Armoured Fist: How tanks defeated the invasion of India

Рет қаралды 8,428

2 ай бұрын

Armoured Fist: How tanks defeated the invasion of India
With Jack Bowsher
Part of our ongoing Burma Week series
• Burma Week
The Japanese invasion was halted by infantry holding on with grim determination in the hills and mountains of northeast India. But it was defeated and pushed back by the pinpoint firepower of tanks, painstaking brought to bear on terrain no one ever thought possible.
Jack Bowsher is a Head of History at a UK Secondary School (11-18y/o), who has recently finished his Masters in Military History at the University of Wolverhampton. His dissertation was about tank warfare in Burma, and was supervised by Prof. John Buckley. In the summer of 2023 he spoke about his research on this topic at the annual festival of the popular Second World War podcast We Have Ways of Making You Talk. His first book Forgotten Armour: tank warfare in Burma is due to published in the summer of 2024 by Chiselbury Publishing. He is @historybowsh on both Twitter and Instagram.
Pre-order the book: www.chiselbury.co.uk/bookstor...
The IWM film Jack refers to www.iwm.org.uk/collections/it...
Credit to Patrick Rogers (From Delaware to India) for images used in this presentation
• An M3 Lee/Grant tank w...
Please click subscribe for updates and the bell icon for notifications
You can become a Patron and support us here / ww2tv
You can become a KZbin Member and support us here / @ww2tv
Social Media links -
/ ww2tv
/ ww2tv
/ ww2tv
For First World War content follow our sister channel WW1TV
/ @ww1tvchannel
WW2TV Bookshop - where you can purchase copies of books featured in my KZbin shows. Any book listed here comes with the personal recommendation of Paul Woodadge, the host of WW2TV. For full disclosure, if you do buy a book through a link from this page WW2TV will earn a commission.
UK - uk.bookshop.org/shop/WW2TV
USA - bookshop.org/shop/WW2TV
Patreon Brigadiers: Susan Yu
Become a WW2TV Brigadier and become part of this Hall of Fame
/ ww2tv

Пікірлер: 48

@MildyHistorical Ай бұрын

The Western Allies thought every tank they came up against was a Tiger, but the Japanese were the ones who actually lived through what that would be like.

@victornewman9904 Ай бұрын

Outstanding British armour-infantry collaboration.

@davidlavigne207 Ай бұрын

"Forgotten Armour" is a brilliant title for this subject. I've read a few accounts of the battles for Imphal and Kohima and have never come across the contribution of British armour in driving the Japanese away. I was very impressed with Jack's detailed knowledge and especially appreciated his reference to the kind of tank warfare associated with the infantry support role envisioned in WWI. That the Japanese, an army modeled after the WWI German Army didn't have tactics or equipment to counter these tactics is testimony to the folly of their long term planning. The IJA got a taste of their own medicine here. Such a well done broadcast!

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- Ай бұрын

@davidlavigne207 Yes, the Japanese were essentially a WW1 army with a modern navy. Even the British despite initially having inferior technology to their opponents, still managed to build better radar, artillery, air craft, ships and anti tank guns.

@voiceofraisin3778 Ай бұрын

@@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- Different philosophy. The British decided it was better to get a decent quality radar in service immdeiately rather than waiting a few years to get high quality sets in service. That allowed them to get the integrated command system up and working so that observer stations and aradr stations all fed to felter staions which fed the central war room and all command systems were conected to RAF fighter fields so that the commander could have real time (by 1938 standards at least) of directing planes to intercept intruders. It was a conscious decision to put priority on practical use rather than highest quality. You can see that in something as basic as infantry webbing and boots. The British decided to go over to simple webbing, connected to a load bearing system with clips so lear is easy to take on or off. The fibres in webbing can be woven to any length and shape, it makes production easy. The Germans stuck with leather, thats limited by breeding high quality hides and getting pieces cut to shape, its also heavy when wet, German soldiers creaked when they walked and when they didnt the insistence on metal containers for things like gass masks meant they rattled. The Japanese werent even that advanced, theres a great video on dressing a Japanese infantrymanby people the Hattori Han channel to show you just how much tying, twisting and knotting was needed to get a Japanese uniform on. As an aside, becasue the British had decided to go with a system tied to a 'basic' system lower powered than what the Germans expected it was outside the range of their detection system, the Luftwaffe didnt even think Britain had a radar system for years becasue it was literally invisible to their detection systems. To give another idea of the quality gap, the Germans invented a radar system for night fighters that needed a specialist operator and also needed metre long antennae that poked out from the nose, the British came up with a system small enough to fit inside the nose of a heavy fighter that allowed it to be streamlined and not lose flying speed and get it in service BEFORE the germans.

@jimwalsh1958space Ай бұрын

Jack Bowser is a brilliant lecturer. almost hypnotised me as i learned so very much in this wonderful broadcast. excitng background stories of heroism and sacrifice. please bring jack here again.

@davidlavigne207 Ай бұрын

Nice reference about a football pitch being equal to 1 Acre. The tennis court was roughly 50 yards by 30? That reminds me of some American Civil War sights, such as the Mule Shoe during the Wilderness Campaign, or the Copse of Trees during Gettysburg. Such a small area contested at great cost.

@jbowsher5057 Ай бұрын

Thank you Jim 👍

@cheesenoodles8316 Ай бұрын

I have seen the film of the tanks .... very impressive... obsolete in Europe.... king in this campaign... brave soldiers... excellent show, excellent guest.

@1089maul Ай бұрын

Woody/Jack. Brilliant presentation! So detailed. I know very little of the Burma campaign and this has filled a gap! Very interesting info re the tanks themselves. Thanks gents. Bob

@davidlavigne207 Ай бұрын

Hi Willie. I agree that Jack was brilliant. Superb history combined with technical data to satisfy the nerd within in the purists was fascinating. I wish I was able to watch this live. Some day I will completely retire and devote myself to such good work as Woody provides.

@jbowsher5057 Ай бұрын

Thank you Bob and David 👍

@lemelin1 Ай бұрын

This is one of the best explanations of these battles I've seen.

@Bullet-Tooth-Tony- Ай бұрын

Another great presentation. Perhaps something on the Battles of Meiktila-Mandalay and the Irrwaddy River Crossing would be a good shout. The logistics involved and exploitation phase were brilliant there. The Irrawaddy made the Rhine look tiny.

@anselmdanker9519 Ай бұрын

Thanks for a great presentation- the only book to cover this aspect is ' Tanks tracks to Rangoon '

@jbowsher5057 Ай бұрын

And that was published in 1978. It’s the reason I wrote this book. I include a lot more about the engineering and logistical sides though.

@philbosworth3789 Ай бұрын

Another episode I missed live due to current work commitments, but at least I got to watch, like and comment on it on catchup.

@lllordllloyd Ай бұрын

This is a book and an episode we needed. I had a very intense interest in tank warfare at one stage, and the Burma campaign was always just tacked on briefly in major studies, if it got mentioned at all. By now I'm sure every WW2TV fan knows all about the importance and difficulty of combined arms warfare, hard to imagine a more difficult theatre to do it, but equally the 14th Army was so utterly practical and pragmatic, who better to do it? It is also interesting in view of the postwar use of tanks in jungle warfare, especially the US and Australian experience in Vietnam. A small note: by 1944 Stuarts had a canister round available. While a 37mm canister round isn't massive, it must have been a superb option to make the gun more effective in jungle warfare. (And thanks Jack for the solid audio, the great maps and 3D views, clear explanation, and the passion).

@exharkhun5605 Ай бұрын

Really loved the episode. Had to watch it in 2 sittings but that's no problem. It was great that Jack took his time, I know so little about this theatre.

@philbosworth3789 Ай бұрын

That was another great presentation from Jack. I really appreciated the great maps photos and other visuals, as well as his enthusiasm for this action.

@michaeldunne338 Ай бұрын

Great episode. This was like coming across an Osprey Publishing book that covered some intriguing, less well-known facet of history, but full of information that exceeded the kind of format / content one gets with those booklets. As mentioned in the chat, its fascinating to hear about mechanized warfare being employed in a place that must have been the ends of the Earth in the spring of 1944 for both sides (like surprised to hear that the Japanese had some tanks there). Given the difficulties of the Allies in employing tanks in Italy and down certain avenues of advance in the Netherlands in Operation Market Garden, really something to hear of the tactics and actions of armour at Imphal and Kohima. Strangely enough, the employment of armour at Imphal and tactics almost evoked Dien Bien Phu - say boxes vs strongpoints, in a valley, with fighting going back and forth. But, guess better logistics, tactics, morale, and territory more secured politically (maybe, with Manipur?), the British India had an advantage than the future French Indochinese forces? As for Japanese and tanks, I am not sure they were held bank in doctrine and technology by ideas about Bushido? In fact, I seem to recall that they were making early advances relative to other countries in the early 1930s (have to check on that). Seems to me the constraints that led to that arm to fall behind say Germany, Britain, the US, the USSR, etc. was good old fashion interservice rivalry, between the Navy and Army for resource. And suspect a similar rivalry for resource took place within the Imperial Japanese Army, with the air force there demanding quite a bit. Otherwise, would have to check on doctrine and needs as influenced by long campaigning in China. One thing I thought I heard was that some eyebrows and thinking were raised following the poor performance of Japanese forces at Nomonahan in 1939. And tanks were employed in Malaya and Philippines in 1941/early 1942. I may be biased on that since my inlaws live in Sagamihara, where the Sagami Depot is located (an early development center, testing ground, maintenance facility for tanks that the US then made good use of in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts). The book "Forgotten Armour" sounds like a good one. I will need to check it out. Thank you for the good show.

@WW2TV Ай бұрын

Good points - thank you

@adambrooker5649 Ай бұрын

Excellent video, great subject

@KevinJones-yh2jb Ай бұрын

That was such an informative, professional presentation by Jack, such a knowledgeable and in depth study and research. I will definitely be pre ordering his book. Great to hear about a campaign I knew very little about. Very many thanks Jack and Woody

@davidmanning7912 Ай бұрын

Fascinating talk, thank you

@AnthonyBrown12324 Ай бұрын

The extra height of the M3 eas often useful in Burmah

@KeithHathaway-ju9cy Ай бұрын

Great presentation , very well done.

@linnharamis1496 Ай бұрын

Excellent presentation- thanks!👍

@RubinoffPrague Ай бұрын

Jack should do a condensed version on the History Rage podcast, though they already had Peter Caddick-Adams raging about Burma.

@jbowsher5057 Ай бұрын

I’ve already recorded a history rage on this, out later this year 👍 and yes it is shorter 😂

@AnthonyBrown12324 Ай бұрын

Both Lee and Grant tanks were basically M3 tanks . The Grant tank was a version built for the British with a bigger turret to house a radio.. Some Lees had a small turret on the top housing a machine gun.

@WW2TV Ай бұрын

Yes we explain this halfway through the video

@johnlucas8479 Ай бұрын

brilliant presentation

@vtirolo Ай бұрын

Amazing details

@robertoneill2502 Ай бұрын

'Bloody Hell' is right Woody. Jack did a great job and can fill in whenever you need an emergency day off.

@billyshakespeare17 Ай бұрын

I have run out of superlatives. Many thanks Woody and Jack.

@brucejack606 Ай бұрын

10 out of 10

@adambrooker5649 Ай бұрын

I thought the Lee also had an additional machine gun in a small turret at the top of the secondary gun. The additional firepower was also a reason why some crews like the Lee in Burma

@AnthonyBrown12324 Ай бұрын

Saw the explanation after making the comment .

@effbee56 Ай бұрын

Very interesting Reasonably armoured tank against no or very poorly armoured tanks = disaster for the Japanese military.

@petestorz172 Ай бұрын

The Japanese Type 95 was a mid-1930s design light tank. It was basically armored against rifle and .30/7.7 mm caliber machine gun fire. It might withstand a .50 caliber Vickers or Browning, but probably not. It was outdated, lightly armored (even compared to an M3 Stuart), and imposed a heavy work load on the commander/gunner. The M3 Lee/Grant was obsolete for use against German panzers, but, oddly, both its 37 mm turret gun and its 75 mm sponson gun could be used effectively against Japanese Type 95s.

@WW2TV Ай бұрын

Which is pretty much what was said in the show

@petestorz172 Ай бұрын

@@WW2TV If adding information so as to be informative was offensive somehow, my apology.

@WW2TV Ай бұрын

No not offensive at all