Jump to content


British Tank History Video


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
29 replies to this topic

Community #1 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:13 PM

    Sergeant

  • Content Team
  • 0 battles
  • 25,704
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011
Are you interested in British tanks? As everyone who plays World of Tanks knows, the vehicles you can play in the game are real war machines that often were seen fighting during different wars. In this video we give you a short insight into the history of the British tank industry beginnings and evolution.

Full news text

XxXSpottedYouXxX #2 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:17 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23824 battles
  • 8,336
  • [4077] 4077
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
Cool thanks for the video.

llVIU #3 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:20 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Commander
  • 37987 battles
  • 964
  • [TKSPG] TKSPG
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
great videos, all of them, but why do you forbid comments on vids through youtube? is this supposed to be a clever tactic to bring everyone to this forum in order to comment, or something?

at first glance it just looks like stupidity on yourside or a pathetic attempt at restricting freedom of speech (I though that was illegal?)

Supernashwan #4 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9497 battles
  • 687
  • Member since:
    08-03-2011

View PostllVIU, on 09 November 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

pathetic attempt at restricting freedom of speech (I though that was illegal?)

:Smile_veryhappy:

XxXSpottedYouXxX #5 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:24 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23824 battles
  • 8,336
  • [4077] 4077
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
We had the first tank in the world that was battle ready "

Rule Britannia.

Aerthryn #6 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:27 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22206 battles
  • 899
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
hehe, i guess it's partly the matilda's fault that the germans werent satisfied with the panzer 4 and developed the tiger to carry an 88

PS. though definately not why they went with such thick armour.. :P

Edited by Aerthryn, 09 November 2012 - 04:28 PM.


Karrajor #7 Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 11288 battles
  • 168
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011
Nice video  :Smile_great:
Learned some nice history facts from it. Through I have to ask one thing. In the video there is said something about Covenanter being unreliable. I guess that means the high chance of fire after hit on its second engine, which is an overclocked version of the first one. This makes sence. But why doesnt the Crusader have also at least one overclocked engine? I have heard and read many times that the Crusader was a very reliable tank until the crews decide theyre engine needed some tuning and end up overloading theyre engine...
Thanks in advance for answer  :Smile_honoring:  and I am sorry for my English (I am not a native speaker)

oops_you_are_dead #8 Posted 09 November 2012 - 05:53 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4306 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    06-10-2012
all is great, but there is one small mistake.

in the video it is said that the idea for the name was because the people who assembled the parts thought they were building water tanks, but this is not true. the british used this name to conceal the true purpose of the machine, because of the fear of spies among the workers and staff. the workers knew they were building war machines, but they used this name to mislead the enemy in case he is listening. i checked this on wikipedia.

Karrajor #9 Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:29 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 11288 battles
  • 168
  • Member since:
    02-08-2011

View Postoops_you_are_dead, on 09 November 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

i checked this on wikipedia.

Considering Wikipedia a good source of information (for non-basic stuff anyway) isnt quite a good idea  :Smile-bajan2:

Edited by Karrajor, 09 November 2012 - 06:29 PM.


NEMESIS #10 Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:53 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 18998 battles
  • 417
  • [-AA-] -AA-
  • Member since:
    07-11-2010
Very good video, wish you`d make some about the other nations as well.
Great job WG.

Comrade_Rory #11 Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6707 battles
  • 327
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    03-26-2011
I'm sorry but this video just makes me think that WG really dislike Britain even more.

The entire video just comes with this whole tone as if they just hate the British so much and just has this really mocking feel to it.

Like, Britain were not "far" behind France.
When it says that all the British tanks had underpowered guns... only that's not true is it? Considering they had some of the best guns (and ammunition) of the war.
Then when it talks about the Cromwell replacing the Crusader, it says "was replaced by the really fine, by British standards particularly, Cromwell" but the Cromwell was better than the majority of main tanks at the time. Panzer IV's had problems with the Crusader, nevermind the Cromwell.

Edited by Comrade_Rory, 09 November 2012 - 07:11 PM.


fdsdh1 #12 Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5978 battles
  • 449
  • [PLATY] PLATY
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012
WG I think it is the battle of Arras, not arse

another pronunciation fail

also it said the centurion had a 17pdr, I thought that it only ever had a 20pdr? but I am no expert

NBNC #13 Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:28 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 11351 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011
No artys? ^^

great_kahn #14 Posted 09 November 2012 - 10:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20059 battles
  • 782
  • Member since:
    06-07-2012
Quite simply we are to fond in this country of letting people behind desks make the decisions rather than the people on the front or the engineers.

Going into WW2, we quite simply had the wrong tanks. Thank god for the English channel, the Royal Navy and the Royal air force or we would all be under the Nazi jack boot today.

The Germans had the right designs and had a build up to a war they knew they were going to start.

Would be interesting to see what would have happened if Britian had a Universal tank doctrine at the start of WW2. Coupled with the French not surrendering there capital without firing a shot, the German attack could have been blunted and repelled in a series of fast moving and dynamic battles across France.

As it was the French gave up, we had to evacuate from Dunkirk. And what really pisses me off is that the French didn't turn there navy over to the Allies for us to use against the Germans.

The_Challenger #15 Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:27 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Military Specialist
  • 4830 battles
  • 1,985
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

View Postfdsdh1, on 09 November 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

WG I think it is the battle of Arras, not arse

another pronunciation fail

also it said the centurion had a 17pdr, I thought that it only ever had a 20pdr? but I am no expert

Agreed, not a good pronunciation, Arras, The MK 1 they are reffering to had the 17pdr the MK3 the 20 pdr, if memory serves me right  :Smile_Default:

PooinClingfilm #16 Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:02 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 3563 battles
  • 110
  • Member since:
    02-04-2012

View PostComrade_Rory, on 09 November 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

I'm sorry but this video just makes me think that WG really dislike Britain even more.

The entire video just comes with this whole tone as if they just hate the British so much and just has this really mocking feel to it.

Like, Britain were not "far" behind France.
When it says that all the British tanks had underpowered guns... only that's not true is it? Considering they had some of the best guns (and ammunition) of the war.
Then when it talks about the Cromwell replacing the Crusader, it says "was replaced by the really fine, by British standards particularly, Cromwell" but the Cromwell was better than the majority of main tanks at the time. Panzer IV's had problems with the Crusader, nevermind the Cromwell.

I didn't get that feeling at all when watching. It's no great secret that most of our vehicles and doctrine especially were woefully lacking. It says more about the quality of the men that they still went out, fought and won even though their machines were quite frankly...a bag of bollocks.

oops_you_are_dead #17 Posted 10 November 2012 - 08:53 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4306 battles
  • 19
  • Member since:
    06-10-2012

View PostKarrajor, on 09 November 2012 - 06:29 PM, said:

Considering Wikipedia a good source of information (for non-basic stuff anyway) isnt quite a good idea  :Smile-bajan2:
lol wikipedia is the best source of information. (i also checked it on Britannica, and you can't argue with the most famous encyclopedia)

XxXSpottedYouXxX #18 Posted 10 November 2012 - 09:30 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 23824 battles
  • 8,336
  • [4077] 4077
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
Wiki is the best it details everything.

wafu_vasco #19 Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:24 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 7217 battles
  • 120
  • Member since:
    08-26-2011
"The general conservatism inherent in the British nation" - thanks, WG, if I want racist comments, prejudice and massive generalisations about every nation other than Russia, I'll know where to go. I'd give a list of examples which prove Britain's history of flexibility in warfare (i.e inventing the tank for one) but most people with any real interest beyond maximising profit would have bothered to look it up.

Envisioned #20 Posted 11 November 2012 - 12:31 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 2773 battles
  • 88
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Postwafu_vasco, on 11 November 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

"The general conservatism inherent in the British nation" - thanks, WG, if I want racist comments, prejudice and massive generalisations about every nation other than Russia, I'll know where to go. I'd give a list of examples which prove Britain's history of flexibility in warfare (i.e inventing the tank for one) but most people with any real interest beyond maximising profit would have bothered to look it up.

Ye I'm not a fan of such sweeting statements, after all its a video about military history not politics.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users