@seralia1 when it's under-equipped paratroopers vs. a German tank, one of the best tanks of the war, in an area where there weren't supposed to be any tanks, mind, it's a very frightening prospect
How did all those fuel cans end up in the street? I don't remember a stock of fuel cans or Germans carrying fuel cans in the battle for the Arnhem bridge...and could tanks actually continue rolling despite having a fuel can jammed on the treads?
tomtom34b - Indeed - the most famous of all Tiger tanks arguably? The 131 captured in Tunisia in 1943 :) - the only Tiger I that can still run and function after 50 years (almost 70 now) - have you been to the Tankfest of 04 and 08? And yes because the remaining Tiger I's are too fragile, they use smaller models or improvised Tiger's built on scratch chassis such as the T-34 for movies - such as Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers :)
4:08 - that tank is meant to represent a Panther tank? Because at 4:42-4:45 the rear looks like a Patton or T-54 tank chassis model instead at 4:55-5:12 - its as if the tank was converted to look like a Panther tank. When I first saw it I thought it was a Jagdpanther on a turret! XD
@HeirofGojira91 it's actually a West German Leopard 1 with extra Armor plating to represent a Generic Panzer design. so in reality, it actually IS a German tank!
@Soundwave3591 Haha - that explains why the machine gun looked funny - and it looked so bulky - I first thought it was an advance Jagdpanther! Then I thought it was a Tiger Ausf B! Then before I got told it was a Leopard I I thought it was a modified Patton Tank! Haha - the gun barrel just looked odd for an 88mm KwK 36 or a 75mm PaK42/KwK42of the Tiger I or Panther
hey? why don't they use the ( king tiger ) leopard tank on the ambush??? they killed the crew did they? they supposed to do many damages w/ it, even challenge the other german tanks in the area and give a t least some relieves for the paras there until they run out of tank ammo.....
@AliceSexyChick Perhaps the Paratroopers were trained to fully utilize this - the Bengal Tiger tank doesn't look like this. And forgive me for being a factual asshole but from my readings General Bittrich sent Panther tanks to attack the Paratroopers - not Tiger's :) -> and there's no Leopard tank that the Germans used in WWII - only today's Leopard I and Leopard II. They did propose the Lowe Panzer VII Lion Tank though :) Also - 1 captured tank is probably no match for long against others sent.
@HeirofGojira91 -Tiger I tanks of Schwere Panzer Kompanie "Hummel' were rushed from Germany and did in fact participate in attacks on the Arnhem position. The first two (of 14) arrived on the 19th and were attached to Kampfgruppe 'Brinkmann' and attacked at appoximately 20:00 that day. One was disabled and the other withdrew, and later when the others arrived these and the remaining one from earlier were then attached to Kampfgruppe 'Knaust', which continued to attack the pocket.
@AliceSexyChick Finally - there can be confusion in the fighting - who is to say all Paratroopers will know they have captured a tank? And should there be technical problems - tank breaks down? Even if they could still use it as an improvised bunker the Germans certainly would have used other means to take it out such as a Panzerfaust, mines, grenades or simply the dreaded Panzershrek. In 1945 a Jagtiger was destroyed by German Volkstroopers who had NEVER even see a Jagdtiger before :(
@AliceSexyChick And don't forget - fuel ;) - plus the Germans can have Panzerfaust/Panzershreks and other tanks that could also deal with the captured tank at times.
@HeirofGojira91 yes, thats true, but w/ an 88 mm canon the british at least could shot some tanks and guns before they get hit, and surely foot soldier must accompany it to prevent the panzershreks like you said ;).
@AliceSexyChick The question was - were the Brit Paratroopers trained to fully utilize a captured vehicle at times - when numbers and not to mention - URBAN street fights are not exactly ideal for tanks - you'd actually be vulnerable to ambushes from ambush happy teams. - Snipers would aim for engines/weaker armour/fuel tanks - Same w' Rocket troopers - and infantry can swarm the tank at times w' grenades/fuel bombs - and easier said than done...
@AliceSexyChick I doubt if paratroopers were actually trained to drive a tank and such through the town - not to mention German tanks weren't noted to be exactly 'light' - the Panther was respectable but again its light armour to the sides and the long barrelled gun was noted to be troublesome when maneuvering in tigher areas compared to the smaller Panzer IV. Try maneuvering a 56 ton Tiger I when there's more enemy tanks + infantry even if you could use the gun over time you'd be outgunned.
@HeirofGojira91 smart poin, but i saw in bovington in YT tiger's turret moves a bit quicker than i thought, its a marvellous tank, but i like panther more, faster and slopped armor as well, thanks to T34, the best tank in WW II
@AliceSexyChick The T-34 actually started to lose its advantage by Kursk - even if they upgraded its gun and armour - I'm still debating this with some other fellows but apparently the Panther and the Tiger I still retained superiority over the T-34/85 due to German tactics, superior ROF, superior optics and experience. In a book I read a T-34/85 MUSt get within 500m to have a chance to stab a Tiger I whilst a Tiger I could clean it out well over 1000m. Panther - you get the message
@AliceSexyChick have you heard of the Josef Stalin Tank? I like that tank, inspite of its faults - and it would have been a bigger danger to infantry compared to a T-34/85 although the T-34/85 was still pretty potent. You like the Panther eh? Haha - what about the JAGDPANTHER? I love that even better than a Panther :D And I just got myself a mini Tiger I yesterday - I love that little baby :D Yessiree!
@AliceSexyChick As for T-34 it was decided they tried to use the T-44 tank in 1944 but it was only tested not used in actual combat - later this would lead to the T-54/T-55 tanks which today retain the advantage of thier WWII predecessor - small size, cheap cost, upgradability ,speed, easy to use - I wouldn't mind trying one out for the fun of it ;)
I had a crazy dream once of driving a T-34/85 down the city haha.
@AliceSexyChick Hmm...sounds like my books are a little out of date! David Miller's The Illustrated Dictionary of Tanks of the World in '01 explained the Tiger I's system was a Merrit-Brown derived type with the Maybach gearbox. The turret transverse of a Tiger I was very low geared and was derived from the Maybach Gearbox. It was powerd by a hydraulic motor and if the main engine stopped you'd have to transverse the turret by hand...
@AliceSexyChick Bengal Tiger tanks used in the battle of Arnhem? I hear the Tiger I and the Panthers were sent by Bittrich to route the Brit paratroopers but Bengal Tigers? Hmm...interesting if it actually did get involved. Oh and another thing - turrets - although Germans had good tanks thier turrets were EXTREMELY slow to rotate - compared to the Sherman tank the Tiger I and Panther had slower rotation making it a tactical disadvantage. Still - you have point using a captured tank.
@AliceSexyChick Even if you use the tank - you gotta consider the Germans aren't going to fall for the same trick so easily because of ... TACTICS - British paratroopers even with backup using a captured Tiger/Panther are not going to use the same tactics as the Germans in tank assaults...in May '44 Josef Stalin 2 tanks were sent against the Germans...the 88mm rounds bounced off the JS-2 tanks. Yet superior German maneuvering, optics and tactics saw the field littered with JS-2 hulks
@HeirofGojira91 JS-2 tanks are vulnarable from sides, thats correct, their guns 122 mm are the same power wih german 75 mm panther in terms of muzzle velocity, yes thats true, german try to outflank the JS-2 tanks and trap them in narrow street
@AliceSexyChick Actually the Iosef Vissarionovich Stalina 2 tanks had apparent shot trap problems - the German Tiger I for instance had excellent Brinell Hardness of 250-280 depending on the years and models - this was actually better than most Allied tanks due to German manufacturing! Well JS-2 tank armour was invested at the front compared to the back - unlike the KV-1 tank which had thick armour but it was not as effective an envelope as the JS-2!
@AliceSexyChick Actually the A19 121.92mm M1931/M1937 wasn't that of a good AT gun - it was really more on firing a big HE shell that could WHAMMO any fortification or soft targets rather than dealign with tanks BUT in cases necessary if the JS-2 tank crews were lucky and skilled enough then they could be a good match to a Tiger/Panther. Yes the Germans used same ambush/flanking tactics against all Allies until the end of the war...
@AliceSexyChick PaK 42 and KwK 36/43 were amongst still the best AT/Tank guns in WWII due to excellent German optics! Leitz Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b attributed to its good accuracy. Then again the A19 122mm gun was still potent, although the German guns had a flatter trajectory, superior ammunition and pretty much good firing rates made them formidable! Haha - do you collect tank models? I myself have a Trumpeter Jagdpanther - that little baby was a joy to build :)
@HeirofGojira91 yes, i collect those small takaras from japan, i picked from my boyfriend long time ago, they are so detailed and accurate. also some cando 1/144 scale models. i also have a 1/35 scale michael wittmann early stug III A/B when he still young in the cadet and fought hard in russia with the stug. but i think here now most people are diverting to 1/35 diecast ranges from dragon, especially german tanks, they are incredibly sharp and nice...and heavy ;p
@AliceSexyChick - On April 13th this year I bought a Tiger III E100 and a Panzer VIII Maus - they were the 1/144 Cando's - gave them away as a goodwill B'day present to a friend in August - I got suprised when the guy said the Tiger III E100 had Zimmerit on it - I nver realized that. O.O Michael Wittmann model? I prefer 1/72 personally not that you care much. In addition to the Jadgpanther I also have a Hasegawa IS-2 and a Roden JS-3 and personally I have a P-47 Thunderbolt model - all 1:72 :)
the hole plan Operation market Garden was a failure form the very first begining. I am very sry to say so but it was and Monty s plan was good but not perfect. old men and kids..good god. that was 1 misstake. 2nd take 3 bridges, and also Airborne and gliders landed 15-20km away...3..do I have too say more?? heavy KIAs mostly REplecments on Allied side.
i laugh at morons who say the soviets won the war.. "oh the russians won the war they ddint need the americans or anybody else.. LMFAO! get out of here you commi piece of shit.. stalin was BEGGING for another front even though the allies where pushing back the germans in africa etc.. "high casualty rate this that.. get the fuck out of here if they fought smarter they wouldnt of lost as many men.. go to fucking combat FIGHT and BLEED for your country than talk shit on the heroes of the past..
u do realize that the russians were fighting the vast majority of the German army dont u?? yes the allies helped but the Russians took the brunt of arguably one of the strongest best armies in history. the russians had a high casualty rate because they were absolutly desperate against a much better trained, equipped, motivated and much much better commanded army
@mammonsss Vast majority? Everybody forgets how savage the Japanese were, although the Americans might not have lost as many, the ways they died were much more horrific. The allies, fighting in North Africa, Sicily, Italy and France, if it wasn't for them Russia would have been over run as they couldn't fight effectively on 3 fronts (Italy, France) and Russia. Russian army tactics were also rubbish, chargine for 'Mother Russia' against MG42 emplacements and then boasting they were the best.
@ross79745 Look I just posted against the "russians won the war" thing. But dude, they contributed as much to the war effort as we did. They didnt just take on the majority of the German Army, they took on its most elite units for most of the war. Shit Rommel himself put holes in the atlantic wall specifically so the Americans would reach berlin before the russians did.
@ross79745 And the Japs were savage, they took most of it out on the Chinese, who held most of the jap elites units in china. In other words, the us did amazing things and was a major factor in the ending of the war. But a lot of people died to help us do that, and not all of that can be contributed to bad leadership or bad tactics ok?
@ross79745 I just wish we could all appreciate the efforts undertaken by all the countries that fought in ww2, and all the sacrifices that all the people serving their countries on both sides had to make. Why cant we just respect? Overblowing your countries involvement doesnt seem like honoring the past to me. It seems like a shitty way to dishonor the sacrifices made by brave men and women around the world.
@ross79745 no i was talking about russia only fighting on 1 front; unless you include the minor occasional skirmishes with japanese on the china-russia border.
@ampthilluk Well of course they were? meaning they could concentrate their forces. The USA couldn't help it if the action was happening on the other side of the world!
@ross79745 whats that got to do with it? you said russia was fighting on 3 fronts but they were only fighting on 1 front if you ignore the minor battles on the chinese border.
@ampthilluk lol yes only one front, but how big it was in kilometers, compared to all the fronts the nonsoviet allies had, taken all together? Hmm, the soviets called their sections of the front "fronts" southwestern front, leningrad front southern front etc. In the kursk battle, 4 fronts were deployed. the axis/soviet struggle was a completely different dimension compared to say D-Day or north Africa.
@ross79745 russian army tactics were as good any other allied nation if not better, by 1943. Russians would use masive bombardment by artillery, USA would use aircraft. No problem charging MG42 emplacements then, for both sides. By the time Allies fought in Sicily, Italy and France, the Soviet were not in danger to be overrun. and the germans had how many divisions deployed in north Africa? 2 or 3? I have to look it up. Dont make me laugh. So the soviets survived bc brits distracted 2 divisions?
@mammonsss i dont need a history lesson.. i read my shit i do my homework.. but the way the Soviet military was organized was a joke.. im by no means putting down the soviets.. just put yourself in that position(laeder) i woulnt push my countrymen into slaughter. Russians where good soldiers but had horrible leadership.. there is the problem. and THATS why they lost so many men.. youve never seen combat.. you woulnt understand that bond. eating lead isnt fun.
So if you have the option to push your countrymen into slaughter, as you call it, and win the war against the invaders, or to not push them, and as a consequence, loose to the invaders, whats your choice then?
@SpainBlood001 u do realize that the russians were fighting the vast majority of the German army dont u?? yes the allies helped but the Russians took the brunt of arguably one of the strongest best armies in history. the russians had a high casualty rate because they were absolutly desperate against a much better trained, equipped, motivated and much much better commanded army
@SpainBlood001 what you mean by if they had fought smarter? look at how smart the USA fought at pearl harbor. They lost 1000+ men on a single halfday small surprise airraid, small compared to the surprise airraid of the german luftwaffe agaisnt the soviets on the first day of barbarossa, there wasnt even ground combat involved in pearl harbor compared to barbarossa. You think the USA would have had less casualties if the germans had barbarossad the USA? What would have been smarter for the sovs?
@tomtom34b look relax im not picking sides i just follows history. you can defend your beloved USSR all day long history wont go anywhere.. point is.. soviet commanders had no regards for their soldiers lives. since they had the man power they could afford it i guess.. but i couldnt go to sleep at night if i fought in an army like that... are you in the army?? than you wouldnt know .. you just know books
@SpainBlood001 Regarding commanders (in soviet army) having no regard about their soldiers: I guess we are all human in the first place. If you risk your own life (as soviet commander) because you dont deliver results (at the cost of your soldiers live), then you think different, than the allied commander who doesnt need to worry to be shot by a commisar for being too cautious. Both have an advantage and a disadvantage mutually excluding each other.
@tomtom34b i get your point but theres still a difference between balls and straight up banzai. no offense but most western commanders with combat experience use better tatics on the ground over all.
@SpainBlood001 Commonly the Soviets which would 'banzai' were penal units, who were criminals so it was either get shot by a German or shot by a Russian. A good idea, using criminals and such as cannon fodder.
@PROkiller16 im aware of this but not all of them. im pretty sure when stallin pushed almost to moscow they were throwing conscripts into battles to slow down the advance so more elite units could come and stop the germans.
@PROkiller16 Trackin.. if only we could come together someway somehow.. imagine how much further we could go as a united race. our tech, med ect would be so advanced. all the greatest minds working for one the greater good of the world. ahh dreams be dreams
@PROkiller16 Only the "criminals" were usually only "guilty" of some minor political infraction, or something such as retreating instead of charging the enemy after running out of ammo. More machine guns were pointed at the backs of Red Army troops than were pointed at the Germans. The vast majority of men in penal battalions wouldn't even warrant a slap on the wrist in any sane nation's military.
@tomtom34b alright this is a debate.. no hard feelings man.. deal. i believe the soviets could of harnessed theyre soldiers abilities better.. better combat leader a better army structure. not using outdated tactics. planned assults not just careless charging. umm i could keep going.. im not saying the soviets didnt or couldnt fight.. no not at all . i just think they wasted good men doing the job. my openion anyways whats your friend
@SpainBlood001 Well, my opinion is that we can easily judge with hindsight, what an outdated and what an effective tactic is, NOW. But back in WW2 (thats also the interesting side about this war), militaries got completely surprised or invented new tactics, strategies. You cannot judge the command by today´s knowlegde. Blitzkrieg, the use of armored formations combined to shocktroops, not distributed as infantry support, the superiority of carriers over battleships, strategic bombing, all of
@SpainBlood001 all of these things (i forgot another, torpedobombing ships in "safe" harbors like tarent and pearl harbor) were new inventions that have proved on the field, while the commander on the receiving end had no experience how to counter that and was slowly learning to deal with it. The soviets learned their lessons, as did all commanders, the soviets had to deal with what was at hand and threw troops of mixed quality into the fray,USA would do the same in that situation of homedefense
@ND20074321 well at least it's not as bad as in the movie "Battle of the Bulge", where a bunch of "Pershing" tanks were used for both U.S. and German tanks, you got to cut them a little slack, especially with an all-star cast, there probably just wasn't enough money left in the budget to get all vintage stuff, plus keeping old natzi era tank pieces in holland was probably frowned upon by the dutch.
@LittleFrenchy72 surprise would have been lost, the wholemarket garden thing was about surprise.
Look at models reaction "all they want is me", if he knew in advance "all they want is the bridges", a parachute assault on a prepared defense on arnheim would be utter suicide.
at 4:07 - WOW, that is a HORRIBLE mock-up of a German Leopard I... I guess they felt if the put a huge Balkan Cross on it no one would notice it doesn't look remotely like ANY WW2 German tank... My GOD... couldn't they have towed a Museum tank across the bridge or something? I mean... wow... horrible... ugh... ack... blah...
I have now moved on to the next part of the movie...
@ND20074321 I think that is a panther 4 tank, not a leopard. I could be wrong. I thought a leopard had more sloped armor, a longer barrel and squatter sillote. Then again i could be wrong.
@ND20074321 Hopefully if or whenever there needs to be a scene like this in any upcoming war movie they'll be able to hire one or more of the recently restored and running panther or tiger tanks that are now available.
@rredhawk not likely, there are only a handful tiger tanks left in original state and they are in tank museums, also there are no manufacturing plans captured to remake tiger tanks. so its other tanks like in old movies to look like tiger tanks , or CGI lol.
@ross79745 Fucked up beyond all recognition. An SS Pz Division meant a well armed, fanatical and ruthless bunch of warriors with no other mentality than death for fatherland... which also explained their high casualty ratio compared to other units.
@darket1234 well the British troopers weren't pansies either but the difference of course is that as paratroopers they were lightly armed by comparsion and werent meant for fixed defence
German tiger tanks could only be destroyed by arty or other heavy tanks, they were the best in the world
xxDrGrinchxx 2 weeks ago
@xxDrGrinchxx
soviet IS-2 or IS-3 were better
9K58 3 days ago
Only one tank attacks... Sure... Stupid germans what?!
seralia1 2 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von ross79745
@seralia1 when it's under-equipped paratroopers vs. a German tank, one of the best tanks of the war, in an area where there weren't supposed to be any tanks, mind, it's a very frightening prospect
Soundwave3591 4 weeks ago
How did all those fuel cans end up in the street? I don't remember a stock of fuel cans or Germans carrying fuel cans in the battle for the Arnhem bridge...and could tanks actually continue rolling despite having a fuel can jammed on the treads?
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
Really lucky that they weren't taking any artillery or small arms fire during the building of the bridge.
NeoIvan17 4 months ago
tomtom34b - Indeed - the most famous of all Tiger tanks arguably? The 131 captured in Tunisia in 1943 :) - the only Tiger I that can still run and function after 50 years (almost 70 now) - have you been to the Tankfest of 04 and 08? And yes because the remaining Tiger I's are too fragile, they use smaller models or improvised Tiger's built on scratch chassis such as the T-34 for movies - such as Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers :)
HeirofGojira91 5 months ago
4:08 - that tank is meant to represent a Panther tank? Because at 4:42-4:45 the rear looks like a Patton or T-54 tank chassis model instead at 4:55-5:12 - its as if the tank was converted to look like a Panther tank. When I first saw it I thought it was a Jagdpanther on a turret! XD
HeirofGojira91 5 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 it's actually a West German Leopard 1 with extra Armor plating to represent a Generic Panzer design. so in reality, it actually IS a German tank!
Soundwave3591 4 weeks ago
@Soundwave3591 Haha - that explains why the machine gun looked funny - and it looked so bulky - I first thought it was an advance Jagdpanther! Then I thought it was a Tiger Ausf B! Then before I got told it was a Leopard I I thought it was a modified Patton Tank! Haha - the gun barrel just looked odd for an 88mm KwK 36 or a 75mm PaK42/KwK42of the Tiger I or Panther
HeirofGojira91 4 weeks ago
hey? why don't they use the ( king tiger ) leopard tank on the ambush??? they killed the crew did they? they supposed to do many damages w/ it, even challenge the other german tanks in the area and give a t least some relieves for the paras there until they run out of tank ammo.....
AliceSexyChick 6 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Perhaps the Paratroopers were trained to fully utilize this - the Bengal Tiger tank doesn't look like this. And forgive me for being a factual asshole but from my readings General Bittrich sent Panther tanks to attack the Paratroopers - not Tiger's :) -> and there's no Leopard tank that the Germans used in WWII - only today's Leopard I and Leopard II. They did propose the Lowe Panzer VII Lion Tank though :) Also - 1 captured tank is probably no match for long against others sent.
HeirofGojira91 5 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 -Tiger I tanks of Schwere Panzer Kompanie "Hummel' were rushed from Germany and did in fact participate in attacks on the Arnhem position. The first two (of 14) arrived on the 19th and were attached to Kampfgruppe 'Brinkmann' and attacked at appoximately 20:00 that day. One was disabled and the other withdrew, and later when the others arrived these and the remaining one from earlier were then attached to Kampfgruppe 'Knaust', which continued to attack the pocket.
Biggus63 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Finally - there can be confusion in the fighting - who is to say all Paratroopers will know they have captured a tank? And should there be technical problems - tank breaks down? Even if they could still use it as an improvised bunker the Germans certainly would have used other means to take it out such as a Panzerfaust, mines, grenades or simply the dreaded Panzershrek. In 1945 a Jagtiger was destroyed by German Volkstroopers who had NEVER even see a Jagdtiger before :(
HeirofGojira91 5 months ago
@AliceSexyChick And don't forget - fuel ;) - plus the Germans can have Panzerfaust/Panzershreks and other tanks that could also deal with the captured tank at times.
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 yes, thats true, but w/ an 88 mm canon the british at least could shot some tanks and guns before they get hit, and surely foot soldier must accompany it to prevent the panzershreks like you said ;).
AliceSexyChick 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick The question was - were the Brit Paratroopers trained to fully utilize a captured vehicle at times - when numbers and not to mention - URBAN street fights are not exactly ideal for tanks - you'd actually be vulnerable to ambushes from ambush happy teams. - Snipers would aim for engines/weaker armour/fuel tanks - Same w' Rocket troopers - and infantry can swarm the tank at times w' grenades/fuel bombs - and easier said than done...
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick I doubt if paratroopers were actually trained to drive a tank and such through the town - not to mention German tanks weren't noted to be exactly 'light' - the Panther was respectable but again its light armour to the sides and the long barrelled gun was noted to be troublesome when maneuvering in tigher areas compared to the smaller Panzer IV. Try maneuvering a 56 ton Tiger I when there's more enemy tanks + infantry even if you could use the gun over time you'd be outgunned.
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 smart poin, but i saw in bovington in YT tiger's turret moves a bit quicker than i thought, its a marvellous tank, but i like panther more, faster and slopped armor as well, thanks to T34, the best tank in WW II
AliceSexyChick 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick The T-34 actually started to lose its advantage by Kursk - even if they upgraded its gun and armour - I'm still debating this with some other fellows but apparently the Panther and the Tiger I still retained superiority over the T-34/85 due to German tactics, superior ROF, superior optics and experience. In a book I read a T-34/85 MUSt get within 500m to have a chance to stab a Tiger I whilst a Tiger I could clean it out well over 1000m. Panther - you get the message
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick have you heard of the Josef Stalin Tank? I like that tank, inspite of its faults - and it would have been a bigger danger to infantry compared to a T-34/85 although the T-34/85 was still pretty potent. You like the Panther eh? Haha - what about the JAGDPANTHER? I love that even better than a Panther :D And I just got myself a mini Tiger I yesterday - I love that little baby :D Yessiree!
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick As for T-34 it was decided they tried to use the T-44 tank in 1944 but it was only tested not used in actual combat - later this would lead to the T-54/T-55 tanks which today retain the advantage of thier WWII predecessor - small size, cheap cost, upgradability ,speed, easy to use - I wouldn't mind trying one out for the fun of it ;)
I had a crazy dream once of driving a T-34/85 down the city haha.
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Hmm...sounds like my books are a little out of date! David Miller's The Illustrated Dictionary of Tanks of the World in '01 explained the Tiger I's system was a Merrit-Brown derived type with the Maybach gearbox. The turret transverse of a Tiger I was very low geared and was derived from the Maybach Gearbox. It was powerd by a hydraulic motor and if the main engine stopped you'd have to transverse the turret by hand...
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Bengal Tiger tanks used in the battle of Arnhem? I hear the Tiger I and the Panthers were sent by Bittrich to route the Brit paratroopers but Bengal Tigers? Hmm...interesting if it actually did get involved. Oh and another thing - turrets - although Germans had good tanks thier turrets were EXTREMELY slow to rotate - compared to the Sherman tank the Tiger I and Panther had slower rotation making it a tactical disadvantage. Still - you have point using a captured tank.
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Even if you use the tank - you gotta consider the Germans aren't going to fall for the same trick so easily because of ... TACTICS - British paratroopers even with backup using a captured Tiger/Panther are not going to use the same tactics as the Germans in tank assaults...in May '44 Josef Stalin 2 tanks were sent against the Germans...the 88mm rounds bounced off the JS-2 tanks. Yet superior German maneuvering, optics and tactics saw the field littered with JS-2 hulks
HeirofGojira91 4 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 JS-2 tanks are vulnarable from sides, thats correct, their guns 122 mm are the same power wih german 75 mm panther in terms of muzzle velocity, yes thats true, german try to outflank the JS-2 tanks and trap them in narrow street
AliceSexyChick 3 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Actually the Iosef Vissarionovich Stalina 2 tanks had apparent shot trap problems - the German Tiger I for instance had excellent Brinell Hardness of 250-280 depending on the years and models - this was actually better than most Allied tanks due to German manufacturing! Well JS-2 tank armour was invested at the front compared to the back - unlike the KV-1 tank which had thick armour but it was not as effective an envelope as the JS-2!
HeirofGojira91 3 months ago
@AliceSexyChick Actually the A19 121.92mm M1931/M1937 wasn't that of a good AT gun - it was really more on firing a big HE shell that could WHAMMO any fortification or soft targets rather than dealign with tanks BUT in cases necessary if the JS-2 tank crews were lucky and skilled enough then they could be a good match to a Tiger/Panther. Yes the Germans used same ambush/flanking tactics against all Allies until the end of the war...
HeirofGojira91 3 months ago
@AliceSexyChick PaK 42 and KwK 36/43 were amongst still the best AT/Tank guns in WWII due to excellent German optics! Leitz Turmzielfernrohr TZF 9b attributed to its good accuracy. Then again the A19 122mm gun was still potent, although the German guns had a flatter trajectory, superior ammunition and pretty much good firing rates made them formidable! Haha - do you collect tank models? I myself have a Trumpeter Jagdpanther - that little baby was a joy to build :)
HeirofGojira91 3 months ago
@HeirofGojira91 yes, i collect those small takaras from japan, i picked from my boyfriend long time ago, they are so detailed and accurate. also some cando 1/144 scale models. i also have a 1/35 scale michael wittmann early stug III A/B when he still young in the cadet and fought hard in russia with the stug. but i think here now most people are diverting to 1/35 diecast ranges from dragon, especially german tanks, they are incredibly sharp and nice...and heavy ;p
AliceSexyChick 3 months ago
@AliceSexyChick - On April 13th this year I bought a Tiger III E100 and a Panzer VIII Maus - they were the 1/144 Cando's - gave them away as a goodwill B'day present to a friend in August - I got suprised when the guy said the Tiger III E100 had Zimmerit on it - I nver realized that. O.O Michael Wittmann model? I prefer 1/72 personally not that you care much. In addition to the Jadgpanther I also have a Hasegawa IS-2 and a Roden JS-3 and personally I have a P-47 Thunderbolt model - all 1:72 :)
HeirofGojira91 3 months ago
These old school movies are done so much better than anything today.
hangfire0352 8 months ago 2
the hole plan Operation market Garden was a failure form the very first begining. I am very sry to say so but it was and Monty s plan was good but not perfect. old men and kids..good god. that was 1 misstake. 2nd take 3 bridges, and also Airborne and gliders landed 15-20km away...3..do I have too say more?? heavy KIAs mostly REplecments on Allied side.
svensksoldat91 8 months ago
this is so cool : roll over fuckers !!!! lol
lordlackson 9 months ago
at 1:45 i know he's saying roll it fellas, but i swear it sounds like roll it f**ckers. lol.
superseal1 10 months ago
@superseal1 Actually, he is saying "Roll the f**ckers
ColdWarShot 10 months ago
i laugh at morons who say the soviets won the war.. "oh the russians won the war they ddint need the americans or anybody else.. LMFAO! get out of here you commi piece of shit.. stalin was BEGGING for another front even though the allies where pushing back the germans in africa etc.. "high casualty rate this that.. get the fuck out of here if they fought smarter they wouldnt of lost as many men.. go to fucking combat FIGHT and BLEED for your country than talk shit on the heroes of the past..
SpainBlood001 11 months ago
@SpainBlood001 Well said.
ross79745 11 months ago
@SpainBlood001
u do realize that the russians were fighting the vast majority of the German army dont u?? yes the allies helped but the Russians took the brunt of arguably one of the strongest best armies in history. the russians had a high casualty rate because they were absolutly desperate against a much better trained, equipped, motivated and much much better commanded army
mammonsss 11 months ago
@mammonsss Vast majority? Everybody forgets how savage the Japanese were, although the Americans might not have lost as many, the ways they died were much more horrific. The allies, fighting in North Africa, Sicily, Italy and France, if it wasn't for them Russia would have been over run as they couldn't fight effectively on 3 fronts (Italy, France) and Russia. Russian army tactics were also rubbish, chargine for 'Mother Russia' against MG42 emplacements and then boasting they were the best.
ross79745 11 months ago
@ross79745 Look I just posted against the "russians won the war" thing. But dude, they contributed as much to the war effort as we did. They didnt just take on the majority of the German Army, they took on its most elite units for most of the war. Shit Rommel himself put holes in the atlantic wall specifically so the Americans would reach berlin before the russians did.
Socrates3141 11 months ago
@ross79745 And the Japs were savage, they took most of it out on the Chinese, who held most of the jap elites units in china. In other words, the us did amazing things and was a major factor in the ending of the war. But a lot of people died to help us do that, and not all of that can be contributed to bad leadership or bad tactics ok?
Socrates3141 11 months ago
@ross79745 I just wish we could all appreciate the efforts undertaken by all the countries that fought in ww2, and all the sacrifices that all the people serving their countries on both sides had to make. Why cant we just respect? Overblowing your countries involvement doesnt seem like honoring the past to me. It seems like a shitty way to dishonor the sacrifices made by brave men and women around the world.
Socrates3141 11 months ago 2
@ross79745 they were only fighting only 1 front though
ampthilluk 10 months ago
@ampthilluk The Allies weren't, nobody was. The Japanese were fighting the Americans, the British Empire in India, and the Chinese.
ross79745 10 months ago
@ross79745 no i was talking about russia only fighting on 1 front; unless you include the minor occasional skirmishes with japanese on the china-russia border.
ampthilluk 10 months ago
@ampthilluk Well of course they were? meaning they could concentrate their forces. The USA couldn't help it if the action was happening on the other side of the world!
ross79745 10 months ago
@ross79745 whats that got to do with it? you said russia was fighting on 3 fronts but they were only fighting on 1 front if you ignore the minor battles on the chinese border.
ampthilluk 10 months ago
@ampthilluk lol yes only one front, but how big it was in kilometers, compared to all the fronts the nonsoviet allies had, taken all together? Hmm, the soviets called their sections of the front "fronts" southwestern front, leningrad front southern front etc. In the kursk battle, 4 fronts were deployed. the axis/soviet struggle was a completely different dimension compared to say D-Day or north Africa.
tomtom34b 9 months ago
@tomtom34b i know but the allies were fighing north africa, the pacific and central asia
ampthilluk 9 months ago
@ross79745 russian army tactics were as good any other allied nation if not better, by 1943. Russians would use masive bombardment by artillery, USA would use aircraft. No problem charging MG42 emplacements then, for both sides. By the time Allies fought in Sicily, Italy and France, the Soviet were not in danger to be overrun. and the germans had how many divisions deployed in north Africa? 2 or 3? I have to look it up. Dont make me laugh. So the soviets survived bc brits distracted 2 divisions?
tomtom34b 9 months ago
@mammonsss i dont need a history lesson.. i read my shit i do my homework.. but the way the Soviet military was organized was a joke.. im by no means putting down the soviets.. just put yourself in that position(laeder) i woulnt push my countrymen into slaughter. Russians where good soldiers but had horrible leadership.. there is the problem. and THATS why they lost so many men.. youve never seen combat.. you woulnt understand that bond. eating lead isnt fun.
SpainBlood001 11 months ago
@SpainBlood001
So if you have the option to push your countrymen into slaughter, as you call it, and win the war against the invaders, or to not push them, and as a consequence, loose to the invaders, whats your choice then?
tomtom34b 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SpainBlood001 u do realize that the russians were fighting the vast majority of the German army dont u?? yes the allies helped but the Russians took the brunt of arguably one of the strongest best armies in history. the russians had a high casualty rate because they were absolutly desperate against a much better trained, equipped, motivated and much much better commanded army
mammonsss 11 months ago
@SpainBlood001 what you mean by if they had fought smarter? look at how smart the USA fought at pearl harbor. They lost 1000+ men on a single halfday small surprise airraid, small compared to the surprise airraid of the german luftwaffe agaisnt the soviets on the first day of barbarossa, there wasnt even ground combat involved in pearl harbor compared to barbarossa. You think the USA would have had less casualties if the germans had barbarossad the USA? What would have been smarter for the sovs?
tomtom34b 9 months ago
@tomtom34b look relax im not picking sides i just follows history. you can defend your beloved USSR all day long history wont go anywhere.. point is.. soviet commanders had no regards for their soldiers lives. since they had the man power they could afford it i guess.. but i couldnt go to sleep at night if i fought in an army like that... are you in the army?? than you wouldnt know .. you just know books
SpainBlood001 9 months ago
@SpainBlood001 Regarding commanders (in soviet army) having no regard about their soldiers: I guess we are all human in the first place. If you risk your own life (as soviet commander) because you dont deliver results (at the cost of your soldiers live), then you think different, than the allied commander who doesnt need to worry to be shot by a commisar for being too cautious. Both have an advantage and a disadvantage mutually excluding each other.
tomtom34b 7 months ago
@tomtom34b i get your point but theres still a difference between balls and straight up banzai. no offense but most western commanders with combat experience use better tatics on the ground over all.
SpainBlood001 7 months ago
@SpainBlood001 Commonly the Soviets which would 'banzai' were penal units, who were criminals so it was either get shot by a German or shot by a Russian. A good idea, using criminals and such as cannon fodder.
PROkiller16 7 months ago
@PROkiller16 im aware of this but not all of them. im pretty sure when stallin pushed almost to moscow they were throwing conscripts into battles to slow down the advance so more elite units could come and stop the germans.
SpainBlood001 7 months ago
@SpainBlood001 It was simple another man on the line, the Red Army really started to increase is size after Moscow.
PROkiller16 7 months ago
@PROkiller16 Trackin.. if only we could come together someway somehow.. imagine how much further we could go as a united race. our tech, med ect would be so advanced. all the greatest minds working for one the greater good of the world. ahh dreams be dreams
SpainBlood001 6 months ago
@SpainBlood001 Free-will.
It'll be the death of us.
PROkiller16 6 months ago
@PROkiller16 Only the "criminals" were usually only "guilty" of some minor political infraction, or something such as retreating instead of charging the enemy after running out of ammo. More machine guns were pointed at the backs of Red Army troops than were pointed at the Germans. The vast majority of men in penal battalions wouldn't even warrant a slap on the wrist in any sane nation's military.
tjhoenecke 6 months ago
@tjhoenecke Well it's simple to send people you dislike through a minefeidl then taking time to clear it.
Nasty but effective, you can keep on the enemy's arse.
PROkiller16 6 months ago
@tomtom34b alright this is a debate.. no hard feelings man.. deal. i believe the soviets could of harnessed theyre soldiers abilities better.. better combat leader a better army structure. not using outdated tactics. planned assults not just careless charging. umm i could keep going.. im not saying the soviets didnt or couldnt fight.. no not at all . i just think they wasted good men doing the job. my openion anyways whats your friend
SpainBlood001 9 months ago
@SpainBlood001 Well, my opinion is that we can easily judge with hindsight, what an outdated and what an effective tactic is, NOW. But back in WW2 (thats also the interesting side about this war), militaries got completely surprised or invented new tactics, strategies. You cannot judge the command by today´s knowlegde. Blitzkrieg, the use of armored formations combined to shocktroops, not distributed as infantry support, the superiority of carriers over battleships, strategic bombing, all of
tomtom34b 7 months ago
@SpainBlood001 all of these things (i forgot another, torpedobombing ships in "safe" harbors like tarent and pearl harbor) were new inventions that have proved on the field, while the commander on the receiving end had no experience how to counter that and was slowly learning to deal with it. The soviets learned their lessons, as did all commanders, the soviets had to deal with what was at hand and threw troops of mixed quality into the fray,USA would do the same in that situation of homedefense
tomtom34b 7 months ago
@ND20074321 well at least it's not as bad as in the movie "Battle of the Bulge", where a bunch of "Pershing" tanks were used for both U.S. and German tanks, you got to cut them a little slack, especially with an all-star cast, there probably just wasn't enough money left in the budget to get all vintage stuff, plus keeping old natzi era tank pieces in holland was probably frowned upon by the dutch.
jaymoe67 11 months ago
Taylor calls the 82nd 'good soldiers' ,,,wiouldnt he have said 'good troopers'?
555paint 1 year ago
Communication...
resculptit 1 year ago
All they should have done is sent the ground units before the Airborne so they would have been on time...
LittleFrenchy72 1 year ago
@LittleFrenchy72 I agree completly, they should have sent the British paratroopers in when they had liberated endhoven or something!
ross79745 1 year ago
@LittleFrenchy72 surprise would have been lost, the wholemarket garden thing was about surprise.
Look at models reaction "all they want is me", if he knew in advance "all they want is the bridges", a parachute assault on a prepared defense on arnheim would be utter suicide.
tomtom34b 9 months ago
at 4:07 - WOW, that is a HORRIBLE mock-up of a German Leopard I... I guess they felt if the put a huge Balkan Cross on it no one would notice it doesn't look remotely like ANY WW2 German tank... My GOD... couldn't they have towed a Museum tank across the bridge or something? I mean... wow... horrible... ugh... ack... blah...
I have now moved on to the next part of the movie...
ND20074321 1 year ago
@ND20074321 I think that is a panther 4 tank, not a leopard. I could be wrong. I thought a leopard had more sloped armor, a longer barrel and squatter sillote. Then again i could be wrong.
mrshlmoltke 1 year ago
@ND20074321 Hopefully if or whenever there needs to be a scene like this in any upcoming war movie they'll be able to hire one or more of the recently restored and running panther or tiger tanks that are now available.
rredhawk 1 year ago
@rredhawk not likely, there are only a handful tiger tanks left in original state and they are in tank museums, also there are no manufacturing plans captured to remake tiger tanks. so its other tanks like in old movies to look like tiger tanks , or CGI lol.
tomtom34b 9 months ago
@ND20074321 It actually do looks a bit like a panther in my opinion but yes its a Leopard 1 ;)
Raafje84 10 months ago
"Couple of homing-pigeons were badly needed, and they don't eat much either."
Grifiki 1 year ago
The actor who played Maxwell D. Taylor could have been his twin. damn he looks the same.
GulleGelderlander 1 year ago
6:40 "... we landed over 2 SS Pz Divisions"
"good god"
... yep... that means FUBAR
darket1234 1 year ago 14
@darket1234 FUBAR stands for what...?
ross79745 1 year ago
@ross79745 Fucked up beyond all recognition. An SS Pz Division meant a well armed, fanatical and ruthless bunch of warriors with no other mentality than death for fatherland... which also explained their high casualty ratio compared to other units.
darket1234 1 year ago
@darket1234 Ok thanks.
ross79745 1 year ago
@ross79745 you are welcome :)
darket1234 1 year ago
@darket1234 du hast keine ahnung
cocacolacompany1 1 year ago
@darket1234 well the British troopers weren't pansies either but the difference of course is that as paratroopers they were lightly armed by comparsion and werent meant for fixed defence
555paint 1 year ago
@ross79745 fucked up beyond all repair
jangotrooper 1 year ago
and monty said this was 90% successful.
xwingclass 1 year ago
@xwingclass And as such a 100% faillure...
AmersfoortTristan 1 year ago
Insta- bridge!
TiaralovesTinsel 1 year ago 7
where is part 13 upload part 13 please and the other parts of the film please thanks
JohnAdams198805 1 year ago