin with. Not someone that actually paid for a lot of money to put something on display.
Displaying a stolen tank poor taste deliver it back to nitro or us government
Shame on you for repeating a false rumor, especially after all correct facts have been published. Nitro acknowledges it doesn’t own the tank, never did, and doesn’t claim it. The same rumor was disproven in 2007.
It's the stolen tank
Read up. It was not stolen. Nitro itself acknowledges this. Stop spreading falsehoods.
Wow, what an amazing M1917 tank, too bad it's stolen from Nitro.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
And poor Nitro WV is without their tank.
They literally said it's not the same tank, also blame the Moody sons for moving it and not bringing it back. It shouldn't have been lost to begin with.
Who is They???