Did Speer kill the Panzerwaffe by cooking the Books? (feat. Dr. Töppel)
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 04. 2019
- When speaking with Dr. Roman Töppel he mentioned a very interesting detail about a major problem the Panzerwaffe endured during the War. There was a severe lack of spare parts and it could be that this was due to Albert Speer (Armaments Minister) focusing too much on tank production instead of producing spare parts. Also in the end we go a bit off-track.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
» patreon - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
»» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
Töppel, Roman: Kursk 1943. The Greatest Battle of the Second World War. Helion: Warwick, UK: 2018.
Stahel, David: Operation Typhoon. Hitler’s March on Moscow, October 1941. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band 4: Der Angriff auf die Sowjetunion. Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt: Stuttgart, Germany, 1983.
ENGLISH VERSION: Germany and the Second World War Volume 4. The Attack on the Soviet Union
Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945. Ferdinand Schöningh: Paderborn, 2016.
Tooze, Adam: The Wages of Destruction. The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy. Penguin Books: United Kingdom (2006).
Stahel, David: Operation Barbarossa and Germany’s Defeat in the East. Cambridge University Press: UK, 2009
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone
#ww2 #Panzer #Panzerwaffe
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
They did not have enough Speer-parts, hah!
This made my day
I am using that the next time I run out of supply in OCS Case Blue!
Magnificent!
It's unacceptable to cook books like they did. One should only cook Kartoffelpanzer !
Also, the video shows the preeminence of logistics ; the Wehrmacht should obviously have ruthlessly simplified logistics in order to have adequate spares, which means...
ARTILLERY (AND SPARE PARTS) ONLY !!!
Also, to put some perspective about the percentage of spare parts, I found this when re-reading an article of Chieftain's : worldoftanks.com/en/news/chieftain/The_Chieftains_Hatch_Undergunned_Italy/
"It is essential that each shipment of medium tanks M4E6 and T71 tank destroyers be accompanied, by authorized 5% army reserves and 60% maintenance spare parts."
Note the T71 is the M36 tank destroyer. So essentially, the request recommends a very high percentage of spare parts for reliable and mature platforms, as both are part of the Sherman family.
Maybe ask Chieftain if he's got other numbers about spare parts.
When Finland bought stugs in 1943 no spare parts were included. Solution: cannibalize one vehicle. Which one? There was at that time no damaged examples. So vehicle number 13 was chosen because superstition.
Pekka Mäkelä so number 13 became a Christmas tree.
Well, maybe because of superstition, but it also let's the numbers be kept in nice order from 1 to 12 with no interruptions.
But there were about thirty tanks in the first batch bought.
@@pekkamakela2566
Ah, OK, that really changes the picture then.
@@TotalRookie_LV Reference Bernard's article (not just the video) to get a nice summary of how complicated StuG units were in composition. It is quite cool how different StuG units were from tank units. militaryhistoryvisualized.com/assault-artillery-history-organization-of-assault-gun-units-stug-life/
Would love to see Dr Töppel become a regular appearance, you two seem to work very well together
Reminds me of the Luftwaffe production and a consistent lack of spare parts. Compared to the Allies that were usually able to repair light or medium damage in the field (or close to), the LW Geschwaders had to send their aircraft back far behind the front lines. Not that they always bothered, at times relatively light damage made them cannibalize the kite for spare parts so that the other planes could be kept in the air. Of course the Allies also did the same but to a far lesser degree.
I can't help it. I see him in that suit and I think "Wedding or funeral?".
My first thought, Has he been watching SerpenZA?
Jim Fortune or going to court....
Go to a Dothraki wedding and you have both...
From the other side I read that in North Africa the Brits fixed this problem by creating huge junk yards behind the lines where wrecks would be assembled and anybody could strip them for parts. And really WW2 was the 1st mechanised war requiring a huge logistics train. The first time there was a need for spare parts in the field.
And as an aside for decades now car companies have made most of their profits from spare parts, which is why they are so expensive. The mark up on a new car is only about 10%. I knew a car wrecker who brought himself a new Ford every year. After a year he dismantled it and got four times it's cost as spare parts.
Back in the late 60s or very early 70s there was a Consumers Reports article that mentioned,accurately,the markup,and what it would have cost to assemble a vehicle by way of purchasing parts from a dealership. I cannot remember the numbers now,but the markup was huge. I think at least some old issues are available online,and they did an inventory list of their contents every 5 years. So if interested,you could access that article with some considerable homework. CU ,Consumers Union,made a very big deal out of accuracy. What mistakes they made were published as a list of corrections in following issues,and I never saw a retraction of the numbers quoted. Now inflation and other items have made enormous differences in what we still call dollars. Smokey Yunick bought his engines in the crate from GM for $89.95 he said. !!!!!!!! But I am willing to bet the percentage of markup is much the same,after all these years.
My Dad always ssid-ss we would go to a local auto salvage yard to get parts to repair one of our used cars'yhat the Real Money was in Auto parts /salvage .
Wars have always depended on supply chains.
@@thethirdman225 not really true. Before the Napoleonic era armies were expected to live of the land. Yes they had baggage trains but nothing like the quantities of supplies required for modern mechanised armies. If a Napoleonic army ran low on supplies it could still march. Not true of modern mechanised armies as demonstrated by the stop start nature of Op Barbarossa advance(s), tanks can't move without fuel. "POL" became the number one concern of Quartermasters "Petrol, Oil and other Lubricants," no mention of even food, water or ammo obvious necessities.
IMO this is where the Allies had a huge advantage over the Nazis, the Germans had a tactical advantage but the Allies had a strategic advantage particularly in logistics. How often did the Panzers run out of fuel or breakdown to be destroyed by their crews? The bulk of the Luftwaffe was grounded by lack of fuel from late 1943 onwards.
Prof_Kaos Some valid points for sure but even Sun Tzu talked about supply chains as early as 2,300 BC.
It's such a pleasure to hear two people so interested in the topic in which I too am quite interested.
When you said "spares deposit" we would probably say "spares bin" or "parts bin" in this context. Great quality video as usual.
I thiunk you covered a very overlooked and forgotten aspect of the war. Great job!
Like a team without Parts and FPE in War Thunder, lacking in staying power being easily ground down.
It's really interesting this to see the return again and again to the logistical question.
Excellent video. The spare parts problem was also quite severe for the Luftwaffe.
Note that Dr. Roman Töppel did not receive the questions before my visit, so he had no time to prepare.
Dr. Roman Töppel's book on the Battle of Kursk is available in English, German, French and a few other languages. Check it out on amazon or your local bookstore.
Interesting discussion on the Panzer III, the birth of Firefly was very similar, getting the 17 pounder into the small a Sherman Turret. Once achieved they couldn’t get enough of them. So Speers activities, undermined the Wehrmacht’s abilities to fight, I do wonder if the Allies were aware from Ultra and breaking Lorenz. Is it due to Speer, you get the political influence on Armour vehicle design, impacting the Panther development importantly and the Unnecessary enlargement from Tiger 1 to King Tiger? It was Director of the Panzer Museum who explained that the Wehrmacht problem was logistics was seen has a third class activity, it is therefore, possible to see why the serviceability of Panzer armour was poor. Is the Kampfgruppe strategy also fundamentally flawed, by taking support troops away from their roles to fix broken armour, to fill tactical holes, you undermine your armours serviceability and abilities to fight. Richard Von Rosen, account post Normandy details his difficulties in getting trained maintenance troops for his new company of Tiger Tanks, because of significant losses at Normandy. Finally, there is the significant use of Horses by the Wehrmacht for logistics transportation, and support for infantry divisions.
Has Herr Doktor Töppel looked similarly into how Germany handled tank maintenance and repair before waging war on the Soviet Union? Dr. Robert Citino would draw a clear line between how effective German warfare could be in the context of its traditional battlegrounds of central and western Europe and how it could perform in the vast spaces and against the vast forces of the Soviet Union. Did the one-spare-for-ten model not hold up in 1940? That would be something he should look into if he has not already. Please to let him know I appreciate his work as well.
I think the source you are looking for on the tank engines is Glantz, Barbarossa Derailed Vol I, Kindle Version, try locations 6624 and 6704.
I love this guy and and your interviews with him. If you can ever get him together with The Chieftain for a three person talk spare parts would be a great jumping off point!
Sounds very similar to the Soviet situation - the Five Year Plans focussed on production of whole vehicles at the expense of spare parts, so at the start of Barbarossa large numbers of Soviet tanks that fell victim to mechanical defects could not be rapidly repaired and were lost as a result.
That’s in part because the Red Army was undergoing enormous changes when the Soviet Union was attacked in 1941. It didn’t have anything to do with five year plans. It took them a couple of years to recover from it.
Don’t forget also that after the attack in June 1941, the Soviet government moved 1,500 factories across the Urals and this included a number of tank factories. That kind of logistical displacement makes it extremely difficult to maintain supply but in reality, they had little choice.
Bullshit
This video is one of the most informative you've made. Thank You for such presentation.
Thank you for the video. I learned something and enjoyed it as always.
Again thank you.
Was this the first "History Semi-Visualized"? 😆😋
This content is brilliant. Awesome insight!
excellent content as always!
I've learned more about World War 2 by watching your channel than I ever did watching TV or going to school. Thank you for what you're doing. I love learning about this stuff.
My father was a weapons repairman in WW2. I remember hearing that the average American soldier had a grudging respect for their German counterparts, ESPECIALLY the German mechanics. They operated in very tough conditions and somehow managed to keep things going for awhile, hence the term "Jerry rigged".
Gary Webb err, jerry rigged means of shoddy construction and not a repair job using the materials at hand, that's jury rigged. Jerry rigged or jerry built refers to the walls of Jerricho and not Germany.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 As I understood the term it meant getting something back into battle by any means necessary, hence the respect due to those men.
It might mean both. Amazing how they got it back running with no means to do it, even if it meant shaky repairs. PS I believe "the Jerries" was the American soldier's nickname for the Germans.
FallenByTheHand it was definitely one of the nicknames used by the British, I'm not aware of it being used by the Americans.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 you need to get out more son. You need to get out from under the rock you are living under and go see a nice American war movie. Enjoy, and count how often they use 'Jerry's'
awesome video. I don't get to watch them as often as I used to, life...But the quality is always 1st rate.
Ahh just like Volkswagen. Fantastic when its all working, but theres always another expensive mechanical issue waiting for you, and the parts must be ordered from Germany.
Had you said Audi, Mercedes or something, I would agree. But Volkswagen?
Volkswagen?! Common, parts are everywhere - new and used, and dirty cheap. Sure, my VW is nearly a quarter century old by now, that may matter too. XD
P.S. Wait! Are you from USA? Here in Europe it certainly isn't an issue.
@@0Turbox sat net has issues with latency..... hard to play stuff like counter-strike with 300 ping
Plus.... a cloud can make you drop packets or simply loose connection
And takes six weeks.
Very interesting information! It makes total sense. As an add on to this video it would be interesting to compare maintenance hours of the different tanks. Say Sherman, T-34 and Pz-4.
Cannibalization was a common practical technique used by all military forces, not just the Germans.....logistics, logistics. It was always difficult to get spares up to units when they needed the units.
That was fun!
Nicely trimmed beard. Keep it up
Please make more videos together. I really liked it.
But I have one more off topic question.
Can you guys recommend good books about german ww2 logistics in Italy? It's a very niche topic that's why I haven't really found anything for it.
A variant of this problem: A friend of mine left the US Army after the Vietnam War and became a product manager for a defense contractor. He was very sensitized to the need for adequate supplies of spare parts for the vehicles he was responsible for. However, to make their units look good on paper, the sergeants in the units had various tricks for exaggerating the number of combat-ready vehicles, with the side-effect of under-reporting requirements for spares. He "solved" his problem by doing unannounced visits to various units and producing his own statistics and then creating a model for the whole Army.
Aside: There is a feedback loop here: When there are routinely delays getting parts to units, they hide that their vehicles need those parts, which leads the maintenance centers to think there is less need for those parts and reduce their inventory, which then results in longer delays in units getting those parts.
Since the US Army is an expeditionary force, know how quickly parts break and wear out is important not just for manufacturing schedules, but for calculating what must be sent with the deployment, especially when it is air-transport where every pound counts.
I forwarded your comment to Roman, he says thank you!
Love the book Roman!
thx, I will send him a screenshot of your comment.
I forwarded your comment to Roman, he says thank you!
very interesting .
Great Interview! I love your videos, especially the interviews. Any plans on investing into some better audio-equipment or improvements into the setup?
Especially the interviews which you do on premise would benefit a lot from this and would make the videos even more enjoyable.
Don't get me wrong the audio is clear and there are no distracting noises, but it sounds kinda off with the current setup.
I actually had upgraded my equipment, the issue was, one audio recorder (mine), had some serious issue, so I went with the microphone of the camera. The irony is, this audio recorder is the follow-up model on the one I used previously and I only once had an issue with in more than year... so I likely will upgrade to a different setup, although that is always a funding issue as well.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Thanks for the response. Makes sense.
I know how expensive audio equipment can get and I guess there are almost always more urgent investments to be done.
The acknowled experts of logistics? Then and now? America.
I wonder about Dr Toppel's point about Germany having enough tanks. One British tank regiment of only 150 tanks, part of the Sherwood Rangers Yeomanry, received no fewer than 1073 replacement tanks to keep it up to strength during the 8 or 9 weeks of the battle of Normandy alone according to one of its officers, David Render.
That is staggering, and only one tank regiment of many allied tank regiments in the battle. Render also recounted that although the Germans destroyed a lot of allied tanks, many more were repaired, up to 3/4 of operational losses. The Sherwoods lost 3 commanding officers in Normandy and many crew, but they were all quickly replaced too.
Spare parts won't help in that case. Elite German panzer units with better tanks were gradually worn down around Caen by this relentless pressure even though it took a long time for the front to crack. Michael Wittman can shoot up a lot of tanks with his Tiger but there are a lot more coming. He gets ambushed a week after receiving his Knight's Cross.
The British officer recounted that some unit crews went through 5 or 6 tanks during the battle while the Germans had to work with their dwindling stock of tanks and what they could repair, Dr Toppel's point about spares.
It didn't really matter if the Germans stopped offensives like Goodwood and Totalise because the massive material advantage was going to tell in the end. This explains the long retreat after Normandy - German units had suffered terrible attrition and could not quickly replace losses as the allied armies could do. The very able General Fritz Bayerlein put it well in the end during operation Cobra, bitterly telling Fuhrer headquarters that his men had not run away. But they could not counterattack again because they were all dead in their positions.
It's also certain to be a lie or completely misremembered abstraction. The first problem is that a Britsh Army tank Regiment didn't have 150 tanks, so that's error one.
The second one is that during the entire western European campaign Britain lost about 4,500 tanks TOTAL. So one fucking regiment didn't loose almost a quarter of all tanks lost in the entire theater in almost a year of fighting in eight weeks. If you assume an average of like 1 man killed per tank knocked out you'd also end up with a situation where the regiment probably would have taken basically 100% crew losses as well. It might be vaguely true if those "replacements" where minorly damaged vehicles sent back and replaced with newly repaired vehicles, but it wasn't true in the slightest regarding like 'total losses'.
The problem is that for the Germans with no spare parts those minorly damaged vehicles that the allies would quickly repair and shuffle back to the front often DID end up as total losses because it didn't matter that the problem was just a carburetor that should only take like 45 minutes to swap and get the engine running, if you don't HAVE a carburetor that tank is going nowhere and the enemy is coming so your entire 50,000 dollar tank ends up set alight by it's crew as a total constructive loss because you didn't have a .50 cent spare part. This is another one of those 'experts talk about logistics' things that doesn't get considered enough, a sufficient and healthy supply of spare parts is often more useful in preserving fighting strength at the sharp end then slightly higher production of complete vehicles.
Tank losses in general for the allies in most battles are also grossly exaggerated, in the end the Germans lost more vehicles then the allies did. Even in the battles they nominally won an apples to apples comparison shows only a small margin of superiority in loss ratios. The thing is that the allies tended to count any vehicle rendered combat ineffective at a given moment as 'lost' even if they were repaired later or hell even if could still move, but had say lost use of it's main gun or something. The reality was that I know for a fact in the US army and I would suspect the British army as well that being a tank crewmen was pretty much without a doubt the safest frontline job.
The losses among tank crews in the Western Allies were actually really low and the tanks losses themselves not all that high either for what was being achieved, and most of those weren't even to enemy tanks.
@@Tk3997 yeah I should have said staggering "if true", I'm quoting the officer Render. Presumably replacements includes repaired vehicles etc. His point was losses were replaced whereas the Germans had dwindling resources until the collapse at Falaise. I find it hard to believe too that one regiment could have received quite so many replacement tanks. But the underlying preponderance of resources point Render was trying to dramatise holds true. If the allies can replace losses even large ones and the Germans can't then the weight of resources will tell in the end even if their tanks are superior AFV and other kit may be better. This is the story of 1943/44 on all fronts. The obliteration of the Luftwaffe probably most dramatic, a chilling clinical decimation of Germany's best pilots so that by D Day they can barely mount a sorty.
Lying to the boss to impress him in an autocratic and bureaucratic governmental system? No.....
I could listen to these for hours. Do you have any videos in German?
no
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized *you mean nein
Mechanic .
" I can fix anything ! If I have the parts!"
Dr rommen toppel : A historian that doesnt bore u to death !!!I wish his book was available in my country .
which country are you from?
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Pakistan .
as far as I know there is no edition planned, especially there a lot of languages in your country.
I want the english version ! The problem is that there is no amazon here ! Is there anyway i can get the english version shipped ?
I have no idea how it works in Pakistan or your area of Pakistan. In Austria you go to book dealer and ask for it, they usually have a complete international catalogue, but then again we have special laws for keeping book prices low and stuff, e.g., in South America books cost usually the same than in Austria or Germany, yet, everything else is like 25-50 % of the price.
Yet, amazon.com might ship to Pakistan as well, not sure on the shipping cost however, but that is just a few clicks away.
As usual very video
It's always about Logistics especially with the mechanization of Warfare in the industrial age. Read the book 'Death Traps" by Cooper'-he was a 2nd Lt. In a US Army forward Support Battalion in France/Germany 1944-'45. He writes about the recovery /repair of damaged equipment-mainly AFVs as he was in a Armored Div. The US Military had planned to have-deploy almost mini tank plants for Divisional Rear areas because of the Long Logistics routes of fighting overseas. The Germans planning had been to send badly damaged Vehicles back to the Factorys for repair as they initially doctrine a Continental War on the distances of Western EU. This started to fail as they got extended into the USSR and N.Africa and the War was going on much longer than planned. The Axis didn't plan Big enough for a multi years campaign and by the time Germany Finally went over to s 'Total War' footing in early 1943 the weight of US /UK production was already in full swing.
No, don’t read it unless you have already read plenty of other books on the subject.
I'll pile on the candy,
It's such a pretty sight
It makes the food taste dandy
But my tummy hurts all night
I'll put in some ingredients
But keep the rest for me
I'm not just disobedient
I'm careful, can't you see?
It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake
If the way is hazy,
You gotta do the cooking by the book
You know you can't be lazy
Never use a messy recipe,
The cake will end up crazy
If you do the cooking by the book,
Then you'll have a cake
We gotta have it made,
You know that I love cake
Finally, it's time to make a cake!
Making food is just like science,
With tools that blend and baste
And every fun appliance
Gives the food a different taste!
It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake
If the way is hazy,
You gotta do the cooking by the book
You know you can't be lazy
Never use a messy recipe,
The cake will end up crazy
If you do the cooking by the book,
Then you'll have a cake
We gotta have it made,
You know that I love cake
Finally, it's time to make a cake
We gotta have it made,
You know that I love cake
Finally, it's time to make a -
'You gotta do the cooking by the book!'
Cake!
RIP Stefan
Speer needs lots of debunking. Thanks for this contribution. Early in the war the Germans were very good at tank recovery, a lesson learned early from the Anschluss where so many tanks broke down.
In France they got tanks going again quickly where the British and French were abandoning them because they didn't have a good recovery procedure. One interesting thing is the tank transporter wasn't invented until after the war as far as I know. It saved a lot on wear and tear. Tanks are not really suited to long distance driving on hard roads. Also saves a lot of fuel.
Your point about the gun is really interesting thanks. It shows the crucial importance of the size of the turret ring. Many British and French tanks could not be upgraded because the turret ring was too small. The Germans and the Russians had bigger turret rings which allowed 3 man turrets and upgrades of guns.
The current British REME euphemism for canibalise is Cross Service. It's horrendously inefficient, and also damages the spare when you remove it from the donor vehicle. However once the spare chain breaks down, which it almost inevitably does there's no other option. Although the modern reasons for lack of spare parts different.
To be fair to Speer - the man was an architect, not a soldier - so it's very possible that he simply didn't understand how much spare parts were really needed.
Lovely suit
CANNABALIZE! I'm watching this in the morning, pre-coffee, and I could only see a Pacific Islander standing with a spear, in my head as I was struggling to find the word Dr Töppel was trying convey.
8:25 same sort of thing with the stg44...
“Eating me up inside”
“Chewing me up”
They didn't have enough reliability for the parts they did have and they didn't have enough petrol for the the tanks they did have. More spare parts weren't about to save them.
I used to have a very naive idea about the WWII.
I used to think the Germans did not had the slightest chance of winning it.
Now I tend to believe it was a very close run thing.
At the same time the idea I had of efficiency of the German side is also dissipating, and particularly from the point of view of logistics, the picture I am acquiring is something from the realm of nightmares.
I cannot thank you enough Bernhard for doing this very interesting channel in English, because my German is very flimsy, at this stage.
there's no point in having tanks and planes if you have no fuel. Germany had the clock ticking.
@@jkahgdkjhafgsd indeed.
When France fell faster than expected, a strategic transformation occurred.
North Africa and the Middle East became a palpable possibility.
Hitler never showed enthusiasm toward that development despite the insistence of Admiral Raeder to that effect. Hitler was focussed on Barbarossa and had no heart to contemplate other prospects. In the beginning of the North African campaign, after the initial successes of Rommel an expert was sent there to assess the situation. His verdict: two additional panzer divisions would suffice to guarantee success. Those division existed, many more indeed, and where waiting for Barbarossa. That expert was not God. But had he been correct, Egypt would fall, the Mediterranean would become a German lake, and the Middle East would follow suit. Germany would be swimming in oil. Dunkirk or no Dunkirk would make little difference, and Barbarossa would develop quite differently, I find.
But hey, who knows?...
@@zachariaszut Bluntly, Rommell doesnt have the fuel for the panzers he has. More wont help. Even if they force the British back to the Red Sea - and they cant, they run out of trucks first - so what ? The supply lines get even longer and destroy more trucks - and the Germans and Italians don't have any way to get oil from Abadan (a mere 5000km from Berlin).
Cannibalize is likely the direct translation but it sounds to me like you guys were searching for the term “Salvage” in English. Thanks for the top quality content as always!!!
No, it is the correct term. Cannibalising is used when you have to diminish your capabilities at one end by stripping parts for another, salvage is in this context more about recovering lost equipment and getting something from things that are total losses.
'Cannibalised for spare parts' is a relatively common sentence in regards to forces in dire straits.
Jonas Drøjdahl the vehicle being cannibalised is also known as a Christmas tree.
Oh that's a new one. Hadn't heard of that before. Thanks for letting me know.
6:44 'eating at me' metaphorically speaking
I agree completely with this statement. At a minimum the commonly required parts, ie road wheels, transmission, track sections, and the other pieces that tanks eat by the dozens should have been available at even regimental depots in abundance. Only a fool expects a tank to never need a replacement anything.
Quick off topic Question: Do you earn enough from Patreon and CZcams to sustain yourself or do you have a Lehrstuhl or something in that regard that gives you an income as well?
Working full-time on CZcams since August 2016, but back then I lived in a shared flat. I actually give a tour in my Silver Play Button video: czcams.com/video/69r7OIc28JE/video.html
Moved out of it in 2017. So, yeah, I can sustain myself, yet the ad rates for "controversial" content like mine are lower, so if I would have completely "safe" topics my income would be higher. At least one valid source told me he saw ad rates of a comedy channel and they were very different. So any support is appreciated, because money makes everything easier and faster: equipment, books, etc. back in 2016 and 2017 every purchase was delayed etc. now the most pressing issues are trips to events and museums, since: travel cost, hotel, food, rental car, etc. adds up rather fast.
cannibalizing is very inefficient compared to producing spares in the correct proportions as a lot of parts which seldom need replacement end up being wasted.
The more parts vehicle has, the bigger is the problem with spare parts. For large scale war you need all weapons as simple as possible.
I always put production sliders on focus on upgrades and then leave it. Better to have well equipped and reinforced troops than have another HARM division 2 weeks faster
except if you only upgrade in waves, you'll skip upgrades. Say: Unit at tech 1, once you research tech 2, don't upgrade, research tech 3, then upgrade the unit directly from tech 1 to tech 3. Afaik it's how it works in hoi3, but DH doesn't work this way.
@@jkahgdkjhafgsd I do that 36 to 41 but right before Soviet invasion I switch over.
Growing up in the 1970s, a guy in my neighborhood collected VW beetles to use for parts and keep his main one running.
Watch a video for lack of spare parts for tanks and I get an ad about spare car parts. What’s going on NSA?
Quick-- smash yur cellphone with a hammer.
Not NSA, just Google...no, you shouldn't feel much better about that
we call them "hanger queens"
Tactics get the press attention, and fame. Logistics, such as supplying spare parts with the numbers and speed required is not sexy. It is just vital. German logistics, often horse driven much of the war, were often terrible. " General, we need more trucks to replace these damn horse carts. " is not going to impress the political leaders of Germany. They KNEW the modern German Army was the one on parades, not the Horse Drawn World War One tech core they actually had. Speer straightened things out, in vehicle production, long after it reached nightmare proportions.
Thanks gentlemen for exposing more of the politics behind the crippling of the German Army. A great Video
I must say you look rather dashing in that suit
The are pictures of T-34's carrying an extra final drive on the rear deck with annotations about the need to repair or replace them. I doubt that the info is available but it would be interesting to know if these were canabalized or original spares. It might suggest at which level of the Red Army this decision and initiative was made.
as far as I know that is from summer 1941, I think I have one of those pictures in the Dubno book. I think it was less common or uncommon later on.
To strip everything- salvage?
Check another box in the Sherman's favor, it didn't need spare parts.
It is notable that when the UK was desperate in 1940, the Ministry of Aircraft Production was authorised to raid Air Force spare parts depots to build more planes. I think spare parts were seen as a luxury by all in WW2 - it's just that for Germany, the desperate period started in December 1941. apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a255904.pdf is a decent reference for Beaverbrook's practices ...
I wonder that even if they did have the spare parts, how could they get them to the tanks that needed them? I've always said the worst job in the whole war was the German Quartermaster's. Keeping track of all those different models had to be a nightmare. (You can't fix a Panzer IV with parts from a Panther)
As TIK oftens point out the German never accounted loss of knocked out tanks once they were repaired. For example you have 10 tanks going into action. 5 gets knocked out and 3 get repaired. They would account only 2 knocked out tanks. This was done by the engineers or responsible on the field. This might also have caused the problem because the higher ups (okh)never had the real number of tank losses thus not feeling the need to produce or supply spare parts.
My favorite cannibalism story is from the USAA 5th Air force in New Guinea. They built a B-25 out of parts from damaged air craft that didn't officially exist. The Air Force didn't know about it but the base used it to fly in "important" supplies from Australia. It was without armor or weapons so was also the fastest B-25 around.
There is a similar story from problem the same air group featured in the "Dogfights" History channel series.
Watch "OLD " 666"" on CZcams
czcams.com/video/6Im086TCu3I/video.html
An unlucky aircraft with the serial number ending "...666" After fixing it up after an unlucky career it was tasked with a long range dangerous recon mission they added heaps of guns, manage to complete the mission, although jumped by a squadron of fighters. They shot down several fighters and survive to be awarded one or two Medals of Honour, one certainly to pilot Jay Zeaman
Were trained mechanics and repair crews in plentiful supply? Or were most soldiers trained to repair their own vehicles? I think you mentioned once the Japanese lost a lot of trained airplane mechanics when they lost a carrier and they couldn't be replaced in time.
Logistics, always vital for modern warfare.
Often vital in ancient warfare as well. The Romans were experts at logistics.
The vehicle being canabalised is also known as a Christmas tree.
They should have talked to the Japanese about getting “just in time” implemented.
Wow! Someone's dressed to kill!
Interestingly in respect of the tank armament/design question, if you look at the 50mm L60 saga, the after-effects were rapid change in German official attitudes towards upgrades. The Tiger I was originally intended to have a 75mm cannon - this was upgraded (rapidly) to an 88mm. The Panther was intended to mount the 75mm L48 cannon - Hitler ordered this upgraded to the L70. The same is true of the Panther's armour.
It seems that once Hitler was proven (or felt he was proven) right, the officials and engineers fell into trying to meet his requirements - the development of increasingly heavy AFVs is a good example of this development.
An extreme example of German AFV and a lack of parts can be seen in the schwere Panzer Abteilung 653 & 512 (Jagdtiger) combat history. It's interesting that in the cases of these high value units a number of Jagdtigers were sent back to the manufacturer Nibelungenwerk. However, in most cases when these vehicles incurred even minor battle damage or mechanical failure - something as simple as a broken track - they simply blew the vehicle up. Amazingly, something like 75% of them were lost in this way.
Very interesting example - can you please give me a source for this? If so, thanks in advance..
@@MarktheMole Münch, Karlheinz, "Combat History of Schwere Panzerjäger Abteilung 653 formerly the Sturmgeschütz Abteilung 197 1940 -1943" J.J.Fedorowicz Publishing Inc.1997
The book is a direct transcription of the Abteilung's origianl post combat operational reports.
Spare parts are some that are always needed. Given that some parts are more prone to fail than are others, cannibalizing parts from a working machine is not a good solution.
Like many Americans of German decent, my father was in the US Army but later found out that cousins from the Oldenburg area were in the Wehrmacht. In German, our family name is: Kläne .
I honestly thought this lack of industrial capacity, use, was more well known.
That's not to say there weren't other issues, quality of parts, sabotage of parts, was an issue to some degree. A relative minor one in so far as it was better for a unit to cannabalise a vehicle that was severely damaged..... okay, let's say it this way. It was better for a unit to declare a unit lost, tank or TD specifically, lost to get the spare parts needed to support the other vehicles.
I'd also add, supporting that many classes, different makes of vehicle made for a very complex system of even under ideal circumstances, producing spare parts too.
At least the Americans worked that out and the Palmer board shut a lot of probably unnecessary experimentation down.
Wow - i did not know you were actually lenin!
Germany had a logistics problem from the beginning. For Barbarossa they scoured the already occupied countries for both military and civilian vehicles. Totaling over 2,000 different types and each type requiring unique spare parts. By contrast the US army knew it would have to operate far from home. This is one reason they concentrated on one basic tank the M4. One 8ton truck from GM. This allowed them to caniabalze damaged vehicles which wasn't hard to do with a Sherman. Remove 16 bolts to replace a suspension unit from the outside was fairly easy and fast compared to replacing a broken torsion suspension bar.
The story of the Marder tank destroyers points up one of the sources of German problems with spare parts: the scavenging of captured enemy and other equipment. According to my sources, the majority of Marder I vehicles were built on the captured French Lorraine chassis, using both the Soviet 76.2mm anti-tank gun and the German 75mm PAK 40. Other version of the Marder were built on the Czech Skoda TNHSP chassis. This scavenging helped create the spare parts situation Arthur C. Clarke described in his pointed satire of military procurement, Superiority. warontherocks.com/2014/12/when-superiority-goes-wrong-science-fiction-and-offset-strategies/
Could the refusal to Cannibalize be a holdover from "craft" standards of fitting? That is, once you "fit" a part to a vehicle it isn't usable anywhere else? I ask because I remember a second-hand quote about Japanese aircraft at Truk etc. Where one aircraft would be grounded for engine issues, while another would be 50 meters away with a good engine and bad propeller (for example). By the way, the USAF slang for a cannibalized plane that never flew was a "hanger queen".
Something in recordkeeping seems to started this (the records being concerned more with the individual vehicles, than the unit as a whole). Then again, from what I've heard (Jack Radey in this case), Heer units would submit a list of infantry losses (Dead or so wounded that they wouldn't come back) at the end of each month, with replacements arriving the end of the next month. By contrast US forces couldn't get replacements literally overnight from the Replacement Depot (though they tended to wait for the unit to be pulled back, after experience showed it gave the replacements better odds of surviving). With replacements so scarce, this may explain the nature of most Kamphgruppen. The commander was given a"core" force and license to take replacements from nearby units as needed.
There was a MAJOR retirement push in the US Army around 1940-41 led by Marshal, that "retired" several hundred older officers (clearing the way for younger ones). Now, part of this was because there had been a massive increase in the Officer Corps for WWI (while the AEF didn't take nearly the officer losses as say Britain). But was this "cleaning out" done by other armies pre-war? (Purges don't count).
This spare part problem also hampered the Luftwaffe. They soon lost there fighting power because of the lack of them. But I always thought the main problem for the Nazi s was lack of fuel. This was the reason for Unternehmen Blau, to get oil. The Alie’s knew this very well and started bombing the synthetic fuel factories.
I don't know if it was a lack of spare parts production rather than a lack of logistics to get them delivered to the fighting units.
In all likelihood it was a combination of the two.
I have been meaning to ask this for some time, but what accents are those?
mine is Upper Austrian - yes you can't hear the different regions of Austria in even English, e.g., Novritsch, who is one or the biggest Austrian CZcamsr sounds rather similar to me, also Upper Austria. Schwarzenegger is Styria and people from there in English sound very similar to him. With Roman I am not sure, because for me he sounds similar to a guy from South Africa.
Military History not Visualized thanks
The Germans had several major problems with steel production the steel type they used to make tanks was used to make steam locomotive boilers at very high pressures 300lbs per square inch it was no good it rusted away. Hitler was not informed of this until 1942, and German Locomotives built between 1928 to 1941 reboilering was not completed until 1950s. The 1000s of locomotives built/rebuilt 1928 to 1941 had run at lower pressure (lower power output) and could not handle the loads expected of them.
"they didn´t have enough spare parts"
Well i see some things never change *hust*Marine Helis *hust*
Ponytail! ponytail alert! You may want to switch to audio alone if seeing the ponytail swaying causes too much distraction.
He had a very bad effect on the panther muffin.
Spare parts are very expensive for German vehicles ..... even today .........
I think salvaging is the word you looked for.
no
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Yeah cannibalize is correct i only saw exploit.
Spare parts were already a problem in summer not 1941, with numerous panzers falling out that could have been repaired. The Germans were geared for quick campaigns that were over in a short amount of time, not durational, attritional and logistical warfare. Speer really isn't the cause of this tradition, but he could be held responsible for not solving it late war.
There's an interesting point in the story of the 50/L70 about prestige, face, and risk-taking. If you're an established tank producer and favored by Hitler, you're better off making sure bets on development and succeeding every time than taking a chance on a big leap and falling flat on your face. (Or losing face.) For Alkett, what did they care if they failed? Everyone says it's impossible, you have very little status, and you're not promising success at all; you're only promising to *find out for sure* whether or not it's possible. It's a bit like Microsoft vs. IBM, Google vs. Microsoft, etc.
interesting point!
As far as I know although, it was the Heereswaffenamt not a company that disobeyed.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized This video says that Jentz relates the that director of the Alkett factory said, "My Fuhrer, I will try." Not disobedience, which is the story Guderian gives (it may have been an honest mistake by Guderian, writing years later, and I'm not clear whether or not he was in the meeting).
@@ethanmckinney203 but that Alkett aspect happened AFTER it had not been done as ordered before.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized i misunderstood. I thought you were saying that someone went behind Hitler's back, something like that. Or that it was done secretly, in any case, while Jentz's account has "I will try" in a meeting with Hitler--it was all in the open.
Any disabled or shot-up tank is full of spare parts....IF you can recover the vehicle intact!
Easier if you are attacking and has a big tank recovery vehicle with a tow hook. If you are defending and retreating, it's a lot harder.
Germans- "Let's build complicated vehicles and push them into the field without sufficient testing, with lots of parts breakages. And whatever we do, DO NOT make spare parts."
But what do that say about Germans enemy? Despite German stupidity, and the alliance superior industry strength and holding the strategic initiative still make the defeat of Germany a bloody and slow business.
7:25 from what i understand about the politics of nazi German it was a very ... almost tribal affair with the gaulighters(?) of each region competing with each other and undercutting each other to acquire resources etc lol that i im sure you much have given you're interest in this subject watched the bbc/thames doco series "the world at war" i cant remember which episode/s it was that i saw that in ... probably one of the "life in nazi germany" ones? and if you havent seen it please let me know and then go watch it :)
Speer inherited a "Horror/Sh!t Show" when Hitler made him armaments minister. The German "War Economy" was never rationalized OR prioritized like American, British (who also had "spares problems") or especially the Russian ( who simply got what they couldn't produce from Lend-Lease ie TRUCKS, aluminum, etc.). Producing the tank hulls and even guns was the EASY part. Through out the entire war engine and transmission production and quality control suffered as Germany literally lacked the lathes, milling machines AND skilled operators to produce spares in adequate quantity.
Without getting hopelessly into the trees and swamps as to the whys... Suffice to say the German economy had little to NO experience with industrial mass production efficiencies on par with America. Even during it's "re-armament" there were colossal bottlenecks where ever highly refined tight technical tolerance production was needed. Adam Tooze has written several excellent books on the topic that begin at the end of WW1 and explain WHY the German "War Economy" of WW2 was almost fore doomed by the impact of Versailles even 20 years later. In essence... Reparations absorbed hard capitol and prevented German industrial re-investment and expansion sufficient to provide excess carrying capacity for wartime conversion and adaptation of civilian manufacturing infrastructure. Less "BIG WORDS VERSION"; ... There was no there, there for Speer to play with. Where as in America during "The Depression" MONTHLY manufacture of automotive ie.; cars AND trucks and "spares" exceeded Germany's ANNUAL production DURING it's "Re-armament".
Mmm. Germany had enormous numbers of machine tools - even more than those in the US, according to various sources..
@MarktheMole It's simply not true. Read Tooze. He provides original source references. One of the main problems Speer faced was instead of integrating the French armaments industry.. industrialist like Krupp Inc. looted the sector for their raw material stockpiles..
The lack of spare parts is what happens when the wrong metrics are tracked. The German war machine was culturally biased towards tracking the number of units produced because that was what was required for operations. Spare parts is a logistical problem, ergo in the corporate mindset of the German Army where Operations reigned supreme, spare parts was a detail brushed aside.
08/15
My father was in the RAF in the Second World War. At one point there was an American airbase next door to the RAF one he was at. At night the RAF would sneak down to the American's scrap heap with a lorry and raid it for spare parts to keep the RAF planes flying. The Americans just changed parts until their planes worked. The RAF ground crew found plenty of good parts had been scrapped. So the Americans kept the RAF flying in more ways than one. ;)
A great story - but how would parts for USAAF aircraft fit into RAF planes, which were different?
@@MarktheMole good grief! The RAF had proper apprenticeships. Whatever was needed was adapted and used. This was a war when everything was in short supply. My Dad kept his planes flying any way he could. As did his colleagues.