Worst Pices of Crap 3: Tanks

Dean

Active member
So, here we go again. I now invite all military-quotes habitués who have far too much time on your hands to do something that we do not do often enough... to think!!! Yes, indeed, I want you to once again put on those thinking caps and try to figure out which was the worst tank ever fielded.
As I am sometimes a logical kind of guy, (I did say sometimes) I will now expound and pontificate and come up with a few simple rules.

1. It has to be a tank. Not an armoured car, not a self-propelled gun, not a German tank destroyer, a TANK.
2. It has to have been fielded. We can discuss the strengths and weaknesses of experimental tanks alll day long, but in the end, if it has not been fielded by some misbegotten army, we can't discuss it in any real terms.
3. The gold medal standard: Was this tank responsible for the deaths of soldiers due to known weaknesses or design flaws? If yes, we have a contendaaaah!
4. I can't think of anything else at the moment.
5. A day later, I thought of something! (Sometimes, I'm really quick!!) You also have to tell me why it was such a lousy deathtrap. The name alone won't cut it, unless the name is Sherman.

So with that, drag your eyes away from the women in skin-tight suits on the cross-country ski trails and start exercising your brains and fingertips. I wanna know from all of you what the worst tanks were.... so let the games begin!

Dean.
 
Last edited:
The main problem with the British Tank during WW2, was the fact that they were under gunned. They made some fairly good and heavlly armoured tanks then just put a 2 pounder gun on it. The Germans had a job in knocking them out but at the same time they could not hurt the Germans
 
zander_0633 said:
Die Mause? It is built in WWII by the Germans

You mean der Maus Panzerkampfwagon? It never actually got past the working prototype stage. It's main problem was that no engine existed that could adequately power it but it was far from the worse design there's ever been. In fact, much of it was quite innovative.
 
I think that would be Renault FT-17. It's a small tank. I heard French still use it until World War 2. When German invade France in World War 2. French send Renaults to face the German tanks. Any german tanks are blew Renault easily.
 
Both the Maus and the Elefant do not count, as both were experimental. Were they not, neither of them would be winners. The armour and armament were both so good that they were damn near impossible to kill and could knock out anything that they could see. Both are great qualities in a tank. The fact that they could not go anywhere cross-country, or without either breaking roadbeds and collapsing bridges did constitute a slight weakness....

Dean.
 
I think that one of the strangest ideas the Germans had on tanks was one that would trundle up to a battle front then dig hole then lift out the turret of the tank and drop it in the hole along with the gunner then leave him to fight on his own. When things had quieten down on the battle field the tank would return and if the turret had survived would pick it up and drop it back in the tank and return to being a tank again
 
Fox said:
I think that would be Renault FT-17. It's a small tank. I heard French still use it until World War 2. When German invade France in World War 2. French send Renaults to face the German tanks. Any german tanks are blew Renault easily.

I cannot agree with you there Fox

The Renault FT-17 was state of the art in WWI, arguably one one of the best tanks of WWI. The fact that it was obsolete (like all military equipment eventually) for WWII doesnt detract from its original conception. It had just lived past its prime thats all...

My choice would be the Polish TKS Tankette, a disasterous design...
 
Dean said:
Reasons, Koz?

Dean.

T-62

A ***** to crew, the 115mm gun was shitty, basically just an interim tank till the T-64

M60A2

The gun missile didn't work much at all. Read some of Dwight Pruitt's posts on tanknet, he says they would maybe be able to get of 2 missiles in a minute.
 
mmarsh said:
I cannot agree with you there Fox

The Renault FT-17 was state of the art in WWI, arguably one one of the best tanks of WWI. The fact that it was obsolete (like all military equipment eventually) for WWII doesnt detract from its original conception. It had just lived past its prime thats all...

My choice would be the Polish TKS Tankette, a disasterous design...

It may be best tank in WWI but not WW2. I think France hasn't make any design the new tank. Polish and French using it in World War 2. German Panther blew Renault easily and German captured them to many. French abandon it. Look...
ft17-1_098.jpg


I know their WW2 german uniform in this picture. And that rifle is Mauser. French just abandon Renault in WW2. But in my opition Renault is maybe better tank of World War I.
 
Fox

Actually in 1940 the best tanks were French. The Somua-35 and the Bis-1 were far better than anything the Germans or British had. France's error was not to group them in Armored divisions but to use them as infantry support. Had they done so they would have been able to blunt and even stop the German Blitzkreig.

As for the FT-17, I agree that its was totally obsolete for WWII but that doesnt qualify it as a 'piece of crap'. I suspect the intent of this thread (could be wrong) was unsuccessful designs. For example my suggestion of the Polish TKS Tankette wasnt obsolete, it was just too unarmored and undergunned. The FT-17 a WWI design, was better armed and armored.
 
mmarsh said:
Fox

Actually in 1940 the best tanks were French. The Somua-35 and the Bis-1 were far better than anything the Germans or British had. France's error was not to group them in Armored divisions but to use them as infantry support. Had they done so they would have been able to blunt and even stop the German Blitzkreig.

As for the FT-17, I agree that its was totally obsolete for WWII but that doesnt qualify it as a 'piece of crap'. I suspect the intent of this thread (could be wrong) was unsuccessful designs. For example my suggestion of the Polish TKS Tankette wasnt obsolete, it was just too unarmored and undergunned. The FT-17 a WWI design, was better armed and armored.

Another German advantage was that every German tank had a radio, while in the French army only command tanks had radios
 
Cant say for sure its the worst.
It sure is crap though.
jr36c.jpg
[SIZE=-1]M.11/39
Weight : 11.0 ton
Dimensions : 4.74 x 2.17 x 2.25 mt
Armor (max) : 30 mm
Range : 200 km
Speed (max - route) : 33 km/hr
Weapons : n.1 gun 37 mm + n.2 8.0 mm MG
Crew : 3
[/SIZE]
 
mmarsh said:
Fox

Actually in 1940 the best tanks were French. The Somua-35 and the Bis-1 were far better than anything the Germans or British had. France's error was not to group them in Armored divisions but to use them as infantry support. Had they done so they would have been able to blunt and even stop the German Blitzkreig.

You're right about the French tanks being better than most of what the Germans had at the time and their lack of proper use in the French Army. However, even if they had grouped them into armoured divisions I still think the Germans would have outmanauvered them due to superior tactics and the element of surprise.

This would never have happened though due to the organisation of the French Army at the time, one of the key tenets being that the Maginot Line was impassible and that the Germans could never send armour through the Ardennes Region.
 
Back
Top