How effective was the Tiger really?
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 12. 2018
- There are quite many debates about the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung E & B - the Tiger & Königstiger - tanks, so in this video we look at how effective or ineffective these panzers were in combat. This means we look at doctrine, kill to loss ratios, mission accomplishment and various other issues.
»» GET OUR BOOK: Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 German/English - www.hdv470-7.com/
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
» Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
»» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop - www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» twitter - / milhivisualized
» facebook - / milhistoryvisualized
» twitch - / militaryhistoryvisualized
» minds.com - www.minds.com/militaryhistory...
» SOURCES «
Wilbeck, Christopher W.: Sledgehammers. Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II. The Aberjona Press: Bedford, PA, USA, 2004.
Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945. Ferdinand Schöningh: Paderborn, 2016.
Zaloga, Steven: Armored Champion. The top Tanks of World War II. Stackpole Books: Mechanicsburg, US, 2015.
Jentz, Thomas L.: Germanys Tiger Tanks: Tiger I & Tiger II: Combat Tactics
Jentz, Thomas L.: Tiger I & II. Kampf und Taktik. Podzun-Pallas: Wölfersheim-Bergstadt, 2000
Spielberger, Walter J.; Doyle, Hilary L.: Tigers I and II and Their Variants (Spielberger German Armor and Military Vehicle)
Spielberger, Walter J.; Doyle, Hilary L.: Panzer VI Tiger und seine Abarten. Motorbuch Verlag: Stuttgart, 2010.
Carruthers, Bob: Tiger I in Combat. Pen & Sword Military: London, 2013.
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone
#tiger #panzer #ww2
![[Barbarossa] The Major Errors and Blunders - Or why Barbarossa Failed](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A_3R-Rkn_98/mqdefault.jpg)
If you like in-depth military history videos, consider supporting me on PayPal, Patreon or SubscribeStar or PayPal:
paypal.me/mhvis --- patreon.com/mhv/ --- www.subscribestar.com/mhv
Could you do a video on the Liger Tank?
I don't agree with the assessment that the Tigers where effective because the allies devoted a disproportionate amount of resources to them. The allies where afraid of them and there for devoted extra resources to them but that does not in and of itself mean they were effective just that the allies knew they had heavy armor and big guns that would take overwhelming firepower to destroy or should be defeated strategically instead of tactically. Isolating a heavy tank battalion and threating its supply lines to force a withdrawal or cut them off is far more effective than losing a disproportionate number of your tanks in a head on fight.
@military history u should play hearts of iron 4 u would love it
aah the mighty jingles salt mines create highest grade salt
umm - just one point - its fair enough to incorporate "non combat losses". However that needs to also be included for the opposing force to make sense.
"So lately my content was a bit tank-heavy, so I thought I'll end the year with some heavy tanks."
I love you so much, man :D
but that would mean no more videos till next year :(
Let the man have some rest, for fuck's sake! He's been digging night shifts at the Jingles Salt Mines lately...
@@Stierlitz or he could be hiding Russian POWs that he had captured since summer to be released before the Christmas truce.
Clearly the solution to too many tanks is more tanks.
No. The solution to too many tanky is tanks to many. Thanks to many. See ya :D
The 501st had the second lowest losses? That's good, they watched out for those wrist rockets.
AT-STs! AT-STs!
*We've got droids!*
Klobi for President DROIDEKAS!
Watch out its a super!
Just like the simulation
Academic citations, critical approach to data, authentic sources. You surpass 99% of all pop-history content. If only more people took your approach...
He is german ofcourse he take it above and beyond
@No One's Innocent same thing
@No One's Innocent *oh no* !
@@xeraphyx7903 lol, correct but incorrect
and don't forget the touch of humor.
The pointy end of the spear suffers the most damage. Combat loses of typewriters was pretty low.
Lol
Artillery General wanted more artillery. Who saw that coming...
Ed Hartley He was right.
@@markanderson3870 then you would have no ammo for all those guns.
You're right to point out that its not a simple 1 Tiger=21 artillery pieces. You also have to factor in how many man hours and industrial capacity i takes to build one Tiger, though. It was a lot. But I still agree with overall idea that making Pz iv's or artillery or Stug's or many other things would have been a more effective use of resources than using those resources for Tigers.
Good point, but there would just be more resources put into making shells vs. using so much effort to build the one Tiger. It would be interesting to break down the statistics and evaluate them. I still think the Tiger would be the loser.
@Boondock Saint _How do you move all those artillery pieces? More horses?_
Funny enough, Rommel was ok with that idea. He also was in the camp of "lets cancel all the weird tanks and build PaKs in huge numbers"
In my youth i spent some time conducting interviews with world war 2 veterans for a military history society mainly British and Germans one interview with a British tank veteran (churchill gunner) told me all i needed to know about the effectiveness of the Tiger. He said as they advanced from Caen they were approaching a village twelve churchills and other assorted armoured\unarmoured vehicles in strung out column the first four tanks went in less then a minute with no one even knowing where the fire had come from over the course of the next half hour all churchills including his were knocked out and as he bailed out of his tank all he could see was burning tanks and vehicles.
As he looked at a ridge to the side of the village three Tigers advanced from the woods then retreated with no damage and no losses the next day the British abandoned that avenue of advance moving the advance 12 miles away. Even at the age of 73 the look on his face as he talked about the attack was full of fear and he said if there were rumours of Tigers and later Tiger 2's his unit would wait for infantry or artillery to clear before advancing. Were they effective yes if in no other way then their psychological impact on both enemies and their own forces getting a boost from knowing they were near.
It took sometime and a considerable amount of document digging but i found the after action report of the attack he described compiled by a colonel whose final recommendation was not to use British armour in area's with verified heavy tank battalions as the British at that time (September 1944) had no effective armoured counter to them. I also tried to interview a soldier who was at villers bocage but wasn't able to complete the interview as he became very emotional describing the desperation in trying to fight off the Tiger and failing. Whatever the material cost or effectiveness they left a lasting impression on any troops that faced fully operational and experienced crewed Tigers more then any other tank.
Good post. Much of war is about psychology. If a weapon system is perceived as being superior, it affects how the soldiers fight on both sides. This is most of the justification for giving soldiers automatic rifles - they don't hit any more often but they boost morale and keep the enemy's heads down.
It couldnt have helped that they were also on the defence and mostly attacked from ambush.
Yeah, but it's important to consider the tradeoff. At about the same time on the other side of Normandy at Carentan the only german German armor which could be mustered to counter attack the American advance was a few assault guns. They were easily defeated by the 2nd Armored Div. which had a plentiful supply of medium tanks. The Americans forces broke out from Carentan and eventually ended up forcing the German defenders around Caen into a disorderly retreat through falaise to avoid encirclement.
The German heavies were effective, but they couldn't be everywhere. The allies doctrine of mass medium tank formations meant that they more or less could have armor everywhere.
Damn maybe he fought against mtfing michael witmann that would be legendary. Your entire story is absolutely thrilling.
Birdy Flying This is a myth. Tigers and panthers were rare while American and British tanks were capable of destroying everything the Germans had with proper tactics. The Sherman in particular had great escape hatches and were well rounded tanks, there was a handful of 76mm Sherman’s that well represented the threat of German heavy tanks. The British were outdone early in Africa, and the doctrine of having cruiser tanks and infantry tanks was outdated, but the tanks worked.
Tank effectiveness is often thought of as how it performed one on one with lighter tanks such as the Sherman. -A nightmare scenario for almost any western front tank (save for the Firefly and Chaffee). Problem is, factors such as allied control of the Air, lack of fuel and difficulty of repair also figure into the Tiger's effectiveness. As one German ex-tanker told me (in 1982), "Its hard to boast of your tank's superiorty when youve been sitting by your [captured] broken tank for hours watching many thousands of American and British troops, tanks and planes rushing past you"
Thank you. Wehraboos get all horny about the big cats, but the fact is they were huge wastes of resources. A tank that cannot even reach the battlefield without needing its transmission replaced multiple times, and constant support because it cannot cross any bridge without assistance, is a worthless tank.
Arguably more important than tactical effectiveness is logistics in warfare. Germany couldn't even support the Tiger or Panther while waging a defensive war for most of their lives, imagine trying to actually go on the offensive with these paperweights. The enemy would be counter-attacking while you were stuck on the side of a road with the engine block removed.
@@CrashB111How were they wasted resources? The Germans didn't have the men or the fuel to build quantity- their ONLY option was a small number of more durable and deadly tanks, which is exactly what Tigers were. Tigers were 3x the cost of other tanks, but had a kill ratio of 10-1, which makes their effectiveness 3.3x that of an allied tank.
What is the advantage of manufacturing 5 panzer IV instead of a Tiger when a. You can't man 4 more tanks, b. Your factories can't produce 4 more tanks c. You don't have fuel to run 4 more tanks and d. You don't have enough trains to transport 4 more tanks.
@@jonathanford7055 Maybe the Panzer IV actually reaches the front line without breaking down and being abandoned in a ditch as the Allies advance on you?
You can't completely discount all of the losses the cats had to non-combat issues. They designed a tank they performed terribly in mud and freezing weather, while fighting a war in Eastern Europe.
@CrashB111 wehraboos may be annoying but those complaining of wehraboos are much worse. Kotaku reading redditors the lot of them.
This is the problem. Everyone talks about WWII tanks through armor vs armor combat when that was never the purpose for most tanks to begin with. Allied tanks were designed for quick maneuverability to cover for infantry. The air superiority made any German on the field a sitting duck without someone to help, especially Tigers that were constantly prone to breaking down.
The fact Wehraboos keep talking about the Tiger's superiority vs. Shermans and Crusaders shows that they do not understand the extreme differences between German and Allied tank differences. They killed a lot, yes. But are they really groundbreaking when your infantry are dead and the sky is littered with Superfortresses dropping bombs on you?
Love when a German who speaks English actually sounds German 😂👌🏻
I wish he has a transcript so I can study after watching his videos.
Ah....but they can't help it..if you get a German drunk enough, he reverts to Ze classic 'Allo 'Allo'. I understand this British Classic of Humour is actually much loved in Germany, which pleased me Greatly
I think he's an Austrian... technically not exactly the same.
@@Physiker17 Yeah, but Hitler was Austrian too. I dunno why I even mentioned that.
@No One's Innocent Uhm no, it's not "whom"; it's who.
"Using Tİgers as mine-clearing vehicles"
What in da name of Guderian.....
No mechanical mine clearing devices - mine plow like the Soviets; Flail like the British; Roller USA used. Closest they came were remote control demo vehicles dropping explosives in the field whose blast cleared the mines - but they couldn't with all of the artillery dropping tell which area they cleared.
@@ODST6262 i thought they just detonate the mine with their thread lol
@@GlitchedBlox Tread? They did but the anti-tank mines damaged the tracks and suspension and soon they had an immobile Tiger.
The Panzer 6 were too tough for the mines we were using, they could just set them off and keep going.
@@davehood2667 Not really. After several mines or a large mine the Tigers would break down. It was an inefficient way to clear mines especially compared to the British flail device and the Soviet mine roller.
Jingle’s salt is highest quality salt. Solid choice.
I haven't watched the video, but..that Jingles?
Tog! Nom nom nom
He's a youtuber, look him up then join us in the Salt Mines
Have to wonder what he would say about 21 artillery pieces per Tiger. Granted, they're not SPGs, but I think we'd all be sent to the salt mines for proposing that.
are u sure he can complete to SirFoch salt ? xD
"War is a team effort"
Tell that to my team in any fps!
Go play some Squad 😋
Simo Häyhö “we’re supposed to be a unit” “suck my unit”
Play Some Post Scriptum! That is WW2 tactical sim!
Battlefield 5 infantry are fucking retarded, they rarely help their tanks, I am a pro commandant, but non help me out with repairs and protecting me against infantry
@@certified_cact that's why I usually role with light tanks
"Okay we need a plan to fight the Tiger tanks"
"Okay, simple. We don't!"
"What"
"They're out of fuel, just go around them and let the artillery deal with them"
"But that will destroy the French town"
"Better that than our entire tank force"
"The town's gonna be bombed by the ameritards anyway so no worries there"
@@jacqirius the "ameritards" air power played a huge role in smashing the German army in the West... and having powerful tanks without much fuel isn't that useful.
Bad ass profile picture dude
@@timothydavidcurp Thanks to the freedoms boys the bombed cities just means easier modernization
@@jacqirius gfy
Semper Fi, wuss
Germany: *builds heaviest tanks in the 1940s world*
Also Germany: "Wtf why cant we cross any bridges???"
Also Germany: "WTF, why mein tank transmission die???"
Also Germany: "WTF, where mein oil for tank and plane go???"
Also Germany: "WTF, why mein [Insert Maus-Tiger-etc.] lost to infantry overrunning us???"
@@kairndreamer2885 Unsinnn,..these points were well aware and there were tactics to counter that.
@@Forodir they weren't going to get far with synthetic oil that is for sure. Failure to capture and hold the oil reserves of Russia.
@@khalee95 Yes thats a Fact, but that has nothing to do with the design of the heavy Tanks, also smaller and lighter tanks would be without Fuel in the end. Design is alway some compromise and the doctrin was to lean heavy (pun intended) to Firepower and Armor, so the high consumption was well aware but the decision was that it was worth it.
And the other points are just rubbish.
@@Forodir Remind me again which ones were actually effective, because moving soldiers and tanks by train is a good way to lose equipment and compromise the organizational integrity of your battalions, and shifting focus away from Grozny in favour of Moscow and Leningrad cost Germany's chance to get and hold Soviet oil, and by the end of the war German tanks were being used on the defensive where they could be more easily overrun given the tanks' poor oil allocation.
A most thorough and contextual overview of the Tiger tanks effectiveness.
Meanwhile the half hour "documentaries" continue to spew bullshit to the masses with alarming success. If there is any salt with me, it is that your see stuff has never killed the phoney docs.
EDIT: THIS IS SARCASTIC
Sherman tanks, the US Army's pathetic attempt at creating an armored vehicle, was known to its crews by only one name: the Ronson, because it lit up the first time, every time. Belton Cooper, who spent the war observing Shermans that had been damaged, remembered that Shermans were very often damaged. It took 5 Shermans to defeat a German tank, which is why US tank platoons had 5 tanks in them and German tank platoons only needed 1 Tiger. The Tiger's gun was way bigger than the Shermans, and therefore more useful in all situations.
In conclusion, the Americans won war due to sheer fighting prowess and patriotism despite the best efforts of their engineers to sabotage them by producing inferior weapons. Next up on the History Channel: Did aliens design the ME-262? Find out after 15 minutes of commercials.
Brian Young - "the Americans won war" (sic). Mmmmm, I think there were other countries fighting too ?
@@brianyoung3324 you're wrong about the Sherman. It was one of the most successful tank designs in the war. It was cheap, reliable, and it was upgraded significantly by the end of the war. Can probably build seven or eight Sherman's for the cost of each tiger. then remember that only a percentage of your tanks actually show up at the battlefield cuz the rest of them are broken down or can't cross that bridge. At the end of the day was the Sherman that beat the tiger.
@Operator_As_Fck I guess everyone missed the sarcasm in Brian Young's comment.
@@85Funkadelic r/whoosh
Have you ever heard the legend of King Tiger the Heavy?
czcams.com/video/ha8CGw9nkTY/video.html
??? Not from an allied tanker
Darth Tigrus the Corpulent
He could save his crew from getting shot, but not himself from breaking down
ironic
Tiger used: *Neutral Steer!*
_It hurts itself in it's confusion!_
Lmao
Yeah it hurts itself and other 10,000 allied tanks in confusion
I once watched a great documentary which interviewed former tiger tank crews who fought in the Battle of Kursk, and obviously beyond - and they interviewed every member of the crew from the commander to the driver.
Perhaps surprising was the former tank commanders somewhat scathing assessment of the tiger's Power to weight ratio - or Horsepower per tonne.
He called the tiger a 'limp crow' on the battlefield due to the fact that it was seriously underpowered. He explained that the minimum requirement for a tank with good mobility was 14 horsepower per tonne.
He recalled the tiger could only muster just over 10 hp/t and that this was a serious handicap especially on the Eastern front given the comparably much better power to weight ratio of the Soviet tanks.
He said that only academics would record optimum high speeds of a Tiger I, King Tiger and other variants but, in reality, during training, crews were cautioned not to exceed a given speed or rpm.
The Tiger was a heavy Tank: that means It's job is to do big damage and have a good survivabillity - for moving fast there are the medium and light Tanks
I don't see why 10 hp/ton is bad. A loot of tanks had even lower hp/t ration and even 14hp/t would not make a loot of difference alone. The lowest known to me is 5hp/t for the us t95.
a slower tank isnt necessarily bad; a steadier pace results in better accuracy when firing on the move.
You would measure a tank or Torque not HP... HP helps top speed not acceleration which would be more useful in the field...
Later versions of the Tiger 1 had the power/weight ratio of 13hp/tonne
The only tank my grandfather mentioned by name were the tigers. He would not have confused it with other panzers. In one engagement he focused all of his guns,12-16, and effort of his unit, 1000+ men, on one visible muzzle brake of a supposed Tiger. The psychological impact is difficult to measure.
So you are telling me 12 to 16 guns and 1000 men were send for one Tiger ? Get out !
Smintina Vlad
They were set up on the southern side of The Bulge. No infantry screen, except for ALL of there support personal, no designated antitank units. Someone spotted something floating in the fog in the valley. It was a muzzle brake. He didn’t know how many tanks or how many men were with the muzzle brake, but he did know what was usually behind one. As I recall it wasn’t the only time they direct fired their weapons.
Smintina Vlad
When Grandpa recounted this story, and he did on several occasions, he was very serious. The phrase I remember was,” If it had gotten into our area we had nothing to stop it. It would have killed all of us.” That was the only time he ever said that. I genuinely believe the Americans had convinced themselves of the invulnerability of the machines.
I just saw this video this morning. Thanks for the exchange!
czcams.com/video/2p-izpDBZv4/video.html
@@logoseven3365 well if the tiger was alone or very few all you need to do is sneak up on one get on it pop open the hatch and gun down the crew hell even steal it or just drop a grenade down there that usually takes it out esally.
Many troops called every single German tank they saw (or thought they saw) a Tiger. You can mainly thank both the German and Allied propaganda machines for that. Me, I have to laugh every time I see US troops being depicted fighting against Tiger Is in movies (especially in Normandy). US troops barely encountered them in actuality.
"how effective was the tiger tank really ?"
French : *"A LOT"*
British : "it was good"
Italians : "MY PIZZA IS BETTER"
Soviets : "behold my t-34 and my wall of men"
Americans : "MY M4 SHERMANS MAKE THE LOUDEST SOUND , AND THAT SOUND IS THE SOUND OF *F R E E D O M* (and 50 tons of pure democracy)"
German : "it is actualy not a tiger but a the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung E"
Soviet : Tiger? Meet your hunter (ISU 152)
@Carnivorus So what? The germans needed a 60 ton tank to destroy a KV-1 or a T-34 effectively at range. If the Russian tanks weren't so good in the early stages of the war, a Tiger or Panther would not be needed. Since they were effective, they impemented the cats, the Russians brought up the 152 and 122mm cannons, so ther germans had to bring up the Tiger 2. It would be a never ending circle.
@Carnivorus It was good, no doubt, I'm just saying that they made the Tiger because of the fear or Soviet tanks. Sure, a long 75mm cannon could penetrate them, but they soviets could also penetrate the Panzers, so they needed someting that soviet cannons can't penetrate but it can penetrate soviet tanks even more effectively.
@Carnivorus So what's the problem with bringing up big guns against big cats?
@Carnivorus The 88 was an Anti-Airctaft cannon.
The reason why you'd track the location of the Heavy Tank battalions was not due to their effectiveness. It was because they were specialized units controlled by higher headquarters. Thus, their deployment would give a clue about the higher headquarter's intent on fighting the next battle. The same would be true of certain heavy artillery or engineer units.
11:59
A R T I L L E R Y O N L Y
and anti tank guns...those pak babies did the MOST t34 killings on the eastern front...
in any wargame I play, pak and arti do the wonders to bleed any invader on my home turf...and rightfully so...
Steiner's worst enemy
The sky cancer.
I give you three internets sir
ODDBALL SOK which war games do you play that simulate both pak and arty?
Thank you so much...Ive learned WAY more from this channel than just about any other WW2 YT channel in years. Its completely factual and in-depth, sites documented sources, and has very little uninformed conjecture or opinion...something that's sadly lacking on many channels.
“Preferably from jingles salt mine” lol I very much appreciate that reference
This also made my day
The first recording of the artillery only meme?
21 artillery pieces for each tiger?
*Laughs in iSorrowProductions*
Imagine if Germany had transitioned away from "Invade the planet" stance sooner and held out for a decade
@@boldCactuslad
They would not.
Every man an artillery gun or an anti-tank piece!
@@deltoroperdedor3166
Now imagine that, but in China.
Recently found your channel while in search of real-life tank tactics to apply to my video games when I play them & I can't get enough of your content. Armor has always been fascinating to me & the Tiger series of tanks has always been the archetypical "Tank". When someone says tank I think of a Tiger. Your videos have truly helped me understand more about tanks, tactics & warfare in general. The fact that you have a German accent when speaking about Tigers is so cool for me. Feels like Model or Rommel talking to me about it; I don't mean any offense when making that comment as I know you're not a Nazi etc. Thank you so much for making these videos & all the best to you.
thank you! Glad you like them!
Rommel was neither a nazi
He tried not to be involved in any of the dark dealings of the 3rd reich
I think he was the most talented general of ww2, liked by hes man always in the middle of the fight, was respected by hes enemy and he respected them too
Hes failing was hes pride, he wrote a book about military tactics, and one of hes enemy found out this. After getting the book and reading it he knew always rommels next step
Not sure if its true or just a legend
The artilery general has a very strong point actually :D At first, one thinks a Tiger is a terrible force to reckon with, surely something else would not match it... but putting myself in position of a tank commander, I dont think I would be excited to face the alternative of 20 tank killing cannons hidden all over the place :D
My friend, keep the videos coming! Your research is beautiful and your delivery is great. And this can be a steady diet for those of us who study warfare. Keep up the good work, brother! 🤘
9:37
21 artillery pieces out of one Tiger worth of steel. What about the towing vehicles for those artillery? Manufacturing, manning, fueling, maintaining, supplying them? How would that effect the equation?
That's what I was going to say. Towed equipment often had to be left back on the Wehrmachts retreat.
How about horses? Would have been a solid choice even in WW2 ;D.
@@mandernachluca3774 In ww2 Germany used more horses than vehicles to pull thingies :)
I kind of formulated the opinion that Germany indeed needed these force multiplying weapons because they didn't have the man power, fuel and mass production manufacturing capacity. What is the advantage of manufacturing 5 panzer IV instead of a Tiger when a. You can't man 4 more tanks, b. Your factories can't produce 4 more tanks c. You don't have fuel to run 4 more tanks and d. You don't have enough trains to transport 4 more tanks. I also don't buy the idea that a Tiger was much more difficult to maintain than say a panzer IV. Both had similar type of overall construction, and once you past a certain point, tank components are very difficult to maneuver during maintenance. I'd say that it is more important the mechanical design of the vehicle, later war design tanks just where waaaay too rushed into service.
@@toonderoeck6341
You got it ;D.
Great analysis, and some very good perspectives on the Tiger tanks, often overlooked. Great stuff! :)
Thanks for an informative video.One thing I have read with regards to potentially just spamming the front with Pz.IV in the latter years of the War is that apparently, even though the Pz.IV were relatively cheap in terms of _steel_ they did have excessive use of other materials that Germany could not source during the conflict - rubber for the suspension being a key component mentioned in the reading I did. Panzers III and IV, with their small roadwheels, demanded relatively decent rubber for the suspension, whereas the larger roadwheels of the Tiger and Panther could get along with home-grown substitutions without simply tearing the rubber off.It may be that the Tiger, expensive though it was, could at least be built, something that might not necessarily have actually been the case with the Pz.IV and III.
Brief but very high quality analysis and overview. Thank you for posting!
*HE PRONOUNCED 'BIBLIOGRAPHY' RIGHT!!!*
*correctly
@@siler7Both works lol
@@matthewjones39 That would be "both work", if it were true.
@@siler7 -🤓
iSaludos desde Mexico! Just wanted to say how I appreciate your videos on both of your channels (VW enthusiast-got my own 68 beetle)
Thank you for such well researched insight. It’s fascinating.
A Scary piece of excellent German Engineering. While being English, I cannot help admiring such a formidable weapon. Respect.
Germans aren't nazis anymore so its fine, if Hitler were as smart as his engineers he wouldn't have gone to war
But Luie we could've been HUGE if they only made 25,000 instead of
Effective or not, they're badass af
As long as you suspend the facts.
Oh who am i kidding, this is the internet, fuck the facts...
@@dakkahead517 we have lots of reports of groups of Allied tanks actively avoiding areas where Tigers were reported. They had a huge psychological impact in addition to their decent KDR - that part is often ignored.
Love to see all these commentators actually hop in a Sherman and go against a Tiger. There's a reason Allied tankers (a few of which I've heard tell their stories in person) never wanted to fight a tiger.
That's either a testament to the Tiger's superiority, or to common sense.
Watch the oversized tin can of death and destruction!
@Carnivorus Tigers kick ass on paper and in video games, but wars aren't won in tank duels. Shermans were better tanks for fighting wars. 80% of warfare is showing up lol.
“1 German tiger tank was worth 5 Sherman tanks yet the Americans always had 6”
That was a Rommel quote... and it was 10 Shermans but there is always 11
Tiny Table Wargames could of been was just paraphrasing it’s a pretty sweet quote
@@chriseversole3529 Yeah if Hitler listened to Rommel, the Normandy landings would've been a failure
Tiny Table Wargames I’m pretty sure he tried to improve the defense but didn’t have the time but he did strengthen it a bit compared to what was before
@@chriseversole3529 Think you need to look into it... Had Rommel convinced Hitler his plans were better, the troops would never have even landed on the beaches...
Fantastic review!! I enjoyed this thoroughly. As much as I love the Tiger, and King Tiger tanks, the information that you lay on the table is far more factual than most of the videos you can find on CZcams. Well done!!
German engineers when making the tiger:
“Hey fisher any ideas for our next tank”
Fisher: *BOX*
Wouldnt the well trained and seasoned crew be the highest priority asset in this case? So not loosing experienced crewmen by providing them with maximum firepower and protection, especially combined with fuel shortage and eventual inevitable numericap inferiority and fighting defensively would go over pure cash spent and metal used argument often used?
The well trained and experienced crews also had to maintain and repair their Tiger 1. They were expected to service the tank after each day in battle or when on the march. That took eight hours so many did the minimum requirements so they had time to eat and get some rest. That usually led to faster wear and failure of parts that took up more of their time to replace. For some reason the German Army wouldn't provide the Tiger battalions with more mechanics to assist the crews so they could get everything done in much less time and reduce failure rates.
@@billwilson3609 Yeah, Otto Carius has said along with a whole host of Heavy Tank Battalion composition. The battalions were only allowed One chief mechanic that has been personally taught the complexities of the Tiger that was sent solely from the very company that created the Tiger. Henschel, so from that they only had one mechanic who could do minor to moderate repairs on tigers in the field. Any more damage, they would have to be sent back to the factory.
@@kevinvelado9907 That's crazy thinking. The US Army had a armor recovery unit and forward repair stations for each tank company on the front line. Their mechanics assisted and observed the tank crews as they did their daily maintenance to make sure they were doing that right. One repair station would be 1/4 to 1/3 mile behind the front line where tanks with running or gun problems could motor back to during battles for quick repairs. If the problem was more complex then it was sent to the second station about a mile away where they had more parts and equipment to perform tasks that took longer.
One thing that got me was the difference between the German and American main gun tank sights. The German sights were of higher quality but had to be sent back to the factory for any sort of repair. The American sights were primitive in comparison yet could be serviced or rebuilt by a mechanic in 15 minutes. That wasn't a big deal for the Germans as long as they had replacement sights on hand and became a problem after bombing tore up the factory and the sights that were sent in for repairs. Their tank gunners then had to learn to adjust their aim thru wonky sights and try to retrieve the good sights out of knocked out and destroyed tanks that were left behind after battles.
@@billwilson3609 Yeah I know the scope of U.S. Support for anything is massive compared to the German support and logistical system. Of course the Germans had, I believe, a company size of mechanical support for each heavy tank Battalion.
400k subs and still growing, up the 500k mate! ´´as always, sources are linked in the description´´... I wish more channels would do this. Been here since 20k, still love your work man! Keep it up.
What the fuck
Fantastic content! Love your videos!
Brilliant channel. Thank you for your diligence...
A superb analysis young man, absolutely brilliant
The Tiger had its flaws. But it was one of the best tanks for the roles it was designed for and that was to function as a line breaker and also could fill defensive roles during its down time.
The problem was that German commanders wanted to use the tiger as a MBT and tried including it in almost any battle. That significantly reduced the tanks down time and the tiger just wasn't set up to do that. They should have just left that to the Panzer 4s.
Also the Germans didn't have the logistics to support the Tiger in a MBT capacity. Limited parts and fuel supply is another reason why the tiger was better suited to be a line breaker because the idea is to use those types of tools only in your important battles. When the battle is over you send them to the rear to do your repairs and move them along the line saving fuel and taking it easy and preventing break downs. This would also make it logistically more viable cause you don't spam line breakers they are niche tools. But I think people were impressed with the initial results and went ham.
The Tiger gets a bad rep cause it wasn't used properly. There is a tool for every job.
Exactly. The 503rd's initial evaluation summarizes this perfectly:
"Evaluation: There must be strict orders that, under no circumstances and at all levels of command, Tiger units must never be committed at less than company strength and that Panzer VIs and Panzer IIIs are not to be committed separately. The Tigers must be used as the battering ram as the attack advances and remain as a bulwark at the Schwerpunkt of the defense. Soldiers, in general, are of the opinion that the Tiger can do anything and everything. They do not understand that a newly developed weapon system has deficiencies and weaknesses that first need to be remedied as a result of increased experience and further development. Because of that, the danger exists that Tiger units may be assigned tasks that normal tank companies can perform without difficulty. As a result of continual movement and the resultant increased demands placed on running gear and power plants and lack of time allowed for technical service, damage occurs that results in Tiger units having mechanical problems when they are used. The maintenance facility must be able to work as long as possible at a single location, preferably a railroad station. When locations are changed, they have a particular need to know the final destination. The Tiger unit must, for the present, be kept as the unit commander’s last reserve, waiting in readiness behind a key sector so that it can force a decision when all other means fail."
Amazing. Great video. Well-researched. Well done.
Many tanks for the great content.
Perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of the PzKpFw. V and VI was the naming. The names facilitate the perception of the tanks as fearsome, sentient beasts by both the germans and their enemies. Having something like that on your side, or on the other side, is absolutely going to affect your confidence and willingness to fight aggressively.
I think that an important consideration in the choice to make Tiger tanks may have been Germany's shortage of men. The Tiger tank in that regard has the important virtue of creating the greatest effect with the fewest men. So, the cost of creating and operating the tank had to be balanced against the cost of the men that would have been needed, and the higher attrition rate, with other methods.
exactly what I've said.....when the allies had inferior tanks but they had mass production, almost limitless material and manpower, the ONLY reason they were triumphant was that alone. Now (arguably) there have been videos on how shermans took on tigers....5 shermans and crew were needed to take out 1 tiger. Those numbers work ONLY if you have the supply.....and it did suck if you were a sherman crew.
I think the issue with the allies is that they had TOO much "disposable" resources....men and machinery. If they were faced with the same issues as Germany, they would have produced better tanks.
The whole "was it effective" reminds me of the way battles were fought originally when muskets were introduced: stand in front of each other and fire until there was no enemy left to kill.......that method of waging war is only effective if you have more soldiers to lose. The thought of preserving the life of said soldier wasn't considered.
But "men" has to include all the support crews and manufacturing resources.
Awesome content , Thanks !!
After hearing over 40 years of debates about this subject, I would choose to be in a Tiger 1 for these reasons, excellent gun and optics, really thick armor. I would just make sure I had plenty of ammo and also know where the gasoline trucks were. The Pershing would be my second choice although it was late to the party. The German Mark 4 with the long 75 m/m gun is also to be considered. It's much shorter in height than the Sherman with a good gun. In regards to the Tiger 1, it could hit and destroy many allied tanks at a range of almost two miles, that's a LONG ways away. The scene in Fury where 3 Shermans took on a Tiger was the most stupid war scene I've ever seen in my life, all the Tiger crew had to do was traverse the turret. BANG,BANG, AND BANG.
Yeah, it totally deserves it's hype. Sadly or well, technically thankfully germany couldn't produce enough of these.
The crew in fury should have done the following:
1.Reload the damm gun and shoot
2. Throw gas grenades and go back home with the 4 kills without taking any odds
The 76mm gun on fury could have killed that tiger from the front. They were less heavily armoured than the British Churchill.
@@SlappyTheElf no thats not true, the fury was less heavy armored than a german leopard 2 tanks so in conclusion a tiger cant be penetrated from a fury, you logic genius. unbelivable..
@@wolflarsen1900 Dude the 76 could penetrate a tiger from the front easily. I wouldnt like to do it for you but you can check literatury anywhere
I feel that this is a very factual an honest evaluation of the tigers I & II.
The next time I find myself in charge of a Schwerepanzerbatallion I'll be kicking myself for not having bookmarked this video.
Tanks for the videos!
you rock! It is so cool to hear a German talk about German WWII vintage tanks!!
BTW, I am thinking about switching careers, and have been looking in the want for openings fur ein Schwere Panzer Abteilung commander....
I am in command of 503 Schwere Panzerabteilung and don‘t know what to do. Thanks for giving me some advice
Ahahhaaha I love the joke in beginning XD
Fantastic content mate. Love your perspective on the German side, especially given you can read all of the historical reports!
You produce the best military economics and technology / doctrine documentaries; beat hands down Discovery's ones. Thanks a million.
Excellent video. I first started playing World of Tanks a long time ago because I wanted to play the Tiger. Wonderful piece of machinery (however complicated) and a tough nut to crack. Thank you!
Same here
to say it's comlicated often means it's ahead and didn't made it early bc of lack of imagination.
Sure easier makes sometimes a difference, but how many technical aspects of various german ww2 craftsmen pearls are implimented or developed further up until our time... history is a bitch, after 70 years so many things are a misconception, but at that time maybe the right decision.
One tank capable of destroying EVERY vehicle that were in service to that point, or 5 (panzer 4's ) that will have a problem with kv1 or t 34 that travelled in groups of hundrets?
I'm pretty sure, the use overwhelmes the costs...
You watch videos made by the Mighty Jingles? Well, he is a great man. This video shows why the Tiger I will always be my favorite tank of all time; it is a psychological weapon that scares the living soul out of people. Good video man.
I dont know what your credentials are, but you present a very concise set of facts in a short time and make it interesting. Keep up the amazing work! Ausgezeischnet.
Tanks a lot for this!
lol the Jingles salt mines, nice one. On the issue of reliability, do we have any info on the ratio of combat losses to total losses of the Tiger in comparison with other German tanks, or tanks from other nations?
hey YOU! Dont ask for stats of other tanks of WW2! thats illegal, we dont want to destroy the "Hans, transmission broke." meme,are we? pls stop asking about other tanks and just know tiger bad and worst tank for german situation in WW2!
I've readiness rates which are comparable. Panther had a bit less, PzIV slightly more but otherwise it depended largely on intensity of employment. Both, tiger and panther started terribly but continued and ended comparable to any other tank. No trace of terrible un-reliability.
www.reddit.com/r/RebuttalTime/comments/9ppmm5/a_closer_look_at_readiness_rates_and_their_value/?
But then, the lack of fuel and spare parts spared no vehicle, regardless of size or complexity.
Total losses to combat losses some non combat losses will be due to lack of fuel, some breakdown ,some abandonment that is a whole different black hole you go down For instance Tiger 131 lost because it was abandoned.
@@pepcozz8519 Based Nobu-poster
Excellent, multi-factor analysis. I get so annoyed by all of these 1-dimensional "which weapon was better head-to-head?" questions. As you mentioned, the larger operational context of the weapon matters as much as the individual comparison. Each nation involved in the war was highly motivated to find the most effective solutions for their unique combat needs and resource constraints, so second-guessing their decisions usually seems a bit silly to me. In the final analysis, there was no version of reality where the Axis powers could've won, but it is interesting to say "what if"?
This is a very good channel up there with Mark Felton and the history guy in my opinion 👍🏻 keep up the interesting work and thank you.
Great work. I watch your videos since sept. 1939.
I mean, it's a heavy tank in large parts fighting medium tanks. While also fighting a defensive war, Of course it's gonna do well. if you start putting Panzer IV's en masse against entrenched pershings you'll see similar kill counts.
Or even tigor 1s and panthers against entenched is-2s
But it also did well in OFFENSIVE operations such as the counter attack at Kharkov, Kursk, Zhitomir-Berdichev, the Cherkassy-Korsun pocket relief attack, the Gran Bridgehead etc.
@@lyndoncmp5751 doing well tactically does not mean doing well strategically. You can have the same tank entire war and win with strategy. This is where the tigors fail. I do not say that on a battlefield they aren't Monsters. They are. Buuuuut, they must first get there, have enough fuel, ammo and not break down while fighting. And after they fight they need to go somewhere else without breaking because there is not enough of those
WarBrainDarkpheonix,
The Tiger could not change the strategic outcome of the war. Germany was already losing the war before the Tigers were even properly deployed. There were zero Tigers at Stalingrad and El Alamein, so Tigers didn't lose those battles. The Tiger had zero chance of strategically altering the war. That's not the fault of the tank though.
Tigers did well considering their small numbers and that the strategic situation was completely against them. Saying they were failures is like saying the Huey helicopter and F4 Phantom jet were failures because they didn't win the Vietnam War.
By the way, it was rare for Tigers to brake down in combat. Otto Carius said this never happened to him and his company, and that it was only really on long road marches when they were over exerted that mechanical issues occurred. Tigers overall operational % in 1944 and 45 wasn't much different to the Panzer IV.
The 30 King Tigers of Schwere SS Panzer Abteilung 501 that were pulled out of the Ardennes fighting in mid January 1945 were then sent to Hungary actually got there and were instrumental in the retaking of the Gran Bridgehead.
Cheers.
@@lyndoncmp5751 they were failures,
You might want to re-word that considering they just lost Afghanistan too .
The US just can’t win wars in general , they even lost WW2 considering the thing they aided is what’s destroying them with their “mandates”.
“No amendment in the constitution is absolute” . “If you don’t vote for me you ain’t black.”
This doesn't seem to take into account that hundreds of Tigers never even reached operational units. Their deliveries were paralysed by the breakdown of German communications towards the end of the war. There were also numbers of Tigers never built due to disruption by Allied bombing.
this is also because the Tigers were very expensive to make and maintain
I love the visual arts and graphics so much !!!
Always enjoy your vids. Even the ones i may disagree with. Keep up the great work.
Oh God I have been watching your videos for an year and only now I understand that the U-Boat over 'liminal message' makes it say SUBliminal messages!!!
My subconscious picked up on that but it didn't bother telling me
Very good job as usual. I wonder how the "effectiveness of the Tiger", when compared with combat loss ratios, accounts for Tigers destroyed by non tank to tank engagements. Specifically how to factor in the large number of tanks destroyed by aircraft and artillery during combat. The other thing to consider is the morale effect the Tiger had on both German and allied forces. My Father served in the 94th Infantry Division during WW 2 and always said that "every German tank looked like a Tiger when You were scared to death".
Your channel is the best on the military theme!!!!!
If you have watched “WWII Greatest Events In Color” Knowing you as I do, I’m sure you have. Unlike you, I do not have any expertise in Tank War-far nor do I desire too ( I’ll leave that up to yourself and other Tank enthusiasts ) the problem with Tigers as they mention in the Documentary. Are they simply didn’t have the replacement parts and or the Mechanics to fix 🔧 Tigers as they wore out & or broke down by either just normal wear & tear from driving them, and or damaged from Combat action... Your teaching methods are GREAT & have a sense of humor, on a dark subject, which I personally appreciate! Thank you
The problem with that criticism of the Tiger is that you can sub tiger for just about anything in the German army, the German logistics were trying to maintain tens and tens of variants of vehicles from their motorcycles to captured vehicles to variant vehicles to domestic vehicles
To conclude the effectivness of Tiger tanks one needs to consider the general supply situation, crew training and the battlefield conditions.
Three negative examples for this would be the 1./SS101 which lost all(?) it's King Tigers after refitting in late August/early September '44 in because it served as rear guard in the German retreat from France, when one machine was out of fuel or needed repairs it automatically was lost since there was no one left to help them. SS501 in the Ardennes lost somewhat around ~50% of its King Tigers in a few days because they had to fight in tank unsuitable terrain and got cut off behind enemy lines. And last but not least there is the story of a rookie Jagdtiger commander from the 512 who got himself and his whole crew killed in the Ruhr pocket. He drove his JT over an ridge, spotted Shermans and started to panic despite his 25cm/15cm front armor and ordered his driver to turn around instead of simply backing up. The Jagtiger was spotted and got destroyed, when a shell flew through the open rear door after it was turned around.
I think the topic is the effectiveness of the tanks, not the effectiveness of their usage by the Wehrmacht
I would just love to read your source about the Jagdtiger crew.
If my mind doesnt trick me it was in Carius' 'Tigers in the mud'. After he was severly wounded as Tiger commander in the east he ended up as Company Commander in heavy tank hunter batallion 512 in the Ruhr pocket.
@@burkinafaso64 thanks
@@3gunslingers I can provide you the passage tommorow If you'd like to
That was brilliant. I shall now relay my new found knowledge to my nonplussed family at the dinner table.
I was looking into the interleaved wheels and there is documentation that says the german had a simple mud solution ( either it was spokes, or a scrapper) and it resolved this issue.
Well, you can't just spoke the tigers roadwheels. However, there are pictures of tanks having a roadwheel removed
I like the video, keep it up. Nice Jingles reference.
M5A1 shoots tiger in the turret "TrAnSMiSsIoN bReAkS
That's not really fare to compare the two
@@francoisv1548 The transmission brakes anyway
*radio operator sprains wrist* *engine sets on fire*
@@gafeleon9032 i thought the transmission changed gear. The brakes, brake.
Well if the transmission brakes the tank will stop moving for some time.
5:17 - Interesting. Would be nice to see such numbers for the M4 sherman and the t-34
I love this channel. The analysis in each is well researched and as objective as one could hope. No “rah rah” cheerleading for this or that. It could almost be a Dutch channel. 😉
Lol, I started laughing immediately when you open up with “mere Kittens...” l You’re the best, keep it up!
It was a great tank - IF you could get it to the battlefield and IF you had enough of them in one place and IF it didn't break down when you got it there and IF you had fuel to keep it going. The capabilities of the tank were extraordinary. But so were its limitations in terms of the Germans' abilities to get enough of them onto the battlefield and keep them operational. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
That is a good way to descrive it
this is pretty much the only comment this comment section needs. Thank you.
The note at 7:43 about the Heavy Tank battalions being the only units bellow Divisional size being posted on the Allied Intelligence maps should not be interpreted as an indication of incredible respect or fear of these formations. This should be interpreted as what it was, a distinctive unit possessed of unique equipment which by identifying and following one can gain Intelligence insight into enemy postures, movements, and intentions. By following the Tigers the Allied Intelligence people could potentially identify not just the Heavy Tank battalions themselves but their higher units as one did not go anywhere significant without the other.
@Piper P Can't believe how far I had to scroll through the comments before finding one other person who actually understood this point.
@@jarink1 yup, they Are called Intel maps for a reason
@Carnivorus There are some historians that say that the best thing about the Tiger was that it's armor and gun allowed the crew to live through a mistake or two which let them learn not to make such mistakes again. The Heavy Battalions weren't sent inexperienced men to begin with, they were soldiers who had already performed well in combat. But now they were able to really hone their skills as crews and as units. If you were an American tanker who is coming into the war with far less experience, do you think it's only the name "Tiger" that scares you? Or is it also the knowledge that the men in those Tigers have a lot more combat experience than you do? The two together is what they should be fearing, a tank with a killer gun crewed by experienced tankers.
But that is not what I was talking about. I was an Intel Analyst in the Army, the point I was making is that the Heavy Tank Battalions were tracked because they were signature equipment for where the German Corps were placing great importance because those Tigers weren't just used in any old place, they were a focus point of effort either defensively or offensively.
Great video thankyou 👍👍
Ein sehr gutes Video 👍
*Destroying an entire convoy of enemy tanks*
Tiger: "Pffft give me a challenge!"
*Move 100m without breaking your transmission*
Tiger: "tHaTs uNfAiR!!!"
Man, imagine if the Sherman and the Tiger 1 go on a race.. then the Sherman won..
@@johnilarde8440 with an ach-acht shell up it's arse.
niet
@@johnilarde8440 the sherman was just a piece of trash it belongs to Hollywood
But the tiger was 98 ton monster belongs to the battlefield
How you compare american toys to tanks?
@@comradejosephstalin8136 The tiger could hardly make it to battlefields, not to mention at the strongest area of its armor having only 100mm while most shermans have 93+ mm accounting for their slope...
I get the argument that the Tigers were very expensive, but at the same time, I'm wondering whether producing more tanks would have solved the problem, as they presumably would have required more fuel. That would support a quality over quantity argument. Is the fuel argument the idea behind the more Howitzers and anti-tank guns in 1943 argument?
But at any rate, I'm glad they didn't go for the optimal solution.
Not only mote fuel but more men to crew them, more ammo needed and more support and supply personnel and vehicles too.
Great post.
Honestly, I'm pretty sure its a combination of the early sherman 3s and 4s in the Africa campaign that really made Germany lose. If they had the fuel to move their armor and more efficient tank designs (look up actual historical accounts of tank repair and tank construction. The later German tanks were terribly over-engineered. They lost more of their later designed tanks to having to abandon slightly damaged or self-immobilized armor than to enemy fire), they could have kept up enough in tank production and tank repair to keep fighting. Honestly though, the best tank to come out of the end of ww2 was the centurion. A heavy tank with the mobility if a medium tank, the gun mobility of an infantryman with an mmg and solid reliability, good enough with upgrade packages to defend Israel to this day from 3 heavily outnumbered tank assaults. Pity every tank that England made before that was purely for infantry support, barely capable of taking on a pz4, even if you needed an 88 to kill a churchill. (88mm equipped tanks were rare on the Western front)
Your question is not without interest. Now, the exact cost in German Reichsmarks for a Tiger is debatable - and a big part of the problem is
that it is hard to estimate the value of the Reichsmark itself. But it is consensus among several ww2 authors that you would get around
3 Pz-IV aus H for each Tiger1- arguably the best P-IV with the most sophisticated equipment. Add to this that P-IV aus H had way longer
operational radius, way less fuel consumption, pretty much all early mechanical troubles fixed, the 75mm L48 was more than adequate to knock out
any allied tank on at least 1km and beyond(apart from the very latest heavy Russian tank models in ww2 like IS-1 and IS2, american Pershings etc).
If we leave the artillery General's ideas be alongside other far-stretched thoughts, I think it is fair to say that the fact that you have produced 3/4 of
what you need of excellent armor to put a full German panzer Division in the field for each Tiger company, is worth considering.
@@squashiejoshie200000 There were only 300 Shermans deployed in Africa. They came too late
@@donaldhysa4836 Not for the 2nd battle of El Alamein. There were enough Shermans in Africa to make a difference, also I made an error by referring to the M3 as a Sherman. There is no such thing as an M3 Sherman or a Sherman 3. I meant the M3 Lee tank, which was still better at killing Panzer 4s than a churchill.
I absolutely appreciate the level of precision that you put into your videos. It’s very German and I don’t mean that in a negative way. 👍
Great job.
I know you have talked about the issue with tipping points in the past but I sort of find it hard when trying to look at good or bad decisions on the strategic level when, especially by 1943-34 nothing matters because Germany could not complete its strategic/grand-strategic objectives. Without a meaningful objective I find it hard to make statements of effective or in-effective. The only one I can think of is stalling for time...to...what?
Germans still believed that wAllies were more afraid of the Soviets than of them. They also failed to understand that UK had more narrow objectives of dismantling Germany in order to eliminate a contender for world empire. Curiously, European bickering was brushed aside by USSR and USA altogether.
@@etwas013 I have heard this tho I would be interested in knowing how much of a 'strategy' this was vs. desperation. How much did the German leadership sit down and think about it, then implement operations and economic planning to achieve this goal? That could be a Military History Visualized (or not visualised) video I would be interested in seeing.
@@marcus7564 Send him some support and he might do it for you.
@@marcus7564 You are spot one here. This was done by one and that was Hitler. This was one of the methods he used to be sure to be in charge. He was the only one there had the complete overview. Sadly he decieded to let all documents about this to be destroyed. However more and more documents is showing up from the old russian secrets documents they found in Berlin. And that clearly understretch that Hitler actual took a lot of good decisions but General Halder there were fired by Hitler because of Halders very big wrong decisions was in hands of the western allied and Halder was alllowed to paint a picture of an insane Hitler instead of the russians actual being very clever i how to stop Hitler. You can find a video named something like "blame Halder". that prove this. History is alwas written by the winner and not the looser...
Glad to see someone making this point, because it's far too often overlooked. Once Germany found itself at war with both the United States and the USSR, any question of victory was fundamentally unattainable.
The most likely long-term goal at this point is to make invading you far too costly, so that your enemies will give up, establish a border around you, and go home. Victory was out of the question, but survival might have been possible.
Unfortunately for Germany, the USSR was in an incredibly precarious position economically and saw looting the resources of Germany as a way to improve their economic situation and further expand their borders, while Britain and the US were determined that the USSR should in no way be allowed to do this. So any question of holding out becomes moot.
Germany did not have the industrial capacity to produce the Tigers effectively (or other tanks for that matter) but I think ultimately the Tiger I was the right choice when it came to evening out the odds. If you can't match them in quantity, figure out something else.
Techpriest
I mean you might as well create something awesome with the limited resources you have.
what about the allied bombing of german industry?
Very good and accurate analysis.
Nice research dude
From Steven Zaloga's review of Sledgehammers:
"The book's analyses are sometimes weakened by dependence on secondary
sources. Since the author often lacks tangible evidence of the combat
performance of the Tigers in roles other than tank-vs.-tank fighting, he
relies on Tiger battalion kill claims against Allied tanks to assess
their effectiveness. He accepts these at face value, stating that the
evidence from British and U.S. sources backs the German claims and that
Soviet unit histories lack tank loss data. The small number of instances
where Tiger claims against British and American tank units can be
verified does not warrant a blanket acceptance of such claims,
especially given the widespread tendency of combat units to exaggerate
aircraft and tank kills. The author seems unaware that the Wehrmacht's
own intelligence service on the Eastern Front, Fremde Heere Ost,
regularly discounted German army tank kill claims by thirty to fifty
percent. The author's assertion about the lack of Soviet tank loss data
is unfortunate as there is no evidence in the book that the author reads
Russian, has read many of the Soviet tank unit histories, or has
conducted any archival research on Russian issues. The appendix on
Allied heavy tank doctrine is weak and unevenly researched."
I know Zaloga to be very accurate
yeah, there are flaws with Wilbeck's book and research, which I noted indirectly a few times in the video.
The issue is, I mailed with Ralf Raths and Chieftain. This is one of the best books on the Tiger(s) out there. I have a few Zaloga's books and in various aspects I have to disagree with some of his assertions and points as well. Lately, I find more and more errors, "interesting interpretations" and unsourced claims even in (recent) high quality publications ( e.g., see my Wolfpack video or my Midway - Why did the Japanese lose?).
also I should note that I agree with most of Zaloga's stuff and I assume that he is quite fed up with all the wehraboos etc.
From Steven Zaloga's review of Sledgehammers:
"The book's analyses are sometimes weakened by dependence on secondary
sources. Since the author often lacks tangible evidence of the combat performance of the Tigers in roles other than tank-vs.-tank fighting, he relies on Tiger battalion kill claims against Allied tanks to assess their effectiveness. He accepts these at face value, stating that the evidence from British and U.S. sources backs the German claims and that Soviet unit histories lack tank loss data. The small number of instances where Tiger claims against British and American tank units can be verified does not warrant a blanket acceptance of such claims, especially given the widespread tendency of combat units to exaggerate aircraft and tank kills. The author seems unaware that the Wehrmacht's own intelligence service on the Eastern Front, Fremde Heere Ost, regularly discounted German army tank kill claims by thirty to fifty percent. The author's assertion about the lack of Soviet tank loss data is unfortunate as there is no evidence in the book that the author reads Russian, has read many of the Soviet tank unit histories, or has conducted any archival research on Russian issues. The appendix on Allied heavy tank doctrine is weak and unevenly researched."
Formatted that for you.
They probably counted tank kills as less because when you're on the backdoor and retreating, a combat kill may not be a permanent kill.
The fear that every tank was a Tiger says a lot! It's reputation far exceeded it's numbers
Jingle's salt mines?! LMAO omg I'm dying here. That was awesome.. Nice little insert there. Does he know you did that?
i liked the jingles bit. got a chuckle outa me.