I'd be interested to hear why you think AA vehicles (presumably just keeping it to this era) are a waste of time. If their only possible use was against aircraft, I might be inclined to agree - but I gather that many armoured allied AA vehicles in the latter days of the war made themselves useful by putting quite obscene levels of suppressing fire on German infantry and light targets. A vehicle armed with multiple autocannons that's immune to small arms fire does sound like quite a powerful infantry support tool
The M-15 and M-16 halftracks were used for "hedgehog clearing" literally from day one (which is D-day ...) in Normandy. They were also useless in their designated role (air defence) but somebody made them work otherwise. When you think about it, a 12,7 mm twin mount isn't going to cut the mustard in air defence anyway. Germany was planning on replacing its 20mm AA guns with 30mm ones since the 20mm lacked the desired impact by 1944/45.
@@ottovonbismarck2443 Some of those half tracks had quad .50 calibers on them. Known quite simply as the Quad 50, those quad mounted heavy machineguns would wreck havoc on infantry and unarmored or lightly armored vehicles. Armor that may stop light firearms fire would be shredded by a .50. Those 4 .50s would have been no fun for dive bombers or close support aircraft to deal with, either. The P-51 Mustang carried 6 of them as its primary armament and did a fairly good job of shooting down what aircraft the Luftwaffe had left. The primary man portable anti-aircraft weapon on US Navy vessels was also the .50 caliber machinegun. On some US destroyers, it was the only anti-aircraft weapon carried. Don't under-estimate what Mr. Browning's machinegun can do. It's still in service with the US military for a number of reasons, including air defense purposes.
@@RichWhiteUM In the context of aircraft, heavy machineguns get more praise than they deserve, primarily because of the murica bias you're exhibiting. Any non-explosive round will often go in one side of a plane and out the other unless it hits armour or the engine. If you're luckily you'll ignite some fuel. If you're going beyond light machineguns, it makes sense to jump to cannons for a whole variety of reasons. The only things the .50 cal had going for it over cannons was that it was lighter so you could put a couple more guns on the plane and that would translate to more rounds in the air, and it's armour penetration performance and ballistic were quite good. But in terms of effect on most targets, four Hispanos mk2s or mg151/20's handily beats eight M2's. I'd say that the only time you'd prefer the greater number of heavy machineguns would be if you were strafing houses.
@N Fels I'd say fair point if the Allies didn't have air superiority at the time of the Normandy landings, but they did, and attempting a landing without air superiority is fairly suicidal. Even if a few hundred Stukas could be magic'd up they'd be torn to shreds by Allied fighter cover. I would presume David's point would be "why waste a chassis on an anti-aircraft vehicle when air superiority is more effective? And if the vehicle isn't any good in its role, why waste resources continuing to make it?"
It's a difference in philosophy. we yanks amused ourselves by popping away at any enemy aircraft we saw flying overhead. the brits just closed the hatches until they got bored and buggered off. if the AA turret was a little better designed for ground support, it probably would have been a more useful vehicle, but it looks like the gunner wasn't really in a good position for ground support in the AA turret.
My Uncle Stan used to crew Staghounds in Italy. he was in the Div Cav of the 2nd NZ Division. They found them too heavy for a lot of Italian roads. The Div Cav was converted to an infantry battalion.
My late father (2nd Lothians and Border Horse, B Sqdn) used to tell me about the Staghound in Italy. After his 3" American gunned Sherman crawling around, a Staghound doing 30, 40 or even 50mph he called them 'jaunty vehicles with a bit of zip'.
The Swiss military loaded their budget heavily towards bladed weapons for hand-to-hand combat, removing corks and splicing rope. Armoured scout cars were a lower priority.
That's right, in 1951 Switzerland bought used Staghound, not 17 but 64. Of these, 9 fell off the ship while being loaded in Southampton. Of the remaining 55 pieces, only one was used for tests and is now in the tank museum in Thun
@@beatgysi3345 Im sure there is a 17 in that story somewhere. I think i go read the sign there right now. Light snowing isnt going to stop me. Nor the guards for I have a badge. Edit: Welp Im wrong. it seems like I got the squadron size of 15-17 stuck in my head.
Thank you for your excellent work David, I stumbled across your videos recently and now im hooked. I find you to be a compelling and enjoyable presenter to listen to and I hope to see you at the Museum for my first visit.
The 17E1 Staghound Armored Vehicle was used by the Guardia Nacional de Nicaragua (G.N.)in the war against the FSLN(Sandinistas) uprising in 1978/1979.The Guard possessed about 40 of these vehicles in a order of battle formation of the Primer Batallón Blindado or PBB.All had the 2 30.06 machine guns and the 37mm AT main gun.It was use mainly in the western part of the country like Managua,León,Masaya,Rivas,Southern Border,and in theNorthern cities of Estelí,and Matagalpa.I believe this was the last used of the T17E1 Staghound in combat in the last century!…
Staghounds here in Oz were mainly post war. Too late for the desert and have never seen any accounts of them being used in the Pacific. So most of them had long and mostly unviolent lives and hence they are 'relatively' common. I know of at least two in South Australia alone. Like David says, they are larger than you would assume from the photos.
One my 2 favorite armored cars of all time. The other being the Saladin. I like this thing so much I just made a 3d computer model of one. Ironic timing for me. But what of the Free Poles? They got some of these for Italy. Granted, I do believe more under British command. But what do I know.
Mr Fletcher, with some considerable joy I recently watched your 5 bottom tanks again. With a lot of the vehicles I really wonder how that piece ended up in the museum. If known and interesting, might I persuade you to shortly tell those story's as well? Thank you, and interesting as ever. Jelle
Come across a fair number of these units on bombing ranges over the years, some were filled with dirt and concrete so they lasted longer as hard range targets, there's a fair amount at museums throughout australia.
My brother in law, 1970-1, Army Reserve ( CMF) in Australia was a driver/commander in one. Hard to believe the length of service life. Apparently very tough, but hot and harsh to operate. Good enough to keep the weekend warriors busy. If you joined the CMF back then, you were exempt from service in Vietnam.
It was built back before we'd discovered Planned Obsolescence, that's why. Stuff we Yankees built back then was built to last until it was _destroyed,_ whenever that might be. As for being harsh and hot to operate, well... It _is_ an armored vehicle. I suppose nowadays we _could_ fit an air conditioning unit without too much fuss.
Here in south america we used stuart tanks until recently in my country. Hell in Uruguay it is in active service today if im not mistaken. Here in brazil we even developed a ver effective APDS shell in the 70's and 80'd for the little 37mm gun. We even produced new ones, equiped with 90mm guns until 1983 :D
Eisenhower's farewell address Television broadcast on January 17, 1961. " In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together "
@Doug Stubbs " If you joined the CMF back then, you were exempt from service in Vietnam" I recall some CMF who did go to Vietnam for limited support. Non-combat, limited time deployment and I think probably volunteers, so exempt from extended planned combat roles as you say. Medical, Engineering/Construction and Logistical and even Cooks are the ones I recall. Much like fly-in fly-out mine workers today. Now there are big $ corporations to do that.
Mr Fletcher, you may not like anti aircraft guns but I guarantee you that the infantry does. When I was in ADA in the 80s I was attached to an infantry company and the captain was real excited to see us...until he found out that I came with 6 Stinger missiles. He even asked if he could replace me with a vulcan unit. Infantry can't wrap their heads around the use of a missile that can't even hurt tanks but they certainly understand the force multiplier of 3000 rounds a minute! :))
Infantry aren't concerned about aircraft, because if aircraft are concerned about infantry, the infantry have already lost. Infantry love the kind of air defense units that were engineered for MOAR DAKKA, because they well understand that you can drop those guns and your air defense unit becomes a ground defense unit. Or, if the guns drop well enough out of the box, without needing any earthworks to lower/tilt the hull, it becomes a ground offense unit. And infantry love giving offense to other infantry with volumes of fire meant to offend aircraft.
They were happy because they thought they would get mobile and armoured gatling cannon on their side. To shoot other infantry/thin skinned vehicles on the ground. Stingers don't do poop for things on ground. AA-tanks/cars suffer on 'increased cost at the increased mobility' and usually AA isn't one to move very much, unlike artillery that will immediately get anti-artillery shot at it. Also, bigger AA-tank/car is bigger and more tempting target to anyone to shoot at. Even a M45 Quadmount with 4x .50-cal is a smaller silhuette target than full height AA-tank/car and even then it's small calibre bullet that has little impact on airplanes. But putting heavier guns in a small ring turret is giving diminishing returns: the larger you install, the less effective it will be. So best bet is to keep the tank and AA-gun as a separate things, no matter how much the infantry would like it :) And use SAMs :D Sure there are exceptions like the 'modern' Shilka but even that has radar tracking and in my understanding big part of it's combat history has been against other ground targets. Making it a scary but very expensive mobile machinegun emplacement and with huge red target painted on it.
he didn't mean that he doesn't like AA guns, he just meant he doesn't see the point of their being mounted on vehicles; presumably he sees the point of the guns themselves
I guess the problem is once you give soldiers a semi armoured vehicle with a couple of machine guns or a cannon and theres nothing to shoot in the sky it will inevitably get pushed into being used against ground targets which they generally also excel at leading to a confidence that generally gets AA vehicles killed when they suddenly come up against something slightly more substantial and they have no way of fighting it. I mean I personally think even a vulcan/ other AA vehicle has its uses against any enemy tank (assuming its not seen) by just raking the hull with machine gun fire and making sure the crew stay buttoned up (limiting their situational awareness) their supporting infantry can't help them out and disabling items like sensors and sights
Probably a vehicle with untapped development potential. I wonder how much influence it had on the requirement resulting in the Saladin? I have a soft spot for Staghound because it's so quick over the ground and it's appearance reminds me of the 6x6 Saladin. BTW Saladin gives me that warm knee trembling feeling. Professional help is being sort but if you have one for sale, give me a shout. Part-x one wife, 61 model, one careful owner.
After watching the Valentine Tank video from a fair while ago, I always wondered what the armoured car was in the background to the left... this video answers that question!
Surprised at the size and that it took 5 crew... so is it more of a wheeled light tank than a AC? The post-war local upgrades with tank turrets with decent AT calibre guns are the parents of the Brit Saladin & French* Panhard Armoured Cars. *In saying that the French had already started down this design path with a 'Push MePull You' type AC design with a front end (steering wheel, etc) at both ends and a big tank gun in a turret... iirc there were drivers in each end so it could get out of trouble just as nimbly as it got into it.
I'd been assigned to the crew of combat car in a foreign war. But my prior military service secured other duties and which left me alive afterward. I'm not complaining either.
I always liked the way the Staghound looked but I guess I never really knew much about it. Makes sense it was too big, especially when things like the Daimler Armored Car was out there. Too bad.
The Staghound's not too big; Europe's too _small!_ We can fix that with a lot of bulldozers and cement mixers. Raze the whole damn place and build it up bigger and better; bigger buildings, bigger garages, bigger hedgerows (the better to hide a Staghound behind), the works.
America had the M3A1 white armored car before the war. They found it's off road capabilities lacking and went with the half track. Later US had the M8 armored car
RCD in petawawa Ontario Canada have one of these for events, that is drivable as well. It drove pass me last month while parking for Christmas light show thing it was taking part in.
I was talking to an old guy many years ago who was at Arnhem just days before the parachute landings in an armored scout car of some description. Could it have been this type? He claimed it had bullet proof tyres?
Not many around now my great grandad was in WW2 he was in Kings Dragoon Guards and in Italy and Greece they had Staghounds far to big meant for desert warfare and North African Campaign but arrived to late he was with horses in Italy and Greece.
Make sure you like, subscribe, and hit the notifcation bell for upcoming content. Also, don't forget to check our other social medias for updates and content there too including, instagram, snapchat, tiktok, facebook, and our Onlyfans but its just pictures we took of the tanks at different perspectives.
Probably the most reliable armoured vehicle the British ever made during WW2 and easiest to operate too l bet, l m pretty sure these were put to good use :)
The US used the M8 Greyhound. The use of armored cars after Africa was not seen as important. The M20 was more of a personell varient of the M8. The Boarhound just didn't make the cut.
As I understand it. The M8 was ordered as a Tank Destroyer but by the time it entered service the 37mm was no longer adequate so it was used for recon.
13 tons, on wheels?? That’s a lot of weight on a small contact patch. Considering these things usually had quite thin steel armour, and are fairly short, I imagined 5-6 tons being more likely… considering most of these sorts of vehicles had under 200 hp, I wonder if they would seem sluggish to modern eyes?
The armoured car squadron of the "1st Belgian Independent Group" (to use their proper name) had a few of them (and 2 AA variants) in the HQ section. The other squads zipped around Normandy in Daimlers.
My great grandfather was in Kings Dragoon Guards and in WW2 they had these in Italy and Greece far to big and designed for desert warfare meant for North African campaign my great grandad drove Marmon Harringtons and chevrolet 1311x3 out in desert and in Italy and Greece he was with horses.
"It's quite rare. There are two, I think."
That really puts these museums' efforts into perspective.
He meant the ones with the crusader turrets
@@ChannelHandlePending That could be the one in Manitoba. The MK 3 was used by Canada.
As much as I love tanks... there's a place in my heart for armored cars.
Thanks as usual David!
🇺🇸 🍻 🇬🇧
I keep armored cars in my right ventricle.
I'd be interested to hear why you think AA vehicles (presumably just keeping it to this era) are a waste of time. If their only possible use was against aircraft, I might be inclined to agree - but I gather that many armoured allied AA vehicles in the latter days of the war made themselves useful by putting quite obscene levels of suppressing fire on German infantry and light targets. A vehicle armed with multiple autocannons that's immune to small arms fire does sound like quite a powerful infantry support tool
The M-15 and M-16 halftracks were used for "hedgehog clearing" literally from day one (which is D-day ...) in Normandy. They were also useless in their designated role (air defence) but somebody made them work otherwise. When you think about it, a 12,7 mm twin mount isn't going to cut the mustard in air defence anyway. Germany was planning on replacing its 20mm AA guns with 30mm ones since the 20mm lacked the desired impact by 1944/45.
@@ottovonbismarck2443 Some of those half tracks had quad .50 calibers on them. Known quite simply as the Quad 50, those quad mounted heavy machineguns would wreck havoc on infantry and unarmored or lightly armored vehicles. Armor that may stop light firearms fire would be shredded by a .50. Those 4 .50s would have been no fun for dive bombers or close support aircraft to deal with, either. The P-51 Mustang carried 6 of them as its primary armament and did a fairly good job of shooting down what aircraft the Luftwaffe had left. The primary man portable anti-aircraft weapon on US Navy vessels was also the .50 caliber machinegun. On some US destroyers, it was the only anti-aircraft weapon carried. Don't under-estimate what Mr. Browning's machinegun can do. It's still in service with the US military for a number of reasons, including air defense purposes.
@@RichWhiteUM In the context of aircraft, heavy machineguns get more praise than they deserve, primarily because of the murica bias you're exhibiting. Any non-explosive round will often go in one side of a plane and out the other unless it hits armour or the engine. If you're luckily you'll ignite some fuel. If you're going beyond light machineguns, it makes sense to jump to cannons for a whole variety of reasons. The only things the .50 cal had going for it over cannons was that it was lighter so you could put a couple more guns on the plane and that would translate to more rounds in the air, and it's armour penetration performance and ballistic were quite good. But in terms of effect on most targets, four Hispanos mk2s or mg151/20's handily beats eight M2's. I'd say that the only time you'd prefer the greater number of heavy machineguns would be if you were strafing houses.
@N Fels I'd say fair point if the Allies didn't have air superiority at the time of the Normandy landings, but they did, and attempting a landing without air superiority is fairly suicidal.
Even if a few hundred Stukas could be magic'd up they'd be torn to shreds by Allied fighter cover.
I would presume David's point would be "why waste a chassis on an anti-aircraft vehicle when air superiority is more effective? And if the vehicle isn't any good in its role, why waste resources continuing to make it?"
It's a difference in philosophy. we yanks amused ourselves by popping away at any enemy aircraft we saw flying overhead. the brits just closed the hatches until they got bored and buggered off. if the AA turret was a little better designed for ground support, it probably would have been a more useful vehicle, but it looks like the gunner wasn't really in a good position for ground support in the AA turret.
My Uncle Stan used to crew Staghounds in Italy. he was in the Div Cav of the 2nd NZ Division. They found them too heavy for a lot of Italian roads. The Div Cav was converted to an infantry battalion.
I read that they had to organise a quick garage sale of all the stuff they had 'acquired' on the way up Italy, before they lost the Staghounds
We had them here in Canada. Even after the war. Still clean up a lot of 37mm off the ranges from these beasts. Armoured RECCE.
My late father (2nd Lothians and Border Horse, B Sqdn) used to tell me about the Staghound in Italy. After his 3" American gunned Sherman crawling around, a Staghound doing 30, 40 or even 50mph he called them 'jaunty vehicles with a bit of zip'.
In Nicaragua it was known as "tanqueta", used in the war from 1978 to 1979.
My great uncles served with the 12th Manitoba Dragoons who used the Staghound in the ETO
Switzerland had an interest in aquiring some. They bought 17 of them for testing but decided against them in favour of the AMX-13.
The Swiss military loaded their budget heavily towards bladed weapons for hand-to-hand combat, removing corks and splicing rope.
Armoured scout cars were a lower priority.
That's right, in 1951 Switzerland bought used Staghound, not 17 but 64. Of these, 9 fell off the ship while being loaded in Southampton. Of the remaining 55 pieces, only one was used for tests and is now in the tank museum in Thun
@@beatgysi3345 Im sure there is a 17 in that story somewhere. I think i go read the sign there right now. Light snowing isnt going to stop me. Nor the guards for I have a badge.
Edit: Welp Im wrong. it seems like I got the squadron size of 15-17 stuck in my head.
David is the real staghound here. Officially retired 10 years ago and still lively as ever.
Thank you for your excellent work David, I stumbled across your videos recently and now im hooked. I find you to be a compelling and enjoyable presenter to listen to and I hope to see you at the Museum for my first visit.
Staghounds were also used by the New Zealand Divisional Cavalry in Italy.
The 17E1 Staghound Armored Vehicle was used by the Guardia Nacional de Nicaragua (G.N.)in the war against the FSLN(Sandinistas) uprising in 1978/1979.The Guard possessed about 40 of these vehicles in a order of battle formation of the Primer Batallón Blindado or PBB.All had the 2 30.06 machine guns and the 37mm AT main gun.It was use mainly in the western part of the country like Managua,León,Masaya,Rivas,Southern Border,and in theNorthern cities of Estelí,and Matagalpa.I believe this was the last used of the T17E1 Staghound in combat in the last century!…
Staghounds here in Oz were mainly post war. Too late for the desert and have never seen any accounts of them being used in the Pacific.
So most of them had long and mostly unviolent lives and hence they are 'relatively' common. I know of at least two in South Australia alone. Like David says, they are larger than you would assume from the photos.
One my 2 favorite armored cars of all time. The other being the Saladin. I like this thing so much I just made a 3d computer model of one. Ironic timing for me. But what of the Free Poles? They got some of these for Italy. Granted, I do believe more under British command. But what do I know.
The New Zealand Division also used them in Italy.
I could listen to David Fletcher all day - he could describe how a toaster works, and I'd listen :-)
I love the M22 Locust-esque turret
Mr Fletcher, with some considerable joy I recently watched your 5 bottom tanks again. With a lot of the vehicles I really wonder how that piece ended up in the museum. If known and interesting, might I persuade you to shortly tell those story's as well?
Thank you, and interesting as ever.
Jelle
Come across a fair number of these units on bombing ranges over the years, some were filled with dirt and concrete so they lasted longer as hard range targets, there's a fair amount at museums throughout australia.
I love the Staghound, I don’t really know why but I find it cute, I’d like to maybe own one someday.
Was just watching Five Romeo Romeo the other day talking about these.
My brother in law, 1970-1, Army Reserve ( CMF) in Australia was a driver/commander in one. Hard to believe the length of service life. Apparently very tough, but hot and harsh to operate. Good enough to keep the weekend warriors busy. If you joined the CMF back then, you were exempt from service in Vietnam.
It was built back before we'd discovered Planned Obsolescence, that's why. Stuff we Yankees built back then was built to last until it was _destroyed,_ whenever that might be.
As for being harsh and hot to operate, well... It _is_ an armored vehicle. I suppose nowadays we _could_ fit an air conditioning unit without too much fuss.
Here in south america we used stuart tanks until recently in my country. Hell in Uruguay it is in active service today if im not mistaken. Here in brazil we even developed a ver effective APDS shell in the 70's and 80'd for the little 37mm gun. We even produced new ones, equiped with 90mm guns until 1983 :D
Eisenhower's farewell address
Television broadcast on January 17, 1961.
" In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together "
@Doug Stubbs " If you joined the CMF back then, you were exempt from service in Vietnam" I recall some CMF who did go to Vietnam for limited support.
Non-combat, limited time deployment and I think probably volunteers, so exempt from extended planned combat roles as you say.
Medical, Engineering/Construction and Logistical and even Cooks are the ones I recall. Much like fly-in fly-out mine workers today. Now there are big $ corporations to do that.
It looks pretty solid, however three in the turret seems pretty tight.
Yes it is.
Quad 50 cal Brownings and Twin 40mm mounted on half tracks saved the day in the battle of the frozen chosen. The quad 50s were popular in NAM too.
Thank you , Mr Fletcher
🐺
Mr Fletcher, you may not like anti aircraft guns but I guarantee you that the infantry does. When I was in ADA in the 80s I was attached to an infantry company and the captain was real excited to see us...until he found out that I came with 6 Stinger missiles. He even asked if he could replace me with a vulcan unit. Infantry can't wrap their heads around the use of a missile that can't even hurt tanks but they certainly understand the force multiplier of 3000 rounds a minute! :))
Infantry aren't concerned about aircraft, because if aircraft are concerned about infantry, the infantry have already lost.
Infantry love the kind of air defense units that were engineered for MOAR DAKKA, because they well understand that you can drop those guns and your air defense unit becomes a ground defense unit. Or, if the guns drop well enough out of the box, without needing any earthworks to lower/tilt the hull, it becomes a ground offense unit.
And infantry love giving offense to other infantry with volumes of fire meant to offend aircraft.
They were happy because they thought they would get mobile and armoured gatling cannon on their side. To shoot other infantry/thin skinned vehicles on the ground. Stingers don't do poop for things on ground.
AA-tanks/cars suffer on 'increased cost at the increased mobility' and usually AA isn't one to move very much, unlike artillery that will immediately get anti-artillery shot at it. Also, bigger AA-tank/car is bigger and more tempting target to anyone to shoot at. Even a M45 Quadmount with 4x .50-cal is a smaller silhuette target than full height AA-tank/car and even then it's small calibre bullet that has little impact on airplanes. But putting heavier guns in a small ring turret is giving diminishing returns: the larger you install, the less effective it will be. So best bet is to keep the tank and AA-gun as a separate things, no matter how much the infantry would like it :) And use SAMs :D
Sure there are exceptions like the 'modern' Shilka but even that has radar tracking and in my understanding big part of it's combat history has been against other ground targets. Making it a scary but very expensive mobile machinegun emplacement and with huge red target painted on it.
he didn't mean that he doesn't like AA guns, he just meant he doesn't see the point of their being mounted on vehicles; presumably he sees the point of the guns themselves
I guess the problem is once you give soldiers a semi armoured vehicle with a couple of machine guns or a cannon and theres nothing to shoot in the sky it will inevitably get pushed into being used against ground targets which they generally also excel at leading to a confidence that generally gets AA vehicles killed when they suddenly come up against something slightly more substantial and they have no way of fighting it.
I mean I personally think even a vulcan/ other AA vehicle has its uses against any enemy tank (assuming its not seen) by just raking the hull with machine gun fire and making sure the crew stay buttoned up (limiting their situational awareness) their supporting infantry can't help them out and disabling items like sensors and sights
@@CorvusCorone68
He should think of them as a mobile AA gun or SP AA gun.
Staghound blob was quite OP in the first company of heroes :D
Also, I think the British Ton is based on the weight of a Tun, and the American Ton is just 2,000Lbs.
Probably a vehicle with untapped development potential. I wonder how much influence it had on the requirement resulting in the Saladin?
I have a soft spot for Staghound because it's so quick over the ground and it's appearance reminds me of the 6x6 Saladin. BTW Saladin gives me that warm knee trembling feeling. Professional help is being sort but if you have one for sale, give me a shout. Part-x one wife, 61 model, one careful owner.
My favorite internet celebrity David Fletcher, I hope you are well my friend!
After watching the Valentine Tank video from a fair while ago, I always wondered what the armoured car was in the background to the left... this video answers that question!
Thanks for all the amazing color footage.
Surprised at the size and that it took 5 crew... so is it more of a wheeled light tank than a AC?
The post-war local upgrades with tank turrets with decent AT calibre guns are the parents of the Brit Saladin & French* Panhard Armoured Cars.
*In saying that the French had already started down this design path with a 'Push MePull You' type AC design with a front end (steering wheel, etc) at both ends and a big tank gun in a turret... iirc there were drivers in each end so it could get out of trouble just as nimbly as it got into it.
The building where they were built still stands on Woodward ave. in Pontiac Mi. Would love to bring one home.
My grandfather was on the Marmon Harrington and then went onto the staghound
6:43 : Staghounds parading before queen Wilhelmina, the palace of the Dam, Amsterdam.
I'd been assigned to the crew of combat car in a foreign war.
But my prior military service secured other duties and which
left me alive afterward. I'm not complaining either.
I always liked the way the Staghound looked but I guess I never really knew much about it. Makes sense it was too big, especially when things like the Daimler Armored Car was out there. Too bad.
The Staghound's not too big; Europe's too _small!_
We can fix that with a lot of bulldozers and cement mixers. Raze the whole damn place and build it up bigger and better; bigger buildings, bigger garages, bigger hedgerows (the better to hide a Staghound behind), the works.
Gotta love that Staghound.
America had the M3A1 white armored car before the war. They found it's off road capabilities lacking and went with the half track. Later US had the M8 armored car
No. 144? There's now simply a gross number of these Tank Chats. Looking forward to many more! (Excuse the pun.)
I love the comment about the tons at the end. It’s just really meant to confuse you..Lol another great review “chaps”. Thanks
Now that you have covered this one, perhaps you can do the T18 Boarhound.
I am, of course, presuming that you have an example in your museum.
They have the only one in the world, which means it would be a great video
@@frostedbutts4340 It would be indeed.
That is bloody enormous!
RCD in petawawa Ontario Canada have one of these for events, that is drivable as well. It drove pass me last month while parking for Christmas light show thing it was taking part in.
Excellent stuff bro
Loved this one…very interesting
Thank you.
That thing is freaking cool.
AA vehicles made good infantry support systems. In Korea the called some of them "half inch artillery".
I want to adopt David Fletcher as my grandfather. I bet he’d be spectacularly grumpy at times, particularly around hyperactive kids!
You didn't list New Zealand under the list of commonwealth countries that used the stag hound.
Don't forget about the metric ton!
A hapy new year and thank you for another great video. And ahhh, this is a Staghound, hence the other American armoured car being called the Greyhound
Beautiful AC.
Ohhhh so this was the inspiration of the armoured car in rise of nations.
it looked more useful than a lot of others
I was talking to an old guy many years ago who was at Arnhem just days before the parachute landings in an armored scout car of some description. Could it have been this type? He claimed it had bullet proof tyres?
I'd like to think there are still a few WW II Veterans around who served in a Staghound or at least remember seeing them during their War.
Not many around now my great grandad was in WW2 he was in Kings Dragoon Guards and in Italy and Greece they had Staghounds far to big meant for desert warfare and North African Campaign but arrived to late he was with horses in Italy and Greece.
Thank you interesting thanks
Make sure you like, subscribe, and hit the notifcation bell for upcoming content. Also, don't forget to check our other social medias for updates and content there too including, instagram, snapchat, tiktok, facebook, and our Onlyfans but its just pictures we took of the tanks at different perspectives.
My favorite armored car. Not great, true, and its size is a problem, but it worked.
Probably the most reliable armoured vehicle the British ever made during WW2 and easiest to operate too l bet, l m pretty sure these were put to good use :)
British made?
The US used the M8 Greyhound. The use of armored cars after Africa was not seen as important. The M20 was more of a personell varient of the M8. The Boarhound just didn't make the cut.
Didn’t the Americans have the greyhound though? Isn’t that an armoured car?
No, it's a cross country bus lol!
Yes, which entered service in 1943. There wasn't really all that much before it.
As I understand it. The M8 was ordered as a Tank Destroyer but by the time it entered service the 37mm was no longer adequate so it was used for recon.
AA vehicles you still want some of, when there's a need. Strictly to throw up tracers and keep the pilots honest. Make them pull out or drop early.
Poles were using it too.
Didn't mention much detail on stowage, just wondering if I could do my weekly shop in one...
13 tons, on wheels?? That’s a lot of weight on a small contact patch.
Considering these things usually had quite thin steel armour, and are fairly short, I imagined 5-6 tons being more likely… considering most of these sorts of vehicles had under 200 hp, I wonder if they would seem sluggish to modern eyes?
Hey mate, M8?!
You should drive those things sometimes it would be more fun to watch.
나는 탱크를 매우 좋아합니다.
당신의 설명도 아주 훌륭합니다.
멋진 탱크
I bet its fun as anything to drive.
Americans not know for Armored Cars...M8 Greyhound used by basically everybody in every theater of the war. Okay.
ther was a eight by eight deer hound aswell .
Interestingly, David never commented on their reliability. Knowing that he _“suffers no fools, ”_ they must have performed adequately. 😉
@N Fels It's not British so of course David likes it.
@N Fels And from this we deduce the Supermarine Spitfire was a boat :)
@@wbertie2604
I've always wondered why the Spitfire's name included the term _“SuperMARINE”._ ⛵
@@dr.ryttmastarecctm6595 Supermarine means ‘over the sea’ obviously. This, my dear doctor, is because they built sea planes.
Like it.
I can totally see this appearing in World of Tanks at some point, bouncing around the terrain like a clown car with howitzers on top.
08:11 Looks like the Fox AC.
A handsome looking vehicle.
5RR just did a q&a that talks about the Staghound.
It sounds like cheap and reliable support for infantry.
However the allies were able to churn iut so many shermans tbat tbey were not short.
Is Mr.Fletcher alright? His voice sounds a bit raspier than usual.
Best wishes from Germany!
Plus 2ndNZEF
Has he covered the M-38 Wolfhound?
No
America built the V100 which is still in use
Isn't there a anti air version of the Staghound?
Yes he shows it about 5 mins in
Brigade piron belgium had them in normandie not only the british
The armoured car squadron of the "1st Belgian Independent Group" (to use their proper name) had a few of them (and 2 AA variants) in the HQ section. The other squads zipped around Normandy in Daimlers.
ist that the locust's turret or is it the locust that has a stag hound turret?
I really feel like your ads might be better if they didn't interrupt the video. Like if you had the presenter do them instead y'know?
"The Americans hadn't any enthusiasm for armoured cars at all"
*Sad M8 Greyhound noises*
I'm seeing double! Two staghounds!? ;D
Looks a bit like a large AML
If possible can you do the t18 boarhound?
If you spend your entire life looking over your shoulder, you walk into lampposts.
The turret looks like a M3 Lee /grant? Is it or not?
Looks similar to me
“Just done to confuse you really”
Most things,
Most days
It seems that every good fighting vehicle of World War II came out too late to be used for its maximum potential!
Brits: "we like armoured cars" yanks: "let's make them bigger"
You can drop the armored line from the sentence and it's still absolutely accurate
@@SlavicCelery you can put pretty much any noun in there and it will still be true.
My great grandfather was in Kings Dragoon Guards and in WW2 they had these in Italy and Greece far to big and designed for desert warfare meant for North African campaign my great grandad drove Marmon Harringtons and chevrolet 1311x3 out in desert and in Italy and Greece he was with horses.