Seek, Strike and Destroy

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 сер 2024
  • Seek, Strike and Destroy
    Part of Tank Destroyers Week on WW2TV
    • Tank Destroyers Week
    With Brian McCallion
    On the Eve of Pearl Harbor in November 1941, The United States War Department would issue a decree to create “Tank Destroyer” Battalions. The fall of Poland and the subsequent fall of Western Europe in the spring of 1940 reinforced the need for a dedicated Anti-Tank force among the ranks of the Army. These Units were trained in specialized Armored warfare tactics to combat the growing threat of the German Blitzkrieg.
    It would be a little over a year later in the distant North African Mountain Passes and Valleys of Tunisia that the 601st, Nicknamed the “Black Y Boys”, would be the first to tackle the dreaded German Panzers…”
    Brian McCallion is a filmmaker and had a tenure at a tank destroyer museum before moving to The Collings Foundation where he works at the Former Jacques Littlefield armor collection. www.collingsfo...
    Brian's previous appearance:
    Normandy Myth Busters - Were American Troops wearing Camo HBT mistaken for the SS?
    www.youtube.co...
    / scuttlebuttmoviereviews
    You can become a UA-cam Member and support us here / @ww2tv
    You can become a Patron here / ww2tv
    Please click subscribe for updates
    Social Media links -
    / ww2tv
    / ww2tv
    / ww2tv
    WW2TV Bookshop - where you can purchase copies of books featured in my UA-cam shows. Any book listed here comes with the personal recommendation of Paul Woodadge, the host of WW2TV. For full disclosure, if you do buy a book through a link from this page WW2TV will earn a commission.
    UK - uk.bookshop.or...
    USA - bookshop.org/s...

КОМЕНТАРІ • 72

  • @davidmanning7912
    @davidmanning7912 4 місяці тому

    I really enjoyed Brian's sharing his knowledge of US tank destroyers, TD tactics and deployment - and most of all his evident enthusiasm for his subject. Thank you Brian, and Paul for another great speaker

  • @jeffreybaker4399
    @jeffreybaker4399 Рік тому +4

    Side note: For those not familiar, Hood did spend time as a cavalry officer but is known amongst the general public in the role of a division commander in the Army of Northern Virginia (Confederate) at Gettysburg. Eventually he was made commander of the Army of Tennesse. His ability to play with others was patchy, as was his combat record. Very aggressive, losing a leg and incapacitating an arm on separate occasions. Side note to the side note: My father was stationed at Fort Hood (formerly Camp Hood) as a heavy equipment operator (armor traffic tends to destroy dirt roads) prior to his deployment to Korea for that war.
    Well, I managed to not say a darn thing about WWII!
    Thank you, Brian and Paul. Lot of information in the show.

  • @philbosworth3789
    @philbosworth3789 Рік тому +3

    That was an interesting chat from Brian regarding doctrine and available technology as applied to TDs.

  • @davidlavigne207
    @davidlavigne207 Рік тому +7

    Glad to see some young and upcoming historians showing an interest in World War 2. Brian would get on well with my nephew Andrew, who is an enthusiast as well as a WW2 reenactor. Keep up the great work Brian! I can't wait to watch "Reveille!"

  • @jeromyfisher297
    @jeromyfisher297 Рік тому +2

    “You got to know what the F$@( you are doing”! Best quote of the episode!

  • @Doc_Tar
    @Doc_Tar Рік тому +4

    Camp Hood was named for John Bell Hood who rose through the ranks during the American Civil War from brigade commander to Commander of the Army of Tennesse literally losing an arm and a leg along the way, as well as losing the Battle of Atlanta and slaughtering his own men at the Battle of Franklin. Oh, and he was from Texas originally.

  • @sayrerowan734
    @sayrerowan734 7 місяців тому +2

    More with this guy please

    • @Nyllsor
      @Nyllsor 5 місяців тому

      yeah this was a good one! :)

  • @jasonrusso9808
    @jasonrusso9808 Рік тому +1

    Our guest orator truly knows this topic I also admire that he looks the part with the tanker jacket, "jeep" cap ie:"Radar", 2 Armored Div. patch. He look like "Fury", y'all member fury? Yeah that guy fury, man he kick ass, yeah. Oh man that fury....mmhhmmmm that fury. Fury come kick yo ass.

  • @jselsor1
    @jselsor1 6 місяців тому +2

    I have patches of the tank destroyer battalion from my neighbor who was in the red ball express !!

  • @whitby910
    @whitby910 21 день тому

    Fascinating, thank you.

  • @ottovonbismarck2443
    @ottovonbismarck2443 Рік тому +3

    I think Brian is mistaken about German crosses. The "Maltese" (which is not a Maltese but a knights cross) had been used in WW1 and is in use with today's Bundeswehr. The German cross in WW2 was the "Balkenkreuz". And German tankers had their own issues with these.
    Other than that minor issue, it has been a pleasure to hear that f*** and sh** are finally official terms in history lessons. I mean, both have been around since mankind first stepped on this planet.
    Great presentation 👍

    • @jasonrusso9808
      @jasonrusso9808 Рік тому

      It's ok in moderation not when it's so profound due to laziness or ignorance. One doesn't appear intelligent when profusely profane. Mofo

  • @morganhale3434
    @morganhale3434 Рік тому +3

    Excellent presentation to a much-neglected subject, not very sexy compared to the MBT's of the time, and what I love most is the combination of both passion and in-depth knowledge on the subject. Fascinating watch and excellent viewing entertainment. Bravo.

  • @jimwatts914
    @jimwatts914 5 місяців тому

    Howdy folks!Impressive presentation on mostly US Army tank destroyer battalions with a shout out to USMC units in the Pacific. Learned a lot.

  • @stevelyle3080
    @stevelyle3080 Рік тому +1

    The battle you couldn't remember, and called Avranches, was at Arracourt. 4th Armored decimated several Panther brigades.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +1

      Yep, i remembered 2 minutes after i ended the stream lol

  • @richardviolet8759
    @richardviolet8759 2 місяці тому

    Very good ,It is very difficult to find history on the Tank Destroyer . My father serve 634th Recon...These guys were Heros and did a great job, But the Army never gave them the credit they deserved ..No movie about Tank Destroyers Units and are never mentioned ...They were not Sherman Tanks but many time they got the same assignments ...

  • @silentotto5099
    @silentotto5099 Рік тому +5

    Brian sure is properly dressed for his lecture. :)
    Nick Moran, "The Chieftain", whom I'm sure many here are familiar with, took a look at the battle of Kasserine Pass. He suggested that one of the mistakes that led to the defeat was the parceling out of the tank destroyer units when they were intended to fight together en mass.
    It seems that when commanders were sending out patrols, recon and such, they'd want to give the men some additional firepower. A half-track with a big gun on it seemed like the perfect solution, so they'd detail a couple of the M3 GMCs to go with them. But that ultimately led to the tank destroyer units being so spread out along the front that they weren't able to apply the concentrated firepower that their doctrine called for when Rommel's attack hit. One M3 GMC shooting at a tank is probably easy meat for the tank, but four M3 GMCs shooting at a tank and the tank probably ends up on the plate.
    It was an interesting take on the battle that I'd never heard anyone else delve into.

  • @Chiller01
    @Chiller01 Рік тому +2

    Really interesting information. When I think of tank destroyers I think of the vehicles and guns. I had no idea regarding the unique nature of the training, judo, knife fighting and Apache stealth techniques; fascinating.

  • @stuartbuxton4316
    @stuartbuxton4316 Рік тому +1

    Brian is a great speaker. His knowledge is mesmerising and I could listen to him all day!

  • @adambrooker5649
    @adambrooker5649 Рік тому +1

    Great overall discussion and topic, looking forward to more

  • @sparkey6746
    @sparkey6746 Рік тому

    Great show, thank you both.

  • @jasonrusso9808
    @jasonrusso9808 2 місяці тому

    They were their own arm or branch. They were issued SSI, DUI, Branch Insignia & Branch Color. Orange and Black. Insignia was the Half-track tank destroyer variety and individual DUI for their battalion varied just like the infantry regimental crest and had heraldry, symbolism and great individualistic meaning. Some crests reflected the patch itself which is described from the time as a Cougar with tank clenched in it's teeth. Not a panther or any other feline, but a Cougar.

  • @FilipDePreter
    @FilipDePreter Рік тому

    Great show. Thanks.

  • @markmorgan6179
    @markmorgan6179 Рік тому

    a lively and really interesting presentation. Thank you!

  • @Nyllsor
    @Nyllsor 5 місяців тому

    Learned a whole lot today! :)

  • @marchuvfulz
    @marchuvfulz Рік тому +1

    Very good discussion. l think it's worth noting that WWII was a time of innovation and some desperate improvisation by leaders trying to solve new problems. It's hardly surprising that some of these efforts did not work out. Tank Destroyers were an improvised response to a big problem. War is a hard school.

  • @markrunnalls7215
    @markrunnalls7215 Рік тому

    Very interesting chat on a very interesting topic ..from you and Brian.
    I was at the tank museum tank fest/ battle day some years back and got chatting to a chap who was one of the crew members of a M18 Hellcat and what a superb example it was fully kitted out with blankets etc tied to the turret sides ,and everyone was in US armoured crew kit ,and it looked great .
    When talking to this chap he showed me just how thin the armour was ,I was amazed ,but the thing was fast ,furthermore without sounding disrespectful he said that some of the US armoured crews coined the phase "Hide n Hope "for exactly that very reason.
    I also got the chance to visit Tunisia and visited Kasserine pass and it was very dry ,so when it rained things could get very boggy plus it was arid rough rocky scrub ,but in places it was wide open ideal for an ambush, very surreal you could easily imagine allied and or German vehicles moving around.

  • @reiniergroeneveld7801
    @reiniergroeneveld7801 Рік тому +1

    Great show! The battle you are looking for at 1:04:28 is the Battle of Arracourt. 704th TD Bn attached to the 4th AD.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      That's the one Reinier!

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 Рік тому

      Yes, where the two Panzer Brigades (111 and 113) were green, badly trained without any organic recon elements. I believe Panzer Brigade 111 didn't even receive its Panthers to train on until the 5th to 7th September, less than two weeks before the battle. Crazy.

  • @scottgrimwood8868
    @scottgrimwood8868 Рік тому

    An excellent presentation by Brian. I am a young historian is so interested in WW2.

  • @stevej8005
    @stevej8005 Рік тому

    Thanks Brian & Paul, fascinating presentation on US TD's and managed to cram a lot of info. into 1 1/4 hrs !!!

  • @gw2058
    @gw2058 Рік тому

    Great presentation 👍

  • @davidhood5550
    @davidhood5550 Рік тому

    I love your guests and content keep up the great work

  • @davidk7324
    @davidk7324 Рік тому

    Great show, gentlemen. I don't offer corrections often, but feel compelled to here. John Bell Hood was not from Texas, he was born and raised in Kentucky and was stationed in Texas and elsewhere following graduation from the USMA. He was angered by his native Kentucky's refusal to secede and offered his services to Confederate forces in Texas after resigning his US Army commission. The base will be thankfully re-named to honor Gen. Richard Cavazos, the first Hispanic four-star general from Texas who was awarded a DSC in both Korea and Vietnam.

  • @CliftonHicksbanjo
    @CliftonHicksbanjo 7 місяців тому

    General John Bell Hood; he had no regard for his own safety, or the safety of his subordinates.

  • @patrickwentz8413
    @patrickwentz8413 Рік тому

    Really interested in checking out Scuttlebutt. Some good movies are reviewed.

  • @edmundmcalister119
    @edmundmcalister119 Рік тому +2

    McNair was not a cavalry officer (and neither was Hood, for that matter). McNair was an artilleryman, and the disagreement was essentially between those who thought that TDs were a necessary doctrinal approach (McNair) and those who thought the best way to kill tanks was other tanks (Gen. Jacob Devers).

    • @jeffreybaker4399
      @jeffreybaker4399 Рік тому +4

      I think you meant to say that Hood was not a cavalry officer during the ACW. He did serve in that capacity in the U.S. Army prior to the war.

    • @Chiller01
      @Chiller01 Рік тому +2

      At 12:20 or so he said McNair was more of an armoured general. That’s also not quite accurate but I don’t see where Brian said McNair was a cavalryman. McNair as Head of Army Ground Forces did argue that the tank destroyers should be towed. He lost the argument and tank destroyers were conceived as mechanized vehicles.

  • @adambrooker5649
    @adambrooker5649 Рік тому +1

    Brian says ' and everything , and things' a lot... I think it's unconcious. But some good information. Good topic

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +2

      Every speaker/guest has similar phrases they use frequently

    • @adambrooker5649
      @adambrooker5649 Рік тому

      @@WW2TV it's something I was taught when learning to public speak, people often don't know they are doing it, and it's essentially because they are nervous. If Brian wants, he can learn to change the habit, you just need to know your doing it

    • @Theakker3B
      @Theakker3B Рік тому +1

      @@adambrooker5649 Ok, dude, whatever haha

    • @adambrooker5649
      @adambrooker5649 Рік тому

      @@Theakker3B indeed

  • @philleonoudakis
    @philleonoudakis Рік тому

    Would of liked to know how towed units where deployed ie set up ambush etc

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      There is no single answer to that. It depends on terrain, the situation, the threat - a thousand and one factors

  • @charlespolk5221
    @charlespolk5221 Рік тому

    Did I misunderstand or did he say the US 57mm wasn't as good as the 6 pounder anti-tank gun?

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      With regards to the shells

    • @charlespolk5221
      @charlespolk5221 Рік тому

      @@WW2TV I was under the impression that the US 57mm M1 was a direct copy of the six pounder. Wouldn't that make the chamber dimensions the same on both guns?

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому

      @@charlespolk5221 yes but not the same ammo

  • @davidbriggs7365
    @davidbriggs7365 Рік тому +1

    Couple of corrections. First, numbering. Per war Square Infantry Divisions had four Infantry Regiments and three Artillery Regiments, and each of the Artillery Regiments had an Antitank Battery within it. Those were consolidated into a newly organized Tank Destroyer Battalion given the same number as the Division, but with 600 added. Separate Infantry Antitank (NOT Artillery) Battalions retained the same number, but with 800 added to it. The 700 series Tank Destroyer Battalions did come from Armored Divisions and from Separate Artillery Antitank Battalions.
    Second, THEY ARE NOT TANKS, AND SO STOP CALLING THEM TANKS. This is fingernails on chalkboard irritating to me. A World War Two Tank (as are modern tanks) were fully armored and carried Machine Guns (both Bow and Coaxial in the case of WW2 tanks), AND they carried fairly heavy armor. Tank DESTROYERS are not fully armored (they had open topped turrets), they did not (with the exception of the M36B2, which used an actual Sherman Hull) carry any Bow Machine Guns, nor did ANY of them carry a coaxial Machine Gun, and their were very thinly armored. The Sherman Tank had up to 4 inches of armor, whereas a TD would find itself lucky to had 1/2 inch of armor. They are not tanks and so stop calling them tanks, call them Tank Destroyers or TD's.
    Third, none of the American TD's used Christie Suspension. The M10 and M36 used the same suspension as the Sherman, and the M18 used Torsion Bar suspension, the same as the more modern M113 APC and the current Abrams Tanks.
    Incidentally, in theory there were Tank Destroyer Battalions given two digit numbers (71st to 79th iirc), though none of those were actually ever activated, most (if not all) of them had been Interwar Cavalry Regiments with the Army Reserve previously numbered 301 to 324. And of the 6 TD Battalions sent to the Pacific, five were equipped with the M10, and one was equipped with the M18. Bruce, mentioned in the piece, later went on to command the 77th Infantry Division. Infantry Regiments at that time were authorized a Cannon Company, and Bruce made sure that the Infantry Regiment Cannon Companies with the 77th Infantry Division were equipped with M18 Hellcats. Most (though not all) photos of Hellcats in the Pacific come from that division.
    One of my favorite stories from the U.S. Army during World War Two comes from the Northwest European Campaign, which went into the campaign starting with D-Day with a 50-50 mix of Towed and SP Tank Destroyer Battalions. Not long after landing in France, the decision was made to convert the M10 TD Battalions to use the M36. But what did they do with the now excess M10's? They used those to convert some of the Towed Battalions into SP Battalions (I might be wrong, but other Towed Battalions might have been converted to SP using M18 Hellcats).

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +1

      The whole point of this week of shows was to make the distinction between tanks and tank destroyers, which I'm pretty sure we did. I don't think we referred any TDs as tanks

    • @davidbriggs7365
      @davidbriggs7365 Рік тому

      @@WW2TV Maybe you didn't, but your guest certainly did. They are TD's NOT tanks.

    • @SirCheezersIII
      @SirCheezersIII 7 місяців тому

      Wait, the 77th swapped out the M3 105mm guns in their regimental cannon companies for M18s? Isn't that like a completely different capability?

  • @scottbuennemeyer8924
    @scottbuennemeyer8924 Рік тому

    This guy is so unprofessional!! His pronunciation of key words is horrible…Corps= “corpse” French “ Cross of War” = “crocs de Guerre” Come on…the slide presentation also had typos. I turned this program off ASAP. Get another “ historian” for this subject- Mccallion took alot of credibility away from your otherwise great channel!

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +1

      Okay point taken, but the key points of the presentation were solid

    • @newtonmillham790
      @newtonmillham790 4 місяці тому

      @@WW2TV I agree with the comment. This presenter appears well informed but has a cavalier and somewhat glib attitude about the subject that diminishes his presentation. Pushes the shit. Is that a technical or quantitative term? comic book presentation. I’d love to see and hear the Chieftain side by side with this”dude”. primary sources research for what he is saying?

  • @jim99west46
    @jim99west46 Рік тому +3

    Great show but your guest needs to discover basic pronunciation, eg the word corps. He also can't speak French, I get that but it's easy to learn how to pronounce basic French military words that are still recognized by the US Army.

    • @johnspurrell1200
      @johnspurrell1200 Рік тому

      How is it that the Germans had an air force and the US had a Luftwaffe?

    • @jim99west46
      @jim99west46 Рік тому +3

      @@johnspurrell1200 American Luftwaffe was GI slang for American planes that accidentally strafed and or bombed US troops.

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +3

      You completely missed the point on this John. The Luftwaffe reference was regarding blue on blue incidents

    • @johnspurrell1200
      @johnspurrell1200 Рік тому

      @@WW2TV reasonable point: were there some soldiers who were quartered in anti tank guns? Tenants not tenets? Or groups of zombie troops! Corpses not corps?

    • @WW2TV
      @WW2TV  Рік тому +6

      @John Spurrell Okay, you've made your poin.. It's clearly a passion of yours to pick people up on pronunciation etc, so why don't you stick with The World at War narrated by Sir Laurence Olivier if you want perfect RP English, rather than bringing your negativity to my comments