How Bad Was The Hetzer?

The Jagdpanzer 38(t) is one of the most well-liked German armored fighting vehicles of World War II. It's also known as the Hetzer tank destroyer, though there's been a lot of debate over that nickname. While many people are fans of it, a decent number of AFV enthusiasts also think it was terrible. To get a clearer picture, we're going to take a very quick dive into the vehicle's history.
Check the channel "About" section for the link to the creator of my profile picture.
Sources:
Jagdpanzer 38t Hetzer, 1944 to 45 - Hilary Doyle, Mike Badrocke
Jagdpanzer 38 to Jagdtiger (Panzer Tracts No.9) - Thomas L. Jentz, Hilary Doyle
German Assault Guns and Tank Destroyers 1940 to 1945 - Anthony Tucker-Jones
Jagdpanzer 38 Hetzer - Vladimir Francev, Miroslav Bílý
Inside the Chieftain's Hatch, Jagdpanzer 38t (G13)
Songs used (in order from first to last):
Subnautica - Into the Unknown
Halo 3: ODST - Rain (Deference for Darkness)
Sound mods:
Epic Thunder (Pre-release)
Gunner HEAT PC Crew Voices Mod (Personal, go play the game: gunnerheatpc.com/ )
Sponsor: apexgamingpcs....
Second channel: / @spookstoon
Patreon: / spookston
Twitter: / spookston
Reddit: /u/spookston
Discord: See my Patreon page.
Twitch: / spookstonwt
Steam: goo.gl/BYQjC9
#warthunder​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tanks​​​​​​​​​​​​ #tankhistory

[@Spookston]

Yes, I meant to say 10cm when talking about the gun's penetration, not 1cm.

[@theultimategamer8537]

Maybe one cm for the HE shell if you’re lucky lol

[@Geniusinventor]

Man I am a engineer I love the hetzer tank I made a video my DIY Hetzer tank please please check its out 🥰🥰

[@clevernamegotban1752]

Why would the Hetzer preform well on the Eastern front against the Russian but not against the Western Allies? Something with the terrain or the tactical differences?

[@warbrain1053]

@@clevernamegotban1752 sherman frontal armor. That's a big thing

[@paul.facciolo6985]

Lol. Was literally Abt to go to the comments to shit on that statistic and this was the first thing I see

[@Panzerfan93]

it made a pretty good egg transport though! a friend of my dad served in the swiss army while these were still in service and he got orders from the quartermaster to grab the nearest vehicle, drive to town and get some eggs He did as he was told, only that the closest vehicle was a G-13 (swiss designation of the Hetzer) When he came back to the kitchen, sitting on top of the gun mantlet holding the eggs, he discovered that the battalion commander was inspecting the unit he wasn't happy

[@Zorro9129]

kek

[@gooberone]

LOL

[@TheGrace020]

Based!

[@arnoldpinguin2982]

@@TheGrace020 ur mom

[@TheGrace020]

@@arnoldpinguin2982 Thank you, you too ☺

[@richman6974]

The Hetzer is one of my favorite tank destroyers, it is fun to play, however, its weaknesses are *very* noticeable, its weak armor can even be penned by airplane MGs

[@DatBoi_TheGudBIAS]

Like any tank Dat isn't heavy or superheavy, roof is weak

[@kimjanek646]

It was the first vehicle I grinded for when I started playing WT in 2016 😄

[@whiskyhyena6801]

roof and sides are hella thin.... the amount of times I've killed em with the m16 AA halftack is crazy ngl

[@genuingamer]

Weak my butt. As an m4 player finding one was death. It's impossible to pen its front. It's transmission blocks shots from the lower hull

[@panzerlite8108]

I one shot an Abrams at 600 meters with it.

[@GoredonTheDestroyer]

The Hetzer may not have been a _good_ vehicle, but it was a good _vehicle,_ if that makes any sense. It was meant to be a cheap tank destroyer that could get the job done, a job it got done in spades.

[@razortheonethelight7303]

Almost like a German equivalent to the sten smg

[@GoredonTheDestroyer]

@@razortheonethelight7303 I feel like that's an apt way to put it.

[@Zero_2558]

It was a nightmare for both the crew and the enemy after all as for the crew is very uncomfortable and awkward but for the enemy it’s very smol and hard to hit and pen it

[@GoredonTheDestroyer]

@@TheJimyyy STuG was also infinitely more expensive to produce, both in terms of cost and resources. Hetzer was the anti-tank vehicle Germany needed at the time - A last-ditch vehicle that was simple and cheap to produce, which could be produced more rapidly than a STuG or a larger Jagdpanzer IV. Being effective in combat doesn't just mean your vehicle is big and scary, it also has to actually be able to accomplish its designated task.

[@Zero_2558]

@@TheJimyyy but the stug cannot reuse older variants of the existing tanks but hetzer was designed to reuse the outdated chassis of the 38t hence allowing them to be effective again so stug was good but it cannot preform the requirement of reusing outdated tanks

[@setesh1294]

Final drives seem to be a serious detriment to WW2 German tanks

[@mrbloodmuffins]

Wehrmacht: Furer, we said final drives would help us win the war, not final solutions.

[@TheNorthie]

The Jadgpanther didn’t really have that problem. Which is weird since the Panther always had this problem

[@_Azulite_]

Wehrmacht HQ, 1944: NEIN, WHAT DO YOU MEAN 'FINAL DRIVE IS THE ISSUE'? WE NEED MORE GUN, MORE ARMOUR, MORE WONDER WAFFEN

[@Fishmanglitz]

Well it was a problem on most heavy tanks of the era. From what I understand drive train problems was a big reason the US chose not to manufacture heavy tanks for most of the war despite the US having several prototypes

[@klauskinski8068]

German steel was really crappy at the end of the war, they just did not have the right materials anymore, so they had to change the mixture of the steel alloy. This caused the steel to be very hard, which also made it really brittle. That not only caused armor plates to crack under stresses they normally would have survived if they were more elastic, but probably also caused problems with the final drives, i presume.

[@user-Minx1]

The hetzer is based on Panzerkampfwagen 38(t), originally known as the ČKD LT vz. 38 was a tank designed during the 1930s, which saw extensive service during World War II. Developed in Czechoslovakia ( and the (T) in the bracket stands for Tschechoslowakei with means Czechoslovakia.

[@neznambratra1714]

YES! Finally someone.

[@AnonymPLOX3]

Finally someone with brain. I hate these people who dont know about Czechoslovakia and his history

[@balkancommenterwithseveree7552]

The Mareșal also inspired it.

[@nesyboi9421]

He mentions this in the video. Not the whole thing of course but if you know the 38t then you know this.

[@fandovec03]

also they developed Hetzer because their Factories couldn't build Stugs because of weigh limitations

[@beefyblom]

I've always liked the Hetzer, it's absolutely adorable for a tank destroyer.

[@Windows98R]

It’s like a E25 before it got flattened out lol

[@beefyblom]

@@Windows98R Wasn't Hetzer supposed to be the name of the E-25 but ended up being used for the Jagdpanzer 38(t) instead?

[@aname6794]

right? my friends call me weird for calling it cute. It is an adorable little guy.

[@frankpolly]

What is interesting about the Hetzer/Jgdpzr.38(t) is that it was a step towards the E Series. You can very clearly see how the hetzer and E-10 and E-25 were alike. their main reason for being built being a cost effective, "reliable" and effective tank. Not to mention the fact that the Hetzer of course still shared many parts with the Pz.38(t) and other designs based on it like the Marders and thus had less downtime when broken down.

[@zafranorbian757]

The Hetzer even outlived the E series. Hetzer production was meant to be cranked to the max at a time where the E series was already canceled.

[@Zorro9129]

@@zafranorbian757 The E-series wasn't a bad idea, it just couldn't be realized during the war.

[@zafranorbian757]

@@Zorro9129 Yes. The follow up plan made a lot more sence though. Instead of makeing a compleatly new generation of vehicles, simply cutting down the production to the 3 essential vehicle types. That being Hetzer, Panther and Tiger II

[@neznambratra1714]

Don't forget, the (t) means Tschechoslowakei, in english Czechoslovakia. It's a Czech based design.

[@zhufortheimpaler4041]

@@neznambratra1714 yes and no. The Pz.30 (t) was a czech design, the Hetzer was a new design, based on 38 (t) components

[@xxfalconarasxx5659]

I love this tank. Despite its shortcomings, I think it served its purpose pretty well. It also was a tank my grandfather operated in World War 2 during the Battle of the Bulge, so it has some sentimental value to me as well.

[@Pao234_]

How did he fare?

[@xxfalconarasxx5659]

@@Pao234_ In the tank? I'm not sure to what extent did they see combat in it, if they did at all. It wasn't originally their tank actually, and him and his squad were not members of the Panzer Divisions. They were part of the Luftwaffe Field Divisions. However, they had experience with tanks, specifically an SPAA, having operated a Wirbelwind prior. They acquired the Hetzer towards the end of the battle. It was found abandoned in the battlefield, still operational, and so they recaptured it. Around this time, the Germans were retreating. My grandfather and his team were still in enemy territory, and were at risk of being captured or gunned down if they tried to make it back on foot, so they used the tank to keep themselves protected as they fell back. The armour was reliable enough to resist small arms fire, and it really helps to have a machine gun that is remote controlled. It was a life saver, and my grandfather was able to make it back across the Siegfried Line. He was quite fond of the vehicle. Towards the end of the war, he was captured by the Belgians. He would be freed shortly after the war, and lived in West Germany for a time. Unable to return to his home country of Lithuania, which was under Soviet occupation, he moved to the US, where he spent the rest of his life in. He passed away in 1997.

[@Pao234_]

@@xxfalconarasxx5659 Thanks for the story!

[@whyjnot420]

As said in the video its not like this was horrendous or a war winning weapon (hard to really find any of those, and when you do they tend to be far less complex things than tanks or ships or whatnot, things like the proximity fuze for instance). What it really is, for the most part, is a really cool looking design. I think that is the only real reason anyone outside of historians really care about it to the point they do. Exceptions exist in all things, but as usual they are what actually proves any given rule.

[@christopherjames5895]

@@xxfalconarasxx5659 Nice story . thank you !

[@BarkBarkImShark]

Basically Germany the entire war: "This tanks rushed design has lead to multiple performance issues." "And I'll fukin do it again!"

[@legolegs87]

At least the Ratte hasn't suffered from rushed design and sloppy production.

[@canthi109]

@@legolegs87 X D

[@marianmarkovic5881]

well most of tanks of WW2 had reliability issues,. especialy those made in small batches,.... but there are pictures Soviet tanks whit "spare" transmission on back of tank,....

[@Jim-Tuner]

Every new tank introduced during the war by anyone had multiple performance issues. Every design carried out during wartime was rushed. And sloppy production wasn't limited to the Germans.

[@noobster4779]

Loosing a war and having a need of new and better vehicles NOW because the enemy is closing in on your homeland tends to force your hand to be especially fast in development. Just look at the Panzer III. and Panzer IV., their design for their time was literalyl revolutionary (motorized tank turrets, tank radio, three men turrets, 5 men crew) and well the Panzer iV. is literally the onyl main vehicle of WW2 that stayedcombat effective from the begining to the end of the war, reaching its final developemeant stage only in 1944 after 5 years of frontline service. In short, the longer it takes for germany to develope a tank the more land and ressources it loses in the meantime to later on build that tank. Better have a rushed tank with as many ressources available as possible for production then basically the best tank ever with no ressources left to build it. I mean when the Hetzer entered service the soviets were literally infront of Romania, germanies main fuel supplier with its only major oil field. Cant be more pressed into action then that; no fuel and the tank is pointless.

[@0g0mogosepikworld31]

"I have seen this one before" "What do you mean? It's brand new" [Aggressively gestures at the lindybeige video]

[@nesyboi9421]

He's just doing his take on it. Spookston is gonna spook.

[@chair6703]

lindybeige is crap

[@nesyboi9421]

@@chair6703 cool now go back to sitting in your chair

[@ThatZenoGuy]

@@nesyboi9421 He's not wrong though, Lindy and Spook are both crap.

[@nesyboi9421]

@@ThatZenoGuy So umm Explain to me what exactly is wrong with them. Also I don't accept "spook is a furry" as an explanation, it needs to go deeper than that. *also he says he ain't but evidence points otherwise, I'll stay neutral on that topic for now

[@eta320]

Your ability to take the development history, performance, pros, and cons, of a tank and present them in an extremely compact yet detailed format is something I've always admired. I take a lot of inspiration from you for my own content, thanks for another great video!

[@gsmit2269]

Ah yes finally a video on the armoured coffin

[@Vodkiller76x2]

But thats not the Sherman ಠ‿ಠ

[@zzzzUS]

@@Vodkiller76x2 You clearly meant BMP-1.

[@WreckItRa1ph]

Lc/33 tankette

[@serdarcam99]

Dont mess with the hetz wise sherman tanker said once

[@Geniusinventor]

@@Vodkiller76x2 he mean the ASU

[@mrbloodmuffins]

The Hetzers were what I depended on as a Panzer Elite player back in Company of Heroes.

[@Paciat]

They seemed crappy when they drove out in front of my 17lbs guns or Fireflies. I usually went for Luftwaffe (advanced repair) or Scorcher Earth (booby traps) tactics, 4 man MP44 squads and Panther battle-group. 2 Hetzers were more expensive than 2 Panthers.

[@panzerplayz]

"Hetzer" means baiter, or chaser as It was used to flank and lure in enemies and distract them. It did the job

[@guppiapfeljustleopardthing8756]

Still the name is (depending on what you read) wrong. Indeed a hand full of troops did call it Hetzer and even guderian said he received a few hetzers but was shortly after that corrected that a vehicle by the name of Hetzer wasn't in production. After the war the allies fund plans for a tank from the purposed "E-Series" called Hetzer and thought it belonged to the 38t. So to summ up. A very small almost nonexistent ammount of crew called it Hetzer, Guderian was corrected by the heereswaffenamt that the Hetzer didn't exist and the 38t is a completely different vehicle and the name mainly popped up because of allied troops mixing up 3 similar designes. To quote the curator of the "Deutsches Panzermuseum Munster" (yes Munster and not Münster) : while it isn't its historically accurate name, we recognize that over the post war years the name "hetzter" developed into the calling name of the 38t, like we call the tiger or panther by their names.

[@proparkour1603]

Fun fact: The Hetzer was inspired by the Romanian M-06 ,,Mareșal" prototype. The Hetzer project was approved the same month M-06 was presented to Hittler. Later on, during testing of the M-06, german observators were impressed by the tanks design and layout. If we compare the designs, the similarities are obvious.

[@balkancommenterwithseveree7552]

hehe i was gonna comment that

[@ghostcz2717]

Hetzer is czechoslovak tank

[@DerDop]

@@ghostcz2717 do you knpw the meaning of "inspired"

[@ghostcz2717]

@@DerDop Yes I'm just saying that concept of that tank were before m-06

[@DerDop]

@@ghostcz2717 probably. Romanian arms industry was heavy influenced by Czech and French designs.

[@Ropetor]

A panther costed as much as a late panzer 4 and took almost the same man hours to make, even if they made more tanks who would've crewed them and what fuel do they use? The make more panzer 4 thing annoys me very much

[@niume7468]

Donitz you should be more considering about U boats and their losses after 1943 May. 75% of u boats crews died.

[@highjumpstudios2384]

@@niume7468 me boats?

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

the panzer 4 took significantly less fuel than the panther, you can get more than 3 (almost 4) panzer 4s from A to B for the same amount of fuel as a single panther. the panzer 4 design is also easier to repair and maintain, is alot more reliable (even 1945 varients which had the best panthers and the worst panzer 4s), and keeping to a single tank would have made spare parts logistics easier. as for crewing them? they could have used manpower otherwise given to infantry units (ie fewer infantry for more tanks) the 'panther cost almost as mutch as a panzer 4 and took almost the same man hours to make' argument also falls flat, the panther was 120% of the cost of a late panzer 4, you can get 6 panzer 4s for each panther and the reason why they are so close is because of the large number of hatches on the panzer 4 turrets, something planned to be reduced (but canceled due to panther), and furthermore that doesn't include development costs. while manhours are alot more different.depending on your sources you can build alittle over 2 to as high as 45 panzer 4s in the man hours of 1 panther, the higher numbers are probably inaccurate, but even the lowest numbers is still more doubling tank production in a given time, and the planned simplification would have made it even quicker. I think the debate isn't as clear-cut as 1 is automatically better than the other. both sides seem to be far too dismissive.

[@bones-fe3gy]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 neither would have mattered because there's *no fucking fuel.*

[@raylast3873]

Think Guderian is the one who came up with it in his Memoirs. Presumably, this led historians to copy it and hence why it just gets accepted without challenge.

[@레오나SeizenTsungWo]

The most promising to become a plush tank.

Yes

[@polakrodak8538]

Pfp

[@polakrodak8538]

Bad

[@1414Kai]

haha damn never thought about that, but you are right :D

[@sillylittleowlguy2392]

@@polakrodak8538 if you think that's bad, check out their banner.

[@RayPall]

Some interesting additional info: - Germans had quite a few plans for further development of the Hetzers. Among them were a turreted medium tank (essentially just a Hetzer with the Pz.IV turret and gun) and an enlarged tank destroyer with rear-mounted casemate and PaK 42 L/70 gun. - There was also an assault gun variant armed with the sIG 33 howitzer housed in a lightly armoured casemate (the same gun as on the Sturmpanzer II). This one was actually produced and about 30 of them were made - Czechoslovakia continued the production of Hetzers post-war. 234 Hetzers were manufactured between 1946-1948 and used under the designation ST-I. Further 50 vehicles were modified for driver training (ST-III) and two prototype variants - the VT-III recovery vehicle and the PM-I flamethrower vehicle. These were used until 1958 and kept in storage until 1963. - Between 1946 and 1950, Switzerland purchased 158 Hetzers and used them under the designation G-13. These were nearly identical to the Hetzer but lacked muzzle brakes, radios and roof-mounted machine guns. The Swiss army then used them until the 1970s.

[@nesyboi9421]

Hey speaking of which Hetzer variants had a muzzle brake? I see a whole lot of them without one and a few with them when I go looking for it on the interwebs.

[@RayPall]

@@nesyboi9421 Early production batches had muzzle brakes by default (you can find photos on the internet), but crews often removed them in the field. The reason was the muzzle brakes generated too much dust and smoke when firing, which could give away the vehicle's position. Based on this feedback, the manufacturer discontinued the muzzle brakes altogether.

[@edi9892]

I think it was an amazing tank for what it was intended to be and considering it's limitations at the time. War is never about the best possible technology, or troops, but coping with logistics... or more precisely managing your shortcomings...

[@kk-gr3ly]

2:27 I think you meant 10 cm at 100m not 1cm, 1cm equals 10mm.

[@kfeltenberger]

The main gun had a penetration of 1cm at 100m?

[@Spookston]

i.imgur.com/AXtFSpZ.png

[@colossusqw3632]

@@Spookston 100mm isn't a centimeter tho, it's 10cm Edit: 100mm would be a decimeter, which would be 10 centimeters

[@futuregohan2398]

@@colossusqw3632 Yeah 10 cm or 1 dm, but Spookston is from the U.S. so it’s understandable to make a small error like that.

[@axmajpayne]

@@Spookston Thats 10cm, not 1.

[@kfeltenberger]

@@Spookston And...it's got a pen of 106mm...that's 10.6cm at 100m. 1cm = 10mm...

[@152mmenjoyer4]

I don't care what anyone says. In theory, the Hetzer is the perfect surprise attack tank. Line them up hiding the lwoer plate, and I would like to see anything short of an IS-2 or Sherman Jumbo break through that.

[@ItsDavieman]

17-pounder maybe?

[@zafranorbian757]

Armour can always fail, the Jagdpanther in the german tank museum was frontally taken out by a 6pdr. What made the Hetzer great was that they had to spot and hit it in the first place.

[@einar8019]

exept the armour is so low quality a normal 75 sherman can go through it

[@TheKsalad]

A quick call to the nearby artillery battery lmao.

[@sillylittleowlguy2392]

"sergeant?" "yes, private?" "Is that a line of kraut tanks over there?" "yes it is, private." "what should we do?" "let me just call in some P-47s, that'll take care of them."

[@imicz6409]

Im quite biased about this, brcause it was manufactured in my homeland, Czechoslovakia. That's why they needed lighter vehicle, we haven't had as strong cranes as the ones for the stugs. Maki g new ones would be too slow. The pz. 38t was realible, but too small.

[@zafranorbian757]

In late war it was intended to be also produced in germany as the Jpz.38(d)

[@scruffyy111]

If I'm correct the t stands for Tschechoslowakei

[@4tbf616]

​@@scruffyy111Czechoslovakawaii

[@i8yourDog]

A sin that you didnt mention its cute-ness

[@billclinton3862]

The Hetzer used the same parts as the 38T but it was not based off the chassis

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

it is based off the chassis. they took the chassis and widened it. then added a new superstructure.

[@besoindunpseudo4144]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 So there is another plate behind the slopped one ??

[@AveragePootis]

@@besoindunpseudo4144 Chassis does not mean taking the entire hull mate. It means having the same suspension components, largely the same drive train and having some of the elements of the hull, like a mostly shared floor

[@billclinton3862]

@@matthiuskoenig3378 If they changed the superstructure then it isn’t the same chassis, It simply used the same parts.

[@keithberger8998]

Hi Spookston, can you make a video about your thoughts in: "If adding bushes to tanks is still relevant/effective?" I hope that will be a very interesting episode. 😉

[@Aahmpower]

Yes it is, completely

[@10kmilesy]

yeah, even with thermals, bushes can take you more time to identify the enemy tank

[@nesyboi9421]

Well we already know the answer. Its yes.

[@yanisbaker881]

Especially on either Heavy tanks with very pertuculer weak spots or light tanks you cannot see as 4 bushes can hade the entire thing

[@_Machitsu]

**Slaps roof of Hetzer** This bad boy can support the entire weight of a Maus

[@Shaun_Jones]

The Hetzer will always have a special place in my heart. In World of Tanks Blitz, back when you could still put the 105mm howitzer in it, the vehicle brought me my first and only Rasani Hero’s medal.

[@Miron_Marnic]

In normal wot you can still use 105mm :-D

[@Shaun_Jones]

@@Miron_Marnic I know, but they gutted blitz’s vehicles for reasons I can’t figure out. They removed gun options from some tanks, and deleted others altogether.

[@philc.352]

The graphics on your machine are top shelf! I enjoy these info vids. Thx for upping

[@alext8406]

I was expecting at least a slight nod towards the Mareșal (The Marshal) especially since it was called "ein großer Hetzer (for the soviets)" by Lieutenant-Colonel Haymann before the Jagdpanzer 38(t) saw battle. They made that remark in January 1944, the Jagdpanzer entered service in July.

[@thegeek0017]

I miss my Hetzer in WoT. Always called it the “Hurtzer” because of how much pain it could dish out while deflecting damn near everything

[@evandotterer4365]

I admire the Hetzer as one of my favorite tanks because of its practicality. 'It was not great but preformed its role excellently. Every tank had its flaws but to engineer such an awesome design with so few resources and so late in the war is incredible.

[@Eliii023]

This tank really stuck to me upon playing Company of Heroes more than a decade ago. Glad to have played it on War Thunder now.

[@jurgenteuer4786]

I will play coh in holidays. And wt too. There is a cool eastern Front Mod.

[@samson9535]

Just go back and read what Hetzer crews thought about this weapon. They loved it and it was very lethal.

[@robinsonsstudios]

indeed,official combat reports would confirm that

[@wolf310ii]

They loved it and they hated it

[@samson9535]

@@wolf310ii Initially, they did have issues with it, but after modifications were completed on the vehicle, they loved it.

[@wolf310ii]

@@samson9535 The issues they hated were never solved, cramped workplace, weak side armor, death trap, poor sight outside especialty to the right side.

[@samson9535]

@@wolf310ii Fine. Whatever you say.

[@robinsonsstudios]

Highly recommend Spielbergers book about the hetzer, its probablythe best source to use. The hetzer was a pretty good tank destroyer but it was often not used as it was intended to be. Crews didnt really like the cramped interior yet one of the combat reports states that the crews were proud and trusting in their new vehicle. One thing to note is that further development of the hetzer was progressing rather quickly,with a new variant called the 38(d) being drawn up in the last stages of the war. Some prototypes might have been built actually. It carried the long 75mm of the panther and was intended to be powered by a new diesel engine from Tatra. It was lenghtened to accomodate the bigger gun and extra weight. Hitler himself saw it as one of the most important tank projects of the late war.

[@mcmoose64]

Given that the standard response to an anti tank ambush was to hose down the area with intense heavy machinegun and high explosive fire , I would rather be in a Hetzer crew than a pak 40 crew.

[@themaus3847]

I’d like gaijin to rename it to “cute little lunchbox” on april fool’s.

[@ChrisS-fh7zt]

Surprised you didn't mention the G-13 which was a licensed copy for the Swiss armor corps during the early 50's to late 70's

[@wrathofatlantis2316]

Thanks for the shot on the crew layout. It actually was so good, the Germans considered plans to produce virtually no other Jagdpanzer in 1946, and even contemplated producing no other tanks period... Food for thought. Another clue is that Switzerland used them until the 1970s. Likely the only German WWII armor (although Swiss-assembled, I think) still in service in that period. (A few Panzer IVs tanks were still in Egyptian use in the 1967 war, in very minor roles, no doubt...)

[@DonMeaker]

PzIv were used by Syria in the Golan Heights, 1973.

[@i8yourDog]

Tbh we need some more historically accurate vids

[@joeavent5554]

The prototype photo is the JPz.38 mounting a StuK.40 which later was modified for the production Swiss G.13.

[@steweygrrr]

"This is debatable etc." No, it's not. Germany didn't have the resources and were facing severe manpower shortages just using the tanks they already had. Flooding the Wehrmacht with JPz.38t or Pz.4 would only have exacerbated that particular issue which would have just seen them lose the war sooner. On the plus side there probably would have been more functional examples of this cute little bugger in existence.

[@JaM-R2TR4]

but fielding untested and design flawed tanks didnt helped them either... Panther was overengineered.. it was not supposed to be that heavy.. it was originally designed as 35ton vehicle.. Hitler demanded stronger armor, and it completely ruined the tank and they were unable to fix it thorough the whole war...

[@ThePerfectRed]

I never understood why the paper thin side armour was angled so steeply. If it had been simply vertical, the inside room would have been drastically improved without loosing much protection.

[@dark7element]

Apparently, the side armor was supposed to be able to resist Soviet anti-tank rifles and was designed with that in mind. It's questionable whether that goal was worth reducing the crew's efficiency by making them so cramped.

[@rafaelnishizumi6330]

How bad is the Stug 3? Own Opinion was that it was German's best TD

Allahuakbar

[@lunatic_nebula9542]

@ where funny

[@bro3217]

I think it's one of the best vehicles during ww2 imo

[@niume7468]

Tiger II was the best tank also KV-2

[@zafranorbian757]

The StuG was beloved by its crews, especually the G version with the allround cupola for the commander, giving excelent visability and situational awareness.

[@JC-jk3kl]

The Hetzer was known by the Allies as the "trouble maker" or "agitator." It was a small tank that was deceptively powerful and a great tank killer. The crews who manned them loved them.

[@legolegs87]

I remember one of the maps of an alternative tank videogame had a factory with literally piles of Hetzer's hulls. Layers of them. Mass production huh.

[@neznambratra1714]

That's WoT(horrible game btw). The map is Plzeň and it's that "Škoda" factory that germans used to construct Hetzers. The P38(t) is a Czech tank and Hetzer is based on it. The (t) in the name stands for Czechoslovakia(in german Tschechoslowakei).

[@Gottchabeach]

The word Hetzer comes from the czech phrase Hecovat which means to agitate(annoy,provoke) someone, so the Hetzer could be translated to agitator

[@xobismarckox]

The Hetzer wasnt the tank we wanted, but the tank we deserved.

[@RomanAquila]

Still did its Job.....and had an impressive "Kill to Loss ratio".....for a Stop-gag Ambush-hunter.

[@Randomrobot-fs4du]

the backround music has inspired me, i now want to play hetzer while listening to abandon ship

[@gustahodbod]

@Spookston the panzer 38(t) t = Tschechisch = czech. hetzer has czech chassis LT vz. 38 (panzer 38) was a light tank of Czechoslovak construction taken over by the Wehrmacht after the occupation of Czechoslovakia

[@AnonymPLOX3]

Btw it was all ours, they just stole it from us, but finally someone with brain

[@gustahodbod]

@@AnonymPLOX3 yes

[@gustahodbod]

@@AnonymPLOX3 and the Czechoslovak army had more soldiers than today's Russia. sad that France and Britain betrayed us

[@joyboy1536]

I once pushed a Hetzer from its side with my T1 Heavy against a huge rock in WoT. And guess what, the Hetzer got lifted up from the ground because of that. And was unable to move since the tracks couldn't make contact with the ground. And it became very easy kill at the end!🤣🤣

[@christophercripps7639]

The Swiss military used a post-war production varient "G-13" with a diesel engine & muzzle brake. The Jgpz 38(t) was certainly better than a towed gun b/c Jpz 38(t) is able to deploy/withdraw under incoming light artillery and mortar fires or when.50"/12.7 mm HMGs open up and better than the Marder series under airburst artillery fires. The side protection is no worse than that (none unless dug in) of a towed gun.

[@wojtekpolska1013]

when i played WoT it was one of my favourite vehicles. sadly WoT went downhill a long time ago now :(

[@redtsar]

Great vehicle for games, would not want to be in one though I truly love the Hetzer tho

[@carol7311]

Can we not forget how cute the Hetzer can be? It's a cute turtle

[@besoindunpseudo4144]

4:02 what a killcam lol

[@jammygamer8961]

Lol WW2's version of top attack

[@pennycarvalho1223]

i never understood why they didnt go with a inverted hetzer design, if the gun was placed on the left side it would not only be able to make the loader's job 100 times easier, it was also would make the vehicle cheaper bc the panzer 38t had the driver on the right side of the chassis meaning they could reuse the gearbox without having to switch the controls and levers and pedals to the opposite side, but thats just food for thought

[@seasuper3402]

I like to imagine the hetzer as a mixed good/bad tank but very good for how cheap it was

[@bigmonke7661]

Bruh that kill steal with the bombs was timed perfectly

[@dustyak79]

And hurting his crew lol. But I don’t blame Air support too much it’s not like he knew he crit and took a track . Could of very well been about to die. I’ve took a second better pass over a brawl only to see the friendly was dead. It’s just nice seeing people actually getting bomb kills vs taking a fighter out and peppering tanks that are already spotted all the while the actual bombers are being shot out the sky.

[@bigmonke7661]

@@dustyak79 I definitely agree I would rather have my kill taken so I can move onto another tank than possibly die. Also you never know if you might be saving a teammate

[@TheWhoamaters]

Somehow more effective in game than a Stug 3

[@dave_sic1365]

No stug g and hetzter perform evenly well

[@Mystic-Midnight]

@@dave_sic1365 issue with the StuG III G I feel is everyone already knows where to shoot it

[@dave_sic1365]

@@Mystic-Midnight yes but that's the problem with any German tank. You can just click anywhere or they have giant weak spots

[@Mystic-Midnight]

@@dave_sic1365 I mean not really, The Hetzer has a lot less Weakspots than a StuG III. A Panther also has harder to hit Weakspots than a Pz IV cause Pz IV's and IIIs are just kinda point and click but everything else actually takes some general knowledge.

[@CookieCommandGaming]

I like this series, and I would personally like to see videos done on the Jagdpanzer IV, and one done on the Marder III. Small stuff, but the Jpz 4 is my favorite tank, so, if you can, I would appreciate it. Keep up the good content!

[@potatochipfury4027]

The lunchbox of tanks strikes us again

[@potatochipfury4027]

@ can't agree more to that

[@JMark-zk5pj]

My friend interviewed a Hetzer crewman from Sturmbrigade Langemarck, he liked it. He was also on a Stg IV.

[@spyran5839]

I might add, that visibility from inside the tank was even poor by WW2 standards. But it was much better than going on building regular 38(t)s in the same factories.

[@Bochi42]

Also better than trying to man & horse handle an AT gun. I think of these as mobile AT guns and then they make sense. Compare them to tanks and the Hetzer loses out of course but tactically and operationally that 's the wrong comparison to make.

[@jaxrammus9165]

amazing video as always, love this series.

[@nostradamusofgames5508]

KZbin- This video has 11 comments also KZbin- This video also has no comments

Lol

[@jamiejones7325]

In the Thames ‘World at War’ TV series interviewing veterans from all sides post-war, The butcher Zhukov says he hated the assault guns most of all, costing him 3 heavy tanks for every one he destroyed taking Berlin. In the 70s I had no idea what an ‘assault gun’ supppsedly was, I thought it was literally a towed gun. At Bovington husband getting 100% on their tests invited to sit inside for ride. He loved the original T-34 but laughed he couldn’t even SEE the Hetzer close up. lol.

[@polakrodak8538]

Hetzers gonna hetz

[@MaxCruise73]

Saw a real one a number of years ago at a WWII reenactment event. Yes, the TD is small. The one on the field was an ex-Swiss military machine that had been fitted with a diesel powerplant. The reenactors did mention the difficulty in loading the gun. Seem to recall (maybe) that the force required to depress the clutch pedal was considerable. In all, a neat machine.

[@kevinthescrub2686]

At my first encounter with there hetzer, didn't know where to pen, but when I use it, I got shot in the transmission and I'm dead, now I rarely use it, in my opinion it's bad.

[@dave_sic1365]

Stay hull down I think it's amazing

[@kevinthescrub2686]

@@dave_sic1365 yeah idk, I just don't see the use, if you think it's amazing, Im cool with that

[@unclesam5733]

Depends on the game mode. Hetzer is very good in realistic and absolutely awesome in simulator.

[@dave_sic1365]

@@unclesam5733 yes it's a beast in Sim

[@pure-coordination]

Please do a video on the comet! I love these videos and I want to see what you think on my fav tank

[@Wolf-zk8ey]

“Hetzer’s gonna Hetz.”

[@polakrodak8538]

Stolen comment

[@somerandomdude6394]

@@polakrodak8538 "StOlEn CoMmEnT" Cry some more please

[@somerandomdude6394]

Dude it's also a quote comment, it's made to quote something, that means it's not stolen lmao 🤡🤡

[@JustAnotherRandomPersonOnline]

@@somerandomdude6394 You know what the most stolen comment is? You'll never guess it. "Stolen Comment" I see that more then anything else, LMAO

[@somerandomdude6394]

@@JustAnotherRandomPersonOnline too true mate, too true

[@bobkowalski7655]

1:26 original name of that tank is LT-vz.38 T

[@peterdd4994]

the main gun was rotated 90 degrees to make it fit, so the loader actually load it from the wrong side...

[@TheLPN05Fan]

One of the niccest tank to look at, which nobody wanted to get into, but did succed at the task it was thrown at. A succesful design in my books, excpsacially shown in the Swiss G18

[@johjoh978]

meanwhile on WT ive never seen it stop any type of shell. its like they updated armor to just not work anymore

[@libertycowboy2495]

Ive gotten to crew one of these and a stug III. To say the hetzer was cramped is an understatement, and if it caught on fire, the drivers chance of getting out was slim. Really enjoyed getting to crew a piece of history tho!

[@huntersorensen5000]

Remember folks, Mass production of vehicles and having lots of vehicles in the field is only relevant if you have the fuel to power those vehicles. Nazi Germany did NOT have the fuel reserves to put any more tanks in the field than they already had at any given time. If you look at any offensive they launch at any period in the war post 1940 fuel is a huge issue especially post 1941. The argument that 'Germany should have just built more (insert AFV here)' is moot if you have any grasp on the German fuel situation.

[@countdooku2365]

Only an idiot fights a world war without domestic oil supplies. Tactical brilliance and strategic stupidity: Its the German way of war.

[@WorivpuqloDMogh]

Saw one in the Bastogne War museum. It was beautiful

[@hagamapama]

There's a factor you're not considering for why proponents say that they should focus on the Hetzer. One of the reasons people say the Hetzer should have been a greater focus for resources andd manpower is because it would have made better use of Skoda facilities already existing which had been built to manufacture the Pz38t. Most of the Hetzer's structure and components carried over from the 38t, which is what induced many of its drawbacks but had the advantage of not requiring massive adjustments to existing production lines allowing for quick pivot in manufatturing. When you're outnumbered and losing any useful weapon that you can produce in useful quantities is desperately needed. in this way they could use the captured Czech facilities to produce a weapon that worked in quantities that would allow them to defend themselves. It's similar to why so many of their SPGs were based on the PzIII, the tank itself was obsolete, but so many resources had been devoted to the production line that it made no sense to simply discard them.

[@okanolin70]

The name Hetzer does not come from the war, but was only given to the Jagtpanzer 38-t after the war. The actual tank that was to be given the can designation was the E-10.

[@robinsonsstudios]

Heinz Guderian notes in a report to Hitler that hetzer was a nickname given to the vehicle by field crews, it certainly circulated among the crews in some way

[@Fabrizio_Ruffo]

I read somewhere that the name Hetzer was used in this context to mean, badger or threaten. The tank would nip at the flanks. Makes sense knowing it's capabilities and actual use.

[@kerrygrittner5733]

I had an uncle familiar with the Hetzer They were happy to have them

[@TheArklyte]

If I remember Yuri Pasholok's article right, between _sabotage by chief designer and production staff, exhaust gases filling the crew compartment, hatch laying on top of commander's head and all other abysmal details,_ it was a pretty *cost effective* solution. But I guess germans have felt regret on not allowing same factories to start production of T-24/25 a few years prior for while it wasn't as good as german tanks, it still would have provided longer and wider chassis with new engine and transmission for all types of possible SPGs based on it. People never think in terms of "best we CAN produce" the instead noticing only the longest shlong with highest caliber:D

[@ThatZenoGuy]

>Yuri Pasholok Might as well just write "Totally not a commie with bias".

[@TheArklyte]

@@ThatZenoGuy He has bias, but that is only in believing that IS-3 was a good tank despite what israelis though of it and how they used them. And it's funny that you talk about national bias on this channel:D

[@657449]

It was designed to destroy tanks from ambush. Everyone forgets that.

[@nostradamusofgames5508]

"If (Blank) was realisitc" when? Especially aircraft.

[@2serveand2protect]

Considering what they've spent on it in comparison to "Panthers" and "Tigers" it was quite a success, although you needed extremely experienced crews to engage with this thing into battle and still have a chance of survival. I mean - seriously - if hit there was just no way anyone else but the commander might have escaped from it, cornered up against the armour and each other as they were... it was a death trap with a very powerful gun in it.

[@venator5]

That was generally the german and the hungarian opinion about the hetzer. It was actually the most hated by crew "german" tank ever. Not to mention the reliability issues, part of them due to the fact that the weight is not spread equally to the suspension. And the guns tendency to go out of alingment.

[@lvrywyn]

The main thing about Hetzer is... It looks hella cute

[@Re-2005]

Those things can appear when you least expected it and going through the front is a bad idea unless you can get a shot towards their lower plate

[@raylast3873]

*laughs in IS-2*

[@jorgsobota2228]

One thing is really rarely noticed - the armor wasn't high tech tank-grade hardened steel but way softer. So even the front couldn't stop anything serious. Which was OK because it was never meant to be more than a motorized, armored platform for the PaK 40... Hilary L. Doyle mentioned that a few times but this is never reported correctly.

[@ThatZenoGuy]

The armor was standard issue E22 RHA alloy, not some sort of mild steel.

[@kriskay5020]

My 3 tanks Germany should have focused on earlier in the war to help stay in the war are the Panzer 4, Tiger 1 and Stug 3.

[@robinsonsstudios]

Yep, the panther is often called the best tank of the war but I think all in all the Tiger I is the better of the two

[@skelejp9982]

Nice Video, Thank You ! I just want to mention that for example the Sherman in WW2 had only 14% of it's engagements with the enemy Tanks. The Hetzer having a 360 remote Mg was a great advantage, and the Crew was really happy with this. Tank was inspired by the Romanian "Mareşal" tank destroyer. Hetzer is like a PAK, support attack , or defend.

[@johnny--dollar]

One thing I learned just recently was that, Germany, almost up to the end were still making consumer products in their factories. This was a shock to find out as I have been a military history fan all of my life and seeing how the US had mobilized all factories for war production. I just thought that it made no sense at all.

[@Dumbassbrick]

your subnautica backround music makes me think of the subnautica videos explaining lore

[@krankenwagen123]

Nice quick history, but I found out that the Hetzer was inspired by the Mareșal tank. They eventually took the design of it and put it on a Pz 38t

[@the7observer]

THe winch inside the factory was the weight limit factor + the fact the 38t was obsolete and they wanted to reuse it

[@white-wolf2864]

Title: How bad was the Hetzer? Me: Very

[@z3r0_35]

My line of thinking with the Hetzer is that it was a way to get a bit more use out of an obsolete chassis, and in that respect it was a serviceable, though not world-beating, design, and put a powerful gun on a light and low profile design. It was at least good enough that the Swiss wanted to buy some after the war.

[@talltroll7092]

It was also because the factories that produced them were far enough East to be difficult for US/UK bombers to hit, and far West enough that the Soviets were unlikely to reach them before winning the war

[@ThatZenoGuy]

Hetzer and Panzer 38(t) didn't use the same chassis. They actually shared basically no parts.

[@z3r0_35]

@@ThatZenoGuy Every single source I've come across says it did, where are you getting this from? Now, I can absolutely believe that it eventually got Ship of Thesseus'd to the point that few if any original components remained, but it's clear where it came from.

[@ThatZenoGuy]

@@z3r0_35 It obviously derives from the 38(t), but it doesn't really share any parts with it. The tracks, wheels, chassis, all completely new. Suspension? New. Gun? New. And so on. I think the engine might be the same though? And "MUH SOURCE" means nothing nowadays, look up the "Replication crisis"

[@z3r0_35]

@@ThatZenoGuy A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[@alexbowman7582]

As a child in Glasgow we would play chases and someone would be het, presumably from old English or Norse.

[@VoloundExpounds]

yep i remember this. around the year 2000 this was everywhere.