Early Tanks Source Book

[Don Boose]

I have received my copy and consider this book to be a real treasure. It is a reprint of a 1933 U.S. Army publication with a forward signed by Douglas MacArthur, who was then the Chief of Staff of the Army. The format and print font are the same as those of Army technical manuals, field manuals, and other military publications (milpubs) of the time.

In addition to a history of tank, armored, and mechanized forces and vehicles, the book describes and has images of all the tanks and other tracked vehicles in use by the U.S. Army in 1933, for which it is quite authoritative, and those of other countries to the extent known by the U.S. Army.

I would be glad to have Charlie's views on this (he is more knowledgeable than I, and I will happily defer to him), but in my opinion, this is an entirely reliable resource on U.S. tanks and tracked military vehicles as of 1933 and is probably fairly accurate on the equipment of other countries.

Don

[maurice]

Downloaded my copy and it's certainly a worthwhile addition to the available literature. But like any other source it can't be assumed to be absolute in it's veracity and must be checked against other references.
Was that particular Brit tank 11' 2" wide with 19 3/4" wide tracks or 8' 4" wide with 20 1/2" tracks as Bovington claims. For certain the 11' is obviously (and was so in 1933) way out.
I'm very pleased to have this book, in particular it's early American content.
Another link for which to be grateful to John.

[Don Boose]

Good point, Maurice. I think the material is likely to be more reliable for U.S. Army vehicles than for those of other nations. Two of the writers, Major Ralph Jones and Captain George Rarey, had been instructors at the Tanks School and were directly involved in U.S. Army mechanization at the time they wrote the book.

As you point out, cross checking with other references is always good policy.

Don

[CharlieC]

This book is really interesting since it's one of the few books produced interwar which tries to define the role of armour and provide a survey of existing and historical vehicles. In a historical context this book was published in 1933 during the 1930s depression and one wonders if there hadn't been suggestions to abandon armour altogether in US Army.

There are lots of references in the book to British ideas and doctrine many of which are in Fuller's writings on the application of armour. The book predates the writings of Tukhachevsky and Guderian so the intellectual base for developing armour doctrine was much narrower than in the late 1930s. The irony of the 1920s and early 1930s was that there were many ideas about the use of armour but few, if any, armies had modern armoured vehicles. The US Army had WW1 era M1917s (Renault FT) and Mark VIIIs in service and a handful of prototypes which were evaluated and rejected - mostly on financial grounds. The British army had the Vickers Medium Mark II which was the only tank in any numbers in the British Army until the late 1930s.

I agree that the technical details in this book shouldn't be considered definitive but that's true of most writings.

Regards,

Charlie

[Don Boose]

Many thanks for that thoughtful and helpful assessment, Charlie.

I notice that Coachwhip Publications (Cryptozoology, Natural History, Speculative Fiction, Mysteries), who did the reprint of this book also has available Terence T. Cuneo's Tanks and How to Draw Them (Tanks and How to Draw Them), which I once discussed in this forum: Drawing Tanks

They also offer Tank-Fighter Team by Lieutenant Robert M. Gerard ("Formerly of the French Armored Force") Tank-Fighter Team: Battle of France.

On the same page as the Gerard book, there is an ad for a book (Bombardment Aviation) by Keith Ayling, who wrote a fictionalized account of the Battle of Britain from the perspective of a Spitfire pilot (R.A.F., Henry Holt & Co., 1941)). I first read that book in high school, was captivated by it, and periodically check out the copy in the Military History Institute Library to reread. The person who reviewed it for Amazon panned it. The review is accurate, but irrelevant to me since I have a sentimental love of the book.

I haven't been able to find out anything about Keith Ayling, but he wrote a lot of popular aviation books during WWII (Amazon.com: Keith Ayling: Books), but now I digress too far from the original subject of this thread, for which I apologize. Wandered off down Memory Lane and lost my situational awareness.

Don

[maurice]

Yes, thanks Charlie.
My interest in tanks is mainly centred on their technology, primarily their mobility, less so on the theory and practice of their use. However advocacy of armour seems to have been the chief reason behind the writing of this book with technical descriptions having a supporting role.

[CharlieC]

To extend a digression - Keith Ayling also wrote under a pseudonym - Arthur Adlon. Adlon's books could be described as "cheap and steamy".

Regards,

Charlie