SIR HOW DARE YOU! THE TIGER TANK WAS THE BEST OF THE WAR! IF GERMANY BUILT MORE OF THEN SURELY THEY COULD HAD WON THE WAR! HELL, WHEN THIS THING CAME IT SENT FEAR AND DREAD THROUGHOUT THE ALLIED LINES THAT MADE ALLIED TANKERS THINK ANY AMBUSH WAS FORM THIS DREADED BEAST OF A MACHINE-Something something angry German noise-
Armor angling was mentioned as RECOMMENDED in the Tiger training book for the crew. Military History Visualised/Not Visualize made a video about it. And I know, everybody can find it on the wikipedia, who searched for it, but I let this infos here for fun facts. "The first production series Tiger Fgst Nr 250001 with Motor Nr 46052 was only run-in for 25 km by Henschel before being sent to Kummersdorf for testing. During a test drive on 28 May 1942, with only 52 km on the odometer, a blockage occurred in the steering gear. This Tiger quickly went through the original and two replacement engines (Motor Nr 46051 from July lst to 3rd, Motor Nr 46065 from July 6 to 8) and was fitted with a fourth motor, Nr 46066, after July 13. By 3 August 1942, this Tiger had covered a total of 1046 km; by 31 March 1943 a total of 5623 km; and by 31 July 1943 a total of 7736 km.These figures clearly demonstrate that once the Tiger had overcome its teething troubles, it could withstand a lot of purposefully administered abuse during test programmes" The Tiger had planetary final drives, what is fantastic (Nowadays all MBT are using it). The germans knew it, but they knew: Planetary final drive is complex, expensive. This is why they not choosed this version of final drive for the panther. Panther was aimed to produce in high numbers.
Yes, but I think the number of scenarios wherein a Tiger is fighting a single tank or conglomerate of tanks that is directly in front of it with no assets in an offset position is pretty slim, not including that the crew would have to remember to angle their tank to the threat. Most of all, the majority of tank engagements during WW2 involved a tank shooting another in the side before the target even knew what was happening.
@@Spookston True, we can't really know if Tiger I crews angled in head to head engagements, but we do know that the Germans were well aware of angling and that it was likely used at some points. Especially when tank crews were very well aware of how deadly the 76mm was later on, as well as more and more tanks from the allies being equipped with guns specifically meant to go through German heavy armour. to the point that German tankers would specifically target 76 carriers and other equivalents before anything else irregardless of the enemy tanks position in a column. If I had to guess, I would say if it wasn't used super often, but it probably was in the back of the mind of alot of competent tank commanders.
@@Spookston another thing to consider is equipment like radio and optics, ergonomics... Not only armor and guns. These are details that play a big role in crew efficiency and are often forgotten. As far Carius report goes, the tiger was for its time an formidable machine.
ok check this out... ive been buying every mil strategy game i could since the early 90's... hell, i even bought the weird english version of Dai Senryaku 7 on the og xbox after buying its non localized versions on earlier consoles (looking at you mega drive version of super dai senryaku), and thats not even starting on pc games... i have an entire guest bedroom full of books about this shit, but when i see this original post, i cant help but yell, "FIGHT, VIRGINS, FIGHT!!!"... thanks for giving an old nerd a chuckle...
It was always weird to me that while being a more cost effective vehicle and more prolific, the Panther was kinda ignored in a lot of WWII documentaries I watched as a kid.
Panther is veri spooky, but it's reputation is nowhere near as mythical as the tigers sadly. But yea, I haven't seen many docs about the oanther either despite it really deserving it
One reason why I as a kid always noticed the Tiger more was simply down to its name... "Tiger" this is a cool AF name, we associate a real Tiger being a deadly carnivore, the heaviest big cat excluding the Liger. So a cool, dangerous animal, that names gives a cool ring and sound.
Indeed, add to this the American narrative in Normandy and the ETO. They don't want you to know that in Normandy it was the British and Canadians who faced five Panzer Divisions (including King Tigers) when the USA faced none (until July, and no heavies). The US never fought against any Tigers in France (not counting the Tigers being unloaded at a rail head because they didn't have ammo). Zaloga only mentions finding three Tiger fights in his research. The fiction that is Saving Private Ryan because the only battle US Airborne fought regarding a bridge and tanks involved three pre-War French Light tanks (R-35 and H-35) aka Beutepanzers and a PzKpfw III from the PzAuE 100 an armoured training battalion. Don't get me started on the romantic novel Band of Brothers and remember Stephen Ambrose wrote novels not histories.
To my understanding, a lot of the tank crews actually preferred the 75mm in the Sherman, not because it was better for tanks, but because it was better for infantry (the HE shell had much better dispersion). This highlights a factor that many tank afficionados ignore: tanks were more often than not used for tank on infantry combat.
When a Tiger tank is something unlikely to meet. But some random german soldier with a Panzerfaust is almost a certainty Yeah that 75 mm becomes quite tempting
Most of the time during the war tank casualties were largely at the result of infantry with anti-tank weaponry. The number of times vehicles came across one another, they were often already facing the rear or side, especially faster moving vehicles like Shermans, light tanks, or other vehicles. The tank combat was mostly prevalent on the Eastern Front and even then, the quality of hastily produced T34's makes it difficult to really gauge how effective either vehicle was. That being said, Sherman 75's had no issue's taking out Panthers or Tigers from the side with the 75, while still having the HE rounds for infantry which were more common anyways. The Sherman 75 also notoriously had a pretty nasty HE shells that could disable vehicles without actually penetrating them.
@@happypunky4129 Not to mention the beautiful M2 Browning near the commander’s hatch. That thing could do lots of damage to infantry and light vehicles.
@@samtheeaglescout1490 Yeah definitely, the Sherman is underrated I feel like, I think a lot of popular Russian and German vehicles are overrated and are only popular because of propaganda, propagated stats, and cause they look cool. Plus the whole, "Le armor and gun be big and double thick."
So for the supposed "Tigers would often run out of ammunition during combat" is not entirely false. There where instances on the Eastern Front where Tiger crews often ran out of ammunition and had to retreat to restock. The myth is that the shells always hit which is far from true. This was escalating by the fact that soviet T34s often just employed the "Just charge at the Tiger/Tigers and hopefully we can get close enough to kill the tiger" and this strategy as insane as it sounds worked half the time. While german sights did help with determining range (I know it was possible, I just have no idea how to explain it), gunners had to constantly adjust the range every time, because between the time in which they fired and when the gun was loaded again, the T34 could have easily moved 50/100 meters.
While the T-34 losses make me almost believe it, I now wonder if the "T-34 charging" is a myth too? xD Tbf it shouldnt be that difficult to outflank a tiger with numeric superiority. And the later 85 gun shouldve been quite effective against the Tiger.
@@skorathereckless6449 Also horrible situational awareness, and cramped interiors didnt help. But if you can throw 5 of them at every tiger, the math might work out.
@@termitreter6545 the T-34 charge wasn’t entirely untrue because the original T-34s had shitty sights and the Germans who were testing captured t-34s claimed it was impossible to see out of the tank, so many t-34s would get super close up to better see what they were shooting
I remember hearing that the Tiger when originally designed was meant to be pulled back for repairs and overhauls after major offensives, but due to the nature of the Eastern Front, became a fireman, rapid response, and wasn't able to get the maintenance it needed.
Yeah and it helped that it was a heavy tank. Not as soft a target for planes. Good gun for infantry support. Also a decent enough gun for anti tank fighting. Low ground pressure, especially for a german tank of the time meaning it could more easily cross soft terrain. It is the most "jack of all trades, master of none" tank in their arsenal. Of course the germans used them so much as a fire brigade.
@@MrDwarfpitcher Honestly kinda impressive if you can make a tank this heavy and powerful, but use it as a "jack of all trades". Cost and maintenance might have been too expensive to justify it, though.
@@Existentialcrisis_1488 people look at tanks not in relation to history or circumstances with how they were used or why. But more on the basis of "ugh... It can't pen an IS from this angle in warthunder???? This tank was garbage IRL."
According to history channel, almost every WWII tank and plane is one or both side in this: "When A nation fielded the X-vehicle, the B nation was shocked as their current vehicle was absolutely useless and to counter this new threat, they developed the Z-vehicle." In reality Z had often been in development way before X was fielded.
Recently again with the T-14 armata, which spawned the development of the kf51, which will probably not be in service for quite some time because it's just not necessary, it would just be overkill as the T-14 absolutely sucks, it even uses the same engine as the porsche tiger, which was incredibly unreliable, and that's why a T-14 broke down during a parade.
What makes that even funnier is that the general British response was "oh blimey, guess we need a new AP round for the 6 pounder, oh wait... we just penned that new beasty. Well off to report this and get some tea." and they generally still made a newer better AP round for the 6 pounder until they just couldn't get any more of of that gun. By the end of the war that gun could pen 177mm at 100m with it's APDS round, for some reference that's around the same amount of armor pen as the German short 88mm fitted on the Tiger I had with it's APCR round. The Brits really didn't want to let the 6 pounder die. Though as the adage goes, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.
I'm not convinced by the observation done at 1:30 about angling, indeed it seems to have been something really documented at the time, and included into the basic formation for Tiger crews. I have a copy of an official french 1945 handbook, directly traduced from a 1943 german 'TigerFibel'. An entire section is dedicated to explain the principle, with memorizing tips for the crew to be able to consider it under pressure. By exemple, it's explained that the Tiger have 4 meal time (breakfast at 10:30, lunch at 1:30, snack at 4:30, supper 7:10), corresponding to the positioning of the target relatively to the driver's clock. Later, a clover-leaf schematic is superpozed to the clock to summarize the principle of angled armor and immune zone, with perforation data and secure distances relative to a set of opposite tanks (T-34-76, KV-1, Lee, Sherman, ...).
Theory vs practice sets in real quick. There's a lot of stuff in manuals that aren't practical in the field. With the tiger, Are you really going to risk that is the only enemy in-front of you. Are you going to slow down your turret rotation (Engine can't power both the turret traverse and the tracks at the same time) Are you even going to have time to angle, as you've been noticed, or are you noticing an enemy ? In which case see above getting an aimed shot first is better while vice versa that might not be the only target your facing and now you have your sides exposed. It's not that it isn't effective, it's that situations are complicated and manuals don't outline everything.
The Churchill tank had thicker frontal armour than the Tiger. In fact it was a Churchill tank which which knocked out the famous Tiger 131 which is now in the Tank Museum at Bovington. And that was from a 6-pounder gun. One Tiger plus two Panthers were all destroyed by the standard 75 MM guns on the British Cromwell tank. So it was not impervious to the US or British guns.
Actually, only the Churchill Mk. VII had thicker armour than the Tiger. The Churchill that (debatably, as other units in that battle make alternate claims) knocked out 131 was a Mk.III, which had thinner armour than the Tiger.
While the armour was by no means impervious to allied guns at the time, it was definitely resistant. Tiger 131 was not penetrated at all by the churchills, one shot managed to hit the turret ring, jamming its traverse and another hit an open hatch, sending shrapnel into the cabin. It was only after this that the crew bailed.
And Tiger 131 wasn’t penetrated by the 6 Pounder fire, it just had its turret jammed by a lucky hit on the turret ring. It was captured after the crew abandoned it and failed to destroy it.
Something to note based on the Tiger Is actual doctrine and purpose. It was fielded and designed with the intent to be used as a breakthrough vehicle, create a gap/hole in enemy lines to allow infantry and other light and medium vehicles to exploit. The Tigers more intensive and difficult logistical requirements was essentially worth the pay off for them. Due to once it had completed it's objective, engineer and maintenance company's would have time to reach the secondary line to provide the needed recovery and maintenance required on the vehicles. All the while the rest of the breakthrough was being exploited by every other usual asset that would be fielded. Serious problems never arose (to a general degree) until it was used out side of its intended role or "leaned" on with the belief it could simply make up for the lack of infantry or mass reserves needed for example. In all it full filled its role as required honestly, and like every armored vehicle also had its issues and drawbacks.
Weapons systems are designed with specific missions in mind. Tiger was close to ideal in this wise. Similarly, use a weapons system outside of its intended roles and missions and anything might happen.
Also logistics, which were a nightmare for germans on the eastern front. That said, to really rate the tiger, you'd have to consider how cost-effective he was. What else could its ressources gotten into? Pushing earlier for a new medium tank like the Panther, or just more Panzer 4s with upgraded guns couldve been more useful.
I feel like what let down a lot of later german tanks was, that they were too heavy, thus were often a bit underpowered and stressed their transmissions, were often difficult to repair and some didn't use angled armour effectively
The transmission part also applies for pretty much every single tank of the war, only the most refined tanks like later M4 could have an actually reliable power train
I like this at 3:55 Tracers work both ways. I don't play this game but I do like your does of history. Thanks. Also as far as crew and command quality, a great example of this is the Battle of Arracourt in 1944 where some American TDs and a bunch of 75mm Shermans annihilated a whole lot of Panthers. It's late 1944 and the quality of the Panzerwaffe has been going downhill due to all the attrition and years of war, while their opponents have gotten better. The Germans had the higher quality of machines at Arracourt, as well as pretty even numerical parity, but they were still beaten. *Badly.*
In reality, the flat front armor of the Tiger was far from invincible. It could be easily penetrated by 76mm, 17-pounder and 85mm guns that were mounted on Allied and Soviet tanks from 1944 onwards. A much more difficult target to deal with from the front was the Panther, which despite being thinner was much more effective due to the steep slope angle.
😂 yeah another war thunder expert its easier said than done, if you would encounter a tiger in frontal situation you would be dead allied tankers hadnt 1000 hours on war thunder and they didnt know evey weakspot , + allied optics werent that precise and good as german there was no such thing as instakill from front like in war thunder dude, to hit something in great distance, gunner had to be very skilled, which was pretty rare
@@tedarcher9120 Well the 85mm more or less 700 meters. the american 76mm well to 900 meters then the 10 Pdr depends on the ammunition with APCBC against FHA steel it was able beyond 1.750 meters.
They are really bad players. Which unfortunately is the problem with most German mains. They think that the Tiger is invincible. However, just like very tank you know it's weaknesses and how to play around it they can be very powerful. The Tiger's reputation drives people to play Germany (Which included me) However, I already knew about it's weaknesses before I got it and therefore I excel as a Tiger player.
@@DJ118USMC If people in WT played tanks to their strengths instead of playing them how they want to believe they work... well it'd be a very different game.
Its because Gaijin twisted reality some time ago, its few years maybe by now, since they ditched real armor pen data that they have collected for all guns for years and now they use some crappy formula that buffed sherman 75mm to unreal values. This lead to Jumbo being uptiered over and over.. In reality the 75mm gun could not pen 102mm even from 1m, with russia its even worse, most of their ammo makes no sense, most russian shells should have very high chance to shatter on impact, but that would not be very fun experience in game and irl too probably, for russians. In reality the 75mm could maybe pen the 80mm side armor from 100m at very good angle, on good day. The game is complete fantasy by now, it wasnt like this for long time. Also the Tiger used to have higher BR and Jumbo much lower. I think Tiger was 6.0 and Jumbo 4.3-4.7, but that was back when the game was using real world data, now they are both at 5.3 lol :D
I don't think you mentioned the commonwealth once whitch is impressive but the 6pr could supposedly penatrate the tiger at 450feet head on tanks like the crusader 3 had been around for a while and is part of the reason the 6pr was put on tanks till late into the war
@@magicelf7559 The APDS was issued prior to D-Day, it was so secret they didn't tell the antitank crews or give them chance to test fire. So when they started to use them they missed a lot of shots when leading the target due to the higher velocity of the round.
Thats definitely not true of the early 6 pounder. It couldnt penetrate the Tigers front armor, only the sides. You might be thinking of the Sabots rounds, which was IIRC first used in 1944, and made the 6 pounder into a very dangerous anti tank weapon.
The Panther actually had a high velocity gun, despite the size difference of the cannons, it could penetrate more armor than the Tiger, although the round itself was smaller and thus caused less damage, it was in fact more feared than the Tiger. The King Tiger of course holding the greatest fear factor of possibly any tank. Its reliability however holding it back.
if you consider the fact that 13 tiger 2s 10 destroyed in the battle of ogeldow by soviet IS2 and T34 85 crews while the germans attempted to counter-attack i say otherwise.
One of the things I see to dispel it’s magical status (not to enforce that) was repairs. I heard this quite a long time ago so I could be off. According to the Chieftain as he heard from a historian the tiger (and panther) weren’t necessarily hard to work on in comparison to other tanks it’s big issue was that the factories making these tanks didn’t make enough spare part. So if any came up they only went to a few. They’re chances of breaking down also, weren’t exceptionally higher either it’s just without the parts to fix them tanks would often just go without which would lead to an increase in breakdowns
Yeah, Nazi Germany had a well earned reputation for sucking at logistics. That and resource shortages with an over reliance on outdated transportation methods (You have horses!) didn’t bode well for the thousand year reich. Hard to fix your tank when you don’t have any of the stuff you need to do it. Meanwhile, a banged up Sherman could easily be repaired or replaced without much fuss.
@@tombrady1848 and of course, sabotage. When a lot is done by slave labor and a great deal of educated germans do not like the nazis. Well they may do just short of the expectations of the party, or just outright sabotage a bit here and there. The primary example is probably the nazi nuclear program. Somehow, great german scientists that had more or less laid much of the foundation for the technology, lagged behind about a decade as was found out after the war. I am not the first to speculate that the scientists just tried to drain some of the german resources while pretending to do their job. Now logistics is much like a chain. All you need is *one weak link* and it breaks
i think Cheftain made perfect video describing what a Tiger relay was and how it was misused. So it appeared Tiger got the "good" and a "bad" press for all wrong reasons. When it comes to " the special shops" its just way hared over all to maintain any 45t+ hardware and i don't believe that is just the case for a Tiger. You couldn't fix a Tiger at any car shop like you could panzer II, III or IV the same way Russians couldn't fix KV1 and Americans Pershings. I just can't see why is it a drawback. If you try to handle M1 with just 10t lifter you will have a bad day :D
Worth mentioning for the British perspective of the Tiger as well is that early encounters in North Africa resulted often in Tigers being abandoned or otherwise rendered incapable of fighting by multiple 6-pounder hits - I own an older book written by David Fletcher called Tanks In Camera about tank warfare in North Africa that has a number of photographs of Tigers hit repeatedly by 6-pounder anti-tank guns and later in the theatre by Churchill IIIs and IVs armed with the gun; the photographs I can obviously only describe in text form, but it's clear to see that in multiple cases the Tiger's crew have bailed out in reaction to coming under fire from multiple sources. 6-pounder rounds could certainly pierce the sides of the Tiger and theoretically the front at close range (not including the APDS round as that sort of goes without saying, and wasn't in service in North Africa anyway) but enough repeated hits, even non-penetrating ones that didn't cause any spall or damage inside the vehicle, could shake and rattle a crew or cripple external parts of the Tiger (and later in Italy and Normandy, the Panther) enough that getting out seemed like a much more solid choice than staying inside. The 17-pounder, however, I think speaks for itself.
I think that the "transmission bad" reputation of the Tiger mostly comes from the Panther, which HAD a very unreliable transmission (crews were limited in what they could do, typically, the transmisison was able to make the tank neutral steer, but crews almost never used it cause if the terrain was a bit rougher than usual, it could break the transmission) It can also come from the Tiger II , as the transmission (and the whole power pack) was incredibly similar, or identical to Tiger Is, transmission that was made for a45/50ish ton tank, not almost 70ton, which lead to a lot of mechanical failures on those vehicles, having a lot of strain on the transmission and the engine running at higher RPM than usual for the same speed, leading to engine swaps more often. And let's just say that if people confuse Panther and Tiger already, it's goint to be difficult to make them do the difference between Tiger I and Tiger II.
Angling was actually a practice Tiger commanders were trained in. MHV did a great video on it a while ago, and the official document is one of the most German things I've ever read
The weirdest myth I see most commonly is the idea that the Tiger could only be penetrated from behind. In reality, both the Tiger and Panther would have been weaker to side shots since they had the same armor as the rear but without the engine and firewall protecting the crew, and allied tankers would have known this. Most kills would have been from the side, the only reason to get behind a Tiger is if you're trying to stay away from its gun, going behind would make the Tiger take the most amount of time slewing the turret.
There is really good video made about Tiger on Polish part of yt made by Grzegorz Bobrek and he's opinion is basically identical with yours at the time of introduction tiger was able to buck on the battlefield crews could pick up targets regardless of tactics, but all of it has ended in 1944 Germany tied to repeat initial tiger success by creating tiger II but it turned out to be dead end for tank development
Not quite. Heavy tanks themselves were a dead end in tank development, not Tiger II as a tank. Though it depends how do you look at it, an M1 Abrams weighs as much as a Tiger II, and an IS-7 weighed 69 tons and could reach the speed of an MBT.
I tend to agree with The Chieftain’s opinion of the Tiger. In its designed role it was very good, but this was part of an offensive doctrine not a defensive one. It could make an offensive, retreat, repair and return to battle. In a constant retreat it couldn’t conduct scheduled maintenance and repairs . The Tiger was like a european sports car, the are complicated to work on and NEED their scheduled maintenance. Some Russian tanks and American tanks are like a Toyota Camry, it doesn’t mind if you forget to change your oil once in a while or don’t do every scheduled maintenance. And when do work on them it’s not super hard.
Another myth is it takes 5 tanks to kill a cat. The fact is it takes 5 tanks because that's the amount of tanks in a tank platoon. Whatever they encounter, even a StuG, they'll always send a platoon of tanks
When it came to the sherman 76 you mentioned in the video the reason they were upgunned atleast the prototypes was because of the inacuracies at longer ranges, A part of this reason had also a bit to do with that in 1942 the Panzer 4 g with 80mm of frontal armor appeared and in longer ranges they could survive the shermans 75mm, But what makes it funnier is that the panzer 4 g in itself was also pretty rare in north africa and most of the tanks the germans had was the panzer 3 with the longer 50mm or the panzer 4 with the longer 75mm but these panzer 4s had only 50mm of frontal armor which the shermans in long ranges could easily penetrate
Potential History also noted that apparently every 6th Tiger or so was modified to such an extent it required some retooling of the production line to accommodate those changes, which bit into the numbers that could be produced
>Myths about KV-1 and T-34, real situation, pros, cons and issues. >Myths about Tiger and Panther, real situation, pros, cons and issues. Me: Hold on a second... /deja vu intensifies/ It's like as if wartime production, material shortages, frontline maintenance, dependence on other branches of the military, unreliable components and rising weights are common place issues everyone has to deal with? No, no, that can't be right!
4:15 That's wrong tho, the Russians manages to capture a Tiger Very Early on ( August or September 42 ) and when they did they started a lot of programs to counter the thing. They thought at first glance that KV modernizations and Casemate Beasts would be enought but they changed mind after Kursk. Not quite because of the Panther, more like because of the Tiger.
Sucks that I can't say the Tiger is one of my favourite tanks without being called a "Wehraboo". Those bastards would've absolutely killed me and half my family, but goddamn, did the bad guys once again make the coolest equipment.
There is a big difference between thinking German stuff is pretty cool and being the "the Tiger was the best tank of ww2 it was so invincible" normie and yeah I agree, German tanks are pretty cool
@@log1125 you are right. My favourite tank is probably the t72 series. Its not the best, but i just love the looks of it. Some people are like "brAh bUt leOpard anD AbRamS is BetTer". I know and I dont fucking care, t72 is cooler
most people forget that britain encountered more armour than the US during the whole war, and British soldiers were (generally) far more experianced and hardy.
You also see plenty of people forget that the US began fighting overseas in 1942 not the end of the war. It was a hard year for the Allies across the board.
Yeah British armoured forces fought first in fall of France, then in North Africa, Sicily and then Italy before being pulled back for dday where they fought through to Germany. I'm not mentioning the Asian theatre as those tank units would've fought less armour and not been in Europe. They also had major tank battles like el Alamein, Caen and then push through Holland (bridge to far). Lot of major tank battles.
Most people also neglect the British tucking tail and leaving the French and Polish for dead for most of the war beginning and end, lmao. Brits are more French than the books say. Tank sniping from their sophistry towers while they wait for the M10 to pull up, lmfao. Two ammo choice limit over-stowage Ronson "experience".
I mean in the german tank manual during WWII, specifically for the tiger, there were specific commands from the commander to the driver on what angle the tank wanted.
Just because they knew it was doable doesn't mean it actually happened all that often on the field. In the event of an attack, getting your gun on target so you can start returning fire would take priority over maximizing the effectiveness of your armor, and getting behind proper cover if any is available would trump both of those. The Tiger also used the same engine for both movement and turret traversal, so attempting to angle the tank would cause the turret to move slower, losing precious seconds that you could have spent lining up your shot. In the event that you're in a defensive position and you know the enemy is coming, you still don't know exactly where they'll emerge from. Angling might increase your survivability against tanks directly in front of you, but it would make you very vulnerable if an enemy tank engages you from the direction you've faced your side armor towards.
I believe MHV showed mentions of armor angling in Tiger manuals, but it was also emphacised there that the frontal armor should be facing enemy if possible...
Tigers were effective when used as intended to break through hardened fortifications at enemy defensive lines in open fields while fighting enemy armour in open fields at range. That panzer 4 was no where near as intimidating but it was a practical workhorse tank that was more agile than a tiger and tended to work better in urban situations along with assault guns like the Stug 3 and 4. Tigers weren't common enough to make a huge dent, however the tended often as defensive reaction forces in stall enemy armoured assaults buying to for allied forces to retreat to new defensive positions or completely with drawl from a country.
75mm Shermans had been designed with a great tungsten APCR round that could defeat Tiger frontally, but they didn’t issue them. And the 76mm Shermans were there but not issued out in full numbers. Those two errors alone invented a century of disinformation.
I know Nicholas Moran has been hinting at possibly looking into the tungsten material use to examine this point. Tungsten was being used for multiple industrial uses, to see if it was a really an error not making more tungsten HVAP/ACPR rounds is going to require looking at how the U.S. was using their tungsten supplies. If they had a bunch of tungsten laying around not doing anything, then yeah it was an error. If they needed that tungsten to enable building the ships, planes, and other equipment that enabled the Allies to endure and win the battle of the Atlantic, stem the Japanese Pacific campaign, and take the offensive against the Axis and prevent the Soviets from dominating post war europe well, that isn't an error it is making a trade off. Could be that while it may have made cracking Tigers and Panthers more difficult, the alternative may have been worse.
Hey Spookston, as I recall the _Tiger_ transmissions weren't particularly high-quality either, although in the case of the _Tiger_ this appears to have been due to wartime shortages forcing the use of sub-optimal alloys in their construction, rather than fundamental design flaws in the geometry of the thing itself, as is the case with the _Panther_ final drives, which were deliberately selected to be a cheaper design that would fail more often. Not sure of the wisdom of that decision given the difficulty of replacing a _Panther's_ final drives myself, but oh well.
I'm starting to think that the Germans created tanks like the Tiger because in case they lost ww2 they could raise an army of wehraboos (tiger fans ect.) in the future to fight ww3
yeaa... the idiots confuse revolutionizing tank combat with competent tank designs. Like they have a few but most were massively overly complicated, expensive while also NOT being significantly better.
Day 14 of Asking Spookston can you talk about an idea I have based off something you said in a past video (think it was the lend lease one). Sweden's tree should be turned into a "Nordic" Tree, which would have a Norwegian and Finnish tree, for the following reasons Sweden lacks heavies, and premiums. Plus they have a general lack of creative tanks as most are similar or copy pastes Norway made multiple tanks, concepts, and experimental designs. Finland made some tanks, modified certain soviet tanks (BT-42, KV-1B), and also captured multiple tanks Finland already exists within the Swedish tree with some vehicles, plus it could be an excuse to add Heavy Tanks to the Swedish trees like the IS-2, plus maybe even a T-34 This is in general, but remove the KV-1B from the German tree (they already have a KV-1) and move it to Sweden.
I find it weird that the Panther is the Panzer V considering it is the Tiger that looks like an upscaled Panzer I-IV. Supposedly a MiG-21 shot down an F-16, so newer is not the deciding factor.
Fishbed had a very lucky day, lmao. That is one of those situations you normally don't walk away from. F-16 is a better plane by a LOT. A LOT a lot. Poopsocking it in a squad with dishonorable advantages for the kill, alot.
The problem with the early models of T-34 was _not_ their guns when facing Tigers because they could go through the front of a Tiger from 800m away. The problem with early models of T-34 was that the Tiger frequently got to dictate the range of engagement and they were well aware of the consequences of letting the T-34s close the distance. That and they were early model T-34s.
Actually , the early T-34s 76 mm gun only had around 87 mm penetration at 10 meters , it were only the T-34/85 and T-34-57 that could penetrate the Tiger's 102 mm armor
Honestly I think the Tiger suffers from the same effect the KV's and the T-34 suffered from. Incompetent commanders blaming their high loses on the enemy having really big and scary pieces of equipment instead of owning up to their failures.
The tiger was a breakthrough tank not a heavy tank. The spearhead would be lead by the breakthroughs and while they where being repaired and after the mediums scourged through the heavies would be the rear line defence.
I've heard another myth about Tiger 1 , not to be very good but extremely poor design in such way that it suffered mechanical failures more often before seeing the battlefield and the most of them were out of action mostly because they were unable to move and not because of enemy fire . According to that myth the strengh of Tiger 1 if not broken was that it could engage a target at 5Km away , far beyound the point where the enemy could fight back . I got doubts that a Tiger could hit a T34-76 at that range and if somehow it does hit it also could penetrate . The same myth says that because of this the Soviets had to upgrade T34 to fit the 85mm gun and still could do nothing to Tiger if the distance was not less than 1Km while Tiger could destroy T34-85 from 3Km . I guess most of the myths came out because of need to make a better propaganda and many stories about Soviet tanks destroying Tigers came from mistaken identity , Pz 4 looking the same as Tiger for any regular Soviet soldier and this is why they reported more Tiger tanks destroyed than ever produced . Long story short , I do not believe any myth about any tank that came out after the war .
I sometimes wonder, if germans had the thought of maybe using angled armor on the panzers and tiger early one, imagine a 102 mm plate angled at 40-60 degrees, that would've been impressive for the early war combatants to see.
Actually, at least according to the channel "military history visualized" angling is described in german tank manuals, suggesting that it was at least relatively common
I think there might also be a problem with conflation of Tiger 1 and Tiger 2. Now visually very diffrent they can both be referd to as Tiger tank. Mostly when it comes to mobility discrepancies.
It`s almost as people forget that war is always a game of trump. A new heavy tank? Well make better guns. The enemy is digging in more? Build assault guns. The Tiger was a great tank yet never unbeatable as seen by reality. And the one big thing why the Tiger has such a status is simply due to the Legendary aces like Otto Carius which published books later on. Not much is told about the crews that just got bombed or flat out lost their tiger in their first engagement
I keep on hearing that the tiger would break down or run out of fuel before it even fired a shot, I also heard in the north Africa campaign when tigers in the afrika corps ran out of fuel they would bury the hull in sand and only show the turret basicly turning it into a bunker which I'm not sure is true.
It didn't matter that much that your armor makes you invincible or your cannon pens everything it can face. What mattered the most was being able to get to the battlefield and not breaking down. And for the second thing is, who is able to spot, engage and shoot the other first. Usual tank-on-tank combat was just oneshoting the enemy from vulnerable angle from a well-covered position.
I love the tiger, in war thunder I can easily get 2-3+ kills in it. It may not sound like a lot but when a mid tier German team is watching my flanks I cant do much. It's gun is its best feature, it's potent with a large calibre and aphe. What I do to get kills is stay with plenty of teammates and use each other to force a shot then pull out and kill the opponent. Only issue with this is German teammates
Tiger had more problems with its engine rather than with its transmission. The Maybach HL210 (and later 230) was tuned for really high power in high RPM. Its power and torque in lower RPMs was insufficient and usage of the higher RPMs really shortened its lifespan drastically.
@@thelieutenant7732 well yeah, but it's plausible that the tiger P had left some mark in the history books as the ferdinand/elefant TDs were only made since 90-odd hulls already existed. i mean, the significant difference between the two tigers was the hull/powertrain, and that's what was already built and then turned into TDs when porsche's proposal lost.
@@vukpsodorov5446 I'm pretty sure the original comment is trying to say that the stereotype of the unreliability of the Tiger I was actually attributed to the Tiger P and just accidentally shared with the Tiger I which I'm arguing against as the Tiger P did not see service and the Elephants were made in small numbers and themselves were not very good. There is a mark in history made by everything, but the Tiger P and its chassis did not make enough of a mark to be able to stain the Tiger I's reputation. In short, I'm claiming that the original comment's theory is wrong.
I'm of the opinion that the Tiger II should have been called Panther II simply for the fact that it looks more like a Panther than a Tiger just on it's face, but what I assume they called it Tiger II for is because the Tiger was the Heavy Tank while the Panther was more meant to replace Panzer IV's in the field. It's kind of strange the way things seemed to go all things considered cause it would have made more sense for the Tiger to be the Panzer V to replace the Panzer IV's or supplement them while the Panther as the Panzer VI is used more like a heavy Tank as it's more capable in that role.
The reason why it was called tiger 2 was due to how it was used in the battlefield, it stood as a moving bunker that would pick off tanks from a distance
Not quite. No tiger actually ever broke down. The tiger could fire and knock out an Abrams at 238,900 miles. No tiger was ever destroyed. It could ford 36201 ft without being prepared. It could drive at 800knots at sea level and 1.8 mach at 50k
Look at how many hits the Tiger took at Kursk, but from the side. The Panther would never have taken so many hits on the side, because its armor was much thiner there.
What many guys not mention is the armor itself , as Russians made their tanks out of cast steel . Were you can make many mistakes and cast is'nt that strong as RHA , the Tiger 1 got face hardened front armor . Cast is cheap and fast to build , while FHA is very hard and expensive to build . As the Germans angle their front like a Panther , they make normal RHA armor . So a German 100mm plate is not the same as a Russian 90mm , this is something that WT does'nt count . Cast got lot's of spalling inside even if you don't penetrates , so the crew's often bail out after a hit . German 50mm or short 75mm could'nt really penetrate the t34 from the front , but still managed to knock them out . Even Wittmann in his 75mm Stug3 knocked out an IS1 from the front , 100-120mm of armor . So armor is not always armor , on paper the Tiger 1 seems not to have much of it . But it was still a hard nut to crack , or you hit a luck shot like this Churchill in Africa . 😅
Spalling in russian tank had nothing to by with the type of treatment of the steel but excesive tempering of the armor, which make it extremely hard but brittle at the same time so a good hit fracture it easily, ending the crew inside even without a penetration.
if you consider the fact that the IS2(1944) has double the amount of armor equivalent made by casting the armor plate with 100mm @0 degrees the IS2 has between 200-250mm of armor equivalent and it was made by casting. also the IS1 armor was meant to protect from the 88mm gun not long 75mm gun this was fixed on the IS2(1944). Wittman also used a stug 3 from 1941-1942 UNTIL 1943 WHEN HE RECIVED A TIGER THE IS1 NEVER ENTERED SERVICE UNTIL 1944 LEARN SOME MORE HISTORY
Spookston:
SIR HOW DARE YOU! THE TIGER TANK WAS THE BEST OF THE WAR! IF GERMANY BUILT MORE OF THEN SURELY THEY COULD HAD WON THE WAR! HELL, WHEN THIS THING CAME IT SENT FEAR AND DREAD THROUGHOUT THE ALLIED LINES THAT MADE ALLIED TANKERS THINK ANY AMBUSH WAS FORM THIS DREADED BEAST OF A MACHINE-Something something angry German noise-
@@rafaelnishizumi6330 lazerpig?
hahhaa wheraboos go brrrrr
I've made a severe and continuous lapse in Judgement and I don't expect to be forgiven, I'm just here to apologize
@@rafaelnishizumi6330 That sounded like the american guy on the E-100 of the squire video of WT vs WOT lol
Armor angling was mentioned as RECOMMENDED in the Tiger training book for the crew.
Military History Visualised/Not Visualize made a video about it.
And I know, everybody can find it on the wikipedia, who searched for it, but I let this infos here for fun facts.
"The first production series Tiger Fgst Nr 250001 with Motor Nr 46052 was only run-in for 25 km by Henschel before being sent to Kummersdorf for testing. During a test drive on 28 May 1942, with only 52 km on the odometer, a blockage occurred in the steering gear. This Tiger quickly went through the original and two replacement engines (Motor Nr 46051 from July lst to 3rd, Motor Nr 46065 from July 6 to 8) and was fitted with a fourth motor, Nr 46066, after July 13. By 3 August 1942, this Tiger had covered a total of 1046 km; by 31 March 1943 a total of 5623 km; and by 31 July 1943 a total of 7736 km.These figures clearly demonstrate that once the Tiger had overcome its teething troubles, it could withstand a lot of purposefully administered abuse during test programmes"
The Tiger had planetary final drives, what is fantastic (Nowadays all MBT are using it).
The germans knew it, but they knew:
Planetary final drive is complex, expensive.
This is why they not choosed this version of final drive for the panther.
Panther was aimed to produce in high numbers.
Yes, but I think the number of scenarios wherein a Tiger is fighting a single tank or conglomerate of tanks that is directly in front of it with no assets in an offset position is pretty slim, not including that the crew would have to remember to angle their tank to the threat. Most of all, the majority of tank engagements during WW2 involved a tank shooting another in the side before the target even knew what was happening.
@@Spookston True, we can't really know if Tiger I crews angled in head to head engagements, but we do know that the Germans were well aware of angling and that it was likely used at some points. Especially when tank crews were very well aware of how deadly the 76mm was later on, as well as more and more tanks from the allies being equipped with guns specifically meant to go through German heavy armour. to the point that German tankers would specifically target 76 carriers and other equivalents before anything else irregardless of the enemy tanks position in a column.
If I had to guess, I would say if it wasn't used super often, but it probably was in the back of the mind of alot of competent tank commanders.
@@Spookston straight up wrote an essay
@@Spookston another thing to consider is equipment like radio and optics, ergonomics... Not only armor and guns. These are details that play a big role in crew efficiency and are often forgotten. As far Carius report goes, the tiger was for its time an formidable machine.
ok check this out... ive been buying every mil strategy game i could since the early 90's... hell, i even bought the weird english version of Dai Senryaku 7 on the og xbox after buying its non localized versions on earlier consoles (looking at you mega drive version of super dai senryaku), and thats not even starting on pc games... i have an entire guest bedroom full of books about this shit, but when i see this original post, i cant help but yell, "FIGHT, VIRGINS, FIGHT!!!"... thanks for giving an old nerd a chuckle...
It was always weird to me that while being a more cost effective vehicle and more prolific, the Panther was kinda ignored in a lot of WWII documentaries I watched as a kid.
Panther is veri spooky, but it's reputation is nowhere near as mythical as the tigers sadly. But yea, I haven't seen many docs about the oanther either despite it really deserving it
One reason why I as a kid always noticed the Tiger more was simply down to its name... "Tiger" this is a cool AF name, we associate a real Tiger being a deadly carnivore, the heaviest big cat excluding the Liger. So a cool, dangerous animal, that names gives a cool ring and sound.
Panther had less of a KD
Tbf the pamther has some very big short comings too.
Indeed, add to this the American narrative in Normandy and the ETO. They don't want you to know that in Normandy it was the British and Canadians who faced five Panzer Divisions (including King Tigers) when the USA faced none (until July, and no heavies). The US never fought against any Tigers in France (not counting the Tigers being unloaded at a rail head because they didn't have ammo). Zaloga only mentions finding three Tiger fights in his research.
The fiction that is Saving Private Ryan because the only battle US Airborne fought regarding a bridge and tanks involved three pre-War French Light tanks (R-35 and H-35) aka Beutepanzers and a PzKpfw III from the PzAuE 100 an armoured training battalion. Don't get me started on the romantic novel Band of Brothers and remember Stephen Ambrose wrote novels not histories.
To my understanding, a lot of the tank crews actually preferred the 75mm in the Sherman, not because it was better for tanks, but because it was better for infantry (the HE shell had much better dispersion). This highlights a factor that many tank afficionados ignore: tanks were more often than not used for tank on infantry combat.
When a Tiger tank is something unlikely to meet.
But some random german soldier with a Panzerfaust is almost a certainty
Yeah that 75 mm becomes quite tempting
Most of the time during the war tank casualties were largely at the result of infantry with anti-tank weaponry. The number of times vehicles came across one another, they were often already facing the rear or side, especially faster moving vehicles like Shermans, light tanks, or other vehicles. The tank combat was mostly prevalent on the Eastern Front and even then, the quality of hastily produced T34's makes it difficult to really gauge how effective either vehicle was. That being said, Sherman 75's had no issue's taking out Panthers or Tigers from the side with the 75, while still having the HE rounds for infantry which were more common anyways. The Sherman 75 also notoriously had a pretty nasty HE shells that could disable vehicles without actually penetrating them.
@@happypunky4129 Not to mention the beautiful M2 Browning near the commander’s hatch. That thing could do lots of damage to infantry and light vehicles.
@@samtheeaglescout1490 Yeah definitely, the Sherman is underrated I feel like, I think a lot of popular Russian and German vehicles are overrated and are only popular because of propaganda, propagated stats, and cause they look cool. Plus the whole, "Le armor and gun be big and double thick."
@@happypunky4129 Absolutely. The Sherman was reliable, versatile, and easy to fix.
So for the supposed "Tigers would often run out of ammunition during combat" is not entirely false. There where instances on the Eastern Front where Tiger crews often ran out of ammunition and had to retreat to restock. The myth is that the shells always hit which is far from true. This was escalating by the fact that soviet T34s often just employed the "Just charge at the Tiger/Tigers and hopefully we can get close enough to kill the tiger" and this strategy as insane as it sounds worked half the time. While german sights did help with determining range (I know it was possible, I just have no idea how to explain it), gunners had to constantly adjust the range every time, because between the time in which they fired and when the gun was loaded again, the T34 could have easily moved 50/100 meters.
While the T-34 losses make me almost believe it, I now wonder if the "T-34 charging" is a myth too? xD
Tbf it shouldnt be that difficult to outflank a tiger with numeric superiority. And the later 85 gun shouldve been quite effective against the Tiger.
T34 had no Radio leaving them limited vision ability to co-ordinate properly
@@skorathereckless6449 Also horrible situational awareness, and cramped interiors didnt help.
But if you can throw 5 of them at every tiger, the math might work out.
interesting
@@termitreter6545 the T-34 charge wasn’t entirely untrue because the original T-34s had shitty sights and the Germans who were testing captured t-34s claimed it was impossible to see out of the tank, so many t-34s would get super close up to better see what they were shooting
I remember hearing that the Tiger when originally designed was meant to be pulled back for repairs and overhauls after major offensives, but due to the nature of the Eastern Front, became a fireman, rapid response, and wasn't able to get the maintenance it needed.
Yeah and it helped that it was a heavy tank.
Not as soft a target for planes.
Good gun for infantry support.
Also a decent enough gun for anti tank fighting.
Low ground pressure, especially for a german tank of the time meaning it could more easily cross soft terrain.
It is the most "jack of all trades, master of none" tank in their arsenal.
Of course the germans used them so much as a fire brigade.
@@MrDwarfpitcher Honestly kinda impressive if you can make a tank this heavy and powerful, but use it as a "jack of all trades".
Cost and maintenance might have been too expensive to justify it, though.
This is mostly correct, yes. It’s not widely understood or known to many
The fireman of the east.
@@Existentialcrisis_1488 people look at tanks not in relation to history or circumstances with how they were used or why.
But more on the basis of "ugh... It can't pen an IS from this angle in warthunder???? This tank was garbage IRL."
According to history channel, almost every WWII tank and plane is one or both side in this: "When A nation fielded the X-vehicle, the B nation was shocked as their current vehicle was absolutely useless and to counter this new threat, they developed the Z-vehicle." In reality Z had often been in development way before X was fielded.
Recently again with the T-14 armata, which spawned the development of the kf51, which will probably not be in service for quite some time because it's just not necessary, it would just be overkill as the T-14 absolutely sucks, it even uses the same engine as the porsche tiger, which was incredibly unreliable, and that's why a T-14 broke down during a parade.
What makes that even funnier is that the general British response was "oh blimey, guess we need a new AP round for the 6 pounder, oh wait... we just penned that new beasty. Well off to report this and get some tea." and they generally still made a newer better AP round for the 6 pounder until they just couldn't get any more of of that gun. By the end of the war that gun could pen 177mm at 100m with it's APDS round, for some reference that's around the same amount of armor pen as the German short 88mm fitted on the Tiger I had with it's APCR round.
The Brits really didn't want to let the 6 pounder die. Though as the adage goes, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.
I'm not convinced by the observation done at 1:30 about angling, indeed it seems to have been something really documented at the time, and included into the basic formation for Tiger crews. I have a copy of an official french 1945 handbook, directly traduced from a 1943 german 'TigerFibel'.
An entire section is dedicated to explain the principle, with memorizing tips for the crew to be able to consider it under pressure. By exemple, it's explained that the Tiger have 4 meal time (breakfast at 10:30, lunch at 1:30, snack at 4:30, supper 7:10), corresponding to the positioning of the target relatively to the driver's clock. Later, a clover-leaf schematic is superpozed to the clock to summarize the principle of angled armor and immune zone, with perforation data and secure distances relative to a set of opposite tanks (T-34-76, KV-1, Lee, Sherman, ...).
Theory vs practice sets in real quick. There's a lot of stuff in manuals that aren't practical in the field.
With the tiger,
Are you really going to risk that is the only enemy in-front of you. Are you going to slow down your turret rotation (Engine can't power both the turret traverse and the tracks at the same time) Are you even going to have time to angle, as you've been noticed, or are you noticing an enemy ? In which case see above getting an aimed shot first is better while vice versa that might not be the only target your facing and now you have your sides exposed.
It's not that it isn't effective, it's that situations are complicated and manuals don't outline everything.
The Churchill tank had thicker frontal armour than the Tiger. In fact it was a Churchill tank which which knocked out the famous Tiger 131 which is now in the Tank Museum at Bovington. And that was from a 6-pounder gun. One Tiger plus two Panthers were all destroyed by the standard 75 MM guns on the British Cromwell tank. So it was not impervious to the US or British guns.
Actually, only the Churchill Mk. VII had thicker armour than the Tiger. The Churchill that (debatably, as other units in that battle make alternate claims) knocked out 131 was a Mk.III, which had thinner armour than the Tiger.
What about tiger 2 h and jagtiger
While the armour was by no means impervious to allied guns at the time, it was definitely resistant. Tiger 131 was not penetrated at all by the churchills, one shot managed to hit the turret ring, jamming its traverse and another hit an open hatch, sending shrapnel into the cabin. It was only after this that the crew bailed.
@@nighthawk6755 They’re irrelevant to this discussion.
And Tiger 131 wasn’t penetrated by the 6 Pounder fire, it just had its turret jammed by a lucky hit on the turret ring. It was captured after the crew abandoned it and failed to destroy it.
Something to note based on the Tiger Is actual doctrine and purpose. It was fielded and designed with the intent to be used as a breakthrough vehicle, create a gap/hole in enemy lines to allow infantry and other light and medium vehicles to exploit. The Tigers more intensive and difficult logistical requirements was essentially worth the pay off for them. Due to once it had completed it's objective, engineer and maintenance company's would have time to reach the secondary line to provide the needed recovery and maintenance required on the vehicles. All the while the rest of the breakthrough was being exploited by every other usual asset that would be fielded. Serious problems never arose (to a general degree) until it was used out side of its intended role or "leaned" on with the belief it could simply make up for the lack of infantry or mass reserves needed for example. In all it full filled its role as required honestly, and like every armored vehicle also had its issues and drawbacks.
1:57 - very nice image. Highlights how the panther was much more vulneable to flanking fire at higher distances than the Tiger
Weapons systems are designed with specific missions in mind. Tiger was close to ideal in this wise.
Similarly, use a weapons system outside of its intended roles and missions and anything might happen.
Also logistics, which were a nightmare for germans on the eastern front.
That said, to really rate the tiger, you'd have to consider how cost-effective he was. What else could its ressources gotten into?
Pushing earlier for a new medium tank like the Panther, or just more Panzer 4s with upgraded guns couldve been more useful.
I feel like what let down a lot of later german tanks was, that they were too heavy, thus were often a bit underpowered and stressed their transmissions, were often difficult to repair and some didn't use angled armour effectively
The transmission part also applies for pretty much every single tank of the war, only the most refined tanks like later M4 could have an actually reliable power train
I like this at 3:55 Tracers work both ways.
I don't play this game but I do like your does of history. Thanks.
Also as far as crew and command quality, a great example of this is the Battle of Arracourt in 1944 where some American TDs and a bunch of 75mm Shermans annihilated a whole lot of Panthers. It's late 1944 and the quality of the Panzerwaffe has been going downhill due to all the attrition and years of war, while their opponents have gotten better. The Germans had the higher quality of machines at Arracourt, as well as pretty even numerical parity, but they were still beaten.
*Badly.*
In reality, the flat front armor of the Tiger was far from invincible. It could be easily penetrated by 76mm, 17-pounder and 85mm guns that were mounted on Allied and Soviet tanks from 1944 onwards. A much more difficult target to deal with from the front was the Panther, which despite being thinner was much more effective due to the steep slope angle.
Not really easily, as 76mm and 85mm could only reliably penetrate it from around 800m, and 17pdr from 1.5 km
😂 yeah another war thunder expert
its easier said than done, if you would encounter a tiger in frontal situation you would be dead
allied tankers hadnt 1000 hours on war thunder and they didnt know evey weakspot , + allied optics werent that precise and good as german
there was no such thing as instakill from front like in war thunder dude, to hit something in great distance, gunner had to be very skilled, which was pretty rare
@@peterkahn6125 Mines, AT guns, infantry and Aircraft is another factor. The 1v1 scenario between a Tiger and a Sherman for example is very rare.
@@tedarcher9120 Well the 85mm more or less 700 meters. the american 76mm well to 900 meters then the 10 Pdr depends on the ammunition with APCBC against FHA steel it was able beyond 1.750 meters.
@@peterkahn6125 The werahboos have arrived.
The idea of angling your tank is actually discussed in “Tigerfibel” it was meant to be done.
Tiger, exist
M4 shermans in the bush 100 merers out, "yeah boy"
Whenever I kill 5 tigers in a row in WT in my easy eight I like to type in chat "5 tigers for every sherman" they get so mad lol
They are really bad players. Which unfortunately is the problem with most German mains. They think that the Tiger is invincible. However, just like very tank you know it's weaknesses and how to play around it they can be very powerful. The Tiger's reputation drives people to play Germany (Which included me) However, I already knew about it's weaknesses before I got it and therefore I excel as a Tiger player.
@@DJ118USMC If people in WT played tanks to their strengths instead of playing them how they want to believe they work... well it'd be a very different game.
@@Gary_The_Metro if I keep telling myself that the raging 152mm shell flying at me will not penetrate, it surely won't!
German mains are free rp
Its because Gaijin twisted reality some time ago, its few years maybe by now, since they ditched real armor pen data that they have collected for all guns for years and now they use some crappy formula that buffed sherman 75mm to unreal values. This lead to Jumbo being uptiered over and over.. In reality the 75mm gun could not pen 102mm even from 1m, with russia its even worse, most of their ammo makes no sense, most russian shells should have very high chance to shatter on impact, but that would not be very fun experience in game and irl too probably, for russians. In reality the 75mm could maybe pen the 80mm side armor from 100m at very good angle, on good day.
The game is complete fantasy by now, it wasnt like this for long time.
Also the Tiger used to have higher BR and Jumbo much lower. I think Tiger was 6.0 and Jumbo 4.3-4.7, but that was back when the game was using real world data, now they are both at 5.3 lol :D
I don't think you mentioned the commonwealth once whitch is impressive but the 6pr could supposedly penatrate the tiger at 450feet head on tanks like the crusader 3 had been around for a while and is part of the reason the 6pr was put on tanks till late into the war
I think there is a jagdpanther in Munster that got frontally knocked out by 6pdr APDS
@@magicelf7559 yes, it impacted the guns casemate
@@magicelf7559 The APDS was issued prior to D-Day, it was so secret they didn't tell the antitank crews or give them chance to test fire. So when they started to use them they missed a lot of shots when leading the target due to the higher velocity of the round.
You're absolutely right, the first Tiger knocked out by the Western Allies was knocked out by the 6-pdr on a Churchill tank, in North Africa.
Thats definitely not true of the early 6 pounder. It couldnt penetrate the Tigers front armor, only the sides.
You might be thinking of the Sabots rounds, which was IIRC first used in 1944, and made the 6 pounder into a very dangerous anti tank weapon.
Spookston can you talk about war thunders maps? I feel it should be covered
I second this, some are amazing some are awful. There doesn't seem to be s middle ground for me
I third this. They suck ass, like the entire game.
That one m10 after getting encircled by 4 tigers : *inserts doom music*
The tiger crew's: hans, why do l hear boss music
The Panther actually had a high velocity gun, despite the size difference of the cannons, it could penetrate more armor than the Tiger, although the round itself was smaller and thus caused less damage, it was in fact more feared than the Tiger. The King Tiger of course holding the greatest fear factor of possibly any tank. Its reliability however holding it back.
Tiger 2 was hold back by its weight, reliability, fuel availability ans logistics.
if you consider the fact that 13 tiger 2s 10 destroyed in the battle of ogeldow by soviet IS2 and T34 85 crews while the germans attempted to counter-attack i say otherwise.
One of the things I see to dispel it’s magical status (not to enforce that) was repairs. I heard this quite a long time ago so I could be off. According to the Chieftain as he heard from a historian the tiger (and panther) weren’t necessarily hard to work on in comparison to other tanks it’s big issue was that the factories making these tanks didn’t make enough spare part. So if any came up they only went to a few. They’re chances of breaking down also, weren’t exceptionally higher either it’s just without the parts to fix them tanks would often just go without which would lead to an increase in breakdowns
Yeah, Nazi Germany had a well earned reputation for sucking at logistics. That and resource shortages with an over reliance on outdated transportation methods (You have horses!) didn’t bode well for the thousand year reich. Hard to fix your tank when you don’t have any of the stuff you need to do it. Meanwhile, a banged up Sherman could easily be repaired or replaced without much fuss.
@@tombrady1848 and of course, sabotage.
When a lot is done by slave labor and a great deal of educated germans do not like the nazis.
Well they may do just short of the expectations of the party, or just outright sabotage a bit here and there.
The primary example is probably the nazi nuclear program.
Somehow, great german scientists that had more or less laid much of the foundation for the technology, lagged behind about a decade as was found out after the war.
I am not the first to speculate that the scientists just tried to drain some of the german resources while pretending to do their job.
Now logistics is much like a chain.
All you need is *one weak link* and it breaks
@@tombrady1848bob reference?
The Tiger I is a leggendary vehicle, whenever you think that it's bad or good
i think Cheftain made perfect video describing what a Tiger relay was and how it was misused. So it appeared Tiger got the "good" and a "bad" press for all wrong reasons. When it comes to " the special shops" its just way hared over all to maintain any 45t+ hardware and i don't believe that is just the case for a Tiger. You couldn't fix a Tiger at any car shop like you could panzer II, III or IV the same way Russians couldn't fix KV1 and Americans Pershings. I just can't see why is it a drawback. If you try to handle M1 with just 10t lifter you will have a bad day :D
Worth mentioning for the British perspective of the Tiger as well is that early encounters in North Africa resulted often in Tigers being abandoned or otherwise rendered incapable of fighting by multiple 6-pounder hits - I own an older book written by David Fletcher called Tanks In Camera about tank warfare in North Africa that has a number of photographs of Tigers hit repeatedly by 6-pounder anti-tank guns and later in the theatre by Churchill IIIs and IVs armed with the gun; the photographs I can obviously only describe in text form, but it's clear to see that in multiple cases the Tiger's crew have bailed out in reaction to coming under fire from multiple sources. 6-pounder rounds could certainly pierce the sides of the Tiger and theoretically the front at close range (not including the APDS round as that sort of goes without saying, and wasn't in service in North Africa anyway) but enough repeated hits, even non-penetrating ones that didn't cause any spall or damage inside the vehicle, could shake and rattle a crew or cripple external parts of the Tiger (and later in Italy and Normandy, the Panther) enough that getting out seemed like a much more solid choice than staying inside.
The 17-pounder, however, I think speaks for itself.
I think that the "transmission bad" reputation of the Tiger mostly comes from the Panther, which HAD a very unreliable transmission (crews were limited in what they could do, typically, the transmisison was able to make the tank neutral steer, but crews almost never used it cause if the terrain was a bit rougher than usual, it could break the transmission)
It can also come from the Tiger II , as the transmission (and the whole power pack) was incredibly similar, or identical to Tiger Is, transmission that was made for a45/50ish ton tank, not almost 70ton, which lead to a lot of mechanical failures on those vehicles, having a lot of strain on the transmission and the engine running at higher RPM than usual for the same speed, leading to engine swaps more often. And let's just say that if people confuse Panther and Tiger already, it's goint to be difficult to make them do the difference between Tiger I and Tiger II.
The first meme that comes up in my head when I see this is "Stop it. He's already dead"
Angling was actually a practice Tiger commanders were trained in. MHV did a great video on it a while ago, and the official document is one of the most German things I've ever read
I don't know why that shoe box design is so aesthetically pleasing, but it is.
The weirdest myth I see most commonly is the idea that the Tiger could only be penetrated from behind. In reality, both the Tiger and Panther would have been weaker to side shots since they had the same armor as the rear but without the engine and firewall protecting the crew, and allied tankers would have known this. Most kills would have been from the side, the only reason to get behind a Tiger is if you're trying to stay away from its gun, going behind would make the Tiger take the most amount of time slewing the turret.
There is really good video made about Tiger on Polish part of yt made by Grzegorz Bobrek and he's opinion is basically identical with yours at the time of introduction tiger was able to buck on the battlefield crews could pick up targets regardless of tactics, but all of it has ended in 1944 Germany tied to repeat initial tiger success by creating tiger II but it turned out to be dead end for tank development
Not quite. Heavy tanks themselves were a dead end in tank development, not Tiger II as a tank. Though it depends how do you look at it, an M1 Abrams weighs as much as a Tiger II, and an IS-7 weighed 69 tons and could reach the speed of an MBT.
@@werrkowalski2985 Tiger II as even heavier heavy tank was immediate disaster, heavy tanks ended when MBT era started with T-55
I tend to agree with The Chieftain’s opinion of the Tiger. In its designed role it was very good, but this was part of an offensive doctrine not a defensive one. It could make an offensive, retreat, repair and return to battle. In a constant retreat it couldn’t conduct scheduled maintenance and repairs . The Tiger was like a european sports car, the are complicated to work on and NEED their scheduled maintenance. Some Russian tanks and American tanks are like a Toyota Camry, it doesn’t mind if you forget to change your oil once in a while or don’t do every scheduled maintenance. And when do work on them it’s not super hard.
T-34 and KV were more like a Yugo...
Bring a flatbed and fire extinguisher.
It's a shame the tiger gets a majority of the popularity, I much prefer the panther
Panther muzzle velocity go crazy 😎
and most of the US soldiers were seeing pz4 and thinking they were tigers anyway
The Panther was one of the worst tanks ever made by Germany
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 not in game it ain’t
@@bloodykillzone yeah, its great in game lol
Another myth is it takes 5 tanks to kill a cat. The fact is it takes 5 tanks because that's the amount of tanks in a tank platoon. Whatever they encounter, even a StuG, they'll always send a platoon of tanks
there is any debut that tiger is one of famous tank in WW2. good video
When it came to the sherman 76 you mentioned in the video the reason they were upgunned atleast the prototypes was because of the inacuracies at longer ranges, A part of this reason had also a bit to do with that in 1942 the Panzer 4 g with 80mm of frontal armor appeared and in longer ranges they could survive the shermans 75mm,
But what makes it funnier is that the panzer 4 g in itself was also pretty rare in north africa and most of the tanks the germans had was the panzer 3 with the longer 50mm or the panzer 4 with the longer 75mm but these panzer 4s had only 50mm of frontal armor which the shermans in long ranges could easily penetrate
Potential History also noted that apparently every 6th Tiger or so was modified to such an extent it required some retooling of the production line to accommodate those changes, which bit into the numbers that could be produced
3:37 i don't know why, but i feel like the cannon is way longer than normal in this image
>Myths about KV-1 and T-34, real situation, pros, cons and issues.
>Myths about Tiger and Panther, real situation, pros, cons and issues.
Me: Hold on a second... /deja vu intensifies/
It's like as if wartime production, material shortages, frontline maintenance, dependence on other branches of the military, unreliable components and rising weights are common place issues everyone has to deal with? No, no, that can't be right!
As a German tanker I can confirm this is 100% true
Omg
Michael Wittmann
Got killed by a fucking shoemaker 💀
@@tapeesa2866 rip bozo
@Mauricio Pittavino yes , but he was killed by Joe Ekins , a Sherman Firefly gunner who was a shoemaker
NO WAY
That was entertaining and informative, thanks!
4:15 That's wrong tho, the Russians manages to capture a Tiger Very Early on ( August or September 42 ) and when they did they started a lot of programs to counter the thing. They thought at first glance that KV modernizations and Casemate Beasts would be enought but they changed mind after Kursk. Not quite because of the Panther, more like because of the Tiger.
great video, so short yet so packed.
Sucks that I can't say the Tiger is one of my favourite tanks without being called a "Wehraboo". Those bastards would've absolutely killed me and half my family, but goddamn, did the bad guys once again make the coolest equipment.
There is a big difference between thinking German stuff is pretty cool and being the "the Tiger was the best tank of ww2 it was so invincible" normie
and yeah I agree, German tanks are pretty cool
Tiger is one of my favorite tanks, same with the tiger 2 but irl they kinde sucked ass
@@Callsign_Merkava Not really.
I'll be honest, I don't get the love for the Tiger 2. Yeah yeah, big gun and big armor, but visually the Tiger 1 is where it's at.
@@log1125 you are right. My favourite tank is probably the t72 series. Its not the best, but i just love the looks of it.
Some people are like "brAh bUt leOpard anD AbRamS is BetTer".
I know and I dont fucking care, t72 is cooler
most people forget that britain encountered more armour than the US during the whole war, and British soldiers were (generally) far more experianced and hardy.
yes they were, they kicked italians and germans out of africa, fought japanese in asia, those guys were something
The experience they got in africa (tank crews i mean) was incredibly usefull for the american tank crews
You also see plenty of people forget that the US began fighting overseas in 1942 not the end of the war. It was a hard year for the Allies across the board.
Yeah British armoured forces fought first in fall of France, then in North Africa, Sicily and then Italy before being pulled back for dday where they fought through to Germany. I'm not mentioning the Asian theatre as those tank units would've fought less armour and not been in Europe. They also had major tank battles like el Alamein, Caen and then push through Holland (bridge to far). Lot of major tank battles.
Most people also neglect the British tucking tail and leaving the French and Polish for dead for most of the war beginning and end, lmao. Brits are more French than the books say. Tank sniping from their sophistry towers while they wait for the M10 to pull up, lmfao. Two ammo choice limit over-stowage Ronson "experience".
1:28 That angling right there saved me a lot of times in warthunder when playing as a Tiger
Can we get a video on ARL-44. It needs some love too.
Tiger: I'm gonna take credit for the allies panicking
Panther: "you stand here admiss my achievement not yours"
I mean in the german tank manual during WWII, specifically for the tiger, there were specific commands from the commander to the driver on what angle the tank wanted.
Just because they knew it was doable doesn't mean it actually happened all that often on the field. In the event of an attack, getting your gun on target so you can start returning fire would take priority over maximizing the effectiveness of your armor, and getting behind proper cover if any is available would trump both of those. The Tiger also used the same engine for both movement and turret traversal, so attempting to angle the tank would cause the turret to move slower, losing precious seconds that you could have spent lining up your shot. In the event that you're in a defensive position and you know the enemy is coming, you still don't know exactly where they'll emerge from. Angling might increase your survivability against tanks directly in front of you, but it would make you very vulnerable if an enemy tank engages you from the direction you've faced your side armor towards.
3:57 thats gotta be one of the best shots I've ever seen
Could you make a video "If Sd/Kfz 234 was historically accurate"
Nice video the only thing that im interested in now is the relationship between the tiger and the firefly.
This is going to be a fun one.
Never forget the 17 pounder when discussing allied guns meant for killing big cats
I still can't help but love the oversized matchbox tank
I believe MHV showed mentions of armor angling in Tiger manuals, but it was also emphacised there that the frontal armor should be facing enemy if possible...
I’ve been playing the Heavy Tank No.6 (Japanese Exported Tiger) in War Thunder Latelyand have actually been having a lot of fun in it.
I will always refer to this tank as 'everyone's favourite armoured lunchbox'. Thx for the good laughs, spookston.
Tigers were effective when used as intended to break through hardened fortifications at enemy defensive lines in open fields while fighting enemy armour in open fields at range. That panzer 4 was no where near as intimidating but it was a practical workhorse tank that was more agile than a tiger and tended to work better in urban situations along with assault guns like the Stug 3 and 4. Tigers weren't common enough to make a huge dent, however the tended often as defensive reaction forces in stall enemy armoured assaults buying to for allied forces to retreat to new defensive positions or completely with drawl from a country.
Im still waiting for KF-51 Panther review
75mm Shermans had been designed with a great tungsten APCR round that could defeat Tiger frontally, but they didn’t issue them.
And the 76mm Shermans were there but not issued out in full numbers.
Those two errors alone invented a century of disinformation.
I know Nicholas Moran has been hinting at possibly looking into the tungsten material use to examine this point. Tungsten was being used for multiple industrial uses, to see if it was a really an error not making more tungsten HVAP/ACPR rounds is going to require looking at how the U.S. was using their tungsten supplies. If they had a bunch of tungsten laying around not doing anything, then yeah it was an error. If they needed that tungsten to enable building the ships, planes, and other equipment that enabled the Allies to endure and win the battle of the Atlantic, stem the Japanese Pacific campaign, and take the offensive against the Axis and prevent the Soviets from dominating post war europe well, that isn't an error it is making a trade off. Could be that while it may have made cracking Tigers and Panthers more difficult, the alternative may have been worse.
Hey Spookston, as I recall the _Tiger_ transmissions weren't particularly high-quality either, although in the case of the _Tiger_ this appears to have been due to wartime shortages forcing the use of sub-optimal alloys in their construction, rather than fundamental design flaws in the geometry of the thing itself, as is the case with the _Panther_ final drives, which were deliberately selected to be a cheaper design that would fail more often. Not sure of the wisdom of that decision given the difficulty of replacing a _Panther's_ final drives myself, but oh well.
I'm starting to think that the Germans created tanks like the Tiger because in case they lost ww2 they could raise an army of wehraboos (tiger fans ect.) in the future to fight ww3
it's enough for them if they are German, trust me
yeaa... the idiots confuse revolutionizing tank combat with competent tank designs. Like they have a few but most were massively overly complicated, expensive while also NOT being significantly better.
such bullshit comment I have not read in a while
🤔
@@Pincuishin they most certainly were better tank designs
For a country that might actually could properly test and maintain them...
Day 14 of Asking
Spookston can you talk about an idea I have based off something you said in a past video (think it was the lend lease one). Sweden's tree should be turned into a "Nordic" Tree, which would have a Norwegian and Finnish tree, for the following reasons
Sweden lacks heavies, and premiums. Plus they have a general lack of creative tanks as most are similar or copy pastes
Norway made multiple tanks, concepts, and experimental designs.
Finland made some tanks, modified certain soviet tanks (BT-42, KV-1B), and also captured multiple tanks
Finland already exists within the Swedish tree with some vehicles, plus it could be an excuse to add Heavy Tanks to the Swedish trees like the IS-2, plus maybe even a T-34
This is in general, but remove the KV-1B from the German tree (they already have a KV-1) and move it to Sweden.
The Tiger could have performed better if it had been utilized for its intended purpose. The Chieftain has an awesome video on this.
I hope you'll revive "everything wrong with" series
I find it weird that the Panther is the Panzer V considering it is the Tiger that looks like an upscaled Panzer I-IV.
Supposedly a MiG-21 shot down an F-16, so newer is not the deciding factor.
Fishbed had a very lucky day, lmao. That is one of those situations you normally don't walk away from. F-16 is a better plane by a LOT. A LOT a lot. Poopsocking it in a squad with dishonorable advantages for the kill, alot.
1:35 angling was sometimes used in real life and even is mentioned in the tiger's "manual".
Spookston: "Not useful often"
It does not mean it was not used.
All of this aside, it still is a beautifull and in my eyes loved vihacle
The problem with the early models of T-34 was _not_ their guns when facing Tigers because they could go through the front of a Tiger from 800m away. The problem with early models of T-34 was that the Tiger frequently got to dictate the range of engagement and they were well aware of the consequences of letting the T-34s close the distance. That and they were early model T-34s.
Actually , the early T-34s 76 mm gun only had around 87 mm penetration at 10 meters , it were only the T-34/85 and T-34-57 that could penetrate the Tiger's 102 mm armor
@@Pgb633 yeah there were only like 3 t-34 57's ever even made
@@scavulous6336 just 3?! Wow , i didn't know that , thank you!
@@Pgb633 The Germans disagree with you on that one. Their manuals say that a T-34 76 could pierce the front at 500 m
@@eyeli160 Wich manuals ? Can you give me the names of these books please?
in the Tiger tank Pamphlets handed out to crews it was mentioned that the corner of the tank should be pointed at the enemy for maximum protection
even thought I am a werraboo, I do agree with you spookston, I count for realistic reason
Ah yes new video from the tank boyo ^^
Honestly I think the Tiger suffers from the same effect the KV's and the T-34 suffered from. Incompetent commanders blaming their high loses on the enemy having really big and scary pieces of equipment instead of owning up to their failures.
KV and T-34 were actual garbage.
I love your content bro, keep it up o7
Only downside is the suspension. All other things were well calculated compromise. Best design- no, bad again now.
The tiger was a breakthrough tank not a heavy tank. The spearhead would be lead by the breakthroughs and while they where being repaired and after the mediums scourged through the heavies would be the rear line defence.
Not very good, not very bad, but it looks cool. Still one of my favorite tanks after the leo 2a4, object 279 and abrams.
1:50 those tigers did also stumble into a mine field.
I've heard another myth about Tiger 1 , not to be very good but extremely poor design in such way that it suffered mechanical failures more often before seeing the battlefield and the most of them were out of action mostly because they were unable to move and not because of enemy fire . According to that myth the strengh of Tiger 1 if not broken was that it could engage a target at 5Km away , far beyound the point where the enemy could fight back . I got doubts that a Tiger could hit a T34-76 at that range and if somehow it does hit it also could penetrate . The same myth says that because of this the Soviets had to upgrade T34 to fit the 85mm gun and still could do nothing to Tiger if the distance was not less than 1Km while Tiger could destroy T34-85 from 3Km . I guess most of the myths came out because of need to make a better propaganda and many stories about Soviet tanks destroying Tigers came from mistaken identity , Pz 4 looking the same as Tiger for any regular Soviet soldier and this is why they reported more Tiger tanks destroyed than ever produced . Long story short , I do not believe any myth about any tank that came out after the war .
WRONG. Carius mention in his book that it was taught at tank school to angle the tiger armor.
Damn... You're cool
I sometimes wonder, if germans had the thought of maybe using angled armor on the panzers and tiger early one, imagine a 102 mm plate angled at 40-60 degrees, that would've been impressive for the early war combatants to see.
Actually, at least according to the channel "military history visualized" angling is described in german tank manuals, suggesting that it was at least relatively common
I think there might also be a problem with conflation of Tiger 1 and Tiger 2. Now visually very diffrent they can both be referd to as Tiger tank. Mostly when it comes to mobility discrepancies.
when allied tank crews on the western front say they knocked out a tiger, it was most likely a Pz4 they knocked out
I feel like angling is no longer as effective as it use to be due to experienced players, especially at higher tiers.
wake up bro
Real shit: BR compression with bad mechanics and far future tonk has made a cucked experience.
Love the videos!
It`s almost as people forget that war is always a game of trump. A new heavy tank? Well make better guns. The enemy is digging in more? Build assault guns. The Tiger was a great tank yet never unbeatable as seen by reality. And the one big thing why the Tiger has such a status is simply due to the Legendary aces like Otto Carius which published books later on. Not much is told about the crews that just got bombed or flat out lost their tiger in their first engagement
I keep on hearing that the tiger would break down or run out of fuel before it even fired a shot, I also heard in the north Africa campaign when tigers in the afrika corps ran out of fuel they would bury the hull in sand and only show the turret basicly turning it into a bunker which I'm not sure is true.
It didn't matter that much that your armor makes you invincible or your cannon pens everything it can face. What mattered the most was being able to get to the battlefield and not breaking down. And for the second thing is, who is able to spot, engage and shoot the other first. Usual tank-on-tank combat was just oneshoting the enemy from vulnerable angle from a well-covered position.
I love the tiger, in war thunder I can easily get 2-3+ kills in it. It may not sound like a lot but when a mid tier German team is watching my flanks I cant do much. It's gun is its best feature, it's potent with a large calibre and aphe. What I do to get kills is stay with plenty of teammates and use each other to force a shot then pull out and kill the opponent. Only issue with this is German teammates
Tiger had more problems with its engine rather than with its transmission. The Maybach HL210 (and later 230) was tuned for really high power in high RPM. Its power and torque in lower RPMs was insufficient and usage of the higher RPMs really shortened its lifespan drastically.
''We need besser trasmision, Hans!''
''More armor, du say?''
''Better transmission, Hans''
''Bigger Kannon, you say?''
''Ahhhh''
''OH, Schlaachschiff kannon!"
''Ja Hans, JAAA"
could you do a simiilar video about the panther?
I think some people got confused with the Tiger P, as both had Tiger in the name, even thogh there were a lot less Ps than regular Tigers
I thought there were zero Tiger Ps in service and they all got turned into Elephant TDs?
@@thelieutenant7732 they were not in service, and chasis were used for elephants
@@thelieutenant7732 well yeah, but it's plausible that the tiger P had left some mark in the history books as the ferdinand/elefant TDs were only made since 90-odd hulls already existed. i mean, the significant difference between the two tigers was the hull/powertrain, and that's what was already built and then turned into TDs when porsche's proposal lost.
@@vukpsodorov5446 I'm pretty sure the original comment is trying to say that the stereotype of the unreliability of the Tiger I was actually attributed to the Tiger P and just accidentally shared with the Tiger I which I'm arguing against as the Tiger P did not see service and the Elephants were made in small numbers and themselves were not very good. There is a mark in history made by everything, but the Tiger P and its chassis did not make enough of a mark to be able to stain the Tiger I's reputation. In short, I'm claiming that the original comment's theory is wrong.
@@thelieutenant7732 One Tiger P was used as a command vehicle on the Eastern Front.
I'm of the opinion that the Tiger II should have been called Panther II simply for the fact that it looks more like a Panther than a Tiger just on it's face, but what I assume they called it Tiger II for is because the Tiger was the Heavy Tank while the Panther was more meant to replace Panzer IV's in the field. It's kind of strange the way things seemed to go all things considered cause it would have made more sense for the Tiger to be the Panzer V to replace the Panzer IV's or supplement them while the Panther as the Panzer VI is used more like a heavy Tank as it's more capable in that role.
The reason why it was called tiger 2 was due to how it was used in the battlefield, it stood as a moving bunker that would pick off tanks from a distance
Not quite. No tiger actually ever broke down. The tiger could fire and knock out an Abrams at 238,900 miles. No tiger was ever destroyed. It could ford 36201 ft without being prepared. It could drive at 800knots at sea level and 1.8 mach at 50k
Someone is going have this fly over their heads lol
The most frightening is people on the internet write comments like this unironically.
Look at how many hits the Tiger took at Kursk, but from the side. The Panther would never have taken so many hits on the side, because its armor was much thiner there.
What many guys not mention is the armor itself , as Russians made their tanks out of cast steel . Were you can make many mistakes and cast is'nt that strong as RHA , the Tiger 1 got face hardened front armor . Cast is cheap and fast to build , while FHA is very hard and expensive to build . As the Germans angle their front like a Panther , they make normal RHA armor .
So a German 100mm plate is not the same as a Russian 90mm , this is something that WT does'nt count . Cast got lot's of spalling inside even if you don't penetrates , so the crew's often bail out after a hit . German 50mm or short 75mm could'nt really penetrate the t34 from the front , but still managed to knock them out . Even Wittmann in his 75mm Stug3 knocked out an IS1 from the front , 100-120mm of armor .
So armor is not always armor , on paper the Tiger 1 seems not to have much of it . But it was still a hard nut to crack , or you hit a luck shot like this Churchill in Africa . 😅
Spalling in russian tank had nothing to by with the type of treatment of the steel but excesive tempering of the armor, which make it extremely hard but brittle at the same time so a good hit fracture it easily, ending the crew inside even without a penetration.
if you consider the fact that the IS2(1944) has double the amount of armor equivalent made by casting the armor plate with 100mm @0 degrees the IS2 has between 200-250mm of armor equivalent and it was made by casting.
also the IS1 armor was meant to protect from the 88mm gun not long 75mm gun this was fixed on the IS2(1944). Wittman also used a stug 3 from 1941-1942 UNTIL 1943 WHEN HE RECIVED A TIGER THE IS1 NEVER ENTERED SERVICE UNTIL 1944 LEARN SOME MORE HISTORY
*cries in 17 pounder not being mentioned or sherman firefly*
I don’t see you crying about the soviet 100mm not being mentioned.
@@Mr_Bunk I'm not much of Russian enthusiastic so I didn't know they used a 100mm in ww2 so thanks for the info
Archer, Achilles and of the eastern side all the big assault gun with 152mm like SU-152 and ISU-152,122mm ISU-122, SU-100, SU-85