1942 British Churchill Tank

[WickyWiggstaz]

did he say fast? lol It was the slowest thing on the battlefield.

As for the weapons, the 75QBF was good for its HE round and the Churchill was an infantry tank so we can't really dispute that.

I must say I adore the churchill, favourite allied tank of D-Day closely followed by the "Crommie" and Hobarts funnies, well they were just incredible.

[888HamilkarBarkas888]

i love part when he says "fast and equipped with formidable weapons for attack"

i wrote a scientific work about propaganda in ww2, brits were masters of propaganda.

[TalonMercenary]

That thing looks terrifying :\

[BigDon62]

My old man used to fix British Army tanks & I remember how he kept his Wolseley 18/85's & alike on the road. Still recall one of the regos ! : NLO227K Big Don doesn't forget much !!!

[pommiesniper]

Best to get your facts from those that crewed them rather than just book stats! Shermans, esp. the Firefly, seem great in comparison but were hated for their 'Ronson' effect i.e. lights on the first strike! Churchill's were great at climbing hills, were a great platform for all the 'Funnies' conversions. They were relatively good to maintain but were let down by their main armament. BTW, King Tiger's weren't that good, they were too heavy & broke down a lot!

[dividednation44]

equipped with fomidable gun? more lies?

this tank is a mechanical disaster. much worse then the tiger, was also very lightly armed and ultra-slow. those are facts if you dont belive me read them

[TheMaccafan]

@dividednation44 Oh dont tell me this nazi lover is back....

[dividednation44]

@TheMaccafan oh dont tell me this racist son of a bitch pig herder who eats mud and does'nt know how to count is back. fuck off you pathetic bitch or i will mess you up beyoned recongition

[Helipadsarefun]

@dividednation44 frontal armour over 100mm is weak?

Hmmm

It's also slow because it's a bloody Infantry tank you moron, you clearly know fuck all about British tank doctrines.

[dividednation44]

@Helipadsarefun its weak compared to other tanks, especielly since the germans had 88mm guns which could blow up a churchill to pieces

[Helipadsarefun]

@dividednation44 Well yeah, but it wasn't until the 17pdr that any AT gun could touch the 88, and then the 17pdr could blow a Tiger to pieces and take a King Tiger in a 2-3 shots.

[dividednation44]

@Helipadsarefun i partilly agree, its a powerful gun, but cant even scratch a king tiger, dude its really stupid of you to say that, the king tiger was the best tank in the entire war, it had a 180MM armor/max and a much better improved and higher velocity 88MM which produces firepower even higher then the russian 122MM and its speed is very respectible (25MPH) which is extremley fast for a heavy tank. it had an awesom side armor aswell.

[Helipadsarefun]

@dividednation44 Really, do you know the penetration of a 17pdr with APCBC shells (which were widely used)

[dividednation44]

@Helipadsarefun yes. 140MM of armour at 457m and 131MM at 914m

lol

[Lawstead]

@dividednation44 I wouldn't go that far as to call it the best tank. That title is either reserved to the improved Sherman or the improved T-34.

[dividednation44]

@Lawstead the improved sherman and T34 cant hit jack shit, they suck!

[Lawstead]

@dividednation44 The 76mm cannon enjoyed good accuracy, but I cannot speak for the 85mm cannon of the T-34. I don't know where you determined it cannot hit anything.

[dividednation44]

@Lawstead what i meant is that they have poor damage power

compared to the much tougher german guns.

anyways even if the germans brought poor guns. the allied tanks sucked dick in terms of protection

[Lawstead]

@dividednation44 Accuracy and Penetrating/destructive power are totally different things. Destructive power is based largely on weight, so bigger bore gun, more power, theoretically. Regardless, the Allied tanks served their purpose, a mobile spearhead for the infantry, and there were a weapons and perhaps Mortars.

[cadmus98]

@dividednation44 "the allied tanks sucked dick in terms of protection"

What are you talking about? The Russians fielded the first sloped armor tanks, which the Germans had trouble dealing with early in the Russian invasion with their Panzers; the British Churchill tanks also had armor thicker than the Tiger I's.

[dividednation44]

@cadmus98 hey, try to not to argue with a tank expert with your shitty info, churchills had less armor then tigers, churchills had 100mm protection front, tiger had over 130mm up front and that cant be dealt with easily especially mentioning the tiger had excellent sights and optics with its 88mm gun which could penetrate the churchill from a very long range, and sell your bullshit elsewhere dumbass, russians dident field the first sloped armor tanks, it was common until they started spamming it

[cadmus98]

@dividednation44 Let me call your bluff then: Can you tell me which model of Churchill fielded 152mm armour? (I'm aware it is not the same thickness all round). That's thicker than the Tiger I's 130mm, and was definitely good armour for its day.

I stand corrected on sloped armour. The French had that on their tanks earlier, not the Russians, though both were allies and were applying it before the Germans really took to the idea later in the war, with Panthers, King Tigers, etc.

[dividednation44]

@cadmus98 yeah, your a dumbshit. the A22 was the only variant to be mass produced and fielded in decent numbers, the only variant that had 150mm armor was the MKVII a prototype, what a dumbass.

sloped armor was commonly used before WW2 broke out you dumbass. germany did used sloped armor in some of its tanks. the panther and king tiger had inclined armor, a german innovation that rendered sloped armor obsolete

[cadmus98]

@dividednation44 "the only variant that had 150mm armor was the MKVII a prototype, what a dumbass."

It was fielded in the Battle of Normandy, so it does count. Both the Churchill and the T-34 series had good armour, especially early on in the war. So you cannot generalize Allied armour as poor, if you include those tanks.

[joseaca]

@dividednation44 the MKVII wasnt a prototype

inclined armor is the same as sloped armor

also what are you insane? why are you insulting this guy over nothing?

[WickyWiggstaz]

@dividednation44 "inclined armour"....that's just another way of saying sloped you fool. They both mean that the Armour is angled.

[YuriPRIME]

Good deffense...

Decent and reliable...

But...

Lolcanon

[JackBulik]

it was a real shit bucket but even the suviets used them via land lease program.

[Omarsito318]

jajajaja this tank was soo lame jajaja and ugly as hell another british lame invention

[iJaydan]

@Omarsito318

At least their country can afford tanks hahahaa...And wait the tank is ugly? Does that mean for you other tanks are pretty? Thats a big problem...

[davetonia1233]

@Omarsito318 What has come out of Puerto Rico that has ever been good?

[Karagianis]

The first tiger tank captured was taken down by a squad of Churchills. One of them managed to bounce a round off the underside of the Tiger's gun which lodged in the turret ring and jammed it.

[Kordax21]

@Karagianis when this was realy happend then it was the only knocked out tiger by a churchil in the WW2 ....

[Karagianis]

@Kordax21 It wasn't the only time, it wasn't even the first time, that was the third tiger they'd gotten in North Africa. Two tigers had been destroyed by a squad of Churchills of the north Irish horse regiment a week before. There's records of the allies in the Po Valley (Italy) taking out "6 or 7", and that was just from a single allied unit, interestingly 6 or 7 for NO LOSSES of Churchills.

[lordofdarkdudes]

i love infantry support tanks like this one

[LarS1963]

No match for a Tiger. Though.... the very first Tiger to be knocked out during WW2, was knocked out by a.... Churchill! :p

[F4Wildcat]

@LarS1963 at 1000M, the Churchill (MK III to V with 104MM armor) could actually survive a shot from a 88 :)

The heavy churchills had 154MM frontal armor! Meaning that tigers and Panthers had to get close to get them

but the churchills often couldnt fire back, because of the stupid 75MM gun

[punkd76]

@F4Wildcat in normandy montgomery got them an average of 1 in 3 churchills having the 6 pounder gun (apparently), and this was able to take out tigers at range

[7SwitzerlandAustria7]

! Churchill tank is good tank !

! it was a very big tank !

! not so super big canon but a damn big armor !

! i rather be in a tank with big armour than small tank with big gun !

! i love that tank it got 152 MM armor in front !

luvit

[rvfharrier]

Actually the Churchill that had 152 front armour was the Black Prince, that had 152 mm frontal armour AND it had a 17 pounder, which could quite easily take out a Tiger even to the front. So the Black Prince was more than a match for the Tiger, the normal Churchill (just over 100mm front armour, which is about the same as the Tiger) could survive hits from a Tiger but the 6 pounder just didn't have enough punch to take the Tiger out.

[thereal1Vanquisher]

@rvfharrier yea un fortunatly the black prince did not see action in world war 2. But the Centurions of which a handful where send to europe only been unloaded from ship to see the war ending would have been a fearsome opponent to a tiger.

[punkd76]

@rvfharrier nah mate

mark vii and viii had 152mm front armour turret and hull and the qf mk5 75mm

black prince would have taken any tiger, but the 6 pounder did have the punch, particularly in normandy where they had APDS ammunition, able to penetrate 131mm at 500 yards and 117 at 1000 yards, easily enough for the tiger's 102mm

[peepeevagi]

That's alot of Tanks.

Shame they cant go fifteen miles an hour though :P

[caspercool1001]

The abrams can :P

[punkd76]

@peepeevagi but they could go places other tanks couldnt, which almost makes up for being slow

[peepeevagi]

But those 'other places' were usually heavily armed/armored tanks immune to the early 40mm or 57mm guns. And it's probably flip over if it went 25mph plus :D

[punkd76]

@peepeevagi i know lool

"almost" makes up for it

[scarlebloke]

Interesting mix of the 2pdr. equipped Mk.2 and the 6pdr. Mk3.

[stuartthegrant]

They look undergunned to me.

[ToonandBBfan]

No Match for a Tiger

[Allyness92]

well it was only an infantry tank

[SteveSpicerPortsmuth]

@ToonandBBfan

and HOW MANY Tigers were there in the German army? Most of them were used on the Eastern Front anyway.

[ToonandBBfan]

@SteveSpicerPortsmuth

Enough to cause more than one British tank crew to have a bad day.