Comments: 10
plovestrains [2015-12-13 04:57:38 +0000 UTC]
wheres the blue one?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
SIERRA-116 [2015-01-05 03:46:51 +0000 UTC]
A lot of US tanks in there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cyklus07 In reply to SIERRA-116 [2015-01-05 13:50:19 +0000 UTC]
well out of 37 tanks 4 of them are US built, most were modified and some were dubbed "Hobarts Funnies" after Major General Percy Hobart who came up with the first concepts of specialist vehicles. The MKVIII International tank or Liberty tank was designed by Britain and the US and France were given licences to build them. But for the most part, they are British. Out of the M3 Grant/Lee came the Sexton SPG, the Kangaroo and some Canadian built modified M4s but never saw action. The Sherman VC Firefly is another modification. These US made tanks were given to RAC regiments whilst the infantry got what was left. The reason being the obsolete tanks that landed in France in 1939 were not adequate to take on Panzer IIIs. A lot of tanks were left on the beaches of Dunkirk 1940.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
GibOilPlox [2014-09-29 23:40:53 +0000 UTC]
Awesome! This shows British Pride to anyone living in the UK.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Enrico1946 [2014-03-01 05:32:37 +0000 UTC]
I thought the MK8 was US tank?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Cyklus07 In reply to Enrico1946 [2014-03-01 09:47:18 +0000 UTC]
It was built under license.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cyklus07 In reply to Enrico1946 [2014-03-01 09:39:03 +0000 UTC]
Nope built in France, a little later it was produced in the US and it was designed in Britain, the first tank to be exported internationally (hence the term "International tank"). It was meant to equip France, Britain and the US. The US dubbed it "Liberty" because of the US tanks had the L-12 Liberty aero piston engine, the British MkVIIIs had the Ricardo V-12 engines. The British dubbed it the "international tank" and France called it Char2. It never saw action because when Vickers developed the "Independent" A1E1 with 1 large central turret and its 4 smaller machine gun turrets (I know it sounds crazy and it looks it too). Designs fell in favour towards a singular turret. The A1E1 was the first step in that direction. In 1940, Canada didn't even have a tank force so Britain handed some MkVIIIs over to train on. The MkVIII was a product of lessons learnt after 1918. Things were to develop faster from that point. The British did most of the research into armour and armoured warfare. Heinz Wilhelm Guderian was heavily Influenced by the British on theory of armoured warfare. They were Major General J. F. C. Fuller and theorist Sir Basil Liddell-Hart (who was an English Soldier). Germany watched and took notes on the technology, thats partly why they managed to get ahead of us. But they never saw "Hobart's funnies" coming lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cyklus07 In reply to Enrico1946 [2014-03-01 14:16:34 +0000 UTC]
Well by this I mean from the A1E1. The US studied the tanks that were built form them and eventually came up with the M2 Stuart as a short term answer. Also the Vickers MkI/II came out of the A1E1 because of the turret but Britain was going through financial strains so had to make do updated and modified MkI/II right into 1940. Thats where we learnt a very harsh lesson about armour. Not the fault of the British Army itself, but the fault of the Treasury. We had the money to modify and upgrade what we had but never a new tank. So when the MkVI/A/B or C tanks came up against Pz. IIIs, our armour had it. in 1940 and the great retreat of Dunkirk was a bitter lesson learnt. The British vowed to never fall behind again. When 1945 came around, the Centurion even surpassed the King Tiger.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Cyklus07 In reply to Enrico1946 [2014-03-01 14:05:51 +0000 UTC]
Well the US wasn't really into interfering with other affairs at the time. The US only sent 10,000 troops to the Western Front in WW1. The US did make the Holt Gas Electric tank, kind of the US's answer to "little Willie". But from this came the Vickers Mki/II and the M2 Stuart.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0