From what I remember alot of crews didn't care for it because the armor was so thin. But they appreciated its high mobility and great gun. It was an improvement over the M10 or pulling a towed piece through the mud.
Yes for sure, it's got the look. This chassis recovered with a say 8v-71T diesel and twin 40mm before L-70 GUNS. and on board radar would have been excellent as a anti helicopter system. I've seen video of the 57mm before and this is potent.
Just completed the Tamiya M18 kit. I can see how it might be mistaken for a German Mk III or MK IV. I've heard the M24 was also mistaken for a German tank.
My dad was the main gunner on a M18 with the 661rst in the last few months of the war. His tank's name was the Coup de Grace and it appears at 12:33 in the video. That sure looks like him in the center top looking at the two women. Great picture. Great Dad.
Very cool. Unfortunately my grandfather will only show up when someone asks the question: ‘what was going on with aviation in Malawi in the middle to late 20th century?’
The Allies wished they had Hellcats back in WW1 With these tanks they easily beat the Central Powers. No Armenian Genocide, No Soviet Union, No Great Depression, No Nazi Germany and No WW2!!!
I love how the staff at the tank museum can celebrate each tank for what it is, while still giving a realistic picture of the success or failure of the design. Thank you.
My thoughts exactly. I had believed previously that this was a real advantage to the Allies. Turns out that, except for a couple of notable examples, not so much.
@@markmuldoon805 It was the upgrade to the M10. Also, it was intended as a fast reaction counter to the German's previously highly successful tactics of fast armor breakthrough doctrine. It's more that the Germans couldn't hope to use the same tactics against American forces. Italy was simply too mountainous in many places for either side's favorite armor doctrines.
My great grandfather was part of a US Army tank destroyer battalion from June of 1942 until the fall of 1945 and he drove tank destroyers. He originally was a chauffeur for officers until they found out he had experience driving crawler tractors from before the war. He originally drove the M10 Wolverine in Africa, Italy, and Western Europe until his M10 got replaced by the M18 Hellcat in December of 1944. He would drive his Hellcat until the end of the war in Europe before being sent back home.
Civildefense, Nice story. Glad that your great-grandpa made it home safely. From the sounds of it, Nth Africa, Italy and Western Europe, he would have had enough points up to not get re-deployed to the Pacific for the final showdown with Japan.
I read Hellcats were very successful fire support vehicles in Italy, because their high power to weight ratio allowed them to climb mountains where other armored vehicles couldn't go and the 76mm was accurate at long ranges. If you could get one on top of a mountain it could command all facing slopes within range. An armored vehicle doesn't have to be great if you have one and the other side doesn't.
This is a great description of overall US armor design during the war. The goal was to get equipment overseas in numbers to matter with the ability to keep them there with technical or protective capability a close 2nd consideration
There was a tv show that showed restoring tanks many years ago. They found an M18 and fixed it up. They then found an old WWII vet who had commanded an M18 in the war. He had a great time going for a ride. It was a "reality show" so who knows how much was true? Good Luck, Rick
I was finally able to visit BTM a week ago... It was NUTS!!! I was especially impressed with the smaller part of exhibition, dedicated to WW1. Striking! And the cutthrough's of British Marks - just insane ❤️❤️❤️
Yet another example of David Wiley's concise but hugely informative and apt explanations as to the 'why' of the subject vehicle that supplements and informs the presentation. He brings colour and nuance to something that could be "is tank, has gun, moves, works". Love his presentations.
My great uncle was in the 705th td battalion as a m-18 driver. He talked with great pride about his tank and it carried the crew through many battles but usually only as supporting fire. Bastogne was a very different story.
A wonderful and insightful video! A favorite armored fighting vehicle I remember reading about, the M-18 was well designed and *fast* ,even if did not often fight in its intended role. Thank you to David Willey and all at The Tank Museum !! ☺
As a former Heavy Antiarmor Infantryman (TOW), we regarded the men of the TD Corps as our direct ancestors in concept and mission. My company was part of 2nd Brigade 3rd Armored Division, and our platoons would be tasked to each of the teams formed from the two armor squadrons and one infantry battalion (which we were organic to). The basic concept remained, but we were tasked as the stand off anti tank element in the defense.
There is another weapons system with the same design goals as the tank destroyers, high speed to get into position to destroy advancing armored units. This is what the AH-64 Apache was designed to do. There is a reason they quickly ended up in units at the Fulda Gap when they become operational. It has not been used for defense like that so any large degree in combat, there have not been any large armored attacks against US units. We can all be glad the was not tested for the design usage in what would have been WWIII.
@@target844 Our unit had two primary targets, anything with multiple antennas and anything remotely close to being AAA. The former to cut the head off of the snake, the later to help air assets to have a better chance at making their attacks and surviving.
Saw some abandoned ones in Bosnia in 1999 , at Gorazde . Engines had been removed. Seem much smaller in person. I understand that they fought on both sides, with other US and Soviet vehicles. In our area (UN) there were wrecks of T-34/85s, T-55s and Hellcats. At least two had been 90% buried by bomb hits nearby. I often wonder if they are still buried.
I love the anecdotes of them actually effectively shooting and scooting during the Battle of the Bulge while M4's were fighting as static and short-lived targets.
And that shows that the concept wasn't bad. The "problem" was that the Allies were on the offensive all the time while the Tank Destroyer units were to be used in defence at an operational and higher level. Wacht Am Rhine was the only German offensive large enough to allow them being used as intended.
My dad was in B Company 602d TD Battalion and made the overnight march from France up to Belgium 20-21 Dec 44 to take up positions in the vicinity of Bastogne.
You know a man is serious about his passions when he has steeltoed boots under his sundays pants. Just the sheer amount of knowledge comming out of this man is staggering. Highly appreciated, love from Holland!
The Germans were coming down the road. In the mainly offensive ops in Normandy, TD’s couldn’t support infantry and the 3 inch M10 and 76mm M-18 barely could deal with Panthers in ambush and were ineffective against the bigger tanks.
@@tonymanero5544 The M18's (IIRC) worked over a good number of Panthers in quick succession, which means they were plenty capable of dealing with them. There simply weren't any or many bigger tanks for them to deal with in the first place.
@@lyndoncmp5751 The amount of armor it takes to stop the armor piercing rounds you're talking about would mean making a Tiger or King Tiger, that moves slow, is more limited in production, and not there and can't get there when you need it.
Many people in war thunder always expected an enemy within a few hundred meters or so. Because it's a small map and you can estimate the number of enemies you would encounter in that match. In real life, you could have driven a tank for days without encountering enemies. Most of your time are spent driving, keep on lookout, and maintenance. Sometimes just an encounter with a small group of infantries, but thats not a big problem. But one day when you dont expect anything special, your friend's tank got destroyed by an enemy Panzer.
Just started watching this channel. Noticed the Mighty Jingles in the top right corner. Been watching his videos for years. Glad to see a familiar face. You all have some great content. Thank you for what y’all do.
I think the real reason they didn't do their intended job except when the Germans were doing their masse armor breakthrough tactics they once so heavily relied on... was that the Germans were no longer capable of using those tactics against the American forces, and were stopped when they tried. It was the tactic the allies in general were worried most about, and they wanted to have it countered. The Germans had breakthrough armor doctrine, and the US had dedicated fast QRF to counter, which was eventually used with great success.
My dad was a tank mechanic, among other things, with the 903rd Heavy Ordnance Battalion during WW2 from the Normandy Invasion all the way through to the end of the war. His unit was attached to the 3rd Armored Division and fought in almost all of the major battles the 3rd Armor was engaged in. He hated the Shermans, but liked the M18 Hellcats.
First of all i want to say i survived the mass genocides across Bosnia that was done by the Serbians (example srebrenica). Yugoslavia split up and Serbia did not like it and backed by Russia they attacked Croatia and Bosnia. Croatia had a military and so did Serbia while us Bosnians did not and had to fight basically civilians vs an army and supply ourselfs or use stuff we captured. Serbs wanted yo slaughter us and take our Land. We had a Sherman we captured in out town from the Serbs and it served us well. Now i live in USA and love history and many things especially Tanks! Thanks for these tank chats! Love em! I want to say, if Germany had these Hellcats instead of these huge Tigers they would not have lost the war so quick! Hitler made so many mistakes and the allies were lucky he did and thats why they did not want to assassinate him.
the hellcats did serve the US army in another way: as it became obvious the tank destroyers were no use, some were converted to APC. the infantry was not too happy with their normalAPC, the halftrack ("purple heart boxes") this was a good idea!
The M39 was a Armored Utility Vehicle sometimes (ab)used as an APC. More mobile than a half track but with many of the problems (open topped, thin armor, difficult to dismount under fire). It was "better than walking" but mainly used for developing doctrin. In the Us the results where M75, M59 and then M113. Germany went to the HS 30 and then Marder IFV
@@McC.444 some south American countries use modernized chaffees and m5 Stuarts as fire support vehicles, if the US had extra after WW2 someone somewhere probably has them left iver
@@blackwoodsecurity531 good idea, but I know that the Croatians and Serbians used M-36s and M-18s throughout the 90s that weren't too different to their original form
Great History lesson guys. Interesting how you say how the Hellcat didn't do much in WWII, yet I've read in several places that it had the best kill/loss ratio of any US armour during WWII. 526 kills claimed for a total kill to loss ratio of 2.4 to 1 from all theaters of WWII that it fought in. Not bad numbers at all.
He did say that used in their designated role they were quite effective (Bastogne for example). I think the problem that many historians have when determining the effectiveness of the Tank Destroyer branch is that they are defensive weapons designed to stop a German offensive during a time when the German army was rarely on the offensive. Tank destroyers don't go on offense because of their lack of armor and that limits their usefulness for the US army at the time because it was usually on the offense. Their effectiveness can be debated as great or poor depending on how one frames the question.
Take the kill claims with a pinch of salt. They'd often lob shells into already knocked out or abandoned tanks and claim it as a kill. If these Hellcat (and Sherman) kill ratio claims are believed then the Germans must have fielded about four times as many tanks as their own records state.
@@lyndoncmp5751 - The same problem assigning "kills" accurately occurs in armored warfare as occurs in aerial combat: Multiple engagements happening in the virtually the same space at the same time, with multiple viewpoints and multiple participants. Just as multiple pilots could/often did claim the same destroyed aircraft, armored vehicle crew did the same at times. At least in the case of fighters, they had gun camera footage to help confirm their claims - but the tankers and TD men had to rely on the plain old human eyeball, mark one, as the quip goes. Well, the intelligence officers had to earn their pay figuring out the after-action reports, right?
My dad was a platoon leader in the 824th Tank Destroyer Battalion. Landed in Marseilles in Oct. of 1944 with half-tracks and towed 76mm. Months later they were upgraded to the M-18. The open turret design presented a close call for him, when a mortar round burst nearby. He brought home a piece of shrapnel that landed next to his foot. He saw action around the Siegfried line, in Heilbronn, and was part of the security detail at the surrender proceedings of Stuttgardt in April. Ended up the war in Austria. His TD's were mostly used as tracked artillery. He had commented how fast the M18s were, and he would tell soldiers hitching a ride to hang on tight.
Thank you so much for this segment I find it very interesting how the US and the Yugoslavs seemed to be very interested in this style of thank the Australian tank museum has a M-36 that came from Yugoslavia and they switched out its power plant while in service there for a Russian T-35 diesel and it seemed to work very well. I’ve been trying to get them to do a piece on it but you beat them to it so to speak with this M-18 which is just an earlier version so thank you very much.
I have an Uncle I never met who served with the 603rd Tank Destroyers but died shorty after the breakout from Normandy during Operation Cobra. On August 8th, 1944, the 603rd was outside of Gousenou, France, when they received "considerable heavy fire" from the German held town that had been converted into a military fortress during 4 years of German occupation. Approximately 30 men were killed, wounded, or missing, that day and among them the Battalion Commander of the 603, Lt. Col. John G. Minniiece, was among the dead. On August 9th, after a buildup of more American forces outside of Gousenou over 900 Germans surrendered without a fight. HOWEVER - On August 7th, 1944, a day before the American forces first arrived outside of town, Germans forced 44 men, women, and children into the center of town and massacred them. I respect my Uncle for standing up to fight those types of people and I try to honor his memory. The sacrifice of my Uncle, Ernest J. Galles, and those like him, is not forgotten.
Props to Mr. David for not perpetuating the old myths. Time constraints probably prevented him from exploring the full context of the Tank Destroyer Branch and its associated doctrine and rationale. It's important to understand that stuff because the whole TD thing doesn't make a lot of sense even in 1945/46, nevermind eighty years later, so it's worth looking at The Chieftain's lecture on Tank Destroyer Branch. To summarize that talk: 1. The perception of the Army (or more to the point the people who made the decisions about doctrine and procurement) was that Poland, France, and to a certain extent, the Soviet Union, were totally *rolled* by zerg-swarms of Nazi tanks. The reality is not quite that melodramatic, but that was nevertheless how it was *perceived* on our side of the ocean. 2. The proposed solution to this perceived problem was lots and lots of highly mobile guns that could stage behind the main line and quickly move to respond to large tank/zergling breakthroughs where they happened. 3. Because their use was to be purely defensive, they did not need to be as fully-developed as a tank in terms of secondary armament, protection, gunnery, and optics. This meant that each unit could cost far less than a full tank, which would help fullfill the doctrinal requirement of having loads of tank destroyers. 4. This difference between the cost of a tank destroyer and a full tank was a large part of the reason for the existence of the Tank Destroyer Branch. There needed to be a very large force of vehicles that didn't have the same kinds of capabilities as a tank, so therefore it needed its own branch of the service, or so the justification went. The reasons Tank Destroyer Branch never came to much were many and varied, but they essentially came down to it being overtaken by advancements in anti-armor and manufacturing technologies, as well as the relative depletion of the German armor force in Russia. In terms of anti-armor technology, by 1942, the shaped charge warhead was the subject of intense development, and by early 1943, the first Bazookas were being deployed to infantry. They were far from perfect, but they represented a quantum leap in terms of being able to threaten German armor wherever it appeared. Even if half of them didn't work and couldn't penetrate a tank except from the rear, German tank crews could no longer charge around with impunity. If they saw even a few American infantry, they could have a bazooka and that meant they had to be found and dealt with, which slowed down any armored advance. With respect to manufacturing technology, by about the same time, economies of scale had brought down the cost of a tank quite drastically compared to what it had been before 1942, to the point where the cost of tanks was almost comparable to that of tank destroyers, and they offered far greater capability, so why bother with a TD? Finally, the between the Russians and the strategic bombing in Germany, the Germans just didn't have the forces available to perform the large, sweeping attacks of the early war. They still had plenty of tanks, to be sure, and they used them, but the panzer force's glory days were long on the past.
During the Korean War, Filipino Tank Ace Capt. Conrado D. Yap held the line with his M18 Hellcat against hordes of Chinese and North Korean soldiers at the Battle of Yuldong. He held the line until he was shot in the chest by an enemy sniper... He is credited for knocking out 13 Chinese and North Korean vehicles..
@ Bobbie Manuel dela Pena - One of the pleasures of studying history - military history in this case - is the chance to learn something new and hear someone's story you had not heard. Thank you for posting about Captain Conrado Yap and his amazing exploits. I was not familiar with it and now I am. Men of his caliber deserve to be remembered and celebrated down through the years of 20th century history. The Korean conflict was not, as a rule, a war of armor - but there certainly were exceptions to that trend. I would like to visit the Philippines someday; I have a great respect for her people. Thank you again....
Never knew about their service in Yugoslavia before. Interesting bit of information. Also I was wondering what that hole in the front might be good for until he said it was battle damage ...
My dad drove this in WWII. He told me that as the war went on the crew would rotate stations. He loved driving, the speed of M18 was its main grace. They would sit in a low spot take a couple of shots and run.
The hellcat is so celebrated in other literature as a great anti tank vehicle but a closer look as given here shows that it was very situational. Might have still been very good in a supporting anti tank role together with other vehicles. Still great piece of engineering.
Must've been early in the weekend: David had pretty bad sunburn by Sunday! It was an awesome show, and seeing a Hellcat frolicking about was really cool!
My grandfather was a tank commander in WW2 and commanded a Hellcat 631st tank battalion Pattons 3rd army Quitman C. Berthay..my hero Google him he went from the beach till Patton said stop ✋️ that's who raised me and I thank him for it the way the world is today
I LOVE the detailed explanation of tank doctrine and design philosophy behind the development of the tanks you feature. Any book recommendations on tank design doctrine, etc?
Dear Mr. Wiley and Mr. Fletcher. I've been to tour fabulous museum in "18 and loved every single minute being there. You can imagine it's a bit of a long drive from Rotterdam that prevents me to visit the Tankmuseum more often. But please explain to me why the V shaped paterns on tank tracks are facing downwards, you might think facing upwards would provide more grip.
This is so that the tracks will dig down to solid footing. If reversed, mud would pack in the 'U' and turn them into slicks. Farm tractor tires are oriented the same way.
Great stuff. The Battle of the Bulge does show how well they worked as intended but those situations were the exception not the rule. Really a sign of how successful D-day and the subsequent western offensive was.
@@princeofcupspoc9073 With the adoption of HVSS suspension and wider tracks, the later models of Sherman had decent flotation. Add on some grousers and it was relatively nimble on snow conditions.
It seems to me that the reason it wasn't a very successful doctrine is because the German Army wasn't really on the offensive anymore once it finally got into service. It was a good idea but arrived too late, when the war was already pretty much won without them. The US had plenty of manufacturing capacity so I don't think it made that much of a difference to produce a few extraneous vehicles near the end of the war.
Hey Tank Nuts! What do you think of the Hellcat?
Veery niice
I love the Hellcat. Very cool vehicle!
Favorite armored vehicle ever, despite almost no armor
From what I remember alot of crews didn't care for it because the armor was so thin. But they appreciated its high mobility and great gun.
It was an improvement over the M10 or pulling a towed piece through the mud.
I heard it's Ricky Bobby approved.
This is one of those vehicles that just has attractive proportions in my opinion.
It's just a good looking vehicle.
Yes for sure, it's got the look. This chassis recovered with a say 8v-71T diesel and twin 40mm before L-70 GUNS. and on board radar would have been excellent as a anti helicopter system. I've seen video of the 57mm before and this is potent.
@@briandumas9975 they used the m24 chassis for that. It's a similarly attractive vehicle.
Stug III for me!
I agree, very clean lines. Merely for WW2 appearance, I would go with the Jagdpanther. Post WW2, the Chieftain or the Tanque Argentino Mediano.
Just completed the Tamiya M18 kit. I can see how it might be mistaken for a German Mk III or MK IV. I've heard the M24 was also mistaken for a German tank.
My dad was the main gunner on a M18 with the 661rst in the last few months of the war. His tank's name was the Coup de Grace and it appears at 12:33 in the video. That sure looks like him in the center top looking at the two women. Great picture. Great Dad.
That's suppper cool man .
Very cool. Unfortunately my grandfather will only show up when someone asks the question: ‘what was going on with aviation in Malawi in the middle to late 20th century?’
My dad was Recon Company of the 661st TD Bn.
Thanks for sharing your dad's story.
Thanks for that story. Coup de Grace. What’s great name for a tank.
Props to the designers. The Hellcat looks modern even by today standards.
This is what you get when you let Harley Earl and his staff design a tank. A timeless classic that looks like a tank should.
I was going to say the same thing! Love the M-18. It's design is 80 yrs-old and it still looks terrific today.
Not sure about it looking modern but it does look good
The Allies wished they had Hellcats back in WW1
With these tanks they easily beat the Central Powers. No Armenian Genocide, No Soviet Union, No Great Depression, No Nazi Germany and No WW2!!!
Not sure it looks modern but it sure looks like it means business!
I saw an article about someone who restored one, he then entered it in car shows as a ‘43 (‘44?) Buick.
Close enough I suppose...
Like that bloke who turns up to Lamborghini meetups with his tractor!
@@hoilst That's legit!
He won every car show due to superior firepower and 76mm HVAP Tungsten balls.
He was really gunning for that door prize. 😁
I love how the staff at the tank museum can celebrate each tank for what it is, while still giving a realistic picture of the success or failure of the design. Thank you.
My thoughts exactly. I had believed previously that this was a real advantage to the Allies. Turns out that, except for a couple of notable examples, not so much.
@@markmuldoon805 It was the upgrade to the M10. Also, it was intended as a fast reaction counter to the German's previously highly successful tactics of fast armor breakthrough doctrine. It's more that the Germans couldn't hope to use the same tactics against American forces. Italy was simply too mountainous in many places for either side's favorite armor doctrines.
The real reason Pelosi visits T 🤔
ruclips.net/video/0uj60mlgs-o/видео.html
My great grandfather was part of a US Army tank destroyer battalion from June of 1942 until the fall of 1945 and he drove tank destroyers. He originally was a chauffeur for officers until they found out he had experience driving crawler tractors from before the war. He originally drove the M10 Wolverine in Africa, Italy, and Western Europe until his M10 got replaced by the M18 Hellcat in December of 1944. He would drive his Hellcat until the end of the war in Europe before being sent back home.
apart, a part of? two different words, two different meanings.
Great presentation the glasses are cool . He'd make a great drinking buddy.
Very cool story.
Civildefense, Nice story. Glad that your great-grandpa made it home safely. From the sounds of it, Nth Africa, Italy and Western Europe, he would have had enough points up to not get re-deployed to the Pacific for the final showdown with Japan.
That is awesome! I wish i could have talked with him and see if he would tell me stories!
I read Hellcats were very successful fire support vehicles in Italy, because their high power to weight ratio allowed them to climb mountains where other armored vehicles couldn't go and the 76mm was accurate at long ranges. If you could get one on top of a mountain it could command all facing slopes within range. An armored vehicle doesn't have to be great if you have one and the other side doesn't.
This is a great description of overall US armor design during the war. The goal was to get equipment overseas in numbers to matter with the ability to keep them there with technical or protective capability a close 2nd consideration
There was a tv show that showed restoring tanks many years ago. They found an M18 and fixed it up. They then found an old WWII vet who had commanded an M18 in the war. He had a great time going for a ride. It was a "reality show" so who knows how much was true? Good Luck, Rick
Tank Overhaul
Not just any old M18 vet. They found the actual guy who commanded that actual M18 from the serial number. And he lived close by.
@@b2spirit35 That's what they claimed but, I've learned not to totally believe what "reality tv" says. Good Luck, Rick
@@richardross7219 it is in the script to say it, so it must be real...
I know Salvage Squad in the UK restored an M10 tank destroyer.
“I need your clothes, your boots and your Armoured Vehicle”
David Willey 2022
Looking very cool next to the hellcat with those shades!
It’s an unusual day for England - the sun is out 😂
I love it when good historical explanations of tanks include mention of "Kelly's Heroes."
👍
oof oof!
Drinking some wine eating some cheese😂
Absolutely gorgeous vehicle all dressed up. Great editing too, the black and white photos interspersed really add to the chat. Cheers boys
I was finally able to visit BTM a week ago... It was NUTS!!! I was especially impressed with the smaller part of exhibition, dedicated to WW1. Striking! And the cutthrough's of British Marks - just insane ❤️❤️❤️
I went before COVID it really is a great day out
I dream of seeing it one day. Unfortunately there’s a pesky ocean in the way! Someday, I hope!
I love these films about various armoured doctrines, always my favourites.
Thanks tank museu.
Love the Boxing Gloves hanging on turret....Gives a new meaning to being prepared for Hand to Hand Combat.
*drive me closer, I wanna sock em!"
@@blackwoodsecurity531 driver, position the tank next to that panther so I may engage his commander in fisticuffs.
Yet another example of David Wiley's concise but hugely informative and apt explanations as to the 'why' of the subject vehicle that supplements and informs the presentation. He brings colour and nuance to something that could be "is tank, has gun, moves, works". Love his presentations.
Absolutely one of the most gorgeously proportioned armoured vehicles of all time!
My great uncle was in the 705th td battalion as a m-18 driver. He talked with great pride about his tank and it carried the crew through many battles but usually only as supporting fire. Bastogne was a very different story.
My great uncle was in the 705th too. He used to tell me a few stories about the war. And the Hellcat was what he drove as well.
A wonderful and insightful video! A favorite armored fighting vehicle I remember reading about, the M-18 was well designed and *fast* ,even if did not often fight in its intended role.
Thank you to David Willey and all at The Tank Museum !!
☺
Thanks! love to sit and watch these!
One of my favorites. I appreciated the great WWII period photos.
That's a good looking unit right there. The tanks not bad looking either
As a former Heavy Antiarmor Infantryman (TOW), we regarded the men of the TD Corps as our direct ancestors in concept and mission. My company was part of 2nd Brigade 3rd Armored Division, and our platoons would be tasked to each of the teams formed from the two armor squadrons and one infantry battalion (which we were organic to). The basic concept remained, but we were tasked as the stand off anti tank element in the defense.
There is another weapons system with the same design goals as the tank destroyers, high speed to get into position to destroy advancing armored units. This is what the AH-64 Apache was designed to do. There is a reason they quickly ended up in units at the Fulda Gap when they become operational.
It has not been used for defense like that so any large degree in combat, there have not been any large armored attacks against US units. We can all be glad the was not tested for the design usage in what would have been WWIII.
@@target844 Our unit had two primary targets, anything with multiple antennas and anything remotely close to being AAA. The former to cut the head off of the snake, the later to help air assets to have a better chance at making their attacks and surviving.
Saw some abandoned ones in Bosnia in 1999 , at Gorazde . Engines had been removed. Seem much smaller in person. I understand that they fought on both sides, with other US and Soviet vehicles. In our area (UN) there were wrecks of T-34/85s, T-55s and Hellcats. At least two had been 90% buried by bomb hits nearby. I often wonder if they are still buried.
Probably, if you find it you keep it
Pelosi, a confessed war criminal,
Jimmy Carter said.......
ruclips.net/video/N5zjvbpgy2s/видео.html
👍
Very interesting to hear from a real observation
Thanks
That moment when you've just finished writing an article on the M18 for your Tank Blog right before the Tank Museum uploads this video 😄
Timing is everything! Where do I find your article? I’d love to read it!
I love the anecdotes of them actually effectively shooting and scooting during the Battle of the Bulge while M4's were fighting as static and short-lived targets.
And that shows that the concept wasn't bad.
The "problem" was that the Allies were on the offensive all the time while the Tank Destroyer units were to be used in defence at an operational and higher level.
Wacht Am Rhine was the only German offensive large enough to allow them being used as intended.
My dad was in B Company 602d TD Battalion and made the overnight march from France up to Belgium 20-21 Dec 44 to take up positions in the vicinity of Bastogne.
He attended several unit reunions over the years and I have a copy of the 602d TD Battalion unit history. Excellent reading.
This looks modern compared to most ww2 tanks. Great design.
You know a man is serious about his passions when he has steeltoed boots under his sundays pants. Just the sheer amount of knowledge comming out of this man is staggering. Highly appreciated, love from Holland!
Very effective shoot and scoot vehicle as proved in the Battle of the Bulge with the 705th .
The Germans were coming down the road. In the mainly offensive ops in Normandy, TD’s couldn’t support infantry and the 3 inch M10 and 76mm M-18 barely could deal with Panthers in ambush and were ineffective against the bigger tanks.
@@tonymanero5544 The M18's (IIRC) worked over a good number of Panthers in quick succession, which means they were plenty capable of dealing with them. There simply weren't any or many bigger tanks for them to deal with in the first place.
I saw PREY | Movie Review
ruclips.net/video/HgLZvB_J74A/видео.html
Terrible armour and open topped turret. Did they think that nothing was going to shoot back and hit it?
@@lyndoncmp5751 The amount of armor it takes to stop the armor piercing rounds you're talking about would mean making a Tiger or King Tiger, that moves slow, is more limited in production, and not there and can't get there when you need it.
I shake my head in bemused confusion at people who assess the effectiveness of armour by its performance in War Thunder.
😆😆
M18 is GOAT in both WT and real life
Many people in war thunder always expected an enemy within a few hundred meters or so. Because it's a small map and you can estimate the number of enemies you would encounter in that match.
In real life, you could have driven a tank for days without encountering enemies. Most of your time are spent driving, keep on lookout, and maintenance. Sometimes just an encounter with a small group of infantries, but thats not a big problem. But one day when you dont expect anything special, your friend's tank got destroyed by an enemy Panzer.
How to sound arrogant on the internet in 3 easy steps: 1. talk down on people 2. use big, out of style words to sound smart 3. profit
Welcome to 2022
M18 Hellcat was the Javelin ATGM of it's day.
During the Brest, France campaign, in August 1944, one M18 sank a German flak ship at a range of over a mile with only six shots.
Guess they were trying to compete with the US submarine (Barb) that sank a train.
That's a fun fact!
Cool
@@ConstantlyDamaged Have to keep the balance, can't let the Navy sink too many ground targets .. wouldn't be fair.
Do not underestimate a tank, specially with today’s modern fire control systems. A ship near the shore could end up in the sights of a tank.
This is a good amount of research, many thanks for that, also, really great footage. Thank you David Wiley and team.
Beautiful restoration job!
One of my fav WoT vehicles, gets in position quick and able to deliver a surprise, lethal first hit.
Thanks
Just started watching this channel. Noticed the Mighty Jingles in the top right corner. Been watching his videos for years. Glad to see a familiar face. You all have some great content. Thank you for what y’all do.
I think the real reason they didn't do their intended job except when the Germans were doing their masse armor breakthrough tactics they once so heavily relied on... was that the Germans were no longer capable of using those tactics against the American forces, and were stopped when they tried. It was the tactic the allies in general were worried most about, and they wanted to have it countered. The Germans had breakthrough armor doctrine, and the US had dedicated fast QRF to counter, which was eventually used with great success.
My dad was a tank mechanic, among other things, with the 903rd Heavy Ordnance Battalion during WW2 from the Normandy Invasion all the way through to the end of the war. His unit was attached to the 3rd Armored Division and fought in almost all of the major battles the 3rd Armor was engaged in. He hated the Shermans, but liked the M18 Hellcats.
Harley Earl was also instrumental in the development of the first Corvettes(the car not the ships, although the car was named after the ships).
First of all i want to say i survived the mass genocides across Bosnia that was done by the Serbians (example srebrenica). Yugoslavia split up and Serbia did not like it and backed by Russia they attacked Croatia and Bosnia. Croatia had a military and so did Serbia while us Bosnians did not and had to fight basically civilians vs an army and supply ourselfs or use stuff we captured. Serbs wanted yo slaughter us and take our Land. We had a Sherman we captured in out town from the Serbs and it served us well. Now i live in USA and love history and many things especially Tanks! Thanks for these tank chats! Love em! I want to say, if Germany had these Hellcats instead of these huge Tigers they would not have lost the war so quick! Hitler made so many mistakes and the allies were lucky he did and thats why they did not want to assassinate him.
My Dad was in US ARMY from 12/08/1941 to 12/20/1945 in the 804TH , T,D, he was a Driver IN M 20 GMCM3 M10 & M18 he love it his M18 .
My grandmother welded on the M18 at the Buick tank plant in Flint Michigan
Both Looking good. Curator rocking those sunglases :)
Great video and presentation - Thank You!
the hellcats did serve the US army in another way: as it became obvious the tank destroyers were no use, some were converted to APC. the infantry was not too happy with their normalAPC, the halftrack ("purple heart boxes") this was a good idea!
The M39 was a Armored Utility Vehicle sometimes (ab)used as an APC. More mobile than a half track but with many of the problems (open topped, thin armor, difficult to dismount under fire). It was "better than walking" but mainly used for developing doctrin. In the Us the results where M75, M59 and then M113. Germany went to the HS 30 and then Marder IFV
Its such a nice looking vehicle, I wonder how many are left?
Taiwan doesn't have any
@@ruzziasht349 the only places outside of the US to have them I'd guess be the Balkans
@@McC.444 some south American countries use modernized chaffees and m5 Stuarts as fire support vehicles, if the US had extra after WW2 someone somewhere probably has them left iver
@@blackwoodsecurity531 good idea, but I know that the Croatians and Serbians used M-36s and M-18s throughout the 90s that weren't too different to their original form
Great History lesson guys. Interesting how you say how the Hellcat didn't do much in WWII, yet I've read in several places that it had the best kill/loss ratio of any US armour during WWII. 526 kills claimed for a total kill to loss ratio of 2.4 to 1 from all theaters of WWII that it fought in. Not bad numbers at all.
He did say that used in their designated role they were quite effective (Bastogne for example). I think the problem that many historians have when determining the effectiveness of the Tank Destroyer branch is that they are defensive weapons designed to stop a German offensive during a time when the German army was rarely on the offensive. Tank destroyers don't go on offense because of their lack of armor and that limits their usefulness for the US army at the time because it was usually on the offense.
Their effectiveness can be debated as great or poor depending on how one frames the question.
@@morganmcallister2001. Very true.
Take the kill claims with a pinch of salt. They'd often lob shells into already knocked out or abandoned tanks and claim it as a kill.
If these Hellcat (and Sherman) kill ratio claims are believed then the Germans must have fielded about four times as many tanks as their own records state.
@@lyndoncmp5751 - The same problem assigning "kills" accurately occurs in armored warfare as occurs in aerial combat: Multiple engagements happening in the virtually the same space at the same time, with multiple viewpoints and multiple participants. Just as multiple pilots could/often did claim the same destroyed aircraft, armored vehicle crew did the same at times. At least in the case of fighters, they had gun camera footage to help confirm their claims - but the tankers and TD men had to rely on the plain old human eyeball, mark one, as the quip goes. Well, the intelligence officers had to earn their pay figuring out the after-action reports, right?
My dad was a platoon leader in the 824th Tank Destroyer Battalion. Landed in Marseilles in Oct. of 1944 with half-tracks and towed 76mm. Months later they were upgraded to the M-18. The open turret design presented a close call for him, when a mortar round burst nearby. He brought home a piece of shrapnel that landed next to his foot. He saw action around the Siegfried line, in Heilbronn, and was part of the security detail at the surrender proceedings of Stuttgardt in April. Ended up the war in Austria. His TD's were mostly used as tracked artillery. He had commented how fast the M18s were, and he would tell soldiers hitching a ride to hang on tight.
Thank you for the stories from your dad.
☺
Thank you so much for this segment I find it very interesting how the US and the Yugoslavs seemed to be very interested in this style of thank the Australian tank museum has a M-36 that came from Yugoslavia and they switched out its power plant while in service there for a Russian T-35 diesel and it seemed to work very well.
I’ve been trying to get them to do a piece on it but you beat them to it so to speak with this M-18 which is just an earlier version so thank you very much.
Thank you for this video from Canada
Awesome! And once again, you are Rocking those sunglasses good sir.
"Traffic problems? Drive away in the hot new 1943 Buick Hellcat, and leave those traffic jams behind! (Or at least in ruins.)"
I have an Uncle I never met who served with the 603rd Tank Destroyers but died shorty after the breakout from Normandy during Operation Cobra. On August 8th, 1944, the 603rd was outside of Gousenou, France, when they received "considerable
heavy fire" from the German held town that had been converted into a military fortress during 4 years of German occupation. Approximately 30 men were killed, wounded, or missing, that day and among them the Battalion Commander of the 603, Lt. Col. John G. Minniiece, was among the dead. On August 9th, after a buildup of more American forces outside of Gousenou over 900 Germans surrendered without a fight.
HOWEVER - On August 7th, 1944, a day before the American forces first arrived outside of town, Germans forced 44 men, women, and children into the center of town and massacred them. I respect my Uncle for standing up to fight those types of people and I try to honor his memory.
The sacrifice of my Uncle, Ernest J. Galles, and those like him, is not forgotten.
The M18 has always been my favorite WW2 vehicle I think it’s just gorgeous looking
Loved seeing this at Tank Fest, one of my favourites!
Best looking tank ever. Fast, and hard hitting.
Props to Mr. David for not perpetuating the old myths.
Time constraints probably prevented him from exploring the full context of the Tank Destroyer Branch and its associated doctrine and rationale. It's important to understand that stuff because the whole TD thing doesn't make a lot of sense even in 1945/46, nevermind eighty years later, so it's worth looking at The Chieftain's lecture on Tank Destroyer Branch.
To summarize that talk:
1. The perception of the Army (or more to the point the people who made the decisions about doctrine and procurement) was that Poland, France, and to a certain extent, the Soviet Union, were totally *rolled* by zerg-swarms of Nazi tanks. The reality is not quite that melodramatic, but that was nevertheless how it was *perceived* on our side of the ocean.
2. The proposed solution to this perceived problem was lots and lots of highly mobile guns that could stage behind the main line and quickly move to respond to large tank/zergling breakthroughs where they happened.
3. Because their use was to be purely defensive, they did not need to be as fully-developed as a tank in terms of secondary armament, protection, gunnery, and optics. This meant that each unit could cost far less than a full tank, which would help fullfill the doctrinal requirement of having loads of tank destroyers.
4. This difference between the cost of a tank destroyer and a full tank was a large part of the reason for the existence of the Tank Destroyer Branch. There needed to be a very large force of vehicles that didn't have the same kinds of capabilities as a tank, so therefore it needed its own branch of the service, or so the justification went.
The reasons Tank Destroyer Branch never came to much were many and varied, but they essentially came down to it being overtaken by advancements in anti-armor and manufacturing technologies, as well as the relative depletion of the German armor force in Russia.
In terms of anti-armor technology, by 1942, the shaped charge warhead was the subject of intense development, and by early 1943, the first Bazookas were being deployed to infantry. They were far from perfect, but they represented a quantum leap in terms of being able to threaten German armor wherever it appeared. Even if half of them didn't work and couldn't penetrate a tank except from the rear, German tank crews could no longer charge around with impunity. If they saw even a few American infantry, they could have a bazooka and that meant they had to be found and dealt with, which slowed down any armored advance.
With respect to manufacturing technology, by about the same time, economies of scale had brought down the cost of a tank quite drastically compared to what it had been before 1942, to the point where the cost of tanks was almost comparable to that of tank destroyers, and they offered far greater capability, so why bother with a TD?
Finally, the between the Russians and the strategic bombing in Germany, the Germans just didn't have the forces available to perform the large, sweeping attacks of the early war. They still had plenty of tanks, to be sure, and they used them, but the panzer force's glory days were long on the past.
He just said all that.
@@annoyingbstard9407 - No, he didn't. Also, your username is very appropriate.
Great tank chat as usual, lots of cool information about the M18. Though I was left wondering what the bucket (15:21) was used for?
Yes! I love the Hellcat!!
That's one cool looking David Willey! 🙂
Trying to attract a younger audience 😜😜
Love the narrator. Great video.
I've been waiting forever for this one!
My grandfather was the tank driver in Company B 602 tank Destroyer Battalion.
Saw that very same Hellcat at the Victory show this year too! Great vehicle.
During the Korean War, Filipino Tank Ace Capt. Conrado D. Yap held the line with his M18 Hellcat against hordes of Chinese and North Korean soldiers at the Battle of Yuldong. He held the line until he was shot in the chest by an enemy sniper... He is credited for knocking out 13 Chinese and North Korean vehicles..
@ Bobbie Manuel dela Pena - One of the pleasures of studying history - military history in this case - is the chance to learn something new and hear someone's story you had not heard. Thank you for posting about Captain Conrado Yap and his amazing exploits. I was not familiar with it and now I am. Men of his caliber deserve to be remembered and celebrated down through the years of 20th century history. The Korean conflict was not, as a rule, a war of armor - but there certainly were exceptions to that trend. I would like to visit the Philippines someday; I have a great respect for her people. Thank you again....
@@GeorgiaBoy1961
🇨🇳: You can't defeat me.
🇺🇲: I know. But he can...
🇵🇭
@@bobbiemanueldelapena4997 - Very good! We Americans already know.... don't mess with Filipinos!
Best videos on the internet
Never knew about their service in Yugoslavia before. Interesting bit of information. Also I was wondering what that hole in the front might be good for until he said it was battle damage ...
Sunglasses David is best David.
One of the best looking tanks ever made
Bloody beautiful vehicle the M18.
I have been building and painting a little model Hellcat, it is one of my favorite WWII vehicles
I love the lines of the Hellcat!
I was wondering when the M18 'Hellcat' would pop up, turns out the Museum don't have one apparently. Great video!
My dad drove this in WWII. He told me that as the war went on the crew would rotate stations. He loved driving, the speed of M18 was its main grace. They would sit in a low spot take a couple of shots and run.
Thank you!
12:27 Very prominent white stars, because with torsion bar suspension and muzzle brake the M18 looked like a German tank?
Thank you, very informative.
It looks way more menacing than a lot of video game representations make it look. Really cool to see one of these
I really like both hellcats of ww2 .
The f6f hellcat and the m18 hellcat are real beauties .
The hellcat is so celebrated in other literature as a great anti tank vehicle but a closer look as given here shows that it was very situational. Might have still been very good in a supporting anti tank role together with other vehicles.
Still great piece of engineering.
It's a gorgeous vehicle no doubt about it
Must've been early in the weekend: David had pretty bad sunburn by Sunday!
It was an awesome show, and seeing a Hellcat frolicking about was really cool!
David looking sharp!
My grandfather was a tank commander in WW2 and commanded a Hellcat 631st tank battalion Pattons 3rd army Quitman C. Berthay..my hero Google him he went from the beach till Patton said stop ✋️ that's who raised me and I thank him for it the way the world is today
Now this is the OG Hellkitty!
3:15
Everybody gets tanks / AFVs that they feel almost fully meet their needs.
Nobody gets as many of them as they feel they need.
The Hellcat was great and our boys could have used more of them.
One of the best looking American AFVs of the war. Sexy stuff.
I LOVE the detailed explanation of tank doctrine and design philosophy behind the development of the tanks you feature. Any book recommendations on tank design doctrine, etc?
Its truly amazing that this is faster than many modern tanks
Sure, but I'd rather get there a little slower but alive.
Dear Mr. Wiley and Mr. Fletcher. I've been to tour fabulous museum in "18 and loved every single minute being there. You can imagine it's a bit of a long drive from Rotterdam that prevents me to visit the Tankmuseum more often. But please explain to me why the V shaped paterns on tank tracks are facing downwards, you might think facing upwards would provide more grip.
This is so that the tracks will dig down to solid footing. If reversed, mud would pack in the 'U' and turn them into slicks. Farm tractor tires are oriented the same way.
Excellent video 📹
Great stuff. The Battle of the Bulge does show how well they worked as intended but those situations were the exception not the rule. Really a sign of how successful D-day and the subsequent western offensive was.
The whole battle in the south of France shows how good they can be. People just forget about that part of the war.
Well it was one of the few US armored vehicles with decent ground pressure. The M4 mediums (Shermans) were stuck in the snow.
@@princeofcupspoc9073 With the adoption of HVSS suspension and wider tracks, the later models of Sherman had decent flotation. Add on some grousers and it was relatively nimble on snow conditions.
It seems to me that the reason it wasn't a very successful doctrine is because the German Army wasn't really on the offensive anymore once it finally got into service. It was a good idea but arrived too late, when the war was already pretty much won without them. The US had plenty of manufacturing capacity so I don't think it made that much of a difference to produce a few extraneous vehicles near the end of the war.
My grandfather was a hellcat driver in 771st TD battalion. Was wounded late in 1944 by a sniper while relieving himself, so the paperwork says.
Unless the sniper shot his Peter off how would they know to put it in the paper work?
Wounded, not killed i suppose.@max420thc
Are those boxing gloves on the side of the turret?
One of my favorite armored vehicles, shame that the doctrine didn't work out.. Great video!
Good looking armored vehicle.
Thank you for some knowledge