Vickers Infantry Tank No.2. the old-fashion tank

Suggestions Ground
1
[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

caid’s suggestion #190

I would like to propose to you the old but yet decent tank, the Vickers Infantry Tank No.2


the Vickers Infantry Tank No.2 was the first proper British light tank. the tank was built with the classical configuration but the chassis of the rhombus which the United Kingdom made their reputation in tank design during the Great War. but was also including innovations inspired by the French, such as the turret rotating on 360°.

The beginning of the 1920s was a very difficult time for British tank building. The Medium Tank Mk.D. it showed phenomenal speed, but it turned out to be an extremely crude vehicle. Colonel John Fuller was creating the requirement for a tank of a new type in the British army. a new tank the main feature would be the lightness and the manoeuvrability. intended for the hot climate, this new tank would be easily shipped to a country where the infrastructure might not allow the larger and heavier tank in service. in the matter of a light tank, the British doctrine had simply ignored the need for light tanks and as a consequence, they fell far behind serial countries in such development; the country which included France, the USA, Italy, Germany, and even Russia who was known to have no modern industry at that time. but aware of the performance of the tanks from the other country, they were confident to easily catch up, as only the German and Italian light tank were reaching their need in mobility but not the rest of their need. They were taken up at Vickers Limited. These developments were led by Sir George Thomas Buckham, chief designer of Vickers.

designed in 1921, the tank was intended to be used in tropical territories outside England, such as India, and South America. the prototype was built with a turret full of machine-gun, This tank was built by Vickers Works in Erith, in southeast London. A total of three such tanks were ordered, but they were built with a significant time gap. The first-born Vickers was created with an eye on the developments of Wilson and Tritton, which is not surprising - so far the company had no experience of its tanks. Therefore, the car received a completely traditional diamond-shaped body. Such a scheme was dictated by the need to get over difficult obstacles. At the same time, the hull was the only thing that made the new tank related to " rhombus ". With a mass of less than 9 tons, the tank was equipped with a 6-cylinder Wolseley engine, which was originally for cars. The tank used a Williams-Jenney hydraulic transmission, which has been used since the days of the " rhombus “” One of the main innovations was the engine being installed behind the fighting compartment in his compartment. the tracks of a new design were more tenacious. it was one of the first British tanks to have a turret and all the armament was in the turret. the first version only included 3 machine-gun. the first tank was ready in December 1921 and sent for testing in the Farnborough area. The tests were ambiguous. The Williams-Jenney hydraulic transmission, which was capricious before, again showed its temper. Yes, and the car engine was weak. Therefore, in early 1922, the car went for revision, having received an 80-horsepower Lanchester engine from the car of the same name. With it, the specific power has become significantly higher, and the speed has risen to 24 km / h. This made the Vickers Infantry Tank the fastest British tank of his time.

the British army soon realized the next generation of tanks would need to carry both machine guns and gun to provide at the same time the fire-support and suppress fire for the infantry. The 3-pounder (47-mm) gun turned out to be optimal, the task of which was to fight enemy tanks. She was equipped only with armor-piercing shells, which is somewhat surprising. The 47 mm fragmentation grenade was quite effective. In July 1922, work began on a cannon version of the tank, which received the designation Vickers Tank No.2. it was the same as its predecessor but with improvements in the engine, chassis, and weapons. but the weight of the tank raised to almost 10 tonnes which raised the question of ever it was still a light tank or his the transmission was enough, it was true the extra weight made the Williams-Jenney hydraulic transmission easily overheat. the 2nd tank was tested until 1923 in the Farnborough area where the tank was having extreme overheating problems from the transmission. the tank intended for the hot climate was unable to work in the English summer leading to the interest of the tank fading away. the 3rd tank was never built and the 2 prototypes were scrapped in 1927/28. the development of this tank show to Vickers they could create an actual tank. but also it taught Vickers to create a tank without the involvement of the army as they take responsibility for the army for the choice of the transmissions to had been imposed to the tank’s development and were unable to apply their own solution. solution that was successfully applied on the 18-pounder gun carrier which was developed in parallel without the regard of the army.


as the problem of overheating is not a factor in the game, the tank would suddenly be showing perfectly fine performance for the game.

Firepower
armed with the 47mm OQF 3-pounder , the tank would not suffer the lack of damage but might lack a tiny bit of punch. been in the game in the oldest tank currently found in the game, the A1E1 Independent, the gun would be capable of a decent penetration of 47mm at 100m (0°) . if the penetration is not the best, it is still far from the worst. the post penetration damage would be great as the gun uses APHE rounds with 16.5 g of TnT equivalent . this would make the gun a lot more devastating than the usual solid rounds. the rate of fire reaching 20 rounds minutes would make it capable to reloading in 3 seconds making it a fast shooter. the elevation is not known but given the close resemblance with the turret of the A1E1 Independent, the same elevation of -4°/+20° is very likely. a machine gun is placed in a ball mount at the rear roof of the turret.

Mobility
the tank was at his time the most agile and the fastest British tank existing, but the other tanks were huge under-powered monsters. in comparison to the tank ingame, this tank will feel a bit slow. but not too slow to be frustrating as you can easily find another tank that can be even slower. the tank weighs a bit less than 10 tonnes , so let’s put him at 9.9 tonnes just as a safe guess as the exact weight is unknown. it was powered by a 80hp Lanchester 40, Six-cylinder, Water-cooled, petrol engine. this shall give a power/weight ratio of around 8.08 hp/ton which is a bit low but again not so bad as you can find a bunch of tanks that have power/weight even lower. the top speed would reach 24 km/h which is acceptable for me and surprising for 1922.

Protection
the details of the armor of the tank are simple, it was half an inch. the understanding was the thickness reached 12.7mm everywhere without exception. the front was slopped which meant the roof still needed protection, the rear was also sloped which meant they still needed protection, the turret is a half sphere making it natural to have the same thickness on all sides. the only horizontal part of the tank was the floor and a tiny part around of the turret. which could quite possibly be 12.7mm as well. 12.7mm is not the best armor, but the early tank of the game often has around 15mm of armor all around so this tank would not be so far from them. besides, due to the rhombus configuration of the chassis, and the naturally round side of the turret, the crew will be more protected than a tank with 15-20mm of armor. the front is sloped as well and the track is famous for eating rounds, which makes the driver quite safe in most situations. while the side is flat and only 12.7mm, the armor is still immune to the LMG fire. the crew was often said to be of 5 men but the source seem to not be confident about this number. and i understand the reason. the tank would need 3 men in the turret (gunner, commander/machine-gunner, loader) and 1 in the chassis at the front (driver) leaving 1 man who we do not know where he shall be used. the crew of 4 men is the most likely.

Sources

2 Likes
2

+1

Nice lil british 1.0 tank.

1 Like
3

I wouldn’t even put this at 1.0, this is a 0.0 or 0.3 tank at best. It’s one of those things I’d love to have, but only if Gaijin make a new rank for WWI and early interwar vehicles.

1 Like
4

+1 Would love to have this. Always open to British additions

1 Like
5

+1

1 Like
6

the APHE does have a decent penetration at a low rank. it’s not the best. but the French have a 37mm with only a solid shot that deals 50mm of penetration. while it might be weak for the current balance, it still can be dangerous at low rank. It’s just the low mobility and light armor that is bad.

7

This is interwar, 24 KPH is comparable to some early inter-war tanks in the game already—Ex: The Ro-Go(22 kph), Vickers A1E1 Independent(32 km/h), Neubaufahzeug(30 km/h) and T-35(30 KPH).

2 Likes
8

The A1E1 is terrible at 1.3 and should be a 1.0 tank. Yet, the A1E1 is still better than this.

1 Like
9

Not to be rude but i don’t care if the vehicle is terrible or not. It still performs its job also you cannot compare a Vickers Infantry Tank No.2 to the Independant they are of completely different sizes. Despite this being slower it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be more lethal. Since its a smaller target.

Results show smaller targets are harder to hit than something the size of 2 Ford 150’s.

2 Likes
10

And I didn’t say it should never be added. I said it should be added if lower BR’s than 1.0 are introduced.

I don’t want a repeat of the French 1.0 experience. The Medium III would be a better addition. Same gun, similar armour, far better mobility to make use of an inferior gun.

1 Like
11

No, this would do fine at 1.3. It’s the same 47mm cannon, and it’s a smaller target, so the results are going to be far better than the giant A1E1 Independent. Which does pretty poorly at 1.3 due to uptiers and even at its BR, the vehicle is an easy target to spot.

3 Likes
12

I mean, you can enjoy your tank that’s slower than all the vehicles you mentioned. Can get killed by a .50 cal up to ranges of 900m, because it has worse armour than all the vehicles you mentioned. With a terrible gun that can’t be used adequately because the tank has no ability to absorb hits or flank. The only positive thing about this vehicle is it’s smaller than the Independent. Which as I already said, shouldn’t even be at 1.3 to begin with.

1 Like
13

It’s 1.3, everything can be penned by a.50 cal Facepalm my dude you don’t know what you’re talking about. Don’t know why you keep trying to defend the claim that this vehicle is worse than the Independent despite it being a smaller target than the Independent. All because it’s slightly slower? Seriously. That’s like claiming the Ho-Ni I is a worse tank than the Ha-Go because its open top.

2 Likes
14

I don’t think you play low tiers at all. I’ve free aced every 1.0 - 3.0 British vehicle. One of my favourite BR’s is 1.3.

This machine is worse than the British reserve in almost every way the A13 has:

  • More armour 14mm to 12.7
  • 48km/h top speed to 24
  • 24.6 hp/t to 8.08
  • 36 degrees of turret rotation compared to 10
  • -15 degrees of gun depression to -4
  • Better shell selection including a better APHE round
  • Smoke dischargers

So yes, continue to tell me I’m wrong when this is worse than Britain’s 1.0 reserve tank.

1 Like
15

top speed is just a part of the mobility

there is other factors to consider. the Gear Ration, the engine power, the weight of the tank, the traction of the track, the torque of the engine. those are all affecting how the tank will behave.

sadly, the Vickers No2 is not favored at any of that. only a few tanks will perform worse than the No2 in this matter, the French H.35, 2C, and R.39 and also the American T95 & T28 and the British TOG II

the low mobility is not a problem as long you play more defensively. the armor makes the No2 ill-suited for taking a hit. but at the BR 1.0 there is plenty of vehicles with a similar level of protection. such as the T-26 or Tetrach. so I would not worry that much. it’s a light tank after all.

the gun is still decent. it might not be good when you bring it at a higher tier but against light armour, it can be rather effective.

but I made this suggestion just because I liked this tank in particular. it has a real steampunk vibe. i also have hope to eventually get a rebalance of the low-rank vehicles in which this tank will have its place. i would also hope to see the Fiat 3000B for Italy, the M1922 Medium tank for the USA, the T-18M for Russia, the Leitchtractor for Germany, The I-Go Ko 1930 for Japan, the AMC P16 for france, Strv L-5 for Sweden and plenty of other tanks that is just not perform well enough in the current balance but still can offer interesting gameplay and maybe even balance the game well. it could also be a way to fix the BR compression.

maybe offering a slower gameplay where 15mm of armor can be enough at a distance would give the possibility to have a more forgiving playstyle and give the new players a decent chance to learn from their mistakes without having those mistakes been too fatal right away. i do not understand why there is .50 call on roof of some reserve tanks when their main gun is already great. i feel like some reserve vehicles and vehicles they can encounter or a bit underrated.

1 Like
16

I’m aware of why you made it and I welcome it. I just don’t agree with any of the points Jam is making since none are solid counterarguments on why it should be added. All of them have been based on “No armor” or “poor speed” which fails to take everything you had said into consideration.

1 Like
17

I not only played them I spaded them. All of them. I’ve played the French and spaded all of them for reserve. So I know what I’m talking about and this would not be the “Worse” by any long shot of that term. Heck, I’m currently spading out the Americans and nearly just finished spading the Soviets.

So when it comes to the British, I’m sorry bud but they are nowhere near the worst in terms of reserves, they haven’t come close to the 2nd, and taking what Cal said into consideration that 47mm cannon would benefit these vehicles at range. If you’re using it up close then you probably need to form a new playstyle in your head based on range and defense and less aggression.

1 Like
18

he is not wrong, currently, this tank would perform poorly in the game. but it does have a gun that is decent enough. it might not be as painful to play as the H.35 and FCM 36. at least when you hit a target, it has a good chance to kill it. it can be added right away and be somewhat playable but it would not be very enjoyable as the tank will feel inferior to the tanks it will encounter.

but as I mentioned in the previous message, this suggestion is not made with the purpose of only having this tank added. it’s an option and maybe a solution to rebalance the game properly. but it comes with a lot of other additions. maybe it would never happen. but if people support enough of those suggestions maybe Gaijin would consider working on it. if the balance is reviewed and similar tanks become the norm in the reserve level, I am sure he will change his mind about it.

19

Put the tank into a defensive position, and turn the entire vehicle to expose the rear. Would do fine considering the engine would be taking the shots. Not every time but considering it’s 1.3 most don’t know how to aim. So you’re gonna pop several off before the tank is inoperable. Even then Gaijin tends to put Interwar vehicles as Premiums rather than tech tree.

20

new players do not use those trick