FRENCH AND AMERICAN TANKS Independent Invention by the French.—The French were faced with the same difficulty as the British in the early stages of the War, and their attacks were held up by machine-guns and barbed wire although they were often well supported by artillery using high-explosive shells. It was Col. (later Gen.) J. B. E. Estienne of the artillery who first perceived the necessity for some mechanical machine which could cross the trenches and barbed wire in the face of machine-gun fire, and when this officer saw the Holt caterpillar tractors at work behind the British front for hauling guns, it occurred to him that the solution might be found in an armoured caterpillar machine. On Dec. 1, 1915, Col. Estienne put forward his idea officially to the French commander in-chief and asked for an interview. Thus the ideas which had been thought out by the British originators in 1914 were re invented separately and independently by the French in 1915. As the result of Col. Estienne's interview, 400 tanks were asked for and the design was to be prepared jointly between Col. Es tienne and M. Brille of the Schneider Works. Later a further order for another 40o machines was placed with the St. Cha mond Works.
In June 1916 French Headquarters received information from British G.H.Q. as to what was being done in England. Col. Estienne visited England and saw the Mark I. tanks in training. He expressed the view that the two countries should collaborate as regards the production of tanks and that as the British had progressed with the design of a large heavy machine, the French might specialize with a light machine for more mobile warfare. Cot Estienne was specially insistent in the view that neither country should forestall the other in the use of tanks, but that they should co-operate and launch a great offensive in which both British and French tanks might obtain full value from sur prise.
to be transported over long distances in lorries. The medium tanks (St. Chamond and Schneider) weighed between Io and 3o tons and could be transported by rail on ordinary trucks. The heavy tanks, of which the British Mark I. formed the only example at the time, were machines weighing over 3o tons and required special railway trucks for transport.
A training centre was now formed at Marly-le-Roi and later an additional centre was started at Champlieu. On Sept. 3o, the artillerie d'assaut, which was the counterpart to the British Tank Corps, was formed under the command of Col. Estienne. The French medium tanks now began to arrive. The Schneider tank was six metres in length and driven by a 6o h.p. engine. It was armed with a short 75 mm. gun and two machine-guns. The St. Chamond tank was somewhat larger and heavier, being 8 metres in length and driven by an 8o h.p. engine through a petrol-electric transmission. The armament was one 75 mm. gun and four machine-guns. Both machines differed radically from the British tank in that the track was not carried round the machine but consisted of the ordinary short type used on trac tors. This resulted in the machines having very limited climbing power out of shell holes or craters. The artillerie d'assaut was organized in "groupes"; each "groupe" had four batteries of four tanks each. The light Renault tank was used as a "com mand" tank and one was allotted to each "groupe." The delivery of both types of tank was very slow and instead of Boo tanks being ready for the spring offensive in 1917 only 250 had been received. The result was that only 1 o "groupes" were able to take part in Gen. Nivelle's offensive. The French high command had grave doubts whether to make use of so small a number of tanks, but eventually decided to do so. The offensive was unsuccessful and although the tanks did good work in isolated cases, the result was disappointing. The employ ment of tanks in this manner was a repetition of the mistakes made by the British.