Why Zimmerit on Panzers & Testing

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 15 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 253

  • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
    @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Місяць тому +44

    Correction: The Stug from the Tank Museum is a Stug III G not F, thanks to @shockblaster1201 for pointing this out.

  • @greenockscatman
    @greenockscatman Місяць тому +712

    Commissioning a company to painstakingly apply 200kg of extra weight onto your tank in order to counter a non existent threat, sounds about right for 1943.

    • @Rutherford_Inchworm_III
      @Rutherford_Inchworm_III Місяць тому +65

      Germany 1943: "We've now improved on the captured American bazooka, giving our infantry unparalleled protection and range against any Allied armor."
      Also Germany 1943: "MINE ON, APPLY DIRECTLY TO TANK SIDE. MINE ON, APPLY DIRECTLY TO TANK SIDE."

    • @Winged_Gunsknecht
      @Winged_Gunsknecht Місяць тому +39

      ​@@Rutherford_Inchworm_III It have not yet ceased to amuse me that the panzerschreck protective shield was a field expedient made official. The nerds thought neeeding an protective poncho and face mask to avoid getting burnt was fine. :D

    • @bigblue6917
      @bigblue6917 Місяць тому +35

      As the tanks were delivered to the frontlines uncoated with Zimmerit this meant the tank had to spend two days being coated in the rear area before being released to the tank crews. Just what you need in the middle of a war.

    • @Teh0X
      @Teh0X Місяць тому +15

      @@bigblue6917 3:08 he mentions it was generally applied by factories. Those two divisions who tested it were an exception.

    • @cathulhu-q7y
      @cathulhu-q7y Місяць тому +8

      ​@@bigblue6917zimmerit Was applied in the factory over the anti rust coat. Over that a primer in RAL7028 was layed. The final camo pattern was to be applied by the units at the front

  • @cannonfodder4376
    @cannonfodder4376 Місяць тому +174

    That the allies never correctly guessed what the Zimmerit coating was for is rather indicative of the fact that magnetic AT grenades were never something they considered developing and as such could not consider that the Germans who did develop such weapons would be mirroring such fears onto the allies.
    An informative video.

    • @kamikaziking
      @kamikaziking 27 днів тому

      even the hafthochladung that the germans used was completely useless in the field ....

  • @KettyFey
    @KettyFey Місяць тому +212

    I can confirm that a British source, of soldiers in the field, thought that Zimmerit was primarily for camouflage. As it helped to break up a vehicle's hard edges (particularly if the Zimmerit was applied locally, as I've seen examples of very roughly applied coating that gave vehicles a surface like chunky papermache/ mud).

    • @kirotheavenger60
      @kirotheavenger60 Місяць тому +17

      I've read multiple allied accounts of testing Zimmerit. Seems commanders officers loved to giving a bucket of concrete to bored looking soldiers.
      All of them had conclusions along the lines of "absolute stonking pain in the arse to apply it, we don't even use magnetic mines anyway, but the finish is quite nice for camouflage"

  • @RalfJosefFries
    @RalfJosefFries Місяць тому +56

    Spoke once with an driver of an Panzer IV - he told me that the tankcrews liked Zimmerit because it made the tanks surface, especially when wet, less slippery - so it was easier to mount and unmount and work on the tanks. And as he told me, it was much easier to get frozen snow or ice off the tank with that zimmerit-layer between steel and snow and ice.

    • @scorchedearth1451
      @scorchedearth1451 5 днів тому

      Why would they get snow and ice off the tank? It's free camouflage.

  • @Absaalookemensch
    @Absaalookemensch Місяць тому +52

    And military modelers have regretted that decision ever since.

  • @ryanrehfuss
    @ryanrehfuss Місяць тому +146

    It seems like the German '-it' suffix is just like the '-ite' suffix in English, given to a named mineral or proprietary compound. So we might have called it Zimmerite.

    • @FirstDagger
      @FirstDagger Місяць тому +20

      Yes, it is the same suffix, e.g. Magnetit = Magnetite, Hämatit = Hematite

    • @RobertEkendahl
      @RobertEkendahl Місяць тому +3

      And here I thought the informal “-ish” suffix 😊

    • @poptart2nd
      @poptart2nd Місяць тому +8

      this makes sense, given that english is a german language

    • @wolf310ii
      @wolf310ii Місяць тому +3

      Romani ite domum

    • @stephenlitten1789
      @stephenlitten1789 Місяць тому +1

      @@wolf310ii Romans the people they go the house? 🤪

  • @grizwoldphantasia5005
    @grizwoldphantasia5005 Місяць тому +132

    It's hard for me to come to grips with the idea that getting close enough to an enemy tank to slap a magnetic mine on it was the best anti-tank weapon available. Someone had a sticky one too, which I think could be thrown a few feet, and that seems just as crazy. But I've got hindsight that they didn't.

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Місяць тому +53

      The German military to this day has the principle "Wirkung vor Deckung" "Effect before cover / protection", in that sense it was clearly the best one at the time.

    • @EXO9X8
      @EXO9X8 Місяць тому +3

      What about Russian magnetic mine dogs….

    • @urlauburlaub2222
      @urlauburlaub2222 Місяць тому +9

      Yes, but also before the age of tanks, cavalry or artillery had been attacked in point-blank-range. Also infantry with a pike or lancet. And especially the German Armies were trained to attack tanks that way, too.

    • @killzoneisa
      @killzoneisa Місяць тому +6

      I think it was the British with the sticky one.

    • @eriks.9730
      @eriks.9730 Місяць тому +8

      That’s why tanks need infantry support and vice verse.

  • @davidjernigan8161
    @davidjernigan8161 Місяць тому +59

    The polyvinyl acetate was probably to bind everything together since most of the other components are of a dry granular consistency

  • @Compulsive_LARPer
    @Compulsive_LARPer Місяць тому +77

    "Historian in its natural habitat" gets me every time.
    Have a good one, Herr Kast.

  • @TCLe
    @TCLe Місяць тому +46

    The surprised Pikachu was a nice touch

  • @MsZeeZed
    @MsZeeZed Місяць тому +43

    4:40 - Caulk (pron kawk) is not “chalk” (pron chawk). Caulk is a soft paste that hardens into a waterproof seal, it’ll be present around your bath and kitchen sink even if you don’t know what it is. Not criticising the English pronunciation here, but the audio is a bit confusing, chalk is hard, brittle and would reduce to powder in a fire. In text Peter is saying the Zimmerit will become like a sticky paste after a fire.

    • @tomppeli.
      @tomppeli. Місяць тому +3

      To be fair, I had a hot minute of confusion when he said chalk

    • @xeroprotagonist
      @xeroprotagonist Місяць тому

      It sounds like it was unintentional but it could also have been a strategic anti-UA-cam-censorship mispronunciation

    • @proCaylak
      @proCaylak Місяць тому +6

      @@xeroprotagonistunlikely. his english pronunciation has always had similar quirks. I don't think it's intentional.

    • @MsZeeZed
      @MsZeeZed Місяць тому +1

      @@proCaylak ironically the phoneme “Ch” is usually pronounced “K” in German/Austrian, so it may be not realising that this English “Ch” was uncommonly a “K” (its more often “Ch” in English).
      What’s doubley ironic is “Calking” goes back several millennia in masonry. It’s derived from the Latin word Calico (fill in with limestone or lime-wash) and so shares a word derivation with Chalk (Calx). Calking may have acquired a different “K” pronunciation just by linguistic drift, possibly being mostly associated with ship building (waterproofing) several thousand years ago. It arrived in English from Latin via Old French and not Germanic influence.
      Just to show how good Peter Samsonov’s observation is the 1913 Websters definition of Cauk (no L in the American, still pron Kawk) is “Barite” (Barium Sulfate) which get’s us right back to what half of Zimmerit is made of. Post WW2 Caulk is more likely to be a Silicone Latex or polyvinyl acetate mix, but it clearly shares physical properties with Barium Sulfate which would have predated it and was used to create brilliant white waterproof exterior paint. This would have been a more commonly used weather coat in early C20th therefore, but Barium was well known to be non-magnetic.

    • @proCaylak
      @proCaylak Місяць тому

      @@MsZeeZed thanks for the lenghty story about the linguistics around "caulk" and the history of the material itself :)

  • @lskovly
    @lskovly Місяць тому +19

    Got zimmerit on my VW Polo, it works!!

    • @outofturn331
      @outofturn331 Місяць тому +2

      I can assure that my charge couldn't stick on it

    • @Blue-bf8lv
      @Blue-bf8lv 16 днів тому +2

      Do parking tickets stick to it?

    • @lskovly
      @lskovly 15 днів тому +2

      @@Blue-bf8lv No, not anymore

  • @mensch1066
    @mensch1066 Місяць тому +105

    I like how the Soviets couldn't even figure out what Zimmerit was even for!

    • @00yiggdrasill00
      @00yiggdrasill00 Місяць тому +17

      Why would they? They didn't use magnetic mines as AT weapons.

    • @ohmyshou1der
      @ohmyshou1der Місяць тому +9

      @@00yiggdrasill00 They probably looted several at some point

    • @00yiggdrasill00
      @00yiggdrasill00 Місяць тому

      @@ohmyshou1der probably. But would they care enough to put it together when they already decided it was an anti fire measure and made no difference to how they instructed troops to destroy tanks?

    • @ohmyshou1der
      @ohmyshou1der Місяць тому +15

      @@00yiggdrasill00 looked like the germans expected their enemies to copy the magnetic charge, I don't know how effective it was and why nobody copied it. I would expect troops were instructed to provide looted equipment for examination.

    • @00yiggdrasill00
      @00yiggdrasill00 Місяць тому

      @@ohmyshou1der I do expect such an order was in place. Though developing the same methods for using it is a different thing. Honestly, running up to a tank and planting a magnetic mine on it doesn't sound like a good way to help experienced troops survive. The Soviets were known for firebombs and bundle grenades early on and they ate hell doing it to my knowledge. But you use what you have.

  • @wsimonton3
    @wsimonton3 28 днів тому +3

    I have read somewhere that the application of Zimmerit was ordered discontinued September 15, 1944, which interestingly is the same day the poduction of the "chin" on the Panther began.

  • @dillonhunt1720
    @dillonhunt1720 Місяць тому +139

    Germans: It defeats magnetic mines
    Soviets: Its anti molotov camo
    Me: It looks cool

    • @Redstoneprofi01
      @Redstoneprofi01 Місяць тому +4

      Nah, it looks cool the first time you look at it but especially in war thunder it gets annoying, a nice shiny tank looks cool too

    • @ThroughTheGatesOfHell
      @ThroughTheGatesOfHell 29 днів тому +1

      @@Redstoneprofi01absolutely not, Tiger E looks significantly better than the H1 for example

    • @unvaxxeddoomerlife6788
      @unvaxxeddoomerlife6788 20 днів тому

      @@Redstoneprofi01 Shiny is a bad thing on a battlefield. Shiny is visible from miles away.

    • @Redstoneprofi01
      @Redstoneprofi01 20 днів тому

      @@unvaxxeddoomerlife6788 The comment was about how it looks cool, not how it's useful. I understand that it wasn't good on the battlefield

  • @Acer_Maximinus
    @Acer_Maximinus Місяць тому +1

    This is a great video.👍
    I had some knowledge of Zimmerit.
    But I learned a lot of interesting details here.
    Excellent presentation.

  • @Teh0X
    @Teh0X Місяць тому +6

    Tank modifications like these are somehow very interesting topic.

  • @JdeMonster
    @JdeMonster Місяць тому +7

    @7:07 PVA is an organic compound. Considering that you mentioned they used a blowtorch, they might have taken a sample and combusted it. The change in mass would correspond to organics/volatile compounds being expelled or combusting.
    Essentially they probably did a proto-Thermogravimetric analysis and that's how they came to that conclusion.

  • @AirsoftTipsandReviews
    @AirsoftTipsandReviews 28 днів тому +1

    Great test and analysis. Great job you're doing, sir.

  • @fancyultrafresh3264
    @fancyultrafresh3264 Місяць тому +1

    Thank you for another brilliant breakdown Bernhardt.

  • @HistoricalHavocHub
    @HistoricalHavocHub 17 днів тому

    i like how they detailed and put it in the application manual that "not to put on the lights"... foreshadowing the situation if some of the workers would be "but it says everywhere on the front" and applying it literally everywhere as "i am just following instructions"

  • @geoffreyscheuerman2378
    @geoffreyscheuerman2378 Місяць тому +4

    Fiinaly, a good description of the compounds whiçh zimmerit was composed of. If you're restoring a German AFV that originally wore the stuff, that's a great thing. As far as us model builders who are replicating it on a German AFV in scale, I'll continue using Squadron or Tamiya putty to reproduce it, LOL

  • @billa6825
    @billa6825 27 днів тому

    Thank you for your excellent and informative work.

  • @marcusott2973
    @marcusott2973 Місяць тому +6

    Much awaited, much appreciated looking forward to excellent insights as always from you.

  • @milgeschichte
    @milgeschichte Місяць тому +7

    Sehr interessant, danke :)

  • @Warmaker01
    @Warmaker01 Місяць тому +3

    It's one of those weird things that makes you wonder why the Germans adopted it in the first place. Yeah, the Germans themselves used magnetic antitank mines, but none of their enemies had them even by mid-1943 when Zimmerit was being applied.
    Magnetic antitank mines were a weapon of desperation. The US Army started issuing the Bazooka as early as Operation Torch in late 1942. The British PIAT started appearing in early 1943 at Tunisia. Germany's enemies had zero reason to go for magnetic AT mines, yet they pushed Zimmerit application anyways in mid-1943.

  •  Місяць тому +10

    What I love about Zimmerit is that it was one of the few times where the germany in WW2 anticipated a thread and acted on it, only for that thread to never materialise :)

    • @me67galaxylife
      @me67galaxylife Місяць тому

      Implying other nations did that a lot ?

  • @shockblaster1201
    @shockblaster1201 Місяць тому +4

    That StuG III from Bovington looks like a G, not F, considering how different the super structure is

  • @themightiestofbooshes9443
    @themightiestofbooshes9443 Місяць тому +1

    We had Zimmerit come and go before the Bf109 K-4 (Oct 1944)

  • @NetTopsey
    @NetTopsey Місяць тому +10

    Zimmerit is a classic example of a solution looking for a problem.

    • @JohnSmith-ty2he
      @JohnSmith-ty2he 12 днів тому

      I mean that pretty much explains German engineering during the era in general. They just kept inventing increasingly more impractical devices lol.

  • @donovanchau3483
    @donovanchau3483 25 днів тому +1

    While it might’ve never had a chance to fulfill its original purpose, it does seem to at least disrupt the typical light glare of the armor. You can see on the second King Tiger that the side skirts and barrel reflect significantly more than the hull and turret side. That said, simple netting would be cheaper, faster to apply, and more effective.

  • @lordcommander3224
    @lordcommander3224 23 дні тому +1

    Thanks for the warning. I will be sure not to try sticking a powerful magnet onto my personal panzer collection.

  • @alt5494
    @alt5494 20 днів тому

    Modular sections of camouflage netting spaced off armor on welded tabs. Would have been a significant improvement.

  • @histhoryk2648
    @histhoryk2648 Місяць тому +7

    The captions are broken, there's a wall of text in first few sec and then there are no captions

  • @bernaue4505
    @bernaue4505 25 днів тому

    The story I've heard was that Zimmerit failed to harden when applied in cold temperatures.
    During the autumn and winter, due to the rapid production of tanks and lack of space, assembled tanks from production line were being placed outside the factory before the Zimmerit was applied.
    This meant that the initial layer of Zimmerit, when being applied as two coatings, failed to harden and was left in a softened state.
    The workers would then apply the second layer and use a blowtorch to heat the surface so it would harden.
    Supposedly, the reports of Zimmerit being flammable was due to incoming shells breaking the outer layer and igniting the unset layer beneath.

  • @jackmoorehead2036
    @jackmoorehead2036 Місяць тому +5

    The problem with Engineers is, they designed things to fill a problem that doesn't exist occasionally.

  • @nvelsen1975
    @nvelsen1975 Місяць тому

    0:58 This is why I come to this channel, to get the real facts. It did indeed influence the Croatian of a protective coating.
    Said Croatian didn't really like being rubbed across all tank hulls during production as it gave him a rash, but after being promised a higher salary he reluctantly agreed. 😉
    (More seriously though: Ab-brennen should probably be 'to burn off' of something like you can use flames to burn old paint off of a metal surface)

  • @matthewmcmacken6716
    @matthewmcmacken6716 26 днів тому

    I like the look, but I love the name.

  • @mathewkelly9968
    @mathewkelly9968 29 днів тому +2

    2:22 as someone who used to fit an install conveyour belts and has worked at bitumen/asphalt plants the troops where correct . Worst idea ever , get any of that on you its off to a specialised burn unit at a top tier hospital

  • @ptonpc
    @ptonpc Місяць тому +2

    From what I recall reading (A long time ago) the production and application of Zimmerit consumed a lot of petrol too. Fuel that could have been used for something else.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      Polyvinyl acetate doesn’t use oil to apply. It is made from acetic acid and acetylene (toxic process) or acetic acid and ethylene (less toxic process).
      It can however take up to a week to dry as it is usually used as an aqueous solution (and won’t dry at all in freezing conditions).

    • @ptonpc
      @ptonpc Місяць тому

      @@allangibson8494 Good point. It wasn't the PVA that used the petrol (not oil) though.
      I'm trying to remember the article, it was a few years ago, that described the application process.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +1

      @@ptonpc Possibly drying the PVA…
      Waiting a week before you could use a new tank in 1944 was probably a nonstarter for the Germans however…

  • @Bzuhl
    @Bzuhl Місяць тому +1

    Just figure out the polarity of ennemy's magnets and coat your tank with magnet of the same polarity => explosives get repelled => profit.

  • @NiallWardrop
    @NiallWardrop Місяць тому +3

    Given that the magnet on the back of that light did seem to stick to some extent, and those are not very strong, I'd like to see how firmly something like a magnet fishing magnet would stick. The British did have magnetic "limpet mines" using very strong magnets for sabotage operations but presumably didn't use them for anti tank purposes due to the difficulty of application. As mentioned in other comments the actual British anti tank charges used a glue like substance and could therefore be thrown from a distance.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому +1

      And the sticky bombs were rapidly replaced with shaped charge projectile weapons (that didn’t stick to the user).

    • @NiallWardrop
      @NiallWardrop Місяць тому +2

      @@allangibson8494 In a wartime context not that rapidly - Sticky bomb 1940, Piat from July '43. Interestingly the nature and texture of Zimmerit probably made it more likely that a sticky would stick.

    • @allangibson8494
      @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

      @@NiallWardrop The PIAT entered service in August 1942.
      The Sticky Bomb couldn’t penetrate anything more robust than a Panzer I.
      The PIAT was derived from the 1940 Blacker Bombard.

    • @SilvaDreams
      @SilvaDreams 29 днів тому +1

      That magnet is fairly weak compared to some now days but it's still likely a neodymium magnet and during WW2 the best they would have are simple ferrous magnets which are much weaker.

    • @NiallWardrop
      @NiallWardrop 29 днів тому

      @@SilvaDreams Those work lights are designed to be easily removed, they barely stick to a painted metal surface. Long before neodymium magnets were around there were things like magnetic radio antenna mounts which were hard to remove.

  • @Korhanne
    @Korhanne Місяць тому +1

    Grahvel, not graevel :)
    Caulk is the word on the screen, (4:49) not chalk (mentioned), not sure what the correct thing is, but caulk and chalk are two different things. Caulking (Caulk) is the material you put in around a bathtub or whatever, forming a waterproof gasket/seal. chalk is for drawing on blackboards in school etc.
    ALSO
    Very happy to finally know all of this. It seems to me the tiger II at a prior date likely had it removed due to the fire hazard rumours... wasting time and resources twice. The stoppage of the application makes sense, see also waste of time, but the removal does not (What's there probably wouldn't hurt it too much)

  • @hell_march6652
    @hell_march6652 Місяць тому +2

    I have 2 questions. 1 : is it hard enough to set off a shaped scharge before making contact with the hull? And 2 : If number 1 is true does it give enough space between the coating and thew hull to disapate any of the shaped charges payload?

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Місяць тому +2

      1) I am very certain it is. If have never heard of something "too soft" to not trigger a shaped charge, they might also use inertia fuzes.
      2) No, it might actually increase the effects, it depends on the shaped charges, but modern ones have usually a tip, from what I know that tip is to extend the distance, so that the jet can properly form.

  • @Cormano980
    @Cormano980 Місяць тому +3

    It looks incredibly cool and ahead of its time

  • @CGM_68
    @CGM_68 Місяць тому

    Given that the other 4 proposed counter measures "were rejected by troops due to the fire hazard." It's a little ironic that one of the reasons it was discontinued in September 1944 was because of rumours that it could be set on fire by shell impacts. Though this was tested and officially disproved.

  • @MrChainsawAardvark
    @MrChainsawAardvark 29 днів тому

    By the numbers, the Hafthohlladung had decent enough penetration, though I don't know much about its beyond armor effect or ease of use. Nor does anyone say if the attachment points just very strong iron magnets, or something a bit more exotic. In turn its a bit hard to say if the allies were missing out not developing magnetic weapons of their own. It probably would have been safer than the sticky bombs designed in Britain (nitro explosive in a glass ball surrounded by adhesive...)

  • @Phos9
    @Phos9 Місяць тому +1

    Did they make the grooved pattern with a tile trowel?

  • @mlugin8050
    @mlugin8050 12 днів тому

    why not try recreat Zimmerit and apply it on a steel plate? Just an idea, would be interesting. use „Zahntraufeln“ for the pattern. Just an idea, the materials sound not so hard to get

  • @jimsackmanbusinesscoaching1344
    @jimsackmanbusinesscoaching1344 Місяць тому +4

    Clearly at 2:35 there is mistake - it should be "House of the Maus". Please do better :)

  • @Swellington_
    @Swellington_ 16 днів тому

    The tracks on the Stug sitting beside the Churchill has its left track on backwards,anyone else notice that? 🤷‍♂️
    The Stug 3 F

  • @clockdva20
    @clockdva20 Місяць тому +2

    Look how much extra weight modern MBT are fitted with all the extra reactive Armour that is fitted and now anti drone and shoot down AT rockets .

    • @polarvortex3294
      @polarvortex3294 Місяць тому

      Sounds like when designing a tank the engine should be over-built, so to speak, just in case additions become necessary.

  • @memo_mauserlorettini5979
    @memo_mauserlorettini5979 Місяць тому

    Our veterans in Bulgaria : call it "Klop-mine" , because the sound which the tank crew listened when it was implied by panzer-grenadiers of 6th SS army.......

  • @kmoecub
    @kmoecub 29 днів тому

    Finally tested?!?!? It was extensively tested both during and after WW2.

  • @ssnydess6787
    @ssnydess6787 23 дні тому

    I thought the irregular surface was also developed to counter the British "sticky anti tank bombs" ?

  • @ChristianTheNorwegian
    @ChristianTheNorwegian Місяць тому +8

    "Ribbed for your pleasure" vibes here

    • @outofturn331
      @outofturn331 Місяць тому

      Heard it did help in the thrust

  • @mikeoxlong6797
    @mikeoxlong6797 Місяць тому

    Could you do a video on why Russia or Ukraine aren’t converting old tank hulls into StuG’s??

  • @AppliedCryogenics
    @AppliedCryogenics 8 днів тому +1

    Ochre is a mineral, so could be the main source of quartz.

  • @1forge2rulethemall88
    @1forge2rulethemall88 Місяць тому

    I'm suprised they didnt try covering in wooden slats. Sure It'd be weaker and have some fire risk (less than tar though), but it'd be infinitely lighter than concrete and cheaper too.

  • @avus-kw2f213
    @avus-kw2f213 Місяць тому

    did not know it was not the metal
    it makes a lot of sense now . the Germans weren't wasting a lot of money protecting the tanks from magnets

  • @bigsarge2085
    @bigsarge2085 Місяць тому +1

    Interesting.

  • @Mrsmith971
    @Mrsmith971 Місяць тому +5

    Can we all just appreciate how a youtube historian/researcher (a good one at that) is using a surprised Pikachu as the graphic for germany realizing no one used magnetic AT mines against them.

  • @Boneless_McGee
    @Boneless_McGee 26 днів тому

    I can't believe Pikachu made a cameo appearance in this video 😮

  • @NoraVilleneuve
    @NoraVilleneuve Місяць тому

    You are real masters! Your content always pleases with high quality and professionalism. Continue to please us with your works.🐗🌕🧐

  • @Swiftzerman
    @Swiftzerman 23 дні тому

    The fact that just simply sticking mud on the tank will make zimmerit almost useless,believe it or not the Soviets did this in their tanks in Operation Bagration

  • @hind6799
    @hind6799 18 днів тому

    I have no opinion on Zimmerit application wether it was a good or bad idea.
    Just because the Hafthohlladung was not copied by the Allies does not mean Zimmerit was a 100% waste. What many fail to understand is that military technology can also have a deterrence effect. Why utilize/copy a weapon that is badly working against German tanks because of Zimmerit? Germans could have waited with the Zimmerit application, see if Allies would field mag mines. It can be a good idea to keep your new inventions in the backhand, especially with Zimmerit being able to applied quickly even in the field but Germans decided to put it on despite no intentions yet by the enemy to field mag mines. This might indicate that they wanted to play out the deterence effect as it was clear that the enemy would notice and study the new paste on German tanks. With the advent of AT launchers the deterence effect was superflous and so they stopped applying it.
    Another mistake is rating a technology solely by retrospective without taking perspective. By 1942 AT rifles coudn´t keep up and there was a infantry anti tank tech gap until AT-launchers started to appear later. Germans filled it with means such as the Hathohlladung and it made sense for them to fear that the allies might field this rather cheap and simple weapon aswell. Few really knew then that AT-launchers will become the next big thing.
    But all of this aside we all know Germans invented this to give model makers 50 years later a hard time.

  • @AsbestosMuffins
    @AsbestosMuffins 9 днів тому

    thought the idea was you couldn't get a charge to stick to like a moving tank thats shaking and rolling

  • @raylast3873
    @raylast3873 22 дні тому

    Is wood glue organic?

  • @808bigisland
    @808bigisland Місяць тому +2

    Used to play on tigers, panthers, jagd-panter as a kid at the local tank museum/then dump. Zimmerit killed your jeans and sneakers instantly and got you bloddy fingertips.

  • @rutherford2580
    @rutherford2580 Місяць тому

    4:40 It behaves like caulk not chalk. A little diffrence.

  • @masudashizue777
    @masudashizue777 Місяць тому

    When I think of zimmerit, I think of those Japanese gardens with raked pebbles.

  • @beyondfubar
    @beyondfubar 17 днів тому

    It always seems like the Germans were trying to play chess with checkers while the Allies never considered chess as an option, for themselves or the enemy.

  • @perimuk
    @perimuk Місяць тому +1

    I mean even if its somewat useles it just looks cool

  • @andyf4292
    @andyf4292 29 днів тому +1

    so they thought about putting stucco on a tank?

  • @triumphant39
    @triumphant39 Місяць тому

    The test proves that it has mild anti magnetic properties, but nothing else. The lack of the full weight of the mine means that it’s much likely to stick than simply a magnetic panel. The weight of the mine is offset substantially from the panel, and clearly even with the setup that was actually used, the magnets weren’t that effective because the mine had to be placed by hand, it couldn’t be thrown and be expected to stick on a tank lacking zimmerit. Likely with an accurate prop or actual artifact tested here, it just wouldn’t stick.

  • @apstrike
    @apstrike Місяць тому +4

    Nobody, not even the Nazis, should ever question the need for waffles.

  • @guidor.4161
    @guidor.4161 29 днів тому +1

    The quarz likely came from some sand mixed in.

  • @Lykyk
    @Lykyk Місяць тому +8

    DO NOT start the video with subtitles on in the first second.

    • @fburger9953
      @fburger9953 Місяць тому +2

      Seems like an opportunity for a "please"

  • @jrmouton5523
    @jrmouton5523 Місяць тому +1

    This video is like a Panther - starts whit disclosures Ausf. D and Ausf. A

  • @herrcobblermachen
    @herrcobblermachen Місяць тому

    Cant imagine the horror when a tanker was told his tank would be coated in tar to make it resistant to antitank mines.

  • @user-pm3lu7vw5l
    @user-pm3lu7vw5l Місяць тому +1

    Ok it s a german panzer video but I laughed at the pikachu icone .

  • @nightshade4186
    @nightshade4186 28 днів тому +1

    Plot twist: It was applied to fool everyone and make everyone wondering for decades what it was for and put time and resources into researching it.

  • @allangibson8494
    @allangibson8494 Місяць тому

    Ochre pigment isn’t organic. It’s an iron oxide (ferric oxide).

  • @QALibrary
    @QALibrary Місяць тому +1

    Oh very interesting and looking forward to this one.
    Does anyone know if one of my tank books is wrong or correct in saying that most of the tanks covered in Zimmerit paste went to the Eastern Front while mostly naked tanks (tanks without Zimmerit paste) were used on the Western Front?

  • @clownofwar
    @clownofwar 28 днів тому

    I want something cursed like a modern day leopard with zimmerit just too see how it looks 😜

  • @GudrezBilly
    @GudrezBilly 27 днів тому

    That surprised pikachu face though 😂

  • @keithmcwilliams7424
    @keithmcwilliams7424 18 днів тому

    The allies never used magnetic mines against tank in ww2 ships yes

  • @eltigre-r5n
    @eltigre-r5n Місяць тому

    Germany thought they did a 200 iq move when they created an anti magnetic armour beforehand only to realisation nobody uses it lol

  • @Eric_Von_Yesselstyn
    @Eric_Von_Yesselstyn Місяць тому

    It's non magnetic and would stop limpet mines from being attached... The Russians never used magnetic mines like that, so they stopped putting it on.
    Interestingly enough, Germany did have a magnetic mine...

  • @TheCat48488
    @TheCat48488 Місяць тому

    Good against magnet
    You know you can just put it on top right?
    Extra steps yes, but not too hard

  • @quint3ssent1a
    @quint3ssent1a Місяць тому +3

    From what I've heard, seems like zimmerit was a scam. Someone though "hey, could we squeeze a few additional reichsmarks out of every tank for additional work?" and boom, a zimmerit coating was born. The fact that nobody else aside from Germans themselves used magnetic mines kinda points in that direction.

    • @melonetankberry5211
      @melonetankberry5211 Місяць тому +1

      the fact that it legit worked its claimed purpose makes it sound like a scam? google what scam means. NOT doing what it promises.

    • @quint3ssent1a
      @quint3ssent1a 28 днів тому

      @@melonetankberry5211 dude, if you go to the car service and in addition to changing oil in your car the serviceman also changes a liquid in your windshield spray washer for some patented bullshit which costs 9000 usd for gallon and you totally didn't asked him to do that, would you call him a scammer if he would try to push that additional cost on you?

    • @quint3ssent1a
      @quint3ssent1a 18 днів тому

      @@hind6799 tl;dr

  • @JessWLStuart
    @JessWLStuart Місяць тому

    By "strong magnet" do you mean a modern rare earth magnet (like a neodymium magnet)? If so, this wouldn't be an accurate test, since rare earth magnets weren't available in WWII.

    • @melonetankberry5211
      @melonetankberry5211 Місяць тому

      wouldn't showing a neodymium magnet failing to properly attach be an even better way to showcase the effect of the coating?

  • @teehasheestower
    @teehasheestower 29 днів тому +2

    Zimmerit seems like a product typical of German genius. It serves as a protective fire retardant coating, acts as camouflage, fire retardation, and mine defense. It does 4 different jobs in one! all of which were wholly unnecessary or redundant projects.

  • @akk-nd3vj
    @akk-nd3vj Місяць тому +1

    soviets must have captured lot of these mines so some use against them i suppose.

  • @pavelslama5543
    @pavelslama5543 Місяць тому

    Germans: We´re gonna make magnetic AT mines!
    Allies: We´re not.
    Germans: And we´re gonna make a special layer for our vehicles that makes those mines not stick to our tank.
    Allies: Ok, now we´re gonna not make magnetic AT mines EVEN MORE.

  • @Schwarzvogel1
    @Schwarzvogel1 28 днів тому

    Zimmerit: a solution in search of a problem that never really existedh. Because magnetic anti-tank mines were _so_ great that the Germans mostly phased them out by 1943 when they had a better infantry AT expedient than having some poor sod with more balls and bravery than self-preservation run up to a 40 ton tank and slap an explosive refrigerator magnet* on it. So the Heereswaffenamt naturally believed that the Allies, who already had Bazookas (Americans), PIATs (British), and no real shortage of various effective ways to kill Panzers (Soviets) would yet downgrade to magnetic mines... because reasons.
    Granted, I guess some partisans COULD ostensibly capture some Werhmacht stocks of Haftholladung 3 mines, or maybe even make their own at home. If you understand the principle of shaped charges and can work with energetic compounds without sending yourself and your workshop/lab flying skyward in small, flaming pieces, then you can probably improvise something similar to an H3 mine out of commonly available materials. Perhaps, if you captured an intact model of one, reverse-engineering it wouldn't be prohibitively difficult. It would certainly be easier than manufacturing your own artillery tubes and ammunition.
    And whilst the H3 is far from an ideal man-portable anti-tank weapon, it does have some slight, perhaps niche/situatioonal advantages over the other contemporary expedients. Its operation is virtually silent (at least until it detonates)--no muzzle flash, report, and cloud of highly visible dust upon firing; no backblast to worry about either. I imagine that these things were also dirt cheap to produce, as they're basically just a metal funnel stuffed with HE, a detonator, and with some strong magnets bolted to one end. And a single man could easily be taught how to use the weapon in very short time, compared to a more complex, crew-served system like a PaK 40. And it's a lot easier to hide an H3 under your coat than a Panzerfaust or Panzerschreck when mean-looking Kettenhund asks you, "Papieren, bitte?"
    So maybe the Heereswaffenamt was concerned about the threat of magnetic mines from _partisans_ rather than regular Allied forces? Those magnetic mines could make rather nasty ambush weapons in forests, urban areas, or simply just some partisans infiltrating a poorly guarded Wehrmacht vehicle depot on the Eastern Front to stick magnetic mines on all the parked AFVs, then be gone before the fireworks start.
    None of this changes that Ziimmerit was, in hindsight, a waste of resources that could have been spent on more relevant projects and efforts. Germany didn't lose the war because of Zimmerit, but the decision to retrofit existing AFVs with it and increase the production time of new ones by adding it was just one of many mind-boggling decisions the Germans made during the war.

  • @jasonyama333
    @jasonyama333 Місяць тому +5

    Anyone else think zimmerite also helped with camouflage? Looks like it reduces shine and reflection to human eye?

  • @hakeemzahardi9207
    @hakeemzahardi9207 Місяць тому

    Even soviet weren't that suicidal to use that weapon

  • @UnitSe7en
    @UnitSe7en Місяць тому

    Caulk is a putty substance. It is not chalk. :)