David Fletcher | Bottom 5 Foreign Tanks | The Tank Museum
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Tank Museum legend and Tank Chat superstar David Fletcher has thoroughly criticised the British tanks, now it's time for the other nations! See which countries have fallen under his scathing gaze in his Bottom 5 Foreign Tanks.
Contrary to what David says (!) please feel free to agree or disagree in the comments below, as we present David Fletcher’s Bottom Five Foreign Tanks.
SUBSCRIBE to The Tank Museum TH-cam channel: ► / @thetankmuseum
Visit The Tank Museum SHOP: ►tankmuseumshop...
Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► / tankmuseum Or donate tankmuseum.org/...
Press the little bell above to enable NOTIFICATIONS so you don’t miss the latest Tank Museum videos.
Follow The Tank Museum on FACEBOOK: ► / tankmuseum
Twitter: ► / tankmuseum
Tiger Tank Blog: ► blog.tiger-tank...
Tank 100 First World War Centenary Blog: ► tank100.com/ #tankmuseum #tanks #top5tanks The Tank Museum E-Newsletter sign-up: mailchi.mp/e6f...
![ผัวเถื่อน - ยูริ โตเกียวมิวสิค [ OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P08ORRVDGl8/mqdefault.jpg)
"I've probably done a few that annoyed people. That's tough.. I don't care."
I love this guy.
Doesn't have a firm grasp on modern marketing does he?
jtan163 yet here we are lol
That’s the way it goes 🤷♂️
Oh, but of course he cares. He likes it. Because there is nothing that’s more of a waste of time than stating things everyone agrees on.
Meme template.
"It sounds great having five turrets, it be shooting in all directions... half the time it be shooting in none" this is man is a treasure
Well, it has been said those who aim at nothing usually hit it.
Similar to a horse designed committee turning out to be a camel, when design needs fto be multipurpose you risk diluting how well it does its just
That explains a lot in the Warhammer 40k universe
I haven’t watched it yet but I’m assuming you are talking about the t 35 as bad as it was I would love to see it in like gta I feel it would be pretty fun
“If you disagree with me that’s ok no one wants to hear it no one cares”
"If you don't like it, don't say anything. No one wants to hear it." -The most honest TH-camr.
Yes....mr Fletcher knows what he talking about.
Honest but futile in the context of a TH-cam video!
No one wants to hear it? Hm, I do, thought. As long as its civilised, shouldn’t anyone be able to add their portion of knowledge to the discussion? Im not implying that Fletcher does not know alot about tanks, of course he does, but I found that request to be kinda useless or counter-productive to the discussion. He simply could have asked to stay polite in the comment section and I think it would have been more than enough.
@@a_random_tank_152mm7 Quite so. He says "
"If you don't like it, don't say anything. No one wants to hear it." When in fact he means
'If you don't like it, don't say anything. I don't want to hear it.'
Yes, he's an undoubted authority on the subject matter but I find his thin-skinned arrogance somewhat off-putting.
@@bayadere8308 I don't think it's so much thin-skin as annoyance about keyboard experts, who think they're the ultimate expert on every subject matter they've studied on Wikipedia... I get it.
'...they were not ideal fighting vehicles for the 2nd World War, and they soon got wiped out. That's the main draw back, really' - Another Fletcherism I will remember
Fletcherism has to become a word now XD it simply must, for it not to become a meme or somesuch would be a crime
Agreed. We must now use this term. I love a lot of Mr. Fletcher’s quotes. He’s honest & direct but with that great British humor and charm that just makes you laugh.
I really hope Wargaming will host another Think Tank. Though at The Tank Museum, so Mr. Fletcher does not have to fly. The level of humor that came with that panel is still great to listen too.
By the way, hello MHV! I love your channel, collaborations, and historical data.
Keep up the great work!
"It really isn't that dangerous. Unless you get fried by it, of course." :)
Feral Lion read his name again
A
"We don't have it of course. It's an awful tank, we probably wouldn't want it" I was in stitches after that. I love this guy.
I smelled the french toast burning after he dropped that bomb :)
"We don't have one here of course, it's terrible we wouldn't want it''. Ever the diplomat Mr F.
But has plenty terrible ones all the same!
I get the impression Fletcher isn't a big fan of the French.
Best line from Mr Fletcher ever.
I was hoping to see a tank that runs on rails in the list, or was I dreaming about them!
🤣
MVP Fletcher
"The flamethrower really wasn't' that dangerous...well, unless you were fried by it..."
We should go through all of David's previous videos and collect all his Fletcherisms. They are too good not be assembled into an illustrated PDF. We could probably come up with with a nice little book of them and raise some money for the museum.
Few collected form this video.
5:59 ... And they soon got wiped out. That's the main drawback, really.
9:06 ... And a driver down here, who didn't know where he was half of the time.
15:50 ... T-35 was about 500 hp and drove through clutch-and-brake steering system, which had no effect anyway, because steering was nearly impossible.
18:24 As it happens, Ferdinand Porsche came along, he would interfere if he could...
19:46 ... And if it tried to get anywhere by moving, it would break down, almost invariably that happened.
20:39 The french, they hadn't anything to do with tanks for four or five years, except German ones, coming and telling them what to do.
21:05 We don't have it, of course. It's an awful tank and probably (?) wouldn't want it.
I would certainly buy that.
The intro of the book should be:
"As I've said before, if you don't agree with any of these things... well, don't agree but don't tell everybody we don't want to know, no one's interested so keep those things to yourself."
- David Fletcher, 22 of December 2018
Agreed
Oh man tank gaming replays with his memes popping up would be great. I hope he would appreciate those though heh.
How glad even David Fletcher doesn't like the M22 Locust, although probably not because he gets constantly flanked by it in War Thunder...
The locusts in War Thunder are a biblical plague. They come and devour anything on their pass, you kill one, 5 more show up... Shivering.
Lol BoTimeGaming started the Locust pack swarm play in WT.
7:30 he calls it good and neat, ok a waste of time with 37mm fair point by 44 - 45... it was the moving by air that was horrendous.
Sending it in a glider was probably a better idea, at least it arrived fully assembled.
Primary reason why Americans didn't want them, was because command was staunchly aganist sending valuable C-54s into active combat zone.
Mr fletcher: starts off beside a tiger
Wehraboos: nervous sweating
What's a wehraboo
RN somebody who worships the Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe/Kriegsmarine of WWII to the point of stupidity. These people are notable for defending the WWII German army by saying such stupid phrases as “it took 5 Sherman’s to kill 1 Tiger,” or “The Wehrmacht were just fighting for their country and not actually Nazis.” It stems from Wehrmacht and Weeaboo, because Wehraboos are overly obsessed with the supposed good of the Wehrmacht.
@@MidnightRobotics Thank you for telling me
@@MidnightRobotics The Wehrmacht had nothing to do with the Nazi Party you troglodyte. You're thinking of the SS. The Wehrmacht fought purely for their country, and actually disliked the SS and the Nazi party in general. There are multiple incidents, especially later in the war, where the Wehrmacht outright fought the SS and refused orders from Nazi affiliated higher ups. One of the most well known of these was the battle for Castle Itter. I'm not saying the Wehrmacht was good or bad, it wasn't any better or worse than any other army. Awful things were done by the Wehrmacht and everyone else in that awful war, but that doesn't make any one side evil.
@@truereaper4572 Ah SURE, Please elaborate over the Looting, Raping, Starvation and Strangulation of the Greek People BY SOLDIERS OF THE WEHRMACHT! Famine of 1941 would spring to mind: "Send us Wheat or Coffins!"
"Ferdinand Porsche came along; he would interfere if he could." Another one for the quote collection.
I would love to know the wider context as to why he holds that view.
We was really off the sauce he would come in and suggest some ridiculous and impractical ideas. Like putting those weird electric engines in the Ferdinand which basically turned the tank into a firebomb
@@solidoperative Because Porsche's designs were overly complicated and generally resulted in terrible to maintain tanks. It's almost like he was actively working to sabotage the German war effort.
@@ConstantlyDamaged
He did, he hated the Nazis, like many other Swabian industrials.
Did Porsche design the Elephant and isn't it pretty much junk?
11:30 “the Russians say it wasn’t”
*close in shot*
“We’ll argue about that later”
😂😂😂
That's a brilliant cut and edit - editor/producer is really on their game.
William Chamberlain I’d love them to do an end-of-year smash up of Mr Fletchers greatest quotes
"Nyet, ve make horrible tank all of own!"
When the russkies say that they didn't do something = they did.
very dry humour! love it
Mr. Fletcher could lecture on my lawn mower and make it interesting! The man is simply a gem 💎!
I'm sure there are various interesting design choices about the lawnmower that reduce jamming and gunk build up.
Isn’t your profile picture from the Andy griffin show
"We aren't supposed to say bad things about German tanks." That bit had me laughing uncontrollably; loved this video!
I have a lot of bad things to say about German tanks, but space prohibits me from doing so.😁
Don't say anything bad about anything with any German component or the Wehraboos will call for your execution
@@ThomasFarquhar2 all Tiger have flaws
Honestly the discussion-meta has gone to the point where people are overly negative about german tanks.
Ofc, the Jagdtiger was one of those late tanks that deserve contempt, being a completely nonsensical design. Its not even that good on paper, being even slower than the Tiger 2, yet without a turret.
Being British, he has to bring one of the strongest German tanks to his bottom list, because the British had nothing like it. When you watch a movie of some of these Jagdtigers surrendering in 1945, piloted by German crews who know how to operate them, they didn't look that underpowered and immobile at all. th-cam.com/video/ukiHmF0qcNE/w-d-xo.html
"The French, they hadn't had anything to do with tanks for four or five years, except German ones coming around, telling them what to do," Fletcher said. Laughter ensued. A lot of laughter.
lol when the french are obnoxious and annoying even when designing tanks
That wasn’t a very gentle line comming from a guy who’s nation hide on an island for 4 years but at least it was funny
@@talosvalcoran7001 Yeah. Its not like the Pols and French hid out on the island after their nations fell... 🤷♂️
Shawn McBeath at least we tried 😉
@@talosvalcoran7001 Tried to do what?
"It's in Kubinka, but it's a long way to go just to see one tank..."
Savage.
Actually the T-35's so long you could probably see it on a map.
The Germans did their best to travel into Russia. But they saw a little more than they wanted to....
"I've probably done a few which have annoyed people. That's tough I don't care". this is going to be my motto for 2019
Same.
Classic Fletcherism!
@grafvonstauffenburg I beg to differ. Every country has a soy boy or emo girl or two. The US is not unique here.
This is also my motto, since I am ancient, and past caring....:)
How’d it go?
I love the troll opening of "worst foreign tanks" against the backdrop of the Tiger. I wish everyone at the Tank Museum Bovington and anyone who watches this video happy holidays, a merry Christmas and a happy new year.
Well if you had to do a transmission swap I think you would agree with that back drop.
@@mavrik104 Ha ha. Have you seen the video about how they had to install the transmission in the Littlefield Collection's Panther? If the Tigers' is anything like that I think I'd have ran away screaming if I worked in a maintenance depot.
@@exharkhun5605 That makes two of us. xD
Happy hollidays to u 2!
Mr Fletcher bait clicking inf front of a tiger? He doesn't care!
Bless you Mr Fletcher and keep doing videos!
I've heard the Italian "Tanks" were called "Selbstfahrsärge" (motorised coffins) by the Germans.
Self propelled coffins would be a better translation but yes
Every nation's tankers had derogatory nicknames for their tanks.
I guess every name the Sherman got called applied to them.
@@benlaskowski357 the Shermans were called Tommycookers
@@krisanludwiczak6377 The Germans called them that. We called them the Purple Heart Box or the Ronson. The Poles called it the Burning Grave. Someone else called it the Mobile Crematorium.
04:27 A line destined for immortality about the flame thrower
"it really isn't that dangerous - unless you get fried by it -of course".
They should get that put on a t-shirt
bumper stickers.
"The French didn't have anything to do with tanks for 4 or 5 years, except for German ones coming around and telling them all what to do."
Absolute mad lad
Even as a frenchman that cracked me up like a nut 😂👌🏼
We didn't have anything to do with tanks for five years? Uh, what about the Free French, then? 🤨🤔
@@BriselanceIf you're referring to Vichy France, they were German allies and were effectively forced out of the war by the Germans. Any tanks they did have were either pre-war remnants of the French armoured vehicles or German vehicles.
As for the French, in the UK, they would've operated primarily with either British tanks, American imports to Britain, or imports that were modified by the British (the Sherman Firefly or M3 Grant, etc). None of them were French-made so you can't exactly call them French.
@Briseur De Lance
The french that were exiled and operating in england? I'm sure they manufactured a bunch of french tanks there lol
Didn't really think this question out did you?@@Briselance
"There is no reason to have five turrets" Ah I see Fletcher isn't familiar with the winning battle doctrine of "More dakka".
Ahhh, a fellow ‘umie of Kulture, I see.
On behalf of World of Warships Legends the Atlanta would like say more DAKKA? I can supply all the DAKKA you need.
*baneblade sad noises*
Bring the dakka
All the dakka
Umies can't make that tactic work, tha bloody gits!
"What they wanted to do was make a tank as French as possible."
Result: Worst tank in history.
In 44, We Frenchs had a destroyed country, very limited industral capabilities, were no more at the state of the art in terms of weaponry conception, national pride was low, mistrust in the population was high, and for all that the final win or loss of the war was not in our hands, (even our possible contribution was fairly limited). Making a new tank design was useless for the conflict, the war industry of UK, USA, USSR was able to produce much better tanks of any kind if they wanted to, and the design would very likely be ready to late. I think the motivation was merely political, like anything in France at the time. The interests of the Free France were to be shown as meritant as possible during the late war, to restart the nation as quickly as possible, to put the idea in everybody's mind that the true, larger France was the Resistant France (which was fairly false in reality). All that to put ourself in the winning side of the war.
Result: worst fighting tank, good political tank (like the T-35 in fact...)
@@maxenceduhamel796 "even our possible contribution was fairly limited"
It wasn't much, but it was honest work.
We did pretty well at Bir Hakeim, though. And had the Germans and Italians been able to take that place, well... things would have turned ugly for the British' southern flank.
We already make the best planes, can't do everything :)
@Bobby Banana about what I remember it's the British who attacked us first in the back because afraid of our fleet in Mers el kébir
@Bobby Banana you mean when the British attacked at Mers el Kebir? Or when us and the Brits hit them in Morrocco and Algeria (Torch)?
"As it happens, Ferdinand Porsche came along, he would interfere if he could..."
I hate when that happens.
"You guys vant some *ENGINES?"*
- Porsche
Ferdinand Porsche do be driving people to suicide
I'd love some Flectcher Restaurant Reviews
"The main drawback is that the food isn't any good." - Fletcher, probably 😄
The ovens couldn't hurt anyone unless you were fried by one..
The problem with the chef is that he's French and doesn't know what he's doing?
The only good fire at this restaurant was the one that burnt it down.
Simply put..even the rats won't eat here.
"It looks dreadful with but its really not all that dangerous, unless you get fried by it of course."
I think this is my favorite quote
Best intro ever :))).
"kubinka -- but a long way to go just to see one tank" - i swear Mr Fletcher could do standup comedy :)
Arl 44 - so awful the Tank Museum doesn't want it :))
Best episode ever.
gusty9053 aaaaaaamen, my friend! This' a lovely Christmas gift Mr Fletcher and the Bovington Museum have decided to give us!
Well, they do have quite a large collection of Japanese tanks, including a Type 4 Ke-Nu and Type 2 Ka-Mi (with pontoons!).
ARL 44 equipped units (two Regts) were given Panthers as a replacement in 1945/46 unit they broke down beyond repair in 1950/51.
If you go to Kubinka, you need 2 days to do it right. The "Old" tank museum (home of the T35, Maus and several other rare machines), and the new Patriot Park, where the collection is being moved to. It's in other words, not a trip for 1 tank, but for a boatload of tanks.
i know 1 tank which tank museum definetelly doesn't want BT-42. what happens if u compine russian tank chassy with 104mm british made howitser cannon. and then let german do the ammo. 1 hell of a mesh
'.....the main problem with these things was that they kept getting wiped out when used. That is quite an important negative....' - understatement of all time!!
You know youve done something right when the Prime minister has copied your hair cut.
yourlordandsavior 69 HAHAH
God damn sir.
Yes, but doesnt Mr Fletcher suit it far better lol!
You sir, have just won the internet today
Yes, but what does she do to hide the mustache?
nothing can beat a 20+ minute video where david talks about tanks , best way to start your morning .
Exactly, no morning like a morning with David Fletcher
Agreed. Now to brush my teeth, get dressed, and face the day.
I totally agree, I'm just watching this while having my morning tea and boiled egg.
tanks are made for driving and shooting them. which kinda does beat watching videos.
Somebody *please* get this man knighted. He's a national treasure. Speaking as a former 'tread-head', I want to grow up and be 'tank curmudgeon' just like him!
More likely to get an MBE.
@@recklessroges: Actually already has an MBE since 2012 for his efforts in armoured vehicle history.
Mr Fletcher is that kind of grandfather figure you want to take to the pub and get pissed with and hear rambling stories of fast women and dodgy tanks
Dodgy women can be very interesting.
@@davewolfy2906 or expensive
Or, my preference, fast women and faster tanks...
Somehow I don’t see David Fletcher with a fast woman.
And fast tanks and dodgy women.
As someone that has played HOI4 and WarThunder i'm clear more informed than Fletcher
Obviously. Who needs a degree when you have games?
Please, please tell me that was written as a joke.
Yeah, I bet Mr David Fletcher hasn't landed a supersonic jet onto a WW2 carrier huh?
@@darson100 Of Course its a bloody joke, are you not familiar with The Iron Armenian?
I can’t believe they don’t have Panther 2 with 8.8 cannon and a Tiger 2 with 10.5. And why don’t they have any Chinese Tank Destroyers?!?!? And they don’t mention how the AMX-13 wasn’t used in WW2?!?!?!?!?
The curators at Bovington are true armoured vehicle enthusiasts, and many ex-servicemen, and their no nonsense way, and huge devotion to their museum that has kept the tank museum alive. Thank you all, gents and ladies!
"It really isn't that dangerous, unless you get fried by it of course"
Oh but it is.
Well the carbon monoxide is the real evil sneaky killing part of flame throwers...
priceless
Yes, that would be rather unpleasant
Or unless it encounters a line of m10 tank destroyers when it has the high ground.
Summary:
"The problem with these vehicles... Well, the problem was... They were crap".
That says both a lot and a little at the same time.
“Likely to get clobbered” he is an absolute legend
"A bullet isn't that dangerous, unless you get hit by it of course..." David Fletcher
Flamethrowers are not that dangerous.. unless you get fried by it"
In short:
5. Too antique
4. Too smoll boii cuz he wanna fly
3. There is such thing as too many turrets
2. Goddamn Porsche you should stick with cars + too big boye
1. Just too french to be practical
I hate it when things are to French to be useful.
@@jasonirwin4631 yeah
@@jasonirwin4631 Like the EU?
@@carbon1255 nah. EU is too German to be realistic and should be dismantled as soon as possible. Just like maus have been just a waste of materials.
@@radosaworman7628lol no EU is fine the British are a joke. Their economy has been suffering ever since the brexit vote. It so appears that Germans actually run things pretty efficiently.
Fletcher: M22 is no good
War Thunder players: this is NOT like the simulations!
It’s a devil when played against
Ha, as a fairly new WT player I was surprised to see this on the list given how strong they can be in game.
Oh I just love that intro. "If you don't like my opinion then sod off cause nobody cares"
Spoken like true communists... it failed in Russia but it is doing great in UK(Labor Party is a good example).
@@Bialy_1 Conservatives won by a record breaking landslide, wtf are you talking about?
@@wibble2482 It was a big majority, but not 'record breaking' by anyone's imagination - Thatcher's majority was 144 in 1983 and Blair's 179 in 1997 was the largest since WWII - So 80 is relatively good, but record breaking it isn't, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_general_elections ^oo^
After the affair with the Elefant I really don’t know why the Germans still listened to Porsche!
1701spacecadet Porsche's political influence.
Porsche was a friend of Hitler. You could say they were best buddies.
When u have ideas like the Ratte being put forward i think anything goes really
Brexit now
Because the nazis were insane
I'd love to get wasted with this guy at the bar and hear him drunkenly ramble on for hours about tanks
What makes you think he would sound any different?
You’re hearing that already in this video.
I'd like to stay sober... so I could pay attention and remember the things he'd say when he'd begin to talk this way about _everything._
If david had put the Bob Semple tank on this list I would have unsubscribed. Luckily he is an intelectual😌
The Bob Semple isn't a tank though....its a Weapon of Mass Destruction
If the allies had mass produced Bob Semple tanks the war would of been over by 1942!
gg ff and that’s exactly why New Zealand wasn’t allowed to massproduce it
@@lenx5953, actually no one wanted to give up their mattresses for the forward Bren gunner, so the plans were shelved and the war continued for many a year.
Jay Leno why did you have to make this meme comment into something political. Go take your opinion to the Pewdiepie comment section
“...if you don’t like it...I don’t care.” I think our love and respect for Mr. Fletcher just increased by a factor of 100 lol.
Thank you again Mr. Fletcher for another great review of a group of AFVs.
I hope they’ll do something on amphibious assault vehicles one day.
M22: "You're probably going to get clobbered anyway". Indeed! Love it.
Particularly love the way you've contrasted how being too big is just as detrimental as being too small.
Yeah, that M22 would have only made a decent reconnaissance vehicle in 1944 - so they could probably have just put a machine gun on it and removed the turret and shell ammunition so it could scoot around faster.
@@brianh9358 it was designed for infantry support, not to battle tanks
As an Italian, my first thought before watching the video was: "there must be AT LEAST one Italian tank in this list." 1:29 aaaand yup. Check.
ahhhh....si. correcto.
They really turned making a bad Tank into an Art ;'D
The Jagdtiger might be unpractical but damn it looks good.
Yeah, but the jagdpanther I think looks even better
@@sparepartssparepartsempori519 Agreed
It's a monster if it worked
@@stateservant but it doesnt
@@TheManinBlack9054 had the germans have time, it would have made even IS 2 it's breakfast. It's prestigious tank, with a precisely engineered Maybach engine, it looks down on cheap Shermans and T-34 with cheap diesels...
"So now we come to the worst horror on my list...it was a French tank..."
He could've stopped right there.
Speaking about his tank choices: "I've probably done a few that annoy people. That's tough. That's the way it goes". The world needs more authenticity like this.
I am a self absorbed conceited prick too old to ever change his mind. But I at least also casually insult you while I tell you this.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 awww, dont get offended.
Yeh but those authenticly offensive people probably shouldn’t expect too much success with their begging.
@@PresidentEvilX I am not in the least bit offended. I merely find his behaviour unbecoming of him, as well as counterproductive.
Do not confuse a lack of respect for taking offense.
@@user-f44hil126ylI Thx bby.
David Fletcher is my spirit animal. If he told me the Tiger 1 is a pile of garbage and amounted to no good, I wouldn't even try and argue against it even if I'm a massive Wheraboo.
swedish_leasuretime_shed id let the 8,8 speak for me
.... Is wheraboo the panzer equivalent to hentai addicts? 😂
I love how early tank designs look like something designed by Orks in warhammer 40k. "Dakka Dakka Dakka!"
More dakka dakka
That's because the Warhammer designs were all designed based on early tanks
Amusing you say they look Orky. The Leman Russ, Chimera and Land Raider were first made by following circulated instructions for kit-bashing model kits of actual old-school armored vehicles! GW-made model kits only came later.
Or imperium...as both leman russ and land raider are directly visually inspired by british tank designs of ww1 as are many forge world models. But ya...t35 totally representative of early tanks xD
Possibly the greatest British moustache since Sir Richard Francis Burton's.
Lord kitcheners moutstache is still king
A huge monster of unknown purpose and uncertain future - the Jadtig was not great either 😊
His eyebrows are stupendous as his sense of humor
there's a younger version sported by some dude on the Matilda Diaries
Thats Captain Sir Richard Francis Burton!
The Russian tank looks like it was designed by Homer Simpson.
Or Games Workshop
Or by someone who was completely stuck in WWI tank design.
Going straight, over trenches, taking out machine guns or lightly armoured structures/vehicles in an almost purely supportive role for the infantry.
In WWI it would´ve pretty much dominated the battlefield, at least in comparison to the other tanks, but the world moved on, so 15 years after the usefulness of its design it was worthless, except maybe for propaganda use.
Ok, that job did it very well!
@@sthenzel basically half of the soviet's stuff in a nutshell. good for propaganda, absolutely horrible at everything else.
@@skelebone9863 It was an early war tank. The KV 1 was much better and the T-34-85 was arguably the best tank of the war.
@@pandax75 WAAAGH!!!
L3 realizing that It Is less worst than a 70 tons jagdtiger :
You have understimated my FIAT power
Mr Fletcher, I can't help but smile with a warm feeling inside when I watch your videos, don't ever change! Thank you so much!
Good grief, Mr Fletcher is really really good -- he said 'parachutists' and not 'paratroopers'. Only someone who's a real expert would know that (I only know it because I got bollocked by a former WWII para for using 'paratroopers').
May he continue to park the tanks of his knowledge on our lawns throughout 2019.
Just remember there are no British paratroopers, and there are no American parachutists.
Wait, so British Paratroopers are called Parachutists?
@@yarus5889
Yes. American parachutists are called paratroopers.
In common modern usage in the US Army they refer to them as airborne even though that more precisely refers to the unit. Meanwhile in the UK they often refer to them as para.
They had a non runner M22 at Ft Benning, the description/history was not kind to put it mildly. The Soviets took the airborne armor concept tho and ran w/it post WW2 but they were the only ones who got it remotely right. (think Sheridans...)
Honestly, slapping together a heavy tank while shaking off an invasion and armouring it with bits of a dead battleship is kind of impressive, even if the finished product arrived late to the party.
What? I never knew there was such a tank.
@@Briselance It's in he video and sounds like an impressive, if late, feat of engineering.
If it can be judged at all by world of tanks the arl is actually pretty decent..... Favorite Frenchie I've used in blitz anyways.
"That's tough. I don't care."
Fletcher couldn't be more British if he tried xD
11:22 "most people in fact,say it was the inspiration for T35,but russians say no,it wasnt...but we will argue about that later" hahaha i swear he has they have to make a standup comedy show for tank historians,David Fletcher (which I honestly fully respect) would excel in it
All 625 dislikes are German fanboys.....
Ferdinand Prosche was one of the greatest engineers who helped the Allies;)
Purposely sabotaging own design XD While wasting Nazi resources doing it
Carnivorus the Ferdinand/elephant, a very... effective tank destroyer...
About that
@@willmarcheselli1986 it was decent on the defensive, which germany was at the time. I believe it got the hightest kill ratio of any ww2 vehicle, which shows a good gun really does help, even if the rest of the vehicle is trash.
Carnivorus I’m not saying it’s crap because it is German, as a matter of fact I am saying it was crap because it was actually crap, strangely enough. The ONLY thing that the Ferdinand had going for it was KD and firepower. The thing was incapable of climbing hills without bursting into flame, broke down all too often, and in general just caught fire a lot. It was made out of a tank that failed because it was too heavy, and the Germans made it even heavier after Kursk, which leads many to the question as to why the Germans didn’t just set the Ferdinand on fire themselves. I think I am on grounds to call it crap
Porche was scamming Germany by making purposefully sabotaged designs with a limited lifespan.
Good morning nothing like a David Fletcher video with my cup of coffee
"If you don't agree with any of these things. Then don't agree, just don't tell anyone, no one cares." That has to be one of my favorite openings to anything I've seen on this site.
David Fletcher on the lethality of flame throwers. "It really isn't that dangerous. Unless you get fried by it, of course." Comedy Gold!!
Well the Italian ones
No, he was talking about that Italian one, that used gasoline. Not about Allied ones that used Napalm.
The Carden-Lloyd was originally seen as a "mobile machinegun nest" of the type that had been so devastating in the Great War, the idea being that you could drive them up to a position and then have it perform as said machinegun nest. Of course people thought they might attack alongside the infantry and gave them all-round armour. Looking like "proper" tanks they were then used as as tanks. The concept only ever worked in the form of the Universal Carrier which didn't look enough like a tank for people to use it as one (well, they did try)
"Slugging it out" with a tiger II is as stupid as dogfighting a zero. There are no points awarded for style. Do *not* fight fairly!
Gotta love the French attitude " we will use only OUR stuff " but use a German engine.
@Jack Renders I remember only Henschel 129 having French engines
"If you don't agree, well then don't agree, but don't tell everyone, we're not interested" David Fletcher is a wise man.
So whats the point of a comments section.... just to suck up to him?! He really only made the point because he doesnt like or cant handle people not agreeing with his opinion.. The wise would engage with why other people might see things differently and who knows, even someone as knowledgeable as David might find a good point in all of it.
@@Owenjf Mr. Fletcher is foreshadowing the French at the end of the video.
@@mfree80286 Hes said it at the start of a few videos, so its not. It would be nice if it was foreshadowing but you really need to make a point of clarifying that with a bit of tongue in cheek humour to go with it or as in this case its just condescending. The thing about not caring about what others think (as David claims) is that you dont care enough to ever think or say it.
Mr @OwenForsythe, my intention in posting my earlier comment was not to as, you insinuate, suck up to Mr Fletcher, especially as I doubt highly that he himself posts the video or indeed reads the comments, and so to do so would be futile. I simply wanted to express my agreement with Mr Fletcher in the sentiment that posting one's personal outrage on the internet is at best inconsequential. I am in agreement that to properly understand any topic one must hear all arguments from all sides, or else you cannot claim to be fully informed. There are however two points, if you would allow me to state them. My first point is that Mr Fletcher is a well informed historian on the subject of tanks particularly, and will likely have taken into consideration the good and bad points of the vehicles on this list. My second point is this, it seems likely to me that the reason he asks the viewer not to comment their disagreement is because this is a list founded on opinion, and therefore is not factual or definitive rendering criticism virtually useless. I hope now that I have explained my reasoning clearly and I have helped you to understand both the context and unspoken meaning behind my post of approximately 5 hours ago.
Sincerely, alasdairfm.
@@Owenjf Imho I believe he is mainly refering to 2 sets of people with his remarks.
1) folks with very little knowledge of tanks posting stupid inaccurate counter arguements.
2) folks/trolls starting flames wars against other folks comments.
I really do not think he has a problem with well informed people adding insight to the discussion.
For examples of stupid people look through so of the early guest top ten personal tank choices. The number of folks stating that the guest's choice is wrong because it does not fit the list the commenter has- how can the guest be wrong in listing of his own personal 10.
I also believe David and to a lesser extent the tank museum staff do not really understand the influence etc the internet has but have been commercially pushed into it to help the museum. David is surprised/bemused by the interest in him. Mighty Jiggles did a some things to educate them- I'm sure that is true but how much based on Jingles telling the world he helped is up for debate without 2nd source.
Mr. Fletcher and Drachinifel need to have discussion on military equipment to determine who has the drier wittier sense of humour.
And who is the bigger Homer.
"The breech actually stuck out of the other end" you can clearly see, even in 144p, how much Mr. Fletcher's mustaches grin saying this. If possible he would have laughed from Bovington all the way to Saumur!
Gonna throw my two cents in about the Locust: I get that it wasn’t effective against the kinds of tanks that the Germans were fielding at the end of the war, but the fact of the matter was that tank VS tank combat was actually somewhat rare during the war, especially on the Western Front as most of Germany’s armor was tied up in the East, even more so late in the war as the Germans exhausted their fuel reserves. Really, the main threats to the M22 were infantry with panzerfausts and the Pak 40 towed anti-tank gun (the latter of which was Germany’s deadliest tank killer during the war), both of which its armament could adequately deal with provided they got the first shot off. Furthermore, even a light tank is better than no armor support at all for airborne forces operating behind enemy lines.
I will concede though that the idea of disassembling the tank for transport and reassembling it on-site isn’t practical.
The premise: Capture an air base. Fly in a transport with a tank. Assemble it at an air base. Is a pretty forward concept. We practically do that today with vehicles that won't arrive in 1 piece. But we can transport a battle tank whole so there is no need to assemble a tank.
Better to have 1 Locust right here over the Rhein in Mannheim, than 100 Jumbos back over the canal in Dover......:)
The idea was sound, it's just that the technology was not up to snuff.
I would argue that the failures of Tetrarch and Locusts have more to do with the fact that they probably didn't answer the problem they were addressing correctly. The issues seems to be to have armor to support infantry with strong points and tanks, with the added constraint of being light enough for airlifting. In that sense, any vehicle that looks like a tank without the firepower or armor of one is pointless, since any enemy armor showing up will deal with a huge amount of them, being invulnerable to the guns of the light tanks.
It feels to me that the best answer would have been to be heavily biased towards firepower, almost as if you were building a tank destroyer. A TD-oriented weapon would have packed a great punch, been a threat to armor and fortifications and still offer decent infantry support for other roles. Maybe building a lightly-armored heavily-armed small vehicle with a fully rotating turret that can ambush the enemy formations would have done a better thing. With a good 76, 105 mm or 17 pounder gun, you would feel vulnerable to the enemy but you would still have the firepower to think you can take them on if you are forced to by killing them first.
When weight becomes an issue, armor is pointless, and if you need fighting capabilities, speed is not useful, especially for paratroops. Therefore, being lopsided towards firepower might have been a better choice. As such, a tank destroyer might have been a better idea.
But this is all speculation for fun thought.
@@Damorann The Russians came to this conclusion with the ASU-57 and ASU-85 airborne tank destroyers
"If you don't agree, well don't tell anyone. No one wants to hear that" what an intro! Brilliant
"Guns sticking up everywhere, but totally useless in battle." You've just described the entire Soviet Army prior to 1942.
T-34 and Kv-1 were made 1939
@@JuneKitsune973 yes, early models that were blind af and crewed by practically untrained conscripts. Problems that were fixed fairly quickly but not before the wehrmacht knocked on Stalin's door with their weedy lil 5cms
@@JuneKitsune973 but they werent up and in the front in any effective numbers until 42-43
The L3/38 was a later model that had torsion bar suspension. These tankettes probably had no business serving as more than an ammo carrier or artillery tractor. But the small and obsolete state of Italian tanks, while a source of much amusement, probably isn't surprising considering the state of the country's industry and the expectation of fighting in a mountain environment rather than on wide, open plains. Italian tankers on the Eastern Front must have been perpetually unamused.
How did u post this 16 hrs ago?
Have you not heard of the gear shift continuum???
@@akhmetmaydan304 Patreon time loop paradox.
Yes, the Polish did not have much armour available at the start of WWII apart from some obsolete Renault FT-17, Vickers Mk. E and Polish version of Mk. E- 7TP (seven tonne Polish) armed with a Bofors 37mm gun. 7TP were more capable than Pz.1 and Pz. 2 tanks but weren't available in sufficient numbers. The tankettes were obliterated quite fast as we may imagine as the front line fighting was no place for them.
@Breezy Mods Yeah but you also could not do anything to them before a screaming Russian killed you with a Molotov Cocktail.
5:25 wow used in the desert?!
Imagine being crammed into a small metal box like that while the sun is burning on it... and an exposed tank of fuel behind you 🤯
"This things got a fiat engine" = "This thing is stationary"
Well now they can upgrade it to a Hemi!
The german joke is that Fiat stands for "Fehler in allen Teilen", "flaws in all parts".
@@gerdforster883 🤣🤣
@@gerdforster883 The British version is "Fix it again tomorrow"
@@phillipcliff4297 In Australia it is Fix It Again Tony. Although I did love my 124 Sport.
Everyone knows the only way to judge a tanks success is by it's global win rate and credit earning potential.
so my loltractor is the best tank in the world
I could listen to him for hours. Well done.
M22 were used "that" way in Portuguese colonial war as escorts and counter insurgency
"Probably, I have done few which anoyed people. That's tough. I dont care." That is the main reason why I subscribed to this channel immediately. Thank you for being real British
*bottom 5 foreign tanks*
'Tiger is behind him'
Dont you dare
I honestly find the Tiger quite underwhelming, the even armor layout makes it far too heavy and underpowered.
I would rather have a Panther or Pz.IV, a Tiger II would be the exception though.
Please dare. Germany were not masters of tank design. They preferred mechanical perfection over mechanical utility and ease of use, resulting in tanks that are way too expensive, making debts they can't pay, to fight a war they wouldn't win anyways. The US and Russia got it down pat, by having a deep supply line with tanks that could be refitted at a moment's notice. If a bogie broke on an M4 you could just replace it in about an hour, re-tension your track, get going, versus a Panther where you would have to basically scoop out all of the inner workings of the tank just to get at the transmission. Tanks built to fight the war they're in for as long as they would be useful is far superior logic, when you consider it because if you can put out eight tanks in a day that are GOOD ENOUGH to do what they need to do and lose two or three in combat, versus ONE tank that is overengineered and likely to die ten minutes after it's reached the battlefield (although in Germany's case, engines and transmissions were a horrific problem, although very powerful).
@@SuperIcyPhoenix #Triggered. Dude, we all know the Tigers effectiveness is highly debateable. But its an iconic machine and it would be a far stretch to call it one of the worst tanks ever.
You may have kicked over a large ant hill there.
The Tiger was too heavy, too complex and too unreliable for the job it was supposed to do. There were also very small numbers of them.
It was, in and of itself, a great vehicle, but in the context of WW2, Sherman and T34 were far better because they were repairable in the field and reliable, and also available in ant-like numbers.
As Stalin said, "Quantity has a quality all of it's own."
@@ScienceChap Actually it was quite good for the job it was supposed to do. It should absorb heavy fire while breaking through the enemy lines. Then it should make room for Panthers or Panzer IVs wich should swarmed through the gap and into the rear of the enemy.
I must say, David Fletcher is an excellent presenter and I look forward to his appearances.
This made my morning! Cheers from Detroit.
I hope you survive your morning in detroit!
Me too!
Macomb County here
No! No, not Detroit! No! No, please! Anything but that! No! No!
All the best ovef there in motown! David Fletcher really is a smashing guy and the museum is superb!
Also this the ARL 44 for all its flaws is still impressive with how fast it went from paper to an actual somewhat functional tank considering the past four to five years of not designing/producing any tanks of their own
I'm amused that the American entry was fine, just designed around a dumb idea and for a role we didn't really need.
It's how it was designed to be transported. The idea you would provide a air transportable tank to airborne via a C-54 Skymaster, a rare and valuable aircraft to an enemy airfield that was hopefully in airborne hands, have the tank drive around to the side of the aircraft and have the turret lowered back on it by crane and hopefully the C-54 able to then take off without getting shotdown on the climb out... it was quite the horrible idea.
@yeoldebiggetee The M22 only saw combat once. And the amusing part was they attracted so much artillery fire that the airborne infantry they where with wanted them to go away XD. It's kinda like this if you have a tank, any tank, and the enemy doesn't then you have an advantage which was the idea behind them for airborne. Which would 'hopefully' be dropping into rear areas away from armored units or units with lots of anti-tank. In that one combat experience the german forces obviously felt most threatened by the by concentrating their infantry guns and mortars on them.
Still the original idea about how to transport the M22 to support airborne forces was beyond ridiculous which is why it deserves mention here. You are basically relying on the enemy to let you assemble your armor (literally) and fly in and out without interception.
It most likely was inspired by someone who thought of the airborne force as a completely independent entity that could have its own "combined arms" doctrine by sending in some light armor after the paratroopers captured an airfield from the enemy. This would be somewhat analogous to the Germans capturing Crete with an almost purely airborne force, although that was mostly because the Royal Navy sunk most of the seaborne force that was supposed to reinforce the airborne force. The concept of an "airhead", as an equivalent to a "beachhead", was popular in some circles until Dien Bien Phu showed that the idea was quite terrible in practice, no matter how good it looked on paper.
There are quite a few examples of each little branch of the military deciding that it would rather build its own self-contained mini-military rather than cooperate with the other branches. That's why the US went through a period of reorganization after the Vietnam War where the word "joint" became over-used to the point that it was almost a joke - the interservice rivalries became so bad that each branch viewed the other branches as the real enemy, rather than the armed forces of other nations. Congress became fed up and forced them to play nice with each other.
That's kinda how we Americans are. Yeah we have some dumb ideas, but most of the time we are good at what we do.
20:55 lol.. when a tank is so bad even a tank museum doesn't want it.
0:00 OMG He's adorable! Mom! Can we keep him! I promise I'll feed him, walk him, and everything!
Starts with wise words from a wise man relevant to more than just this video.
That Carro is so thin a .30-06 would go in one end and out the other and that just a hunting rifle.
Ray Ceeya Source?
"We don't have one in our museum. It's an awful tank. Why would anyone want it (ARL 44)?" - lol. Of course the British hating on French tanks.
'But ordinary petrol, fired out and set light, looks dreadful. Great clouds of smoke, roaring flame, but it really isn't that dangerous. Unless you get fried by it of course'.
- Of course
"If you disagree, Keep it to yourself. Nobody cares" lol. Got to love it.
I clicked on this video cause I was curious and I instantly loved this man.
Why am not surprised the worst tank in the British presenter would be a french one?
Because the French made crap tanks? 🙄🤷♂️😁
The British don't deride the French military because they are French: they deride the French because of the French military. But the French compound the problem by being arrogant as well as weak...
@@thePronto arrogant and weak, we definitely need you to have a perfect illustration of these traits
@@Arno_L de Gaulle.
@@thePronto The brits really don't have anything to tell the French militarily, since they can't achieve anything without having someone else do all the fighting for them.
#5: Carro Veloce
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I saw that tankette at Bovington. That thing would've been claustrophobic for a smile child! I can't imagine two adult men - even short ones like myself - being able to get in it and be complete enclosed. At the museum, the info posted said something to the effect that the flamethrower on it was a particularly poor design because it lacked sufficient pressure to shoot out the flame far enough away from the tank to avoid roasting the crew. Perhaps an exaggeration, but I don't know that it was ever used.
folgore1 It was used heavily they made 2000+
@@hallsey_ I know the Carro Veloce was used in great numbers in Ethiopia, Spain, and in the early part of WWII. I was referring specifically to the flame thrower variant on display in Bovington. I believe the info they posted there indicated there aren't any known instances of this variant ever being used in battle, likely because of the poor design.
That one has to actually be the worst. An utter death trap. :(
I'll take the armor in the ARL-44, thank you very much. At least then, I can survive long enough to get to the edge of the battlefield and run away!
Duce
15:22 "it had guns everywhere but would hit nothing at all" 😂😂😂
I like jagdtiger because it’s insane it made it into production with how enormous everything is, but yes Germany didn’t have any business pouring money into this beast. Thankfully Bovington has this beautiful example.
16:17 "I know you're not supposed to say nasty things about German tanks..." yes, exactly. I'm glad David Fletcher doesn't submit to the mandatory cool factor all fascist weaponry is imagined to possess. What could be more cool than a V2, for example? But on average, they killed about three people apiece in Britain. Many of them ended up in the drink. A lot of time, money, and expertise spent to achieve little, militarily.
I dunno man, the V2 is my favorite nazi weapon. Screwed over the nazis and advanced rocket science, both at once.
I am not sure I would call the invention of the ICBM a waste of time. Remarkable.
@@Gestapo93 It was a waste of time and resources from the point of view of the Nazis, or at least it should have been. Expensive and largely ineffective, at a time where they couldn't afford either problem. For humanity, though, it was a great advancement.
Max Savage the V rocket programme would have been pretty useful if Hitler (or his generals) didn‘t order that they were used to destroy civilian targets. I’m pretty sure that’s its main downfall
@@thomasclarke8550 It wouldn't have changed much if they'd targeted military assets, their main downfall was their abysmal accuracy. Plus, even when they did manage to reach their target, their effectiveness was lacking; when they'd hit a city, they'd only kill a few people. Less than one bomb might have, even.
His sense of humor is hilarious 😂 What an awesome guy 😎
But David, what do you REALLY think? lol