Artillery Combat in World War 1

[@mikhailv67tv]

Imagine a bombardment that lasted for days??? Imagine it? Can you ... High Explosive for 3-4 days of explosions . no wonder men went mad.

[@Ruebacca]

Look at the shell shocked videos they are very disturbing.

[@Joebunkyss1]

see kubriks "paths of glory"

[@neilwilson5785]

Great movie. Unusually authentic for a war movie.

[@ShermanT.Potter]

Death, you have no clue what you're saying. I've never experienced combat, but if you do enough research it doesn't take a genius to figure out that weakness or cowardice isn't the culprit. Some minds can take certain trauma better than others. Only after the incessant shelling is over will you know how you will react. Maybe I could take it, maybe I'd go insane, who knows? Just an example, I'm a farmer, and have been around dead animals. Seeing blood, guts, crawling maggots, and black liquid oozing out of corpses after sitting in the sun I've gotten used to, the smell makes me gag and puke. Am I weak because the smell causes that reaction? Everyone's mind is different.

[@MerlijnDingemanse]

All quit on the western front has a quite detailed Account on what happens to you

[@saschal.151]

67 people use direct fire

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

:D

[@johnfroehling5653]

Lol

[@gunarsmiezis9321]

Direct fire artilery works if you are on the defence and explode the shels in air or agaisnt vidacles.

[@tlip3480]

That's why the term fire for effect is used. It means shot right now for results 50 years later

[@williamrosenbloom215]

I don't understand

[@Balrogthebuff]

I love the little digs at World of tanks Stock ammo at 5:30

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thx, actually it was a War Thunder reference, but it works for both.

[@danielhall6354]

Wow this was one of the best videos so far. I really like how you go straight for the most important issues and don't get caught up in politics, rhetoric or anything else that has no substance when it comes to the real issues. All i can say is Thank you and keep up the good work; i look forward to future videos. If you want suggestions, perhaps a video on the Belgium forts and/or the Maginot line.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you! I like my videos the same way I like my music, straight to the point, just like Heavy Metal :) Maybe at some point, not on my current list.

[@guidoguenthoer]

DUNKIRK

[@MegaRaven100]

A fascinating video for which I would merely add ONE complaint (disagreement). The use of long range very heavy artillery to destroy heavy fortifications which essentially remained the same from 1914-1945. Whether in Belgium in 1914 or 1940 or Sevastopol in 1942! This point in NO WAY contradicts your correct detailed comments on the use of REGULAR Artillery in field operations!

[@samuelparker9882]

Daniel Hall AGREE COMPLETELY!! ONLY FACTUAL INFORMATION... AND ZERO POLITICAL RAMBLINGS. LOVED IT AND ALSO LEARNED FROM IT!!

[@MarcosElMalo2]

French artillery didn’t need as many rounds early in the war because their rounds had more elán. 😝

[@stephenpowstinger733]

MarcosElMalo2 and by 1917 French shells barely cleared friendly lines, so depondent were they.

[@mattharrell6880]

French artillery was the best design of the Great War. The French didn't need as many because they developed the hydraulic carriage that allowed rapid fire on targets because they didn't need to get back on target. Mocking the French military not only shows the intellectual ignorance, it shows the mind of a mental handicap.

[@rollutherhodie3076]

@@mattharrell6880 calm down mr. salty ass

[@MsArchitectschannel]

"look a lewis and a spandau together in one icon... one might wonder which was better" amazing XD

[@Birkbecks]

it would have been better if the had used the Vickers machine gun as it was comparable with the Spandau the lewis was a light mobile gun and used in a different manner

[@orionbarbalate4350]

DANIEL YOU ARE A FUNNY MAN

[@orionbarbalate4350]

Telling an opinion*

[@MsArchitectschannel]

THE WHOLE THING IS A JOKE ABOUT LINDYBEIGES VIDEO

The Woodio Bros Who?

[@leroy4320]

This channel is actually really helpful, I'm doing an essay about the evolution of artillery tactics from 1914 to present day, and many of the links and sources you've provided have been extremely helpful to my research. Thank you for the informative overviews and included sources.

[@redrb26dett]

Leroy Tan not just this subject this is an extremely good channel as the author sites all sides and accurate information from detailed records

[@destructionandregeneration]

I’m literally just watching it for enjoyment

[@randyscrandy2071]

T

[@randyscrandy2071]

I just woke you so I don’t think so so I just just got back

[@randyscrandy2071]

I just woke you you feel like

[@XxKINGatLIFExX]

GOD BLESS YOU FOR CITING YOUR SOURCES. YOU ARE THE ONLY KZbinR THAT DOES THIS!!!!

[@s4ss]

As someone who served as an artillery spotter, it´s nice to see the historical background to the tactics that we use today.

[@r0e404]

Any stories you'd like to share? id love to hear some

[@marangatu3688]

love the little spandau in joke, i suppose you and lindybeige are cool now. great video btw, all the way from nz

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

we never really engaged outside of our videos, I sent him a tweet and referenced him in facebook. Until he made his response video I never "heard" (read) anything from him, besides one reply to a comment from one of my subscribers on one of my videos, so I knew he probably watched the video. I think we never were "not cool" with each other, especially after he linked to me in his video with positive remarks.

[@winkerdude]

+Military History Visualized I am subscribed to you and lindybeige. I see no conflict. A source of new knowledge is not to be scorned or wasted.

[@johnlansing2902]

one factor usually overlooked in the trench warfare of WW1 is that the German armed forces had a habit of picking higher ground to establish their trench lines. The German lines were not mud soaked pits. The Allies were happy to establish their lines in the low ground and their soldiers paid dearly for this policy. Look at the allied force notes on captured German lines one would be tempted to view them as a resort compared to the hell holes the Allied soldier's lived and died in.

[@placebo3223]

Very interesting summary of the changes in WW1 artillery. It would be great to have a follow up on what happened during WW2, since the changes were easily as great (e.g. anti-tank, radio, more coordination, naval bombardment for landings, proximity fuses). Thanks!

[@TheBurg229]

Sick burn with the Spandau note

[@kamenridernephilim]

How progressive and tolerant of you.

[@pred796]

SteveOwnsMC ...

[@icecold1805]

You have to be kidding me... you have the name SANDERS on your freaking account and you are an intolerant little bitch.

[@migkillerphantom]

So Char was actually Bernie Sanders before he became space Hitler?

[@de4th1snt3nough]

WOW ARE MY EYES AND EARS DECEIVE ME?! Point blank actual military recognized facts?! Put in an actual blunt as is presentation?! God Bless you

[@boilgamersalive]

I've been wanting to know about WW1 artillery tactics for a while now. Nice job!

[@00yiggdrasill00]

I glad I found this, far too many people fail to realize that ww2 came from ww1 in almost every way. from artillery to tanks to air power to the convoy system and more. I'm going to look around your page and see if I can find more but I would like it if you did more ww1 stuff (I know, its dry stuff and the sheer pigheadedness of the generals on any form of change is infuriating to read but its such an important part of military history)

[@00yiggdrasill00]

now that ive said that I also realize I really like the modern hypothetical situations and comparisons you've started to do...I don't know man I like your stuff

[@scottjohnson9912]

Alot of historians regard WW 2 as a continuatio. of Ww1

[@angrytigermpc]

Don't know how much you've looked into military history since making this comment years ago, but I for one have found my opinion on "stubborn generals" shifting quite a bit. It's easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to see the rapid technological growth of the early-to-mid 20th century and laugh at those doddering old men and their fixation on what "worked", but you have to also consider the bigger picture. Germany had the benefit of basically being able to start from scratch, and having lost the war they saw no need to inherit any aspect of their previous failed attempts. They also had the power to go "all-in" on whatever new concepts they had, as their economy was functionally pointless and raw material was all that mattered. Meanwhile, all the allied nations not only had the complacency of victory hanging over their decisions, but also the health of continuing economies to worry about. Throwing away hundreds of thousands of vehicles and heavy weapons just because of a hunch that the next war would be radically different didn't make sense. Again, knowing what we know now it's a "wow, how shortsighted", but you can look back through primary sources and see how the visionaries we point to as being the only ones who "figured it out" were typically in a very small minority and ignored or at least competently dismissed via contemporaries' assurances based on evidence of the time.

[@00yiggdrasill00]

@@angrytigermpc you make a good point on Germany being able to start from scratch and go all in from go. I deliberately try not to use hindsight when judging things, views or opinions but what I think I get wrong (and got wrong here) is that I am a person living in 2021 and have seen much change already in my life, where as they would have seen little major change in their lives till it all exploded. I'm thinking it's a difference in expectation. I expect change and plan for it, they didn't. Not because they were stupid but because they had lived decades with little swift change so they made the call that was logical to their lived experience.

[@bloqk16]

The vast quantities of artillery shells used in WW I had lingering effects in areas of the French countryside years after the hostilities ended. My French mother, as a child in France prior to immigrating to the US in the mid-1930s, told me of swaths of properties in France where signs were posted to warn people not to trek into the areas due to unexploded artillery ordnance. She recalled one incident when a picnicking young couple ventured into one of those areas and were killed when they stumbled upon and detonated an artillery round.

[@WildBillCox13]

I have watched a goodly number of your videos and been both edified and entertained-even when our conclusions differ. Still, I believe this is the best one so far for placing an issue in perspective. Thanks for posting!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!!!

[@fiucik1]

Days of shelling empty enemy trenches seems like a great idea to me. What a brilliant commanders they had in WWI...

[@cannonfodder4376]

Excellent video and I all but LOLed at 14:38. :D

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you, well, I guess it could be a start of a new line of jokes that are not Pommel-related :)

[@colbyw3575]

i love the pommel one though :(

[@patchesohoolihan666]

The Lewis Gun was obviously better. The British won the war after 1917, after all.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

:D

[@Ruebacca]

No begets in this video?

[@daviddrabick9018]

Greatly enjoy your videos. As regards this one, it helps dispel the Great War myths about the "lions led by donkeys." Simply put, it was clear that artillery was a key to victory, but needed refinements in quality and quantity, logistics and tactics, all at great cost. The worst thing about the Great War is that Europe has never recovered from its self-inflicted damage, and I think the world is way poorer for it.

[@bigbluebuttonman1137]

Even today we are seeing its aftereffects…

[@destructionandregeneration]

This is one of my favourite history channels as the videos are short and quick flashes of info keep it up 👍

[@simonschneider5913]

this is an absolutely spectacular video! I am blown away by what I just took in. and the writing is funny, too!

[@WildBillCox13]

Liked, commented, and shared to a friend who was a career artillerist in the US Army (155mm Self Propelled-15.5cm Selbstfahrlafette Paladin ;-) ). That's the highest praise I have at my disposal. Good work!

[@ardaonen4968]

just subbed the little potshots you take at gaijin and in this case, lindybeige, are hilarious

[@platospotatoes6205]

I would only critique one item concerning your description of the issue facing the creeping barrage development: I would think it worth mentioning the coordination failures during this type of barrage that either put infantry too far behind the barrage (thus giving the defenders time to recover) or worse, amidst the barrage, leading to horrendous friendly fire incidents.

[@neilwilson5785]

Excellent. I've read a lot about WW1, and still got a lot from this video. Thanks!

[@gregorybrennan8539]

This guy works hard and is accurate and professional. I thank you sir.

[@novemberdawn8145]

12:40 "I'm about to drop the hammer, and dispense some indiscriminate justice!" - Siege Tank Operator, Starcraft

[@wacojones8062]

Shrapnel does not explode it is a steel shell with a time fuze in the nose which ignites a black powder push charge which ruptures the fuze threads then pushes the load of lead balls mixed with sulfur dust out the nose at the selected range. I have samples of the lead balls from US 75mm Rounds fired at Ft. McCoy after WW I.

[@Dav1Gv]

Excellent analysis and video presentation. In the British service wire cutting without chewing up the ground too much did become possible with the 106 fuse and creeping barrages were fired with shrapnel too keep the enemy's heads down as the danger zone was in front of the burst which allowed the infantry to follow the barrage more closely without taking excessive casualtied from their own guns, say more than 10%.

[@losfelizvillage1]

This is so awesome. I can't believe it only has 56,000 views. This is the future of education. And German, to boot -- which means it's the best (superior numbers be damned).

[@jasonbarnes4488]

I would love you to do a unit breakdown of units in the American civil war. I would love to see what a union battalion, regiment, brigade, division and so on looked like. I know there was no standardization but still would like to see.

[@mycinematics8948]

Awesome work. Very, very informative. Honestly this is so good. Thank you!

[@KrillLiberator]

Another superb tutorial; informed and accessible simultaneously. I really enjoy your work.

[@arkboy3]

Very important post on the dominance of WW1 Artillery!

[@LegionOfEclaires]

I really enjoy your videos. You explain things nicely and I do learn stuff that I didn't know before or knew little about.

[@MaziarYousefi]

Don't mind me, I'm just a humble man helping the algorithm to bring this awesome video up. :)

[@RonDuligi]

Great video, as usual, sir. It's nice to see your channel growth pick up some momentum :)

[@ARandomUsernameForMe]

This was a really amazing video well done! How are you enjoying hoi4?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

I only started it for a short look... 6 hours later the Soviet kicked my butt, by pre-empting my Barbarossa ;) I guess my time is better spent on videos.

[@sub-cr2xx]

Your channel is simply awesome man, I was looking for something like that. +1 sub

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!

[@ph5832]

Recommend adding segments covering the Russo-Japanese War, Balkan Wars, and frankly any other smaller or non-Western campaigns/wars. Having lived in Germany (Swabia) there are so many German/Prussian/Franch/other German kingdoms battles that are worth studying .. You could spend an entire year doing videos on the American Civil War ....

[@mikhailv67tv]

Shrapnel gives the seen that veterans describe as raining or that the sky was solid lead

[@natanl1567]

I love the accent and the visuals. Keep doing well!

[@toast_cat2265]

someone get this man his own studio

[@Steve17010]

When you consider how many shells were fired during WW1, it's no wonder that tons of unexploded shells are found in France and some areas are considered too dangerous for people to enter.

[@stompingpartridge258]

This was a great upload, can't believe i've missed it until now. Lest we forget this phenomenal waste of human life.

[@narreddarr8092]

I think the mention of certain Russian generals that whooped Austro-Hungarian forces deserved a mention as they used some novel tactics to break the deadlock and several times the Germans had to move in to help their sedentary Austro-Hungarian partners. I cannot remember the names of these Generals but they were men who 'thought outside the box' to force the Austro-Hungarians into retreat. I loaned the book to a friend, it was about Bismarck and Ludendorff and went in to great detail about the use of artillery in different ways to fool the enemy [when we talk of WW1, artillery is a topic difficult to avoid]. And this was 1915-16 when certain Russian Generals used tactics that forced Germany's intervention on behalf of Austro-Hungary.

[@nialltomy15]

Could you do a video of the structure of the Royal Navy during the First World War? Maybe the German Navy as well?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

at some point I guess I will do it, but probably not in 2016... I almost wrote 1916 :D

[@stephenpowstinger733]

My understanding is that Germans used howitzers to lob shells while French used direct fire 75s. At any rate, experiencing heavy artillery bombardment extremely close in is simultaneously exhilarating and terrifying. US Army 1967-69 SVN

[@JeanLucCaptain]

i read somewhere that the french artillery stockpiles were completely used up 2 weeks into the war, jesus. then they had to start panic production of artillery shells w/ very bad quality that often failed to detonate on impact.

[@ukee31]

your videos are awesome! thank u

[@douglasparkinson4123]

there was one major increase in doctrine. the tank.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

Very well done. Though I wish you had covered the use of mortars as well.

[@redshirt1917]

Researched and delivered in typical German organization and thoroughness. Love it.

[@timneeno4784]

Very interesting and informative! Thank you.

[@sindey2000]

I cant stop watching! I love this layout and his humour

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!

[@sindey2000]

keep up the amazing work

[@I_am_Diogenes]

15:00 Obviously the Spandau was better than the Lewis ... it is on top in the icon. lol

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

:D

[@mecallahan1]

depends on what you're wanting to do with it I guess. Defending a trench, give me the Spandau (or Vickers). Attacking the trench, give me the Lewis.

No they were both good weapons for different roles. The Lewis gave the Brit's excellent mobile firepower. The Spandau was a static defence weapon with a high rate of fire but nor very mobile.

[@jonathancarshow9573]

mecallahan1 maxim is good for attack ask Rommel you put them on the flanks and they can suppress the enemy while your troops move up now holding that trench from a quick counter attack would be a nice time to have that Lewis

[@DawnOfTheDead991]

The Spandaus were Maxim licensed mgs like most nations used

[@danielmarunczak1155]

Where do you get the pictures / icons you use? Or do you create them? If you make them, what software do you use? Sorry if someone has asked this question before.

[@historofiles]

Very informative!

[@anddemar]

Grazie.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Thank you!

[@catified2081]

When talking about WW1 artillery how do you forget Canadian general Sir Arthur Currie? He single handily devised Triangulation using microphones to pin point where enemy machine gun and artillery positions where. This use of actual science absolutely devastated defending German positions on Vimy Ridge and Canadian troops took the hill in a day......compared to 4 yrs of no advancement at Vimy Ridge. In FACT his British commanders were so shocked by the success Currie was even critize for "taking the sport out of war"! Currie was a true soldiers general and actually wanted to save as many of his mens lives and not constantly through them away like 99% of WW1 generals did.

[@dannyjr1791]

As a modern day gunner I give this a massive thumbs up it was really interesting. Keep up the great work!!!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

thank you!

[@Delgen1951]

Why is it I got the feeling that the Europeans payed no attention to the US civil War as the trench warfare that developed at pietersburg looks a lot like what developed in WWI up to and including the development of indirect fire vs trenches. If you compare the photo taken of each war the trench photos look all most the same . So why did not the European not learn form the US experiences in the Civil War? Were They to prideful to learn?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

they also did not pay attention to what was happening in the Balkan Wars (1912-13) right in front of their face. Also the flow of information back then was extremely different, way less information, handful books, etc. also the military is usually conservative, just look at how Mitchell and his ideas were received in the United States.

[@AVKnecht]

They also did not pay any attention to: The Crimean War, the two Boer Wars and the Russo-Japanese-War

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

good point AVKnecht, as always most people don't pay attention :) glad you do!

[@anderskorsback4104]

If I had to take a wild guess, I'd think they dismissed the US Civil War as an anomaly resulting from what they thought were shitty conscript armies led by shitty generals, that things would be totally different when *their* first-rate great power armies went to war.

[@Catonius]

Nice one.

[@CoryFalde175]

great videos

[@MaxRavenclaw]

Wow, this was a long one. How long did it take to make?

[@VladVlad-ul1io]

3 days :D

[@Nighti88]

Very good reserched Video. And a cool accent. :D

[@johnfluker1034]

Use of shrapnel in the early part of the war was not so much a choice as forced by the technology. High explosive only became more useful than shrapnel when equipped with fuzes that would act quickly enough that the shell would not completely bury itself in the ground before the detonation.

[@jarmokankaanpaa6528]

It's not quite as simple as that. Nose fuzes are typically "fast-acting" and have been so since the 1860's; in fact, the development of delayed-action fuzes is what made indirect fire more efficient. When your enemy is entrenched, a surface explosion would have little more effect than shrapnel. Using stiff (capped) or delayed-action fuzes would allow the rounds to collapse the trenches even if not hit directly, since detonating deeper in the ground they would displace more mass sidewise. Artillery later in WW1 was used typically to destroy enemy defensive fortifications and trench lines with massive barrages prior to attack, not against moving soldiers on the surface, who were to be taken care of more economically and accurately by machine guns.

[@philusaphur4924]

This shows the german industrial power before all the world wars

[@burkinafaso64]

Damn a awesome channel...instant abo

[@airforcemax]

..................................interesante............informative........informy.........

[@FightCain]

8:30 "Oh so I guess they made like 5000 of heavy arty by 1918" _12286 Heavy Artillery Guns_

[@murmurrrr]

Why was WO II the end of the Battleship? Is there a video about that too?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

carriers, not yet.

[@potatopotato8360]

Artillery combat in World War 2 please.

[@Jansie_NL]

"look, a Lewis and Spandau in one picture.. one might wonder wich was better.." Take that LindyBeige xD But seriously, wich one do you think was better? My guess is the Spandau, since it is a lot lighter/more manouverable. One remark about the Bren vs Spandau, I'd have to agree with LB, Bren = better for attack, Spandau = better for defence, even though his explanation and examples might not have been the best, this is the best conclision in my opinion.

[@friggingbomb88]

MOAR

[@tarena958]

this guy loves icons

[@mikhailv67tv]

Can you do Calvary ??? Please . We saw Calvary end in the early days but it still had use and came to victorious use is the desert .The Australians ( my greaT UNCLES ) Performed a cavalry charge against machine guns and were not wiped out. Apparently the guns were targeted over there heads... I don't know how this happened, Ive heard it told maybe you could explain why they were not machine gunned to nothing... Battles of Movement still happened; police still use cavalry to great effect against crowds... Maybe POW or retreating soldiers could be managed with Cavalry. WW2 Partisan actions were conducted with Cossack on Horse back. So they still have a role. Not just as highly mobile soldiers with; Cars; Motor bikes or helicopters but with Horses.. Maybe you could cover how they still function in various armies in the world

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

maybe at some point, but I have like 20-50 articles/chapters copied, which I will be working on the next few months, Cavalry wasn't one of the topics, but maybe something slipped in the future, yeah, I will, got quite some "calls" for cavalry.

[@robbroadstock8637]

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized battle of Beersheba, in the Middle East 1917-18.

[@battlerock8792]

Britain was a Battle Ship nation, reliant on its naval power... ...which explains quite a lot about Britain when you think about it.

[@battlerock8792]

...now now my good sir, a true briton is modest... ...modestly arrogant, HAIL BRITANNIA!

[@Ruebacca]

If you don't get Brexit passed you should change your name to North Belgium.

[@battlerock8792]

Ruebacca charmed... ...& yet somewhat baffled by your response. would one be able to elaborate?

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

On the other hand the Brits expect to produce an army genius every land war just because it actually happened a couple times. Which is asking too much of many generals (Monty).

[@acfake7858]

So Royal,praise the British naval.

[@kristinarain9098]

**raises hand** ✋ During a creeping barrage would 'short rounds' ever present a serious issue?

[@calebkeidge5921]

In New Zealand we learn about Gallipoli and that's at

[@erichvonmanstein1952]

Unlike WW2,Germany was really well prepared for WW1.We could clearly see it from Germany’s war material advantage,surplus of rounds,machine guns,artillery etc.Also they had a very large and mostly professional army and very large navy(ranked 2nd after Royal Navy in 1914)They had a very big industrial might(their steel-chemical production was larger than Britain-France-Russia combined and their coal production was large as Britain’s)especially in heavy and chemical industries.Probably Germany’s only weakness was his diplomacy...

[@guyeysseric9442]

Yes but in 1913, France was producing respectively 40% and 80% of cars (including trucks) and planes produced in the world. And logistics involving trucks (which French army used fully in Verdun, for example, or even in 1914 on the Marne) proved eventually more efficient than logistics by train, which German army almost exclusively relied upon. And as for airplanes, 8500 Spad S. XIII were buid in a little more than 1 year, whereas only 1800 Fokker D. VIII were build in a little less than 1 year, for example. This may explain (in a little part) why outnumbered French army was able to resist.

[@Delgen1951]

and they did not listen to their own observers that they sent to observe the battles. Ture abut Billy Mitchell, but at least the Navy changed fast ather Dec 7. Those who pay no attention to history are doomed to repeat it, sad but true.

[@Usammityduzntafraidofanythin]

They didn't have toilet paper back then, bro.

[@moileben]

The French were also the first to use railway guns.

[@barefoot_James]

My impression is that the subtitles writer did not understand the subject matter and/or narrator (e.g., writing "a theory" when the narrator says "artillery".

[@anderskorsback4104]

KZbin subtitles are automatically generated by speech recognition software, and those aren't known for their ability to compensate for accents, let alone understand subject matter.

[@VladVlad-ul1io]

Can you talk a bit about Romanian army equipment/ organization/movements in WWI or WWII? Unfortunately the Romanians are disregarded but they are quite important in both the WW :D Thnaks. It would be useful to learn.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

I have copies on some ww2 Romanian organization that should be sufficient for an infantry and tank division organization video, I guess I will do it this year, but no guarantees. Still didn't do a British WW2 division and also some US stuff is needed, after all more than 30 % of my subs are from the US.

[@VladVlad-ul1io]

+Military History Visualized ooh! Nice :) good then. i will be waiting and i will enjoy. Succes :D

[@VladVlad-ul1io]

www.worldwar2.ro/ This may help a lot :D

[@elonhusk5203]

Artillery op pls nerf

[@Marc83Aus]

A Spandau and a Lewis together? Why not, there's no need to fight.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

I guess you don't know about the Spandau vs. Bren controversy?

[@kebman]

But no math or mention of Haubitz..

[@tomvobbe9538]

WW1 is high on my list of wars I would not want to be in.

[@desslokbasileus571]

3:46　　5:15　　7:20　　❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@HaloFTW55]

Three walnuts served in WWI. All were shelled and one cracked under fire.

[@4TheWinQuinn]

That's easy. The Lewis Gun... for the King! Charge!

[@santeri7843]

What is that acent ? :D

[@aazz9676]

It's easy to criticize the use of artillery as an inefficientall purpose instrument like for clearing the barbed wire but remember the option to expending shells was expending infantry lives.

[@Gronicle1]

Things sometimes change slowly. My dad was still dragging French 75's around with horses in the US Army Field Artillery for direct fire missions in 1934-37. He said they called it "training".

[@tomservo5347]

And the German Army used horses to drag their artillery around until the end of WW2. The fabulous mechanized German Army everyone feared was still using horses for most of it's logistics. It's why horse meat was available during many 'kessel' operations when the boot was on the other foot.

[@cushpnk]

@@tomservo5347 Yep, they used it for supply on the Eastern front too, guess they were surprised when the horses died of the cold.

[@Souledex]

@@cushpnk if only there was some precedent they could have learned from! /s

[@ComfortsSpecter]

Because It was Literally Training

[@ComfortsSpecter]

@@tomservo5347Doesn’t Make It Good Infact It Specifically Make’s It’s Bad But It does show Its Possible Also: Neo Nazi Propaganda:

[@thinkingthingxii2061]

D O A R T I L L E R Y O N L Y

[@Toratchi888]

5:03 What most of my production lines look like in HOI IV.