How Bad Was The Jagdtiger?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
  • Much like the Jagdpanzer Ferdinand we talked about last month, the Jagdtiger was designed to act as a sort of heavy StuG, using its thick armor and powerful gun to attack both fortifications and tanks directly. The Jagdtiger was based on the chassis of the Tiger II (colloquially known as the King Tiger), and unfortunately inherited its problems. Surely it would at least be better than the Ferdinand, right? Don't get your hopes up.
    Check the channel "About" section for the link to the creator of my profile picture.
    Sources:
    Jagdpanzer 38 to Jagdtiger (Panzer Tracts No.9) - Thomas L. Jentz, Hilary Louis Doyle
    Germany’s Tiger Tanks: VK45.02 to Tiger II - Thomas L. Jentz, Hilary Louis Doyle
    Tiger I and Tiger II - Anthony Tucker-Jones
    German Tanks of World War II - Michael Green
    Encyclopedia Of German Tanks Of WW2 - Peter Chaimberlain, Hilary Louis Doyle
    Tiger Tanks at War - Michael Green, James D. Brown
    Elefant, Jagdtiger, Sturmtiger - Wolfgang Schneider
    Songs used (in order from first to last):
    Subnautica - Into the Unknown
    Halo 3: ODST - Rain (Deference for Darkness)
    Sound mods:
    Epic Thunder (Pre-release)
    Gunner HEAT PC Crew Voices Mod (Personal, go play the game: gunnerheatpc.com/ )
    Sponsor: apexgamingpcs.com/pages/spook...
    Second channel: / @spookstoon
    Patreon: / spookston
    Twitter: / spookston
    Reddit: /u/spookston
    Discord: See my Patreon page.
    Twitch: / spookstonwt
    Steam: goo.gl/BYQjC9
    #warthunder​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tanks​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tankhistory
  • Ігри

КОМЕНТАРІ • 732

  • @Spookston
    @Spookston  2 роки тому +81

    Sponsor: apexgamingpcs.com/products/spookston

    • @dpointdefender8196
      @dpointdefender8196 2 роки тому +1

      Very noice 👍

    • @TheArklyte
      @TheArklyte 2 роки тому +4

      People discussing how bad was Jagdtiger - talk about technical side of things. Reliability, logistics, production, allied airpower and soviet artillery.
      Reality of how bad was Jagtiger - no demand for such vehicle, no battlefield and doctrinal niche to fill, no opponent that only it would counter.
      The truth is that even if Jagdtiger had no technical drawbacks, Gwrmany had resources to fuel and produce it, infrastructure would be able to transport it and opposition had neither air superiority, nor superiority in numbers, it would STILL be as "effective" as constructing a 500m tall purple dildo in the center of Berlin.

    • @Geniusinventor
      @Geniusinventor 2 роки тому +3

      Can we take a moment to appreciate the work this man is doing to entertain us. This man is playing to most mind breaker tank in war thunder to educate us.

    • @zyagard8962
      @zyagard8962 2 роки тому +1

      Ok I still don't have enough money to buy it loo

    • @efinveecaught7281
      @efinveecaught7281 2 роки тому

      Damn their products are overpriced compared to competitors, what a shame. Its absurd how expensive it is for the parts you get

  • @Cheezymuffin.
    @Cheezymuffin. 2 роки тому +1415

    we like hearing about the bad tanks, because we already know they are bad, yet still get surprised they are even worse than we thought.

    • @legaroojack1251
      @legaroojack1251 2 роки тому +106

      Our expectations were low but holy fuck

    • @eternalwarfare514
      @eternalwarfare514 2 роки тому +49

      @@legaroojack1251 Our expectations were low but holy fuck they managed to make that bar subterranean

    • @The_Viscount
      @The_Viscount 2 роки тому +19

      You assume we all know enough about land vehicles to know which tanks are good and bad. Bold of you. I mean, my specialty is warships not tanks, so...

    • @darklysm8345
      @darklysm8345 2 роки тому

      How it is worse? Allieboo

    • @Ben-mw9vz
      @Ben-mw9vz 2 роки тому +13

      @@darklysm8345 He never mentioned a nation though, he just said in a general sense ‘bad tanks’. Malding much?

  • @calessel3139
    @calessel3139 2 роки тому +223

    If you read the operation reports from sPzjr Abt.512 & 653rd, the primary mechanical failure of Jagdtigers was it's final drive, secondary was track breakage. Engine problems proved a comparablely minor cause of mechanical failure or loss. Combat losses were quite low mainly due to the fact most broke down and were abandoned before combat.
    The 512 & 653rd sPzJr Abteilung's records show the following losses: (highest to lowest): 20 mechanical failure outside of combat, 17 abandoned and self-destroyed due to lack of fuel, 11 mechanical failure while seting up for combat (mainly track breakage), 9 surrendered to US forces (ie. in good running order at the end of war), 6 lost due to battle damage (mobility kills), 4 unknown loss, 3 mechanical failure during field march, 3 destroyed by enemy tanks or TD, 2 loss due to artillery indirect fire (engine hits/ fire), 1 aircraft rocket attack, 1 infantry (bazooka), 1 bridge collapse.
    A couple of interesting lesser known losses -- the 1st Jagdtiger lost was destroyed by a lowly infantryman with a bazooka. Another being a rather spectacular kill by an Allied fighter bomber pilot who actually fired his rockets into a Jagdtiger's open rear hatch while the crew was reloading ammunition into the vehicle!

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому +20

      Its ironic how the best posts with the most facts get the fewest thumbs up.
      Cheers.

    • @BadMuflon
      @BadMuflon Місяць тому

      Nice

  • @ThatSuicideBear
    @ThatSuicideBear 2 роки тому +478

    If I am not mistaken, the 128mm was so heavy, it couldn't be installed in the mantlet. So, unlike any other tank destroyer, a platform was installed to basically carry the gun, thus drastically increasing weight of the vehicle.

    • @builder396
      @builder396 2 роки тому +43

      Not wrong. If you look at the ingame armor model you can actually see where the lower side plate behind the tracks was extended up right under the main front plate to carry all that weight of the armor and the gun mount.
      Another tidbit is that the gun was so heavy, that for any travelling at all the travel lock needed to be used to prevent the elevation mechanism from getting damaged. Not that it helped *that* much given that damaged elevation gears were still frequent during marches and even in short engagements.

    • @headphonesz6527
      @headphonesz6527 2 роки тому +8

      Russians had 122mm before them, and a 152 howitzer used for direct shots as well. Everyone idolized the tiger, but they built it to battle the superior Russian tanks. Nobody idolized Russian tanks. Really weird

    • @builder396
      @builder396 2 роки тому +63

      @@headphonesz6527 Russian tanks werent "superior" in any particular way. They were definitely powerful, but also incredibly crude. Russians did on average have larger guns available, but even a 122mm A-19 and D-25 barely match the armor penetration of the German 8.8cm L/71, but is hindered by long reload times from large two-piece ammo.
      Besides, Tiger I was armored specifically against Soviet 76mm guns, primarily F-34 and ZiS-5 tank guns, and 76mm ZiS-3 and F-22 field guns, as larger guns were typically not used in the anti-tank role anyway, and all of those guns have roughly just under 100mm of penetration (and the Tigers frontal armor is 100mm.)
      Tiger Is idolization also comes mainly from wartime propaganda giving it a scary reputation, both with Germans as well as opposing forces, resulting in a lot of tanks being misidentified as Tigers. A funny one was a picture of a Panzer IV H with skirt armor, photographed by the Soviets and captioned "A fascist Panzer IV maliciously disguised as a Tiger I in order to try and fool our brave troops." (they just talked that way).
      But if you go to Russia today they primarily idolize Russian tanks to the point of sometimes deliberately talking badly about German tanks beyond fact.
      The truth is somewhere in between. Tiger I was a good design when it came out, but it was not future-proofed very well and at the end of the war it could be countered fairly well.

    • @simonkevnorris
      @simonkevnorris 2 роки тому +6

      @Builder I think their research came from World of Tanks.

    • @builder396
      @builder396 2 роки тому +6

      @@simonkevnorris Thats why Im educating them.

  • @resistivewig610
    @resistivewig610 2 роки тому +515

    I remember hearing a story about a jagtiger crew that got themselves killed.
    Apparently since the driver was so fresh from recruitment camps he didn't really know what he was doing so after they crest a hill and started getting shot at he tried to turn the tank around to retreat however the second the side was full on to the enemy it got blasted.
    Edit wow I did not expect this to get this many replies or likes. Also I would like to point out the first reply gives a source as to where the story came from.

    • @Sammael66685
      @Sammael66685 2 роки тому +159

      That story is from Otto Carius autobiography, as he narrates how that happened to the JagdTiger which was in squad with the one he was in, to his own dismay.

    • @boss9mustang404
      @boss9mustang404 2 роки тому +17

      why didn't he just back up instead of turning around?

    • @Appletank8
      @Appletank8 2 роки тому +67

      @@boss9mustang404
      Backing up when you can't see what's behind you is scary? Doesn't know how without someone guiding him?

    • @Red_Karen
      @Red_Karen 2 роки тому +159

      @@boss9mustang404 incompetent caused by lack of training and rash action

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +52

      I've seen this pretty often in Post Scriptum, an inexperienced driver can really screw things up.

  • @SilentButDudley
    @SilentButDudley 2 роки тому +111

    This tank is the epitome of, “But why tho”

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому +3

      Presumably because the Germans in 1943 when it was proposed thought the allies would come up with more powerful tanks than they actually did.

    • @sapphyrus
      @sapphyrus 2 роки тому +5

      Killing everything Allies had at all ranges without dying to return fire in a crew-starved country. It'd have done that if Germans already weren't on their last legs with no air cover.

    • @SCLHP666
      @SCLHP666 2 роки тому +2

      @@lyndoncmp5751 these German beast tanks all were bad because of rush, no time to fix problems, inexperienced crews, not enough time to mass produce. Probably in an head on a against a jagdtiger and any allied tank (not an is3, I don't think that tank saw any action) would never win. Considering all tanks had experienced crews, no mechanical problems, each aspect of each tank preforming at its best.

    • @SilentButDudley
      @SilentButDudley 2 роки тому +2

      @@SCLHP666 uh, they couldn’t mass produce these. They quite literally didn’t have the logistical ability to do so. Not to mention only a few of them massively depleted their metal reserves, and they could have made hundreds of Tigers or Panthers with the supplies alone. Sure they had issues with numbers and crews, but their underlying issue was supply, and at the stage this tank was produced, it was the most idiotic thing Germany could do. The few Jagdtigers produced depleted their metal supply by percentage points.

    • @mattbowden4996
      @mattbowden4996 4 місяці тому

      Because of the IS-3, Tortoise, T28, etc. The Germans didn't know the specifics of these vehicles, but they were correct in guessing that the Allies might be developing next generation heavy armour for the final assault on the homeland and had the Allies been stalled at Germany's borders and European war dragged on into late 45 then all three of these vehicles would most likely have been deployed in combat.
      The whole point of the 128mm PaK 44 was to stay ahead of the gun armour race and it was logical to want to mount it in a tank destroyer - however the vehicles it was expected to counter did not see service because the war ended.

  • @franklind.roosevelt7416
    @franklind.roosevelt7416 2 роки тому +154

    You also forgot to mention that the lack of nickel in the armor plates led to shattered plates. Theres an image out there somewhere of a jagdtiger that was struck by some American 155mm artillery and almost the whole left plate looks like it shattered like glass.

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +4

      155mm was deployed in an anti-tank role?

    • @ShaggyGotSauce
      @ShaggyGotSauce 2 роки тому +71

      @@Zorro9129 the 155mm was deployed in an anti-anything role

    • @onebigfatguy
      @onebigfatguy 2 роки тому +11

      @@Zorro9129 Likely a direct hit from plunging 155mm Long Tom fire. I've heard stories of Tiger 1's having 155mm round blow up next to them tossing them away like rag dolls.

    • @darklysm8345
      @darklysm8345 2 роки тому +3

      Show me allieboo. Muh bad cracking armor myth is hilarious.

    • @ShaggyGotSauce
      @ShaggyGotSauce 2 роки тому +30

      @@darklysm8345 this is literally high school chemistry

  • @ComissarYarrick
    @ComissarYarrick 2 роки тому +75

    To be honest, it wasn't the only one "stupid heavy TD with overkill gun" of WW2. Americans had T28, Brits had Tortoise, Soviets had several prototypes of ISU with long 122, 130 or 152mm guns.
    Tho it was the only one put into "mass" production.

    • @sosogo4real
      @sosogo4real 2 роки тому

      T28/95 was a SPG not a TD.

    • @suguri7266
      @suguri7266 2 роки тому +17

      @@sosogo4real it was meant to break the siegfried line (not an spg but more like a super heavy assault tank)

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +10

      Funny how opposing countries came to essentially the same conclusion completely independently of each other.

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому +12

      There were far more ISU-122 and ISU-152 made.
      Less than 80 Jadgtigers were made. It wasn't mass produced.

    • @thomasellysonting3554
      @thomasellysonting3554 2 роки тому +10

      T28 and Tortoise were not tank destroyers. Both were heavy assault tanks. The German equivalent were the Sturmpanzers; particularly the Sturmtiger.
      The ISU-122/152 were likewise heavy assault guns + self propelled artillery and were very successful. The German equivalents were again the Sturmpanzer like the Brummbar, or the StuH with the 105mm cannon.
      The Jagdtiger by contrast was always meant to be a head to head tank hunter.

  • @maley335
    @maley335 2 роки тому +222

    Wish the next one of the series could be a British Tank, like the Churchill or the Matilda.
    Overall I am a lot interested in the first one with the models I, III, VII and AVRE.
    Sorry for my english.

    • @paraphrasition
      @paraphrasition 2 роки тому +15

      as far as I remember the Churchill was quite gud

    • @CODRD
      @CODRD 2 роки тому +5

      The cruiser tanks in general could be interesting.

    • @donjuanmckenzie4897
      @donjuanmckenzie4897 2 роки тому +3

      @@nedsteven4622 never heard of her

    • @CaptainBogroll
      @CaptainBogroll 2 роки тому +12

      @@paraphrasition Churchill I & II were pretty poor, III onwards got good, Churchill VII was fantastic

    • @stc3145
      @stc3145 2 роки тому +4

      Or the Cromwell. Kinda curious about it, is it a sherman copy basically, or is it worse or better

  • @Vulkanprimarch
    @Vulkanprimarch 2 роки тому +72

    These stories remind me of playing RTS games where you have to make a choice between putting a heap of resources into researching and producing a new unit. OR producing more, less powerful units, faster and cheaper. Depending on the tactical and economic situation.

  • @Demonetised_
    @Demonetised_ 2 роки тому +54

    No matter how bad the Jagdtiger was. You can't deny it looks really cool

    • @naamadossantossilva4736
      @naamadossantossilva4736 2 роки тому +9

      Nah,the Jagdpanther beats it at that.

    • @nisamokej4692
      @nisamokej4692 Рік тому +2

      @@naamadossantossilva4736 no

    • @superflybrothermj
      @superflybrothermj Рік тому +6

      That's literally the only reason I like German tanks so much. I genuinely couldn't care for how shit they were in battle. If it looks cool, it is cool.

    • @jasoncarswell7458
      @jasoncarswell7458 Рік тому +11

      "Did you hear that, Hans? 75 years later, long after we're dead and our country has been utterly conquered by our enemies, American and British teenagers will be agape at how cool we looked! They might even buy model kits to decorate their bedrooms and have throwaway arguments with people on "The Internet" about it!"
      "Yes Franz. All this will be worth it some day."

    • @Dumify
      @Dumify Рік тому +1

      ​@@superflybrothermj i got tje tiger 2 only because it looks cool xd

  • @JarOfDirt.
    @JarOfDirt. 2 роки тому +254

    These tanks were BEASTS, even though they had a bad transmission, bad engine, bad gun traverse and elevation systems…..

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому +75

      If you aim the gun, they die, if you catch on fire upon leaving the factory, well… you get the idea

    • @Vlad_-_-_
      @Vlad_-_-_ 2 роки тому +23

      They were failures, worse then Ferdi. The gun of the Ferdi made sense at least, the 128mm was just retarded.

    • @waterdotzable
      @waterdotzable 2 роки тому +17

      Looked cool though

    • @TR33ZY_CRTM
      @TR33ZY_CRTM 2 роки тому +13

      @@waterdotzable
      Good looks won't do you any good out on the battlefield

    • @CS-zn6pp
      @CS-zn6pp 2 роки тому +24

      @@Vlad_-_-_ they up the gun due to reports of the IS-2 and some Churchill tanks surviving 88mm hits.
      The StuG was good enough for dealing with M4 and the T-34/85.

  • @me262omlett
    @me262omlett 2 роки тому +195

    I never understood why you would take a tank that is in theory far more powerful than anything it fought and just make it bigger, resulting in lower reliability. I can understand that while the 88mm was good enough for anti tank use, the 128mm could have been more effective at killing emplacements, but i think it‘s was sure when the Jagdtiger entered production that Germany wasn‘t going to run into heavily fortified lines in the near future.__.

    • @sinclair2469
      @sinclair2469 2 роки тому +20

      Hitler kept investing in attacked styled weapons for some reason, I'm not sure why

    • @charchadonto
      @charchadonto 2 роки тому +54

      well the issue was political people getting involved in the tank design/procurement, who wanted bigger guns and armor. The actual army guys were advocating for other stuff.
      However, the line of thinking isn't entirely flawed. Germany was never going to win the war with numbers, so superior equipment is their best bet in a bad situation.
      There is also the important principle of *Being ahead of the curve* Having equipment that can deal with current vehicles is good enough, until your enemies come at you with better stuff, at which point you need better stuff.. So every army was doing major experimentation to develop things that could deal with the next generation or upgrades. just in case.

    • @dessertfoxo4096
      @dessertfoxo4096 2 роки тому +23

      @@sinclair2469 Inertia, most of these projects were started when Germany was on the offensive and looting masses of Soviet oil. When they come into service however the table has turned and Germany is on the defensive.

    • @thesayxx
      @thesayxx 2 роки тому +9

      @@dessertfoxo4096 Thanks to the Soviets sabotaging their oil wells while retreating, Germany managed to pump less oil than they produced synthetically from coal. So not much at all.

    • @dessertfoxo4096
      @dessertfoxo4096 2 роки тому +5

      @@thesayxx The Germans were able to get a lot of wells working again, esspecaly in Ukraine around Kyve. Around 1942-43 the amount of raw oil it's self wasn't a problem, it was the refining capacity and transport of it.
      The Soviets concentrated their refinaries Crimea and Caucuses which they where roothless in destroying along with any pipelines heading towards the west.

  • @whywouldyoudothat782
    @whywouldyoudothat782 2 роки тому +99

    Aside from a particularly impressive long-rang (4km at most) engagement against a US armored column in April of '45, where 4 jagdtigers of the 512th Heavy Panzerjäger Battalion engaged from hull-down and scored a 41/1 K/D, with 1 Jagdtiger lost to an American ground attack mission (P-47), the Jagdtiger was just too little too late. Kind of like the Ferdinand it was useful in its original role, bunker busting, and as a static gun faced towards opponents who could not pen its armor except at very close range, if then. The Jagdtiger just was limited due to its immense technical issues and logistic problems, something Otto Carius outlines in his book.

    • @Tonixxy
      @Tonixxy 2 роки тому +16

      No it was not too late it was a piece of shit.

    • @FlowDeBandoler0
      @FlowDeBandoler0 2 роки тому +18

      So war thunder is historically accurate after all, USA players pussying out and start to Cas spamming

    • @alphabravodelta42
      @alphabravodelta42 2 роки тому +32

      Love how you adjusted the wiki numbers to make the battle seem better. 11 Sherman tanks and 30 light skinned vehicles. Then glossing over the fact that the unit had to surrender a few days later.

    • @teox7967
      @teox7967 2 роки тому

      source?

    • @yasseralwash7127
      @yasseralwash7127 2 роки тому

      I was going to mention this
      Thank you

  • @Direwolf13PS3
    @Direwolf13PS3 2 роки тому +77

    'How Bad Was The Jagdpanzer IV?' Considering the Pz.IV's rather troubled suspension I'd love to hear about this.

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +1

      Or the StuG IV?

    • @onebigfatguy
      @onebigfatguy 2 роки тому +1

      Depends on the model. It's well known enough that the version that mounted the Panthers L/70 cannon was badly front heavy and tore it's transmission to bits. The version that used the Panzer 4's L/48 cannon faired much better mobility wise thanks to the lower weight gun.

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому

      Onebigfatguy
      That an over exaggeration. In fact the biggest issue was the nose heavy front wearing the rubber off the front road wheels but they solved that by replacing them with all steel wheels.
      The Jagdpanzer IV L/70 was a very good ank destroyer and better than the M18 and M10.

    • @thomasellysonting3554
      @thomasellysonting3554 2 роки тому +1

      Jagdpanzer IV's design history on its own is convoluted and mind-bogglingly bad as-is. Basically at one point you had the Stug IV, Jagdpanzer IV, and the Paner IV J (which deleted the electric motor for turning the turret so was a TD in most combat situations) all being produced at the same time using the same chassis and same gun but somehow not the same vehicle.
      That said, the Panzer IV (70) - the Jagdpanzer with the Panther cannon - was a very underrated vehicle and consolidating all Panzer IV chassis to this model would likely have served Germany better than more Stugs, Panzer IVs, or Panthers - and would have done so at a reasonable price. Thing is, the Nazis hated sensible consolidation and wanted duplicates and pointless redundancy in everything.

  • @-MarcelDavis-
    @-MarcelDavis- 2 роки тому +19

    Ahh yes, the Jagdtiger. My favorite -mobile- bunker

    • @mjlindero9065
      @mjlindero9065 2 роки тому +2

      Ngl bro, this bunker kina shit, MG firing arcs are too limited
      Much prefer the previous King Tiger Bunkers smh

  • @bubbasbigblast8563
    @bubbasbigblast8563 2 роки тому +26

    "Hanz, command wants us to escape from the Americans with the tanks, so we can help fight the Russians!"
    "Is the Engine on fire, Fred?"
    "No..?"
    "Are you sure? Check again. The Eastern Front can wait a few more minutes."
    "..I think you're right, Hanz, that engine DOES look like it's on fire!"

  • @KuroNekoKohi
    @KuroNekoKohi 2 роки тому +17

    Having stood next to this monster at Bovington, it is awe inspiring. It makes tigerII and jagdpanther look puny in comparison

    • @sampackman69
      @sampackman69 Рік тому

      Went to Bovington a couple of years ago and I never really got how tall tanks were until that moment
      I'm 6.3, so I towered over things like the Tetrarch and the Panzer 2, but Tiger 131, the sherman used in fury, and the Centurion that was cut in half made me feel tiny

  • @Rosenrot_raccoon
    @Rosenrot_raccoon 2 роки тому +99

    Yea it was quite well armoured, but USS Pennsylvania could still penetrate it :D

  • @Elian504
    @Elian504 2 роки тому +7

    Germany: *Makes any tank*
    Engine: This is going to be lit 😎

  • @Zorro9129
    @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +45

    It probably would have done at least well, if not marvelously, if 1) it had faced primarily heavy tanks like it was designed for and 2) it had been crewed by people at least as experienced as those who crewed the Ferdinands.

    • @MisterMainiac
      @MisterMainiac 2 роки тому +11

      It's hard to tell if either of those wouldve helped considering the mechanical unreliability. Suspension was overloaded, the power plant was insanely overworked and fuel supply lines were short. Crew experience and proper deployment can only work if the vehicle can actually make it out to the field.

    • @AEB1066
      @AEB1066 2 роки тому +1

      The idea had some merit given the arrival of heavy tanks like the IS series. Both the Ferdinand and the Jadgtiger could be deadly if the were in the right position on the defense. The problem was that Germany no longer had the fuel to move such behemoths tactically nor strategically, nor the strategic materials to make them reliable, nor the support units they needed to prtect their flanks, nor the air cover to protect them and their supporting transports from air attack.
      Much like the heavy tanks they were meant to counter they proved to be an expensive and ineffective dead end as the concept of the MBT took over.

    • @mikegolden3021
      @mikegolden3021 2 роки тому +3

      Some of them were crewed by ex-Ferdinands crews, and they hated it.

    • @Smokey348
      @Smokey348 2 роки тому +1

      or not make such a behemoth in the first place xD. If it had like 5cm less armour on all places i think it would have done much better.

    • @TheArklyte
      @TheArklyte 2 роки тому +5

      People discussing how bad was Jagdtiger - talk about technical side of things. Reliability, logistics, production, allied airpower and soviet artillery.
      Reality of how bad was Jagtiger - no demand for such vehicle, no battlefield and doctrinal niche to fill, no opponent that only it would counter.
      The truth is that even if Jagdtiger had no technical drawbacks, Gwrmany had resources to fuel and produce it, infrastructure would be able to transport it and opposition had neither air superiority, nor superiority in numbers, it would STILL be as "effective" as constructing a 500m tall purple dildo in the center of Berlin.

  • @cookiecraze1310
    @cookiecraze1310 2 роки тому +10

    'How bad was the Jagdti-'
    y e s

  • @venator5
    @venator5 2 роки тому +14

    Just for some corrections here
    1:00
    - The Jagdtiger has nothing to do with Stugs: It was meant to be a Jagdpanzer for the replacement of the no longer produced Ferdis.
    3:04 Jagdtigers do not had double helical final drives! Nor do any german tanks due to lack of helical gear cutting tools. all used spur gears.
    However there was indeed a technical difference there. Panthers got the two gear type which shown on the example drawning. Tigers got an additional planetary reduction gear set in their final drives. Jagdtiger and Kingtiger final drives were identical and I am sure that KT had spur type gears as it is how the KT in Thun has them.
    3:58
    Jagdtigers did not seen combat in 1944.
    1945 Jan 09 Attack by Jagdtiger at the area of Rimling. This is the earliest date could be found in the unit logs of Schwere Panzerjager Abtailung 653
    4:20
    Claimed kills for Jagdtiger units were:
    Around 200 for Abtailung 653
    Around 150 for Abtailung 512
    Sources used:
    Andrew Devey Jagdtiger: The most poverfull Armoured vehicle of wwII
    Walter Spielberger: Heavy Jagdpanzer.

    • @LIETUVIS10STUDIO1
      @LIETUVIS10STUDIO1 2 роки тому +12

      uhuh. Your sources are:
      - a wehrboo book by an author who has never had anything else published and I struggle to verify even exists
      - Another wehrboo (is it wehrboo if he was in the wehrmacht tho?) "historian" who stopped writing in 1998
      TL;DR: Your sources are trash

    • @venator5
      @venator5 2 роки тому +1

      @@LIETUVIS10STUDIO1 Do you have anything better then?
      Judging by your "wehraboo" attitude only german equipment trashing sources fits your preferences.
      Go on get a life. Bigot!
      And for some points here.
      It does not discredits a book if the writter is only published one. To be clear I would pick up a book from someone writing about one tank but in detail than from someone who is writing about all of them but in a more careless way.
      What do you struggle to verify in existence? The book or the writer? How do you know about his only published book then?
      Yes Spielberg does not released books after 1998, he was 73 years old at that time and passed away in 2005, 7 years later.
      So it was more likelly that he cancelled due to health related issues.

    • @CharcharoExplorer
      @CharcharoExplorer 2 роки тому +3

      @@venator5 IDK about the other possible mistakes, but I really do not trust the kill scores. Especially German ones. If they really had such good K/Ds as they claim they would have at least slowed down the advance of the USSR or US. But they rarely did.

    • @nicol7651
      @nicol7651 2 роки тому +1

      @@CharcharoExplorer probably overclaimed was quite common in ww2 sometimes on purpose and sometimes not

    • @CharcharoExplorer
      @CharcharoExplorer 2 роки тому +3

      @@nicol7651 Yeah I know. Sometimes its just a mistake. Other times its an attempt at propaganda.

  • @mirodanissk2282
    @mirodanissk2282 2 роки тому +317

    I have never clicked so quickly

    • @shivanshna7618
      @shivanshna7618 2 роки тому +13

      Fastest finger in west

    • @Spike_365
      @Spike_365 2 роки тому +13

      @@shivanshna7618
      R/HoldUp

    • @skittlesbutwithchocolatein2274
      @skittlesbutwithchocolatein2274 2 роки тому +3

      same bro

    • @cthulhurage4580
      @cthulhurage4580 2 роки тому +2

      Names Fast West, Fast "Finger" West, if youve seen the wanted posters you know IM the fastest I challange you to a duel at noon. (Does a finger gun) finger bang you later

  • @randomlyentertaining8287
    @randomlyentertaining8287 2 роки тому +7

    I think the engine overheating/fire problem was intended to be rectified via the use of Allied tears from trying to fight the Jagdtiger. Of course, few tears were shred lol

  • @garrettai1610
    @garrettai1610 2 роки тому +13

    It's too bad that the tank-destroyer was a technical dead end shortly after WW2. If nothing else these machines are one of my favorite developments for armored warfare.

    • @jeremyboughtono2
      @jeremyboughtono2 2 роки тому

      They were only made because they were far cheaper to produce than tanks. After ww2 this economic element was no longer in effect.

    • @selfdo
      @selfdo 2 роки тому +3

      The Swedes didn't think so, and they developed their S-103 "tank"...which was designed to counter invading Soviet armor. Looks like a tank destroyer to me.

  • @blu5021
    @blu5021 2 роки тому

    Great video as always!

  • @rubraph-ceccaldi9874
    @rubraph-ceccaldi9874 2 роки тому

    Great videos! Keep it up man!

  • @therando42069
    @therando42069 2 роки тому

    Thank you, I don't know if you listened to me personally, but I'm glad you could do this topic!!

  • @yesman2948
    @yesman2948 2 роки тому +35

    I would like to see a video done on the final heavy tank ever sent to production and accepted into service (I think also might just be last made in general) the American M103. With its unique and odd looking design, its a wonder how the American heavy tanks changed looks so drastically over the years. I've heard quite a bit about how terrible they were.

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +1

      You mean American heavy? The Soviet T-10 was made in the 50's.

    • @diesirae8954
      @diesirae8954 2 роки тому

      Final American heavy*

    • @onebigfatguy
      @onebigfatguy 2 роки тому +4

      The M103 is really special in a way seeing as it's M58 cannon was one of the most powerful 120mm guns in the world at its time and was still so powerful 20 years later that it was a close contest between the M58 120mm and the M60 Pattons M68 105mm to see which gun that was going to be installed in the M1 Abrams.

    • @diesirae8954
      @diesirae8954 2 роки тому

      @@onebigfatguy Pretty sure the French 120mm was more powerful.

    • @onebigfatguy
      @onebigfatguy 2 роки тому +2

      @@diesirae8954 Doubt it. When they were doing tests to see if they could re-arm the M103 the US armored board sourced several different guns. If I remember the tests right the M58 smoked all of them and tied with the M68/L7 105mm so they just left the M58 as is.

  • @jaxrammus9165
    @jaxrammus9165 2 роки тому

    thank you for the upload and info dump, mr spooky

  • @leopy6534
    @leopy6534 10 місяців тому

    love these videos, ty algorythm for the channel

  • @correctedshredd
    @correctedshredd 2 роки тому

    Favorite UA-camr by far right now 💙

  • @Savior20061
    @Savior20061 Рік тому

    I've been binging these all day.

  • @Minute_Sniper
    @Minute_Sniper 2 роки тому +3

    It would cool if you made a video about the jagdpanzer iv/70 its one of my favourite tank and one of the least talked about

  • @dominiccari1405
    @dominiccari1405 2 роки тому +8

    The Fact that when you angle a jagtiger in front it can even bounce the heat shells
    In one game I used this and bounced like 20 or 25 shots 5 of them are heat shells but too bad we lost :(

  • @VKK-cr1uk
    @VKK-cr1uk 2 роки тому +5

    I really like these videos, I think you should one on either the IS-4, Amx50 (and all its variants) or the Conqueror, leaning to the latter two tho because you never really discussed french or British tanks

    • @TheKenji2221
      @TheKenji2221 2 роки тому

      The AMX 50 never saw production nor combat. It would be completely useless to make a video.
      The AMX 13 on the other hand would make a more interesting video

    • @Kalashnikov413
      @Kalashnikov413 2 роки тому +3

      @@TheKenji2221 the AMX 50 did saw production mate, it even participated in a military parade and one ''Surbaissé'' variant is still on display

  • @mrs9935
    @mrs9935 2 роки тому +15

    Alternate universe: jadgtiger is 6.3. What's the worst that could happen?

    • @theduck96
      @theduck96 2 роки тому +5

      erika starts playing the backround

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому +10

      Downtiered to 5.7… death of the universe.

    • @mrs9935
      @mrs9935 2 роки тому +8

      @@lawrence.ap28 P-47: Allow me to introduce myself.

    • @theduck96
      @theduck96 2 роки тому +1

      @@lawrence.ap28 tiger 1 downtiered to 4.0

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому

      @@mrs9935 I’d like to see that lol. Then we can call the jagdtiger the “boom box”

  • @khornatekrieger3023
    @khornatekrieger3023 2 роки тому +11

    When I was in Benning there was a shot up one of these in the armor yard. Had three smacks into it's front glacis and turret about the size of my first.

  • @CookieCommandGaming
    @CookieCommandGaming 2 роки тому

    I'd love to see you do a video on the Jagdpanzer IV. My favorite tank, plus it has an interesting history.

  • @ilikewarthunder8598
    @ilikewarthunder8598 2 роки тому

    Amazing video

  • @Real_Claudy_Focan
    @Real_Claudy_Focan 2 роки тому +3

    Again, ZF transmission werent the problem, only the people who used them (less experienced) and the HUUUGE workload required to properly maintain them
    Frontal transmission is a massive design flaw if you dont provide a generous access to it ! (Like on M42 chassis and M113)
    Otto Carius also scored the most with the JagdTiger ! His books provide a lot of feedback for this tank

    • @Kalashnikov413
      @Kalashnikov413 2 роки тому

      His books provide a lot of feedback for this tank and also complain about the issues regarding of this tank

  • @TheClord123
    @TheClord123 2 роки тому

    Day just started, spookston uploaded a new vid 15 min ago, yep, good start to the morning

  • @robertdevito5001
    @robertdevito5001 2 роки тому +3

    4:09
    A jagdtiger knocked out with a 1911, Saving Private Ryan critics eat your hearts out!

  • @Asaberyeen
    @Asaberyeen 2 роки тому +4

    Can you do an everything wrong with video on the Star Citizen Nova Tank? That'd be a neat watch

  • @jebbroham1776
    @jebbroham1776 2 роки тому +2

    The Jagdtiger is my favorite TD to run with due to its superb pen and excellent armor. It's slow to reload, but when I consistently get a kill every shot it's worth the tradeoff.

  • @reteppeter9742
    @reteppeter9742 2 роки тому +9

    Short answer: Giant waste of metal and fuel

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому +2

      Drop in the bucket considering how much they wasted on rockers etc.

  • @johnnytzovanovksy8354
    @johnnytzovanovksy8354 2 роки тому +3

    a really good idea would be how good/bad would be the churchill/cromwell/matilda because they played a significant role in WW2.

  • @albero319
    @albero319 2 роки тому +48

    That’s why I love WWII German war machines: over the top, unreliable and logistical nightmares, look like absolute monsters, and then you don’t even feel bad when you realize how bad they actually were on the battlefield, because you know, I quite like to know that the Nazis wasted money, time and resources on really cool museum pieces instead of contributing to the war effort.

    • @shadowraven3253
      @shadowraven3253 2 роки тому +11

      To give it some credit: it probably was the only german weapon that could take on the IS-3 (but didn't obviously). It's truly the smallest of advantages but it is one.

    • @waterdotzable
      @waterdotzable 2 роки тому +5

      Only really the jagdtiger fits the bill of actually being bad on the battlefield, and that was mostly because of poorly trained crews. The panther and tiger were overall pretty effective tanks and the tiger ii was effective whenever it actually managed to see combat. Even the Ferdinand was pretty good in it's role when it reached the battlefield, the Soviets were terrified of them

    • @lunatic_nebula9542
      @lunatic_nebula9542 2 роки тому +2

      @@waterdotzable yeah IF

    • @Ben-mw9vz
      @Ben-mw9vz 2 роки тому +1

      @@waterdotzable The soviets stopped being scared once their IL2s arrived, unimpeded because the luftwaffe is nowhere to be seen

    • @waterdotzable
      @waterdotzable 2 роки тому

      @@Ben-mw9vz doesn't really change how a tank crewman views that tank. With that logic American crews wouldn't have cared about facing tigers

  • @thegreatskinkpriest8104
    @thegreatskinkpriest8104 2 роки тому +5

    Imagine how many AT guns they could have made more the cost of one of these

  • @Sander117
    @Sander117 2 роки тому +1

    Idk if you ever done such thing but can you make a serie for beings to change about there settings to make it better.
    Like the plane thing where it doesnt correct you when you fly to low and all

  • @NapoleonBonaparte05
    @NapoleonBonaparte05 2 роки тому +1

    Hmm id like to see the SU SPG series. I like using those type of tanks

  • @matt2244
    @matt2244 2 роки тому

    That poor sherman at 3:46 and great video.

  • @sgtass1
    @sgtass1 2 роки тому

    Spookston, do you have any tips for playing these turretless TD's? I notice that I only do well with these things when I push aggressively on the more flat urban maps

  • @patwilson2546
    @patwilson2546 2 роки тому

    The best description that I have heard of the Jagdtiger is that it was an affront to logistics men everywhere.

  • @noahsawesomevids422
    @noahsawesomevids422 2 роки тому

    Awesome 😎

  • @kawaiiarchive357
    @kawaiiarchive357 2 роки тому +4

    I am saddened anytime a vehicle regardless of it's country of origin is produced just to be fielded and do nothing but become a heap of scrap metal.

  • @mystictomato9466
    @mystictomato9466 Рік тому +2

    It is interesting to add that previous to the famous Challenger longest scored kill which is the current record today. The previous record was set by a Jagdtiger, it killed an allied tank at almost 4km of distance. Insane for a WW2 tank. Thank the 128mm instead I guess.

  • @connorgormly3236
    @connorgormly3236 2 роки тому

    Waiting for this one

  • @darjeelingsama2523
    @darjeelingsama2523 2 роки тому

    I hope you will made a video about the Churchill too

  • @AlreadyTakenTag
    @AlreadyTakenTag 2 роки тому +2

    Spookston should just make an entire video where he only talks about apex gaming...

  • @AzukaSenseii
    @AzukaSenseii 2 роки тому

    I didnt realize it was a new video

  • @duke0salt717
    @duke0salt717 9 місяців тому

    Anyone else notice how aphe fragments no longer damage the engine, transmission, or breach of vehicles anymore. After rewatching these older videos I noticed the aphe seems more dangerous

  • @derangedoven7928
    @derangedoven7928 2 роки тому +4

    How bad was (insert late war german heavy anything)
    it was bad because (insert issue with engine or transmission here)
    also, inexperienced crew

  • @drache444444
    @drache444444 2 роки тому

    the thing why there was so little cannons for it was that they used the 80 leftover cannons from the maus project and i believe a few long barrel 88mm's

  • @michaeld2622
    @michaeld2622 2 роки тому

    I'm too absorbed with your Warthunder video lol

  • @skittlesbutwithchocolatein2274
    @skittlesbutwithchocolatein2274 2 роки тому

    looks scary I imagine the kick and the sound that big ole gun made

  • @jojonesjojo8919
    @jojonesjojo8919 2 роки тому +1

    I'm feeling that this tank needed to go on a serious diet. It had a very good long range gun, so it could forgo thick armour. It might just have needed bullet and shrapnel proof at the side (1.5cm) and back, and then anti tank rifle thickness at the front (5cm).
    Reckon you'd end up with a 45 tonne oddity which might have some niche role on the Eastern front.
    Maybe something to hold in penny packets in reserve 30km back. Activate them in case of a breakthrough. An excellent gun with a strong morale effect on a chassis engineered to carry 55 t and up. They would anchor the defence with flown in paratroopers acting as supporting infantry.
    What say you?

  • @brandor763
    @brandor763 2 роки тому

    Yay new speak torque upload

  • @oscarhf7569
    @oscarhf7569 2 роки тому

    Could you do a video on a Cold War era mbt? Could be cool

  • @HungarianPatriotGaming
    @HungarianPatriotGaming 2 роки тому +9

    German engineers tend to get lots of flak for designing vehicles that had overkill guns, unreasonably lots of armor, and were expensive. It is easy to see the flaws of their thinking in hindsight, however, from world war 1 up to the end of ww2, tanks continuously grew larger and stronger, year by year, sometimes even months by months. From the perspective of that age, designing a tank that had an overkill gun and an unreasonable amount of armor simply meant designing a tank 1 or at most 2 years into the future. The war ended before a worthy adversary (the IS-3, as the video states) to the JT's gun and armor was fielded by the Allies. Had the Germans faced the IS-3 in battle, the JT might have been much more appreciated than it really is, even with all its faults.Trying to be very reasonable, and designing vehicles for the given moment, like my own country did, meant designing vehicles that were obsolete by the time production even began, and expense of production doesn't mean much when the main issue is not the number of tanks that can be produced but fuel for them. It's odd that while the video vaguely mentions logistical and mechanical issues, it does not shed light on three major problems the JT, as well as all other super-heavies faced: most bridges could not support their weight, they could not be towed if they broke down, and transporting them via trains was very problematic.

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому +1

      Indeed. And the Germans were actually designing these things before the strategic situation changed. The Jagdtiger had a proto mock up in late 1943, when the Germans were still deep in Russia's wide open spaces.

    • @selfdo
      @selfdo 2 роки тому +1

      Tank classification changes to reflect the reality that the beasts were getting bigger. By 1949, for example, the US Army reclassified its AFVs, on the basis of their basis gun size...so 75 and 76 mm gun tanks were "light" (M24, M41 "Walker Bulldog"), 90 mm gun tanks (M26, M46, M47, and early M48s) were "medium" tanks, and 105 mm and 120 mm were "heavy" gun tanks (M103). Interesting that the M41 "light tank" was as heavy as the French Char B1 "Heavy" tank that preceded it by about 12 years.

  • @sgtpepper0spray
    @sgtpepper0spray 2 роки тому +4

    Speaking of German TDs, how about a video on the Jagdpanther? It seems to have been the most successful casemate design, with many of the issues of the early Panthers being eliminated. iirc, the majority of Jagdpanther losses were to crew scuttling or surrenders.

    • @Zorro9129
      @Zorro9129 2 роки тому +4

      Also the most aesthetically pleasing of tank destroyers.

  • @Quantomknight77
    @Quantomknight77 2 роки тому

    Hey Spookston, please make a vid bout the Dicker Max.

  • @jasonbrynn5633
    @jasonbrynn5633 2 роки тому +1

    The German heavy tanks where basically mass produced prototypes. The German tanks based off the tiger chassis where the basis of all modern tank design

  • @NOOBSLAYER-cw3gd
    @NOOBSLAYER-cw3gd 2 роки тому

    Otto Carius described the incredibly strong 128mm cannon in his autobiography.
    there was a Sherman hiding behind a house. Carius fired at the Sherman's position. The 128mm shell went through 2 walls and destroyed the Sherman.
    sorry for my bad English

  • @vladioanalexandru4222
    @vladioanalexandru4222 2 роки тому

    I had my volume muted and yet I still heard the intro music and the gun firing, expecting his voice to chime in. I guess I'm just too used to that.

  • @KiRiTO72987
    @KiRiTO72987 7 місяців тому

    @Spookston why the subnautica music in the background ?

  • @patrik011_sk8
    @patrik011_sk8 2 роки тому

    Babe wake up. Spookston just uploaded

  • @dquod6.096
    @dquod6.096 7 місяців тому

    I want to see this tank in Enlisted that would be crazy

  • @BL1TZY_YT
    @BL1TZY_YT 2 роки тому

    Can you do a talk about the E100 or Maus? i would like to see you talk about them

  • @frags7792
    @frags7792 2 роки тому

    Make a video about the Jagdpanther next.

  • @ToastToast
    @ToastToast 2 роки тому +1

    Furry?
    War Thunder?
    Genuinely an awesome channel?
    Instant sub.

  • @agentreece8140
    @agentreece8140 2 роки тому

    I just love hitting this thing in the tracks and penning the back hatch.

  • @serdarcam99
    @serdarcam99 2 роки тому +2

    German tank without transmission issue called wunderwaffe

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому

      It had a good gun, good armor, but couldn’t even drive itself off the production line

    • @serdarcam99
      @serdarcam99 2 роки тому +2

      @@lawrence.ap28 yeah coastal cannons has good gun and good armor too

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому

      @@serdarcam99 yeah and those don’t even NEED to move, they just do their job, unlike the jagdtiger which was SUPPOSED to be a landship, but it didn’t go very well…

  • @16.krjmonata74
    @16.krjmonata74 2 роки тому +9

    Interesting how you ignore its 400:1 kill ratio and experimental fin stabilized rounds

  • @haatonofthebasementoutofth276
    @haatonofthebasementoutofth276 2 роки тому +1

    Nothing better than having a Vehicle with overkill gun on your side. Make that baby go boom.
    Enemy CAS on the other side...

  • @Patches-vq8cd
    @Patches-vq8cd 2 роки тому +1

    Still waiting for a Churchill vid :( no love for the poor Churchill’s

  • @bloodwyn4184
    @bloodwyn4184 2 роки тому +1

    Next video idea: How ̶B̶a̶d̶ Good Was The M36?

  • @darthimperious8661
    @darthimperious8661 2 роки тому +3

    So basically it had all the issues of every German tank/Td from that time in the war but we aren’t gonna talk about the gun effectiveness or the armor effectiveness or it being a very strong defensive ambush td?

    • @christians.597
      @christians.597 2 роки тому +1

      if you dare to say someting good you are going to be wehraboo. just let them enjoy the roast..

    • @TheMeanLemon
      @TheMeanLemon 2 роки тому +1

      Which doesn't really mean anything if your tank just breaks down and doesn't work, which it often did, as Spookston said. It's becomes just a useless chunk of metal. You also can't talk about it's effectivenes when there are virtually no records of it being effective

    • @doktork3406
      @doktork3406 2 роки тому +2

      @@TheMeanLemon What is the point of the entire series then?
      Just slap an excel with click and drag with "unreliable, broke down" for an entire column and call it a day

    • @TheMeanLemon
      @TheMeanLemon 2 роки тому

      @@doktork3406 I mean the series is called "How bad was _________ "

    • @darthimperious8661
      @darthimperious8661 2 роки тому

      @@TheMeanLemon well yeah no shit but there’s always more to any tank than an engine and suspension

  • @reecewestmoreland6137
    @reecewestmoreland6137 2 роки тому +2

    by theoretical top speed do you mean if it was dropped of a cliff ?

    • @lyndoncmp5751
      @lyndoncmp5751 2 роки тому

      Watch the footage of them in Iserlohn or on the British testing ground. They are going along pretty fast. It surprised me.

  • @izul4223
    @izul4223 2 роки тому

    i feel like at some point its just better to have a pulled anti tank gun eventho it has less armour it works better with cover and lower profile

  • @ugarit5404
    @ugarit5404 2 роки тому +2

    Meanwhile Ferdinand is chilling at 6.7 along with Jagdtiger

  • @mikegolden3021
    @mikegolden3021 2 роки тому +1

    If you really want to know how bad the Jagdtiger was, read "The Combat History of German Heavy Anti-tank Unit 653 In World War II" This unit hated it. They started as a StugIII unit then got the Ferdinand which the really like once they learned how to use they. Later they got "up grated" to the Jagdtiger. Basic problem, reloading took to long; it was better at being used as artillery than tank hunting, 128mm (5 inch) shell makes a big boom.

  • @Elthenar
    @Elthenar 2 роки тому +1

    The Jagdtiger was great, as long as it was already in position and never had to be moved again.

  • @Spike_365
    @Spike_365 2 роки тому +3

    The question is.. was it worse than the l3/33 c

    • @Kalashnikov413
      @Kalashnikov413 2 роки тому

      Considering how many was produced, saw action, and variants produced, i'd say the L3 was slightly better

    • @Guy_GuyGuy
      @Guy_GuyGuy 2 роки тому

      The L3 was a very early 1930s tank that was comparable to what was being made by many countries at the time like the Pz I and TKS, it was just kept in service too long because Italy had limited industrial capability to produce anything that was much better. The Jagdtiger was a massively overkill tank destroyer built on the chassis of an already massively overkill heavy tank by a nation with ever-dwindling resources. The Jagdtiger was worse.

  • @irritated888
    @irritated888 2 роки тому

    The jagtiger was amazing. I had the highest kill to death ratio on that tank of all my WoT tanks.

  • @captinobvious4705
    @captinobvious4705 2 роки тому +3

    what actually is the point of putting a 128mm on this thing?
    the long 88 is already slightly overkill, the fuck is the point?!?!?!

  • @yeetmcgeet9998
    @yeetmcgeet9998 2 роки тому

    Dis is some good sthuf

  • @Ethan-kp4vz
    @Ethan-kp4vz 2 роки тому +3

    Did you get a graphics card?

    • @lawrence.ap28
      @lawrence.ap28 2 роки тому

      He talked about it in a previous video when his APEX sponsorship began, he has a 3090

    • @Ethan-kp4vz
      @Ethan-kp4vz 2 роки тому

      @@lawrence.ap28 oh ok

  • @crazywarriorscatfan9061
    @crazywarriorscatfan9061 2 роки тому

    Interesting