The Swimming "DD Tanks" of WW2
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 05. 2023
- An overview of the swimming "DD Tanks" used by the allies in WW2.
More War Movie Content: / johnnyjohnsonesq
Request a review: johnnyjohnsonreviews@gmail.com
Moves Featured:
The Longest Day 1962
Saving Private Ryan 1998
Big Red One 1980
#tank #ww2 #tanks
The US DD tanks which were to land at Omaha Beach were told to use a church spire beyond the beach to guild themselves in. As they were coming in at an angle to the approach to the beach they realised that they were heading for a point beyond the landing zone so they turned towards the beach. The problem then was that this enabled the waves to come over top of the skirt and flood the tank. Several of those which managed to get ashore at Omaha because their commander had some sailing experience and adjusted their course to make sure they could land safely.
Yes they were launched at a greater distance from the beach than was planned for and this made matters worse as this meant that the tanks were pushed further west by the sea and this was causing the overshoot. Several of the DD tanks actually got very close to the beach before they sank and but for the state of the sea would have made it to the beach.
Furing practice, they worked with great success. However, the bad weather on that June 6th also played a substantial factor in their failure.
Screw that. Imagine being trapped in a tank under water.
they were released fat too far out by an impatient American commander who was unused to them. they were not meant to be "sea going" vessels, simply brought into the beach and released a couple hundred metres out . Omaha was like a quarter to half a mile out..
I seem to recall the crews assigned were tankers, not navy. As a result, they were trained in how to pilot the tanks, but did not have the experience needed to understand how to negotiate a strong, sideways current.
My great-grandfather was one of the engineers who designed the DD-tank and he was always upset about how many men died unnecessarily due to poor leadership in the Omaha beach landings.
“Did you get the new tanks? Are they amphibious? Well, there’s only one way to find out. We can always buy more.” [Homer Simpson]
What a harrowing moment, if you are the bow gunner, and you suddenly hear "abandon ship" as your M4 gets swamped two miles out...
The Driver was the only Person inside the Tank Until the reached Ground the other Crew members where standing on the Hull of the Tank
@Hawk155 Wonder if they were always the ones on the crew being killed? It seemed that for everyone that sunk, one always died
@@jamalwilburn228 Most likely as they would have had to get out of the Driver Hatcher against the incoming Water.
@@hawk1559 thats alot of pressure to poor guys almsot impossible he would be under by the time he knew there was a issue
Interesting Fact:
Another DD tank not mentioned in the video was the DD Tetrarch. It was a British light tank which was used as a testbed to see if the DD system could be applied to heavier tanks such as the Valentine and the M4 Sherman.
The Tetrach was also the first airborne tank to be used. It helped in the Madagascar campaign, and in the first days of the invasion, when there weren't enough Shermans.
Thanks. I'd forgotten about the DD version of the Tetrarch
The scene in The Longest Day where they attack Ousterham and the casino is one of my favorites of all time. Amazing how they did that one long shot. As many times as I've seen the film though, i had no idea that the tank which shoots the casino was a DD tank.
It was NOT a real DD tank just one made up for the film.
@@RJM1011 I figured. I never noticed the skirt at all before. I guess i hadn't ever thought of DD tanks aside from coming ashore and on the beaches
@@L_Train Yes the real ones on D Day did travel in land to fight. The first thing that gives the one in the film away is the gun being far too long to be a real DD tank. There is a real Sherman DD tank just down the road from where I live at the tank museum in Dorset UK apart from some wrecks in France this is the only Sherman DD tank left. The Valentine DD tanks that were lost in April 1944 as part of Op Smash are also not far from where I live and there are some others in the River Forth in Scotland that were also lost at some point in WW2. Thank you.
I had seen a real one on Port & Bessin. That one was recovered from the sea floor at OMAHA beach. Nice video John!
Ooh yes! The museum is called: Musee de Epaves Sous-Marines de Debarquement in Port-en-Bessin in Normandy France.
I remember in the 90s a local incident of a wheeled amphibious military transport sinking due to the crew not sealing some hatch well enough. Everyone on board, including passengers, drowned.
Sounds like a "Ride The Ducks" type incident.
czcams.com/video/0yG5C94qM2Y/video.html
If I remember correctly, those landing craft commanders who ignored their orders took the tanks in closer to shore. Those without that much initiative didn't.
I remember a British DD tank crewman said in an interview that he believed that the American ship captains had released too early, and he believed cowardice was to blame, as I am not a veteran I will not make a judgement on that one way or another.
An order was given to launch from the LST's at 3,000 yards and not the 6,000 yards as first planned for as the knew about the seas being rough the morning of June 6th. For some reason the LST's going to Omaha beach with their DD tanks never got this order ??
@@RJM1011 That would fit with the British interview, and what the evidence at Normandy suggests, but the question is how did the Omaha crews not get the change in orders?
@@drewjohnson-85 No one knows it was on TV about it a few years ago with some of the DD tank crews that were still alive at the time and what they tried to do to get to the beaches with their tanks. Thank you.
@@RJM1011 I know it’s hard to tell what happened considering the circumstances of the largest landing action in history, but I’m actually in the Broadcasting Radio Industry and the technical aspect of if it was a technical issue or environmental interference is somewhat interesting to me. Given that it was supposedly Several LSTs all headed to Omaha beach and only Omaha that didn’t get the message I would be willing to guess that the problem was an environmental issue, especially given the weather conditions. But like you said we’ll probably never know, and it could have been anything, for example I was once in a forest, and I discovered that the length of the pine needles was just the right length to interfere with cell phone signals.
@0:33 another CZcamsr by the name of History Legends did a reaction video of the Omaha Beach scene where he noticed one Sherman tank in the back ground which really did happen in real life. Only one tank managed to arrive at the beach but got stuck in the sand and just sat there providing direct-fire support for the troops on the beach.
Yes and I seem to remember it was helpful to the naval guns, which simply fired at wherever the tank was firing. This was far more accurate than their previous attempts.
It is astonishing to me how very far out the DD were launched. It’s perplexing why warships weren’t ordered in closer from where effective support to the immediate beach could be given.
An order was given to launch from the LST's at 3,000 yards and not the 6,000 yards as first planned for as they knew the seas were rough the morning of June 6th. For some reason the DD tanks going to Omaha beach never got this order ?? Later in the morning some warships did move closer to the beach and fired at German bunkers and other.
In the run up to D-Day, one of the many highly specialized trades that the Navy suddenly realized they were drastically short of was trained, seasoned small boat captains who could quickly adapt to challenging combat circumstances. Not just the Army was mostly draftees - most of the Navy guys were green as grass in their jobs too, and many had never seen the ocean before they got their call up. This includes the crews, the captains and the planning staff.
One of the most common reports from D-Day was coxswains who were terrified and undertrained so they kicked the men out on the first sandbar they landed on, sometimes 100m+ from the actual shoreline, instead of doing the correct thing (backing up and going around it). This should have been opposed at gunpoint by an officer or NCO (and occasionally was), but more often the men simply jumped out into water up to their chins and made for the beach as best they could. A lot of them died that way.
The vast majority of the naval gunfire support, for example, was fired too far inland to be of any use on the beaches. There was so much dust and noise from all the battleships banging away nobody could tell where any of it was landing. It had never been an issue before. If it had been directed properly the cliff at Dog Green would have been literally flattened and granularized. Instead, the Rangers had to assault it the old fashioned way, rifle and grenade.
"Shore Party. No armor has made it ashore. We've got no DD tanks on the beach. Dog 1 is not open."
All right, Johnny 😊 Have you done videos about any of the other 'Hobarts's Funnies', the slightly odd AFVs used in Normandy? Apologies if you have. All the best 😊
He hasn't to recollection. Maybe he did one on the Calliope but I really am not remembering any compilation videos on them
That would be a great one...I think Churchill rescued Hobart from the Home Guard...cheers...E..
Great video. All the Sherman tanks which took part in the filming of 'The Longest Day' in 1961 were supplied by the French military and were all post-war French versions with 76mm guns. A single recreated DD tank with a 76mm gun is shown in the film but all the Shermans which landed on D Day had 75mm guns (or 17 pounders in the case of some of the British tanks). I don't think there ever were any 76mm Shermans which had a DD conversion thought someone reading this might be able to correct me.
17 pounders are 76mm guns basically
Yes, the Americans just left the 76's in Britain as the commander's, officer's and crew though it was unnecessary and the 75mm did it's job well.
Nice video on an often misunderstood armored project. Some trivia: 1) the "DD" tank in THE LONGEST DAY was a mock-up put onto a French Army M4A1, 76mm, Wet Stowage. None of that particular sub-variant were ever DD tanks, but the French had a number of M4A1, 76mm in their reserves into the 1960s (they also feature prominently in IS PARIS BURNING). 2) the British built their DD tanks on the M4A2 (Sherman III) and M4A4 (Sherman V) as those were the majority available to them. The US Army used the British plans and had 250 kits built in the US by Firestone Tire and Rubber. The kits were added to modified late M4A1s with 75mm guns at the Lima Tank Depot and were shipped to England. The Commonwealth forces also received M4A1 DDs. 3) the major tragic loss of DDs was mostly in the US Army's 741st Tank Battalion, the other battalion, the 743rd either landed closer to shore or directly off the landing craft. The DD was to allow armor to get to shore slightly ahead of the first waves and lay down covering fire. The tanks were originally supposed to wait at water's edge and cover the infantry. The Germans had two PAK43 8.8cm guns covering Omaha Beach as well as other antitank guns. The DDs were often knocked out where they stood (a motionless tank is just a target!). 4) the US used three DD units during Operation Neptune, the 70th Tank Battalion at Utah, plus the 741st and 743rd at Omaha. Each battalion had two companies of DD tanks with their third company being M4s or M4A1s with the deep wading trunks to be landed in later waves. This third company was also reinforced with extra dozer Shermans. Some of these tanks pulled ammo trailers with extra supplies. The light tank company (Co "D") of each battalion was scheduled to arrive with the support/supply trucks on the next day. 5) DD tanks were used at Southern France, and one of the tanks used for practice sank in the bay at Salerno, it was later recovered and sits in a museum in Italy and is the best example of an M4A1 Duplex Drive. 6) DDs also supported Patton's Rhine crossing. Many of the tanks used in Normandy were either destroyed or had their special equipment ripped away to be used as gun tanks. The US Army had to look high and low in the ETO to find some DD tanks for the Rhine operations, even borrowing a few from the British.
good to know some crews survived the sinking. always wondered about that
Love yah JJ, keep spreading the knowledge friend
The Valentine DD tanks that were lost in April 1944 off of the coast of Dorset as part of Op Smash a D Day practice landing. It was the drivers of them that sadly drowned. I live about 10 miles from there. There are also some other Valentine DD tanks lost in the river Forth not far from the Forth Bridge in Scotland.
I've dived a couple of the tanks using dive charters out of Swanage. Two of them are relatively close together and can be dived together by following a rope that has been placed between them
@@DONALDSON51 Thank you there is one off of Boscombe Pier about 300 yards I was told.
Great vid Johnny.
Keep on floatin man. Thanks Johnny, see ya for the next one.
There was one DD-Sherman tank in the movie "Saving private Ryan" from 1998 but the scenes are cut out. I had seen pictures of it.
I remember way back when SPR first came out and before I learned about DD tanks how confused I was when Hanks said "All the armor is floundering in the channel!"
I was like "Why are the tanks in the water?"
Great subject and clip. Elsewhere on CZcams there was an old late 60's/early 70's documentary with British Army veterans (and a German Officer) talking about crossing the Rhine in 1945 and a urban attack afterwards with a Sherman tank and Scottish Infantry in support. The Ex-British Army 2nd LT (Conscript) explained how he was in charge of a Troop of Sherman DD's (4 tanks I believe) crossing the Rhine, not directly under fire but very nervous about the tank's 'swimming' abilities, and with great horror noticing one his Troop's tanks starting to sink (I believe the crew got out). I think he explained or implied it was more terrifying and nerve racking than being in battle crossing the river that way even if not under fire.
Funny how you post this, at this time I am cycling Normandy with cadets!
I think you should do Churchill's funnies, that be great
Thank you for making my brain bigger
I have scuba dived on several of the sunken wrecks of valentine DD tanks off Swanage that were lost during trials
Just want to say I really enjoy your videos
They have just the right amount of information to be sufficient for casual viewing, but enough interest and direction to motivate those more interested to do their own research. That and I enjoy that the vids aren’t super long, and the information is presented clearly
Also, I imagine that finding a bunch of different films can be super time consuming, especially for the more niche subjects- so I appreciate that aspect of your content too
Thanks so much that's both kind and very helpful feedback. 🙏
Of course! Also, for clarity, I don’t mean anything negative by the term “casual viewing.” I really just mean it’s easily digestible- I actually think you go into a really good level of detail, but the way you present it doesn’t make it a chore :)
The German panzer 3, panzer 4 and the Tiger all had the ability to snorkel or "deep wade" up to 15 metres apparently. The Tiger being so heavy it needed this as many bridges couldn't take its weight. Even the modern German Leopard tank has the ability to wade rivers in a similar way to its forebears.
And the Maus was also made so it could, together with an other, drive underwater to the other side of like a river. Again because like the Tiger, not many bridges could support the weight of Maus
Tigers could be outfitted with gear that would allow it to ford rivers at a depth of four meters. A small number of German tanks(168 Panzer IIIs and 42 Panzer IVs) were fitted with snorkels for deep wading during the planned Operation Sea Lion. Tank crews didn't like the idea of getting stuck underwater and drowning.
@@richardstephens5570 how very shocking that they don’t want to do that before widespread scuba exists and in an unreliable death trap
Interesting, I’ve seen most of the ww2 movies and yet there’s new information to know. Like DD never knew that was an amphibious tann
Imagine being Fritz and seeing a fucking *swimming tank* sneaking up
The screen/skirt more correctly increases the tank's displacement. This is what allows it to float.
Freeboard just means the distance from the waterline to the level where water can get over the hull plating or in the DD tank case the top of the skirt. Freeboard was minimal which is why the tanks were easily swamped.
Best Channel ever
The M551 Sheridan Reconnaissance Vehicle was amphibious with shirts that were built into the hull. They were deployed as needed to swim.
I never served on the Sheridan, but had friends in my various Armor Units that did. Swimming wasn't popular with the Sheridan crews.
The Sheridan's that were deployed to 2d ID in Korea at Camp Garryowen's in the late 70's had Belly Armor attached under the Driver's compartment for mines, so they didn't swim.
this vid is actully underated
And this oddness is why I'm more into hovertanks from realities like Command and Conquer, Battlezone 1998 and Combat Commander, and Star Wars Legends.
If I heard Tom Hanks say that in the movie I don't remember it (I was emotionally compromised though, at that time.) Indeed this is the first I've heard of the existence of these tanks. Thank you.
Pretty ingenious. There were also deep wading tanks driven off LCT’s used on D-Day and most of those destined for Omaha made it to shore. There was actually armour congestion on Omaha Beach on June 6. Though armour did contribute on Omaha Beach the local terrain restricted the tanks’ effectiveness not a lack of them. Interesting content as always.
Can you also talk about the landing vehicle tracked?
Try telling a kid who Donald duck is after telling them what a DD tank is after they see you starting the model kit,
englesh ples
@@lauripapunen2309 Learn to spell it.
As always very interesting and informative, a DUKW ,sank here at the Royal Albert Dock in Liverpool, Her Majesty the Queen, RIP ,had enjoyed a trip in it only the week before, personally I had great fun in one on the Potomac river in Washington DC....quack, quack...!!!...😅😅😅😅
A video I think you should do is one on the Madsen MG
Arguably one of the first light machine guns, it’s been used for over 100 years from the two world wars, and as recently as the late 2010s with Brazilian police forces
How about the LVT-4? I see that a lot in media but know very little about it
With those DD's no wonder they floated...
Do the DUKW please.
It's pretty impressive just how many variants of the M4 Sherman were made.
Well they had to design a tank that can be used in many theaters in many different ways
Nice.
Today amphibious military vehicle are mostly APC and AFV , very few have a significant firepower like those in tank except some Russian amphibious AFV who had either 37mm or 75mm automatic canon like PT-76
there was a scene from storming juno that showed these DDs for canada
Awesome video!!! The crews of these tanks had to have BALLS of TITANIUM to get into those things and try to float them into shore. When I was in US Army during 1980s, I was always fearful of command wanting to float our M113s but - thankfully - by mid-1980s they were losing interest in that nonsense. Also, supposedly the M577 was floatable as well, but nobody could convince me of that because it looked way too off-center for that nonsense. Yep - was vehicle commander of each type and may have convinced myself of the feasibility of floating the M113 but definitely NOT the M577. There you go, a subject for a future video - floating M113s!!!!
If yoh watched storming Juno they showed us tbe use of the DD tanks it is not much but gave us a. Clear view how it helped the infantry during the Beach landings.
Using the exhaust gasses as an inflator an a bi valve you could inflate or deflate with the turn of a ball valve an would have been much more usable as pontunes than as a inflatable curtain
Neat!
Actually the DD tanks had some success on British and Canadian beaches.
Seems like they had alot of success while the Americans arguably botched their deployment by being to far out.
@Samuel The seas were rougher at Omaha, but yes, they were deployed too far out. Idk what you mean by Americans since Utah Beach landed more successfully than the British or Canadian landings. It was just circumstance.
@@samuel10125 minors successes it was the seas that played a huge role in the problems at the landing ZONES. These tanks might have a harder time in the Pacific with Japanese fire everywhere.
@@AdamantLightLP Ok, I remember a documentary and greatest tank battles about D-day and they pointed out how the swimming tanks had battle success in the British and Canadian sectors. Yes, Utah had rough seas and ultimately got tanks ashore.
Well, there goes the casino.
FUG :DD moment 💀
There are still some surviving examples of DD Shermans
And RESICAST made a wonderfull 1:35 Scale Resin Modell !
In our Axis$Allies Global 1940 house rules during an amphibious assault the only land vehicles that can attack before a beachhead is established must be amphibious. They cost 1 IPC extra. The miniatures look cool!
The original will it float.
Theres also the Sherman Snorkles
Soviets made a lot of amphibious tanks in the cold war. Germany and eastern europe has a lot of rivers so swimming or wading capability was mandatory. They either use the tracks like on the bmp or dedicated water jets like on the PT 76 or BTR family so those are probably the closest do modern day duplex drives.
Fire
^
First commenter here.
And so...
"I arrived second, but at least I had style..."
"Then, a geography teacher arrived."
They may not be the best, but they serverd their purpose. They weren't too successful, but enough made it ashore to allow for the beach landings to be possible. So you at least have to give them credit for that. So while not the best, they were at least effective in their role. And that's something at least.
Wasn’t the bollix at Omaha due to the tanks being let off too far out by a windy captain worried about fire from the shore?
Im 3 minutes in to the video, but I cant wait. Since the skirt floatation device was rubber, I assume it couldn't withstand much gunfire or shrapnel. Do we have any information on these tanks getting swamped due to suddenly losing integrity?
Absolutely, they could be blown apart and sink. I would not want to crew this.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq another terrifying reason being a tanker would NOT be the job for me.
Are LVT considered DD or amphibious tank?
I think it’s in the name, LVT = Landing Vehicle Tracked. It might be open to interpretation, but a tank it’s not.
Big DD
meanwhile LVT(A)-4 exists
Damn, I thought the DD stood for D-Day tank. yikes.
Shame most of them were retrofited into Submarines.
Can you do anything H&K next pretty please?
So, will you next have a Tank Girl video, or the anime series, Dominion Tank Police video, later?
Take care, and all the best.
lol I LOVED dominion tank police as a kid.
I am curious to know how effective the DD tanks were once ashore
My understanding is that, once you deflate the skirt and disengage the propellers, for most intents and purposes, it's just a normal tank of it's base type.
I would guess that the propellers where a little prone to snagging on rough ground but I doubt it mattered much as they wouldn't really be needed anymore once you make it ashore. I also assume that the drive train is a little less reliable but they're not really meant to stay in sustained combat for extended periods. Just long enough to secure a big enough area to unload more tanks directly ashore.
There's going to be other details too. I imagine it was harder for the crew to get on and off one of those dd tanks for instance.
@@ColonelSandersLite Thanks for the insight. I was also wondering if they played any critical role once ashore ie. they could play a part in clearing the beachhead. I ask because tanks could arrive by conventional means once the beach was cleared anyway, and so the role of DD tanks before that is not obvious to me. For instance, were their guns powerful enough to destroy concrete bunkers?
@dragons123ism He said that many were Shermans, tanks are super useful when you're pressing an attack against any entrenched enemy, that's why they were invented.
@@AdamantLightLP I'm afraid that obviously doesn't answer the question
The tank got wrecked by submarine's rockets.
Oof.
It’s 3am the day of a biology exam, but…
Ah, then you've found out about the surprise quiz that comes after the biology test - the quiz on the history and biology of the DD tank.
I wonder if Donald Duck drove such one tank in his lifetime!
the thumbnail is kind of sus
A bit hey
donald duck tanks!
Nice, Finally managed to findout what "DD Tank" actually means in real life. And here I thought it was made-up name by a bunch of Vietnamese MMO bootleg devs.
Boys and their toys
You can only imagine all the jokes made about the "DD" tank. Especially by all the 18 year old American soldiers who hadn't seen a woman in many months. Lol.
well I imagin yes.
as far as Im am aware they did intermingle with locals in host countries. this was part of propaganda against americans used by Japense in the case of Austrilia and Germany with Britain (the propaganda being they were stealing their women). this was partially true, I mean obviously locals and hosted miltary forces will intermingle, but also cause American troops were significantly better paid, and their military stores/commissaries, included things like nylon stockings and even silk stockings which could be given as gifts. many troops spent a lot of time training in Britain.
It wasn't uncommon to be invited to diner a least according to a miltary intructional film on youtube, it had more too. this film had things like reminding soldiers things like don't expect segregation at bars or most places, and to eat a small amount if your invited for diner in some ones home since there is rationing, their was more then these 2 things but their what i rember of the the top of my head.
austrilia would kind of have many large riots because of the idea of Americans stealing their women. kinda. it started out with 2 drunk Australians and 1 drunk American kind of fighting in the street over this issue, a US MP saw it and the started to take the american into custody, but Austrilains hated american mps, do to some diference they had compared to their own MP system, I can't Rember though. they kinda all skee dadle, intially it as anti MP riots but they grew inot anti american due to origanly nature of fight and the pov.
actully i think i found the video where my knowledges primarily comes from
czcams.com/video/TW7ZTx6cb00/video.htmlsi=zAbWjPK1PHlUZO8d
this is Indy....NiDell idk how ot spell his name. he is a formal historian.
czcams.com/video/SyYSBBE1DFw/video.htmlsi=T-UMV7clN0bXs4BD
this is the US national archeives youtube channel
I might have gotten some things wrong so I recommend if you want to be accurate watch these, don't trust me. I am probably going to rewatch them again.
🤨📸
Wow you kept your tank promise
Now all we need is the m16 to complete it
It must have been terrifying to get on board these tanks...
Crewman: You want me to get onboard THAT?!
Commander: Yep. These skirts will allow you to be offloaded near the beach and swim ashore.
Crewman: Let me get this straight...you're putting F-Ing WATERWINGS on an F-Ing tank, and expect it to swim onto the F-Ing beach!?
Commander: Yes! It'll work! Trust me!
Crewman: So why aren't the brass getting into these tanks?! We're screwed, boss!🫣🙄🙁
I wonder how those 6 crews died during the beach assault :/ I mean they could've stand on top of the tank and let the commander and driver do their job since their positions are right on top of the exit hatch, once they're close to the beach the crews could just get back in
That's not how it works on a battlefield
@@janitorizamped just wondering yk, but that kinda implies that you knew, then tell me
@@tartzmir7934 they were miles out in rough seas, so I would assume some of them died because they just never got rescued while they were wading in rough seas miles from the coast. Drowning was a danger pretty much all the way to coast.
v
Drowning in a tank is an awful, and stupid, way to die.
回應PTT,不覺得會沉,只是ENGINE入水了而停了吧,沉估計因自爆了因不想落入NAZI手中
most them sank they were useless
First here. Great video as always.
''Sherman's were better suited to the modification''?
I'd argue to the contrary!
Sherman is 30 to 38 tonnes depending on variant with tall profile making it want to sway whilst a British valentine is 16long tons or shy of 18metric tons with a rather low profile not swaying.
Try making an extra 12 to 20 tons float & hence no wonder no Sherman made it ashore at Omaha beach & British command told them not to land at the beaches they did but to go closer to brest but yanks never listen to a Blight no matter how many must die for there stubborn ego.
Britain brought DD tanks of both variants as they weren't that confident on either tank though the valentine was more successful contrary to what you say as it is much lighter thus easier to keep afloat.
Johnny;)
Nicolas Straussler made the freeboard & screens for the tanks being effectively improvised hulls.
The 1st tank fitted was a British A17Tetrarch in June of 1941.
The reason the Sherman was put forward even if less stable as the valentine was an older tank that had less faith put in it.
Britain had ''Tank landing craft" Mark 1-8 gave some to the cannucks though the yanks built built the Mark 5 & 6 in limited numbers though the 7 & 8 marks not sure if they built any in the states.
Yanks relied on DD tanks for both of there beach's unlike at Juno, Gold & sword as DD tanks were more acting additional backup.
Britain had A13 cruisers out of the Mk1 TLC's.
The Mk3's could hold 11 Valentines, 11 M4 Sherman or 5 Churchill tanks.
unlike the yanks the blighties had 40 long ton rolling on the beaches from landing craft.
Other types of tanks as well out of landing craft as well but that is to long to go into as they just rolled of a steel ramp in short but alot more to it Id's rather not cover.
Britain did do DD tests for flamethrower Universal carriers/wasp, Cromwell's, Churchills & crocodile tanks but this line of thought was abandoned though briefly revisited after the ww2 to be abandoned again.
The Freeboards & skirts of both tanks on the Sherman & valentine are pretty much identical hence why the Sherman was selected as it required far less alteration compared to the other armoured vehicles tested by British command.
As for 1 vs 2 propellers argument even if the valentine was slower more simply valentines made it on to the beach's then Sherman did!
As for the 6 valentines you mentioned 1 was stuck by a seperate TLC that got it stuck in the sand being of no effective use.
More human error then then the floatation device failing.
The Ministry still registered it to the device mind even if unforeseen happenstance.
Weight is a fact that can't be ignored & 12 to 20 extra tons is roughly double the weight.
Saying the Americans have an ego while you write about how superior the British were is funny. The reason for the bad landing was stated, it'll you'd paid attention you'd know that Utah Beach, the other American landing point, had better success than either the British or the Canadian beaches. It was just circumstance. Omaha was a rough time all around.
@@AdamantLightLP Preparation not circumstance!
Britain scouted & surveyed the beaches ahead of time & the stretch the USA picked the shore was abundant with Peat so many of the vehicles did sink on the beaches they picked.
Rommel flooded the surrounding behind the 2 beaches by breaking dams dams ahead of time.
1,003 airborne are stated as killed but they died from drowning as the USA shoots had no quick release that Britain also advised they adopted but the USA had to learn the hard way!
Both said beaches are known for choppy waters but what do yanks know about geography outside the USA?
Picking Colleville-sur-Mer to pointe du hoc show the yanks lack of preparation or even knowledge of basic French geography. Saint Marie du Mont was an even worse pick due to the steep cliff faces.
I could have told your yank so called command they fvcked up as unlike them I know even enough French & basic geography to know they lead their men to slaughter.
yanks can never accept their failures & it is both sad & counterintuitive all to guard their image.
I never said the British are ''superior'' but I am stating how we didn't fvck up at in operation overlord.
The Cannucks did better which is a fact!
Probably because they listen to us blights unlike the yanks.
Mind it wasn't our lot dead!
Only the USA try to make failure look like a win.
Pearl harbour the greatest naval defeat in history & battle of big horn the greatest military defeat in history against unorganised natives relying on spirits to dictate their time of attack & strategy bested the USA for fvck sake.
France even defeated Vietnam were the yanks failed miserably & yet the yanks could take care of that like Britain did in The 1945-46 War in Vietnam code name ''operation Masterdom''.
Another Ernest King if you ask me as he lost the USA 1/2 of all allied shipping in mere months as he didn't black out USA east coast cities as the royal navy advised him.
10,000's of US merchant sailors dead for nothing but USA naval commands ego!
Your nation has the man that wants to be in charge & not the man that should be in charge!
A silver tongue is worth more in the USA then loaf let alone sensibility & or savvy!