He is just talking about male tank curves, totally normal.

@bushsbakedbaby1374

5 ай бұрын

Nothing wrong with admiring a males curves

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

GIY.

@scottjurrjens8954

5 ай бұрын

​@@bushsbakedbaby1374just like David.

@CGM_68

5 ай бұрын

From the IWM website: "The two types of vehicles were to work in pairs, one destroyer tank and one man-killing tank. The half armed with the 6-pounder guns, which seemed more phallic, became known as male tanks and their machine-gun toting partners became female tanks."

@craigevans6156

5 ай бұрын

He’s just reverting to his feminine side 😂

I always looked at this design as a way to more easily cross trenches, nothing more. That just made sense in my head as a kid, when I first saw British tanks like the Mark IV or the MK VIII in Indiana Jones. Didn't think at all about ground pressure, steering with tracks, or how much of it was actually touching the ground. Kid me was just thinking, "well, if you stop moving one track, the other track will turn it, easy."

@BurtonShotton

5 ай бұрын

Indiana Jones tank was really a mock up built on the basis of an excavator. I always thought it was a WWI British tank as well until I saw a video on it. If you're familiar with what excavator tracks look like, you see it right away once it's pointed out to you.

@ODST_Parker

5 ай бұрын

@@BurtonShotton I know it's not actually a Mk VIII tank, but that's the model it's based on, if I'm remembering correctly. Then they added a turret to the design.

@SirLoinBeefsteak

5 ай бұрын

There is no “Indiana jones tank”

@SirLoinBeefsteak

5 ай бұрын

😂

@rigormortiz5357

4 ай бұрын

​@@SirLoinBeefsteak lol nice b8 m8

Video subject is interesting, but more than anything, I'm blown away to learn there's a combat vet WWI tank still intact and wearing its original paint.

@SearTrip

5 ай бұрын

There’s more than one in that museum in Brussels. And their WWI artillery collection is even more impressive.

@wmason1961

5 ай бұрын

It's hard to believe that the metal was not recycled in WWII.

@Klovaneer

5 ай бұрын

@@wmason1961 tank armor is very hard to work with - melt or cut or whatever, easier to leave obsolete tanks as monuments

@silverjohn6037

5 ай бұрын

@@wmason1961 If it had been tungsten, brass or aluminum it probably would have but iron wasn't that rare.

as kid i had this explained to me by an old guy. he had joined the british army in the late 20s and worked on tanks till his demob in 1945. even as a kid i could see this was a very elegant solution to the problem. but the enthusiasm of this crumpled up old man of 70 plus years. really why it stuck in my mind.

@DrBunnyMedicinal

5 ай бұрын

Man, isn't it GREAT when someone both very knowledgeable and enthusiastic about a topic sets the throttle to full and let's you know ALL about their favourite subject? Ahh, I find myself slightly jealous of your experience now. Such luck!

The Chieftain is happiest when we is talking tracks.... he is a Tanker.

The first Mark Is had two wheels behind the tank that would act like a rudder to improve steering. But many of them were destroyed in combat and didn't affect the steering at all so subsequent tanks were built without them

@cjwrench07

5 ай бұрын

I remember reading that too. They really did see these as “Land Battleships.”

@captiannemo1587

5 ай бұрын

Not intended for steering.

@AsbestosMuffins

5 ай бұрын

they did cover this on the recent deep dive on the Tank Museum's site. the rear wheels were more required when cresting hills or crossing trenches, in theory it helped the tank change its balance point, though ya they just improved the steering system dramatically and didn't need it in the end

@Maus5000

5 ай бұрын

The new "Tanks at Flers" by Pigeon and Pope has a great little appendix giving detailed instructions on how a Mark I was driven. It's a common myth that the tail by itself increased the trench crossing ability, but as you allude to, it was a complicated system affecting the tank's balance point. Simply approaching a trench with the tail in the 'down' position, the springs forcing the tail against the ground would lever the tank's nose forward prematurely and actually lessen the trench crossing ability. A complicated procedure of raising and lowering the tail to take advantage of this lever effect was necessary to cross extra-wide gaps @@AsbestosMuffins

@womble321

5 ай бұрын

​@@AsbestosMuffinsdue to the curve at the bottom it would rock, the springs on that tail also helped to damp out the rocking. That Shape was very clever indeed as mud etc couldn't jam up the tracks either and on hard surfaces it could turn even with such a low power engine.

"Very easy to steer" as long as any one of the 4 people doing it hadn't passed out

This shows a great deal more cleverness to this design than I would previiusly grant

It is interesting how late "trench crossers" like T-35, Independent and TOG had reversed the angle/position of the rear sprocket putting it up while earlier "romboid" tanks had it down to better push against vertical wall of a trench for climbing out.

WOAAH! A Mark IV veteran still in its original paint? What a gorgeous beast!

The same physics work for snowmobiles. Longer tracked sleds (usually used in deep snow in the mountains as there's more track surface to spread out the weight) don't steer well because the skis are trying to drag a long length of track sideways across the snow. Trail sleds have short tracks so they steer well on groomed trails but are likely to get stuck powder.

It's interesting how old school vehicles dealt with issues like this. For example the Model T had thin tires compared to modern vehicles which meant that they'd dig into the dirt more easily but, if they did get stuck, it also meant they were easier to pull out. Which, in the days when your "tow truck" was mostly likely going to be a team of horses, was the important consideration.

It is funny, but the Rhombohedral design with those wrap-around tracks, and the protected suspension ( and the sponson guns/MG's) was "optimal" for the thick wire obstacles and trenches of WWI. A modern day MBT would never have made across "No-Man's Land". I say that from having driven an original M1/XM1 ,in Ft. Polk , for a year. I luved challenges of terrain and obstacles, and got an ARCOM for driving. I had a bad-ass tank, but I can say with certainty, my tank "Death Machine -serial number 0054" could not have driven across "No-mans land" with those 10' high 20' thick barbed wire obstacles or cross deep trenches , like those old "Mothers" . Plus they carried a "Fascine" to fill a really deep trench. I stand in awe, that a 100hp tank could go through chit , that I could not go through with a 1500hp tank😎. I have seen M-1's stopped by 1 roll of Constantino, or a simple 3 strand barbed wire fence. Those WW1/MkIV tanks could roll over mountains of wire and trenches I would not phuck with, in the "bestest" M-1.- -------------------------------- *Also I "sorta" researched the ground pressure of the M1 compared to Mk IV , even asked the AI/chat bot, about it. End result , the UK MK IV of WWI had 13 psi compared to the US M-1 at 15 psi. Take it for what it is worth as to crossing "soft ground".

@HellecticMojo

5 ай бұрын

FT Polk? Yeesh

@chrisperrien7055

5 ай бұрын

@@HellecticMojo "Oye Como Va?, Ja! , Ft. Polk is a swamp." Gotta luv Santana 😎 I saw them In West Berlin. Drivin' a tank.😎

@nightshade4873

5 ай бұрын

100hp but hell of alot of torque and probably greater surface patch as it sinks into the soft ground.

That is something I've never known. THANK YOU!

Interesting. My point of reference would be caterpillar-style tracked farm and construction vehicles of that era. They seemed to have moved along a significantly different path of development, but I never thought much as to why. Vehicle size and speed certainly played a role, as did maneuverability.

"There's only one tank who would dare give me the raspberry. LODESTAR!"

Love WWI tanks! So industrial and kinda steampunk-ish - also love that it has its original 100+ year-old paint :)

@alexturnbackthearmy1907

5 ай бұрын

No wondering here, they were literally tractor-based. If only tracked trains received just as much love...such an interesting things with nothing known.

That’s really interesting and smart considering how early in the grand scheme of things this was. Still got the advantages of tracks with the surface area once it starts to ‘settle’ into softer ground. But for manoeuvring you’ve got the mobility of the small surface area

A very clever and elegant solution.

I would've chalked that curve up to an optical illusion if you didn't point it out.

I didn't know this about these tanks. Brilliant. Thank you for this. ☮

That is very informative as heck.

Super interesting, thank you for that!

Clear and to the point. TY. 👍

Merry Christmas & have a happy & safe New Years Chieftan!

I'm pretty sure the Chieftain is building a killdozer in his garage.

That is pretty amazing! I never realized this before! Thank you for sharing

Wow, I learned something. Thank you

Short but sweet...And informative. Thank you.

Ok, first real comment here it seems! Very cool, albeit short video about the track curvature of the Mark series rhomboid tanks! I had semi-noticed this in Gmod when toying around with a Mark V and driving it around! Thanks for the explanation, and I hope you have a great night!

Thanks! Totally makes sense and is kind of genius, there was a lot of thought in these early designs.

Great video, and I love the Blackhorse apparel! Much Allons to you!

Cool!

I believe the 'tank curve' is a carry over from an extreme design by the RN and is basically the quadrant of a 60 foot diameter wheel.

@AsbestosMuffins

5 ай бұрын

no I think they tested on Little Willie the various track lengths they could get away with, they tested quite a lot of the pieces of the later tanks on that and Mother before being put into serial production

@allanfoster6965

5 ай бұрын

@AsbestosMuffins i wasn't on about the tracks as was on about the 'touch point' as it were.

The curve on the top of the tank helps to keep the track snug and stops it from slapping around - my opinion

Good talk.

in boat design its called rocker

@andrewflindall9048

5 ай бұрын

They were landships, after all...

Early tank development for design and doctrine is interesting.

That's clever!

The science of tanks. Just when you thought you were up to snuff The Chieftain goes back to WWI to show you how and why it’s done.

Neat.

OMG I've stood at the exact same spot! I've shared the same coordinates as The Chieftain. 🤓

Half of me was expecting you to give the end of it a good shove and move it slightly!

I've seen tank tracks many times and it always amazed me how they'd only be a few centimeters down even in soft soil I do love how much the tracks lend to the tanks designs and abilites

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

Look at the mud in Ukraine. Try to make sentences.

@Klovaneer

5 ай бұрын

@@kiereluurs1243 yeah western autobahn tracks aren't feeling so good there

Using geometry instead of complexity to solve a problem. I like it.

reminiscent of lift axles on heavy trucks, though simpler and less flexible.

Huh, yeah, that's an elegant solution. I think Lindybeige has a video where he talks about how there are practical limits to the ratio of width to length, but I can't find it. Searching for it, I see that you and him did a video in 2017.

I wonder how practical it was in the end? Also if so I wonder if hydropnuematics could emulate this in some way to turn more easily, especially in the context of certain roads that don't enjoy 60+ ton tanks doing a neutral turn on them.

Damn, I was expecting a lengthy video

Those engineers were smart cookies.

What about the carriage wheel thing they had on the back of some of them?

Hockey skates. Originally a flat, tube-blade. Then in the 70/80’s a rocker blade. Less contact easier turning equaled more mobility.

Most importantly, the Mark I was the first tank to accommodate the sloped armor. According to the Chieftain, that is. Why you may ask? Take a shoe box and look at it at 45 degree angle. There you have it - a sloped armor from all directions !!! Merry Christmas everybody.

Interesting! I wish there were more tanks and planes with their originl paint on them.

So this tank has scoliosis

and that's why first tanks were parallelograms

Simple and fail resistant solution. Briliant.

[flatearther]i see no curvature[/flatearther]

The 18 years old conscripts inside were probably thrilled thinking about that, while slowly suffocating due to carbon monoxide poisoning

I thought the curved tracks are to plough through mud better. Steering didn't cross my mind.

wasn't the shape intended to follow the curve of a 60' diameter wheel?

That's not a tank, it's a landship (lol)

okay. so what about churchill. what was that like to steer?

Huh, neat.

Its a mobile rocking chair

So if the tank had more and more track in contact when on soft ground wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of designing it to have a short length in contact in the first place? Especially as they were intended to be used on the churned up mud of no man’s land.

@minuteman4199

5 ай бұрын

Trade offs. If you have sunk so far into the mud that you can't get out, the ability to steer is no longer a concern.

@dwaneanderson8039

5 ай бұрын

The reason it's hard to turn a tracked vehicle is because the track in front of the midpoint has to slide sideways in the direction you're turning, while the track behind the midpoint slides in the opposite direction. The midpoint doesn't have to slide sideways at all, so it has the least resistance to turning. So you want the midpoint to be lower and supporting more weight and the ends higher and supporting less weight. That makes it easier for the ends to slide sideways. On soft ground where it sinks in a bit, it still helps to have the ends higher so they can slide sideways without having to push as much dirt out of the way.

Did mud/soft ground affect the ability to turn?

@deptusmechanikus7362

5 ай бұрын

yesnt

@Stuka87

5 ай бұрын

It did. But, not sinking was more important that being able to sharply turn. As typically if they were in very soft terrain like that, it meant they were crossing no-mans land and straight ahead was mostly the only way to go.

@LadyAnuB

5 ай бұрын

@@Stuka87 Moving forward to avoid artillery is a good idea

Het koninklijk militair museum

I understood there was not a original first world war tank in the UK . And the one they had at the museum was a copy made for a film. Interestingly I have read there are 21 original ones in Russia . Which must be a story in it's own right.

Lol 😆

No-no-no, not 'my' solution. I wasn't born then. English.

Like all good women, the more curves the better.

If a female tank sauntered by he would need to get clear quickly or it might get messy..

But how do we know the tank identifies as male?? LOL

20th, 28 December 2023

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

30th!!

5th?

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

30th!!

For mine, it’s an insult to call these ‘male’. An object which has such frontal protrusions, and large proboscis, alluring to buttocks, screams Beyonce, not Kitchner. Although, it has been rumoured that Kitchner battled for the other team. Could it be that the sexual orientation of the Mk. Series of Rhomboidal Armoured Fighting Vehicles can be called into question ? Could it be on the ‘small m’ male tanks, the grenade mesh cover was really a top knot ? Did the crew’s rations include soy latte and smashed avocado on toast ? Was the anti shrapnel steel visor face just the latest Bolle’ of the Day ? Should the Tank Museum restore the FV4007 to answer these questions ? Can Mr. Hewes answer these questions ? I’m only asking questions. Don’t attack me. Cheers.

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

GIY.

first?

A Male ?? Did you just assume this tanks Gender ? 🤣🤣

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

GIY.

First

@stevebarnes2

5 ай бұрын

So?

@kiereluurs1243

5 ай бұрын

30th!!