Chieftain's Q&A #7

all right the December QA not too many questions this time since we've been a bit of a shorter gap after the last Q&A which is delayed in November I'm also taking the Christmas period off more or less so there could be a two-week gap in between this video and the next one as ever the patrons get the priority on the questions and I've taken a few from YouTube comments but before starting I feel myself compelled to return to the matter of headgear now I had thought I was done with the matter of cavalry headgear after the last video but a recent release over on a certain firearms channel has put out some false information I'll feel obliged to fix now I mentioned it briefly in the Irish army weapons video but this is the Irish Glengarry not Tam it may technically be actually more for Kabini but we call it a gray Gary so then Gary it is in the Irish military it is worn only by Cavalier men and reserve officers and the difference between the two is that Reserve Officers have a green band and ribbons whilst cavalry ones are black now I've had it explained to me that the black is a sign of mourning given that Michael Collins the head of the Irish Army at the time was killed whilst under a cavalry escort now I'm not actually sure how true that connection is it could just be a legend or coincidence but it's a reasonable enough argument to me Regular Army AKA permanent defence forces have a red square backing to the cap patch reservists like I was do not so to correctly shape your Glenn in note that the left side is indented inwards behind the cap badge and the right side is brought down in a manner similar to a beret so it's worn kind of like this the first thing you need to do to your Glenn is iron it and that kind of beats the u.s. army beret which you had bloody shave before you want it no idiot do you have to shave a beret before you wear it anyway a crease down the top line and it also forces the front and back into points and this makes a thing much easier to put into your cargo pocket when you're not wearing it you cheat on the right side once it's down and ironed in that place you then put a couple of stitches in it to keep it in place and there you go a shaped Irish Calvary gang Gary the way in it's all in good fun you weren't to know although whoever was a sent it to you should probably provided instructions so on to the normal run of business SEO 896 how efficient was the m8 Scott I always hidden video games but I don't hear much about it okay he's referring to the 75 millimeter howitzer motor carriage m8 also known as General Scott they made about 1800 of them the idea of mounting the 75 millimeter pack howitzer onto an armored vehicle dates at least far back in the early 1930s after all it's a small light gun with a reasonable high explosive charge and not too much recoil initial attempts weren't fantastic with the artillery branch sent in the 75 millimeter in the m3 light tank hull was just too crowded although perhaps there was some merit to the vehicle as an assault gun eventually the idea was put forward to place this same pack howitzer into a half track making the t30 as an interim vehicle whilst they try to work on something better like the m3 gun motor carriage in the early 1940s when armored force was being stood up and the new battalions initially there was going to be the split between the light battalions and the medium battalions the role of the assault gun for the medium battalion would go to the 105 millimeter armed m4 Sherman once that got itself sorted out obviously though the pointed light tank battalions is that they're lighter and the 105 millimeter m4 isn't gonna do the job it also made general sense to just use the same light tanks as light tank battalions were using anyway ergo the idea of using the Stuart design at this point or start moving to the m5 between cadillac's and lower power train but still in order to give even more adequate working room they needed to enlarge the turret ring and the overhang at the front further meant that the hatches in the whole roof for the whole crew were not feasible and they needed an alternative design in the front one of the unique features of the design is the flash hider it's a large round around the short gun this all gave a vehicle with enough room to work in and the mobility to keep up with the other units vehicles in the unit plus it had a turret and was a little bit more flexible than half-track t30 being easier to establish an indirect role and faster to react in the assault control by all accounts the vehicle worked fine and was just overtaken by events the idea of the light tank battalion did not survive until the fielding of the m8 the release was a stupid idea and the m8 role as either an assault gun in the medium tank battalions which resulted or as a self-propelled gun and artillery units only lasted for as long as it took for something better to come along ie be 105 millimeter m4 assault gun and the 105 millimeter m7 self about howitzer the vehicles were then sent off to cavalry units which appreciated a small fast little vehicle with a bigger gun than the 37 than their tanks and armoured cars were equipped with at the time and of course this only lasted until the m24 chaffee came along with 775 perhaps the most important use of the enemies development though was on the em tanks you take the m8 turret and it's relatively lightweight allowed for it to be mounted on an L V T providing much better immediate and fibia spire support than the 37 millimeter Stuart turret mounted on the first versions provided they were direct fire weapons during the initial assault providing tank like firepower until proper armoured and mobile tanks could be landed at which point they would then revert back to an indirect artillery role so overall I'd say it was a success even if only when viewed from a certain lens chase walls what's my opinion on the T 14 Armada against other MBTs and he thought through information about the m1 a3 being developed to counter it I imagine don't seem to be a rather popular topic of discussion and debate firstly I strongly doubt that the m1 a3 is being developed at the counter specifically in the t14 the design requirements are generally going to be something generic like to defeat all armored and on armored threats the bottom line is whatever they want the m1 to do they want that tank to hit first hit accurately hit hard the specific design of the vehicle on the receiving end is fairly irrelevant as 4014 itself it's a technique one plus side about our markets it's a family of vehicles which makes economic sense how good is it I have absolutely no idea I'm not as much a seen one let alone crawled over it and anybody who's professing a particularly strong opinion without having spent much time on the vehicle which is basically everybody who professes a particularly strong opinion on it is talking out of their arse I have reservations as to the concept accrue on the whole I mean I understand the benefits in terms of survivability and efficient use of space in a turret but I am not yet convinced the mark one eyeball from the turret roof has as yet been made totally redundant now this may just be me being a reactionary dinosaur stuck in my ways and given that provisions apparently tend to like the fight from hatches closed anyway the liability or inability to use mark one may be less critical for them again I emphasize that in general tank designers are not stupid they have a set of requirements which need not match what anyone else's requirements are and armata presumably meets these requirements further as modern tank commanders end up spending more and more their time focus on the electronics either commanders in a ventral thermal view or a remote weapon stations battlefield communication systems and so on there is a point to be made that inevitably they're spending less and less time sticking the heads out the table anyway so if you really want to get that on pixelated 3d binocular view of what's over the ridge line or to see whether or not that terrain really will support the tank or whatever maybe the t14 command you can just stand up out of his hatch climb to the turret roof I'm really sickly how often do we really need to do that in the US service perhaps MGS vehicle commanders will be the closest equivalent to ask for an opinion but they do have the advantage of already sitting atop a huge hull so they're already pretty high up when they just open the hatch and stick your head out fossa it is entirely possible that the crew in the whole design really is better overall for today's generation of tanks now bear in mind even if you were to put a traditional tanker and put them into our t14 for a month long enough to actually understand its benefits I suspect that one would still primarily get a list of opinions of negatives doing this is harder that is more difficult backup procedures or tougher but some of the benefits of the design may only become apparent after live combat a top attack round for example impacting on a typical tank has an excellent chance of penetrating some part of the tank which is inhabited by crewmen now depending on key 14s compartmentalization and I know I would have designed some comment lazy compartmentalization into the tank that chance is dramatically reduced 4014 and because the turret is unmanned and smarter they can put more thickness of roof and fertile armor into it for the same weight now again a crewman isn't going to notice this in training when he gives is I think the following opinion the bottom line then is a t14 likely isn't any more lethal or dangerous than say the next generation of t90 would be it may in fact be marginally less dangerous on the other hand it is likely to be a little bit tougher to kill and it definitely seems to be more survivable for the crew so if those are important criteria for you then t fourteens design has merit Spenser Loper do I think that mix and other giant stompy things are viable mechanically are the viable I don't see why not I mean it's an engineering challenge I'm sure eventually somebody's going to get there and I do mean better than the ones which already been built the mek supposedly has one great advantage it is not as constricted by terrain as a normal terrestrial vehicle wheeled or tracked though crime of cliffs pick the way through rocky terrain and so on and so forth the primary problem though it's ground pressure and Orion class heavy mech comes in a simmer over seventy tons the same as an abrams an Atlas comes in at a solid hundred so that's 35 to 50 tons per full when standing still and the full 75 to 100 tons per for when walking I'm sure someone somewhere has done ground pressure calculations now presumably eventually the foot will go down deep enough that will meet sufficient pressure to hold it up it's not going to end up sinking down to the Earth's core after all now this may only be a foot down it can be three to five feet down I don't know it very well may be sufficiently deep that it impedes the movement of the other foot and so the MEK gets stuck the other problem is that as armoured vehicles go mechs are stupidly inefficient designs the amount of protection that a tank needs for its powertrain and the pack here is pretty small it's the whole thing is compact and fits in an area maybe three meters by three by one and a half whereas if you can imagine the weight and volume of all the various actuators hydraulics pumps and everything else that a stompy thing needs in order to move its various limbs and torso about the figures are gonna be daft the next problem is frontal target sights a tank designer tries to make the frontal aspect of a tank as small as possible and it's easier to make this armor thicker at the front when you do so most of the surface area of a tank is not visible to the enemy and so it needs not be as thick the armor where as a mech has the entire front of the torso to armor up more in efficiency now perhaps a partial counter than this is to fall the vehicle forward onto its belly and effectively start high crawling enter the multi-legged Nets like xanthus or great turtle they are more stable have less ground pressure and a smaller frontal profile requiring less armor of course now you have twice the amount of Hydra to run if not more of you go for an arachnid design so no for heavy combat vehicles and cool though 8080 SR I don't see giant stumpy things ever being practical enough to replace tracked vehicles small stompy things like before-mentioned power suits however do seem far more reasonable if we ever get the power supply problems sorted out Robert Henry Elston what would I store inside my tank versus outside well almost everything not required for the inside of the tank was stored outside so there are stowage points inside the tank for everything from maps and spare bulbs to gas masks and there isn't much room for anything else I personally brought my laptop inside and stuffed it in the corner right rear that he's he saw but that was it everything else went in the bustle rack or the side sponsor I can't speak to what other folks did yeah it should also be added that I am spoiled by American levels of external stowage everything we would need for let's say a month we deployment to Mosul we carried on the tank boss Iraq exten Abbas Iraq on the blower panels in the side sponsors lots of lots of room I have no idea how British or German tank crews managed to deal with their small little covered bins it looked neat but lack capacity to my mind Andrew going back to UK tanks in World War 2 they eventually came up with Cromwell comment and centurion was this an effect of an improved process more practiced by the tank designers or just a fluke given that in the same time scales you also get things like black prints now I suspect that the genesis of this question is last month's one where I referenced G McLeod Ross's litany of issues it wasn't just the tank designs getting practice as I understand it the ministry is supply and the army also starting getting its act together as well so the tank designers are getting more practice and designing things in the ministry is getting more practice at specification as an ordering however Andrew was talking basically about three different project lines as a work two of them are evolutionary the Vauxhall line which is Churchill then expanded into black prints literally expanded think Churchill expanded in all directions except for armor thickness and power output and the other was the Cromwell comic line which is obviously in of the lineage of the earlier cruisers Centurion there was a blank slate with enough American vehicles coming over to fill the shortfall and with Cromwell in comic keeping the factories busy with a reasonable and often vehicle for now the British designers could completely start afresh if Centurion didn't work out it wasn't going to be the end of the world unlike the situation say when they were designing crusader when the British needed something good enough right the hell now more likely though since the British were no longer under the same level of time crunch they could afford to slow down and do the job right which they did karma Tsar Karl wishes to know about other countries tank uniforms I've done a tank uniform video and I'm gonna have to pass on that one for now simply because I don't know enough to answer intelligently I suspect however that I'll be able to put up answers in the future so I'll bear in mind tn sheepmen complete the sentence all I want for Christmas is blank shades of Les Dawson or Terry Wogan they're all I want for Christmas is blank world peace however since that seems a little bit unreasonable I'll go with an m3 Scout car since that also seems unlikely as does that Maserati the wife wants good luck with that I'm kind of hoping for a larger fish tank wife keeps saying that she's gonna refinish the cabinet know the things that it's going to go on top off but that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon otherwise all things considered life's pretty good keep throwing video opportunities in the ideas my way keep going my channel and adding patrons Admiral Tiberius would I ever see the 1 2001 25 millimeter caliber for the main gun be replaced by something larger or smaller as technology changes I think bigger seems more like even smaller I can we need only recall one move to smaller that was he Israeli sixty millimeter hypervelocity cannon which he ended up mounting mainly on Sherman's the first problem with that though is that it's all but a pure anti arm around much less bang of hey GE the other problem is given that the rand is faster but lighter it loses speed faster which means reduced effectiveness at range as optics fire control systems and the likes get better longer and longer engagement ranges up to eventually line-of-sight will not become unlikely it is observed that 120 millimeter is about the limit as to what a human loader can handle at least for one piece of ammo but as human loaders become less and less used in forthcoming tank designs this limitation seems to be less of a problem so then it comes down to more ammunition capacity and the question of just how big a gun with how much recoil are you going to have to try to stuff into a tank to get tank effects so bear in mind that the Soviets did Mach around for a good bit with a long 152 millimeter main gun but then they went back down to the 125 as granted did the Americans in the mbt-70 although not sure that was quite the same level of pressure and velocity Charles sure Onge wants to know my opinion all flamethrower tanks they certainly seem to do the job back in the day is recent news Vietnam they are certainly a damn sight safer than trying to run up to a bunker with a backpack either satchel charge or a handheld flamethrower on the other hand they aren't as safe as a good thermobaric or modern fuse conventional round so like the backpack flamethrower their day has passed I do not recall actually ever haven't come across any crew experiences with the vehicles I've only ever come across accounts from folks outside the vehicles either watching or on the receiving end and the commentary from both side is usually on the gist of a significant emotional event which probably explains why there are around so much Joe Paula way will I ever do a high-speed tour with Canadian War Museum next time I'm in Ottawa yes I've been there a few times for those who don't know the Canadian War Museum is a relatively modern facility in downtown Ottawa good indoor parking if you happen to find yourself they were winter for some reason and for those of us who are interested in tanks Vimy Hall has about 30 armored vehicles including a few more rare ones such as the egg panzer 470 definitely where the visit if you're in town I reserved this question about science fiction tanks for a future time are aw what is the best tank coax machine gun ever designed that's an interesting one one will be doing very well to beat the FN mag and there's a reason it shows up everywhere it's reliable it's light as impactive it's simple barrel changes are a piece of cake then again I have no experience with the DTS the PK T is indium or the mg 3 I have no particular reason to doubt their capability either and technically the m2 caliber 50 is a coaxial machine gun as well although perhaps one with a slightly different concept of use in mind I won't say that machine gun evolution has reached the pinnacle but it does seem that we're about reaching the apex of Mg design no matter what country or mechanical operating principle you want to look at so I don't really have an answer I will say by reputation that it doesn't seem to be the m73 Kazuki K do tank ventilation systems work when the engine is off answer yes they're all electric and like all electrical systems in the tank and work off the battery now the original question which I didn't put down actually had a presupposition in it and it gave the example of power Traverse requiring that the engine be operating and although that was the case for some vehicle it's actually not the case for most tanks those with electric Traverse obviously can simply draw straight from the power supply but normally hydraulic Traverse tanks can have auxilary pumps run on the battery power as well that said the speed of Traverse from a battery versus when the engine is running is not necessarily the same and m1 stir traverse rate is about a quarter if not less under backup power than full power but it sure as hell beats hang cranking there is also a question about whether there was any successful application of wet lubricated track I guess the Germans thought it was successful so they kept with it all the way through the war on their lighter vehicles doesn't make any sense to me but they seem to have liked it and I can't think of any other applications off the top of my head so I'm going to figure it didn't make much sense to anybody else either that said the existence of the quite famous Canadian dry pin tracks for Sherman's seems to imply that there was a Canadian wet pin track but damned if I can tell you what that may have been though I haven't found anything on it bad [ __ ] wants to know with the predominance of thermal imagers and alike while the folks bother turning their tanks into moving trees okay for anybody who's been in the US Army in the last 20 years hot flash most countries don't care so much about Forestry protection rules as we do and it is actually possible to take local footage and place it on your tank they can see that from vision the bass is partially right there has obtained of being plenty of effort put forward into conceiving the thermal signature of vehicle so in the meantime why bother doing that and then leaving the vehicle open to everybody else with a pair of binoculars methods of reducing the thermal signature include active measures thermal blankets or camo netting a second skin which works a bit like a vacuum flask or velcro paneling amongst other things and face it even today there are more eyeballs looking around without thermal imagers and there are width so the bottom line is at worst it doesn't hurt except the trace who some believe can feel pain Stafford I'm gonna come back to yours in another video Admiral Tiberius is wandering back canister ammo and it certainly dates back a very long ways basically into the days a grapeshot imagine if you will of 120 millimeter shotgun and well that's modern in canister in World War 2 what was found mainly in the American 37 millimeter gun quite useful in the jungles of the Pacific in particular although I do seem to recall that the Aussies made one for the two pounder the 75 millimeter also had the t30 canister shot which contained 270 LED balls so Sherman's and grants could use that in the jungles quite well as well the australians highly valued canister shot in vietnam from the 20 pounder guns not necessarily as much for their lethal effect but because they had a fantastic ability to strip away foliage in camouflage making any repositions highly visible today the US Army has reintroduced chemistry to the Abrams the m10 28 round which contains approximately eleven hundred and fifty tungsten balls the tough dense metal is used that has a secondary which is a breaching round if you have barbed wire to the front for example the canister round will make nice gap for the infantry the same can be said for house walls if you don't want to going through a few walls before the ball stop and these walls may also include a rebar so if you want to punch a hole for the infantry to go through Thompson could help you they're related but somewhat different round is beehive there are two main differences between B - canister the first is the beehive usually comes of flesh heads as opposed to balls the difference is likely academic to the infantry on the receiving end the other difference is diffuse canister has no fuse once it reaches the muzzle the SHA pattern on canister starts to spread beehive however generally remains intact until it reaches a set distance at which point the fuse detonates and the components starts separating this gives Beehive a longer effective range I do seem to recall around similar to be hugged which uses tungsten rods instead of flechette switch may be an alternative to Empire and the any aircraft roll a modern Ram but for the life of me I can't he define the name of it offhand canister is due to be replacing service in the US by the new AP round which is a hey cheer em with a multi setting programmable fuse although I found myself a bit suspicious that can really be replaced so that's about it that I would be at a good Christmas and made the New Year bring you all sorts of fortune oh and if you see me Charleston this weekend say hi

Channel: The_Chieftain

Views: 84,369

Rating: 4.967113 out of 5

Keywords:

Id: kDeOWVshgG8

Length: 26min 50sec (1610 seconds)

Published: Sat Dec 28 2019