Quote by lithgow View Post
It has to be said that British tanks of the period were even worse as regards servicing and often reliability-Covenanter anyone?
The history of the 15th/19th The King's Royal Hussars 1939-45 states:

"In any case the Covenanter had only been produced for home defence and its armour was little better than that of the Light Tank, and its gun, the 2-pr, was easily outclassed by contemporary German weapons-we were beginning to want something better in which to go to war."

And later:

"... Cruiser tanks Marks V and VI, known later as Covenanter and Crusader respectively, were therefore being developed just before the war. It was the first of these machines that became the equipment of the Regiment in 1941.

The story of both these tanks is an unhappy one: under pressure of events in the summer of 1940 they were rushed into production before development work on them was completed and both acquired a bad name for mechanical unreliability, and for
the complication and lack of accessibility of their components. To deal with the Covenanter first. In retrospect it must be admitted that this tank served as a useful training machine, since it was the first tank of any real size and performance held by
the Regiment. Like the A13 Cruiser Tank Mark 111, it carried only main turret armament. In addition to a host of minor defects, many of which were gradually eliminated, it suffered from one major one-the engine could not be cooled sufficiently for operations in the desert."

So yes, a bit of a non starter if you'll pardon the expression.....