Facebook: Friends of the Tank Museum

[Techno II]

Sorry...I know you lot know I'm a complete 'historical' ignoramous, (Which I'm genuinely NOT proud of).....

But in that photo...The staff car ? (half way downish, on the left hand side of the pic) looks like it could hold a lot more men than some of those tanks/tankettes ?

Must have been horrendous to be in one of those 'wee tanks'.

Cheers - Astounded of Wales

[toxicpixie]

Yep, two men crammed into the Matilda I.

I did have a set of schematics somewhere that had the crew sketched in.

I am not a tall man, but I wouldn't want to drive one...

That's the Tilly II. The "big boys" version

[fsn]

Excellent photo . Do you know by any chance when the photo was taken? I've used the Vickers Medium in my AVBCW games and Operation Sealion. Pretty useless to be honest but looks cool and needs must and all that.

I don't know ... I'd guess 1938 or 39? Certainly no later than 1940.

[fsn]

But in that photo...The staff car ? (half way downish, on the left hand side of the pic) looks like it could hold a lot more men than some of those tanks/tankettes ?

Two men only. 

[fred.]

That is a small tank! The turret has to be rotated to allow the driver's hatch to open!

You do have to wonder about inter-war tank design...

[toxicpixie]

No one had a clue, requirements for actual war were rather hazy, funding was... limited, technology was basic and unrefined, what was needed for the rather euphemistic "colonial policing" or "security" differs from what was needed in a full on at tier equivilent war, etc etc.

All the bits were there but it took a rather hotter crucible to forge it together and produce Centurion.

[steve_holmes_11]

That is a small tank! The turret has to be rotated to allow the driver's hatch to open!

You do have to wonder about inter-war tank design...

With out hindsight, most look like Tracks and a machinegun fitted onto Noddy's car.

[steve_holmes_11]

No one had a clue, requirements for actual war were rather hazy, funding was... limited, technology was basic and unrefined, what was needed for the rather euphemistic "colonial policing" or "security" differs from what was needed in a full on at tier equivilent war, etc etc.

All the bits were there but it took a rather hotter crucible to forge it together and produce Centurion.

More hindsight.

It's all very well to sit here 80 years later and claim that the Somua, BT-5, Panzer II, Japanese Type 95 or L6/40 are complete pants.
But almost any tank's a good tank with a bit of elan, and when the enemy have only  a few big rifles to oppose you.

Witness Italy in Abysynnia, Japan in Malaya, Germany in Poland, France, Netherlands, Belgium.

[toxicpixie]

Very true, and application of the correct soft factors goes a very long way.

Technically British and French tanks were much "better" than the opposition (guns, armour) but all the soft things were lacking. Reversed in the late war, although the quality of everything was far better.

And tanks are seldom built for the military needs alone, as much as they're political creatures and bought for politico-economic factors (witness the British Army & Abrams versus Chally I/Shir, or the Soviet T-64/72/80 "competing" design bureau politics).

[fsn]

There were a lot of factors that went into tank design. The Italians were self-limited by their bridges, the British by their rail gauge. The Chieftain makes a point that the most important feature of the Sherman was the eyebolts that allowed the tanks to be lifted by cranes onto ships.

That plus the economic factors, the philosophy of armoured use and industrial capacity all affect tank design.   

The cute little Matilda I was there to provide the infantry tanks with an anti-machine gun capacity. In short, it is a mobile Vickers gun. So being slow and small didn't matter, but having thick armour was beneficial.

Similarly early Pz IV were just support tanks with a short barrelled howitzer, and the Pz III was meant to fight other tanks.

[fsn]

We managed to get the M3 Lee back into the museum yesterday and that's made room for us to start on the M3a1 Stuart in the workshops. Never a dull moment.
Www.armourgeddon.co.uk

Could someone explain the priapic M3?  That 75mm looks to be twice as long as it ought to be!

[Techno II]

I don't know what they should really look like......

But if those have been 'poshed up'........what a storming job !

Cheers - Phil.

[Raider4]

Could someone explain the priapic M3?   That 75mm looks to be twice as long as it ought to be!

Two versions of the US 75mm fitted to the M3 Medium tank - the M2 (31 calibers) and the longer M3 (40 calibers). The M3 was also used on the M4 Medium tank.

And . . .

The Americans don't make it easy, do they. There's at least an M3 Medium tank, an M3 gun, an M3 Light tank and an M3 Half-track that I can name right off the bat.

[toxicpixie]

M3 White Scout Car also

Did you mean the M3 submachine gun, the M3 37mm gun or the M3 75mm gun?

Happy to help

[paulr]

...
Could someone explain the priapic M3?  That 75mm looks to be twice as long as it ought to be!

I suspect they used a wide angle lens that distorts most at the edges...

Perhaps they have elevated it to stop people walking into it

[steve_holmes_11]

We managed to get the M3 Lee back into the museum yesterday and that's made room for us to start on the M3a1 Stuart in the workshops. Never a dull moment.
Www.armourgeddon.co.uk

Could someone explain the priapic M3?  That 75mm looks to be twice as long as it ought to be!

Is it  just "pleased to see you", or masquerading as a dalek.

[hammurabi70]

Is it a command tank dummy gun?

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Does look rather too long though.

[toxicpixie]

I think it's a panoramic lense - look at the back of the kubelwagon stretching...

[steve_holmes_11]

Does look rather too long though.

Maaaat-ron!