Go to ground.news/coneofarc to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Sign up or subscribe through my link for 30% OFF unlimited access if you support the mission and find it as useful as I do
Can you cover the porche JadgTiger 2, it's the one with the porshe styled suspension there's one in Bovington but i can not find info on the reasons why it was used other than it being experimental/available
Cool vid, as always! How about analyzing the TR-125 P? I'd like to see your opinion on this tank. I'm no expert on heavy military vehicles, but I'd say it is a pretty good hardware, even for nowadays standards.
I really challenge you to provide a primary source were it's written that Germans used five Famos on a single tank. Those fuckers had a towing capacity of 28 to 35 tons and a very powerful engine driven winch!
The prominent failure at Kursk with mines was due to stupidity of deployment. Specifically with the 653. s.Pz.Jg.Abt. It was with the if I recall correctly the 2. Panzer Divisions Pioneers where they were sent out to clear the mines. This Soviet shad defenses on top of hills and artillery observers, so each time the pioneers went to clear the mines, Soviet artillery would batter them. Some idiot made a decision to use the Ferdinand’s to charge into the minefield to clear a path. The Ferdinand’s particularity got hit by Soviet infantry because of the specific tenacity of the Soviet 15th Rifle Division. While the 15th rifle division utterly collapsed and died due to the 27 Tigers of the 505. s.Pz.Abt. and Infantry of the 6. infanterie Division, the north of the 15th Soviet rifle division held up much better, it was specifically ordered by the leader in area to stay in their trenches and let the tanks pass over them, once the tanks passed, pop back out and halting the incoming infantry. This effectively isolated the Ferdinand’s where they could be hit from the front, side, and rear, not only by infantry, but by anti tank infantry and light anti tank guns. It’s was due to the sheer tenacity and the Germans blunder that the Ferdinand’s faced particular losses here. It still boggle me why charging a whole battalion through a minefield was an acceptable idea, then the employment and use was just against the doctrine it was meant to do.
Ah, as opposed to the brilliant russian strategy of displaying utter incompetence, corrupt military leadership and embarassing oneself completely in front of the whole world, against a much, much smaller, militarily much weaker nation😂 @@KuK137
@@junibug6790they might be exageratting on numbers, but the new offensive on the south is (at the very least) terrible. Barely any gains, alot of casualties. And no, just cus I'm saying Ukraine is doing bad (on this part of the war) doesn't mean I support Russia.
The Ferdinand/Elefant may have the highest kill ratio, but it should've been used mainly as a Defensive Anti-Tank Weapon rather than what is was used for without infantry support in the Battle of Kursk
If so then it should be mobile, cause in defense the enemy decides where it attacks. It is a shit tank destroyer if it cant arrive in time to prepare an ambush and the kill count dosnt change that. Cause youre just adding 0:0 most of the time.
It WAS. Kursk only lasted a short period of July 1943. From August 1943, through 1944 and even into early 1945 the Ferdinand/Elefant WAS used very successfully in a defensive tank destroyer role by and large. A few even made it back to help defend Berlin.
@lyndoncmp5751 when the Elephant was given to former stug crews who used it like one it was very successful. They were able to pick their targets off at range it wasn't meant to be used like a tank despite the armour.
@@johnludmon7419 Exactly. After Kursk, the Ferdinand was used as a long range anti tank sniper, particularly in the defensive fighting of the River Dnieper bend battles. It took a long time for the rest of the Ferdinands to be lost. They lasted well into and through 1944 and even into 1945.
No, the highest Kill Ratio was the Commander of the Elephants unit... the Tiger P 003, that had the same new reliable engines and the 200 front armor like a elephant but more agile and with turret... but is was destroyed on a rush of an orde of T34s to hunt them from killing the tanks that tried to surround the Elephants... there was a lot of war histories about that tiger and there is even a movie, and actually we had real pictures about it, sad it was lost in the tundra.
As a retired heavy duty mechanic, who has worked a huge variety of equipment from small forklifts all the way up to massive mining equipment. I was pleasantly surprised when you spoke about the maintenance difficulties. A BIG Thank you for some of this info that is severely lacking on UA-cam videos! Well Done!
Fritz: Hans we need better transmission Hans: More armor you say ? Fritz: Nien better transmission Hans: Bigger cannon you say ? Fritz: Goddamn it Hans Hans: Oh battleship cannons Fritz: ..... Ja Hans JAAAAAA
Despite all its flaws, Ferdinand/Elephant remains as one of my two favorite tank destroyers from WW2 (the other being Hetzer). There's just something about its big size, quirky design, odd boxy look, and the history of being spawned from a losing tank design that just grab my interest... lol. x3
The Jag Tiger also…shite but a beautiful Metal Monster❤all zee German tanks r beautiful, they worshipped craftmanship, not reality If they had kept the war going somehow, who knows what those bigger is better cud of achieved… The maus, ratte, I’m guessing Hitler wud have ordered a skyscraper 🏙️ sized tank with 100ft diameter rounds to send zee Nazis to the moon to start on tht Giant Mirror whacked idea. The meth force was strong with them😅
The part of the Ferdinand/Elephant story i've never quite understood is how Porshe was able to get away with and also his confidence in getting the Tiger contract that 100 hulls were produced.
Because Porche considered himself a genius, which isn't being unkind. The man was rich within a highly hierarchical society, driven to skirt the Versailles treaty limitations & he had powerful political connections. Plus, the Nazis had a very loose, permissive relationship with German industry & the capitalist class. If the Nazis got their bribes & their weapons, they'd supply slaves & state money, & be largely hands off with the industrial sector.
@@TrollOfReason "capitalist class" Yeah no there was zero of that going on. The whole nationalization of all industry and economy, factory owners outside of a few inner fold folks having not even the right to fire someone, zero option to set prices as it was all dictated by the government, simply put there was ZERO just entire ZERO capitalism at play after National Socialists took power. And no Capitalism isn't where the government dictates every tiny detail with commerce because it isn't a different form of socialism just because you think so.
I remember seeing one of the surviving ones at Bovington Tank Museum next to the Tiger 2P. I had no idea it was on display that day and I've never been so excited...
That story with the exploding pz3 parts landing on top of the ferdinand setting it on fire is sad and funny at the same time.. how much bad luck can someone have
I love this tank destroyer. it gets a bad wrap but it is actually an awesome killing machine. As you said, it may be the most successful tank destroyer of the war. It is a truly creative unit, being both the result of innovation, rejection, and improvisation. To be tested under such conditions is highly unusual so this tank deserves the utmost respect.
@@rdallas81 There were only 90 Ferdinands, the STUG was some 10,000s of vehicles, so I don't know the ratio between them, but certainly the Ferdinand was a powerful weapon. Whether it was cost effective is another point.
I have the hardback version of the combat history of heavy tank destroyer battalion 653 and the research and photography in that book are second to none , wasn't cheap at £80 when published but worth every penny
I remember talking to a member of the 653rd. He said that between STuG, JgPz6(P), and Jagdtiger, the JgPz6(P) was the unit's favorite. It was a bit overweight, but it was significantly better than Jagdtiger with a more efficient gun, it was more survivable and comfortable than STuG, and when they needed to bail out, everyone had a better chance to. My opinion of it is; of the heavy SPG's, it was probably the best; it's biggest issue being a heavy SPG, which was just a bad class to exist. Argument could be made for ISU series being better, but the driver and gunner situations are really bad
Hey Cone, have you done a video on the Jagdpanzer 38(t)? If not, i would love to see one. From what ive seen, it doenst really get too much attention, and i just love the Hetzer so much to not hear its history
What? Doesn't get much attention? Everyone and their brother has done a video or two about the Jagdpanzer 38(t) except for Cone. Multiple videos from Chieftain, both major tank museums in Europe, Military History Visualized, Spookston, and more. Go to almost any of them to learn why it's also not really called a Hetzer as well. ua-cam.com/users/results?search_query=jagdpanzer+38(t)
It would’ve been much more reliable if they just gave it a 3.0 litre air cooled, 6-cylinder boxer mounted behind the rear axle driving the rear wheels.
As it mention in the video, the Engine was proven, since it has been used in Panzer III and IV But the rush conversion cause lot of issue, like fuel and engine overheating do to bad layout Also since it was a Hybrid, the one who move the tank was electric motor not the engine it self
@@roastedsand5917 It wasn't a hybrid, it was a petrol-electric drive. A hybrid, in one way or another, uses both an ICE and electric motor to drive the vehicle. A petrol-electric just uses a gas engine to generate electricity, it serves no other purpose
@@filmandfirearms yeah i know that, i should say Petrol-Electric But it slip into my mind about that BMW hybrid car i saw on TV when write that comment, so i write Hybrid instead Petrol-Electric 😅😂
What speaks volumes to me is the fact that even with the known problems they had and the scheduling of the refitting is the fact they were held in place to fight rather than being sent back. To me that means the issues were nowhere near 'fatal flaws' territory and merely 'maintenance pig' headaches.
Problem is that nearly every vehicle nowadays can mount ATGMs, so the line between what is a dedicated tank destroyer is and an IFV is blurred very hard.
@@dannyzero692 Which is why the term "Tank Destroyer" isn't really used anymore, except in some BS games. The West German Jaguar might have been the last one.
@@whya2ndaccount still is actually otherwise the hell do you call those strykers with 105 mm guns? Or those pandur 2 with 105 mm guns ordered by the Philippines? Theyd be dedicated tank destroyer
@@augustuslunasol10thapostle The MGS was not designed to engage tanks. They were designed for strong point reduction etc. The real world has moved on, but feel free to stick with your "Waste of Time" or "War Chunder" BS definitions.
Nicely done. First rule of armored warfare: be mobile. Ferdinand was nowhere close. German Heavy Units ALL had seriously inflated kill ratios. It was misused at Kursk and suffered significant losses. It was a waste of resources. Heavy armored units required far more maintenance personnel and Ferdinand’s spent too much time offline and being transported hundreds of miles for refitting. How many StuG Battalions could you have traded for those 91 Ferdinands?
"How many StuG Battalions could you have traded for those 91 Ferdinands?" Given you had all these Tiger P hulls already built with Porsche's own money, not many, because the StuG factory probably can't just take heavy tank hulls and make StuGs out of them. Maybe from the scrap value, you could have turned 91 Ferdinands into a dozen StuGs.
The Elephant is at Fort Lee, which also has a German railway gun (you can see that one from the roadside) and is close to the Petersburg National Battlefield Park.
I'd say the "fire warning" was more of a warning given to the crews getting blown out of proportion after the fact. After all, most soldiers saw the Ferdy getting repairs more than in the thick of combat. Add on top of that, that the crews likely kept complaining about all the flaws they encountered, and it will absolutely "tanking" the reputation.
Imagine being the radio operator during the battle of Kursk: you can't do anything except use the radio, you're stuck at the front with the overheating stressed engine, you are in the most vulnerable position and can't see much of the outside world😔
To be fair, the radioman also had a machinegun, and was sitting behind a 200mm thick wall of armour. It wouldn't have been a great place to be, but as long as your unit isn't ordered ro change straight through a minefield and get itself surrounded by antifa... oh, wait... yeah, no, I wouldn't want to be a radioman in one of these things either.
@@gustaveliasson5395 That's the point you are missing - he didn't have a machine gun. Originally these vehicles didn't have an MG, it was only added later during the refurbishment back at the factory.
Good video man, learned a lot. The Ferdinand is one of those axis vehicles I knew about, but didnt really know about most of the details/specifications. I have always been a Porsche guy, so I love hearing more about the brain that created these beastly wartime machines. Respect to German engineering (the transmissions dont count lol)
Despite its issues, I'm a big fan of the Elephant. Like all German heavy armor of WWII, highly effective when operational but often needing extensive maintenance. I built a model of an Italian Elephant that I recently posted on my UA-cam channel.
It was an informative and wonderful introduction video about Ferdinand anti-tank vehicles ..German designed it as a fast responsive to the ward's higher quantity of Soviets T-34 tanks in east front... thank you for sharing
I always wondered why they built these things instead of just building the hulls into complete Tiger P tanks instead since that seems like it would’ve been easier, quicker and that the better tested Tiger P design would theoretically have less issues.
Because that electrical transmission was a pipedream. Germany did not have the resources to build it and still supply the U-boats with their electrical engines. And the Kriegsmarine was very vocal in telling the Heer it could f off with stealing their stuff.
The 88mm gun is mounted within a casement which sits atop the superstructure which of course is affixed to the chassis. I flinched when the narrator called the casemate a superstructure. The hull and suspension make up the chassis.
From being young enough to read through books with my granpa I remember falling in love with this vehicle, it’s so unashamedly hideous and such a characteristically brutal response the advances of allied forces
The Ferdinand also know as the Elefant was effective but used as an Assault tank without Infantry cover was extremely vulnerable, in short it was cost effective to use converted hulls but not really cost effective. Though Germany could never outproduce the US and Soviet Union it did work well as a defensive tank.
I still love it though, I love imperfection, it’s ridiculous, as is life. It’s a fighting vehicle that helped me fall in love with German armored vehicles. She was my gateway, she showed me why the designs need balance, stats don’t matter…..🥰
When playing micro tank tabletop warfare we found the best way to utilise the Elephant/Ferdinand was a long range tank destroyer as the frontal armour was given a heavy bias and the gun was rated A+ too so giving it a very good defensive position or a long range offensive position. The only downside was it was slow and the nimble T34/76 or T34/85 could without infantry support get in close to the Elephant quite quickly and then heap damage and destruction against it. If however you mixed it up with anti tank guns and infantry support it was a difficult target to assail as the armour and gun gave it amazing defensive capabilities
Being tired as it's morning here, I was wondering why the heck the germans had a lot of holes left over. Then it clicked Cone had said Hull's and not Holes 😸
As a long range, defensive artillery, weapon, they worked well.where they had to move as little as possible! Probably explains the high kill ratio?🤷🏻♂️
4 of only 91 being lost just due to engine fires is totally meme worthy. For a normal vehicle, that’d mean thousands would have been lost due to this design flaw.
How to create a problem where there isn't one: "what are we going to do with all these tiger P chassis?" "What do you mean? Just finish them, put the Krupp turret on there and send them out" "well that doesn't seem very complicated? we're going to need a different plan."
I love how many photos from that era you have included here. For me personally, they make the content so much more entertaining. Prob the same for you and the reasoning for why you've included them lol... Meh , I'm an idiot.
The greatest flaw was the lack of combat testing. The inability to reduce some of the issues with the design, together with its assault talk role, doomed much of its further use.
You have a tank which is used best in a defensive, hidden position and kill the enemy at big range. Both, being hidden and being far away, lessens the need for big armor. Staying with 100mm and simply angling it at 45° would protect the tank against 98% the enemy can field. This would save at least 5-6 tons of weight. And a tank destroyer, which always needs to face an enemy don't need much side armour, also saving like 5 tons...
@@TheKamiran85 incorrect, the Ferdinand/Elefant was an offensive vehicles explicitly stated as a offensive vehicle and used as an offensive vehicle. Many people do not understand the doctrine of a tank destroyer, let alone a Heavy Tank Destroyer special role. As stated by German doctrine, a Heavy Tank Destroyer is not a towed gun, it is NOT a static weapon platform and should not be used as such. It is a mobile element. Now what makes it offensive? It’s an Breakthrough Support vehicle. When on offensive breakthrough is to be commenced, speed, surprise and firepower are needed to crush the enemy. Speed puts the enemy in a state of shock allowing for exploitation, surprise catches the enemy off guard and unprepared, firepower allows the destruction of enemy assets. What are the man components of a breakthrough? The tank specifically made for that, Heavy Breakthrough Tanks, Tigers. If not available, then just medium tank. The breakthrough tanks gain in its simplest form is to destroy the enemy defense and make a gap in the enemy defensive line for exploitation. Now where does the Elefant come in? Well, when breakthrough tanks attempt to make a breakthrough, what might the enemy do? They’d likely send tanks as a countermeasure. Why is this an issue for breakthrough tanks? Breakthrough tanks are to focus on making a breakthrough, creating a gap in the enemy line, the more time they spend fighting, the more time is wasted and enemy reserves can replace losses, they can regroup and reorganize a defense making the attack fail, they can allow time for better rear line defenses so that if the frontline breaks though, it’s grinds to a halt and becomes stagnant by the next defensive line. Additionally fighting enemy tanks mean potentially higher losses of friendly tanks, thus meaning loss in overall firepower, less firepower means it’s less capabilities to breakthrough, weaker capabilities means less chance to win, or more time wasted to win. Lastly surprise, the more time is wasted, the less surprise takes effect, if the attack takes too long because the breakthrough tanks now have to deal with enemy tanks and the front line defenses, the enemy is not in a much larger advantage. Ferdinand/Elefant are to relieve the workload on the breakthrough tanks, they are to go on the offensive WITH breakthrough tanks, when enemy tanks are to arrive to counter the breakthrough force, the heavy tank destroyers would relieve the stress and deal with enemy tanks while the breakthrough force focuses on destroying enemy defenses quickly. That is THE purpose of ALL German Heavy tank destroyers including the Jagdpanther, and Jagdtiger, even in 1944 with Wacht am Rhein (Battle of the Bulge), the Jagdtiger was deployed there for specifically that purpose. The reason it has thick armor is because it’s a frontline vehicle made for the offensive assault, it is NOT an assault gun, it’s a tank destroyer meant to support friendly breakthrough tanks by reducing their workload. It’s purpose is best suited for the offensive, it was used in the offensive well when the idiotic generals didn’t fuck up the doctrine, and it does well in a defensive. It is NOT a defensively orientated vehicle
"Germany send 11 elephants to the Italy" - it seems sending small, almost useless amounts of tanks to their allies is a long standing tradition in Germany.
I'm in the "it should never have seen the light of day" camp. This vehicle was hampered by its design, for sure, but any armour needs to be recoverable. The fact that its introduction was not accompanied by the introduction of an engineering vehicle capable of rescuing it, was a significant logistical error. Had they turned twenty of the hulls into engineering vehicles, they probably would have had a great battlefield asset, but in the German Army of WW2, logistics was for mugs,,,
I can see the sense in trying to quickly field weapons like the Ferdinand, elephants, and Tigers instead of more panzer 4s or panthers. The Panther was very vulnerable on the sides also, and most elephants "knocked out" only had armor spalling not penetration, even from 120mm guns that liquified some of the crew and damaged wiring etc but were returned to combat. Adding 10% more weight in more armor is simple to prevent the fires in the first place. A total re-design and re-tool isn't when you are about to loose half your country to the communists. It's just the mathematics of a very limited supply chain in a nation fighting far away from the factory with rapidly dwindling limited strategic resources that does not have air supremacy. Fighting against the U.S. and britian who gained mastery of the seas, and whose production and quality was rapidly INCREASING. It takes far more time and limited resources to build and field 2 or 3 weaker tanks that one Tiger or Ferdinand could equal 5 or 6 of in a fight. Also, it was known that the allies that could build good heavy tanks were overseas and the ships and dock cranes, transporters etc weren't up to the task. They were shoving the Russians pretty hard making it difficult for them to field newer heavy tanks, however they did need an answer to the ones the Russians did have. The much celebrated T34 wasn't actually as tough of a nut to crack, reliable or efficient in combat as commonly believed, on a one on one basis it was a higher end substandard design that won by overwhelming numbers. A costly tactic that very nearly DIDN'T work. Especially after upgunned panzers arrived. More T34s were killed by sub 75mm than anything else. Therefore, what was needed was an answer to IS etc. If you can't outproduce and out field them you have to be 4x as good, quickly enter the Ferdinand and Elephant, ruined by tactics, and necessity of miss application. The Achilles heel of Germany was overcomplication and lack of serviceability of design. The Western Allies could afford to mass produce a fairly decent tank at the start of the war that was by far the best mechanically and could be heavily modified. Let's remember the sheer psycological effect the German heavies had, guys were seeing Tigers everywhere, every German tank was a Tiger. The dang things are so completely awe inspiring it persists until today, psy ops and propaganda works both ways. It bolstered German hearts to see them at work, and made the allies nervously look around every corner for one. let's remember boys and girls, Germany was puny compared to the U.S. let alone the rest of the allies, and it VERY nearly worked! so much that so we still discuss it with reverence today. Bill Mauldin said you can call your enemy any dirty word except stupid! No allied tank commander ever saw a Tiger come crashing out of the woods, it's commander grinning from ear to ear, and laughed his butt off, slapping the turret and said "look Joe! Those stupid Jerrys just fielded another Tiger!" I can tell you what Michael Wittman thought looking down his 88 when he saw Shermans! There's probably been more models of, more books about, and videos of Tigers proudly displayed on AMERICAN bookshelves than any other tank combined! WW2 was a 10% war, 10% more time, better engieering, training, total production, air defence, and resources would have made a terrifying difference. Almighty God Himself had something to say about the fall of the Nazis.
Because the tanks were supposed to be used as Tank destroyers, not Assault Guns. But the army lacking any big tanks with thicc armour and big guns needed breakthrough vehicles so the Ferdis were used as Assault Guns instead. A role they were not intended for. The Germans should've taken a few hulls to design as assault guns (maybe using a 105mm gun instead of an 8.8cm gun) for breakthrough vehicles.
@@HunterSteel29 Yeah, all i'm saying is in hindsight, maybe the application of the American doctrine of putting at least one machine gun on every single vehicle that was put into service would have been wise. I'm sure Germany still had the industry to churn out mg 34s.
@@JoeyyDoesLifeYou're talking about a nation whose main combat arm was a bolt action rifle , who only issued automatic weapons to squad and platoon leaders , which still was using horse drawn wagons to haul most of their stuff around. And adding hull machine guns wouldn't have helped. You can't use a Tank Destroyer as an assault gun regardless whether or not it has machine guns or not.
The Ferdinands were committed too quickly and at Kursk the Panthers had severe problems as well. The Germans had created perfect defensive tanks but not in the numbers needed, thankfully.
I saw the US Ferdinand at Aberdeen Proving Grounds when it still had the white paint before restoration. I hate that these vehicles are in museums that aren.t open to the public.
Maaaaan idc if this thing has mechanical problems, the Ferdinand is a man among boys in war thunder. God, I love that slow ass giant hunk of metal. It might be slow, huge, and an enormous target. But it hits hard as fuck and can be very difficult to get to its weak spots. Love taking out noobs with this beast.
While it's true that many were lost relatively quickly this isn't something exclusive to the Ferdinand. Many other German tanks were lost in even greater numbers during that offensive. The reason the losses seem greater for the Ferdinand is because less were produced to begin with.
@@ConeOfArc Thats my point, it wasnt the sheer number of losses it was the proportion of losses, the Germans lost 10% of their tanks overall in the battle (323 of about 3,000) but the Ferdinand alone accounted for close to 20% of the losses despite it making up only around around 2% of the armour present.
The Tank Destroyer did not die in WW II. I think it was Chieftain who made the best point in that regard. A tank destroyer has low armour, good firepower to take out enemy tanks in a single strike if possible, and high enough speed to get into a good firing position and getting the hell out after firing. So, one could make a very good point that actually the Tank Destroyer just changed platform. From a tracked vehicle - to an attack helicopter.
The idea of Tank destroyer as an Armored vehicle, dedicated to that role died after WW2, since modern, or coldwar, tanks could now balance strong firepower and a good speed, so there is no reason to design tank destroyer, which only advantage is a cheaper cost, now Like other tank concept that died after the war, heavy, light. Etc. There are simply no reason to build a tank dedicate to 1 taskwhen you could just create a platform that could do it all
@@RedXlVthat is debatable, as most modern armored vehicle that is equipped with ATGMs are no design dedicated to tank hunting role, but just a weapon to defend itsself if it went face to face with a tank
@@imreallynoob8311 You're living up to your nickname, because you are entirely missing the point. The concept didn't die, it evolved. That's like saying "the idea of the tank died" when comparin Mark I to a modern MBT. Or "No nation needs a navy anymore" when comparing modern task forces to dreadnought fleets of the past.
@@DGARedRaven you are wrong comparing this with ship and tanks, the concept of tank itself as an mobile armored unit didnt fell out of favor The battleships are indeed obsolete, and has been since ww2 That dosent mean the entire existance of navy is needed Tank destroyer is a type of tank made for 1 mission, and as we generalise our tanks to a multi mission one, tanks that are dedicated to 1 mission no longer existed
The problem with the Ferdinand was that the whole concept was flawed and the Heer didn’t want it. They were forced to accept it and fit it into their battle planning. It soaked up too many resources and was too limited in its capabilities to be of much use. In short, there wasn’t much it could do that couldn’t already be done by a carriage mounted 88mm PaK43.
Yes, after reading the comments and of course watching your video. Using it as an assault tank was hair brained. Defensively, with decent air cover and supply of parts, it seems to have been useful. Nevertheless, for all of the Tigers, Ferd's and Panzers, produced. One can't help but wonder how many more Stugs and Panzer IV's, they could have produced.
What's interesting is that the Historican Herman Töppel had the chance to talk to a lot of German tankers who serverd in various vehicles, like the Tiger I, Panther and also the Ferdinand. He mentioned that the Ferdinand crews actually liked the tank quite a bit. Most likely due to the security the tank provided due to the thick armor and powerfull gun. Mechanically the tank might have been a night mare but if you know that your tank is difficult to destroy I guess that counts for something. Töppel also mentioned that the Russians have been pretty impressed by Ferdinand as well. Not so much by the Panther though.
@@kelvisshandei Possible. I think it had more to do with the whole tank. The Panther was rushed in to service and mechanically very unreliable. A lot of issues have been solved with later versions but some remained till the end of the war. I also think the Soviets have been kinda unimpressed by the caliber of the Panther, as their tanks started to use larger calibers, even for their medium tanks like the 85mm gun or when you look at the IS2. While the Panther had exceptional penetration for the size of the gun it lacked somewhat in the ability to effectively fight soft targets with high explosive shells. I think the Soviets simply had different design principles in mind at that point.
The debut on Kursk saw minefields 3-5 Km deep, all covered by MG's , mortars, AT guns, with hordes of artillery waiting as last so not spoil the mines. A big reserve of T-34 's wait for their timely need if you break in. No wonder things did not go well for the brutes.
I can’t but to think that Germany should’ve made more use of captured enemy tanks by installing a quality German designed and made turret/main gun. This would’ve allowed them to have a tank with a heavily armored turret and a deadly main gun that had room for an upgrade if they wanted to install a more powerful main gun. And since most Russian tanks were diesel powered, this would allow Germany to make synthetic diesel fuel from seed oils and anything else that would pass as diesel. The Russians quit counting how many T-34’s they made at 35,000 so it’s safe to say they (Germany) would have a good amount of vehicles and spare parts to draw from, lol. It’s mind boggling how poorly German tanks were designed for ease of maintenance but, back then we were still developing design priorities but the Sherman showed excellent maintenance design as if the engineers focused on this as their first priority and it had a huge impact. Thank you for taking time to produce this video, you covered some interesting aspects many skim over.
The Porsche Tiger used a weird power system. The Elephant / Ferdinand could function as a self-propelled tank destroyer, from an overwatch position, using the range of the 88 to knock out enemy tanks before they could reply. To employ it in the assault gun role threw away this advantage, while the lack of any close-in weapons (machine-guns) left it vulnerable in situations like Kursk if infantry escorts were lost. Too heavy, too difficult to recover during retreats, too much resources consumed for limited deployability. The JagdPanther was a better attempt.
THIS WAS A MOBILE HOWITZER NOT A TANK BUSTER! Though when used to go after tanks it did bust the other tanks up. This was the original modern American 108s
Go to ground.news/coneofarc to stay fully informed on breaking news, compare coverage and avoid media bias. Sign up or subscribe through my link for 30% OFF unlimited access if you support the mission and find it as useful as I do
Can you cover the porche JadgTiger 2, it's the one with the porshe styled suspension there's one in Bovington but i can not find info on the reasons why it was used other than it being experimental/available
Cool vid, as always! How about analyzing the TR-125 P? I'd like to see your opinion on this tank. I'm no expert on heavy military vehicles, but I'd say it is a pretty good hardware, even for nowadays standards.
Hey,can you please do a jagdtiger video
I really challenge you to provide a primary source were it's written that Germans used five Famos on a single tank. Those fuckers had a towing capacity of 28 to 35 tons and a very powerful engine driven winch!
@@HaVoC117X as the pop-up said in the video there is a photograph of it happening
The German solution to the Ferdinand reliability problems is to add more weight to it
Fixing complexity *with MORE complexity the German way!*
they took “bigger is better” a bit too seriously
They say that the german tank weight graphic only goes up
They were big fans of Giles Corey.
@@warlloverespanol2897As for any other country.
The prominent failure at Kursk with mines was due to stupidity of deployment.
Specifically with the 653. s.Pz.Jg.Abt.
It was with the if I recall correctly the 2. Panzer Divisions Pioneers where they were sent out to clear the mines. This Soviet shad defenses on top of hills and artillery observers, so each time the pioneers went to clear the mines, Soviet artillery would batter them. Some idiot made a decision to use the Ferdinand’s to charge into the minefield to clear a path.
The Ferdinand’s particularity got hit by Soviet infantry because of the specific tenacity of the Soviet 15th Rifle Division. While the 15th rifle division utterly collapsed and died due to the 27 Tigers of the 505. s.Pz.Abt. and Infantry of the 6. infanterie Division, the north of the 15th Soviet rifle division held up much better, it was specifically ordered by the leader in area to stay in their trenches and let the tanks pass over them, once the tanks passed, pop back out and halting the incoming infantry. This effectively isolated the Ferdinand’s where they could be hit from the front, side, and rear, not only by infantry, but by anti tank infantry and light anti tank guns.
It’s was due to the sheer tenacity and the Germans blunder that the Ferdinand’s faced particular losses here.
It still boggle me why charging a whole battalion through a minefield was an acceptable idea, then the employment and use was just against the doctrine it was meant to do.
@@KuK137Looks like we just found Putin's personal UA-cam account 😂
Huh...
Sounds identical to the current Russian tactic in Ukraine lmao
Ah, as opposed to the brilliant russian strategy of displaying utter incompetence, corrupt military leadership and embarassing oneself completely in front of the whole world, against a much, much smaller, militarily much weaker nation😂 @@KuK137
Desperate,but Kursk is very early on the war ,They still have few offensive after Kursk aren't they?
@@junibug6790they might be exageratting on numbers, but the new offensive on the south is (at the very least) terrible. Barely any gains, alot of casualties.
And no, just cus I'm saying Ukraine is doing bad (on this part of the war) doesn't mean I support Russia.
The Ferdinand/Elefant may have the highest kill ratio, but it should've been used mainly as a Defensive Anti-Tank Weapon rather than what is was used for without infantry support in the Battle of Kursk
If so then it should be mobile, cause in defense the enemy decides where it attacks. It is a shit tank destroyer if it cant arrive in time to prepare an ambush and the kill count dosnt change that. Cause youre just adding 0:0 most of the time.
It WAS. Kursk only lasted a short period of July 1943. From August 1943, through 1944 and even into early 1945 the Ferdinand/Elefant WAS used very successfully in a defensive tank destroyer role by and large. A few even made it back to help defend Berlin.
@lyndoncmp5751 when the Elephant was given to former stug crews who used it like one it was very successful. They were able to pick their targets off at range it wasn't meant to be used like a tank despite the armour.
@@johnludmon7419
Exactly. After Kursk, the Ferdinand was used as a long range anti tank sniper, particularly in the defensive fighting of the River Dnieper bend battles. It took a long time for the rest of the Ferdinands to be lost. They lasted well into and through 1944 and even into 1945.
No, the highest Kill Ratio was the Commander of the Elephants unit... the Tiger P 003, that had the same new reliable engines and the 200 front armor like a elephant but more agile and with turret... but is was destroyed on a rush of an orde of T34s to hunt them from killing the tanks that tried to surround the Elephants... there was a lot of war histories about that tiger and there is even a movie, and actually we had real pictures about it, sad it was lost in the tundra.
As a retired heavy duty mechanic, who has worked a huge variety of equipment from small forklifts all the way up to massive mining equipment. I was pleasantly surprised when you spoke about the maintenance difficulties. A BIG Thank you for some of this info that is severely lacking on UA-cam videos! Well Done!
Fritz: Hans we need better transmission
Hans: More armor you say ?
Fritz: Nien better transmission
Hans: Bigger cannon you say ?
Fritz: Goddamn it Hans
Hans: Oh battleship cannons
Fritz: ..... Ja Hans JAAAAAA
German engineering in a nutshell
Its actually spelled nein and not nien.
@@johnnycab8986for real. All I see are comments spewing the same, wrong, misconceptions that are debunked in the video.
Ah yes, a tankfish reference
Despite all its flaws, Ferdinand/Elephant remains as one of my two favorite tank destroyers from WW2 (the other being Hetzer). There's just something about its big size, quirky design, odd boxy look, and the history of being spawned from a losing tank design that just grab my interest... lol. x3
StuG 3 Aufs G
@@romaboo6218 Your mother. Stug III wasnt big, quirky nor designed on a chassis of a failed tank.
@@romaboo6218 StuG isn't a Tank Destroyer, its an Assault Gun.
My favourites are rarely the best, something doesn’t have to be good to be endearing!
@@Paciat the hetzer was smaller than a stug
Always loved the elephant despite its many flaws it was a powerful and wicked looking beast.
"wicked looking"? It's a good thing that has absolutely nothing to do with combat effectiveness.
The Jag Tiger also…shite but a beautiful Metal Monster❤all zee German tanks r beautiful, they worshipped craftmanship, not reality
If they had kept the war going somehow, who knows what those bigger is better cud of achieved…
The maus, ratte, I’m guessing Hitler wud have ordered a skyscraper 🏙️ sized tank with 100ft diameter rounds to send zee Nazis to the moon to start on tht Giant Mirror whacked idea.
The meth force was strong with them😅
Its motor and Transmission are the biggest flaws, however it wouldve been REALLY good as defensive T.D.,
The part of the Ferdinand/Elephant story i've never quite understood is how Porshe was able to get away with and also his confidence in getting the Tiger contract that 100 hulls were produced.
Because Porche considered himself a genius, which isn't being unkind. The man was rich within a highly hierarchical society, driven to skirt the Versailles treaty limitations & he had powerful political connections. Plus, the Nazis had a very loose, permissive relationship with German industry & the capitalist class.
If the Nazis got their bribes & their weapons, they'd supply slaves & state money, & be largely hands off with the industrial sector.
You should definitely watch my previous video on the Tiger (P) in that case. The common misconception that he ordered them without approval is wrong
Porsche was very close to the 3rd reich, that was no penalty was given
@@TrollOfReason "capitalist class" Yeah no there was zero of that going on. The whole nationalization of all industry and economy, factory owners outside of a few inner fold folks having not even the right to fire someone, zero option to set prices as it was all dictated by the government, simply put there was ZERO just entire ZERO capitalism at play after National Socialists took power. And no Capitalism isn't where the government dictates every tiny detail with commerce because it isn't a different form of socialism just because you think so.
@@ConeOfArc
That is fair, & I'm guilty of hyperbole & lying for children. Sorry.
I remember seeing one of the surviving ones at Bovington Tank Museum next to the Tiger 2P. I had no idea it was on display that day and I've never been so excited...
That story with the exploding pz3 parts landing on top of the ferdinand setting it on fire is sad and funny at the same time.. how much bad luck can someone have
23:16 HE SAID THE LINE, HE SAID IT!
The biggest enemy is a slight incline or a hill.
But still a 5-10% loss rate due to engine fires is not positive.
No it isn't, but a 10:1 plus kill ratio very much is.
I love this tank destroyer. it gets a bad wrap but it is actually an awesome killing machine. As you said, it may be the most successful tank destroyer of the war. It is a truly creative unit, being both the result of innovation, rejection, and improvisation. To be tested under such conditions is highly unusual so this tank deserves the utmost respect.
That title belongs to STUG.
@@rdallas81 There were only 90 Ferdinands, the STUG was some 10,000s of vehicles, so I don't know the ratio between them, but certainly the Ferdinand was a powerful weapon. Whether it was cost effective is another point.
"Slowest Porsche ever."
I have the hardback version of the combat history of heavy tank destroyer battalion 653 and the research and photography in that book are second to none , wasn't cheap at £80 when published but worth every penny
I remember talking to a member of the 653rd. He said that between STuG, JgPz6(P), and Jagdtiger, the JgPz6(P) was the unit's favorite. It was a bit overweight, but it was significantly better than Jagdtiger with a more efficient gun, it was more survivable and comfortable than STuG, and when they needed to bail out, everyone had a better chance to. My opinion of it is; of the heavy SPG's, it was probably the best; it's biggest issue being a heavy SPG, which was just a bad class to exist. Argument could be made for ISU series being better, but the driver and gunner situations are really bad
Hey Cone, would you ever do a series or video on the Italian tank destroyers of WW2?
Id like to see that
Name one. Betcha can't.
@@frenzalrhomb6919 M43 75/46
Semovente @@frenzalrhomb6919
75/34 m43
great video, i learned a bunch about the Ferdinand
You know a tank is bad when the Jagdtiger is more reliable.
😂
Ferdinand was one of my favourite tanks tho
I got to see the Ferdinand in Ft. Lee while I was there. it was truly a sight to behold!
Hey Cone, have you done a video on the Jagdpanzer 38(t)? If not, i would love to see one. From what ive seen, it doenst really get too much attention, and i just love the Hetzer so much to not hear its history
What? Doesn't get much attention? Everyone and their brother has done a video or two about the Jagdpanzer 38(t) except for Cone. Multiple videos from Chieftain, both major tank museums in Europe, Military History Visualized, Spookston, and more. Go to almost any of them to learn why it's also not really called a Hetzer as well.
ua-cam.com/users/results?search_query=jagdpanzer+38(t)
Why you hetzin' bro?@@wolfehoffmann2697
The hetzer is likely the most talked about tank destroyer.
I love the Ferdinand in warthunder . They need to Get Porsche some credit of this amazing sexy tank
It would’ve been much more reliable if they just gave it a 3.0 litre air cooled, 6-cylinder boxer mounted behind the rear axle driving the rear wheels.
As it mention in the video, the Engine was proven, since it has been used in Panzer III and IV
But the rush conversion cause lot of issue, like fuel and engine overheating do to bad layout
Also since it was a Hybrid, the one who move the tank was electric motor not the engine it self
And called the 911?😂
@@roastedsand5917 It wasn't a hybrid, it was a petrol-electric drive. A hybrid, in one way or another, uses both an ICE and electric motor to drive the vehicle. A petrol-electric just uses a gas engine to generate electricity, it serves no other purpose
@@filmandfirearms yeah i know that, i should say Petrol-Electric
But it slip into my mind about that BMW hybrid car i saw on TV when write that comment, so i write Hybrid instead Petrol-Electric 😅😂
@@JoshuaC923 Ferdinand Carrera
What speaks volumes to me is the fact that even with the known problems they had and the scheduling of the refitting is the fact they were held in place to fight rather than being sent back. To me that means the issues were nowhere near 'fatal flaws' territory and merely 'maintenance pig' headaches.
hello coneofarc i have been watching your youtube channel for a while now and i wanted to thank you for making such good videos!
Arguably tank destroyers have continued, they are just now armed with ATGMs instead of guns.
There's relatively few ATGM-only vehicles these days.
Problem is that nearly every vehicle nowadays can mount ATGMs, so the line between what is a dedicated tank destroyer is and an IFV is blurred very hard.
@@dannyzero692 Which is why the term "Tank Destroyer" isn't really used anymore, except in some BS games. The West German Jaguar might have been the last one.
@@whya2ndaccount still is actually otherwise the hell do you call those strykers with 105 mm guns? Or those pandur 2 with 105 mm guns ordered by the Philippines? Theyd be dedicated tank destroyer
@@augustuslunasol10thapostle The MGS was not designed to engage tanks. They were designed for strong point reduction etc.
The real world has moved on, but feel free to stick with your "Waste of Time" or "War Chunder" BS definitions.
Nicely done.
First rule of armored warfare: be mobile. Ferdinand was nowhere close.
German Heavy Units ALL had seriously inflated kill ratios.
It was misused at Kursk and suffered significant losses.
It was a waste of resources. Heavy armored units required far more maintenance personnel and Ferdinand’s spent too much time offline and being transported hundreds of miles for refitting.
How many StuG Battalions could you have traded for those 91 Ferdinands?
"How many StuG Battalions could you have traded for those 91 Ferdinands?" Given you had all these Tiger P hulls already built with Porsche's own money, not many, because the StuG factory probably can't just take heavy tank hulls and make StuGs out of them. Maybe from the scrap value, you could have turned 91 Ferdinands into a dozen StuGs.
WAKE UP BABE NEW CURSED BY DESIGN EPISODE (now with a new intro!)
The Elephant is at Fort Lee, which also has a German railway gun (you can see that one from the roadside) and is close to the Petersburg National Battlefield Park.
Imagine destroying a panzer 3 and a double kill display appears on your HUD for destroying the ferdinand
imagjne the crew reporting how they lost their ferdinand
Better than anything you could do in War Thunder
I'd say the "fire warning" was more of a warning given to the crews getting blown out of proportion after the fact. After all, most soldiers saw the Ferdy getting repairs more than in the thick of combat. Add on top of that, that the crews likely kept complaining about all the flaws they encountered, and it will absolutely "tanking" the reputation.
I still remember seeing the US one before it was restored, in the collection at Aberdeen. That was a cool collection.
Imagine being the radio operator during the battle of Kursk: you can't do anything except use the radio, you're stuck at the front with the overheating stressed engine, you are in the most vulnerable position and can't see much of the outside world😔
To be fair, the radioman also had a machinegun, and was sitting behind a 200mm thick wall of armour.
It wouldn't have been a great place to be, but as long as your unit isn't ordered ro change straight through a minefield and get itself surrounded by antifa... oh, wait... yeah, no, I wouldn't want to be a radioman in one of these things either.
I wouldn't want to be in one of these tanks, nevermind the position I find myself in lol.
@@gustaveliasson5395 That's the point you are missing - he didn't have a machine gun. Originally these vehicles didn't have an MG, it was only added later during the refurbishment back at the factory.
@@MaxCroat Oh well, at least he's got armour, a roof over his head, and a ride.
Not great, but better than being an infantryman, I'd bet.
@@gustaveliasson5395 sure if the tank was any fucking good at moving and not breaking
Good video man, learned a lot. The Ferdinand is one of those axis vehicles I knew about, but didnt really know about most of the details/specifications. I have always been a Porsche guy, so I love hearing more about the brain that created these beastly wartime machines. Respect to German engineering (the transmissions dont count lol)
15:39 Murphy was feeling... _Angry_ that day.
When I joined the army and went to MOS school in Lee I got to see it it’s pretty cool
Watching the plants in the game footage lay down before the tank rolls over them, and even springing back up when the tank reverses is very funny.
Despite its issues, I'm a big fan of the Elephant. Like all German heavy armor of WWII, highly effective when operational but often needing extensive maintenance. I built a model of an Italian Elephant that I recently posted on my UA-cam channel.
why dosent porche make these anymore, sad face, much better than the sports cars
also, can you do a video on the jumbo or jackson?
I agree. MUCH better than sports cars 😝😝
Not even close
1:34 that tank dunce hat Is such a cool idea
The origins of scourge of German car ownership - the perennially lit Check Engine Light.
Hannibal could have told them the futility of sending Elefants to Italy.
Ayeee
It was an informative and wonderful introduction video about Ferdinand anti-tank vehicles ..German designed it as a fast responsive to the ward's higher quantity of Soviets T-34 tanks in east front... thank you for sharing
I always wondered why they built these things instead of just building the hulls into complete Tiger P tanks instead since that seems like it would’ve been easier, quicker and that the better tested Tiger P design would theoretically have less issues.
Because that electrical transmission was a pipedream. Germany did not have the resources to build it and still supply the U-boats with their electrical engines.
And the Kriegsmarine was very vocal in telling the Heer it could f off with stealing their stuff.
They wanted the 88mm L71, and the Tiger turret was incapable of taking it. A fixed superstructure could.
The 88mm gun is mounted within a casement which sits atop the superstructure which of course is affixed to the chassis. I flinched when the narrator called the casemate a superstructure. The hull and suspension make up the chassis.
That that picture of the Tigers single bent piece(3 of them)80mm turret armor is cool.
From being young enough to read through books with my granpa I remember falling in love with this vehicle, it’s so unashamedly hideous and such a characteristically brutal response the advances of allied forces
The Ferdinand also know as the Elefant was effective but used as an Assault tank without Infantry cover was extremely vulnerable, in short it was cost effective to use converted hulls but not really cost effective. Though Germany could never outproduce the US and Soviet Union it did work well as a defensive tank.
4:10 addy doing his best paul ruben impresion
The "hundreds of hours already sunk into making the hulls" is a perfect demonstration of the sunk cost fallacy.
The tiger took 300,000 man hours to build so think maybe hundered of hours building the first 100 hulls is an understatement of noble scope
I still love it though, I love imperfection, it’s ridiculous, as is life. It’s a fighting vehicle that helped me fall in love with German armored vehicles. She was my gateway, she showed me why the designs need balance, stats don’t matter…..🥰
When playing micro tank tabletop warfare we found the best way to utilise the Elephant/Ferdinand was a long range tank destroyer as the frontal armour was given a heavy bias and the gun was rated A+ too so giving it a very good defensive position or a long range offensive position. The only downside was it was slow and the nimble T34/76 or T34/85 could without infantry support get in close to the Elephant quite quickly and then heap damage and destruction against it.
If however you mixed it up with anti tank guns and infantry support it was a difficult target to assail as the armour and gun gave it amazing defensive capabilities
Being tired as it's morning here, I was wondering why the heck the germans had a lot of holes left over. Then it clicked Cone had said Hull's and not Holes 😸
Remember kids, thats why you dont add more weight and bullshit to an already unreliable vehicle. Especially if it is Porsche's Tiger
As Tiger P was a Cursed by Design, I see this thing squared.
The British also landed at Anzio as well and we're the 1st in rome
15:28
Who would've known that the most effective Ferdinand killer was a Panzer III Turret
Mein liebstes gepanzertes fahrzeug aus dem zweiten weltkrieg ist der Elefant, er ist einfach wunderschön, seit CoD:UO liebe ich ihn..
As a long range, defensive artillery, weapon, they worked well.where they had to move as little as possible! Probably explains the high kill ratio?🤷🏻♂️
Great tank, I was able to see the Elephant and climb inside. Wow, what a monster.
4 of only 91 being lost just due to engine fires is totally meme worthy. For a normal vehicle, that’d mean thousands would have been lost due to this design flaw.
I live in St. Valentin/Austria next to the "Nibelungenwerk". Today it´s a tractor factory still using some of the original buildings remaining.
How to create a problem where there isn't one: "what are we going to do with all these tiger P chassis?" "What do you mean? Just finish them, put the Krupp turret on there and send them out" "well that doesn't seem very complicated? we're going to need a different plan."
Soviet AT crew after it blows up Panzer III and it takes out the Ferdinand
*Fist Bump*
I love how many photos from that era you have included here. For me personally, they make the content so much more entertaining. Prob the same for you and the reasoning for why you've included them lol... Meh , I'm an idiot.
The greatest flaw was the lack of combat testing. The inability to reduce some of the issues with the design, together with its assault talk role, doomed much of its further use.
You have a tank which is used best in a defensive, hidden position and kill the enemy at big range. Both, being hidden and being far away, lessens the need for big armor. Staying with 100mm and simply angling it at 45° would protect the tank against 98% the enemy can field. This would save at least 5-6 tons of weight. And a tank destroyer, which always needs to face an enemy don't need much side armour, also saving like 5 tons...
@@TheKamiran85 incorrect, the Ferdinand/Elefant was an offensive vehicles explicitly stated as a offensive vehicle and used as an offensive vehicle.
Many people do not understand the doctrine of a tank destroyer, let alone a Heavy Tank Destroyer special role.
As stated by German doctrine, a Heavy Tank Destroyer is not a towed gun, it is NOT a static weapon platform and should not be used as such. It is a mobile element.
Now what makes it offensive? It’s an Breakthrough Support vehicle. When on offensive breakthrough is to be commenced, speed, surprise and firepower are needed to crush the enemy. Speed puts the enemy in a state of shock allowing for exploitation, surprise catches the enemy off guard and unprepared, firepower allows the destruction of enemy assets.
What are the man components of a breakthrough? The tank specifically made for that, Heavy Breakthrough Tanks, Tigers. If not available, then just medium tank. The breakthrough tanks gain in its simplest form is to destroy the enemy defense and make a gap in the enemy defensive line for exploitation.
Now where does the Elefant come in? Well, when breakthrough tanks attempt to make a breakthrough, what might the enemy do? They’d likely send tanks as a countermeasure.
Why is this an issue for breakthrough tanks?
Breakthrough tanks are to focus on making a breakthrough, creating a gap in the enemy line, the more time they spend fighting, the more time is wasted and enemy reserves can replace losses, they can regroup and reorganize a defense making the attack fail, they can allow time for better rear line defenses so that if the frontline breaks though, it’s grinds to a halt and becomes stagnant by the next defensive line.
Additionally fighting enemy tanks mean potentially higher losses of friendly tanks, thus meaning loss in overall firepower, less firepower means it’s less capabilities to breakthrough, weaker capabilities means less chance to win, or more time wasted to win.
Lastly surprise, the more time is wasted, the less surprise takes effect, if the attack takes too long because the breakthrough tanks now have to deal with enemy tanks and the front line defenses, the enemy is not in a much larger advantage.
Ferdinand/Elefant are to relieve the workload on the breakthrough tanks, they are to go on the offensive WITH breakthrough tanks, when enemy tanks are to arrive to counter the breakthrough force, the heavy tank destroyers would relieve the stress and deal with enemy tanks while the breakthrough force focuses on destroying enemy defenses quickly. That is THE purpose of ALL German Heavy tank destroyers including the Jagdpanther, and Jagdtiger, even in 1944 with Wacht am Rhein (Battle of the Bulge), the Jagdtiger was deployed there for specifically that purpose.
The reason it has thick armor is because it’s a frontline vehicle made for the offensive assault, it is NOT an assault gun, it’s a tank destroyer meant to support friendly breakthrough tanks by reducing their workload.
It’s purpose is best suited for the offensive, it was used in the offensive well when the idiotic generals didn’t fuck up the doctrine, and it does well in a defensive. It is NOT a defensively orientated vehicle
Look to my reply to the other guy, you are incorrect with the assault tank role you described
Your alert worked, here I am watching your video
One of my favorite armored vehicles of the war. Along with the panther and the Nashhorn.
Hello, My Grandfather was driver in one of the returning Ferdinands from Italy. Unit 653
"The Tank Hunter Tiger Elephant" that already sounds harass enough, can't imagine the other ones
"Germany send 11 elephants to the Italy" - it seems sending small, almost useless amounts of tanks to their allies is a long standing tradition in Germany.
I'm in the "it should never have seen the light of day" camp. This vehicle was hampered by its design, for sure, but any armour needs to be recoverable. The fact that its introduction was not accompanied by the introduction of an engineering vehicle capable of rescuing it, was a significant logistical error.
Had they turned twenty of the hulls into engineering vehicles, they probably would have had a great battlefield asset, but in the German Army of WW2, logistics was for mugs,,,
I can see the sense in trying to quickly field weapons like the Ferdinand, elephants, and Tigers instead of more panzer 4s or panthers. The Panther was very vulnerable on the sides also, and most elephants "knocked out" only had armor spalling not penetration, even from 120mm guns that liquified some of the crew and damaged wiring etc but were returned to combat. Adding 10% more weight in more armor is simple to prevent the fires in the first place. A total re-design and re-tool isn't when you are about to loose half your country to the communists. It's just the mathematics of a very limited supply chain in a nation fighting far away from the factory with rapidly dwindling limited strategic resources that does not have air supremacy. Fighting against the U.S. and britian who gained mastery of the seas, and whose production and quality was rapidly INCREASING. It takes far more time and limited resources to build and field 2 or 3 weaker tanks that one Tiger or Ferdinand could equal 5 or 6 of in a fight. Also, it was known that the allies that could build good heavy tanks were overseas and the ships and dock cranes, transporters etc weren't up to the task. They were shoving the Russians pretty hard making it difficult for them to field newer heavy tanks, however they did need an answer to the ones the Russians did have. The much celebrated T34 wasn't actually as tough of a nut to crack, reliable or efficient in combat as commonly believed, on a one on one basis it was a higher end substandard design that won by overwhelming numbers. A costly tactic that very nearly DIDN'T work. Especially after upgunned panzers arrived. More T34s were killed by sub 75mm than anything else. Therefore, what was needed was an answer to IS etc. If you can't outproduce and out field them you have to be 4x as good, quickly enter the Ferdinand and Elephant, ruined by tactics, and necessity of miss application. The Achilles heel of Germany was overcomplication and lack of serviceability of design. The Western Allies could afford to mass produce a fairly decent tank at the start of the war that was by far the best mechanically and could be heavily modified. Let's remember the sheer psycological effect the German heavies had, guys were seeing Tigers everywhere, every German tank was a Tiger. The dang things are so completely awe inspiring it persists until today, psy ops and propaganda works both ways. It bolstered German hearts to see them at work, and made the allies nervously look around every corner for one. let's remember boys and girls, Germany was puny compared to the U.S. let alone the rest of the allies, and it VERY nearly worked! so much that so we still discuss it with reverence today. Bill Mauldin said you can call your enemy any dirty word except stupid! No allied tank commander ever saw a Tiger come crashing out of the woods, it's commander grinning from ear to ear, and laughed his butt off, slapping the turret and said "look Joe! Those stupid Jerrys just fielded another Tiger!" I can tell you what Michael Wittman thought looking down his 88 when he saw Shermans! There's probably been more models of, more books about, and videos of Tigers proudly displayed on AMERICAN bookshelves than any other tank combined! WW2 was a 10% war, 10% more time, better engieering, training, total production, air defence, and resources would have made a terrifying difference. Almighty God Himself had something to say about the fall of the Nazis.
In the "kill ratio" calculation they should include all the Panzer IVs or Stugs that could have been built instead.
You're telling me throughout the entire r&d process of creating these vehicles, they never thought of added just one single machine gun mount?😮
I guess in the rush it was overlooked or they made the mistake thinking no infantry would get close..🤔
hyper rushed, and the design seemed to change quite a bit during their refit.
Because the tanks were supposed to be used as Tank destroyers, not Assault Guns. But the army lacking any big tanks with thicc armour and big guns needed breakthrough vehicles so the Ferdis were used as Assault Guns instead. A role they were not intended for. The Germans should've taken a few hulls to design as assault guns (maybe using a 105mm gun instead of an 8.8cm gun) for breakthrough vehicles.
@@HunterSteel29 Yeah, all i'm saying is in hindsight, maybe the application of the American doctrine of putting at least one machine gun on every single vehicle that was put into service would have been wise. I'm sure Germany still had the industry to churn out mg 34s.
@@JoeyyDoesLifeYou're talking about a nation whose main combat arm was a bolt action rifle , who only issued automatic weapons to squad and platoon leaders , which still was using horse drawn wagons to haul most of their stuff around.
And adding hull machine guns wouldn't have helped. You can't use a Tank Destroyer as an assault gun regardless whether or not it has machine guns or not.
The Ferdinands were committed too quickly and at Kursk the Panthers had severe problems as well. The Germans had created perfect defensive tanks but not in the numbers needed, thankfully.
Engine fires, huh? I have just the animal to name it after: The Pinto.
I saw the US Ferdinand at Aberdeen Proving Grounds when it still had the white paint before restoration. I hate that these vehicles are in museums that aren.t open to the public.
Maaaaan idc if this thing has mechanical problems, the Ferdinand is a man among boys in war thunder. God, I love that slow ass giant hunk of metal.
It might be slow, huge, and an enormous target. But it hits hard as fuck and can be very difficult to get to its weak spots. Love taking out noobs with this beast.
57 were deployed to Kursk and over 40 of them were lost, with that attrition rate you can see why it got the reputation of a failure.
While it's true that many were lost relatively quickly this isn't something exclusive to the Ferdinand. Many other German tanks were lost in even greater numbers during that offensive. The reason the losses seem greater for the Ferdinand is because less were produced to begin with.
@@ConeOfArc Thats my point, it wasnt the sheer number of losses it was the proportion of losses, the Germans lost 10% of their tanks overall in the battle (323 of about 3,000) but the Ferdinand alone accounted for close to 20% of the losses despite it making up only around around 2% of the armour present.
The Tank Destroyer did not die in WW II. I think it was Chieftain who made the best point in that regard. A tank destroyer has low armour, good firepower to take out enemy tanks in a single strike if possible, and high enough speed to get into a good firing position and getting the hell out after firing.
So, one could make a very good point that actually the Tank Destroyer just changed platform. From a tracked vehicle - to an attack helicopter.
And also ATGM carriers are the modern tank destroyers.
The idea of Tank destroyer as an Armored vehicle, dedicated to that role died after WW2, since modern, or coldwar, tanks could now balance strong firepower and a good speed, so there is no reason to design tank destroyer, which only advantage is a cheaper cost, now
Like other tank concept that died after the war, heavy, light. Etc. There are simply no reason to build a tank dedicate to 1 taskwhen you could just create a platform that could do it all
@@RedXlVthat is debatable, as most modern armored vehicle that is equipped with ATGMs are no design dedicated to tank hunting role, but just a weapon to defend itsself if it went face to face with a tank
@@imreallynoob8311 You're living up to your nickname, because you are entirely missing the point. The concept didn't die, it evolved. That's like saying "the idea of the tank died" when comparin Mark I to a modern MBT. Or "No nation needs a navy anymore" when comparing modern task forces to dreadnought fleets of the past.
@@DGARedRaven you are wrong comparing this with ship and tanks, the concept of tank itself as an mobile armored unit didnt fell out of favor
The battleships are indeed obsolete, and has been since ww2
That dosent mean the entire existance of navy is needed
Tank destroyer is a type of tank made for 1 mission, and as we generalise our tanks to a multi mission one, tanks that are dedicated to 1 mission no longer existed
The problem with the Ferdinand was that the whole concept was flawed and the Heer didn’t want it. They were forced to accept it and fit it into their battle planning. It soaked up too many resources and was too limited in its capabilities to be of much use. In short, there wasn’t much it could do that couldn’t already be done by a carriage mounted 88mm PaK43.
i thought after 43 they no longer wanted zimmer paste because they thought it caught fire
Best kill to death ration of ww2 we ferdinanding outta this one
Someone needs to breed a new species of cats and name these überkittens Ferdinands, just to keep the naming conventions consistent.
the great cat named artillerie tank Wespe xD
9:20 I think we need a video on the mechanism that's holding aloft 65 tons of weight there. Good god
awesome video very informative
Would you do a video on the pvkv 2 someday?
Yes, after reading the comments and of course watching your video. Using it as an assault tank was hair brained. Defensively, with decent air cover and supply of parts, it seems to have been useful. Nevertheless, for all of the Tigers, Ferd's and Panzers, produced. One can't help but wonder how many more Stugs and Panzer IV's, they could have produced.
What's interesting is that the Historican Herman Töppel had the chance to talk to a lot of German tankers who serverd in various vehicles, like the Tiger I, Panther and also the Ferdinand. He mentioned that the Ferdinand crews actually liked the tank quite a bit. Most likely due to the security the tank provided due to the thick armor and powerfull gun. Mechanically the tank might have been a night mare but if you know that your tank is difficult to destroy I guess that counts for something. Töppel also mentioned that the Russians have been pretty impressed by Ferdinand as well. Not so much by the Panther though.
Maybe because the Idea of a Panther was inspired by the T-34
@@kelvisshandei Possible. I think it had more to do with the whole tank. The Panther was rushed in to service and mechanically very unreliable. A lot of issues have been solved with later versions but some remained till the end of the war. I also think the Soviets have been kinda unimpressed by the caliber of the Panther, as their tanks started to use larger calibers, even for their medium tanks like the 85mm gun or when you look at the IS2. While the Panther had exceptional penetration for the size of the gun it lacked somewhat in the ability to effectively fight soft targets with high explosive shells.
I think the Soviets simply had different design principles in mind at that point.
By the end we are talking 38 vehicles more of a pain to have parts for less than 50 operational units.
The Allies should have thanked Porsche for wasting so much of Germany's available resources on his crazy designs.
The debut on Kursk saw minefields 3-5 Km deep, all covered by MG's , mortars, AT guns, with hordes of artillery waiting as last so not spoil the mines. A big reserve of T-34 's wait for their timely need if you break in. No wonder things did not go well for the brutes.
I can’t but to think that Germany should’ve made more use of captured enemy tanks by installing a quality German designed and made turret/main gun. This would’ve allowed them to have a tank with a heavily armored turret and a deadly main gun that had room for an upgrade if they wanted to install a more powerful main gun. And since most Russian tanks were diesel powered, this would allow Germany to make synthetic diesel fuel from seed oils and anything else that would pass as diesel. The Russians quit counting how many T-34’s they made at 35,000 so it’s safe to say they (Germany) would have a good amount of vehicles and spare parts to draw from, lol.
It’s mind boggling how poorly German tanks were designed for ease of maintenance but, back then we were still developing design priorities but the Sherman showed excellent maintenance design as if the engineers focused on this as their first priority and it had a huge impact.
Thank you for taking time to produce this video, you covered some interesting aspects many skim over.
The Porsche Tiger used a weird power system. The Elephant / Ferdinand could function as a self-propelled tank destroyer, from an overwatch position, using the range of the 88 to knock out enemy tanks before they could reply. To employ it in the assault gun role threw away this advantage, while the lack of any close-in weapons (machine-guns) left it vulnerable in situations like Kursk if infantry escorts were lost. Too heavy, too difficult to recover during retreats, too much resources consumed for limited deployability. The JagdPanther was a better attempt.
Can't get enough of that good ol zimmerit
Are there any more books like that goes into the specifics of a tank or unit that book is very interesting
THIS WAS A MOBILE HOWITZER NOT A TANK BUSTER! Though when used to go after tanks it did bust the other tanks up. This was the original modern American 108s
1:38 "But is this really the case?" cheers TIKHistory