Friend, 'The technology of the time from new weapons and modes of communication. The advent of Drones, Satilites, computers and Cellular devices mark death to those stuck out in the open and allow for instant communication and the exact targeting of armaments. And no one was as prepared for it as they thought they were." Thank you.

Excellent documentary thank you for explaining this battle in detail and so clearly.

So where's the Renault 17s in all of this

Hi! So, I've slaughtered my spotted wild bore and I've got a parcel prepared to send you, please provide me with an address. Thanks! Love, A Warsaw Descendant

My new book Trench 1915: The Dawn of Modern warfare is out. Set in World War I from a German's perspective. Available at any stores that sell books

History always looks the same when something entirely new emerges.

@@McLarenMercedes In the words of Sabaton: It’s the nature of time that the old ways must give in It’s the nature of time that the new ways comes in sin When the new meets the old it always ends the ancient ways And as history told the old ways go out in a blaze

They were so bad the British will have to either give them to their allies or admit they made a mistake. Poor Australians they can't handle some thing like the tank after Gallipoli!

Totally obsolete, better to uparmor drafthorses.

@@johnd2058 Sorry sir, we just et the last this morning. Scouts though have spotted a small herd of French generals. Saddles probably won't fit but the men can hold on to those moustachio's for a quick charge across no-mans-land. Jerry won't know what hit them.

You should play battlefield 1 !it's a world war 1 game with all these tanks and uniforms from ww1 inside this game ,it's the best

5

​@@_TahsinAhmad 1

oddly there's another"The Great War"video on Cambrai,5yrs older

@@ricardorascon88 Battlefield 1 is not a world war 1 game. Everyone is running around with full auto weapons or extremely rare/obscrure firearms that were never widely adopted. It's a fun game to play but is an extremely bizarre interpretation of the war.

if everyone learns the first lesson : "Don't go to War" i'd be very happy.

@@CountBakfromten agree 100%

You got quite a lot of videos to watch then😂

precisely why found this so interesting to explore. and thanks for watching on Nebula, great way to support us.

During the interwar period, the books and papers written by Liddell- Hart and Fuller received more attention than they did in the UK

You might say that those who lose wars are more open to new ideas that give them a better chance for the "rematch", while those who win are more complacent to keep things as they are since they won with such tactics/strategies.

You could say it made such a big impression on them that they ended up overcompensating, bigger and better being their development plan for everything, to the point where it just became ridiculous.

Your question is quite typical when it comes to many of the battlefield refinements introduced during the war. One needs to look at the High Commanders and the philosophy they entered the war with. They were very, VERY 19th century when it came to tactics and overall military applications that became available to them. New hardware such as Airplanes, U-Boats, poison gas, HE artillery en masse, machine guns, Zeppelins, Dreadnaught Class Battleships, automotive transport, battlefield telephonic communications, wireless radio, and of course, the ol' family favorite...Tanks! The senior staff was not ready and in many cases incompetent as these new innovations came available. The mindset was to have at it with cavalry, move about on the flanks toss cannon fire where needed, and plow ahead. Arrange infantry and fire at distance. (Hence all rifles were exceedingly long and ungainly in the trench environment.) The ENTIRE war became a clash of old dated tactics and the menacing crunch of a new industrial era of warfare. Trench warfare is clumsy and the result of incomplete planning. We are seeing this play out on the Ukrainian Steppe today! (Unbelievable, right?) The bottom line is that to see the war, you must don the headgear of a 19th-century Aristocrat. The direction of the war changes gears and acceptance and understanding of the new equipment only after The Aristocratic Officer Corps dies out by late 1917. Look through their lens and you will have your answer. (I hope this helped, at least a bit) Remember this one thing, it is this war that created the geopolitical changes that we still paint on to this day! One needs to gaze upon the maps of 1913, 1932, 1943, 1945, 1992, and today. Many things change but alas they stay the same.

Did you think that was the case ? The issue was the planning and tactics did not value the lives of men, not there was no planning

You've got a real eye for detail, I didn't even see the thumbnail...

I remember how one soldier encountering tanks for the first time called them monsters. Crocodiles. Imagine seeing something you literally had no conception of. Today with all the fantasy we have. That's a hard idea to understand.

That's true, water tanks.

Also, as they were under the navy when being built. Its why there is a long or naval terminology regarding tanks. Hull, deck, hatch etc.

DVD? You mean a thin circular object that must be inserted into a special playback machine connected to your TV in order to watch? Why, just why???

david WILLY

The mutinies are often overblown, or deliberately misinterpreted. I second this motion.

I'm not 100%, but believe that is a grease gun.. or at least it's lubricating some way.

Overemphasized morale element of tanks, not realizing most of that was simply due to what the tanks actually did.

we're working on a few similar videos about 1918, going to see what we can come up with on the ft17 in combined arms.

Misuse? I mean you are not wrong, and we know that now after a century of experience with tanks on the Battlefield. But it is worth keeping in mind that in September of 1916, when tanks were used on the Battlefield for the very first time, they did not HAVE that century of experience and knowledge. These were brand new weapons, and no one knew quite how they would turn out, or how to use them correctly. That is a *very* important consideration when looking at the decisions made by historical figures. You should never be asking yourself what do we know NOW, you should be asking yourself what did they know THEN. Given how new the tank was in September 1916 I am in no way surprised that they took the risk of deploying them in small numbers. it is also worth bearing in mind that while that first action was a failure, the Generals, and Haig in particular where encouraged enough by the results that Haig immediately ordered more. You see the same thing after Cambrai in 1917, yes, the battle was a failure, but Haig immediately put in a further order for another 1000 tanks. When you are learning an entirely new method of warfare, mistakes are going to be made.....

@@alganhar1 Also they were the very first tanks so had mechanical problems, difficult to steer and had problems with fumes inside the tank.

The French had a much better idea of what they wanted to do with their tanks from watching how not to do things [ie, the early British failures.] Part of why they *had* the FT17s, because they knew their big tanks would be incapable to exploiting the holes they created in the line. Wish I could remember the name of the source that I read which gave more history of the WW1 French tanks, but it's been years and my remembry is cattywampus...

@@nunyabidniz2868 The Brits invented the tank so they made all the early mistakes.

A simple Google search will answer that. How about "WWI trenches/battlegrounds today" ? and click "pics".

@@McLarenMercedes his was an honest comment, maybe he felt the need for a first hand experience, dunno why you felt the need to be condescending, that's bad faith. But seeing as the deed is done, I hope it at least made you feel a bit better.

@MrGoesBoom I actually had those in my back yard (an entire small valley). If you search Battle of Predeal Pass, that's what it was all about. Yes they were all overrun with vegetation and don't look like much, with pieces of shells spread all over if you dig a bit, sometimes even at the surface. Maybe even some unexploded ordnace here and there if you're not careful. I could not find any guns though. The trenches had their walls collapse over time and they don't look like trenches anyomre, they look like shallow ditches with isometric walls instead of vertical with tall grass grown all over. Most people grew up playing with toys but I was rich in shellcasings lmao. These are just words though, I advise also taking Mr.McLaren's suggestion because it would paint a more complete picture.

@@chrisrosenkreuz23 Thanks for the info!

I have a friend who works for HALO trust and he tells me it's not at all uncommon to come across unexploded ordinance from both world wars especially in conjunction with earth removal for roads or buildings. This includes land mines which sadly kill and maim dozens every year.

No one person created it, you can watch this video to learn more about the advanced stage combined arms warfare had reached in the British army in late 1917.

@@jessealexander2695 Jesse. You shoudl read about the battle of La Hamel.

@@matthewbrook7683 You should read more balanced assessments of Monash, and the progress of combined arms warfare in the British ad French armies during the war.

"This ain't a Monty Python sketch!" -Julian Bing, probably

its wild how i never hear anything of general monash but he just seems like a genius from the surface looking in. wild.

that's just plain incorrect.

@@uncle7215 Oh really? Name the first battle in WWI that the Allies won using combined arms. Hint, it was that precise that it was planned to the minute, even the hot meal breaks. Let’s see what you know.

@@seanlander9321 Second Battle of the Marne springs to mind as the decisive combined arms attack… French combined arms assault that broke the German right flank and forced them to retreat… 5 French armies encircled 3 German ones.

@@uncle7215 Nope, before then.

I wonder how many knew they were offered the tank by an inventor years before and rejected it too