My Grandfather was a tank commander in a US M24 Chaffee. He was part of the US 8th armoured division under the control of Patton's 3rd army. He was involved in numerous engagements. One of them being the Battle of the Bulge. His tank was ultimately hit by a German 88mm when some bad intelligence told them that the town ahead was lightly fortified. In reality is was an extremely heavily armoured fortress of a town called Rheinberg. My Grandfather survived because he was about 6 foot 2 inches tall and had to spread his legs apart to stay low in the tank so he didn't get picked off. When the 88mm hit his tank it went between his legs and killed the the two guys up front. My Grandfather remembered his training and bailed out of the tank before a second round was fired as did a second soldier. The other soldier was hit by machine gun fire and my Grandfather ran to a ditch where he was strafed by machine gun fire as he tried to crawl to the rear. He finally made it back to friendly lines and went to empty his boots of the rain water. When he emptied them he poured out his own blood. It was then he discovered the 88mm had grazed his leg as it came through the tank. More information can be learned about this battle here. m.th-cam.com/video/_YT1N0BfEdk/w-d-xo.html He and my other Grandfather who was involved in the Normandy invasion at Omaha Beach on the coast of France both survived WW2.
+Wargaming Europe Agree with OP, though I do notice some audible distortion right at the start of the video when Richard begins his intro. Other than that, love watching these during my lunch break - keep up the good work!
my father has a full command tank radio, meant for the m4 sherman in 1944 with full mounts, radio, spare parts, manuals, antenna, etc, all garage sale finds. he uses it for HAM radio but it's in amazing condition and he'd love to give it a new home
There was a m3 Stuart that you would guide through town in Medal of Honor pacific assault, since then I’ve preferred the look of the m3 over the m5 Stuart
El Ejército Nacional de Uruguay operó el M3 Stuart hasta fines de los '90 como carro de instrucción, y hace muy poco se dieron de baja 17 M24 Chafee(que fueron modernizados y mejorados en los '90).
My passion is for aeroplanes, particularly WWII Warbirds...and then mainly the Spitfire. But watching these videos is getting me hooked into the World of Tanks.. excellent videos!
I realized that it's seldom remembered but there was a minor conflict in the Pacific where the M5 and even the M3 give good service as infantry support. the M8 gun carriage based on the same Hull also did very well
I LOVE these videos. They seem complete, full of interesting data/facts and very well presented. The presenter obviously loves armoured vehicles but does not get goofy about it by throwing adjectives all over the place. I think his presenting is spot on. But I wish you would tone down the 'bang' every time you change segments. The noise after the bang is cool. But the Bang itself is a bit jolting (unnecessarily, imo) - especially when you have headphones on (which I have to wear when watching these videos on my PC).
It may be here or may not but the M-24 was still in use in Norway until the early 1990s. They were upgunned to a French low-pressure 90mm main gun and had the power pack replaced. The Norwegians saw this as a relatively low cost upgrade to a proven vehicle.
As well as the main tank of the US Army in the Pacific until the arrival of M4 Shermans. The IJA also used captured US Army M3 Stuarts for also in defending the Philippines together with their own tanks and SPGs.
I was hoping that with your presentation of the differences between the Stuart and the Chaffee you would discuss the Tank Commander's Vane Sight that was mounted on the M-24, and how it was used for sighting the main gun. It you have any information about the "L-Shaped" sight I would be thankful if you could pass that along to me. I tried finding information on how TC's would use if for indirect fire, or helping with target acquisition for the gunner, but I have not found very much at all.
M-24's look cool..........Saw alotta them in the Henry Fonda movie "Battle Of The Bulge" with Telly Savalas as Guffy the M-24 tank commander, Charles Bronson, and "Danno" from Hawaii 5-0 was a Lt.Robert Shaw was the German Tiger II commander trying to race to the fuel dumps to get fuel for his tank army. Good film, nice tank!
The Chaffee seemed a logical concept: A light, fast tank with a potent 75mm main gun. The drawback: light armor. As fast as the Chaffee was, I'd have felt confidant in one at WW2's end.
HVAP ammunition was scarce during the war and mainly allocated to tank destroyer units, so its penetration is not very relevant as a measure of the effectiveness of the Chaffee's 75 mm gun.
Personally I’ve always been drawn to the M3 tank. I suppose it was because of a comic book I think was named ghost tank, it was looked over bythe ghost of JEB Sturat I think the tank commander was related to him. However, Say what you want but the M24 Chaffee is a beautiful looking tank atleast on the outside. Was it any good, I don’t know but it’s still a winner in the beauty category.
To me the Chaffee is a great illustration of US tank progress. The Americans go from have no 75mm guns, to having a hull mounted one, to finally getting it on the turret of the Sherman, and then by the end of the war it's on the light tank.
+Wargaming Europe Why was assault guns done away with? The STUG was such a success and cheaper to produce. I know the Swedes made the S Tank. But in these times of military cut backs are they not better bringing in a modern assault guns.
Slightly off topic but does anyone know about fort Chaffee? The one near fort smith that was filled with asbestos in its barracks that “conveniently” burned down instead of a hazmat team coming down and doing it themselves. A whole lot of cancer started after in my family for those who lived near I wonder if the similar names have anything to do with each other.
I read somewhere that the British Military deny naming the Stuart "The Honey". They claim this is an Americanism. The British said that in the UK at that time honey is something you put on toast. It was never at that time something you called your girlfriend or wife. That was a pure Americanism.
+popojoeexplode I dunno, the maps on Blitz are smaller and have less room to maneuver. And due to the clunky touch screen controls tanks that rely on mobility suffer.
I love all these vids but more on there combat history would be good. It was just getting good. Challenger did not mention it also saw action with Pakistan during there wars with India. It also served in Chilli in modernised form until recently. More on combat history please or even better do a series.
Im new seeing all of this tank thing but how does the turret and the body of the tank works , like how the crew could get in and not get crushed with the turret?
The American factories flooded the battlefield with these along with the capable M 4 Sherman. Look at it like having hundreds of thousands of Chuckies (from the horror movie) rampaging through your Oktoberfest.
When use correctly light tanks are highly valuable. The light tanks use less fuel they can exploit flanks and generally harass the enemy better than the fuel hog heavy's. Light tank armor should only be expected to protect the crew from rifle fire and shrapnel. The speed of the light tank is it's advantage. The M3 Stuart was very capable with the 37mm gun to take advantage of flanking enemy tanks. Fighting head on would not be the way to use light tanks, they would not survive frontal assaults. Hit and run, never trade punches with any other tank. It is not practical to engineer tanks to take more than it can dish out, but that is what has been done. The Chaffee with it's 75mm gun was a worthy replacement for the Stuart. The 37mm lost the confidence of tankers because it was the smallest gun on the battle field. The controversy of small hole -vs- big hole, the big hole gives better odds of a one shot kill but reloading is slower so if a miss is scored the smaller faster reloading gun is favored. That gave way to the slow heavy M6 mounted with both a big hole maker 76mm and a small hole maker 37mm. The 76mm M18 tank destroyer filled the flank and harass role best, it just needed a lid on the turret.
what are you referring to ? the vision slit on the right side of it ? if not that it may just be angled armor to give some false sense of effective thickness. sloped is better then flat in any situation.
I wonder how the the armor of the stuart and the chaffee would have stood up to the anti armor and anti personnel mines of the nva and Vietcong back in nam.?
Don't get seen by one lol. Not even sure in Wot or WT if angling would help much. In WT Ive managed to occasionally bounce a round, but it was likely a poorly aimed shot to begin with at an extreme angle. With armor that thin 50cal HMG's can go through your sides, best advice avoid getting spotted or fired on first, use its speed and maneuverability to evade shots or get behind cover.
+Wargaming europe ,you also answer people, thats why we like you! , i tryed wg for 5 years, i just see respect , fun ,surprise over surprise....... Good work wg..... I hope you always go forword!
TJ D they are designed completely differently. They main place for comparison is graphics. Which atm I'll agree WT looks better, but the Hd maps coming into wot are gorgeous. In terms of gameplay Wot is much more arcade style, while WT focusses much more on realism. Comparing it is like comparing Mario kart to F1 2017 (or a similar game focussed on realism).
The 3 yes the 4 not so much, the 4 has 80mm frontal armor, the best M3 37mm shell had 61mm of pen, unless it was a side shot it wasn't going to have much chance of penetrating a panzer 4
Why did people in the field mistaken the Chaffee for a German Tank? It looks uniquely American. Where they like, Hey that tank doesn't have a high profile, it must be an enemy?
As I see it, the Chaffee was underpowered. It looks great, but a slow light tank is a grandma car. The Walker Bulldog came out of the low power closet, increasing Chaffee's 220hp powerplant (dividing 220hp by 20short tons for 11:1) to 500hp (dividing 500hp by 23 tons for 21:1). Moreover, we already had a 75mm armed replacement for the Stuart in 1942, with the US M7 Light. That was the purpose for which it was designed, after all. Confusing its potential with the need for a replacement for the Sherman was a disservice for a fine design. It also meant our Light Tank Battalions and Recon Squadrons had to soldier on with what was in effect a modernized Renault FT. Chaffee was a pig in a poke, war wise. We could have issued, should have issued, the M7 . . . the WoT equivalent of the Gremlin!
It wasn't slow. It would reach 54km/h relatively easily. I have actually seen Collings Foundation's first M24, even with its age brake 50km/h without difficulty first hand. The M24's combat weight is a bit over 40,000lb (20.25 according to its TM). Not 23. Though as far as a mobility is concerned, there is no direct effect that power-weight ratio has on the vehicle's ability to move. Maybe some sluggish acceleration, though that directly depends on torque. And doesn't on power-weight. The M24 according to its TM is rated at 480ft-lb at just above idling rpm. For a PanzerKampfwagen III Ausf.L/M (according to the given information of it on Valka) is approximately 517 for marginally higher hp at lower rpm. Then again, that's one V-12. This is two, much smaller, V-8 automobile engines.
My Grandfather was a tank commander in a US M24 Chaffee. He was part of the US 8th armoured division under the control of Patton's 3rd army. He was involved in numerous engagements. One of them being the Battle of the Bulge. His tank was ultimately hit by a German 88mm when some bad intelligence told them that the town ahead was lightly fortified. In reality is was an extremely heavily armoured fortress of a town called Rheinberg. My Grandfather survived because he was about 6 foot 2 inches tall and had to spread his legs apart to stay low in the tank so he didn't get picked off. When the 88mm hit his tank it went between his legs and killed the the two guys up front. My Grandfather remembered his training and bailed out of the tank before a second round was fired as did a second soldier. The other soldier was hit by machine gun fire and my Grandfather ran to a ditch where he was strafed by machine gun fire as he tried to crawl to the rear. He finally made it back to friendly lines and went to empty his boots of the rain water. When he emptied them he poured out his own blood. It was then he discovered the 88mm had grazed his leg as it came through the tank. More information can be learned about this battle here. m.th-cam.com/video/_YT1N0BfEdk/w-d-xo.html
He and my other Grandfather who was involved in the Normandy invasion at Omaha Beach on the coast of France both survived WW2.
Your production values are amazing. Some really superb analysis with real historical value. Bravo! Will be sharing this.
+Matthew Russell Thank you! We are very pleased you enjoy our videos.
+Wargaming Europe Agree with OP, though I do notice some audible distortion right at the start of the video when Richard begins his intro.
Other than that, love watching these during my lunch break - keep up the good work!
@@WargamingEurope More than six years later, STILL awesome!!!
my father has a full command tank radio, meant for the m4 sherman in 1944 with full mounts, radio, spare parts, manuals, antenna, etc, all garage sale finds. he uses it for HAM radio but it's in amazing condition and he'd love to give it a new home
I've loved the Stuart tank ever sense I first saw it on Brothers in Arms: road to hill 30
There was a m3 Stuart that you would guide through town in Medal of Honor pacific assault, since then I’ve preferred the look of the m3 over the m5 Stuart
El Ejército Nacional de Uruguay operó el M3 Stuart hasta fines de los '90 como carro de instrucción, y hace muy poco se dieron de baja 17 M24 Chafee(que fueron modernizados y mejorados en los '90).
My passion is for aeroplanes, particularly WWII Warbirds...and then mainly the Spitfire. But watching these videos is getting me hooked into the World of Tanks.. excellent videos!
I realized that it's seldom remembered but there was a minor conflict in the Pacific where the M5 and even the M3 give good service as infantry support. the M8 gun carriage based on the same Hull also did very well
I LOVE these videos. They seem complete, full of interesting data/facts and very well presented. The presenter obviously loves armoured vehicles but does not get goofy about it by throwing adjectives all over the place. I think his presenting is spot on.
But I wish you would tone down the 'bang' every time you change segments. The noise after the bang is cool. But the Bang itself is a bit jolting (unnecessarily, imo) - especially when you have headphones on (which I have to wear when watching these videos on my PC).
I damn love the Chaffee, I wish I had one :)
Love it so much I use it in world of Tanks often.
HeeroYuy911 yea that's because your weight class is put against similar classes but that wouldn't be in warfare
🙂🤝🇧🇷🇺🇸
Hey Honey, I replaced your Stuart with a Chaffee...
okrajoe
Honey was an unofficial nickname for the Stuart
And took a gun out of a plane and stuck it to a tank
R/whoosh
The Chaffee really brought out the Philippine Army's fetish for light tanks...
what do you mean?
@@docterlancedamiray333 Korean war dude we used M24 chaffee and since then we bought light tanks our last was the M41 Walker Bulldog
@@miked884 ...did you just respond to my 1 year question?
And honduras Guatemala’s el salvadors too
M41 Walker Bulldog was our latest tank
It may be here or may not but the M-24 was still in use in Norway until the early 1990s. They were upgunned to a French low-pressure 90mm main gun and had the power pack replaced. The Norwegians saw this as a relatively low cost upgrade to a proven vehicle.
Any chance we'd ever see the Chilean Army upgrade of the Chaffee with the 60mm High Velocity gun in game?
Thanks again Richard for another good vid!
Absolutely awesome series love the challenger
M3 Stuart was a scout tank and used in pacific campaign
As well as the main tank of the US Army in the Pacific until the arrival of M4 Shermans.
The IJA also used captured US Army M3 Stuarts for also in defending the Philippines together with their own tanks and SPGs.
@@paulsteaven yes, thank you
I was hoping that with your presentation of the differences between the Stuart and the Chaffee you would discuss the Tank Commander's Vane Sight that was mounted on the M-24, and how it was used for sighting the main gun. It you have any information about the "L-Shaped" sight I would be thankful if you could pass that along to me. I tried finding information on how TC's would use if for indirect fire, or helping with target acquisition for the gunner, but I have not found very much at all.
These are still two highly combat capable machines even today. The numbers produced alone speak *"volumes"* (so to speak.)
M-24's look cool..........Saw alotta them in the Henry Fonda movie "Battle Of The Bulge" with Telly Savalas as Guffy the M-24 tank commander, Charles Bronson, and "Danno" from Hawaii 5-0 was a Lt.Robert Shaw was the German Tiger II commander trying to race to the fuel dumps to get fuel for his tank army. Good film, nice tank!
I like the Chaffee, its a very neat and tidy looking tank! :)
The Chaffee seemed a logical concept: A light, fast tank with a potent 75mm main gun. The drawback: light armor. As fast as the Chaffee was, I'd have felt confidant in one at WW2's end.
The only way they could keep the tank below 20 tons was to keep armor at a minimum.
A very nice review. Comparing the 2 light tanks was a great idea. Thanks.
13:20 unless you have a TOW type missle launcher on side
idk why, But its satisfying when i hear them talk about how america and uk worked together so well
Fr America and UK are hella the best duo
Great video, i love these two tanks!
HVAP ammunition was scarce during the war and mainly allocated to tank destroyer units, so its penetration is not very relevant as a measure of the effectiveness of the Chaffee's 75 mm gun.
Great video, though.
Personally I’ve always been drawn to the M3 tank. I suppose it was because of a comic book I think was named ghost tank, it was looked over bythe ghost of JEB Sturat I think the tank commander was related to him. However, Say what you want but the M24 Chaffee is a beautiful looking tank atleast on the outside. Was it any good, I don’t know but it’s still a winner in the beauty category.
Both the Stuart and Chaffee had seen action in Korea
To me the Chaffee is a great illustration of US tank progress. The Americans go from have no 75mm guns, to having a hull mounted one, to finally getting it on the turret of the Sherman, and then by the end of the war it's on the light tank.
great video 👍 💯
would love to see one of these remade with modern advances in machining and equipment.
Have this series covered the panther and king tiger? If not plz do these two soon Wargaming
+Liam Morrison (Kirito Senpai) Nope, not yet. We are though planning on doing it.
+Wargaming Europe Why was assault guns done away with? The STUG was such a success and cheaper to produce. I know the Swedes made the S Tank. But in these times of military cut backs are they not better bringing in a modern assault guns.
+sammni Turretless tanks cannot fire on the move. That's a huge deal breaker when we're talking about modern mobile warfare.
+sammni The S-tank is a MBT!
+deodorantdeath yes the can
Why oh why did you nerf my M5 Stuart? I was a rolling nightmare on tracks for those "Artys" with the howitzer.
Slightly off topic but does anyone know about fort Chaffee? The one near fort smith that was filled with asbestos in its barracks that “conveniently” burned down instead of a hazmat team coming down and doing it themselves. A whole lot of cancer started after in my family for those who lived near I wonder if the similar names have anything to do with each other.
I read somewhere that the British Military deny naming the Stuart "The Honey". They claim this is an Americanism. The British said that in the UK at that time honey is something you put on toast. It was never at that time something you called your girlfriend or wife. That was a pure Americanism.
I've seen 4 M24's here in Thailand. I wonder how much one is worth on the market?
11:22 Does anyone know what the intended use of the panel with the numbers is?
Im Here Coz I Using M5 Stuart for a Long Time Without Upgrading for a Large and Better Class in World Of Tanks Game..😅😅
Nice vid Richard
10:30 easily penetrate the frontal armour of a Panzer IV..nice
Too bad I only get in tier 7-8 match makings XD
6-8 ;)
No problem with that in WT lol
bring the chaffie to blitz
+popojoeexplode I dunno, the maps on Blitz are smaller and have less room to maneuver. And due to the clunky touch screen controls tanks that rely on mobility suffer.
+Kevin Jack-Nunez Not for all light tanks
That particular line is being introduced very, very shortly.
It's already here for a long time actually
J Bautista check date of original post
I love all these vids but more on there combat history would be good. It was just getting good. Challenger did not mention it also saw action with Pakistan during there wars with India. It also served in Chilli in modernised form until recently. More on combat history please or even better do a series.
Im new seeing all of this tank thing but how does the turret and the body of the tank works , like how the crew could get in and not get crushed with the turret?
need the Chaffee as daily car, realy nice design
7:32 who feed annie?
Great video
Great report Richard, well done.
Where do I find the one with the M3 Stuart
Hey. Whats the song used at the start ? Sounds so epic
Comment obtenir des pièces de rechanges pour APC casspir transport de troupe
I got a question why if the m5 replaced the m3 why did the marines still use it
The American factories flooded the battlefield with these along with the capable M 4 Sherman. Look at it like having hundreds of thousands of Chuckies (from the horror movie) rampaging through your Oktoberfest.
When use correctly light tanks are highly valuable. The light tanks use less fuel they can exploit flanks and generally harass the enemy better than the fuel hog heavy's. Light tank armor should only be expected to protect the crew from rifle fire and shrapnel. The speed of the light tank is it's advantage. The M3 Stuart was very capable with the 37mm gun to take advantage of flanking enemy tanks. Fighting head on would not be the way to use light tanks, they would not survive frontal assaults. Hit and run, never trade punches with any other tank. It is not practical to engineer tanks to take more than it can dish out, but that is what has been done. The Chaffee with it's 75mm gun was a worthy replacement for the Stuart. The 37mm lost the confidence of tankers because it was the smallest gun on the battle field. The controversy of small hole -vs- big hole, the big hole gives better odds of a one shot kill but reloading is slower so if a miss is scored the smaller faster reloading gun is favored. That gave way to the slow heavy M6 mounted with both a big hole maker 76mm and a small hole maker 37mm. The 76mm M18 tank destroyer filled the flank and harass role best, it just needed a lid on the turret.
+Wargaming Europe At 7:35 I can see that your not trying to get your finger prints on that Chaffee. :-P
What about BT-7 art.?
Love the Chaffee
What was the most comfortable tank of WWII? Which was the best just sitting and moving around in? Which had the best cross country performance?
Believe it or not but the tiger had an amazing suspension that provides great comfort when going over rough terrain.
+Tizer m8 Amazing suspension for the crew, not the mechanics.
Hellcat
Crews loved the Churchill as it was spacious and the armour of a Tiger.
***** Well for the Churchill VII true, anything prior no.
What is the purpose of the angled projection on the right side of the M5 turret?
what are you referring to ? the vision slit on the right side of it ? if not that it may just be angled armor to give some false sense of effective thickness. sloped is better then flat in any situation.
It’s an armoured cover for the .30 calibration Browning. It swings down into the cover.
m 24 Chaffee is my favorite tank in WOT
Narwhal Gaming PLAY WAR THUNDER
My Chi-Nu is better
Me tooo
Trollcat _22 I had a higher WR on Chaffee than I did with Chi-Nu. Not a fan of Japan’s tanks.
Trollcat _22 mt-25 >
Ahora que lo pienso...el Chaffee si se parecía bastante a los Panzer
The M5 Stuart is my favorite tank
I wonder how the the armor of the stuart and the chaffee would have stood up to the anti armor and anti personnel mines of the nva and Vietcong back in nam.?
Likely very poorly, it wouldn't have stood up to WW2 anti armor weapons and mines.
Lousy. Read books like Praying for Slack or Tank Sergeant about M48A3 in Vietnam. Even they where vulnerable
@@mbr5742 yup by the time the Shermam hit Nam they were little more then a IFV. far too past their prime.
@@tomdibernardo1699 M48 is Patton, Sherman is M4. Totally different tanks even different design Linde with M48 coming from the M26 Pershing
shit your right i misread that as an easy 8 coding, we i was still correct, they did still use them till they fell apart, up to nam@@mbr5742
3:26 That is a Matilda...Not an M3.
plz add in more tanks to blitz other than premium or limited time tanks like the anger Conner or the is3 defender
what about the m22?
The m24 toffee:D
lol
Whats the best way to avoid bieng penetrate by german tank!
Don't get seen by one lol. Not even sure in Wot or WT if angling would help much. In WT Ive managed to occasionally bounce a round, but it was likely a poorly aimed shot to begin with at an extreme angle. With armor that thin 50cal HMG's can go through your sides, best advice avoid getting spotted or fired on first, use its speed and maneuverability to evade shots or get behind cover.
What's the music ?
Just got the m5 Stuart
Krasa!
The game brought me here. Getting bored with Fifa16 and Black Ops3 on XBOX1. Cool video.
why can we use the machine gun?
I really like this tank and I love it in war thunder!
can you amagin one of those rolling down youre street
Well, I do live in San Diego, and there was that incident with the M60.
I feel like he should do the M22
light tanks in the modern era will be turned into recon vehicles,but what about light tanks turning into tank hunters?
5:00 So it was faster off-road than on the road? Wtf Wargaming...
+Marc L. 36km/h on-road and 18km/h off-road. Listen again.
+Hax ja Mix and 64 in game lol
Hax ja Mix I hear 80/eighty time and time again
+Marc L. I think it means marching speed. A speed that a tank can maintain for at least 5 hours.
+Marc L. turn subtitles on then. he says 18.
I didn't know barry chuckle was into tanks
What does HVAP mean?
+Spyronite913 High Velocity Armour Piercing
+Wargaming europe ,you also answer people, thats why we like you! , i tryed wg for 5 years, i just see respect , fun ,surprise over surprise....... Good work wg..... I hope you always go forword!
Wargaming Europe Thank you very much! It's nice that you answer people ^^
+Mohamed Kh What a nice comment, thank you sir appreciated, Challenger
+Mohamed Kh you are sick !!! ahahhh
respect from WG ?
Thanks for turkish language translate.
+Burakahmet DH Will pass your thanks to our Turkish Team :)
+Wargaming Europe Türkish languege taranslete thankyou:)
Excellent video as always. But the game itself (World of tanks) is way inferior compare to Warthunder.
TJ D they are designed completely differently. They main place for comparison is graphics. Which atm I'll agree WT looks better, but the Hd maps coming into wot are gorgeous.
In terms of gameplay Wot is much more arcade style, while WT focusses much more on realism. Comparing it is like comparing Mario kart to F1 2017 (or a similar game focussed on realism).
Add them to next upadate
Yes
You guys are idiots! M2 M3 M5 and M24 Chaffe have been in WoT for ages
Yes bro...... But not in blitz ** ....... Behave btw
+Mohamed Kh I don't mean to be rude, but perhaps you should've specified.
+Peter Seagrave , im with you in this point, but its not his right to say , thanks for your note anyway :)
And both are still use in manny or same Latin American State today.
🙂🤝🇧🇷🇺🇸
In memory of your heroes
M5 Stuart tank♡♡
Wait, M24 has an autoloader? Why in war thunder it doesnt??
it wasn't an auto loader gun.
Here because of Enlisted.
rip chuckle
Crude joke, i liked watching this video, thanks :)
Is 7 plzz
Then simple make a even FASTER tank!
we need more tanks movie plz!!!
+Safwan Joulis btw,i loved the m5a1 stuart,had like 62% with 150+ battles
Why did you reply to yourself?
I’m sorry, undergunned? This tanks gun penetrated pz lll and lv like butter.
The 3 yes the 4 not so much, the 4 has 80mm frontal armor, the best M3 37mm shell had 61mm of pen, unless it was a side shot it wasn't going to have much chance of penetrating a panzer 4
Man I know there is already a video on the Sherman, but I would love to see a video for this series on the most feared Sherman, the Sherman Firefly.
+Eblank3218 Noted :)
It's just a Sherman up gunned with a 17 pounder, nothing special about it.
Cough Cough Jumbo Sherman.
Bazooka is bigger than its cannon.
0:28 that's m3 not m5
steel coffins
Why did people in the field mistaken the Chaffee for a German Tank? It looks uniquely American. Where they like, Hey that tank doesn't have a high profile, it must be an enemy?
+-T-X-M- then how did they fit in other light tanks you idiot
+-T-X-M- not all
+-T-X-M- so you can have better armor or fit fat lords inside
+-T-X-M- part of that is true because Americans where physically bigger. Now Americans are just fat.
+-T-X-M- how about you read up on stuff. Ww2 books literally SAY physically
As I see it, the Chaffee was underpowered. It looks great, but a slow light tank is a grandma car. The Walker Bulldog came out of the low power closet, increasing Chaffee's 220hp powerplant (dividing 220hp by 20short tons for 11:1) to 500hp (dividing 500hp by 23 tons for 21:1).
Moreover, we already had a 75mm armed replacement for the Stuart in 1942, with the US M7 Light. That was the purpose for which it was designed, after all. Confusing its potential with the need for a replacement for the Sherman was a disservice for a fine design. It also meant our Light Tank Battalions and Recon Squadrons had to soldier on with what was in effect a modernized Renault FT. Chaffee was a pig in a poke, war wise. We could have issued, should have issued, the M7 . . . the WoT equivalent of the Gremlin!
It wasn't slow. It would reach 54km/h relatively easily. I have actually seen Collings Foundation's first M24, even with its age brake 50km/h without difficulty first hand.
The M24's combat weight is a bit over 40,000lb (20.25 according to its TM). Not 23.
Though as far as a mobility is concerned, there is no direct effect that power-weight ratio has on the vehicle's ability to move. Maybe some sluggish acceleration, though that directly depends on torque. And doesn't on power-weight. The M24 according to its TM is rated at 480ft-lb at just above idling rpm. For a PanzerKampfwagen III Ausf.L/M (according to the given information of it on Valka) is approximately 517 for marginally higher hp at lower rpm. Then again, that's one V-12. This is two, much smaller, V-8 automobile engines.
AMX ELC bis
日本語字幕が有るのはありがたい。