We kept on fighting them in the desert, but our tanks were puny things [poorly armored] armed with toy shotguns. We went out armed with something called a 2 pounder which is a pitiful thing about that long [arms streched]. And when I fired first at a German tank, it went 500 yards and dropped in the sand .... And if it would have hit, it wouldn't have hurt it.

-- Pat Dyas, Tank Commander, 7th Armoured Division

The British were the only country to enter World War II with a fully mechanized army. With the advent of World War II, major improvements had been realized in tank designs. Only since the early-1930s the British had fallen behind the Germans in tank design and tactics. Most of the German Army was not mechanized, but the leading elements were and that with close-air support from the Luftwaffe was enough to smash front-line elements of the British and French Army in northern France and Belgium. The British tank units were obliterated. What was left of them was left behind when the BEF and French forces were evacuated from Dunkirk (May 1940). Unlike World War I, the Allies now faced a Germany that had given great attention to mechanized warfare. The tanks deployed by the British in France like the German and French tanks were far more effective combat weapons and all-terrain vehicles in a way that the World War I tanks were not. The British like the Germans had radios in their tanks, but the French did not. The Allied combat doctrine, both the British and French, was to use the tanks as an infantry support weapon as had been the case in World War II. As the infantry would be attacking on foot, high speed was not a requirement. This was even more true of the French who were intent on remaining behind the protection of the Maginot Line. Surprisingly the British did not have an effective tank at the onset of the War, but the German tanks were not much better. What both the British and French lacked was well conceived tank tactics. And neither fully appreciated the importance of anti-tank guns. After Dunkirk. the British forces preparing to fight off an expected German invasion had few tanks, little artillery, and an insufficient number of small arms. Most of this had been left behind in France and Belgium. The British Army in World War II developed many different individual tanks. Thee were specialized category of infantry tanks, such as the Churchill. There were also cruiser tanks, such as the Crusader and Cromwell1. The infantry tanks were well-armored and the cruiser tanks were fast, but none had he fire power of German and Soviet tanks until the end of the War. The British tanks include the Matilda, Vickers Light Tank, Crusader, Cromwell, and Char B1, It would, however, no be until British tankers got the American M-3 Grants (1942) that they had a gun that could takeout a Panzer. The Grants were a Rube Goldberg of a tank, but without its 75mm gun, the British may have lost North Africa and Suez. The M-4 Shermans were a much better tank and in desperate days following the fall of Tobruk (June 1942), President Roosevelt gave priority to he British over America's own Army. Surprisingly, the British failed to develop a superior tank that could be deployed in significant numbers during the war. Given the effectiveness of British weapons development, and the importance of the tank, this is rather surprising. The British after Dunkirk began rebuilding their tank force. They never, however, came up with a tank equal to the improved tanks being produced by the Germans. They had lost the advantage to the Germans and Soviets in the early-1930s because of drastic cuts in he Army's budgets and ad would never regain it, only reaching parity at the end of the War (1945). It was not due to lack of effort. Many designs were produced. Most can not be classified as total failures. They for the most part, however, did not match up well with the German tanks. None of the British tanks are among the ones commonly suggested as the most effective tanks of the War. A factor here was the War Cabinet's decision to focus British industry on the strategic bombing campaign. Instead of matching German production, the British turned to American Lend Lease. The British equipped much of their Army and supporting Commonwealth divisions with American tanks, especially the M-4 Sherman. The Sherman also did not march the German tanks, but were highly maneuverable, fast, and available in numbers. They also had the most advanced radios of the War. With artillery and air support, the Sherman proved effective in North Africa, France, the Bulge, and the invasion of Germany.

Mehanization

The British were the only country to enter World War II with a fully mechanized army. Mechanization without armor sperriority s, hwever, no real advantage. In contrast only about 20 percent of theGerman Army was mecnized. In the fighing in Belgium and France (May 1940), it did not make much of a difference becuse the distances were relatively short. The ground combat fighting for the the British hen shifted to the Western Desert after Italy entered the War (June 1940). The British ad great success against the poorly led and equipped Italians (December 1940). Then the Germans enterd te fighing with thearrival of Erwin Rommel and he Afrika Korps (March 1941). Inlike he huge Ostheer, the Afrika Korps was fully mechanized. The Germns were fully mechanized and possessed better tanks than the British. Only the arrival of the American Grants with a 75mm gun enabled the Briish to stay in the game. Mechanzation w a two edge sword. Grman succees to the gates of Cairo and Alexandria (July 1942), butonly with an icredably lng and exposed supply line. Rommel had to use more petrol gettin petrol to his Panzers and rucks than was acually used at the front. And that was just the supply inefrom ripoli. Getting supplies to Tripli was also a challenge, Italian convoys wre attacked by the Royal Navy and planes based in Malta. The Ostheer in contrast had rail connections to the Reich.

Tank Design

With the advent of World War II, major improvements had been realized in tank designs. Only since the early-1930s the British had fallen behind the Germans in tank design and tactics. The British Army entered World War II with a varirty of poor designs. The British knew lile about the Grman-Soviet tank cooperation associated wih Rapollo (1920s). The Grmans had been following what bwas going on in Britain. In contrast te British werelagely unasare of what was going on in Gerany and the Soviet Union. Thiswas not only hrdwear, but lso developing concepts of tank warfare The British War Office also sent a fac finding mission to he Soviet Union and were impressed wih new Soviet designs (1936). They espeially noted the off-road performance of the Soviet BT tanks incorpoating the Christy suspension syste. And he imprssive reliabily of Soviet tanks. One imprtant step taken in the 1930s was to adopt the Christie suspenion system in some of their designs. Iniially rejeced by he Americans, it was a major strp forward in tank design. The appropritions needed, however, to procure new Britih tanks and apnd development work were sill not forthcoming. Churchill and his assovciatrs motly hmmred away at the Government on lagging air and naval armament. They made litle dent in Government policy, byt he primary reason hat he bcme priome minister wold be he punlic rememnbeed his heated warnings during his 'Wilderness Years'. After the fct finding mision to the Soviet Union the War Office commissioned the Nuffield Mechanization Company, the Tank building arm of Morrios Motors. (Lord Nuffierld was W.R. Morris, the chairman of Morris Motor.) Profuction of the A 15 Crusader began. t would become the mainay Cruiser tank, premaily erving in the Estern Desert. It was poorly armored undr poweered and weakly gunned. Beginning with the Crisader, the Briish would fomd he Germans one step ahad of them throughout the War.

Bltzkrieg

The British Army had pioneered armored combat in World War I. But because of sharp budget cuts hadlost hat edge. When Hitler and Stalin launched teWar by invading Poland (September 1939), the Briish were woefully behind the Germans in terms of strategy and tactics. British and French thinking was centeredon the static trench warfare of World War One. This initially did not make a difference as the the fighting was in Poland. It made a huge difference when the Geramns attacked in the West (May 1940). British tankers notonly had poorly designed tanks, but they were burdened by dated doctrine. They employd the tactics develope by Captain BH Liddell Hart and Major-General Sir Percy Hobart. s a result, he British split their tank force into two groups: 1) Infantry tanks and 2) Cruiser tanks. British tank use still had the signature of 19th century cavalry-type missions and infantry support. This conrasted poorl wih th combined-arms Blitzkrieg tactics develed by he Germans. Most of the German Army was not mechanized, but the leading elements were and that with close-air support from the Luftwaffe was enough to smash front-line elements of the British and French Army in northern France and Belgium. This was largely due the German Blitzkrieg tactics more than the quality of the tanks. The German Luftwaffe from the beginning of the War had develope a system of close ground support. The British tankers (unlike the Fench nd Soviet tankers at the time) did have radios not have the same level of support until the the D-Day landings. The Desert Air Force generally was stonger than Rommel's air component, but unlike the Gramns, there was at first little or no commuication between the pilots and ground forces. Thisws only beginning to developo with the closure of the campoaign in Tunisia (May 1943). It developed further in Italy.

Fall of France (May-June 1940)

The beginnng phase of the War ended with the Fall of France (June 1940). The French Army had been the bulwark on the Western Front during World War I. With the Fall of France, the British were on their own. The British tank units were obliterated in France and Belgium.. What was left of them was left behind when the BEF and French forces were evacuated from Dunkirk (May 1940). Unlike World War I, the Allies now faced a Germany that had given great attention to mechanized warfare. The tanks deployed by the British in France like the German and French tanks were far more effective combat weapons and all-terrain vehicles in a way that the World War I tanks were not. The British like the Germans had radios in their tanks, but the French did not. The Allied combat doctrine, both the British and French, was to use the tanks as an infantry support weapon as had been the case in World War II. As the infantry would be attacking on foot, high speed was not a requirement. This was even more true of the French who were intent on remaining behind the protection of the Maginot Line. Surprisingly the British did not have an effective tank at the onset of the War, but the German tanks were not much better. What both the British and French lacked was well conceived tank tactics. And neither fully appreciated the importance of anti-tank guns. British tank forces consisting of lightban infantry tanks was nailated in theGrman Western offensive (May 1940). Most of the men escape during th Dunkirk rescie operation, but nne of the tanks. After Dunkirk. the British forces preparing to fight off an expected German invasion had few tanks, little artillery, and an insufficient number of small arms. There was no national reserve of tanks. Virtually all British tanks and most of the vartilery had been left behind in France and Belgium. A decade ofbudget cuts and poor decisins came back o haunt Britain. Here to much blame is commonly placed on he military, but the actual blame is actually the British peoole. They did not want money spent on the military or an arms race with the Germns and elected MPs that carried out their wishes. Some blame can be placed on Baldwin and Chamberlain because in carrying out their appeasment policies, they restricted the publication of data on he extent of German rearmament.

Tank Types

The British developed several different tanks and extensive variants of the basic types. They also relied on American tanks because the United States had a much larger industrial capacity. Not only did the British not come up with an effective tank, but they failed to grasp for about 3 years what the Germans had at the beginning of the War--and understanding of effective tank tactics. This did not occur until nearly 2 years of fighting in the Western Desert. Rommel essentially taught the British modern tank tactics, as he did the Amerians who proved to be faster learners. This was possible because unlike France, the Germans never deployed sufficent forces to defeat the British in the Western Desert. While huge quantities of American material flowed to the British. The British did not have the industrial capacity to build tanks in the numbers needed. Much of the British industrial capacity was focused on the air war. Thus the 8th Army in the Western Desert relied heavily on the American M-3 Grants and then the M-4 Sherman. British tank forces were notable for the variety of prototypes and types produced in relatively small numbers. The British tanks included the Maltida, Churchill, and Crusader. Most observers believe that the 52-ton Centurion was the best British tank of the War. It was conceived as the answer to the German Panthers and Tigers. The design proved so sucessful that some of its various upgrades were still in service in armies during the 1990s. The Comet Cruiser tank was the most powerful main battle tank developed by the British. It reached British forces relatively late in the War. And by this time not only had tank tactics been worked out, but the the entry of the United States in the War and the attrition experienced by the Germans on the Eastern Front and the development of close air support meant that the British tanks faced a more supportive battlefield situation than they had at the beginning of the War. The Cruiser reached British forces before American tankers got the M-26 Pershing. The British did not really have the tank they wanted until the final nonths of the War. One of the problens was they worked on developing specilized tanks rathervthn multi-porpose tanks kike the Germans. The British worked in three times more types of tanks than the Germans. individual tanks. Thee were specialized category of infantry tanks, such as the Churchill. There were also cruiser tanks, such as the Crusader and Cromwell1. The infantry tanks were well-armored and the cruiser tanks were fast, but none had he fire power of German and Soviet tanks until the end of the War. The British tanks include the Matilda, Vickers Light Tank, Crusader, Cromwell, and Char B1, The first purpose-designed infantry tanks were the Matilda I armed with a machine-gun and Matilda II, which was armed with a machine gun and a QF 2 pounder anti-tank gun. It was quickly seen that the Matilda I, with only a machine gun, was inadequate for its intended role. The second Matilda was ordered directly off the drawing board in 1937. During its production years of 1940 to 1943, 2,987 of these sturdy tanks were built. Though small, the tank presented a massive appearance due to its armoured skirts and cast armour. The Matilda 2 totally dominated all Italian armour and could claim title to "Queen of the Desert" until the arrival of German tanks in North Africa. >

Catching Up

Faced with the disaster in France (May 1940), British military strategists and arms manufacturers were forced to rethink tactics and tank design. Almost decade og meager budget and indecision could be easily remedied. It meant mean that it would not be an easy or quick process. Britain would be forced to fight the campaign in the Western Desert which began immediately after the fall of France. The British had to go with what they had and could produce on short order. Fortunately, the campaign began with the Italians who had even worse tanks than the British (September 1940). Notice that the Germans were not helping he Italians with advanced chronology.) They would not have to face German tanks again until Rommel and the Afrika Korps arrived to rescue the Italians (March 1941). By this time the British had Lend Lease and the American Arsenal of Democracy to aid them. The first major contribution was the M-3 Grant. The Grant had issues, but despite major short-comings had a much needed 75mm gun. The British were feverishly coming up with new tanks. There was little time for testing. hey went directly from the drawing boar to production with major issues resulting. And invariably British designers and manufacturers were normally one step behind their German counterparts. And here the British made a serious mistake. They came up with multiple designs aimed at specific missions rather creating one really excellent design hat could be produced in great numbers and adapted to particular tasks. this decision taken early in the war dominated British tank designs far too long. The first Cruiser tank was the A-9, but produced in very small numbers. It did, however, have a major influence on subsequent British tank design. A few were sent to France and most of the remainder were sent to Egypt. The first cruiser tank produced in numbers was the Crusader. The Crusader could have handled most of the German Panzers deployed in France (1940). In he Western Desert, it was barely able to deal with the Panzer Mark IIIs, but the Crusader shells just bounced off the Mark IVs (1942). As was the case throughout the War, the British were constantly one step behind the Germans.

Western Desert (1940-43)

Tank warfare beganing the Western Desert began with fighing between the British and Italians. The large Italian Army in Libya invaded British Egypt (Sepember 1940). The Italian tanks proved ineffective. he British countr-attacked (December 1940). Except for afw A-9s, the first new tanks to reach the British in numbers were the Crusaders. They had many positive features, but a huge flaw. Itsmain amament was only a twopunder gun which was fine forfighting he Italkians, but woulkd commonly jyst bounce off Grman armor. The Only the intervenion of the German Arika Korps, saved he Axis position in Libya. Rommel had only a small force, but his tanks were superior to the British Crusader tanks which were poorly armored and had only 2 pounder guns. It would not be until British tankers got the American M-3 Grants (late-1941) that they had a gun that could takeout a Panzer. The Grants were a Rube Goldberg of a tank, but without its 75mm gun, the British may have lost North Africa and Suez. We are not sure just wen the British got the first Grants, but we believe it was (late-1941). We know that they hadthem in the Battle of El Gazala (May-June 1942). Gazala was Rommel's greatest victory, but it would have been even worse for the British without the 75mm gun of the Grants. The M-4 Shermans were a much better tank and in desperate days following the fall of Tobruk (June 1942), President Roosevelt gave priority to he British over America's own Army. As a result, Montgomery's Eghth Army hadthe new Shermans in the decisive Battle of El Alemein (August 1942), the Americans did not have them for the Torch landings (November 1942) and the opening phase of the North African campaign.

Development

Surprisingly, the British failed to develop a superior tank that could be deployed in significant numbers during the war. Given the effectiveness of British weapons development, and the importance of the tank, this is rather surprising. The British after Dunkirk (May 1940) began rebuilding their tank force. They never, however, came up with a tank equal to the improved tanks being produced by the Germans. They had lost the advantage to the Germans and Soviets in the early-1930s because of drastic cuts in he Army's budgets and ad would never regain it, only reaching parity at the end of the War (1945). It was not due to lack of effort. Many designs were produced. Most can not be classified as total failures. They for the most part, however, did not match up well with the German tanks. None of the British tanks are among the ones commonly suggested as the most effective tanks of the War. A factor here was the War Cabinet's decision to focus British industry on the strategic bombing campaign.

Americn Tanks

The British apprroach to tanks was different than the American. The British tried to develop tanks to meet specific circumsances. The Americans decided to fix on one major design maimizing the hree major features (armor, armament, and speed). Ultimately because of Lend Lease, instead of matching German production, the British turned to American Lend Lease. The British equipped much of their Army and supporting Commonwealth divisions with American tanks, especially the M-4 Sherman. The Sherman also did not march the German tanks, but were highly maneuverable, fast, and available in numbers. They also had the most advanced radios of the War. The Sherman was competive with German armor in he Western Desert (1942)and then Tunisia (1943). Notably, he American tankers at Kasaerine did not yet have the Shermans (February 1943), most had gone to the Britsh Eighth Army. By 1944 with D-Day and the campaign in northn France, it was outclassed by the new German tanks (Panthers and Tigers). Fortunately the Germans did not have very many of them. And the Amricans had tank destroyer units. With inovative doctrine, artillery, and air support, the Sherman proved effective in France, the Bulge, and the invasion of Germany (1944-45).

Created: 5:19 AM 11/20/2024
Last updated: 4:05 AM 11/21/2024