Renault FT-17 on a Renault FP artillery transporter by RGL - Meng/U-Models - PLASTIC/RESIN - diorama

[Egilman]

It's lineage runs to the Holt Tractors... the ideal was the holt artillery tractor, (which worked well in that capacity) would work a lot better with a light gun mounted directly to it, then the usual line of modifications chain took over, Armor, Revolving turrets, Machine gun mounts more than one gun mount, etc etc...

 

What eventually happens in these situations is they overload the load carrying capacity of the chassis itself... Or the power of the engine to actually move it...

 

That is what eventually happened to all the Holt/Catepillar line of armored vehicles, they couldn't get past ordinance testing under real life battlefield conditions... (mostly underpowered and very poor battlefield mobility) But they did learn a lot from them...

 

 

[RGL]

It ended up being a stopgap propaganda tool. Made for a movie in 1916. 

[Canute]

Like the Doughboys attacking in their campaign hats.😉

[wefalck]

It's all about finding the right configurations and writing the right specifications. Such experiments even date back to the Boer Wars in South Africa, where they began to armour traction engines, if I am not mistaken.

 

It's also about understanding the tactical possibilities and thinking beyond the then current engineering capabilities. It is clear that initially tanks were mainly conceived as infantry support vehicles, rather than a replacement of heavy cavalry (light cavalary in its reconnaisance role began to be replaced by armourd road vehicles). It wasn't until the late 1920s/early 1930s that IC engine and track engineering made fast tanks really possible. Until then tanks were seen as war-elephants, rather than chariots, hence the idea of converting crawler tractors.

 

[Egilman]

13 hours ago, wefalck said:

It's all about finding the right configurations and writing the right specifications. Such experiments even date back to the Boer Wars in South Africa, where they began to armour traction engines, if I am not mistaken.

 

It's also about understanding the tactical possibilities and thinking beyond the then current engineering capabilities. It is clear that initially tanks were mainly conceived as infantry support vehicles, rather than a replacement of heavy cavalry (light cavalary in its reconnaisance role began to be replaced by armourd road vehicles). It wasn't until the late 1920s/early 1930s that IC engine and track engineering made fast tanks really possible. Until then tanks were seen as war-elephants, rather than chariots, hence the idea of converting crawler tractors.

 

Tanks are what they are today due to the forward thinking of one man... And one man only....

 

George S Patton....

 

He was the first to apply calvary tactics to light tanks on the battlefield... During WWI he commanded the AEF's tank battalions to great effectiveness... Post war he served under Eisenhower who commanded the US Army's tank school until they disbanded the Tank Corp.... Take a look at the US army's combat cars... 40mph in the '20's but the depression prevented the army from filling their ranks with them... Patton worked closely with Christie to develop the T3 combat car, of which the army had 7... He eventually went back to the calvary when the Tank Corp was disbanded due to inter-army political influence/warfare... but during his time after he was sent to Namur, the French military school where he expounded his ideals with people like Liddle Hart, who wrote books about good armor tactics and was considered the world wide authority on Armor usage on the battlefield... His writings were studied by Heinz Guderian, who developed combined arms blitzkrieg tactics based upon Liddle Hart's books and Patton's writings.... (and developed the methods of supporting them on the battlefield, the infrastructure, the chain of supply for moving armor columns)

The rest of them, including Rommel, all learned from the masters...

 

Patton, Liddle Hart & Guderian....

 

George Patton is the godfather of tank tactics, he wrote the ideals of and demonstrated the proper usage of tanks on the battlefield, during WWI...

Edited Thursday at 02:59 AM by Egilman

[realworkingsailor]

32 minutes ago, Egilman said:

Tanks are what they are today due to the forward thinking of one man... And one man only....

 

George S Patton....

 

He was the first to apply calvary tactics to light tanks on the battlefield... During WWI he commanded the AEF's tank battalions to great effectiveness... Post war he served under Eisenhower who commanded the US Army's tank school until they disbanded the Tank Corp.... Take a look at the US army's combat cars... 40mph in the '20's but the depression prevented the army from filling their ranks with them... Patton worked closely with Christie to develop the T3 combat car, of which the army had 7... He eventually went back to the calvary when the Tank Corp was disbanded due to inter-army political influence/warfare... but during his time after he was sent to Namur, the French military school where he expounded his ideals with people like Liddle Hart, who wrote books about good armor tactics and was considered the world wide authority on Armor usage on the battlefield... His writings were studied by Heinz Guderian, who developed combined arms blitzkrieg tactics based upon Liddle Hart's books and Patton's writings.... (and developed the methods of supporting them on the battlefield, the infrastructure, the chain of supply for moving armor columns)

The rest of them, including Rommel, all learned from the masters...

 

Patton, Liddle Hart & Guderian....

 

George Patton is the godfather of tank tactics, he wrote the ideals of and demonstrated the proper usage of tanks on the battlefield, during WWI...

Maybe, but the first ever armoured troops to deploy anywhere was the Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, led, and equipped with armoured vehicles designed, by Major Raymond Brutinel, in 1915. Brutinel was a pioneer in the concept of mobile armour. The static nature of the war, and the need for roads prevented their envisioned usage of spearheading advances. 
 

Andy

[RGL]

Weathering started 

[Egilman]

5 hours ago, realworkingsailor said:

Maybe, but the first ever armoured troops to deploy anywhere was the Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, led, and equipped with armoured vehicles designed, by Major Raymond Brutinel, in 1915. Brutinel was a pioneer in the concept of mobile armour. The static nature of the war, and the need for roads prevented their envisioned usage of spearheading advances. 
 

Andy

Andy not going to argue here but armored vehicles were a concept recognized as advantageous for centuries... Just about every nation on the planet has someone that can claim to be first...

 

Hussite forces in Bohemia developed war wagons – medieval horse-drawn wagons that doubled as wagon forts – around 1420 during the Hussite Wars. These heavy wagons were given protective sides with firing slits; their heavy firepower came from either a cannon or from a force of hand-gunners and crossbowmen, supported by light cavalry and infantry using pikes and flails. Heavy arquebuses mounted on wagons were called arquebus à croc. These carried a ball of about 3.5 ounces (100 g)

 

Armored wagons and locomotives were used during the Civil War... The concept is as old as the hills...

 

But the melding of it all together into a cohesive plan of usage was Patton's idea... The FT-17 is recognized as the first modern pattern tank and set the pattern that has been used ever since... The pierce and encircle calvary tactics was perfect for the equipment of the day...

 

Everything else since is simple refinement of the successful concepts that he first employed in France....

Edited Thursday at 08:36 AM by Egilman

[realworkingsailor]

4 hours ago, Egilman said:

Andy not going to argue here but armored vehicles were a concept recognized as advantageous for centuries... Just about every nation on the planet has someone that can claim to be first...

 

Hussite forces in Bohemia developed war wagons – medieval horse-drawn wagons that doubled as wagon forts – around 1420 during the Hussite Wars. These heavy wagons were given protective sides with firing slits; their heavy firepower came from either a cannon or from a force of hand-gunners and crossbowmen, supported by light cavalry and infantry using pikes and flails. Heavy arquebuses mounted on wagons were called arquebus à croc. These carried a ball of about 3.5 ounces (100 g)

 

Armored wagons and locomotives were used during the Civil War... The concept is as old as the hills...

 

But the melding of it all together into a cohesive plan of usage was Patton's idea... The FT-17 is recognized as the first modern pattern tank and set the pattern that has been used ever since... The pierce and encircle calvary tactics was perfect for the equipment of the day...

 

Everything else since is simple refinement of the successful concepts that he first employed in France....

 

Not trying to dismiss Patton, more that he wasn’t alone in his thinkings on how to use mechanized armour effectively in combat. Look at the development and use of the Whippet tank (at the Battle of Amiens, which occurred a month before Patton’s first tank actions at Saint Mihiel).

 

After the first world war, many veteran officers were writing and theorizing about the use of armour in the future battlefield. JFC Fuller and Plan 1919, the development of the Experimental Mechanized Force in 1927, and many others in many other countries.

 

Patton was arguably the heaviest influence in the development and usage of armour in the US, and is deserving of a decent amount of credit in general, but he certainly wasn’t alone in his thinking.

 

Andy

[Egilman]

2 hours ago, realworkingsailor said:

 

Not trying to dismiss Patton, more that he wasn’t alone in his thinkings on how to use mechanized armour effectively in combat. Look at the development and use of the Whippet tank (at the Battle of Amiens, which occurred a month before Patton’s first tank actions at Saint Mihiel).

 

After the first world war, many veteran officers were writing and theorizing about the use of armour in the future battlefield. JFC Fuller and Plan 1919, the development of the Experimental Mechanized Force in 1927, and many others in many other countries.

 

Patton was arguably the heaviest influence in the development and usage of armour in the US, and is deserving of a decent amount of credit in general, but he certainly wasn’t alone in his thinking.

 

Andy

No doubt Brother, once the war was over, the debate on the proper usage of the new weapon ran for years... Even though the tech hadn't quite kept up with the thinking... And figuring out the logistics of moving tank columns were still being worked out...

 

And then, expanding the ideals to Combined Arms in actual combat....

 

The development of the armored forces concept is a broad and very deep subject.... And we can't forget Dwight Eisenhower in the mix, he was the other genius behind what the US Army Armored force became...

[RGL]

Ok, back to normal programming soon