I'm so sick of uneducated, typical American Yankee kids/Brits bitching their sad, ill made statements to me without any facts. It''s very sad that these children lack the knowledge of what books tell them, rather than discovery channel's often lacking, biased and misleading bullshit.
I think the strict secrecy enforced within the German high command also hampered their effort to find Allied fuel dumps, in addition to not given enough time to scout the Allied sectors. Understandable though, since had the Germans made recon in advance, that would have tipped off the Allies as to what the Germans were up to.
@mbkl79 Agreed. There are stories of old men and even little kids taking out Russian T-34s and IS-2s using the Panzerfaust during the Battle of Berlin, not to mention how they can be homemade in barrel-loads. Finally, of course, it's the Panzerfaust that inspired modern one-shot disposable antiank weapons like the M72 LAW and the AT4.
Except for the assertion that Peiper "got off to a good start" at 3:20. That's a big mistake. Of course he didn't, he was raging at being delayed during the first 48 hours and that rage helped trigger the atrocities at Malmedy and Stavelot against US troops and Belgian civilians...
They needed a better technical advisor to weed out the various mistakes - which are annoying but not really significant in the overall story, which is still fairly accurate.
@xganger2 Haha, one Sherman w/76 VS a Panther/Tiger/Panzer IV = Germany's Death. :D! British Sherman, that had no ammo storage and went boom while ours survived and were not called "Tommy cookers."
@Avenger2680 Are you stupid? I'm stating the M4 Sherman equipped with a 76mm M1. Look it up. The 76mm variants recorded hits as far as 1,200 meters against Panthers, and easily destroyed them. Finally, AvengerWhoLacksHistoricalFacts, let's not forget the Tiger had a pathetic 100mms of non-slopped armor VS the Sherman's 51mms of slopping armor, which gave the effect of 125mms...
@Tyco200 Lol how do you figure 51mm sloped armour = 125mm unsloped? At the best possible angle sloping armour would provide an additional +50% armour at no cost to weight. Also the tanks were hardly ever "lone"... almost all of the time it took 5-6 shermans to take out one tiger, with only one sherman coming out of the engagement intact. Shermans only accounted for a few percent of the german tanks knocked out. 50% were mechanical/abandoned and almost the other half were fighter bombers
@Avenger2680 Finally, the Sherman had superior vision to the Panther, much better reliability, an engine that didn't have exhaust problems ("Gudarian's troubled child," as it became known at Kursk.) and had a much better gun that could kill both infantry and tanks with no more than 68mms at 1,000 meters (Pz IVs worst nightmare)/80mms at a good 800 meters.
@Avenger2680 Finally, let's not forget the poor visibility of the Panther meant almost certain death when encountered by a loan-Sherman that simply popped behind or off the side at close ranges. Despite the 75mm variants being out-gunned at long range, it didn't matter. At close range? The Panther was the easiest target on the battlefield.
I feel really sorry for the soldiers of both sides - most of them didn't even know their government were killing the Jews and a lot were psychologically in the same terrifying boat as everyone else.
@HoustonGD Yeah.. I know what you mean. They're still interesting, if you can weed out the correct statements from the incorrect. For someone newly interested in the war, I would recommend a different documentary. Documentaries like these are how people get misconceptions about 'OMG! Tigerz!' and 'the .50 cal could reliably take out a Panther!' Some of the mistakes are just silly, though.
More mistakes.. Claiming the attack would fall upon 4 American infantry divisions, then turning right around and showing it was 3 infantry and one armored division. Not to mention they claim at first that all 4 were part of the 5th corps, only to reveal two of them are part of the 8th corps. The 82nd Division was NOT ordered to Bastogne. Fleming calls Skorzeny "Sikorsky." It's not pronounced "Stav-a-lot." I'm speechless.
@pursuinginsanity they also make plenty of mistakes with mislabeling German units. This episode makes more mistakes than all the other Tanks episodes. But O'well.
Bastogne. I made a movie about that on my channel if you want to check it out. It's absoloutley hopeless though and features no tanks! And I don't think I got camouflage down nor historical accuracy. The only relevence to real one is in it's name. Simply because my imagination had wandered.
I'm so sick of uneducated, typical American Yankee kids/Brits bitching their sad, ill made statements to me without any facts. It''s very sad that these children lack the knowledge of what books tell them, rather than discovery channel's often lacking, biased and misleading bullshit.
Tyco200 4 days ago
@Tyco200 damn man. calm down its a tank. not wroth fighting over geez -_-
USSWISCONSIN64 4 days ago
I think the strict secrecy enforced within the German high command also hampered their effort to find Allied fuel dumps, in addition to not given enough time to scout the Allied sectors. Understandable though, since had the Germans made recon in advance, that would have tipped off the Allies as to what the Germans were up to.
Waterflux 1 week ago
4:54
How did that Soviet officer get in there?
the82spartans 2 weeks ago
The Panzerfaust was an amazing weapon: Cheap, fast to produce and easy to handle. But very effective!
mbkl79 5 months ago
@mbkl79 Agreed. There are stories of old men and even little kids taking out Russian T-34s and IS-2s using the Panzerfaust during the Battle of Berlin, not to mention how they can be homemade in barrel-loads. Finally, of course, it's the Panzerfaust that inspired modern one-shot disposable antiank weapons like the M72 LAW and the AT4.
Point50Cal 1 month ago
it was a big battle
legogermanarmy 7 months ago
Except for the assertion that Peiper "got off to a good start" at 3:20. That's a big mistake. Of course he didn't, he was raging at being delayed during the first 48 hours and that rage helped trigger the atrocities at Malmedy and Stavelot against US troops and Belgian civilians...
belisariusorb 1 year ago
They needed a better technical advisor to weed out the various mistakes - which are annoying but not really significant in the overall story, which is still fairly accurate.
belisariusorb 1 year ago
German tanks <3 haha your shermans against the german tanks :D
xganger2 1 year ago
@xganger2 Haha, one Sherman w/76 VS a Panther/Tiger/Panzer IV = Germany's Death. :D! British Sherman, that had no ammo storage and went boom while ours survived and were not called "Tommy cookers."
Tyco200 5 months ago
@Tyco200 One sherman could obviously NOT take on a panther or a tiger...
Avenger2680 6 days ago
@Avenger2680 Are you stupid? I'm stating the M4 Sherman equipped with a 76mm M1. Look it up. The 76mm variants recorded hits as far as 1,200 meters against Panthers, and easily destroyed them. Finally, AvengerWhoLacksHistoricalFacts, let's not forget the Tiger had a pathetic 100mms of non-slopped armor VS the Sherman's 51mms of slopping armor, which gave the effect of 125mms...
Tyco200 4 days ago
@Tyco200 Lol how do you figure 51mm sloped armour = 125mm unsloped? At the best possible angle sloping armour would provide an additional +50% armour at no cost to weight. Also the tanks were hardly ever "lone"... almost all of the time it took 5-6 shermans to take out one tiger, with only one sherman coming out of the engagement intact. Shermans only accounted for a few percent of the german tanks knocked out. 50% were mechanical/abandoned and almost the other half were fighter bombers
Avenger2680 4 days ago
@Avenger2680 Finally, the Sherman had superior vision to the Panther, much better reliability, an engine that didn't have exhaust problems ("Gudarian's troubled child," as it became known at Kursk.) and had a much better gun that could kill both infantry and tanks with no more than 68mms at 1,000 meters (Pz IVs worst nightmare)/80mms at a good 800 meters.
Tyco200 4 days ago
@Avenger2680 Finally, let's not forget the poor visibility of the Panther meant almost certain death when encountered by a loan-Sherman that simply popped behind or off the side at close ranges. Despite the 75mm variants being out-gunned at long range, it didn't matter. At close range? The Panther was the easiest target on the battlefield.
Tyco200 4 days ago
One retard doesn't like this!!
scottlarue33 1 year ago
Panzerfausts!
sjp092 1 year ago
I feel really sorry for the soldiers of both sides - most of them didn't even know their government were killing the Jews and a lot were psychologically in the same terrifying boat as everyone else.
ninjatoothpaste 1 year ago
it would be more interesting if they succeeded in ardennes instead of failing
Leopardipzg 1 year ago
@HoustonGD Yeah.. I know what you mean. They're still interesting, if you can weed out the correct statements from the incorrect. For someone newly interested in the war, I would recommend a different documentary. Documentaries like these are how people get misconceptions about 'OMG! Tigerz!' and 'the .50 cal could reliably take out a Panther!' Some of the mistakes are just silly, though.
pursuinginsanity 1 year ago
More mistakes.. Claiming the attack would fall upon 4 American infantry divisions, then turning right around and showing it was 3 infantry and one armored division. Not to mention they claim at first that all 4 were part of the 5th corps, only to reveal two of them are part of the 8th corps. The 82nd Division was NOT ordered to Bastogne. Fleming calls Skorzeny "Sikorsky." It's not pronounced "Stav-a-lot." I'm speechless.
pursuinginsanity 1 year ago
@pursuinginsanity they also make plenty of mistakes with mislabeling German units. This episode makes more mistakes than all the other Tanks episodes. But O'well.
HoustonGD 1 year ago
I as an asian american man, am very proud of the 442. go for broke brother.
MrRocketman19 1 year ago
Bastogne. I made a movie about that on my channel if you want to check it out. It's absoloutley hopeless though and features no tanks! And I don't think I got camouflage down nor historical accuracy. The only relevence to real one is in it's name. Simply because my imagination had wandered.
kartkidchun 1 year ago
amazing
leenygurl91 2 years ago 11
Thanks for this, i love ww2 history
TheFlossMan 2 years ago 49
The real deal...
JAGDPANTHER20 1 year ago