Chieftain, I have always wondered about one thing. Are these additional outside fuel barrels dangerous for the tank? Is it possible that when they get shot fuel gets sucked into the engine and ignited? Or is it unlikely that a leaking barrel at the very end of the tank would do any harm? Or were these barrels removed (or emptied) before a battle anyhow? thx for your response and keep up the interesting work!
It's an un-ditching log, it gets chained to the tracks and is used to increase traction when stuck in muddy ground, it's much easier to just get pulled out though.
Personally I eagerly await his detailed take on the Sherman. With all the "Sherman=worst tank of ww2" guff floating around I'd love to see the Chieftain demonstrate the various things that actually made it a pretty nifty tank.
It's amazing to look back at this one in comparison to the IS-3 tour that he just released. The IS-4 doesn't look as scary or innovative but the turret interior is so much better.....
I think it's generally unlikely that the fuel on the external tanks will flow in towards the intake. It is far more likely to run down the side. Is it plausible? Yes. Likely, not necessarily.
I would serious watch a full tv show of tanks with you hosting it. basically going in depth with hundreds of tanks and what not (modern as well as older)...seriously
Intercom is standard in most modern tanks. If the crew hatch is open, commander is exposed 360º. But infantry going to the intercom have 90º cover (front), while the crew is completely protected. However, the location of this intercom is somewhat inconvenient. It seem to be just a step from the crew hatch. It would be nicer if it was located in the back of the tank.
The Sherman had good mechanical reliability, low maintenance, and America could produce them in the tens of thousands. The bad reputation comes from the 75 mm gun which, while good in 1942, it was simply outdated in the anti-tank role on the Western Front (76 mm guns were pretty rare). However, Britain engaged most of the large tanks at this time, so the 75 mm Sherman was mainly used as infantry support, encountering mostly light vehicles, StuGs, and Pz IVs, which it could deal with well enough.
So the loader would leave the turrent climb onto the engine compartment to operate the AA gun or would he swivel the gun around to operate from the hatch?
Fortunately for the Allies, Tiger I and II tanks were pretty thin on the ground. If you were unlucky enough to meet one of the 'big cats' it would most likely be a Panther. The vast majority of German armour was made up of Panzer IV's and assault guns such as the StuG III, vehicles that the Sherman was capable of dealing with. Also don't forget the Sherman Firefly used by British/Commonwealth forces. The Tiger didn't like its 17lb gun.
I was thinking about the KV-2 and the IS-2. One is the fore-bearer of the latter. The disastrous KV-2 which was top heavy and the IS-2 which was 7 short tons lighter and had a more powerful gun. In 3 years time.
lol at campfire log. If you never lived in a snowy winter country i understand you don't get the point. But when your tires (tracks here) doesn't have enough traction and you're stuck in place, you got 2-3 choices; push, pull or add traction. We'd use a shovell or pine branches but for something like a tank you need a massive log. Since you need more force+toque to get something moving it also apply to your initial traction.
This is not an answer to my question. I know they are not connected to the tank. Nevertheless the engine ventialtino intake is no more than a meter away from the barrels. Leaking fuel from a punctured barrel could easily spread over the back of the tank, get sucked into the enginge compartment and lit by the hot engine, causing an engine fire and maybe even worse. These are my thoughts and why I want to know from the Chieftain whether this is plausible or not.
Not if the gunner remembered to blink when he pressed the trigger. It did give a big flash but it was the only gun fielded by the western Allies that could take on the German heavies at reasonable combat ranges, which it did very successfully regardless of any shortcomings. Unfortunately for the Americans they couldn't call on the support of this weapon. The US planned to introduce the Firefly, but the war ended before any of the US ones could enter action.
But why the spring locking mechanism? From a construction point, it would make more sense to just have the pin lock and the hinged section and flip the fender backwards. Why having the complexity of the springs to keep it down, it bends back and rests completely on the fender.
Tank riders were a response to the need for infantry to accompany tanks when you didn't have any APCs or trucks with sufficient cross-country performance. The Soviets concentrated on tanks and SP guns during WW2 and the US 6x6 trucks were too important to sustaining the logistics support to hazard in combat. After the war, the Soviets made a concerted effort to mount their infantry, starting with the BTR40 and BTR152, but it wasn't until the late 1950s, that the Soviets had enough APCs to meet mounted infantry requirements in the tank divisions and regiments AND mechanize all the rifle divisions.
people say shit about Churchill too, but Chieftain did NOT mention hardly any of the things that made the tank so important. So i would not count on it. Unless it was the other guy who did that one, long time ago now
IIRC the log is used to help unditch the tank if it gets stuck. Russian tanks have carried them since the end of WWII, even the T-80 and T-90 have them. Typical Soviet/Russian design; simple but effective.
Sherman was a solid anti-infantry tank for it's time. Too bad nobody fought only with infantry. Since it wasn't exactly smaller, better armored or significantly faster than the Tiger, and had a gun that was too weak to engage in long range battles, it lost.
Fortunately for the Americans, they fought ~15% of the German forces, and thus considerably less tanks. Firefly might have had a strong gun, but it's inaccuracy didn't help when it's sub-caliber core failed to cause much damage. It also had a very large muzzle flash which gave away it's position AND blinded the crew. The main fight on the western front was fought in the air, and without it, Shermans and all the other assorted crap couldn't advance.
Russian tankers= Comrade, so these american tanks from lendlease? They have spring loaded hatches! We are sure comrade stalin has thought of this, maybe our new tanks should have these aswel, so we can escape quickly from tank and keel more nazis Soviet designers= 2:14 SpRinG LoAdEd FeNdErS
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #30 ДВА В ОДНОМ [Один человек]• Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nrXy15orKhY/mqdefault.jpg)
I can say that I am very happy to discover and subscribe to this channel, everything looks very accurate and the videos are amazing.
Chieftain, I have always wondered about one thing. Are these additional outside fuel barrels dangerous for the tank? Is it possible that when they get shot fuel gets sucked into the engine and ignited? Or is it unlikely that a leaking barrel at the very end of the tank would do any harm?
Or were these barrels removed (or emptied) before a battle anyhow?
thx for your response and keep up the interesting work!
It's an un-ditching log, it gets chained to the tracks and is used to increase traction when stuck in muddy ground, it's much easier to just get pulled out though.
Personally I eagerly await his detailed take on the Sherman.
With all the "Sherman=worst tank of ww2" guff floating around I'd love to see the Chieftain demonstrate the various things that actually made it a pretty nifty tank.
It's amazing to look back at this one in comparison to the IS-3 tour that he just released. The IS-4 doesn't look as scary or innovative but the turret interior is so much better.....
I think it's generally unlikely that the fuel on the external tanks will flow in towards the intake. It is far more likely to run down the side.
Is it plausible? Yes. Likely, not necessarily.
dont cha just love those 2 random tourists at 6:42
+Kyoya Izumi i love how he takes the camera from her like "woman PLEASE THE TANKS NOT HIS ASS"
I would serious watch a full tv show of tanks with you hosting it. basically going in depth with hundreds of tanks and what not (modern as well as older)...seriously
The DshK was an AA MG so it makes kinda sense to have this elevation
Hey chieftain, are you going to do any more operation think tanks? I loved those videos
Intercom is standard in most modern tanks. If the crew hatch is open, commander is exposed 360º. But infantry going to the intercom have 90º cover (front), while the crew is completely protected. However, the location of this intercom is somewhat inconvenient. It seem to be just a step from the crew hatch. It would be nicer if it was located in the back of the tank.
Sure
The Sherman had good mechanical reliability, low maintenance, and America could produce them in the tens of thousands. The bad reputation comes from the 75 mm gun which, while good in 1942, it was simply outdated in the anti-tank role on the Western Front (76 mm guns were pretty rare). However, Britain engaged most of the large tanks at this time, so the 75 mm Sherman was mainly used as infantry support, encountering mostly light vehicles, StuGs, and Pz IVs, which it could deal with well enough.
To go on the Chieftain's reply, doctrine usually had external fuel tank jettisoned before entering battle.
So the loader would leave the turrent climb onto the engine compartment to operate the AA gun or would he swivel the gun around to operate from the hatch?
Are all these tanks you show working? I mean, is it possible to fill it with fuel and pull out?
After you do the IS-4, do a review on the Karl-Gerat Heavy Mortar that is sitting next to the Maus.
Dumb question, what are the logs for?
Are you going to do the M3 Lee one any time soon?
Fortunately for the Allies, Tiger I and II tanks were pretty thin on the ground. If you were unlucky enough to meet one of the 'big cats' it would most likely be a Panther. The vast majority of German armour was made up of Panzer IV's and assault guns such as the StuG III, vehicles that the Sherman was capable of dealing with. Also don't forget the Sherman Firefly used by British/Commonwealth forces. The Tiger didn't like its 17lb gun.
I was thinking about the KV-2 and the IS-2. One is the fore-bearer of the latter. The disastrous KV-2 which was top heavy and the IS-2 which was 7 short tons lighter and had a more powerful gun. In 3 years time.
The Germans invented circular fans? What shape were they before, out of curiosity?;)
Or perhaps it is the location of the fans you were getting at?
lol at campfire log. If you never lived in a snowy winter country i understand you don't get the point. But when your tires (tracks here) doesn't have enough traction and you're stuck in place, you got 2-3 choices; push, pull or add traction. We'd use a shovell or pine branches but for something like a tank you need a massive log. Since you need more force+toque to get something moving it also apply to your initial traction.
I have never understood what is the log for ? Helping with maintenance jobs or what ? =O
There were a lot of references that this or that was the same as IS-3, suggesting that I had missed the video on IS-3...Did I? Can't find one...
This is not an answer to my question. I know they are not connected to the tank. Nevertheless the engine ventialtino intake is no more than a meter away from the barrels. Leaking fuel from a punctured barrel could easily spread over the back of the tank, get sucked into the enginge compartment and lit by the hot engine, causing an engine fire and maybe even worse.
These are my thoughts and why I want to know from the Chieftain whether this is plausible or not.
Not if the gunner remembered to blink when he pressed the trigger. It did give a big flash but it was the only gun fielded by the western Allies that could take on the German heavies at reasonable combat ranges, which it did very successfully regardless of any shortcomings. Unfortunately for the Americans they couldn't call on the support of this weapon. The US planned to introduce the Firefly, but the war ended before any of the US ones could enter action.
Great video as always Chief o7
But why the spring locking mechanism? From a construction point, it would make more sense to just have the pin lock and the hinged section and flip the fender backwards. Why having the complexity of the springs to keep it down, it bends back and rests completely on the fender.
The video is the their main page, i dont know what else you want...
Maybe something to do with the tank getting stuck some times.
The log is for un-ditching the tank if it gets stuck, hence the name "un-ditching log"
So when are you going inside the hatch of the IS-7?
it should be able to turn around by the look of the part it is mounting on.
hey how bout the is 7 sitting right next to the is 4 can u do a vid on the is 7
He already did
shhh dont talk about the holy one
It will be nice to meke a video with IS-7 after this
Tank riders were a response to the need for infantry to accompany tanks when you didn't have any APCs or trucks with sufficient cross-country performance. The Soviets concentrated on tanks and SP guns during WW2 and the US 6x6 trucks were too important to sustaining the logistics support to hazard in combat. After the war, the Soviets made a concerted effort to mount their infantry, starting with the BTR40 and BTR152, but it wasn't until the late 1950s, that the Soviets had enough APCs to meet mounted infantry requirements in the tank divisions and regiments AND mechanize all the rifle divisions.
YAY finally more Cheiftain's hatch!
people say shit about Churchill too, but Chieftain did NOT mention hardly any of the things that made the tank so important. So i would not count on it. Unless it was the other guy who did that one, long time ago now
On the official Wot channel, this is chieftain's own.
IIRC the log is used to help unditch the tank if it gets stuck. Russian tanks have carried them since the end of WWII, even the T-80 and T-90 have them. Typical Soviet/Russian design; simple but effective.
i like to see an episode about the elc amx or a french tank with an autoloader like the amx 13t
if i may ask, what's the name of the song?
omfg its about time
I like the look of IS-4
what is with the logs with russian tanks
He told you in the video. It's to get them unstuck in mud.
One thing you can always say about the soviets, they know how to design some sexy vehicles.
More please :)
Were there QB and Peppy at the end??
nah, totally different guys, not even remotely close.
+mrbeast85 the Sherman Firefly was a British tank not American
The Americans were going to make them under license
They are just barrels not connected to the tank.
Sherman was a solid anti-infantry tank for it's time. Too bad nobody fought only with infantry. Since it wasn't exactly smaller, better armored or significantly faster than the Tiger, and had a gun that was too weak to engage in long range battles, it lost.
ah yes, because every German tank was a tiger, right? Just like every American tank was a pershing
Permission 2 link your YT channel onto my website . Thx
Sorry I got distracted by the couple in the background... I appeared they wanted a picture.
I think fuel usually is sucked into engines and ignited. ;)
Oh Thanks.
Do the is-7
The log is for the wood burner used to keep the crew warm in the winter and cook food with.
Wait what? I watched this yesterday already...
ye indeed i have to say its one of the prettiest russian tanks of that time period :D
Spring loaded fenders are for track maintenance, so you wouldn't have to take the whole fender off, as a tanker i think you should know that
next the is7 ! :D
They were used to lever the tank out of the russian mud and snow.
Fortunately for the Americans, they fought ~15% of the German forces, and thus considerably less tanks.
Firefly might have had a strong gun, but it's inaccuracy didn't help when it's sub-caliber core failed to cause much damage. It also had a very large muzzle flash which gave away it's position AND blinded the crew.
The main fight on the western front was fought in the air, and without it, Shermans and all the other assorted crap couldn't advance.
The log, you almost never see a russian tank without it unlike everyone else
Lots of mud in Russia.
Not sure why wargaming feels it necessary to upload these twice... and never link your youtube page! No wonder it has no views, pah.
That is not a Soviet tank................no log mounted
6:12 Because it's Russia.
Aha tackar.
The IS tanks would have been terrifying to come up against in the 1940s
To get out of the mud.
Pimpek
Russian tankers= Comrade, so these american tanks from lendlease? They have spring loaded hatches! We are sure comrade stalin has thought of this, maybe our new tanks should have these aswel, so we can escape quickly from tank and keel more nazis
Soviet designers= 2:14 SpRinG LoAdEd FeNdErS
Ugh! IS-4 OP IRL!!!
Russian Bias!