Flying Tanks? Tank Deployment by Air

preview_player
Показать описание
Since the development of Airborne Infantry, there have been attempts to support them with Airborne tanks.

As the Germans discovered at Crete – made painfully clear to the British at Arnhem - lightly equipped parachute infantry are incredibly vulnerable against heavy weapons and armour.

These lessons saw many attempts to make Airborne troops more effective in seizing and holding objectives behind enemy lines.

This is a history of experimentation with Airborne Armour – explaining why there still isn’t a perfect solution.

From the Hamilcar gliders of World War II to the C17 Globemaster, we look at how they made tanks fly....

00:00 | Intro
00:47 | The Origins of Airborne Operations
02:34 | Gliders
07:20 | A Tank Light Enough to Fly?
09:02 | Success & Failure
14:24 | Post-War Solutions
17:41 | Better Aircraft - Better Tanks?
20:15 | Strategic Deployment
21:39 | Conclusion

#tankmuseum
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

My youngest brother was a navigator aboard one of the C-141s that made the Sheridan drop over Torrijos-Tocumen Airport (now Tocumen International Airport). The aircrews had been instructed to deliver the M551s next to the airfield instead of onto it because of fear the vehicles might strike some of the paratroopers or interfere with follow-on troop landings by tactical transports. What they were not told was that the adjacent field of elephant grass was actually a marsh. At least one of the armored reconnaissance vehicles became hopelessly mired in it, and I still joke with him today that it was probably the one he dropped.

Paladin
Автор

At 5:14 it is stated that the span of the Hamilcar was quite short compared to modern sport gliders. That is, I'm afraid, a misapprehension. The largest sport glider ever made, the Eta, has a span of 30.9 meters, shorter than the Hamilcar's 33.5 meters.
Gliders in the Open Class (this is a FAI competition class for unrestricted spans) have actually been getting smaller with recent advances in aerodynamics and structures. Spans increased from 25 to 29 meters between the 1980's and the 2000's but the latest open class gliders are back to around 23 or 24 meters.
Modern open class gliders have increadibly slender wings, and therein perhaps lies the misapprehension regarding their span. The aforementioned Eta has a wing spar that is only 9 cm tall at the root - for a 31 meter span!

troppoandante
Автор

It would seem like carrying AT guns capable of taking out current tanks fielded by the enemy would be the realistic choice. It could be transported by jeep type vehicles capable of towing the guns with the crew. It just seems trying to airdrop tanks capable of taking out most tanks wasn't possible at the time.

joshuajgrillot
Автор

While it's only the turret russian designs have exceptional airborne quality's and can deploy with out the use of a aeroplane

adammccormack
Автор

Didn't the Americans use C-17's to fly M1's into Northern Iraq in2003??

richardvernon
Автор

Fascinating, and Chris is a compelling presenter. Thank you to all involved at the museum!

LouisAmateurArt
Автор

Great video. Can you make a follow-up video looking at some other examples, like the German Wiesel, the Soviet ASU-57 and BMD, or the relatively new US M10 Booker? Or other ideas such as how ATGM's have allowed lightweight, air-portable AFV's to remain viable, or the Soviet's usage of rocket-assisted parachutes?

claykalmar
Автор

Hey there Tank Nuts! We hope you enjoyed our latest video. What do you think - Flying Tanks: a great idea or a waste of time? Let us know your thoughts below

thetankmuseum
Автор

On the cinematic war front, A Bridge Too Far shows the failure of Airborne to capture a bridge across the Rhine, while The Bridge At Remagen shows the U.S. 9th Armoured Division successfully capturing the titular bridge. So, maybe tanks may be a better investment than parachutes.

c.j.zographos
Автор

21:00 former C-17 loadmaster here. The C-17 can land on minimally prepared dirt strips (just don't let MX know what the underside is going to look like) and low level drogue chute extraction both mean you do not need a major airfield to deploy cargo. The second point about stripping down the tank is a well made point though

SkippingHellPHX
Автор

The remains of that Hamilcar was awesome to see!

theoneandonlysoslappy
Автор

Loved TankFest Thanks. Keep up the good work

ianclayton
Автор

You should have mentioned the Me-321. Although more used in strategic way and not combined with paratroopers, this glider was able to carry a Panzer IV.

wOrLdOfEaRlY
Автор

Excellent video on a rarely discussed subject. Thank you very much

shaneblack
Автор

The Germans built a giant glider (suitably named the Gigant) to carry tanks . . . thought better of it and changed it into a six-engined transport aircraft that ferried tanks to Tunisia.

michaelmanning
Автор

Please the same video BUT with wheeled vehicles! There aren't that many videos about wheeled tanks yet (on this channel) and this is where they shine.

digdigktn
Автор

Honorable mention to LAPES: Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System.
A tank (a Sheridan) is palletized in the back of a C130. The Hercules skims along the ground and throws a parachute out the back. The chute pulls the pallet, and the tank slides out to drop to the ground in a nearly combat-ready state. Theoretically.
As far as I am aware, it was never used operationally, but there is some awesome test footage on Youtube!

MM
Автор

Like a lot of Indigenous North American words, "chinook" was transcribed by the French and is pronounced "shin-ook." Normally I'd not quibble about British versus Canadian pronounciation, but "Chinook" is a proper noun and the name of an ethnic group. Saying it wrong feels mildly disrespectful.

Also, yay to see Chris back! I feel like the Tank Museum's last few videos had different presenters (or maybe that's just because I've been working through the back catalogue) and Chris is very much the most effective at the "short video documentary presenter" role.

davydatwood
Автор

3 Hamilcars? There's 1 at Bovington, 1 at Middle Wallop, where's number 3?

alastairmellor
Автор

Really enjoyed this one . . . a very interesting example of a seemingly straightforward problem that has yet to be solved and maybe never will be! Thank you for all the hard work that goes into these videos, and for being so generous with your knowledge.

chrischambers