This channel is the drachinifel of amoured vehicles

@dougstubbs9637

Жыл бұрын

Drachinifel is the Seaweed Sucker, Anchor Wanker of Armoured Archives…..only joking Drach…

@byz2482

Жыл бұрын

Agreed, and one hell of a compliment.

@blankblank4642

Жыл бұрын

I'll subscribe then, cheers.

@samholdsworth420

Жыл бұрын

Drachs a sellout lol. JAYKAY

@lifeindetale

Жыл бұрын

Really?

Here is a like just for the mango reference 🙂

The fact that that armored car escaped from 15 fighters might tell us something about how effective ground attack aircraft really were.

@tompiper9276

Жыл бұрын

It tells us a lot about driver motivation!!!

@basbass429

9 ай бұрын

Most tiger tanks were destroyed by airplanes, since the sherman tanks and the t-34 did not stand a change at all against a tiger. Having complete control of the sky's saved many, many allied solders their live.

@thr335ix7

4 ай бұрын

@@basbass429loud incorrect buzzer noise. Both the T34 and Sherman could reliably take out the Tiger. Real life isn’t warthunder.

@basbass429

4 ай бұрын

​@@thr335ix7 Hi Troll, have a nice day.

@thr335ix7

4 ай бұрын

@@basbass429 troll? Partner I’m someone with common sense. If the Nazi machines were so damn good, why is it that they lost.

A note on the stealthiness for a reconnaissance vehicle, and a general point on reccie. There is actually an argument that as this was a heavy reconnaissance vehicle with decent mobility, its intended role may have been in reconnaissance by force. By that I mean, a tough vehicle with decent speed and mobility that can quickly run ahead into unknown situations, get some information by lightly engaging or being engaged, and then scampering back with an idea of what's ahead to inform the main group and develop a plan. In this scenario, it being big isn't actually that much of an issue, as it's not designed to be stealthy but rather to be able to resist what can see it in order to gain information about it. It's of note, that never in any of the reports are its size or lack of concealment stated as an issue. You could consider it a skirmisher, instead of a pure scout, even if the roles often have crossover and both are often used as either. But, tbh, there is no real reason why you'd need a dedicated vehicle for that, instead of just using the light tanks and mediums you already have.

@bigblue6917

Жыл бұрын

It is perfectly feasible that reconnaissance by force was something they had in mind when the Boarhound was proposed. But military thinking on the subject was ever changing until experience filled in the blanks on the guesswork and they worked out what they did need. And what they decided was that they did not need was the Boarhound.

@havoc3742

Жыл бұрын

so, the Panzer IIJ approach? Reconnaissance by Volume of Fire?

@michaelmulligan0

Жыл бұрын

Or a more flexible Recce vehicle In other words more capable of other armoured cavalry / light cavalry roles

@pluemas

Жыл бұрын

@@havoc3742 not quite, Britain toyed with the idea of recce by force but isn't normally a fan of it. It's considered the last possible option in getting information on the enemy. Our idea of recce by force is not to go to a position and engage the enemy and then hold while other forces approach to reinforce. Instead it is to go and kick the hornets nest and try and draw out a counter attack, which is then lured into a prepared force. Britain differed in this because we didn't believe that recce by force should actually hang around and engage, which is not how other forces do it (for god sake american recce units have Abrams in them). Instead, our recce by force is more like a standard recce, and then we also have a stealth recce that aims to not fire a shot at all. We believed that recce units should have enough firepower that they can thoroughly suppress anything that finds them while they get the hell out of dodge, and heavy recce units were simply an implementation of that idea but trading increased likelihood of detection for increased survivability. Both were expected to pull back, but heavy units were more suited to areas where it was harder to hide (and so needed better survivability) and lighter units were more suited to areas with better ability to hide. British doctrine believes that you categorically do not attack something you have no intelligence on. Whereas German doctrine was to attack and use overwhelming force to overrun a position if they received contact. This was exploited by Monty in the desert, who set up hold out positions that effectively acted as recce by force, and would engage the Germans when they moved in. The Germans would then swoop in on them, but the actual quick reaction forces of the British would be informed and start pushing in from the sides instead. This negated the main advantage of the Germans 88s, allowed the British to have a very deep but very wide defence, and allowed the British to use their superior numbers to deny the Germans the possibility to focus their force into a breakthrough. These days we still basically follow this doctrine, and have basically split into two forms. Every regiment has a recce battalion or element (depending on size). They are either Armoured/Mechanised Recce (like the 1st grenadier guards) and use very small AFVs with 4 man crews; or they are light infantry recce (like the pathfinders) that travel very light and are almost entirely composed of artillery spotters, FACs, snipers and electronic warfare types. Both have the same kinda methods, which is to sneak up to areas that might have enemy and observe during the early morning and day then maneuver to another location at night. They're not equipped to actually stand and fight the enemy, and travel light but with heavy firepower. This is so that if they stumble into a small enemy force, they can unleash a massive amount of suppression and then retreat before the enemy can launch a coordinated attack. if you ever see a British military jeep crammed absolutely full with a comical amount of machine guns and rocket launchers, that's why (have a look at our Jackals and WMIKs). Their role is to get enough information that the main force can prepare and surprise the enemy. They often don't actually join in the attack, and instead stay in position and call in support (artillery, CAS, etc) or move to cut off retreating units or to monitor for reinforcements.

@Cragified

Жыл бұрын

During the second World War towards the end the M18 was often attached to the mechanized cav to give them significant firepower when they ran into the enemy. Your job might be to find the enemy and then break contact in theory. But in reality you might be tasked to try to pin down or harass an enemy so other forces can arrive or the enemy may simply not allow you to break contact.

Oh God....I literally started to shake when I saw this video pop up. I've got such a love of an 8X8 armored military vehicle but the Boarhound holds such a special place in my heart. Absolutely fantastic and thank you so much for making it. Plus that name is just so cool.

@Oddball_E8

Жыл бұрын

I have it in War Thunder. It's great fun. But if you don't already have it already, it's not easy to get in the game. It's sometimes up for sale on the marketplace, but it'll be hella expensive.

@admiraltiberius1989

Жыл бұрын

@@Oddball_E8 i used to have a Boarhound die-cast toy(?) as a kid in the 90s. No idea the manufacturer or what happened to it. But I remember that shape became a favorite of mine.

@PatGilliland

Жыл бұрын

@@admiraltiberius1989 Look at the Die Waffen Kammer site in the after 45 allied section. They do a 1/56 Boarhound in resin.

@admiraltiberius1989

Жыл бұрын

@@PatGilliland thank you very much

Imagine Boarhound with the T77E1 AA turret. Six fifty cals . . . "It's just overkill . . ."

i always liked the look of the boarhound - thanks for this illuminating vid, ed!

The T19 Medium Armored car also runs in parallel with the T18 T17 and T17E1.

loved that blackadder reference :)

Love the Blackadder reference.

I have a plea I make to several military channels. When mentioning a 3 pounder or 6 pounder gun, *please* give the barrel diameter in inches or millimeters, especially at the first mention. The rest of the world who use metric manage to deal with inches in militaria, and we Americans begrudgingly manage with metric for militaria, but *nobody* in the world has used the nominal weight of a lead ball for barrel size for a couple of centuries. There are common reference points in everyday life to compare inches and millimeters, but of course no such thing for "pounders." OK, I appreciate you did convert it once late in the video. But I'm keeping my eye on you!

@Simon_Nonymous

Жыл бұрын

It's a reasonable point. These terms were what the British military called the guns at the time they were in use, which lasted until about 1959 when the UK went into millimetres with the L7. I would suggest it is a proper reference point, commonly used and well understood by those discussing British guns and armour. It wasn't based on the old Napoleonic lead ball system, but the weight of the solid shot for each weapon when in service, so I would debate it is an archaic term. However - as you say a quick mention of the bore size won't hurt anyone. For reference: 2 pdr = 40mm, 3 pdr = 47mm 6 pdr = 57mm, 17 pdr = 76.2mm, 20 pdr = 84mm, 25 pdr = 88.8mm - I think that's all of the common ones anyway! EDIT - I forgot the 32 pdr on the Tortoise - 94mm.

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

yup i will try to do so more, growing up with these they coem as second nature, but will try to add in mm where possible, less so inches as tbh its even more achaic :P - there are a lot of 'pounders' the UK had at least 15 different callibres and counting

@Simon_Nonymous

Жыл бұрын

@@armouredarchives8867 nice one - I'm in the same boat as you, I take it for granted that people know our quaint customs and can work in both metric and Imperial without thinking about it. 🙂

Well done man!!! You've earned a pint of larger from me with this program!

Great content, thank you. I love the detail and history.

There were several armored cars that almost made it into service. The Wolf hound was a 6 wheeled armored car that was pretty futuristic for the time frame. And of course the staghound which surprisingly although being a great armored car, never served in the US Army. Majority of these designs died out in the latter stages of WW2 or because of the end of the war. Too bad...would have been fun to see the t18e2 in actual service.

A very well researched and presented video well done!

This is all new to me , very good topic and coverage , thank you.

Another superbly researched and presented video. Thank you!

This was another very intersting Video. Amazing how many different designs they had and to be reminded of capacity/availability problems which killed some of them. Which is quite usefull for todays discussions on a modern Lend Lease program going on.

Phenomenal video, thoroughly educational

Superb Ed have to watch a few times.

Wonderfully educational.

It's my personal dream to see the one in Bovington restored and brought back to life. I would teach myself how to be a mechanic if I had to so I could do it myself

7:16)The REO was also an auto.Ransom Eli Olds owned the REO truck company.

So, im way late to the party here, commenting on a year-old video, but i have a bit of a pedantic point of order when it comes to wheel count naming. In the standard format of (a)x(b) for naming wheeled vehicles, (a) refers to the number of wheels fitted, while (b) refers to the number of driven wheels, so the SARC Mk V, for example, wouldn't be an 8x8, but actually an 8x4. Anyway, i still enjoy the videos and appreciate the effort put into researching producing them, in spite of my OCD.

Yup, very interesting as always, hey I'm a stickler for 'tyres' many pictures show the tyres the wrong way round, the 'V' of the tyre should face forwards and down into the ground,,,, just a bit of info...

Would be interesting to see a video on the development of the SARC's, specifically the Mk1, 2, 3 and 4 variants which saw service.

@Militaryheritage

Жыл бұрын

Hang bal

@ashleybevis9769

Жыл бұрын

Think they even have a variant in the Johannesburg military museum next to the zoo

Excellent, interesting content as always and like Drachinifel…strangely calming.

Awesome I’ve always liked the British armoured cars !

Very interesting as usual.

had never even heard of this till now what an interesting vehicle.

Great video - thanks

Excellent video. I never knew about the Canadian Wolf Armoured Car.

The History Guy with the Tank Museum has just released his "Bottom 5 Tanks". His number 3 was the T18 Boarhound! Interesting look! It is covered in a very thick layer of dust!

@hammer1349

Жыл бұрын

Been in the conservation hall for probably a number of years now so the dust is no surprise

This clearly shows that Peter Beale was bang on at how incompetent the British decisionmakers were at deciding things. And while they fluffed around crews were getting killed and injured.

Excellent work! Subscribed.

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard!

Interesting stuff - I would bet £10 that there was only one in the UK, the Victory Parade photos seem very similar in this like the tow wire stowage on the front of the hull for instance. EDIT And pretty sure it's the same serial number

@hammer1349

Жыл бұрын

Pretty sure it is at the Bovington tank museum in the restoration centre

There's still one over here, I've seen it in the background of pictures at Ft. Benning I think. And....the US's use of M1 is only slightly less precise as the UK's use of MkI. It isn't much help unless you have the rest of the nomenclature. If you say "Combat Car M1", you won't confuse it with "Scout Car M1" or "Halftrack M1".

Thanks for this👍🇳🇿

3:36 Blackadder reference. LOL

Excellent!

Good stuff! I especially always wondered about the SARCs and well now I understand a bit better. It is weird the intense interest in them to start with and then it quickly fading by the time they get them. Maybe it was because of the larger open plains of the desert being better suited for it as it was fast? I do realize guns were getting a lot bigger around that time as well. But the designs they were offered weren't too unlike the German versions.

Back in the late 70's I was TDY at Aberdeen Proving Grounds and the had one at the ordinance center museum I don't know if it's still around but I understand that most of the armor and artillery are at Benning or Knox

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

they are indeed and in very good hands

This is a great candidate for a model.

The Chieftan did a short on this vehicle #7, here's the link: kzread.info/dash/bejne/Z6x9w9Sim6a1eKQ.html As far as I know, the Brits Got the Staghound T-17 from the US, about 1000 total. And it was big, it was not near the size of the T18. The US opted to use their M18 Greyhounds and forgo both the T-17 and T18.

Also the boar hound and those other 8x8 vehicles in the vid, to me, looked promising to redesign for modern standards I mean they're big enough as platforms for Anti-Aircraft roles as well as ground support roles. As for the original role of recon armored car for modern use? Not a chance

Excellent history of boarhound hope they fix up the last one

Looks like something we need today. Lol

Brit tank and AC design was also hampered by Brit pre-war import bans for large displacement petrol engines ( displacement volume based tax ).

My father who was an experienced reconnaissance corps officer in the European theatre in WW2 always said that what rec ops needed was a fast light weight vehicle, and that a ‘fast tank’ was totallly inappropriate. He thought that the Daimler scout car was was perfect…

An interesting vehicle

Rather interesting that in the era of tracked tanks, the wheeled armored fighting vehicles are coming back into the doctrine

Great video! The automatic transmissions sound really sophisticated for the 1940s, how reliable would they have been? Also, could it have been able to limp back to a repair depot or lager on one engine

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

the boarhound could work on one engine at lower speeds etc. - but that trans and engines were found to be pernickity, with issues that occured but were very hard to diagnose easily

The US Board of Review ruled that no AC over 14k Ibs weight was to be produced - that ended the T18E2. UK rec'd 30 of the ACs under construction. UK had initiated its development in 1942 for use in desert war but that requirement fell away in 1943.

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

no as said we wanted an 8x8 before Africa. the bid question is where did the other hulls go as so far only the one vehicle crops up in photos

@alanjack7524

Жыл бұрын

@@armouredarchives8867 The info I gave came from a book published in 1980 by Ian V Hogg and John Weeks. They stated that the British Army had been impressed by use of German 8x8 in North Africa and had requested the US to co-operate in design of an 8x8 early in 1942.. The 30 shipped to GB were used in tests and trials. I would venture to suggest that most would have ended their days as gunnery targets.

As far as I know there is a rusting boardhound carcass sitting outside of the dutch tank museum in overloon

Thank you. Always a pain to find reliable data on an ‘essentially’ failed project.

I bet Blackadder would cheerfully step aside if anyone attacked General Melchett with a sharpened mango. Thanks for all the research. Were the external fuel tanks connected to the fuel system in any way? Idk if a design could allow a quick jettison if hit.

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

i do not beleive so, from the FVDD trials, when one strap broek they fell off

Is there a video specifically about the history and development of APCs? Which is considered the first?

HoarBound? Wait, ..No That's Right~!!!

Wondering if you are aware of the Australian Rhino heavy armoured car and if yes would you consider making a video on it if you could get enough on it?

Yellow Cab co. The civilian transporter service used the Canadian company Checker's Sedan-perhaps the best built automobile of its time. I would've asked them first.

@willthorson4543

Жыл бұрын

Why? They weren't making things to the level the US companies were. It's amazing how many companies switched from civilian infrastructure to military. And having a reliable taxi has no bearing on making and designing armored cars. Canada didn't have the infrastructure to design and build huge armored cars.

@gryph01

Жыл бұрын

@@willthorson4543 Train manufacturing companies in Canada switched over quickly. One company produced Grizzly tanks (modified version of the Sherman). Production was stopped because there was adequate capacity in the U.S. The Ram tank was designed and built in Canada. The Ram was never used in combat. They were used for training though. The Ram hulls were modified to become APC's Self Propelled gun platforms and engineering vehicles.

So in reality the only successful 8 wheeled armoured car is the French Panhard EBR, where they built over 1100 of them between 1951 and 1960. There is one on display at the artillery barracks in Draguignan, which I drive past regularly. It has 4 wheels with pneumatic tyres and 4 cleated steel wheels, held out of contact with the road and for traction assistance over rough ground. Some of them had a very large but low pressure 90mm gun, maybe the largest gun ever mounted in a wheeled AFV.

@armouredarchives8867

Жыл бұрын

the french have a long history of makiggn good wheeled vehicles tbh. tho gun wise there were bigger, 105, is not uncommon, 120 is some and ever 125 in a few today

Boar hound sounds like an animal from Avatar the last Airbender

Does anyone know if any of the maintenance manuels still exist anywhere? I dream of seeing that one at Bovington restored to running order

Give the Boarhound a 57mm and it would've been fine .Just enough AT and HE capability to keep the enemy on their toe , so that the Boarhound can break contact and withdraw from their skirmish.

Are those 4 x Bren Mk1 on a single AA Mount?

I was Not Borehounded. Thank You for the very interesting video. But You Failed to mention how soon I can order up one of these in British Racing Green at My Local Range Rover Dealer? My Credit Score is Good.

I have read on the internet (so take this with a grain of salt) that some Boarhounds were employed for convoy protection use behind the front lines by the British.

@hammer1349

Жыл бұрын

As far as I'm aware, that's the only service they saw. I imagine generally because they were generally poorly rated for combat

Might've made a decent "Kangaroo" style APC. As far as "stealthy" goes, we all love the PSW 234; another ach rad design. It wasn't very stealthy, either, I think. Puma and Boarhound are synonymous stealth-wise in my view.

@seanmalloy7249

Жыл бұрын

The photos of the SARC VI and the SARC VII look as if they're taking considerable inspiration from the SdKfz 234 series, just looking at the hull shape.

3:40: BAAAAAAHHHHH!!!

You sound exactly like the Rev Simon Sideways, just saying

The constantly floating away goalposts and even worse, the Yanks not bothering to finish the orders they were given (even when they already had the parts in stock and a production line sort-of going), seems to be the fate of many collaborations with them.

@willthorson4543

Жыл бұрын

Slow it down there. The same time this was going on, the US designed the staghound which served with the British military. And last time I checked, how much stuff was being designed and made in the US during the war? Then add in manufacturing. Hell, the p51 went from a question to flying in way less than a year. As to the armoured car? That was all up to the British war dept or did you not hear hear that? From changing armament to turret and then having up to 50 ready and your own people never doing anything to get it out to the troops. It's like a cliched broken record with you guys...always finding something to bitch about the US. Never fails.

Needs an ex- Crusader turret really, with a 75mm gun, just to be complete.

@captiannemo1587

Жыл бұрын

Just install the 75mm version of the 6 pdr and it slides right in.

Was the hull of the MK VI intentionally copied from the German 8 wheeler?

Isn't it a 4x4 (or 2x2x2x2), not an 8x8? Or am I missing something? (Subtitle on the still).

@hammer1349

Жыл бұрын

I think it still counts as an 8x8 as all 8 wheels have drive despite only 4 wheels having steering. Admittedly, I'm not so clear on it myself so take it at that

T18 BALL Hound? Voice to text sabotage. Got a laugh.

Must be the name. Didn't work out for an aero engine either. As to the 37mm. Apparently an M8 Greyhound took out a Tiger l with its 37mm by shooting it in fine Oddball fashion. Multiple shots in the ass.

3:08 An M8 still managed to knock out a Tiger, albeit from point-blank range.

@reform-revolution

Жыл бұрын

I thought that was a myth?

@calessel3139

Жыл бұрын

Unfortunately that turned out to be a myth. It's likely that the greyhound in question probably K/O'd a Pzkpfw-IV and misidentified it as a Tiger. The Tank Encyclopedia actually produced an extensively detailed video on the topic (link below). kzread.info/dash/bejne/YomGuq6qeLCbdbA.html

Poor cavalry, not allowed to have tanks like the infantry. All they could have were "combat cars." 😉

Doesn’t look unlike the German Luchs Recce vehicle

Did we ever capture any Schwerer Panzerspähwagens? And if so why not just clone them?

@mattbowden4996

Жыл бұрын

The SARC mk VI seen in this video is very clearly rocking a German armoured car inspired faceted hull design.

@clangerbasher

Жыл бұрын

@@mattbowden4996 Thank you. 😀

@clangerbasher

Жыл бұрын

@Tired of War Thanks!

@sultanbev

Жыл бұрын

It is known that individual British & Commonwealth units used captured AB41 and Sdkfz 221/222 in North Africa on occasion, but not on a scale to completely outfit whole platoons or companies. Don't think I've seen a record of the bigger 8x8 Sdkfz 231 series being used though.

@clangerbasher

Жыл бұрын

@@sultanbev Thanks. :)

3:16: *"colonial chums"* What better way to say it

Imagine if they had got into service a year earlier.

@richjeakins88

Жыл бұрын

Well the British army placed an order of 2500 initially. Until they actually received them an then realised that they were over priced, under armed and useless at going cross country. Only 27 made it into the 8th army in Africa. They never saw heavy combat and weren't used for recon, they were only used in static defense positions or in escort duties.

@ptonpc

Жыл бұрын

@@richjeakins88 Yes, I know.

If I were rich enough to own a tank privately, I'd rather get an armored car to drive around in on my estate!

I won't say great stuff because it is an obvious thing on this channel. But I have a question. Can anyone please explain to me why the hell these wheeled armored cars had such a thin tires? If there was no technology (I'm sure it was available), you could place extra second pair of wheels on each axis that seems overloaded. The axis caused car immobility in the mud. Tracks used to be widened if needed. Pz III and IV in easttern front. M4 on the west. Why no one does this for 4x4 and 6x6? The obvious thing, Polish armored cars were utilizing it before WWII. It fixes the need to design new 8x8 construction.

@richarda996

Жыл бұрын

Most officers in the military did not get out in the rain and especially mud, thus had no experience.

Well to me the military and their choices about tanks got people killed, but that was ok because they weren't important people. To only think of a tank as troop support in WWII was criminal. So remember this poor people when this country goes to war again. Only the important people get the best. Besides let's have no more rich mans war and the poor mans fight. Let the rich fight for their money.

What is your source for Britain paying for anything after Lend Lease was approved March 41? "First and foremost, they note that they have written off the main body of Lend-Lease, amounting to something of the order of £4,000,000,000 to £5,000,000,000 net" 16 to 20 billion USD below 678 Hansard ANGLO-AMERICAN FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS HL Deb 17 December 1945

@nickdanger3802

Жыл бұрын

"As stated in the second paragraph of the Report on Mutual Aid published in November, 1943 (Cmd. 6483), we had, up to that date, spent some £1,500,000,000 (6 billion USD, ND) in the United States since the outbreak of war on supplies of all kinds. The greater part of this expenditure was incurred in connection with contracts placed before the application of the Lend-Lease Act." Hansard British War Purchases, U.S.A. HC Deb 14 December 1944