Great job man!! What's that on top of the turret at 0;43? The back thing? I've seen it b4. I'm putting 2gether one now,and don't know if I need to addd the black thing.Great job.Thanks!!!! A+!!
lol this is so a model tank and i did not even read the comments first before figuring that out the first 10 seconds of the video. i mean old industrialized tech at that time for that tank to move one inch it would have been seen miles away from its exhaust spewing out just for moving one yard watching it go over over that fake concrete block with no black exhaust gave it away lol. anyways not like any body cares lol.
@JDogDrums THATS =) the reason why the t90 have his eloctronic eystems.. his infra red echquiptment.. his laser detecting equiptment and his dynamic palting dynamic plating protects the t90 from "accumulative ammunition" (AT ammo) you can look up how it works.. t90 also have infra red projectors, for not been targeted by inra red "fire and forget" weapons i'll post you an vid in which you can see it very good its in russian language, but you understand it by watching ^^ /watch?v=-bz3f0qiD5M
I have to agree with DudemanClide here... LOL AT missles mostly use either heat signature or fire forget photo imaging. so no matter how high or low the tank is.. if your armor cant keep up with technology.. your screwed. Oh and the T-90 is not all that is cracked up to be. Besides I dont think they have but a few Regiments or Divisions of them.. to expensive.. Russians still mainly have T-80 with reserves of upgraded T-74's. The T-80 is old... T-90 pretty much upgraded T-80UT.
@JuergenGDB Also there are currently only around 400-T-90 Tanks in Service.. some with the 5th Guards and Eastern Military District.. (Siberia) The rest of their tank arm is mainly old T-80 tanks.. although capable.. got jacked up in Grozny...T-80 crews lacked sufficient training before the war..andthe T-80BV sucked.
@gazakind ...okay...every tank has reactive plating, and hieght doesnt matter when it comes to anti tank missles. so yeah you pretty much failed hard. while your at it, would you like some epic with your phail?
I got another question, I cannot seem to find a band anywhere on google named "musicshake" and I cannot seem to find the song besides on here and 1 other youtube video.
I got the song from a different place and person on youtube. I found another video with a guy that was sending the song to people via e-mail. Thanks anyways.
Hey guys, is it really so difficult to write to me at least 1 sentence of the song? That I could find the song and artist on the Internet. I can not understand the lirycs - I know english too bad. This is NOT Morbid Angel - Hatework!
It is a nice model well photographed but I really think that those who post models without stating so are real asses. It is just a way to get those who are not interested to veiw their post. Be considerate and include that it is a model in the title.
This is a very nice model you have and I had built a maybe 100 tank models, tanks are fascinating. I learned airbrushing in high school (late 1970's) and the variations you can create with one are amazing. I bought my last one (still in the box) for $6 from harborfreight and a compressor from pep boys for $40 (cans are expensive, you have a buy a case to do anything worthwhile, and run out of air too fast, moreover, the compressor is very useful for cleaning computers and many other things).
Sorry, maybe I do not know English, maybe moron, but I am not deaf))) This is not Morbid Angel. Here Morbid Angel "Hatework" (watch? V = 0sQav7zv_TQ) And this is clearly not something that is yours. Maybe it's a lightweight remix of Morbid Angel. But this is totally different songs and styles. He Hatework - deathmetal and this is more rock + rap))
Adults also love to play with toys. Just toys become larger and more expensive)) And I feel sorry for those who do not want to spend some child. )) Thanks man, for the video. +5
People. Who speaks in English. Please tell me the song title or the text At least one sentence that I could find the lyrics to the Internet. I can not understand the words - the recording quality is too bad. Write At least the first sentence. I was too bad speak english, to make a correct spelling suggestion from the song. Maybe it is bad song, not important. I need name. Thank you.
these are nice kits, this one has the porsche turret, i've seen some metal r/c tanks that were like 3feet long and some shot softair and other fired 22cal blanks. the thing with german tanks is their armour was 8-10" thick and rommel espically had some of his panzers coated in cement to add a buffer to machine gun fire. not as devestating to some of our modern tanks but a ww2 tiger is still considered a deadly tank today.
I'm pretty sure the tiger 2's 88mm was longer and higher velocity than the tiger 1. If you look at the models you can easily see the difference. The Is2's 122mm was tested to destroy the T2's frontal armour after groups of three or four shots hit it (russian testing). Of course, the T2 had excellent optics and was sited defensively to take advantage of this fact in long range duals as the war went against the germans. If I had to go head to head with a T2 I'd want a JS3, not an IS2.
The 88m L71 on the Tiger 2 had a longer barrel and improved muzzle velocity as compared to the Tiger 1`s 88mm L56 gun . It is notably the greatest AT weapon of the war . The Js3 didnt serve in the war ... at least not against the germans . It waas only present in Berlin when the Reich collapsed but didnt see any action . It is however possible that a regiment of JS3s might of served against the Japaneese after Germany surrendered .
12 January 1945, the column "Tiger - 2" from 524 PzAbt was involved in near fight with tanks IS-2 about village Lisuv. In furious collision both sides have had very serious losses, practically having exterminated each other.
Maybe you mean Schwere Panzer-Abteilung 504 (or SwPzAbt 504 in short) . Heavy tank battalion 524 didnt exist .
SwPzAbt 504 was never equipped with Tiger 2 tanks . Only Tiger 1 tanks equiped the 504 . And its imposible for the 504 to have engaged the Russians as it spent the war in Italy . The 504 was first attached to the Herrmann Goering panzer division in Sicilly.After that The 504 spent the rest of the war in Italy and in Jan 1945 it was fighting around Argenta .
It has taken place during initial phase Berlin-Oder of operation. 504?? Is not present but Casual fight between IS-2 and tigers-2 from 503 PzAbt has taken place in November, 1944 nearby to Budapest.
"12 January 1945, the column "Tiger - 2" from 524 PzAbt "
is what you sayd , and SwPzAbt 524 didnt exist .
Maybe i didnt understand what you ment.
Yes sure thing the Js2 and Tiger 2 tanks engaged in combat many times .
You are correct , the 503rd was equiped with Tiger 2 tanks in September 1944 and sent to Hungary where it participated in the defence of Budapest at the end of 1944 .
The Tiger 2 tank was mostlly present on the E front , fighting against the russians .
The muzzle velocity you gave for the 88mm is that of the Tiger 1s L56 gun fireing APCBC shells .
The Tiger2`s 88 mm L71 gun fired Pzgr 39 (APCBC Shell) at 1000 m/s . The Pzgr 39 round weight at around 10.4 KG . The 88mm L71 of the Tiger 2 also fired Pzgr 40/43 (APCR Round) which weight around 7,3 Kg . It fired this at 1130 m/s . Also 773m/s was the velocity at which the 88mm L71 fired its Gr 39 rounds ( or HEAT rounds)
I have found the information that it probably was 424 sPzAb (45 King of Tigers) he has got in ambush IS-2 (29 GTTP (Guards heavy tank shelfs) Result of fight became 424 sPzAb Germans have lost actual destruction about 35 kings - tigers. Have lost the USSR up to 30 IS-2, both commanders of divisions both Jukov and Semish were lost.
Its not possible.SCHWERE(as in Heavy) Panzer Abteilung 424 didnt exist. Tiger 2 tanks were issued ONLY to the Heavy Tank Battalions of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS . Those units were SwPzAbt 501, 502 ,503, 508,509 and 511 . Also the Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 501 , 502 and 503 were equiped with Tiger 2s after September 1944. Also HIGHLLY unusual that a Battalion might of had all its full compliment of 45 KT operational and engaged at same time . Maybe you have the unit mixed up my friend .
Your info canis hard to believe, there were only 40-60 Tiger II tanks in the eastfront. The Tiger II hadnt same firepower, but its precision and reaload time were much better. Germans wanted to upgrade themwith better cannons(and not only that) but it was alrready too late.
Germans wanted to create Tiger III, and they would do it, but they hadnt enough ressources. So far as i know they had 1 of them. Read about E 100 Panzerkampfwagen.
Valid you couldnt be more wrong... it was the chinese that invented rocets for war around 1100 ad and yes they did have have fighters that fired rockets in WW2 such as the brittish typhoon and american p-47
O ya the way all the king tiger crews died was from the explosion of the HE Shells fired out of stalin tanks, it cooked the crew alive while inside the tank and the armored of the KT was melted.
damn you are so blinded of propaganda, the most king tigers that were really destroyed by the enemy were knocked out by anti tank guns or airstrike! only the fewest were destroyed by the IS-2s. the IS-2 was not even his common enemy because they met each other only very seldom. on the eastern most Tiger II's were destroyed by T-34-85s, SU-100s or artilleries. but most of all were destroyed by their own crews to prevent captrue.
All kt crews died from HE shells? Guess history books will have to be re-written. For starters, HE were really meant as anti personel/lightvehicle/structure ammo. If AP shells could barely penetrate KT's armor how could HE melt through the armor consistently? Now if you mean rockets from planes coming down upon the weaker top armor that might be a bit more believable.
180mm of armor is not much armor at all, and none of the tanks had the armor to take an explosive round, all tanks and all anti tank weapons were destroyed by these explosions. planes did not fire rockets back then they used machine guns and bombs. yes HE shells is like cooking a person a in metal containment and yes they died from it. no tanks back then were meant to take heat.
Approx 7" of Steel for WWII tech was not enough? Sorry forgot we had DU rounds back then that just breezed right through steel. Makes me wonder why allies had such a hard time taking out German tanks and letting KT's have an avg kill ratio of 16:1 particularly on the eastern front when apparently all you needed was a good HE regardless of muzzle velocity and caliber.
Soviet Tanks did not have too much trouble. if a round comes from IS-2 a 122m round with explosion it killed any person inside that vehicle. Stalin tanks had similiar ratios like that as well. Stalin tanks had more than enough of velocity and caliber to destroy any tank and cook it up.
Perhaps next time you should go for a girl who has reached puberty oh and if you put the comics down and pick up a history book it would help you in the accuracy department.
shes 18 my age, and i did not know it takes longer than 18 years for people to go through puberty in your country. US History books are the best, unlike Church-hills propaganda.
WTH? Planes definitly didn't fire rockets back then.... In WW2 the Nazis inventend the first rockets for war... Called V-1 & V-2... they were made for bombarding London...
Are you nuts? Might I suggest that you put this in your search engine: British Typhoon, (picture, rockets). That should clear up your ignorance of WW 2 Allied technology. Geez.
Valid almost every side had rockets in WW2 on their planes and on the ground. The Americans had the Calliope and P-47 with Rockets, Germans had Nebelwerfer, British had the Typhoon with Rockets, and the Russians had the Katyusha Rocket system so yea rockets have been around a LOOOOOONG time, the U.S even had them in the Civil War(Hale Rocket)
You need to educate yourself. British Typhoons fired rockets. I'm pretty sure that the Germans had a basic anti shipping missile and there's probably a few others as well.
Yes English Typhoons, Russian Il2 Sturmovic, P47 Thunderbolts, Lightnings, German Me262, FW 190 and many, many other aircraft fired a variety of effective unguided rockets during WWII. The germans also deployed a radio guided glide bomb in the anti ship role late in the war, but I can't list any successes with it.
depends what are you talking about....air to air missiles ,were used by germans on their jet fighters,the brits.....they were useless...they prove themselves at dunkirk lucky with rusky and americans.
rits werent useless, without britain west allied wouldnt be able to attack germany, usa gave less lifes to recapture the europe, usa borrowed ressources. Britain protected africa, without the, Germany would capture the asian parts of the earth and Japan would be able to work togetgher with germany.
The 122m was great for penetration it even penetrated thought king tiger and jadtiger frontal armor it did what it needed too and also they were explosive shells which added to penetration and impact. But the Best AT gun was the 15 cm on the ISU-152.
Man, you have to understand that as PENETRATION goes,the 122mm and 152mm were NOT good at all..in fact they were less then average . Those two guns first and formost were low velocity guns , howitzers that fired HE rounds . HE Anti Tank rounds were very rare in those days. A HE shell fired from those tanks could disable a tanks drivetrain or transmition,BUT COULD NOT PENETRATE the armour . Those guns were NOT designed with AT purpose in mind , they were for infantry suport first and foremost.
bullshit if a big caliber hit any of those none highly armored tanks back then they would be destroyed. the explosion can double the impact and penetration. and that big round destroyed armor with even very low velocity and paralyzed tanks after being hit with it.
Dude , stop beeing such a hard head . Yes a High explosive round from a large caliber howitzer can paralize a tank , but IT DOES NOT PENETRATE ,xcept on rare ocazions . That means the Crew survives a hit and probablly the tank is NOT an irecuperable loss . An AT Gun`s main purpose is to DISTROY a tank = that means clean Penetration and explosion insde the crew compartiment killing everyone and explodeing the TANK . A howitzer can`t do that , it maybe can disable the tank but NOT DISTROY IT .
None of you children have ever been in a tank batlle. You don't need to penetrate to get a kill. Armor can scab internally when hit by a round and still kill the crew. And yes thr 203mmHowitzer has killed tanks, Look up the terms HESH and HEAT
Well Mr. Pedantic , we were actually discussing the effects that a dedicated AT gun , in this case the 88 L71 of the Tiger 2 has on a tank , as oposed to the 152mm or 122mm Howitzers that the Red army used . Less than 3% of the shells used by the Red army for AT purposes were HEAT and were primitive .There have been cases that a Howitzer totally distroyed a tank, depending on caliber, range etc , but i was argueing that a Howitzer`s main purpose is NOT an AT role.
Did not speak to Soviet artillery. Most are not but many US piecesare dual purpose. The velocity of the 71 calibre 88 was in many cases self defeating. It could plough thru many lightly armored targets without exploding, causing only and entrance and exit hole
All people who served in the war deserve respect , If you really did serve,couse in front of the computer everyone is someone, doesnt mean you are right . And as about the disscution you totally missed the point and i failed to see any veteran beeing smart about fighting in ww2 . We KIDS might not of fought in the war but we have acces to information and disscutions with others,includeing experts and veterans and franklly you`ve "tried" to be smart without any arguments .
Come look me up if you please . I live in a small town of less than 1000 people in Alabama USA. You see over time, Information is oftern lost, memeories fade, and in many cases embellished. I ahve tried to be "smart" as you say from bein in the US armored forces for 3 decades and inthe defense establishment for another 20. I will be in teh Vteran Day Parade 11 Nov 09 in Birmingham with 5 of my surviving mates. Come if you please. We can dispell some myths
I would love to come to wittness such event . Unfortunatelly i can`t honor the invitation . It would of been quite an experience to meet you and others who were directlly involved in that awful war .
Yes you are right Blitz. I served in WWII. You don't ahve to pierce the armor to kill the crew. I ahve seen countless dead NAZI tankmen dead at their crew stations when the concussion and shock from 155 and 203 mm shells ruptered their internal organs and such the oxygen out of them.Also I ahve seen the WP shells trun their tanks into 70 ton pressure cookers litterally frying the crews inside.
I'm going to say this one last time, in a stricly anti tank sense the 122mm was completely inadequate when compared to antitank guns on other late war tanks. and there is no account of a 122mm completely disabling many tanks at a time. it was too large for the chasis cumbersome to reload and lacked the penetrating power of other higher velocity anti tank guns. the best anti tank gun in the war is far and away the 8.8cm gun that the jagdpanther, and regular tiger carried.
May have been useless but what a show of german engineering. to bad they couldn't make this but a smaller lighter, quicker version. But hell it was the 1940's propaganda and fear ruled those who followed it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Mass times velocity = force. BS-300 o that is the gun on the IS-3 and its a 100mm gun with more velocity than the 122m but. Yes The IS-2 had the D-25. and no it can't do more armor penetration by the numbers you have given me, i plugged in the numbers for the formula and the 122mm cam out with greater force. It's not a fact you made it up and this formula has proven you wrong.
No, the IS-3 had the same gun which was used by the IS-2, a 122mm D-25. a tank gun named "BS-300" with a caliber of 100mm was never designed in history(only in your confused mind)
i don't know how often i already said it, but it's a historical fact, the 8,8cm KwK 43 of the KT had more penetrating power than any other soviet tank gun of WW2, believe it or not. nobody cares. the 88mm was longer + it had a higher muzzle velocity and better armor piercing capabilities. end of story!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
it is not a historical fact. The BS-300 was a soveit gun ready to be used on future tanks including the barely used IS-3. it is not a historical fact, if the velocity of 88mm does not make up for the amount of mass on the 122mm, 122mm has more force and therefore more penetration not only physics says that but military experts as well. The 88mm was not longer than the 122mm, you need 1/3 longer barrely to fire 122m than you do 88mm, certain density need for certain mass. physics disproves you.
The impact of the 122m if it did not bust through them armor it shook up other tanks like crazy to wear gears and tracks were out of place, so it ended up paralyzing other tanks including king tiger. Mechanical breakdowns were from the impact of the 122m rounds. some tanks were flipped over by the impact.
the 122mm gun was not a good anti tank gun slow rate of fire becasue the shells were too big, it couldn't penetrate a good portion fo the PANTHERs(not tigers) frontal armor and proved to be a much better bunker and anti personel gun. it was effectively the same as the PANTHERs 7.5 CM high velocity cannon for penetration but sucked for reloading and so was less effective. the B-3 was a 100mm cannon that was used onthe SU-100 it was effectively able todestroy german tanks andwas used extensively.
122m either penetrated or paralyzed what ever it landed on and as long as it does one or the other its a very good round. B-3 was used in SU-100 as well as IS-3 tanks and upgraded kv tanks.
the 122mm was a poor anti gun, the only reason it was used at all was it was one of the few russian guns that could disable a panther from the front. its rate of fire was terrible due tot he size fo the round. and it was less effective than the german 8.8cm and about equivalent to the panthers 7.5 cm gun by the end of the war it was being used mainly as an anti bunker and emplacement cannon.
The 122mm was a guaranteed destroy or paralyze of a target. The 122mm turned Berlin into ruins as well as many tanks into sitting ducks or just destroyed.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
maybe the gun did but the ammo it self its still 1/3 less armor penetrable than the 122mm ammo. to have the penetration of the 122m gun the 88mm gun has to go at least 1/3 more velocity of that of the 122m to equal it out. The King Tiger did not have much of a longer barrel than the IS-2. The IS-2 barrel would almost double the length of the tank itself. The armor penetration is more than that it destroyed tigers and they had 110mm at 2.5k distance. But the impact of 122m was far greater than 88
the Tiger's frontal armor was VERTICAL, but the penetration table was sloped at 30degrees! of course, the IS-2 could kill Tigers frontally from 1,300 meters distance! impact is only effective against buildings and infantry, while penetrating power is effective against armoured targets.
i still don't get your point, the 8,8 cm gun had better penetrating power + higher muzzle velocity anyway! the large of the caliber DOESN'T MATTER! end of the story!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
larger caliber more impact more explosion more power simple. Impact riled up gears of many German tanks and caused them to have mechanical breakdowns. that was the most common reason for The KT breaking down. IS tanks even with penetrated armor often kept moving and firing. The velocity was not much faster than then 122m to make it more powerful. The 122m impact could take out 2 to 3 tanks at a time when they were near each other.
but your logic makes no sense, just listen to your own words!
velocity was not much faster?
806 m/s of the 122mm compared to 1,130 m/s of the 8,8cm KwK!!!
that is very MUCH faster! over 300 m/s!
as i showed you before, the 8,8cm did penetrate almost 90mm more armor than the russian D-25 did!
the main reason why most King Tigers broke down was because they had to go straight into series production without the new engine. it would have required more testing to work out problems.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
if those are the velocity it still is not more armor penetrating than the 122mm that is not 1/3 more velocity. it seems the 122m still had more armor penetration according to the laws of physics. im not talking about the D-25 i am talking about the BS-300.
a) what is a "BS-300"? there was no "BS-300" version of a 122mm gun!
b) of course, you are talking about the D-25 because we are comparing the King tiger and the IS-2 and this tank was armed with the D-25 gun!
c) what the hack have the laws of physics got to do with this topic? i don't get it! the 8,8 cm has significant MORE penetrating power. it is already proven! the 8,8cm gun of the Tiger can simply penetrate more mm of armor than the russian 12,2 cm gun - fact! end of the story!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The IS-2 gun had such power that it hit near a tank tiger tank 2 the impact rumbled the tank so hard the gears stopped working and the tiger could not even shoot. and then the IS-2 comes closer and destroys the KT. The IS-3 was the KT killer and the KT had to come close to destroy this tank since it was tough armored and hard to hit.
bla bla JBBlitz shut up, you are the most annoying youtuber ever with your stupid and senseless propaganda! stop writing ridiculous comments under every WW2 video!
on some videos you claimed the 122mm gun of the IS-2 could fire 8000 meters and it had 300 mm armor, just lies. congratulations, you are just brainwashed by wrong information, do more research, its not that hard!
the 8,8cm KwK could kill the IS-2/3 at 2,500+ meters range far outside the effective gun range of the 122mm!
Great job man!! What's that on top of the turret at 0;43? The back thing? I've seen it b4. I'm putting 2gether one now,and don't know if I need to addd the black thing.Great job.Thanks!!!! A+!!
willsworthy 8 months ago
@willsworthy
That is an Infrared detector for laser tag style battles with another tank.
heavyaslead 8 months ago
yo thats a RC
slim77k 8 months ago
duz the gun work??
canadiangangsterno1 10 months ago
Very nice model and very well done video. By the way, this was the version with the porsche turret?
Alexpress 10 months ago
lol this is so a model tank and i did not even read the comments first before figuring that out the first 10 seconds of the video. i mean old industrialized tech at that time for that tank to move one inch it would have been seen miles away from its exhaust spewing out just for moving one yard watching it go over over that fake concrete block with no black exhaust gave it away lol. anyways not like any body cares lol.
fusionmechanic 11 months ago
tiger is a badass tank. but the propaganda around it is his most outstanding feature.
do a little research, look at some statistics an you knew what i mean.(to everybody) it was the tank that got destroyed most by its own troops!
also compare the recurces and man-hours that went into building a tiger vs. a small fighter plane with anti tank bombs. (1:3 for the german stuka)
these kind of planes killed a lot of tigers too.
still tiger rocks! it was just too good/advanced to be effective.
masterblaster12000 1 year ago
king tiger most feared tank on the battlefield. british commando infantry most feared infantry on the battle field
nathnastyman 1 year ago
nice camo pattern
petrwarry72 1 year ago
nice play tank
deurmadd 1 year ago
You think thats scary? Imagine if the Germans developed the P1000 Landkruezer Ratte. The Allies would be dead in the water!
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
I have the Forces of Valor 1/16 monster scale German King Tiger diecast and resin model.
***** stars for this video
freeharddrive 1 year ago
king tiger king of its time they need to make a new tiger tank
kira420weed 1 year ago
Лучше пусть будут только такие танки
MrPhanatIQ 1 year ago
is this a toy or wat
phanable1 1 year ago
klasse!
AX2361234 1 year ago
una excelente maquina...
jokindumec 1 year ago
gazakind 1 year ago
I have to agree with DudemanClide here... LOL AT missles mostly use either heat signature or fire forget photo imaging. so no matter how high or low the tank is.. if your armor cant keep up with technology.. your screwed. Oh and the T-90 is not all that is cracked up to be. Besides I dont think they have but a few Regiments or Divisions of them.. to expensive.. Russians still mainly have T-80 with reserves of upgraded T-74's. The T-80 is old... T-90 pretty much upgraded T-80UT.
JuergenGDB 1 year ago
@JuergenGDB Also there are currently only around 400-T-90 Tanks in Service.. some with the 5th Guards and Eastern Military District.. (Siberia) The rest of their tank arm is mainly old T-80 tanks.. although capable.. got jacked up in Grozny...T-80 crews lacked sufficient training before the war..andthe T-80BV sucked.
JuergenGDB 1 year ago
and the russians think their tanks are best xD. Germany, USA, and Israel all have the best
DudemanClide 1 year ago
this tank could beat the T95
DudemanClide 1 year ago
@DudemanClide
:D you faild
whats harder to hit with an AT weapon?
T90 hight =2.22 m
Merkava hight = 2.66 m
abrams hight = 2.86 m
leopard 2 hight = 3.03 m
so.. t90 winner
t95 is even smaller
and t90 have his reaktive plating, due to which at weapons have a lower damaging effect ^^
gazakind 1 year ago
@gazakind ...okay...every tank has reactive plating, and hieght doesnt matter when it comes to anti tank missles. so yeah you pretty much failed hard. while your at it, would you like some epic with your phail?
DudemanClide 1 year ago
@DudemanClide
i never seen reactive plating on an abrams ^^ or an leopard..
you know that are the small boxes on the tank..
by the way :D the hight matters more than you think..
if you try to HIDE an tank its far more easier to hide an half a meter smaller tank.. dont you think so?
if you plan an ambush its better to NOT be seen
gazakind 1 year ago
@gazakind thats true, and i can send you a pic of reactive plating on an abrams. we use it everyday in Iraq
DudemanClide 1 year ago
@DudemanClide
send
gazakind 1 year ago
@gazakind it would be more important if your enemy didn't have thermal sights, mounted in unmanned aircraft, sending GPS coordinates to the shooters.
DonMeaker 1 year ago
@DudemanClide
The Leo2A6 and the british Challenger 2 is the shit
Ialocin85 1 year ago
I got another question, I cannot seem to find a band anywhere on google named "musicshake" and I cannot seem to find the song besides on here and 1 other youtube video.
larsulrich3356 2 years ago
sounds like an odd megadeth track but is not, anyway how hard did u look bc i found it easily
noordwinter 1 year ago
I got the song from a different place and person on youtube. I found another video with a guy that was sending the song to people via e-mail. Thanks anyways.
larsulrich3356 1 year ago
@larsulrich3356 "musicshake" - it's music site, not band. Write there in search "Anger"
MrSarMax 1 year ago
for all, which do not know the song:
Anger, from, MusicShake
Schattensonne 2 years ago 5
Thank you very much for your information, it is much appreciated!
larsulrich3356 2 years ago
@Schattensonne Thank you very mach for information !!!
MrSarMax 1 year ago
How much did this tank cost and where did you buy it?
ImperialUprising 2 years ago
pleasse,the name of the song of the vid,is a brutal song....
POWERxPREDATOR 2 years ago
Hey guys, is it really so difficult to write to me at least 1 sentence of the song? That I could find the song and artist on the Internet. I can not understand the lirycs - I know english too bad. This is NOT Morbid Angel - Hatework!
MrSarMax 2 years ago
Not sure- I pulled it from Audioswap-
heavyaslead 2 years ago
where did you get 1
lonewolf2212 2 years ago
It is a nice model well photographed but I really think that those who post models without stating so are real asses. It is just a way to get those who are not interested to veiw their post. Be considerate and include that it is a model in the title.
scottduncan44 2 years ago 17
I agree.
ExUSSailor 2 years ago
This is a very nice model you have and I had built a maybe 100 tank models, tanks are fascinating. I learned airbrushing in high school (late 1970's) and the variations you can create with one are amazing. I bought my last one (still in the box) for $6 from harborfreight and a compressor from pep boys for $40 (cans are expensive, you have a buy a case to do anything worthwhile, and run out of air too fast, moreover, the compressor is very useful for cleaning computers and many other things).
PrinceMustDie666 2 years ago
Heeeeeelp!))
MrSarMax 2 years ago
Write "morbid angel hatework" and listen - this is totally different music. If that song in general can be called music ...
MrSarMax 2 years ago
Sorry, maybe I do not know English, maybe moron, but I am not deaf))) This is not Morbid Angel. Here Morbid Angel "Hatework" (watch? V = 0sQav7zv_TQ) And this is clearly not something that is yours. Maybe it's a lightweight remix of Morbid Angel. But this is totally different songs and styles. He Hatework - deathmetal and this is more rock + rap))
MrSarMax 2 years ago
Adults also love to play with toys. Just toys become larger and more expensive)) And I feel sorry for those who do not want to spend some child. )) Thanks man, for the video. +5
MrSarMax 2 years ago
plzzz must know song!
scope1414 2 years ago
Song is "Hatework" by Morbid Angel.
heavyaslead 2 years ago
I think it is not Morbid Angel, as written at the end of the clip ...
MrSarMax 2 years ago
People. Who speaks in English. Please tell me the song title or the text At least one sentence that I could find the lyrics to the Internet. I can not understand the words - the recording quality is too bad. Write At least the first sentence. I was too bad speak english, to make a correct spelling suggestion from the song. Maybe it is bad song, not important. I need name. Thank you.
MrSarMax 2 years ago
anger, my music something... its in the statistics and data section above ^^
xXxassassinatorxXx 2 years ago
... this is a toy, right?
HiconPicon 2 years ago 3
terrible music
MajorasLiepa 2 years ago
absolute shit sound track, you could not call it music.
bobwhead42 2 years ago
IDIOTEN
roemersss 2 years ago 2
An Iranian IED can flip this tank so we have to strike back at the Iranians with carpet bombing their oil depots and destroy their port system.
Strike by the sea and cripple Iran.
jethromayham 2 years ago
yea ignite all of the oil, great thinking dumbass oil is very valuable
scope1414 2 years ago
Somebody knows the name of a song and group? Please tell me. Thanks.
MrSarMax 2 years ago
these are nice kits, this one has the porsche turret, i've seen some metal r/c tanks that were like 3feet long and some shot softair and other fired 22cal blanks. the thing with german tanks is their armour was 8-10" thick and rommel espically had some of his panzers coated in cement to add a buffer to machine gun fire. not as devestating to some of our modern tanks but a ww2 tiger is still considered a deadly tank today.
34D2234 2 years ago
i would like to see a real R/C maus tank
bestamerica 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure the tiger 2's 88mm was longer and higher velocity than the tiger 1. If you look at the models you can easily see the difference. The Is2's 122mm was tested to destroy the T2's frontal armour after groups of three or four shots hit it (russian testing). Of course, the T2 had excellent optics and was sited defensively to take advantage of this fact in long range duals as the war went against the germans. If I had to go head to head with a T2 I'd want a JS3, not an IS2.
kramnosdivad 2 years ago
The 88m L71 on the Tiger 2 had a longer barrel and improved muzzle velocity as compared to the Tiger 1`s 88mm L56 gun . It is notably the greatest AT weapon of the war . The Js3 didnt serve in the war ... at least not against the germans . It waas only present in Berlin when the Reich collapsed but didnt see any action . It is however possible that a regiment of JS3s might of served against the Japaneese after Germany surrendered .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
12 January 1945, the column "Tiger - 2" from 524 PzAbt was involved in near fight with tanks IS-2 about village Lisuv. In furious collision both sides have had very serious losses, practically having exterminated each other.
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
Maybe you mean Schwere Panzer-Abteilung 504 (or SwPzAbt 504 in short) . Heavy tank battalion 524 didnt exist .
SwPzAbt 504 was never equipped with Tiger 2 tanks . Only Tiger 1 tanks equiped the 504 . And its imposible for the 504 to have engaged the Russians as it spent the war in Italy . The 504 was first attached to the Herrmann Goering panzer division in Sicilly.After that The 504 spent the rest of the war in Italy and in Jan 1945 it was fighting around Argenta .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
It has taken place during initial phase Berlin-Oder of operation. 504?? Is not present but Casual fight between IS-2 and tigers-2 from 503 PzAbt has taken place in November, 1944 nearby to Budapest.
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
"12 January 1945, the column "Tiger - 2" from 524 PzAbt "
is what you sayd , and SwPzAbt 524 didnt exist .
Maybe i didnt understand what you ment.
Yes sure thing the Js2 and Tiger 2 tanks engaged in combat many times .
You are correct , the 503rd was equiped with Tiger 2 tanks in September 1944 and sent to Hungary where it participated in the defence of Budapest at the end of 1944 .
The Tiger 2 tank was mostlly present on the E front , fighting against the russians .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
TIGR2 gun 88mm a shell 10,2kg 773m/s
IS2 gun 122mm a shell 25kg 790m/s
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
The muzzle velocity you gave for the 88mm is that of the Tiger 1s L56 gun fireing APCBC shells .
The Tiger2`s 88 mm L71 gun fired Pzgr 39 (APCBC Shell) at 1000 m/s . The Pzgr 39 round weight at around 10.4 KG . The 88mm L71 of the Tiger 2 also fired Pzgr 40/43 (APCR Round) which weight around 7,3 Kg . It fired this at 1130 m/s . Also 773m/s was the velocity at which the 88mm L71 fired its Gr 39 rounds ( or HEAT rounds)
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
Cosmin1511 You are right in 1945 IS3 (Approximately 40-70)participated in Fight for Manchuria
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
I have found the information that it probably was 424 sPzAb (45 King of Tigers) he has got in ambush IS-2 (29 GTTP (Guards heavy tank shelfs) Result of fight became 424 sPzAb Germans have lost actual destruction about 35 kings - tigers. Have lost the USSR up to 30 IS-2, both commanders of divisions both Jukov and Semish were lost.
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
Its not possible.SCHWERE(as in Heavy) Panzer Abteilung 424 didnt exist. Tiger 2 tanks were issued ONLY to the Heavy Tank Battalions of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS . Those units were SwPzAbt 501, 502 ,503, 508,509 and 511 . Also the Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 501 , 502 and 503 were equiped with Tiger 2s after September 1944. Also HIGHLLY unusual that a Battalion might of had all its full compliment of 45 KT operational and engaged at same time . Maybe you have the unit mixed up my friend .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
poland village Lisuv Schwere Panzer-Abteilung 424 (501):-)
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
The Schwere Panzer Abteilung 424 was formed in December 1944 from Schwere Panzer Abteilung 501.!!!!!!!
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
the IS2 M44's thick and well sloped one-piece glaics would be inpenetrable to Tiger E's 88 at even 100 meters.
Source is German field manual cited by Thomas Jentz in his book GERMANY'S TIGER TANKS.
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
In August 1944 on Sandomirski, 1 IS2 in an ambush struggled against 24 TIGR2 it was destroyed 13 TIGR2s (King)
IT PROVES FEEBLENESS TIGERs AGAINST HEAVY TANKS..
KOSTIAN242 2 years ago
Your info canis hard to believe, there were only 40-60 Tiger II tanks in the eastfront. The Tiger II hadnt same firepower, but its precision and reaload time were much better. Germans wanted to upgrade themwith better cannons(and not only that) but it was alrready too late.
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
The armor was better too. IS-2 could be destroyed by a panther.
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
Germans wanted to create Tiger III, and they would do it, but they hadnt enough ressources. So far as i know they had 1 of them. Read about E 100 Panzerkampfwagen.
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
I'm sorry guys... Im swiss and I transleted rockets with guided rockets.. Im sorry i was wrong... But hey, 10 guys should be enought to correct me^^
ValidlD 2 years ago
Translated^^
ValidlD 2 years ago
Valid you couldnt be more wrong... it was the chinese that invented rocets for war around 1100 ad and yes they did have have fighters that fired rockets in WW2 such as the brittish typhoon and american p-47
konfederate6277144 2 years ago
so nice to know that modern society can debate historical accuracy in a sane and calm manner. . . . .
tigerproductions4 2 years ago
O ya the way all the king tiger crews died was from the explosion of the HE Shells fired out of stalin tanks, it cooked the crew alive while inside the tank and the armored of the KT was melted.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
damn you are so blinded of propaganda, the most king tigers that were really destroyed by the enemy were knocked out by anti tank guns or airstrike! only the fewest were destroyed by the IS-2s. the IS-2 was not even his common enemy because they met each other only very seldom. on the eastern most Tiger II's were destroyed by T-34-85s, SU-100s or artilleries. but most of all were destroyed by their own crews to prevent captrue.
xNexus65x 2 years ago
Lies you speak
ocolumbia 2 years ago
All kt crews died from HE shells? Guess history books will have to be re-written. For starters, HE were really meant as anti personel/lightvehicle/structure ammo. If AP shells could barely penetrate KT's armor how could HE melt through the armor consistently? Now if you mean rockets from planes coming down upon the weaker top armor that might be a bit more believable.
PonsXAsinorum 2 years ago
180mm of armor is not much armor at all, and none of the tanks had the armor to take an explosive round, all tanks and all anti tank weapons were destroyed by these explosions. planes did not fire rockets back then they used machine guns and bombs. yes HE shells is like cooking a person a in metal containment and yes they died from it. no tanks back then were meant to take heat.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Approx 7" of Steel for WWII tech was not enough? Sorry forgot we had DU rounds back then that just breezed right through steel. Makes me wonder why allies had such a hard time taking out German tanks and letting KT's have an avg kill ratio of 16:1 particularly on the eastern front when apparently all you needed was a good HE regardless of muzzle velocity and caliber.
PonsXAsinorum 2 years ago
Soviet Tanks did not have too much trouble. if a round comes from IS-2 a 122m round with explosion it killed any person inside that vehicle. Stalin tanks had similiar ratios like that as well. Stalin tanks had more than enough of velocity and caliber to destroy any tank and cook it up.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
I think that you need to do some research.
Saxe333 2 years ago
i don't care what you think its what i know that matters.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
LOL your just a silly little boy, making stuff up as you go along. Go back to masturbating.
Saxe333 2 years ago
i have a gf but it sucks i you have been beating off for 50 years and don't have someone but hey that's normal where you are.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Perhaps next time you should go for a girl who has reached puberty oh and if you put the comics down and pick up a history book it would help you in the accuracy department.
Saxe333 2 years ago
shes 18 my age, and i did not know it takes longer than 18 years for people to go through puberty in your country. US History books are the best, unlike Church-hills propaganda.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Dude , really stop beliveing what that old guys says .... its not true , or at least not entirelly .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
enough of it is.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Planes did fire rockets back then,the British Typhoon to name one.
Saxe333 2 years ago
WTH? Planes definitly didn't fire rockets back then.... In WW2 the Nazis inventend the first rockets for war... Called V-1 & V-2... they were made for bombarding London...
ValidlD 2 years ago
Are you nuts? Might I suggest that you put this in your search engine: British Typhoon, (picture, rockets). That should clear up your ignorance of WW 2 Allied technology. Geez.
EStrongblade 2 years ago
Valid almost every side had rockets in WW2 on their planes and on the ground. The Americans had the Calliope and P-47 with Rockets, Germans had Nebelwerfer, British had the Typhoon with Rockets, and the Russians had the Katyusha Rocket system so yea rockets have been around a LOOOOOONG time, the U.S even had them in the Civil War(Hale Rocket)
tyler4171 2 years ago
but they did have atomic bombs =D
Agomongo1235 2 years ago
No invalid. the Chines invented the first war rockets nearly 1600 yeaers ago
ocolumbia 2 years ago
You need to educate yourself. British Typhoons fired rockets. I'm pretty sure that the Germans had a basic anti shipping missile and there's probably a few others as well.
Saxe333 2 years ago
Comment removed
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
Yes English Typhoons, Russian Il2 Sturmovic, P47 Thunderbolts, Lightnings, German Me262, FW 190 and many, many other aircraft fired a variety of effective unguided rockets during WWII. The germans also deployed a radio guided glide bomb in the anti ship role late in the war, but I can't list any successes with it.
kramnosdivad 2 years ago
And?
First Bombing the civillian Attack
Begin THe FUCKING ENGLAND
Very human integrity Things that was
CONGRATULATION
BewareOfTheBoogeyMan 2 years ago
shut up you whining maggot.
Saxe333 2 years ago
depends what are you talking about....air to air missiles ,were used by germans on their jet fighters,the brits.....they were useless...they prove themselves at dunkirk lucky with rusky and americans.
walt282002 2 years ago
rits werent useless, without britain west allied wouldnt be able to attack germany, usa gave less lifes to recapture the europe, usa borrowed ressources. Britain protected africa, without the, Germany would capture the asian parts of the earth and Japan would be able to work togetgher with germany.
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
i wrote too quick, sry
Ixtzalit 2 years ago
Shut up you uneducated dickhead.
Saxe333 2 years ago
yes they did, at the end of the war...
UrBigTwats 2 years ago
unguided rockets were fired from ground attack planes (not sure about everyone but americans definatly used them)
Archangel292 2 years ago
toy tank lol
counterstrike911 2 years ago
It could be destroyed by a RPG 29. and IED homemade.
felipe31283 2 years ago
if it can destroy a t-72 it could destroy anything else used in ww2.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
The 122m was great for penetration it even penetrated thought king tiger and jadtiger frontal armor it did what it needed too and also they were explosive shells which added to penetration and impact. But the Best AT gun was the 15 cm on the ISU-152.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Man, you have to understand that as PENETRATION goes,the 122mm and 152mm were NOT good at all..in fact they were less then average . Those two guns first and formost were low velocity guns , howitzers that fired HE rounds . HE Anti Tank rounds were very rare in those days. A HE shell fired from those tanks could disable a tanks drivetrain or transmition,BUT COULD NOT PENETRATE the armour . Those guns were NOT designed with AT purpose in mind , they were for infantry suport first and foremost.
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
bullshit if a big caliber hit any of those none highly armored tanks back then they would be destroyed. the explosion can double the impact and penetration. and that big round destroyed armor with even very low velocity and paralyzed tanks after being hit with it.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
Dude , stop beeing such a hard head . Yes a High explosive round from a large caliber howitzer can paralize a tank , but IT DOES NOT PENETRATE ,xcept on rare ocazions . That means the Crew survives a hit and probablly the tank is NOT an irecuperable loss . An AT Gun`s main purpose is to DISTROY a tank = that means clean Penetration and explosion insde the crew compartiment killing everyone and explodeing the TANK . A howitzer can`t do that , it maybe can disable the tank but NOT DISTROY IT .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
it can do both and it did in the war.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
None of you children have ever been in a tank batlle. You don't need to penetrate to get a kill. Armor can scab internally when hit by a round and still kill the crew. And yes thr 203mmHowitzer has killed tanks, Look up the terms HESH and HEAT
ThisFlagBowsToNoKing 2 years ago
Comment removed
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
Well Mr. Pedantic , we were actually discussing the effects that a dedicated AT gun , in this case the 88 L71 of the Tiger 2 has on a tank , as oposed to the 152mm or 122mm Howitzers that the Red army used . Less than 3% of the shells used by the Red army for AT purposes were HEAT and were primitive .There have been cases that a Howitzer totally distroyed a tank, depending on caliber, range etc , but i was argueing that a Howitzer`s main purpose is NOT an AT role.
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
Did not speak to Soviet artillery. Most are not but many US piecesare dual purpose. The velocity of the 71 calibre 88 was in many cases self defeating. It could plough thru many lightly armored targets without exploding, causing only and entrance and exit hole
ThisFlagBowsToNoKing 2 years ago
True . Excellent point .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
What war were you in? Video games don't count.
ThisFlagBowsToNoKing 2 years ago 2
All people who served in the war deserve respect , If you really did serve,couse in front of the computer everyone is someone, doesnt mean you are right . And as about the disscution you totally missed the point and i failed to see any veteran beeing smart about fighting in ww2 . We KIDS might not of fought in the war but we have acces to information and disscutions with others,includeing experts and veterans and franklly you`ve "tried" to be smart without any arguments .
Cheers !
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
Come look me up if you please . I live in a small town of less than 1000 people in Alabama USA. You see over time, Information is oftern lost, memeories fade, and in many cases embellished. I ahve tried to be "smart" as you say from bein in the US armored forces for 3 decades and inthe defense establishment for another 20. I will be in teh Vteran Day Parade 11 Nov 09 in Birmingham with 5 of my surviving mates. Come if you please. We can dispell some myths
ThisFlagBowsToNoKing 2 years ago
I would love to come to wittness such event . Unfortunatelly i can`t honor the invitation . It would of been quite an experience to meet you and others who were directlly involved in that awful war .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
Yes you are right Blitz. I served in WWII. You don't ahve to pierce the armor to kill the crew. I ahve seen countless dead NAZI tankmen dead at their crew stations when the concussion and shock from 155 and 203 mm shells ruptered their internal organs and such the oxygen out of them.Also I ahve seen the WP shells trun their tanks into 70 ton pressure cookers litterally frying the crews inside.
ThisFlagBowsToNoKing 2 years ago
I'm going to say this one last time, in a stricly anti tank sense the 122mm was completely inadequate when compared to antitank guns on other late war tanks. and there is no account of a 122mm completely disabling many tanks at a time. it was too large for the chasis cumbersome to reload and lacked the penetrating power of other higher velocity anti tank guns. the best anti tank gun in the war is far and away the 8.8cm gun that the jagdpanther, and regular tiger carried.
shilelea 2 years ago
The Jagdpanther had the 88mm L71 gun , same as the Tiger 2 . Tiger 1 had the 88mm L56 gun .
Cosmin1511 2 years ago
you are correct, my bad.
shilelea 2 years ago
Which exactly Morbid Angel song?
somebody know?
BewareOfTheBoogeyMan 2 years ago
R/C model.....try saying so in the first place man
RifledBarrel 2 years ago
nice toy lol
averbakh01 2 years ago
look at all those dumb fucks who can't stand reality LMAO
JBBlitz 2 years ago
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Most of em were toys
TomRuskin 2 years ago
lol
MurderMyDoll2 2 years ago
Comment removed
PavelasM 2 years ago
Are there any other TOY TANKS out there?
MrSupermonster 2 years ago
May have been useless but what a show of german engineering. to bad they couldn't make this but a smaller lighter, quicker version. But hell it was the 1940's propaganda and fear ruled those who followed it.
elfishgrin 2 years ago
That looks like a toy tank.
MrSupermonster 2 years ago
it is...
deadman903 2 years ago
you seem to be very smart :D
Ratti666 2 years ago
king tiger was a peice, way to slow and had somthing rediculas like a 90mm gun
rosher22 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Science disproves what you say and all you can say without any sources is that simply lie. i think were done here
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
gunmetal if you change your numbers please list a source and plug it in the formula to find the truth.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
by the numbers you have given me it seems the 122mm had slightly better armor penetration than the 88mm round on the KT.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
more force more armor penetration. each tank ammo was made of the same metal so the mass should be easy to measure from the 88mm to 122mm.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Mass times velocity = force. BS-300 o that is the gun on the IS-3 and its a 100mm gun with more velocity than the 122m but. Yes The IS-2 had the D-25. and no it can't do more armor penetration by the numbers you have given me, i plugged in the numbers for the formula and the 122mm cam out with greater force. It's not a fact you made it up and this formula has proven you wrong.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
No, the IS-3 had the same gun which was used by the IS-2, a 122mm D-25. a tank gun named "BS-300" with a caliber of 100mm was never designed in history(only in your confused mind)
i don't know how often i already said it, but it's a historical fact, the 8,8cm KwK 43 of the KT had more penetrating power than any other soviet tank gun of WW2, believe it or not. nobody cares. the 88mm was longer + it had a higher muzzle velocity and better armor piercing capabilities. end of story!
gunmetalxXx 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
it is not a historical fact. The BS-300 was a soveit gun ready to be used on future tanks including the barely used IS-3. it is not a historical fact, if the velocity of 88mm does not make up for the amount of mass on the 122mm, 122mm has more force and therefore more penetration not only physics says that but military experts as well. The 88mm was not longer than the 122mm, you need 1/3 longer barrely to fire 122m than you do 88mm, certain density need for certain mass. physics disproves you.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
for the 88m to have the same armor penetration as the 122m you need according to your stats 1218m/s to equal it out.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The Maybach engine 900hp was the new engine.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the bigger gun and ammo the more armor penetration simple fact even the discovery channel says that.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
The impact of the 122m if it did not bust through them armor it shook up other tanks like crazy to wear gears and tracks were out of place, so it ended up paralyzing other tanks including king tiger. Mechanical breakdowns were from the impact of the 122m rounds. some tanks were flipped over by the impact.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
the 122mm gun was not a good anti tank gun slow rate of fire becasue the shells were too big, it couldn't penetrate a good portion fo the PANTHERs(not tigers) frontal armor and proved to be a much better bunker and anti personel gun. it was effectively the same as the PANTHERs 7.5 CM high velocity cannon for penetration but sucked for reloading and so was less effective. the B-3 was a 100mm cannon that was used onthe SU-100 it was effectively able todestroy german tanks andwas used extensively.
shilelea 2 years ago
122m either penetrated or paralyzed what ever it landed on and as long as it does one or the other its a very good round. B-3 was used in SU-100 as well as IS-3 tanks and upgraded kv tanks.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
the 122mm was a poor anti gun, the only reason it was used at all was it was one of the few russian guns that could disable a panther from the front. its rate of fire was terrible due tot he size fo the round. and it was less effective than the german 8.8cm and about equivalent to the panthers 7.5 cm gun by the end of the war it was being used mainly as an anti bunker and emplacement cannon.
shilelea 2 years ago
The 122mm was a guaranteed destroy or paralyze of a target. The 122mm turned Berlin into ruins as well as many tanks into sitting ducks or just destroyed.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
maybe the gun did but the ammo it self its still 1/3 less armor penetrable than the 122mm ammo. to have the penetration of the 122m gun the 88mm gun has to go at least 1/3 more velocity of that of the 122m to equal it out. The King Tiger did not have much of a longer barrel than the IS-2. The IS-2 barrel would almost double the length of the tank itself. The armor penetration is more than that it destroyed tigers and they had 110mm at 2.5k distance. But the impact of 122m was far greater than 88
JBBlitz 2 years ago
the Tiger's frontal armor was VERTICAL, but the penetration table was sloped at 30degrees! of course, the IS-2 could kill Tigers frontally from 1,300 meters distance! impact is only effective against buildings and infantry, while penetrating power is effective against armoured targets.
i still don't get your point, the 8,8 cm gun had better penetrating power + higher muzzle velocity anyway! the large of the caliber DOESN'T MATTER! end of the story!
gunmetalxXx 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
larger caliber more impact more explosion more power simple. Impact riled up gears of many German tanks and caused them to have mechanical breakdowns. that was the most common reason for The KT breaking down. IS tanks even with penetrated armor often kept moving and firing. The velocity was not much faster than then 122m to make it more powerful. The 122m impact could take out 2 to 3 tanks at a time when they were near each other.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
but your logic makes no sense, just listen to your own words!
velocity was not much faster?
806 m/s of the 122mm compared to 1,130 m/s of the 8,8cm KwK!!!
that is very MUCH faster! over 300 m/s!
as i showed you before, the 8,8cm did penetrate almost 90mm more armor than the russian D-25 did!
the main reason why most King Tigers broke down was because they had to go straight into series production without the new engine. it would have required more testing to work out problems.
gunmetalxXx 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
if those are the velocity it still is not more armor penetrating than the 122mm that is not 1/3 more velocity. it seems the 122m still had more armor penetration according to the laws of physics. im not talking about the D-25 i am talking about the BS-300.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
a) what is a "BS-300"? there was no "BS-300" version of a 122mm gun!
b) of course, you are talking about the D-25 because we are comparing the King tiger and the IS-2 and this tank was armed with the D-25 gun!
c) what the hack have the laws of physics got to do with this topic? i don't get it! the 8,8 cm has significant MORE penetrating power. it is already proven! the 8,8cm gun of the Tiger can simply penetrate more mm of armor than the russian 12,2 cm gun - fact! end of the story!
gunmetalxXx 2 years ago 3
ich will auch so ein spielzeugmodell haben xD die teile können auch softairkugel verschießen lol^^
Leftyotism 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the comment below was personally witnessed by General Manstein.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
could you post your reference on that? where did you find that out?
ewolstenholm 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The IS-2 gun had such power that it hit near a tank tiger tank 2 the impact rumbled the tank so hard the gears stopped working and the tiger could not even shoot. and then the IS-2 comes closer and destroys the KT. The IS-3 was the KT killer and the KT had to come close to destroy this tank since it was tough armored and hard to hit.
JBBlitz 2 years ago
bla bla JBBlitz shut up, you are the most annoying youtuber ever with your stupid and senseless propaganda! stop writing ridiculous comments under every WW2 video!
on some videos you claimed the 122mm gun of the IS-2 could fire 8000 meters and it had 300 mm armor, just lies. congratulations, you are just brainwashed by wrong information, do more research, its not that hard!
the 8,8cm KwK could kill the IS-2/3 at 2,500+ meters range far outside the effective gun range of the 122mm!
gunmetalxXx 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
have fun wasting your life spreading this bullshit propaganda and trying to get people to believe it.
JBBlitz 2 years ago