Tanks and the Navy - The Origins of the Landship
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июн 2024
- Head to www.squarespace.com/drachinifel to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code DRACHINIFEL
Today we take a quick look at the origins of the tank and how the Royal Navy had a lot to do with it, plus some other naval connections to tanks as time went on.
With many thanks to the Tank Museum, Bovington, for inviting me down on Tiger Day 2023!
Visit them here: tankmuseum.org/
00:00:00 - Intro
00:01:56 - Books
Naval History books, use code 'DRACH' for 25% off - www.usni.org/press/books?f%5B...
Free naval photos and more - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want a shirt/mug/hoodie - shop.spreadshirt.com/drachini...
Want a poster? - www.etsy.com/uk/shop/Drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Pinned post for Q&A :)
The powerplant of the South Dakota and Iowa classes had a vast difference with regards to the produced output, but apparently, both classes had 8 identical boilers. How is this possible? Can you please explain the overall differences, particularly with regards to the turbines?
Is there any chance of you doing a video on the small river gunboats that used tank turrets? I know the Russians and the Japanese both made them
I was recently watching Pirates of the Caribbean Dead man tell no tales movie and and their was a scene at the start of the movie that caught my attention. During the scene one of the characters was part of a Royal Navy ship crew and he was accused of being a coward so the officer ripped his jacket as proof of this and this caught my attention because I had never heard of this being a thing. so my question is whether this actually was what they did or was this just something that the movie invented? what did they do instead if this wasn't what they did and what did other navies do in these sort of cases?
3:55 Did you mop up your dirty footprints on your way out?
Yes yes I know.
Silly question... what is the opening music for the Fun Fridays video? Can't find it on the title card, but it's utterly soothing. This was a most wonderful episode, BTW. Love seeing you branch out into ground armor while still keeping it Naval.
One thing you missed was the naming of parts that continues today. Like the hull, turret and bulkheads, all come from the navy.
calling groups of vehicles a "fleet" isn't solely a navy thing though.
@@marhawkman303 What vehicles would not have been inspired by naval terms?
@@damascus1111 Well, is the term originally naval?
Hull isn't strictly a navy term, it's been used in botany as well as other uses. Also the "hull" of a ground vehicle is most commonly and properly called the chassis.
The use of turrets predates the use of gun powder and were for various types of artillery usually on fortifications. The word turret actually originated from fortifications and was adapted to the naval application.
Bulkheads, yeah that did come from the navy.
Also the obsolete term “sponson” aka the M-3 Medium Tank’s 75mm was mounted in a sponson.
“Tog is long. Tog is two. Tog is great.” Perhaps the greatest thing I have ever heard!
All hail king TOG
I would love a video on instances when tanks were engaged by naval forces, especially the ones at D Day that were on the receiving end of battleship gunfire from His Majesty’s Navy.
I was thinking of Anzio, but that would be interesting.
Or the other way around, of course
@@derekbowbrick6233 Scicily.
@@rogersmith7396 that one is interesting because it shows that even destroyer-grade fire can and will fuck up a tank and various enemy entrenched positions quite nicely, at the fraction of the costs (and risks) involved in using battleships for shore bombardment.
I have read that the infantry was disappointed when they were out of range of the battleships guns. Being able to neutralise the enemy with a 15 inch shell
I remember in the 1980s reading the obituary in the Daily Telegraph of a ww2 RN submarine commander who was credited with 'sinking' a tiger tank on a beach using a torpedo. I always regret ot keeping it, there must be a story there.
I can only assume some barely sane tank commander had realized that water can act as armor, and not thought any further. Also, a non-US WW2 torpedo against a tank sounds just gratuitous.
@@absalomdraconis bet you could skim one up onto the beach too. Should have enough momentum to travel a few dozen meters on land.
@@chemistryofquestionablequa6252 They depict this in Operation Petticoat.
So fun story: My sister fostered cats and would ask us for naming ideas. Litter was a pair of boys, my suggestions of Colt, Smith or Wesson were all vetoed by the foster group, as was Bazooka and Howitzer (suggested by our dad). However Mauser and Panzer were approved with great cooing. lol Pretty near positive foster group didn't make the connection that these were also weapons.
Honestly Mauser is a pretty fitting name for a cat. Might have to name my next cat Mauser
Ð
Damn. I never realized just how big the Tiger II was before you switched shots from Panzer IV to the Tiger. That thing is bloody huge
It is beautiful in all it's squareness.
@@JonatasAdoM And that awesome mantlet that always reminded me of some heavy-duty industrial pipes
I knew they were bigger but assembling Flames of War tanks made me stop short when I compare them. And next to Shermans the minis look like they're in the wrong scale!
I visit German Tank Museum once and they have a Tiger II next to a Sturmtiger and Jagdpanther.that Tiger II is so big it almost make those two look reasonably size
@@Fortunes.Fool. I made a scale model set once, and did actually triple check that the KT was in the right scale after building them.
There is no amount of video from Bovington that can be considered "too much".
By all means, make more such crossover videos!
Absolutely!
MOAR!!!
Too much Bovington! We really don't need that sort of negativity in our lives.
If I ever make it across the Pond again I’m definitely gonna take a trip to Bovington! 🙂
@@grahamstrouse1165
It's on my "bucket list" for sure.
Best edit is at 24 minutes, in front of the Panzer 4, where you can see the two small boys approaching, only for a jump cut to show them going on to the next tank and Drach's voice to've suddenly risen in volume.
It’s worth noting that while Japanese tanks matched poorly on a 1 to 1 basis, their light weight and mobility meant that the Japanese could often bring their “terrible” tanks to places where no one expected tanks, like the Jungle highlands of Burma, or amphibious operations in the pacific. They were also quiet, sipped fuel, and were quite rugged.
I think they are unfairly maligned. Obviously they lose to most later tanks, but in purpose they were viewed as more akin to an AFV, and they did that quite well. And obviously given steel and fuel shortages it’s probably the best they could do, as the navy was a higher priority.
Well argued!
Another factor was they weren't expecting to have to deal with western tanks, so all most of them needed was armour strong enough to keep HMG rounds out and they only needed large enough tank guns to deal with light fortifications. They didn't need 64 tonne monsters with 88mm or 90mm guns and 100mm of armour.
In fairness to the Great War tanks being so bloody long, that was basically the most immediate solution to crossing ever wider trenches and other kinds of obstacles being developed to slow down the tank formations.
Even today, a good wide ditch is a very effective way to slow down or even outright block tanks. Many tanker fatalities during the Cold War were to accidents involving a tank running into common ditches around the European and American countryside, and more than a few of those incidents involved the tankers overestimating how well their tank could handle said ditches, not because they didn't see them!
Don't forget that engines powerful enough to move these things in the 1910's were positively massive affairs that required an adequate amount of space inside the hull.
That Big Wheel Machine, or as I like to call it The Tricycle of Death, looks equal parts ridiculous and awesome. If no 40k vehicles haven't been modeled after it yet, I'll be extremely disappointed.
It also looks remarkably similar to the Tsar Tank.
Genuinely one of my favorite things is the interwar period of tank design. So many utterly bananas concepts people thought up. Hamster wheels with guns, giant armored tricycles, literal landships... just absolute buckwild stuff.
It's that glorious period in any technology's life where it's new enough to work, but not yet mature enough to know what *doesn't* work...
You should check out Dystopian Wars, which is another favorite of Drach's. For the land wars side, they use a lot of WW1 vehicles and prototypes as inspiration for their models. Eg. the Tsar Tank became the Tikhvin Small Tank of the Russian Coalition.
And its also where the Habakkuk finally got a model...although on the other side of the war...
If you want something especially ridiculous, awesome, and very real, look up "The Big Wind". It's a T-34 chassis that's had its turret replaced by a pair of forward-pointing MiG-21 engines and water hoses, and painted entirely bright red; it's used to fight oil well fires.
Could use it as a mobility unit for a small Imperial Knight
Popular historical legend has it that the Mark IX was also accidentally the first amphibious APC. I've been unable to find exactly how this was discovered, but it was found that the tank's body alone was almost neutrally bouyant, and with a couple of pontoons made from oil drums Scrapheap Challenge style strapped to its sides, it would float quite happily. Propulsion and steering were accomplished by running the tracks a bit like a paddle steamer, stopping one or the other track to steer; some accounts suggest that a temporary rudder could also be fitted.
I'd assume they discovered it could float after they told the driver a direction and he kept going until he hit a pond.
@@pretzelbomb6105 A modern GPS car unit fell through a wormhole and travelled back in time, and the driver believed the little voice coming out of it.
I must say the the first armed and armored car was actually built for the British Army by Frederick Simms for experimental use in the Boar War. It was armed with two Vickers machine guns and carried 1/4" armor plate- not very thick but helped a bit. The car was completed in 1902- a bit to late for the war.
Hence my qualification of the first in a continuous line of armoured vehicle development, as opposed to the various stop-starts previously:)
@@Drachinifel Aye, that honor does go to the Silver Ghost.
Neeeerrrrrrd.
Get wrecked 😂
Boer War*
I'm far more stunned than I should be by how I've never equated the army use of "cruiser" and the naval use. I feel a bit dense now
The 8.8cm Flak 36's main reason for becoming a prominent anti-tank weapon was because the Germans had identified the 8.8cm Flak 36 was good for defeating bunkers and field fortifications, so they perfected an armor-piercing round with a good explosive filler and formed units devoted to being "bunker-busters." These were the units that would quickly be repurposed as anti-tank units beginning in 1940 because the AP shells, of course, would have effect on the steel plates of tanks no less so than they had on the steel plates of many bunkers.
I think *technically* the gun on the LVT Buffalo's a Polsten gun, but that (I think) is a derivative of the Oerlikon so calling it an Oerlikon is probably still accurate.
A mastery of pedantry to rival my own.
NB the image of the flipped tank at 24:31 is of a Tiger II, and the chap next to it is Dwight Eisenhower - it's in the Wikipedia entry on the Tiger II. The location given is Chambois, which is 57km from the ocean, therefore this is probably not due to a warship's shell, and is most likely to be due to bombing.
PS - the Oerlikon on the LVT4 is not historical, it would have been the similar Polsten cannon. Just servicing my inner nerd folks!
Was there not a massive bombing campaign on German positions during Operation Cobra if memory serves?
@@Ragefps you are right. Heavy bombers did a lot of bombing in support of tactical objectives in Normandy I think
@@Simon_NonymousThe Japanese generally did a better job of artillery-proofing their fortified positions than the Germans, I think. After Midway they were basically just playing defense but even so their aptitude for limiting the effectiveness of heavy naval bombardment against their island redoubts was pretty darn impressive. In the Pacific War destroyers and light cruisers usually provided the most effective close support. In Europe, on the other hand, heavier warships had a lot more things to shoot at that required the loving attention of their big guns. 😁
@@grahamstrouse1165 very interesting information, but are you replying to the right comment? 🙂
@@Simon_Nonymous A few 60lb rockets from a Typhoon or Tempest could make a tanker's life interesting as well, I've got photos in a couple of old books of panthers on their turrets after being visited by such jabos.
If it wouldn't be too much trouble, I'd love a channel about medieval history from you, Drach
I could try, maybe start with medieval naval battles 😀
@@Drachinifel No!!! We need Classical engagements - much more fun, and frankly probably more reliable info available.
I would thoroughly recommend "Ancient Ships" by Cecil Torr as a starter - a Victorian gent writing with care and knowledge - excellent stuff.
The Soviet SMK and it's contemporary had almost the exact 'warship' multi-turret configuration you were talking about. Main turret superfiring a smaller bow turret (and the original mockups also had a superfiring rear turret as well).
A few things on the Ha-Go, Drach. I wouldn't just say it was pretty good when it was made, but in the context it was made. Japanese tanks like the Type 95 and 97 were made to fight in Northeast Asia and against the Soviets, and I'd say they fulfilled that need until around Khalkin Gol. After that, yeah as you say they should have developed better. The Shinhoto clearly was an insufficient anti-Soviet design. However, it's by then a primarily naval war where diverting scarce resources for tanks on islands that are screwed if you don't win the naval war anyway would be rather foolish, and Japan has a non-aggression pact with the Soviets. I think tanks should be judged by their performance in their intended role first and unintended ones second, as any failings there are the fault of the users for misusing or planning the tank poorly. The Ha-Go wasn't made for Pacific Islands or to fight Shermans and T-34s, but I wouldn't fault the tank for that. It's the fault of the strategic situation Japan put themselves in and the decisions made with the resources available at the time.
I'd broadly agree with you, albeit with the qualifier that when it's one of the few tanks the Boys AT Rifle can just blast clean through as opposed to going after the road wheels... well there are thinner skinned tanks, but not many! 😀
@@Drachinifel Oh certainly, I'd say your joke about sharpened sticks and rocks getting through its armor wasn't far off. Just a consideration of Japanese industrial limitations and its intended use makes that a bit forgivable to me. I often talk with people about the Type 2 Ka-Mi and say that as an amphibious tank, the amphibious part gets full marks but the tank part is a failing grade because its essentially a Ha-Go in the 40s. To quote a friend of mine, a much greater chance it survives its swim than a DD Sherman, but at least with the DD you get a Sherman if it survives.
If all you're coming against on the mainland(China or Malaya)is Mark 1 Panzers or nothing, yes then, not a bad tank(operationally). If you're a naval power(UK, Japan, Italy), then your tank development is just going to have to suffer; IMHO.
Even modern Japanese tanks tend to be pretty light, at least by Western standards. Most of their tanks weigh in at about 40-45 tonnes or so. They have developed a number of kits that they can use to up-armor their tanks in the field when circumstances permit. China & Russia also favor lighter MBTs.
Ehhh no, the Japanese Army faction had already lost huge amounts of support and failed their coups to get it back, Tank tech and the industry to make a lot of them had already fallen well behind. Khalkin Gol was doomed years and years before it happened.
It occurred to me that the Tank Destroyer also shares not only a name but a mission profile with the Naval Destroyer. Both expected to use speed to punch above their weight against targets that could easily erase them from existence with a single hit.
When you were in Fall River at Battleship Cove, too bad you didn't know about the Tank Museum (The American Heritage Museum) in Hudson MA. I've lived in the state for over 44 years and only learned of it's existence 3 years ago. It is said to have the largest collection of operational tanks as well as Aircraft on Display. They do live shows and battles with their tanks as well. On a side note, they have a F6F Hellcat in the museum and you really have to see one in person to understand what a beast that aircraft is.
Good museum, I was there last summer. At the time, they also had an operational WW1 Renault tank on loan from Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome in NY (also highly recommended museum).
Most of my mother’s fam lives up in Massachusetts. I’ll have to add that museum to my itinerary during my next visit! 🙂
I’m sure Warhammer fans Will identify a few big things here that inspired miniatures on the tabletop
Surely Drach, the moment you asked if we'd like more tank museum video from you, the future was fixed.. And the answer has to be yes.. :)
Drach, you say that about a true land battleship needing a superfiring main battery... and then the French come along with the FCM F1 and almost build exactly that
T35 anyone? Or the Independent, or the SMK?
A few random snippets of info for you:
North Korea has some Sariwon-class corvettes which, at least as late as the 1990s, had T34/85 turrets in A-position. The ships are still in service but the 85mm is no longer listed, having apparently been replaced by naval twin 57mm guns instead.
There were at least two abortive British attempts to use tank guns and turret systems on warships in the post-WWII period:
CFS-1 and CFS-2 were intended as surface-to-surface armament for Coastal Forces patrol craft in the 1950s. CFS-1's full radar control proved too ambitious, so CFS-2 combined the tank gun and turret systems with naval type stabilisation and a fighter-plane style lead-computing gunsight! It proved very effective in trials, but it fell victim to the disbandment of Coastal Forces generally in the late (?) 1950s. There's some dispute about which guns were used. One source I have claims it was the 17pdr (3.3-inch) gun from the Firefly or Comet, while another claims it was the 20pdr gun from the early Centurion.
Much later, in the 1970s, Vickers came up with a similar scheme to put the guts of a late Centurion turret, complete with it's 105mm L7 gun and three crewmen, into a naval style stabilised turret, and called it the Autonomous Patrol Gun. The idea was that the gun and all it's systems would be a self-contained drop-in module that demanded nothing from the host ship except electrical power and communications, and would thus be useful for small navies buying cheap ships and/or adapting civilian ones. Again, the idea got no takers.
_When tanks go to sea_
That’s pretty cool! Thanks for the info!
I'm half expecting Drach's meet & greet table to be located in the T-55 cutaway turret.
This is great actually to send to some family members. When I explain my fascination with naval history, I mention the anecdote about how tanks were actually inspired by battleships. That gets a lot of confused stares and odd smirks. This as a link I can send will help to those interested enough to give 30 minutes of their time to it.
When Drach was working with the T-34, I thought he might bring up the parallels, if not deep connections, in signaling between tank and naval actions, with both progressing from flags to radios.
Couldn't find any tanks with signal flags on their antenna 😀
@@Drachinifel some of the larger tanks DID have a dedicated RTO though.
As a Tanker. I always enjoyed working on the engine in the hull. Or operating the main gun inside the turret. And walking on the deck.
The tank museum is awesome. Not just with all the tanks, but with its connection with the community. Like squire and drac
in his book on Sicily '43, James Holland described naval fire from the USS Shubrick bombarding german tanks trying to charge to the allied landings in Gella. it puts it into scale how big ships are when a small ship like a destroyer overmatches Tiger I's
The sound was obviously limited to the active environment, but audible for all that. If there are other naval'ish related matters that could be covered by another one, or two, visits to Bovington ... who wouldn't want to see that?
Very good job in this discussion. As you say, tanks started out as "landships" and you know the "ships" part rather well, don't you?
Unfortunately I can't even make the 3,000Km journey from home to the Australian Tank (Arms and Armour) Museum, so any video of yours on tanks I find fascinating. Thank You !
Great Idea!. A couple of things. When the M24 was replacing the M3/M5s in Europe. the M3/M5's went to the Pacific theater where they could handily dispatch the Ha-Gos or any other Japanese armored vehicle- despite the small 37mm gun. The smaller size made them useful across the theater in the jungles. Turrets from the
M3/M5 and the M3/M5's 75MM howitzer variant, the M8, were fitted to LVT Amtracs as well for landing fire support- where they were quite effective.
On tanks vs ships, I remember an episode in Vietnam around 1967-68 (recorded in a book called Tank Sergeant) of a platoon of five M48 Patton tanks being used for coastal interdiction of smuggling using small sampans.
For some reason that reminds me of the few instances in history when cavalry has attacked ships.
Big shout out for the "Hound of the Baskervilles" movie poster in the background! One of Basil Rathbones best Sherlock Holmes flicks. (It's all in the eyes!) RIP Basil and also Nigel.
Quick babe new Drach dropped 🎊
Very cool video, Drac! Der Koenig was truly frightening. I know that they are big, but seeing you standing next to it really put it into perspective. I’m sure glad that the Germans didn’t have more of them!
It's a pity they didn't actually, because the amount of resources they chewed up would have made 3 panzer IVs or 5 StuGs... And if they'd managed to get the Maus or E100 into production, they'd probably have shortened the war by 8 months.
A video after my own heart Drach! Loved it!!!!
I've visited that museum almost every year since I was about 4yrs old - honestly enjoy the meeting of you and the tank story!
My grandfather trained at bovington in 1943, and was part of the 34th Armoured/7RTR on D-Day - he took me there every year since 1988, and iv kept the tradition going with my kids :)
I can't believe 1 Tiger Day I decided to miss, and you're there!
If you're making another visit any time soon please let me know - I have all my Grandfather's ww 2 photos your welcome to make use of if you want.
I'll be there for Tankfest next month 😀
@@Drachinifel Hmm so how many APCs(Armored Personnel Carrier) do they have there?
It seems pedantic, but due to the lack of built-in weapons, APCs will sometimes get used for non-combat duties in the US Army.
Nothing wrong with the sound Drach, you're always audible and comprehensible. The Devil's Chariots by John Glanfield is a good read for anyone who wants a more detailed look at the evolution of the tank in British/Empire service in the Great War
I love the new World of Shiptanks. Matches develop at the pace of the Swiss Alps. This gives me plenty of time for ripe banter and to do some chores while my tankship maneuvers.
Always nice to see a collaboration with Bovington!
Also, always amuses me how few people remember that Churchill wasn't just involved with the navy, but also was responsible for funding for the Landship committee, hence without him, tanks very well may have not existed, or didn't become a thing until far later
Well how else are you going to get a tank across the channel? Would be a nice topic to talk about. How the navy or any navy developed ships to carry stuff like tanks.
I like that your camera's frame rate makes it look like the tanks are moonwalking near the start.
The Tank Museum looks like it would be a fascinating place to visit.
Fascinating vid, Drach - I like the esoteric tangents as much as the 'deep' naval topics. Many thanks.
Living within bus-ride distance of Wool and Bovington, I'd love to make it to TankFest, but I have a horrible feeling I'll be cleaning holiday caravans over that weekend as usual - bills and all.
Which is quite the shame, as there are a bunchette of related 'army/navy' sidebars & ideas that I'd really enjoy discussing with you; from the Buffalo's origins as one of the alphabet soup of small landing vessels (putting their origin somewhere on the clade with the Higgins boats?), to the use of ex-air-force prototype anti-tank guns as boat guns courtesy of Rolls-Royce again (and how that links to a VC of particular renown) and, well a whole bunch of stuff. Including the use of Army AA rockets as equipment on coast-defence AA paddle-steamers.
But, like I say, probably can't get the time off.
You're a very busy man, but I would love to chat sometime, so maybe if there were some way of DM'ing or similar, who knows?
Keep up the good work and excellent content; I enjoy your pragmatic take on things and your lawyerly avoidance of selling false impressions in your narratives.
A video I worked on used a large shotgun mike instead of the Lav, to limit the background noise, instead of the LAV, the Shotguns directionality helps limit the background unless it is inline with the speaker.
Gotta love TOG II. I want one in the yard. Rope off an area in its interior for skating and charge the neighbors to use. Pure joy. Thanks so much for this doc. Always an educational event much appreciated.
I wish I had gotten serious about history/historical topics about 20~30 year's ago; then I might have the luxury of earning a living at it like you've managed to do. Alas, I'll just have to settle for being the CNC machinist in the shop who actually knows something about history in general, with a lot of footnotes as to where to dig, courtesy of experts like your self.
I've got an Uncle who served in the US Marines in Vietnam; he used to claim that he was the family expert on military matters. It's quite fun handing him videos like this; suddenly, it's" I didn't know that!!!", or, "Where did you find that????".
Thanks Drach!!!
I could Watch This All Day
uploaded 30 seconds ago.. and here I am. The day is saved! Thank you for your dedication, infotainment and laughs for all those years, drachinifel
24:30 shows a Tiger Ausf. B (Tiger II), it has one additional pair of road wheels compared to the Tiger I.
Back when National Lampoon was a sort of alternative humor magazine and not a Chevy Chase movie vehicle they published a hilarious article on the “history of tanks.” My favorite was a between war French tank, the “Esprit de Maginot” (or something like that), a 3 mile per hour top speed behemoth that was manned by over a thousand soldiers. Supposedly it was defeated by a single German toddler riding a “Kinderpanzer.” Silly. I loved it.
Good god I’m old…
You are. _National Lampoon_ hasn’t done a Chevy Chase movie since the Clinton administration.
@@EricDaMAJ Well you didn’t comment on the tank article I mentioned, just an insult over my age. You see, National Lampoon was a damn funny, edgy magazine long before the Vacation movies, thus my comment. As for the not “since the Clinton administration” comment, in addition to a cameo in the Ed Helms version… around the 2nd Obama administration, there was at least one more Chevy Chase/Vacation vehicle in the 21st century. That information took me about 12 seconds to verify.
@@GildedEntries *YOU* are the one who said they were old. I just confirmed it. I make no editorial judgment on the magazine or the movies, as both are basically irrelevant. And if you're jonesing to be offended like some pink haired SJW, well, you're irrelevant too.
When the 'at more length' option is on offer, does it even matter whether we like the audio quality? It's a no-brainer. Go for it!
I agree with you. I'd like to have seen Battleship TOG II on the field in the early stages of WW2. If for no other reason it would be to compare it's results as opposed to the Cruiser tanks that were actually fielded. If nothing else they could have turned sideways, formed a wall, and acted as the northern end of the Maginot Line and prevented the German invasion through the Ardennes with "Great Wall of TOG."
Drach: "Would you like a video on..."
ME: "YES! I KNOW that any video you create will be great!!!"
Probably mere coincidence that this upload coincides with the tank museums Char B1 video
Great video! Very entertaining. Thanks for making it despite all the crowds.
If you think landships are cool, ever heard of submarines with tank tracks? Russia, Germany, and the US all had minisub designs for crawling along the sea floor in the early 1900s, Russia even had one in the 1980s (look up hisutton, "Russian Tracked Submarines Baltic 1980s").
It's really hard to research though, I don't know what has changed with Google and other search engine algorithms, I used to be able to easily find them and today it took ages.
One example of a US tracked sub was the Defender. The Germans had the Seeteufel in WWII, and I know I had a picture of a WWI design with heavy tracks sitting on land, implying it was amphibious, but now I can't find it at all.
33:42 David Willey, the Tank Museum's curator making a cameo appearance :)
Pretty nice video overall, however I want to address something that I haven't seen anyone else address: That is an amazing article in the thumbnail.
I imagine insurgents fighting the Ha-Go would look something like the Ewok counterattack on Endor.
I just thought this would be the perfect opportunity to state how the worst change in the Star Wars Special Editions from the '90s was the replacement of "Yub Nub" at the end of Jedi. Instead of getting an amazing Ewok jam, we get some crappy new-age schlok. Yub Nub should be the national anthem; Yub Nub 4 Life.
@@jona.scholt4362 I think the replacement song in Jabba's Palace was worse. What was wrong with Max Rebo's song? We didn't need CG characters screaming at the screen.
It's called Chinese infantry at Changsha.
@@DanielSilverthorn I don't mind it at all, I grew up watching the remastered versions, but the part where Greedo shot first shouldn't even be a thing.
@@DanielSilverthorn Another crime against humanity. The music in Jedi was simply murdered and turned into a monstrosity. RIP Max Rebo and Yub Nub
I visited the Bovington tank museum last weekend and loved it.
Make as many "crossover" videos as you want Drach, I'll watch them all :)
That was enlightening on many levels. Enjoyed it a lot, thank you.
Excellent! I really enjoyed this one, I would definitely enjoy seeing more of this type of content.
Wonderful video. As long as your voice is loud enough to hear I'm good. I listen thru my truck stereo while working on equipment.
Well done. The audio wasn't always smooth but it was always understandable - which is what counts.
Thanks.
.
Thanks for the look around and the commentary. I am across the pond and am not likely to get there in my lifetime. Seems like a very neat place to visit with a comprehensive history of the tank. Thank you for sharing.
Fascinating! Would love a whole video on the Landship Committee from you!
Oh yes, oh yes indeed.
Chief engineer, it's time to fire up the boilers.
HMLS Ridiculous, set sail!!!!!
5 minutes in, it hit me! Drach would be an excellent Bond villain. No, not Draxx, Drach!
To comment on your Panzer 4 story about the Destroyer hitting it with a 4.7 inch shell, back when I shot a 155mm M777 Howitzer we had a direct fire competition and shot a old M60 directly in the side with 155mm HE round. There wasn't much of a tank left after that.
Thank you, that video made a lot of the British armor make sense in where their minds were in the interwar years.
I always felt the British tank design seemed to be off on a strange tangent compared to the German line of thought, but it makes more sense knowing how they were thinking in naval terms, especially as a naval power.
I have always been fascinated by tanks! Very cool!
Thank you for putting this together
It took me a long minute to realise that the presentation will eventually reach the TOG ll. My year has been made.
I quite enjoyed the video. Learning more about the interrelated nature of tech development is always interesting.
The best channel about ships talking about tanks.
I'm not complaining!
Knowledge is a wonderful thing, regardless from whence it comes. So yes, more knowledge, please!
Tigers wet themselves at the mere mention of Mighty TOG! 👍😄
I REALLY enjoyed this video for a variety of reasons. the connection whilst nebulous reflects the fixed thinking of the higher command people that, well, interfered with design and implementation. So I say more of as you see fit. Always fascinating and informative.
@ 21:30: I think that he meant to say the Panzer IV engaging that destroyer, not tank.
Since the coastal artillery became part of the Finnish navy in the 90s I think You should've included the 100 56 TK. The Finns used the turret of a T-55 to create a coastal weapon. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_56_TK
Background noise wasn't bad. Would definitely like to see an in-depth video of warships vs tanks.
Excellent video! More is always welcome.
Drach u have made this nerd a very happy nerd
Great video. Thanks for posting it.
My son is going to love this episode (when he gets home from school, of course). S
Brilliant my man, genius. The presentation i never knew I wanted to see until you went and did it.
Tanks Drach. I enjoyed this.
Very cool, definitely would watch more stuff like this
Great vid, enjoyed it, thanks again for the quality info and entertainment.
The audio is perfectly fine!!!
Excellent video!
I'm just imagining the glory of dozens of Tog IIs in France holding back now terrified German attackers as they came out of nowhere hiding in sheds and tunnels with enemy artillery in such disarray that they cant concentrate to destroy any single vehicle and the enemy tanks horrified they are unable to penetrate the solid wall of armor and gun several of them side by side create going down streets
Loved it! Thank you.