Birth of the TANK - Armoured Warfare In WWI

Рет қаралды 148,533

The Tank Museum

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 208

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

Hello Tank Nuts! Let us know what you thought of our latest video.

@pyeitme508 6 ай бұрын

Wish for future videos about Chinese tanks.

@granola661 6 ай бұрын

Needs more non-british perspectives

@letmeeatcake7836 6 ай бұрын

The amount of film that exists is incredible. Seeing these vehicles on the move is extremely informative.

@latch9781 6 ай бұрын

Given you released it the day after I was told to prepare a presentation on this topic, rather handy

@Ob1sdarkside 6 ай бұрын

Excellent. It's great seeing everything brought together like this, the old footage is the icing on the cake

@Novous 6 ай бұрын

Can we just appreciate for a moment how KZbin channels are giving us 1000x the quality of content that History Channel ever did?

@jacobq.2204 6 ай бұрын

Best I can offer is some reruns of PawnStars - Rick

@DrLoverLover 6 ай бұрын

what an original comment

@SolarWebsite 6 ай бұрын

Maybe not, but it's absolutely true. Of course, there also many YT channels that produce absolute crap as well....

@alexanderfox-robinson4910 6 ай бұрын

Come on guys, that's not a very positive attitude. Yes I agree, KZbin is amazingly useful and entertaining.

@MrVictoria69 5 ай бұрын

How about that chasing treasure UBoats show? 🙃

@davidpope3943 6 ай бұрын

My paternal grandfather started off in the cavalry and ended up in the Tank Corps in WW1. Unfortunately his military records were lost in the Blitz in WW2 but I do know he was in a Mark IV ~ probably a Female version ~ when his tank was destroyed by a German field gun, possibly 7.7cm. The warhead detonated in the engine and he was covered in burning engine oil and fuel. He later named his house Morlancourt and I’m not sure if it was because there was a tankodrome there that he might have been based at or whether he was in an action nearby there. He passed away in 1967 and although I was only 7 then I can remember the burn scars. I always regret that he didn’t live longer so I could really talk to him about his experiences. Those early tankers were real trailblazers, working in pretty horrendous conditions. I have the greatest respect for them all.

@brittakriep2938 6 ай бұрын

I am german. When my mother, born 1942 was a Teenage girl, a neighbor of my grandfathers house was a Veteran of WW 1. The old man still had an , Imperial moustache' and was proud, that was a Dragoner ( No Translation necessary). For the reason, that Dragoner once ago had been mounted infantry, german Dragoner in 1914 also used a spiked helmet, in contrast to other Cavallry branches. When the old man was drunken, He stood in Front of His House, wearing His old helmet and sung old soldiers songs. One day the old man , who was proud of once being a Dragoner, told this to a rather young man, who Had No knowledge about Cavallry Had never heared the word Dragoner and misheared it. He asked the old man: I don't know, what Davoner are? Did you run away? Davonrennen - to run away.

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

Hi David, our research team supplied this information; Morlancourt was captured on the 9th August 1918 during the Battle of Amiens. 10th Battalion fought in that sector of the battle. They were using Mark Vs, but only received them about 3 weeks earlier, so he's likely to have had experience on Mark IVs too. Too many tanks lost to narrow it down further. There could be a link between the house name and a place where tanks fought.

@davidpope3943 6 ай бұрын

@@thetankmuseum Thanks for that. I know there were several actions around Morlancourt during 1918 and your mention of 10th Battalion is most helpful. I’m sure I’ve seen mention of a tankodrome/assembly area nearby in one of my older reference books. And there are a few smaller WW1 cemeteries in the area. Maybe he lost one or more close companions there. Perhaps it’s time to drag out my grandfather’s 19 volume ‘Times Illustrated History of The War’ and start ploughing through the later volumes again!

@OscarOSullivan 6 ай бұрын

Tanks are part of the calvary

@petestorz172 6 ай бұрын

That the FT was very forward-looking is shown by it seeing some service in WW2, and the Japanese Type 95 light tank being an improved FT-17.

@parodyclip36 6 ай бұрын

Ft only, not FT17. It was never called ft17

@strelnagaming 6 ай бұрын

@@parodyclip36 try googling the term ft17 Its used pretty extensively, and is considered interchangeable with FT

@ITFNBiteBayKon 6 ай бұрын

Great video again. I've been in Guy Martin's Mk IV. My old man took me out for the day, and where it was being kept in Norfolk was just up the road from where he lives. It was an insane piece of machinery.

@andrewclayton4181 6 ай бұрын

That was good. You covered all the salient points. These early tanks are quite fascinating. A bit like early naval ironclads, they didn't know how they were going to develop,, an they were feeling their way. In a longer video you could have mentioned some of the funnies they came up with. Troop and stores carriers, radio tanks, gun carriers. Good video though.

@brittakriep2938 6 ай бұрын

In 1866 strangely the smaller austrian fleet with mostly wooden ships won at Lissa against larger more modern italian fleet.

@MrVictoria69 5 ай бұрын

They actually developed pretty quick moving the engine compartment to the back unlike the first versions up front with the crew. Must have been nasty

@Musketeer009 6 ай бұрын

Another interesting and high quality video. Thanks.

@cmotdibbler4454 6 ай бұрын

"It is very unstable and prone to fall over on rough ground, which is, to my way of thinking, not an ideal tank characteristic" I nearly choked on my cup of tea!

@joseelempecinao89 6 ай бұрын

Excuse my ignorance but is that an example of British understatement?

@williamzk9083 6 ай бұрын

The A7V was a successful tank. As the Curator of the Tank Museum Munster points out, over 95% of the western front was not rough ground and quite passable to the A7V. The tracks of the A7V came from a Tractor and had to be designed this way to ensure the vehicle got into service as quickly as possible. There were other tank designs ready for production as the war ended but the Germans had essentially decided not to to produce them due to iron shortages forcing them to choose between artillery and tank. Besides they had over 400 captured British tanks.

@mikewinston8709 6 ай бұрын

@@joseelempecinao89..totally so….🇬🇧…😂

@jmc7034 6 ай бұрын

Great vid. Would love to see the inter war years as well as WW2 in this format

@philo6850 6 ай бұрын

Splendid to see this more in depth coverage of the Great War armored vehicles and the genesis of tank warfare. Looking forward to visiting the American Heritage Museum Trench Warfare Exhibit, along with the restored M1917, our first mass produced tank based on the Renault FT. Another outstanding video production, kudos to Tank Museum staff, keep 'em coming and thanks very much!

@chrisj2848 6 ай бұрын

This was excellent. Thank you Tank Museum. 👍

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

🙌

@Green-Mountainboy 6 ай бұрын

Outstanding video! Even my roommate who has zero interest in this type of content watched and really liked it.

@donpfoutz625 6 ай бұрын

Excellent presentation! Thank you for posting such a clear presentation. I would like to see more of the experimentals especially from this era.

@darrenjosephgregory 6 ай бұрын

I'm guessing there is still no heating in The Great War exhibition as Chris has donned a warm coat! As usual another great video, looking forward to Tankfest 2024.

@stevesmodelbuilds5473 6 ай бұрын

One thing missing here is the role of Winston Churchill in the development of the tank. Initially, the idea was rejected by the army, but Mr. Churchill provided financing for a 'land ship' through the Admiralty.

@davidhollenshead4892 6 ай бұрын

Keep in mind that Churchill was known for overstating his contributions. I read one account where he appeared to claim he was responsible for the invention of the tank...

@stevesmodelbuilds5473 6 ай бұрын

@@davidhollenshead4892 He was First Lord of the Admiralty and paid for initial development of the concept for Britain. He may not have 'invented' them, but after the concept was developed, the army adopted them.

@Trebor74 6 ай бұрын

The park in waltham cross, England has a replica wwi tank in it. It's a replacement for an original wwi tank that was placed there after wwi to thank the town for raising funds for one. It was scrapped in wwii for the metal.

@weetyskemian44 6 ай бұрын

Very amused that a tank crew called their tank frey bentos. Cos its a tin can full of meat right? War humour.

@thhseeking 6 ай бұрын

"Steak and Kidney" :P

@fatherglyn 6 ай бұрын

excellent video. Really interesting looking at the contrasting developments and well presented. Thank you.

@olivierguely7871 6 ай бұрын

Very interesting video. The spanish civil war made both germans and soviets understand how to operate tank units and the need to upsize them ( firepower, protection and mobility). The germans tested also combined operations (artillery + airplanes + tanks + infantry)

@brittakriep2938 6 ай бұрын

Was only , Kampf der verbundenen Waffen' extended with planes and tanks.

@PolishMechanik 6 ай бұрын

Poland also used around 17 FTs during WW2 when Germans entered Warsaw to block tunnel leading to central square

@Tailssonic1999x 6 ай бұрын

I never knew they were planning to fit a rotating turret on Little Willie. I wonder why they didn't do it to the Mark I and up?

@Musketeer009 6 ай бұрын

The centre of gravity was too high and the turreted version was prone to tipping over.

@tobiasfreitag2182 6 ай бұрын

This is just an assumption, but I guess that, since the tanks were supposed to shoot down into the trenches while crossing them, a turret on top, that would not have had enough depression to do so, would have been seen as unnecessary weight and complication.

@RaspberryWhy 6 ай бұрын

This is a very impressive video. Well done The Tank Museum

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

🙌Thanks for the feedback!

@AsbestosMuffins 6 ай бұрын

it is always interesting that there was the tank made for ww1, the tanks that won ww2, and then everything thats come after

@SuzieSherlock 6 ай бұрын

Now THIS is epic!!!!!!

@c.j.zographos3713 6 ай бұрын

Fascinating to see the World War 1 origins of a weapon that we now take for granted. Excellent presentation, as we've come to expect from the Tank Museum!

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! 🙌

@johnlant1730 6 ай бұрын

Great production as usual. Copson again in good form!

@randyhavard6084 6 ай бұрын

Over 50,000 casualties in one day.... The generals or whoever was in charge must have really thought that the Germans would run out of bullets eventually since they just kept sending men in after the first 8 or 10,000 wounded. Insane!

@tomhenry897 6 ай бұрын

And continued for months

@thhseeking 6 ай бұрын

"Blackadder Goes Forth" parodies some of the insane thinking. The ending is...emotional.

@MrDandare21 Ай бұрын

You have to remember that this type of warfare was fairly new. Less than one hundred years before the start of the First World War. Armies would face each other at close quarters and shoot at each other until one gave way. Tanks were designed to deal with barbed wire and machine guns. With the first limited use during the Somme battle. Had they had more reliable tanks available, then the outcome may have been different. Fast forward 18 months and you have tanks, planes and infantry working together with the artillery, causing massive losses to the German Army. The black day as their lead general called it. Progress takes time, effort and sometimes failures to succeed.

@randyhavard6084 Ай бұрын

@@MrDandare21 That's exactly why I type that comment. They must have literally thought the Germans would eventually run out of bullets before they run out of men

@ollyhardy7015 6 ай бұрын

Great stuff, thanks to all who produced this

@jeremygreenwood1021 6 ай бұрын

I find land leviathans incredibly romantic. Thank you for your scholarship.

@Alan.livingston 6 ай бұрын

The FT was a little beast.

@williwonti 6 ай бұрын

This is me telling the math robot that I liked this content

@binaway 6 ай бұрын

Only on the western Front. In the East it was still mobile warfare with some modern weapons added. The French built more tanks during WW1 than Britain had. I've read of a tank German WW2 veteran who never mentioned his war service. He had been assigned to drive a Renault FT on occupation duties and never saw action. He was to embarrassed to mention this.

@DeaconBlu 6 ай бұрын

Fantastic video! Thanks!

@riverbluevert7814 6 ай бұрын

This video from The Tank Museum, as always, excellent!

@darrenharvey6084 6 ай бұрын

I've been inside the A7V at the Queensland museum in Brisbane .

@brittakriep2938 6 ай бұрын

Leopard 2 A7V is currently used:-))

@whya2ndaccount 6 ай бұрын

0:10: Not just "Europeans". How about Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, even the US who arrived just in time for "last drinks" lost a sizeable chunk of that generation. Also in what about the Austro-Hungarian Motorgeschütz designed by Günther Burstyn but admitted not built.

@grahamepigney8565 6 ай бұрын

One of the earliest problems, and one that dogs the Russians currently, was the lack of understanding of the necessity for combined warfare. The co-ordination of tanks and infantry was difficult because there was no lightweight radio communications. Officers often guided their tanks from the outside. At Bullecourt attacks were launched according to the clock, thus infantry launched without tank support & vice-versa. My wife's grandfather (Ernest William Hayward DCM, MM) fought at Bullecourt and was invalided back to the UK after that battle.

@johanmetreus1268 6 ай бұрын

Everyone knows the importance of combined arms, it is the ability to achieve it that is the problem.

@papaaaaaaa2625 6 ай бұрын

Awesome video, as always. Thank you! O think it is interesting that tanks were invented as a breakthrough weapon against the stalemate of the western front...than became a mobil element in WW2 to bring fast n quick havoc to overrun the enemy. From a vehicle designed to support infantry to a vehicle infantry is designated to support it.

@Pyjamarama11 6 ай бұрын

My great grandfather served in WW1 in a specialist armoured mime unit using sign language to communicate inside the vehicle When asked, he never spoke about what he did in the war

@MrVictoria69 5 ай бұрын

David Fletcher said one of the Mark's they had ideas to use it as a mobile MASH unit or something like that. Sounded really interesting idea

@stco2426 5 ай бұрын

Many thanks for this great quality content

@LeeBrasher 6 ай бұрын

Good video on an interesting topic.

@SteamCrane 5 ай бұрын

Very well done.

@Imp-mq1be 6 ай бұрын

I love the tank museums videos

@thetankmuseum 6 ай бұрын

🙌

@ianbell5611 6 ай бұрын

Great video. Loved hearing the history. Any chance of a video about inter war development Cheers

@MJG72a 6 ай бұрын

Great stuff! Thank you.

@darrensmith6999 6 ай бұрын

Always a treat to watch your videos (:

@theemporersnewclothes 6 ай бұрын

Many tanks for the informative content

@shadowtrooper262 6 ай бұрын

I was also aware that Japan also saw the effective use of tanks as a way to provide cover and support for their infantry, starting with the I-Go tank.

@grahampalmer9337 6 ай бұрын

Thank you. Very informative. My brother, now, lives close to Bovington & although I've not been since toddler/childhood I will visit again (along with RNAS Yeovilton & Haynes Sparkford) ASAP.

@martinhill7038 6 ай бұрын

Chris heart gold 💛 ❤

6 ай бұрын

Very nice Video. Thank you

@simongee8928 6 ай бұрын

As the French & British were first in the field of tank design in a totally new industrialised war, they had nothing to guide them. Thus what they did produce was pretty good considering the circumstances.

@billevans7936 6 ай бұрын

Awesome...

@earlyriser8998 6 ай бұрын

Good summary

@heidiwilks5316 6 ай бұрын

I absolutely love WWI tanks - they have such a steampunk look to them :)

@ChopperMeir 6 ай бұрын

Surely it's the other way around?.

@Wolfie387 6 ай бұрын

A superb insight, great overview of the iron clad horse.

@theromanorder 6 ай бұрын

Please do more evaluation of tank doctrine videos

@pyeitme508 6 ай бұрын

Tank goodness!

@billballbuster7186 6 ай бұрын

LOL the Germans only built very unimpressive 20 x A7V tanks in WWI, they were largely equipped by captured British and French designs. Apart from the little Renault Ft-17, British designs dominated with the Lozenge Tanks MkI - MkV having the superior mobility and the Whippet the speed and endurance.

@HearGear 27 күн бұрын

at 1:58 That is a headshot right there.

@sailordude2094 6 ай бұрын

Very interesting military weapon history, thanks! @16:20, I never heard of a Chinse Labor Corps before, interesting!

@The_Modeling_Underdog 6 ай бұрын

Came here for the great video. Stayed for the looney farm comments. Wasn't disappointed in both cases. For those interested in the French side of WWI armoured warfare, there is a little book published in 1931 and tittled "Ceux des chars d'assault" (Roughly translated into "Those of the assault vehicles"). A pretty grim read on the combat conditions faced by the crews - as bad as the British had it -, though it's pretty much on an "unobtanium" level at this point. Only seen two other copies and that was ten years ago while doing a google search. Cheers.

@ThePsiclone 6 ай бұрын

I think their tanks rolling over on rough ground was an excellent characteristic for German tanks. Not from the German point of view obviously...but I'm sure the British soldiers loved it.

@franksposato6072 6 ай бұрын

When the Germans capture British tanks, did any of those ever see tank combat against them elsewhere in the war? Was there ONLY the one tank battle?

@seanlander9321 6 ай бұрын

Eventually the Australians developed combined arms tactics to include tanks and that changed the war to breakthrough the Hindenburg Line.

@sloths-df3gf 3 ай бұрын

That wonderful guy Monash put it best: ‘A perfected modern battle plan is like nothing so much as a score for an orchestral composition, where the various arms and units are the instruments, and the tasks they perform are their respective musical phrases.'

@alancranford3398 6 ай бұрын

I look at the first British and French tanks as if they were the modern siege towers. siege towers in medieval times had mobility (WHEELS) and protection (arrow-protection) and firepower (archers) and could deliver an infantry team to the top of the castle walls. That forced the defenders to dig more ditches to stop those siege towers. In medieval times wider ditches meant using engineers (sappers, pioneers, miners, and cannon) to create pathways for infantry, cavalry and siege towers. The Whippet and the Reneau were actually second-generation tanks.

@richardwaring8613 6 ай бұрын

Lincoln still commemorates Tritton by the naming of one of the major roads in the lower part of Lincoln, Tritton Way. There is a MK4? tucked away in the Museum of Lincolnshire Life on top of the Cliff on the approach to the Cathedral.

@andrewallason4530 6 ай бұрын

In an alternate WW1 timeline, the French developed a Renault FT Grosse. Longer and wider overall, with a larger turret ring and turret. The two man turret, with a 37 mm Infantry Gun Model 1917 main gun, and an inverted Lewis gun mounted in a commander’s cupola (the magazine disc would effectively be above the commander’s head). Capable of great speed (for the time), accurate and deadly fire against troops, emplacements and vehicles.

@gareththompson2708 6 ай бұрын

To hear Nicholas Moran tell it (and I don't doubt your expertise, but I think he also has some idea of what he's talking about) the Germans most certainly were not the only ones to appreciate the potential importance of the tank. The Germans certainly went through the least troubled interwar armor doctrine development of any of the powers that would play a part in WW2. And, unlike the British and the French, they incorporated tanks into a maneuver warfare doctrine (though the British did experiment with the idea of using mechanized maneuver forces). But the British, French, and Soviets all clearly understood that tanks were going to be very important in the next war.

@lllordllloyd 6 ай бұрын

I think you misunderstand Chris: hecmeans the Germans best understood the way in which to use them... 'their importance on the battlefield'. Everyone knew it was important to have them.

@garybrown4449 6 ай бұрын

The maxam gun ignored .by 19 century generals . 1904 Austrian emperor armed car scared the horses . And the generals were still in the 19th century

@foreverpinkf.7603 6 ай бұрын

Schneider is pronounced Schnyder (EI in German is closer to Y in English, IE is pronounced like the I in machine), not Schnieder. Apart from that a good comparison.

@thhseeking 6 ай бұрын

He even pronounced Ieper correctly, as it's in Flanders. Otherwise, I've heard some people butcher the French pronunciation as "Wipers" :(

@rankoorovic7904 6 ай бұрын

As far as innovation the French have that title they came up with the turret

@ROBERTNABORNEY Ай бұрын

An A7V crewman was Sergeant Josip "Sepp" Dietrich. After the war, he joined the National Socialists and because of his experience with motor vehicles, in the army became Hitler's driver. He was an early recruit to the SS and became a very popular general in the next war.

@rickblackwell6435 5 ай бұрын

It seems the British were able to scale up manufacturing very quickly. Any insight on how they did this?

@ShadowDragon8685 5 ай бұрын

I would say that the first world war had quite a lot in common with the current Russian attempted annexation of Ukraine; trenches, fieldworks and static warfare are back in vogue.

@rexgeorg7324 6 ай бұрын

top upload guys

@itsjustizumi 6 ай бұрын

When i first time seeing the mark tanks I thought they can also be flipped and keep moving upside down😅

@jameskelly7782 6 ай бұрын

Gentlemen, you have never produced a poor content video.

@davidpope3943 6 ай бұрын

The Germans did plan on an improvement to the A7V ~ and frankly almost ANYTHING was in improvement on the A7V - in the form of the A7V-U which was a rhomboid design that looked remarkably similar to the British heavy tanks. This seems a bit redundant, given that the Germans had on hand 400 captured British MkIV tanks. Incidentally, the British realised that their tanks were being captured in large numbers and so the Mk.V had a gun-cotton demolition charge built into the design situated next to the gearbox and there are no records of Mk.V being captured and used by the Germans. Better late than never I suppose…. It does seem that the fatal German fascination with mega tank projects was already firmly in place long before WW2 with the 1917 designed Großkampfwagen / K-Wagen. 13 metres long, 6 metres wide and 2.7 metres tall, this monster weighing in at a not insubstantial 100-120 tonnes depending on which engines were fitted ~ and that was a reduction from the original 150 tonnes design for an even longer vehicle. Originally planned to be powered by 2 x 200hp engines, these were given the boot as being FAR too underpowered and were replaced with 2 x 650hp Daimler-Benz marine diesel engines with electrical, communications and control equipment copied from U-boats. 40mm front armour composed of 2 x 20mm plates, 30mm on sides and rear, 20mm on the roof and 10mm floor armour, this absolute beast may have been capable of a top speed of 4.66mph / 7.5kph with a 4 metre trench crossing capability. The heavy armament was watered down from 8.8cm guns to 7.7cm ~ and these had to be specially sourced from the Idstein Fortress as they had a highly desirable short recoil of 40cm. So, 4 x 7.7cm in sponsons as per the British rhomboid designs but ~ of course ~ a LOT bigger. Seven x 7.92 mm Maxim MG08/15mg rounded out the armament. The K-Wagen even topped the A7V crew complement. The A7V got by with a mere 18 crew. The K-Wagen? 27! All of the sensible reasons NOT to proceed with this beastie were similar to those to be found 28 years later in late WW2 Germany, but they persisted and two K-Wagen were in a fairly advanced state of construction as WW1 drew to a close. On the other hand, the German designed ‘light’ tanks LK 1 and 2 that owed quite a bit to the British Whippet concept were built in small numbers and post-war, Sweden purchased sufficient parts for 10 LKs which were smuggled into Sweden as ‘agricultural equipment and boiler plates’ and were renamed as Stridsvagn m/21. It must have been an acceptable design, as five were rebuilt in 1929 as the Strv M/21-29 which remained in service until 1938!

@peterjanvanbijnen226 6 ай бұрын

please more videos 1 in every 2 weeks is not enough

@lllordllloyd 6 ай бұрын

One reason the Germans underestimated the tank was the very poor way the BEF used it before Cambrai. Haig wanted tanks, but that didn't mean he was willing to listen to the officers who knew about their strengths and limitations.

@captiannemo1587 6 ай бұрын

The British used Bullock track not Holt. The British also used armored road trains in South Africa prior to WW1. And the track laying vehicles shown just prior to 4:29 are not even Holts anyways. The UK had be using track layers for artillery as far back as 1902.

@bebo4807 6 ай бұрын

The first tanks date to ancient Egypt and the reign of Mentuhotep the 2nd. Constructed of stone and timber with rudimentary tracks fabricated with flax and reeds with copper plates these vehicles were powered by a column of slaves that propelled the vehicle forwards. Archers within the stone armor chassis provided offensive power. They were used extensively during the battle of Avaris against the Canaanites the seige of Buhen in 130 BC.

@huginstarkstrom 6 ай бұрын

funny how the Burstyn prototype is absolutely forgotten...

@TCK71 6 ай бұрын

Simply an excellent video.

@madzen112 6 ай бұрын

Stosstruppen was a tactical solution to a technological problem. And it worked even better than the tank.

@docholiday7975 6 ай бұрын

Which is why WWI was a great German victory . . . oh wait. It was a tactical solution to a strategic problem and a flawed one at that. The German army was strapped for manpower and created those units by stripping their regular units of their best men, which meant when those assault units took casualties it disproportionately weakened the army, doubly so since they took higher proportionate casualties, and couldn't readily replace them. This bites hard following Luddendorf's offensive in the west as, amongst a boatload of other problems, the cream part of the German army had just been wasted leaving a mediocre (and now demoralised) core. It also wasn't anything different neither. The entente powers had been doing similar things including making platoons smaller and easier to control on the ground, increasing firepower in those platoons, increased officer and NCO initiative and tactical training. The difference being was that the entente held a massive advantage in resources and could afford to invest in technological solutions like tanks or Petain's "le teu feu" doctrine that could better allow troops like these to do their job without taking the brunt of it.

@jerrysolomon7623 6 ай бұрын

Stuck inside a steel box with an engine pumping carbon monoxide out would as dangerous to the crew as it is the enemy

@DrLoverLover 6 ай бұрын

any documented deaths?

@jerrysolomon7623 6 ай бұрын

I do not know for sure about the deaths,but there was a lot of sick crew members.

@docholiday7975 6 ай бұрын

@@DrLoverLover I recall reading about British tanks found immobile with their crews passed out inside from carbon monoxide. Between poor exhaust design and the guns going off, carbon monoxide poisoning was a real issue enough to be documented in medical texts and memoirs. Not that it was a pleasant place to be anyway; the noise of the engine was deafening enough to require hand signs to communicate, the heat inside was ~60C, it reeked of sump oil, burning cordite and petrol and lacking suspension meant bridging trenches knocked crew around bad enough to knock some unconscious.

@chrissouthgate4554 6 ай бұрын

For all the many flaws of the British Heavy Tanks, I think they still hold the record for trench crossing & obstacle climbing.

@gaptaxi 6 ай бұрын

And I´ll bet the Aristocratic Donkey Wallopers of the Cavalry had a hand in stopping the development of the Tank? I believe Churchill had to threaten quite a few with Disbandment if they didn´t get on plan and ditch their horses. The reason the Germans built so few Tanks, easy really, their Kriegsmarine or Navy had all the steel, it was left over from their Dreadnought push pre WW1, that helped start the War itself. When the Army wanted the Steel they were politely told to do one! No Steel no tanks, then as you say BeutePanzer, a habit that was carried on in WW2 when hundreds of armoured vehicles were abandoned after Dunkirk, The Breb Gun Carrier, or Universal Carrier was often used with the 37mm artillery piece. WW1 ended when the German civilians were starving to death due to a Royal Navy Embargo and the German sailors refused to fight at the Front and mutinied, end of WW1, what Hitler called the Dolchstoss! Or stab in the back.