This tank has appeared in such books as "Tanks of the World 1915-1945" by Chamberlain and Ellis, which makes you suppose it must have been a viable AFV design. There is actually a story that Holt offered the little vehicle to the army as a one man tank - but I have never seen proof of this.
The HA 36 was built as a promotional joke/gimmick for when Swinton visited Holts Stockton California plant.
Perhaps it was a joke that people took too seriously.
The HA 36 was built as a promotional joke/gimmick for when Swinton visited Holts Stockton California plant. Perhaps it was a joke that people took too seriously. ---Vil.
I think you're right there. TANKS! website has this to say under a photo, the same as your last one Vil, showing a Holt tractor with the baby tank (http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/ww1/WW1.html):
Mr. Holt and General Swinton
With them are two very curious vehicles. On the left is a prime mover that was offered to the U.S. Army. On the right is an unknown. Records are not clear about it. Holt records state that it was built for the visit of General Swinton. Some historians suggest that it was submitted to the army for testing as a 1 man tank. Based on the size, I suspect that it was built for a company promotion only and not as a serious combat vehicle.
In a affirmation of my opinion, I received the following letter 11/12/02:
"The small tank that is shown in your picture of Benjamin Holt and Ernest Swinton was a wooden mock-up powered by a motorcycle engine and was especially made for the visit of Gen. Swinton in April of 1918. The tractor--which was a standard Holt '75' was used by the military but was no different than other '75' made for agricultural and construction work. We have a number of photographs in our archives of the Swinton visit to Stockton.
Tod Ruhstaller Director The Haggin Museum Stockton, CA, USA
Very neat little machine, and thx for the rather clear images of it Vilkata
Right off I would think that someone most definitely in control of ones claustrophobia response would be required to operate the vehicle....but with further thought, I must admit to thinking it's a shame they didn't have proper RC capabilities at the time.
I wonder if it could be classified as a an AFV design, simply because so many people thought it was? Apparently even when it was made people didn't get that it was a joke. They thought it was a real concept design.
What would fit inside that thing armament wise? A couple 1911 handguns with extended magazines bolted in as the sponson guns, and a Browning automatic rifle with extended magazine for the main gun? No true machine gun could ever hope to fit.
Or could it? What type of MG did the little Ford 3 Ton take?
The Fighting Tanks 1933 by Jones Barry and Icks (Jones was a member of the US Tank Board and Rarry a designer of various improvements to the 6 ton tank ) indicate that it carried a .30 machine gun with limited traverse and vertical arc. They go on to damn it with faint praise as follows: " Machine gun had limited traverse. Low and easily manouvered. A fair accompanying tank except for limited fire power, defective cooling and ventilation, cramped quarters and other minor faults." Other texts suggest that it was primarily intended as a weapons carrier and tractor - a sort of WW1 universal carrier rather than a tank. A tankette perhaps.
Interesting excerpt centurion, although I knew it was a .30 cal. I was wondering which one, because the entire mechanism must have been pretty small to fit in the Ford 3 Ton. A regular Maxim certainly wouldn't have fit.
In the 3-ton it was an air-cooled version of the Browning Model 1917, .30 cal. MG, which was the forerunner of the Browning 1919 which was used on US tanks into the 60's. I'm not sure what it's actual designation was, though. The receiver on the 1917/1919 is fairly "small", especially compared to the Maxim, etc., but I'm sure it still would have been a handful in the tiny 3-ton. That makes me wonder, though, where would they have kept the ammo boxes? There's virtually no space inside that vehicle for ammo when the gun and crew are in! Anyway, hope that helps. Matt
__________________
“[B]ut these tanks are machines, their caterpillars run on as endless as the war, they are annihilation, they roll without feeling into the craters, and climb up again without stopping..." -Erich Maria Remarque
I dont know if you know, But on the British Pathe site they have a newsreel of the HA 36 being driven down a road. I have attached a photo from the stills.