I can really say it too. In Tank Chats his videos are mandatory. :) He has a clear view of tanks and some really old time english irony in his summaries.
I have no idea why but I really like the Crusader. Probably just because it has such a sleek look for an early-war design. Riddled with design flaws but oh well.
@@T3hderk87 Really? That kind of thing disturbed you as a teen? I would have thought little pixel men screaming, crackling and crisping inside a tank was awesome..
@@b.elzebub9252 My teens were in the time of banana toss and lemmings, by the time this rolled around my mind was well and truly fortified as an adult... Also, fantastic necropost.
It does strike me as odd that when they noticed the problems with the engines getting clogged with sand and dust no-one thought to move the air intakes.
Spot on, good chap! And, bloody hell, if it by some unfortunate event bloody did catch on fire, just put it out with your blooming pot of tea, what's all the fuss about? You are a BRITISH tanker, mind you, gosh darn it! Well, jolly good then, common, in the tank now, go on...
Why is the background music always off in terms of volume? I don't mind the music itself, but I do mind it being too loud and interfering with the actual relevant stuff. Especially when to compensate, the volume of chief gets messed up with distorted and poor quality audio. :/
Meanwhile, the Yugoslav M-84's in Kuwait's service: Problem? Trivago. I am trying to say that they had no problems at all. I am fairly confident that if Yugoslavia had survived to the modern day and put the M-90 Vihor in service - Kuwait would throw money at it.
The way i read about the external air intake was that they ran out of space in the engine bay and had to mount them externally, thus the first of the two big issues with the Crusader was born
In all of my reading about D-DAY, I have never seen mention of Military Harvest Forces before today. It could easily have been a very dangerous occupation being tasked with bringing in the harvest after a battle front has moved through an area. Unexploded ordinance, booby traps, the dead, the wounded and stragglers, mine fields, bunkers, the list goes on.
The first time I ever laughed out loud, and at length, at a Chieftain video, was when I was suddenly struck by the implications of the positioning of the air intakes. There's something about bad design that I find hilarious.
I cannot wait to see you in the drivers position, that armoured box does not look like it gives much room. A bit sadistic I know but it's the little things.
Such an Iconic looking vehicle. Looks a little bit small and cramped, but I guess thats the sacrifice if you want to keep a certain weight. At least this would make a smaller taret then an M3 Medium.
David Fletcher in a Chieftan video? My body can only handle so much. Also, music was fine IMO. Only was too loud for like the last 10 seconds or so, I could hear Mr. Fletcher fine. Also that 6 pounder has caused me much hurt in Warthunder. My poor Panzer III's can't take a glancing hit from one.
Good point on the air filter, did the guys in the Desert do their own modifications and move them? Looking forward to seeing the Chieftain getting into it, a repeat of the comet I anticipate, looks very tight god knows what it was like in the desert.
DC I think the ones on the tank were the later version so it could be worse! Early Crusaders were very unreliable. They were built really fast to fill a shortage in materiel following Dunkirk, and then trying to play catch up with the current desert losses. This was also combined with a large part of the pre-war workforce being called up, not all factory work was protected.
fdsdh1 yes I watched David Fletchers video, he went into further detail on the poor reliability. Interestingly, they kept at with the tank, fitting side skirts, improving ammunition storage. A lot of funnies were built using the platform, anti aircraft, bridge layer, early crab. It will be interesting to see how he likes inside designed for 2 in the turret.
DC I don't think the design itself was bad, it's more that they needed tanks so desperately they built whatever was available as soon as it was available as quickly as possible. It's never a good combination of things when that happens. The original ones had a 3 man turret which is quite good, the 6pdr brought it down to two which wasn't ideal but could be worse. I reckon it would pass the tank is on fire test though because the rear hatch is huge and the driver just goes straight up. It's quite interesting that it probably would have made a good light tank in Europe 1944, however by that point the British army had moved away from light tanks (except lend lease ones) towards armoured cars for the role.
I have heard in multiple places/articles that "American English" is actually closer to English spoken in the 1600s - 1700s compared to the modern day 'British English" is. Apparently British accents have changed quite a lot of the years; comparatively, the typical American accent has changed very little. Thus in a way you could say Americans speak it more accurately. As for Aluminum vs Aluminium, the scientist couldn't make up his mind when naming the element. First Alumium in 1807, then Aluminum, and then he finally decided on Aluminium in 1812. So that the element sound similar to how other elements ended. With the -ium. Like Potassium and Sodium (also named by the same guy). Somehow the mid version ended up in the Merriam Webster dictionary that the American's used and final version ending up in the Oxford dictionary that the Brits use. Thus its easy to imagine journalists turning to their respective dictionary's in confirmation of the spelling, thus resulting in how the spelling/pronunciation was adopted by their respective countries.
The Moderator except it's not really true, only the East Coast of the USA and in isolated places has a more original accent, but this is also true of areas of the UK like parts of the South West. The USA had huge numbers of German immigrants, not to mention those areas of the USA formerly under Mexican/Spanish or French control, this changed the accents a lot.
The Moderator lol in some parts of the United States people talk almost exactly like people from Northern Ireland the accent is slightly different but the words an actual turn of phrase are nearly identical...shared history at its best.
Yeah, we heard about this guy's official discovery of this metal, said it was called "Aluminum", wrote that down in all the books and dictionaries and then got very confused when everyone in Europe started telling us we're saying it wrong. That's the spelling he gave us, dammit, we're not changing it! As for the more general issue, written language shifts FAR slower than the spoken. People start to shorten, alter, and slur words as time goes on but the spelling remains the same because....well......that's just how the word is "correctly" spelled, why change it? This is why written French is so baffling compared to how it's actually pronounced and why the Yanks and Brits spell things differently. Why does "Armour" have a U in British English? Well I'm sure it was more vital for how it was pronounced hundreds of years ago, but the language shifted since then and Americans take any opportunity they can to shorten spelling so we just cut that right out (I still cringe when I see "Drive *Thru*" though, that's just too far). In the Victorian era I believe the English made an effort to try and modernize the written language a bit to cut some of this linguistic inertia out, hence why you don't spell it "Shoppe" or "Olde" anymore in either language, but it was hardly complete and proper names and titles resist it. Gloucestershire, for example. You bastards don't even use a third of the letters in that word anymore!
I've just finished reading a book about 5 RTR through WW2. Very interesting read and it seems the Crusader was met with mixed reviews, great for recon and not bad firepower with the 6 pounder especialy once they were able to make an offensive push after Al elemain and spread out but it was unreliable like most early war British tanks. Most seemed to prefer using the Grant at the time
Chopper Meir Crusader was liked for its speed, low profile, long range - Lee/Grant for reliability and the 75mm - Crusader was disliked for the 2pdr and aux turret (both got rid off) and poor reliability (which did improve), the M3 medium was hated for its size, inability to go hull down. Both had good and bad points. Crusader got better, the Lee/Grant was stuck with its design - but it led to the excellent M4
Could the track tensioning equipment be the similar from this to the T-34 - because its a hold over from the original Christie design that they both carried over?
A couple of points - regarding the excessive workload of the tank commander in the Crusader III with a two man turret, that was why troop and squadron commanders in units equipped with the 6pdr versions of the Crusader and Valentine often retained a three man turreted 2pdr version of the tank. Not really fair to say at the end of Part 2 that it can only have been British pride that led to the Crusader III being produced; the Sherman was at that point not only an unknown quantity, but also not necessarily going to be available to the British in large enough numbers, quickly enough. After all, the Shermans used at Second Alamein had been very generously donated from US stocks, as a simpler, faster alternative to sending a US armoured division to join 8th Army.
All the M4s that went to the British were "donated from US stocks". Every single piece of Lend Lease equipment was officially US inventory "loaned" to the British.
I must ask, what's the story behind that "Rectified!" note on the inside of the engine compartment plate? Is that the date they restored the tank to running order or something?
Why is the front of the turret completely vertical? They sloped the front of the hull. What made them decide not to slope the turret? Was it a space-saving consideration? Making sure the barrel could elevate properly? Ease of manufacture? Or some other consideration?
Aluminum and Aluminium are both correct, Aluminum came first and the person responsible for naming the element decided to change the name following peer suggestions to maintain naming consistency with other elements of the time.
People complain about how difficult the overlapping roadwheel and torsion bar suspension of the Tigers and Panthers was to fix, but when compared to this it seems to be an improvement on every level (performance and fixability).
Nicholas Moran and David Fletcher really know their subject literally inside and out. I wonder how the Crusader did going up against the PzKpfw Mk. IV.
Considering there were barely any Pz 4s in Africa, and those that were there wouldn't be the L varient, not the J probably very well. This tank gets constantly shit on for it's early varients being mechanically poor. The crusader could destroy Pz3s at an equivalent range, was incredibly fast, and fairly accurate when firing on the move. Both tank Jesus and Chieftan do it a complete diservice by not talking around any of the nuances of the vehicle. They weren't designed with desert warfare in mind, so of course the air intakes wouldn't have been an issue in Europe, they were then of course fixed for later versions. Things that people just refuse to mention because lol British tanks bad
@The_Chieftain: given your personal exp & knowledge in what's possible, logistics & cost consciousness - how would you put together a serviceable modern MBT?
Nuffield's company had developed an engine for the Airspeed Oxford that promised much, although not for combat aircraft. The Chamberlain Government reacted in a panic to a newspaper's artificial outrage about profiteering by cutting the agreed price for the engine. Nuffield personally told the Government to stick it's contract where a monkey keeps it's nuts. He made sure an other company's engine would be available for the Oxford, but his own company's, better, engine died at that point.. This story is told in Neville Shute's autobiography; which also gives a chilling, first hand, description of the manslaughter (not his word) of the 48 people who were killed in the R101 airship crash. He worked for Vickers on the R100, which flew to Canada and back, and gives a frightening account of how pride, fear and stupidity sent the R101 off to India when it was not fit to leave the ground. Shute is so out of fashion that he's just a random name to most; but if you have even the vaguest interest in the 1920's and 30's then you really should read Slide Rule en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_Rule:_Autobiography_of_an_Engineer
That'll be the same Neville Shute who wrote the English language's bleakest and most miserable novel, _On the Beach_ ? Glad to hear he was also capable of writing a book that _doesn't_ make the reader want to end it all in hopeless despair. (Although, that said, those examples sound like pretty big downers too. :)
I know it's (probably) a universal phrase, but whenever I hear the phrase "What were they thinking?" I can't help thinking of the Nerd, and it gives me a giggle.
The Crusader which had spaced armor around the turret was retired from front line use before the Panzerfaust with it's HEAT warhead became common. I wonder if it would of protected Crusaders turrets?
Err... no. Humphry first named it "aluminum" in 1806, but by 1812 both he and the rest of the scientific world had adopted "aluminium" INCLUDING in the USA. Noah Webster confused the Septics with his 1828 "American Dictionary of the English Language". They haven't looked forward since.
Ah yes, let's take a box filled with ammo and fuel and have a tank (which is going to draw enemy fire) drag it into an active combat zone. That's a truly brilliant idea lol
there was HE available for both the 2pdr & the 6pdr, but not issued to tankers. The role of HE was considered the work of artillery, so the "towed" guns would have it available.
Don't know much about this tank. Ok, so it wasn't particularly reliable but how well did it fight? Sounds like it had some worthwhile attributes. Gad Zukes! The Liberty engine went back to WWI, where it was state of the art. Even with upgrades, I guess it was long in the tooth for WWII. Still, I guess it was what they had.
In africa it actually did fairly well, so long as noone was shooting at it. The 6 pounder was definitely good enough to deal with everything except Tigers, and the mobility was very useful considering the relative vastness of the desert. That said, due to the low weight restrictions it simply didnt have much upgrade potential like a Panzer IV, so beyond the Mk III there wasnt much to be done with upgrades (even the upgrade from a 2 to a 6 pounder required removal of a turret crewman), but a few conversions exist, mostly as artillery tractors (turret removed) or AA vehicles (Mk I with 40mm Bofors, Mk II with 2x 20mm Oerlikon autocannon, Mk III with 3x 20mm Oerlikon)
In the African theatre the Germans thought very highly of captured crusaders where it was known as Panzerkampfwagen Mk VI 746 (e). However it's biggest flaw wasn't reliability which although maligned was no worse than tanks like the Panzer III or IV. It was that no HE ammunition was issued to units using it or any other 6lber armed tank and this resulted in a switch to American tanks like the Sherman that had significantly inferior anti-tank capabilities than the 6lber which could take out a Tiger (Tiger 131 in Bovington was taken out by a 6lb armed Churchill) especially when in 1944 APDS ammo was issued for the 6lb gun during the Normandy campaign this ammunition allowed the gun to take out a Tiger or Panther frontally at over 2000 yards however the 75mm on the American tanks like the Sherman was infinitely better all around as a weapon as it could engage soft targets, as unlike in video games the vast majority of targets for a tank are not other tanks but infantry, artillery, bunkers and soft skinned vehicles etc and AP ammo is bloody useless in those situations and against these targets all the crusader had was a machine gun that simply doesn't cut it when you are up against an dug in AT gun
True, the lack of HE rounds was a big issue in all british tanks, but not specific to the Crusader (hence I neglected to mention it). However its pretty bad form to say the 6 pounder can take out a Tiger at over 2000m because it happened once due to an insane fluke shot. In truth, using APCBC, penetrating the Tigers armor (which is a much more practical measurement) is only possible up to 500m.
David Fletcher what a treasure and what a dry wit.
Carl Verigotta he is literally my favorite. I certainly hope I can make it to Bovington one day before he retires!
I can really say it too. In Tank Chats his videos are mandatory. :) He has a clear view of tanks and some really old time english irony in his summaries.
Of all the places to put that damned music, over top of David Fletcher has got to be the most egregious.
Hear! Hear!
Use less music, or add more variation to the music you do use. You make 20 min videos that use the same 45 second loop throughout.
I found the music to be rather pleasant, actually.
Oh yes, it is - the first dozen times you hear it.
Straight up, the music sucks.
@@kaistzar2831 I actually like the music track on chieftain's videos!
"..it is totally useless pulled or pushed in any direction!"
Priceless! xD
I have no idea why but I really like the Crusader. Probably just because it has such a sleek look for an early-war design. Riddled with design flaws but oh well.
Sexy design^^
I just love it's tracks, it looks so beautiful. And the back side, because it looks sporty.
That angular turret front.
Agree. I know this is largely a failure of a design, but I think it looks the part. Very handsome tank.
I'm a simple man, I see Chieftain or I see my favourite tank, I press like, this has both.
Crusader is best girl. I mean tank.
Stannum
Crusader is by far better looking than any girl ever could be.
Crusader is gay
Mr. Clean How about you Mr Clean that lying mouth of yours
The 3D scanning crew must be somewhere else in the Tank Museum and ordered by Chieftain to do "The Tank Is On Fire" drills on all the early war tanks.
RIP
This is a PG game. The realism of putting that in a game would disturb many of the teens that play...
@@T3hderk87 Really? That kind of thing disturbed you as a teen? I would have thought little pixel men screaming, crackling and crisping inside a tank was awesome..
@@b.elzebub9252 My teens were in the time of banana toss and lemmings, by the time this rolled around my mind was well and truly fortified as an adult... Also, fantastic necropost.
It does strike me as odd that when they noticed the problems with the engines getting clogged with sand and dust no-one thought to move the air intakes.
That's "military grade" for you
No need to do the fire test with this tank. The crusader could never catch fire. Britsh engenring at it's finest
I think he was being satirical. Crusader caught fire about as much as any other tank of the time.
Clearly German propaganda, such fine British engineering could never succumb to such a thing.
It did catch fire, but had a warm-tea safety sistem that took care of the fires by spraying warm tea and milk everywere
They did burn, but it was intentional, everyone in a company could heat their tea over one crusader.
Spot on, good chap! And, bloody hell, if it by some unfortunate event bloody did catch on fire, just put it out with your blooming pot of tea, what's all the fuss about? You are a BRITISH tanker, mind you, gosh darn it! Well, jolly good then, common, in the tank now, go on...
David Fletcher is the David Attenborough of tanks.
unarmoured box full of ammunition and fuel with no suspension towed behind your tank. Nope, can't see any problems with this design...
Ciara
I guess its better if the enemy hits your box then your tank
"A load penetrated my box"
But it was really handy for providing extra ammunition for farm tractors.
Some of those potatoes are really stubborn.
They were fighting Italian tanks mostly, they didn't need much.
Why is the background music always off in terms of volume? I don't mind the music itself, but I do mind it being too loud and interfering with the actual relevant stuff. Especially when to compensate, the volume of chief gets messed up with distorted and poor quality audio. :/
These videos are superb. Well done that man.
Thanks for all the uploads chieftain!
and yet the m1a2's air intake did the same thing in the desert... keep up the good work designers
Meanwhile, the Yugoslav M-84's in Kuwait's service: Problem? Trivago.
I am trying to say that they had no problems at all. I am fairly confident that if Yugoslavia had survived to the modern day and put the M-90 Vihor in service - Kuwait would throw money at it.
The way i read about the external air intake was that they ran out of space in the engine bay and had to mount them externally, thus the first of the two big issues with the Crusader was born
That 1 dislike is by the trailer
the second one is from David Fletcher because the video contains a Rotatrailer
No it's the 3d crew
So now its the whole crew and 2 poor lads who volunteered to help them detach the upside down rotatrailer with twisted rod))
Or people who are butthurt about the "aluminum" joke.
In all of my reading about D-DAY, I have never seen mention of Military Harvest Forces before today. It could easily have been a very dangerous occupation being tasked with bringing in the harvest after a battle front has moved through an area. Unexploded ordinance, booby traps, the dead, the wounded and stragglers, mine fields, bunkers, the list goes on.
nice video, the throwback to mr fletcher at thinktank on the rota-trailer is pure gold XD
Finally my favorite tank in the world gets an Inside the Chieftain's Hatch!!!
Not gonna lie
This is my favourite tank in War Thunder
It's super versatile even uptiered
Hold on, this isn't an Ambulance.
Foo-Foo Cuddlypoops
When do we get a fire truck?
I want to see an ambulance with a 2-pounder now. Clearly the 3/4-ton had that towing hitch on the back for a Rota-trailer.
Bit
Like that GI Joe truck that had the turret on it?
Bit now that is what you call a fire control group!
Been waiting for this one.
Thanks
The first time I ever laughed out loud, and at length, at a Chieftain video, was when I was suddenly struck by the implications of the positioning of the air intakes. There's something about bad design that I find hilarious.
I have waited for this episode for a very long time
i could gladly live in that museum and never be bored
Chieftain please please make a video on the cromwell not much is talked about it it's extremely underrated please
Always a pleasure to watch a vid from the chieftain. ;)
Great work as always
Ayyy it’s Rosehip’s tank :DDD
Spitfirefan1397 the matildas were better in my opinion
I cannot wait to see you in the drivers position, that armoured box does not look like it gives much room. A bit sadistic I know but it's the little things.
God but I love that tank. It is absolutely is my defining mental image for the 8th Army vs Rommel in the Western Desert.
The cruiser tanks were always the sleekest looking tanks...
_stares at Cruiser "Boxes On Boxes" Mark I_
...if you say so...
@@broadbandislife We do not speak of the Mk.I
Having recently been to bovington, it’s especially fascinating to watch this!
I have so been waiting for this one.
David Fletcher is brilliant. Shame he's retired. Love his satirical wit
4:52 **Add's fuel to the fire**
Ah got to love David Fletcher...funny and cool dude!
This is a very pretty tank.
Very beautiful tank
I'll tell you one thing, I was hoping he would feature this in a video and he did!
Who, The Chieftain? Jokes aside, I too am happy with a bit of David Fletcher.
You should do a video on the Covenanter tank!that would make an interesting video!!
Such an Iconic looking vehicle.
Looks a little bit small and cramped, but I guess thats the sacrifice if you want to keep a certain weight.
At least this would make a smaller taret then an M3 Medium.
David Fletcher in a Chieftan video? My body can only handle so much. Also, music was fine IMO. Only was too loud for like the last 10 seconds or so, I could hear Mr. Fletcher fine.
Also that 6 pounder has caused me much hurt in Warthunder. My poor Panzer III's can't take a glancing hit from one.
Sawed Off Laser they were actually chatting together at tankfest this year, you can imagine a crowd started to built up for that
@@wuppieigor All I can see is the crowd from ATLA with the guy foaming at the mouth while cheering.
David Fletcher is a bonafide treasure to Armor history and Bovington...
Good point on the air filter, did the guys in the Desert do their own modifications and move them? Looking forward to seeing the Chieftain getting into it, a repeat of the comet I anticipate, looks very tight god knows what it was like in the desert.
DC I think the ones on the tank were the later version so it could be worse!
Early Crusaders were very unreliable. They were built really fast to fill a shortage in materiel following Dunkirk, and then trying to play catch up with the current desert losses. This was also combined with a large part of the pre-war workforce being called up, not all factory work was protected.
fdsdh1 yes I watched David Fletchers video, he went into further detail on the poor reliability. Interestingly, they kept at with the tank, fitting side skirts, improving ammunition storage. A lot of funnies were built using the platform, anti aircraft, bridge layer, early crab. It will be interesting to see how he likes inside designed for 2 in the turret.
DC I don't think the design itself was bad, it's more that they needed tanks so desperately they built whatever was available as soon as it was available as quickly as possible. It's never a good combination of things when that happens. The original ones had a 3 man turret which is quite good, the 6pdr brought it down to two which wasn't ideal but could be worse. I reckon it would pass the tank is on fire test though because the rear hatch is huge and the driver just goes straight up.
It's quite interesting that it probably would have made a good light tank in Europe 1944, however by that point the British army had moved away from light tanks (except lend lease ones) towards armoured cars for the role.
I have heard in multiple places/articles that "American English" is actually closer to English spoken in the 1600s - 1700s compared to the modern day 'British English" is. Apparently British accents have changed quite a lot of the years; comparatively, the typical American accent has changed very little. Thus in a way you could say Americans speak it more accurately.
As for Aluminum vs Aluminium, the scientist couldn't make up his mind when naming the element. First Alumium in 1807, then Aluminum, and then he finally decided on Aluminium in 1812. So that the element sound similar to how other elements ended. With the -ium. Like Potassium and Sodium (also named by the same guy). Somehow the mid version ended up in the Merriam Webster dictionary that the American's used and final version ending up in the Oxford dictionary that the Brits use. Thus its easy to imagine journalists turning to their respective dictionary's in confirmation of the spelling, thus resulting in how the spelling/pronunciation was adopted by their respective countries.
The Moderator except it's not really true, only the East Coast of the USA and in isolated places has a more original accent, but this is also true of areas of the UK like parts of the South West. The USA had huge numbers of German immigrants, not to mention those areas of the USA formerly under Mexican/Spanish or French control, this changed the accents a lot.
The Moderator lol in some parts of the United States people talk almost exactly like people from Northern Ireland the accent is slightly different but the words an actual turn of phrase are nearly identical...shared history at its best.
Did those with the northern irish accent arrive in north america during the 1600's though or maybe as late as the 1900's?
Not much help as it is about a 19th century metal extracted from alum(ium) or alumin(ium)
Yeah, we heard about this guy's official discovery of this metal, said it was called "Aluminum", wrote that down in all the books and dictionaries and then got very confused when everyone in Europe started telling us we're saying it wrong. That's the spelling he gave us, dammit, we're not changing it!
As for the more general issue, written language shifts FAR slower than the spoken. People start to shorten, alter, and slur words as time goes on but the spelling remains the same because....well......that's just how the word is "correctly" spelled, why change it? This is why written French is so baffling compared to how it's actually pronounced and why the Yanks and Brits spell things differently. Why does "Armour" have a U in British English? Well I'm sure it was more vital for how it was pronounced hundreds of years ago, but the language shifted since then and Americans take any opportunity they can to shorten spelling so we just cut that right out (I still cringe when I see "Drive *Thru*" though, that's just too far). In the Victorian era I believe the English made an effort to try and modernize the written language a bit to cut some of this linguistic inertia out, hence why you don't spell it "Shoppe" or "Olde" anymore in either language, but it was hardly complete and proper names and titles resist it.
Gloucestershire, for example. You bastards don't even use a third of the letters in that word anymore!
An Art Deco tank! So pretty.
I've just finished reading a book about 5 RTR through WW2. Very interesting read and it seems the Crusader was met with mixed reviews, great for recon and not bad firepower with the 6 pounder especialy once they were able to make an offensive push after Al elemain and spread out but it was unreliable like most early war British tanks. Most seemed to prefer using the Grant at the time
Chopper Meir Crusader was liked for its speed, low profile, long range - Lee/Grant for reliability and the 75mm - Crusader was disliked for the 2pdr and aux turret (both got rid off) and poor reliability (which did improve), the M3 medium was hated for its size, inability to go hull down.
Both had good and bad points. Crusader got better, the Lee/Grant was stuck with its design - but it led to the excellent M4
I swear I was searching just yesterday to see if you had a Crusader video.
I came onto RUclips looking for something to fall asleep to - it can wait 13 minutes!
Could the track tensioning equipment be the similar from this to the T-34 - because its a hold over from the original Christie design that they both carried over?
A couple of points - regarding the excessive workload of the tank commander in the Crusader III with a two man turret, that was why troop and squadron commanders in units equipped with the 6pdr versions of the Crusader and Valentine often retained a three man turreted 2pdr version of the tank. Not really fair to say at the end of Part 2 that it can only have been British pride that led to the Crusader III being produced; the Sherman was at that point not only an unknown quantity, but also not necessarily going to be available to the British in large enough numbers, quickly enough. After all, the Shermans used at Second Alamein had been very generously donated from US stocks, as a simpler, faster alternative to sending a US armoured division to join 8th Army.
All the M4s that went to the British were "donated from US stocks". Every single piece of Lend Lease equipment was officially US inventory "loaned" to the British.
Any video that contains David Fletcher's facial hair is vastly improved.
I needed this comment.
about time lad
I'm taking off the speed limiter!
All we need now is a Cheiftain video on the T95 the mighty doom turtle
Please do inside the Type 95 Ha-Go. I know they have one in Bovington. Possibly the only Japanese tank in entire museum?
Sealed because it's full of asbestos.
I must ask, what's the story behind that "Rectified!" note on the inside of the engine compartment plate? Is that the date they restored the tank to running order or something?
ask the Pearsons
Yeah! I want to know, too. when I "rectified" my car, I did so by recktifing it into a pole. I don't want to save the date of that....
Lorin Wingtips I am sure that your insurance company will be asking you repeatedly about that date, better get used to it.
Why is the front of the turret completely vertical? They sloped the front of the hull. What made them decide not to slope the turret? Was it a space-saving consideration? Making sure the barrel could elevate properly? Ease of manufacture? Or some other consideration?
Praise the lord and pass the ammo, chieftain’s got a new video up. Get the popcorn goin ma!
The M-60 series of tanks had their air cleaners with two blower motors similarly mounted on their rear fenders.
Please get rid of the music.
NWBackcountry drives everyone insane
Not me.
Miss darjeeling's precious tea will go cold!
Aluminum and Aluminium are both correct, Aluminum came first and the person responsible for naming the element decided to change the name following peer suggestions to maintain naming consistency with other elements of the time.
People complain about how difficult the overlapping roadwheel and torsion bar suspension of the Tigers and Panthers was to fix, but when compared to this it seems to be an improvement on every level (performance and fixability).
You do not have to deal with the springs near as often as you have to deal with road wheels. In the balance the Tiger was a bigger pain.
The springs also don't get frozen solid together in Russian winter...
If one Tank can be called cruiser tank , it's the Crusader. this tank just looks sleek.
You would have thought that all those rivets on this tank would be enough in the way of dots for the scanning crew.
Hahahahaha! David Fletcher is just awesome!
Bren Gun Carrier + any variants you can find in one video?
I am not disappointed
Nicholas Moran and David Fletcher really know their subject literally inside and out. I wonder how the Crusader did going up against the PzKpfw Mk. IV.
Considering there were barely any Pz 4s in Africa, and those that were there wouldn't be the L varient, not the J probably very well. This tank gets constantly shit on for it's early varients being mechanically poor.
The crusader could destroy Pz3s at an equivalent range, was incredibly fast, and fairly accurate when firing on the move.
Both tank Jesus and Chieftan do it a complete diservice by not talking around any of the nuances of the vehicle. They weren't designed with desert warfare in mind, so of course the air intakes wouldn't have been an issue in Europe, they were then of course fixed for later versions. Things that people just refuse to mention because lol British tanks bad
I'd like to know of why they are scanning it.
Those look more like bolts than rivets. or is the armor plate just bolted over the interior structure?
@The_Chieftain: given your personal exp & knowledge in what's possible, logistics & cost consciousness - how would you put together a serviceable modern MBT?
Nuffield's company had developed an engine for the Airspeed Oxford that promised much, although not for combat aircraft. The Chamberlain Government reacted in a panic to a newspaper's artificial outrage about profiteering by cutting the agreed price for the engine. Nuffield personally told the Government to stick it's contract where a monkey keeps it's nuts. He made sure an other company's engine would be available for the Oxford, but his own company's, better, engine died at that point..
This story is told in Neville Shute's autobiography; which also gives a chilling, first hand, description of the manslaughter (not his word) of the 48 people who were killed in the R101 airship crash. He worked for Vickers on the R100, which flew to Canada and back, and gives a frightening account of how pride, fear and stupidity sent the R101 off to India when it was not fit to leave the ground.
Shute is so out of fashion that he's just a random name to most; but if you have even the vaguest interest in the 1920's and 30's then you really should read Slide Rule
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slide_Rule:_Autobiography_of_an_Engineer
That'll be the same Neville Shute who wrote the English language's bleakest and most miserable novel, _On the Beach_ ? Glad to hear he was also capable of writing a book that _doesn't_ make the reader want to end it all in hopeless despair. (Although, that said, those examples sound like pretty big downers too. :)
I know it's (probably) a universal phrase, but whenever I hear the phrase "What were they thinking?" I can't help thinking of the Nerd, and it gives me a giggle.
4:25.. Just in case he is feeling particularly courageous.. Lol
8:00 The Liberty was a WW One aircraft engine.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_L-12
9:23 Pershing and T-34-85, nice :)
Crusader is one of those tanks that looks so cool, you wish it was better than it actually was so you can game with it.
4:14 my face when the cheiftan uploads a new video
funny thing, they had the same problem with airintakes and filters on challenger 2
Slick little tank .
On the inside of the engine compartment hatch: The Pearsons January 2000?
The Crusader which had spaced armor around the turret was retired from front line use before the Panzerfaust with it's HEAT warhead became common. I wonder if it would of protected Crusaders turrets?
They had Gewehrpanzergranate from 1942 on
i'm dying with the story of the trailer, oh my god this british engineering
I said it once and ill say it again; Gentleman and a scholar
Can you repost parts 1 & 2 as a complete film without the music?
3D scanning? Does that mean some one is doing this for a new tooled Crusader model? Tamiya 1/16th full option??
Great vid just shows how brave those tank crews where having to take crap like that to war.
Well, it was that or the joys of being infantry.
I need part 2 fast. Put a rolls royce meteor behind it.
xTheRealKestrelx oh hell yes! Wish i could tweak WoT that way
It's got spots.
Time to see a doctor for that.
The Rota-trailer makes selling a well designed fuel trailer hard to do.
Err... no. Humphry first named it "aluminum" in 1806, but by 1812 both he and the rest of the scientific world had adopted "aluminium" INCLUDING in the USA. Noah Webster confused the Septics with his 1828 "American Dictionary of the English Language". They haven't looked forward since.
What are the white spots all over the exterior - is that paint or something else?
one of the best looking tanks
Quick list of the crusaders faults.
Ah yes, let's take a box filled with ammo and fuel and have a tank (which is going to draw enemy fire) drag it into an active combat zone. That's a truly brilliant idea lol
Did the 6 pounder have a HE shell or was it also like the 2 pounder - given only solid shot?
there was HE available for both the 2pdr & the 6pdr, but not issued to tankers. The role of HE was considered the work of artillery, so the "towed" guns would have it available.
Don't know much about this tank. Ok, so it wasn't particularly reliable but how well did it fight? Sounds like it had some worthwhile attributes. Gad Zukes! The Liberty engine went back to WWI, where it was state of the art. Even with upgrades, I guess it was long in the tooth for WWII. Still, I guess it was what they had.
Apart from reliability, the British tactics of the time resulted in heavy losses.
the first part of this shows a bit more info on the covanater and crusader
ruclips.net/video/smOUVWQRTDo/видео.html
In africa it actually did fairly well, so long as noone was shooting at it. The 6 pounder was definitely good enough to deal with everything except Tigers, and the mobility was very useful considering the relative vastness of the desert. That said, due to the low weight restrictions it simply didnt have much upgrade potential like a Panzer IV, so beyond the Mk III there wasnt much to be done with upgrades (even the upgrade from a 2 to a 6 pounder required removal of a turret crewman), but a few conversions exist, mostly as artillery tractors (turret removed) or AA vehicles (Mk I with 40mm Bofors, Mk II with 2x 20mm Oerlikon autocannon, Mk III with 3x 20mm Oerlikon)
In the African theatre the Germans thought very highly of captured crusaders where it was known as Panzerkampfwagen Mk VI 746 (e). However it's biggest flaw wasn't reliability which although maligned was no worse than tanks like the Panzer III or IV. It was that no HE ammunition was issued to units using it or any other 6lber armed tank and this resulted in a switch to American tanks like the Sherman that had significantly inferior anti-tank capabilities than the 6lber which could take out a Tiger (Tiger 131 in Bovington was taken out by a 6lb armed Churchill) especially when in 1944 APDS ammo was issued for the 6lb gun during the Normandy campaign this ammunition allowed the gun to take out a Tiger or Panther frontally at over 2000 yards however the 75mm on the American tanks like the Sherman was infinitely better all around as a weapon as it could engage soft targets, as unlike in video games the vast majority of targets for a tank are not other tanks but infantry, artillery, bunkers and soft skinned vehicles etc and AP ammo is bloody useless in those situations and against these targets all the crusader had was a machine gun that simply doesn't cut it when you are up against an dug in AT gun
True, the lack of HE rounds was a big issue in all british tanks, but not specific to the Crusader (hence I neglected to mention it).
However its pretty bad form to say the 6 pounder can take out a Tiger at over 2000m because it happened once due to an insane fluke shot. In truth, using APCBC, penetrating the Tigers armor (which is a much more practical measurement) is only possible up to 500m.