When a restorer of Comets or Shermans sees this video, he only can run to the nearest pub and get drunk for dispair.
To pakr72 - About the great successes of the refurbished Shermans in Korea, Syria, Jordan or Egypt: against such botched crews, even the ridiculous L3's of Mussolini would have been enough ...
Machinery is worth as much as those who use it: Panzerwaffe=body&soul
@jimmyxx3 it kinda is the first mbt ever produced, great firepower, very good protection, good mobility, well trained crews, only the fact that it was overengineered hurt it, if it was a little closer to acopy of the t34 then maybe the germans could build more, but then it may not be as superior as it was
One of the best tanks made; only real competitor would have been the Russian T34 which the Germas copied from ( especially the " sloped armour " for the turret ). If Germany had been able to fully mass produce these in the same numbers as the T34 the war wouldn't have ended in 1945. Nice clip; thanks for uploading.
I like the way this video was shot... Just imagine for a second that this is 1944 and that is you looking straight at the panther like in this video.. Its pretty scary
You don't see that every day do you? A fully restored Panzer mk V Panther coming towards you. Fabulous looking vehicle. I wonder if it would be stretching it a bit to call it a work of art?
@Flamethrower334 I agree, together with sloping armour of T-34 42 76 mm till 85 mm, are the best tank ever invented in WWII, good choice Flammy!!!! the balance of firepower, protection and mobility, fuck the shermans.............only win by numbers....but shit in quality
@tomicalover yeah the gun was actually more powerful than tiger's 88 mm...too bad for the nazis that they diverted resources into expensive, crappy tiger 1's and 2's which couldnt even cross bridges due their weight
@Flamethrower334 Yes, they are too heavy, even with their own power from the maybach, still too heavy for their engine and transmission. We could imagine the resources and trucks(heavy famo and sdkfz-8 & 9s)just for towing those giants. So impractical. If they made more of the panthers and more Me-262s jets, and better radars maybe the war will be end far more later, maybe till 1946/1947 :D. Ohya i have a very nice story that support the clumsiness of allies move. i'll sent to your youtube inbox
@Flamethrower334 the tiger had better armor than the t34, and the 8.8cm kwk 43 on the king tiger was better than the panthers gun the 7.5cm kwk 42, the panther was an idustrial nightmare to produce too you know, plu sthey were vulnerable from the sides
@tomicalover the shermans were better in quality than the t34, russian guard units perfered the sherman over the t34, the easy 8 shermans demolished the t34/85 in korea, the sherman had more frontal armor than the t34 and its armor was sloped to, more armor was added later, plus better gun sights, and better tactics for the americans
@packr72 LOL...ARE YOU A CHILD OR WHAT? Tell this story to the German tankers! The Germans laughed at the Sherman. Called it the ronsen.. since if burnt so easily. The Germans copied the T34 in making the Panther becasue it was so superior to the German tanks at the time on the Eastern front. The only problem with the T34 is that most often the people using them were poor. They lacked NO radios and once you destroyed one tank, the rest were easily confused and dealt with.
@packr72 Oh, and the Sherman didn't win in quantity since they built nearly 70,000 of them????? Face it , dude. Any respectable person who knows ww2 history will tell you the Sherman was a coffin and one of the worst medium tanks of the war....as the men whom had to use them! The T34 was better than the Sherman. And continuing this argument is beneath me.
@packr72 ...and I forgot to mention how you claim the t34 won only in quantity while ignoring the mass of Shermans built, and you say the t34's gun was bad, but the Shermans gun was also either a 75mm or 76mm!!! So why is the Sherman better? Everything you claim is bad about the t34, you claim is a plus for the Sherman! Your a child!
@thegoosebrain over 80000 t34 built around 45000 shermans built. yes the 75mm gun of the sherman could penetrate the side armor of a panther at greater ranges than the 76mm gun of the t34 could, plus the easy 8 shermans proved they were superior to the t34/85 in korea, and israeli shermans destroyed with ease, t34, and t55s
@packr72 ohya? why the data said by the whole armor history books, all books about korean war between 1951-53, american tank crew testimony, south korean infantry, and the wikis says : this tank are incredible, still after WWII ended give a knock out punch to those who oppose them, excellent mobility and firepower and very easy to learn to use, the most lightest, genius and excellent diesel v12 ever mounted on a tracked vehicle in the entire WW22 hemisphere, and give a shock to german generals!
@packr72 one more thing, beside be the most advance tank in the early 1940's-1941's in its design, why? because christie innovation ( AN American ? strange, fellow countymen reject such a genius idea of tank suspension for fast travelling in muds and obstacle) being much much much better that the sherman shitty suspension, forget the HVSS on easy 8 being the same misery, for independent suspension used in T-34 were rejected by american comrade? stupid thing to reject christie, very-very stupid
@tomicalover please the t34 was cannon foder, 45,000 were destroyed, compared to about 700 shermans completely destroyed and another 1400 badly damaged
@packr72 Oh? forgetting the success of P51 and P-47 as the jabos, b-25 mitchell, b-26 marauder, b24 liberator, the tempest, the typhoon, and the most importantly the 8th AF B-17s, they're most record braker of destroying the german tanks, beside the panzerjager bazookas and other anti tank weapons like the m36 jackson and M10s 90 mm gun,not the shermans! you're wrong and cocky, besides t-34 are far more advance than any other tank in 1940-41, and remains lethal into korean war in 1953, jet ages!
@packr72 remember wrong american motto in WWII? tank should be ONLY engaged as an infantry support, not tank versus tank battle, you yourself american have that perspectives all along, thats why pershing came too late and don't have any effect on the battlefield, and miserably the muzzle velocity pershing giant 90 mm gun still being OVERRUN by the smaller but much more excellent 75 mm of panther tank, don't you feel ashame for your comment?? you want the data? i have it! israelis use it!!!! bwee
@tomicalover i am not saying that the sherman or pershing were better than the panther, the pershings 90mm gun was not as effective as the panthers gun, but it was better than the tiger1s gun and definetly better than the t34/85s gun, yes the french reversed engineered the panthers gun and the israelis put the gun on a sherman, winning
Wahrscheinlich einer der Panther von denen Frankreich nach dem Krieg ein Panzerregiment im dienst hatte, alles von U.S. erbeutete frühe BauloseA oder D
I wonder if the French in WWII would have wanted to be "liberated" if they could see what their country is like today- millions of non-white muslims running around their country, and their capital of Paris looks like an African bazaar.
Another thing have you ever been to Senshiem the Panther G is almost as big as the King Tiger the main body of the tank are almost Identical and the Turret of the king tiger is way larger but the Panther G is a big tank and a very good one.
The Panther AUS G was one of the best tanks of the war and it was super off road in fact until 1955 the French used all the old Panthers as their main battle tanks! So the M18 also suffered terrible casualties at the hands of the infantry and antitank batteries. not to mention tanks and tank hunters. They also outnumbered the Germans armor with Shermans and M24s also
@MegaLiopleurodon - By the time WWII broke out, the Hurricane was an obsolete plane. It was underpowered, slow, had a very poor rate of climb and used wood and cloth WWI technology from the cockpit aft. The R.A.F. used this plane only because it's what they had. It's replacement, the Spitfire was a vastly superior plane. In the Battle of Britain, the Spitfire's took on the Luftwaffe Me/Bf-109 bomber fighter escorts so the Hurricanes could take out the slow, lumbering bombers, which they did.
@Echeque5 once again the Hurricane destroyed 77% of German fighters during the Battle of Britain. It's wood and canvas design allowed it to absorb far more damage than the thin aluminium skin of the Spitfire. Its could still out outperform the Bf-109E in level combat and had a considerably superior roll and dive rate. The only "vastly superior" quality of the Spit was it was marginally faster than the Hurricane, but at the altitudes that most of the combat was occuring, the Hurricane dominated.
@jhoag56 - The Spitfire was much faster than the cumbersome and slow Hurricane, as well as having a much greater climb rate, better protection for the pilot, a much higher ceiling, superior maneuverability and all around outclassed the WWII wood and cloth technology of the obsolete Hurricane.
@Echeque5 Also the "obsolete" Hurricane remained in production until 1944 and it was its wood and canvas design that allowed it to be durable enough to meet the Luftwaffe with little maintenance. As for the protection, the aircraft both had armoured canopy glass, and an armoured belt around the cockpit itself.
@Echeque5 Hurricane Ia: Service date Dec 1939; Top Speed 340 m/h; Ceiling: 41,000 ft; climb: 5,857 ft/min. Spitfire Ia: Service Date Nov 1939 Top Speed 367 m/h; Ceiling 38,000 ft; Climb: 3025 feet/min. The Spit was marginally faster, but had a slower rate of climb and a lower service ceiling. This was because the designers at Hawker used the Merlin XX and the Spit still used he old Merlin III.
@MegaLiopleurodon yes there were more hurricanes at the battle of britain, and the hurricane claimed more kills during the battle, then went on to be an excellent fighter bomber in north africa, out performing superior german and italian fighters due to its rugged ness, even served with the red airforce as did the spitfire
DeBalaguer - Here is a documented historical fact for you about the Tiger tank you might not know about; from the book, "Tigers in Combat", by Wolfgang Schneider", page 217, in regards to the Tiger tanks mechanical, "reliability", "they were usually lost as a result of mechanical failure". This tank was plagued with mechanical reliability issues.
@Echeque5 Here's a fact about Echeque5 you guys might not know about. His penis was lost as a result of a mechanical accident as well. We're talking about the Panzer here. Your quote ain't relevant to the discussion. We know the Tiger broke down.
we found one of these guys in s river in Poland it had been there for 60years.
rebuilt the engine and it fired up first start..
Again no parking problems or pemits needed, or clamps. if the local council started gettin to libal and knitting there yougurts about me. I'd just park it up the town halls main entrance and stop
as discribed in Talksport Mick Dickens)them getting in and out. woops i broke down.
mmm will always hate the french always will and that should be a faimilar to french german equipment in there land and it should stay there french suck onions
@p51mustangjoe - You don't know me. If you hate someone you don't even know, might be an idea to seek help from a psychiatrist. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! :)
Is her name Angela or maybe Nadine? You know that you were in love and still are with a German girl who dumped you and that is why you have such a negative attitude toward so many things German.
haha self consuming i disagree if anything it is self preservation for anyone and everyone everybody hates someone and greatly ejoys it its a part of life get over it mr philosofical
@p51mustangjoe - Hate is very wrong. There's no excuse for it or rationalization for it. It is what is causing fighting, suffering, killing, death, wars, waste of human life and resources, all over the world. Hate is bad any way we cut it. It's something to be avoided, not encouraged. Stop the hate.
take a class on the human mind you will hey rarunderstand why hate is a very crucial and needed aspect. Also fighting is a needed aspect wiether physical or mental it is needed. the thing with ideals that people have they rarely ever work and they have false hope just like the one your trying to show
@p51mustangjoe - I don't need to take any classes on the human mind to know the horrors of hate and how all its negative consequences, thank you. Even a cursory evaluation of world history is clear testimony to the ravages of hatred. Death, murder, killing, fighting, war, suffering, destruction, etc. Hatred destroys and is by no means a desirable affliction. Merry Christmas and Happen New Year! :)
@Paciat - "The Great Patriotic War"? Do you mean World War II? I would have to disagree that any way is, "great", and with the Russians killing so many of their soldiers for being cowards just because a Russian attack was repulsed and returning/surviving Russian soldiers were then shot for, "betrayal to the motherland", is hardly, "patriotic". The Russians didn't fight because of any great love for communism, but because they had to or be shot by the Russian communist government.
@Paciat - See the movie, "Enemy at the Gates", which shows Russian soldiers being shot and killed by their commanding officers, for merely the crime of returning to their own lines when their attack was repulsed by the Germans. An absolutely horrific, evil crime against humanity.
@Paciat - That is good. :) Unfortunately, as I am sure you have seen for yourself, there are people who try to be revisionist historians and try to change historical facts in order to fit their agenda, which is usually based on silly nationalistic pride. I think we can all agree that war is a horrible, horrible thing. Look at all the wars, the tremendous loss and waste of human life, of resources destroyed in war. Imagine if all that had been used for good instead, to feed the hungry, etc?
lets see 150m soveit pop + US pop 200m at that time + Uk 35m pop = 385m Germany had about 80m people, normally around the same percentages of population were in military so maybe 7 to 1 but if you add axis powers and allie it was japan 90m + germany 80M + Italy 40m = 210m so allie 385m vs 210m the axis ratio did not add up to even 1:2. Germany had a large military larger than USA has now a day.
However, in their relentless drive westward during the latter half of 1943 onward, everytime they conquered new lands, they would immediately press conscripts into military service. Also, they would release prisoners and press them into military service as well. This ensured that the Red Army constantly had fresh new troops every mile they advanced westward. So, in the end, they actually had almost 20 million ground troops that fought in their ranks between 1941 and 1945.
T-34/85mm round was better than the 75mm round since its a bigger round and the slightly higher velocity did not make up for the mass of the round yet again, simple physics. IS-2 1,500 ms and T-34/85 1,800 m/s
Not true! There are numerous variables involved in the aspect of firepower. The German Panther gun was a full 71 calibers longer than most Allied tank guns. Also, the Panther's shells had a larger fuse on them than even the Tiger I's. In addition, the Panther's firing mechanism was torqued up to the absloute extreme like a rattlesnake coiled up ready to strike. All this translated into the Panther's muzzle velocity [Fireopower] being far superior to most any other tank of WW2, except the K.T.
bigger round more power more penetration so of course the 122mm gun was better than the 88mm. the slightly higher velocity did not make up for the mass and size of the 122mm round. 122m fired was more powerful than a 88mm round simple fact learn physics.
@JBBlitz The equation for the impact energy is E=mass x velocity squared. So an any increase in mass of the shell does not have as much effect as the increase in velocity. The increase in velocity is squared. Ths is why the German 75mm used on the Panther was a lethal tank killer. More than the Tiger 1's 88mm, the Soviet 85 and the US 76mm. Similarly the 88mm on the Tiger 2 was a more effective tank killer than the Soviet 122mm. You should learn basic physics yourself before mouthing off.
So very correct. The construction of the gun played far more of a part than the size of the shell. The L70 75mm had a tremendous velocity, more so than the 88 in the Tiger 1e. The British 17 pndr (76.2mm) had a higher velocity than its Soviet or American counterparts because it utilize a "squeeze tube" design that slowly tapered as the shell exited the barrel, that and unlike the Soviet guns it was rifled as was the L70
@JBBlitz There are tables readily available showing the effective armor pentration of different rounds at different ranges. There are other factors also effecting penetration such as material. APDS rounds with Tungston cores such as used on the English 17 lb.This made it an effective counter to both the Panther and Tigers A weakness of the high velocity anti tank guns was their inablity to carry a strong HE charge. The Soviet 122 had a massive blast effect. The 152mm even more so.
Germany could of won with enough ME 262's, but a HUGE problem was that they needed tungston and chromium for the jet turbine fins, because they could resist heat. But those materials were in Turkey and other un-reachable countries, so Germany had to make due with hardened steel for turbine fins. Steel turbine fins could only last about 10 to 15 hours, then the engine would have to be replaced. So again, thanks to a lack of materials, Germany had to fight with one foot in a bucket.
@calimar28 - Nazi Germany couldn't have on under any circumstances, (thank God!). The Me-262 had many mechanical issues. From the book, "German Weapons of World War II", by Chris Bishop and Adam Warner, page 74, "Stunning though its performance was, the 262 suffered from its axial engines and casualties due to engine failure, fires or break up were heavy. The 30-mm cannon was also prone to jamming and the landing gear to collapse". Speed is not the only thing that wins aerial battles.
Ok. I decided to help you get over the German girl who dumped you. So, I contacted this other German girl who lives near me. I told her all about your problem. She says that she will go out with you to the movies. But, there are two stipulations. First, you have to pick her up in a BMW with a license plate that reads: PANTHER 1, meaning: the best tank of WW2, and secondly, you have to shave your back! Her address is: 66 Hitler lane, and her Phone number is: 1-646-PAN-THER!
@SWALE1984 - When you graduate Elementary School, just let me know and maybe you will be able to have some sort of mature, adult conversation. Until then, your comments will go unread and MARKED AS SPAM. Bye.
"German technology has been very much overrated." Big Fail....what you talking? First Jet First Jet Fighters First ballistic missile First cruise missile First "real" U-Boats First Assault Rifle First Stealth technology Jet Fighter First Variable-sweep Jet Aircraft First "real" rocket-powered fighter aircraft First Vertical Take-Off Aircraft Germany was developer for most modern Weapons up to Moon rockets.
Please consider the IS2 didnt come until very late in the war...and was finally realized out of years of desperate searching to find something to take on a Tiger...and the Tiger could also take the IS2 on!
And the T34/85 gun was not as good as Panthers 75mm, nor was the T34's armor as good as Panthers. T34/85 was a good tank, dont get me wrong, and its speed and numbers helped it win battles. But saying it could "beat the shit out of a Panther" is ridculous.
Oh no, I guess I have to give you a lesson in ballistics...no offense meant though.
Yes, the Panthers 75mm gun was far better than the T34 85mm gun. This is because the Panthers 75mm gun was a "high velocity round"...meaning it went faster through the air and could penetrate better than the 85mm. You can tell this because the Panthers gun was very long, an L/70 gun. The longer the barrel the higher velocity the round. Hell, the Panthers 75mm could penetrate even better than the Tigers 88mm!
swale, you're right with what you said. I've read, Luftwaffe-pilots were sent into battle with less than 30 hrs of practice, whereas the Americans went into battle with no less than 300 hrs. So the inexperienced young German pilots were an easy prey for them. Germany had the best planes, but was short on pilots (and fuel)
Advantages changed during the war. Spit was a bit nimbler than Me 109, but the Me had advantages when breaking away in a fast dive, because it had fuel-injection, whereas the Spit only had carburettors, and trying, to follow the Me too quick, caused malfunction. HP was about equal. Then they built a stronger Merlin for the Spit, but the answer was the introduction of the FW 190, which was a shock for the Brits. Advantages were always only small and soon equalised. My favourite is the
The La-7 was also better than the Messerschmitt 109, and so was the Yak-3, these Soviet planes were actually on a par with the much vaunted Fw 190.
As for the Me-262, it's worth reminding that, although faster, it had a rather poor manoeuvrability, Mustangs and La-7 s even managed to shoot down some.
The Me 109 was very good and the Spitfire was a good airplane! They were both equally well! But the Germans had a decisive advantage .... their pilots were very much better than those of other nations!
is that why they lose to the Royal air force of Britain and all their planes were shot down at Stalingrad with over half of soviet planes still in the air.
@stradic92 - German pilots weren't any better than pilots from other nations. People are people and our biology is all the same. The German Luftwaffe was blown out of the sky by the British Royal Air Force during the Battle for Britain and the Luftwaffe lost. The Spitfire was a later, more modern design than the Me/Bf-109 and could outmaneuver the older German designed plane.
Then answer me the question why the best German fighter has 352 victories and the best UK has only 50! The German were more in use had more experience and no air force in the world had a chance against the German! We are simply the best in the world and will remain so forever!
@stradic92 - Erich Hartmann got his 352 victories flying against old, sub-standard Russian planes. No big deal. The German Luftwaffe had their asses handed to them by the Royal Air Force in the Battle for Britain and was largely destroyed, never to be a factor again. Facts are far more relevant and important than silly nationalistic pride.
@stradic92 there are several answers for this. First the UK and US pilots had to share kills, where the Germans received a full kill even if the aircraft was brought down by seven other aircraft. Second, as much of an Erich Hartman fan as I am, they were just Soviets. Very poor pilot training and many inadequate aircraft. The only decent aircraft the Soviets had was the IL-2. Also the Germans did not always rely on gun camera footage to verify kills, word of mouth would do.
@jhoag56 - The IL-2 was a sitting duck for a Me/BF-109. The IL-2 was a ground attack plane and was specifically designed to destroy tanks. As a result, it was slow, cumbersome and not in any way a fighter plane. The rear gunners in these things were prisoners of the Soviet Union forced to be gunners, or die. The Russians always had such a, "positive", way of encouraging/motivating their fighting units. lol
@Echeque5 but it was still the best they had, and compared to the Stuka it was loads better. Who designs an aircraft with landing gear that detaches so it can escape?
The German fighter pilots have received only then a shooting if they have shot down the enemy plane alone without participation of comrades! In addition, the launch had to be confirmed by a comrade to be valid!
The Soviets were not really bad drivers, many believe, the end of the war, the Soviets have lost so many good pilots that they could use only poorly trained pilots! This is because the Soviet air force was not so mature! But that was only at the end of 1944 the case!
@stradic92 the German Luftwaffe's pilots were getting credits for kills off of probables and damaged aircraft. Two pilots could claim credit for the same aircraft. There have been conflicting reports regarding aircraft kills on days when no Allied aircraft were flying in the area where German pilots claimed to have shot down an enemy. The RAF pilots had to give the target aircraft's designation number to claim a kill and the USAAF would not award credit unless the pilot saw the target crash
What you give here is from you at all dignity! I survived with a lot of fighter pilots to the war have personally spoken with Erich Hartmann! There was no firing or shares when they were only involved in it alone without the participation of comrades had to shoot at the enemy firing also get ... either everything or nothing, there was no half-victories, or something of that kind! When a launch was not confirmed because no comrade was near or has not seen it, then the firing was not valid!
If there was an air force in the firings have been split, then a thousand times closer to the British, Russians or the U.S.! The German then had more honor than it could imagine himself an opponent! You insult them with your statements honorable soldiers and me too! I'm more of these virtues then and am proud of this history of my country! The real shame of the war had to end like this!
It was the Hurricane that won the Battle of Britain, not the Spitfire. The Hurricane accounted for more enemy aircraft destroyed than any other Allied aircraft. However, the British pilots were better because they were taught to fly as a team, to protected one another and did not have this 'fighter as the hunter' mentality that the German pilots did, which prevented them from protecting the bombers which were easy picking for the nimble Hurricanes and Spitfires. But it was training, not genetics
@jhoag56 - The Hurricanes shot down the most planes in the Battle for Britain because their assignment was to take on the slow, lumbering German bombers and shred them, which they did. It was the vastly superior Spitfire that took on the Luftwaffe fighter plane bomber escort, so the Hurricanes would be free and clear to attack the bombers.
@Echeque5 the Hurricane destroyed 77% of all Luftwaffe fighters during the Battle of Britain and 70% of the bombers according to Stephen Bungay. The Spitfire could only outperform the Hurricane above 25,000 ft, and then it was only marginal. During a 1938 exercise at lower altitudes the Hurricane destroyed the Spitfire, and at higher altitudes it could only inflict 1-1 losses
@MegaLiopleurodon - Germany didn't have the best planes. The Me/Bf-109 was an older design and initially was better than other planes. However, as new allied planes came online, like the Spitfire, P-51 Mustang, P-38 Lightning, etc., they could fly circles around the Axis planes. Nazi Germany started a war they couldn't win because they couldn't ever hope to have the industrial capacity of America, not in their wildest dreams. Millions of people died, for, nothing.A horrific waste of human life.
@Echeque5 actually, the Bf 109 was a terrible fighter. It lacked an armored canopy and cockpit, it could not detach its extended range fuel tank, early models lacked self sealing tanks, its propeller mounted cannon was jam prone and its wing weight was so heavy that it could not even turn inside the old P-40C. It was an abysmal aircraft that was used only because of Willy Messershmitt's connections to Hitler and the Nazi party
jhoag56 - Correct, but at the onset of WWII, it was probably the best plane in the air. It was light and maneuverable. Erich Hartmann shot down P-51 Mustangs with the Me/Bf-109 and when the new FW-190 was introduced, Hartmann stuck with his Me/Bf-109.
@Echeque5 no, the Hurricane and Spit were still better. They at least had armored cockpits and bullet proof glass so the pilots were protected, and as an added bonus the wood and canvas design of the Hurri allowed cannon shells to pass through without detonating
@jhoag56 - In the Battle for Britain, the R.A.F. had the advanced Spitfire take on the Luftwaffe fighter planes and the Hurricanes attacked the slow, cumbersome bombers. The Hurricane was virtually obsolete.
@Echeque5 this is a myth. In reality the Spitfire engaged only a handful of the escorts while the Hurricane pilots were left to deal with the remaining escorts and the bombers as well. This is detailed in multiple after action reports, diary entries of pilots and multiple books and magazines including Aviation History, Hurricane v. Messerschmidt and Douglas Bader's autobiography: Duel for the Skies
The Panther tank-a legendary fighting machine. Remember the movie, "Tank" with James Garner and he said, "I think I have you covered". It would have been so fitting if a guy in a Panther or Tiger would have been directly behind Garner, and said "No, old man, I think it is me who has you covered!" Wouldn't that have been just hilarious!? And then have Garner's face turn white as a ghost and say to the guy in the Panther or Tiger, " Excuse me please, I need to change my shorts!" Totally awesome!!!
Treetop - The continent of Europe was not prepared for war at all and that is why the German army succeeded in the early days of the war. When an army expecting a fight landed on the beaches of Normandy though, it took them less than a year to make the German army retreat all the way back to Germany and surrender, defeated. Germany couldn't have won WWII. It was impossible, as they didn't have the industrial capacity to sustain and win WWII. This is a historical fact.
The French had prepared extensively for war. I would say that the Maginot line was a less than subtle preparation for war. It was superior tactics, communication and use of close air support with armor that allowed the Germans to succeed in the early days. Novel developments still studied and employed by the US to this day. Strategic bombing ended Germany's industrial stregnth. The war was over when they lost the Battle of Britain and we had a base for bombers and an invasion.
Once again, you do not know what you are talking about. Germany was whoefully unprepared to fight a prolonged conflict because they planned to destroy every nation they went against in just a matter of weeks. This worked extremely well unitl the invasion of the USSR. Then, with the death of Fritz Todt in Feb. 1942, Speer soon took over war armaments, and more than tripled overall German output, and even built much better weapons, despite the constant air attacks.
And all the concentration on production meant spare parts were all but non-existent. It was easier to get a whole new 109 than to get, say, a tailwheel assembly. When a new plane did arrive maybe they could put a pilot in it, maybe not, but more often than not it didn't have gas anyway - LOL.
@rpurdey The Germans had switched over to synthetic gas production in the final days of the war. The problem was that they had to man their aircraft with teenage pilots and the allies were fielding superior machines with seasoned pilots in large numbers. The Me-262, Go229, He-162, and Me-163 were too little too late.
@Treetopflyer172 Actually, they began experimenting with synthetic fuel in the 20s and had reasonable production under way in the mid 30s. The percentage of synthetic to organic went from 22% in '38 to 50% in '43. The bombing raids of May and June 1944 cut production of aviation fuel by 90%, according to Speer, and with continuing raids it never recovered. For Operation Bodenplatte the Luftwaffe had to curtail operations to build up the fuel needed. Jet fuel was low grade but engines few.
Correct. In Heinz Gudarian's auto biography he points out that the Pnzrkpfw 1s and 2s were merely for training and that the Mk III and IV were meant to be the main battle tanks. Had Nazi Germany not been allowed to occupy Czechoslovakia, there would have been 5 less gun armed tank divisions. Instead the old Triple Entente powers allowed Nazi Germany to occupy the only country that possessed modern tanks; so that Europe could have "peace in our time".
@jhoag56 5 tank divisions? At what time? The Czech Skoda tanks were used to form 3 panzer divisions in the west in 1940. The 5th was 35ts, the 6th and 7th were 38ts.
@SWALE1984 in 1942 allied bombing had not yet reached its height. If you read my previous post carefully, communications, close air support and armor were the principal elements of Blitzkrieg (Lightning War). Yes, they aimed to defeat their enemies quickly but the battle against the USSR could have turned out differently without the Russian winter. You can't take a piss without it freezing in your dick, let alone start an engine.
Had the Germans planned on a long and drawn out war, and organized their industial strength the way in which Speer did way back in 1936, instead of 1943, they would have easily won the war. Remember, they came very close to defeating the USSR in 1941. And that was with only 3300 tanks, all of them inferior to the T34/76, and just 7000 artillery pieces and mortars. In 1944, Speer's genius managed to build a stunning 25,000 tanks and tank destroyers. What if they would have had that many in 1941?
@SWALE1984 Agreed. I would add one more point. The Germans needed to focus more on the production of long range strategic bombers. This didn't become a priority until far too late in the war. By that time they had to pour all their energy into fighter production for defense. I will say that the fact that they never had an agressive strategic bomber program flies in the face of accusations that Germany wanted to invade the United States from the beginning
The Germans had plenty of industrial capacity. What they did not have enough of was manpower. Patton's 3rd Army over ran hundreds of underground factories in 1945, and when they did, they discovered hundreds of brand new vehicles, tanks, trucks, armored cars, artillery pieces of every type, etc. And they were completely finished products just sitting on assembly lines. The Germans just did not have the men to operate these weapons. So, they were never shipped to the front. Hence, no manpower.
@SWALE1984 - Germany couldn't ever hope to match the industrial capacity of America, not in their wildest dreams. America fought a two front war against Germany and Japan at the same time, whilst also supplying England, Russia and other Allied nations as well. Who did Germany supply other than themselves? No one. Germany was short of raw materials, fuel, supplies, etc., almost throughout the entire war. Even at the beginning, one of their modes of troop transport was HORSES and BICYCLES.
Another historical fact that you have, once again, completely missed, is that by early May 1944, Speer's factories were turning out and delivering more than 2200 ME 109 fighter planes and FW 190's to the Luftwaffe. However, the Germans did not have an extensive pilot training program to successfully operate these machines. So, once again, the problem for the German in WW2 was not lack of industrial capacity, it was an utter lack of trained men to man the thousands of machines Speer was making.
@SWALE1984 Well put. I'd love to see a movie about the heroism of the teenage pilots facing down swarms of Allied bombers. Yes, I'm glad that Germany lost, but you have to recognize the courage of young men trying to defend their families.
Amazing-the transmission didn't fail.
Tempestzzzz 4 months ago
When a restorer of Comets or Shermans sees this video, he only can run to the nearest pub and get drunk for dispair.
To pakr72 - About the great successes of the refurbished Shermans in Korea, Syria, Jordan or Egypt: against such botched crews, even the ridiculous L3's of Mussolini would have been enough ...
Machinery is worth as much as those who use it: Panzerwaffe=body&soul
Ignorantissimus 6 months ago
I know of only one working Panther in the USA. Its at the Littlefield collection outside San Francisco. Anybody know of any others in USA?
thegoosebrain 7 months ago
looks like hes having more trouble getting about in france than in 1940 ,thats for sure ,
hillarybriss1 8 months ago
If any tank in this war, I chose the Panther.
jimmyxx3 8 months ago
@jimmyxx3 it kinda is the first mbt ever produced, great firepower, very good protection, good mobility, well trained crews, only the fact that it was overengineered hurt it, if it was a little closer to acopy of the t34 then maybe the germans could build more, but then it may not be as superior as it was
packr72 7 months ago
One of the best tanks made; only real competitor would have been the Russian T34 which the Germas copied from ( especially the " sloped armour " for the turret ). If Germany had been able to fully mass produce these in the same numbers as the T34 the war wouldn't have ended in 1945. Nice clip; thanks for uploading.
Splitskirts 10 months ago
I like the way this video was shot... Just imagine for a second that this is 1944 and that is you looking straight at the panther like in this video.. Its pretty scary
1ownjoo2 1 year ago
You don't see that every day do you? A fully restored Panzer mk V Panther coming towards you. Fabulous looking vehicle. I wonder if it would be stretching it a bit to call it a work of art?
MrAngleman63 1 year ago
undoubtedly the best ww2 tank .period. :)
Flamethrower334 1 year ago
@Flamethrower334 I agree, together with sloping armour of T-34 42 76 mm till 85 mm, are the best tank ever invented in WWII, good choice Flammy!!!! the balance of firepower, protection and mobility, fuck the shermans.............only win by numbers....but shit in quality
tomicalover 1 year ago
@tomicalover yeah the gun was actually more powerful than tiger's 88 mm...too bad for the nazis that they diverted resources into expensive, crappy tiger 1's and 2's which couldnt even cross bridges due their weight
Flamethrower334 1 year ago
@Flamethrower334 Yes, they are too heavy, even with their own power from the maybach, still too heavy for their engine and transmission. We could imagine the resources and trucks(heavy famo and sdkfz-8 & 9s)just for towing those giants. So impractical. If they made more of the panthers and more Me-262s jets, and better radars maybe the war will be end far more later, maybe till 1946/1947 :D. Ohya i have a very nice story that support the clumsiness of allies move. i'll sent to your youtube inbox
tomicalover 1 year ago
@Flamethrower334 the tiger had better armor than the t34, and the 8.8cm kwk 43 on the king tiger was better than the panthers gun the 7.5cm kwk 42, the panther was an idustrial nightmare to produce too you know, plu sthey were vulnerable from the sides
packr72 7 months ago
@tomicalover the shermans were better in quality than the t34, russian guard units perfered the sherman over the t34, the easy 8 shermans demolished the t34/85 in korea, the sherman had more frontal armor than the t34 and its armor was sloped to, more armor was added later, plus better gun sights, and better tactics for the americans
packr72 7 months ago
@packr72 LOL...ARE YOU A CHILD OR WHAT? Tell this story to the German tankers! The Germans laughed at the Sherman. Called it the ronsen.. since if burnt so easily. The Germans copied the T34 in making the Panther becasue it was so superior to the German tanks at the time on the Eastern front. The only problem with the T34 is that most often the people using them were poor. They lacked NO radios and once you destroyed one tank, the rest were easily confused and dealt with.
Sherman=JOKE
thegoosebrain 7 months ago
@packr72 HAHAHA
thegoosebrain 7 months ago
@thegoosebrain t34s only won in quantity the 76 mm gun was pathetic after 1942
packr72 7 months ago
@packr72 Oh, and the Sherman didn't win in quantity since they built nearly 70,000 of them????? Face it , dude. Any respectable person who knows ww2 history will tell you the Sherman was a coffin and one of the worst medium tanks of the war....as the men whom had to use them! The T34 was better than the Sherman. And continuing this argument is beneath me.
thegoosebrain 7 months ago
@packr72 ...and I forgot to mention how you claim the t34 won only in quantity while ignoring the mass of Shermans built, and you say the t34's gun was bad, but the Shermans gun was also either a 75mm or 76mm!!! So why is the Sherman better? Everything you claim is bad about the t34, you claim is a plus for the Sherman! Your a child!
thegoosebrain 7 months ago
@thegoosebrain over 80000 t34 built around 45000 shermans built. yes the 75mm gun of the sherman could penetrate the side armor of a panther at greater ranges than the 76mm gun of the t34 could, plus the easy 8 shermans proved they were superior to the t34/85 in korea, and israeli shermans destroyed with ease, t34, and t55s
packr72 7 months ago
@packr72 ohya? why the data said by the whole armor history books, all books about korean war between 1951-53, american tank crew testimony, south korean infantry, and the wikis says : this tank are incredible, still after WWII ended give a knock out punch to those who oppose them, excellent mobility and firepower and very easy to learn to use, the most lightest, genius and excellent diesel v12 ever mounted on a tracked vehicle in the entire WW22 hemisphere, and give a shock to german generals!
tomicalover 5 months ago
@packr72 one more thing, beside be the most advance tank in the early 1940's-1941's in its design, why? because christie innovation ( AN American ? strange, fellow countymen reject such a genius idea of tank suspension for fast travelling in muds and obstacle) being much much much better that the sherman shitty suspension, forget the HVSS on easy 8 being the same misery, for independent suspension used in T-34 were rejected by american comrade? stupid thing to reject christie, very-very stupid
tomicalover 5 months ago
@tomicalover please the t34 was cannon foder, 45,000 were destroyed, compared to about 700 shermans completely destroyed and another 1400 badly damaged
packr72 5 months ago
@packr72 Oh? forgetting the success of P51 and P-47 as the jabos, b-25 mitchell, b-26 marauder, b24 liberator, the tempest, the typhoon, and the most importantly the 8th AF B-17s, they're most record braker of destroying the german tanks, beside the panzerjager bazookas and other anti tank weapons like the m36 jackson and M10s 90 mm gun,not the shermans! you're wrong and cocky, besides t-34 are far more advance than any other tank in 1940-41, and remains lethal into korean war in 1953, jet ages!
tomicalover 5 months ago
@packr72 remember wrong american motto in WWII? tank should be ONLY engaged as an infantry support, not tank versus tank battle, you yourself american have that perspectives all along, thats why pershing came too late and don't have any effect on the battlefield, and miserably the muzzle velocity pershing giant 90 mm gun still being OVERRUN by the smaller but much more excellent 75 mm of panther tank, don't you feel ashame for your comment?? you want the data? i have it! israelis use it!!!! bwee
tomicalover 5 months ago
@tomicalover i am not saying that the sherman or pershing were better than the panther, the pershings 90mm gun was not as effective as the panthers gun, but it was better than the tiger1s gun and definetly better than the t34/85s gun, yes the french reversed engineered the panthers gun and the israelis put the gun on a sherman, winning
packr72 5 months ago
I can see a Hetzer in 0:10!
TheXenomorph1 1 year ago
shit camo especially on the hetzer on the background
GuidoMetallo 1 year ago
@GuidoMetallo
i agree
Landoforpresident 1 year ago
Wahrscheinlich einer der Panther von denen Frankreich nach dem Krieg ein Panzerregiment im dienst hatte, alles von U.S. erbeutete frühe BauloseA oder D
Fehnriss 1 year ago
Awesome beast! I hope to see it one day in the Saumur Museum !
jerrymail 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I wonder if the French in WWII would have wanted to be "liberated" if they could see what their country is like today- millions of non-white muslims running around their country, and their capital of Paris looks like an African bazaar.
solinvictus39 1 year ago 5
@solinvictus39 xD if it's real what u say i fimd it some kind of funny...u know i am german and i am glad to life in the "new" germany :D...
Neckomack 1 year ago
@solinvictus39 and the fascists(there were french fascists too) have been replaced by bigoted, obnoxious asswipes like yourself
icantfindanamex86 1 year ago
'
yes i wish american can make it bigger, powerful, stronger tank MAUS tank than M1A1 tank / panther tank
bestamerica 1 year ago
A jagdpanther in the background! :)
histoirian 1 year ago
@histoirian sorry but thats a hetzer tankdestroyer:)
tropicthunder332 1 year ago
@tropicthunder332 My bad... lol Thanks for the info!
histoirian 1 year ago
Panther and King Tiger were the best-looking tanks of the war.
r8wing 1 year ago
awsome vid !
catnap4444 1 year ago
wow,,,thats big,,,bigger than most modern tanks I'd wager,,,,no wonder people were scared of it
GamingLeeLee 1 year ago
You can see sloping of armor on glacis and turret was excellent.
lebarosky 1 year ago
Another thing have you ever been to Senshiem the Panther G is almost as big as the King Tiger the main body of the tank are almost Identical and the Turret of the king tiger is way larger but the Panther G is a big tank and a very good one.
Krylogenic 1 year ago
The Panther AUS G was one of the best tanks of the war and it was super off road in fact until 1955 the French used all the old Panthers as their main battle tanks! So the M18 also suffered terrible casualties at the hands of the infantry and antitank batteries. not to mention tanks and tank hunters. They also outnumbered the Germans armor with Shermans and M24s also
Krylogenic 1 year ago
*wank wank*
Redfingers 2 years ago
I've seen a documentary about the "Most underestimated Fighter of WWII", the Hurricane.
A Veteran: Most people think, Spitfires won the BoB, with a little help from the Hurricanes, in fact it was exactly the other way round.
MegaLiopleurodon 2 years ago 6
@MegaLiopleurodon - By the time WWII broke out, the Hurricane was an obsolete plane. It was underpowered, slow, had a very poor rate of climb and used wood and cloth WWI technology from the cockpit aft. The R.A.F. used this plane only because it's what they had. It's replacement, the Spitfire was a vastly superior plane. In the Battle of Britain, the Spitfire's took on the Luftwaffe Me/Bf-109 bomber fighter escorts so the Hurricanes could take out the slow, lumbering bombers, which they did.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 once again the Hurricane destroyed 77% of German fighters during the Battle of Britain. It's wood and canvas design allowed it to absorb far more damage than the thin aluminium skin of the Spitfire. Its could still out outperform the Bf-109E in level combat and had a considerably superior roll and dive rate. The only "vastly superior" quality of the Spit was it was marginally faster than the Hurricane, but at the altitudes that most of the combat was occuring, the Hurricane dominated.
jhoag56 2 years ago
@jhoag56 - The Spitfire was much faster than the cumbersome and slow Hurricane, as well as having a much greater climb rate, better protection for the pilot, a much higher ceiling, superior maneuverability and all around outclassed the WWII wood and cloth technology of the obsolete Hurricane.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 - WWI wood and cloth technology of the obsolete Hurricane, that is.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 Also the "obsolete" Hurricane remained in production until 1944 and it was its wood and canvas design that allowed it to be durable enough to meet the Luftwaffe with little maintenance. As for the protection, the aircraft both had armoured canopy glass, and an armoured belt around the cockpit itself.
jhoag56 2 years ago
@Echeque5 Hurricane Ia: Service date Dec 1939; Top Speed 340 m/h; Ceiling: 41,000 ft; climb: 5,857 ft/min. Spitfire Ia: Service Date Nov 1939 Top Speed 367 m/h; Ceiling 38,000 ft; Climb: 3025 feet/min. The Spit was marginally faster, but had a slower rate of climb and a lower service ceiling. This was because the designers at Hawker used the Merlin XX and the Spit still used he old Merlin III.
jhoag56 2 years ago
@MegaLiopleurodon yes there were more hurricanes at the battle of britain, and the hurricane claimed more kills during the battle, then went on to be an excellent fighter bomber in north africa, out performing superior german and italian fighters due to its rugged ness, even served with the red airforce as did the spitfire
packr72 7 months ago
i have not commented on here in forever but i am no longer interested in european propaganda on this either.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
@JBBlitz - Well then, that's probably why it would be helpful for you to comment? :)
Echeque5 2 years ago
so people stop replying from years back, its irrelevant to do so
JBBlitz 2 years ago
@JBBlitz - Sharing knowledge is never irrelevant. The comments in question weren't from years back either, but were very recent.
Echeque5 2 years ago
few months at least, who would even remember what they were arguing or posted than.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
@JBBlitz - History, learn from it or be bound to repeat it. I would hope anyone would have a better memory than just a few months.
Echeque5 2 years ago
i don't recall USA doing horrible things, i think that is more relevant to Europe.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
DeBalaguer - Here is a documented historical fact for you about the Tiger tank you might not know about; from the book, "Tigers in Combat", by Wolfgang Schneider", page 217, in regards to the Tiger tanks mechanical, "reliability", "they were usually lost as a result of mechanical failure". This tank was plagued with mechanical reliability issues.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 Here's a fact about Echeque5 you guys might not know about. His penis was lost as a result of a mechanical accident as well. We're talking about the Panzer here. Your quote ain't relevant to the discussion. We know the Tiger broke down.
Treetopflyer172 1 year ago
@Treetopflyer172 <----Booted to the SPAM LIST. Hopefully YouTube Administration will also terminate their account.
Echeque5 1 year ago
Poor Panther now it probably smells like onions!
BigAndTall666 2 years ago
when I say we rebuild the Panther that is we the tank lovingYou Tube guys.
It was featured on You tube that a tank was retreived from a river and shipped to whereever and rebuilt.
the engine started first time as featured You tube
fuckthissignoncrap 2 years ago
Here is my second vehicle.
Fuck the BMW this is a V16 pot Maybach.
we found one of these guys in s river in Poland it had been there for 60years.
rebuilt the engine and it fired up first start..
Again no parking problems or pemits needed, or clamps. if the local council started gettin to libal and knitting there yougurts about me. I'd just park it up the town halls main entrance and stop
as discribed in Talksport Mick Dickens)them getting in and out. woops i broke down.
fuckthissignoncrap 2 years ago
best tank of the war
aSuperbadassninja 2 years ago 6
Hetzer in the back!
volpetrolski 2 years ago
@volpetrolski - So what?
Echeque5 2 years ago
actually the Panther's armour was angled - not 'sloped'
RifledBarrel 2 years ago
@RifledBarrel - What's the difference? The effect is the same.
Echeque5 2 years ago
German girls are just not that into you. Don't be sad. Just smile and remember what might have been.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
all i have to say besides i dislike the french in this, is HOW FUCKING MUCH FOR ONE!!!
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
HEY!! French is kewl
askjiir 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - Firstly, please don't be racist. Secondly the price tag for a running Panther tank would be millions of dollars.
Echeque5 2 years ago
mmm will always hate the french always will and that should be a faimilar to french german equipment in there land and it should stay there french suck onions
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - The racism and hatred you espouse is what causes wars, death and killing. Stop the hate.
Echeque5 2 years ago
German girls are the best; even though they won't have anything to do with you.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
well i know i hate you and your flawed ideals
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - You don't know me. If you hate someone you don't even know, might be an idea to seek help from a psychiatrist. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! :)
Echeque5 2 years ago
Is her name Angela or maybe Nadine? You know that you were in love and still are with a German girl who dumped you and that is why you have such a negative attitude toward so many things German.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
first of all i love germans i hate the french
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - Shouldn't hate anyone. Hate is a very self-consuming and destroying affliction.
Echeque5 2 years ago
haha self consuming i disagree if anything it is self preservation for anyone and everyone everybody hates someone and greatly ejoys it its a part of life get over it mr philosofical
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - Hate is very wrong. There's no excuse for it or rationalization for it. It is what is causing fighting, suffering, killing, death, wars, waste of human life and resources, all over the world. Hate is bad any way we cut it. It's something to be avoided, not encouraged. Stop the hate.
Echeque5 2 years ago
take a class on the human mind you will hey rarunderstand why hate is a very crucial and needed aspect. Also fighting is a needed aspect wiether physical or mental it is needed. the thing with ideals that people have they rarely ever work and they have false hope just like the one your trying to show
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
@p51mustangjoe - I don't need to take any classes on the human mind to know the horrors of hate and how all its negative consequences, thank you. Even a cursory evaluation of world history is clear testimony to the ravages of hatred. Death, murder, killing, fighting, war, suffering, destruction, etc. Hatred destroys and is by no means a desirable affliction. Merry Christmas and Happen New Year! :)
Echeque5 2 years ago
haha world history is lead by greed yes youll say holocaust but that was just a x factor
p51mustangjoe 2 years ago
nvm it seems to that first one it was about 1 to 5.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
During the Great Patriotic War, the Red Army conscripted 29,574,900 men in addition to the 4,826,907 in service at the beginning of the war.
Paciat 2 years ago
yeah and they conscripted their whole population eh no.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
@Paciat - "The Great Patriotic War"? Do you mean World War II? I would have to disagree that any way is, "great", and with the Russians killing so many of their soldiers for being cowards just because a Russian attack was repulsed and returning/surviving Russian soldiers were then shot for, "betrayal to the motherland", is hardly, "patriotic". The Russians didn't fight because of any great love for communism, but because they had to or be shot by the Russian communist government.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Paciat - See the movie, "Enemy at the Gates", which shows Russian soldiers being shot and killed by their commanding officers, for merely the crime of returning to their own lines when their attack was repulsed by the Germans. An absolutely horrific, evil crime against humanity.
Echeque5 2 years ago
Im from Poland - a pupet state of USRR till 1989. Dont need a movie to know that.
Paciat 2 years ago
@Paciat - That is good. :) Unfortunately, as I am sure you have seen for yourself, there are people who try to be revisionist historians and try to change historical facts in order to fit their agenda, which is usually based on silly nationalistic pride. I think we can all agree that war is a horrible, horrible thing. Look at all the wars, the tremendous loss and waste of human life, of resources destroyed in war. Imagine if all that had been used for good instead, to feed the hungry, etc?
Echeque5 2 years ago
lets see 150m soveit pop + US pop 200m at that time + Uk 35m pop = 385m Germany had about 80m people, normally around the same percentages of population were in military so maybe 7 to 1 but if you add axis powers and allie it was japan 90m + germany 80M + Italy 40m = 210m so allie 385m vs 210m the axis ratio did not add up to even 1:2. Germany had a large military larger than USA has now a day.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
you forgot canada, french, new zealand, australia, china, india, and a lot of others..^^
entenkrieger 2 years ago
o ya they were against the Soviet Union
JBBlitz 2 years ago
maybe 5 to 1 but not 100 to 1
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
here is a fact before many of you go crazy with numbers the Soviet Red Army only had 5.2 million soldiers enlisted during world war 2.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
However, in their relentless drive westward during the latter half of 1943 onward, everytime they conquered new lands, they would immediately press conscripts into military service. Also, they would release prisoners and press them into military service as well. This ensured that the Red Army constantly had fresh new troops every mile they advanced westward. So, in the end, they actually had almost 20 million ground troops that fought in their ranks between 1941 and 1945.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
T-34/85mm round was better than the 75mm round since its a bigger round and the slightly higher velocity did not make up for the mass of the round yet again, simple physics. IS-2 1,500 ms and T-34/85 1,800 m/s
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Not true! There are numerous variables involved in the aspect of firepower. The German Panther gun was a full 71 calibers longer than most Allied tank guns. Also, the Panther's shells had a larger fuse on them than even the Tiger I's. In addition, the Panther's firing mechanism was torqued up to the absloute extreme like a rattlesnake coiled up ready to strike. All this translated into the Panther's muzzle velocity [Fireopower] being far superior to most any other tank of WW2, except the K.T.
SWALE1984 2 years ago 5
bigger round more power more penetration so of course the 122mm gun was better than the 88mm. the slightly higher velocity did not make up for the mass and size of the 122mm round. 122m fired was more powerful than a 88mm round simple fact learn physics.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
@JBBlitz The equation for the impact energy is E=mass x velocity squared. So an any increase in mass of the shell does not have as much effect as the increase in velocity. The increase in velocity is squared. Ths is why the German 75mm used on the Panther was a lethal tank killer. More than the Tiger 1's 88mm, the Soviet 85 and the US 76mm. Similarly the 88mm on the Tiger 2 was a more effective tank killer than the Soviet 122mm. You should learn basic physics yourself before mouthing off.
scottduncan44 2 years ago 2
So very correct. The construction of the gun played far more of a part than the size of the shell. The L70 75mm had a tremendous velocity, more so than the 88 in the Tiger 1e. The British 17 pndr (76.2mm) had a higher velocity than its Soviet or American counterparts because it utilize a "squeeze tube" design that slowly tapered as the shell exited the barrel, that and unlike the Soviet guns it was rifled as was the L70
jhoag56 2 years ago
@JBBlitz There are tables readily available showing the effective armor pentration of different rounds at different ranges. There are other factors also effecting penetration such as material. APDS rounds with Tungston cores such as used on the English 17 lb.This made it an effective counter to both the Panther and Tigers A weakness of the high velocity anti tank guns was their inablity to carry a strong HE charge. The Soviet 122 had a massive blast effect. The 152mm even more so.
scottduncan44 2 years ago
Germany could of won with enough ME 262's, but a HUGE problem was that they needed tungston and chromium for the jet turbine fins, because they could resist heat. But those materials were in Turkey and other un-reachable countries, so Germany had to make due with hardened steel for turbine fins. Steel turbine fins could only last about 10 to 15 hours, then the engine would have to be replaced. So again, thanks to a lack of materials, Germany had to fight with one foot in a bucket.
calimar28 2 years ago
@calimar28 - Nazi Germany couldn't have on under any circumstances, (thank God!). The Me-262 had many mechanical issues. From the book, "German Weapons of World War II", by Chris Bishop and Adam Warner, page 74, "Stunning though its performance was, the 262 suffered from its axial engines and casualties due to engine failure, fires or break up were heavy. The 30-mm cannon was also prone to jamming and the landing gear to collapse". Speed is not the only thing that wins aerial battles.
Echeque5 2 years ago
Ok. I decided to help you get over the German girl who dumped you. So, I contacted this other German girl who lives near me. I told her all about your problem. She says that she will go out with you to the movies. But, there are two stipulations. First, you have to pick her up in a BMW with a license plate that reads: PANTHER 1, meaning: the best tank of WW2, and secondly, you have to shave your back! Her address is: 66 Hitler lane, and her Phone number is: 1-646-PAN-THER!
SWALE1984 2 years ago
@SWALE1984 - When you graduate Elementary School, just let me know and maybe you will be able to have some sort of mature, adult conversation. Until then, your comments will go unread and MARKED AS SPAM. Bye.
Echeque5 2 years ago
Was her name Claudia?!
SWALE1984 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
IS-2, even T-34/85 could beat the shit out of any Panther, IS-2 could even defeat a Tiger at 1500 m range because of its superior 122 mm gun.
German technology has been very much overrated.
ComradeFlorian28 2 years ago
2805alexander 2 years ago 4
er germany didn't invent the jet or the jet engine research into your facts a bit more
corrion1 2 years ago
Heinkel He 178 (first Jet)
- 1939 Germany
ME 262 (first Jet Fighter)
- 1942 Germany
My facts are right....
2805alexander 2 years ago 2
13.5 million reds died in ww2, great battle tactics lol, compared to germany, only a few million
carrierform 2 years ago
Please consider the IS2 didnt come until very late in the war...and was finally realized out of years of desperate searching to find something to take on a Tiger...and the Tiger could also take the IS2 on!
And the T34/85 gun was not as good as Panthers 75mm, nor was the T34's armor as good as Panthers. T34/85 was a good tank, dont get me wrong, and its speed and numbers helped it win battles. But saying it could "beat the shit out of a Panther" is ridculous.
calimar28 2 years ago 2
Yeah, right, a 75 mm gun better than a 85 mm one, man, who you're trying to fool?
I definitely stand by my claim- German weaponry, although fairly modern for its time, has been very much OVERRATED. That's simply the truth.
ComradeFlorian28 2 years ago
Oh no, I guess I have to give you a lesson in ballistics...no offense meant though.
Yes, the Panthers 75mm gun was far better than the T34 85mm gun. This is because the Panthers 75mm gun was a "high velocity round"...meaning it went faster through the air and could penetrate better than the 85mm. You can tell this because the Panthers gun was very long, an L/70 gun. The longer the barrel the higher velocity the round. Hell, the Panthers 75mm could penetrate even better than the Tigers 88mm!
calimar28 2 years ago
No offense to you ComradeFlorian28, I used to think like you. :) After some time, I learned about gun velocity.
I also think the 75mm round of the Panther had more poweder behind it to make it go faster. (same with the 88mm).
calimar28 2 years ago
The IS-2's gun was good yes, but not better than the Tigers 88mm gun. Again, the 88mm L/56 gun of the Tiger was a very high velocity gun.
calimar28 2 years ago
swale, you're right with what you said. I've read, Luftwaffe-pilots were sent into battle with less than 30 hrs of practice, whereas the Americans went into battle with no less than 300 hrs. So the inexperienced young German pilots were an easy prey for them. Germany had the best planes, but was short on pilots (and fuel)
MegaLiopleurodon 2 years ago
Thanks for your nice comment. I appreciate it. You are also right about what you said as well.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
sure the german had excellent planes, but i thought the ''spitfire'' was better then the ''messerschmit'' because it could turn faster in dog fights.
im not sure tough, could be the opposite :P
Spem27 2 years ago
Advantages changed during the war. Spit was a bit nimbler than Me 109, but the Me had advantages when breaking away in a fast dive, because it had fuel-injection, whereas the Spit only had carburettors, and trying, to follow the Me too quick, caused malfunction. HP was about equal. Then they built a stronger Merlin for the Spit, but the answer was the introduction of the FW 190, which was a shock for the Brits. Advantages were always only small and soon equalised. My favourite is the
TA 152
MegaLiopleurodon 2 years ago
The La-7 was also better than the Messerschmitt 109, and so was the Yak-3, these Soviet planes were actually on a par with the much vaunted Fw 190.
As for the Me-262, it's worth reminding that, although faster, it had a rather poor manoeuvrability, Mustangs and La-7 s even managed to shoot down some.
ComradeFlorian28 2 years ago
The Me 109 was very good and the Spitfire was a good airplane! They were both equally well! But the Germans had a decisive advantage .... their pilots were very much better than those of other nations!
stradic92 2 years ago
is that why they lose to the Royal air force of Britain and all their planes were shot down at Stalingrad with over half of soviet planes still in the air.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
The Russians, British and Americans were just a lot more material. They had a lot more pilots and soldiers!
The ratio of the Allies, the Germans were at 1 to 100
stradic92 2 years ago
@stradic92 - German pilots weren't any better than pilots from other nations. People are people and our biology is all the same. The German Luftwaffe was blown out of the sky by the British Royal Air Force during the Battle for Britain and the Luftwaffe lost. The Spitfire was a later, more modern design than the Me/Bf-109 and could outmaneuver the older German designed plane.
Echeque5 2 years ago
Comment removed
stradic92 2 years ago
Then answer me the question why the best German fighter has 352 victories and the best UK has only 50! The German were more in use had more experience and no air force in the world had a chance against the German! We are simply the best in the world and will remain so forever!
stradic92 2 years ago
@stradic92 - Erich Hartmann got his 352 victories flying against old, sub-standard Russian planes. No big deal. The German Luftwaffe had their asses handed to them by the Royal Air Force in the Battle for Britain and was largely destroyed, never to be a factor again. Facts are far more relevant and important than silly nationalistic pride.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@stradic92 there are several answers for this. First the UK and US pilots had to share kills, where the Germans received a full kill even if the aircraft was brought down by seven other aircraft. Second, as much of an Erich Hartman fan as I am, they were just Soviets. Very poor pilot training and many inadequate aircraft. The only decent aircraft the Soviets had was the IL-2. Also the Germans did not always rely on gun camera footage to verify kills, word of mouth would do.
jhoag56 2 years ago
@jhoag56 - The IL-2 was a sitting duck for a Me/BF-109. The IL-2 was a ground attack plane and was specifically designed to destroy tanks. As a result, it was slow, cumbersome and not in any way a fighter plane. The rear gunners in these things were prisoners of the Soviet Union forced to be gunners, or die. The Russians always had such a, "positive", way of encouraging/motivating their fighting units. lol
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 but it was still the best they had, and compared to the Stuka it was loads better. Who designs an aircraft with landing gear that detaches so it can escape?
jhoag56 2 years ago
The German fighter pilots have received only then a shooting if they have shot down the enemy plane alone without participation of comrades! In addition, the launch had to be confirmed by a comrade to be valid!
The Soviets were not really bad drivers, many believe, the end of the war, the Soviets have lost so many good pilots that they could use only poorly trained pilots! This is because the Soviet air force was not so mature! But that was only at the end of 1944 the case!
stradic92 2 years ago
The aircraft, especially the IL-2 were really good! The ME109 is a good aircraft, but more important is the pilot!
stradic92 2 years ago
@stradic92 the German Luftwaffe's pilots were getting credits for kills off of probables and damaged aircraft. Two pilots could claim credit for the same aircraft. There have been conflicting reports regarding aircraft kills on days when no Allied aircraft were flying in the area where German pilots claimed to have shot down an enemy. The RAF pilots had to give the target aircraft's designation number to claim a kill and the USAAF would not award credit unless the pilot saw the target crash
jhoag56 2 years ago
What you give here is from you at all dignity! I survived with a lot of fighter pilots to the war have personally spoken with Erich Hartmann! There was no firing or shares when they were only involved in it alone without the participation of comrades had to shoot at the enemy firing also get ... either everything or nothing, there was no half-victories, or something of that kind! When a launch was not confirmed because no comrade was near or has not seen it, then the firing was not valid!
stradic92 2 years ago
If there was an air force in the firings have been split, then a thousand times closer to the British, Russians or the U.S.! The German then had more honor than it could imagine himself an opponent! You insult them with your statements honorable soldiers and me too! I'm more of these virtues then and am proud of this history of my country! The real shame of the war had to end like this!
stradic92 2 years ago
It was the Hurricane that won the Battle of Britain, not the Spitfire. The Hurricane accounted for more enemy aircraft destroyed than any other Allied aircraft. However, the British pilots were better because they were taught to fly as a team, to protected one another and did not have this 'fighter as the hunter' mentality that the German pilots did, which prevented them from protecting the bombers which were easy picking for the nimble Hurricanes and Spitfires. But it was training, not genetics
jhoag56 2 years ago
@jhoag56 - The Hurricanes shot down the most planes in the Battle for Britain because their assignment was to take on the slow, lumbering German bombers and shred them, which they did. It was the vastly superior Spitfire that took on the Luftwaffe fighter plane bomber escort, so the Hurricanes would be free and clear to attack the bombers.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 the Hurricane destroyed 77% of all Luftwaffe fighters during the Battle of Britain and 70% of the bombers according to Stephen Bungay. The Spitfire could only outperform the Hurricane above 25,000 ft, and then it was only marginal. During a 1938 exercise at lower altitudes the Hurricane destroyed the Spitfire, and at higher altitudes it could only inflict 1-1 losses
jhoag56 2 years ago
@Spem27 - You are correct. The Spitfire was a better plane than the older design Me/Bf-109.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@MegaLiopleurodon - Germany didn't have the best planes. The Me/Bf-109 was an older design and initially was better than other planes. However, as new allied planes came online, like the Spitfire, P-51 Mustang, P-38 Lightning, etc., they could fly circles around the Axis planes. Nazi Germany started a war they couldn't win because they couldn't ever hope to have the industrial capacity of America, not in their wildest dreams. Millions of people died, for, nothing.A horrific waste of human life.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 actually, the Bf 109 was a terrible fighter. It lacked an armored canopy and cockpit, it could not detach its extended range fuel tank, early models lacked self sealing tanks, its propeller mounted cannon was jam prone and its wing weight was so heavy that it could not even turn inside the old P-40C. It was an abysmal aircraft that was used only because of Willy Messershmitt's connections to Hitler and the Nazi party
jhoag56 2 years ago
jhoag56 - Correct, but at the onset of WWII, it was probably the best plane in the air. It was light and maneuverable. Erich Hartmann shot down P-51 Mustangs with the Me/Bf-109 and when the new FW-190 was introduced, Hartmann stuck with his Me/Bf-109.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 no, the Hurricane and Spit were still better. They at least had armored cockpits and bullet proof glass so the pilots were protected, and as an added bonus the wood and canvas design of the Hurri allowed cannon shells to pass through without detonating
jhoag56 2 years ago
@jhoag56 - In the Battle for Britain, the R.A.F. had the advanced Spitfire take on the Luftwaffe fighter planes and the Hurricanes attacked the slow, cumbersome bombers. The Hurricane was virtually obsolete.
Echeque5 2 years ago
@Echeque5 this is a myth. In reality the Spitfire engaged only a handful of the escorts while the Hurricane pilots were left to deal with the remaining escorts and the bombers as well. This is detailed in multiple after action reports, diary entries of pilots and multiple books and magazines including Aviation History, Hurricane v. Messerschmidt and Douglas Bader's autobiography: Duel for the Skies
jhoag56 2 years ago
Panther tank = unreliable piece of junk.
Echeque5 2 years ago
The Panther tank-a legendary fighting machine. Remember the movie, "Tank" with James Garner and he said, "I think I have you covered". It would have been so fitting if a guy in a Panther or Tiger would have been directly behind Garner, and said "No, old man, I think it is me who has you covered!" Wouldn't that have been just hilarious!? And then have Garner's face turn white as a ghost and say to the guy in the Panther or Tiger, " Excuse me please, I need to change my shorts!" Totally awesome!!!
SWALE1984 2 years ago
reliable enough to put the whole continent of europe under its treads. We are very fortunate to have won the war
Treetopflyer172 2 years ago
Treetop - The continent of Europe was not prepared for war at all and that is why the German army succeeded in the early days of the war. When an army expecting a fight landed on the beaches of Normandy though, it took them less than a year to make the German army retreat all the way back to Germany and surrender, defeated. Germany couldn't have won WWII. It was impossible, as they didn't have the industrial capacity to sustain and win WWII. This is a historical fact.
Echeque5 2 years ago
The French had prepared extensively for war. I would say that the Maginot line was a less than subtle preparation for war. It was superior tactics, communication and use of close air support with armor that allowed the Germans to succeed in the early days. Novel developments still studied and employed by the US to this day. Strategic bombing ended Germany's industrial stregnth. The war was over when they lost the Battle of Britain and we had a base for bombers and an invasion.
Treetopflyer172 2 years ago 2
Once again, you do not know what you are talking about. Germany was whoefully unprepared to fight a prolonged conflict because they planned to destroy every nation they went against in just a matter of weeks. This worked extremely well unitl the invasion of the USSR. Then, with the death of Fritz Todt in Feb. 1942, Speer soon took over war armaments, and more than tripled overall German output, and even built much better weapons, despite the constant air attacks.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
And all the concentration on production meant spare parts were all but non-existent. It was easier to get a whole new 109 than to get, say, a tailwheel assembly. When a new plane did arrive maybe they could put a pilot in it, maybe not, but more often than not it didn't have gas anyway - LOL.
rpurdey 2 years ago
Very true. Excellent point.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
@rpurdey The Germans had switched over to synthetic gas production in the final days of the war. The problem was that they had to man their aircraft with teenage pilots and the allies were fielding superior machines with seasoned pilots in large numbers. The Me-262, Go229, He-162, and Me-163 were too little too late.
Treetopflyer172 1 year ago
@Treetopflyer172 Actually, they began experimenting with synthetic fuel in the 20s and had reasonable production under way in the mid 30s. The percentage of synthetic to organic went from 22% in '38 to 50% in '43. The bombing raids of May and June 1944 cut production of aviation fuel by 90%, according to Speer, and with continuing raids it never recovered. For Operation Bodenplatte the Luftwaffe had to curtail operations to build up the fuel needed. Jet fuel was low grade but engines few.
rpurdey 1 year ago
Correct. In Heinz Gudarian's auto biography he points out that the Pnzrkpfw 1s and 2s were merely for training and that the Mk III and IV were meant to be the main battle tanks. Had Nazi Germany not been allowed to occupy Czechoslovakia, there would have been 5 less gun armed tank divisions. Instead the old Triple Entente powers allowed Nazi Germany to occupy the only country that possessed modern tanks; so that Europe could have "peace in our time".
jhoag56 2 years ago
@jhoag56 5 tank divisions? At what time? The Czech Skoda tanks were used to form 3 panzer divisions in the west in 1940. The 5th was 35ts, the 6th and 7th were 38ts.
astrocat75 1 year ago
@SWALE1984 in 1942 allied bombing had not yet reached its height. If you read my previous post carefully, communications, close air support and armor were the principal elements of Blitzkrieg (Lightning War). Yes, they aimed to defeat their enemies quickly but the battle against the USSR could have turned out differently without the Russian winter. You can't take a piss without it freezing in your dick, let alone start an engine.
Treetopflyer172 1 year ago
Had the Germans planned on a long and drawn out war, and organized their industial strength the way in which Speer did way back in 1936, instead of 1943, they would have easily won the war. Remember, they came very close to defeating the USSR in 1941. And that was with only 3300 tanks, all of them inferior to the T34/76, and just 7000 artillery pieces and mortars. In 1944, Speer's genius managed to build a stunning 25,000 tanks and tank destroyers. What if they would have had that many in 1941?
SWALE1984 2 years ago
@SWALE1984 Agreed. I would add one more point. The Germans needed to focus more on the production of long range strategic bombers. This didn't become a priority until far too late in the war. By that time they had to pour all their energy into fighter production for defense. I will say that the fact that they never had an agressive strategic bomber program flies in the face of accusations that Germany wanted to invade the United States from the beginning
Treetopflyer172 1 year ago
The Germans had plenty of industrial capacity. What they did not have enough of was manpower. Patton's 3rd Army over ran hundreds of underground factories in 1945, and when they did, they discovered hundreds of brand new vehicles, tanks, trucks, armored cars, artillery pieces of every type, etc. And they were completely finished products just sitting on assembly lines. The Germans just did not have the men to operate these weapons. So, they were never shipped to the front. Hence, no manpower.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
@SWALE1984 - Germany couldn't ever hope to match the industrial capacity of America, not in their wildest dreams. America fought a two front war against Germany and Japan at the same time, whilst also supplying England, Russia and other Allied nations as well. Who did Germany supply other than themselves? No one. Germany was short of raw materials, fuel, supplies, etc., almost throughout the entire war. Even at the beginning, one of their modes of troop transport was HORSES and BICYCLES.
Echeque5 2 years ago
Another historical fact that you have, once again, completely missed, is that by early May 1944, Speer's factories were turning out and delivering more than 2200 ME 109 fighter planes and FW 190's to the Luftwaffe. However, the Germans did not have an extensive pilot training program to successfully operate these machines. So, once again, the problem for the German in WW2 was not lack of industrial capacity, it was an utter lack of trained men to man the thousands of machines Speer was making.
SWALE1984 2 years ago
@SWALE1984 Well put. I'd love to see a movie about the heroism of the teenage pilots facing down swarms of Allied bombers. Yes, I'm glad that Germany lost, but you have to recognize the courage of young men trying to defend their families.
Treetopflyer172 1 year ago