Thanks to World of Tanks for sponsoring this video. Download the game for free today and use code COMBAT for a starter bonus: tanks.ly/499MaSZ

The most hilarious of M18 history was...that Americans needed to write to not shoot at it because Americans and the British looked at it and saw Panther

M18 Hellcat: When you want them to get off your lawn, as well as their lawn.

The tank museum-restorer dudes in Utah recovered one, restoring it to running condition and actually discovered a crewman from WW 2 who lived locally and turned out that, researching the veh number, it was actually his Hellcat. He showed them things like how the crew mounted the vehicle, etc. He was jazzed about the whole affair and enjoyed being taken for a ride, crying “faster faster.”

The 77th Division in the Philippines was commanded by MG Bruce. The same Bruce who developed the M18 so he was basically writing a good review of his pride and joy.

7:19 they didn't have enough gun depression so they used rocks/ruble to raise the right hand side of their vehicle. I've never seen that before.. it's amazing.

Bureau of Ordinance: “Here’s the M10. It’s just an expedient. Something better is coming.” Tank Destroyer Branch: “Cool!” BuOrd: “Okay, here’s the M18 to replace all your M10s.” TD Branch: “Nah, we’re good.”

Serviceability was another important consideration. I don't know if it was the 1st, but being able to drop the rear door and slide out the engine, rather than craning out the rear deck is probably what led to the adoption of the 'Powerpack' modular engine/gearbox/cooling system in modern vehicles.

I recommend “The Tank Killers” by Harry Yeide. One problem with the tank destroyer doctrine was that it was intended to deal with tank breakthroughs and by the time they were deployed in Europe that was a rare occurrence since the Germans were on the defensive. The M18 was intended to get to the point of breakthrough with it’s speed to fill the breach.

After Seeing a M18 Hellcat speeding like a bat out of hell and being allowed to look into the crew compartment . Seeing The M18 at the American Heritage Museum battle of the airfield reenactment a few years ago really made me love this machine

Hellcat turrets were put onto M42 anti-air chassic, therefore, Type 64 was created.

I'm glad to see the M18 getting some attention. As someone who's done maintenance on and driven an M18, you've hit it out of the ballpark.

I feel like the M18 should have been a scout vehicle all along. The high firepower could be used to launch surprise attacks before moving out to another position to scout. It probably would've fit well in the French doctrine in that regard.

Ah My Favorite Fast Boy When You’re Objectively The Better Mass Produced Tank Killer and Scout but less People Talk about You:

That "All Hellcat" unit sounds like Stryker Brigade, the prequel

Im a bit surprised that there was no mention of the torsion bar suspension which the smooth ride capability was one of the main strengths of the M18. It was the first US tracked combat vehicle to feature an torsion bar suspension and proved the viability of the system in future US tanks!

I imagine that, had development of the M36 been expedited rather than the M18, the M36 would have been more well-received by troops in the field. Given that it is basically an M10 with a better gun and faster traverse, as well as a number of other QoL features, there would have been little to complain about. I also imagine that the M36 would have had a reputation like the Firefly going into Normandy, with it being one of the only tanks with enough penetration to deal with most of the German heavy tanks of the time. An interesting alternate history scenario to explore.

For some reason, the M18 has always been one of my all time favourites. Sure it is far from perfect, but there is this "hot rod" kind of vibe that goes with it!

Hellcat: I’m fast af boi

I believe this tank was what developed into the Hellcats the navy used. Same engine and suspension but with aluminum body and folding wings.

It may not be a rolling fortress, but the M18 can get in, smash the enemy, and get out before the enemy even know they're there. Hellcat: "Deja Vu!" Tiger: *panicked screams in German*

M18 wasn't the only WWII era tank* which had it's top speed limited. Usual reasons were exessive wear to automotive parts, including tracks, too high transmission temperatures and just too large risk to throw tracks off.

This is personally one of my favorite light AFVs and I my book, is better classified as a multi purpose light tank. It can recon, support infantry, and destroy medium and even some heavy tanks from a good range, while being light and fast with barely any armor. The example you gave of less spall is literally the embodiment of “No armor best armor.”

M18 is the coolest Tank destroyer of WW2. Can't change my mind.

So, it is true that a vehicle with higher mobility will generally have an easier time hitting the flank of an enemy tank. But I feel like people have the misconception that this involves literally driving a circle around the enemy tank in order to get on its flank, as if real armored warfare was anything like Fury or War Thunder. That's not it at all. Higher mobility just means that you'll have an easier time getting into a favorable firing position. Engagement ranges are generally too long, and the terrain too complex, for literrally driving in a circle around an enemy tank to be practical in the first place. And if you tried to do it, you would probably find yourself running headlong into the rest of the enemy tanks and their accompanying infantry.

Underrated tank, it doesn’t get enough love

I adore your content. it's a real shame that so many people in the comments are less than knowledgeable when it comes to saying some things. but that's why great content creators like you exist. Keep it up, I am rooting for you!

Greetings from Hungary! The M18 Hellcat is my favourite US WW2 vehicle, so how dare you...? Jokes aside, I unnderstand the practical issues with the design. If I would be the U.S. military right after WW2, I'd update the design to a light tank. Giving it more armour protection and and a better engine,like the Ford GAA[which,by the way, would fit into it's engine bay]. And as we know, the size of the turret ring would accept the M36's turret. So there is a small chance that the later 90 mm guns of the M47 and M48 might would fit.(Although in fairness,I'm yet to read R.P.Hunnicutt's works on the Patton tanks, so I might be wrong.)

Love the gradual increase in production quality this channel has developed

One of my old units incorporated a black panther in the unit emblem as a connection can be made in its lineage back to an M18 TD unit in World War II. So, thank you for doing this and for pointing people to The Chieftain's book & KZfaq channel for additional information.

Its like Im watching a high quality show on History TV when I was a kid 🙌

I really hope you follow this up with the M36 Jackson!

FINALLY, A NEW CURSED BY DESIGN EPISODE!

7:22 Notice the tank destroyer troops making use of blocking material to gain gun depression by physically moving the hull up on one side. Underneath the RH side track (as if sitting in driver seat)

I am a German viewer and a particular fan of the format cursed by design. However, I notice the more or less incorrect pronunciation of German terms everywhere on KZfaq and at your channel. I would like to offer you that we can get in contact and that, as a German, I can perfectly pronounce all the German words for your KZfaq channel videos. You could include these recorded words in your videos or you now know how they are pronounced and thus have higher quality videos. (At least better than, for example, having words read out to you incorrectly by Google Translate.)

Simply put, it was a mobile anti tank gun as towed anti tank guns took it in the shorts. Once a towed fired you were targeted and could not avoid (that size). It clearly was a better setup than the M3/5. Used as an anti tank screen, good. The problem is people expected it to be a tank and that would be lethal to the M18. And it would have had a nice role as MPF type. Still you better see the other guy first.

Here’s something interesting. The book “Sherman Tanks of the Red Army: The American Vehicle in Soviet Service” mentions the Hellcat in Soviet trials.

My father was a crew member these. He said that they would rotate duties, but he mainly was the driver. He was in Europe from September 1941 until the end and was involved in the battle of the bugle.

There's a few things about this tank that make it amazing to me: 1. These tanks even saw action in the Yugoslav Wars, over 50 after they were built 2. They were designed by the famous auto designer Harley Earl 3. Some TD platoons averaged anywhere between 2:1 and 5:1 kill ratios in Europe

The fact that i laid my eyes on this speedy cat in WOT years ago only to find it nerfed by the time i obtained it. But looking back with my combat experience with its currently state, its still one heck of a mobile TD, moving to War thunder it does shine brightly in that world. Tho designating it as an LT today seems reasonable considering its major role in WW2 was a recon vehicle before the battle of the bulge showing its true potential as a speedy cat flanking bigger cats. That tank really took a big interest out of my younger self.

I was just watching this video while renovating an M18 in Tank Mechanic Simulator. The part about moving the transmission to the front gave me an "ah, yea that makes sense" moment while looking at the interior. Great video, thank you for this type of content.

My uncle, Paul Burgess, fought in one of those wee beasties. He landed in Normandy on 13 June, 1944 and fought all the way to the end of the war.

I like the m10 wolverine better, it is larger in height and width which allows for greater crew comfort and greater visibility of enemy tanks and has greater armor. I once read that a battalion in Italy mutiny, because they didn't want to abandon their m10s for the m18s.

Just want to say, I love the US gov kink of naming things after a cat. It’s a crime that the mail truck wasn’t called Mailcat.

Hey babe, a new ConeOfArc video just dropped

Ah, time to drag race a jeep.

This is my favorite tank and I always love learning about it

Great and really even-handed coverage, as is your usual metier. Well done!

The idea of flying around at 60mph in that open top turret sounds exciting.

I love how "no armor best armor" was actually an idea in WW2. Maybe war thunder is more realistic than we give it credit for

There were two Sherman designs that could have been more effective, had they been done more. One being the 90mm Sherman, and the other was the 105mm Sherman. The 105 had a dozer blade behind it, because the recoil was more than the tank could handle, so it needed the support of the blade to anchor it. I have seen pictures of these two tanks, but know very little about the use of them, or the numbers they were built.

The biggest problem with the hellcat was the open turret meant the crew was much more vulnerable to shrapnel.

Another great video. Cheers mate.

One of my favorites in War Thunder Mobile

Fun fact there is reports of m18s hitting 67mph which is hauling absolute butt for a vehicle of that size even by today’s standards with not the best brakes and suspension, this is faster than any tracked vehicle we have today, an m1 would smoke it in acceleration but the m18 would eventually pass it

I served with 4th inf div. in vietnam, M-48 tank 52 ton, 90MM main 30 MPH down hill, never liked the low-lands(mud). LZ. Albany, LZ action, LZ Oasis , pla-Durang.

"Seek, strike, and destroy" is also the inspiration behind the name of my favorite tank game of all time, "Seek & Destroy" for the Playstation 2.

Great vid. The Tank Destroyer branch was an experiment that did not survive the war. The real problem with the TDs was how the effort and focus on them distracted attention and resources away from developing a better-protected, up-gunned replacement for the Sherman, which they needed by mid-1944.

M10 and M36 shared the reliable, cheaper and heavier Sherman M4 chassis. After Jan 1944 no more M10s were made and gradually converted to M36s, the first of which were operational from September 1944. M18 and M36 were both useful during the Battle of the Bulge. M18 cost $5k more due to its faster custom chassis.

The kill ratio of Hellcats was better than of any competitor. It was a great tank destroyer, used brilliantly.

Like the M10, it does look like a Panther. The Germans also noted this hence the Panthers cosplaying as tank destroyers in the battle of the bulge.

wait hold up.... T-34 tanks had fuel consumption of 300L per 100km range.... what was the Hellcat's fuel economy for the soviets to call it poor????

The next Spielberg/Hanks production needs to be on TD's in Italy. Such underrated heroes who went through so much and hardly anyone knows of them.

Funny how the line drawings of some of the prototypes look vaguely like T-34s with Gaika Turrets.

I feel that the Hellcat might’ve been a bit redundant. Its firepower could’ve been fulfilled by Shermans using the 76 inch gun and its low silhouette and speed for recon could’ve been fulfilled by the Chaffee. While the M18 could go faster than the M24, in practical use it’s less about maximum speed and more about the acceleration and maneuverability. Rather than make the M18, it may have been more practical to up gun more Shermans, especially with the initial hesitation to using a completely new vehicle. Or if speed is still an issue, rather than the M24 as we got it, there could have been a new purpose built high mobility, low silhouette light tank for recon. The M36 also could’ve been more focused on instead of creating a stopgap if they were dead set on pursuing their tank destroyer doctrine. But despite all this, the M18 was still a valuable lesson in AFV development and doctrine and I still love the vehicle.

Good stuff, although the more interesting, and fundamental, question is whether the CONCEPT of big guns on a speed platform is actually an advantage in real-world combat. Can you better scoot from one covered position to another faster? Can you pop out, shoot, and pop back behind cover faster? Any actual advantage to sheer vehicle speed?

Love the hellcat, thanks for the video ❤

The m18 is probably my favorite tank in WOT

This M18 tank could actually run across rough terrain at *55mph* On roads, it could fly at *60mph* The enemy tanks had difficulty 0:15 even getting a bead on this tank. It had that 76mm high velocity cannon which would destroy a tiger tank with one shell. It had a very quiet engine. The men were not cooped up in an enclosed turret. They could view 360° everything around them at anytime from the turret with more than one tanker observing the terrain with binoculars. In trouble, the crew could get out instantaneously, leap jump right out. It was very maneuverable, agile, with better trench crossing ability. It was a "grabber" tracked vehicle by it's front bogeys being driven. This tank *wiped* *out* nazi opposing tanks it faced, and caught, in ETO Europe.

Late to this party, but I think the US' tank destroyer concept is quite similar to the British cruiser tank concept - both were attempts to overcome the limitations of contemporary engine technology in order to enhance operational and technical mobility, but resulted in a vehicle that - though good at the designed job - weren't quite useful enough on the battlefield. And, of course, both would go away once engines got good enough to have a tank that was both fast and well armed and armoured.

Did Gen. Patton have any comments on the M-18 ? He seemed to cherish speed and mobility .

I served on the XM-163 in the early 1970s. We still had open turrets.

finnaly the vid i have been waited for! i plade the hellcat in heroes and generals and then war thunder(back a few years ago when it still was fast). i love the mobility and the firepower. i like that most important posibylitys with the tank was tested, egnolenge or proven(hellcats in diffrent forms and the armor thing).

One of my favorite tanks in World of Tanks.

😊 in World of tanks to M18 hellcat is quite fun.

When the TD Battalions got the M18 Hellcat in 1943, the Americans began supplying the British with the older M10. Most of these 1,150, had the 3in gun replaced with the 17 Pounder to produce the Achilles MkIIc. At the battle of Buron, Normandy 1944, two of these destroyed 15 Panther and Pz.IV of 12th SS Hitler Jurgund in one afternoon!

@7:18 they put a rock or something under the left side of the vehicle to further depress the gun over that ridgeline, if I'm seeing correctly.

And it's one of the few vehicles in War Thunder whose pintle MG is not controlled with magic

Ah yes, the Hellcat. The best tank destroyer that I still suck at using it in War Thunder.

The idea that it was the fuel that caused American AFV'S to "brew-up" is bunk. Remember all the German main battle tanks and AFV'S were powered by gasoline- not diesel, and nobody I have read has called German tanks "Nazi Cookers, or the German version of a "Ronson" lighter. Wet storage, armour thickness, ammo storage placement , etc, all had more to do with the flammable issues than did the fuel type. My 2 cents anyway.

Sure, there was a "competitor" to the M36 "Slugger" that was based on the Sherman chassis with the M18A3 "Super Hellcat" with the 90 mm main weapon used on the M36; this was faster. It was cancelled as the M26 Pershing which also had a 90 mm gun was being issued to some tank unit in the closing months of the war, seeing service in Germany, and it was believed, correctly, that the war would be over before the Super Hellcats would reach tank destroyer battalions in Europe. Since the original M18 utterly outmatched anything the Japanese had as it was, and so did the M4 mediums, or, for that matter, even the otherwise-obsolete M3 Grants, there was no role foreseen for the Super Hellcat, and it was cancelled. Likewise cancelled were an entire line of specialized vehicles, like a 105 mm gun-howitzer carriage, an anti-aircraft vehicle with "quad 20s" or twin Bofors 40 mm, and a CEV/ARV vehicle. There were plenty of M4s with the "leftover" original turret and M3 75 mm gun which were considered obsolete in the US Army post-war planning, as armor was being re-classified more by gun type than weight class. That is, the "Easy Eight" Shermans were being retained because they used the same 76.2 mm M1 gun as did the M10 and M18 tank destroyers, and also the upcoming M41 "Bulldog" (renamed "Walker-Bulldog" after the death of LTG Walton H Walker in early 1951) until they wore out, and the other M4s were repurposed into various vehicle types, or sold off or given away to "friendlies". The M26s were classified as 90 mm gun tanks, and, despite their weight, given the role traditionally assigned to a "medium" tank, which would continue with the re-engined M26, or M46 "Patton I", as well as its successors, the M47 "Patton II" and M48 "Patton III", all originally with 90 mm guns. There was little consensus on what should be the "heavy" tank gun caliber, 105 mm or 120 mm, if indeed the Army should have a heavy tank at all, but eventually a lengthened and up-armored and up-gunned M48 was converted into the unsuccessful M103 heavy tanks. Underpowered, unwieldy, and with thirsty engines, the mobility of these heavies were very questionable, it's only saving grace being that its main weapon, the M58 120 mm gun, could out-range its counterparts on the JS-3s and T-10s that the Soviets had. By 1970, the US Army had sent all its M103s back to the States, where some were foisted upon the USMC, which in turn never deployed them abroad anyway. The M18 Hellcat was actually a very versatile and advanced, for its day, AFV chassis, with its automatic transmission making it fairly easy to drive. It's fairly low weight would have made it an excellent vehicle platform for all manner of SP guns, ARVs, CEVs, SPAAGs, and other specialized tracked vehicles, but the US Army had moved on to other platforms.

It seems a little strange to say on the one hand that it's armor would barely protect the vehicle from fragments and small arms, but then on the other hand say that crew-added improvised armor improvements like strips of tracks or sandbags wouldn't do anything at all. If an MG42 will penetrate my armor at close range, stacking a few sandbags on the vehicle will certainly make a difference. I can't imagine extra parts like tracks and wheels would be useless, either...just that much extra steel for the machinegun to penetrate. It might not make a difference if it's an antitank cannon, or a Tiger's 88 or whatever...

one of my favourite tanks. Beautiful, sleek, and stealthy.

Tank vs Tank Destroyer. Tank: Armor protection balanced with mobility and firepower in the Offense. Firepower, protection, and maneuver. Tank Destroyer: Firepower and mobility on the Defense. Get to the optimized location and range to overmatch attacking forces. Consider the Abrams and the Bradley. Bradley serves as TD with it's TOW missiles that can hit beyond M1 gun range and then support Infantry at closer range with 25mm. Abrams has the irresistible 120mm ammo that can fire a round every 5 seconds. Brads kill the enemy tanks at range. Abrams go in and mop up the enemy IFVs.

I wonder if early Israel could have gotten tank destroyers from the US by arguing that they were defensive rather than offensive? Considering the upgrades they eventually gave to M4s they purchased from France I'd be interested in seeing what they did with M18s. I'm assuming M10s and M36s would end up similar to what they did with M4s, possibly even including up armoring them into medium tanks.

To be fair, the 77th understood how to fight, survive, and protect assets when somebody gave them the M18.

The lack of the bow machine gun wasn’t liked by the crews as the AA .50 cal was faced backwards and couldn’t help against enemy infantry in the front. The M36B1 using a modified M4 Sherman chassis retained the bow .30 cal mg. And was liked. Mounts were sometimes welded to the interior front corners of the vehicles to help suppress enemy infantry.

Having watched ‘The Zero Killer’ episode of Dogfights and now seeing it this it’s clear that once the M.I.C. had drafted a configuration not immediately cucked due to a latent disharmony between their technical and production frontiers. The models which preceded the Hellcat in both the fighter jet and Tank trees seemed very much like being served up as an hors d'oeuvres if the Krauts ever got a bead on them. “Ya Ya… I see him!!” It was the LAPD vs Nakatomi Plaza, but for actual sheep stations. Don’t worry about fists with your toes, you’d be making fists with your arse in a Sherman vs Tigers & Stugs

the wolverine and hellcat have got to be my favorite tank designs good speed good gun and they look so sexy

Perhaps it's not Cursed by Design, but perhaps the role was. So, maybe, Cursed by Doctrine?

On D Day the British had the Sherman Firefly and the Americans had the Hellcat, both crews knew a single shot could kill a Tiger but a single shot from a Tiger would kill either vehicle. The Sherman Firefly needed a bigger turret to fit the crew in properly, the Hellcat had even less armour than the Sherman Firefly. Both vehicles evolved into the bigger and more heavily armoured main battle tanks.

There was an old, weird PS2 game I loved as a kid named "Seek & Destroy." The Hellcat was one of the tanks you could start the game with and now I know why.

What I've always found interesting is that US built the M18 with an actual turret instead of making it an assault gun

The whole problem with Tank Destroyer Doctrine was that it acted like it had some control over how the Tank Destroyers were used. Tank Destroyers were designed to go against other tanks - not do infantry support whereas the Tanks were designed to be able to support the infantry. Thus Tanks had more machine guns. What happened was if they had an enemy attacking them - whatever was closest was what responded. If they needed Tanks - but only had Tank Destroyers nearby - the Tank Destroyers went after the enemy infantry. If they had enemy tanks - and they had no Tank Destroyers nearby - but they did have tanks - the tanks went after the enemy tanks. It would be my guess - that the majority of the Tank Destroyers time - was spent shooting at enemy infantry as the enemy had a lot more infantry than they did tanks. If they had Tank Destroyers and needed infantry support - they were not going to have the Tank Destroyers sitting around doing nothing just because the enemy had no tanks. That's why they developed the concept of the Main Battle Tank that was supposed to do everything and Tank Destroyers just went away. One of the reasons they had so many "Tank Destroyers" was they had all these old tanks - that had guns that had become to small to be of use - and - they could not put a larger gun in a turret on these tanks - so - they just dispensed with the Turret and mounted the gun in the hull - and turned these former Tanks into Assault Guns. Those old tanks - were only around at all - because they were in the middle of humanities greatest war - and you could still put a gun on these things - so they did. .

Saints and Soldiers: The Void, That is a great movie about M18

Imagine being the crew inside the turret and your commander is just letting loose right over your head with a m2 browning, You know their ears had to be bleeding..😭😭😭

Yeah, The Neglected cousin of the M-10 and The arguably the most successful US TD the M-36

Let’s go! A new video that’s not a compilation 😂

Did become fully validated during the Battle of the Bulge. Very simple (no muzzle brake at first) and had an actual radial engine so very robust but also, yes...the open top turret as the vehicle was freezing cold given how much air the radial engine required for cooling which was enormous. US anti tank Doctrine was very impressive and in fact turned into "overkill" as by the time the USA landed in France in 1944 Germany didn't have many Tanks left to fight with in the West and almost zero airpower. The biggest threat was from Axis Infantry and German 88s but in the alternative being an open turret was a very great thing as most of the time was used over upon liberated territories and being able to literally see physically your liberators was a very powerful thing as this was clearly an impressive vehicle that could be seen as a serious effort to annihilate the German occupier. As Allied Forces approached the German Homeland having this amount of firepower was very much beyond appreciated indeed beloved by War's end. Also given the complexity no one tried to fool around with the M18 as opposed to the M4 Sherman. The diminutive size of the US Tank Fleet indeed vehicle fleet in general in World War 2 was also a huge war winner as well. The Germans built way too big thus becoming in effect immobilized even in trying to defend Germany in the West from the West. World War 2 Jeep and the GMC 6x6 were the War winners however as that's what provided the actual mobility for the entire US Army in every Theater.