Nice to hear from you chaps, more power to your elbows! you put on a damn good show, and do us a service in keeping these old dears running. Any idea when the museum's 'tarting up' will be properly finished?
Not exactly sure at the moment when it will be open to the public, I believe it's gong to be sometime later this year but it will be advertised & I will post once I find out myself!
@lordazn Depends where you live. In the UK, ownership is fine - some with a still-live gun require an FAC and a declaration that you'll never use it, but other than that they're just a heavy tracked vehicle, with whatever rules apply if you wish to use it on the road.
Both Crusader and Matilda 2 ARE very good runners, Crusader's only problem at the last Tankfest it ran was that it simply ran out of Fuel (I know it looked a major breakdown on the track with what looked like smoke, it was only steam though from a leak on the radiator hose). I should know... I was in the turret at the time!
we can say with confidence than the centurion was the one who finaly put the UK armor at respectable level. comet came to late and was dead end by 1945. In 1942, it would have been a wonderful tank, just like cromwell in 1941 would have been.
THE WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIND video would have been nicer if one could hear the tank and not sound like it was in the middle of a hurricane xD
Ah, I thought you were comparing them more by year of introduction. My bad. Yes MBTs have heavy firepower with medium-tank like mobility. One could call the panther a MBT, but that classification simply wasn't used in WWII. There generally isn't any difference between medium tanks with good firepower and MBTs. Just a different name. And heavy tanks were better suited for defence, or for supporting the advancing medium tanks with long range firing.
Crusader should be compared with russian bt-5, cromwell with T-34/76 comet with T-34/85 and centurion with IS-2. All these UK tanks came into action only ~2 years too late.
Cromwell had allmost the same type of gun and weight as the T-34/76, Comet as the T-34/85 (better armor penetration by Comet but no sloper armor). I guess that Centurion cannot be compared with any of russian medium or heavy tanks becouse it was a main battle tank (heavy tanks are better for fire support and breakthru missions while MBT are good all around tanks).
Actually in the early stages of the war Britain and France were much superior when it came to tank development (the Matilda being a prime example of this) it was only later in the war Germany surpassed the allies.
in everything but armour and armament, pz3 and 4 were superior to any french-uk tank. Matilda was dead end, but its armour was really a successful design. B1 bis was undermanned (like all french tanks) but could be problematic with its armour. S-35 as well. The rest was tin cans, shit boxes.
For any people later reading this, he is not completely right. The late Pz3 and 4s had somewhat better guns, when compared to the 2-pounder(Not so, at least not to the same extent when compared to the 6-pounder), but the earlier Pz3s and 4s (e.g. most of the North Africa campaign) were not really superior as far as I have heard/read.
40mm 2pdr could not. It was a joke. Against 1939-40 versions of Pz3/4 it was fine out to 300-400m, but against the versions used in the desert (pz3 J/L pz4 F1/G/H) it was useless... except shots on flanks. However 6pdr made short story of any german tank at 600-800m, except tiger.
The matilda looks like a fat chunk of steel and the jammed a barrel to shoot outa it and call it a tank. It is the ugliest tank I have ever seen along with the american stewart tank.
A truly terrible tank, prone to break downs. It is a sad fact that British tank development was way behind that of the Germans and Soviets but she started to catch up in 1944
Main problem with the tank was the oil filled air filter. To say that this was unsuited to desert operations, which is where the Crusader say 90+% of it's activer service life, would be an understatement. They had actually sorted out all the issues by the time the Crusader III came into service (including upgrading the 2pdr pop gun, to the 6pdr) but the crews had lost faith in the tank, so the chassis were converted to AA and SP gun roles.
my favourite british tank
Nice to hear from you chaps, more power to your elbows! you put on a damn good show, and do us a service in keeping these old dears running.
Any idea when the museum's 'tarting up' will be properly finished?
Not exactly sure at the moment when it will be open to the public, I believe it's gong to be sometime later this year but it will be advertised & I will post once I find out myself!
Road speeds.
c.15mph for the Tilly 2.
Crusader's top end c.28 mph,
@lordazn
Depends where you live.
In the UK, ownership is fine - some with a still-live gun require an FAC and a declaration that you'll never use it, but other than that they're just a heavy tracked vehicle, with whatever rules apply if you wish to use it on the road.
Both Crusader and Matilda 2 ARE very good runners, Crusader's only problem at the last Tankfest it ran was that it simply ran out of Fuel (I know it looked a major breakdown on the track with what looked like smoke, it was only steam though from a leak on the radiator hose). I should know... I was in the turret at the time!
we can say with confidence than the centurion was the one who finaly put the UK armor at respectable level. comet came to late and was dead end by 1945. In 1942, it would have been a wonderful tank, just like cromwell in 1941 would have been.
You mean cromwell with t-34/85, comet with IS-2 and centurion with Tiger III or IS-3.
Man, so much good video is ruined by not putting a sock over the mike.
THE WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIND
video would have been nicer if one could hear the tank and not sound like it was in the middle of a hurricane xD
Hawker Hurricane nearby?
The Crusader 3 is STILL my favourite tank. Tigers be damned!
The comet and centurion are mine
Ah, I thought you were comparing them more by year of introduction. My bad.
Yes MBTs have heavy firepower with medium-tank like mobility. One could call the panther a MBT, but that classification simply wasn't used in WWII.
There generally isn't any difference between medium tanks with good firepower and MBTs. Just a different name.
And heavy tanks were better suited for defence, or for supporting the advancing medium tanks with long range firing.
are those tanks Original ? or just reconstructions....they look to good :)
What are the laws on the tanks? I heard you could have one under some conditions...
it looked kinda advanced for its time
Crusader should be compared with russian bt-5, cromwell with T-34/76 comet with T-34/85 and centurion with IS-2. All these UK tanks came into action only ~2 years too late.
Cromwell had allmost the same type of gun and weight as the T-34/76, Comet as the T-34/85 (better armor penetration by Comet but no sloper armor). I guess that Centurion cannot be compared with any of russian medium or heavy tanks becouse it was a main battle tank (heavy tanks are better for fire support and breakthru missions while MBT are good all around tanks).
@hoodoo2001
If I did that, it'd also have to go over the lens.
It was a very tiny camera...
@Megashehri lol no shit. panther would turn the t-26 into scrapmetal
@SunKing968 Crusaders RULE!!!
Actually in the early stages of the war Britain and France were much superior when it came to tank development (the Matilda being a prime example of this) it was only later in the war Germany surpassed the allies.
is that the max speed?
15 mph
the 77HV mm was more powerful than the russian 85 mm
ofcourse not! it's max. speed is 43,4 kmh
Centurion was more a T-54 machine.
@88pie88 Panther< (all of the tanks you mentioned)
fahad zsas Tiger>panther
in everything but armour and armament, pz3 and 4 were superior to any french-uk tank. Matilda was dead end, but its armour was really a successful design. B1 bis was undermanned (like all french tanks) but could be problematic with its armour. S-35 as well. The rest was tin cans, shit boxes.
For any people later reading this, he is not completely right. The late Pz3 and 4s had somewhat better guns, when compared to the 2-pounder(Not so, at least not to the same extent when compared to the 6-pounder), but the earlier Pz3s and 4s (e.g. most of the North Africa campaign) were not really superior as far as I have heard/read.
40mm 2pdr could not. It was a joke. Against 1939-40 versions of Pz3/4 it was fine out to 300-400m, but against the versions used in the desert (pz3 J/L pz4 F1/G/H) it was useless... except shots on flanks. However 6pdr made short story of any german tank at 600-800m, except tiger.
t-34>sherman>matilda>panzer3>crusader>t-26>panzer2>BA-6>panzer1.
The matilda looks like a fat chunk of steel and the jammed a barrel to shoot outa it and call it a tank. It is the ugliest tank I have ever seen along with the american stewart tank.
A truly terrible tank, prone to break downs. It is a sad fact that British tank development was way behind that of the Germans and Soviets but she started to catch up in 1944
Main problem with the tank was the oil filled air filter. To say that this was unsuited to desert operations, which is where the Crusader say 90+% of it's activer service life, would be an understatement. They had actually sorted out all the issues by the time the Crusader III came into service (including upgrading the 2pdr pop gun, to the 6pdr) but the crews had lost faith in the tank, so the chassis were converted to AA and SP gun roles.