Axel
patreon
I Became a Tycoon During World War I - Chapter 73
🕑 Added 2025-02-25 18:03:00 +0000 UTCChapter 73: Why the Rigid Suspension of the "Mark I" Could Not Accommodate Artillery
In the last chapter, I wrote about why the "Mark I" tank did not utilize artillery, which raised questions from many readers. Allow me to provide an explanation.
Before discussing tank-mounted artillery, let’s use machine guns for comparison:
When a machine gun is mounted on a bipod and placed on flat ground, the gunner can aim freely in all directions, sweeping targets vertically and horizontally with precision.
But what happens if one leg of the bipod is higher than the other? The gun will no longer rotate smoothly. Instead, its barrel will either point toward the sky or dip toward the ground. Adjusting vertically becomes just as troublesome, making it nearly impossible to aim at a target directly ahead—even if the enemy is only a few feet away.
The "Mark I" was the first generation of tanks, featuring a rigid suspension system. This meant it had no suspension system at all; the road wheels were directly connected to the hull.
This design led to a severe problem: if the tank encountered a protruding rock or uneven terrain, one side of the tank would tilt higher than the other.
In such conditions, artillery could not be aimed at a target, even one close at hand.
Because the tank’s hull was uneven, the artillery would also be uneven. Moreover, the gunner, confined within the unbalanced tank and relying on a tiny observation port, could not even determine whether the barrel was level.
As a result, artillery became practically useless. It could neither aim nor hit targets and brought a host of additional issues, such as toxic gases from firing filling the tank interior with no way to disperse them.
This problem was partially resolved with the Renault tank, which featured a horizontal suspension system. Simply put, it used a triangular structure that converted vertical forces into horizontal ones.
For example, if a Renault tank encountered a protruding rock, the horizontal suspension system would cause the road wheels to spread out horizontally. The rock would press into the tank’s tracks and sink between the road wheels, keeping the hull relatively level.
In summary, the rigid suspension of the "Mark I" meant that even when stationary, the artillery could not aim at targets unless the ground was perfectly flat. A single protruding rock beneath the tracks would throw the aim off completely.
In contrast, the horizontal suspension of the Renault tank allowed it to aim at targets while stationary. Its flexible suspension system adjusted for ground protrusions or depressions, keeping the hull relatively level. As long as the terrain wasn’t excessively rugged, it could maintain its aim.
However, it could not fire while moving.
During World War II, most tanks still could not fire accurately while in motion, with two exceptions: the British Matilda and the American Sherman.
The Matilda achieved this due to its numerous road wheels and slow speed, which kept the hull relatively stable and allowed for some accuracy when firing on the move.
The Sherman had a vertical stabilizer system that kept the barrel steady at a fixed height, enabling it to fire with reasonable accuracy while moving.
Modern tanks, however, can fire while in motion thanks to advancements beyond vertical stabilization. They now feature dual stabilization systems, stabilizing the barrel both vertically and horizontally.
With dual stabilization, the barrel remains fixed in an absolute position regardless of the tank’s movements or turns. This allows modern tanks to perform feats like balancing a beer can on the barrel or raising a wrench...
Looking back at the "Mark I," it becomes clear that the designers of the time had no understanding of these concepts. They merely sought to mount artillery onto tanks to enable firing. This is why the "Mark I" ended up with a rigid suspension system and two main guns.
In combat, there were indeed instances of rigid suspension tanks successfully hitting targets, but these were typically achieved at close range, relying on instinct and luck. Such cases were exceptions and did not prove the practicality of the design.
The protagonist, knowing that rigid suspension tanks couldn’t effectively use artillery, naturally opted to equip the "Mark I" with machine guns as its main weapon to cover a broader area.
Table of content - Next Chapter >>>
