germany didn't have enough of these tanks, otherwise they might have proved decisive, at Kursk they fought very well, but they only had 270 tigers for the battle.
I think the best German tank was Panzer 4. And then Panzer 5.
This tank is very strong and hard to destroy, but is almost impossible to use in long range attacks like was the campaign from Russia. And also is simply stuck in the mud. The engine is not strong enough and the speed is small. Also is impossible to repair on front line like was with Sherman. Even Germans considered Tiger a scare tank but useless in real long campaign. Also how much time they need to build one?
Is there a way to get this video with english (or even polish) subtitles? Or just a translation of what is the guy in background speaking... That would be my dream.
It couldn't match the T-34. The T had superior protection, superior mobility and a superior gun. It could destroy a T, but it had to have favourable conditions to do so, like surprise.
obwohl der Tiger eine magnifacent Zisterne war, die es bis zu viel Zeit nahm, und Mittel brauchte gerrmany eine Zisterne ähnlich das t-34 leichte, um zu machen, und preiswert in Mitteln.
the most influential tank of post war (ww2). just my opinion, but still.and a killer in field, something to afraid of... correct me if iam complete out....
"sie repräsentierte genau die kraft des dritten reiches" was für eine beknackte tonspur, schlecht gesprochen und zudem ganz offensichtlich mit dem wörterbuch übersetzt. peinlichst!
Der Panther hatte aber mit seiner 75mm Kanone eine höhere Durchschlagskraft, er konnte mehr mm auf höhere Entfernung durchdringen. Der Durchmesser des Kaliber hat nicht unbedingt eine bessere Durchschlagskraft zufolge. Zudem der Hauptlasten Esel war ist und bleibt der PzKw 3 J und 4 F2. Diese Panzer haben bereits in Frankreich überlegenen Mathilda 2 und dem Französischen Ungetüm Char B1 gegenüberstehen müssen. Und die Franzosen hatten überlegenere Panzer nur die Taktik war scheiße!
The Panther was superior to the T-35/85 in almost every way. The T-34 had trouble penetrating the Panther from the front except at very close ranges, even with it's 85 gun, whereas the Panther could penetrate the front T-34 at 1,000 yards. The only problem is towards the end of the war (Late 1944) Germany was having a hard time coming up with the precious metals used to harden the armor plating which resulted in a degrade in quality. The Tiger was a wonderful tank as well.
@ MrBobe9 You sir, should do your research better. First off there were a large number of tanks that preced the Abrams, so to say it is a decendent of the PZV from WW2 is ludacris. Second, the T34 won the war for the Russians in the east, and was the FIRST tank to use sloped armor, of which all modern tanks have. The slope deflects incoming tank rounds, rpg's etc. The numbers that Tigers supposedly killed in the war were alot of propganda to keep morale up at home.
die so hoch gelobten deutschen panzer waren leider zu kompliziert und sogar innerhald der gleichen baureihe inkompatibel weil zuviele verschiedene hersteller die dinger gebaut habenerst mit dem PKpf V. Panther kam da etwas ruhe rein
First watch your language. Second : consider 2:22 - 2: 45. What it says is basically that German tanks were superior to the British at the beginning of the war. This is far from the truth. At that time, the Germans had only light tanks (Pzkpfw i, II, III, IV) where the IV only had a very short barreled 75mm gun which was practically useless against tanks. The Brits had their Matilda tanks which were superior in armament and protection. Even the french Char B1 was better
@DavidVanPatten stimmt nicht ganz die 3er und 4er panzer hatten jeweils 2 aufgaben zu übernehmen einaml als haubitze und einmal als panzer kampr wagen deswgen gab es ja auch den panzer IV J aufwärts im alfabet der mit seiner kanone jeden Matilda schlagen konnte
@DavidVanPatten You should do more research before saying wrong comments,and looking ill informed .
The TIGER was the most feared tank in WW2, the russian T34 was mass produced in incredible numbers,the PANTHER and TIGER although superior were not produced in enough numbers.Today the american main tank is based not on the T34 but on the german PANTHER.
Ten german TIGER tank acers killed more than 1000 ALLIED TANKS(MOSTLY RUSSIANS) that speaks by itself how FEARED was this tank.
Please read my comments carefully because 1) I never wrote that the Tiger was not the most feared tank (which it of course was). 2) Of course the Panther and the Tiger were not produced in enough numbers to hold the pace with the Allies. Whether the Abrams is based on the Panther or not is beyond my knowledge. Besides this your comment is plainly stupid because it does not refer to what I've written (read carefully) so do not call my uninformed.
Great video I only wish I spoke german but got the idea early in the war stewarts and shermans could hold there own with the panzers... then the Germans showed us shock and awe.... they new how to break out the BIG GUNS in a big way
Stuarts were decent tanks and even though outclassed early they served throughout the war with latter variants. Shermans always held their own, they and the T-34 were arguably the best tanks of WWII(easily built, easily maintained, reliable and effective). The Germans would have been better served if they hadn't wasted resources on Tigers/Tiger II's and stuck with IV's and Panthers.
Manpower has nothing to do with it. Logistics was the big problem, these massive behemoths required huge resources to maintain, repair and move. It took 3 FAMO's to tow a Tiger, 1 for a Panther. The VI's and VII's, due to their weight and complexity broke down all the time and wear almost impossible to repair in the field. Also roads had to be scouted in advance to make sure they'd be able to travel on them. They couldn't cross most bridges, etc. etc.
Manpower is a logistical resource too. Given the attritional conditions, they did the logical thing to focus on quality over quantity. The IV was a good tank, but except for it gun and optics, was too thinly armoured.
My point is they could have made more, cheaper, lighter tanks. But they would not have been able to use them effectively because of the manpower shortage. Consider the emergency fighter program - thousands produced but no-one left to fly them!
Hmm, my reply dissappeared. It's not how many crews they had that is the problem. It was far far more difficult to replace, retrieve or maintain any of these massive vehicles. The added fact they were prone to mechanical failure made them that much more difficult to keep in action. What made the Sherman and to a lesser extent the T-34 such great weapon systems was that they were reliable, easily maintained and easy to produce as well as being effective weapons.
". What made the Sherman and to a lesser extent the T-34 such great weapon systems was that they were reliable, easily maintained and easy to produce as well as being effective weapons."
Obviously. And yet Germany could not hope to compete with the war output of the USSR and USA. The qualitive option was the only one left open to them.
That's my point, the Tigers were not quality at all. IIRC, most Tiger losses were due to mechanical failure. I realize the German theory was to build weapon systems that could deal with a numerically superior enemy but they should have put their reasources into perfecting less grandois vehicles. The Panther itself was plauged with mechanical issues but it would have been easier to improve upon a design that was already more than capable but easier to support logistically.
the sherman's 75mm gun is so short, so it doesnt have a very good muzzle velocity
HahaGot 3 days ago
what can a short 75mm do to a Tiger's armour? I'm just wondering... Probably ricochet off its armour I guess
HahaGot 3 days ago
germany didn't have enough of these tanks, otherwise they might have proved decisive, at Kursk they fought very well, but they only had 270 tigers for the battle.
bombarderoazul 2 months ago
TIIIGEEERRRRRRRRRR!!!!!
LOS RUFT SOFORT DIE NEUE ACHE: DEUTSCHLAND-TÜRKEI-JAPAN AUS
SOOOFOORTTTTT
RACHEE
RAAACHHEEEEEE
Rachenwut 2 months ago
flak 88mm.
dariuszryngwelski 3 months ago
@52111centumcz the only reason the gun was good was because the weight of the 88mm shell, the T-34 weldings couldn't hold it.
y0ur12 6 months ago
@y0ur12
bs... Very high velocity too...aa-gun = FlaK
mynthon11 2 months ago
I think the best German tank was Panzer 4. And then Panzer 5.
This tank is very strong and hard to destroy, but is almost impossible to use in long range attacks like was the campaign from Russia. And also is simply stuck in the mud. The engine is not strong enough and the speed is small. Also is impossible to repair on front line like was with Sherman. Even Germans considered Tiger a scare tank but useless in real long campaign. Also how much time they need to build one?
relu777 7 months ago
Leute, ufach geniall! Cool! ( Chabie -Ungarn)
Cirbonukleon 7 months ago
thank god i understand german... thank you highschool :P
5seba56 8 months ago
Is there a way to get this video with english (or even polish) subtitles? Or just a translation of what is the guy in background speaking... That would be my dream.
DarkMisiaqable 9 months ago
the best combat tank in ww2 was the kettenkrad have you seen how awesome they are
freethinker971 9 months ago
Subtitles pl0x :D else I copy vid and do it myself :D
carwik149 10 months ago
Sherman was a standard tank. Nothing inferior about it. Couldn't fight the world's best, overpowered, but could match anything else. Even T-34.
Tyco200 10 months ago
@Tyco200
It couldn't match the T-34. The T had superior protection, superior mobility and a superior gun. It could destroy a T, but it had to have favourable conditions to do so, like surprise.
52111centrumcz 7 months ago
obwohl der Tiger eine magnifacent Zisterne war, die es bis zu viel Zeit nahm, und Mittel brauchte gerrmany eine Zisterne ähnlich das t-34 leichte, um zu machen, und preiswert in Mitteln.
Atomicomet 10 months ago
Batner danke für eine richtige Information, die zum Thema passt...
Mundstuhl13 11 months ago
talk to any soldier who faced this monster..they had a healthy respect of it
1942PANTHERV 1 year ago
the most influential tank of post war (ww2). just my opinion, but still.and a killer in field, something to afraid of... correct me if iam complete out....
karinen657 1 year ago
"sie repräsentierte genau die kraft des dritten reiches" was für eine beknackte tonspur, schlecht gesprochen und zudem ganz offensichtlich mit dem wörterbuch übersetzt. peinlichst!
shipvillager 1 year ago
Der Panther hatte aber mit seiner 75mm Kanone eine höhere Durchschlagskraft, er konnte mehr mm auf höhere Entfernung durchdringen. Der Durchmesser des Kaliber hat nicht unbedingt eine bessere Durchschlagskraft zufolge. Zudem der Hauptlasten Esel war ist und bleibt der PzKw 3 J und 4 F2. Diese Panzer haben bereits in Frankreich überlegenen Mathilda 2 und dem Französischen Ungetüm Char B1 gegenüberstehen müssen. Und die Franzosen hatten überlegenere Panzer nur die Taktik war scheiße!
Batner112 1 year ago
2 pazer shrek OWNZ that shit
24Grox 1 year ago
The Panther was superior to the T-35/85 in almost every way. The T-34 had trouble penetrating the Panther from the front except at very close ranges, even with it's 85 gun, whereas the Panther could penetrate the front T-34 at 1,000 yards. The only problem is towards the end of the war (Late 1944) Germany was having a hard time coming up with the precious metals used to harden the armor plating which resulted in a degrade in quality. The Tiger was a wonderful tank as well.
Noxide99 1 year ago
@ MrBobe9 You sir, should do your research better. First off there were a large number of tanks that preced the Abrams, so to say it is a decendent of the PZV from WW2 is ludacris. Second, the T34 won the war for the Russians in the east, and was the FIRST tank to use sloped armor, of which all modern tanks have. The slope deflects incoming tank rounds, rpg's etc. The numbers that Tigers supposedly killed in the war were alot of propganda to keep morale up at home.
Scuurge 1 year ago
Spitzenmäßige Dokumentation.
peterhueper 1 year ago
die so hoch gelobten deutschen panzer waren leider zu kompliziert und sogar innerhald der gleichen baureihe inkompatibel weil zuviele verschiedene hersteller die dinger gebaut habenerst mit dem PKpf V. Panther kam da etwas ruhe rein
axel99i 1 year ago
Sorry but this docu is wrong on so many points..
DavidVanPatten 1 year ago
@DavidVanPatten prove it asshole
JAGDTIGERFUCK 1 year ago
@JAGDTIGERFUCK
First watch your language. Second : consider 2:22 - 2: 45. What it says is basically that German tanks were superior to the British at the beginning of the war. This is far from the truth. At that time, the Germans had only light tanks (Pzkpfw i, II, III, IV) where the IV only had a very short barreled 75mm gun which was practically useless against tanks. The Brits had their Matilda tanks which were superior in armament and protection. Even the french Char B1 was better
DavidVanPatten 1 year ago
@DavidVanPatten most of that is fucking true
JAGDTIGERFUCK 1 year ago
@DavidVanPatten stimmt nicht ganz die 3er und 4er panzer hatten jeweils 2 aufgaben zu übernehmen einaml als haubitze und einmal als panzer kampr wagen deswgen gab es ja auch den panzer IV J aufwärts im alfabet der mit seiner kanone jeden Matilda schlagen konnte
axel99i 1 year ago
@axel99i
Aber der Panzer IV J kam doch erst 1944! Die früheste Version mit der
längern L 43 Kanone Panzer (IV F2) kam erst Mitte 1942 raus. Da Waren
schon fast 3 Jahre Krieg vorbei und da war der Tiger bereits vorhanden.
DavidVanPatten 1 year ago
@DavidVanPatten You should do more research before saying wrong comments,and looking ill informed .
The TIGER was the most feared tank in WW2, the russian T34 was mass produced in incredible numbers,the PANTHER and TIGER although superior were not produced in enough numbers.Today the american main tank is based not on the T34 but on the german PANTHER.
Ten german TIGER tank acers killed more than 1000 ALLIED TANKS(MOSTLY RUSSIANS) that speaks by itself how FEARED was this tank.
MrBobe9 1 year ago 2
@MrBobe9
Please read my comments carefully because 1) I never wrote that the Tiger was not the most feared tank (which it of course was). 2) Of course the Panther and the Tiger were not produced in enough numbers to hold the pace with the Allies. Whether the Abrams is based on the Panther or not is beyond my knowledge. Besides this your comment is plainly stupid because it does not refer to what I've written (read carefully) so do not call my uninformed.
DavidVanPatten 1 year ago
der Tiger I = schöne Deutsche Technik
RifledBarrel 2 years ago
One the best best and most horrifying tanks of the war, the shermans don't stand a chance!!
HKUK94 2 years ago 14
@HKUK94 but the easy eight does
bulletinyurass 1 year ago
you have right,i think sherman was lost of money,sherman tanks are biggest shit in the world war
Lochnes2007 5 months ago
Glad they never used the Ferdinand tiger, it looks like shit,Henschel far better looking
mapexblack 2 years ago
A few protos made it to the ostfront but the complex electric drive was it's undoing.
Danny77uk 2 years ago
4.02 crusader to the rescue LOL
1bearcatf8f 2 years ago
10000 Tigers + Erwin Rommel/Micheal Wittmann = the demise of the Russian inbreds.....(sighs).....only in fantasy! Too bad...Cheers!
hockeydudeluv 2 years ago
Great video I only wish I spoke german but got the idea early in the war stewarts and shermans could hold there own with the panzers... then the Germans showed us shock and awe.... they new how to break out the BIG GUNS in a big way
saberdryver 2 years ago
Stuarts were decent tanks and even though outclassed early they served throughout the war with latter variants. Shermans always held their own, they and the T-34 were arguably the best tanks of WWII(easily built, easily maintained, reliable and effective). The Germans would have been better served if they hadn't wasted resources on Tigers/Tiger II's and stuck with IV's and Panthers.
Grendelrex 2 years ago
" The Germans would have been better served if they hadn't wasted resources on Tigers/Tiger II's and stuck with IV's and Panthers."
Except that they didn't have the manpower to equip more, lighter tanks.
Danny77uk 2 years ago
Manpower has nothing to do with it. Logistics was the big problem, these massive behemoths required huge resources to maintain, repair and move. It took 3 FAMO's to tow a Tiger, 1 for a Panther. The VI's and VII's, due to their weight and complexity broke down all the time and wear almost impossible to repair in the field. Also roads had to be scouted in advance to make sure they'd be able to travel on them. They couldn't cross most bridges, etc. etc.
Grendelrex 2 years ago
Manpower is a logistical resource too. Given the attritional conditions, they did the logical thing to focus on quality over quantity. The IV was a good tank, but except for it gun and optics, was too thinly armoured.
My point is they could have made more, cheaper, lighter tanks. But they would not have been able to use them effectively because of the manpower shortage. Consider the emergency fighter program - thousands produced but no-one left to fly them!
Danny77uk 2 years ago
Hmm, my reply dissappeared. It's not how many crews they had that is the problem. It was far far more difficult to replace, retrieve or maintain any of these massive vehicles. The added fact they were prone to mechanical failure made them that much more difficult to keep in action. What made the Sherman and to a lesser extent the T-34 such great weapon systems was that they were reliable, easily maintained and easy to produce as well as being effective weapons.
Grendelrex 2 years ago
". What made the Sherman and to a lesser extent the T-34 such great weapon systems was that they were reliable, easily maintained and easy to produce as well as being effective weapons."
Obviously. And yet Germany could not hope to compete with the war output of the USSR and USA. The qualitive option was the only one left open to them.
Danny77uk 2 years ago
That's my point, the Tigers were not quality at all. IIRC, most Tiger losses were due to mechanical failure. I realize the German theory was to build weapon systems that could deal with a numerically superior enemy but they should have put their reasources into perfecting less grandois vehicles. The Panther itself was plauged with mechanical issues but it would have been easier to improve upon a design that was already more than capable but easier to support logistically.
Grendelrex 2 years ago
1 million Reich Marks to make a Tiger!!? ....Holy Shit!
ThePanzerWarMachine 2 years ago
damn...hehehehe u can speak German!! How unfair is this? =P
hatakashi1900 2 years ago 8
i grew up with 2 languages. so this is easy for me. you speak Chinese, and i dont. so we're even =)
ThePanzerWarMachine 2 years ago
But sadly there isn't a documentary on Tiger tank in Chinese =D
hatakashi1900 2 years ago
yes their is, just look for it. i've seen it myself... mostly it is subbed with Chinese comments. but they do excist.!
ThePanzerWarMachine 2 years ago
They're wrong,the real cost was ''only'' 800.000 RM.
SEXSENTER 2 years ago
And then to realize that the People worked for 50 Dollars a Months!
that is Nuts!
ThePanzerWarMachine 2 years ago
Yeah,that's fucking sick.
SEXSENTER 2 years ago
gute doku
jamestaylor94b 2 years ago
da stimm ich dir zu:)
jamestaylor94b 2 years ago
ja deutsch
SCHEDTER 2 years ago
tiger tank has a powerful long range 88mm lethal gun
stanislaw84 2 years ago
Documentary, not documentation.
DAMN ITS IN GERMAN
Gabpopp 3 years ago