That is good

Thats basic

Talk about the good old days.

Cobblestones 1 Tank 0

Didn't do so well on the pebble beaches of Dieppe either.

Dieppe was a diversion for the real reason for the raid which was further upstream on the estuary. It was never meant to succeed - it was all to do with getting some code documents. Google it. Hidden history.

...well, it did after all look like something out of WW1! 🙄

100% agree , Black Prince it’s power to weight ratio aside , is phenomenal looking.

All it would of took is a year earlier release and a more powerful engine and it would of definitely seen service/combat... Imagine faster packs of them driving around during 1944...!? Would of been a beast.

And it was so slow that you'll have plenty of time to appreciate the looks as you walk alongside it

Not just the width, but the way the front tracks are slightly lower than the normal Churchill. It's asthetically a very good looking tank. The Black Prince with a Meteor engine would have been fantastic.

Must say the "Black Prince is a handsome beast" but dunno why i do think the british tanks in the mid - later part of ww2 looked ace. if you asked a 5 year old to draw a tank would look like a churchill/valetine .. yes yes ok a Tiger/panther as well ;-)

Definitely marks a step change in quality for the mixed media format. Chris is a first class presenter and the resources available to the Tank Museum are unparalleled so looking forward to further instalments.

exactly what i was thinking, well said.

Thank you!

Well said.

Great story!

Lindybeige has a video on the "most effective weapon of ww2" and made a very compelling case for Crocodiles being the answer.

Seen it & its brilliant. 😊

@@kylelantan9220 Lindybeige is an idiot when it comes to anything that isn't medieval.

More like this please love this type of video instead of some bloke stud next to it talking

As the Churchill supported infantry I support this video.

Fantastic.

Fantastic video - again. So great to hear Chris doing the presentation.

Gentlemen, whenever you say “we haven’t got time to..” it makes me wish you actually did do long form content. Like twice a year do a deep dive on one particular tank. If c&rsenal can do hour long videos on ww1 small arms, you could certainly make an hour long video of a tank be just as engaging and informative.

Or tiny peebles that rolled under the tracks plus a sea wall just to tall to be climbed the later one inspiring german fortification designs

There seems to be an enduring myth that the Churchills that landed simply dug themselves straight into the shingle and sat there, but it's recorded that a number of the tanks made it off the beach, either being disabled, or returning to the beach to support the infantry after being unable to progress into the town due to roadblocks. Ultimately they were more capable of getting off the beach than the poor bloody Canadian infantry were.

It is called shingle

To be honest nearly everything gets stuck on shingles, you need huge flotation to cross it. Just think of the gravel traps at race tracks.

This invites the question as to why wasn't this brought up during planning? Was the beach composition not noticed during planning?

they cant handle making a low tier British tank good

​@@Imp-mq1beYeah they should make it burn uncontrollably when you hit the white phosphorus smoke grenade racks in the turret.

@@tankolad I can see 75mm/88mm Smoke shells (also Phosphorous) being a lot more dangerous than the smoke grenades... Do not open a door if you don't like what is behind it.

@@tankolad that would be a funny mechanic tbh similar to how the leo 2 cooks off when you hit its ready rack

The Churchill is good in WT tho​@@Imp-mq1be

The front mudguards could be deformed by the blast of the main gun, and the mid sections, if damaged in battle, could jam the turret.

Apparently in the winter snow and ice would jam the turret so they would remove the middle sections of the mudguards.

I suppose it would be more accurate to say "They were a godsend for their intended purpose but the rigors of battle made them a real pain."

Common in the military around the world, the Men always think they know better mainly because they learn things during real combat that the engineers could only assume or speculate. It persists to this day. If Governments ever actually let combat vets design some of this stuff it would be far more useful reliable.

Maybe those mudguards were more useful in the sandy North African deserts than in muddy Europe. Those high tracks probably could kick up huge sand storms without some kind of covering over them.

Yeah man, and before anyone say "but muh 88", remember: the Churchills where plenty and used in many operations theaters, the tigers were used In many too, but had one small problemd:quantity

Unfortunately, there weren't enough churchills available in Normandy, so shermans were used in the infantry role. The M4 wasn't suitable, and took heavy losses as a result.

The Cromwell, however, was the absolutely perfect compliment as it was so fast as to dispense with inconvenient things like gravity when needed.

@@afs101 What?

@@petermuller3995 He means that Cromwells can sometimes leave the ground like rally cars.

"It's a glorified WW1 tank!" is always a funny ciricism coming from people who probably stan tanks that couldn't make it down the road without breaking down "HANS! ZE TRANSMISSION BROKE!" and all that

15mph is faster than you can run wearing fighting order. Or more precisely - you won't outrun it when it comes after you.

Little bit like the charge scene at the end of Monty Python and the holy grail!

Whats even more surprising was Of particluar interest, on 10th April fire from Churchills BESAs successfully downed a Messerschmitt 110 - the first (and possibly the only) occasion that fire from turret mounted guns had accomplished this feat. The pilot baled out landing almost on top of one of 'B' Squadron's tanks of the North Irish Horse

@@zoiders Average walking pace with no kit on the road - 4 MPH, so 15MPH across country when you are encumbered with all your kit is fast

There's always one.

I'll take that as a compliment 😁@@animalyze7120

The manufacturers had teams with the units issued with Churchills to immediately identify and rectify issues as found, these were then changed on the production vehicles and retro fitted to those in Units - this helped fix the issues much faster.

Photographs of german troops show the same expression. Even towards the end of the war. Soldiers are soldiers. Only the uniforms change.

Yep, you are right, in the end they were all fighting to survive

The cousins just wanted to hang out together. Where better than the back of a Churchill? Bet they even had time to stop of to play a bit of baseball / cricket - well a bats a bat.... But I will bet a tenner when it came down to food everyone went American.

@@Boric78 I'm down with ya on the food 😂 been to the UK 🇬🇧 absolutely love it and the people too, but we couldn't even find a decent fish and chips. Now of course we're biased, my wife is a Kiwi 🇳🇿 once you've had good New Zealand tucker like fish and chips, sausage rolls, and meat pies nothing else can compare!

@@philo6850 God Bless the Kiwi's - some of gods children those. Friends with many. Good in a fight too.

Thanks!

someone give it a blanket🥺

I suppose funding would be hard to come by. Imagine the running costs of such a huge museum.

Mr. Willey has already answered that question with a very diplomatic: As a museum it is our mission to preserve and restore every object entrusted to us eventually. You can interpret that as: After everything else AND after we've bought the workshop guys a new espresso machine and re-gritted the kitty litter.

Thanks!

Great stuff! Thank you!

One can wonder how the Churchill would've performed had it received the Meteor or another more powerful engine instead.

@@Arthion Part of its success was the very low gearing and high torque with the Bedford engine - this complimented the small road wheels Fitting a meteor may be a bit too much of a power increase for the transmission and road wheel arrangement - a more powerful engine would have been better 400 to 450 maybe rather than double to 700

Ugliest tank of the war.

Could Churchill withstand being hit by an 88 mm armor-piercing shell?

The Churchill's in North Africa were the Mark III or earlier variants. The heaviest armored area of the Mk III was its hull front which was about 100mm thick. The German 88 Flak could just about penetrate 100 mm vertical armor plate at 1km. So the Churchill's were not immune to the 88's in North Africa in normal combat distances but they certainly survived a lot better than the Crusader, Valentine, Matilda and Sherman.

Thank you!

Of 30 tanks due to land - 27 got on shore (2 drowned in 8 foot and 10 foot of water and one landing craft had bow damage preventing 1 from being disembarked so went back to UK) - of the 27 landed dryshod 15 made it onto the promenade where the Sappers were unable to clear the obstacles so 10 returned to the beach to give fire support and protection to the infantry (one on promenade was disabled by shell to track, one fell into an underground bunker, one hit by "Stuka"), the remaining 2 were destroyed by the crews using "Sticky Bombs" 6 Tracks broken by shellfire 4 Tracks broken by Chert build up (one after returning to the beach from the promenade) 1 Track broken unknown 1 bogged down (grounded) There was no tank of the day that could have coped as well as the Churchills did

@@retiredbore378Well said.

@@retiredbore378 Only prototype parts used were Mk 1 OKE flamethrower tanks (3 of them) and a couple of tanks with an early version of track laying (both broke) The Tanks were mostly standard Mk III with a few MK II and MK I

Thanks for the feedback!

You summed up the Churchills appearance quite nicely, that WW1 style track, like the French Char B1 Bis of the interwar design period.

Thank you for watching!

Thanks for the feedback!

Thanks!

A pity the panic in 1940 was so persuasive and so the 6 pdr which was due to enter service in late 1940 was stopped to produce more 2pdrs (which at the time were still effective), pushing the 6pdr back a year and the 17pdr back to 1942 (its design was started in 1940)

Height and the military mind never seem to meet for some odd reason. I served in the South African Armoured Corps in 1989/90, and of the two leadership squadrons based on our height, the tall guys of B Squadron went into the tiny 'Noddy car' commonly known as the Eland 90. Us shorter chaps in D Squadron were tankers... the old, but great, Centurion tanks. Seeing those tall blokes getting in and out of the Noddy car was hilarious, as well as seeing the crew commander sticking up out of the turret hatch and ducking to avoid low hanging branches.

@@robert-trading-as-Bob69 post-war Mike was deployed to India during the Partition strife, in 'Dingo' Scout Cars. It must of looked like he was commanding a shoe on roller skates.

@@johncartwright8154 That's it exactly! During the Driving and Maintenance course, a turret-less Eland was used, so it looked even worse than normal... one day my mate Grant was under instruction, and the single bolt holding the steering wheel came loose and fell off... he couldn't get the car under prooer control without the wheel, and tried to tell the Crew Commander. There was no comms in that stripped hull though, so Grant waved the steering wheel through the drivers hatch to explain why he wasn't turning away from the building directly in front of them... The Crew Commander was either young a young man named Pocock or Landsman, the two tallest recruits on the base, who had to duck going through doors. He looked like the mast of a ship standing there, frozen in disbelief as the warehouse wall got closer. Good memories... Can you imagine how the British Universal, or Bren, Carrier would look with really tall troops trying to occupy it? Those vehicles have dividing compartments all over the place, in fact I'm surprised they even fit a driver in there!

Infantry Tank is a stupid idea. That said Churchill did what it was supposed to.

@@ABrit-bt6ce ,,,, as an Infantry Tank,,,?

@@keithskelhorne3993 Doesn't move faster than you can walk. F* idiots.

@@ABrit-bt6ce All nations had their own infantry tank/Support vehicle - The Russians was the T26, Germans had the StuG III (with the Panzer IV to support tanks), Italians CV 33/35 - just as a couple of examples You need to understand the doctrine and use of the vehicles in each nation - The British would have been better with a good dual purpose gun on the Churchill from the start

Thanks!

the 6pdr was better at short range, the 75mm was better and longer range (due to the weight of the projectile).

@@chaz8758 Although the 6pdr. had a muzzle velocity of 2,600 - 2,950 fps, with the 75mm of 2,030 fps for A/P it depends much on the situation at the time of engagement.

another panzer chud

If i remember correctly the tiget wasn't knocked out, the gun traverse was jammed by the shell, and the tiger's crew abandoned it

How well did it work without its crew?@@saynomoreification

It was one of a group of Churchills engaging 131, but yes. One miracle shot ricocheted down the underside of the barrel and went straight into the driver's compartment, killing the driver and cleanly disabling the tank. The crew of 131 were forced to abandon their otherwise intact vehicle, and the rest is history.

@@86pp73 I’ve never heard of that, what’s the source? I’ve only ever heard about it’s turret being jammed up. She doesn’t show any battle damage over her drivers hatch from what I’ve seen, and you can still see the shrapnel marks in her turret and turret basket.

@@stuglife5514 There is a patch over the damage to the drivers hatch area - the damage can still be seen inside the drivers/co drivers area)

Thanks!

Thank you!

Compared to not being able to more across that ground at all - any speed is great speed - The Churchill had much better mobility and manoeuvrability - which people often mix up with speed

Thank you so much for your feedback!

Thanks for the feedback!

About whom are you speaking? I didn’t see anyone with a particularly aberrant head.

Thank you!

Great work, thanks for your efforts.

Super - glad you enjoyed your day!