🇵🇱Poland Is Not Yet Lost! | Polish Armoured Fighting Vehicles of 1918-1945 (part 1)

[@radosaworman7628]

Nice! My garand-randpa was a Gunner on Wz.29 during september of 1939! I highly appreciate Your work here guys!

[@NoName-sb9tp]

Wow, that’s really suprise to hear. Bless your garand-randpa. A hero he is

[@tusidex5228]

@@NoName-sb9tp Garand-randpa, funny

[@NoName-sb9tp]

@@tusidex5228 whatesle mate? Maybe Garandpa? Sound cool enough eh?

[@krzysztofparski8294]

Garand rifle and Roundap

[@priisxm4392]

3:06 Bro looks like he spotted a Tiger 2 at the rear

[@Oddball_E8]

4:03 Dear god! A 3.7 meter gun! It's amazing that the Germans dared invade with such a chad vehicle in the Polish military! :P

[@lordvader9712]

Don't forget about the 200mm autocannon on the TKS tankette.

[@TomCouger]

This puts a smile on my face

[@dasboot5903]

Honestly .... work very well DONE !!!! According to the only mentioned Polish tank 10TP, this tank was designed and build on the American model Christie track suspension. This particular tank was planned to full-fill role as a pursuing fast tank !!!! Only two or three fully working prototypes were built and tested on the Polish roads and off-road, too. Congratulation !!!!

[@zombieroo7348]

Cool! Nice article guys, u need more subs

[@Joshua_N-A]

That thumbnail though. Poland ready to pull an *IMPERIUM* .

[@nakuroyuki]

You're so underrated!

[@grzegorzpiasek9076]

Piłsudski looks badass...

[@PC-coolant-pipe-sucker]

The vehicle or Him? Because if it's the vehicle, then it looks like a damn blob, a jelly under 2x gravity

[@grzegorzpiasek9076]

@@PC-coolant-pipe-sucker Marshal Piłsudski, of course. As for the vehicle, "Steel Blob" is a good nickname... 😁

[@mareksicinski3726]

0:39 I don't think it is usually referred to as the ‘Russo-Polish war’, it was the Polish-Soviet war

[@TheRezro]

Yes. Soviets were composite force. Not specifically Russian.

[@wwaa_pl3822]

In Poland we name it "Wojna Polsko Rosyjska" witch means Polish Russo war

[@polishscribe674]

If you wonder what does "wz" mean, it's short for "wzór", which could be lightly translated to "example".

[@lasomil]

“Type”, “model” or “version" fits better for “wz” (wzór) in this case.

[@polishscribe674]

@@lasomil the only problem is that these have their own equivalences. "Typ", "model", "wersja".

[@lasomil]

@@polishscribe674 W tym przypadku “wzór” właśnie oznacza model, typ, czy wersję. (edit) Według mnie najbliższy angielski odpowiednik “wz” to angielskie “Mk” (Mark), czyli właśnie model.

[@lordvader9712]

It could also mean pattern.

[@thegrimgripper8416]

What about the story with tks with a 20mm cannon that took out a pz III and two Pz 38's

[@jackjohnson2101]

"Sitrone" Jesus, make an effort.

[@Galvars]

I have to disagree on TKD description. The available data do not support the opinion about "poor performance", in opposite... TKD was praised for it's performance. It had the same level of mobility as TK-3 and much bigger firepower, when it was implemented, 47mm wz.25 cannon had very good characteristics and even to 1934 it was considered to meet the expectations of the army. The main problem with TKD's that there was was just 4 of them build. The other problem was with just 2 men crew, if driver was not helping commander the single person was responsible for detecting, targeting, loading and firing the gun. There was just not enough space for third crew member, TKD was very small vehicle. In late 30's characteristics of wz.25 cannon still was acceptable, comparing to many short barreled guns of that time, caliber was solid and it still could penetrate armor of most armored vehicles.

[@TanksEncyclopediaYT]

If only we had an article on it actually detailing that it was actually disappointing in performance. Oh wait, we do tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/polish/tkd

[@Galvars]

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT I have some criticism about that article. For years number of rounds carried by TKD was written as 55 (stated by Magnuski) and it was clearly a false information. There is just no space for such large number of ammo in such small vehicle, the only solution was to carry those additional ammunition in trailer but none was build for TKD or no source state about such thing. The most recent articles by Piotr Zarzycki and especially Jędrzej Korbal point that out, mister Korbal estimates the maximum number of rounds would be 20 or less. That fit in to criticism of the vehicles from tests about small number of carried ammo... 55 is not a small number, it's almost the same as number of rounds later carried by 7TP tank. The poor armor protection is misleading, the armor plates of T3 had been replaced by ordinary steel plates probably to reduce weight and cost of rebuilding and as TKD series was just a prototypes, demonstrators if you like, they never received true armor. In maneuvers of 1932 TKD were praised for firepower and mobility and criticizes for slow firing rate and lack of protection for crew. Maneuvers of 1934, similar opinions. 1935 again, similar positive opinions and similar criticism: tightness, limited cover of the fighting compartment, small supply of ammunition (!), overload of the crew. And first time there had been criticism about gun or rather about decreasing effectiveness of anti-tank ammunition. Indeed the round had problems with penetrating 30mm armor under 300 meters range. But it was still capable to penetrate frontal armor of Panzer I, II or T-26 of that time. But HQ demand that gun should be able to penetrate 35-45mm on range 800-1200 meters and with such ammo it was not capable, that's why new ammo and modified gun (so called, long barrel) was designed and in tests of 1935 they "almost" meet the requirements, penetration of 30mm on 90 angle from 1200 meters. The "disappointments in performance" start to appear in second part of 1935, form most times TKD was praised for his performance. But it was only an experimental system, more to design how such mobile anti armor reserve could operate. The many ailments had never been removed, nor was it actually feasible. It was truly experimental machine, that did lead in to TK-D vehicle with even more peculiar history.

[@TanksEncyclopediaYT]

Please point us towards the two articles you mention.

[@radosaworman7628]

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT www.magnum-x.pl/artykul/prototypowe-dziala-samobiezne-tkd Short version of the article in polish. Full one is availiable in "Technika Wojskowa Historia" No. special 5/2020 for 18.5zł. Unfortunetly I do not own that number so i cannot provide it in any measure. If u will be able to get them i would be willing to translate them for free- but that would take time.

[@Galvars]

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Yes, mister Orman provide link to article of mister Korbal in NTW. I also have only in paper version. The second one is in form of monograph of "Infantry Gun 47mm wz. 1925 "Pocisk" from Wielki Leksykon Uzbrojenia by Piotr Zarzycki 2016.

[@cherryscarlett]

4:19 _¡≠/₹Əπçl|•l| Əπğ¡πəƏ/₹, §∅£cl ẞ2 l|•l|∆£¡≠₺/₹∆Çll(§._

[@GeluTavi]

No coverage of the 7TP?

[@TanksEncyclopediaYT]

Check video #2, Tracked Hussars

[@rynzpekoex4043]

I take a wooooookkkkk in Poland

[@SermonFapple]

why does the pic at 4:19 look so fake?

[@cherryscarlett]

2:30

[@jayfelsberg1931]

I feel it only right to note the Poles invaded the Ukraine and other parts of Russia, and were sent fleeing back to Poland, where they defeated the Sovite counterattack. This is not take anything away from their defeat of the Soviets, but in part to put it in context.

[@krzysztofpl5871]

....rightfully so...Intermarium would ONLY benefit central and eastern europe... and only THEN it would stand a chance against possible russian agression.... Can you blame the Poles? Poles having a democratic mindset, vs Russians who had legal fiefdom/serdom up to ww1! Im failing to see how one can perceive the Russians as doing any good of any kind...

[@TheRezro]

I'm bit confused what you talking about Felsberg? Situation of Poland after WW1 was complicated, because there were no historical borders to rely. Initial plans considered restoring border of Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth. But quite fast Poland bump on issue of other nations like Lithuanians and Ukrainians fighting over own independence. Conflict with Lithuania was over city Vilnius. What was seen Polish prior to war. After the war Poland recognized Lithuanian independence and stop using Lithuanian symbolizm, what was part of Commonwealth tradition. Similarly war with Ukraine was actually not with Proper Ukraine. But West Ukrainian People's Republic, what inhabited part of Polish Eastern Galatia and city of Lviv was at the time primarily inhabited by Poles. And I would not mention that peoples from there were responsible for Volyn massacre of Polish civilians. But both nations come to understanding after that, with Poland in fact supporting Ukrainian fight with Soviets, before they fall. Conflict with Czechoslovakia was minor border conflict and they invade Poland, not the other way around. Furthermore Silesian Uprising was not against Poles but Germans. Who at the time control Silesia. It was in fact pro-Polish revolt. Silesian minority is generally relatively minor movement, as most Silesians consider themself as branch of Poles. Anyway. Border situation in that region and time was complicated. It is why everyone was happy that it is over after WW2. Point is that idea that Poland was warmonger is misconception, sponsored by actual warmongers on the East.