Les falta unas pocas Ruedas de Marcha en el tren de rodaje, ademas de los tubos de escapes como alguna cajita donde almacenar lotes de abordo, espero que con el paso de los años lo dejen operativo, seria una pasada ver a este monstruo en movimiento
France had a lot of problems prior to the war which did not help their cause. Their strategy depended too much on static defences and there were too many socialist sympathisers who were against the war sabotaging equipment needed for the war effort. Politically France was just not ready for war but if you know anything of World War One, espescially Verdun, you would know the French are definitely not "quitters".
@arlington33able No, I am not French. I did not say that they "did not quit"! If you took the time to understand what I said I was commenting on the blanket statement that "the French are quitters"!
Thats designed to counter super heavy tanks like the Maus so naturally it would have its face fucked off by the T-28 but the Maus in turn would have fucked the T-28s face off in my opinion.
@RedwihteGame Germany had a huge and disciplined army, well drilled and had no equals among the allies during WW2. Germany lost cause of a madman who refused to listen to hes generals.
It doesn't matter how big your army is if ur fighting on too many frontlines at the same time, if Hitler would have listened to hes generals it's possible that most of Europe would have been a part of germany today.
omg such a crowd of idiots! the german tanks from ww2 were the fucking best, which ever were build! already the PzKpfw IV ownes every opposing tank and the PzKpfw VI II with its 88 mm KwK 43 L/71 cannon destroyed every opposing tank with only one shot! so shut up! german soldiers + Krupp stahl = invincible. germany loses the war cause they had to fight at 5 fronts with too few soldiers. if the german wouldnt have such a war-skill and great strategist, they wouldnt have succeeded as they did.
Who gives a fuck about who's tank was better than who's. That's just machinery. The Germans had less and qualitatively worse tanks than the Allies during the invasion of the West. The reason for their rapid victory lay in their motivation and more aggressive fighting spirit.
At these times french units had to make a request when they wanted reinforcement, counterattack or w/e. This often could take a FULL DAY.
Compare that to german panzer division who had been trained to act independent and relying on their own officers. The german 7th panzer division was nicknamed the Ghost Division, as their own headquarters had trouble knowing where they were.
Its not hard to guess why the french were not able to keep up with the germans and their fast way of warfare.
And about the Panzer 3 and 4, the early panzer 3 in the France campaign did NOT YET carry the 50mm gun, but a 37mm gun. This gun would be a peashooter versus the better armoured french types of tank like the Somua and the Char B1. The panzer 4, available at that time in even smaller numbers, carried an infantry support gun, not perfectly suited for fighting other tanks.
The germans went into Russia with largely the same tanks, and had the same trouble with the Russian heavy tank, the KV-1
German tank crews were very good, but the german armoured forces invading france still relied heavily on Panzer I and II tanks, and Czech made panzer 35 and 38 tanks. These tanks saw action even in the early stages of the later invasion of Russia, where it became painfully obvious that these tanks were outdated and suffering high losses. At that point the Panzer I and also II's came back where they started: Training vehicles.
Not all early panzers came back for training, some were converted.
@ComboSlicer If germany had such good tanks, why did they lose the war? Your way of thinking makes no sense. The French got obliterated because the Germans had tactics and weren't afraid to fight.
@joost1120 You play to many online games without doing any research. Youre right about French tanks firing capability but they were hardly great tanks; good at best! Any vet will tell you the complete numbing fear of seeing a King tiger or tiger rolling in; for that matter even the panther was greatly feared!
@NBBrew1 German tanks had a great reputation to the enemies, but the tank commanders knew it suffered from more mechanical problems than any other tank.
The French had good tanks, but they weren't able to use them. Up to this day, one of the AMX-# tanks, not sure which one, is used by some Asian armies. Might have been the AMX-13.
@Fackifiknow Because the ww2 was fought with tanks only and not a million german soldiers that fought pretty damn hard.
Germany did not have that much bad tanks, but the Tiger was one of them. They had mediocre tanks like the PzKpfW 2 to 3, and then they had a couple good tanks, such as the PzKpfW 4 and 5, The Panther.
Other than that, they had really good tank destroyers, such as the Hetzer, Marder 3, Stug 4, Jagdpanzer IV, Jagdpanther, Jagdtiger and Elefant.
No french tanks? The few that were built were junk. Why would the French need a tank when the they know the poor brits and the yanks would come over and fight for them.
@StarriderWe. Your figures for German military fatalities are too low. 4,500,000 - 5,500,000. Soldiers killed. And those numbers are race altering numbers for Germany.
@fergyinkorea The French rolled over and played dead because their tanks sucked huge against German armour. France got overrun and was a non-factor in ww2.
@haiherosner dude, you are clueless... fact is France had better tanks than Germany, and quite a lot of them. However, they failed miserably because of their outdated static military doctrine kept from WW1... they were totally unprepared for the Blitzkrieg
but looking at the tanks alone, France had better tanks than Germany in 1941.
@Mandrak789 The French tanks were no match DUDE!, I'm not clueless, the French Hotchkiss h-35 tanks were no match for the Panzer III's w/50mm cannon and especially the heavy at that time (1940) Panzer IV w/75mm gun. The only decent French Tank was the Renault Char B-1, which had 75mm gun, but was not as maneuverable as Panzer IV, or the German Blitzkrieg tactics. One on One I would take the Panzer IV w/75mm gun any day of the week over the lumbering Char B-1 DUDE! Later smart-ass FRENCHIE!
at both, hello I am from germany and I want to correct the facts from "neutral" point.
total death ger soldiers of WWII: 3,2 Mio; casualties at eastern front 2,7 Mio.
Defeat was mainly started by the US support supplies of ships, weapons, ammunition and planes. So the highest effect have been the bombers, british at night/ us at day, that hade high impact one the production and the supplies to the eastern front. (germany tanks needed many fuel, ammunition, spare parts).
@StarriderWe Yes I agree in part, becasue the Soviets cpatured POWs who were eventually killed.That is how i arrived ata larger figure. The UK and USA treated German prisoners IAW the Geneva Convention and repatriated most of them> How do you tally a soldier killed as a POW? Additionalyl the UK and USA foughtt set piece battles of manoever rather than attrttion as the Soviets did. Overall to achieve their defeat of nazi Germany the USSR lost more troops
@GigglinMarley Sorry for being rude to you back then. I was going through some bad shit. I don't care if you hate me but just want you to know I wish you no ill will.
@xCh34pShOtx somebody else asked why there was no exhaust, and his question was so stupid so I said what i said. like "what? what relevance does your question even have?" thats why I said "huh"
And flanking has nothing to do with the speed of the Tiger II (which was good already) but with the low number of Tigers. Which then again was not a problem since it was designed to kill from range. Flanking in a 1 on 1 situation is impossible, that is why tanks have a turret. The truth is that the Germans should have done nothing at all after 1942/43, but as long as AH was in charge there was really no option. The Tiger performed miraculously considering the odds it faced.
Well I mainly discuss the use of the Tiger II in its intended role, on the front that DECIDED the war.
The Sherman, if you want, has a full traverse speed of 15 seconds, the Tiger II around 19 (and I have heard faster). Even if the Tiger is stationary the Sherman will need to be well within 100m for the tiger not to be able to turn in time. And the driver would definately slam the entire tank around in time.
@Imppilz Which front decided the War? There were about equal numbers on each front, but because of the reckles tactics of the USSR on offence, the Aufs B scored more. And yes the Sherman often was ( in the very few encounters, you nazist yayhoos act if they encountered daily) were within 100 m Read Timo Worst's or Brenno decker's accounts of having taken 3 hits from Sherman in this manner before he ahd to abandon tank. Also read the accounts of Task Force MeGeorge and LoveLady
I was talking about the Tigers intended role on the Soviet front.
The Sherman was the most numerous tank there. I was merely saying that it was not the Tigers speed (either itself or the turret) that killed it, it was the fact that it was in the wrong place at the wrong time. In a position where it did not matter what tank it was (but the Tiger did survive better obviously..)
@Imppilz Ir as the wrong vehicle at the wrong time. The Pzk IV with a 75 mm gun was reliable, cheap and still able to go toe to toe with most allied tanks
But the Tiger II was decided on in 1942, when the war still looked to be fought in the east. They no longer had any chance to change their assembly lines in 1944-->.
It killed anything anyone at the time could throw against it. They did not have the luxury of time or resources, and yet they made one of the best tanks of the war. It used some 20% more fuel than a Panther but survived better. They did not have the men to drive any more tanks so it was really no use to build a thousand more to sit outside the factory. And it was not slow, not at all for its size.
Build more what? They had the capacity to build 500 complex heavy tanks while being bombed to death and fighting for a lost cause. Not to mention the thousands of other tanks&vehicles. They built more in 1945 that they could even use. They built more ME 262s than they had pilots, so that when the war ended they sat in endless rows on the airfields, and people discuss if the war could be changed by building more!
No need to be rude here. I understood wrong. Yes everything in the war was a waste after it had been decided.
My country has bought the Leopard 2. It is too heavy to be used in this country, it can not cross bridges, it tears up roads etcetc. and its performance so far has been perfect.
@BIGUNKboy hmnn..im not really sure. perhaps it was easier to simply throw huge numbers of shermans at the nazis instead of retooling factories to produce a better heavy tank design. the M26 was the result of heavy tank development, but it didnt make it into the war on time to do anything. the sherman was plagued by artillery commanders who requested a lower velocity gun so it could have a longer barrel life as a combat tank. isnt that effed up?
Soon this museum will be removed. It goes against political correctness and Islam. Brittian is already an islamic nation. Middle easterners will just have to snap their fingers and the british government will apply.
@GigglinMarley Islamification of Europe and the UK will be a positive developement. Whenever societies become effete and decrepit it takes the vigour of some new and alien people to recreate civilisation afresh and rejuvenate the society. Demographic of islam in Europe is young, growing, confident and outspoken. Demographics is destiny. So get with the program.
@GigglinMarley Listen up worthless cock sucking,penis sniffing, butt fucked, crotch grabbing, ball licking, semen drinking, dog raping, nazi loving, child touching, cow humping, perverted, spineless, mindless, dickless, testicle choking, urine gargling, jerk offing, horse faced, sheep fondling, toilet kissing, faeces puking turd. If I could only have you in front of me now so I could smash your face and knife you in the guts. Do the world a favour and blow your brains out you fucking zilch.
@GigglinMarley Do you mind if I sketch a picture of Allah real quick and shove it up your ass? It'll only take a second. Fact is Allah is Santa Clause for Muslims.
@USExceptionalism Battle of Britian 1940 - Nazis first halted by British commonwealth, Stalingrad 1942 - tide turned in Russia. USA barely into the war at this point, certainly never fought a major battle...DDay 1944 - British, Canadian and US victory, 9 months before the end of the war, The Russians and British commonwealth were turning the tide slowly well before major US contributions. US entry dramatically speeded up the defeat, We are greatful for all the supplies, but get your facts right
@Xiolablu3 Wrong still again1940 Britian, France defeated and RA evacuated. Low countries overun. In 1941 Churchill had already planned evacuation of the government to Canada. In 1942, Midway, largest naval air taskforce to date decimated, Guadalcanal sucessfully invaded, Australia saved tide turned in Battle of Atlantic, to name a few..The US had fought in every major engagement up the Italian Peninsula prior to D-day and had sweeped Kwajalien, Saipan,Tarawa, New Guniea.
@USExceptionalism Wrong? Please tell me which of my statements is 'wrong'. Did Britain really lose the BOB? Did Stalingrad never happen? Britain and its commonwealth was fighting the Japanese and Italians before the US entered the war. 80% of German casualties were on the Eastern front, so dont get too high and mighty about the US contribution. I am not talking about the pacific, yes the US DID do the majority of the fighting on that front, I am talking about Europe, Nazis,Italians,Romanians.
@Xiolablu3 Singapore and Burma fell after 7 Dec. You simply cannot ignore the Pacific Theatre of War, As fierce as the naz were, They had no surface navy to speak of and no marine and seldom fought to the death, The US repeated a "Dday" dozens of times over. Germany lost in total 5.5 million dead soldiers . On the eastern front approx. 3.5 million german soldiers died By your own statiics the whole Brithish Empire inflicted less than 20% of nazi casulties
Si vous voulez voir unTigre Royal en etat de marche, vous pouvez en voir au musée de saumur, c'est le seul en etat de marche - If you want see the last KingTiger in good runing condition, you must go at "musée des blindés", at saumur in france, you can see this tank Tigre Royal on Youtube, it's the last Tigre 2 with engine running.
And I too have lots of books, and the right ones too like the one I mentioned, it's a reference book for military historians, and written by Thomas Jentz and Hilary Doyle. The Front Hull armour (Glacis Plate) is 150mm thick while the turret front is 180mm =D
Stop talking nonsense, all tanks during ww2 could 'fire on the move' when driving on flat ground. A stabilized main gun was only needed on uneven terrain so hat the tank crew could aim more accurate. stabiloized optics and gun means that it is easier to keep the gun aimed on the enemy target while moving on uneven trerrain. This was a good advantage for fast and weak armored tanks like the Sherman. but the Tiger had very good armor so it could just stand there and was still powerful.
@tanker1408 It was pointed out to me that all tanks could fire on the move. Hitting on the move at more than point blank range was almost unique to US made tanks.
Certainly the Tiger was an effective roadblock, whether crewed or not.
At this point in the war the Germans didn't have much fuel but they keep building bigger and heavier tanksa not sure why. Well I quess it was cause Hitler was a fool anyone agree?
@MakeNine42 I would not call him a fool. He just was a snitcher who was orderd by the state to infiltrate the NSDAP so the civil servants could steer it. As it is usually done in Germany with every organization. There are some clues that he already was brainwashed with technical means. I found one publication showing the use of wireless torturing techniques as early as 1908. Its found on my homepage -> Psychiatrie -> Klinik der Narkolepsie.
@TigerIPanzer Half marks, It was a very fine tank if it broke down in the right spot. It was not suited to German logisitics, nor could it shoot on the move (no stabilization system).
@DonMeaker all WW2 tanks broke-down... the Tiger II didn't need to fire on the move coz it could knock-out any enemy tank at extreme range....also fire-on-the-move is mainly a post WW2 concept
@TigerIPanzer Sometimes. M-3s were mostly out of service by the time the Tiger came out. The Tigers were mostly out of service by the time the M-26 came out, though there is a story about one that shot a Tiger across a river, but it may have been a Panther given the propensity of soldiers to mis-identify. Tiger and Panther had a bad reputation for reliability even among the German soldiers who were not spoiled by Detroit products.
the bits adopted the fireonthemove philosophy prior to ww2. but it was not very efective because of the need to have highly train gunners, which were expensive and time-costing to produce
it has and always will be my dream to be able to utter what the man just said in the video
CrypticWatcher 2 weeks ago
'
how about a MAUS tank is still in the tank museum
bestamerica 1 month ago
Even in my time, the German Panzer rules the battlefield.
The Leopard II
13Psycho13 1 month ago
massive,heavy,slow,very effective german engernearing
123mrresidentevil 1 month ago
The King Tiger once dominated the battlefield, but then it took an arrow to the knee.
Zpoke 1 month ago
well done brittisch
7reaneke 2 months ago
Les falta unas pocas Ruedas de Marcha en el tren de rodaje, ademas de los tubos de escapes como alguna cajita donde almacenar lotes de abordo, espero que con el paso de los años lo dejen operativo, seria una pasada ver a este monstruo en movimiento
EvilEsp 2 months ago
What a beauty..makes you to want go start building a model just looking at it...
Hiristis 2 months ago
does this one work
RichardLvsHisBabys 4 months ago
lots of scratches on the roads!! Thx for the upload!
NvidiATI 4 months ago
se i tedeschi avessero vinto la guerra sarebbe forse sato il carro armato per eccelenza del futuro
bistathebest 4 months ago
U FUCKIN SOB REMOVE STUFF FROM THIS RELIC!!??
CrazyGamerFromBrazil 4 months ago
U FUCKIN SOB REMOVE STUFF FROM THIS RELIC!!??
CrazyGamerFromBrazil 4 months ago
France had a lot of problems prior to the war which did not help their cause. Their strategy depended too much on static defences and there were too many socialist sympathisers who were against the war sabotaging equipment needed for the war effort. Politically France was just not ready for war but if you know anything of World War One, espescially Verdun, you would know the French are definitely not "quitters".
FrancoHitlini 5 months ago
@FrancoHitlini I do know much about world war 1 and the france of 1940 was very different to that of 1914.
How can you say that they did not quit? ... Maybe you are French and if so i understand your wish to distort
The history of this period as it is not Frances finest hour.. The fact is France only exists today because of
The allied Victory in world war 2. The resistance in France was largely generated by British intelligence.
arlington33able 2 months ago
@arlington33able No, I am not French. I did not say that they "did not quit"! If you took the time to understand what I said I was commenting on the blanket statement that "the French are quitters"!
FrancoHitlini 2 months ago
How did they ever lose?
thegafferlives 5 months ago
@thegafferlives
Because the german forces were swamped by the western allies and russians.
Germany produced 50438 fully tracked AFV, the US produced 99448 fully tracked AFV, Russia produced 105675 AFV, UK produced 27896.
Dreachon 5 months ago
Cool tank to bad the T-28 would fuck it face off
slopymongchode 5 months ago
@slopymongchode
You have to be joking right?
HauptmannRob 5 months ago
@HauptmannRob not the Russian garbage the american t-28 super heavy tank
slopymongchode 5 months ago
@slopymongchode
Thats designed to counter super heavy tanks like the Maus so naturally it would have its face fucked off by the T-28 but the Maus in turn would have fucked the T-28s face off in my opinion.
HauptmannRob 5 months ago
@HauptmannRob now your the one joking
slopymongchode 5 months ago
@slopymongchode
Well, the T-28 had to be pretty aweful to not even make it past the prototype stages.
HauptmannRob 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Was the king tiger the first tank to store ammunition in the back of the turret?
kaupunkimoukari 5 months ago
Comment removed
kaupunkimoukari 5 months ago
Germany had the best tanks in the entire world under world war 2 they lose because they didn't have a big army
RedwihteGame 5 months ago
@RedwihteGame Germany had a huge and disciplined army, well drilled and had no equals among the allies during WW2. Germany lost cause of a madman who refused to listen to hes generals.
It doesn't matter how big your army is if ur fighting on too many frontlines at the same time, if Hitler would have listened to hes generals it's possible that most of Europe would have been a part of germany today.
Skalmans750 5 months ago
If germany would have that big army like Russia they would win the war
RedwihteGame 5 months ago
I would imagine that Chieftain ARV is kept pretty busy at the museum.
23vin850 5 months ago
omg such a crowd of idiots! the german tanks from ww2 were the fucking best, which ever were build! already the PzKpfw IV ownes every opposing tank and the PzKpfw VI II with its 88 mm KwK 43 L/71 cannon destroyed every opposing tank with only one shot! so shut up! german soldiers + Krupp stahl = invincible. germany loses the war cause they had to fight at 5 fronts with too few soldiers. if the german wouldnt have such a war-skill and great strategist, they wouldnt have succeeded as they did.
MrJackMeL 6 months ago
Who gives a fuck about who's tank was better than who's. That's just machinery. The Germans had less and qualitatively worse tanks than the Allies during the invasion of the West. The reason for their rapid victory lay in their motivation and more aggressive fighting spirit.
ilGrandeCornuto 6 months ago
Also,
At these times french units had to make a request when they wanted reinforcement, counterattack or w/e. This often could take a FULL DAY.
Compare that to german panzer division who had been trained to act independent and relying on their own officers. The german 7th panzer division was nicknamed the Ghost Division, as their own headquarters had trouble knowing where they were.
Its not hard to guess why the french were not able to keep up with the germans and their fast way of warfare.
TheTuberKnownAsMe 6 months ago
And about the Panzer 3 and 4, the early panzer 3 in the France campaign did NOT YET carry the 50mm gun, but a 37mm gun. This gun would be a peashooter versus the better armoured french types of tank like the Somua and the Char B1. The panzer 4, available at that time in even smaller numbers, carried an infantry support gun, not perfectly suited for fighting other tanks.
The germans went into Russia with largely the same tanks, and had the same trouble with the Russian heavy tank, the KV-1
TheTuberKnownAsMe 6 months ago
German tank crews were very good, but the german armoured forces invading france still relied heavily on Panzer I and II tanks, and Czech made panzer 35 and 38 tanks. These tanks saw action even in the early stages of the later invasion of Russia, where it became painfully obvious that these tanks were outdated and suffering high losses. At that point the Panzer I and also II's came back where they started: Training vehicles.
Not all early panzers came back for training, some were converted.
TheTuberKnownAsMe 6 months ago
french had better wat? lol germany had the best tanks all the time
poor french dogs no chance againts Blitzkrieg
germanrifle 6 months ago
@germanrifle No they didn't. Germany had really bad tanks, with an exception of the tank destroyers.
The French had great tanks. For instance, the AMX-13. A strong light tank.
Most French tanks used a revolver cannon, which meant that they could fire multiple times without having to reload.
joost1120 6 months ago
@joost1120
Yet france got defeated
ComboSlicer 6 months ago
@ComboSlicer If germany had such good tanks, why did they lose the war? Your way of thinking makes no sense. The French got obliterated because the Germans had tactics and weren't afraid to fight.
Also they were with many.
joost1120 6 months ago
@joost1120 You play to many online games without doing any research. Youre right about French tanks firing capability but they were hardly great tanks; good at best! Any vet will tell you the complete numbing fear of seeing a King tiger or tiger rolling in; for that matter even the panther was greatly feared!
NBBrew1 5 months ago
@NBBrew1 German tanks had a great reputation to the enemies, but the tank commanders knew it suffered from more mechanical problems than any other tank.
The French had good tanks, but they weren't able to use them. Up to this day, one of the AMX-# tanks, not sure which one, is used by some Asian armies. Might have been the AMX-13.
joost1120 5 months ago
@joost1120 Germany = bad tanks? wtf are you smoking.... Germany rolled France in less than 2 months... because france = quitters
Fackifiknow 5 months ago
@Fackifiknow Because the ww2 was fought with tanks only and not a million german soldiers that fought pretty damn hard.
Germany did not have that much bad tanks, but the Tiger was one of them. They had mediocre tanks like the PzKpfW 2 to 3, and then they had a couple good tanks, such as the PzKpfW 4 and 5, The Panther.
Other than that, they had really good tank destroyers, such as the Hetzer, Marder 3, Stug 4, Jagdpanzer IV, Jagdpanther, Jagdtiger and Elefant.
joost1120 5 months ago
I would shit my pants if I saw that rolling at me -_-
xCh34pShOtx 6 months ago
No french tanks? The few that were built were junk. Why would the French need a tank when the they know the poor brits and the yanks would come over and fight for them.
jelkins1969 6 months ago
@StarriderWe. Your figures for German military fatalities are too low. 4,500,000 - 5,500,000. Soldiers killed. And those numbers are race altering numbers for Germany.
lew7273 6 months ago
It is interesting how one can see old British, American and German tanks, but there are no old French tanks around.
fergyinkorea 6 months ago
@fergyinkorea The French rolled over and played dead because their tanks sucked huge against German armour. France got overrun and was a non-factor in ww2.
haiherosner 6 months ago
@haiherosner dude, you are clueless... fact is France had better tanks than Germany, and quite a lot of them. However, they failed miserably because of their outdated static military doctrine kept from WW1... they were totally unprepared for the Blitzkrieg
but looking at the tanks alone, France had better tanks than Germany in 1941.
Mandrak789 6 months ago
@Mandrak789 The French tanks were no match DUDE!, I'm not clueless, the French Hotchkiss h-35 tanks were no match for the Panzer III's w/50mm cannon and especially the heavy at that time (1940) Panzer IV w/75mm gun. The only decent French Tank was the Renault Char B-1, which had 75mm gun, but was not as maneuverable as Panzer IV, or the German Blitzkrieg tactics. One on One I would take the Panzer IV w/75mm gun any day of the week over the lumbering Char B-1 DUDE! Later smart-ass FRENCHIE!
haiherosner 6 months ago
Ill exchange my gf for this tank.
MrOfflain 7 months ago
That is one sexy beast.
dibuk123 7 months ago
at both, hello I am from germany and I want to correct the facts from "neutral" point.
total death ger soldiers of WWII: 3,2 Mio; casualties at eastern front 2,7 Mio.
Defeat was mainly started by the US support supplies of ships, weapons, ammunition and planes. So the highest effect have been the bombers, british at night/ us at day, that hade high impact one the production and the supplies to the eastern front. (germany tanks needed many fuel, ammunition, spare parts).
StarriderWe 7 months ago
@StarriderWe Yes I agree in part, becasue the Soviets cpatured POWs who were eventually killed.That is how i arrived ata larger figure. The UK and USA treated German prisoners IAW the Geneva Convention and repatriated most of them> How do you tally a soldier killed as a POW? Additionalyl the UK and USA foughtt set piece battles of manoever rather than attrttion as the Soviets did. Overall to achieve their defeat of nazi Germany the USSR lost more troops
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@StarriderWe
ähm naja eigentlich sind mehr als 6 Mio. deutsche Soldaten gefallen und nicht 3,2 Mio.
Companjeros 7 months ago
@Companjeros
3.250.000 Soldaten
3.640.000 Zivilisten
Summe: 6.890.000
das sind die wissenschaftlich belegten Zahlen (s. Rüdiger Overmans Standartwerke hierzu)
StarriderWe 7 months ago
I would love to see modern day RPG's fired at this behemoth just to see what kind of damage they can do.
thetrollingdouche 7 months ago
@GigglinMarley Sorry for being rude to you back then. I was going through some bad shit. I don't care if you hate me but just want you to know I wish you no ill will.
lew7272 7 months ago
Can i buy one on ebay?
Stalinsurfstheweb 7 months ago
this is the mother of gass gusslers, a king tiger used a liter per 100 metres, fuck your hummer, this is the king of gass
repzyree 8 months ago
no exhaust at 1:50 ? huh
SwissCheese707 8 months ago
@SwissCheese707 It's being towed....
xCh34pShOtx 6 months ago
@xCh34pShOtx somebody else asked why there was no exhaust, and his question was so stupid so I said what i said. like "what? what relevance does your question even have?" thats why I said "huh"
SwissCheese707 6 months ago
can someone plz tell me why tanks have the bumps like at :52 idk what you call it
jeffreyguerra66 8 months ago
@jeffreyguerra66 thats zimmerit. its something you put on the tank and its anti magnetic so enemies cant put magnetic mines on your tank
SwissCheese707 8 months ago
@KiranaForever
And flanking has nothing to do with the speed of the Tiger II (which was good already) but with the low number of Tigers. Which then again was not a problem since it was designed to kill from range. Flanking in a 1 on 1 situation is impossible, that is why tanks have a turret. The truth is that the Germans should have done nothing at all after 1942/43, but as long as AH was in charge there was really no option. The Tiger performed miraculously considering the odds it faced.
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz Wrong, not if one has gun stablisation and can shoot on the run esceeding the revultion spped o the other's turret.
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism
Well I mainly discuss the use of the Tiger II in its intended role, on the front that DECIDED the war.
The Sherman, if you want, has a full traverse speed of 15 seconds, the Tiger II around 19 (and I have heard faster). Even if the Tiger is stationary the Sherman will need to be well within 100m for the tiger not to be able to turn in time. And the driver would definately slam the entire tank around in time.
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz Which front decided the War? There were about equal numbers on each front, but because of the reckles tactics of the USSR on offence, the Aufs B scored more. And yes the Sherman often was ( in the very few encounters, you nazist yayhoos act if they encountered daily) were within 100 m Read Timo Worst's or Brenno decker's accounts of having taken 3 hits from Sherman in this manner before he ahd to abandon tank. Also read the accounts of Task Force MeGeorge and LoveLady
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism
I was talking about the Tigers intended role on the Soviet front.
The Sherman was the most numerous tank there. I was merely saying that it was not the Tigers speed (either itself or the turret) that killed it, it was the fact that it was in the wrong place at the wrong time. In a position where it did not matter what tank it was (but the Tiger did survive better obviously..)
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz Ir as the wrong vehicle at the wrong time. The Pzk IV with a 75 mm gun was reliable, cheap and still able to go toe to toe with most allied tanks
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism
But the Tiger II was decided on in 1942, when the war still looked to be fought in the east. They no longer had any chance to change their assembly lines in 1944-->.
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz Pzk IV was already in production in 1941. All was needed was to continue on the current line.
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@Imppilz No the Tiger Aufs A was decided on i 1942
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@USExceptionalism not against waves of T34 or the later T34-85
GPSaBu 7 months ago
@Imppilz Did it. Thee were Sherman in armies in the the 80's
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@KiranaForever
It killed anything anyone at the time could throw against it. They did not have the luxury of time or resources, and yet they made one of the best tanks of the war. It used some 20% more fuel than a Panther but survived better. They did not have the men to drive any more tanks so it was really no use to build a thousand more to sit outside the factory. And it was not slow, not at all for its size.
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz They had'nt the resoures, or technical ability, nor industrial capacity to build more, which was in itself a waste
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism
Build more what? They had the capacity to build 500 complex heavy tanks while being bombed to death and fighting for a lost cause. Not to mention the thousands of other tanks&vehicles. They built more in 1945 that they could even use. They built more ME 262s than they had pilots, so that when the war ended they sat in endless rows on the airfields, and people discuss if the war could be changed by building more!
Imppilz 8 months ago
@Imppilz Reread what I said ..."which was in itself a WASTE" Understand?
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism
No need to be rude here. I understood wrong. Yes everything in the war was a waste after it had been decided.
My country has bought the Leopard 2. It is too heavy to be used in this country, it can not cross bridges, it tears up roads etcetc. and its performance so far has been perfect.
Imppilz 8 months ago
наконец достали скилет фюрера
stas19689889 8 months ago
hmmmm...tank-porn, as only the Germans can provide
martin1226 8 months ago 2
amazing tank, by far my favourite tank of the war
marechalrommel 8 months ago
@RaichoIchisada AMEN TO THAT!
laagin5 9 months ago
Tiger II's ass so goddamn sexy
RaichoIchisada 9 months ago 2
only america had the industrial potential to create these things in large numbers. that would be an unstoppable force in those days.
23HAMSANDWICH 9 months ago
@23HAMSANDWICH Why didnt they create it then mister smart-ass?
BIGUNKboy 9 months ago
@BIGUNKboy hmnn..im not really sure. perhaps it was easier to simply throw huge numbers of shermans at the nazis instead of retooling factories to produce a better heavy tank design. the M26 was the result of heavy tank development, but it didnt make it into the war on time to do anything. the sherman was plagued by artillery commanders who requested a lower velocity gun so it could have a longer barrel life as a combat tank. isnt that effed up?
23HAMSANDWICH 9 months ago
Tiger ate shermans for breakfast.
Gim6759 9 months ago
The sick part is that German Panther ll tanks (I think) had nightvision in the end of WW2.
atatyrknumber1 10 months ago
@atatyrknumber1
Yes but hardly of any use in those days, too bad quality.
Imppilz 9 months ago
this video is priceless for a 3D tank modeler like me!!!
LordOfRage 10 months ago
of which division?
BYAcommand 10 months ago
1:29 looks like this tiger lacks a few wheels
903strikerunit 11 months ago
king tiger was one of the most advance war machine of all times
omairiqbal889 11 months ago
this thing is pretty much next to useless
gg2000gg2000 11 months ago
German property
It belongs to us
alfredthebong 11 months ago
@alfredthebong Spoils of War and to the Victors go the spoils be happy the Allies let you your country exist
USExceptionalism 11 months ago
@alfredthebong on which germany are you on sir in the federal or in the democratic?
903strikerunit 11 months ago
Its funny cause mo brittish/american gun could penetrate the armour of the Tiger II....Its only weakness was the amount of fuel it used.
AKKUPATI 11 months ago
@AKKUPATI Several could and did
USExceptionalism 11 months ago
@AKKUPATI T15e1 tore thru like butter
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
THEY'RE GR-GR-GREAT
Oh shit, wait. I read that title wrong.
SnakeTheFox 11 months ago
Soon this museum will be removed. It goes against political correctness and Islam. Brittian is already an islamic nation. Middle easterners will just have to snap their fingers and the british government will apply.
GigglinMarley 11 months ago
@GigglinMarley Islamification of Europe and the UK will be a positive developement. Whenever societies become effete and decrepit it takes the vigour of some new and alien people to recreate civilisation afresh and rejuvenate the society. Demographic of islam in Europe is young, growing, confident and outspoken. Demographics is destiny. So get with the program.
lew7272 11 months ago
@lew7272 Just go fuck yourself.
GigglinMarley 11 months ago
@GigglinMarley Listen up worthless cock sucking,penis sniffing, butt fucked, crotch grabbing, ball licking, semen drinking, dog raping, nazi loving, child touching, cow humping, perverted, spineless, mindless, dickless, testicle choking, urine gargling, jerk offing, horse faced, sheep fondling, toilet kissing, faeces puking turd. If I could only have you in front of me now so I could smash your face and knife you in the guts. Do the world a favour and blow your brains out you fucking zilch.
lew7272 11 months ago
@lew7272
but why you mad tho? butthurt that we turned your grandparents into soap and there's nothing you can do about it? fucking deal with it.
493175001 11 months ago
@lew7272 Bring it cunt.
GigglinMarley 11 months ago
@GigglinMarley Do you mind if I sketch a picture of Allah real quick and shove it up your ass? It'll only take a second. Fact is Allah is Santa Clause for Muslims.
platypusone 7 months ago
@platypusone Could you?. I want it!
GigglinMarley 7 months ago
Man i would like to owne one of these,
Haddockxyz300 11 months ago
Jóféle :D
thekingtigerfan 1 year ago
Whats the likelyhood of getting this one up and running ?? keep up the good work Bovie ....
woodenz 1 year ago
Dear Santa...
ablebravo 1 year ago
why tow it around? just fix it up and restore it so you can drive it like it was new lol
HellzNord 1 year ago
what a beast of a tank...
xntrickk 1 year ago
Don't you just love that sound of the tiger...
1000RRboyJay 1 year ago
@1000RRboyJay The sound is from the towing tank.
agt155 1 year ago
@agt155 oh, still sounds good
1000RRboyJay 1 year ago
German steel, German design, German engineering! Germany=Quality>Quantity.
BF2superfans 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@BF2superfans WWII proved you wrong.
juicifer 1 year ago
@BF2superfans = AMERICAN VICTORY
USExceptionalism 8 months ago
@USExceptionalism err British, Canadian, Russian, AND later American victory I think you will find, in order of entry to the war,,,,
Xiolablu3 7 months ago
@Xiolablu3 Nope, Wrong. French, and British Defeat. Russian Defeat. American Led and Supplied Allied Victory in Europe and Asia.
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@USExceptionalism Battle of Britian 1940 - Nazis first halted by British commonwealth, Stalingrad 1942 - tide turned in Russia. USA barely into the war at this point, certainly never fought a major battle...DDay 1944 - British, Canadian and US victory, 9 months before the end of the war, The Russians and British commonwealth were turning the tide slowly well before major US contributions. US entry dramatically speeded up the defeat, We are greatful for all the supplies, but get your facts right
Xiolablu3 7 months ago
@Xiolablu3 Wrong still again1940 Britian, France defeated and RA evacuated. Low countries overun. In 1941 Churchill had already planned evacuation of the government to Canada. In 1942, Midway, largest naval air taskforce to date decimated, Guadalcanal sucessfully invaded, Australia saved tide turned in Battle of Atlantic, to name a few..The US had fought in every major engagement up the Italian Peninsula prior to D-day and had sweeped Kwajalien, Saipan,Tarawa, New Guniea.
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@USExceptionalism Wrong? Please tell me which of my statements is 'wrong'. Did Britain really lose the BOB? Did Stalingrad never happen? Britain and its commonwealth was fighting the Japanese and Italians before the US entered the war. 80% of German casualties were on the Eastern front, so dont get too high and mighty about the US contribution. I am not talking about the pacific, yes the US DID do the majority of the fighting on that front, I am talking about Europe, Nazis,Italians,Romanians.
Xiolablu3 7 months ago
@Xiolablu3 Singapore and Burma fell after 7 Dec. You simply cannot ignore the Pacific Theatre of War, As fierce as the naz were, They had no surface navy to speak of and no marine and seldom fought to the death, The US repeated a "Dday" dozens of times over. Germany lost in total 5.5 million dead soldiers . On the eastern front approx. 3.5 million german soldiers died By your own statiics the whole Brithish Empire inflicted less than 20% of nazi casulties
USExceptionalism 7 months ago
@USExceptionalism Yup, thats true, less than 20%
Xiolablu3 7 months ago
"The gyroscopic mount was unique, but there is little evidence that Sherman gunners trusted their capability to shoot on the move. "
mjeshaw 1 year ago
I always thought the Henschel turret was one with a curve at the front?
alphamax03 1 year ago
@alphamax03 no that's the porsche turret and it was abandoned as the curve was a shot trap
14th20thKRHkickass 1 year ago
That King Tiger is still in a bit of a mess... It's missing a few wheels...
leylandcarsloverslea 1 year ago
I thought the one in France was the only King Tiger that can work! Anyways, the King Tiger... was one big destroyer!!
TheXenomorph1 1 year ago
@TheXenomorph1
Nahhhh, the JagdTiger is the One Big Destroyer.
EvilFingers 1 year ago
true the tank musuem is on loan of 12 million dollars
thebomb730 1 year ago
you say 'the tank musuem's' but isn't it actually owned by the defence academy at Shrivenham?????
dalekbitch 1 year ago 2
@dalekbitch No, the other way round - it was on loan to Shrivenham.
PZSIX131 1 year ago 11
@PZSIX131 oh,thnx for clarifying.wikipedia isn't that clear.
dalekbitch 1 year ago
@dalekbitch japadabadu
Pfanne95 9 months ago
@dalekbitch
Pfanne95 9 months ago
the tank was just too heavy...
TheDeathbatfoREVer 1 year ago
Si vous voulez voir unTigre Royal en etat de marche, vous pouvez en voir au musée de saumur, c'est le seul en etat de marche - If you want see the last KingTiger in good runing condition, you must go at "musée des blindés", at saumur in france, you can see this tank Tigre Royal on Youtube, it's the last Tigre 2 with engine running.
ThePseudopseudo 1 year ago
what motor mounted?
CostantinoLenzi 1 year ago
isn't the tiger I is better? because it's armor looks better from the outsite, and this tiger II reminds me the T-34
4FunPlayin 1 year ago
IN terms of armour protection, Tiger II is better, it has 150mm sloped frontal armour, while Tiger 1 only has 100mm
hatakashi1900 1 year ago
@hatakashi1900 Frontal armour Tiger II have 180mm not 150mm.
Kirimatusam 1 year ago
No it is 150mm, check out T.Jentz's Tiger Tanks "VK45.02 to Tiger II" book.
hatakashi1900 1 year ago
@hatakashi1900 I tell you 180mm. I had a lots of books.
Kirimatusam 1 year ago
And I too have lots of books, and the right ones too like the one I mentioned, it's a reference book for military historians, and written by Thomas Jentz and Hilary Doyle. The Front Hull armour (Glacis Plate) is 150mm thick while the turret front is 180mm =D
hatakashi1900 1 year ago
@hatakashi1900 Maybe you have right... I will check in my book. :)
Kirimatusam 1 year ago
That would be hilarious to drive that thing to school.
MeltingHolster 1 year ago
what a beast
Heatseeker872591 1 year ago
Stop talking nonsense, all tanks during ww2 could 'fire on the move' when driving on flat ground. A stabilized main gun was only needed on uneven terrain so hat the tank crew could aim more accurate. stabiloized optics and gun means that it is easier to keep the gun aimed on the enemy target while moving on uneven trerrain. This was a good advantage for fast and weak armored tanks like the Sherman. but the Tiger had very good armor so it could just stand there and was still powerful.
tanker1408 1 year ago
@tanker1408 Yep stand there and be knocked out
ocolumbia 1 year ago
@tanker1408 It was pointed out to me that all tanks could fire on the move. Hitting on the move at more than point blank range was almost unique to US made tanks.
Certainly the Tiger was an effective roadblock, whether crewed or not.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
Zimmerit Coating Nice tank :)
Hiposinel 1 year ago
At this point in the war the Germans didn't have much fuel but they keep building bigger and heavier tanksa not sure why. Well I quess it was cause Hitler was a fool anyone agree?
DaManzMoney 1 year ago
@DaManzMoney Yeah Hitler was a fool indeed. The whole attack on Russia failed because of him and his advisers.
MakeNine42 1 year ago 2
@MakeNine42 I would not call him a fool. He just was a snitcher who was orderd by the state to infiltrate the NSDAP so the civil servants could steer it. As it is usually done in Germany with every organization. There are some clues that he already was brainwashed with technical means. I found one publication showing the use of wireless torturing techniques as early as 1908. Its found on my homepage -> Psychiatrie -> Klinik der Narkolepsie.
wwwtotalitaerde 1 year ago
What moron drives a King Tiger into a no parking zone!
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
abrams is towing tiger 2 cool
CROhaX 1 year ago
@CROhaX Sorry that's a Cheiftain recovery , not an Abrahms .........
woodenz 1 year ago
the poor 700hp Maybach has a hard time
DavidVanPatten 1 year ago
that is a big frickin tank!
joeyobroto101 1 year ago
that is a big tank. kudos to german designers for size and epicness.
Hiigaranwarrior159 1 year ago
Beatiful machine,great!
cmelak598 1 year ago
even after 60+ years the Tiger II looks extremely modern...full marks to the German designers
TigerIPanzer 1 year ago 60
@TigerIPanzer Half marks, It was a very fine tank if it broke down in the right spot. It was not suited to German logisitics, nor could it shoot on the move (no stabilization system).
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DonMeaker all WW2 tanks broke-down... the Tiger II didn't need to fire on the move coz it could knock-out any enemy tank at extreme range....also fire-on-the-move is mainly a post WW2 concept
TigerIPanzer 1 year ago
@TigerIPanzer Fire on the move was a post war concept for everyone but US. US M-3, M-4, M-5, M-24, M-26 all had gun stabilization systems.
DonMeaker 1 year ago 2
@DonMeaker yes and all those those US tanks you mention got blasted to hell by the Tiger
TigerIPanzer 1 year ago
@TigerIPanzer Sometimes. M-3s were mostly out of service by the time the Tiger came out. The Tigers were mostly out of service by the time the M-26 came out, though there is a story about one that shot a Tiger across a river, but it may have been a Panther given the propensity of soldiers to mis-identify. Tiger and Panther had a bad reputation for reliability even among the German soldiers who were not spoiled by Detroit products.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@TigerIPanzer There weee a total of 4000 Shermans lsot in all of WWII but virtualy every German tank of all marks was captured or destroyed
327pir 1 year ago
@TigerIPanzer
the bits adopted the fireonthemove philosophy prior to ww2. but it was not very efective because of the need to have highly train gunners, which were expensive and time-costing to produce
standingByHim 1 year ago