Development of the British Tank Arm, 1918-1939
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 01. 2019
- Supporting the World War Two channel, / @worldwartwo
The second in the series of videos discussing how various nations spent the time in between the two wars analyzing what did or did not work for their tank doctrines, how they were developed, and what they came up with. This video (obviously) looks at the British, where budgets and votes were far more important than tank capability.
References:
Mechanised Force, David Fletcher
The Challenge of Change, Harold Winton
Military Innovation in the Interwar Period: Willaimson Murray
The Business of Tanks: G. Mcleod Ross
Men, Ideas and Tanks, J.P. Harris
T-Shirt sales: everpress.com/the-chieftain
Book Sales:
Canada: Ontario Regiment Museum Shop: squareup.com/store/ontario-re...
US: www.echopointbooks.com/histor...
Europe: www.panzerwrecks.com/product/...
Percy Hobart was a true visionary and he did foresee and predict the development of the Blitzkrieg tactics used so successfully by the Germans in 1940. However to describe him as 'not a people person' is something of an understatement. According to some of his contemporaries, he was the sort of person who could start a fight in an empty room. He was combative, abrasive and, unfortunately for the many who became targets for his ire, usually right. After developing the desert tank force in 1930s he was side-lined at the beginning of the war, being placed in charge of specialist armour development. In this he was phenomenally successful, being responsible for many of the armoured innovations used by the British on D Day. As a footnote, the Americans were offered some of the specialist armour developed by Hobart for the Normandy landings and turned it down - a decision later described by Eisenhower as one of the worst of the entire war.
Your description of Hobart reminds me of his daughter's description of Admiral Earnest J. King. "My father was the most even-tempered man I ever knew. He was always angry."
@@kemarisite my dad is always angry too xD
Blitzkrieg wasn’t a thing
@@joemungus6063 Doesn't the name Blitzkreig just refer to the German named "Bewegungskrieg" (Manuever Warfare)?
@@TheN9nth it was never called it in historical documents, it was a name coined by historians afterwards
"Oh dear, the British tank doctrine is on fire; Time to get out."
"What did you do during the war Dad?" "I was a Tank Marine son!" "Oh so you were infantry"
35:40 "BUT! Unfortunately, more peace was about to be declared!" I laugh every time xD
"Mum said it's our turn with the tanks"
-the British infantry and cavalry, probably.
you mean "ma sad i's oyr tarn wihda tenk"
I love these Chieftain talks. Keep 'em coming.
+1 for the Yes, Minister reference.
As a companion to your "watching paint dry" video, I would definitely love to hear you talk about the scale models you've built. I wonder how you find the time make them as they take quite amount of time and care to build and paint!
James Nigel quick one can be done in two weekends
Depends how much free time/day he'd be able to dedicate to building/painting models, and how much effort each model needs for the desired paint job.
Mate and I, mostly him, does W40K locally, he can put together a model in about an hour or two, but painting it just takes time. For more complex ones like he's doing now, a good 30-50 hours cumulatively, of painting.
If you've got 2 hours a day, that's about two weeks.
@@nebuchadnezzer2436 oh so true... my own semi-painted 40k collection of roughly 32'000pts in 6th ed has been glaring at me to resume painting since 2012...
And since they are a mechanised collection of chaos mutant guardsmen, around a Word Bearer host core with the requisite neverborn, allied warbands of god specific legions and a Dark Mech warhound titan, those glares get more disturbing with time ;)
I've built and finished some in a single weekend.
i also recommend a "watching grass grow" video.
Who else wants him to do a tank identification video?
I often get confused between different tanks. I'd love to see a tank identification for dummies, I think a lot of us could use it.
Amazing video as always brother! Let me know when you want to do the collab!! 👍
Forgot about that (Was in Ireland for Christmas). Pretty much any time the next month or two works.
Holy shit this is going to be God tier
'War thoughts' could be a good title, different war same geographical conflict. Anyway thankyou for putting the pre war British tanks in context and therefore making the Panzer 1 a sexy beast..... P.S. Matilda was a motherlover :)
Can't wait for it already
Awesome, I'm glad you're going to be doing the colab with The Chieftain. Congrats!
Holy fuck, an hour long Chieftain video. I can't tell if Christmas is a bit late or extremely early, but either way, this is awesome
It's impressive how accurately they guessed how the war would go in the west, for the beginning at least.
Great overview! Interesting that so many accurately predicted what was to be called "The Blitzkrieg".
I am very excited that the Chieftain is working with the WW2 channel!
Thank you for the talk! This sort of interplay between Command structures involved in setting up an armored force is endlessly fascinating. Also, all the desktop and shelf based Armor and the canned air to keep them presentable warms my modelers heart. ;o)
Points for the Yes, Minister reference. Also at 11.10. "Is there anything Fletcher has done that isn't worth a read?" Most treadheads would say "No, read it all. All Fletcher, all of the time"
Those cables are going to give some people nightmares.
WHY DID YOU SAY SOMETHING, OH NO
Damn. You said it. And now i can't unsee it.
i’ve seen worse,,,
,,,like in my wife’s office.
Lol, my cable management can be easily re-created by dropping wires and a grenade into a bucket. However they land is probably close to what my setup looks like....
When ever I am reading about tanks from my books it is with The Cheiftan's voice in my head.
It all boiled down to money, until the politicians realised the shooting was to start. Given developments went from A10 and Matilda 2 to Centurion in 5 years the engineers knew their stuff.
Which has to make you wonder how much more effective the UK would have been if they invested properly and continuously during the interwar period into modernization. Also, this is a good thing for modern states to reflect on, a reason why gutting their militaries, or maintenance of the norm is a bad way to prepare for the next conflict.
thisghy yes, at the time of the Battle of France In 1940, when Churchill became prime minister, some say on the same day. President Roosevelt, effectively start war preparations in the USA, he brought the famous production expert William Knudsen to Washington to help with war production. Knudsen was appointed as Chairman of the Office of Production Management and member of the National Defense Advisory Commission. With the exception of the US Navy, the Army was underfunded and kept small because of the world depression, Knudsen’s production methods addressed that situation so when Pearl Harbour occurred 18 months later, the major ground work was completed. An excellent example was the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant Established in 1940 under Chrysler, this plant was fundamental behind the British successes in the Desert with the production of the M3 and early M4 Sherman.
@@thisghy8126 Britain was broke. WW1 had been very expensive, reparations mostly went to France (when they happened at all, which mean France was pretty broke too), Churchill had managed to mess up the economy in 1925 before the Wall Street Crash, and the Empire was proving to be more costly to run than anticipated. So whilst investment would have been good, the money just wasn't there. In the 1920s aircraft were seen as more useful in the Empire (given the distances involved) than tanks, and even in the 1930s you had dual use bombers/Empire transport aircraft like the Bombay and even the Stirling to try and make the most of the assets. The UK was largely hoping to keep out of a European war as WW1 had been so expensive, and WW2 was too, hence rationing continuing in the UK to the 1950s as the UK was broke again.
@@wbertie2604 of course. I know it wasnt completely feasable due to the state of the economy, and i understand what the priorities were. This is mostly a hypothetical question that disreguards all those factors at the time.
@@thisghy8126 The real world and its priorities do tend to intrude on the hypotheticals!
Very good work! I found it far more riveting :p than I'd imagined the subject would be. Thank you for the time and effort you put in to share what you've learned with strangers. Especially the sorting out of the different personalities involved from all the works you've read. And now I'd love to learn more about the British armoured forces in WW2. They certainly were up against the odds with generally less than ideal equipment much of the time. Takes balls & stubbornness. I admire that.
I am really enjoying both your history talks and your tank reviews. It is fascinating to learn about the background development behind the vehicles and the people behind them and what their objectives were. I especially enjoy your comprehensive inside/outside reviews of each vehicle from the prospective of a tanker- their features, the maintenance, and how easily the operators can do their jobs inside. I think the “Oh my God, the tank is on fire” test should be part of every review. Please keep it up and THANK YOU!
I knew the video was going to be highly interesting, but at 0:30 I just had to be happy that the moving company found your stuff.
Points for the “Yes Minister” reference!
It's unbelievable how much information I can get out of your explanation about the tank development. Thank you for that stunning amount of videos about tanks 👍
Damn, I forgot to say that you did your usual outstanding job taking us through the prewar Brit armor developments. Thank you I never miss one of your posts.
Respect. The most amazing thing about your series is the in depth description WITHIN the CONTEXT of the time period that decisions were made. Against this subtle fact all the Monday morning armchair coaches fail in their assessments as we learn that generally, the decision makers of the time made the generally best decisions that were available then with the knowledge and data that was available then. Outstanding and insightful work!
Thanks for the great video! I know this is a long way away, but I'd really be interested in seeing equivalent videos for Cold War tank developments, not in types (that would be cool too) but in doctrines.
Great videos, Thanks!
Love how the shelf shadow paints a tank track on the wall.
I absolutely love his videos! So flipping informative and accurate. Thanks man!
Having spent all night watching your prior talks I’m stupidly happy to see a new one just when I needed it. Yay~
As an aside Hobart was dismissed out of the service in 1940 by Gen. Wavell, becoming a lance corporal in the Home Guard. Later brought back into the service to create Hobart's Funnies.
Liddell Hart said of him: "To have moulded the best two British armoured divisions of the war was an outstanding achievement, but Hobart made it a "hat trick" by his subsequent training of the specialised 79th Armoured Division, the decisive factor on D-Day." (wiki)
May I suggest that it might be of interest to look at some of the armored commanders. No matter how fine an armored force you have it will be naught, lacking a commander with drive.
I always thought that O'Connor showed what can be done when he defeated the Italians, as his combined use of infantry and the "Infantry tanks" together with the artillery was precisely what was required (and emulated what the Germans had done up to that point in the war). It was a shame that he was captured, along with Neame, when they got lost in the Desert and stumbled upon an excited German patrol. His subsequent "holiday" courtesy of Il Duce robbed Auchinleck of a valuable and knowledgeable commander. Subsequent commanders, such as Cunningham and Ritchie were out of their depths, and the likes of Gort were guilty of using the armour like they were cavalry horses, chasing after the German tanks, only to find themselves trapped in a screen of anti-tank guns with no appreciable way of fighting back. In many ways, this was also attributed to Hobart, if I am not mistaken (but happy to be proven wrong!), so for all Hobart's strengths and passion with regards to armour, I think a lot of his ideas were detrimental to the lives of many a British tank crew.
27:00 "War was officially outlawed!" WE DID IT, REDDIT!
Have my updoot
I know Gudarian claims to have been influenced by the writings of Liddell Hart. It's interesting to hear how these theories developed. Thanks to Chieftain for these valuable additions to a great series. I like to see my favorite yt channels collaborating with each other. Like Tanks and Infantry should do!
See video interview with Ralf Raths (Part 2, doctrine). Guderian claimed it in the re-write of his book when he was trying to make friends with the British.
@@TheChieftainsHatch While I have your ear.. There is a Forgotten weapons video on a civil war sniper rifle with unique rifling and shot. Well it occurred to me that this could be the answer to Tank barrel rifling wear. Just a thought. Thanks for your time.
@@zulubeatz1 Yes, because there's no way British tank designers had access to the British made Whitworth rifle. The Whitworth rifle's unique design was only relevant for a muzzle loader. The reason no one copied it is because breech loaders became commonplace very shortly after the American Civil War, and every tank gun ever made has been breech loaded
Thank you Chief. This was an eye opening and an immersing piece of work. Cheers mate!
Hurrah - been looking forward to this!
Fantastic video. Very informative. I love how you contextualise stuff which so rarely happens when people are ranting about fuller and lidle-Hart. More please!
"colonial policing"
... why the hell did I just imagine a Cruiser II rolling at Hong Kong to crush a riot...
ZeKeR BaNaaG I’m going to guess that’s because something like that happened? I know a strike was broken with a tank in Glasgow.
“You can’t do that, it deprives us as people.”
“Do you have a flag?”
“As a matter of fact, yes.”
“...do you have a tank?”
@@AnimeOtaku2 okay this is the first time I heard of that. I know of rubber bullets, beanbags and tear gas but a tank? damn, UK. das overkill
@@gings4ever You just made me imagine tank-fired 6pdr rubber bullet, bouncing off walls 3 minutes after being fired, wreaking havoc among protesters :D
ZeKeR BaNaaG look up “The Battle Of George Square”.
Very glad to know you got all your things back at long last. Hope you carry on as usual.
The political problem of how to get ones country to build the equipment needed to defend itself is nothing new. In the 1870s the US Navy found itself stuck with a lot of Civil War built ships constructed of green wood and in what became known as the Robenson subterfuge the Navy built brand new ships giving them the names of the old ships under the guise of a extended repair process. It was discovered. But it was also discovered the Navy really needed these ships and they were finished out in the open.
The navy did that before the war, too. They got funding to rebuild _Constellation,_ but build a new ship instead. This subterfuge was only discovered a few decades ago; when I was a kid, everyone thought the ship in the inner harbor was the original.
That was actually something that happened a lot before ironclads, as wooden ships have a short short service expectancy, so they ended up rebuilding ships all the time and sometimes, they would sneak in an entirely new ship.
Yes, many countries would contract builders of dubious reputation when desperate during wartime and soon regret it, there were the 40 thieves, ships built in Nelsons time that were great as long as they didn't get wet, shot at or expect to shoot at anyone else. I'm sure the ones that didn't kill their own crews were quietly gotten rid of in many ways including the one mentioned after the war.
Love the "Jim Hacker" reference ! Good stuff....
Love these lectures , outstanding
I really enjoy chats like this, great video!
"Hmmm,how to build a tank that wont be obsolete by the time it is produced". Hi from New Zealand,love your posts,so informative & entertaining. You're a friggin' legend mate.
This was your best video I have seen so far. It was informative, entertaining and very interesting. I had always wondered what the thinking was that created the Tankette and a few other British AFVs. Now I know. Keep up the good work!
Very well prepared and highly informed, loved it!
I was not expecting a yes minister reference. Thank you for the chuckle!
I'm still waiting for the "oh bugger the tanks on fire" t-shirt
Yet again, amazingly detailed research. Thank you.
great to see this Nick
Remind the WWII channel to add this video to their 'vehicles' playlist.
One economic point, The loan the UK paid off in 2015 was the $ 6 billion in financial aid given as a loan to keep the UK out of bankrupcy after the end of world war2. You are totally right about the inter allied war debt as it was called at the time limiting tank development as well as all defense expenditures by the UK after world war 1. This inter allied war debt was intended by the US to be an enforcement for Disarmament as shown by the Washington treaty naval cuts. The inter allied war debt declines with Herbert Hoover''s freeze of it around 1930 and its repudiation during the early 30s. The Kelloog Briande Treaty set the western borders of Germany as being not subject to military action. Germany,s border with Poland were not covered by this treaty. Having just completed Adam Toonz's book Ddeluge, I though i might add these comments to your very well done history of the period..
Thank you for the clarification. It is sad that this insightful information is not appreciated by more people.
Well the debt for WW1 was rolled into WW2's borrowing as it was still outstanding when lend lease started and Britain's WW2 money sink really started (prior to lend lease US goods were paid for with gold)
In 1919 The Uk had a $40 billion national debt. This compares to its $11 billion pre war GNP and its $ 75 billion pre war national wealth. The interest charges on this at $2 billion were half the $4 billion in national tax revenue per year. So that the UK did as well as they did to maintain their national defense was a major achievement. If you want to understand The origins and much what was done in Word war 2, especially by the Germans comes from World War one and its aftermath. Adam Tooze's book Deluge and a set Videos on You tube done by the Western Front Association do a very good job of explaining this.
Tanks , planes ww1-ww2 and all of the above it doesn’t matter as long as your talking about something interesting I’ll sit and watch. GO! Chieftain.
Good work my friend, thanks.
Well that filled in a lot of missing parts to my knowledge of that period. Thanks for that. 👍
Second time of listening to the excellent series of each country's tales on tanks. Thanks for sharing cheifton your vast knowledge.
This channel helped me get through a lot of late nights work.
amen to that brother !
Love the way Chieftain talks about peace treaties and disarment pacts, the great destroyer of military advancements.
Always informative and interesting.
I was looking forward to watching the paint dry sequel, maybe you can do one on a model and as it's being done you can do a talk about the vehicle.
That way we could have informative videos about tanks not in existence anymore like E-100 or Churchill gun carrier
Love these talks, interesting and informative. It's also a very interesting topic. Now let us enjoy this "pop's a beer".
Thanks! I enjoy your vids's! ;)
I've never understood why the RR Kestrel wasn't adopted as a standard tank engine in the late 30s. It was a mature design, powerful, compact, had advanced cooling systems and a supercharger for high altitude work that could be removed to make it cheaper and smaller still. Easily a better engine than the Liberty. Most importantly it was in production and about to be discarded by the RAF. It had powered generations of pointy Hawkers, but no longer cut the mustard for the new monoplanes. RR and the govt had numerous incentives to find a use for this old power plant - the Whirlwind and the steam cooled Goshawks being examples - but none stuck and it faded into the background just as Nuffields were gearing up to make Liberty's by the thousand? De-rated to 300hp it would have been very robust and cool to operate in early cruisers and could still have easily been uprated to around 500hp+ thus propelling later Cromwells and even Comets to a decent speed.
Probably because seemingly every important military equipment decision made in Britain has to be decided by a politician with absolutely no relevant experience. Which is why we got SA80 instead of a C7 manufacturing licence, the crappy VTOL version of the F35 and sold the Rolls Royce Nene to the Russians in the 40's...
@@royaluglydude8838 Was there a Rolls Royce whip to go with that NeNe?
I'll see myself out.
The RR Kestrel was an end-of-life design at that point and RR was expected to be concentrating on the Merlin and the R (Griffon) for aircraft (plus the Vulture and Exe). AEC and Rover were more expected to be concentrating on vehicle engines. Hence Rover handed over development of the Whittle engine to RR in WW2 and developed the Meteor from the Merlin. Given RR couldn't get the Vulture or Exe to work reliably I don't think there was any spare capacity to do anything with the Kestrel. There were other engines that could have been used, e.g. from Bristol, Siddley, etc.
@@wbertie2604 This was my point, RR had to move onto other things, but had an entire production line up and running turning out kestrels. Switching it off only for someone else to start Liberty production elsewhere was hugely wasteful of a great engine, available manpower and money. As you say the engine manufacturers traded designs and work between them to maximise efficiency. If Nuffields had been given the Kestrel production line, jigs and tools for its cruisers, the money, resources and manpower setting up the Liberty could have been diverted to setting up the Merlin or Griffon.
The Liberty was a twenty year old design in 1939. You couldn't have sold a twenty year old truck engine to the military so how did the Liberty get sold. Christie used one yes, not because of any inherent excellence but there simply hundreds of the things left over in crates from 1919. Surplus it was cheap, putting it back in production was expensive and diverted resources from better engines.
@@davidrendall2461 I can see some logic in that. I suppose it depends whether there was a decent production line still in existence for Kestrels at the relevant decision point. Putting de-rated Kestrels into tanks would have been a bit radical when the A9 and A10 were being designed, especially given the need to prove reliability for tank applications. At least the Liberty was a known quantity and reliable.
In terms of the military not getting twenty year old engine designs for other vehicles, in many cases it was. But another point is what additional development was done under the same name, e. g. the Jupiter range and derivatives were still in use by WW2 but had an origin at the end of WW1.
Excellent job Nick
Such a good video :) made my work break (And a bit more besides) a bit more pleasant
Yes! Informative and interesting!
.
Really interesting. Thank you.
Damn! Now I'll have to wait a month or more before another fascinating video gets on 'The Tube'.
really great video! I was lucky enough to live near Aberdeen Proving Grounds growing up and made many trips to see the tanks there and remember the M1922. I really hope down the road they restore them and put them somewhere where the general public can see them again, hopefully sheltered from the elements this time.
Great video, as usual. Is the Pz-IV ever going to be featured on your channel? I'd sure enjoy seeing one. Thanks again for all the hard work.
Excellent. Thank you.
*Amazing!!, Thanks for sharing us. Liked & Subcribed!!*
Greetings ,
wish express my gratitude for great content and interesting way of representing it :)
Keep the good job and best of wishies :)
14:10 Loving the "Yes Minister" reference!
Me too.
I wonder how the "sales associates" at the local paint store reacted to a request for:
"Semi-gloss, 1 gallon, 46 Dunkelgrau"
Might want to hang some acoustic panels/art on the walls. Awesome space, I could see myself knocking everything off the back shelf trying to pull a book out for a guest. That's because I am a legendary klutz. Oh, that Centurion in Bovington was my fathers among many others. So he says anyway. He loves your channel.
OK that's actually the best Chieftain clip I have ever heard. Nothing about track tensioners and lots of original research on British Army pre war force structures, people ans political influence. Many (belated) thanks for putting that out..wish I had played it earlier.
Interesting hearing about British tanks over this period. Nice vid.
Thank you for another superb discussion of tank development between the wars, Chieftain.. Your presentation on French tank doctrine was great; I'm very much looking forward to watching your presentation on Germany's pre-WWII panzer perspective.
Good to hear the Ten Year Rule mentioned.
Elsewhere on the channel,
Nice one. Lots of info.
Commerce Inspector: Lemme check your luggage
"Box labeled Grapefruit"
"Sees tank parts"
Commerce Inspector: *Ok, you can pass*
I'm surprised that they just didn't drive it in places like North Dakota, Montana, etc. for Field Testing across various terrain. types and have "A Navigation Error" that "Accidentally" crossing the 49th parallel!
I recommend the book "Tinned Soldier" for a grounds eye view from a man who enlisted in the Royal Tank Corps right after the war and served into the mid/late Twenties
Balancing budgets with the need to develop new tech is always a problem between wars. Interesting video.
Liddel Hart: Come on now, the French will have everything in hand, there is no reason to assume that the Armoured Corp will have to rush in and save the day. Its a stupid idea.
Hore-Belisha: That's the entire reason the Armoured Corp exist. We might as well get rid of it.
Also Liddle Hart: No don't do that!
Thanks for all your work/videos +The_Chieftan . Love your work.
Not so sure about your lavender walls.
This series of talks is excellent. The sources in the description are especially helpful (although it will hurt my wallet).
Thank you. (And now I look, the T-Shirt link is wrong!)
Great stuff. Historical, technical, and tactical, perspective generate Fuller understanding (pun intended). Thanks for posting.
awesome your involving yourself with indie and crew in whatever capacity.
Hi love your videos great info for my build and great to learn the history for each one my knowledge has really increased about the ww2 and still can't get enough theres just so much interesting vehicles and planning that went in to everything some is just mad to think of but amazing! I'm liking the T-shirt haha! Do you have shirts n stiff for sale with tanks etc on them its quite hard to find cool things like that, I'd have one with you tank is on fire lol
Chieftain any chance of a closer look at your book shelf? Any recommendations?
I could listen to this forever
Very good again!
Re: Fuller
That sounds very much like after the second set of communications with the Field Marshall that he might have received a note to the effect that, "The Royal Army would look favorably upon a request for reassignment from your current posting."
Note that I have no specific information regarding this; it's purely speculation. But an officer who can't be bothered to either follow the chain of command or listen to direction from the highest command levels is the sort that might be given an opportunity for a job more in keeping with his temperament and abilities.
See also: William L. Mitchell, BG (acting), USA
Absolutely fantastic video. Eventually, can we get some videos of you building models and talking about the tank you're building? :D
I'm impressed that you made the effort to get Canadians a good deal on the book, and something for the museum.
i love the yes minister reference!
Love the background
Some of the jump-cuts are just hilariously comidical. I almost smiles - therefore I shall write here this comment with LOL and smiley face... LOL :-)
Facinating. 🏁
Great video chieftan, really infomative - many thanks! Was the MB wireless in the boxcar able to transmit AND receive voice? How did they cope with the tank noise? Wireless in battalion and company tanks - so I guess that means no radios in platoon tanks!
Chieftain seems to have painted that room the same colour as I did mine. BTW, glad you got your stuff.
Happy new year!
Thank god the chieftain has arrived, And an hour!