Size does matter !

[galex]

Which was the smallest tank in WWII ?
Please excuse my couriosity :D !

[Chevan]

Which was the smallest tank in WWII ?
Please excuse my couriosity :D !

This was a British "pocket tank".
Mk VIB "Tetrarh"
http://howard-stern.narod.ru/tankuww2/england_t2_2b.jpg

[Gen. Sandworm]

Which was the smallest tank in WWII ?
Please excuse my couriosity :D !

Depends what you call a tank.

This was consided a tank then but by todays standards it would be a mobile machine gun nest.

http://www.wpclipart.com/armed_services/tanks/tanks_3/Panzer_1.png

They have a Panzer 1 here in Norway. Cracks me up everytime I see it. Alot changed by the end of the war.

[Chevan]

Right Gen Pz1 was even less - 5 tonns and two mens of crew
http://howard-stern.narod.ru/tankuww2/germany_t1_1b.jpg
Pirates of Europe continent;)
But it was not a tank with a gun - this was rather an armored mashin-gun transport.

[Gen. Sandworm]

Right Gen Pz1 was even less - 5 tonns and two mens of crew
http://howard-stern.narod.ru/tankuww2/germany_t1_1b.jpg
Pirates of Europe continent;)
But it was not a tank with a gun - this was rather an armored mashin-gun transport.

This thing would have been lucky to stop my Grandmas Ford LTD! :D

[Walther]

Actually the Bundeswehr today uses a small tracked, lightly armoured vehicle, called not a tank, but a "Waffenträger" (Weapons carrier) named "Wiesel" (Weasel). It is quite light, can be carried in larger helicopters (e.g. CH-53G ), has a two man crew and is intended to give airborne troops a bit of fire power. Armament is either a 20 mm cannon or an AT missile (not sure if HOT).

http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/wiesel_mk20/001g.jpg

from http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/wiesel_mk20/wiesel_mk20.htm

Jan

[Rising Sun*]

Actually the Bundeswehr today uses a small tracked, lightly armoured vehicle, called not a tank, but a "Waffenträger" (Weapons carrier) named "Wiesel" (Weasel). It is quite light, can be carried in larger helicopters (e.g. CH-53G ), has a two man crew and is intended to give airborne troops a bit of fire power. Armament is either a 20 mm cannon or an AT missile (not sure if HOT).

http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/wiesel_mk20/001g.jpg

from http://www.panzer-modell.de/referenz/in_detail/wiesel_mk20/wiesel_mk20.htm

Jan

I might be missing something, but I can't see a machine gun on it.

This means that it's an infantry support weapon with, so far as cannon go, very light low firepower and no ability to defend itself against many infantry attacks. So it has to rely on infantry for its defence, who are relying upon it while it's attracting a lot of fire. Not a recipe for success for either arm.

Despite disparaging comments about the mobile twin machine gun nest posted earlier, if you're infantry facing it with no armour piercing weapons it'll clean you up very nicely.

Still, if we're going to pursue great armoured ideas, the Bren gun carrier with a crew of two to even five (no idea what the other three did after the driver and gunner - who is not the bloke on top with no protection - look behind the driver to bloke furthest right with gun in front) has to get a mention.

http://www.lancs-fusiliers.co.uk/feature/McQuire/guncarrier.jpg


An example of its limitations are best summed-up in the following account: On 23rd November 1942, General Clowes at Milne Bay, New Guinea ordered a small number of Bren Gun Carriers to Cape Endaiadere as direct support to American troops operating in this area. It was made clear to the Americans that the Carriers were too lightly armoured and the crews too exposed for them to be used as tanks. In addition, they lacked any overhead protection from sniper fire, shell splinters and were extremely vulnerable to flank attacks. Thus they were forced to work with infantry support.

The aftermath of an attack at Cape Endaiadere on 5th December, resulted in vehicle crews being roughly handled and resulted in the abandonment of five vehicles. The supporting American infantry found they could not advance any further and the attack was called off. Sadly, it proved yet again, the futility of attempting to use inappropriate vehicles as tanks'.
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-armour/allied/bren_carrier.htm

[Walther]

The Bren carrier, at least in Europe, was, after initial wrong deployment as a "tank", quickly relegated to transport duties in terrain not accesible to wheeled vehicles. Also, with it's 6 mm armour plate, it was reasonably fragment proof and was e.g. used to transport men and equipment over areas under enemy mortar fire. It was also used in reconnaisance roles.

These things are actually quite fast. I once had the opportunity to ride in one and had to hold on for my life (now a picture for all our "Walt" spotters, outing myself. It was taken a few years ago at the 50 year VE day celebrations in Bussum, Netherlands. Our living history group set up a display and we were able to bribe the Bren carrier driver with a crate of German beer to take us for a spin. I'm the bloke desperately holding on to the Bren gun, which was BTW a live firing one, fitted with a Hollywood style (like in movie work not visible from the outside) blank adapted barrel), while trying not to fall overboard, these things are BUMPY:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v174/jkrusat/Rwr3.jpg

If I had Euro 8000-9000 spare, I would buy the two unrestored Bren carriers a guy I know has in his garage and restore one of them in a recce version (with a working No. 19 wireless set included. :-P

Jan

[Walther]

RisingSun*,
The crew of a Wiesel weapons carrier consists of two men, a driver and a commander / gunner. They both carry their personal weapons, a H&K G36. The commander at least can use his G36 for close in defense. These vehicles are quite small, about the size of a Bren carrier. I see them quite often at the airport I work on, being shipped to Afghanistan.

Jan

[l33torange]

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/GreatBritain/GB-M2A4.jpg

This funky little thing is the M2a4 light American tank

[sniper18]

I think the smallest tank would be the Japenese heavy tank. Its about half the size of a typical german tank and packs a big punch with a 57mm gun.

[diverdoc]

the french had a little tank, so small that the 2 man crew had hatchs which were rounded upwards to make room for their heads. it only had amachine gun. was used to haul artillery by the germans after 1940.

[Nickdfresh]

...
Still, if we're going to pursue great armoured ideas, the Bren gun carrier with a crew of two to even five (no idea what the other three did after the driver and gunner....

Threw the grenades back out?

http://www.lancs-fusiliers.co.uk/feature/McQuire/guncarrier.jpg



http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-armour/allied/bren_carrier.htm[/QUOTE]

[Nickdfresh]

http://www.robertsarmory.com/m22.jpg

TECHNICAL DATA

Weight................16000 lb.
Length............12 ft. 11 in.
Width............7 ft. 3.75 in.
Height............5 ft. 8.5 in.
Ground Clearance.........10 in.
Armament:
1 37 mm Gun, M6; ammunition
A.P.C., M51B1, M51B2; A.P.,
M74; H.E., M63
1 cal .30 machine gun
Maximum speed............35 mph
Turning radius............20 ft
Maximum grade..............50 %


http://www.robertsarmory.com/m22.htm

More:

http://www.onwar.com/tanks/usa/data/ltm22.htm

http://wapedia.mobi/en/M22_Locust

[Nickdfresh]

The British Army Paras also used an indigenous airborne tank, MK VII Tetrarch tank (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrarch_tank) which could be carried by a Hamilcar glider, in their drop across the Rhine in 1945...

http://www.geocities.com/britsatwar/tetrarchunloading.jpg
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/2/2d/300px-Tetrarch_tank.jpg

[Kozak]

Maybe polish TKS ?? only two men crew, and one machine gun
http://www.1939.pl/uzbrojenie/polskie/pojazdy/tk/tks_00.gif
http://www.iirp.prv.pl/pancer/tankietki/tks/tks_1.jpg

[George Eller]

-

Type 94 Tankette "TK" - Japan
http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/tk.htm

http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/tk.JPG

http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/tk2.JPG

Type 94 Tankette "TK"
Introduced Year : 1934
Weight : 3.2 ton
Dimensions: 3.08 x 1.62 x 1.62(h) m
Armor (max) : 12 mm
Speed (max) : 40 km/hr
Engine : Gasoline Engine 35 PS/2500 rpm
Armaments : Type 97 7.7 mm or Type 91 6.5 mm x 1
Crew : 2
Production Qty : 843

TK was designed as an ammunition tractor but it was used as tankette in China. Light-weight TK was very convenient in China because the roads in China were very poor and the Chinese infantry had no anti-tank weapons.

The idler wheels of the modified model were replaced to large one and grounded in order to improve the stability of the chassis.

TK was mainly deployed in the Independent Tankette Companies.

-

[Carl Schwamberger]

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/GreatBritain/GB-M2A4.jpg

This funky little thing is the M2a4 light American tank

When originally built the M2 was designated, and met the standards for a medium tank. A contemporary of the German MkII, the French R35, or the early Soviet BT5 types. Note the sponson mounted MMG for attacking infantry & other soft targets.

[snebold]

Here´s the Renault UE of 2,8ton, but I think it misses the definition of a tank...
...the microscopic Japanese "Kanda" (on which any info will be appreciated)

Some Polish TKD´s and the Japanese Type 95 So-Ki

The VA 601 (a Vickers "ulitily tractor", I suspect) which might not be armoured (can anybody tell me?), but I like the picture...

The C-L One Man Tankette, not part of WWII though and an off topic picture from 1899...1920

1921

1922

1923

[Churchill]

the french had a little tank, so small that the 2 man crew had hatchs which were rounded upwards to make room for their heads. it only had amachine gun. was used to haul artillery by the germans after 1940.

Would that be the R35?

http://www.tbof.us/images/tanks/r35/r35_3.jpg

[Nickdfresh]

The R35 was a medium tank with an overworked crew...

And as for the definition of a tank: I think something should have a revolving, closed turret. Otherwise, it's just a machine gun carrier, assault gun, small APC, armed tractor, or a tank destroyer...

[Churchill]

Well it was used to tow artillery peices by the Germans...

[larryparamedic]

My favorite 2 would have to be the M22 Locust (awesome machine and what I would call a "tank") and the Universal Carrier (though I don't consider it a "tank" at all).

I found this little guy.
It is a Finnish light tank weighing in at a measly 6,000 lbs. but having some nice firepower. Crew of 2. The very few ever made seem to have seen an unusually long service.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/Vickers.jpg
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/Fin-Vickers6tonMkE.jpg

The Vickers-Armstrong Six-ton tank

"Tested in 1933 (model B), this tank was found acceptable by the Finns and more were purchased. Roughly thirty Vickers-Armstrong Six-ton tanks used in the Winter War. The tanks were ordered unarmed from Vickers. The hulls were sent to Germany for fitting with optics. This took much longer than planned and that by the time the Winter War broke out, only ten were fully operational. These tanks were fitted with the Finnish-built 37mm At-guns (37 psvk 36) - they were also armed with MG and exellent 9mm Suomi SMG, which had a sufficient efficiency and accuracy at most combat ranges. One Vickers company took part in the first Finnish tank battle at Honkaniemi in February 1940 - because of technical problems and inexperienced crews, the Vickers company suffered heavy losses - 7 tanks destroyed and one disabled. During the Winter War, an abundance of Soviet T-26 tanks and equipment were captured. These tanks were the very similar to the Vickers design. The surviving twenty-three were refitted with captured Soviet equipment. The Soviet 45mm (high-velocity antitank) guns, and Degtyarev Tankoviy coaxial MG's were extracted from knocked out T-26 tanks. The Finns had plenty new resources, it seems that over 2000 Soviet tanks were knocked out in the short war. The Vickers were then redesignated as T-26E. About 30 vehicles started the Continuation War - in the beginning of 1945, nineteen were still in service."

Found this great site (LINK HERE (http://www.winterwar.com/Battles/Naykkijaervi.htm#ind)ENJOY!) that describes in absolute details the Vickers in combat in The Winter War 1940, even marking the locations of each known destroyed tanks position on the field.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/viku.jpg
Vickers survivor.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/honktankid.gif
Marked locations of destroyed Vickers.
http://www.winterwar.com/Battles/Naykkijaervi.htm#ind

The following photos were from here (http://www.andreaslarka.net/ps161006/ps161006.html). Nice site!
The updated and new designated T-26.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/16100601.jpg
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/16100610.jpg
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/16100609.jpg
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f184/larryparamed/16100610-1.jpg
huh...
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ___
"Nobody respects a country with a poor army, but everybody respects a country with a good army. I raise my toast to the Finnish Army." J. Stalin 1948

[snebold]

diverdoc: It was the Renault UE.

If it must have an enclosed turret (and it must, if we are to call it a tank), it must be the Japanese Type 94 at 3,2t.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

What about this?
http://www.gizmology.net/images/tank11.jpg
http://www.gizmology.net/tanks.htm
:):):):)

[ww2admin]

That looks like a tank you wear, not drive, lol. nice pics guys

[larryparamedic]

What about this?
http://www.gizmology.net/images/tank11.jpg
http://www.gizmology.net/tanks.htm
:):):):)
That one wins hands down. ;)

[Churchill]

Yes. I agree. That would be fun to drive around in.

[Major Walter Schmidt]

too bad most of us are too big....

[Churchill]

Hahaha, isn't that the truth...

[Major Walter Schmidt]

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_01/2PanzerPaintBNPS_468x306.jpg
http://www.funtrak.co.uk/
This you can ride:).

[Churchill]

I envy him... How much would that cost?