30 Tons with 2 Guns: The M3 | Did it matter?
2024 ж. 24 Мам.
125 599 Рет қаралды
In this brief overview, Associate Curator Hank Wilcox walks you through the various M3 Medium Tank variants on display at the National Museum of Military Vehicles, highlighting the essential facts behind what many historians call a "stopgap" weapon.
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 - Introduction to the M3 Medium Tank
1:03 - The M3 Lee: American Variant
3:38 - The M3 Grant: British Variant
5:53 - M3 in Early Combat: North Africa
8:35 - The M3A4: A Rare Variant
10:42 - Did the M3 Medium Tank Matter?
nmmv.org/
National Museum of Military Vehicles
Dubois, Wyoming
The film Sahara 1943 with Humphrey Bogart is a one of the best tank movies and does M3 justice.
Look up remake with James Belushi
One of my favorite tank movies, by all means!
@@markidjanivulle3680 You sure you're not thinking of '1941' with John Belushi?
One of my father's favorites; we watched it together many times.
It also is featured in the opening scenes of "Five Graves to Cairo" with Franchot Tone as the sole survivor of a Grant tank stuck behind German lines.
In the Pacific and India / Burma it was a great tank, the Japanese had very poor anti armor, so it was great in that area.
The Japanese had actually some anti tank weapons, at least for their infantry in the form of shaped anti tank charges/rockets and anti tank guns, like the Type 5 45 mm Recoilless Gun, the Type 4 70 mm AT rocket launcher in 1944 or their various Typ-1-37-mm- und -47-mm-Anti-Tank guns and even some field guns in 10 and 12cm. Their own tanks have been always quite inferiour compared to the enemies they faced. At least the US and Soviets.
There is a recent series of videos from the Australian Armour guys in which they rebuild a Lee from parts. Surplus tanks were used by the farmers in Australia after the war.
Well worth a look!
Yeah, Australia has a treasure trove of (mostly) abandoned M3s in various states of disrepair. I think this is because the M3s sent to Australia didn't see combat - for the most part - and the Americans weren't interested in shipping them back home.
I believe it's a "Grant" but yes. Love the channel. The use of screens to block shaped and satchel charges that was only used by the Australians is also very interesting
Given the wildlife of Australia, I can see why the farmers want a tank.
One point about the height, I've read that the tankers who were using it in the far east and the Pacific liked the extra height because it allowed them to better see into the dense undergrowth that they were more likely to encounter in a tropical environment.
They did not face the amount of anti tank gunfire and Japanese tanks were poor early 1930's designed models. So jungle island terrain was fine for the M3.
The British using M3 in Burma did ok with them too.. but off they were using them against Japanese static defences and not tanks, at least mostly.. in North Africa they were up against panzer IV .. idk if any faced Tigers in Tunisia.
Like the famous Dutch soccer player Johan Cruijff once said: "Every disadvantage has it's advantage" (and vice versa...)
They were only as good as their crews. 2 cannons 37mm and 75mm ---2 30 cal. machine . Lots of firepower.
"It looked like a damned cathedral going down the road"-An Army at Dawn, Rick Atkinson. But it kept the Allies in the fight until newer models could come into service. Great video: My Dad joined the Army in 1937 and trained on these tanks, although he went overseas in an M4.
If you're going to mention the Panzer IV F2, I'd think you'd mention the Panzer III J, which was the main rival to the Grant in the 1941 war in North Africa. It changed out the earlier 37mm for a 50mm long-barrel (3m) cannon, and was the only German tank in the theater that was effective against the M3's armor.
Actually most Panzer III Js in North Africa had the shorter (L42) 50mm gun, only a few J models and the L and later models had the long (L60) 50mm gun from spring 1942 onward.
Minor issue when it come to countering german guns. The M2 75mm on the M3 was able to lob HE out to 6 miles and could be expected to reliable place HE with 20 yards of a target at 3 miles. Against a tank thats useles, but against an open air gun thats going to scythe through the crew and possible even destroy the gun. At any rate anti tanks guns were deadly as an ambushing weapon but once they were spotted the M3 had little trouble dealing with them.
Except the 75 was also equipped with an AP shell
@gotanon9659 true but you dont need an AP round to kill a large flack gun sitting out in the open with its crew exposed.
@@gotanon9659 The whole AP debacle was also a thing, the first 75mm AP shell that came to Africa didn't work as intended and the British informed USA about it but the still needed a AP shell fast. One of the thing the did was to marry captured German 75mm AP shell from Tobruk with captured France 75mm casings that the captured from Vichy France in Syria, which worked wonders until the could be supplied with working AP shells.
@Lunkwow this is not quite what happened and you seem to combining 2 different issues. Some background. The 75mm gun M2 was directly derived from the M1897 its self was just an americanized French cannon de 75 1897. The Lend Lease laws required drawing down old stocks before new material could be transfered so the early ammo provided was Great War era ammo which was intended to be fired from a field gun operating as a howitzer ie the round would fall from a high angle. Becuase of that the ammo supplied had no grazing fuse which meant that if it hit at a low angle becuase it was fired from a might bounce without detonating. The solution was to pull fuses from french ammo which was produced according to their early great war doctrine of using the 75mm as a direct fire weapon so they had grazing fuses. You could (and they did) just fire old stocks of french 75mm from the american tanks. The second issue wasent that the 75mm AP didnt work, it worked exactly as intended. The problem was that the production line for 75mm APC was still being built so we sent the 75mm AP we had in stock. 75mm AP was perfectly capable of fulling perforating the early PzIIIs and PzIV but when the germans started replacing losses with up armord tanks specficlly the Pz IIIj the old AP round had issues with deflection and shattering. That said below 500 yards even if the round shattered it would still likely kill the target through massive spall and above 500 yard it would still wound and kill crew.
@@kennethreese2193 Regarding the HE shell I didn't about the fuse problem. Most of what I heard was the British where happy having a good HE shell on there new tanks. I might be wrong, but I'm quite sure of the marriage between German shell and French casing, even if it was a really short story. But finding where I read or heard about is a daunting task. Spalling is quite deadly but would it still be hot enough to ignite penetrated shell casings? You don't want to leave a tank to recovered during the night.
Field Marshall Montgomery's command tank was an M3 Grant, there is one at Duxford in the UK
The 37mm was beginning to be obsolescent when the M3 rolled out, but it’s high rate of fire helped it’s usefulness.
it could fire canister shot also
And the 75 was designed to kill armor from the beginning, it was never a pure infantry support gun
Plus it had cannister to fire. Very useful.
@@JENKEM1000 That's just not true... The 75mm was developed from the Canon de 75 modèle 1897, which was a French artillery piece made in 1897. The US took the basic design and adapted it to tank use; it even used the same ammunition as the M 1897 artillery piece. It was in fact not designed for use against armor, but by virtue of being in a tank, had ammunition designed for it afterwards to combat enemy armor.
I was going to question what they used it for if they used the 75 for tanks
Great video and well informed!! My vote for next tank to do a walk around would be the M26 Pershing.
I second!
Great video, lots of detail. The thought of the shattered rivets flying around the vehicle when it was hit made me shudder.
Fantastic overview! Great tanks and great personality. I would really love to see this guy moving those heavy hatches open to get a sense of how tough the crews operating these machines really were.
Wonderfully done, Mr. Wilcox. Please keep these coming. I recognize that the folks filming and editing are skilled and effective.
Against the Japanese with British and Commonwealth forces it had more than "limited success against Japanese light tanks", it was generally a great asset helped not only by it's superiority to Japanese tanks but the Japanese had very little anti-tank. As an armoured gun suite in defence or in support of advancing infantry it was put to effective use.
The return of Hank the Tank
Very good and balanced narration, way better than what one is used to on KZhead.
Hank the Tank is back!!!
The counter weight was used because the stabilization gear was designed for the m4 gun not the m3 shown here. The m4 gun was longer thereby heavier hence the added weight. As with the M4 Sherman the stabilization system was considered secret. No training or manuals were provided. Some crews figured it out most didn't.
Actually the first M3 tanks used the shorter M2 gun (31 calibers long), which needed the counter weight) while later models used the same M3 gun as the M4 Sherman tank (40 calibers).
Very well done , the tempo is smooth and upbeat . Your enunciation and clarity , spot on . I am excited for every drop going forward , no doubt , y’all are in the big leagues now .
Such a joy to have a US tank channel now! I love all the other Tank museum channels too but I very much enjoy watching something that I have an real chance to visit!
How about the M8 Greyhound?
The grant also had an inch more armor for the turret front. When first deployed the British called ELH Egypt's last hope. After Africa the grants were deployed to the Pacific. Here its deficiencies became strengths. The high siloute allowed it to see over the tall grass. It could fire in two directions at once. The 37mm gun was devastating at close range against infantry with the canister round. The Japanese had no antitank capability to speak of. This vehicle was a value to the allies. In 1942 when deployed the 37mm gun was still effective against German armor. The Russians hated the Lee calling coffin for 7 brothers.
The Russians had the T-34 which was superior to the lee and really did not need it very much. The British, on the other hand, who were struggling hard with getting an effective native meedium tank until the development of the Cromwell, loved the thing.
Baldwin was indeed a locomotive company whereas Pullman and Pressed Steel were railroad rolling stock manufacturers but neither produced locomotives, just freight and passenger cars (still really "heavy weight" equipment).
you know … your museum and representation of tank’s have a lot of potential to grow more viewer’s! just like the tank museum, if you showcase more vehicles, and explain them more often on youtube, you can DEFINETELY See more subscriber’s and more customer’s … Just focus on less known and liked vehicles, instead of just following the 1 million’d time german tank from ww2 formula
Australian armoured artillery museum has 2 operating m3 grant tanks and im hoping to ride on m3 lee and the m3 grant tanks at this year's Australian armoured artillery museum tank fest this year
Great video! Thank you for all the updates!
Concise, accurate, informative! I particularly appreciate the absence of " mood" or " bumper music". All together, well done!
Really good video, but playback speed of .75 made it sound normal. You have great delivery, don’t rush it!
Excellent video on this forgotten tank
Stopgap is a good name for the M3. This tank got caught up between two time periods for tanks. From their beginnings in World War I, tanks were really nothing but a mobile bunker that moved through infantry positions. But in the interwar years, innovations such as turrets, gun emplacements, armor, and sighting systems were being developed. The M3 was rushed into the fray and because so many things were being developed to make tanks better and more effective, it was pretty much obsolete from day one. To a lessor degree, the same argument goes for the Sherman. The Sherman had all the improvements the M3 lacked, but designers ignored the heavier tank designs that were appearing in Germany. Still, the sheer numbers of Shermans compensated for whatever it lacked in a side by side comparison to heavy tanks.
The Sherman's greatest attribute was that it RAN. A reliable tank that actually shows up someplace is infinitely more useful than a supertank that doesn't.
Very well presented and informative.
Let’s go another Hank the Tank video!!!
I always liked this tank. Cool and unusual. It served its purpose for the time it was intended.
I'd like to see something about the M2 Light tanks you have. Grant/Lee, Sherman, and Stuart get covered quite a bit, but the M2 Light almost never gets a mention.
A very good, informative video, Sir. Well done!
BABE GET OUT OF BED! A NEW HANK THE TANK VIDEO IS OUT!
I just adore the Grant tank. It's one of those "not very useful but still cute" vehicles like the French MS406 fighter or the Finnish BT-5 with 114mm gun.
Nice presentation! I need to make a trip to Wyoming.
Great lesson! I learned a bunch! Thanks.
Cool! I didn't know that you had M3 Mediums out there. I NEED to visit! More Sherman tours are always interesting to me.
excellent! yeah, its much better to have a stopgap when you need something than have nothing at all while youre waiting for a better solution. quite a number went to australia, have you tried contacting anyone there to see if you can find the correct cupula for it? the australian armor and artillery museum recently finished restoring a grant, maybe they could help you source a cupula.
As long as Humphrey Bogart is the tank commander, it's a fine tank!
Good presentation sir.
Interesting that the limited traverse of the M3 is criticised but yet the Stug and Hetzer, both lauded, have the same issue.
Great vid! Thank You!
Really interesting. subscribed!
This tank is iconic for me because of the old Haunted Tank comic books I read a as a kid. They were going to make a movie about the series last decade but the project collapsed.
If you look at the M2, where it came from, you’ll suddenly realize it was needed in order to get to the M4. It’s amazing how much was learned in such a short period of time.
I built a model of the M3 as a kid. I thought it was cool that it had two cannons and could conceivably engage two targets at once! Two cannons better than one right?
Nice presentation. It's good to see a young persoon with an interest in, and good knowledge about, WWII armor.
Not gonna lie, when the video started, the only thing I could think was, "why are you filming your outside model in a Dubois February, when I know there's another one inside the nice warm museum."
Yes, our Grant and M3A4 are nice and cozy, but I didn't want to leave our Aussie Lee left out! (It was indeed very cold.)
Awsome vid and in the Australian Australian Armour and Artillery Museum' Ytube channel they have purchased and done up a few of these old warhorses which is worth the watch. Next tank I think you should do is starting the evolution of American light tanks maybe the M2 or M3 Stuart light tanks.
We kinda like chestnuts! One of my all time favorites! Wonderful memories of my WW 2 vet dad and uncle, who was a tanker in 3rd Division through all 4 spearheads from North Africa through Sicily, Italy and France!!!
Nice work Hank. Just found this channel, enjoying it.
As an m3 medium lover, I think the m3 medium is heavily underrated
Great video! I was there last September! I noted that you have an M103 heavy tank off in that field to the right of the building! Are there plans to do a show on that monster? Thanks!
Great info.
That’s a good and fair assessment of the M3. In what I’ve read of the desert campaign, the British liked them as an improvement on what they had till then and they were welcome between Gazala and the 2nd battle of Alamein. Also, service with the allies against the Japanese, for example in Burma was sterling, where it remained effective. The 88 was a problem for Allied tankers for the whole of the war. BTW, the multibank engine was also deployed in a variant of the Sherman. M4A4, which the British also liked. It was one of the variants that could be converted to take the excellent 17pdr AT gun as a Firefly.
It actually did well in the desert , early in the war . Even Rommel noted several times , that they gave them a problem . Have to remember , that most of the German tanks at this time , was the panzer III , with a 50mm gun . The grant was an issue . They were not happy to see the sherman either ....but they had more panzer 4s by that time .
I have an operational radio communications system for this in my Ham Shack. The General Electric radios take a bay that defined the space for the Sherman as well as the later install of the FM gear for D Day.
Fantastic. Thank you.
I would love to see a video on some of the armored cars you have.
love that it has two main guns. When I was a kid I always thought it was such a cool looking tank.
American interwar tanks had features that marked them as distinctly American and one of them was machine guns everywhere you could conceivably fit one. On the M2 medium the sponson gun was, you guessed it, another machine gun.
We have one of these on display at our barracks, the boys have been restoring it. Was Used by Australia in WW2
Bam ! You are hitting the points , the inflection is natural , no bull sh-- , Tank Museum just met its North American equal , I am so hype for this .
The 37mm gun did have "canister rounds" available usually on load out, HE AP & Smoke also were used.
Australian Armor Museum has a barn find of 3-4 M3's plus the M3 they rebuilt and they were able to use the Australian grenade screen add on plus a few other Aus Army unique items well worth to look at and maybe get plans for the add ons for your Aus Army M3 good video and I am wanting to head out this summer so I can see family in Riverton
Did your museum get some Scorpion tanks out of Washington State? How about a video of the future plans with them?
great video i have always been curious about this tank!! one question- where is the bathroom!😀
Do you have anything on the Stuart tank that also served in North Africa?
Excellent video! M3 Medium tank solo’s Tiger tanks any day of the week! #RankDoesNotMatter
Tigers ate them for breakfast at Tebourba, Maknassy, Sidi-bou-Zid etc.
The narrator is well verse and explains simply .
Yes It filled the gap before the M4 was made Gave the British the tanks to defeat Rommel Gave the Soviets tanks to hold of the Germans
Odd not to mention that both the short M2 75mm, and 'sherman' M3 75mm were installed.
Hank, what do you think it would have been with long caliber 75mm casement mounted?
In the beginning scene of the Bogart movie “Sahara” when they scan over the tanks that look disabled, you have a view of a very rare M3, one with a cast hull. I believe the Russians called it “a grave (or coffin) for seven brothers”
Does the last tank you showed have an engine in it? If so what engine does it have and does it run?
Should have paid attention when he spoke about the engine.
It gave the British a tank that could go toe to toe with Panzer 4s it had its issues but it was goid enough the theme that won the war for the allies!
Nice vid. Spalling description was kinda right, but was bits of armour scabbing off the inside of the plates and doing nasty stuff to the crew.
Great video.... Huzzah!! 😊
should do the pershing next. maybe somthing like the M8 greyhound/scott etc
How many of the cast hull M3 variants where made?
I'd like to see a video where the components of the M3 and M4 are compared to show how the M4 was a natural progression of the M3.
Hello Everyone, For all it's weaknesses, it's pretty handy for blasting bunkers and for a farm tractor when the war is over. Australia is grateful for each and every one!
Thanks!
Thank you
Awesome M3 was a good tank in a very specific timeframe. Its gun was good enough for North Africa. Its armor was good enough until the M4 could be put into service. I also love the one anecdote of a Grant commander being handed a sandwich as theyre about to crest a hill in North Africa.
Jim Belushi did the original Sahara justice in the remake. Big shoes to fill. I'll watch either one. ❤🙏
must admite "I never knew" the 75 out ranged any typ of any PAK 88's at Any Piont in any battles of WWII. THANK YOU Sr! May I Have Another?
Seen it in 1995 "Sahara" named Lullebelle.
The main gun on the A4 looks different , I was hoping you would mention that !
There are not many people saying the Stug or Russian SPGs are not very good. The M3 was adequate enough.
Used extensively by the British at the Battle of the Admin Box. You can make a very good case that this was the tank which really broke the Japanese in the Far East land campaign. IMHO deserves a lot more love than it normally gets.
I’m not so sure that rivets fracturing and being driven inside the tank is spalling. Spalling is generally the inside section of armor plate breaking off and becoming dangerous to crew and equipment inside the tank.
Hey! Hank here: Funny enough the crew and I had a little "side bet" going on someone mentioning this- I had found the definition of spalling to be "Spalling and spallation both describe the process of surface failure in which spall is shed." And spall being "Spall are fragments of a material that are broken off a larger solid body." It was my personal opinion that since rivet shrapnel had broken off from the rivet's body it counted as a spall... hence the term. I will say we did try to find a more precise definition, but in the end decided not to change the line. Anyway, I think I owe someone a soda now. Thanks for the comment!
@@BasicRH All I can say is, Riveting.
@@BasicRH”grenading” like the WW2 pineapple grenade would be the descriptive term.
I’ll say this for the M3, it could and did hold the Line until the M4 Sherman.got there, so I would say it’s a fine machine for the time it entered service. Better imperfect and there than perfect and “too late”!
M3 is pretty effective simply for the fact its the first to bring the 75mm to the fight and was at least reliable and maintainable(unlike almost all others) in much the same way the Sherman was. Also the m3 was the Red armies original IFV where its large internal capacity and crew made a great under armor carrier for dismounts, inspiring the BMP series who again are rocking the 3 guns and the machine gun blossom of death going back to the US doctrine of the M3 conception.
Stopping panzers is a lot more fun with a 37mm at gun and some steel around you than without. It definitely mattered.
It doesn't matter if it mattered. It's the coolest American tank of WW2.
ai always thought that the M3 chassis could have been used as the basis of an A+.A tank by teplacinf the small turret with a new turret with multiple AA auto cannon or quad >50 caliber machineguns. The 75 mm could be removed or left in place for infantry support
The British in Africa seemed to appreciate the Lee. It was enough to defeat German Armor when it was sorely needed.