What killed the Excelsior and the T14?

In 1941 and in somewhat of a panic over their lack of assault vehicles, Britain and America embarked on a quest to develop Britain's next offensive weapon. Out came the T14 and the A33 "Excelsior" - and these were good vehicles. So what happened? Why were only 4 made of out of a planned 8500?

Any feedback is greatly appreciated, I'm always trying to improve.

If you enjoyed the video please leave a like - and if you want to see more like it, I'd encourage you to subscribe!

Credit to these excellent articles:

All content is presented in historical context for educational purposes. All footage is owned by it's copyright holder and is used in this channel under "fair use".

Music by Epidemic Sound

[jsplicer]

I always found it funny that the increased discomfort/danger the crew experienced due to the extreme sloping frontal plate of the T14 was actually noted and seen as unacceptable. The crew comfort in the Soviet T-34 however was not a limiting factor.

[BHuang]

It is the same problem the Tiger 1 tanks had, a design made for a specific task which fails when utilized to other tasks that it was not built for.

[philo]

Another great one! I think by the time these assault tank prototypes were built they were already redundant. The Churchill AVRE which had tremendous effect during D-Day and Sherman Jumbo had satisfied the need for an assault tank.

[andybelcher]

Actually the Dieppe raid did not show the Churchill as outdated and useless, what it showed was that no tank could operate on a shingle beach. The Churchill was an extraordinary hill climber, ascending gradients with ease that nothing else could. If it could not move at Dieppe then a completely different type of beachhead had to be chosen for the invasion of mainland Europe for the use of all tanks. I totally agree that Dieppe was a disaster but a lot was learned from it that made the Normandy landings the success that they were.

[still_guns]

It was World of Tanks that introduced me to both of these vehicles. I always feared the T14 when playing lower and equal tier tanks because I didn't know where to shoot it. A33's flat armour made it a lot easier to penetrate.

[ukgamer]

A33 would be a little strange with a 6-pdr, it's high explosive isn't great and the AP shell would be better at fighting tanks.

Imagine a late war A33 with the comet turret that would be an interesting tank.

[brianzhang]

I love the T-14’s design. It’s like a Sherman, but more sleek (I think I’d the right way of describing it)

[ushikiii]

The "Excelsior" is so good looking. Such a clean looking tank. Cool video.

[smoketinytom]

Love how these tanks look. They might have been failed in development, but they’re great for base materials for modelling and Warhammer 40K tanks.

[trevormenard]

I wrote the article on the A.33 for tanks encyclopedia, the vehicle was something I always found interesting and the more I dug, the more interesting it is as a curiosity. If anyone had any more specific questions related to the vehicle that I might have answers for, feel free to ask.

[LittleNala]

Very interesting video.

But I have to say, if I was in a burning tank, I'd love the idea of an extra side escape hatch, and I don't think I'd quibble about it being a bit narrow!

[leopoldthedigger]

Another great video yet again, exploring things not often talked about!

[lucaswallace]

"Used as a range target."

I mean.... At least that's an opportunity to test the armour!

[bladimirantoniorosasgonzal]

i was reading the book of american-british tank and both of them are mentioned

[AshleyBlackwater]

I really love the look of the T14 visually. It's like an alt history M4 mixed with a panther or something

[c.j.]

The fact the Allies tested and rejected an assault tank and the Germans tested and put their prototypes into the field is the perfect example of why the Allies won the war. Germany had a tendency to focus on winning battles, and the Allies focused on winning wars.

[carlostommybaggs]

Unfortunately it seems like these tanks came along at about the same time as tank design was moving away from cruiser tanks and infantry tanks & towards the concept of the universal tank, a tank that could do both jobs but was neither.
However, what we got instead at the very end of the war, was the MBT.

[maxbradley]

awesome content man. nice to see your channel growing since last i checked!

[philo]

What'd think about this idea for a video? The U.S. 75mm round was I believe the single most important tank munition in the Allied inventory. If we look at the North African campaign there's two stories which stand out, the Australian Major Northy with the Royal Ordnance Corps who utilized captured German 75mm APCBC projectiles on the U.S. 75mm cases prior to the M61 APCBC being available. The second is the story of British Captain Morrell with the REME who utilized guns salvaged from wrecked Sherman tanks to convert the Churchill to the NA 75 giving them a better HE round. Both stories represent innovative and unique solutions to effect much needed field modifications which proved very practical and successful. Jump forward to D Day and we now have all three of the major Allied tanks in Normandy using the same 75mm round, Churchill and Cromwell of course having had the 6 pounders bored out to accept the 75mm and of course the ubiquitous Sherman, the vast majority armed with the 75mm as well. I think we could say the U.S. 75mm M61 APCBC and the M48 HE along with the WP smoke round were perhaps the first "standardized" munition in the time prior to NATO, it surely eased supplied issues for the Allied armies in Normandy, and despite improved rounds, the 17 pounder and U.S. 76mm, it still proved very effective. Apologies if I'm telling you what you likely already know, I think with your superb presentation it would make for a great video. Thank you again, and happy new year!

[aarondavies]

Some great videos mate about on par with armoured archives