The Souain Tank Trial

[PhilB]

I came across this:-

"The Souain experiment was a French military experiment using a prototype tank, in the former battlefied of Souain, in northeastern France, on 9 December 1915. The experiment has a decisive influence of the French tank program and intiated the design and order of the first French operational tank, the Schneider CA1. The experiment occurred the same month the British Little Willie was being completed."

This seems quite early for an actual tank trial. As we assume that the British invented the tank, were the French influenced by British development or were they working independently?

[centurion]

The French experimented with a whole raft of ideas, some quite outre. They included a vast machine that moved at about 1 mph and laid down large flat plates that would crush wire. Unfortunateltythis could only travel in a straight line. Various armoured tractors were tested including at least one powered by a generator and cable. Little Willy (originally with Bullock tracks) convinced the British that using Holt type suspension was not the answer, seemingly the Souain experiment did the opposite for the French. I'll post more this evening

[centurion]

The Souain 'tank' was a baby Holt tractor that was armoured. Much like Little Willy in concept.

[centurion]

You might be interested in my interpretation of a late war French project based on three Holt track units in a row. Not built although I believe a two track unit proof of concept was built.

[PhilB]

Development

Schneider & Co.Schneider Electric

Schneider Electric is a France global company. It was founded in 1836 by two brothers, Eug?ne I and Adolphe Schneider.In the first part of the 20th century, Schneider et Cie associated itself with Westinghouse Electric Corporation who were a major international electrical group at the time....

was a large arms manufacturer in France. Having been given the order to develop heavy artillery tractors, in January 1915 the company sent out its chief designer, Eugène Brillié, to investigate tracked tractors from the American Holt Company, at that time participating in a test programme in . On his return Brillié, who had earlier been involved in designing armoured cars for Spain convinced the company management to initiate studies on the development of a Tracteur blindé et armé (armoured and armed tractor), based on the Baby Holt chassis, two of which were ordered. In July 1915 this private programme was combined with an official one for the development of a barbed wire cutter by engineer and Member of Parliament Jules-Louis Bréton. Ten of the fifteen available Baby Holt vehicles were to be armoured and fitted with the wire cutter.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Schneider_CA1

On 9 December 1915, the first chassis was demonstrated to the French Army. One of the onlookers was colonel Jean-Baptiste Eugène

Jean-Baptiste Eug?ne Estienne was a general of artillery and a specialist in military engineering, one of the founders of modern French artillery and French military aviation; and the creator of the French tank arm....

(1860-1936), an artillery man and engineer held in very high regard throughout the army for his unmatched technological and tactical expertise. For Estienne the vehicle shown embodied vague concepts about AFVs already growing in his mind. On 12 December he presented to the High Command a plan to form an armoured force, equipped with tracked vehicles. This plan met with approbation and a production order of 400 at a price of 56,000 French francFrench franc

The franc is a former currency of France. Between 1360 and 1641, it was the name of coins worth 1 livre tournois and it remained in common parlance as a term for this amount of money....

s per vehicle was made on 25 February 1916. In January it had been decided not to use the Baby Holt chassis, but the longer 75 hp Holt tractor; for this the armoured superstructure had to be completely changed, which was done in an army workshop in February. The first vehicle of the production series was delivered on 5 September. Meanwhile, production had shifted to the SOMUA company, a dependency of Schneider.

[PhilB]

Would this be the Holt tractor on which tank development in both France & Britain were based?

[centurion]

QUOTE (Phil_B @ Sep 23 2009, 09:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Would this be the Holt tractor on which tank development in both France & Britain were based?

No that is a much earlier Holt. It was in effect an early half track having a steering roller in front. The Baby Holt on which the French (and to some extent German) tank development was based was fully tracked. Although many American sources claim that the British tanks were based on Holt this is not correct. Holts in part gave the idea of investigating the use of tracks but at no time were Holt components involved in the design of the British tanks wereas both French and German tanks used modified Holt track systems.

[per ardua per mare per terram]

The Souain armoured vehicle was more akin to the Killen-Strait experiments, such as the tracked wire cutter demonstrated 30 June 1915. It was later armoured using the armour used from the short lived Delaunay-Belleville armoured car.

The Holt is a red herring, Colonel Ernest Swinton may have been inspired by seeing one in 1914, but Murray Seuter had already sugested the use of tracked vehicles to RF Scott years before. As the War Office regected Swinton's idea it was a blind alley. Whereas Seuter was part of the Landship Committe which oversaw the development of the tank - a committe formed before the abortive demonstrations, to the War Office team, of the Holt tractor as a prospective armoured vehicle.

[centurion]

The Souain armoured vehicle was more akin to the Killen-Strait experiments, such as the tracked wire cutter demonstrated 30 June 1915. It was later armoured using the armour used from the short lived Delaunay-Belleville armoured car.

The Holt is a red herring, Colonel Ernest Swinton may have been inspired by seeing one in 1914, but Murray Seuter had already sugested the use of tracked vehicles to RF Scott years before. As the War Office regected Swinton's idea it was a blind alley. Whereas Seuter was part of the Landship Committe which oversaw the development of the tank - a committe formed before the abortive demonstrations, to the War Office team, of the Holt tractor as a prospective armoured vehicle.

I did say Holts in part gave the idea of investigating the use of tracks. Swinton presented a number of ideas and kept hammering away at the use of tracks.

It was certainly not a red herring in the case of the French as after the Souain trials five baby Holts were ordered for experiments with armour that led directly to the Schneider C1

[per ardua per mare per terram]

Holt tractors gave one man the idea of tracks, whose ideas were largely blind allies. He didn't organise a suppy chain (including a manufacture who helped carry the designs forward), he didn't contract with manufacturers who manages to produce armoured plate that could be bent without cracking (as the RNAS already had for their armoured cars), he didn't evolve a reliable track mechanism, he got little encouragement from the War Office. The list of how Swinton and the Holt didn't progress British tank manufacture is huge.

Granted the Schneider C1 was produced in greater numbers than the A7V, but the Holt was still a red herring, it wasn't a great clue for tank development.

[centurion]

Granted the Schneider C1 was produced in greater numbers than the A7V, but the Holt was still a red herring, it wasn't a great clue for tank development.

As was the St Chamond also mounted on modified Holt units. I never said that the Holt was the way to the future but it did form the basis for at least 3 operational tanks. The St Chamond when away from shelled areas (in late 1918) actually proved better than the British heavies - certainly in the assault gun role.

BTW which of the allies were blind? Granted Switon was gone by the time Mother was built but he did keep hammering away that tracks not wheels, rollers, legs etc etc were the way foward. Tritton almost gave up on tracks.

[per ardua per mare per terram]

The St Chamond when away from shelled areas (in late 1918) actually proved better than the British heavies - certainly in the assault gun role. In other words when the St Chamond was away from the conditions that the British tanks were designed to over come, it managed to get over the problems inherent in the Holt tracks. The War Office and other elements in the army had quashed the use of the gun carriers which could have been used in the assault gun role.

Which designs did Swinton propose? What solutions to the problems tracks did he advocate? Tritton did give up on tracks in 1912. Sueter however, didn't and had been advocating them throughout his involvement, while the others brain stormed. Tritton and that great Naval officer Wilson solved the trank problem, combining the 'big wheel' theory with a practical track solution.

[centurion]

Modern tanks combine elements from both sets of tank. The upward slope of track from the road wheels to the front roller or wheel is the legacy of the old Rhomboid and may arise originally from the big wheel (although some dispute this) and is what gives tanks their ability to overcome obstacles; the idea of a sprung suspension originates in the Holt track units and is what allows tanks to move faster than a crawl. The rhomboid designs eschewed suspension as mud could gum it up and tanks without it could be built faster, cheaper and in greater numbers. The tactics in the shelled areas did not require fast movement. Once away from a shelled area, when warfare became more fluid, obstacle climbing etc became less important and the greater speed that suspension systems allowed more so hence the St Chammond's advantage in these conditions (plus having a big gun able to fire directly forward).

[per ardua per mare per terram]

The St Chammond's disadvantage was that it wasn't an all terrain vehicle; it could be defeated by a small ditch let alone a trench. Sprung suspension predates the Holt system.

[centurion]

The St Chammond's disadvantage was that it wasn't an all terrain vehicle; it could be defeated by a small ditch let alone a trench. So tell us something new. Sprung suspension predates the Holt system. On what track systems? And were any of them used on armoured vehicles?

The Rhomboid tanks were ideal for shelled areas but much too slow and with limited range to be used anywhere else so in that respect they were also not multi terrain. The Rhomboid was the right choice for the Western Front but the modern tank owes a debt to both types.

[per ardua per mare per terram]

Are you using the royal we or assuming knowledge on behalf of every possible person who might read this thread? I thought the limitations of the St Chammond's were worth emphasising. The Holt Company bought the patients of other manufacturers and innovators. The Rhomboid tanks were greatly constrained by the limited vision of the War Office requirements.

[per ardua per mare per terram]

Being fairer on the WWI War Office & Minestry of Munitions than I usually am. From the convening of the Landship committee in February 1915 to November 1918 a totally new concept in warfare was developped, orders placed and hundreds delivered to the front line and used operationally. "They don't make 'em like that any more!"