Reacting to "Experts" in my Comments
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лип 2024
- In this video I'll be sharing with you just a small taste of the terrible comments I receive on a daily basis. Buckle in because some of these will really make you wonder how the people who wrote them can operate an electronic device.
Social links:
www.coneofarc.com/
Discord: / discord
Twitch: / coneofarc
Instagram: / coneofarc
Twitter: / coneofarc
Merch: teespring.com/stores/coneofar...
Merch(Amazon): www.amazon.com/shop/coneofarc
Things I use:
Camera: amzn.to/2OppVnR
Editing software: Sony Vegas 17 amzn.to/3kOwtIu
PC Hardware: www.amazon.com/shop/coneofarc...
Recording Equipment: www.amazon.com/shop/coneofarc...
You can check out more stuff I use on my Amazon Store:
www.amazon.com/shop/coneofarc
Cursed by Design Intro: www.fiverr.com/share/jd5Gdm
Provided links are affiliate links which allow me to earn from qualifying purchases
Want to send me something?
ConeOfArc
PO Box 305
Thompson, CT 06277
Or support the channel using Crypto:
BTC- bc1qjs2fqh6zupnwzjhyd9kjvqfld728sqnea4r67s
ETH- 0x5547e17113640c162Ded5B664155227058060C54
Thanks to my ConelyFans:
Sakura Prime
Thunder war
Blue Knight
Limmy K
Ragnarok
COL BEAUSABRE
Claire “Boz E-Claire”
Pervitin
Jaime Facco JJF
Trkr
Kris Quinn
JLS1001
Henrique
Elijah Pass
Paul Walsh
will wilm
Icosaedro
Sean
O D
Sukoshi Tiger
Marvin Mills
Yuk-Luen Man
MetaDave
Flying Pachyderm
pompomchan
Braňo Kohút
Become one today and get a Cone badge next to all your comments as well as other spicy perks!
/ @coneofarc
Some music provided by Epidemic Sound.
License music for your videos without fear of copyright claims
www.epidemicsound.com/referra... - Розваги
Goes without saying but don't harass any of the people who left these comments. Their comments may be stupid but it doesn't mean they're a bad person. Also this video is meant for entertainment purposes and is not like my normal fully researched videos so I may make errors or other goofs when referring to specific vehicles so please do not take what I say in this video as fact. Thanks for watching and I hope you enjoy!
Yes
Being a furry you look about what I imagined
8:00 guy shudda wrote "Not See".
8:30 I'm glad you're one of the FEW people who actually realize that not all Germans during WW2 were bad. Yes, they were all Not Sees, or 99%. But that's like saying every Russian was a Communist.
@@INSANESUICIDE I think you have me confused with someone else
@@INSANESUICIDE yeah tf you goin on about?
“The thrieth reich.” Ah yes and the Axel powers, with Fashion Italy, and the UwUerial Japanese.
Whats wrong with 3th it means thirth or am i wrong
@@hanssmidt12 I thought it was third reich, third as in the 3rd?
@@griggs8345 ah like that 3rd not 3th
@@griggs8345 You are all wrong! It is 3nd!
@@macdaniel6029 are you mentally impaired? Tis 3st!
Cone: "Don't get your Information from Warthunder Forums."
me: *looks at the Classified Military Intel that has been leaked*
i will leak document!!1!1
I think the funniest part is that classified military intelligence has been leaked multiple times
update i have leaked document
with respect, how do you know those top secret docs are real? do you have access to the real ones to verify them?
@@GorFrag because in all cases the original poster got in big trouble for breaking their NDAs by sharing the info
If that guy who would “gladly hunt hunters” actually tried to, he would probably fail miserably
ohio man tries to hunt hunters, gets shot seventeen times on the head
Well first they would have to go outdoors. So that’s out.
Odds are they would get bored out of their skull, and some hunter would find them asleep, with their weapon by their side.
i like how this random comment i made on a persons channel i never knew about until that day has 46 likes
47 now sir
Germany: *builds more tanks*
Germany: *has no petrol, ammo, manpower or factories*
Wheraboos: Best military ever!!!
@@Lonovaviralso wheraboos, the whermacht was the best military force in the universe
@@Lonovavirreal, on the moment of fashion, germany number one, but when logistics & shit, err, er, eugh.
@@Lonovavir Wikipedia: "French tanks was outclassed German tanks in ww2"
The cm and the mm argument makes me think of the joke about a kilogram of steel vs a kilogram of feathers.
But steel's heavier than feathers....
Oh god that scottish guy that cant "burglar alarm" XD
The feathers are heavier though. You also have to carry the weight of what you did to those poor birds.
There was a nice exchange on that one in QI with Stephan Fry where he retorts it actually different because one was weighed in different scales (was more tongue-in-cheek though as is his style but sometimes the obvious isnt as such, like how technically ee have more then one moon 😀)
Cm and mm= inches and feet.105mm=10.5cm,just as 18 inches=1 foot 6 inches.It's just terminology that equates to the same measurement.But some people just gotta people.
EDIT:Shit I need new glasses.....
I remember driving my horse down Tokyo in operation market garden. The amount of Zweihandler that are needed to defeat Palpatine is on average green. Truly a sight to behold.
green? that's gotta be at least magenta
I thought the calzone gun wasn't meant to be in production at that point in time in Italy?
This is truly one of the comments ever
you all should have thought of vader, you can’t forget about somebody always by palpatine’s side. Should’ve brought more lances.
this comment is on the tier list of comments
It isn't so much the myths about tanks (especially the Sherman) that bothers me, but that the myths refuse to die no matter how many expert opinions debunk them over, and over, and over, and over...
Seems to be with just everything nowadays, some humans are just incapable of being smart
What are the myths about the sherman?
I'm a smoothbrain who does kinda like ww2 tanks, and what I know of the sherman was that it was a relatively low cost and effective tank that met all the tankering needs of the time with passable armor on the flanks and front, with a more than adequate gun.
I'd have figured there was more myths about German tanks since they're the cool looking ones with big cat names, and cause people on the Internet think the nazis were fashionable
@@spook9155 I hope you don't mind a wall of text. :) And take this with a grain of salt, I'm no expert either.
Myth: Sherman was infantry support and tank destroyers were supposed to deal with tanks.
Context: One of the prevailing tank doctrines of the era was that tanks exploited weak points in the front line to break through and reek havoc on unprotected rear areas. This was countered by the US tank destroyer doctrine of having units that could move quickly to engage these tanks, those were the tank destroyers. The sherman was always a battle tank and was intended to engage whatever it fought, tanks included. It is a myth that shermans waited for tank destroyers to move up and engage enemy armor for them.
Myth: Sherman was equipped with the 75mm for anti infantry/fortification uses and not anti-armor.
Context: The 75mm gun was chosen because it was the best overall cannon the US could fit into the sherman and still keep the tank feasible. The larger 3inch was deemed impractical (but was used in tank destroyers that had larger open turrets) and it wasn't until the new 76mm and redesigned turret in the "E" series tanks that the sherman gun was upgraded.
Myth: Sherman was an easy target because it was so tall.
Context. The sherman was taller than both the T34 (approx 8') and P4 (approx 8'10") at 9' to 9'9". I'll leave it up to you to decide if that extra foot over the T34 or several inches over the P4 made it significantly easer to target in actual combat situations. What it did do was allow the tank to have better ergonomics, gun deflection, crew cohesion, and crew escape characteristics. Did those pros outweigh the con of being a 1' taller than the other guy? I think so.
Myth: Sherman burned easy because of its gasoline motor.
Context: Aside from the Russians no one fielded any significant amount of tanks that ran on anything other than gasoline/petrol. Nor is there any hard evidence that more shermans burned than any other tanks. In some of the early engagements sherman crews were lax on how they stowed extra ammunition and if something touched it off (impact, fire, heat, etc.) it went up in violent fashion. The ammo storage on the sherman was upgraded to wet storage but by then the reputation had taken hold. However, outside of anecdotal stories there is little hard evidence that shermans were universally referred to as "tommy cookers" "Ronson's" "lights the first time, every time" etc.
Myth: Sherman wasn't as good as Tiger
Context: Apples to oranges comparison as Tiger was a heavy tank designed for breakthrough maneuvers and sherman was a medium battle tank. And as for the "it took 4 shermans to stop a tiger" the origin of that comes from the fact that shermans operated in 4 tank platoons. And while surviving crews believed everything they faced was a tiger the reality is that on the Western front the US didn't face very many tigers.
Myth: The US used the Sherman because it was all they had, and they couldn't design anything like the Tiger
Context: I'm not even sure what to say to this...if the US (or the Russians, or the British) wanted to copy the Tiger they certainly could have built a comparable heavy tank. But the reality is that while the Tiger was a fantastic tank used in the proper role it had massive limitations caused by its complexity and the strain it put on its components. The Tiger (and all other heavy tanks) required massive maintenance and repair which is why most were lost to mechanical reasons and not due to enemy fire, and they were difficult to transport. The US could ship shermans in large quantities and drive them across Europe's roads and bridges. That wasn't going to be the case with a heavy tank.
Myth: Shermans were a deathtrap
Context: As with the burning issue I addressed earlier this was a reputation that isn't actually supported by hard evidence. Were more shermans knocked out than other tanks used in the same fashion? Were more sherman crews killed than operators in other tanks? The evidence might exist to support this assertion but I'm not familiar with it. Belton Cooper wrote a scathing book about the sherman being a deathtrap but he was a logistics officer who's experience was with recovered tanks and not himself a tanker, so I would take his opinion on the matter with a large amount of skepticism.
Myth: Sherman had poor armor
Context: The Sherman entered the war with comparable armor to the current P4 (some argue better, some worse). Later upgrades to the P4 however supersede the sherman ("jumbo" and "E" series tanks not withstanding). It wasn't entirely a problem with sherman armor though as the germans fitted many guns that could punch through more armor than the sherman could have been realistically equipped with, and you aren't going to make a 33 ton sherman as comparably armored as a 44 ton panther, or 51 ton tiger.
Myth: Shermans should have all been equipped with 17 pounder guns (aka British Firefly Sherman)
Context: The 17 pounder/76mm was a good gun and a substantial upgrade over the 75mm but it was difficult for crews to use the gun and American crews were hesitant to fit a larger gun in the existing turret (the American 3"/76mm was already available if they had wanted to do that) because of the confined space and difficulty in using the larger guns and larger ammunition. The US went a different route with the newer/smaller 76mm fitted in the "E" series shermans that coincided with the introduction of a new turret design.
Myth: T34 was better than sherman
Context: This isn't to slight the T34 but again this is somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison as the two tanks were designed with different needs in mind. The T34 was a simple, robust tank that was exactly as good as it needed to be to get the job done. Nothing wrong with that approach, it worked well for the Russians and later model T34's were much improved over the early ones. I think the T34/85 was a great tank in its own right. But the US wanted a tank that while easy to mass produce was going to be able to be easily shipped, unpacked, driven countless miles, and then deployed into service. The US also put a higher priority on crew survivability than the Russian's did and so the tank needed to have comfort, survivability and crew-cohesion in mind, as well as the logistical requirements. Combat is very dynamic and isn't all about who has the bigger gun or the thickest armor. I don't think the US would have been satisfied with the T34 as their primary tank, nor would the Russians been satisfied with the sherman as theirs.
In the end, I think the P4, Sherman and T34 were largely comparable tanks, each with advantages and disadvantages.
@@JD_79 so what I did know was the truths, I guess !
It doesn't make sense for the gun to be anti personell while also having like 3 different machine guns just for that purpose
Though I always thought the tiger was used for ambushes, though I dunno
@@spook9155 I believe the US forces did encounter the Tiger more often in a defensive rather than offensive role, but they were used offensively on the Eastern front. The Tiger was designed originally as a breakthrough tank. The German specifications called on the P3 as their primary battle tank, the P4 supported the P3's, and the Tiger did the breakthrough then pulled back for maintenance and refitting before doing it again. In reality the Tiger was often used as a front line battle tank, just as the US forces called on tank destroyers to be used in traditional tank roles.
I think there was "doctrine" and then there was the reality of actual combat. ;)
1:49 That comment literally embodies "Watches Fury once and thinks they're a tank expert"
God I hate that movie. The fact that Shia Leboufe's character was an overly preachy Christian AND was still one of the most likeable characters in the movie says a lot.
Lol Sherman bad tho
@@lonesurvivalist3147 Pretty fair fight against Pz. IVs and IIIs with the 75 mm and an almost okay match against Panthers and Tigers with the 76 mm. Plus the sight picture on the Sherman’s gunner optics looks much cleaner than the ones on German tanks.
@@lonesurvivalist3147 And hell, I’d take the Ford GAA on the A3 over any WW2 German engine any day.
@@Some_Average_Joe The characters aren't supposed to be likable. Fury isn't supposed to be some "look at these All-American(tm) GI's coming to rescue Europe from the Nazi menace!" movie. The whole point of the movie is that Germany is already losing, it's a forgone conclusion, and these are the nasty fuckers that are there to kick in Germany's teeth so that the war can end.
"they where stupid" is a pretty good indication of the type of people commenting this stuff
Nazi propaganda was stupid tho. And fighting a whole world in 1944 was stupid. It only prolonged the war destruction of Germany.
@@Paciat if i wasn't on youtube i'd think this comment was ironic
@@Paciat By 44 they didn’t really have a choice left. What were they gonna do, surrender their entire country to the Allies before D-Day? They weren’t accepting that without France being literally back (and angry Stalin)
Surrendering after D-Day isn’t also a choice. The Soviet and French people were far too angry to accept “good peace terms” at that point, short of the terms being similar to 45 surrender anyway
I'm pretty sure "Nazis" were much smarter and can spell their first language better than these degenerates.
@@Paciat Most reasonable HOI4 player
The SEX guy is the best for sure.
Lmao
Lol I thought you were Ian from Forgotten Weapons.
That guy spoke facts
I'm mad at ConeOfArc for refusing to address the issue of whether or not he can in fact SEX.
Hunting in general is extremely important for population control and safety, in every populated area there is a clash between the habitat of animals and humans, in Germany deer don't have natural predators, so humans need to fill this role to keep the populations out of the cities and manageable sizes that don't interfere with traffic etc
well, there are wolves in Germany - but I agree not nearly enough to keep the deer population under control.
- but for 'youngsters' that lived in a city all their lives, that have just seen 'Bambi and the bad hunter' - well, I can imagine that they become upset about hunting. On the other hand this doesn't fit with wanting to hunt the hunters. Anyways, I agree that hunting (not poaching) is important.
You are right. Here in Germany that is why hunting is so big. Sure there are wolves, but not enough to fully control to populatio
@@dereinzige3092 and we don't want What Happened to Australia when they Introduced a fuck ton of animals and predators to the ecosystem
We have a very similar situation in the US as well. Even in some areas carp in the lakes is invasive so most let you fish an unlimited number of carp and keep them. Granted not to keep but to get out of the lakes/rivers
Plus meat taste good
Ah, the old Dunning Kruger effect. The less they know, the more confidently they know it.
BTW: Krupp's 10.5cm King Tiger project was rejected for the following reasons:
"The proposed 10,5cm gun [L/68] was not accepted for service by the army. Therefore, it doesn't appear advisable to produce a special caliber just for this [vehicle]. In any case, the gun requires a new traversing and elevating mechanism so the turret would probably need to be redesigned. The rate of fire would drop off significantly because of the two piece ammunition. In addition, a second loader would be needed and adding space for him would create considerable difficulties."
- Wa.Pruf-6, assessment of Krupp design projects.
Generalinspekteur d. Panzertruppen
20 January 1945
Close enough to "What? No!"
Hate Europeans for using a comma instead of a period to indicate where a period should go
I swear I've seen one of these at Bovington tank museum. Have I confused it for something else.
@@roblogic6823 a 105mm King Tiger was never made
You’ve seen a regular Königstiger with an 88mm mounted in a Henschel turret.
I liked the quote, "Sir, this is a Wendy's. I don't know what you're asking me."
Many years ago I worked drive-thru at a Taco Bell and had a guy say, "I don't want mayonnaise on my taco." Just wanted to share that.
He definitely meant Sour Cream lol
Yeah neither would I
That’s what she said!
@@JoeOvercoat bruh...
I got the joke but dam new one
Must have been his first time trying a taco..... What's the white stuff on top??? Ah must be mayo..
"A tank is better than no tank."
Amazing how often people forget this.
Yes, and how one good tank is better than a lot but bad ones.
The 120mph thing nearly made me laugh to death. Please don't tell me that's somehow real now or I'll probably actually die
Well, the actual amount isn't true.
But yeah, if you remove the governor from the Abrams, it is stupidly fast.
It's just... it'll fucking shake itself apart like any super fast multiton vehicle will at those speeds.
I think it's well over 70-80mphs last time I heard the number.
Talked to some Gulf War dudes who specifically removed their governor for the extra speed while in the last bit of tank warfare we ever got to experience as a nation. And yeah, it definitely can go a fuckton faster than it's "official" stats say... Because the stat is based on what it can SAFELY run at
Kinda like effective range, maximum range and "Yeah technically if you fire the cannon from a mountain, it could travel like 10x further than it's stated max range!"
@@caelodevorago608 have you ever seen a 10 ton truck go 160mph on sand dunes? It is both mesmerising and terrifying. And I would certainly love to see a tank go that fast.
@@mintgoldheart6126 absolutely I'd love to see that.
But yeah, I think the Abrams can hit like 70-80 in good condition
@@caelodevorago608 a bit of an old video, but here is a DAF turbo twin overtaking a Peugeot 405 T16
ua-cam.com/video/AWCNnlk8rkU/v-deo.html
And the Abrams being capable of this kind of speed is already ludicrous and awesome.
@@mintgoldheart6126 And yet, it can't even depress its gun when facing backwards
that E-100 and Maus comment was just them saying "they didnt have problems" then listing the problems they would have had with the tanks crossing a river or riding rail
german super heavy tanks have no problems crossing rivers. either they can travel miles to find a intact rail bridge, wait hours for the correct special rail cars to show up, and hopefully get the vehicles loaded, across and unloaded within the day, or they can cross fully submerged, 1 at a time, at slower than walking speed. while being fully dependent on another tank on shore sitting stationary providing power. perfect breakthrough vehicles if germany had the same terrain as southern libya
@@theguy9208 strategy genius obviously above the thinking of mere normies
@@theguy9208 I dunno about that mang
Legit not try a be an expert but I don’t think Germany ever successfully fitted the mass turret to the hull in any operational sense did they?
@@theguy9208 👍👍
😂😂😂😂😂.
But about this, after rereading your comment I'm really hoping that's just sarcasm.🤷
Given the comments he read on this video it's sometimes hard to tell. My apologies if that's the case
If it did take 8 Shermans to kill one tiger, that proves that *there were* 8 (or more) Shermans for every tiger.
Plot twist: it was just the same 8 Shermans that picked off all tigers one by one
I have never heard that it took 8 Shermans to kill a tiger.
Most allied squadrons attached a firefly or an E8 to four 75 mm Shermans. That had more to with availability of up gunned Shermans.
The Tigers biggest advantage was that they could engage Shermans before they could.
Even worse when you figure in there were two fronts: east and west and Tigers did not go to just one of them.
The original statement was "one Tiger is a match for four Shermans. Unfortunately there is always a fifth Sherman." And it was made by a German officer who's point was that Germany was going to lose because the US was building so many more tanks than Germany was.
@@gryph01 funnily enough people who say it takes 8 fully underestimate a Sherman firefly who I'm pretty sure could solo a tiger altho face to face would be a dumb idea
"the sherman couldnt kill the tiger"
sherman firefly : am i a joke to u
An add on point i got from the multi-turret part. Think of tank design as natural selection, if it works and keeps it alive it stays. But if it does not, then it doesn’t make it. (Just throwing that out there)
Perfect description
15:00 As someone who recently avoided crashing into a deer while going below the speed limit, I can confirm this person is nuts
Same here. More than a few times.
the deer population is out of control, probably because most of their natural predators are gone.
We have killed deer's natural predators. In Pennsylvania, the population has reached pre-coloniam levels.
Overpopulation results in the spread of wasting disease. Hunting them is not only a natural necessity but a kindness. Deer don't get to die surrounded by their friends and family as a respected elder.
@@blockstacker5614 facts
@@blockstacker5614 yes that's why we had to reintroduce wolves into yellowstone
LazerPig also did a video on why the Sherman production and casualty numbers are massively overstated.
In short, due to how casualties are counted, they don't differentiate between "back to the depot for repairs" and "back to the scrapyard". Damaged and repaired tanks are thus counted multiple times.
@@ideadlift20kg83 and the fact that outnumbered tigers would ambush shermans from where they couldn't see it
@@ideadlift20kg83 Something Lazerpig also talks about in that video
It’s very interesting how often people forget that these types of regimes LOVE to “imagine” numbers to improve their image. The Nazis were in many ways no different than the Soviets, or the Russian and chinese regimes today.
Over reporting or at the very least misaligned after action reports been used for follow up field or strategic reporting is still common today.
There are multiple examples just in the last 10 to 20 years where even with with open source information gathering during and after the fact we still see ratio's that don't stack up.
Military quality 'armed' drones currently been a great example since it's very much in the interest of one side to down play their effectiveness given their losing expensesive armoured units, installations or V.I.Ps to them while the other wants to buff their number's or cost effectiveness as much as possible to sell more!
Slight correction, I believe it was the British doing this with their tank units, rather than the Americans or the Sherman units.
I don't want to be annoying, so I'm sorry if I am.
Edit for a bit more clarity.
15:53
as a firearm enthusiast I totally agree.
I once read something once that I agreed with.
"every deer you hunt will die anyways, never from age, usually being eaten alive"
Edit:
After reading replies I have changed my opinion. I still agree with hunting but no longer the quote
I wouldn't use that logic as it can be expanded to anything that lives, especially ones in poor conditions. The homeless for example.
"Every bum you hunt will die anyways, never from age, usually from drugs."
@@filonin2 Only if you consider a deer the equivalent to a human
@@filonin2 It's already established that shooting deer is fine but shooting homeless is evil so I don't think your logic can be applied.
PilotBugs point is that the deer will usually suffer a painful and early death anyways not that "killing not bad because not die from old age anyways"
@@filonin2 except people tend to have humans and animals in separate moral categories, but it doesn't matter considering that after your talk about logic you won't engage anyone's point.
-"Here's a super advanced prototype that could save the war"
-"scrap it immediately"
I'm torn between wanting to see more "expert" commentary, and worrying about the loss of brain cells by seeing more "expert" commentary. Keep up the good work.
Maybe you could do a Fake Tank Commentary Friday.
Please no Fake Tank commentary Friday. 1-2 times a year is plenty
Stupid Comment Saturday
As much as I like to laugh at these, I don't want people to start commenting more dumb stuff just to get into a video. Or the act of giving more unnecessary attention to the dumb comments.
I'm in the same boat lol like I see enough stupid history comments on a daily basis but boy do I get a laugh at those people
I love how you can tell when someone’s entire knowledge of allied-vs-axis tanks especially when it comes to Tigers stems from the history channel and War Thunder
Well war thunder/wot to some extent have better facts. i am aware wot is an arcade game with many made up stats, before some smartass thinks they got me now.
@@_Juke_ yeah, I know, I meant moreso the people that take video game mechanics verbatim especially in war thunder’s case since armor penetration is a little over exaggerated in areas whether a shell will do damage or bounce off
I understood what you meant :) just wanted point out the other side as well
@@_Juke_ video games are good for the hard factors, they are useless for the actually important part that is the soft factors.
@@deezboyeed6764 the problem is, videogames are not capable to capture real warfare, because that just wouldn't make for a fun game. You can't simulate all factors of a battlefield and have a fun game, because some stuff, like one live per battle, just get in the way of playing. And in warthunders case, I am pretty sure stuff like armor, mobility, and guns are optimised for fun rather than accuracy, so you can't compare this to an irl environment. Of course some stuff is realistic, but when realism and fun clash/get in the way if each other, fun often comes out on top
33:06 this man has unlocked esoteric knowledge lost to time we are blessed to even get a shred of his intellect shared with us
POV: youre looking for “Experts” in the comments so ur on newest first
Late to the game but in case you’re seeing this. The myth, as covered by The Chieftain comes from the size of American armor platoons (the smallest size an American armor unit operated alone in) which was… 5 tanks.
When Tigers were setting up alone to ambush American armor you’d have 5 Sherman’s taking on one tiger. Hence the myth.
Seriously, wehraboos claimed to love history yet fail to understand that the reason why the US use 4-5 tanks to kill one Tiger or Panther is because the US doctrine was overwhelming firepower. Literally a doctrine used to this day that states, "if the enemy has 1 tank, bring 10".
It's not because the Shermans suck, but because they want to ensure whatever is fighting them is dead.
and also werent germans much less i dont know the word but like more cautious to call it a loss of a tank then an allied nationn
@@Whyisthat451 from what I can guess, if the Germans could get their tanks back to the factory for ‘repairs’, then they wouldn’t consider the tank a loss, even if the tank is so incredibly damaged that I cannot possibly see combat for the rest of its life. Americans meanwhile, would sometimes accidentally mark one tank as several losses, as when damaged tanks were salvaged they had to pass through multiple checkpoints to get repairs back on the American homeland, and at each ‘em checkpoint was someone marking down potential and actual tank losses
@@loyalhoodini4944 You're correct about the German protocol. As long as they held on to it, it was not "lost" regardless of damage.
The Germans couldn't have fielded that many tanks if they wanted to, thanks to their supply lines being nearly nonexistent and their factories being smoldering rubble.
The X Shermans to kill 1 Tiger is such a ridiculous trope. They looked at how many Shermans lost and divided by the number of Tigers lost, and presumed every loss on either was by the other. It took 1 Sherman to kill a Tiger, if the Sherman was in the right place with the right vantage point. And the Sherman Jumbo had not only a gun capable of killing a Tiger, but similar armor thickness, and better sloping. The 88 was a powerful gun, but not unstoppable.
Why don't they mount a Panzerschrek as coaxial. Now you can kill every tank.
@@oasis1282 sweet Jesus Christ. If your not being sarcastic (which I hope to god you are) there is a thing with any rocket launchers called ‘backblast’ when the rocket is fired all the hot gas comes out the back (that’s why all rocket launchers have a hole in the back even disposable ones) if you mounted that in the coaxial mount of a tank your crew is dead when you pull the trigger, and that’s not accounting range, optics or how it’s mounted I really hope you are just being sarcastic my guy because this is one of the dumbest comments I’ve seen when talking about ww2
I think the trope mostly stems from one fo the Tiger tank commanders popularized quotes of "1 tiger was worth 10 Sherman's, the issue is the Americans always had 11" I'm sure I've misquoted that but that's the gist.
@@oasis1282 It would kill the dude who would fire it lmao. Using a Panzerschrek required a protective set of clothing. Not to mention anyone inside would get their eardrums torn apart.
@@shirayuri4345 The protective clothing was only needed for the early models without the blast shield, and wouldn't be an issue because you're firing it from inside a tank. The real issue is that you would have to leave the tank to reload, which would make it essentially a single-use weapon during most battles.
Just so you know, often times (not all the time though) anyone on youtube claiming to be an expert is likely in the 9-12 age range. You should do more of these videos, they are very fun to watch!
Adding to the age part, if someone is asking you your age and/or saying that you are just a 'kid' in an argument, that is most definitely someone not worth interacting with.
This was a fun video. Would happily watch you pick apart more crazy comments!
I feel like half of these people that do this have too be trolls
nah trust me dude, a good amount of these people are fr lol. its sad but true
@@pilotmic2109 it baffles me..
Not me, i wasnt really learned enough at that moment and my comment was formulated wrong
@@hanssmidt12 it seems English isn't your first language, even so we all make mistakes, I used too think the panther was the best tank of WW2
@@rcaf_ozzie5802 Yes it isnt and its a late hour for me lol
I refused to believe real people can type out comments like that, but I guess you taught me better.
They probably used speech to text if they were on a phone or something
I sometimes struggle to do the same bud. Even when I type to fast I make typos so egregious I wonder "How the fuck did that even happen" it's more coherent than some of these people...
Young kids that think they are smart thanks to IQ online tests.
@@yoshineitor Trusting online IQ tests --> Room temperature IQ
@@Registered_Simp wtf is room temperature iq?
This was GREAT! Please more of this! Listening to this was funny and great for lightening the mood at work. Cheers all.
This was really entertaining. Id be happy to see a Pt 2!
As someone who volunteers at the American Heritage Museum, yeah, I can confirm that Cone was there and he did record his own footage.
Holy crap! Luke Skywalker works at the AHM! Yet another reason to go!
Dude saved the Star Wars universe, become a living legend and proceeds to work at a tank museum afterwards. I guess that's what they call priorities.
@@Joeofthemasks **Luke Skywalket (Skywalket is not Skywalker)
@@anm10wolvorinenotapanther32 It's like that one Roman emperor who went back to farming cabbages after saving the Roman Empire.
@@michimatsch5862 Ah you mean Diocletian.
Who would forget him? The Roman Emperor that made Tetrarchy, leadership of 4 Emperors 1 Empire.
33:30 "125mph if the governor was delete" This is just beautiful
I *will* note that I've heard a story from a source I consider reliable that, when he was stationed at White Sands in 1980, he was doing about 60-65 mph on his way into the base one morning and was passed by a group of XM1s (which still weighed about 55-60 tons at that point, before the armor upgrades and the 120mm gun) on the parallel tank road, at a speed that meant they were doing about 65-70 mph. I can buy that, I could even buy an XM1 approaching 80 on a long downhill grade. But 125? Man, the only way it could ever hit that speed is if you dropped it out of a C-5 at high altitude with no parachutes...
Love the humor- thanks for helping me smile during a dark time. Best wishes homie
Thnx for this I really needed it haven't laughed so hard in awhile.
Regarding the footage you shot and shared: THANK YOU for doing that!
I'm disabled, I'll never get a chance to attend such an event. When enthusiasts such as yourself take the time and effort to shoot and and then share those experiences I get to participate vicariously. It means a lot to me and I suspect to many others. That is one of the various reasons that I subscribe and faithfully watch.
Again, thank you. Please don't think that that one random objector speaks for everyone.
Ir
Also, regarding hunting: I grew up in Chicago but spent many, many summer, fall, and winter breaks with family in rural northeastern Missouri. In that area deer were dangerous pests that routinely overbred because their natural predators had been exterminated. Yes, killing off the predators was shortsighted but that is the situation we inherited.
Many families depended on venison for meat; they could not afford storebought meat. Further, huge deer populations demolished crops, endangered traffic, and spread disease. Twice I was invited to help cull the deer population. I did so and gave the meat to folks who needed it (if it was free of sickness).
The poster who fantasizes that he could hunt hunters would likely be in for a sudden, rude, and terminal experience. Perhaps he should confine his activities to assaulting a corporate cattle ranch, or pig or chicken farm. He would likely only face arrest, not the consequences of challenging subsistence hunters on their own terrain.
@@mbryson2899 very based
@@YEET-fe3fw your mothers home is based on my cock
@@YEET-fe3fw Unrelated, but nice pfp.
On the T30/T34 comment. Its quite possible to fit a 155mm in a turret originally ment for a 105, because the 155 gun was a howitzer, this has overall less pressure than a regular gun, which means the breech and recoil mechanism theoretically can be similar in size to the armament already present
A similar 1.5x increase in caliber with a howitzer was seen with the Pz 3 N.
Engineers managed to stuff a 17 pounder into a Sherman turret. Mind you, they had to add an extention to it to compensate the recoil.
@@gryph01 yeah, Britian didnt want to wait for the 76mm turrets to be finished which would have provided enough room for the 17 pounder, so they did some modifications to the 75mm turret and had to set the gun in an awkward position inside the vehicle but they managed to fit it in relatively well enough for mass production of the modifications
The AC4 Sentinel used 2×25pdr guns to test for recoil when they were trying to fit the 17pdr in the new Sentinel. They figured that if the tank could take the combined simultaneous recoil of two howitzers, then it would survive a 17pdr's recoil just fine
@@thegamingzilla6269I watched a Chieftain video where he demonstrated loading a 17 pounder shell into the breech. I would hate to be a loader in a firefly.
Talking about fitting larger guns, the Centurion was initially designed with a 17 pounder (roughly 76 mm), but mainly served with a 20 pounder (roughly 83 mm) and then a 105 mm, and the turrets looked almost exactly the same for the 20 pounder and 105 mm variants.
Also, while it may seem strange, but when the T-34-85 was being designed in the late 1943, it was discovered that the 85 mm gun could fit into the hexagonal 1942-1943 turret which was originally designed for 76mm cannon. But it left very little space left for the crew, and so a new, three-man turret was designed.
Yes, do more videos like this. It was funny. All UA-camrs should do this, regardless what type of content they make usually, this would work for any genre.
"Don't get your information from the War Thunder forums."
Going to be honest with you, that should probably be a disclaimer on most AFV-related videos.
A friend of mine was a moderator for several military vehicle forums a few years ago. He said that the worst things he had to deal with was 1: people who thought WW2 German equipment was superior in every way to that of the Allies, and 2: people who got all their armoured vehicle knowledge from World of Tanks.
No no, the War Thunder players have classified government documents to back their statements up...
@@RealRexRiplash I'll start believing that has any weight when they start getting shot for espionage.
@@minimalbstolerance8113 My god, world of tanks is probably even worse than war thunder in that regard...
@@rigel9228 no shit condom head.
As for the Maus fording a river, sure, it was theorized, German engineers also theorized the Großtraktor was amphibious but the sole test of its amphibious capability resulted in it sinking and drowning an engineer with it. Let's not forget the Germans also theorized the Maus would have similar ground pressure to a Panther but then it promptly sank up to its turret in mobility trials
the maus wouldn't have forded rivers so much as dammed them, really
@@nottherealpaulsmith I suppose it depends on the river, but it might make for some fun rapids in something like the Danube.
This video made my day and earned my sub, thanks for your content man
You need to make more of these bud and make a Playlist I needed this laugh
This is great. It's 50% sir, this is a wendy's and 50% wehraboo cope
Not really, some people do not know enough or watch wrong videos so they get wrong reference of thing like i used to
33:05
If that dude spent just half the time and energy he put into typing that comment into learning about spelling and grammar, the comment would have been typed properly.
If he put the other half into learning the actual history of the M1 Abrams or Willys Jeep, he wouldn't have typed it at all.
The fact that he read it “as is” took some dedication.
Speaking the language of the gods
More UA-camr's should do this, I've read some of the most outrageous comments, on other channels. You should do this more often, I found it interesting and funny.
True.
This video is nothing short from being epic, this really made my day😊
That E-79 😂
When you make video of fake tank, and explain it was a "fake", yet people complaint because you take the information from Video game, that literally the source of the Tank in the first place
That's the reason why it's called "fake tank friday"
God, is reading the title a very hard thing to do? This people probably never go to elementary school
@@GoingForth *these
@@kasvos9292 Still learning english, so thx for your correction
How about the E27
at 23:59 there's also a perfect example of 'why scrap the advanced designs rather than just use them?' with the Type XXI submarine. Because that *was* genuinely more advanced than contemporary Allied subs, and as a result, they were handed out to the various Allies to reverse-engineer. Which led to the immediate post-war diesel subs.
baffles me that none of them realize just why there was an international technological boom in the late 40s and 50s: all hyper competitive state secrets were poured into one big intl melting pot of advanced electronics and production methods
Rockets as well
From memory the hull for the Yamato was innovative and adopted widely for extremely large ships also.
@@Nomisdoowtsae wasn't the Yamato sunk in combat?
@@blockstacker5614 yes but the hull was a great way of dealing with the massive displacement. That big bulge just below the surface on the bow of most modern superships? Thats from the Yamato.
1:28 best comment
Can we see more of these? I had a great hearty chuckle
There are always "experts" that now everything!
You meant the "know"?
This was F*****G hilarious. Thanks for this man
About that multi turret thing: Rheinmetall alluded to the MG turret of KF51 being potentially AI controlled in the future. I believe there was also some similar talk about the active defense systems planned for the "next gen" MBTs relying on AI (flight path predicts etc I assume). So if you want to count every weapon system that can move independantly a turret ... maybe? I guess? But I find it hard to conjure an image of a modern tank having multiple real turrets like a T-35. They'd just get in the way of each other, increase weight, complexity, and cost.
I imagine it like putting it on top and having it work as an AI controlled anti air, or ai controlled machine gun.
Im not a tank expert, i only know 8 tanks, i preffer artillery.
@@lollikabosso.w.n7153Americans made one now. It's called the M5 Ripsaw, a fully autonomous ai controlled tank. The best part is there are civilian models that we can buy.
Also a common misconception is that there were tank rushes on the Eastern Front all the time. The Red Army did make these desparate charges early in the war, but by the end of '42. those were much more rare.
every “military historian” starterpack
plays war thunder/wot
watches oversimplified
Gotta say man, Love the room the aesthetic! It looks really nice!
Well thank you for doing this video. I'm fortunate in that having a smaller Channel I don't have as many people that comment and very very rarely do I get any kind of derogatory comments. Sometimes I get some constructive criticism and every once in awhile I'll get somebody who is more knowledgeable than I am which isn't hard but for the most part I've got a really good group. With that said you have just proven that there are some real wackos out there in this world!
15:15 At the time of me starting to watch this video before I had to go to my truck to warm up, I was watching this in the woods; hunting for white tailed deer. The reason I hunt is not for the fun of shooting animals, it's for the experience of walking quietly walking thought the woods, of looking at things you are less likely to see in a largely populated area. I have had the luck of seeing moose for the pass 5 years hunting for deer. I have always loved walking in the woods and I have been hunting ever since I could shoot a gun. I also hunt to help put food on the table. It makes the food taste better knowing that you put work into getting the animal you are about to eat. My grandfather and I love to eat the heart and liver. In some religions, they say if you eat the heart of an animal, you gain their knowledge. Lastly, the community. Hunters and also fishermen love to tell stories to each other. There is always someone out there to help teach you to be more successful (making good choices and ethical shots with target practice) or someone to help you pull your kill from with in the woods. Also, it is a hunters ethical job to kill the animal as painlessly as possible. Here is my 2 cents.
I think the idea of hunting being extremely unethical and gross is that a lot of city rats (like me) only get to see the loud minority of hunters (who usually also come from major cities) that do edge on the bloodthirsty side as well as poachers. I don't know how it is on the other side of sea but here in Poland hunting license comes with more than just hunting, the clubs here frequently help with preparing for controlled burns, building feeding areas during rougher seasons for animal population to not collapse and sometimes capturing animals alive too (A lot of various reasons for this one).
I would say from my limited experience volunteering in one to help with the burns and feeding spots it is way more humane than the factory farms (Would honestly still prefer lab meat though).
@@Jenner_IICYea city rats are the worst
How about this for everyone. Hunting is how food was originally gotten. Even today, the food (at least the stuff that should be there in the meat markets) in the markets were hunted for. You cannot take away a wolf from hunting, he will just kill you too if you try. You cannot take a person away from hunting as people do not understand that we are animals too, we are supposed to hunt as we are predators and prey in certain situations
Two other points in this.
1) Most wild, mid to large sized, animals that live into adulthood (about 1 in 10) live many more years in much better conditions than farm facyory equivalents. Many adult animals survive w/ or w/o predators until the hitnold age at which their teeth have worn down to expose nerves, resulting in less ingestion of food and either starvation, disease, or predators (who can now successfully take them down) leading to their deaths. It can been seen as more humane for a hunter's bullet to instantly, or nearly so, than any of these other types.
2) Generally harvesting of a deer, etc., for meat is much less hard of the environment than factory farm equivalents. Cows require something over 4x as much land for the same amount of meat produced, more land cleared (much of which will turn to deserts), and produce much more methane.
I wonder what if vegetable was able to talking..
Why dose this feel like a LazarPig video
It is
laserpig but not br*tish
How does it feel like a LazarPig video? I didn't see any fake virtue signaling over geopolitics in this video lol.
@@shisponk8378, Lazerpig but not drunk.
Perhaps they are one in the same, But it's just a theory, A CONSPIRACY THEORY
Thank you for responding to internet "experts." Does my heart good to see idiots slapped down.
I love the story of the jadgtiger that tried to retreat by turning the spg around instead of reversing. Not sure if the story is true but it’s comedic to think about.
American had squads of 4-8 tanks so it would make sense for there to be 8 M4s vs. 1 Tiger.
I think they were meaning the sherman could never kill the tiger in a 1v1 and would need 8 to kill not the squad number but still 4 to 8 Sherman's advancing on your position probably isn't fun
Oh nvm I read your comment sorry for the trouble
Wrong
To paraphrase The Chieftain "well you're not gonna go 'oh its only a sturmgeschutz, hey joe we don't need you and your buddy' "
American tank platoons were 5 tanks max.
Responding to comments takes a lot of patience. You are very patient
bro rlly said hed be glad to hunt hunters, wait till the hunters fill his facial features with funny metal balls fired from a rod
tea and snacks are ready, I am prepared for some great sunday evening content
edit after watching the whole vid: I really enjoyed this one, would be nice to see similar stuff every once in a while, because not only this allows you to reply to probably hundreds of similar comments-complaints at once, but also this is pretty funny at times (33:03 sequence is one of my favourite moments from your channel already, an instant classic). keep up the great work, Cone!
This was hilarious and painful at the same time. Please do more of these videos :D
35:05 yes my brain melted as you read that long sentence.
HOI4 enjoyers are just the worst kind of nerds around.
Says me, HOI4 enjoyer with 1k hours and counting.
wehraboos when they get put as a commander of a tiger 1 and realise it isnt like warthunder and there isnt phonk or little dark age playing
even in WT those wehraboos are gonna lost their shit and screams "GerMaNY SuFfER" lmao.
they're type of person that think tigers and panthers are superior to allies or soviet counterparts and drove it like it was invincible, then ragequit when they got sniped by a well positioned 76mm sherman, or got penned frontally by 75mm sherman because they drove to close, or even get dismantled piece by piece by a group of locusts.
Suddenly they get strafed by a P-51
"quite a few dollars" I think that's a bit of an understatement lol
15:05 Hunters are sadists but that person is ready to “hunt” hunters?!😂
again, many people simply hunt for food, to survive, explain to me how that makes them "sadists"
"I don't have any country bias. Other than Britain"
Fair enough my brother
Can you imagine 6 HIGHLY EXPENSIVE E-100s just riding around in a tight formation, surrounded by even more tanks, in the bomb sights of an allied bomber?
That allied bomber will have a boom boom fun time
I can certainly imagine the bomber having some difficulty flying straight with the crew all sporting spontaneous boners from it.
@@youmukonpaku3168 Exactly hahaha
Tempest MkV late, P47D Thunderbolt (Razorback):
*It's free real estate.*
No you don't get it the bombs are just gonna bounce off of the tanks, they put springs on top of the tanks so they'll just fly off elsewhere with a loud *boing* demonstrating superior German engineering.
Never let dumb comments sour you on your viewers in general. I’ve seen far too many channels where they have barely concealed contempt for their viewers because of a small and notorious pack of commenters.
Agreed. Every channel with a following gets comments from low IQ or mentally ill people. You really should just ignore them, you’re not gonna change their mind. And you don’t have to defend yourself against them, we know em when we see em
Like you?
Would love to see another one from you in the future 😊
Loved the vid. Keep up the good work.
I have no idea how a tank works. All I know is that it aims at something, fires and then all your worries disappear. Unless your caliber is too small. Then your problems multiply very quickly.
Yeah, thats pretty much all you need to know if you don't want to be a tank expert.
A good chunk of these comments were just people speaking “Engrish” from translating their native language through Google Translate which made their comments absolutely nonsense. The other portions are just kids that are interested in tanks and spouting general stereotypical beliefs on tanks, people that....”think outside the box” like that guy counting the cupola as being an extra turret, and people that are irrationally enraged by sponsorships.
I think you are right. And People can get so angry when their favorite thing is challenged.
For the "it took 5 Sherman's to kill one tiger tank" argument; I initially thought this misconception was a thing because the number of tanks in a Sherman squadron were usually of higher numbers than that of a Tiger squadron? Like for every 1 Tiger there was like 3-5 Sherman tanks. Not saying it took that many to tank down a Tiger, I'm saying that is just how many more tanks were in that squad.
i dont know how they fit the 155mm gun in the 105mm turret. But im guessing they took the 105mm gun out so they had room for the 155mm
Like they wouldn't? 2 cannons on a turret? Of course they would take the 105mm out to put in the 155mm
Okay, literally just before you mentioned the Abrams part at around 13:30 ish (a bit more but idc), I googled it because I tend to do that.
The proposals from Chrysler and GM had the 105mm but were redesigned so that by the prototype phase, the turret could mount both the M68 105mm gun or the then undesignated Rh120 120mm gun for evaluation. The 105mm was selected for ammo commonality with the M60 but later on, obviously the M1 was upgraded to the M1A1 standard which gave it the M256 120mm gun.
I initially thought they were designed for the 120mm from the start but partially redesigned for the 105mm for the same reason why the 105mm was selected for the initial M1s. I was wrong.
From what I've heard it had to do with ammo availability and effectiveness. The 105 had good ammo which was already widely in service with NATO members but the designers knew eventually they would need to upgrade so they made sure a better armament could later be installed.
@@ConeOfArc Hell it could be argued the 105 is still capable to this day and preferable for certain use cases. Though I suppose vehicle mounted ATGMs combined with a smaller gun have essentially taken over that niche.
@@ConeOfArc So in a nutshell, "Hey guys, let's future proof this thing a little while where at it."
Spookston made a good video explaining why the 105mm was chosen for the XM1 over the 120mm.
The 105 costs less, weighs less, and uses common ammunition throughout NATO at the time.
12:57 this guy would shit himself if he knew they put a Pershing turret on a Sherman hull.
or what yugoslavian did with SO122 (Sherman with 122mm)
As a weapons and vehicle nerd for both WW1 and WW2, these comments hurt my brain as well XD
If I had a dollar for every "5 Sherman's to kill a tiger" comment i saw. I could probably buy every Sherman still around.
15:10, was that dude literally complaining about people hunting yet watches a UA-cam channel about war vehicles deigned to kill people? It was probably ThatVeganTeacher on a alt account lol
These videos are like mini pop quizzes of history, and they’re honestly quite enjoyable! Thanks for this video Cone; and yes, at least I can say I’ll see you in the next one ✌️ 💪
I love how ReaperTango19 said that the shells should be referred to as 105mm, the Germans used cm's for everything they built 😂
Hahaha yes this was great entertainment! Do more in the future!!
You are correct in that "it took five Shermans to take out one Tiger (or Pz. IV)" because, as The Chieftain pointed out, five is the number of Shermans in a tank platoon. So when there is an enemy tank around, five is the number of tanks you send. Sure, if the Tiger were well camouflaged and dug in (hull down), then a frontal assault of Shermans could lose more than five tanks. Just like a single dug-in, hull down, KV-2 held off a dozen German tanks.
@@mr9263 He isn't. This is all true.
You are right but there is a difference between sending five Shermans and requiring five Shermans which is what these people seem to think, that you literally need at least five tanks or the Tiger just won't be penetrated or something. I assume the idea is to use the five tanks to rush and surround it but why couldn't you do that with 4 or 3? And of course it doesn't take into account 76mm Shermans, anti-tank guns and vehicles and all the other branches that could neutralize or impede a Tiger. Would be pretty hard for the Tiger to pick off those so-called feeble helpless Shermans if some artillery behind the lines is blinding the tank with a smokescreen. So yes, you are correct in saying that five would be sent assuming that the platoon has five operational tanks, perhaps there could even be multiple platoons in the area, but saying that you REQUIRE that many is still just incorrect wehraboo nonsense.
I think I heard a long time ago that it was a KV1 that did that. I personally find that more believable because the KV1 was less clunky. Though, I do know that it’s heavily debated. Some have argued it was a T34.
@@TuShan18 You're likely talking about the Raseinai tank which appears to be debated whether it was a KV1 or KV2. It got behind German lines and held up elements of the 6th Panzer Division for a full day before finally being knocked out by a combination of tanks, 88mm flak and infantry but this is mostly just because it wasn't attacked very hard. It got a lucky kill against an 88mm gun moving up behind it but otherwise it just shrugged off rounds until being overwhelmed.
@@EnSayne987 ah, so it was a different event. Sorry about that. Thanks for the explanation to what happened, it was interesting.
Wehraboos trying to look smart on the internet challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Great vid, would love to see more of these
Loo
Wehraboos are literal spergs
Wehraboo try not to make a fool of yourself challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
This was, at times, hilarious!
Good work on that excessively long run-on sentence. I was rooting for you to complete it without a breath. So close!
33:03 thats just an average Ford fan to be honest
Yes more tanks would make the fuel issue Germany was facing better xD