Five Things About the M18 Hellcat with The Chieftain - World of Tanks

Nicholas "The Chieftain" Moran is back with another episode of Five Things. This time he clears up common misconceptions about the M18 Hellcat. Was it actually recalled? Tune-in to learn more.
Want to join The Chieftain on the battlefield? Download World of Tanks for free using this link, or the code CHIEFTAIN2019 when creating the account, & start your account with some tank goodness: tanks.ly/Chieftain
Let's Battle! Play World of Tanks for FREE:
North America: na.wargaming.net/en/games/wot
Follow us on:
Instagram: / worldoftanks
Twitter: / worldoftanks
Facebook: / worldoftanks.na
Twitch: / worldoftanksna
Discord: / discord

[@billyslide7645]

Interesting that two of the US weapon systems with the highest Kill to Death ratios are both named “Hellcat”. M18 and F6F Navy Fighter

[@USS_Grey_Ghost]

P-47 Thunderbolt

[@billyslide7645]

@@USS_Grey_Ghost I’m not sure I understand. Are you saying the P-47 had a high Kill ratio? I’m not disagreeing, rather pointing two ‘of’, that of the F6F and the M18 and they’re both nicknamed ‘Hellcat’

[@JazzJaRa]

The Name Hellcat wasn't used in WW2 though. From what i know it was only called M18 GMC and didn't got the name Hellcat officially. While on the F6 it was common for Grumman to give planes a name with "Cat" - "Wildcat" "Tomcat" you name it.

[@billyslide7645]

@@JazzJaRa Right! Wildcat, F4 Hellcat, F8 Bearcat, and the F14 Tomcat. However the F14 is nicknamed after a person not an animal, in honor of Admiral Tom Connolly

[@philipmarler5704]

Interesting comment. The F6F was originally to be named the Tomcat, but the prudish nature of the time resulted in the name Hellcat.

[@noobepro_7146]

Me : I love Hellcat Military lover : Which Hellcat? Plane? Tank Destroyer or what? Be specific dude

[@peteranderson037]

Car guy: "The Dodge Challenger Hellcat, or the Charger Hellcat?" Gun guy: "The Springfield Armory Hellcat?" Retrowave Synthpop guy: "No, he has to be talking about the song 'Tokyo Hellcat' by Shuriken Sun."

[@franklinhadick2866]

My answer was always...yes...

[@registrado54]

Me: yes

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

Yes

[@Melody_Raventress]

Brick, do you REALLY love Hellcat?

[@ericbrammer2245]

Dang, that thing is Fast, on the Road! I understand, too, that it's Burst-out acceleration made it hard to counter when it 'sniped' from cover, as it simply 'wasn't' where the Enemy thought it'd be.

[@marioacevedo5077]

During high school, my next-door neighbor's dad fought in Italy with the 3ID's M18 tank destroyers. We never pressed him about war stories since he had what we today call PTSD.

[@skeemnave4882]

Rock a the Marne!

[@George_M_]

I know it's anecdotal but was really impressed by mentions of M18s during the early phase of the Battle of the Bulge - actually getting kills and pulling out, instead standing their ground and being taken out like M4's.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Its kill claims are highly exaggerated though. They don't stack up to reality.

[@Gunner40Five]

M18 is my only 3 marked vehicle in the game. Love the Hell Kitty

[@randywise5241]

I would like to see more on the swimming equipment .

[@BaraTwoswords]

Since it is an M18 would that be a "Speedo"? 😉

[@randywise5241]

@@BaraTwoswords 😂😂

[@ianmarsden1130]

I would like to see an officer explaining it to a crew...

[@postal105]

Thank you Chieftain for teaching more about the M18 as the Museum I work at has one in their collection and now I can tell our visitors more about it.

[@moss8448]

Nothing like hearing about tanks from a tanker. Well done as usual.

[@ditzydoo4378]

Yaaaaa! more Chieftain please. The M-18 is one of my all-time favorite vehicles. I do wonder how it would have done if the 90mm gun of the later M-56 had been around during WWII...

[@clydeosterhout1221]

Should have assigned them to the Armoured Cavalry regiments. They desperately needed the firepower.

[@ekscalybur]

Small, fast and heavily armed? This thing screams CFV.

[@A.J.K87]

I remember seeing an interview with Harry Yeide in which he said that M18's were assigned to cavalry units to give them more firepower and because they could keep up.

[@clydeosterhout1221]

@@A.J.K87 makes sense. Reading the official history of the Battle of the Bulge it becomes quite clear that the cavalry units responsible for holding long sections of the line were stuck in assigned static positions, but were not given the fire power to hold them. Notably the only effective organic anti-tank weapons were the M8 SP howitzers with the short barreled 75’s. Some m18s would have been really handy!

[@legbreaker2762]

But what about track tensioning?

[@donjones4719]

Well, this did show film of track *un* tensioning. ;)

[@deadmeat_bc_143]

Howdy Nick, Thank you for this video. Extremely interesting. I loved seeing that old video of pulling the suspension and the torsion bar out. "Looks too much like a German tank" While the Germans disguised the Panther to look like a M10 :)

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Heya DM. I found it interesting they went the M10 route as well. Maybe it was due to the size of the turret, getting the round shape out of a Panther just wasn’t going to work.

[@tvgerbil1984]

The M18 was actually lighter than the M24 Chaffee, cheaper to manufacture and armed with a much better main gun. All it needed was a co-axial machine gun and an armored turret roof (a roof armor kit was developed but came too late for ww2) and the US army would have a far better and more effective light tank than those M3, M5 and M24.

[@justforever96]

If the entire point of a light tank was to be a tank destroyer, you might have a point. But that is not the point of a light tank, that is the point of a tank destroyer. The M18 had a _maximum_ armor thickness of .5 inches, basically good for small arms fire, nothing else. The M24 had .4 inches on the sides, 1.5 on the front. So it could actually stop something more than rifle and MG fire. It also had a gun that fired a shell useful for something besides penetrating armor, which is not the case with the 76mm. So if your definition of "light tank" is "a vehicle that is very good at taking out enemy armor from ambush positions as long as it never gets shot at in return", sure, you have a point. But that is basically a tank destroyer. which is what an M18 is. If you want something that can deliver a useful HE round to enemy positions and at least make some pretense of slugging it out in open combat under return fire, the M24 is far better.

[@tvgerbil1984]

@@justforever96 When the M24s entered the European theatre in late 1944, virtually every piece of German anti-tank weapon had no problem in defeating them, including the long obsolete Pak-36s which were given Stielgranate 41 shaped charge ammunitions. The M18s probably had better chance of survival because of their superior agility and speed over the M24s. The US tank destroyer doctrine was not practical anyway and the M18s were mostly and successfully deployed as light tanks to screen the main armor formation in battles.

[@Tooawesome693]

The m24 was designed to do a very different job than the m18. The m24 is designed for infantry support, while the m18 is designed for dealing with enemy armor.

[@WorldoftanksNAarchived]

Did The Chieftain clear up any misconceptions you had?

[@Arelia39]

one of the misconception that I have about the tank... is that I though that the M18 is a widely acceptable tank to begin with... never thought it have a hard time trying to be in the army...

[@Bochi42]

@@Arelia39 When people are shooting at you crews tend to prefer more more armor. It's interesting how he pointed out that in the tough slogging campaigns the crews preferred the M-10 for that reason; and the ones on the breakout following Operation Cobra really like the M-18. It makes sense but I didn't know that.

[@Grubnar]

His first point is about why it used the Continental engine, rather than the new Ford engine ... but he doesn't mention what difference it would have made.

[@aldenconsolver3428]

These 5 thing videos are entertaining and specially useful when looking into world of tanks play.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

@@Grubnar About 150hp, to start with.

[@cliverockability3829]

As usual, interesting, informative, and good humour

[@smuldohuntermuldo9312]

I'm definitely a cat person, no cat like a Hellcat.

[@korbell1089]

Ordnance Board: "oh, so you won't trade in your M10s for the M18? You done screwed up because now you'll just have to settle for the M36!"

[@Bagledog5000]

I'll take "ability to destroy German tanks from long range" for $500 Alex.

[@brealistic3542]

You failed to mention that the M18 had a lot of HVAP as a standard load out of ammo unlike other tanks, therefore the 9O mm.wasn't really needed.

[@Kerak21]

Super Hellcat in WoT is fun Though I miss the classic Hellcat before it was nerfed. Great video

[@spudpud-T67]

lol how it was so fast in reality and yet so slow in game. Of all the elements they could have been faithful too. I guess its not Russian....

[@franklinhadick2866]

More great info, thanks, also the opening reminds me of some older film openings of murder mysteries. I like it.

[@Probookuser03]

“Yeah, a conventional V8 is too experimental for us, let’s just slap *an engine from an airplane in it* “

[@captainswoop8722]

It was a brand new engine though, what if it turned out to have a serious defect after it had some time running on it?

[@Crosshair84]

The Ford GAA was not a "conventional", for the time, engine. It was a high-performance V12 aircraft engine with 4 cylinders cut off and the compression ratio adjusted to run on lower octane fuel. All aluminum, DOHC, dual magneto, dual sparkplug, dual carburetor V8 engines were not the norm at all. Granted, the alternative was another repurposed aircraft engine. That one was, as the video said, known to work just fine. So was not an issue.

[@captainswoop8722]

@@Crosshair84 Similar to the RR Meteor tank engine being a de-rated Merlin.

[@eta320]

Man, I was literally planning to make a video on how awesome the M18 was and how it was “The Tank America Couldn’t Make Enough Of.” I had no idea it was so disliked and had such a rocky development history. Guess I’ll have to reconsider the theme of the video!

[@Bochi42]

Yeah if I was a crew member I'd want my more armored M-10. Plus speed in the advance unless the enemy is on the run just makes you more likely to get killed. TDs are supposed to be a defensive weapon so the Hellcat makes perfect sense as a quick response weapon in that context and on that level. I'm sure the M-10 crews also had that loyal affection to their machines that had got them through this much of the war alive as well. Something new needs to be an obvious improvement not a questionable one that requires new tactics to use properly.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Sorry, Eta..

[@eta320]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Curse you Chieftain! Forcing me to actually do my research! Don't you know that the last thing a Tank enthusiast like me wants to do is read page after page on the minutia of these tanks to produce historically accurate and well researched content!

[@eta320]

@hognoxious who asked

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

I never knew it's kill count. Best tank killer I've simmed with.

[@jamesellis4664]

The M-18 was my dad's tank during the war. He said he loved that tank as well as the rest of his crew. The HVAP ammo was such it was like having a big gun on their tank he said. Also they were so dam fast that the German's could not get a good bead on them.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

But the Germans knocked out lots of them so?

[@jamesellis4664]

@@lyndoncmp5751 Everyone lost lots of tanks. But I think I would rather have the fastest tank in the world. "I can get out of trouble faster than I got in it." "Odd ball- Kelly's Heroes"

[@Mark3nd]

M18 does have a Rooftop! The top turret is just a M36 Turret without the roof and 90mm. Effectively called SUPER Hellcat.

[@Arelia39]

4:45 I knew a German who love this tanks A LOT... and he so obsessed with it... and I think he is the only person who have the most camo for the Hellcat in World Of Tanks Blitz...

[@chrismiddleton398]

I love my M18, but I love my M8A1 more! It's the same but better in every way, for its tier. Unfortunately, it's a low tier, so I don't run it out very often. Give M8A1 a retry sometime. It's lovely!

[@jackgilpin9614]

I'll get some flack back on this but when some of the boys who grew up on the farms got through playing with the governess on the engines. Good roads (paved) they could do 65. My dad was in the hellcats under Patton.

[@MarcosElMalo2]

I like this shortish “5 things” format. It’s very entertaining, and just right when I want a quick hit of military history. I’m less likely to click on a 20-30 minute video if I’ve got a ten minute window. Fine point criticism: lose or dial down the dust and scratch filter. It really doesn’t add anything. if you want to “documentarify” video, just apply a grain filter and tweak appropriately. Or keep the artificial dust and scratches-it’s not a big deal, just a suggestion.

[@ncktbs]

i do like some of that old archive footage never seen some of that before

[@MGB-learning]

Great video!

[@KnifeChatswithTobias]

Perhaps a silly question but this kill ratio... how does it compare to say M10s and M4-76mm serving during the same time period? Could it be that the M18 kill ratio benefits from when it was fighting? The German Tanks crews were struggling near the end. and early American and Commonwealth TDs and Tank crews were still learning the ropes before June 1944. Let's face, we all know how statistics can lie. This is not to say the Hellcat was not excellent at what it did. I'm just wondering about some of the factors that contributed to its kill ratio.

[@donjones4719]

Good points. The Grumman Hellcat fighter had a dominating kill ratio, but a significant number of Japan's corp of skilled fighter pilots had been eliminated by the time it came into service. Once the Hellcat had nearly wiped out the remainder early in its career the succession of under-trained pilots were easy targets. Japan was hard-pressed to produce enough fighters, so the Hellcat often had the numerical advantage in formation v formation combat, IIRC. All that made that Hellcat's stats impressive. Likewise, the M18 Hellcat was fighting German armored units that were progressively reeling from combat with hordes of M4s, etc. That must have depleted the ranks of skilled crews. Skills are learned at school, but the crucial level of learning can only be learned in combat from the experienced crews (or pilots) around you. Once enough veterans are depleted a downward spiral sets in. The M18 joined in at the beginning of this, in my rough estimation, and continued to benefit from it. Nothing dominates like domination.

[@KnifeChatswithTobias]

@@donjones4719, well said!

[@castor3020]

It was faster and more nimble hence it could be more likely in position when it was needed vs the M10. As for Shermans the answer is simple, the vehicle was meant for defence, in defence you have an advantage of camouflage and ability to choose the terrain. M4 was used for that too but it was used a lot more for offence. Same reason why Late war German vehicles had such awesome kill amounts, the enemy had to come to them.

[@KnifeChatswithTobias]

@@castor3020, that doesn’t answer the question. I’d like to know how it’s kill ratio, say from July, 1944 until February, 1945. Compares to the M10 and the M4-76mm during the same time period. It might still be higher but at least it would be more accurate. The other vehicles were in action for a longer period including a time when American crews were less experienced than German crews. Also from what I read much of time the M18 was being used for less glamorous chores than as a TD; that is direct fire support for infantry. Again, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying the M18 was bad. I like the vehicle. But I’m curious as to how this stat came about and what numbers were crunched to come up with it. I see how they got the kill ratio for the M18. But for the other vehicles- did they compare their numbers during the same time period or for the entire duration of service? It makes a difference. I would much preferred to be a Sherman tank crew in 1945 than 1943.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Take the kill claims with a massive pinch of salt. We know for a fact that some of the claims do not stack up to reality on closer analysis.

Interesting stuff.

[@HM2SGT]

Just looking at the specs and this thing is about the same size as my ambulance! That’s smaller than I would’ve thought a tank destroyer/armored fighting vehicle would be. The ambulance is 24 feet long, 8 feet wide and 10 feet high.

[@davidjamgochian]

Great Video

[@douglasmiller8607]

I'd like to see something on the different propellants used by the combatants.

[@bp5009]

My favorite tank of all time in game and in real life

[@deejayimm]

Well done Sir.

[@mattwilliams3456]

Well now we obviously need 5 facts about the M10 and 5 more about the M36 to gauge how those crews in Italy came to their conclusions.

[@D4rkn3ss2000]

Me: I love the hellcat ^^ Some random person: the tank destroyer or the figther plane? Me: *YES*

[@larry-three8225]

In World of Tanks, the M18 and M36 are at the same Tier. Both use a 90, although the M18 has worse DPM and movement Dispersion, while the M36 is a bit better.

[@andypohl9550]

Super cool more I want more.😁

[@LineDoggie]

Love the old school G.I. Desk there must be millions still around

[@tedshipley6872]

My question are; Was the M18 really as slow in reverse as in the game? Was the turret rotation as slow as in the game? For me, those are the two things that I have issue with.

[@tutzdesYT]

IDK about speed in reverse. As for turret traverse rate, IIRC it is one of the rare vehicles that has slower turret rotation rate in the game, than IRL. Back when M18 implemented this "nerf" was totally justified as the vehicle used to be insanely OP.

[@JamesIsAway]

If the M18’s stats in the game were historical it would be the only tank anyone played at tier 6

[@Bird_Dog00]

Imo they kinda droped the ball with the T6 US TDs. You have two turreted TDs with the same gun. One has a little more armour, but not that much. It is also much slower. Imo they should never have givien the M18 the 90mm and instead just given it more historical-ish mobility, so that the two vehicles were more distinct in their playstiles. Although I can see the issue of the 76mm struggling for relevance against T8s. But then again... T6 mediums: "fist time here?"

[@deadmeat_bc_143]

Hellcat = 89km/h on-road, 42km/h off-road, 32km/h reverse. Turret Traverse of 24dps, +20/-10 elevation/depression. The 76mm gun could kill anything with the HVAP Ammo, but I heard that after firing a certain number of these, the barrel had to be replaced, but this is unsubstantiated, the crews were given a limited number of these rounds probably more due to there just not being many. WoT originally had a much more powerful M18, perhaps identical to the Super Hellcat. But even novice players could get 4-6 kills in a battle. I think it just needed to be moved up to Tier 7 or 8 and left alone (the Super Hellcat is Tier 7). Also, at one time, WoT had a Historic Battles mode where you had teams formed with specific tanks on specific battle fields representing what was actually in those battles. But the equipment and ammo loadout was also per what they had. The Hellcat in the Historic Battle mode had the 76mm (as the 90mm was only tested, never released with the tank), and I believe you only had 4 or 5 HVAP rounds. I once was able to carry a team all the way to the last Tiger tank, which I could not kill without the HVAP as he could sense (or had illegal mods) of every time I flanked him, and I could not frontally pen him with the AP rounds.

[@richardbell7678]

You triggered a happy flash back. An enemy Hellcat was doing to forward and back movement at a corner to tempt me into firing and missing, so that he could fully come out and finish me off. I lost that minigame, before happily discovering that the Hellcat player was unfamiliar with the Matilda Black Prince-- my reload time was less than the Hellcat's AIM time. After cursing myself for firing and missing, he stopped right in my reticle and it went green, before he fired. I can only imagine the look on the Hellcat driver's face when the 6-pdr did just enough damage to kill him.

[@patrickwentz8413]

An M18 with a 90 MM gun?! Yes Please!

[@Macrochenia]

I heard that the recoil o the 90mm gun caused serious stress damage to the M18's structure. The gun was just too powerful for use on such a light vehicle.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

No evidence of such in the test reporting. The conversion was considered quite feasible.

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

@@TheChieftainsHatch It's a shame that it wasn't done. While the 76 might have proved "adequate", the 90 would have offered a significant advantage and performance improvement.

[@thesandtiger]

Mr Moran can you tell world of tanks we like some of the real recital like the one shown on the camera in this video or on real ww2 tanks i think that would add to the game and they done no new ones in a long time and i do not trust the i got one of the recital mood packs for the sight an it just did not have one that work right

[@M18Hellcat-17]

I do approve of this video.

[@davidsike734]

"The armor was too thin" there lacked Any allied armor which would stop any German guns after 1943, so what you need is to get the first shot off, on the run if possible (so stabilized gun makes sense) along with better speed then your opponent. So I don't understand the resistance.

[@jackthunderbolt4307]

Louis lamour was a tank destroyer commander

[@mikehenthorn1778]

i know they were not around but i keep thinking how the would have ran with a mopor 426 hemi. lol i need help.

[@qingyunwang3802]

Is M18 the first US tank (in broader terms) fielded that uses an automatic gearbox?

[@colbeausabre8842]

No, the M5 light tank was the first

[@ddraig1957]

The radial engine was blamed for the high silhouette of the Sherman,but the Hellcat seems to have a reasonably low profile. Would this be because the M18 has torsion bar suspension and lacks a turret basket ?

[@reform-revolution]

"actively hostile" did they get drunk and try to fight the things?

[@sheadjohn]

Is the gun any better on a m18 vs m10

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Ballistically, they are as near to identical as makes little difference. They even use the same projectiles. The main difference is the M18's gun is about half the weight of the M10's.

[@ahmedalsadik]

Hmmm.. just as the new Tamiya kit is released....hmmmm.... :)

[@clarkyoder7302]

Is chieftain going to do a inside the hatch on the m18?

[@julesrumbaoa7986]

Sir can you feature the US TANK "The HUNTER" by RHEEM, Thanks

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Armored Archives just did a fairly good video on it.

[@toomanyuserids]

More amazing content.. But I need sleep.

[@LadyDarkhound]

Haha, tanks! I love me some Hellkitty!

[@lapatriot9268]

Wow! It looks faster IRL than in WOT!

[@JamesIsAway]

It is.

[@D4rkn3ss2000]

I believe the speed of the hellcat in real life was 90 Km/h? Yeah there is that.

[@TexasSpectre]

It is. The M18 in WOT got ambushed by a mob of Russian developers wielding nerf bats and doesn't accelerate, turn, reverse or traverse anywhere near as fast as the real thing does.

[@notbadsince97]

"Came out with a great kill to death ratio, which probably was of little consolation to the folks on the left side"

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

"on the death side"

[@notbadsince97]

@@TheChieftainsHatch I stand corrected

[@terrysmith9362]

its the motorway ehich links the M1,A1 and M62

[@alexzorro8884]

Never seen a t-49, looked much like a t-34 without the big road wheels .A very modern design for the times. I think the early leopards copied the m18 concept and hull design. I kinda liked the open-ish turret top just for all-round visibility by more of the crew...but does leave crew more vulnerable in certain environments. A gun that can do the job when getting first shot opportunity then Hit and run, speed and agility make hard to hit. Not made for a slugfest .IMO .

[@JazzJaRa]

Wasn't the M24 also considered to look too much like a "german" Vehicle and they had to familize the Troop with it's shape? I remember seeing a old video about where they explain the differences of the M24.

[@nahuelleandroarroyo]

Round chasis and round turret, quite diferent to any axis light or medium

[@colbeausabre8842]

Yes, they took the first M24's around in a traveling road show to familiarize US troops with its appearance

[@bryanwiedeman3154]

Stielhandgranate storage potential

[@chrissheffield5468]

Interesting but incomplete. Why did he not mention the difference between the original milled turret and the stamped steel turret used in later production models? Why was there no forward assisted added to the main gun mantlet? He mentions the stabilized fire control system but fails to discuss the viability of tritium night sights.

[@SomeRandomHuman717]

Because it's "5 things," not "8 things." :)

[@thesandtiger]

the t 53 kinda look like a Waffenträger

[@Bill23799]

New M-18 Crew: Hey! Where the hell is the roof?

[@jackgilpin9614]

That "roof" was the cooling intake for the engine. None a valuable.

[@USS_Grey_Ghost]

I live near about 30 minutes from a authentic M-18 that is in running condition and drives around at World War 2 Weekend USA Pennsylvania Reading Airport ever June

[@hearsemonkey]

Cool, now tell wargaming to buff the hellcat back to what it used to be.

[@atlasdusk6341]

The M18 hellcat's engine was supercharged

[@larrybomber83]

Yeah, it blow up easy in the game if you get hit more than once.

[@MatthewChenault]

M36 “Jackson” because it’s the Stonewall Jackson way.

[@Grubnar]

His first point is about why it used the Continental engine, rather than the new Ford engine ... but he doesn't mention what difference it would have made.

[@chrisrawlins3954]

It would made a good light tank?

[@colbeausabre8842]

No, it didn't have a coax or a bow machine gun - which the combat troops insisted was necessary. And it, dear Jesus, it didn't have a roof. Ever hear of airbursts?

[@JazzJaRa]

@@colbeausabre8842 and it's armor could be pierced by almost everything ^^

[@hoodoo2001]

Love your videos but this one left me feeling "flat". Need some numbers as to how many M18's were not used. The "refusal" of some units to take the M18 is similar to Cleburne's division refusing to carry X battleflags when the rest of the CSA army of Tennessee was issued them in the Spring of 1864. Cleburne's division hung on to their blue "Hardee" type flags (actually a new version) with the white disc for the remainder of the war. Soldiers, especially those who are thinking they are doing a good job and have equipment they have trained with and trust and which are still working, tend to not like change for change sake. The M18 did not bring a lot to the table to justify a change from the M10 although once new troops were issued them they probably would have swore by them...human psychology. The best way to introduce a new weapon is to train new troops in it before issuance. In WWI the US Army sent the first 10 or so divisions to France where they were issued French 8mm machine guns of the Hotchkiss and 1915 Chauchat type along with M1917 Rifles. The second tranche of divisions were issued with Colt-Vickers machine guns and 1918 .30/06 Chauchats (which were a disaster due to bad barrel production by a subcontractor that was missed by inspectors pressured to get the weapons in the field) with M1917 rifles, while the third tranche came in at the end of the war with BARs, Browning M1917 machine guns, and 03 Springfields. It was only in November 1918 that the previous two tranches started re-equipping with BARS, Brownings M1917's, not sure if anyone worried about the M1917's as they were great battle rifles. Interestingly the 5 divisions that were issued Trench Shotguns did not do well with them (even though they really pissed off the Germans as being cruel weapons--poison gas was ok but shotguns were criticized!) primarily due to ammo problems(paper cases and poor ways to carry the ammo due to weather conditions caused the cases to swell and become unusable) and issuance of most of these shotguns was significantly delayed until brass case shotgun shells were provided and the war was nearly over (the Army liked the shotguns though). The weapons the US Army would have been fighting with in 1919 would have been significantly more uniform....the US Army of 1919 would have been a juggernaut that swept over Germany, the best Army in the World that never got to fight.

[@douglasmiller8607]

If the US had named it the Kitty Kat or Scat Kat, would the Germans have died laughing while we punched holes through them?

[@user-ig9we5ru2p]

Всем привет)))))

[@kokuta1941]

Seek strike destroy

[@kaiserwilhelmshatner3156]

T53 premium when?

[@LatteDZ]

the shaking screen in the backgound drives me crazy. PLZ fix this.

[@billcar6805]

@4:03 maybe they were giving them to germans......

[@hoodoo2001]

Chieftain, check out my not for profit youtube video FT Tank Attack 1918. After 4 years of building (free time) my home made full scale FT tank was tested in "combat" at Camp Mabry in Austin (ever been there?). Wonderful WWI/WWII/Vietnam museum lots of hands on stuff. Still got to make the tracks more authentic, working on that. You might appreciate the bail out of the tank during the battle, my smoke bomb did not go off but they bailed out anyways... the "commander's" (Grant Hanson) bail out of the turret (with doughboy helmet), is classic, 20 years old, motivated, the right size and wiryness for tanks (you should use this kid he is great and a major history buff--does awesome impressions) was impressive.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Pioneer Flight Museum? Around the corner from me, maybe we can meet up there and you can show me around.

[@L0stEngineer]

So.... If the troops had to actually fight, they didn't want it, but if they wanted something fast to be the first one in to liberate a French village and all the lovely wimmin inside, they liked it. I think I understand.

[@jonathansmith6050]

Maybe. Though you could just as easily say that troops who (mis)used TDs as tanks didn't want it but those who used them per TD doctrine did like it. (After all US TD doctrine, as the Chieftain repeatedly tells us, was to race towards and enemy armored breakthrough and quickly set up an anti-armor ambush for them. And you need a fair turn of speed to effectively do that)

[@watcherzero5256]

@@jonathansmith6050 Or rather it was good when the enemy had their backs to you and you were in pursuit but not so good when he was actively defending a position and waiting for you. Shooting back is cheating!

[@daltondickens1848]

In tank development, or even TD development we were far behind the Axis once the US dove into WWII. Ammunition tech was also lacking as well.

[@Telecasterland]

It's so odd to hear "it looked to German" but it's only because we have seen it for years.

[@hobbyking5364]

Al Gores rythm

[@McRocket]

It's a cool-looking vehicle. And it is FAST. But seems almost useless - otherwise - to me. Sure, it had a great kill ratio. Against whom? A crumbling and fleeing German Army whilst the US had TOTAL air/logistical supremacy. But it's armor was beyond pathetic. 12.7mm for the hull (upper and lower)? The poor driver if they stumbled onto a German anti tank gun. ANY German, anti tank gun. And 25mm in the turret (with 19 mm for the gun mantlet). And let's not even MENTION mines. In 1944? Insane. Fine. You sit behind some TALL bushes and wait for German tanks to stumble onto you. You fire once and than book it out of there at 55 mph. Great - assuming you actually hit a tank before you left. And prey to GOD that none of the surviving tanks has even a clue where you are. Here is a novel idea? Why not put enough armor on the front of this bloody thing so that the poor crew had a remote chance of surviving being hit by even a tiny German tank/ATG they stumble upon. And settle for a top speed of 'only' 35/40 mph? I get the M10. I like the M36. I think the M18 is junk. Cool - but junk. Obviously designed by some dude who equated speed with penis size. ☮

[@colbeausabre8842]

His name was Andrew Bruce, head of the TD Center. He was on record that for his dream TD, he wanted "A cruiser, not a battleship"

[@josephahner3031]

The M18 was designed for speed due to the operational and strategic role of the tank destroyer. It was what it was because the M18 was intended to be in reserve until a gap needed plugging with something that could kill tanks. Then it was to haul ass into the gap and engage German armor.

[@gleggett3817]

@@josephahner3031 quickly into the gap, or quickly onto the flanks of the gap?

[@CT9905.]

How could the M18 have the highest kill ratio of any vehicle when it was not in service that long. The StuG III and V were the Best tank destroyer’s of WWII!

[@jamess7576]

Ratio, a vehicle in service for one day could theoretically have the highest "kill" ratio.

[@CT9905.]

@@jamess7576 Nein!!!

[@TexasSpectre]

That's because it was ridiculously effective when used correctly - hit and run, shoot and scoot. In post-war interviews, German Panzer crews voted that the M18 was the most fearsome Allied vehicle on the Western Front. They could literally circle-strafe German armor; Hellcat units at the Battle of the Bulge also had a nasty habit of setting up an ambush, slaughtering enough German armor to stop the Panzer column, running away, disappearing... then just as the Panzer column was about to get underway again, appear from a totally different side of the battlefield from where they were last seen and hit them again. Rinse, repeat. One other case in point: Battle Of Arracourt: *Thirty-nine* confirmed destroyed or disabled Panzers to just seven Hellcat destroyed or disabled.

[@CT9905.]

@@TexasSpectre Nein!!!!

[@TexasSpectre]

@@CT9905. Denying objective, statistical reality is not a good look for you. :P

[@nebelwerfer199]

The most overrated vehicle ever.