Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: Char В1 Bis part 2

In the second part of the Inside the Chieftain's Hatch episode about the French Char B1 bis heavy tank, Nicholas Moran will talk about the crew positions and their misery: a turret without a hatch, positions without seats, and a lack of space inside.

[@stupidburp]

"No place to sit" "Can't see where they put all the ammunition" I suspect that the ammo is the seat.

[@Joe93819]

If you look closely, left of the drivers seat is an ammo box

[@StudleyDuderight]

That would certainly give new meaning to the phrase "hot seat."

[@VRichardsn]

That side hatch has to be one of the most comfortable to escape from of the many tanks reviewed in this series.

[@Wolvenworks]

you know the interior's preety bad if the chief doesn't even do the "oh no the tank's on fire" test

[@Colinpark]

Seriously this is a tank designed by a submarine designer. Just needs a periscope.

[@joe125ful]

Ahahahahaha:)

[@jaaksootak318]

Colin Park And it's yellow! At least from the inside.

[@THX11458]

I was thinking the same thing!

[@broadbandislife]

Nah that's the Ratte. IIRC Herr Grotte was a naval engineer by training and that was hardly the first stupidly huge AFV he came up with...

[@Milyyym]

Speaking about tanks that were in service, FCM, as in FCM 2C (kzbin.info/www/bejne/fprdfWt4hNaobbM ) and FCM 36 (kzbin.info/www/bejne/qHbOk4msjqxoj8k ), was a shipbuilding company.

[@tankolad]

Seems like the ergonomics of the tank would be decent if they installed seats.

[@erinbarnes5055]

6

[@JohnRodriguesPhotographer]

Maybe put seats in like they had on the original Enterprise in the original series! That way everyone could fall out of their seats every time I hit a bump! I agree some place to park your butt when you're going cross-country in particular would be very helpful

[@kw9849]

I'm not sure where you'd put the seats, though, since the crew still need to be able to walk around on the floor, and that's the only place you could put them.

[@KENACT1]

He was wondering where the 75 mm ammo was stored; the answer is in that tunnel in back next to the engine; behind that firewall door, sort of a precursor of the external ammo stowage you see on modern tanks. The radio operator also had the position of "purveyor", a tank position unique to the French army, passing ammo to the commander and the 75 mm loader, a position also found on the Char D2. The limitations of the tank may not be as bad as indicated; when the tank did confront German armor it had an awesome combat record; a single Char B1 knocked out 13 Panzer III and IV's at Stonne while taking 140 hits with no damage, at that time a record massacre. If infantry had kept up, the battle would have turned out very differently. Char B1's at Abbeville under DeGaulle's command also tore a German infantry division to pieces, with panicked soldier's throwing down weapons and fleeing from what was then an invincible tank. You have to wonder if just 3 changes - a two-man turret (the French did have one), a decent cupola and most important a decent fuel load would have changed history.

[@madcat4633]

A good gun on a tank with decent armor = great duellist. Commander with 3 tasks to perform inside a crappy turret and a slow tank with a mediocre radio = bad tank when tactics and leadership are involved. So, the smaller the engagements the better the French tanks performed. The larger the scale of the operation, the less they achieved.

[@nicholaspratt8473]

​@CipiRipi00 ​@Mad Cat In other words, Blitzkrieg worked best specifically against the French. Better than just about any other military (of comparable ability... not South African nations)

[@Einwetok]

@@madcat4633 Even with the radio, they were still used to communicating with flag signals in formation.

[@wiesshund-games]

@@madcat4633 If french force deployment had not been dictated by old guys stuck in a WWI mind set, the French had the armor to knock the axis back through the Adrennes. But they did not, it also did not help that the crews mostly got no good training, as things like dumping the wrong oil in the steering system took overwise find tanks out of action. But the tank itself would have been fine defending France. Take a pair of B1 bis with a unit of S35's and deployed properly and you have a tank force the axis would have found it damned hard to go up against. There is a lot about the B1 that was outdated in the thought behind the design. It's speed was not super good and some other aspects show the very WWI like mindset, but still, in a defensive war with logistics set up properly, it was good enough to make a difference at the time. Pretty much most of what France had would have been plenty capable of stopping the Blitz, if you get rid of the people deciding how to actually deploy the stuff and set up the logistics.

[@ravenouself4181]

@@nicholaspratt8473 Meanwhile the Soviets: 'Tis but a flesh wound.

[@adamdubin1276]

Easy Explanation for the Ammunition... French Tankers were Dwarves

[@kennethquesenberry2610]

I'd suggest that most people, especially Europeans, were smaller then than they are now. Besides, the soldiers were probably going to be men in the twenties and thinner.

[@danielaramburo7648]

@@kennethquesenberry2610 Or maybe they singled out short men for tank duty.

[@abecadlo15]

@@danielaramburo7648 Wasn't that a common practice? Like obviously putting someone that's 185cm or taller in a tank s just a dumb idea if you're trying to save space

[@andrealves2630]

They were. Frenchmen are kinda short nowadays, back then these guys were really small

[@djizomdjinn]

Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: Leman Russ

[@catharsis3881]

just wait 25000 years

[@matthayward7889]

Would be very much like the m3 grant, I’d imagine!

[@Stukov961]

@BlackDeathViral03 armoured magazine at the bottom of the tank, with an elevator for the shells, naval style according to the book Baneblade. It also has a crew of 8.

[@Colonel_Overkill]

@BlackDeathViral03I have often wondered if the demolisher cannon is a true cannon or a rocket launcher. the barrel has exhaust holes identical to the Sturmtiger so if it were a rocket launcher over a true cannon it would make sense for how a gun of that size would fit into a turret that tiny. on a side note, the vanquisher battle cannon is the one that I suspect would be unable to work. the demolisher is either a low velocity howitzer or rocket launcher, thus not as much relative breech travel but the vanquisher cannon is such high pressure that the travel would have to span the entire turret length. Add to that the brass length would have to be huge and I really wonder about the viability of that system.

[@drakozozhaeternus2840]

@BlackDeathViral03 Shhhhhhhh. Don't remind them of the Nova Cannon's issues.

[@chrisderochwr4670]

I was just watching this video again, I don't know, just for old times sake. Great video - Chief has never made one that wasn't, - but I can,t help but feel profoundly disappointed by this tank. My childhood imagination had the interior looking like key some sort of steam punk spaceship, but it turned out to be just a cramped metal coffin for cinq fils.

[@garomcfbgdd3211]

I like big tanks and I cannot lie You other gunners can't deny That when a Maus rolls in with a big glacis plate And parks itself in your base

[@dubsy1026]

Garomcfbgdd there's no ending. You stop at [abridged] 'when a Maus roles in your base', that does not say what happens when a Maus roles in your base.

[@johnmartin4639]

Garomcfbgdd "you shit bricks"

[@cattledog901]

You get ... PENNED

[@warhawk3719]

While THEKINGOFMETROPOLIS's ending to the rhyme make more sense from a lyrical standpoint (in that it follows the cadence of the previous verse as well as the cadence of the original work that is being parodied), I would have to say that john martin's ending better sums up what actually happens when "A Maus rolls in with a big glacis plate and parks itself in your base". All that to say that john martin's ending was the one that actually made me laugh. :)

[@gings4ever]

I get STRUNG wanna shoot out an AP

I have always thought this tank was very interesting, especially that doorway leading into the "engine room". Excellent presentation as usual.

[@pep206]

Awww, you didn't crawl into the engine compartment, I can't help, but be disappointed.

[@VirginiaRican]

This is one of my favorite tanks. I know it's not the best but it's just so weird. Like something you'd see cobbled together in some WW1 post apoc movie.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

Well for 20`s it is the best.

[@SirAroace]

always liked the look of early french tanks.

[@captiannemo1587]

what chief forgets to mention.... is that while it has power transverse... pretty much nothing else in the world does at the time.

[@johnmartin4639]

Captian Nemo false..

[@johnmartin4639]

Captian Nemo what he also manages to say is that "despite its thick armor and mediocre guns it was knocked out easily that is when they managed to get to the front".

[@MadnerKami]

Yup. Also take note of the stereoscopic range-finder. The french had the wierd ability to do all the right things in detail, but usually messed up in putting these ideas together into something really good.

[@MrKilljoy212]

I'm pretty sure he mentioned it in the first part, yeah actually he made a big point about it, not for the fact that it was rather unique for the time but because of the fluid used

[@goprev9715]

MadnerKami That is typical of the french in general. Coming up and pioneering great ideas but not quite their execution. If only this tank had seen more battles before ww2, if the french had foreseen the war to come and focused on preparing earlier while not getting caught up with internal problems, a strategically dying army and a general unwillingness to fight due to the remembrance of WW1 by the population. Maybe the tabk could have fixed it's now obvious flaws and maybe France would have lasted longer in the war.

[@jagervonweebs610]

i kinda like the yellow on the interior not as harsh as white but not as dark as the greens and greys some tanks seem to use

[@gracesprocket7340]

The French manual for the Char B1 bis seems to show the SA35 as being a medium velocity gun (and the 470m/s indicated in it for the L17.1 (1.28m) gun is not inconsistent with heavy construction guns of similar length in terms of sectional density * V0. It is not the same as the Fortress gun which did have a V0 of ~200m/s on a length of 0.71m L9.5, which is in line with the lighter construction standard of the howitzers, and the KwK37. I have no idea whether the CharB1 had the shorter howitzer originally, but the bis certainly had the more powerful gun type nose ordnance.

[@gracesprocket7340]

While I am here and thinking of this... the KwK37 is anomalously weak compared to other tank guns - it seems to have a loading equivalent to the leFH, rather than PaK types - and is intermediate between the leIG and PaK in terms of acceleration of shells. This seems slightly strange for 'emergency anti-tank' use, using a APHE round, where usually the stress limits on the gun are raised.

[@SuperTelecom]

What a horrendous tank to crew. That Radio operators position is hilarious, "just sit on the floor in the dark noisy bowels of this giant tank and perform your duties with a Morse code system"

[@Chaps_Jr]

Hey, Chieftain. Is there any way we could get some more Behind the Scenes footage, like everyone setting up for different shots, the struggles of navigating certain vehicles, and the shenanigans that surely occur between shoots? It would be very interesting to see how you guys do everything.

[@romantoppel2330]

Thanks so much for the video! I feel claustrophobic just by watching this. Poor French tankers!

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Mr Toppel, good to see you here. Welcome aboard!

[@romantoppel2330]

@@TheChieftainsHatch ❤ You can call me Roman. Great videos! They have really given me a new perspective on the French WWII tanks. I have of course read about many of their problems and seen them from the outside, but I have only been inside German WWII tanks so far. After watching your vids, nobody can ever tell me in earnest again that the French had better tanks than the Germans. (One rather famous German historian called the Somua S-35 "the world's best tank at that time". He should watch your videos!)

[@okrajoe]

Such a fascinating vehicle design.

[@ApexContestPrep]

Love your video's man, have been letting them auto play in binge mode while battling insomnia.

[@shidder_mutt]

Chieftain upload is the best Halloween treat.

[@Dreska_]

I feel like one could live in this tank quite easily (assuming no ammunition taking up half of it)

[@RyanDillashaw]

Another great episode of inside the hatch.

[@cameronkelly8739]

I love the looks of the char b1 and most French tanks it's just different

[@DiggingForFacts]

Um yeah that radio mount isn't actually a radio mount. The radio mount was located halfway along the upper hull. That little stub on the turret was a location for a very complex and dubious anti-aircraft machine gun mount that could in theory be operated from the turret hatch.

[@Shaun_Jones]

Great, so in addition to finding targets, finding the route to travel, aiming the turret cannon, aiming the turret machine gun, loading the turret cannon, requesting the ammunition that is stashed in the far corners of the vehicle, and telling three other people what to do, the TC also has the job of shooting at planes with basically no visibility. I hope the job payed well.

[@Einwetok]

@@Shaun_Jones About as practical as the "gunner/loader" role.

[@vikingwarlord2453]

Thankyou for your great work keep it up matey can't wait until next tank :) thanks again to you and your team.

[@lavenderdnd]

The 75s and some 47s were stored in the engine compartment. So the view port makes sense. If the engines on fire you have ammo back there

[@leneanderthalien]

Nope: in the B1b was the engine compartment totaly isolated from the men compartment to protect thenb from fire like on... the 1917 Renault FT

[@mok822]

@@leneanderthalien he literally shows the door on the video

[@xc43t]

AMX ELC Bis prototype video would be great

[@Edax_Royeaux]

Yes! I'm dying to know if the tank is even big enough to fit the Chieftain and a camera inside it!

[@joe125ful]

Agreed!!

[@matyasgrohmann]

xc43t Yes i would like to see the drivers mechanism in the turret

[@xGxPhantomZzz]

Agreed.

[@nfsfanAndrew]

xc43t id like to see that and the amx 50b

[@bingokitty5822]

Wonderful presentation Chieftain and as usual many thanks for this video. This tank looks positively roomie inside, albeit uncomfortable for the crew other than the driver (granted the fellow is not the height of the Chieftain).

[@tekis0]

Nice! I’ve always wondered how the Char looked inside.

[@zorkwhouse8125]

@The_Chieftain Excellent video as always! I could see this tank being quite warm, possibly uncomfortably/distractingly so, inside b/c of the location of the engine - something it would share with many of its WW1 predecessors. I think the fact that the Germans put so many captured vehicles to use, does say something for its capabilities as well. Would be interesting to see a study on how well they performed in the hands of the Germans, presumably being put to use in conjunction with the Germans' own tanks and presumably employed with the same tactics as the German's other armored vehicles, Or perhaps they were instead put to use for garrison protection duties or something of the like and didn't find themselves in the thick of it as part of German armored formations? Would wonder how they would have performed on the eastern front if any had made it that far? I ask these questions because, as you alluded to, a lot of criticisms of the vehicle have come from it not being used as it was intended, or at least not used as it could have best been deployed - which then leads to the question above, if it performed better in the hands of an army (Germans) who arguably had a better grasp of where armored warfare was heading at the time and perhaps how best they could be put to use.

[@murphy7801]

I dont think be that warm, south france can get pretty hot and france well known for being involved in africa. I'm pretty sure they would planned for warmer climate more so than a very cold climate?

[@beaushaver3779]

The tank museum has an intact interior walk through. It's very different than what you see here.

[@karoltakisobie6638]

Thank you for this great episode.Somehow I imagined this tank was a bit larger as pictures from period suggest.I'm looking forward to next one.

[@dukenukem8381]

Iron Armenian must still be sleeping. I am commenting on his behalf.

[@TotalRookie_LV]

Yeay, been waiting for this after part one! And... Oh my, what a hell were they thinking?!

[@donaldwiller9238]

Nice job

[@solvens4890]

1:15 "radio mount" This is not for the radio, it's the support for an AA MG. Most french tanks at the time had one, you could use it either by sitting on the hatch, or by standing inside the turret. This supposedly allowed the commander to let the plane pass while staying under the protection of the turret, and then shoot at it from behind. The radio antenna was on the back of the hull, just before the exhaust pipes. Here's a picture of the AA mount on the R35 (similar system): image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2017/44/3/1509530615-r35-aa-mg.jpg Also you didn't speak about the hull MG next to the 75mm. On the topic of the engine viewport, I've seen a similar system on old ships, usually paired with a fire extinguisher with a special punch trough nozzle that allows you to fight the flames without opening the whole door and creating a backdraft. I don't know if the B1 was equipped with such fire extinguishers, however.

[@DiggingForFacts]

Glad I wasn't the only one to catch that error.

[@yereverluvinuncleber]

Very useful.

[@leftnoname]

At the time this tank was designed (mid20s-early 30s) it was cutting edge technology. Its armor and cross country capability pretty much beat everything. Would a good tank for the type of warfare it was designed. However, french let valuable time be wasted concentrating on diplomacy and their great wall. By 1939-40 B1 simply did not meet requirements of modern combat, i.e. fast paced armored break through.

[@cmanningdeal6228]

As a heavy breakthrough tank [ like the Tiger I, as the Chieftain points out.] it was an ok design. With lighter Soumas to exploit, it would do well. Punch as hole, let the Soumas, Reault, and Hitchkiss pour through, then hold and refit.. kzbin.info/www/bejne/a2jSg6R4lMZgiaM

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

@@cmanningdeal6228 Pretty mich like the tiger later. And france even had their own maus (aka Char2C with upgraded 90mm thick armor).

[@quintonhas]

Nice video Chieftain.

[@ProfessorChops]

I'll be honest, the B1 Ter is pretty dope in War Thunder. At it's proper BR it is a force to be reckoned with. The front gun, with its added horizontal traverse, is absolutely devastating against other tanks and its armor is almost impenetrable by other tanks at its BR. It really doesn't run into trouble until it starts to fight mid war tanks or the German heat rounds. The B1 Bis is pretty awful in comparison. The lack of traverse on the front gun makes it almost unusable and the armor can actually be penetrated by other tanks at its BR.

[@user-hy9hi1cm4s]

If warthunder did B1 real they should make u blind when loading ammo, also they should limit the view of your tank TC since it didn't allow the TC to pop out his head to see. 1 man turret is a very bad design comparing to 3 man turret. Even t34 with 2 man turret had many problems

[@ProfessorChops]

@@user-hy9hi1cm4s oh for sure. There are lots of tank designs that work great in war thunder but terrible in real life. My favorite tank to play recently is the sturmtiger. That thing is a blast to play but it was horrible in real life.

[@joshuaosgood4870]

enjoyed the bloopers

[@Novous]

From what I heard, the radio was morse code, and the later voice ones were made but not used. The reason was that the voice radios were extremely hard to understand with the engine running, and combat operations, whereas a beeping morse code would cut through the noise much better.

[@jdcmusicchoice]

Sod getting shot at in that thing! Good video though Chief! Love your stuff!

[@jukahri]

Well until long barreled 50 and 75mm guns came into service, you'd really only have to worry about 88s in a B1.

[@jdcmusicchoice]

Jukelo is that just the armour thickness and slope, giving that much deflection?

[@broadbandislife]

It was all but immune to everything the Germans had short of the 88 and the 10,5 cm howitzer, neither of which was exactly optimised for antitank work. Whence the instances of one or two B1s tearing apart entire German columns and returning to base covered in ricochet marks - Capt. Billotte's stunt at Stonne being the most famous.

[@Koopax13]

The irony of getting a Citroen advert for a Renault produced tank is not lost on me KZbin.

[@ZodZulu]

Very informative. What did have against seats

[@mbox314]

At 9:30 the drivers vision port has a door on it with two rack gears on the cover and two stationary spur gears. As the cover slides down the two spur gears prevent one side from moving faster than the other and jamming the cover in its motion. This is minor detail but I am blown away with how cleaver of a solution this is to the common stick/slip problem.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Huh. Never noticed it.

[@justforever96]

I would guess they used the space in the rear to store the ammo. Why not? Probably missing a lot of racks and stuff, so there probably was a seat for the loader somewhere, of some sort. The sling for the commander makes sense if he is going to be sitting at the guns for any period of time, like if he is waiting in ambush, or long periods of combat.

[@ferrari123ist]

Do the AMX pluton next. Saumur has a nice collection.

[@jforden78]

Does anyone else get claustrophobic watching him get in and out some of these tanks?

[@bullettube9863]

You can understand after seeing this episode where America go the idea for the M-3 Grant. I think the idea for mobile artillery with an anti-tank gun for protection was a good idea in 1924, but the actual product was simply in the wrong war.

[@andrewp8284]

Bullettube the M3 wasn't in the wrong war really; its 75 outgunned and outranged and protected against the 20-50 mm armed tank and AT competition in North Africa. Of course it was not as good against 75-88 mm, but still.

[@broadbandislife]

The "Grant" was simply a stopgap design built on basis of the existing M2 Medium to tide things over while a more modern design was developed though. The M2 was basically an MG pillbox on tracks with one in every corner of a quite roomy fighting compartement and the itty-bitty turret (which IIRC ported over as-is) on top - not exactly a good starting point for doing much with the turret, but the spacious hull accepted a medium-velocity 75 mm gun just fine. (The Soviets experimented using it as a sort of IFV too - it could carry quite a few soldiers without hampering the crew too much, but getting all of them in or out was too slow to be practical so the idea was dropped.) It also blew everything the Axis had in North Africa out of the water save for the brand spanking new, and rather scarce, "Mark IV specials" as the Allies called the Pz IV Ausf. F2. The Germans actually considered it enough of a threat to merit exposing their new long-gun tanks to Allied aircraft and artillery as good counters were otherwise scarce.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

This tank seems to be the polar opposite of the A7V, where instead of 18 crewmembers, you have 4 that have to do the work of 9 people. I guess that's one way to save on manpower, the Char B1 Bis certainly had the armor to give the crew the extra time need to preform all the tasks. And just what is it about these old tanks that look like if could be driven like most cars? It looks really easy to drive around.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

I think a crew of 6 is enough really. commander, loader and gunner for the turret. gunner and loader for hull mount and driver. If you insist, a 7th member, if you want a radio operator. The highest I can get it is 8 with a mechanic in the engine bay.... Tank would be massive to fit twice the members

[@thunberbolttwo3953]

Except on the sides.

[@matthayward7889]

Was looking forward to watching Mr Moran folding himself into this: wasn’t disappointed

[@izumishion6267]

Am i the only on disturbed by the fact that the escape hatch is in the place where, if hit, is in the same place as there the fire will most likely occur?

[@zacht9447]

You should definitely do one of these on the abrams considering you served in one

[@Chaps_Jr]

Abrams is still in active service, so highly unlikely the US Army would allow anyone to record its details, especially interior.

[@zacht9447]

You are kidding right? he goes to museums I've been inside of Abrams before it's not some closely guarded secret literally nothing about the interior would really give anything classified away seriously just search m1 abrams interior on youtube

[@zacht9447]

Hell just look up M1 Abrams Tour

[@Chaps_Jr]

1423 171 Chill out, dude. I made a simple mistake.

[@sirboomsalot4902]

Can you please do the Tog II? I know the Challenger did one, but he didn't actually go inside the tank. One of the main reasons I watch these videos is to see how the crew conditions were, and Tog seems pretty roomy

[@McRocket]

You seem to review all the truly interesting tanks (to me anyway)...the Char B, Hetzer (wrong name, I know), Panther, T-34, etc.. Thank you.

[@warhawk3719]

Could you please next do a Chieftan's Hatch that focuses on either the Stug or any of the first four panzers?

[@Emchisti]

At 1:20 that isn't a radio antenna mount. It's the AA machine gun mount.

[@billygray8863]

Finally!

[@redloup]

just found your site , really good thank you, just one question comes to mind ....how tall are you? I've just watched 5/6 of your vids you seemed to tall for all of them ...

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

About 1.98m or 6’5”. Definitely taller than now Tankers of the time, but not too tall for all tanks. Some still give me a fair bit of room.

[@fundamentos3439]

A ten - year - waiting period between design and production , says much about the politics of the time . Then the rush from factories to the front , without proper training & maintenance courses . All in all , a formidable weapon . Commanders like the then Colonel De Gaulle , knew how to use it . With massed numbers concentrated against the enemy , together with adequate air support , the outcome of the battle of France would have been quite different .

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

France had every chance on winning even alone. And lost miserably.

[@fundamentos3439]

@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 Ah , my friend ! It's so easy to judge after the issues have become history. In order to be able to understand the events , it's important to take a look at ' the other side of the hill '. Angloamerican historians are too biased , and their approach to the event polluted all the narrative during the rest of the XXth. Century. So good to see some pretty interesting information coming out from French , German , and Italian sources in the last two decades.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

@@fundamentos3439 Indeed it is. Just like in airplanes, for something to go wrong much more things need to be already messed up.

[@lalucre1803]

I miss the "Oh god the tank is on fire" test. :)

[@Wideoval73]

Good video of what potentially could have been a fairly successful tank had they been used correctly. It did have limitations, but for its time it might have done well.

[@julianrobertoswart9217]

God this is my favorite tank!! I also like the Renault ft17

[@jon-paulfilkins7820]

You had the Matchbox kit as a kid?

[@julianrobertoswart9217]

Jon-Paul No actualy but I am really looking around for that kit in 1:76 scale I would really like to build it and have it And I just finnished a 1:76 pzkw2 I would like to make the intire German production line of tanks from pzkw1-pzkw8

[@taylor7772]

Is there any running B1’s and is the one in the video one of them?

[@KevinSmith-qi5yn]

When will we get the version without the top mounted turret?

[@Martin-fu6fc]

Hello, for the next episode, can u do an easy8 Sherman? HVSS suspensions, 76 mm gun, ... It’s my favorite tank😃 Go check, there is an M4A1E8 in running condition at Bastogne barracks in Bastogne, Belgium.. Thanks!

[@shidder_mutt]

Martin 610050 the a1e8 is not the true easy 8.

[@larshenrik8900]

rowsdower Yes it is

[@shidder_mutt]

Lars Henrik Daniloff wrong the true easy 8 is the m4a3e8. Just because it shares the same suspension system doesn't make it the real mccoy.

[@rileyernst9086]

The Char B1 would actually fulfill its intended role with the French army during the siege of La Rochelle in 1944. The tanks which were operated by the 13th Dragoons would also cross the Rhine in 1945.

[@317eltoro]

Lol the end is the best the chieftain is funny 😄

[@lucas_1351]

Do a video on the SU-76

[@deepsteep4748]

Never heard of the french Ace Pierre Billotte, who destroyed 11- 13 german tanks and 2- 3 AT- guns in one occassion? The tank could work fine in 1939/40, but french high command didn't react in the right way to maneuver warfare.

[@broadbandislife]

More like they couldn't. Their mobile formations, the Cavalry's Divisions Légères Mécaniques ("Light Mechanised Divisions", more or less analogous to the German Panzerdivisionen) were mostly up North fighting the German feint in the Benelux and aside from being in active combat rather needed a bit of repair after their rapid advance to contact - and the German sweep to the coast had just cut their supply lines. The French commanders basically dropped the ball *hard* during the Ardennes thrust with the result that the situation became all but unsalvageable. Fewer screw-ups in the attempts to break the German cordon (including better Entente cooperation, the Brits didn't exactly cover themselves in glory at the time) *might* have been able to stabilize things but that's pure speculation.

[@mickvonbornemann3824]

Wasn’t there a French tank in which the hatch on the cupola in effect formed the helmet for the commander thus when he turned his head the cupola turned with him?

[@marktercsak9728]

Looks cool to me

[@a.i1137]

Ooh yiissss

[@zoperxplex]

It looked like the French decided that the ideal tank would be combining a Renault FT with the Mark V.

[@aojpictures]

Although not deliberate, the design of this tank is super interesting as a mid-point between a self-propelled artillery piece and a tank. I’m surprised that RTS games haven’t used this tank for a concept like that.

[@FreakyFred18827]

Didn't know the Char had a safe room.

[@johnburdis5352]

There was a Char 1b bis used in the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.

[@colindhowell]

That's not a B1 bis in that movie. That's a replica of a fictional tank based on the size and shape of the British World War One-era Mark VIII tank (which was *much* bigger than the B1 bis), but with a turret added; it was built from the frame of an excavator.

[@sirboomsalot4902]

Weren't you an Abrams commander? If so, how was the inside compared to the tanks on the show?

[@burrowingowl6885]

Off topic questions here, but did WW2 battleships use spall lining in their armor? Was this also used in coastal defense turrets as well?

[@Kingsquad2011]

I think the US navy, Royal navy and Kriegsmarine di for battleships, cruiser and anything in between.

[@burrowingowl6885]

I would assume Japan did so as well since they tend to take inspiration from western countries. Thanks.

[@UnintentionalSubmarine]

The Italians backlined their armour with wood (good quality wood too). Presumably for this very reason. But mostly the protection against splinters and spalling came from thick bulkheads. There are literally decks called splinterdecks on a fair few ships, especially designed to catch low velocity spall splinters. The simple fact is that the force behind a main battery shell from a battleship *will* cause significant stress on the armour it impacts. It is unlikely that any liner of the day could contain that force for it to be practical. Now for less critical areas, vulnerable to MG and autocannon fire from planes and such, there was liners, at least on some ships.

[@Kingsquad2011]

Careful about Japan tho. In comparison, they did run low on resources, and from that, one could assume low on budget as well, so they maybe had what it takes to do it in terms of brainpower, but maybe not in terms of steel I was so bad ha they had to choose beween tanks OR warships, whereas other western countries weren't in that much of a pickle abou those ressources

[@burrowingowl6885]

Would this also apply to coastal fortifications? Considering some used fixed naval turrets, just wondering if they used similar mechanisms, such as a mechanized gun rammer, found on battleships.

[@calvingreene90]

It would have been a great tank in 1930 and cut a larger turret ring for a bigger turret and it would look pretty capable. I am sure that the crew sat on ammo crates.

[@johanleivasaldarriaga4366]

Imagine "Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: AMX ELC"

[@sirboomsalot4902]

I think some of the ammo went in the back with the engine

[@tacticalmanatee]

Are there any surviving M22 Locusts for you to look at? It's one of the funnest tanks to play in WoT.

[@thurin84]

ive seen at least one at reenactments years ago.

[@josephahner3031]

A tetrarch would be neat too

[@Cobra6Gaming]

Where was the: "Oh my god the tank is on fire!" test?

[@charlesadams1721]

Really enjoyed the video. However, it does pose an very interesting question. I had been told in various history classes, even in university, over the years as well as multiple books that the B1CharBis was one of the best tanks in the 1930’s era, superior to German tanks, British tanks, etc. I realize we have the overwhelming benefit of hindsight, but it’s superiority doesn’t seem apparent from this presentation. I would like to say in my defense that it seems to have the same “feel” of French cars of the same era, and they seem a bit odd to me as well. Perhaps you need to be a Frenchman or Francophile to appreciate the Tank, but I believe of all the tanks of the period, maybe the British tanks would be the best fighting implement?

[@Appletank8]

Seems like the French tanks were all good in theory, but their soft stats (cramped turret, vision, tactics etc) made it very hard for the crew to use effectively.

[@charlesadams1721]

McPuff, thanks for the info, but I’ve heard the statement that French tanks were superior for several decades. As to German tanks superiority, it was said among WW2 vets that I’ve known and spoken with that they really did believe that German tanks were individually superior (the veterans were primarily American GI’s, with a smattering of Brits and Australians and one Former soldier). This is an interesting series of videos, I look forward to each and every one.

[@MadnerKami]

@Charles Adams Assuming there would have been a war starting in early 1930s. This tank would be up against Panzer Is and IIs, BT-series tanks, early Cruiser Mk and american machine gun tracked cars. The crux of the matter is, that tank-development at that point, was a rapid-fire staccato of inovations. The B1 is very advanced *for it's time*. It has very thick and sloped armor, while everyone else is running around with riveted armor that just barely survives machine gun fire. It doesn't keep up in terms of speed with the Christie-tanks, but it outpaces every other heavy design by quite a margin. Also it's gunnery is quite remarkable. It got one machine gun, one anti-infantry/anti-fortification gun and one anti-tank gun with a relatively high caliber, while everybody else is either running around in tracked armored machine gun cars (the americans), training tanks armed with machine guns (the germans), riveted sheet-metal boxes that can neiter take nor dish out the hurt in combined arms warfare (the brits) or in unarmored and sometimes tracked race-cars armed with something that could be a gun (the russians). You really shouldn't think about how bad the tank is by modern understanding, but you should think about how this tank was able to give the germans a headache in 1940, up to 20 years after it was designed. It had many flaws, but also was ahead of it's time in many regards and this is why the french should be given credit for this achievement. The tank fought in a war that it was not designed for and still managed to do a good job, 20 years after it's inception.

[@petesheppard1709]

Given the heavy armor and powerful (for the time) gun, it did indeed have superior elements, but it was not as 'fightable' as the lighter panzers. Perhaps the same relative roles as the big German cats and M4s??

[@Edax_Royeaux]

Think of it this way, the B1 Char Bis was one of the few heavy tanks ever built for it's day. Few nations had the capacity to build heavy tanks, much less design them. However, Heavy Tanks were a flawed concept, and the B1 Char Bis failed in the same way the KV-1 &2, Tiger and Tog II did. They were too slow, too heavy, guzzled too much gas and were too expensive. While utterly terrifying in combat, they don't win wars that involve driving across entire countries.

[@mesothelioma5024]

Have you ever done Italian tanks?

[@jeffreybezong4121]

This is so cool you should work a miracle and do a char 2c video

[@Masada1911]

But there aren’t any of those left. Is that why you said he should work a miracle?

[@jeffreybezong4121]

@@Masada1911 yes..

[@Masada1911]

@@jeffreybezong4121 sorry, I am an idiot

[@117thWing]

Biggest surprise while watching this video: The driver had a seat!

[@DarknessInferno15]

Are there any German modifications of this tank still around? I'd love to hear what they did to it.

[@DiggingForFacts]

The one over in Bovington is mostly in the condition as found on the channel islands after German occupation service. Most German additions included stuff like radio and tool mountings as well as cutting a commander's turret hatch. The Germans converted a few into flamethrower tanks (fairly famous for having fought in operation market garden) and of course the 105mm Le.Fh.18 mounted ones. Both conversions were built in very low numbers though.

[@sheeplord4976]

When he says it peirces 40 meters at 30° does he mean they angled a 40 mil plate or they took a plate and angled it to be 40 mil

[@9192939fuck]

do the object 120 next

[@ishouldgetalif3]

mmm yeeesss...

[@VekhGaming]

Wait, are those MG Pans still loaded? Do bullets even work after so long?

[@TheCoffeehound]

That one had a dummy round in it. As for old ammo - yes it usually will, if it has been stored properly. I've got some 1943 head stamped .30 ball that I've shot. Still reasonably accurate and haven't had a dud round yet. It's got corrosive primers, though, so I have to clean the rifle (1903 Springfield) carefully after I use some.

[@tamer2t736]

can you do the is 3

[@Gpower441]

"OH MY GOD ! THE TANK IS ON FIRE!" in ELC

[@imtiredtiredtired]

Kang Alex With a vehicle that small, i don't think the crews will have a chance to say those lines when a round hit the tank xD

[@SunKing968]

Anyone tempted to dismiss this tank as totally "combat ineffective" needs to look up the Stonne incident during the Battle of France first.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

If you are referring to Bilotte’s experience, it is worth questioning why Bilotte was on his own, what happened the rest of the B1s of his unit, and how much it affected the outcome of the fighting. It may not have been “totally” ineffective, but it did turn out to be something of a one-trick pony.

[@genekelly8467]

Yep-the hull 75 could destroy any German tank; while the thick frontal armor made the ChaRB1 almost invulnerable.