There was a documentary where they built a huge flamethrower created in WW1, and fired it . Obviously bigger than the one in this tank but the roar is unforgettable.
General Neyland once had to _fly the hump_ and was shoved in a cargo plane full of bombs and other assorted munitions then, in his words, he said they rolled in several hundred gallons of fuel just to make sure there was no need to come look for the bodies. I can only imagine the screaming roar that thing let out.
The cons of staggered video releases and christmas' mental fatigue: it took me almost an entire minute to remind myself that the reason there is a fuel tank in the turret is that it's a bloody flamethrower vehicle.
This looks like one of the most terrifying armoured vehicles to ever have to crew. With the size of that main weapon’s fuel tank and the complete lack of separation between the crew and the tank, the fear of any sort of penetration of the turret would be palpable
As you have figured out, that is an M48A3 chassis as it has the outside cleaners associated with the diesel engine. The M48A2C gasser had oil bath air cleaners on the inside. The coax mount in the video is for an M1919 or M37 Browning machine gun as evidenced by the front and rear mounting pins. The miserable M73?M219 was secured by a collar around the barrel jacket. which help contribute to its legendary unreliability. Drives controls are the same as an early M60, wheel instead of T-bar. The gas version, M48A2C had the brake and accelerator pedals reversed. The cupola mounted an M2HBTT, laying on its side. Those of us who were tank commanders in those days jealously guarded our solid link chutes.
This is a terrifying vehicle. It's frightening just to see Chieftain sitting in it. I can only imagine what it must be like to actually be in a working one, let alone the significant emotional event you would have if you found yourself on the wrong end of one.
Driver's position was pretty much the same on M48A1, M48A2, and M48A5 (and the M60 slick) with the small steering wheel, from personal experience driving and crewing them 1970-86. As you said, nearly identical to the M103, which I had the opportunity to crawl through once before they were dragged out onto Fort Drum's A10 gunnery range. I suspect it was the same on the M48 slick and the M48A3, although I never had the opportunity to drive or crawl through either of those versions. The T-bar wasn't used until the M60A1 came out.
As you spoke of the sound inside during firing my thought was that it sure would be nice to hear archive footage. My 2nd thought is that if this were in use today, some soldier would be posting a video taken by his cellphone to share the experience.
I can only imagine the noise, a typical home furnace can make a nice bit of noise even in normal operation! That thing could heat an entire apartment complex!
It strikes me that the Churchill Crocodile was a better way of doing things, with the fuel tank outside the tank and keeping the main gun. I don't imagine that crewing that thing in combat would be a pleasant experience.
Churchill is the better design , with the flame gun in the bow, now the flame projector....trailer is worthwhile trade off for safety of crew. This example is indeed a crematorium on tracks.
Very interesting video, makes me wonder what older systems would have been like for noise on the inside of the vehicles. Sherman and Churchill flame tanks come to mind
I find it funny how certain equipment has remained the same on military vehicles about 50 years now. Like the headlight switch and internal domelights and such. Things you wouldn't really think about off hand but if you have a keen eye once you notice you see popup more than you think it would.
I gues this is just because, why would you design a new part when a completly satisfactory part is already available off the shelf? This is standard practice in all parts of industry and especially handy if you only build a small number of machines (compared to something like cars and washing machines or whatever you like) Also note that for example in cars one wants to make a new model look different from the older model as a trick to make the customer believe the old one is outdated and so he needs to buy the new one (head and taillights in cars are a notorious example and change every model and facelift while actual performance or functionality oftem is exactly the same) while in the army they don't care about what is or looks new, it just has to meet the newer specs and for that basic stuff there is no need to change the specs so,..
USMC never used the POS M73. In fact you tell just by looking at the coaxial mount that it was definitely not for the M73, rather it was for the M37, 30 caliber MG.
I figured the instructions on the inside of the hatch were on how to open the hatch. On many occasions I have only found a set of instructions once I had learned the hard way.
At 2d MarDiv FMF At CLNC had Flame Tanks in the 70's, I don't believe they ever took them out but there was a Flame Tank and Flame Thrower range not far from the depot for the SP 155 Howitzer park Main side.
I believe these are mentioned in Tank Sergeant-Zumbro, or maybe in Praying for Slack--Peavey, both good Vietnam tanker reads. And tracks are weapons too.
Fuel tank in the turret and people think that the Russian are crazy for mounting fuel tanks on the back. I hope they restore it and you can revisit it later.
You have only 1 individual which rivals you Chieftain. That's the old timer from Bovington Museum. He is blessed with an all grey mustache that looks very much like a mini road broom. I now must include I mean zero disrespect towards him, just cannot remember his name at this time. He's earned all the respect and acknowledged professionalism. As always excellent video Chieftain 👍 HOWEVER. You must limit the length of the videos, but why do you not include anything about the tanks armor? No specs, no "caliber immunity" no idea of HEAT round resistance or weakness. Composition, ideal angling..... anything man. You know what you're doing, just surprised no one's had to include the subject in the videos at least as-of-yet
why Frankenstein? It was an Upgrade. It would be nice to compare it to an israeli Magach 3 in terms of construction with the fitting of the 105mm main gun.
If that air pressure gauge is scaled as I assume it to be, then the working pressure on that air supply is something on the order of 4k psi, which it itself would be enough to ruin everybody's day if something breached the bottle. Then consider the sheer size of the fuel storage vessel, which is itself running at around five hundred pounds per square inch of surface area, and is close enough to hug. Yikes!
@@rogersmith7396 Maybe my question wasn't as obvious as i first thought...I wanted to know which of the 3 "designations" the Chieftain would use for the M36 GMC. I myself am more of a Slugger guy.
Hey, another mistery is cleared.... In this video you can see why the Cadillacs called Cadillacs.... Because of... They are produced by Cadillac as you can see on the plate of the gunners main controller 😁
@@TheChieftainsHatch "Automated Dialog Replacement", which is a misnomer because there's nothing automated about it. You just re-record the audio and replace the original. It's the reason for dialog sometimes not matching the mouth movements of actors, because the lines were most likely re-recorded and changed.
There are good jobs, just jobs and then bad jobs in the Army, a crewman in that thing was about as bad as you could get. Between essentially a human BBQ and the idea of sitting next to a huge fuel tank pressurized that will cook EVERYONE in the vicinity if a rpg hits it, I think I would prefer to be a puddle pirate to doing that job. No offense intended to the Coast Guard 😊
How were crew's selected for this vehicle ? Were they volunteers or volunteered? How about doing a M113 video. As always delivering an informative overview ,good one Chief.
Being an m132 (m113 with flame thrower) had to be awful. To be in a clown car with 200 gallons of napalm in it means you know if it goes wrong your family buries an empty box.
I have to wonder about the tactical utility of a full-size tank stuffed full of fuel with an effective range of 200 yards and 60 seconds of firing time. It seems like this thing would be more of a liability than an asset compared to a regular M48.
On quite the opposite. Flame tanks are very usefull in assaulting entrenched positions. The psychological affects are also huge. An example can be seen in the old churchill crocodile flame tanks of the british in WW2. The crews always fired a short burst in front of defending troops. The sight alone, made many abandon their positions or surrender immediatly.
@@F4WildcatI guess that would be a no brainer. Should I surrender, or risk being burned alive. I guess you have to give credit to the British crews to at least giving the Germans a chance to surrender, rather than just burning them.
There wasn't a lot of extra space to put it. Since it replaced the main gun, you didn't need that room for anything else. I doubt there was a lot of room in the hull for a tank that size, and the point about the difficulty of trying to plumb a liquid fuel from a fixed tank in the hull to a movable turret, would be challenging... at best!
I just wonder why didnt they just make the whole hull a giant fuel tank. And have the TC become the driver. And the gunner is the gunner. The TC can rotate themselves to look around anyways. Also they got that freaking tumor on top too. I'm imagining like the MBT project where the driver is in the turret. It should be able to hold more fuel and be safer perse as if you only show the the turret and not the hull and having the fuel in the hull. There isnt any risk
IIRC, systems like that consistently gave drivers motion sickness once the turret started moving. Also, extra load on the TC, less crew for maintenance tasks. Probably also just plain too much work.
Hi, I am a pyro, and this thing seems like a dream. Only thing better would be the Crocodile, because that also had a 75mm gun on it as well. Also, the Crocodile had a quickly detachable fuel tank should things happen to catch fire so the crew didn't get immolated. But this is a nice runner up.
@@RS_Mogli good thing they're enemy really had weapons that could do that. And the military knew this that's why it was designated for mop-up duties. So they'd send it behind the normal main battle tanks.
"With the flame tank filling the turret, you REALLY don't want to cross paths with anti-tank guns or MBTs" How much of a difference do you think it makes? Here a T-72 with the ammunition brewing up after being hit by an RPG in Syria ruclips.net/video/rm2T68srg04/видео.html
so they put the fuel tank in the turret next to the TC....... yeah brilliant they must think the tank will never take a hit flamethrower tank or not that is a poor place for the tank
yo pediría permisos para estarle haciendo restauraciones graduales me da tristeza dejar que una parte de la historia se pudra pudiéndose salvar que descuido que vagancia -.-
Your run of the mill Wehrmacht soldier in a fortified position thought otherwise. Tanks they could put up with but they were terrified of the Churchill Crocodiles.
With a tank you might die, with an advertising Churchill you were, at best, going to have a horrible firey death. To a certain extent Crocodiles were to get defenders to surrender or break and run. Killing Germans was the last resort for the crews.
@@balazsneuperger2063 I understand, however the Churchill crocodile, towed a lightly armoured tender carrying the fuel. Carrying it in the turret gives a new meaning to Tommy cooker.
@@stevenhoman2253 Probably the reason why the Churchill Crocodile had a trailer is space. You couldn't fit an extra fuel tank into an already cramped tank. My bet is that there were a requirement for X amount of fuel for that flamethrower and the only place with sufficient space for that big fuel tank was the turret. It is true that solution is not ideal but for a specialized weapon like this, maybe not as big of a problem like it seems.
Looks like they found that tank at the bottom of a lake. Like somebody took that tank swimming and left it. Never seen such rust in the entire interior!
Adds a whole new level to "Oh bugger, the tank is on fire"
Taking BBQ to a whole new level
Oh, bugger. The tank IS the fire!
Oh bugger the tank exploded and I'm dead
No getting out of that one if on fire no matter how good the hatches or the person is.
Needs friggen high velocity ejection seats. Like 0.1 sec to 1000 feet altitude.
It’s kind of frightening to think that this flame gun was much louder than a normal tank main gun going off.
There was a documentary where they built a huge flamethrower created in WW1, and fired it . Obviously bigger than the one in this tank but the roar is unforgettable.
General Neyland once had to _fly the hump_ and was shoved in a cargo plane full of bombs and other assorted munitions then, in his words, he said they rolled in several hundred gallons of fuel just to make sure there was no need to come look for the bodies.
I can only imagine the screaming roar that thing let out.
Gives a whole new meaning to "wet ammo storage"
I am also old and not well maintained, but have managed to avoid that stiffness problem
There's a little blue pill for that...😉
lucky you
Your poor wife. Lol.
@@blueduck9409 Have you seen his wife?
The cons of staggered video releases and christmas' mental fatigue: it took me almost an entire minute to remind myself that the reason there is a fuel tank in the turret is that it's a bloody flamethrower vehicle.
Omg the TC is just surrounded by fuel and pressure tanks, these men were very brave
They should make the Cheiftan’s button up shirt patterns available as customer camos in WoT! LOL!
This looks like one of the most terrifying armoured vehicles to ever have to crew. With the size of that main weapon’s fuel tank and the complete lack of separation between the crew and the tank, the fear of any sort of penetration of the turret would be palpable
As you have figured out, that is an M48A3 chassis as it has the outside cleaners associated with the diesel engine. The M48A2C gasser had oil bath air cleaners on the inside. The coax mount in the video is for an M1919 or M37 Browning machine gun as evidenced by the front and rear mounting pins. The miserable M73?M219 was secured by a collar around the barrel jacket. which help contribute to its legendary unreliability. Drives controls are the same as an early M60, wheel instead of T-bar. The gas version, M48A2C had the brake and accelerator pedals reversed. The cupola mounted an M2HBTT, laying on its side. Those of us who were tank commanders in those days jealously guarded our solid link chutes.
60 seconds of fuel is a pretty long load, that's almost as much fuel as the old Churchill Crocodile had _in the trailer._
Someone has to be the A* that points out that a Churchill Crocodile did include a fully functional main gun.
Happy Holidays btw. :)
Having seen this system, the Churchill Crocodile seems much more sensible.
Be interesting to know how long bursts were typically.
They should have used a trailer. What the hell were thy thinking.
@@gordonstewart5774 Until the trigger burnt your finger off.
This is a terrifying vehicle. It's frightening just to see Chieftain sitting in it. I can only imagine what it must be like to actually be in a working one, let alone the significant emotional event you would have if you found yourself on the wrong end of one.
Well an RPG hit as he mentioned would be also a significan emotional event. This thing is an only driving fuel tank.
Driver's position was pretty much the same on M48A1, M48A2, and M48A5 (and the M60 slick) with the small steering wheel, from personal experience driving and crewing them 1970-86. As you said, nearly identical to the M103, which I had the opportunity to crawl through once before they were dragged out onto Fort Drum's A10 gunnery range. I suspect it was the same on the M48 slick and the M48A3, although I never had the opportunity to drive or crawl through either of those versions. The T-bar wasn't used until the M60A1 came out.
Oh man, now I want to see this in WoT as part of an event.
As you spoke of the sound inside during firing my thought was that it sure would be nice to hear archive footage.
My 2nd thought is that if this were in use today, some soldier would be posting a video taken by his cellphone to share the experience.
I can only imagine the noise, a typical home furnace can make a nice bit of noise even in normal operation! That thing could heat an entire apartment complex!
Theres a history program where they dig up a dragons breath flame thrower from the somme and the sound it makes when they fire a replica is immense
One of the few things that are "extremely old and not maintained" that could be described as "stiff". 😞
I am ominously realizing I still use the same comms plugs and cords in the humvee at work
M51 part two? Its one of the vehicles i have great interest in so I apologize for the impatience
Thank you, for part 2 👍🏻👌🏻
It strikes me that the Churchill Crocodile was a better way of doing things, with the fuel tank outside the tank and keeping the main gun. I don't imagine that crewing that thing in combat would be a pleasant experience.
On the negative side, having a trailer on your tanks realy does a number on your manouverablity.
Even just backing up would be a challenge I recon.
Churchill is the better design , with the flame gun in the bow, now the flame projector....trailer is worthwhile trade off for safety of crew. This example is indeed a crematorium on tracks.
That Deboss Garage appearance was unexpected and delightful.
Very interesting video, makes me wonder what older systems would have been like for noise on the inside of the vehicles. Sherman and Churchill flame tanks come to mind
Thank you for another very informative video on another obscure piece of armor.
I really think I'd rather be in a regular M48.This version is like a mobile crematorium.
Glad to see you are back to filming and providing these documentaries.
Part 2!!!
Kick ass!!!
I find it funny how certain equipment has remained the same on military vehicles about 50 years now. Like the headlight switch and internal domelights and such. Things you wouldn't really think about off hand but if you have a keen eye once you notice you see popup more than you think it would.
I gues this is just because, why would you design a new part when a completly satisfactory part is already available off the shelf? This is standard practice in all parts of industry and especially handy if you only build a small number of machines (compared to something like cars and washing machines or whatever you like) Also note that for example in cars one wants to make a new model look different from the older model as a trick to make the customer believe the old one is outdated and so he needs to buy the new one (head and taillights in cars are a notorious example and change every model and facelift while actual performance or functionality oftem is exactly the same) while in the army they don't care about what is or looks new, it just has to meet the newer specs and for that basic stuff there is no need to change the specs so,..
Greetings from the Old Country, Nicholas. Hope you had a good Christmas !
Nice Cadillac bro
2:09 Never know that COM-port so old
USMC never used the POS M73. In fact you tell just by looking at the coaxial mount that it was definitely not for the M73, rather it was for the M37, 30 caliber MG.
Sorry for the audio Glitch at the end.
High pressure fuel and propellant gas it seems makes a very loud shrieking sound.
I figured the instructions on the inside of the hatch were on how to open the hatch. On many occasions I have only found a set of instructions once I had learned the hard way.
At 2d MarDiv FMF At CLNC had Flame Tanks in the 70's, I don't believe they ever took them out but there was a Flame Tank and Flame Thrower range not far from the depot for the SP 155 Howitzer park Main side.
Love these videos, keep up the good work!
I believe these are mentioned in Tank Sergeant-Zumbro, or maybe in Praying for Slack--Peavey, both good Vietnam tanker reads. And tracks are weapons too.
so wait...the fuel tank is IN the turret ?? Alright I'm done right here, I'd resign and never look back
The fuel tank is the turret. Shove oily rags into the torpedo tube. But sarge. Shut up Rags.
Oh no, the fire is on tank.
Oh bugger, the fire tank is on fire.
I would really love to see a chieftain's hatch video on the t28 tank. Second try.
Muito bom, deveria vir aqui para o Brasil, não temos muitos veículos, porem temos uns especiais como o cascavel, tamoio, Osório e a família X1
I think meeting this tank on the battlefield is not as scary as fighting on it, (being inside) ...
You're in luck, Chieftan; think there's a backrest sighting at @ 3:47?
Can't wait for a proper M48 video!
"On second thoughts, let's not go to the M48's driver's hole; it is a silly place."
It will be interesting to see IF they clean her up to even static condition...too complicated right? Thanks for the video.
So essentially your're driving around in a self propelled lightly armored incendiary bomb.
Missed the best opportunity for the "Oh bugger" exercise."
It maybe a good idea to bring along a can of WD-40.
How long was that tank left in disrepair?
They let third graders play in it one summer.
How long was that tank left in disrepair? Close to 50 years, the USMC phased them out in 1974
Was this a voluntary assignment with extra pay like the flamethrower backpack of WII?
Fuel tank in the turret and people think that the Russian are crazy for mounting fuel tanks on the back.
I hope they restore it and you can revisit it later.
You should carry a bottle of break free around with you. I’ll assume they still use break free as a lubricant.
You have only 1 individual which rivals you Chieftain. That's the old timer from Bovington Museum. He is blessed with an all grey mustache that looks very much like a mini road broom. I now must include I mean zero disrespect towards him, just cannot remember his name at this time. He's earned all the respect and acknowledged professionalism.
As always excellent video Chieftain 👍
HOWEVER. You must limit the length of the videos, but why do you not include anything about the tanks armor? No specs, no "caliber immunity" no idea of HEAT round resistance or weakness. Composition, ideal angling..... anything man. You know what you're doing, just surprised no one's had to include the subject in the videos at least as-of-yet
I discuss some armor thicknesses in Pt1.
Any chance of covering an M48A2GA2 in the future? The Bundeswehr Frankenstein was quite common during the cold war in germany.
why Frankenstein? It was an Upgrade. It would be nice to compare it to an israeli Magach 3 in terms of construction with the fitting of the 105mm main gun.
@@jangustl_wt2358 German gun, german hatches, american base - iirc a ni e mix of metric and imperial
"On second thought, let's not go to the M48's driver's hole, tis a silly place"
Of flame throwers are legal in America can you have a running driving firing tank with less paper work
If that air pressure gauge is scaled as I assume it to be, then the working pressure on that air supply is something on the order of 4k psi, which it itself would be enough to ruin everybody's day if something breached the bottle. Then consider the sheer size of the fuel storage vessel, which is itself running at around five hundred pounds per square inch of surface area, and is close enough to hug. Yikes!
Will we possibly get a video of a crawl around and crawl inside of an M36?
On "the list"
@@TheChieftainsHatch Jackson or Slugger or M36 GMC?
@@Cylus024 How about a Blue Bird 90 person school bus?
@@rogersmith7396 Maybe my question wasn't as obvious as i first thought...I wanted to know which of the 3 "designations" the Chieftain would use for the M36 GMC. I myself am more of a Slugger guy.
@@Cylus024 I always wanted a 90 person school bus. Diesel pusher. Or puller, I don't care. AC preferred.
What was the range of the flame gun?
Were WW2 era flame tanks working the same way?
Normally stuff is built around engine or gun. M67 was built around fuel tank. :)
Did these work? What's the oppartinal history any anecdotes out there?
Misspells due to malt whisky hic........
Very often used at luaus and forth of July parties. Good for starting wet bar be que charcoal.
How does a inside of a closed vehicle get so rusty inside ?
Hey, another mistery is cleared.... In this video you can see why the Cadillacs called Cadillacs.... Because of... They are produced by Cadillac as you can see on the plate of the gunners main controller 😁
Are those tankers boots you have on?
They are.
Nothing like driving around in a bomb waiting to blow me up - 🤪🤪🤪
You always do ADR for the audio parts that get borked.
ADR?
@@TheChieftainsHatch "Automated Dialog Replacement", which is a misnomer because there's nothing automated about it. You just re-record the audio and replace the original. It's the reason for dialog sometimes not matching the mouth movements of actors, because the lines were most likely re-recorded and changed.
Where is the video if sherman m50 part 2?
Where's the part 2 of M50?
What a complete death trap!
There are good jobs, just jobs and then bad jobs in the Army, a crewman in that thing was about as bad as you could get. Between essentially a human BBQ and the idea of sitting next to a huge fuel tank pressurized that will cook EVERYONE in the vicinity if a rpg hits it, I think I would prefer to be a puddle pirate to doing that job. No offense intended to the Coast Guard 😊
I'd prefer a trailer for the fuel!
You guys get extra pay for using that contraption?
Just a cool Kamakazi head scarf and a Katana.
Hell, no. The risk of death was no worse than a gun tank. Watch what happens when tank ammunition cooks off
ruclips.net/video/rm2T68srg04/видео.html
How were crew's selected for this vehicle ? Were they volunteers or volunteered?
How about doing a M113 video. As always delivering an informative overview ,good one Chief.
Being an m132 (m113 with flame thrower) had to be awful. To be in a clown car with 200 gallons of napalm in it means you know if it goes wrong your family buries an empty box.
Apologies, poor grammar, should said " How about doing a video on the M113 and it's variants."
@@tonylynch1529 no big deal, I was on a flamethrower tangent, just stating how awful I think being in any flame vehicle would be.
"On second thoughts, let's not go to the Driver's hole, tis a silly place"
I would not like stick around this thing in a combat zone. No way.
I fully agree.
Oh the fire would probably be contained inside. You would be OK 20 feet away. Use the roasty hull to cook breakfast on.
It must really suck to be a crew member in that tank when Smoking is not allowed.
RIP another mic, sounds like you need to have new mics on an repeating Amazon subscription.
I have to wonder about the tactical utility of a full-size tank stuffed full of fuel with an effective range of 200 yards and 60 seconds of firing time. It seems like this thing would be more of a liability than an asset compared to a regular M48.
On quite the opposite. Flame tanks are very usefull in assaulting entrenched positions. The psychological affects are also huge. An example can be seen in the old churchill crocodile flame tanks of the british in WW2. The crews always fired a short burst in front of defending troops. The sight alone, made many abandon their positions or surrender immediatly.
@@F4WildcatI guess that would be a no brainer. Should I surrender, or risk being burned alive. I guess you have to give credit to the British crews to at least giving the Germans a chance to surrender, rather than just burning them.
Why would you put the fuel tank in the turret? Seems like a really dumb place to put something flammable and it takes up valuable fighting space.
with a rotating turret, its maybe the easiest solution.
The tank does not need a loader at all, and I expect that it also replaced the whole turret ammo ready rack.
I think it would be alot harder to pipe to the gun if it wasn't in the turret.
@@ScottKenny1978 I forgot it was a flame tank, good point.
There wasn't a lot of extra space to put it. Since it replaced the main gun, you didn't need that room for anything else.
I doubt there was a lot of room in the hull for a tank that size, and the point about the difficulty of trying to plumb a liquid fuel from a fixed tank in the hull to a movable turret, would be challenging... at best!
I just wonder why didnt they just make the whole hull a giant fuel tank. And have the TC become the driver. And the gunner is the gunner. The TC can rotate themselves to look around anyways. Also they got that freaking tumor on top too. I'm imagining like the MBT project where the driver is in the turret. It should be able to hold more fuel and be safer perse as if you only show the the turret and not the hull and having the fuel in the hull. There isnt any risk
IIRC, systems like that consistently gave drivers motion sickness once the turret started moving.
Also, extra load on the TC, less crew for maintenance tasks. Probably also just plain too much work.
Man, I would not want to be in that thing if it gets penned
So they had about 60s of flamethrower shots and when they did shoot it for 60s, They need to go back to the base to refuel it?
Did the Soviets have their own flame tank?
Yes OT-26 (4 versions), OT-34 (85 turret and 76 turret), TO-55, TO-62, and KV-8
On Soviet tanks, a flamethrower was installed in addition to the main gun.
One penetrating hit on the turret = instant barbeque.
Who in Gods name would have wanted to be in one of those?!
Certainly better than getting shot at with no armor from the bushes.
@@clonescope2433 burning to death after more or less any penetration isn't that much better
Hi, I am a pyro, and this thing seems like a dream. Only thing better would be the Crocodile, because that also had a 75mm gun on it as well. Also, the Crocodile had a quickly detachable fuel tank should things happen to catch fire so the crew didn't get immolated. But this is a nice runner up.
@@RS_Mogli good thing they're enemy really had weapons that could do that. And the military knew this that's why it was designated for mop-up duties. So they'd send it behind the normal main battle tanks.
@@Jeremiah90526 and the KV with the flamethrower and gun?
8:10 - I volunteer to be your tank tunnel rat, crawling into spaces as needed :v
With the flame tank filling the turret, you REALLY don't want to cross paths with anti-tank guns or MBTs
"With the flame tank filling the turret, you REALLY don't want to cross paths with anti-tank guns or MBTs" How much of a difference do you think it makes? Here a T-72 with the ammunition brewing up after being hit by an RPG in Syria
ruclips.net/video/rm2T68srg04/видео.html
...CMP?
I really don't think I'd be comfortable at any point serving in a tank basically filled with napalm. Except when it was time to get out.
so they put the fuel tank in the turret next to the TC....... yeah brilliant they must think the tank will never take a hit flamethrower tank or not that is a poor place for the tank
yo pediría permisos para estarle haciendo restauraciones graduales me da tristeza dejar que una parte de la historia se pudra pudiéndose salvar que descuido que vagancia -.-
I wil never get the point of a flame tank. A good HE shell will do the exact same job and do it safer.
Your run of the mill Wehrmacht soldier in a fortified position thought otherwise. Tanks they could put up with but they were terrified of the Churchill Crocodiles.
looks way cooler
With a tank you might die, with an advertising Churchill you were, at best, going to have a horrible firey death.
To a certain extent Crocodiles were to get defenders to surrender or break and run. Killing Germans was the last resort for the crews.
Outlawed by Geneva I think.
Apparently blowing up dams is naughty too.
I LIKES BURNA'S ......... GROTS DON'T BUT I DOES ;)
Wow this thing looks like a haphazardly designed pile of hot trash
60 seconds to empty a load ..hey I'm not as bad as my wife said I was !
Oh my Jesus... That looks absolutely terrible to sit In.. or be in...gosh
Why on earth would a fuel tank be placed in a turret ¿¿????????
It is a flamethrower tank
@@balazsneuperger2063 I understand, however the Churchill crocodile, towed a lightly armoured tender carrying the fuel. Carrying it in the turret gives a new meaning to Tommy cooker.
@@stevenhoman2253 Probably the reason why the Churchill Crocodile had a trailer is space. You couldn't fit an extra fuel tank into an already cramped tank.
My bet is that there were a requirement for X amount of fuel for that flamethrower and the only place with sufficient space for that big fuel tank was the turret. It is true that solution is not ideal but for a specialized weapon like this, maybe not as big of a problem like it seems.
They make excellent spray-on anti-rust formulas now. Looks like the tank needs some.
Looks like they found that tank at the bottom of a lake. Like somebody took that tank swimming and left it. Never seen such rust in the entire interior!
Im Early apparently