Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: Light Tank T1E2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- T1E2 is the third variant of a series of light tanks which the US Army ordered in the late 1920s in order to explore the technical capabilities of tanks a decade after WW1.
Thanks to the US Army's Ordnance Collection and the financial support from Patreons, merchandise purchasors, or other direct donations for making the trip possible.
Merchandise (The carousel below seems dodgy)
the-chieftains...
Public facebook page:
/ thechieftainarmor
Financial donations:
Patreon: / the_chieftain
Direct Paypal: paypal.me/thec...
I’m delighted to find that what looks like a metal cap just sitting loosely on top of the turret is in fact a metal cap just sitting loosely on top of the turret.
Charming!
He did mention that they didn't know how to build tanks yet at the time.
Just like a lid for a old water well made with a steel cribbing, got 2 wells like that at the farm 🚜
Like many naval gun mounts
@@jackdarbyshire5888 some random old tank engineer, to his boss/coworker.
hes onto us.
Prototype blowout panel
A tank so old the Browning .50 caliber was a legitimate anti-tank weapon... and wasn't even the Ma Deuce yet, but the M1921. Still beats an FT-17.
beat at what?
@@MrQ454 the longer 37 would have marginally better antitank performance and it seems a little less cramped in general, but I wouldn't want to go into battle in either vehicle
Your choice was this or walk
You'd be surprised by the much more modern vehicles that are quite vulnerable to .50 Caliber fire.
A lot of APCs were/are designed to protect you from .30 cal and not much above..
@@OGPatriot03 Usually 12.7 to 20 mm cannon fire from the front at 500 m and 5.56 mm at the sides^^
Honestly, considering the age, that thing is in great shape. A few months with a media blaster and a bunch of paint and she would really look good. I suspect making it run and drive would be a monstrous project with every bit needing custom machining to replace corroded parts, but the main structures haven't gone too far at all.
Well, it looks small enough to fully submerge it in rust remover for a few days, would make any restoration work a lot easier.
@@Dr_V "I need the biggest Ultrasonic Bath you have... no, that's too big"
@@wraithcadmus LoL Hans Moleman, The Simpsons...
I'm not so sure that it would be all that much work to get it running and driving once the excess paint was fixed. A lot of the work would be freeing the control linkages, and finding out where to put oil in the transmission. But what I could see of the engine looked to be in remarkably good condition.
@@lwilton Bearings and ensuring everything is free could be a bear though. Watching other tank restoration videos it is a lot of slow disassembly (for documentation and to figure out how it all works) and then making all the parts required. I doubt there is much "new old stock" left for a machine like this.
When I was a kid my dad made me a tank out of an old washer/dryer set. He bolted the outer shells together to form the hull and the washing drum placed on top for the turret and old car tire rims for the road wheels. (No engine. It was just for play). It looked remarkably like this vehicle so I guess the US Army’s first tank was something you could build in your back yard lol.
That sounds freaking badass. No sarcasm, that'd be awesome for a kid to have. How "functional" was it? I.e. could the turret turn? Were there buttons and switches for you to play with? Did the gun "work?"
Also, kudos to your dad for building that for you. I hope that tank saw a lot of action during its "service history."
Wholesome dad
Thanks for sharing that memory Bryan. I am not a dad yet... But I filed your dad's idea away for the future. God will, my kids one day will owe you for having similar memories.
@@danielhaikkila3056 I hope you do that for them, or something similar. I'm sure you'll make a great dad one day!
Amazing that the American standard for tank comfort comes from the very first begining
If you are going to drive a tank across New Mexico, might as well do it in relative comfort.
Looks like decent space and even a geared turret, only failure is the lack of a firewall for the driver. Must be hard having driving around with a fire place in between your legs
@@JoshuaC923 maybe but I've seen much more recent tanks that had the firewall taken out so it's not necessary a gaurantee
@@JoshuaC923 Kept your nuts warm lol
@@JoshuaC923 Yeah, it very much looks like the driver was practically straddling the engine
The sling seat might also serve as a back rest when seating in the old fashioned formed steel tractor seat.
Double purpose design - such forward thinking.
The Chieftain: “I guess you’ll have to change gear by ear” (19:10)
Driver: Well, I guess it’s ok there’s no firewall, and I’m currently wrapping myself around the engine
This was less of a tour and more of an archaeology dig. I'm sure the museum is happy that you showed interest. Thanks for giving this ancient vehicle its due.
Gonna take a crane, some chains, a lot of PB Blaster, and some courage to get this thing restored to "everything hinges and swings open properly" condition.
That's okay, they have armor students to do the work.
They just need Drachinifel's laser rust stripper. It did an amazing job on a 20mm Oerlikon.
Even if it never runs, there will hopefully be a full restoration of the interior, which would of course beg for a followup video.
That was sooooooooooo awesome! Thank you! I see the Elefant back there! Any chance of a inside of that one? I cannot believe this is closed to the public! So many one of a kind vehicles!
Yes, PLEASE? Ferdinand/Elefant is my favorite armor of all!!!!!!
@@tb7771 The two sad things about the old Ferdinand/ Elephant, is that first of all, they only ever produced ninety of them ... And..
Reliability. These things were some of the most over engineered, and mostly because of this, highly unreliable examples of a Tank Destroyer every to be fielded by any side in the War. Most of the reason for this, as the Chieftain himself has explained in the past, was the Petrol/Electric drivetrain. In other words, to move the vehicle forward, the petrol engine had to then power an electric motor to turn pull the vehicle forward. Why? Ferdinand Porch thought it was a piece of genius, and had the backing of some guy named Adolf something or the other ... Hitler, that's right, a guy named Adolf Hitler was his major backer all the way through, with this untested Petrol/Electric drive train.
AH got sold a lot of stuff, think he was an easy sell
@@frenzalrhomb6919 yes you are correct. I am aware of the history of it. It does not hinder the fact that I find it asteticly pleasing as well as the Jagdtiger. No need to fill me in on its history as I am well read on it as well.
@@frenzalrhomb6919 Nevertheless it had a high kill ratio.
I hope you get the chance to do a tour of a farming museum that has Caterpiller Tractors/Bulldozers in it because I think that you would see a lot of trading ideas from the late 1910s early 1920s tank Tracks from the heavy industry world. This design for the track looks very similar to them.
The German A7V used track systems from the Holt Caterpillar tractor as did the French Saint Charmond series.
Both had problems with excessive overhangs but that was unrelated to the underlying track system.
A couple of rare coast artillery weapons are visible in the background. On a pedestal mount is the 3-inch gun M1903. These were deployed in numerous US coastal forts. On a wheeled carriage is a 6-inch gun, either M1903 or M1905 on the M1917 carriage. These were initially at coastal forts until the US entered WWI, then about 72 of them were removed from the forts and remounted on wheeled carriages for use on the Western Front. They equipped three Coast Artillery regiments in France, but saw no action because these units didn't complete training in time for the Armistice. The vast majority of these were in storage between the wars, then reused on new high-angle mountings in WWII coastal batteries. However, one was preserved on the WWI field carriage for the Ordnance Corps museum.
thank you
There's also a turreted 1928 Christie combat car on wheels in the background at the end. Hope the Big Chief takes us on a tour of it!
Does anybody know where the chieftain was when he did this video? Armour museum at Ft. BENNING?
@@harrisonlewis6853 Sorry, my first reply to you (which I deleted) was in error. At the 22:00 point Chieftain mentions that it's at the US Army Ordnance Collection, Fort Lee, VA. Not open to the public, BS I know. He mentions that if you have base access you can knock on the door and see if they let you in. Fort Lee is where the majority of the collection from Aberdeen Proving Ground ended up.
@@robdgaming : Thank you. I had heard that Ft. Knox armor was transfer to Benning. I didn't know where Aberdeen had gone.
You asked what the Army was doing with the T1E2 in January of 1945. I can only hazard a guess, but I wonder if there isn't some training film out there where it makes an appearance as a Japanese tank, maybe a Chi-Ha? It's a wild guess, but it's the only thing I can think of.
I mean, drive in reverse with the turret pointed over the rear, and it looks remarkably like, say, a Type 89.
The stepped or flanged idler ect. is just like a bull dozer or excavator's. That spring tensioner is also like the early tractors/dozers, prior to the grease tensioning system used in earth moving equipment for the last 50 or so years, maybe longer.
The view comparison between unobstructed and the vision slits was an inspired directorial choice.
Agreed!
I love the 'point of view' shots. It would be neat to actually see what the view is like through viewports/vision blocks/periscopes on different vehicles.
Occasionally we get to see the gun sight (If there's one fitted/it's feasible to film) and I love that!
It's always the lights and tankettes that get me excited about this channel. It's where you find the more eccentric and entertaining engineering attempts.
There may be a lot of shortcomings, but you can see the train of thought was not illogical, despite some oopsies.
And I can't help but think there's a lot to love about the geometry of this hull, were I to try a modern tankette. The weight distribution of the engine & armor in front balances vs turret weight, stacked 2 man position & entry, glacis slope. Make engine block sacrificial protection in front of an inner armor shell.
Feels like having the driver behind the block rather than riding shotgun to it, and facing incoming rounds with more metal in between, is better for crew protection versus the side-saddle driver position of the Wiesel, Scorpion, M113, my old Brad, etc, etc
Not like they're meant to do tank v tank duty anyways, just be better weapons platforms and more cross country mobile than an M1151 or MRAP, which have zero in the way of cross-country superpowers. More a self propelled crew serve fighting position than APC, IFV, or Tank.
If I remember correctly, the design of the Merkava MBT having the engine at the front of the tank to provide protection for the crew
@@hawkeye5955 It does, and uses the freed-up rear space very handily for crew storage, utility, and access/escape. They could probably engineer a tiny crew toilet in there, which would be a godsend when in CBRN posture.
As an American crewman, my jealousy towards the Merk knows no bounds.
My brain read that as "the lights and tankettes" and just went "what? You love steering lights?" Before it caught on.
So, a commercial truck chassis with a diesel engine. Or at least a 7ton truck chassis.
I find it remarkable just how similar the suspension and sprockets are to some of the Caterpillar Tractor models that would have been current with this tank.
Where do you think they got the tracks from?!
@@samholdsworth420 It clearly shares a lot of design thinking with contemporary machines like the Caterpillar Sixty ... I've been watching this thinking "it's an armored ag machine!"
@@jruser I'm sure these things must ride like Lincoln Town Cars.
The whole thing looks like a slightly stretched agricultural tractor where they removed the steering wheel and just kept the steering brakes and put a armoured box on top, so yeah if even the tracks looks like something from a period tractor it probably is
These old tanks are something else. Countries sure loved having exposed engines in their vehicles. We take things that seem so obvious for granted. At least this one isn't exhausting right into the cabin like other WWI era tanks, but that seems like a bear minimum when the driver is still less than a foot away from the heat and noise lol. I'm sure there were still plenty of smells coming out of the engine.
Considering how small the crew compartment and what the experience of the British mark tanks an engine is hot and they probably assumed it would heat up whatever they used for a firewall.
There was a time before safety was invented, or atleast in wide spread use.
On the upside, this also makes the engine easy to access for repairs, maintenance and lubrication. This was an era when ship crews included dedicated oilers after all.
Too bad a T1E4 or T1E6 wasn't saved as well. It'd be interesting to see the T1E2 and them side by side and compare the two.
All things considered that tank had some pretty good idea. And even the bad ideas (like no sprung suspension) were typical of the tracked tractors that would be made well into the late 1940s, so you can see where they got the idea. For that matter those two seat pans look like they could have been tractor seats from the 1940s.
Very interesting as I never heard about the T1E2!! I had a quick look on Wikipedia just to have a look but apparently they built various variants of the prototypes finally addressing a bit the suspensions: from awful ride to barely sustainable ride! Thanks again for doing a good job and looking forward to see your new videos 👍 👍👍
BTW what a shame that part is not open for the public because it would have been very interesting to visit by looking behind the T1E2....
The driver's position, besides being what I would imagine excruciatingly warm, also seems to have a great deal of potential for excitement under unfortunate conditions. And not the good kind of excitement, I might add. You'd really have to have clankers of cast iron to be in the driving position of that thing, and even then they would probably melt. Between having that big ol' V8 rattling around less than a foot away from your face and the knowledge that in combat it's only a matter of when(Definitely not if) something kind of violent will find it's way through the front facia to say hello and make your day real bad, that's a heck of a job.
But yeah, it really is incredibly neat to see a tank of that era still around. For her to be in such good overall condition is a bit mind-blowing as well. She's far less crusty than tanks I've seen less than half her age, so I'm guessing at least a fair amount of care was put into keeping her in one piece along the way. Very, very cool.
I would think that opening would've been covered with something like leather to keep out the heat and any hot coolant from being sprayed onto the driver.
@@billwilson3609 I very much doubt it. Besides, your feet and legs are going to be next to and under the engine while operating it, so it wouldn't do much for you anyway.
My very first tank in World of Tanks, love it 🤗
Nostalgic.
@@Eagerston yeah
i must ask what that is hanging off the front of the mantlet, is it simply a counterweight for the gun or is there something more going on there that isnt immediately obvious due to the currently removed status of said gun?
Looks like the housing for the recoil spring
It was a long boi judging by the pic
I think it's a counterweight
I agree. It looks like it is made from flat weights bolted together, which makes sense for a developmental test vehicle which may have different guns installed.
@@tacticalmanatee I'd not thought about it being customisable/tuneable for different guns, that is an excellent point, thank you
It's remarkable how little has changed with that suspension system. It is very similar in form and function to the system currently used on excavators, even down to the tensioning spring on the front idlers and the mud slides to keep the track run clear.
Great video on an interesting tank. The Chieftain has tried to explain how the Army tanks evolved into the M-4 Sherman, but looking at the earlier experiments, that war winner seems to come out of thin air! The M-3 to M-4 makes sense, but how did they come up with things like VVS that bolts on, or using aircraft engines, or the removable transmission housing from a tank like this? Plus add in reliability, assembly line production, and truly interchangeable parts to create arguably the best tank of the war.
id argue a panther is just as good
This isn't that bad. In the mid-1920s France was using !still! FTs and the British were bringing the Vickers Mk II into service and didn't have a production-fit light tank. The soviets still had no plans to build the BT line that would lead to the T34. Everyone was still trying to figure out something that was useful and factory-friendly. The Sherman just hit it out of the park.
I imagine the Sherman is not just built from lessons from domestic models but also from what was being built overseas.
@@pilotteacher4527 You'd be wrong. Panther was terribly unreliable. If you can't get it to the battlefield, it's worthless
Didn't come out of thin air. With limited funds, Ordnance concentrated on developing components - like the use of aircraft engines and the VVS suspension - that could be applied to mass produced vehicles when the time came, not to build fleets of soon to obsolete tanks. See
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Combat_Car
tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/US/M1_Combat_Car.php
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_light_tank
tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/US/M2_Light_Tank.php
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_medium_tank
tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/us/m2_medium_tank.php
The early M3 & M4 suspension system was lifted off the M2 light tank which used four interchangeable bogies as opposed to the six on the medium tanks).
It was developed as the T2 (so was the immediate successor to the T1 in this video).
Thanks! Really appreciate your commitment to telling us about these old pieces of iron.
I miss "oh bugger, the tank is on fire"
Huh I didn't even know there was any of these still around. I alway assumed it was one of those lost interwar tanks. The more you know eh...? W
Looking at the open grills down to the engine, and with your mention that there was no firewall, THIS is the very tank that the Molotov Cocktail was designed to defeat!
I never knew that any of those tanks survived. Thank You for the tour!
“What were they doing with this tank in January, 1945???
My guess - selling War Bonds.
19:37 - hits his head
19:43 - "Ouch, that hurt"
It is true, tankists have the best reflexes! :D
Great video anyway! I really like these examples of those great pioneer times of tank design.
Look at that sloped armor!
I really hope there are plans to clean and restore the interior. Also, it should definitely be possible to have machinists replicate the parts that are missing. Expensive and very time consuming, yes, but definitely doable.
I wonder if perhaps with that "January 1945" number, it had anything to do with research into smaller tanks for the invasion of Japan? It seems unlikely considering how outdated the vehicle would have been though.
That date might of been painted there to show when it was serviced for use in War Bond drives.
That looks like an absolute miserable experience driving that tank...
I think it would have had an asbestos curtain between the engine bay and crew area..
After quickly counting I ended up at 104 rounds in those two racks :)
Un-armoured external fuel tanks located directly above the exhaust pipes. Sounds like a good idea!
Could be worse...could be inside the fighting compartment like some of the T34's...
Well, we don't know how thick the gas tanks are. And if they're half inch thick, they're fairly armored for the day. Perhaps the thought was though, that if they got struck and leaked and caught fire, the fire would be well outside the fighting compartment. And given the tank's layout, the crew escaping would be quite easy with that nice big back door.
Terrible idea, but perhaps not as terrible as some other things you see in these interwar vehicles.
I live 20 minutes away from Ft. Lee and can't go visit. Make me sad!
I wonder if, given the age of the vehicle, there once was a fire wall but it was made of asbestos? Which would have been removed. I’d hazard a guess that the 1945 date is when it was sent to the museum.
I love these quirky, early tanks.
Considering how banged up I was after a demo ride in an M-60a2 (gunners spot) I know smooth is relative.
running the hot exhaust pipes underneath the fuel tanks doesnt seem like a particularly good idea.
Wonder if they had it outside as a monument, which would explain them welding that up.
Brings to mind your lecture on the evolution of cav tank doctrine.
@The Chieftain. In 9:22 that piece of metal looks like an barbed wire cutter (although it is facing wrong way). Thanks for your great videos.
Love to hear about the Ford 3 ton, lots of contradictory information about that one. Love your work as always!👍
9:15 That triangular fin on the hood looks almost exactly like a wire cutter.
I assume they put that there as a trial for barbed wire.
Fascinating to see this old hardware!
The hardly remembered Cunningham was one of the very best American made cars. The early ‘20s V-8 was 442 cubic inches, 5.2 compression, rated at ninety hp, but with a lot of torque. Very reliable.
I like the informal format. It's personal, and a nice change. Awesome content!
I would love to have this as a little RC tank, set in next to my Tiger II and Abrams.
My math says 52 rds per side for a total loadout of 104 rds of 37mm.
It must have been quite an 'experience' to drive the T1E2 with that V8 firing right in front of you. Nice to see grandpa is still in one piece.
Thanks Nick. For all of us who've spent hours in the WoT version of this vehicle it's nice to see a real one.
.
The T 1 is still my favorite in WOT.
I wondered for a second why everything was so quiet and serene, then I realized this wasn't an obnoxious WoT sponsored Inside the Chieftain's Hatch, lol.
I understand, gotta pay the bills, but I do like these plain un-sponsored ones.
We get so involved with the hero tanks and the designers that we forget the peace time Armies , strapped for men and cash somehow managed to develop vehicles and doctrine. I hope we can see Tornado. T 3 ( I Think) ?
This made me think a video on OD Paint would be interesting. I know the Civil War Army used Lamp Black and Ocher to make an OD for Artillery pieces. So clearly it was a Government color long before it was used as a Camo color. Thanks it is an interesting little tank.
Do you know what OD stands for? Over Dirt
The ww2 specification for Olive Drab paint was the same as the Civil War color. Lamp black in ochre.
For an early wacky tank design, this one is not bad at all.
Why are these weapons of war so adorable?! Oh, the irony.
That looks to be a pretty deadly contraption for its crew.
8:19 "...I strongly suspect that this lid here is literally just resting here by weight of gravity alone."
Call that an early blowout panel
Suspect what you'd be calling the gunner/commander/loader is overworked.
Thanks for the video and tank history lesson. Very much enjoyed. Really appreciate your time & effort.
I loved seeing this, glad to see one of these still exists. I don't know if anyone else noticed, but if you look carefully, the tracks on the museum vehicle are on backwards compared to the tracks shown in the old period photos that Chieftain showed during this video. The patterns of the links run in the opposite direction. Wonder how that happened, did someone at the museum install them incorrectly??
I do love these videos. Thank you sir for all the hard work and for your service.
This is what i need for the Beltway.
Chieftain "Fits" soooo he "Sits"... ^~^
Wait - there is no ''OMG the tank is on fire''?
No chance of survival anyways :O
I think we should drop in a Willie Pete while the Chieftain is inside just to be sure 😜
People need motivation to do their best😂
At first glance I would say that GM/Cadillac used this as a basis for the M114. Almost as much HP output from the V8, fantastic for 1920s. As a career Scout/Tanker I really wish these museums were open to the public. At least you can get us inside and probably get us a better look in the vehicles.
The James Cunningham and Sons company in Rochester NY, was known for building robust V-8 engines and gearboxes. They built the chassis for cars but the bodies were custom made by coach builders. Before that they were known for their robust and reliable wagons and artillery carriages which the Union army during the Civil War preferred. So it's no wonder they were contacted by the army as they had a long history working together. Jay Leno featured a 1920 Cunningham on his TH-cam channel. Later the Cunningham sons got out of the auto biz and started making telephone switching equipment.
I can’t tell you how much I appreciate your content, and your Body’s sacrifices:!
As an automotive engineer the method of use of those cotter pins on the tracks make me wince.
17:47 BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Oh my god, what is that voice?! “Okay. So now I have WERRRRMED my way forward”. That’s so April Fools 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆
8:42 the drivers vision box: -_-
Good stuff thank you. Any idea what that thing behind you that said tornado on it is? Has kind of a funky look to it
Christie T4
I know I'm not alone in looking forward to more installments of youtube's favorite game: 'Oh God The Tank Is On Fire'
Why doesn't WoT have WW1 mode?
1922? Fabric continuous-link canvas ammunition belts for the .30 caliber (Browning 1917, or 1919?), before disintegrating-link belts, therefore hooks for the belts to hang -- saving all kinds of time -- and chutes to keep them approximately straight.
When you slapped it, it sounded like it was going to crumble lol
Just wanted to say hello I was in 1-185th in San Bernardino from 1998 to 2005 I was a 31U/25U but got to train as a M1 loader/ driver and in my last tour in 2009 I ran the largest class VII shipping and receiving yard in Iraq. I was the only one besides our CW3 licensed to operate the 24 m1 ‘s we signed over to the Iraqis. I remember watching the M1’s we gave them getting driven away by ISIS on television.
Get a Hypertherm Plasma cutter to release the welds to the Engine covers (please let the Museum know these exist/work-well). I'm a former Machinist, and former employee of HT (don't, for a Second, believe their HR Hype! They SUCK to work for, but, Grind-Out a decent product, as they Grind-down any Lower-level Employees, in the N.H. Tradition), so my 'Note' Is Not an endorsement of HT! But, as a 'Tool', Gordon made sure they're bluntly effective.
I want one. Think of the creative things you could use it for! You need the Patton,gold football helmet! 🤠
Jan. 1945? Perhaps as a training tank! The M-1903A2 could be fitted to various breech actions of a wide selection of artillery. This plus a training round that was mainly graphite (so it would leave a mark, but not punch a hole in any reasonably thick piece of steel) would make this a plausible idea. (The M-1903A2 had a threaded piece and a very short barrel (6 inches (~152mm) if I remember correctly, of which is 2.5"(~63mm) is the chamber!). It also had a modified trigger assembly for use with a lanyard so you would pull (not yank) on it as if you were actually firing an artillery round!
Wait... Wait.... You had to start from the very beginning... Lmao.. it sounded like u started from the beginning.. and said the part about not being able to drive it...
But last said your on your way out...
Lmao... That's hilarious... But really sucky
In front of the driver's seat, there's a little tab sticking down from the beam where the engine cover and driver's "cupola" meet. It may be two metal tabs with a screw running through them?
Having an old (old!) stove and looking at some of the other bits of the hull structure, I think that may have been one of the main attachments for a partial firewall. Almost certainly thin-gauge steel with an asbestos backing. On the driver's side.
Reminds me of the Beverly Hillbillies episode where Jethro & Mr. Drysdale drive a early US light tank around Griffith Park in LA, Calif.
So after they decided FT-17 and British tanks weren't good enough they made a Whippet? Revolutionary ;D
these things look urban security like perfect for American "intervention" or some say '',private invasion protection 😲', during the late 20's thru the mid 30's. they would fit security of any latin american city of the time in the financial or political neighborhoods just sayin.....it fits the Canal Zone area ya feel me.
I would guess in 1945 they were using it for training, even if itwas just ROTC or reserves, like the FTs. Even just to stand in for an "enemy tank". Or the sqme role in Army training films. I wonder if the loose top was supposd to mitigate blast effects, or fast escape if it isnt too heavy.
Early engines needed constant maintenance in the field that's why no firewall. The driver was originally usually a Ford auto mechanic. FORD ..Fix Or Repair Daily
It will be lovely if You have t-shirt with sing on the back: "Please stay behind me, I know how to operate tank." or: "Stay Back ! Front armour is most effective !" Thank You mate, have a nice day :)
I think I heard the Chieftain say Ft. Lee. If so, I've seen the structure going up, but alas it's closed to the public. But I remember the original collection from Aberdeen from visits in the 80s and 90s.
As a Rochester fellow, I knew we made plenty of stuff for the military (its mostly an optics industry city) but I had no idea we were involved with making a tank?! Guess you learn something new every day.
9:15 It could be blade for cutting barbwire or steel cables that get's in the way of tank,
like that on helicopters.But these are facing the wrong way :)
Looks like it has a sharp edge on the underside. Possibly reinstalled the wrong way round.
@@dylanmilne6683 Well, if you think about it. Due to the track design, the vast majority of barbed wire/cables up to the start of the deck, would get grabbed and pulled down under the tank via the tracks. Any of them higher than that would slide up the glacias and snag either on the 2 posts forward (that no one knows what they are), that flag thing, the driver's hatch (possibly harming the driver). Anything drug up higher would hust hit the rounded turret face, maybe beign stuck and the tank dragging stuff along, but perhaps they figured most barbed wire in use wouldn't be that much higher (also with the tank driving forward, even high mounted barbed wire would get dragged down by the tracks mostly. That flag properly installed dealing with any that didnt)
I recall seeing a very small 37mm gun used by infantry in WW1. They may have used the same load with a long barrel, not the nubby of the portable version. May I suggest looking for a soft helmet like the early American football helmets? These things are just not built for an Irishman built more like a Texan than a Leprechaun? I shudder to think about the "Damn We're on Fire " drill would look like for this torture device. God protect you, My friend.
The mud slides are also designed to provide spaced protection from people firing from trenches with AT rifles...
Probably a stupid question, answered before, but..... exhaust under the fuel tank? A good idea?
Chieftain, Ian McCollum carries a cap of a bic pen to aid disassembly. You should think about carrying a Can of WD 40 ?