This vehicle is an Elefant, the modernised version of the Ferdinand and can be recognized by the inclusion of a hull mounted MG-34 and a commander cupola.
these were impressive assault guns but at kursk they were mopped up pretty easily by russian infantry, due to no anti-infantry defence (machine guns). Guderian : "quail hunting with cannon"
And that is nothing more than soviet era propaganda.
It's actually the opposite that most soviet infantry actually ran away fro the Ferdinands and yes the ferdinandn did carry a MG34 with them internally often along a few MP40 with them.
Only 1 Ferdinand was captured by russian infantry and that was only because the infantry had left the vilage that evening without informing the Ferdinand crew.
@Dreachon i imagine the soviets eagerly exploited the propaganda opportunity, but if you read Alan Clark's "Barbarossa" chapter on the Kursk offensive he does a fairly comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Ferdinand and its strenthgs weaknesses.
That might be but I'm yaking directly from the combat histories of both the 653rd and 654th schwere panzerjager abteilung, they both make it clear that infantry was not the be to all end for the Ferdinand, 654th seems to had it even easier with infantry running away from their Ferdinands after firing their main guns.
They also seemed very accurate using their HE shells against them.
@cikenberry3 I could not agree more. See my video on Bovington for comparison. But, the sad truth is these tanks have been sitting out in the weather for about 60 years. When you get up close you can really see what terrible shape they're in. Some of them have a hole cut in the turret so you can look inside and its just a pile of rust in there. A handful might be restorable to something like decent condition with enough private money and time, but I doubt it will happen. Too bad.
@cikenberry3 Not just that either - they're also pretty lax about the paint they slap on without proper research first. They recently repainted their Vickers Light Mk VIb in what's meant to be early Western Desert "Caunter" camouflage but the colours are all wrong, (markings too), plus the tank doesn't have the appropriate desert modifications to match. I recognised which website they must've used for their colour guide, or maybe they consulted the same "expert" as the website.
@cikenberry3 I used to live near APG and I can tell you that as long as I've been visiting the ordinance museum, they've had a perpetual lack of funding. It's sad to see the shape the tanks there are in.
And another comment consisting of junk, seriously were do you people ghet this nonsense.
This vehicle in an Elefant, a modernised version of the Ferdinand ( sdkfz 184 ), the E-100 of which there was only a chassis build was never given a name and certainly not Elefant.
I can't believe this simple YouTube clip has a quarter-million views! LOL I only posted it for the heck of it. Maybe next year I will go back and take some proper photos with my full size camera and post a follow-up.
What a waste of resources to produce this thing or the Ferdinand, the Nashorn or the Hummel would've been a much more economical and quicker assault gun to build.
They were not waste of resources since they were built on the already existing test units of the Porsche Tiger I. The Nashorn and Hummel are not assault guns.
Wow, you read about a subject before makeing such a false statement, off all german tank destroyer scored a kill ratio as high as the Elefant they achieved a 16:1 kill-ratio, in many cases 2 to 3 Eelefant would be reponsible for the destruction of an entire T-34 battalion during the withdrawls of 1943.
THEY DID NOT CHANGED THE OUTCOME OF THE WAR. 320 tanks the Russians lost will be produced in no time but the Germans are not in a position to reproduce their ferdinands. The Nashorn armed with a fantastic pak43 which had cost effectiveness, reliability, ease of manufacture and deadly long range is the practical way to win a war. ferdinand/tigers/jagdtigers may form a great show pieces of Nazi brilliance but in the long run they are one of the reasons that contributed to their defeat.
Your math is considerable off, 90 ff them were produced, bringing them to 1440 AFV destroyed, also the Elefant packed the very same gun as the Nashorn so it had just a as well the deadly accurate long range.
The panzerIV tank's long barreled 75mm gun could penetrate a T34 at about 1200m at any angle. A company of well trained panzer IV could take out hastly trained T34's at that time and live to fight another day. The ferdinand are blown up due to break downs.They are bad at fighting infantry P4 is an all rounder. Panzer costs about 140,000Rm compared to about 300,000Rm of the ferdinand. P4 is the sucesful tank of the war used even after in the 6days war. Ferdinand is a notorious failure.
And the Elefant could bust a T-34 at over 4000m if it needed to, by 1944 the Panzer Iv has reached the end of it's life, it's no longer able to match the latest allied and russians medium tank designs in terms of armour and firepower.
Again how are they bad at fighting infantry, they are just as able at it as any other AFV, plenty of AFV had 1 or even 1 MG, if you falling for the dumb muths of russians infantry climbing on them and throwing molotov on them thick again.
If the P4 reaching the end of its life so do the M4 and T34 still the allies managed to produce a 50,000 of them. P4 preformed no way inferior to them. Armies desperately needed tanks for taking out Infantry emplacements, pill boxes, machinegun nest, encroached buildings. For that purpose a simple, reliable, production friendly tank such as the M4’s & T34’s are sufficient.
The Allies know very well the capabilities of the super powerful German amour but also knew that Germans are not in a position to produce them in large numbers due to their recourse restrictions. Elephant was built to destroy other tanks and it did quite well but do you think it can survive without other tank support to fed off infantry? No that’s were tanks like P4 come into the scene.
Infantry were not send against Elefants, not to mention you seem to forget that they also carried a HE shell, and this proved very succesfull due to their accuracy, there is an account on such an action in the 654th combat history book.
Yes P4 are outclassed against the late advanced armour of allies. But P4 is a medium tank built to fight off other medium tanks only. Late war allied armour are heavy and should not be compared with P4’s moreover the allies upgraded their armour only because of small number of formidable AFV’s fielded by germans eg.tigers still they used M4’s and T34’s in mass.
I am talking about medium, by mid 1944 both the T-34 and sherman are beeing upgraded, the T-34/85 and as for the sherman the installlation of the more powerfull 76mm M1 gun and thicker armour, the sherman got even better by late 1044 with the M4A3E8
In around 1944 shortage of tanks became apparent the Germans had to use AFV’s like Jagdpanther to do tanks job this is because of the flawed doctrine of investing on heavy, complicated and time consuming unreliable models rather than wisely upgrading existing models. The T34-85, su100, Sherman firefly, m18 hellcat, wolverine are some fine examples.
Jagdpanther never acted like tanks, they weren't supplied to panzerdivision either, they were kept in the special heavy tank-destroyer battalions or schwere panzerjager abteilung.
From it's first concept it was intended as tank destroyer a task for which it was well suited.
To prove the fact germans even manufactured the monstrosity MAUS an example of the stupid, overconfident, impractical nature of german high command. I wont say I am right & you are wrong. It’s the unique point of view of a person counts at the time. You are indeed right about Elephant’s performance it did extraordinary well against other tanks but what about other aspects & what about the economic & financial stress on Germany. My opinion in the long run its just a very bad idea.
Tank runover by infantry is very common and it’s a fate experienced by all tanks this will happen if they are left alone without infantry support. To fight with infantry the AFV either should have turrent mounted machine guns or guns mounted all over the body some thing like a A7V of WW1. Thick enclosed armour with a stationary gun is an infantry suicide. They must have support from tanks that are light and quick like P4 guarding their rear.
This vehicle was originally made for the Tiger tank project, however the Henschel design (which ultimately became the Tiger I) was favored over the Porsche design. By the time the decision was made to go with the Henschel design the Porsche company had already manufactured 90 chassis of their tank. They didn't want to waste them so they converted them to a tank destroyer which became the Ferdinand (and later Elefant). Technically speaking, this vehicle should have never existed.
the elephant and the ferdinant are the same tanks the only diffrent thing between those two are that the first production version who was called the elephant didnt had a machine gun for infantery defence so they put a machine gun inside the tank and called it the ferdinand.
Actually it is an Elefant, it has all the modifications that define it as one, hull mounted machinegun, commanders cupola, sadly the zimmerit is not present.
@jobu88 The tiger (P) was never mass produced because the henschel design was chosen due to its superiority, so they recycled the chassis. Porsche just transformed them into this huge tank destroyer sporting a L71/88mm I believe. I may be mistaken, but I think the name Elefant came first, but it may be the other way around.
@jobu88 Technically it's an Elephant, they were converted from surving Ferdinands after the battle of Kursk to include a machine gun mounted in the glais plate.
If your asking about the difference between the Ferdinand ( earlier version ) and the Elefant ( modernised version seen in these photo's )
Main difference is a more powerfull engine, hull MG mount in the forward hull, cupola added for the commander and the application of zimmerit, there are soem smaller changes as wel but these are the main ones.
These were all applied to the Elefant and you see the cupola and hull MG moun in the pictures,
@jobu88 Ferdinand and elephant were both the same tank - the officioal name was "Elephant" while the soldiers called it "Ferdinand" -> because of its developer - Ferdinand Porsche of the Porsche Company in WW2
Actually it's official name was Ferdinand then later in early 1944 the name was officially changed to Elefant although the crews did keep referring to them as Ferdinand.
@Evangelinger it was first named Ferdinand and later Elefant , but Elefant was the unofficial name. After the Battle of Kursk the remaining Ferdinand's got recalled and modified and then called Elefant
@Evangelinger No MG-34 in the bow/hull position - and it has the bolted on armor - later Ferdinands or should we call 'Elefants' had slightly upgraded armor, transmission and an improved commander's cupola in addition to the MG-34 - and of course they were battle damaged more or less from Kursk :)
Ferdinand = Elefant without upgrades or MG-34's.
Elefant = Ferdinand with the upgrades as many including jobu88 pointed out :)
Elephants and Ferdinand were interesting but were inefficient. They were incased in heavy armor and possessed powerful gun but their engine and suspention were insufficient for their size. There is even a record of German soldier saying that many Elephants caught on fire while climbing a mild hill because the engines were overworked and overheated.
These armoured vehicles were basically self propped 88's, enveloped in armor. serious design flaw: no secondary arnament. mg 34/42 mchgns! very vunerable to communists' close infantry attacks. many elefants in kursk fell victim to russian infantry
@adampie12 The elephant's failed reputation comes almost entirely from's Guderian's account of their performance as part of Model's assault force on the northern sector of the Kursk offensive. He was quoted as saying that without machine guns to neutralize it's opponent's infantry, it outran it's own infantry who could not advance, and was then overwhelmed by the enemy. I've seen it quoted dozens of times as rationale for saying the Elephant was completely useless.
@adampie12 I recently read a first-person account from a machine gunner in the Nikopol Bridgehead in late 43/early 1944. He discussed how 2-3 Elephants would arrive on the scene every time the Russians would mount a tank attack on the bridgehead.
He stated that they were completely impervious to enemy long range fire (they weighed about 65 with immensely thick armor) and with their extremely powerful 88MM gun (a longer caliber weapon than the 88 used in Tiger I's I believe), they could knock out their opponents of up to 2,000 yards. These few machines held the enemy at bay for weeks according this report, destroying large numbers of Russian tanks.
All german armor back in ww2 looks pretty close to all modern armor to this day. Look at the T34, the american Sherman and all others. The japanese and italian tanks.
From the look of design (and performace) would indicate they would be like 30+ years older than the awesome panthers, tigers, strumtiger (i believe is the correct name) and elefant.
It's true that a large number of them were lost at Kursk, but what is never said is that they knocked out about 6 Russian tanks for every loss of their own.
They seem be taking a very slapdash approach to 'restoration at APG. Maybe they lack the money to do a better job, but some of their efforts appear just lazy or incompetent. They've done a similar "restoration" on their Vickers Mk VIb recently. The "Caunter" scheme colours and markings are hopelessly wrong, apparently having used the Mk IIb at WW2drawings.jexiste as a guide, without bothering to consult anyone who knows better. Also it''s the wrong scheme for a non-desert modified version.
@lzoli18B ok well it was a support gun, other support guns like the stug had machine guns on them, leaving out a machinegun port was a major design flaw
Restored? Repainted they mean and if it was restored they would of drove it and they cut the brakes apart to get it back together insateed of just fixing it right
guy and gals, this tank destroyer was a mech failure. It had a short life not becouse the war ended, but becouse the darn thing kept breaking down. In kursk it proved unreliable and to make things worse for the crews the tanks did not have a machine gun which the russians soon used to their advantange. Im not saying it wasnt powerful, I am saying this tank just sucked royal in performance and in combat. along with the hunting tiger, tiger 2, and (although they had more luck with) tiger 1
@glynamus Quite true... same with the Panther as well because these vehicles were overweight and the engines were also underpowered for the massive chassis. However these heavy vehicles were not meant for frontline charges, they were more so used for engaging enemy tanks and for more suitable for static defence roles. To be honest the Ardennes offense in 1944 is a total woot to me using the Königstiger. :)
"This is not a fully restored Elephant. The engine doesn't function and all they did was remove the rust and repaint it. It is nothing more then a very well restored static display of a Elephant"
CORRECT but not only this, they find some destroyed Elephants too, that are likely unrepairable.
I remember seeing the Elefant at Aberdeen in '81, If I remember, the gun mount was broken or something, because the mantlet sat cockeyed on it. They were never used wisely. As the Ferdinand they had NO close defense capability other than opening the hatch and shooting at infantry or throwing a grenade. The surviving ones from Kursk were modified with a hull machine gun and commander's cupola and sent to Italy. Another blunder sending something prone to drivetrain trouble to mountainous terrain!
Today Germany is using fifths columns to infiltrate and systematically suppres any opposition in other countries on its way to world domination.This includes faking ecidence to let people disappear in prison,cause them trouble and murder them.
My homepage gives information about the techniques being used today by German officials and snitchers.They are no longer fighting open battles because Germany failed twice. Now Germans are using all sort of dirty tricks if you dont collaborate with them.
Johann Spielmann (born 29.12.1916) was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves for the destruction of 14 russian tanks which he took out during Operation Citadel in battle of Kursk. Under his command the battalion "Schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 653" destroyed 320 enemy tanks in area of Höhe 257, also known as "Panzerhöhe", for the loss of 13 Eleants that were immobilized by mines.
As of January 5, 2010 the Elephant, KV-1, Sherman, 155mm M40, Somua, M2a1, Panzer 4d, M6 heavy tank Skeleton tank & numerous other items are gone, The Hetzer has been restored and is in the lobby.
They where first named Ferdinand's it was not until the retrofit of a Machine gun and extra armor they got the name Elephant,, just to clarify that there where no Elephants at Kursk as those where Ferdinands.
The Elefant was a great anti-tank weapon. Its gun was very powerful and usually did its job, but as you said, it was the chassis for the early designed Tiger I and indeed it was slow and vulnerable to the sides and rear, so the Henschell was taken. Early flaws with the elefant was the lack of a MG. Infantry could just walk up to the tank from just about anywhere, plant a charge and run. These tanks turret could also turn very slightly, making it tough to take on tanks from angles.
Yeah,only 2 known to still exsist. This one was a later type,while the other one is at Kubinika in Russia.That one is in the original configuration.They only made 100 or so with this chasisbut most of them where built similiar to this one.
It's pretty famous, considering what a very short life it had. It's built on the hull for the losing design in the Tiger tank project, the other design won and became the Tiger, and the Germans had a bunch of these tank hulls and so they slapped an 88mm gun on them, with enormous frontal armor, and used them at Kursk. Against tanks at long range they were practically invulnerable, but with no MG they were also very vulnerable to infantry.
@jobu88 Guderian and a few other Generals were known to have despised the design. It was very inflexible and its vulnerability to infantry made it basically useless. Only about 90 were built anyway.
@jobu88 Your description of the Elefant is in fact not an Elefant but an earlier "Ferdinand" Originally the hull which Porsche designed was meant for the Tiger tank however the hull which Henschel designed was in favour. After the Battle of Kursk due to its lack of secondary armament, the Tank Destroyer(not tank) underwent modifications which added the ball MG34, Commander's Cupola along with anti-magnetic Zimmerit paste and it became known as the Elefant, which is in the video! :)
This is not a fully restored Elephant. The engine doesn't function and all they did was remove the rust and repaint it. It is nothing more then a very well restored static display of a Elephant
Correct, as many have pointed out. It's not really corect to say "Restored" I should have said "repainted". When you got up close you could see how very old and broken down it was.
@jobu88 It's a shame that Elephant is outside considering there are only two left in the world. I am 24 this year, and saw that tank at Aberdeen when I was 10, pre-repaint and I found it isolated from the other tanks and in heavy decay.
@jobu88 It's a shame to see one of the only two existing Elephant tanks rotting away outdoors. I saw this tank at Aberdeen 14 years ago in an isolated part of the lot (pre-repaint). Perhaps the Imperial War Museum could 'adopt' it some how.
i live near the aberdeen museum, and would you believe they actually keep the best exhibits outside, i heard they were trying to raise money for an indoor display room but nothing's come of it yet.... too bad. they also have an is-3 there, which is my favorite ww2-era armored fighting vehicles besides the elefant, and that's rusting outside as well.
Actually, ALL of the tanks on the display ground at Aberdeen were just rusting away inside (and also outside). Several had a turret side cut away so you could look inside -- just a mass of rusted metal. It's a shame. The museum at Bovington in the UK shows what you can do when your tanks are indoors and well cared-for.
Only if you knew what and how some of the restoration process went on these tanks. Theres only one guy climbing in and out of these tanks exposing his self to God knows what ,to bring these tanks back to life. I know because I was one of them before I retired. No books no manuals just a pictures and prays and politics.
for anyone who buids models for a hobby Testors used to have this tank in 1/35th scale. I remember building this as a kid. Don'r know if the kit is available anymore. I am taling late seventies early eighties
I always look for model tanks when I'm in a hobby store, judging by what I see I guess the 1970s were the Golden Age of modelling. The selection you find today is a lot less than what I remember. I remember building an Elephant and a bunch of model Tigers.
Believe it, or not, there are a ton more military vehicle model kits, then there used to be. The thing is, most of them are "variants" or "prototypes". You can still find Tigers/Panthers/Panzer Mark IV/Sherman/T-34 and such. I believe Dragon Models produces the Elefant in 1/35 scale.
Its a Ferdinand :D
takeiou 1 week ago
@takeiou
This vehicle is an Elefant, the modernised version of the Ferdinand and can be recognized by the inclusion of a hull mounted MG-34 and a commander cupola.
Dreachon 5 days ago
this is a Ferdinand,a german heavy TANK DESTROYER
ARCAGNELL0 1 week ago
these were impressive assault guns but at kursk they were mopped up pretty easily by russian infantry, due to no anti-infantry defence (machine guns). Guderian : "quail hunting with cannon"
vondembach20 3 weeks ago
@vondembach20
And that is nothing more than soviet era propaganda.
It's actually the opposite that most soviet infantry actually ran away fro the Ferdinands and yes the ferdinandn did carry a MG34 with them internally often along a few MP40 with them.
Only 1 Ferdinand was captured by russian infantry and that was only because the infantry had left the vilage that evening without informing the Ferdinand crew.
Dreachon 2 weeks ago
@Dreachon i imagine the soviets eagerly exploited the propaganda opportunity, but if you read Alan Clark's "Barbarossa" chapter on the Kursk offensive he does a fairly comprehensive analysis of the impact of the Ferdinand and its strenthgs weaknesses.
vondembach20 2 weeks ago
@vondembach20
That might be but I'm yaking directly from the combat histories of both the 653rd and 654th schwere panzerjager abteilung, they both make it clear that infantry was not the be to all end for the Ferdinand, 654th seems to had it even easier with infantry running away from their Ferdinands after firing their main guns.
They also seemed very accurate using their HE shells against them.
Dreachon 2 weeks ago
@1st glance i thought it was the damn Maus, looks alike, Ferdi is just the TD in this case.
valentyn0 3 weeks ago
Its too bad that all they do is slap paint on them at Aberdeen instead of actually restoring them like Bovington does.
cikenberry3 1 month ago 4
@cikenberry3 I could not agree more. See my video on Bovington for comparison. But, the sad truth is these tanks have been sitting out in the weather for about 60 years. When you get up close you can really see what terrible shape they're in. Some of them have a hole cut in the turret so you can look inside and its just a pile of rust in there. A handful might be restorable to something like decent condition with enough private money and time, but I doubt it will happen. Too bad.
jobu88 1 month ago
@cikenberry3 Not just that either - they're also pretty lax about the paint they slap on without proper research first. They recently repainted their Vickers Light Mk VIb in what's meant to be early Western Desert "Caunter" camouflage but the colours are all wrong, (markings too), plus the tank doesn't have the appropriate desert modifications to match. I recognised which website they must've used for their colour guide, or maybe they consulted the same "expert" as the website.
mjeshaw 4 weeks ago
@cikenberry3 I used to live near APG and I can tell you that as long as I've been visiting the ordinance museum, they've had a perpetual lack of funding. It's sad to see the shape the tanks there are in.
tachikoma747 3 weeks ago
dude thats an ferdinand
softwAre56 1 month ago
@softwAre56 what are you trying to say? Ferdinand is just another name for elefant.
zhihao1 1 month ago
@zhihao1 ow sorry did not know that
softwAre56 1 month ago
RESTORE THAT RUSING JAGDTIGER THEY GOT THERE!!!
Theakker3B 1 month ago
@HipHopStixoima A Ferdinand and an Elefant are the same thing
Theakker3B 1 month ago
its a ferdinand,the codename elephant was to be given to the e-100 prototype
togurotoguro 1 month ago
@togurotoguro
And another comment consisting of junk, seriously were do you people ghet this nonsense.
This vehicle in an Elefant, a modernised version of the Ferdinand ( sdkfz 184 ), the E-100 of which there was only a chassis build was never given a name and certainly not Elefant.
Dreachon 1 month ago
It's "not" restored it only has a facial . They only got it rolling and painted it. Restored is a rebuilt "running driving" tank.
rotax7804 1 month ago
I've 275 batl on Ferdy.... superb td!
arzy2008 1 month ago
I can't believe this simple YouTube clip has a quarter-million views! LOL I only posted it for the heck of it. Maybe next year I will go back and take some proper photos with my full size camera and post a follow-up.
jobu88 1 month ago
@jobu88
You should do that mate :)
skyZZofreniKdesignS 1 month ago
@jobu88 is it an Elephant or a Ferdinand :o I cant remember but one of them didint have a mg :X
22tasos22 3 days ago
They say Elefants never forget......so i am surprised this thing didn't blast those Brits, haha jk
TalonMercenary 2 months ago
sorry to burst any one's bubble,BUT this Ferdinand(Elephant) is not totally restored,all it really got was a paint job!
the engine(petrol/electric) does not work ,nor does the main gun!
grahamkeithtodd 2 months ago
What a waste of resources to produce this thing or the Ferdinand, the Nashorn or the Hummel would've been a much more economical and quicker assault gun to build.
zzhamstring 3 months ago
@zzhamstring
They were not waste of resources since they were built on the already existing test units of the Porsche Tiger I. The Nashorn and Hummel are not assault guns.
Imppilz 3 months ago
Im glad they finally restored that thing.
ProPorchMonkey 3 months ago
Comment removed
ProPorchMonkey 3 months ago
Elephant or Ferdinand come from the tiger P
BizzLeVrai 5 months ago
Really cool I was at school there while they rebuilt the tank. We marched past it every day on way to school.
61389alpha 5 months ago
ich dachte der pa zer heisst hummel
HighnRichChiller 6 months ago
@HighnRichChiller nöö ist nen ferdinand
Woodstock187 6 months ago
the nazi idiots should have built more practical panzer IV's with 75mm gun rather than this resource sucking,inefficient,unreliable behemoth.
karthikbans 7 months ago
@karthikbans
Wow, you read about a subject before makeing such a false statement, off all german tank destroyer scored a kill ratio as high as the Elefant they achieved a 16:1 kill-ratio, in many cases 2 to 3 Eelefant would be reponsible for the destruction of an entire T-34 battalion during the withdrawls of 1943.
Dreachon 7 months ago
@Dreachon
THEY DID NOT CHANGED THE OUTCOME OF THE WAR. 320 tanks the Russians lost will be produced in no time but the Germans are not in a position to reproduce their ferdinands. The Nashorn armed with a fantastic pak43 which had cost effectiveness, reliability, ease of manufacture and deadly long range is the practical way to win a war. ferdinand/tigers/jagdtigers may form a great show pieces of Nazi brilliance but in the long run they are one of the reasons that contributed to their defeat.
karthikbans 7 months ago
@karthikbans
Your math is considerable off, 90 ff them were produced, bringing them to 1440 AFV destroyed, also the Elefant packed the very same gun as the Nashorn so it had just a as well the deadly accurate long range.
Dreachon 7 months ago
@Dreachon
The panzerIV tank's long barreled 75mm gun could penetrate a T34 at about 1200m at any angle. A company of well trained panzer IV could take out hastly trained T34's at that time and live to fight another day. The ferdinand are blown up due to break downs.They are bad at fighting infantry P4 is an all rounder. Panzer costs about 140,000Rm compared to about 300,000Rm of the ferdinand. P4 is the sucesful tank of the war used even after in the 6days war. Ferdinand is a notorious failure.
karthikbans 7 months ago
@karthikbans
And the Elefant could bust a T-34 at over 4000m if it needed to, by 1944 the Panzer Iv has reached the end of it's life, it's no longer able to match the latest allied and russians medium tank designs in terms of armour and firepower.
Again how are they bad at fighting infantry, they are just as able at it as any other AFV, plenty of AFV had 1 or even 1 MG, if you falling for the dumb muths of russians infantry climbing on them and throwing molotov on them thick again.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@Dreachon
If the P4 reaching the end of its life so do the M4 and T34 still the allies managed to produce a 50,000 of them. P4 preformed no way inferior to them. Armies desperately needed tanks for taking out Infantry emplacements, pill boxes, machinegun nest, encroached buildings. For that purpose a simple, reliable, production friendly tank such as the M4’s & T34’s are sufficient.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@Dreachon
The Allies know very well the capabilities of the super powerful German amour but also knew that Germans are not in a position to produce them in large numbers due to their recourse restrictions. Elephant was built to destroy other tanks and it did quite well but do you think it can survive without other tank support to fed off infantry? No that’s were tanks like P4 come into the scene.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@karthikbans
Infantry were not send against Elefants, not to mention you seem to forget that they also carried a HE shell, and this proved very succesfull due to their accuracy, there is an account on such an action in the 654th combat history book.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@Dreachon
Yes P4 are outclassed against the late advanced armour of allies. But P4 is a medium tank built to fight off other medium tanks only. Late war allied armour are heavy and should not be compared with P4’s moreover the allies upgraded their armour only because of small number of formidable AFV’s fielded by germans eg.tigers still they used M4’s and T34’s in mass.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@karthikbans
I am talking about medium, by mid 1944 both the T-34 and sherman are beeing upgraded, the T-34/85 and as for the sherman the installlation of the more powerfull 76mm M1 gun and thicker armour, the sherman got even better by late 1044 with the M4A3E8
Dreachon 6 months ago
@Dreachon
In around 1944 shortage of tanks became apparent the Germans had to use AFV’s like Jagdpanther to do tanks job this is because of the flawed doctrine of investing on heavy, complicated and time consuming unreliable models rather than wisely upgrading existing models. The T34-85, su100, Sherman firefly, m18 hellcat, wolverine are some fine examples.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@karthikbans
Jagdpanther never acted like tanks, they weren't supplied to panzerdivision either, they were kept in the special heavy tank-destroyer battalions or schwere panzerjager abteilung.
From it's first concept it was intended as tank destroyer a task for which it was well suited.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@Dreachon
To prove the fact germans even manufactured the monstrosity MAUS an example of the stupid, overconfident, impractical nature of german high command. I wont say I am right & you are wrong. It’s the unique point of view of a person counts at the time. You are indeed right about Elephant’s performance it did extraordinary well against other tanks but what about other aspects & what about the economic & financial stress on Germany. My opinion in the long run its just a very bad idea.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@karthikbans
Only 2 prototypes were ever made, in late 44 Hitler also issues an order that forbids any further work on superheavies.
Only reasons it seems the Maus even got that far was to keep Porsche happy since he was a personal firend of Hitler.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@karthikbans
So again on what fact do you base this view that it was a failure cause at it's given task at destroying soviet armour it more than succeeded.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@Dreachon
Tank runover by infantry is very common and it’s a fate experienced by all tanks this will happen if they are left alone without infantry support. To fight with infantry the AFV either should have turrent mounted machine guns or guns mounted all over the body some thing like a A7V of WW1. Thick enclosed armour with a stationary gun is an infantry suicide. They must have support from tanks that are light and quick like P4 guarding their rear.
karthikbans 6 months ago
@karthikbans
AFv don't need lighter tanks to provide support against enemy infantry they need their own infantry which can do the job far better.
Dreachon 6 months ago
@karthikbans
This vehicle was originally made for the Tiger tank project, however the Henschel design (which ultimately became the Tiger I) was favored over the Porsche design. By the time the decision was made to go with the Henschel design the Porsche company had already manufactured 90 chassis of their tank. They didn't want to waste them so they converted them to a tank destroyer which became the Ferdinand (and later Elefant). Technically speaking, this vehicle should have never existed.
ApocDevTeam 6 months ago
@ApocDevTeam
yes you are right i never thought about that.
karthikbans 6 months ago
and this tank on the foto is an elephant because it do,nt have a machine gun installed in the hull.
hardcorecrusher12 7 months ago
the elephant and the ferdinant are the same tanks the only diffrent thing between those two are that the first production version who was called the elephant didnt had a machine gun for infantery defence so they put a machine gun inside the tank and called it the ferdinand.
hardcorecrusher12 7 months ago
That is Ferdinand, not elephant. or perhaps its the same tank? >.>
Evangelinger 7 months ago 11
@Evangelinger Yes, others have already pointed that out. It's a Ferdinand.
jobu88 7 months ago 6
@jobu88 It was called the elephant the designer was Ferdinand Porsche
BanditDragoon 6 months ago
@jobu88
Actually it is an Elefant, it has all the modifications that define it as one, hull mounted machinegun, commanders cupola, sadly the zimmerit is not present.
Dreachon 5 months ago
@jobu88 The tiger (P) was never mass produced because the henschel design was chosen due to its superiority, so they recycled the chassis. Porsche just transformed them into this huge tank destroyer sporting a L71/88mm I believe. I may be mistaken, but I think the name Elefant came first, but it may be the other way around.
MillowQc 4 months ago
@MillowQc
Actually they were first called Ferdinand in honour of dr. Ferdinand Porsche, the name change to Elefant didn't come until early 1944.
Dreachon 4 months ago
Comment removed
sadlmatt 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jobu88 Technically it's an Elephant, they were converted from surving Ferdinands after the battle of Kursk to include a machine gun mounted in the glais plate.
sadlmatt 2 months ago
@jobu88 whats the differance?
2015meyer 1 month ago
@2015meyer
If your asking about the difference between the Ferdinand ( earlier version ) and the Elefant ( modernised version seen in these photo's )
Main difference is a more powerfull engine, hull MG mount in the forward hull, cupola added for the commander and the application of zimmerit, there are soem smaller changes as wel but these are the main ones.
These were all applied to the Elefant and you see the cupola and hull MG moun in the pictures,
Dreachon 1 month ago
@Dreachon oh ok ty mate
2015meyer 1 month ago
@jobu88 You can easily change the name of the video^^.
1981Badfish 3 weeks ago
@jobu88 Ferdinand and elephant were both the same tank - the officioal name was "Elephant" while the soldiers called it "Ferdinand" -> because of its developer - Ferdinand Porsche of the Porsche Company in WW2
Haloprogamer1996 3 weeks ago
@Haloprogamer1996
Actually it's official name was Ferdinand then later in early 1944 the name was officially changed to Elefant although the crews did keep referring to them as Ferdinand.
Dreachon 3 weeks ago
@Evangelinger Ferdinand is the old name of that tank, they changed it to Elephant.
valttu94 7 months ago
@Evangelinger it was first named Ferdinand and later Elefant , but Elefant was the unofficial name. After the Battle of Kursk the remaining Ferdinand's got recalled and modified and then called Elefant
Prugdish 6 months ago
@Evangelinger The Elephant is the "upgraded" Ferdinand easy recognized by a coaxial Machine Gun
zeron2222 5 months ago
@Evangelinger No MG-34 in the bow/hull position - and it has the bolted on armor - later Ferdinands or should we call 'Elefants' had slightly upgraded armor, transmission and an improved commander's cupola in addition to the MG-34 - and of course they were battle damaged more or less from Kursk :)
Ferdinand = Elefant without upgrades or MG-34's.
Elefant = Ferdinand with the upgrades as many including jobu88 pointed out :)
HeirofGojira91 5 months ago
@Evangelinger Ferdinands did not have a BMG... this tank has a BMG.. you make the call
hwoods01 5 months ago
@Evangelinger it's the same thing
Ferdinand was the official name for a while, but Elephant took over
hivewasp 4 months ago
@Evangelinger Its the same tank
akkudakkupl 4 months ago
@Evangelinger Ferdinand and Elephant are the same tanks
F1zzzy90 2 months ago
@Evangelinger
Porsche Ferdinand, correct.
fateephat 1 month ago
oh wow and i thought almost all of them were destroyed int he battle of kursk because of a missing machinegun on the front or so..
happosai27 7 months ago
@happosai27
Over half of the Ferdinands survived Kursk, they kept on fighting until late 43 when they were recalled for a refit.
Dreachon 7 months ago
Elephants and Ferdinand were interesting but were inefficient. They were incased in heavy armor and possessed powerful gun but their engine and suspention were insufficient for their size. There is even a record of German soldier saying that many Elephants caught on fire while climbing a mild hill because the engines were overworked and overheated.
dlxowns322 8 months ago
FERDINAND?
IRELANDSELITE 8 months ago
dud youshould edit your text at description cose you did a por job with this one
zumpster 8 months ago
The germans tought of some of the greatest tanks of all time and turrets.
paintballKid545 8 months ago
These armoured vehicles were basically self propped 88's, enveloped in armor. serious design flaw: no secondary arnament. mg 34/42 mchgns! very vunerable to communists' close infantry attacks. many elefants in kursk fell victim to russian infantry
attacks.
adampie12 8 months ago
@adampie12
Actually almost none fell victim to infantry attacks, that is just a myth.
Dreachon 8 months ago
@adampie12 The elephant's failed reputation comes almost entirely from's Guderian's account of their performance as part of Model's assault force on the northern sector of the Kursk offensive. He was quoted as saying that without machine guns to neutralize it's opponent's infantry, it outran it's own infantry who could not advance, and was then overwhelmed by the enemy. I've seen it quoted dozens of times as rationale for saying the Elephant was completely useless.
Ullbritt 7 months ago
@adampie12 I recently read a first-person account from a machine gunner in the Nikopol Bridgehead in late 43/early 1944. He discussed how 2-3 Elephants would arrive on the scene every time the Russians would mount a tank attack on the bridgehead.
Ullbritt 7 months ago
He stated that they were completely impervious to enemy long range fire (they weighed about 65 with immensely thick armor) and with their extremely powerful 88MM gun (a longer caliber weapon than the 88 used in Tiger I's I believe), they could knock out their opponents of up to 2,000 yards. These few machines held the enemy at bay for weeks according this report, destroying large numbers of Russian tanks.
Ullbritt 7 months ago
funny how ppl call them elephant when they are actually called elefant
the ones called ferdinand dont got machine guns only a cannon
borgri09 9 months ago
It's sickening how poorly Aberdeen has taken care of their collection of armor.
vanscoyoc 9 months ago 29
@vanscoyoc yea i agree
Brian79camino 5 months ago
Was gibt es Schöneres? Ich liebe deutsche Panzer der Wehrmacht, sie strahlen Würde aus!
Thor1212121212 10 months ago 2
das ist eine selbstfahrende Artillerie und kein Panzer
uthar1986 10 months ago
That paint-job is horrible, as always.
Kal50BMG 10 months ago
@Kal50BMG
this is the original Camo for an elephant in Italy, Summer 1944. so it is Historicly correct.
ThePanzerWarMachine 10 months ago
@ThePanzerWarMachine How do you know this? That pattern sucks and is everything but historic. Just look at pictures regarding that time.
Kal50BMG 10 months ago
@Kal50BMG
obviously, you haven't seen my channel. I have all episodes of Greatest Tank Battles & Tank Overhaul on my channel. Including the Elephant Tank.
ThePanzerWarMachine 10 months ago
All german armor back in ww2 looks pretty close to all modern armor to this day. Look at the T34, the american Sherman and all others. The japanese and italian tanks.
From the look of design (and performace) would indicate they would be like 30+ years older than the awesome panthers, tigers, strumtiger (i believe is the correct name) and elefant.
German engineering is amazing.
KyoshoCrew 10 months ago
It's true that a large number of them were lost at Kursk, but what is never said is that they knocked out about 6 Russian tanks for every loss of their own.
Attila709 10 months ago
thi is Ferdinand no Elephant
Krysin151 11 months ago
@Krysin151
It is an elephant, the vehicle spots all the modifications sans the zimmerit.
Dreachon 11 months ago
Tiger would kick elephant's ass :D
Astrix4life 11 months ago
Known as the Ferdinand, excellent tank buster!
crktp7 11 months ago
They seem be taking a very slapdash approach to 'restoration at APG. Maybe they lack the money to do a better job, but some of their efforts appear just lazy or incompetent. They've done a similar "restoration" on their Vickers Mk VIb recently. The "Caunter" scheme colours and markings are hopelessly wrong, apparently having used the Mk IIb at WW2drawings.jexiste as a guide, without bothering to consult anyone who knows better. Also it''s the wrong scheme for a non-desert modified version.
mjeshaw 1 year ago
@1988rogers
search ferdinand tank destroyer
elephant is a nickname ;)
sn0wD 1 year ago
funniest thing about this tank is howt hey forgot to put machine guns on it. so whent he russians found out they just ran right up to them lol
wallieburger 1 year ago
@wallieburger yeah. but it was never designed to engage infantry; it's called a 'tank destroyer' because it was built to kill other tanks
also, it doesn't have a turret like a regular tank would..so not a tank
lzoli18B 11 months ago
@lzoli18B ok well it was a support gun, other support guns like the stug had machine guns on them, leaving out a machinegun port was a major design flaw
wallieburger 11 months ago
This is an repainted elephant, not restored!
ktc8308 1 year ago
Restored? Repainted they mean and if it was restored they would of drove it and they cut the brakes apart to get it back together insateed of just fixing it right
= HACK JOB
DaManzMoney 1 year ago
@AdamSavage88 Hahahahaha! And... i believe you are a Mythbuster fan!! :)
SSUstufRudel 1 year ago
guy and gals, this tank destroyer was a mech failure. It had a short life not becouse the war ended, but becouse the darn thing kept breaking down. In kursk it proved unreliable and to make things worse for the crews the tanks did not have a machine gun which the russians soon used to their advantange. Im not saying it wasnt powerful, I am saying this tank just sucked royal in performance and in combat. along with the hunting tiger, tiger 2, and (although they had more luck with) tiger 1
glynamus 1 year ago
@glynamus Quite true... same with the Panther as well because these vehicles were overweight and the engines were also underpowered for the massive chassis. However these heavy vehicles were not meant for frontline charges, they were more so used for engaging enemy tanks and for more suitable for static defence roles. To be honest the Ardennes offense in 1944 is a total woot to me using the Königstiger. :)
SSUstufRudel 1 year ago
these tanks are moving to fort lee va...and will be inside
Imachowderhead 1 year ago
it looks like the marder lll
127ahmed 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
K2korgoth
1 year before
"This is not a fully restored Elephant. The engine doesn't function and all they did was remove the rust and repaint it. It is nothing more then a very well restored static display of a Elephant"
CORRECT but not only this, they find some destroyed Elephants too, that are likely unrepairable.
merdaporrenta 1 year ago
Its looks like the Maüs
fanfuckingtasticity 1 year ago
This could be considered the fore-runner to the Paladin artillery system we have today in the U.S. Army, looks allot like it.
greywolf45 1 year ago
Pictures are for gays!
Rudolf555 1 year ago
I remember seeing the Elefant at Aberdeen in '81, If I remember, the gun mount was broken or something, because the mantlet sat cockeyed on it. They were never used wisely. As the Ferdinand they had NO close defense capability other than opening the hatch and shooting at infantry or throwing a grenade. The surviving ones from Kursk were modified with a hull machine gun and commander's cupola and sent to Italy. Another blunder sending something prone to drivetrain trouble to mountainous terrain!
roadstarman58 1 year ago
I remember seeing the Elefant at Aberdeen in '81, If I remember, the gun mount was broken or something, because the mantlet sat cockeyed on it.
roadstarman58 1 year ago
Damn it. I've never seen that . Teh two times i went it must've been still in Resto.
petro116 1 year ago
Today Germany is using fifths columns to infiltrate and systematically suppres any opposition in other countries on its way to world domination.This includes faking ecidence to let people disappear in prison,cause them trouble and murder them.
My homepage gives information about the techniques being used today by German officials and snitchers.They are no longer fighting open battles because Germany failed twice. Now Germans are using all sort of dirty tricks if you dont collaborate with them.
wwwtotalitaerde 1 year ago
the Ferdinand is cool, i've never heard of it before playing World of Tanks.
fourstar7 1 year ago
@fourstar7 I play WoT too!.. Hate to turn around a cornor just to get stuck in a alley between the Ferdi and a Tiger/Tiger 2 >_>'
RazkilZ 1 year ago
@fourstar7 I play it too!! :)
SSUstufRudel 1 year ago
fake
kooziejr 1 year ago
no defenses to stave off enemy tank killing infantry, like additional MGs
volvo4377 1 year ago
I have the Episode of this Elephant of Tank Overhaul on my channel. Those who want to see this mighty beast in action should really see it! =D
ThePanzerWarMachine 1 year ago
elephant is the english translation. the name is elefant.
for example, MP40 is maschinenpistole not machine pistol.
volound 1 year ago
tank hunters dream machine...
dareta 1 year ago
nice work!
Khoutekkelly 1 year ago
This is the tank from the History channel's tank restore show. Very cool to watch it being redone!
Niche79 1 year ago
Johann Spielmann (born 29.12.1916) was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves for the destruction of 14 russian tanks which he took out during Operation Citadel in battle of Kursk. Under his command the battalion "Schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 653" destroyed 320 enemy tanks in area of Höhe 257, also known as "Panzerhöhe", for the loss of 13 Eleants that were immobilized by mines.
tanker1408 1 year ago
when i went to aberdeen most of the tanks along the main road they drove off and around base about once a week
GUNNY89 1 year ago
They are being relocated to Ft. Lee Virginia for indoor exhibits.
canary11141 2 years ago
As of January 5, 2010 the Elephant, KV-1, Sherman, 155mm M40, Somua, M2a1, Panzer 4d, M6 heavy tank Skeleton tank & numerous other items are gone, The Hetzer has been restored and is in the lobby.
canary11141 2 years ago
where did they go ?
derrickislander 2 years ago
ww2 tanks are the coolest ever made..
Janandeweg 2 years ago
Oh dear. I wish I could see it move.
marceeee22 2 years ago
"To hell with handicapped parking, Ill park where I want to."
HazeGreyAndUnderway 2 years ago 23
They where first named Ferdinand's it was not until the retrofit of a Machine gun and extra armor they got the name Elephant,, just to clarify that there where no Elephants at Kursk as those where Ferdinands.
OtantalizingO 2 years ago
Wow! Do they have a good museum in Maryland at Aberdeen? I have been to the Patton at FT. Knox, pretty outstanding museum.
hellbilly074 2 years ago
the porsche chassis was shit right? too slow too vulnerable to infantry too heavy armor for hchassis ?
Santoslhelpa 2 years ago
The Elefant was a great anti-tank weapon. Its gun was very powerful and usually did its job, but as you said, it was the chassis for the early designed Tiger I and indeed it was slow and vulnerable to the sides and rear, so the Henschell was taken. Early flaws with the elefant was the lack of a MG. Infantry could just walk up to the tank from just about anywhere, plant a charge and run. These tanks turret could also turn very slightly, making it tough to take on tanks from angles.
Crossingman18 2 years ago
Sweet restoration! thoes are rare like only 2 around or so?
lordchunkyfat 2 years ago
Yeah,only 2 known to still exsist. This one was a later type,while the other one is at Kubinika in Russia.That one is in the original configuration.They only made 100 or so with this chasisbut most of them where built similiar to this one.
cybasame 2 years ago
It's pretty famous, considering what a very short life it had. It's built on the hull for the losing design in the Tiger tank project, the other design won and became the Tiger, and the Germans had a bunch of these tank hulls and so they slapped an 88mm gun on them, with enormous frontal armor, and used them at Kursk. Against tanks at long range they were practically invulnerable, but with no MG they were also very vulnerable to infantry.
jobu88 2 years ago 16
@jobu88 Guderian and a few other Generals were known to have despised the design. It was very inflexible and its vulnerability to infantry made it basically useless. Only about 90 were built anyway.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
@jobu88 Your description of the Elefant is in fact not an Elefant but an earlier "Ferdinand" Originally the hull which Porsche designed was meant for the Tiger tank however the hull which Henschel designed was in favour. After the Battle of Kursk due to its lack of secondary armament, the Tank Destroyer(not tank) underwent modifications which added the ball MG34, Commander's Cupola along with anti-magnetic Zimmerit paste and it became known as the Elefant, which is in the video! :)
SSUstufRudel 1 year ago 16
@SSUstufRudel Well done thanks for the correct info.
jobu88 1 year ago 4
@jobu88 No problem! I mean looking at your channel, I see that you like WWII German armour too! Cool! :)
SSUstufRudel 1 year ago
This is not a fully restored Elephant. The engine doesn't function and all they did was remove the rust and repaint it. It is nothing more then a very well restored static display of a Elephant
K2korgoth 2 years ago 12
Correct, as many have pointed out. It's not really corect to say "Restored" I should have said "repainted". When you got up close you could see how very old and broken down it was.
jobu88 2 years ago 7
@jobu88 It's a shame that Elephant is outside considering there are only two left in the world. I am 24 this year, and saw that tank at Aberdeen when I was 10, pre-repaint and I found it isolated from the other tanks and in heavy decay.
MrDersuUzala 11 months ago
@jobu88 It's a shame to see one of the only two existing Elephant tanks rotting away outdoors. I saw this tank at Aberdeen 14 years ago in an isolated part of the lot (pre-repaint). Perhaps the Imperial War Museum could 'adopt' it some how.
MrDersuUzala 11 months ago
i live near the aberdeen museum, and would you believe they actually keep the best exhibits outside, i heard they were trying to raise money for an indoor display room but nothing's come of it yet.... too bad. they also have an is-3 there, which is my favorite ww2-era armored fighting vehicles besides the elefant, and that's rusting outside as well.
aloofasalways 2 years ago
Please post more video about the museum
kwokwing 2 years ago
Actually, ALL of the tanks on the display ground at Aberdeen were just rusting away inside (and also outside). Several had a turret side cut away so you could look inside -- just a mass of rusted metal. It's a shame. The museum at Bovington in the UK shows what you can do when your tanks are indoors and well cared-for.
jobu88 2 years ago
Only if you knew what and how some of the restoration process went on these tanks. Theres only one guy climbing in and out of these tanks exposing his self to God knows what ,to bring these tanks back to life. I know because I was one of them before I retired. No books no manuals just a pictures and prays and politics.
LycanVP 2 years ago
hurenkind
WernerB1000 2 years ago
i sat on this very one!....beautiful machine, but it was a huge failure
Brian79camino 2 years ago
the Elefants were built as a stop gap tank destroyer by the germans predominently for the battle of Kursk in 1943.
They were all based on the Porsche design for the Tiger that failed to go into production as the Tiger 1
twister444 2 years ago
for anyone who buids models for a hobby Testors used to have this tank in 1/35th scale. I remember building this as a kid. Don'r know if the kit is available anymore. I am taling late seventies early eighties
DSmith99000 2 years ago
I always look for model tanks when I'm in a hobby store, judging by what I see I guess the 1970s were the Golden Age of modelling. The selection you find today is a lot less than what I remember. I remember building an Elephant and a bunch of model Tigers.
jobu88 2 years ago
if u want too see a really big machin type in dora or landkruzer p.1500 and you will be amazed
TheFatalmortality 2 years ago
Believe it, or not, there are a ton more military vehicle model kits, then there used to be. The thing is, most of them are "variants" or "prototypes". You can still find Tigers/Panthers/Panzer Mark IV/Sherman/T-34 and such. I believe Dragon Models produces the Elefant in 1/35 scale.
kyokogodai 2 years ago