Tankfest, Part II
Created | Updated Aug 15, 2023
Tankfest, Part II
The story so far – Britain had invented the tank during the First World War and, up until the Great Depression, were at the forefront of tank development. After that tanks were very much considered a low priority with Britain's defence policy concentrating on the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. Churchill once summarised this belief with the words, 'The navy can lose us the law but only the air force can win it.'
By the outbreak of war, Britain had three types of tanks. The heaviest were called Infantry Tanks – they were heavily armoured and had powerful (for the time) weaponry, designed to penetrate enemy fortifications and armour, however they were very slow. This was not considered a drawback as they were intended to work in close support with infantry. Then there were Cruiser or Cavalry tanks, which were designed to essentially take on the role of the cavalry. Faster, these sacrificed armour for speed, with the idea that 'speed is armour' and that when a gap had been created in the enemy's frontline by the infantry tanks, cruiser tanks could penetrate through and attack the enemy from the rear and disrupt their lines of supply and communication, creating a wider collapse. They also had powerful guns. Like the infantry tanks their engines were largely terrible, using either the Liberty tank engine dating from the First World War, or often converted bus engines – which probably explains why they kept stopping every mile or two.
Britain's Light Tanks, intended for reconnaissance, were pretty much useless and quickly withdrawn from service. Following Dunkirk the British army didn't have many tanks left, though the oft-repeated 'less than a hundred' figure frequently found online is misleading as by then Britain was manufacturing over 100 tanks a month. What is true is that, short of tanks, the decision was made to keep making the existing tanks as a stop gap measure in order to recover numbers as quickly as possible, while developing newer and better tanks was put on hold. The reason for this was it was believed to be better to have a large number of adequate tanks quickly and there wasn't the time for the luxury of developing and improving new designs. British tank development lagged behind for a couple of years.
Matilda II (1939)
 |  |
The Matilda II was the best of Britain's Infantry Tanks, and was the only tank to serve with the British army from the start to the end of the Second World War. At the time of its development it had the thickest armour of any tank in the world as it was intended to be able to withstand the standard anti-tank guns of any European army. More than a match for Panzer III and Panzer IV tanks in the Battle of France, able to disable them while largely invulnerable to their weaponry, the Matilda II was also nicknamed 'the Queen of the Desert' due to it dominating battlefields and outclassing all Italian tanks in the early phase of the North Africa campaign2 (1940-43). It weighed 25 tons, which was heavy by 1939 standards, and had a maximum speed of 15 mph on road, 9 mph off road. Initially armed with a QF 2-pounder (quick firing 40mm) gun for main armament and had armament up to 78mm at a time when the Panzer IV had 50mm. Almost 3,000 Matilda IIs were built, but at the time war broke out only two had entered army service. This was largely because of a widespread belief that the arms race in Edwardian times was a contributing factor in starting the First World War, and so avoiding arming should prevent another war. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Neville Chamberpot's belief that giving Nazi Germany all the Czechoslovakian tank factories they wanted and then waving a piece of paper about like a white flag would prevent the outbreak of war would prove rather farfetched.
The Matilda II had served with impunity against German tanks of the early war years and is credited with giving the British army time to evacuate at Dunkirk, when 16 Matilda II tanks delayed the approach of the German 7th Panzer Division in the Battle of Arras. However Rommel turned artillery weapon the PaK 43 88mm into the best anti-tank gun of the war. The Matilda II was almost exclusively issued with armour piercing rounds, designed to penetrate armour, rather than high explosive shells that were more effective against infantry and an anti-tank gun's crew, leaving the Matilda unable to adequately respond to the 88mm gun's threat. That said, the success of both the Matilda II and French Char B1 against Germany's tanks directly inspired Hitler to order the development of bigger and more powerful German tanks that carried the 88mm gun, resulting in the Tiger.
During the Desert War Matilda II crews suffered significantly less with dysentery than their German and Italian counterparts – if you know why, answer below!
Panzer III (1939)
 |  |
This is the tank that is often credited with conquering Europe. It was reliable, easy to manufacture and highly adaptable, able to be improved and modified throughout the war. Germany's best medium tank before the Panther, it made short work of Britain's equivalent cruiser tanks. Weighing less than the Matilda II, and capable of speeds of 25mph on road, 12mph off road – it was far more mobile than the Matilda II. At the start of the war it had lighter armour and a smaller gun than the Matilda II, whose thick armour was invulnerable to the Panzer III's gun. That said, it was constantly updated and by the end of the war had a much more powerful gun – increasing from 37mm to 50mm - and armour three times as thick as initially. There were even tanks equipped with schnorchels, able to cross rivers underwater with even crossing the English Channel contemplated.
On paper at the outbreak of war the Panzer III was also no match for France's best tank, the Char B1, which easily outgunned the Panzer and was all-but invulnerable to its weapon3. However war is not a game of Top Trumps. The biggest disadvantage that France's Char B1 had was poor communication, with only the lead tank typically equipped with radio and the rest often expected to rely on using semaphore to communicate, which was far from ideal in battle situations4. In comparison each Panzer III played a part in the German tactic of Combined Arms Warfare, and so when a strong enemy was encountered, this could be relayed back to base and the Luftwaffe and dive bombers dispatched to eliminate the threat. The Panzer III was a good all-round tank but was backed up with a commander able to use effective tactics that took the Allies by surprise and exploited their mistakes, air support, strong logistical support and its mobility allowed it to spearhead attacks in strength to great effect.
The tanks were also particularly well suited to desert warfare, with the large turret doors and small escape hatches often opened to provide extra ventilation.
Conclusion
What made both these tanks effective in battle was not the nuts and bolts holding them together, but their crews, and their support. The Matilda II was intended to be an infantry support vehicle, providing mutual protection. The Panzer III similarly was an important cog in the machine of combined arms warfare often called Blitzkrieg. Strangely in 2022 at the start of the War of Putin's Ego, Russian tanks again and again were seen being sent senselessly into battle without infantry support only to be popped like bread from a toaster. There's probably a lesson to be learnt there.
