Anti-Tank Chats #6 | Panzerfaust | The Tank Museum

[@thetankmuseum]

Hello tank nuts! We hope you enjoy this episode on The Panzerfaust. Let us know your thoughts down below.

[@wape1]

After 7:45 you say that the Panzerfaust 150 included a hand grip with trigger, but I thought that those would have been included on the Panzerfaust 250 only. The 150 did have the new type of warhead, though. Am I mistaken?

[@joeschoenfelder5646]

​@@johnanon6938

[@christiandauz3742]

Germany wished it had the Panzerfausts when the Mongols were invading

[@oliver5403]

I like it. I think you could make more of the old tank videos longer like this.

[@bazzakeegan2243]

Excellent presentation here! Well done guys! 👍

[@johnlansing2902]

Thank you for pointing out the psychological effect of a weapon of this type , the worry that a single person could destroy or cripple a massive machine such as a tank just made the job even more horrible .

[@DeHerg]

Well I wouldn't underestimate the worry of needing to let that tank come closer that 30m (without getting discovered prematurely) either.

[@williamzk9083]

The 30m range versions, Panzerfaust 30 came into service in late 1943 (about September 1943). Although it’s sights could be set to 40m a range of 30m was more realistic and 20m moreso. Had the 60m and 100m range versions been available before Normandy Landings instead of September and November 1944 they would have been far more devastating. The Panzerfaust was a light weight squad level weapon and 6-8 members of the 12-14 man squad could carry one while the rest provided covering fire. Panzershrek had a nominal range of 150m (sights set able to 200 practical range 100m against a moving target) but was a platoon level weapon and needed two men to operate.

[@johnlansing2902]

@@williamzk9083 Thank you .

[@johnh.tuomala4379]

Especially if that person were someone that normally wouldn't be dangerous, like a teenager or old-age pensioner.

[@41tl]

@@johnlansing2902 *Ukrainian Javelin troops have entered the chat*

[@samuelpope7798]

Everything I have ever read or seen about these weapons said they were really quite good and in all of the late war footage they are as ubiquitous as rifles. What a simple weapon. And it wasn't over engineered, which was rare for German equipment.

[@jerryjeromehawkins1712]

"Over engineered"... I'm not so sure the bulk of WW2 German equipment deserves that description Samuel. Mauser 98k, FW190, PzIII, PzIV (along with their Stug variants), Type VII Uboat, Me109, Mg42, Kumbelwagon, Stuka, Schnellboots, 75mm PaK 40, Junkers Ju-52, Walther P-38, M24 grenade, the Stahlhelm, S-mines... the list goes on and on. Even remarkable, cutting edge weapons like the StG44, V1 and V2 rockets and ME262 were not "over engineered"... the amount of engineering that went into them could be described as "just right." The bulk of German equipment during WW2 was simplistic (for lack of a better word) and well designed. Too many of their weapons and equipment get swept up into this "over engineered" description that is not deserved.

[@Jotgut]

@@jerryjeromehawkins1712 Agreed, they just had bad manufacturing plants and no resources due to Allied bombing of factories. Or in some cases, more often than not just down to bad engineering with no thought about maintenance/replacement parts

[@mikeynth7919]

@@jerryjeromehawkins1712 It wasn't over-engineered because Ferdinand Porsche wasn't part of the design team.

[@Cancun771]

@@jerryjeromehawkins1712 Watch the decades of Mauser rifle development history through mutiple iterations on C&Rsenal and then say again it wasn't overengineered.

[@Cancun771]

@@mikeynth7919 He would have found a way to stick a Diesel-electric drive on it.

[@patriot-renegade]

While I was a volunteer at the MVTF in California, we occasionally had a veteran come in who would relate his experiences in the invasion of Germany. He said his most visceral memory of the war was manning the M2 and firing at Hitler Youth trying to fire Panzerfausts from the rooftops of buildings.

[@hotlanta35]

Good tactics

[@Omniseed]

I hope they went down without much trouble (for everyone else)

[@elgringo8585]

Fake news you dont shoot a pf from top position 😭

[@Datboi814]

@@elgringo8585it’s hitler youth what do you expect 😂

[@michaelporzio7384]

Great chat! Allied soldiers also used captured Panzerfausts and turned them on their former owners! Allied soldiers found them easy to use and generally more effective than the PIAT and bazooka.

[@Welterino]

I believe you, I've heard a British joke about the PIAT never making a kill in the entire war and we all know bazookas were good but penetrated less than the german ones, IIRC.

[@michaelporzio7384]

@@Welterino Use it once throw it away, relatively light weight, one man operated, not crew served, don't have to worry about maintenance. So easy to use a 12 year old or a 70 year old German could use it.

[@jerrysmooth24]

GI's with rifle grenades as well as the logistical capacity for true combined arms and artillery made sure that Allies werent really lacking in Anti tank capacity too often people on the internet concern ourselves with the importance of individual small arms but there is always more than one factor. Especially with the increasing rarity of heavy panzers on the western front.

[@karoltakisobie6638]

Soviets were more than happy to use any weapon Germans left behind including this. I'm sure it could be useful can opener today in urban areas and a lot cheaper than modern options.

[@andrewallason4530]

@@karoltakisobie6638 much like the Ukrainians today with the abandoned Russian equipment. Using your enemy’s logistics for your own advantage is a brilliant idea, especially when you actually trained with it in the first place. Slava Ukraina. Putin Khuylo!

[@thatguyoverthere9634]

So basically the Panzerfaust turned the western front into a proto-iraq where soldiers were worried about their vehicles being hit by man portable explosives. The result being a common "jerry"rigging of add on armor.

[@jacobthrym7552]

The same thing is happening in the current war in Ukraine as well. There was a photo circulating a while ago of a Russian soft skinned transport truck with logs crudely slung over the door attempting to create spaced armour due to the Ukrainian raiding parties use of single man anti tank weaponry on the logistic routes.

[@Orangefan77]

Jury-rigging.

[@williamzk9083]

Any idea what panzerfaust they were using? 30, 60 or 100?. Also what range did they fire at?

[@williamzk9083]

@@goldenhawk352 So his unit was essentially a harbor defense unit? I'm trying to figure out the difference in effectiveness between the Panzerfaust 30, Panzerfaust 60 and Panzerfaust 100. I was I believe Panzerschreks were usually fired at 100m by two teams because the chance of a hit was so low against a moving tank at that range it required two shots. -My Father was 11 when the war ended. Given his farm boy toughness and Preussische Schnautze I suspect if handed a panzerfaust he would have ambushed a column of T-34 if asked. He threw potatoes into the POW camps to feed starving prisoners, something which would have gotten an adult shot. He was affable and made acquaintance with Russian Soldiers when he was a East German border guard many years latter. They'd meet out on patrol and goof off in the Forrest smoking and drinking (the Russians were big on both). This was before the Berlin wall. The Russians were often farm boys themselves and related to that. He and mom escaped East Germany and so I was born in Australia. -What I learned from him is you can usually solve a problem with humor rather than insults, fight or threat. . It was a simple but important lesson for me.

[@JohnRodriguesPhotographer]

My Dad's Sherman took a Panzer faust/Shrek shot to the front left drive sprocket. Tore up the sprocket but was drive able to get it replaced. This occurred just before Operation Cobra.

[@richardross7219]

Very good video. 50 years ago, in the US Army we had the M72 LAW. A SSG was teaching a PVT how to fire it and the darned thing blew up killing both of them. The investigators never released their findings. We just avoided them.

[@tomhenry897]

The problem was fixed

[@richardross7219]

@@tomhenry897 I did 29 with the big dumb green machine and learned that they lied a lot, especially to cover up a manufacturers mistakes. What was the problem?

[@WildBillCox13]

@@richardross7219 Here's what the Wiki says: "During the Vietnam and post-Vietnam periods, all issued LAWs were recalled after instances of the warhead exploding in flight, sometimes injuring the operator. After safety improvements, part of the training and firing drills included the requirement to ensure that the words "w/coupler" were included in the text description stenciled on the launcher, which indicated that the launcher had the required safety modifications.[citation needed][note 3]"

[@danielgreen6302]

Jeez! 72' was 50 yrs ago...unreal.😲

[@richardross7219]

@@danielgreen6302 What a long strange trip it's been.

[@sam1812seal]

In light of recent calls for the return of items to their country of origin, the Dutch would like their bicycle back

[@ironrgamesandmore4333]

For the next April Fools event in War Thunder they should just have a bunch of German soldiers riding bicycles with Panzerfausts trying to destroy low tier tanks in a city map

[@JanFWeh]

Why low tier tanks? You heard that they could punch through the armour of ever Allied tank in WWII

[@AlRoderick]

People shouldn't sleep too hard on the bicycle as military logistics. Using the same calories as a soldier was going to use for a day of marching they can move a lot more weight a lot farther.

[@Studio23Media]

Especially now that e-bikes are so affordable...

[@thetroyzernator]

You need roads/trails and flat ground though. For it to be efficient anyway. Two legs are probably more efficient off-road over hilly terrain.

[@yourfavoritetoy]

yes bc bicycles are so much better than horses. shows you how far the germany logistic train was wrecked. if youre down to the bike you are in trouble. you are in a war of survival and went to war with a logistics train made for the first world war. its a huge reason the germans lost. terrible logistics for this war.

[@kohinarec6580]

Most armies relied heavily on horses during WW2. Of course USA was different story, but in 1940s European countries, despite their industrial capacity, were still very agrarian. Trucks and cars were not ubiquitous and fuel was a problem especially for Germany. But yes, horses are a problem. They die quite easily in bad conditions.

[@nikotheophanis8795]

Dude i know i always go for a mountain bike for pubg, bikes are quiet, and they dont use fuel very underutilized piece of gear that is very practical in many circumstances

[@cliffordnelson8454]

Maybe one of the greatest weapon developments of WW2. The RPG weapons and their success around the world are testament to this weapon. Great presentation.

[@George_M_]

I love how studies showed the extra sandbags and stuff didn't actually add protection, but losses were lower because crews were more confident.

[@Alakazzam09]

A tank covered in spikes sounds like the most punk rock 40k thing ever. Short of more dakka, of course.

[@Liamv4696]

"An order for 100,000 was placed in April 1945" I love the optimism. I'd be surprised if any even saw combat.

[@Arbiter099]

Speer wasn't tasked with setting up an emergency war economy until after it was already too late (43/44) meanwhile the Allies were on that sort of footing since 39, except for the US

[@dustindubbo2892]

Lmao that’s exactly like I thought same month hitler blows his brains out and they think they can produce a new item lol.

[@williamzk9083]

@@Arbiter099 It turns out not to be true. Part of it was that Speer is attributed the armaments miracle due to his autobiographical book but Fritz Todt his predecessor had done a fairly good job. The reality is that Germany engineers and technocrats and economic planners had already set up a war time economy. Part of it was that the victorious allies and anti Nazi ideologues wanted to portray the Nazis living an easy peace time life out of their fear of putting the German population into a war time footing and upsetting them. The reality is quite different. German factories didn't go into triple shifts because there was a labor shortage and this simply wasn't possible. German women didn't work in munitions factories in large numbers because they were working on farms keeping up food production. Germany managed to grow 85% of its food and this is where women worked, agriculture on the family farm. Britain was importing over 50% of its food from the US so there was no need for women in agriculture and so they were put to work in munitions factories instead.

[@1TruNub]

@@Arbiter099 it's kind of scary to think what would have happened had spear been in charge since 1939

[@owensthilaire8189]

From what I've read the panzer Faust 150 that reached the troops was just a 100 with a fragmentation sleeve added to give it some anti personnel capacity.

[@bernarddeboeck8405]

This is a well done video....again! Thank you tank museum for what you do for your KZbin fans all over the globe!

[@MB-nn3jw]

Your AT videos are great, adding another dimension to the channel. The presenter is clear, succinct and detailed. Well done.

[@roygardiner2229]

Thanks very much. I had not realised the severe threat that this weapon posed to allied armour.

[@njlauren]

The tank crews feared the panzerfaust bc it was easily deployed and it was deadly, especially in close in fighting. Just finished reading the book by Douglas Holland 'Brothers in Arms' about a British tank unit from D day on, and they took a beating w these weapons. This was especially true when they were without infantry, the infantry would help suppress this kind of fire.

[@nicholaswimborne]

James Holland?

[@njlauren]

@@nicholaswimborne Thank you, yes, James Holland.

[@henrysokol3466]

You could carry a bunch of them over your shoulder on straps and pass them out to your whole squad like cans of beer. A powerful antitank shot could come from anywhere, and another from somewhere else might be coming a split-second later. That must have been terrifying... you wouldn't even be sure where to focus attention.

[@njlauren]

@@henrysokol3466 Yep, and that is what made them so deadly, they had a lot of them, easy to use from any position. It was especially bad when tanks tried to operate without infantry support, who could spot potential threats. In close in fightinge Normandy it would be really bad.

[@AyebeeMk2]

THIS ANTI-TANK, series is the best content online at the moment, the museum puts out the best and this is top of their content. Brilliant.

[@patrickshanley4466]

Outstanding-also loved all the film segments 👍

[@feedingravens]

My father got one when he was called into the "Volkssturm" to hold up the advancing russian tanks in Schlesia. And so they were in their manholes and seeing the russian tanks coming - he looked right, no one, he looked left, no one, so he also let the Panzerfaust be Panzerfaust, jumped up and ran. He got captured later and came into the Rheinwiesen camps near Bad Kreuznach, with the US forces, and got released with severe dysntery (familiy legend: "because they thought I would not survive anyhow")

[@903lew]

Smart man

[@markwilliams2620]

💩💩💩💩 your way to freedom. A perfect conclusion to the lunacy that was the Third Reich.

[@delphin422]

The episode starts with a thrilling retelling of an engagement of british troops against the Panzerfaust. Then you say the name of the lead designer of the thing was called Dr. H. Langweiler. Wich I had to look up since that would simply be to ironic, since thats german for bore, drag or slowpoke. But yes, thats his actual name.

[@chuckliebenauer3656]

Best documentary on the subject that I have either read or seen. Thku much.

[@tomhorn6679]

great intro. the Rus used captured models to clear out basements and attics and to open access to adjoining basement by blowing holes brtween them. im wondering if this was how the chancellory was eventualy taken, as the survivor rate was close to zero.

[@tomhenry897]

The Soviets weren’t interested In taking prisoners Don’t think the Germans wanted to surrender to the Soviets

[@tomhorn6679]

@@tomhenry897 well considering the holdouts held out for a very long time, 2 held out until 1961, they needed blasted out. 300 were in the chancellory building i believe. ive never read about any that came out alive, or broke out either. same with the Kroll Opera house.

[@AtheistOrphan]

@@tomhorn6679 - Held out until 1961? Sixteen years after the war ended? Wow.

[@Jagdtyger2A]

A very nice examination of a historical weapon. So well done, I learned a few new setails that I hadn;r known before

[@paulhills1967]

Excellent, well researched and presented video. Thank you!

[@chrisjones6002]

I remember hearing a theory that adding the sandbags could actually help an AP shell penetrate the armor if the armor was sloped. They said the sandbag would reduce the chance of a ricochet due to the slope. I don't know if it's ever been tested but I think it would be interesting to see.

[@WBtimhawk]

Yeah heard the same. The theory I think is that a soft-ish layer helps the projectile turn into the armor rather than either ricochet or having to deal with more armor because of the slope. Not sure to which type of anti-projectile it applies (HEAT or any solid shot)

[@michaeltelson9798]

From Sicily onwards, the 82nd Airborne used PanzerFausts. They even captured a truckload of practice versions and trained with them.

[@leepalmer1210]

Had never heard of this. Was there any attempt to make a allied produced version?

[@celston51]

@@leepalmer1210 That's reverse engineering a reverse engineering project. The M9 and M9A1 variants of the Bazooka was as far as development of recoilless antitank weapons for the Allies got. The British already had the PIAT which was a spigot mortar. The Soviets relied on rocket artillery, anti-tank guns, and hand grenades for their antitank needs.

[@Stripedbottom]

@@celston51 The Soviets were actually supplied the bazooka as lend-lease, but it's distinct lack of appearance in any anecdotes or even photographs from the time makes me think they maybe never even issued it, or perhaps only in limited numbers and to specialist troops. But it, along with captured examples of Panzerfaust and Panzerschreck, surely must have influenced their own designs of shaped-charge rocket launchers.

[@muttmankc]

One of the strongest arguments against efforts to up armor allied tanks, as even a Sherman Jumbo could easily be frontally penetrated by a 12 year old kid with a Panzerfaust.

[@88porpoise]

Thicker armour wouldn't have helped. Any amount of armour sufficient to protect a tank against such weapons would have been wholly impractical. The Jumbo Sherman was already heavy enough that it ran into issues and never could have managed as the primary medium tank (it was great for specific use cases). The defense against such weapons was combined arms and battlefield awareness.

[@T4nkcommander]

Good point, but up armoring would (and did) help versus other Axis AT, so there was still reason too.

[@88porpoise]

@@T4nkcommander How much more armour do you need? What will that achieve (what threat will it protect from)? And how will that harm performance and reliability of the tanks? What logistics issues will this new heavier tank create? It is all well and good to say more armour better, but things aren't that simple. And it was an issue the Germans had when orders came down to meet arbitrary minimum thicknesses of armour without any other considerations.

[@T4nkcommander]

@@88porpoise The Tiger tanks met their design goal as breakthrough tanks - the picture of a Tiger 1 with over 200 AT hits at Kursk comes to mind. The idea of "arbitrary minimum thickness' is absurd; the boxed design of the Tiger was deemed acceptable because they didn't figure Allied AT would catch up until the Tiger 1 was replaced (they got this right). Not only did they account for thickness but also angling - much engineering was put into the design. The nature of your question is very complex. Obviously the Jumbos traded a lot for the front armor, and that tradeoff was not worth it for most use cases, otherwise they'd have been everywhere. But in the breakthrough role they were used it was deemed a wortwhile trade for the drastically increased strain on the drivetrain.* There's no need to over-complicate things, either. If your life is at stake, armor suddenly becomes much more important to you. It is the reason that Tiger crews absolutely loved their tanks while Sherman vets generally didn't feel safe. Obviously, there's a lot to unpack there, but I can't think of a single Sherman vet I've talked to who would have turned down extra armor just on principle. *Just reiterates how far ahead in tank design the Germans were. It wasn't until several years post war we developed tanks with similar armor and weight characteristics of the German WW2 fleet...

[@88porpoise]

@@T4nkcommander The Tiger and Jumbo Sherman were tanks for specific jobs. They were not general use medium tanks and they could never have replaced the medium tanks because they were specialized for one job. It was only at the end of the war that technology was just getting to a point where the next generation of medium tanks could pretty much fill those niche roles while remaining good general purpose tanks. And that would lead to the MBT. Also, in terms of frontal armour, the Sherman's was actually had pretty close effective thickness (accounting for the slope) to the Tiger. The Tiger's extra armour was mainly around the sides and rear as it was supposed to go into places where it would expect to get shot from the sides and rear. And more armour almost always was popular with crews. But the point of a tank is not to make its crew happy, it is to win the war. And that involves accepting that casualties will occur. Sure, you want to minimize casualties, but not to a point that it is detrimental to the war effort. And let's not forget casualties aren't just in the tank crews, but also the infantry they are supporting. Let's say you built a tank that was impervious to enemy fire, that is great. But far fewer will be available due to logistics and it will be unreliable and extremely slow so you can't count on it being where you need it when it is needed. And the infantry will pay for that with their lives, and the war will take longer. But I am sure the tank crews will love their safety.

[@BretHiggins]

Loved the history lesson, but the tie would have looked so much better with a half windsor knot. I don't know why I feel presentation is important for presentation of information but I do. Again, not taking away anything from what was said, indeed, Mr Wheeler is quite the adept lecturer.

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

I was pointing out to my spotty son (17) how fortunate he is to be born in this age rather than in 1926! A 15 year old in Berlin in 1945... there you go! Have a hat and a panzerfaust, welcome to the Wermacht, hero!

[@stefanobonaiuti8243]

yep. Many children died for what, watching berlin fall a week later?

[@ArmiesOfWar]

Of all the tank museums I have visited this one is the best and the panzerfaust could destroy a challenger 2

[@vksasdgaming9472]

FDF made use of Panzerfausts and -schrecks during Battle of Tali-Ihantala. Experiences were mixed, but having a AT-weapon when you need them at hand is better than not having them.

[@stefanobonaiuti8243]

Not as flashy as a King Tiger, but such a smart weapon.

[@jackdarbyshire5888]

Great video,I've been waiting for this one 💣💥☠

[@sfjp1]

Oooh been waiting for this. Thanks 👍🏻

[@largemouthbass355]

Amazing video! Great teaching material!

[@rrl4245]

Excellent information. Thanks

[@fredrickszahowski6154]

Excellent video and thanks for the info .

[@howardchambers9679]

By Tank into Normandy by Stuart Hills is an excellent book. Written by someone who was there. Highly recommend anyone interested in tank warfare to get it and read it. Parts are harrowing but it shows the bravery of those tank crews.

[@zulubeatz1]

A historic development. Giving anti tank capability to infantry changes the dominance that Armour enjoyed. We can see the effects today.

[@bikenavbm1229]

excellent info very well done thank you

[@ollep9142]

This was an unexpectedly short video. The Panzerfaust wasn't one weapon, but a whole family of them. I was expecting some more info on the entire evolution.

[@michaelbevan3285]

The Panzerfaust was also an excellent breaching weapon for urban warfare as it was guaranteed to kill or stun the occupants of a room, prior to getting grenades in or getting a flamethrower up close. It was also excellent for knocking out bunkers and reinforced dugouts.

[@polish22doves]

Good video, lots of details. Liked the look at the instruction book, build confidence and proficiency will come in time.

[@The_Modeling_Underdog]

Great video, as usual. 10:29 is the guy on the left using a late pattern Beretta M38?

[@michaelbevan1081]

I loved the video, though the bike took my attention more over😅 Still I massively enjoyed the video and subbed yesterday, hopefully I can visit sometime? Duxford is the closet to me, though their main focus is aircraft.

[@kohinarec6580]

Panzerfaust was an important tool for Finnish army during the Soviet summer offensive of 1944.

[@reganmahoney8264]

Love this series!

[@DaremoKamen]

In the Vietnam war, supply convoys that faced ambush by RPG 2 and B40 weapons found that chain link fencing made good improvised armor. Studies showed it was less from setting off the fuse earlier and more from deforming the shaped charge so it was ineffective.

[@bob_the_bomb4508]

The B40 is one of my favourite weapons. Made from the carcass of an unexploded cluster munition mated with a PG-2 motor

[@williamzk9083]

Note you missed one stage of development. The FP42 or “Faust Patrone 1942” which was used in large numbers in Russia. FP42 looked like a Panzerfaust 30 with only a 40cm tube. The tube often let cinders blow on to the operator and it was hard to aim hence the tube was lengthened. The early panzerfaust 30 were available in later half of 1943. I think the range was very limiting butevtte panzerfaust 60 from September 1944 and panzerfaust 100 about 2 months latter. I would say that had the Panzerfaust 100 been available in late 1943 it would have devastated allied tanks far more. All panzerfaust were reloadable and issued with spare warheads. Reloading was cumbersome and only done after combat.

[@paoloviti6156]

A very interesting video about the Panzerfaust! It was very effective in urban areas especially if the company was handled by good veteran commanders who knew how to lead because the Hitlerjugend troops generally were simply only too green. In truth the tank crews really feared the Panzerfaust because of it's unpredictably...

[@chpet1655]

I’ve told this story on KZbin before elsewhere but my fathers uncle was in the retreat from Stalingrad. I’m not sure how long after the actual loss of the 6th Army this was but he was some kind of rear echelon service personal because he was over 40 years old and wasn’t in top shape but his airbase was being over run by the soviets and he grabbed a Panzerschrek and knocked out 2 T-34s to stem the assault and for this he got a second class iron cross. My point in this is, anyone can now destroy a tank, all it takes is bravery. The Panzerschrek allowed a little more aim and a little more distance than a Panzerfaust but the idea is the same…you just need sone huge balls to kill a tank

[@muttmankc]

Excellent, thanks!

[@KVW22]

Very interesting, keep up the good work!

[@WildBillCox13]

That scene from "A Bridge Too Far", tho, when the PIAT armed U.K. Panzerknacker fires his weapon against a "lone panzer" * . . . Punkt . . . MISS! Punkt . . . MISS!! *Leo 1, I think. The Leopard 1 was less well armored than the Panzer IV. Proof positive that hope outweighs all other countermeasures, especially for the weight conscious.

[@PoLaNd4life96]

Will you eventually cover Anti Tank grenades?

[@samuelpope7798]

I would like that too.😀

[@moc6897]

Thx!

[@bruceinoz8002]

Also worked will as an off-route mine. A bit of wire and a stout tree or two and "bingo". Crude, but effective.

[@ashifabedin]

This is a well done video....

[@loupiscanis9449]

Thank you , 🐺

[@quantumplastic]

Great vídeo👍👍👍

[@mstevens113]

Ranges, sighting systems, penetration and armour effectiveness have all increased, but fundamentally very little has actually changed in tactics and counter tactics in 80 years. Only active defence systems would really come as something new to Ww2 tanker.

[@benjaminbenson8714]

Superb. As usual. I'll watch it again in a day or 2 to digest the info as it is almost second to none. Why watch the history/discovery channel. Fantastic series as it frames tank development perfectly.

[@NotoriusMaximus]

Fascinating!

[@JawsHLL]

Panzerschreck next?

[@speedicusmaximus]

A very interesting film - thank you ! The Tank Museum has produced two Panzerfibel, for the Tiger and Panther. Would the museum consider producing the Panzerfaustfibel, perhaps including, but not limited to, the respective instructions for the Panzershreck and German stick grenade should the Panzerfaust instructions be only a few pages ? Thanks.

[@crownprincesebastianjohano7069]

What's crazy is that German infantry killed 8000 enemy tanks with hand weapons BEFORE the Panzerfaust and shreck were fielded. From 1940 on, German Infantry Basic Training involved a tank killing course. They got the men used to tanks by having a Panzer III roll over them several times while they sat in trenches or fox holes, followed by basic instruction on the universal weak points of enemy tanks, and the best ways to cripple or kill them. They had a hodgepodge of anti-tank weapons of varying effectiveness. The advent of the Panzerfaust made these tasks much easier.

[@andershansson2245]

The Wehrmacht learned that from the Finnish infantry. Not sure if any German Schnaps distilleries re-arranged their production into making Molotov Cocktails for the army, but I know they did in Finland.

[@lineinthesand663]

The one thing that I have never seen addressed in a video on the weapon, even in comments, is an exact explanation of the impact detonation mechanism, which clearly is placed at the base of the shaped charge, forward the propellant charge. Was it an inertial spring/hammer mechanism?

[@Rabble2]

Do you have this on loan from The Anti-Tank Museum?

[@wape1]

After 7:45 they say that the Panzerfaust 150 included a hand grip with trigger, but I thought that those would have been included on the Panzerfaust 250 only. The 150 did have the new type of warhead, though. Am I mistaken?

[@mikesmithg0rfd356]

thank you

[@tonygarcia-fd4sg]

👍👍👍Awesome vid

[@TheFjordflier]

Splendid 👌

[@jimleffler7976]

Sad scene in "Fury" reminds one of what it was like getting hit by that thing

[@colbeausabre8842]

That was one of my criticisms if the film 1) By April 1945, no one was sending a platoon of tanks anywhere without infantry (and vice versa) 2) The tanks should have use d recon by fire - hosing down the hedgerow with their coax and bow machineguns.

[@landserkorps796]

The Name panzerfaust has nothing to do with Götz v. Berlichingen and his "panzerfaust". Panzerfaust is the short version of the developname " panzerabwehrfaustpatrone" . Which means ... tankdefencefistcartridge ( Wordlytranslation). Maybe englishspeaker would translate it as antitankfistcartridge. ( Sorry for my Rosty english. ) best regards from Germany.

[@jakevelasco4072]

side note why were both panzerfaust and panzershriek coexisting during the late war stages? Didn't the panzerfaust have more benefits than the later?

[@88porpoise]

The Germans weren't exactly renowned for cohesive weapons development plans and avoiding duplication of efforts. The Panzerschreck and Panzerfaust were in development at pretty much the same time and went into service pretty similar times too. The Panzerschreck also provided singificanr range advantage over Panzerfausts. And it's ability to be reused could be more cost effective in the low run (if the tube wasn't post or damaged).

[@kleinesschreckgespenst319]

No, Panzerfaust was an one use weapon designed for the regular infantryman. Panzerschrecks were reloadable and were meant to be only used by specialized infantrymen anti tank teams with the proper training. You can also see the differences in the effective range of both weapons. The most basic Panzerfaust was meant to be shot from a distance of max. 30 meters (almost 100 feet), while the Panzerschreck had an effective range of 100-200 meters (330-660 feet). As you can see, the Panzerfaust - as its simplicity indicates - was meant as a weapon of last possible selfdefence for your common infantryman who would stand otherwise no chance even against lightly armored vehicles, while the Panzerschreck was also meant to be capable to activly engage enemy tanks on its own with professionalized teams.

[@comentedonakeyboard]

"Jagdfahrad 45"🚲😂

[@annoyingbstard9407]

It’s the weapon you introduce when you know the war’s already lost.

[@stefanobonaiuti8243]

great for ambushing

[@brittakriep2938]

The mans name was ,Langweiler'? Can be translated as ,Boring Man' or ,Coming from Langweil'.

[@pj_ytmt-123]

And now with ATGM ranges of 2+km not even infantry support can be realistically expected to deter them.

[@death00124]

So like the strumgewehr 42 is a pre AK the Panzerfaust is a pre RPG-7

[@c1ph3rpunk]

You have to give their weapons designers credit for many of their inventions, they either inspired & influenced modern designs or are still in use (MG-3 comes to mind). The one that I always found odd was zimmerit on their armor, nobody but the Germans had magnetic mines, at least that I know of. Seems they were protecting against a threat that really didn’t exist.

[@T4nkcommander]

Gotta assume your enemy has the same or better tech than you. Just so happens the Germans were mostly ahead of everyone else, so stuff like this happened.

[@brainprochaska8214]

My now passed German father in law said they used to shoot them up into the trees. He was 19 and wounded near Seelow.

[@lachbullen8014]

And what sort accounting measures did the allies have against the panzerfaust.?

[@mabbrey]

great vid

[@N_Wheeler]

2:20 I thought I saw Anti-Tank Chat on the Bazooka pop up in October, but - did it disappear?

[@brainpolice5016]

Nice video - however, I a missing some information. This doesn't really go into any detail about how a PF works. i.e., when the shape-charge hits the side of a tank - how does it work?

[@mattw785]

Hi Mr. Wheeler, this was a great vid!

[@ecognitio9605]

Would've been a game changer early on in the war, especially on the eastern front. Too little too late....

[@neilwilson5785]

All the military history channels talk about tanks, but not much about the anti-tank guns. Of course, then we get the shaped-charge anti tank weapons such as Panzerfaust Both of these are a potent threat to armoured vehicles.

[@Grom_the_Paunch]

Anyone know the movies that they are taking some of the clips from?

[@Bird_Dog00]

Dr Heinrich Langweiler? Poor man must have been the target of some serious bullying back in school. Given that Langweiler literaly translates to "boring guy".

[@TheZinmo]

Those Germans with Panzerfausts on bycicles are the direct aequivalent to the Ukrainians on their electric dirt-bikes. It really baffles me that the Russians learned nothing in all that time.

[@sirmoke9646]

Ukraine has close to zero electricity. Good luck pushing 50kg of useless weight in November mud.

[@sealove79able]

A great tank chat. What was the panzerfaust250?

[@Folgeantrag]

This could be an error. Propably he meant the Model 150. There were only four known version of the Panzerfaust 30/60/100/150. The Number indicates the effective weapons range which was improved during the Production

[@sealove79able]

@@Folgeantrag Thank you.

[@LordBloodpool]

Could these be dual-wielded? Theoretically.

[@Juel92]

Now I'm disappointed we never got tanks covered in spikes during ww2.

[@anthyatt6904]

The image of the crew trying to get into the tank reminds me of that joke abut how hedgehogs have sex "Very bloody carefully"

[@jimbo9305]

What's the cost comparison of Panzerfausts built versus tanks lost?

[@williamzk9083]

Military History Visulised does a video on this. It decreases dramatically as the war progresses. Unfortunately the data isn’t Brocken down for the late war long range models.

[@andrebartels1690]

A minor translation issue: As I understand, Faustpatrone translates into fist cartridge, not fist projectile. But surely, this doesn't alter the content of this great video.