Tanks of the Red Army in 1941: Medium and Heavy Tanks, by the Chieftain - WW2 Special

Chieftain's channel: / thechieftainwot
Chieftain returns to the World War Two channel this week for Part 2 of his deep-dive into the Soviet armour in the first months of war on the Eastern Front. This week, the focus is on medium and heavy tanks.
You can see Part 1 which covers armoured cars and light tanks here: • Tanks of the Red Army ...
Chieftain's previous video on Soviet doctrine: • The Development of Sov...
For Indy's introduction to armour on both sides: • The Tanks of Operation...
Join us on Patreon: / timeghosthistory
Or join The TimeGhost Army directly at: timeghost.tv
Check out our TimeGhost History KZbin Channel: kzbin.info?s...
Follow WW2 day by day on Instagram @ww2_day_by_day - / ww2_day_by_day
Like us on Facebook: / timeghosthistory
Between 2 Wars: • Between 2 Wars
Source list: bit.ly/WW2sources
Written and Hosted by: The Chieftain / thechieftainshatch
Director: Astrid Deinhard
Producers: Astrid Deinhard and Spartacus Olsson
Executive Producers: Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson, Bodo Rittenauer
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Research by: The Chieftain
Edited by: Miki Cackowski
Sound design: Marek Kamiński
Map animations: Eastory ( / eastory )
Sources:
Bundesarchiv
RIA Novosti archive, image #613694
Narodowe Archiwum Cyfrowe
Picture of K2, courtesy Ein persoon from Wikimedia Commons commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Picture of MBV-2 at Patriot Museum, Kubinka, courtesy Alan Wilson flic.kr/p/ZhtG6k
From the Noun Project: Shield by Nikita Kozin, Weight by Vadim Solomakhin, company soldiers by Andrei Yushchenko
Soundtracks from the Epidemic Sound:
Rannar Sillard - March Of The Brave 4
Johannes Bornlof - The Inspector 4
Fabien Tell - Last Point of Safe Return
Reynard Seidel - Deflection
Johannes Bornlof - Deviation In Time
Phoenix Tail - At the Front
Max Anson - Ancient Saga
Fabien Tell - Other Sides of Glory
Archive by Screenocean/Reuters www.screenocean.com.
A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.

[@WorldWarTwo]

A CONVERSATION BETWEEN FRANCIS AND IAN JUST BEFORE THE VIDEO GOES LIVE. Ian: Would Chieftain still not like to write the pinned comment for this and leave it to us? Francis: Leave it to us again. Ian: Should I keep the gag going and use this conversation? Francis: Yes. THE END Please go and give Chieftain's channel lots of love if you haven't already: kzbin.info Please read our rules of conduct before you comment: community.timeghost.tv/t/rules-of-conduct/4518

[@luxembourgishempire2826]

Again lol.

[@olletenvoorde7810]

Why are the regular episodes not uploaded on the website anymore?

[@NormanMStewart]

@World War Two I have a question regarding the website updates. It's been weeks since a new episode was uploaded to the TimeGhost forum. Any reasons for that? community.timeghost.tv/t/new-videos-not-available-on-timeghost-tv/4993

[@olletenvoorde7810]

@@NormanMStewart Wait so I have to access now through patreon? I don't have a patreon account and I contribute to the project via PayPall.... So how can I again access the content?

[@NormanMStewart]

@@olletenvoorde7810 I don''t know. But the forum is what I'm concerned about at the moment.

[@eetutorri8767]

I have to add there is few stories about KVs ridiculous protection in here Finland. In August '41 Finnish army advancing in Karelian Isthmus came upon lone KV-1 sitting on road towards a village. Advance units AT -rifles did nothing and any attempt to get close to it was met with angry return fire. So Finns build up defences, set up some mines and waited for some AT -guns that finally arrived on the following day, did nothing against this monster. And to make matters worse, a second KV came up and joined with its brethen and again AT -guns did nothing. So then a fieldgun was brought up and it had the exactly the same effect as was with AT -guns which was nothing. Well expect KV's did not like being targeted by fieldguns, so what is 2 heavy tanks to do in this situation? Answer was to assault the said gun position, through a minefield, without infantry support and drive the gun crew away. Then the one of the KV-tanks crew had the audacity to jump out of the tank, hook up the fieldgun and tow the gun back to friendly lines. But the other KV wasn't so lucky as the 3rd mine it drove over finally managed to break its track, making it immobile. On the following night, some Finnish pioneers managed to get close enough to set 20kg explosive charge on top of it and blew it up. And in final defiance the KV tank remains were so heavy that Finns lacked any vehicles to move it so they had to build a new road, around it.

[@konstantinriumin2657]

>Then the one of the KV-tanks crew had the audacity to jump out of the tank, hook up the fieldgun and tow the gun back to friendly lines. The WHAT?

[@crplsteve]

@@konstantinriumin2657 Sounds like they where trying to seize the means of destruction.

[@andmos1001]

Konstantin Riumin sounds like a cartoon

[@nonamesplease6288]

Awesome story. The fact that the tanks didn't move until there was a threat the crews felt was unacceptable says everything you need to know about Soviet attitudes. What's the point of having a tank if it isn't tearing around in the enemy rear, shooting everything up? Instead the tanks appeared to be used as very large paperweights.

[@m1sz3lpl24]

@@nonamesplease6288 war isn't a war thunder match, like the guy said, they were without support, so that was about what they could do relatively safely

[@gafeleon9032]

That "check back in a couple of years" lol

[@eldorados_lost_searcher]

Why? It's going to be over any day now.

[@gafeleon9032]

@@eldorados_lost_searcher I don't see how it can last more than a year at this rate

[@stefanosgrimp8990]

Well some elements of the german high command believe that the war will last during the entire winter but a couple of years seems like a strech to me

[@JJJBunney001]

Come on guys, I know it didn't come true last time Europe had a big party but I'm sure this one will definitely be over by Christmas

[@yayksurahi4366]

Germans got this by christmas. Look at the current situation soviets might get encircled again how can they replace their armies ? This time germans know what they doing.

[@bbcmotd]

Oh yes talk to me about those big thick metal beasts daddy Chieftain

[@DY-xl6rq]

UwU daddy chieftan

[@rgm96x49]

Oh yes thank you Irish tank daddy

[@Zeljko96Srb]

HANZ GET ZE FLAMMENWERFER

[@maoh0183]

@@Zeljko96Srb I love my Flammenwerfer! It werfs Flammen.... (Oh good as a german this sentence looks wrong)

[@hansheden]

I read a book by a russian tanker. He tells the story about the time when the technical officer said that their tank had to do a 100 hour service. Nobody knew what he was talking about since it was the first time in over two years that a tank had survived long enough to get 100 hours on the clock.

[@allangibson8494]

Mark IT Geek The Germans had chronic power transmission problems from the Panzer IV onwards. It took two days to replace the transmission in a Panther - and it lasted 200km. Availability has a quality of its own too (the American M3 and M4 had a transmission that could be changed in two hours and lasted 3000km).

[@thecaveofthedead]

There's a great memoir, called "Panzer Destroyer," in English by a commander of motorised artillery - mostly Su-85s IIR. He talked about them doing all their training on tractors and only getting into a tank for the first time days prior to battle.

[@HaVoC117X]

@@allangibson8494 Then pls explain this: Since spring 1944 the Panther and the Panzer IV achieved almost the same combar ready rates (Tiger I and II combat tactics by Jentz). During 1944 both Tanks achieved combat ready rates around 70%. The Panzer IV was known for its reliability and ease of maintenance, if the Panther was so much harder to maintain or its maintenance requirements were unbearable for the troops how on earth did the Panther achieve the same ready rates as the Panzer IV or the Stug III????? Second: transmission is only good for 200km A Bergepanther (ARV) drove 4200 km without new spareparts and 1000 km from 4200 km it was towing other panthers. (Panther - Thomas Anderson page 55.) "There is an article on this subject in the June 1944 edition of Nachrichtenblatt der Panzertruppen (News sheet: Armoured troops): Performance of a Panther-recovery tank driver. Unteroffizier Krause of a Panther workshop platoon has up to 3 May 1944 driven his Panther recovery tank - Chassis No. 212132 - 4,200km without an engine change or damage to the transmission, including the final drive units, gearbox and drive shaft. Approximately 1,000km of this was made towing a Panther tank. The vehicle and engine are still in excellent condition and continue to be operational.(Panther - Thomas Anderson page 55). Third: You are lying 1 mechanic and 4 crew members could change the transmission in 8 hours. Another 8 hours for a complete engine replacement. So 16 hours in total to exchange the majority of the drivetrain of a Panther and not two days like you claimed. The transmission replacement isn't ideal, but there aren't many tanks which could have their engines replaced in 8 hours. Even postwar the replacement of the T54 engine took much longer, for a Centurion they needed 15,5 hours. And did you ever heard of hydrostatic lock? Or did you know, how to change a spark plug in a M4A1 or M4A4?? ?? It's impossible without removing the engine, because 50% of the cylinder heads are facing down into the tank hull. Not very maintenance friendly compared to other tank engines. Just a few reasons why the germans did not choose the BMW 132 radial engine for the Panther, despite successful prototype tests. (Spielberger - Panther and its Variants).

[@HaVoC117X]

@@allangibson8494 Fourth: Transmission replacement As we learned the Panther transmission was very robust like most german transmissions and had a service life of 5000 km between overhauls. (Even the suspicious french report states that). The chance that a tank survives long enough, that transmission replacement becomes necessary was actually very low, given the intensive fights the germans were involved in with the russians. The russians turned the war around with tank engines (The V2-series), which had a service life of only 100 to 400 km between 1941 until mid 1944 (T 34 vs Stug III by Steven Zaloga). Percentage of T34 tanks reaching 300km during factory trials (Zaloga, Page 14): Apr 1943 = 10.1%, May 1943 = 23%, Jun 1943 = 7.7% This number slowly imporves to 79% in February 1944. But only 33% reached 1000 km before a breakdown in Feb. 1944 The british stopped their long endurance Tests of the M4A1, M4A2 and M4A3 after the tanks had reached 2500 miles, because they did not expect that the tanks reached that mileage during deployment. (Chieftain published the original british documents a few years ago somewhere on the WOT forum). So if we are speaking of transmission replacement, we are speaking about an event which was very unlikely to happen. And still the US wasted production capacity and time to produce a Sherman tank with a transmission that was easy to access and mounted it in a separate unite which was bolted to the front end of the tank. They had to cast serval large hull parts (instead of just one, Patton tank family for example) and invested a lot of effort and material to drill holes through the serval inches thick armor to put the separate pieces together with giant bolts and nuts. Those bolts and nuts don't grow on trees and had to be produced too. All this increased the overall count of parts for the vehicle. The US industry went the extra mile for every tank which left the factory and invested time, effort and resources for an event which rarely happened. So tell me, who has wasted more man hours and resources on this specific task called transmission replacement? The Russians, the Germans, the British or the US which were probably a bit too cautious in this regard? Basic maintenance and adjusting the steering could be done with the transmission installed (in the Panther as well as in the Sherman). So what if you really had to replace the transmission because of battle damage. If a round or a mine impacts at the front a sherman, bolts can be damaged and the force and the heat of the impact, can put tennsion into the metall. As a result things which should separate easily wouldn't move at all. That's where the real fun for every mechanic begins.

[@HaVoC117X]

@@markitgeek "They had some pretty good equipment" Did you watched the video at all??? By 1944 with the upgraded T34/85 they had a very good tank. But during the first 2 thirds of the war until late 1943, their tanks and aircrafts had serios shortcomings and the russian Soldiers, Pilots and Tankers had to be very brave and smart to make those systems work in the field.

[@misterijaaaa]

Driver hatch was knocked off and driver had significant emotional event. Always cracks me up with "significant emotional events" hahaha.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

He was lucky if his head or some other body part was not removed along with the hatch. Also bullets could come in through the now hatchless aperture.

[@waukivorycopse2402]

@@patrickholt2270 I imagine I would have done all three, simultaneously!

[@dpeasehead]

"Damn door knocker knocked my door right off." From a translation of declassified after action report.

[@colbeausabre8842]

​@@patrickholt2270 It is well known that the ancient Greeks didn't wear trousers and went into battle bare ass. It is also well known they fought packed into a phalanx. What is often not mentioned is that some men have an involuntary reaction to terror involving the bowels, The result was the neighbors and especially the next rank back getting well sprayed, I learned this factoid from one of Victor Davis Hansen's volumes on Classical Warfare, which I highly recommend

[@BHuang92]

8:59 The tank that is on the crane is a rare KV variant called the KV-220. It was up-armored with 100mm all around and elongated (notice the 7 wheels instead of the usual 6) which was suppose to have a different turret housing an 85mm gun. But with the German invasion and the turret not completed, the sole example was hastily fitted with a regular KV turret and rushed to the front lines.

[@deptusmechanikus7362]

My favorite KV variant of them all 🥰

[@foowashere]

BHuang92 very well spotted. Thanks!

[@briandamage5677]

Great catch!

[@lorddashdonalddappington2653]

I remember that thing. Conventional tank wisdom is to shoot it in the flat hull, especially the sides, but with that thing you couldn't kill it unless you shot at its weak-ass turret.

[@acarerdogan4590]

-At last! The scroll of truth! "T-34 was initially a poorly designed tank." -NNNYEEEEEEH!

[@dlifedt]

Just like panther

[@HaVoC117X]

@@dlifedt just like every tank which was pushed into service during wwii, like Churchills, Cromwells, Pershings and many others. This does include the m4 sherman, which was reliable from the start but had a lot of shortcomings in its design like optics, hatches, commanders copula etc., which were slowly sorted out until mid to late 1944.

[@hallamhal]

@@HaVoC117X 100% agree - it's fair to say that unless you were crazy prepared for war most testing of equipment would happen in the field, and only then could design flaws really be identified. Most of the 'great' tanks only became great as the war progressed

[@wideyxyz2271]

@@hallamhal A truer comment has never been written.....Spot on sir! Very few military items work as intended straight out of the "box"...

[@wideyxyz2271]

@Carnivorus But it had some very big shortcomings....

[@muffy469]

They even mounted t-34 turrets onto armored boats which were used at the volga in the defence of Stalingrad.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

The Germans installed removed French tank turrets with their guns to help fortify some parts of the Atlantic Wall.

[@davidbrennan660]

Waste not, that would be wrecking.

[@chrisstewart4288]

Weird skip at the beginning of Chieftain's video.

[@Tuning3434]

I guess he recorded the armoured cars + light tank section in the same session? Didn't check if he used the same setup / clothes in that one.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

@@Tuning3434 I did. The WW2 Channel guys objected to a half-hour show, so they just cut it down the middle.

[@TimDutch]

@@TheChieftainsHatch quite strange. The more info the better. Good video Chieftain!

[@alecjones4135]

@@TimDutch it's not really their style. 10-15 minutes covering one topic at a time

[@JustSomeCanuck]

10:50 - Also shown here is proper use of the Stalinium fishing rod used to pull the KV out of the river when the bridge collapses.

[@brucetucker4847]

If Putin had been around, he could have pulled it out with one hand. Shirtless, of course.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

@@brucetucker4847 His predecessor Yeltsin was a pudgy alcoholic with missing fingers on one hand (and he was clearly drunk in some TV interviews) and Putin's he-man behaviour is partly a reaction against Yeltsin's persona as well as policies.

[@wideyxyz2271]

Pmsl...Good call...Stalinium fishing rod never leave home without mine just incase my tank gets stuck in the river....

[@_ArsNova]

Always good to see Chieftain on here, a legitimate expert on armored warfare and tank designs. His videos are brilliant, especially his op ed videos and history of national tanks designs.

[@alecjones4135]

He's a great "primary source history KZbinr". Not many of those around

[@Elizabeth-0]

Carnivorus What makes one an expert?

[@colbeausabre8842]

@Carnivorus Not a driver, a tank commander iwith tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan and having served as a platoon leader and troop commander. Whar YOUR credentials, smart ass

[@drudgenemo7030]

@@colbeausabre8842 yes but driving a modern tank doesn't make you an expert on anything but what you drove(maybe.. You could have just been fair to middling). His expertise is in the primary source research. As he is also very much a tank nerd, he managed to get paid to do his research in the archives(WoT) so he has actual nuts and bolts on how to use a tank, command a tank as well as a company, AND has years of poking around moldering boxes at the national archives.

[@attilakatona-bugner1140]

Conclusion: soviet bias was hard to kill, if it got to the battle, and you have been notified by the presence of the enemy through rapid "ping" sounds of your armour. The stronger the ping, the closer the enemy.

[@Paciat]

5:06 "Only 50 T-34 had been operated before the war started." This number sais a lot. It looks bad even when compared to Panthers at Kursk.

[@billwilson3609]

Parade tanks.

[@buffalo_yt9245]

We need a ww2 special series like this but with aircraft hosted by military aviation history

[@davidoppong-nkrumah4154]

And one for Ships with Drachnifel

[@otakunthevegan4206]

@@davidoppong-nkrumah4154 I am more interested in tanks then ships, and even I love that guys channel.

[@kirbyculp3449]

Check out Greg's Airplanes

[@oldguy217]

@@davidoppong-nkrumah4154 Could not agree more. Indie and chieftan are knowledgeable and a pleasure to listen to as is Drachnifel, i feel a great team in the making.

[@otakunthevegan4206]

@@oldguy217 Better history then the history channel.

[@richardcolesjr.1164]

The Soviets didn't have a lot of good tanks in the beginning of the war but they greatly improved their armor throughout the war.

[@gunman47]

Glorious Stalinum T-34 and KV-1 tanks incoming!

[@dovalek69420]

Don't forget the mBt-5 and the (b)I(a)S-2

[@tomjustis7237]

Everything I've ever read credited the T-34 with nearly being God's own perfect and invincible gift to the Russians. Thanks for an unbiased view which finally shows the T-34 for what it was ... an effective armoured vehicle which still had its share of problems.

[@mino1205]

Drachinifel would be a perfect guest for the Midway series or other Naval battles.

[@Dustz92]

They should get Montemayor to animate them

[@paulmeier8817]

This guy knows propably everything there is to know about warships

[@_ArsNova]

Not really, he's far from an expert like Chieftain is. His recounting of battles and ships are little more than reading a beefed up version of their respective Wikipedia articles.

[@mino1205]

@@_ArsNova Thats not right just look at his streams for example he knows way more than you can read on Wiki. He is an Expert.

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

@@_ArsNova Umm, to put this politely, no, you are wrong.

[@dskpgsoe9008]

7:15 There we go, the legendary line.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Excellent explaining of Medium & Heavy tanks of Soviet Union During 2WW..thanks for Sharing

[@sevenonthelineproductionsl7524]

Thanks for splitting these into two (bc 30 min videos on tanks and tank doctrines can sometimes be a bit of a drag)

[@teseucamps4832]

Yes, this is what i must do at 2AM on a school night

[@robashton8606]

So, the Politruk was the only one who, somehow, managed to escape with his tank and his life after a fierce engagement, huh? Imagine that. 🤔 Edit: The KVs had torsion bar suspension? I wasn't aware of that. Cool, today I have learned something.

[@_ArsNova]

Soviets experimented around with a few torsion bar suspension designs (most notably the T-43, essentially a T-34 tank with a torsion bar suspension) but most during the war would go with the Christie suspension for simplicity's sake.

[@bbcmotd]

T-34 was scheduled for an upgrade to torsion bars and other improvements for the second half onf 1941 but the plan was scrapped when numbers were needed asap.

[@Ypog_UA]

T-44 was designed with torsion bars (Even though it looks very similar to christie)

[@builder396]

@@_ArsNova That was the T-34M. T-43 was a much later project and more focused on uparmoreding the tank to 75mm all around and giving it what was effectively a T-34/85 turret while retaining the 76mm gun. Eventually they obviously adopted the turret for the 85mm gun and screwed it onto T-34s. Both projects though were scrapped to not have to change production and deal with a drop in numbers.

[@rvail136]

As always, the Chieftain, Nick Moran is well researched and articulate.

[@mich8050]

"When the Germans came to visit" now that's a lovely way of putting it.

[@thurin84]

klopfen, klopfen; "Candygram" (mit deutschem akzent)

[@Rendell001]

@@thurin84 "Candygram for Josef!" * BOOOOM *

[@joeyjamison5772]

100 hours from the engines. Who was making them, Fiat?

[@xmaniac99]

Joey Jamison Actually Fiat had a very important role in adapting the standard soviet v12 tank engine which originally started out as a hispano suiza tractor engine. If only engines could talk xd

[@chrisscerbo5731]

yeah those huge armored trains were cool and they looked like a monster on rails. must have been something seeing them in action

[@peteroneill5426]

I love the 'Knocking at the front door' analogy. If you can't come in through the front, you go along the back!

[@florincismaru1074]

Wonderful episode, thank you!

[@maxayson9386]

Excellent work Chieftain! Love these colabs between the Time ghost guys and other historical youtubers, no such thing as to much of a good thing!

[@deptusmechanikus7362]

5:38 to be fair that, at the very least, means they had spare transmission. **unlike ze germans**

[@builder396]

The Germans had halftracks fitted to be basically unarmored ARVs that could carry a spare transmission or engine. It also brought the crane and tools necessary to switch the transmission in the field. T-34s do have a notable lack of cranes, and even if you have such equipment on trucks, good luck getting to the tank if its behind any kind of wilder terrain or trench as trucks just do not go these places.

[@builder396]

@hickspaced Yeah, noone would do it under fire. But tanks usually are used in offensives, so chances are the other tanks continue advancing far enough for ARVs to move in safely, and then either tow the vehicle to safety, which doesnt require nearly as much exposure, or just swap out the transmission on the spot. If the other tanks dont succeed, youre gonna have way more broken tanks and recover absolutely none of them anyway.

[@HooptieWagon]

Both the tank videos were very informative. Thanks for the good content.

[@Overture-ur6mk]

Amazing work once again!

[@stevebarrett9357]

Always worth a listen when the Chieftain weighs in on the tanks. It would be nice if you could also do something like this for the aircraft. My perception is that there are some interesting parallels between the tank and aircraft designs of these two nations.

[@alexanderakh4955]

Thank's! Very informative and objective!

[@Lisztomaniac1022]

WWII weapons special that would be awesome like what you did with c&arsenal at The Great War and I know I'm not the only person who would want this

[@shawnr771]

Excellent collaboration.

[@foowashere]

Superb episode I must say. Chieftain's delivery was very crisp and well paced. 👍

[@foowashere]

@D D kek, what fav tank of yours did he say a bad word about?

[@foowashere]

@D D Well, you seem very salty about him, and care enough to comment snarkily all over instead of just moving on.

[@jcsmith8992]

Thank You for the Great Videos!

[@frankwhite3406]

Excellent Episode Indeed Most Enjoyable.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

I hope you guys start to cover the small arms of WW2 soon like you did for the Great War channel. The small arms of WW2 are a lot more diverse then the WW1 small arms as each country came up with different strategies for their units. I hope you guys can try to get Forgotten Weapons/InRange or C&Rcenal involved in your channel again. They would be perfect to do those kinds of videos and would have access to the weapons.

[@IchWillNicht0119]

Ian mentioned that there was a breakdown of communication leading up to start of this channel. But he also said that he isn't ruling out any future collaboration with TimeGhost. I think only Eastory and Chieftain were the only surviving remnants of the many planned collaborations.

[@PhillyPhanVinny]

@@IchWillNicht0119 Yeah I remember that video. I still hope they can get Forgotten Weapons/InRange and C&Rcenal back involved. The small arms of WW2 need to be covered by the channel to be complete I think. So even if they don't use gun experts they should be covering the weapons the common soldiers in the war are using I think.

[@indianajones4321]

Great video 👍👍

[@TheWalterKurtz]

Armored trains. What a concept.

[@TheIfifi]

I hope (and assume) we will in fact check back with him in a couple of years? As he told us to do? Great episode, Chieftan is always a delight. Incidentally, I am in fact going to an Irish pub tonight.

[@robertphelps7091]

My father was in WW2, in Europe. So I am throughly enjoying this series. Please keep it going, you all are awesome.

[@firingallcylinders2949]

Tanks for the video

[@briandamage5677]

Great stuff!

[@MoreUngaMoreBunga]

Having spare tracks on your tank make you look cool. Having a spare transmission makes you look like you bought and MG tank.

[@luxembourgishempire2826]

Keep these videos up.

[@luxembourgishempire2826]

@Belagerungsmörser the Sheep First thing came to my head XD. I was happy they uploaded.

[@notidentifieduser6533]

Hey again

[@Conn30Mtenor]

Ah, yes. The "This Tank Is Too Small For Me" Chieftan.

[@bigapplebucky]

Good stuff.

[@SteveVDuelist]

always fun to see the chieften

[@brokenbridge6316]

Yeah I can see Soviet tanks being a mixed bag in 1941. But once improved upon some were obviously very dangerous. Great job.

[@heckinmemes6430]

Haha! Is bridge destruction unit too! Tank, Pillbox, Bunker, Bridge buster! Truly the best of machines!

[@nickthenoodle9206]

Usual excellent content by Nick Moran.

[@TheSuperhoden]

Yes please

[@kvlt1349]

Lol, they should have just followed the meta. SMH. With proper timing of focuses and juggling techs, the Soviets could have the IS researched and in production with +5 to guns, speed, and reliability in 1940. Stalin needs to get his head in the game. Stop playing meme games with noobs, and start playing competitive multiplayer.

[@MichaelDavis-mk4me]

Last time he tried, Luxembourg sent a truck to Moscow and parchuted random dudes everywhere in his land so he had to surrender.

[@knottastu]

This comment is meta

[@climax050]

Obviously he doesn’t play enough tommykay esports multiplayer 😂😂 The real question is he playing 10, 20 or 40 width spam?

[@stephenwood6663]

Do you mean SMK?

[@wil5448]

the hot tanks here we go

[@stevekaczynski3793]

The KV-1 angular turret rear developed a reputation as a shot trap, and upgrades made that area sloped to deflect AT shells and shot better.

[@mqcapps]

Good collaboration.....

[@jonathanball8237]

Gotta Love _A Chieftain_ Collab!!!

[@zhuli693]

interesting collections of tank models, looks like you have a type 89 120mm assault gun, and a type 99 MBT there. :)

[@MikeJones-qn1gz]

I find it so odd that the soviets took so long to embrace 2 way radios in their tanks and planes. Like did they not know that communication and coordination was much smoother and easier with the 2 way radio?

[@spetsnatzlegion3366]

I expect some sort of authoritarian seizure overtook the designers, thinking that if the crews could not talk back they would be less likely to disobey orders despite the orders probably being crap.

[@watcherzero5256]

Yes it was mainly a belief that orders should flow down, though also there were limits to their production capacity of electronics like radios. Theres a training report from the commander of a training battalion to his superiors which says that they didnt really trust the soldiers with them as they kept breaking the delicate radios through incorrect operation (with some suspicion it was done deliberately in some cases) and so he ordered them to be removed. The result was that by graduation of what was supposed to be a three year tank academy course most of the graduates hadnt completed the first years modules and only knew enough to pickup messages not to send them.

[@builder396]

Short story: Radios are touchy, expensive and complicated to figure out. Electronics kind of have that about them. If you dont have electron tubes, you cant make radios. If you have very few tubes, you can only make very few of these radios. And the Soviets had more steel for tanks than tubes for radios.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

As the war went on, more and more radios were installed, both Soviet-designed and American lend-lease. The Red Army had a bias for a long time in favour of field telephones for communication and was somewhat anti-radio, perhaps because at that time radio was easier to intercept (uncoded radio transmissions had been a factor in the Russian defeat at Tannenburg in 1914, when the radio was very new technology).

[@axelpatrickb.pingol3228]

If I remember correctly, they don't have a large industrial base to make those. Most of their radios were from the US lend-lease...

[@edgaraugustoruizsantos4732]

There should be a version of this series for all of the other armies involved in the war.

[@codymcdowell4442]

You should see about working with C&Rsenal again for WW2 firearms specials.

[@majorbloodnok6659]

At 8.59 the vehicle slung beneath the overhead crane is Object 220

[@Kumimono]

Sort of an abrupt cut at the beginning. Good info, as always.

[@jameskoch7190]

Great intro.

[@shimarinlogistics6616]

Also, there were serious supply issues with T-34's V-2 diesel engine, so bad that some of the T-34 tanks headed into combat in 1941 had to make do with the old Mikulin M17T V12 gasoline engines found on the BT light tanks.

[@klklkl427586]

3:12 do i hear The Elder Scrolls Oblivion music in the background?

[@kleinerPanzer]

8:07 looks like the early/pre-production T-35 with 37 mm secondaries and a PS-3 for the main gun, not the standard armament.

[@SirWilliamKidney]

Saying "spoiler alert" AFTER you say the thing defeats the purpose, Mr. Tin. :P

[@matshagglund3550]

Another major problem with T-34 was the unwieldy gearbox. It had poor reliability and it needed excessive force to change gears, leading to driver fatigue. The study ‘Engineering analysis of the Russian T34/85 tank’ says: 'Rough steering due to the use of clutch and brake steering control, and Difficulty in shifting due to the use of a spur gear clash-shift transmission (no synchronizers, no clutches) and a multi-disc dry clutch, undoubtedly make driving this tank a difficult and very fatiguing job.’ Initially the powerful V-2 engine (500hp) could not be used to the fullest due to the 4-speed gearbox . Changing gears required excessive force on behalf of the driver. The T-34 could use the 4th gear only on a paved road, thus the max speed over cross-country was theoretically 25 km/h but in practice it was only 15km/h because changing from 2nd gear to 3rd required superhuman strength. On later modifications there was a 5-speed gearbox which allowed for a cross country speed of 30 km/h. However it seems that even vehicles built late in the war were not guaranteed to have the new 5-speed gearbox. The tanks given to the Polish People's Army in late 1944/early 1945 and those used by the North Korean Army in 1950 had the old 4-speed setup

[@jamiepeter3567]

everybody loves a crossover!

[@randystiles230]

LOVE the insite!!

[@rmod42]

Interesting that the castmate tank destroyers /spgs that would be so widely used by the red army during and post war are entirely absent from its initial arsenal.

[@thecaveofthedead]

This is one of the Chieftan's funniest vids.

[@carlosteran5617]

You' re the BEST my british historic mate!!! From Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, España. All the best Indy 😎😉🐏

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you Carlos!

[@nonamesplease6288]

Gotta love the T35. Yes, it was a terrible tank. But just look at it!

[@foowashere]

Vintovka it's truly grand, isn't it? A real landship.

[@nonamesplease6288]

It's absolutely fantastic! The same land ship idea fairy hit the Soviets after it hit all of the other countries of Europe, and the result was beyond compare.

[@chuckygobyebye]

Armoured trains! Yay!

[@johnperez6069]

Conrad sits by impassively while listening to data about the Russian behemoths. I don't know if Time Ghost and associated channels have ever put out a Conrad von Hötzendorf t-shirt to date, but that dude certainly deserves one. If there ever was a time in history for Conrad von Hötzendorf swag, this is it!

[@hugod2000]

Thanks for your great content. God loves you.

[@gianniverschueren870]

Same tie as for part 1, so check my rating there!

[@MBP1918]

Can you make more videos about axis tanks in WWII

[@williamharvey8895]

You should talk to Drachinefel about the Naval side, he is like the Chieftain only with Naval stuff.

[@linelis7804]

The Lithuanian city is Alytus not Alitus. Just a nitpick, video is as awesome, as always!

[@MegaMark0000]

5:02 What does he say? Germans tended to wait for ______ shots.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Flank (Side)

[@GraemeBell9864]

Chief:- Was the T35 inspiration for the German's ultra super heavy 1945 tank? (the one beyond the Maus)?

[@beageler]

I paused the video and, when coming back, didn't remember where I left off. He listed the equipment of the rail cars and, thinking that it was a tank, I couldn't believe what he was saying :-)

[@toddmoss1689]

Great video as always from Chieftain, but where was the more than just rudimentary reference to A-20 and A-32? They were not included in the light tank video and only received passing reference within the T-34 genealogy.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

They weren’t service or production vehicles in service, just prototypes. Not really relevant for a discussion on Soviet armor during the German invasion.

[@toddmoss1689]

The_Chieftain Thanks for those facts. I need to be careful with assuming a tank I’m playing in WoT was anything more than a prototype. LOL!

[@ScooterWeibels]

Are you going to do the same type of specials about the aircraft of WW2

[@carlosteran5617]

I do like your style Indy😉😅😅👍👍🤩

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks very much, Carlos!

[@TheStugbit]

Two questions! First: did the Germans had already in 1941 some sort of HEAT ammunition for the Panzer IV and StuGs short 75mm L24 guns who could tackle KV tanks? Second: are you sure tungsten ammunition for the short 50mm L42 gun of the Panzer III could really get through the KV tank? Perhaps this has to do with damaging some sort of important component of the tank instead of getting through the armor itself or finding any sort of gap or weak spot like the 37mm gun did to the T-34. But the accounts I have seen from 1941 seems to point to a dire situation in combat against the KV for the German tanks, in the North front in particular where KV tanks were more available. I may be wrong but it seems to me that the city of Leningrad was saved from German capture mainly thanks to those KV which slowed German advances on the region.

[@stevekaczynski3793]

I have seen a German colour photo of a KV turret on a tank knocked out in the summer of 1942. There were a lot of holes in it, but only one had clearly gone through.

[@TheStugbit]

@@stevekaczynski3793 when they described the action around Raseiniai, with the sole KV tank holding the road, it seems that the Germans have put at least four PAK 38 AT guns against it and they were using tungsten ammunition because later on, when they had access to the destroyed tank, the Germans were able to see the blueish marks left on the armor plates where the tungsten shots have hit it. The longer 50mm L/60 wasn't able to get through the KV even with tungsten. But still, AT guns are a different story from a tank, which is mobile and have more chances of choosing different places to shoot. But to me, the KV seems to have had way less weak spots as there were on the T-34 since the KV took longer to develop and was conceived with less rush. One aspect which seems to corroborate this is the fact that the Russians dropped a version of the KV with extra appliqué armor plates on it.

[@DeerHunter308]

I do want to say, "Nice hair cut Chieftain". As my mother said to me when I shaved my head 20 years ago, "You look like an idiot."

[@exnihilo5087]

I think you guys accidentally chopped off a bit of what The_Chieftan was saying when he started speaking.

[@johnrettig1880]

You're right about how blind the 34 was But I was told the less experienced crews just opened the breach block and aimed down the barrel until they saw the target .

[@gwtpictgwtpict4214]

Wouldn't hit anything above point blank range due to the ballistic trajectory of the round. So, yes in an emergency, but you really wouldn't want to depend on it.

[@johnrettig1880]

@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 better training would have helped . Some of them were just yanked off a farm tractor ( if Stalin would have let them have one ). and thrown in the tank .

[@stevekaczynski3793]

@@johnrettig1880 I have mentioned this elsewhere, but one T-34 tank commander described his crew (they took part in the 1943 Kursk fighting). One of his crew was a restaurant waiter in civilian life, another had been an inmate in a labour camp and was released not long before Barbarossa started (the commander's memoir seems not to have mentioned what he was imprisoned for) and the loader was a somewhat educationally subnormal peasant - the first time he fired the gun in training, the noise and recoil made him panic and he climbed out of the tank and ran away. Not a particularly picked bunch, from the sound of it. It seems in 1941 some KV crews at least were the pick of the Soviet tank force but this was not true of T-34 crews, at least at that time.

[@karoltakisobie6638]

Armored trains are not oddity. They are excellent toll when crews are trained properly as shown in ww1,Russian civil war,Polish/Russian war,ww2 and Yugoslav civil war. They were used succesfuly in Chechen wars as well.Chinese used them in their civil war as well. I'm sure we will see them in use again.

[@Aotearas]

A one and a two and a T-34, I see what you did there ... cheeky!

[@billd.iniowa2263]

At 05:00 "... the Germans tended to wait for frag shots..." Is he talking about spawling? Rounds that don't penetrate but cause the armor to fracture inside the tank and send small pieces flying around in the crew compartment.

[@bbcmotd]

flank shots

[@billd.iniowa2263]

@@bbcmotd Oh, ok. I must have misheard then. Thanx.