In Search of the Perfect Sphere

The idea of building spherical tanks was born long ago. Spherical tanks were treated as a viable weapon during WWI, but interest in this topic peaked in the 1930s and 40s. Most of the time, work reached the prototype stage, or sometimes only scale demonstration models were built. Nevertheless, spherical machines continued to enchant the minds of engineers. In our time, the "descendants" of spherical tanks are rather common, having lost their drawbacks.

From the Pickelhaube to the Stahlhelm

Many years after the World Wars, the infantry helmet has become a symbol of war. A descendant of bronze and iron helmets used by legionnaires, gladiators, knights, and other warriors of the past, the steel helmet is one of the few elements of a soldier's equipment that hasn't changed its initial function in our days, despite significant technological progress. The most memorable such helmet of the first half of the 20th century was the Stahlhelm (steel helmet). Its aggressive and predatory form is easily recognizeable: a combination of a cylindrical portion, protecting the head, a cone-shaped portion protecting the back, neck, and ears from shrapnel raining from above, and a protruding visor. The Wehrmacht soldier's visage with a stark shadow cast by the helmet's visor was a staple of propaganda. What is the history of this helmet?

The Birth of the Three-Line Rifle

The history of the Russian model 1891 bolt action rifle, better known as the Mosin rifle or the "mosinka" has spanned over 100 years, but this weapon still fights, and doesn't just collect dust in warehouses. How did the three line rifle come to be, and what came before?

The First Classic Tank

France was the second country in the world to equip itself with tanks. The French were about half a year behind the British, but their designs were a lot more progressive. The French army had the most tanks at the end of WWI, and quality came along with this quantity. At this point, the Renault FT was the backbone of the French armoured force. This was the most numerous tank of its time, the first mass produced light tank, and the first tank in the world of a layout that was later deemed classic. What is the story of the creation of the Renault FT?

Char B: A Difficult Beginning

The Char B1 and its improved version, the Char B1 bis, stand as the symbol of French tank building in WWII. At the start of WWII, these were the best medium tanks, combining shell-proof armour and serious armament, capable of destroying any tank in the world. Meanwhile, several elements of the Char B1, such as its suspension and its short barreled 75 mm howitzer in the hull, were rather archaic. Naturally, there was a good reason for this. Even though the Char B1 was accepted into service in 1934, five years before the start of the war, its story begins more than a decade and a half prior...

World of Tanks History Section: The British Devil and His Brothers

No one could have guessed on September 15th, 1916 that many military theory books would become obsolete in an instant. The first tank entered its baptism by fire, and an unnamed German's cry "The devil is coming!" announced the coming of the new god of war.

French and German tanks came after British ones, but the "rhombus" was the first of the first. Nine tanks belonged to this family. Some of them made it in time for the war, others remained prototoypes. Episodes collected in this article will briefly describe the "rhomboid" family.

World of Tanks History Section: 100 Years of Tanks

1916. For many months, endless trench warfare raged on along the fronts of the First World War. Attacks into a storm of enemy shells and bullets, thousands of dead men to push the enemy back hundreds of meters. Day after day, week after week. The way out of this dead end was coming. A new, never before seen weapon, a demon of technological warfare, was already coming to life within British arsenals. Its name was "tank".

In order to bring this fighting machine to life, four technical inventions were necessary, as well as one condition to bring them together. Here they are.

Garford-Putilovets

Armoured Garford Car equipped with 3 inch anti-assault gun designed by the Putilov factory and two machineguns.

World of Tanks History Section: Armoured Cars of the Pre-Tank Era

How do you protect a soldier from bullets, fragments, and shrapnel? Can you quickly move a machinegun or a cannon over tens of kilometers without using horses? These problems were solved with cars at the start of the 20th century. By that time, they moved past the stage of awkward boxes on wheels. There were no more problems with speed, carrying capacity, or off-road performance. The military had its carrying platform and decided to protect the crew and driver with armoured plates. This is how the armoured car was born. Here is some information about some armoured cars of the pre-tank era.

Astro-Daimler Panzerwagen

This is one of the first armoured cars in history, designed and built in Austria-Hungary in 1905. The design was ahead of its time, and it's no wonder, as it was designed by a representative of the famous engineering dynasty, Paul Daimler.

He added a series of features which later became classic: all wheel drive, a fully armoured hull, a hemispherical turret with a port for a 7.7 mm Maxim gun (later there were two). The front and side armour was 3.5 mm thick, the turret armour was 4 mm thick. The armoured plates were curved, increasing protection. Daimler was right to be proud of his design. One thing remained: a successful demonstration and an order from the Imperial army.

The project met its end due to the sound of its engine. It frightened the horses of some high ranking people attending the trials. Emperor Franz-Joseph was discouraged and infuriated. He claimed that there is no room for these vehicles on a battlefield and left Daimler no chances.

Minerva

Belgium was one of the first countries to hear the thunder of the Great War in 1914. Lieutenant Charles Ankar of the Belgian General Staff drove to the battlefield in his personal car. In order to protect his life, he armoured it. Ankar's superiors considered his experience promising. Several other Minervas were covered in armour, armed with 8 mm Hotchkiss machineguns, and sent into battle.

These cars showed themselves well during the maneuver period of the First World War, turning out to be an unpleasant surprise for the Germans. However, once positional warfare started, Minervas became harder to use. As a result, the Belgian armoured car squadron was gifted to Emperor Nikolai II and moved to the Russian front.

After the end of WWI, Minervas were repeatedly modernized and remained in service wit the Belgian army until 1935.

Rolls-Royce Armoured Car

Today, Rolls-Royce cars are a symbol of luxury more than a method of transportation. Little is known about the military career of this car. In 1914, the famous Silver Ghost was armoured by the British, following the Belgian Minerva design.

It was covered with 8-9 mm thick armour, with a rear fighting compartment. The turret had a cylindrical turret with sloped sides to increase protection. It also featured a platform big enough to transport several soldiers or equipment. The Rolls-Royce was armed with a heavy 7.7 mm Vickers machinegun, propelled by an excellent 6-cylinder engine. The first three vehicles were ready and sent to Europe in December of 1914.

By that time, the war became positional, and the effectiveness of armoured cars became limited. Nevertheless, these cars participated in battle inside the United Kingdom in 1916 during the Easter Uprising in Dublin. Rolls-Royce armoured cars fought alongside improvised armoured cars built with boilers from the Guinness brewery on three-ton trucks. The last Rolls-Royce armoured cars were used by Great Britain as late as 1944.

Bussing A5P

As a rule, armoured cars on the battlefields of WWI earned their way there through a tender, but there were exceptions. Facing the first armoured cars of the Entente armies, the Germans attempted a symmetric response to their enemy. The Bussing prototype was inferior to its competitors, but still managed to make it to the battle.

The Bussing A5P was a rather large all wheel drive car. This design differed from others with its rear and front driver's compartments and the ability to bring a large amount of guns on target. The Bussing had ten portholes for machineguns, but only three were fixed in place. The crew (10 men) were supposed to move between the remaining ones.

All three assembled Bussing A5Ps participated in battle on the Western Front. When Romania entered the war on the side of the Entente in 1916, the armoured cars were sent there. These grotesque children of WWI survived the war. The last Bussing was lost somewhere in the Ukrainian steppe during the Russian Civil War.

Russo-Balt Type S

The first Russian armoured car was designed and sent to production in a surprisingly short time. Minister of War V.A. Sukhomlinov approved the project on August 17th, 1914, and in mid-October Nikolai II wrote in his diary: "At 11:00, on the palace grounds, I was shown a newly formed company of cars with 47 mm guns, machineguns, and steel shields. It leaves for a campaign."

The hurried design stunned the enemy. Its 5 mm chrome-nickel armour reliably protected the front and rear of the Russo-Balt, and the 3.5 mm sides could still take a hit. The secret to its protection lay in the sloping of the armour, designed by Colonel A.N. Dobrzhanskiy and engineer Staff Captain A.Ya. Grawen.

The Russo-Balt was armed with a menacing trio of 7.62 mm Maxim machineguns, but the machineguns had to be supported with cannon fire. Steel-lined gun trucks were only a band-aid solution. As a result, the Garford cannon-armed armoured car was built.

Austin

Minister Sukhomlinov wanted to increase the size of his armoured car park after approving the Russo-Balt by buying armoured cars from Entente allies. British-made Austin armoured cars were ordered in the fall of 1914 and arrived in Russia by the end of the year.

These two-machinegun armoured cars with horizontal armoured plates demonstrated a weak transmission and vulnerable armour. Despite that, a second batch of Austins was bought in March of 1915.

In November 1915, commander of the Reserve Armoured Company Captain Khaletskiy made a series of comments about the design: "One exit hatch in the side... Small internal volume... Difficulty steering while reversing... Lack of space for a spare wheel..." It is hard to tell if this was nitpicking or reasonable criticism. In August of 1916, the Military Directorate ordered another 60 Austin armoured cars and the same number of chassis for domestically built cars. The latter had doubled driver's controls. Khaletskiy's criticism must have been heard.

Garford-Putilov

The idea of a fully fledged cannon-armed armoured car was brought to fruition by the chief of the infantry officer school, N.M. Filatov. American five-ton Garford trucks were a suitable chassis for the project. 33 cars were shipped to Petrograd in December of 1914. Assembly began at the Putilov factory in January.

The Garford's size allowed the use of thicker armour (6.5 mm), mostly placed vertically. Since the engine and fuel tanks were placed above and to the left and right of the driver and commander, armour protection was of utmost importance. The slow but powerful trucks were armed with the 76 mm anti-assault mod. 1910 gun and three Maxim guns.

The vehicles were assigned to machinegun armoured car platoons, reinforcing a duo of Austins. Each Garford had a personal name. These armoured cars fought in WWI, Civil War, and small wars of he 1920s and 1930s.

AB Ansaldo

Italy entered WWI on the side of the Entente in 1915. The Joe Ansaldo company designed a machinegun armoured car for the army. The 60 hp engine let the car accelerate to 70 kph. The hull was made from chrome-nickel steel. The armament of the Automobile Blindato Ansaldo consisted of three machineguns in a two-level turret. The crew consisted of 6 men.

The Ansaldo fought at the Austro-Hungarian border, and later against the Germany army. In late January of 1916, the creators of the Ansaldo armoured car sent a proposal to the Russian GAU for a purchase. The armoured car's protection was advertised to be "...protected with special armour, impermeable from 100 meters to the bullet of the Italian model 1891 rifle. The motor and wheels are completely protected by shields." The Italians asked for blueprints of machineguns and data on shells of Russian artillery, allegedly to modify the armoured car.

The Ansaldo did not have a chance to fight on the Russian front, but they had a much more exotic fate. After the Spanish Civil War they fought in the African campaign of the Italian army.

Archer

In the summer of 1915, the "Archer automobile-machinegun" was offered to the Russian War Directorate by the French engineer J. Archer.

The French hyped up their design, and its characteristics were quite high: a four-cylinder 16 hp engine, top speed of 60 kph, 7 mm chrome-nickel armour. The only armament was a rear-mounted machinegun.

The creator of Russian armoured car forces Major-General P.I. Sekretev familiarized himself with this proposal and categorically declined: "... the Archer armoured car does not protect the crew from shrapnel, its engine is weak for Russian roads, one machinegun is insufficient, moving backwards is difficult... The starter is complicated and unreliable."

Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: Adna Chaffee

The creator of the American armoured forces did not fight in a single large armoured battle. He was born on September 23rd, 1884, when tanks were far from the drawing board, and died on August 22nd, 1941, before the United States took an active part in the Second World War. However, Adna Romanza Chaffee Jr. did have combat experience.

He participated in the police action of American cavalry in Cuba in 1909, served in the Philippine occupational forces in 1914-1915, then transferred to France where he fought in the Battle of Saint-Mihiel and the Meuse-Argonne Offensive. Here, Chaffee first encountered tanks, a new weapon that has not yet reached its full potential. Soon, this weapon would become Chaffee's life.

Anti-tank trenches of bureaucracy

The experience of WWI was carefully studied by militaries of the world. Did senior American commanders understand the significance of the tank as an independent mobile fighting unit? They did, but not fully, and not unanimously. Many senior officers considered that the horse was still viable.

These disagreements were enhanced by the National Defense Act of 1920, which assigned tanks only one role: infantry support. Cavalry, where Chaffee served, was not supposed to have tanks. There was no talk of armoured forces as an independent branch, either. In order for it to appear, Chaffee and his allies would have to overcome the inertia of the American bureaucratic machine.

It was important to obtain authorization for at least a small mechanized unit and prove its usefulness in practice. This idea could be pushed through by a high ranking and respected field commander, whose opinion had weight to it in a discussion at any level. For instance, in the Soviet Union, Budyonniy was a proponent of total army mechanization. Americans that fought for the same thing did not have such a trump card. Major-General Chaffee, the main supporter of these reforms, earned his reputation only during peace time.

The American "tank lobby" won one small but significant victory over the bureaucrats: ordering a Combat Car for cavalry units. Even though it was a tracked vehicle with a rotating turret, it was not formally a tank, therefore Chaffee's opponents did not complain. This victory would soon become the foundation of the American tank program.

A willful general's theories

In 1928, Adna Chaffee managed to get his four year plan for the creation of a mechanized unit approved. However, Congress only allotted $284,000 for this task after two years, out of the required four million.

The foundation was laid, but the question of how to properly use these vehicles remained. The Americans could not follow the experience of other nations, as the doctrines of the leading tank-building nations, Britain, France, and Germany, varied wildly. Chaffee had to carefully analyze worldwide experience.

One of the first conclusions was that "with combined arms support, tank forces are the most powerful offensive force known today". WWII would confirm Chaffee's theory in less than 10 years.

His other theories also proved true. Indeed, the most effective way to use tanks turned out to be en masse, in corps or armies. Tanks without infantry, artillery, and air support turned out to be ineffective at cementing their success in battle. Chaffee's prediction that the coming years would see the increase in gun calibers and armour thickness was correct as well. Finally, the general remarked that the success of tanks on the battlefield was decided by "training and professional experience of specially selected and trained personnel. This training will take a large amount of time and cannot be replaced with any accelerated program".

In the end of 1934, Chaffee became the Budget and Law-making Coordinator in the Staff of the United States Army, giving him a real possibility of influencing the creation of independent tank and mechanized units with their own doctrine. He had one important thing left to do: confirm his assumptions in practice. This possibility arose in five years.

How to defeat regressives in two strikes

The Plattsburgh military exercise were held in the summer of 1939. Adna Chaffee participated as the commander of the 7th Cavalry (mechanized) Brigade and the "blue" side. His subordinates' actions against the "black" side were so successful that the exercise was stopped early, as the advantage of an aggressive tank offensive over traditional static defense was made very clear.

Chaffee widely applied speedy maneuvers, rapid change in the direction of attack, deep penetration into the enemy rear. In this way, he manages to paralyze the "black" team's attempt to adequately react to the changing situation. A combined arms attack with a concentrated fist of armour proved much more effective than infantry tactics with tanks pulled apart by battalion.

As the Plattsburgh exercises happened before the start of WWII, it is incorrect to state that he copied German Blitzkrieg. His strategy obviously was based on European experience, but it was independently created.

Despite the success of this doctrine, Chaffee decided that it needs serious improvements. In order to reach peak effectiveness, the tank "fist" needed infantry to hold ground and engineers to provide vital support. Chaffee worked on his mistakes and applied his new doctrine to large scale exercises in Louisiana a year later.

This time, the task was harder. Aside from standard objectives, Chaffee's 7th Cavalry Brigade was assigned the 66th Infantry-Tank Brigade as reinforcements. In 48 hours, these two units were supposed to join into one, march for 120 km, and deliver an attack against an enemy.

Despite the fact that this strike unit was formed ltierally on the march, it successfully penetrated organized defenses and reached operational depth. Here is where the exercise ended.

Adna Chaffee's stunning success allowed him to decide the future of the American armoured forces. Senior officers, including Brigadier General George Patton, formed the tank forces as an independent branch of the armed forces with its own doctrine. Conservative infantry and cavalry officers were no longer permitted to make these decisions. Chaffee himself died in 1941 and never saw his creation in action, but he did the most important thing, just in time.

Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: Railway Warriors

Land Merrimack: the first real armoured train, 1862

When the Northern forces sieged Richmond during the American Civil War, Southern commanders were afraid that assault guns will be used against the city. In order to counter this threat, General Lee ordered a train car with a powerful 165 mm naval gun. The Navy was supposed to build and service it. It already had experience with armour, as recently steamship Merrimack was refitted into ironclad Virginia.

The "Land Merrimack" consisted of an armoured train car protected by two layers of thick strips of rolled iron on an oak foundation. The armour was installed on the front and on the sides, the rear and the top remained open to allow for ventilation and crew evacuation. Behind the armoured car was a locomotive, protected from bullets by bales of cotton. The same "armour" was used on carts with riflemen.

The only use of the "Land Merrimack" in support of infantry happened during the battle for Savage's Station in late June of 1862. The armoured train was effective, killing many Northerners and forcing them to abandon a hospital with 500 wounded.

"Hairy Mary": the strangest armour, 1899

The first widespread use of armoured trains was during the Boer War of 1899-1902. The Boers actively used guerilla tactics to harass British supply lines. In order to protect them, the British started building armoured trains that served as mobile garrisons.

One of the most interesting armoured trains of the era was built using the Havelock locomotive. Instead of armoured plate, the locomotive was protected with tightly wound hemp rope 6 inches (15 cm) thick. This made the locomotive practically invulnerable to bullets and small caliber shells.

Due to its exotic exterior, the locomotive was nicknamed "Hairy Mary". This was the most unusual armour for this type of armoured vehicle.

The first Russian armoured train, 1914

This train was built in Tarnopol in the workshops of the 9th Railway Battalion on a captured Austro-Hungarian locomotive and three train cars: two with machineguns and one with a cannon. The armament was also captured. It consisted of one 80 mm Austrian gun and 12 machineguns. The train was protected by regular steel plates and sand sandwiched between boards. One of the machinegun cars had a turret for observation of the battlefield.

Despite the primitive design, the train fought well and proved itself in the first battles of WWI. For instance, in the Lvov direction, on August 22nd, 1914, a sudden attack by the armoured train allowed the capture of an important bridge and ensure the capture of Stanislawow. The armoured train of the 9th Battalion often earned the praise of commanders.

The first Russian armoured train finished its career as a part of the Red Army on the South Front in 1919.

Armoured Motorized Train Car "Zaamurets": a train with a curious fate, 1916

A self propelled train car was built for the Russian army using the most advanced technology of the time. Its armour was sloped. It was propelled by gasoline engines, equipped with rangefinders and periscopes, as well as internal telephones. The Zaamurets was armed with 57 mm automatic Nordenfelt guns.

During its service, this train car changed hands many times. Starting out in the Russian army, it then was used by the Ukrainian units of the Central Rada in 1917. In January of 1918 the Zaamurets fought for the Reds, but literally a month later it was captured by a gang of anarchists and used to terrorize villages near Odessa. A while later, the Red Army recaptured it.

The Civil War brought the Zaamurets to Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk). Here, the Czechoslovak Legion, fighting for the White Army, captured it. The Czechs renamed it "Orlik", replaced some of the armament, and used it until their departure from Russia. The train was left to the Japanese, which later gave it to the Whites near Vladivostok. In 1922, the Zaamurets retreated with the Whites to Harbin. In the mid-1920s the train fought in the army of Chinese field commander Zhang Xu Chan. Some sources say that the Japanese captured it in 1931 in Manchuria.

Rain on Baku: an armoured train strategic operation, 1920

In the spring of 1920, the Red Army defeated the White Guards commander Anton Denikin and drew closer to the borders of Azerbaijan. The capture of this republic was very important, as it was rich in oil. However, the local government was prepared to burn the oil wells lest they fall into the hands of the Bolsheviks.

In order to resolve this situation, four armoured trains were selected: "Timofey Ulyanov", "Third International", "Red Dagestan" and "Red Astrakhan". On the night of April 27th, they penetrated enemy fortified lines, fought their way through 200 kilometers, and burst into Baku.

When Red sympathizers heard about the success of the armoured trains, a rebellion erupted in Baku. In only one day, control of the city was in Bolshevik hands.

Armoured Train #13: the smallest in history, 1940

This dwarf was built for a narrow rail gauge, only 38.1 cm wide. It consisted of two train cars, one with a Boys AT rifle, one with two machineguns, one of which could be used for anti-air.

Despite superstitions, the train was indexed #13. The locomotive was ironically named "Hercules". #13 entered service in July of 1940.

Despite the fact that the Germans never landed in Britain, the train still fought in battle. During the Battle of Britain, the train crew's AA gunners claimed that they shot down two enemy planes, a He-111 bomber and a Bf 109 fighter.

The train remained in service until 1943.

Armoured Train #1, 66th Squadron: the heaviest armed, 1942

This Soviet armoured train was built in Voroshilovgrad (today Lugansk) at the October Revolution factory. It consisted of an armoured locomotive and two armoured train platforms. The first had a T-34 turret with a 76 mm gun, two 76 mm guns separately, and 6 machineguns. The second had a KV-2 turret with a 152 mm howitzer, a 76 mm gun, and a 45 mm gun in a T-34 turret, as well as 8 machineguns. The train also had two DShK AA machineguns.

The train fought at Voroshiliovgrad with the 66th Squadron. Documents record that it repelled 18 German attacks from the air and mention that some planes were shot down.

German recon trains: the most maneuverable, 1944

The most maneuverable armoured trains of WWII were German light and heavy recon trains. They consisted of several (up to 10 for light and 12 for heavy) armoured draisines with internal combustion engines. A main feature of these trains was that, if necessary, the draisines could separate and travel independently. This increased the tactical flexibility of the armoured train.

The draisines were armed with machineguns, automatic 20 mm AA guns, and various caliber guns taken from German, Italian, and maybe even Soviet tanks.

These trains were used in the Balkans in the second half of 1944.

"Kozma Minin" and "Ilya Muromets", longest serving, 1942-1945

These two armoured trains were a part of the 31st Special Squadron. The "special" label indicated that these trains were equipped with rocket launchers. Additionally, "Kozma Minin" and "Ilya Muromets" were equipped with 76 mm guns, machineguns, and AA guns.

The trains entered service in 1942, as a part of the Bryansk Front. In 1943, they fought at Bolkhov and Mtsensk, covering weaknesses in Soviet defenses. In these battles, they destroyed 11 German strongholds, a mortar battery, and two trains.

In 1944 and 1945, "Kozma Minin" and "Ilya Muromets" fought their way through the Ukraine, Poland, and Germany, covering the Red Army during the crossing of the Vistula and the liberation of Warsaw. They met the end of the war in Germany, at Frankfurt an der Oder, protecting the rear of the 1st Belorussian Front.

Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: How Tanks Learned to Fight

European strategists planned on finishing up the war that erupted in August of 1914 in only a few weeks. Many young officers were afraid that they would not have time to prove their bravery on the battlefield. Sadly, both groups were mistaken. Not that much time elapsed before the war ended up in a positional dead end. All offensives ended up the same: hundreds, sometimes tens of meters of progress at a horrible cost in human lives.

Both sides of the conflict looked for a solution, inventing more and more new types of weapons until one September morning in 1916, the sound of tracks and tank engines filled the air.

Perfect Theory and Flawed Practice

The British military theorist Ernest Swinton and French Jean-Baptiste Etienne proved the need for tanks on the battlefield and described in detail how they should be used. They wrote that tanks should be used suddenly, in large numbers, and only on appropriate terrain. Here, Swinton immediately made the note that there is often a gap between theory and practice.

That was exactly what happened in first tank battles. The army, exhausted by battles at the Somme, needed hope for a victory. Not in a year or two, but now. There was no time to save up tanks, train crews, and practise cooperation with infantry. Any delay could mean loss of initiative to the Germans. This is why instead of armoured armadas, only 32 tanks went into battle on September 15th, 1916. Five got stuck in mud or craters, and nine had their engines break down, but the rest reached their battlefield.

Of course, the first tank attack shocked the Germans. However, the miserly amount of tanks failed to influence the entire front, and the Germans quickly regained their courage and no longer fled from the "devils" that appeared on the battlefield. They fought against tanks, and with some success. Grandiose claims of overwhelming success in Entente press had little in common with the truth.

Swinton's cautions were confirmed in the first battle, and the situation repeated itself with some regularity. Tanks attacked through a pock-marked landscape, got stuck in it without the aid of engineers, and were destroyed by enemy fire. Infantry followed tanks clumsily, German machineguns mowed down anyone who was visible between the tanks, and many soldiers died from fragments of shells that exploded on the tanks' armour. Tanks without infantry were easy prey for the enemy. Tanks were supposed to be a wonder weapon, but resulted in little more than disappointment and criticism.

Infantry's Low Priority Escort

Despite all that, tanks were seen as a useful invention. By the end of the war in 1918, armoured forces began to take shape. Due to technical limitations, their vehicles could not perform any tasks independently. Tanks worked tightly with infantry, and there were rigid rules about how it was done.

A tank attack was to start at dawn, so drivers could see. Excess noise was to be avoided. Tanks travelled in groups of three: while the front tank suppressed the enemy, the other two cut a path through the wire for infantry. Each tank had no more than a platoon of infantry (25-30 men) accompanying it. Tanks made very narrow openings in barbed wire, so too many soldiers would create a crowd that was vulnerable to enemy fire.

Infantry split up into three groups. The first group destroyed the enemies in trenches with the aid of tanks. The third group marked openings on the wire and guarded them from enemy counterattacks. The last group assisted the first two and other attacking infantry.

The most important thing for infantry was to not lose contact with tanks. Armoured vehicles could cover it, force the enemy to withdraw, or just distract advancing enemies. When attacking a village or a forest, some tanks would attempt to get into the enemy flank or rear. Maneuvers were concealed with a smoke screen. Some tanks were left behind to protect flanks.

If there was a delay, the tanks were supposed to take cover. After that, tank commanders and gunners were to leave the tank, meet up with infantry commanders, and discuss further action.

Definitive Success: Battle of Hamel

A classic example of a competent tank attack was the battle at Hamel on July 4th, 1918. Before its start, cooperation between tanks and infantry was drilled thoroughly. In order to "befriend" the soldiers and these fairly esoteric vehicles, a proper name was painted on each one. This simplified communications and improved morale. During training, tanks crossed real trenches and barbed wire. Soldiers not only rode on and in tanks, but were given a chance to drive them.

The Entente carefully examined enemy positions. Aircraft were constantly flying over the front lines. In the morning, the artillery and machineguns started firing suddenly. The Germans didn't know if it would be an offensive or just another day of a positional war.

When the real attack started, the noise of tank engines were drowned out by aircraft. This trick was used several times, such as when attacking Amiens in August of 1918 or by the Red Army during Operation Bagration in 1944.

60 new MkV tanks participated in the offensive. Vehicles followed the creeping artillery barrage closely. Every 3-4 minutes, the barrage shifted forward by 100 meters. Tanks proved very helpful when fighting machinegunners. As a result, the Entente captured about 1500 prisoners and many weapons, including brand new anti-tank rifles.

Support in battle was also carefully practised. Each tank carried two crates of ammunition, magazines for Lewis guns, and drinking water. They were in turn supported by tanks converted to armoured carriers. Four of these vehicles delivered over 20 tons of supplies only half an hour after enemy positions were captured: ammunition, grenades, water, barbed wire, and stakes. For the first time in history, aircraft didn't just perform reconnaissance from the air, but dropped supplies for infantry with parachutes.

The commander of the operation, Australian General John Monash, later wrote: "everything was decided within 93 minutes".

And so, within two years, tanks made their journey from questionable novelties to a fully fledged type of forces. Here, the evolution of offensive tank tactics stopped. Europe was tired of war. Although there were many conflicts between 1918 and 1939, they were mostly local. Experience gained from them was limited and specialized. When a new large war started, tank tactics had to be learned anew from almost nothing.

Original article available here.

Author: Evgeniy Belash

Evgeniy Belash is a historian, an author of books and articles on the First and Second World Wars. His best known work is "Myths of the First World War". He is the author of a book "Tanks of the Interbellum" on the participation of armoured vehicles in military conflicts in the 1920s and 1930s.

Sources:

• Fletcher David. Tanks and Trenches: first hand accounts of tank warfare in the First World War. History Press, 2009. P. 116–120.
• Infantry and tank co-operation and training. War department, 1918.
• List, Single, Major. The battle of Booby's Bluffs. United States Infantry Association, 1922.
• Monash, John. The Australian victories in France in 1918. London Hutchinson, 1920. P. 48–60.
• Mitchell F. Tanks at War. History of development of tanks in the 1914-1918 World War. Moscow. Gosvoyenizdat, 1935

World of Tanks History Section: Tank Spies of the First World War

When the first British MkI tanks reached the battlefield, intelligence workers all over the world found their hands full. Placed as observers, military attaches, or as spies behind enemy lines, agents began exploring the topic of "land battleships". Since 1910, intelligence and counterintelligence in Russia was controlled by the Special Department of the General Quartermaster of the Chief Directorate of the General Staff. Its office was the one receiving information from foreign agents.

After the debut of tanks in September of 1916 at the Somme, Russian intelligence passed on information found in British press on these new events. Their opinions were, at first, very critical. For instance, a message written on December 10th, 1916: "All data on English tanks, both from a mechanical and a tactical point of view, shows that they do not present a significant interest, which is further confirmed by the English abandoning them". When he talked of abandonment, the author meant that British engineers already began work on modernization of the first tank and other types of this weapon.

Scepticism to Interest

Two months is not a lot of time. However, it was a new year, and tank building made a step forward. One Russian military attache was able to attend British tank trials. His report was different from previous ones: "Trials were carried out on clay soil, soft from rain, with a fairly sound foundation. Tanks crossed huge steep holes up to 8 feet deep, a robust parapet, and an ordinary brick English house. The tank broke up its walls and crossed over the wreckage ... Trials went very well." The use of the word "tank" as a feminine word is curious, but remember that the English word "tank" came into military use only a few months before that. It will be a while before it enters the vocabulary of people all over the world.

In this document, another section is of interest. "Tanks have been improved compared to what I saw in September on the English front." As it is unlikely that an agent would confuse early fall of 1916 with November, this means that Russian intelligence already knew about its ally's work on tanks long before they were used in battle.

The message included news that the vehicles were armed with Lewis guns. It can be said without a doubt that the nameless scout observed MkIV tanks, as they were the first to carry these weapons. Their side and top armour was improved. It is important to note that these tanks arrived to the front lines in April of 1917, and fought their first battle on June 7th. Again, Russian military intelligence was aware of the newest vehicles months before they reached the battlefield.

Behind Enemy Lines

The most interesting intelligence work was targeting German tanks. One of the residents wrote: "Various sources report that there are two types of tanks, big and small... Tanks have a rounded shape in front, with a 35 degree slope."

The Germans indeed had a number of tank designs, but this description matches the famous Colossal. The same title would be given to Krupp's superheavy gun that shot at Paris in 1918. A weapon of such magnitude was needed on tracks. The Colossal, or K-Wagen, was created as a superheavy breakthrough tank that would sweep away French defenses with its 150 tons of mass.

The rhombus shape of British was smoothed out to armoured ovals in the front and rear. The project was approved at the end of June 1917, and not even a model was made until next year. Thanks to intelligence professionals, Russian high command obtained sketches of the Kaiser's "vengeance weapon".

They also retrieved information on another German tank which actually got to fight: the A7V. "Another type [of tank] was very large, the size of a railroad car", an agent in Ogenkwar wrote. This was a good comparison. The 30-ton tank was also symmetric, and carried a record of 18 men. Each one had it rough due to the heat inside the tank. The heavyweight A7V was clumsy, heavily armoured, and had poor visibility and cripplingly small firing angles, even worse on the MkI. Only 20 of these tanks were built, and they had little influence on the battlefield of WWI.

Kamikaze Tankettes and the best anti-tank weapons

Russian intelligence also intercepted information about German work on early transporters of explosive charges, something like Borgward tankettes used in WWII. "Sources indicate that the Germans propose the use of small automobiles, akin to English "tanks", to destroy enemy wire and trenches. Loaded with explosive or poisonous substances, they are directed towards the enemy with no crew. The explosion is controlled by a clockwork mechanism", one agent wrote.

There is only one vehicle of this type known to be built in WWI, the French Torpille Terrestre, or "land torpedo". Controlled by wire, this tankette would approach enemy lines and destroy them with explosives. A prototype was built in 1915, but that was it. It is difficult to say what the German analogue would have been like, as information is lacking.

Obviously this information on new tanks caused development of methods to fight them. Here, specialists of the Entente matched each other. "Our artillery, same as the English, is considered the main method of combat with heavy armoured cars." The 37 mm trench cannon firing AP grenades at short ranges was considered the most effective weapon.

It is known that the Russian military had no tanks. However, Austrian WWI reports include a mention of Russian attacks on Austro-Hungarian positions at Bukovina, allegedly supported by two tanks. These were likely Garford armoured cars equipped with cannons, but the enemy faced those before, and it is difficult to confuse tracked and wheeled vehicles. What could they have been? It looks like another mystery of early tank building.

Sources and literature:

• RGVIA 802-4-1477
• S.L. Fedoseev, Tanki Pervoy Mirovoy, Moscow, 2012
• Das Kriegsjahr 1917; 6. Das Kriegsjahr 1917

Article author: Yuri Bakhurin. Yuri Bakhurin is a military historian, an author of many publications in regional and central scientific press: "Questions of History" magazine, "Military-Historical Magazine", "Military-Historical Archive", "Motherland", "Anthology of War", the "Reitar" almanac, and many more. He is also the author of the "Panzerjager Tiger (P) Ferdinand: Use in Combat" book.
Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: Swinton's Land Battleship

In the end of 1915, the European theater was in crisis. Opposing forces had such deep and powerful defensive lines that any offensive would come at a cost of many lives, and would have miserable success. Tends, sometimes hundreds, of thousands would die to take a few hundred meters. In order to exit this dead end, a new means of waging was was needed. One of the many proposals was the tank. Of course, no one used the term in the process of development. The projects were called "self-propelled pillbox-fort", "land battleship", etc.

As for the requirements of the new battle machine, one of the most important criteria was its off-road performance. The field of battle is difficult to traverse. It is covered in trenches, barbed wire, craters. For armoured cars, common in armies of the time, this terrain was impassable. Only tracked vehicles could deal with such obstacles.

Attempts to build such vehicles in Britain already happened, but the land forces were staunch conservatives, and constantly told inventors that they have no need for such vehicles.

Winston Churchill, at the time the First Lord of the Admiralty, displayed an interest in these new projects. Even his influence was not enough to change the army's mind. Churchill had to do it himself. In February of 1915, he created a Committee of Land Ships at the Admiralty, a small department with engineers, polticians, and naval officers. The committee was tasked with developing vehicles that would later be called tanks. The committee was headed by the head of the Naval Construction Directorate, Tennison D'Encur.

The commmitee had many projects and ideas. Mobile shields, steam-powered tractors, amazing vehicles made of two parts, connected together with a flexible chain (land ship "Pedrail"), three-tracked armoured tractor "Killen-Strait", with three wooden tracks. All of this needed to be examined and evaluated, and, if the idea was deemed worthwhile, built and tested. The finances of the committee came from the Admiralty's special treasury, which existed thanks to Churchill's timely understanding of the potential of the new weapon.

The most reasonable and promising project chosen by the committee was Ernest Dunlop Swinton's land battleship. Swinton used the American Holt tractor as a base, which turned out to be the right choice, as no other tractor measured up to the requirements for tanks.

Under the committee's patronage, Swinton successfully completed His Majesty's Land Battleship "Centipede" (also known as "Big Willy" or "Mother"). On February 2nd, 1916, at Marquis of Solsbery's estate, the vehicles was demonstrated to the cabinet of ministers, Admiralty, and General Staff. The trials were successful enough that the army agreed that these tanks need to be built. On February 8th, Big Willy was shown to King George V, who was so impressed, he shook the driver's hand. The land ship, finally and irreversibly, was given the green light.

In order to maintain secrecy, the workers assembling hulls were told they were making mobile water tanks. The name stuck, and since then, 20th century's most menacing fighting machine was called a tank. On September 15th, 1916, the tanks created panic when they arrived on the battlefield at Somme. The effect was mostly psychological, as the Mk. I tanks had neither outstanding reliability nor firepower. The first battle with tanks showed that the way out of positional war was found, and should be developed further. At that point, no one could have guessed how tanks would change the art of war.

Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: Flying Elephant

Englishman William Tritton must have had a well developed sense of humour to call his creation a "Flying Elephant".

The reason for its creation were the deficiencies of the Mark I tanks, discovered after their use in battle. Despite the panic that they caused at the Somme in September of 1916, the first British tanks were far from technical perfection. Additionally, once the Germans recovered from the initial shock, they discovered that the tanks can be penetrated not only by cannon fire, but by large caliber bullets.

Tritton had a choice: correct the deficiencies of the Mark I or create a brand new vehicle. He chose the second path. By December, a new tank project was ready and presented to the military.

The tank was very modern for its time. It would have had real anti-shell armour: 76 mm in the front, 51 on the sides and rear. Furthermore, Tritton developed a brand new suspension for his "Flying Elepant", which included two additional tracks underneath the tank. These tracks would increase the vehicle's performance on soft terrain. The tracks were positioned on the side of the tank, and not hugging the entire hull like on the rhombus tanks, and were covered in armour.

The tank would have been armed with a 57 mm gun, located in the front. A similar approach was later taken with assault guns. Aside from the main gun, the tank would have 4-6 7.7 mm Lewis machineguns, placed on the sides and the rear.

Foreign historians insist that the Flying Elephant had two types of hulls developed for it, one with a hemispherical front, and the other with a curved vertical front, with the aforementioned gun installed in it.

The crew would consist of 8-10 men, which was the norm at the time. The military did not accept the vehicle. It was too heavy, complicated, and expensive. Many components would have had to be developed anew. Since Mark IV and Mark V tanks reached production by December of 1916, the Flying Elephant had no future.

Original article available here. 

World of Tanks History Section: "Transformers" of the World Wars

All Terrain Meteor: An armoured train-tank
September, 1941. A medic from Syzran, V.N. Emelyanov, decided not to waste time and send his invention straight to Stalin: “Super-speed universal all-terrain armoured train-tank”. The author insisted that his creation can “travel on rails by itself or towing a load at up to 200 kph, on land it can go over mountains and ravines, it can swim in water regardless of depth of width of rivers”. Emelyanov’s letter was sent to GABTU, but did not impress its specialists. From the included papers, it could be seen that such a vehicle would have poor off-road performance, low maneuverability, and the entire thing was too bulky.

Emelyanov was not distraught, and continued to improve his invention for two years. As a result, the proposed mass of the tank shrank by a factor of 3, and it gained the ability to travel on rail and ground with wheels, as well as tracks. The new project had an equally glamorous title: “Universal armoured train-tank METEOR”.

Emelyanov described his invention as follows: “The METEOR comes off the railroad and engages its tracks, allowing it to go around any obstacle, after which it can return to the railroad… due to its super high speed, the probability of the METEOR being hit by enemy shells or bombs is reduced”. The tank switched between tracks and wheels with automatic jacks. The incredible speed (200 kph) would be obtained by replacing the locomotive transmission with a hydraulic one. All mechanisms of the suspension and the movement of the vehicle would be powered by only one steam cylinder. The transmission would be covered with reliable armour. The boiler, also armoured, was supposed to be “omnivorous”. It could consume coal, kerosene, oil, wood, or even straw. Despite Emelyanov’s efforts, GABTU specialists remained uninterested, and his projects remained on paper.

Double Tankette "Sark": Fool your enemy!

Muscovites A.A. Smirnov and K.N. Romanov came up with a non-trivial design in 1945. They named their puzzling project "Sark".

What was so original about it? According to the authors "the vehicle is made from two identical looking moving vehicles, in order to disguise the real vehicle".

Both tankettes were connected with a sturdy cable, which powered the engine of the secondary vehicle. The energy was provided by a DC generator in the main vehicle. The cable was about 800 meters long, and the secondary tankette was to have a wooden spool for it. Only one person was required to drive the main vehicle, as Smirnov and Romanov described: "The main vehicle is driven by a single person, lying down. He controls it with levers next to his hands and feet. In order to stabilize the soldier, there is a cushioned saddle on which he can lean when lying down or sitting up." The driver was also cushioned with shoulder belts and a cushion on the ceiling.

Why did the "Sark" have to come in a pair? The authors did not give it much thought. They mentioned that the "copy" covering the main tanketter can serve as a moving bomb, carrying explosives and blowing up enemy fortifications or vehicles as far away as the cable could take it. 

The only historical inspiration for the invention would be assault barrels. In wars of the past, as late as WWI, they were filled with gunpowder, striking elements (chunks of metal, shrapnel, bullets), equipped with a fuse, and rolled at the enemy that was besieging the fortress. However, making and using such improvised weapons was definitely much cheaper than the proposed cost of the Sark project.

Modular All-terrain Armoured Vehicle

Emelyanov, Smirnov, and Romanov's projects are far from the first. Thirty years before that, modular and all-terrain vehicles were already on the mind of inventors.

In the end of March of 1916, Horatio Thomas Lyell, a British citizen from Essex, sent a message to the Russian diplomat in London, Count Benkendorf titled "A description of an improved combined motorized motor vehicle, a car-sled-boat-seaplane". Lyell described a vehicle that was like a boat with propellers, capable of moving over any surface without loss of speed, due to its swappable suspension: wheels, pontoons, or runners. The two-man crew, according to the engineer, could swap between the three with little effort. The armament was weak, only one machinegun. This weakness in battle was to be compensated by mobility, and the ability to maneuver on any terrain. The letter stated that a proposal was sent to the British military in 1914, but they showed no interest. Two years later, Russian specialists received it no better.

In December of that same year, P.S. Marchenko from Odessa offered an invention to the Minister of War in Russia, Infantry General D.S. Shuvayev. His design was composed of independent modules. Two damaged vehicles could be combined into one working one in the field. This armoured cruiser was to be armed with six 75 mm ship guns, four machineguns, and 2 AA guns. Sadly, the author did not add a picture of his design, and only described it.

Today, many proposals from the pages of history trigger a smile. They remain as a testament to the struggles of engineering thought on the difficult path from the start of tank design to its heights. The inventors, whichever nation the served, strived for victory on the front line, and their projects await researches in the archives.

Article author: Yuri Bakhurin. Yuri Bakhurin is a military historian, an author of many publications in regional and central scientific press: "Questions of History" magazine, "Military-Historical Magazine", "Military-Historical Archive", "Motherland", "Anthology of War", the "Reitar" almanac, and many more. He is also the author of the "Panzerjager Tiger (P) Ferdinand: Use in Combat" book.

Sources:

• RGVIA 803-1-1829
• RGVIA 803-1-1817
• CAMD RF 38-11350-591
• CAMD RF 38-11350-1695
• V.F. Sperk, Fortifikatsionniy Slovar, Moscow, 1946

Original article available here.

World of Tanks History Section: Oboy Epicycloid

The end of the spring of 1915 was tough for the Russian Empire and its armies. An Austrian and German offensive that started on May 2nd threatened the entire front and the territory of the Polish Kingdom.

On May 4th, 1915, a fascinating letter reached Nikolai II's office, addressed personally to the Tsar. Its author was one Ivan Fedorovich Semchishin, a citizen of the city of Lvov, which was a part of the Russian Empire as of September of 1914. Semchishin's lack of fluency in Russian [unfortunately, the curious turns of phrase are lost in translation] was compensated by flowery prose and creativity. The letter was titled "A project of a machine for crushing trenches and military fortresses", and was immediately sent to military specialists at the Technical Committee of the Chief Military-Technical Directorate (GVTU). This organization processed proposals and inventions, which came in significant volume.

Changing the Landscape

The military engineers were no strangers to radical ideas, but Semchishin's project overcame even their imaginations. The author wrote: "If we had a large armoured barrel or roller with a motor inside which can spin on its axis, we could drive it over our enemies. My project, composed of a mobile fortress, realizes this principle and can be used to destroy fortified regions. It is called "Oboy"".

The author wrote of an armoured ellipsoid (which he called "epicycloid") of colossal size: 605 meters tall and 960 meters wide. Oboy's armour could withstand the enemy's bullets and shells, as well as mines. Two hatches were planned at each end, covered with robust caps. The crew would climb into them with 300 meter long rope ladders. Inside, the vehicle was equipped with a command post, projectors, and a wireless telegraph station.

Until recently, the Oboy was considered to have no armament, but archive documents show the opposite. The vehicle had provisions for heavy artillery. The design also included a sewer system, a ventilation system, a gas line, as well as "electric wires, telephones, elevators, fans, etc". The many floors of the vehicle would have hallways with living quarters, workshops, and stores. Semchishin's proposal was more than a house, but a whole mobile city.

The Oboy had no wheels, as it was itself a wheel. The vehicle would be propelled into motion by a system of steam engines, pendulums, and dynamo machines. The system produced "stores of energy, kinetic and potential". A flywheel would rotation into a rocking motion, allowing the ellipsoid to roll. The author did not specify how powerful this engine would have to be, but his design called for a mind-boggling maximum speed of 321 kph.

The engineers' verdict was laconic and absolute: the project is infeasible.

What if?

The military was correct. But now, after a century of technical progress, let's try to figure out why.

First of all, the Oboy would be impossible to build. There is no assembly plant today large enough to accommodate its size. Semchishin's supertank would have been taller than skyscrapers. There are also few buildings wider than 900 meters, none of which are capable of motion.

The vehicle would have to have been built near the front lines. In any other case, it would have expended its engine lifetime moving towards it, changing the landscape in its path.

The assembly of a prototype would be impossible to conceal from the enemy. If a team of saboteurs would be unable to impede such a colossal project, then an artillery barrage or a bombing run would leave it defenseless.

Even if the technology was available, the vehicle would crush itself when it moved. A mere 100 mm of armour would crumple like tinfoil under the Oboy's colossal mass.

A year later, another inventor proposed an idea of new armour. Using a cloth weaved from 1.9 cm thick rope and "so tightly wound that it would become like stone". This cloth, 71 cm thick, would be backed by 10 cm of steel. Even this invention, decades ahead of Soviet or American composite armour, would not protect the giant from its fate.

Two and a bit decades later, in July of 1943, the idea was reborn in miniature. Engineer-mechanic A.S. Dashevskiy proposed an ellipsoid "moving fortress". Its armour was 200 mm thick, but it was only 2.5 meters in diameter and 5 meters long. Dashevskiy's vehicle was like a mini Oboy.

Many spherical vehicles were proposed in the first half of the 20th century. Today, they become more and more known to those interested in military history. The Oboy "fortress destruction vehicle" remains the largest armoured vehicle designed in history.

Article author: Yuri Bakhurin. Yuri Bakhurin is a military historian, an author of many publications in regional and central scientific press: "Questions of History" magazine, "Military-Historical Magazine", "Military-Historical Archive", "Motherland", "Anthology of War", the "Reitar" almanac, and many more. He is also the author of the "Panzerjager Tiger (P) Ferdinand: Use in Combat" book.

Sources and literature:

• RGVIA 803-1-1828 p. 123-134
• RGVIA 803-1-1816 p. 140 and reverse
• Y. Pasholok, Stalniye Shary Stalina, Moscow, Tactical Press, 2014

Original article available here.

Pigeons at War

The use of pigeons for communication is nothing new.

However, what if you didn't have much space for holding pigeons? You had to get creative.

Pigeons can also be used for another, more creative purpose.

"In some cases, pigeons were released 1500-2000 meters from us. They circled around the vicinity and hovered above our column when spotted, marking us for artillery and mortar fire (see p. 27). At the same time, small groups of Japanese suicide bombers moved out in front of us with prepared explosives or mines to destroy our tanks and SPGs."

World of Tanks History Section: Battle of the Somme

By the fall of 1916, the British and French offensive against the Germans at the river Somme in North France petered out, having set into a positional meat grinder. Both sides tried to tear through a maze of trenches wrapped in barbed wire, fruitlessly. In the first day of the offensive, the British lost 20,000 men dead and 40,000 wounded from machinegun and artillery fire, while the Germans lost 6,000 men. It seemed that there was no way to change the situation.

Steel Ace

As a last ditch effort to achieve success in this long and bloody struggle, the British General Douglas Haig placed his faith in new combat vehicles. To preserve secrecy, they were called "tanks".

The British began making tanks in 1915. By the summer of 1916, the amount of vehicles approached 50. The rhomboid tracked monsters were indexed MkI and MkII, and were made in two modifications. Tanks with only machineguns were called "female", and were meant to fight enemy soldiers. "Male" tanks were equipped with a machinegun and two 57 mm guns.

After transport to the mainland, the tanks were moved towards the front line in utmost secrecy. Nighttime marches in unscouted terrain proved difficult for the MkI; 17 of them were bogged down in mud or suffered mechanical failure. 32 vehicles reached their starting positions.

With their new vehicles, the British expected to knock the Germans out of Guedecourt and Fleur. In platoons of 2-3, the tanks were to penetrate enemy lines in its most powerful sections, covering advancing infantry. The first to enter the battle was Captain Mortimer's "male". It was 5:15 on September 15th, 1916. The tank approached German lines between Ginchy and Delville Wood. It destroyed a machinegun nest that impeded British light infantry, but was then knocked out by an artillery shell to the suspension.

At 5:30, other tanks entered combat. Their crews were suffocating due to fumes, the sound of cannon fire and hammering of bullets against the armour deafened them. It was very cramped inside, next to the spare oil tank, two small gas tanks, three water tanks, spare machinegun barrels, a spare machinegun, a cage with postal pigeons, a signal flag, and a set of signal lamps. Of course, there also had to be room for two days worth of food and the crew's personal equipment.

Germans in shock

In the first years of WWI, psychosis caused by unending artillery explosions (shell-shock) was a common affliction for a soldier. The Germans were even more shocked by the appearance of tanks. When a German screamed "The Devil is coming!" in the first trenches, his words spread like wildfire. Through the tanks' observation slits, one could see many figures in feldgrau uniforms fleeing from their positions. The few brave men that attempted to open fire at these steel monsters were unsuccessful.

The tanks advanced. Far from perfect, they thundered as they fell into German trenches or got stuck in shell craters. Crews had to climb out to attempt to repair the tank. However, those MkIs that were spared this fate performed well.

For instance, the male D17 "Dinnaken" commanded by Lieutenant Hastie was the first to enter the village of Fleurs, slowly following running and hiding Germans. An airplane reconnaissance mission reported "The tank is moving through the main street of Fleur, English soldiers are following it in good spirits".

Other vehicles were of great help to infantry, making holes in barbed wire and crushing machinegun nests. One MkI stopped above a German trench, cleared it with machinegun fire, and proceeded to move along the trench. With its help, approximately 300 enemy soldiers were captured. 10 tanks were knocked out during the attack for various reasons, 7 more received superficial damage.

Local success with serious consequences

How effective was this use of tanks? A certain tactical success, but one that failed to turn the tide of battle.

On one hand, the British moved several kilometers forward over a front of 10 kilometers in only five hours, with minimal losses. Positions were taken that were attacked before, without success. Douglas Haig, who viewed tanks sceptically, ordered an additional thousand vehicles.

On the other hand, the British lost the element of surprise, as the effect from a sudden appearance of these stunning tanks could have been much greater. As it was, the news of their use travelled around the front lines, then around the world. Spies and engineers in nearly every nation participating in WWI got to work.

The Russian Empire did not have time to make its own land battleships, but carefully watched their evolution. Documents of the General Staff contain such reports as this one, for December of 1916: "In Germany, Krupp, Ehrhart, and Hans-Lloyd factories in Bremen are at work making 120 "tanks", for now...only two types. It is expected that they will be used on all fronts, for offence, not defense. The best weapon against these "tanks" is a 3.7 centimeter trench gun."

The word "tank" is used awkwardly. However, events of September 15th, 1916, made "tank" an international word, and assigned to it a military meaning. From that moment on, war took a more modern turn.

Article author: Yuri Bakhurin. Yuri Bakhurin is a military historian, an author of many publications in regional and central scientific press: "Questions of History" magazine, "Military-Historical Magazine", "Military-Historical Archive", "Motherland", "Anthology of War", the "Reitar" almanac, and many more. He is also the author of the "Panzerjager Tiger (P) Ferdinand: Use in Combat" book.

Sources:

• F. Mitchell, Tank Warfare. The Story of the Tanks in the Great War, Moscow, 1935
• RGVIA 802-4-1477, Materials on fighting tanks in the event of their use by foreign powers
• S.L. Fedoseev, Tanki Pervoy Mirovoy, Moscow, 2012

Original article available here. 

World of Tanks: Today in History: Tsar Tank

Many armoured vehicles were developed in the early 20th century that are amusing in hindsight. One should not forget that this was an era of trial and error, and if not for these wondrous vehicles, perhaps we would never have seen "classic" tanks.

The source of Nikolai Lebedenko's inspiration, according to his own admission, was the araba carriage, which had large wheels that could easily traverse bumps and pits. As a result, the engineer came up with a vehicle that had two massive front wheels (about 9 meters in diameter) and a small rear guiding wheel. An immobile casemate was installed at about the height of a two-story house, which could hold a machinegun or a cannon. Two machinegun sponsons were placed by the sides of the casemate, and a turret was planned for the bottom. According to calculations, the speed of this vehicle would be 17 kph.

Lebedenko's design, surprisingly, received approval from many military directorates. During an audience on February 8th, 1915, a model of the tank running around the carpet thrilled Emperor Nikolai II, who personally ordered for 210,000 rubles to be awarded to Lebedenko to finance the project.

Components for the vehicle were produced at a factory in Khamovniki. From spring to the end of summer of 1915, assembly took place at Orudyevo station, near Dmitrov. When the vehicle was completed, its gigantic size earned it the name "Tsar Tank".

Mobility trials began on August 27th, 1915. The tank moved, crushing trees with its massive front wheels. However, since its mass was not evenly distributed, and difference between wheels was so huge, the tank almost immediately sank into the ground. Even two 240 hp Maybach engines could not pull it out. This was immediately recorded as a strike against Lebedenko. The second strike makes one wonder why it was not noticed while the tank was still on paper: the front wheels of the tank. The fragile spokes did not even need a direct shell hit, a close explosion was enough. If a wheel was destroyed, the tank would fall like a house of cards.

Lebedenko's tank could be considered a complete failure, if not for the fact that young engineers A. Mikulin and B. Stechkin gathered valuable experience by working on this project. Later, these men became well known specialists in the field of engines.

Attempts to pull the vehicle free did not succeed, and the Tsar Tank remained in the forest near Orudyevo. In 1923, the vehicle was disassembled for scrap.

Original article available here.