Woah, i always tought T-26 just to be the regular tank with its 37mm turret, and be total cannon fodder to anything, but seems like it had many variants of it being produced
SUPERB!!! I've somewhat of an interest in the Vickers 6 ton tank - I have the superb 1/35 kit of the export version from CAMS. It seems bizarre to me that the British rejected the tank for its own AFV requirements [and instead looked to the US and Christie] BUT Russia, Italy and Japan all built licensed versions that were further developed into very successful and influential vehicles, such as the T-26, the M13/M14 series, Semovente SPGs, and numerous early JP tankettes... Then there were Polish 7tp tanks and Chinese built developments. It was probably the most influential tank design in history, since it was exported, licensed and developed so widely. That development into native production models surely makes the Vickers 6 ton even more important than the T-34 and Sherman, in that they kick-started tank technology around the globe rather than just being 'ready mades' to fill an urgent need in under-developed warring nations, as T-34 and Shermans invariably were, outside of their native armies.
Properly handled, with trained crews and competent officers, properly supplied and maintained, as part of a proper defensive doctrine, they would have been a real handful to the Wehrmacht. Unfortunately, the crews were poorly trained, officers either incompetent or promoted beyond the competence of their experience, poorly supplied, badly maintained and used part of an extremely flawed doctrine. They were little more than chaff to the advancing forces
These tanks would have been better used as infantry support weapons carriers. Remove the turret and mount a 120mm mortar on a turntable on the hull floor. Or as an AT-1 derivative mount the 76.2 regimental gun on a swivel with about 75 degrees of elevation. This assumes that the tanks had radios and there were competent forward observers. Like the wehrmacht. Infantry weapons carriers provide close and immediate indirect fire support for maneuver units while allowing for rapid displacement & quick reaction to the tactical situation. The ability to relocate not only allows fire support to be provided where it is needed faster and allows these units to quickly avoid counter battery fire.
It was whofully inferior for the most part to what it faced the thing. What it had going for it was that there where as many t26 as the entire wehrmacht armor combined and then some. When i say inferior i mean lacking radar amongst other things.
that tank was captured by the finns in 1940 during the winter war, and was actually dug into the mannerheim line. it was recovered in the 1980s and then sold to bovintgton tank museum.
and the soviets say that their victory or that the US/British (Persian Oil through the Wolga and Don and smaller rivers, crossing thousands of kilometers to the Moscow area, than Leningrad and even into the Baltic Sea... But the T-26 was at least "copied" from a 6 ton WW1 or 20's tank? Weight was 9.6 tons I think when I looked yesterday, engine was very weak gasoline, but that is okay for such a light weight and for the early 30's... they were used against the Nazis, were all converted old british tanks or just based on it?! The British Army maybe wanted to sell them during the financial crisis and the negative outlook, but I think it was more a copy.... soviets did test a lot different tanks before WW2 since WW1 the tanks did not win because of the guns or speed, just a driving "thing" with many tons which could cross the trenches slowly, and the "Panzerbüchse" was the only thing in very small numbers which reached the troops (it would be something like "Anti-Tank Shotgun/Rifle", and it was something like that I think, with a bi- or tripod to absorb the recoil, and shooting at the weakest areas... Tankgewehr M1918 on the German side was the only one which was a bit service I think, the caliber of 13 x 92 mm was strong, from the size comparable with the heavy mounted "caliber .50" NATO machine guns, they were 12.7 x 99 mm. Crazy times, I hope I can only read and write about wars, but the geopolitical and economic situation sucks, the Arab states in the Middle East did nothing to create other Industry than Oil and some OPEC members also Gas, or main export is Gas and gas condensate upgraded to high quality fuel like in Qatar for example, and some oil fields of course there too... Gas is the "future"...
The Germans used armor-piercing 7.92mm ammunition in their rifles and machine guns to fight tanks in WW1 as well. Not as effective as the Tankgewehr, but better than nothing. They also brought up light artillery and used them as improvised AT guns.
@@Zretgul_timerunner it is indeed...a licensed copy at that. It was a private venture by Vickers Armstrong...the British didn't want it but the Soviets did. They had a number delivered them reverse engineered them,they spent time at vickers factory learning how to construct them during production.
This is almost as well made like a documentary made by professionals, thanks a lot
+kane joshua espina that is very kind of you, thanks! =)
No, thank You for such informative videos, hope you make some more ;-)
i will, they just take a while, i've rleardt done a few, BT tanks, T-34, KV, soviet cars, T-28 and T-35 =D
Woah, i always tought T-26 just to be the regular tank with its 37mm turret, and be total cannon fodder to anything, but seems like it had many variants of it being produced
Toni kireE Lahtinen there were 56 different sub types of T-26 and 26 massed produced types =D
+Iron Bloke COOOOOOL
SUPERB!!! I've somewhat of an interest in the Vickers 6 ton tank - I have the superb 1/35 kit of the export version from CAMS. It seems bizarre to me that the British rejected the tank for its own AFV requirements [and instead looked to the US and Christie] BUT Russia, Italy and Japan all built licensed versions that were further developed into very successful and influential vehicles, such as the T-26, the M13/M14 series, Semovente SPGs, and numerous early JP tankettes... Then there were Polish 7tp tanks and Chinese built developments. It was probably the most influential tank design in history, since it was exported, licensed and developed so widely. That development into native production models surely makes the Vickers 6 ton even more important than the T-34 and Sherman, in that they kick-started tank technology around the globe rather than just being 'ready mades' to fill an urgent need in under-developed warring nations, as T-34 and Shermans invariably were, outside of their native armies.
Favorite early tank design right next to the Pz 38t.
Wabaanimkii
That tank reminds me of a German Bt-7
Czech
Your voice in the video could be louder, but other than that this is good.
Nicholas Mew thanks for the feed back =) i'm considering removing or subdueing music in the future
I say free occasionally myself but hearing it all the time is annoying.
Good little tank for the early and mid 1930s don't forget about Khalkin Gol 1939. T26 outclassed anything the Japanese had
Actually it was the faster BT-5 that did nearly all the fighting at Khalkin Gol. Very few T-26's took part.
RO2 music? Nice
You missed out mentioning the chemical (gas) dispensing and telemetric (radio controlled) demolition variants.
Need to turn up the sound
Properly handled, with trained crews and competent officers, properly supplied and maintained, as part of a proper defensive doctrine, they would have been a real handful to the Wehrmacht.
Unfortunately, the crews were poorly trained, officers either incompetent or promoted beyond the competence of their experience, poorly supplied, badly maintained and used part of an extremely flawed doctrine. They were little more than chaff to the advancing forces
perfect? no. better than their reputation? yes.
This Soviet T-26 tank did well against the Imperial Japanese tanks.
Mestari1Gaming it was british made, northern british made. the russians copied of this design throughout the war, helping to win
@@jsc6286 hull was sure. but the soviet 47mm was among the best AT guns at the time.
These tanks would have been better used as infantry support weapons carriers. Remove the turret and mount a 120mm mortar on a turntable on the hull floor. Or as an AT-1 derivative mount the 76.2 regimental gun on a swivel with about 75 degrees of elevation.
This assumes that the tanks had radios and there were competent forward observers. Like the wehrmacht.
Infantry weapons carriers provide close and immediate indirect fire support for maneuver units while allowing for rapid displacement & quick reaction to the tactical situation. The ability to relocate not only allows fire support to be provided where it is needed faster and allows these units to quickly avoid counter battery fire.
nice video
would be nice to mention its important role in the Spanish Civil War against the german counterparts at the time
It was
0:19 a T-26-4, that's rare
Awesome video!
your videos are class
I love the t26 at the tank museum ❤❤😂
While the T-26 was flawed, it gave ways to the BT series, which gave ways to the T-34 series.
0:00 does anybody know song name please?
spasibo
The twin turrents were likely intended for breaching trenchworks.
You could take the audio from this and clear it up, I could show you how, it's not super hard.
Allso the SU 5-1
This videoseries is great, but i'm really trying to find that mournful song at 0:28
Maybe you or someone can tell me what it is?
its from the TV show "The Forgotten War". highly recommend the series.
Cool. thanks dude.
Iron Bloke I cannot find it! Could you maybe put a link ;)
It was whofully inferior for the most part to what it faced the thing. What it had going for it was that there where as many t26 as the entire wehrmacht armor combined and then some.
When i say inferior i mean lacking radar amongst other things.
Geordieland ! !
8:40 Why does the tank have Finnish markings?
that tank was captured by the finns in 1940 during the winter war, and was actually dug into the mannerheim line. it was recovered in the 1980s and then sold to bovintgton tank museum.
and the soviets say that their victory or that the US/British (Persian Oil through the Wolga and Don and smaller rivers, crossing thousands of kilometers to the Moscow area, than Leningrad and even into the Baltic Sea...
But the T-26 was at least "copied" from a 6 ton WW1 or 20's tank? Weight was 9.6 tons I think when I looked yesterday, engine was very weak gasoline, but that is okay for such a light weight and for the early 30's... they were used against the Nazis, were all converted old british tanks or just based on it?! The British Army maybe wanted to sell them during the financial crisis and the negative outlook,
but I think it was more a copy.... soviets did test a lot different tanks before WW2 since WW1 the tanks did not win because of the guns or speed, just a driving "thing" with many tons which could cross the trenches slowly, and the "Panzerbüchse" was the only thing in very small numbers which reached the troops (it would be something like "Anti-Tank Shotgun/Rifle", and it was something like that I think, with a bi- or tripod to absorb the recoil, and shooting at the weakest areas... Tankgewehr M1918 on the German side was the only one which was a bit service I think, the caliber of 13 x 92 mm was strong, from the size comparable with the heavy mounted "caliber .50" NATO machine guns, they were 12.7 x 99 mm.
Crazy times, I hope I can only read and write about wars, but the geopolitical and economic situation sucks, the Arab states in the Middle East did nothing to create other Industry than Oil and some OPEC members also Gas, or main export is Gas and gas condensate upgraded to high quality fuel like in Qatar for example, and some oil fields of course there too... Gas is the "future"...
The Germans used armor-piercing 7.92mm ammunition in their rifles and machine guns to fight tanks in WW1 as well. Not as effective as the Tankgewehr, but better than nothing. They also brought up light artillery and used them as improvised AT guns.
The T26 is essentially a copy of the Vickers 6-ton tank
@@Zretgul_timerunner it is indeed...a licensed copy at that. It was a private venture by Vickers Armstrong...the British didn't want it but the Soviets did. They had a number delivered them reverse engineered them,they spent time at vickers factory learning how to construct them during production.
First 1930 war
Parola = Palora