The Development of Soviet Armour and its Doctrine 1918-1941

Continuing with the series of videos which are being released at applicable moments to support the timeline over on the World War Two channel, we now turn to the Soviets, who got really, really, big into this tank business, even if they were not so sure what to do with them.
WW2 Channel:
/ @worldwartwo
Earlier talks of this series:
Germany: • Development of the Pan...
UK: • Development of the Bri...
France: • Development of French ...
Italy: • Development of Italy's...
Chieftain's Scout Car Fund:
Patreon: / the_chieftain
Direct Paypal: paypal.me/thec...
Subscribestar: www.subscribes...
Or buy a handy mug or hoodie below.

[@slim_senya]

Hi! Overall, great video, I've really enjoyed it, great job, es[ecially for the non-Russian author. However there are several remarks I'd like to add that might clarify some moments: In general, you as many other Western authors tend to overestimate the influence of Marxism and internal Party political discourse on military decision making. In reality the military decision making tended to be more in touch with reality and autonomous, just sometimes they "sold" their decisions and ideas to the Party leadership using such ideological, let's say, "branding". You also have not mentioned quite unique conditions in which Red Army doctrine developed in 1920s, which I think will be quite interesting ans explain this whole "back-and-forth" doctrine dynamics a little bit better. In essence after the Civil war the Soviet Union was a poor country devasted by a First World war and a Civil war. In order to survive massive peasant rebellions and general discontetn with Communist governemnt the regime enacted New Economic Policy (NEP). A partial privatization of property was allowed as well as free internal trade was ensured along with siginificant cuts to government spendings. This included the military spending, having defeated the immediate threat of the White armies there was no more need for gigantic Red army. So the size of the Red army, as you said, was drammaticaly decreased. But the regime was afraid that a lot of young, energetic and popular army commanders ho rose through the ranks during the war would turn against the regime if they lost their job. Also wasting this promising young commanders in the state of iternational isolation by non-friendly capitalist states was also concidered not smart. So the General Staff Academy was significantly expanded in order to provide jobs to the Civil war officer cadre. This has created a purely academic atmosphere in which numerous theories were studied and debated (the majority of instructors were former Tsarist generals) but very few posiibilities to test this theories were provided. The moment Stalin encted his industrialistaion policy the testing poibilities emerged, thus creating this dynamics of Soviet military first developing were bold atheories ahead of its own time and then getting back into touch with reality. More specific remarks: 1) It' not entirely correct to label the Whites as anti-revolutionary, the Whites were an amalgamation of anti-Bolshevik with political leadership coming preedominantly from two Socialist parties: non-Marxist Socialist-Revolutionary party ("Essery") and Menshevik wing of Russian Socialist Democratic Worker Party. While some generals within Whites' were monarchists, their goals were never to reinstate Romanov government and supress the revolution, but rather to reinstate democraticly elected non-Bolshevik Socialist Revolutionary government. The narrative of "counter-revolutionary White armies" was constructed by Bolshevik propaganda during and after the Civil war and this narrative is being deconstructed rather actively in modern Russian academic circles and civil society. 2) The Bolshevik leadership did not expect the Polish workers to rebel against the Polish state during the Battle of Warsaw. The goal of the offensive was to break through Poland into Germany which at the moment was in the state of low-intense Civil war with both communist and conservative uprisings and rebellions undermining the weak Weimar government. The possibility of KPD raising its own Red Army to support the Soviet one would've been very high in this scenario. 3) Offensive nature of Red army doctrine while being more convinient to "sell" to the Party had very little to do with the official ideology. The majoriy ofRed Army officers had NCO expirience in Tsarist army and then rose through the ranks uring the Civil war. And Civil war was very different from the Fisrt Waorld War due to a large number of factors: this war was the war of maneuver which heavily favoured the attacking side. So the millitary leadership of the Red Army had a background of ansuccessfull defensive war in Tsarist army and succesfull offensive operations carried out by large scale maneuvers and attacks. So, obviosly the Red Army doctrine was very much offensive-oriented. The arguement of World revolution theory causing Red army to adopt offensive stance is further debunked by the fact that Red Army doctrince did not become less offensive when main proponent of World Revolution, Trotsky, was banished from the Union and a political course of peacefull coexistance with capitalist nations was proclaimed. 4) One of the main reasons why Tuhachevsky supported Stalin and Frunze and vica versa during the power struggle of the late 1920s was that their views and plans supplemented each other: Stalin has advocated for the Industrialization and abandonmnet of NEP, while Tuhachevsky at hte same time advocated for more modern, mechanizied Army. Since the modern Army required devoped industrial base Stalin has used the supporters of this approach within the Army to levu additional support in the Party during his fight against Bukharin. Once again, great video and sorry for any mistakes and typos.

[@JiriSusta]

Thanks for your points. Can you please recomend me some good sources on Red Army during WW2? I am trying to learn russian, so it could be either in english or russian.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I'm going to pin this one for a bit, thank you.

[@TheSunchaster]

The Whites *were NOT* an amalgamation of anti-Bolshevik with political leadership coming preedominantly from two Socialist parties. They were very separate, even monarchists. And military men like Alexeyev, Kornilov, Denikin etc. were not unite in their fight, especially Kolchak. Left essers till July 1918 were in Soviet government. "Cadets", constitutional democrats, were ineffective and not popular. Essers failed their programm despite that fact that they were the most popular party in 1917. The only unite force were bolsheviks, they proved it. "counter-revolutionary White armies" was constructed by Bolshevik propaganda" - October revolution is revolution too, not only February revolution. Where is the problem? 2 remark: also Finns Civil war was in full swing, and Hungary. Yep, in the border of 1920`s and 1930`s political course was changed, but it was preparation to new defending war.

[@TheSunchaster]

@@JiriSusta Books by Алексей Исаев, Валерий Замулин, Мирослав Морозов, Юрий Пашолок, Максим Коломиец (you can find their lectures on KZbin), Alexander Hill, David Glanz. Read old memoirs of Soviet officers and soldiers, but keep in mind that in it may be inaccuracies and some propaganda. Search for published documents - in digests and scans (try resourses of Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation).

[@KenshiroPlayDotA]

DPP ? Deep penetration ? Where's the X rating for that video ? :D Also, I just happened to be reading an issue of Foreign Affairs a few hours before watching that video. Check out Foreign Affairs, issue of March/April 2018, the Future Fights article, pp. 162-167. This seems quite fitting with what the Soviet higher ups had to grapple with in this video, and how they completely failed compared to other situations mentioned in the article. You can register for free on FA's website to read the article if you want.

[@nk_3332]

Oh bugger, the doctrine is on fire.

[@lovablesnowman]

"How quickly can we fix it" *is unable to fix it quick enough

[@falloutghoul1]

@@lovablesnowman Purge the firefighters!

[@xenofoxx]

@@falloutghoul1 *takes a sip of apple juice*

[@kyle857]

Gotta swing out of Russia feet first.

[@bsuper63]

In Russian winter, doctrine purges you.

[@OgreWithanIronClub]

I think horses are actually quite susceptible to mechanical failure. The buggers seem to break down from a single bullet or even some microscopic organisms getting in the intake.

[@ProphTruth100]

Or when laid over

[@thenamescarter8279]

@@ProphTruth100 and when a shock absorber breaks youve got to scrap the whole bloody thing

[@ByzantineDarkwraith]

@@thenamescarter8279 in that case, at least they’re composed partially of edible components

[@scoutobrien3406]

Indeed, entirely reusable parts and when they break down the crews only need to be trained in how to point a shotgun.

[@justforever96]

I know thst is a joke, but it is actually true. Horses are very liable to break down, wastage among horses and mules was enormous, even without combat.

[@Rubashow]

"The crew didn't know what they were doing and nobody seemed to work together" So like World of Tanks, then?

[@lazarmarkovic9466]

Nevertheless, I played that game for 4 years and I still play it (5 years in total) and only 1 out of 15 players knows how to use tactics

[@gittyupalice96]

@@lazarmarkovic9466 Sounds like the teams I get all the time. Even when I do very very poorly, and lose the battle... I check the stats at the end and see I was the number 1 player on my team, and just shake my head in amazement that 14 people did worse than my terrible game lol.

[@rc59191]

Same in War Thunder lol but at least War Thunders more fun.

[@SpecialJess2]

@Carnivorus you clearly don't understand how the camo and sight mechanics works I recommend playing light tanks so you can figure them out and show you why they exist

[@yanuchiuchihaanimegamesand3907]

Imagine having a good location. Imagine doing the "peek and shoot". Then imagine a "teammate" blocking you from going back in cover and you die as a result.

[@timberry4709]

The best explanation of bureaucratic position papers I ever heard: "The authors may not have necessarily believed what they wrote, but, they certainly believed they had to say it."

[@MikaelKKarlsson]

The commissar wants to gauge the revolutionary integrity of your track tension.

[@dmg4415]

Like todays military gender study doctrine in Swedish Defence Forces.

[@Exospray]

wait about 4 years he'll probadly be doing a look at late war/post war armoured doctrines

[@KuK137]

@@dmg4415 Let me guess, another fox lies/4chan drone? Funny that, now that modern military force no longer consists of teenaged males exclusively, you need to figure out what the needs and problems of new soldiers are (like bulletproof vests made for males being terrible at fitting/protecting female soldiers and police officers). You behave like these WW1 morons who saw trench warfare and were all "cavalry and bayonet charges are still king, look at these idiots making military tank and airplane study doctrine"...

[@davidbrennan660]

There would have been a norm to follow within Scientific Marxist Leninism you can be sure.

[@G-Mastah-Fash]

@@KuK137 Women in front line combat are already a stupid decision. So the armor vests shouldn't be a problem at all.

[@robot-he6nq]

“I seem to be running out of apple juice” what a plot twist

[@theluftwaffle1]

"Why is the apple juice always gone"

[@julemandenudengaver4580]

"apple juice"

[@davidbrennan660]

Following the Soviet model the Chieftain had his Rear Services Directorate arrested for unSoviet ( Counterrevolutionary) behaviour.

[@draco84oz]

I was kinda expecting him to keel over completely after the farewell...

[@LittleJohnAB1]

Oh bugger the glass is empty.....

[@Ciborium]

"Revolutionary zeal has a shorter range than a Gewehr 98 firing a 7.92 mm round." LOL!

[@flipvdfluitketel867]

Imagine if firing 7.92 Mauser

[@sheogoraththemadgod9876]

@@flipvdfluitketel867 imagine demilling a transferrable MG-42/45 or StG-44/45

[@harvesterofsorrow4930]

@@flipvdfluitketel867 That's the joke. 7.62 is a little small to engage rifling or form enough of a seal to keep gas behind it. You'd be lucky if the bullet left the barrel. 7.92 Mauser, being the correct ammo for a post-1903 Gewehr 98, could likely go a wee bit further.

[@sheogoraththemadgod9876]

@@harvesterofsorrow4930 Hi

[@maotisjan]

Imagine what would happen if "Revolutionary Zeal" was put against an Artillery Shell

[@jarink1]

Budyonny may have had his failings as a commander and military theorist, but he had one hell of an impressive mustache.

[@SinOfAugust]

Jim Rinkenberger - There’s a glorious quote about him, describing him as: “a man with moustache bigger than his brain”

[@TheArklyte]

@@SinOfAugust have you described french government of the time?0_o

[@davidbrennan660]

He suffered from Stalin liking him....... (silent scream)

[@jangrosek4334]

@@SinOfAugust Find a photo of the white general Konstantin Konstantinovich Mamontov. This is a really cool mustache.

[@vanhovemare]

@Jimmy De'Souza man, irritating, this anti French propaganda pushed as fact. Are you French / a historian, or just have an axe to grind? The French mutinies in WW1 were mostly because the officers used them as cannon fodder and they were fed up with that.

[@d33b33]

Look at that apple juice hull-down behind the crest of the Abrams.

[@Masada1911]

That’s tactics for you

[@davidbrennan660]

Standard Tanker defensive doctrine.

[@Masada1911]

Ability Damage That is absolutely not a leopard

[@Masada1911]

Ability Damage its all good brother. And yeah seeing Abrams in anything but tan has been relatively rare the last few decades

[@NodDisciple1]

@@Masada1911 I would like to learn some Eastern Bloc Tanker Tactics tbh. Since they focus so much on mass formation movement instead of running until you can find an improvised bern and park hull down behind it to take some shots.

[@sadwingsraging3044]

"I can only imagine the terror that an infantryman would feel holding on for dear life to a BT-2 as it careened through the enemies lines with machine guns and anti tank guns shooting at it." "Presumably casualties were expected..... Cheers!" Nicholas Moran 2020 I would pay good money for a BT-2 shirt with this quote on it... As a matter of fact just transcribe everything from 36:24 to 37:05 on the back with a nice picture of the BT-2 tank and assembled infantry on their glorious charge supported by the God of war doing their part to 'help' them through the front lines. Chief, this entire part of your video is a true masterpiece. Well done!

[@stevepirie8130]

SadWings Raging absolutely terrifying I’d suspect without any enemy action.

[@nanorider426]

@Chan Kideoke Lighten up. Which purge did you want to be in?

[@SergeantSarge]

No matter how bad things may be in reality, your cheery “Greetings all!” never fails to make things a little bit better.

[@danielaramburo7648]

Sounds similar to gutten tag, German for good morning.

[@rastislavstanik]

@@danielaramburo7648 you mean guten morgen?

[@Hebdomad7]

Gutten tag = good day Gutten Morgan = good morning

[@lukerichardson9301]

"The range of revolutionary zeal proved to be quite a bit shorter than the gewehr acht-und-neunzig" Damn. Just damn.

[@TovarishTony]

Interesting history on how a huge mess the Red Army during the interwar period especially the internal struggles in the Red Army. I hope this will get a sequel on how the Soviet doctrine got changed in WWII from Barbarossa onwards especially on how the Soviets look at tanks when they decided to focus on medium tanks, heavy tanks and SPGs especially after the experience in Kursk with them being the receiving end of Tigers, Panthers and Ferdinands. Hopefully Chief would also tackle how Zhukov, Rokossovsky, Konev and other generals took the spotlight from the likes of Voroshilov and Budyonny and how they changed the attitude of the Soviets towards tanks and other vehicles.

[@ImmortalSugimoto792]

Since this video goes further than just the history of Soviet tank doctrine, I think you’ve significantly overlooked the influence of Marshall Shaposhnikov. He was a former Czarist officer but gained Stalin’s trust due to his lack of involvement in politics. His work “Mozg Armii” was influential in developing Soviet doctrine on total war and he laid much of the frame work that allowed the Red Army to have a lot of its success. He also had an eye for talent and groomed his protégée Vasilevsky (who’s career was helped in no small part by the purges) to secede him.

[@thethirdman225]

Don't forget Brusilov. Just saying.

[@Goran1138]

@@thethirdman225 Around 42% of the Red Army officers at the end of the Civil War was former officers of the Imperial army. Some joined from the start of the revolution, some joined later. Most ironical example was general Slaschev, who succesfully defended Crymea against Red Army literally under drugs, but later he become dissapointed by White movement (because they are screamed about patriotism, but in reality rhey are was just a puppets of Antanta), and blamed himself, because his actions in Crymea become one of the reasons of the defeat in Soviet-Polish war (Red army was forced to split their armies because Whites started huge raids from Crimea on the South front), and joined Red Army. So, it is was nothing strange in fact of the former imperial officers in army

[@thethirdman225]

@@Goran1138 Interesting information.

[@jakublulek3261]

Shaposhnikov is generally not very know, not in a small part because propaganda omitted his achievements.

[@jerryx3253]

@@jakublulek3261 He’s literally the chief of staff of the Red Army during the outbreak of the war.(retired due to severe bad health)

[@Wladislav]

Wish I had school teachers who could make classes as entertaining, yet informative as this. Cherish your teachers, everyone. It's an unbelievably important profession.

[@DeePsix501]

Brilliant work sir! Thank you! I love this cooperation between you and TimeGhost.

[@Mr_Torgue]

I love the way he explains things. I hope I can teach history as exciting and engaging as he does someday.

[@JagerLange]

WWII Channel either didn't promote this episode enough or I've been asleep for a week - I'm only just now getting round to watching this and I had not idea (apart from maybe the thumbnail) that this was another collab video. I was just thinking the other night about how much of a shame it is that there aren't more collabs with TimeGhost and the history-channel greats, so I'm very glad that Chieftain is still involved.

[@patrikcath1025]

I love how every time someone actually predicts something correctly, they're labeled an enemy of the state, insane, or anything along those lines

[@looinrims]

Smart people by definition are a minority and scary to dumb people

[@whyme943]

Can't wait for the one on American tank development in... Half a year? 2 years for Torch?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Year and a bit. But, yes, Torch.

[@deezboyeed6764]

I've been waiting for this, with tank fest cancelled i was dissapointed. Its people like you and the two David's at the tank museum that have motivated me to push my self further. I'm going to uni this year wish me luck yall.

[@dongiovanni4331]

Good luck. Show up to class, and ask the profs/TAs if you dont get something. Take advantage of uni services, and you wont end up like me.

[@deezboyeed6764]

@@dongiovanni4331 I full well intend too, my teachers seem really nice from what I've seen and with how much I'm paying im gonna use it! Thanks for the advice dude. (ps no sarcasm even if it sounds like it)

[@sadwingsraging3044]

Just steer clear of the Marxist revolutionary types that seem to collect around such places.

[@Vezerai]

I am so incredibly impressed by your ability to talk in such a structured and point driven manner for so very long without a single cut or break. Truly amazing! Great content as always too!

[@rastislavstanik]

there are many cuts you just don't see them..but I agree he is good

[@breembo]

Chieftan, can you do a video on the technical developments of half tracks, why they are a dead end, etc. How heavy could you reasonably make a half track?

[@xerxeskingofking]

i believe Bernard of military history visualised already did a video or two about them, if you look for them.

[@keithjennings6187]

Here's a good video on half tracks from Bernard kzbin.info/www/bejne/eH7GmqmQhdmhedk

[@stevepirie8130]

I’ll not say anything about the halftrack and why they faded away as an idea but weight is easier to answer. How much weight can your Divisional trains carry on the cars? What weight can your bridging equipment take? What’s the weight capacity of your nation’s rail and road bridges? If there is a requirement for being air-portable what dimensions and weight can your planes carry? What weight can your armoured recovery vehicles deal with? Etc.

[@ScottKenny1978]

@@lostalone9320 it also helped that the Jeep had demonstrated that it was possible for a wheeled vehicle to have comparable off road performance to a tracked vehicle.

[@destroyerarmor2846]

Kettenkrad is still a viable vehicle in an apocalypse wasteland

[@redbasher636]

May be my last youtube video I ever watch. A good man to end it all on.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Quitting for more challenging pastimes?

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

Suicide?

[@totallyaploy1824]

Cancer?

[@damianbisha6712]

He alive, I checked on his comments on other videos

[@redbasher636]

@@damianbisha6712 I am indeed. That was a very bad day in my life.

[@dwavenminer]

*New Chieftain video* Sweet *Video is over an hour long* AWESOME!!!

[@Mrobertnoel]

I got my "that car offends me, remove it!" shirt! Love it!

[@revoltaiignoto3881]

"The Chieftan dissing the Red Army for an Hour" The video.

[@thethirdman225]

Chieftain broadcasting for an American audience.

[@VunderGuy]

@@thethirdman225 The correct audience, pleb.

[@thethirdman225]

@@VunderGuy The sun is setting on the American century.

[@egoalter1276]

And russia has once again proven itself to be a paper bear. Climb back under your rock.

[@revoltaiignoto3881]

@@VunderGuy >"pleb" No opinion

[@AmazingAce]

12:47 OMG my colorization made it into a Chieftain video! Awesome!!!!

[@mykolatkachuk7770]

i thought these series would never come back thank you!

[@vernunfta.d.6361]

T-19 and Vickers 6-ton -- it is not about superiority. Its all about time: when last of 15 Vickers` came to SU, Bolshevik factory was trying to bring out T-19 for trials. Anyway, there was 4 types of light tanks, that could possibly be the "main": T-20, T-19, T-23 and pre-serial T-26. Decision in favor of T-26 was made because it was only finished and reliable type of construction, the others recquired more additional work. In such conditions there was no time to build our tanks -- some war could happend in any moment. T-35 is a unique piece of machinery, because there was not so many such things with same tactical tasks at the time. From `29 to 31` mechanization branch could not create even a conception of such a tank. There was warious projects: for example, 43-ton with two 76-mm guns 360`firing angle. Even Triandafillov poorly represented this type of tank, so in his project of tank system heavy tank looks like an absolutely apocalypse tool. But in `33 T-35 was acceptable Sorry for my probably bad english

[@looinrims]

It was about cost, 96k R isn’t as good as 42k R

[@terryrasmussen6409]

Thanks!

[@alanch90]

At last! I was looking forward for this one!

[@stevebarrett9357]

I have been waiting for this talk. A most amazing, excellent, and informative video. Thank you very much.

[@podemosurss8316]

28:46 At the same time he included armour units within his cavalry, so it was more like "I wanted these tanks for myself"...

[@davidolie8392]

I had to watch this over three sessions because it was just so entertaining. Kudos!

[@commissarcactus1513]

I love all of these doctrine videos. Can't wait for the next one!

[@Idaho-Cowboy]

Nice job! Lots of detail and you still kept it engaging and fun.

[@Snoggy_1_2]

"Yes it was never full semi-automatic" He went there, 47:56

[@GenMaj_Knight]

Well it makes sense lul

[@sceligator]

I'm a die hard lefty, but "it turns out revolutionary zeal has a shorter range than a Gewehr 98" gave me a good chuckle. Great video as always!

[@clothar23]

Meh seems revolutionary zeal managed to overcome German rifles eventually..20 million corpses later anyway.

[@stevewhite3424]

@@clothar23 I know this is late but reading of history of the Eastern front makes it clear that love of the motherland was by far the driving force and not revolutionary zeal. The Russian army couldn't have given a damn whether they converted the Germans or the Poles or any of the other countries they absorbed after the war.

[@dejandradex9341]

Is that t-28 on thumbnail

[@deepspacewanderer9897]

Looks like it, judging by the 2 mg-turrets on the front of the tank

[@Function.displayName]

Yes

[@SinOfAugust]

yep

[@thomasellysonting3554]

And all this roundabout doctrinal development is why the Soviets ultimately ended up pretty much focusing on simplified battlefield operations. A simple battle plan carried out well is better than facing all the arguments and political intrigue back in HQ!

[@Betrix5060]

That and the fiasco that was Finland. Originally it was just "concentrate our forces in Leningrad and steamroller on to Helsinki", but Stalin didn't want something so banal after what Hitler had gotten up to in Poland. So a far more complicated plan was devised and it went horribly. When the Soviets finally won it was basically because they reverted to the original plan of Helsinki steamroller.

[@campgiant2392]

Great information and presentation - thank you! One question though: Where those olives or cold stones in the apple juice?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

stones.

[@razorboy251]

Great video. I want to add one caveat: Western historians often assume that "purged" means shot. In reality, although the purges of the military were horrendous, almost 70% of the commanders purged in 1937-38 were back by 1941 on in 1941. One of the famous names that stands out is Rokossovsky who was purged in 1937, reinstated before the German invasion, and finished the war having done quite well for himself. Did the purges affect the morale of the military and stymie some potential reforms and developments? Absolutely, but it bears repeating that purged did not mean permanently gone. Another common misconception by Western historians (not you, at least not in this video as far as I can tell) is the overstating of Tukhachevsky's "military genius". In reality Tukhachevsky was a very junior officer, promoted very quickly because of the high death rate of Red Army officers in the Civil War, and distinguished himself primarily in two ways: the crushing of the Tambov rebellion, and the crushing of the Kronstadt rebellion. He was hardly a military genius and hero on the battlefield; poison gassing barely armed peasant mobs and taking hostage the families of mutinous sailors and then shooting them hardly constitute amazing battlefield successes. The failure of the Polish campaign cannot be laid alone at Stalin and Budyonny's feet either; Tukhachevsky ran out of reserves and overextended too quickly. Certainly he was one of the more avid reformers in the Red Army, but as you correctly point out some of his ideas were.... out there... Not that I am in the habit of agreeing with Stalin, but Tukhachevsky's theories and proposals really did belong in the realm of science fiction. Tukhachevsky's purge is over too overstated as the reason for the Red Army's poor performance in Finland and in 1941 against the Germans.

[@stephanl1983]

Yes, but also many Officers of the rank of Colonel or higher were executed, and in 1941 young Officers, who would be in command of a Company or Battalion, now were in command of a Regiment or a Brigade. They had no experience in leading such a big unit, or the use of combined weapons. Even coordinating such a big force was a problem. Imagine you are a Captain in charge of a Rifle Company, you can see your Platoons and give direct orders to your Platoon Commanders. Even when you are a Major or a Lieutenant Colonel, you can see your Companies with a binocular, and give orders to your Officers . When you are in charge of a Regiment, or a Brigade, you can't see your Battalions or Regiments, you get your orders via phone, radio or a courier, and have to set their movements on a map. And it need some time to give an order to one of your smaller units, so you have to imagine, how does the enemy react to your current movement, and you must give an order to the reaction your enemy could show! You must read out of your reports, where could I break through the enemy positions, and make your decision, which Battalion or Regiment should get the most support of reinforcements, Artillery and so on, to reach your target. For this reason Officers are educated at Staff Colleges.

[@DrLoverLover]

Cool opinion bro

[@sparkyfromel]

Tukhachevsky was no military genius , any commander which get turned deserve what he get as for Rokosovsky , he was not simply purged , he was tortured , teeth and ribs broken , but never confessed anything , when brought to court to be condemned and shot , he pointed out that one of his accomplice had died many years before , the judge trew , the case out . Rokosovsky ,wrote in his memoir that he was "resting" a few weeks later when an NKVD officer took him from his home , put him in a train to Moscow , no explanation given . Somewhat apprehensive and much to his surprise he was taken to the Kremlin where Stalin with a big smile asked "but where have you been " he knew perfectly well where Rokosovsky had been but gave him a division to command , later becoming one of his favorite commander

[@tamlandipper29]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'not being shot' does also cover extended torture, 'losing' your nails, getting pneumonia and vitamin deficiency in a camp, being disowned by your family...

[@RotgerValdes]

@@stephanl1983 Besides purges there was operation "Spring" in 1931 when the former imperial officers were removed from the Red Army. And there was also the tremendous increase of the Red Army itself - from 600 thousands in 1932 to 5 millions in 1941. The Nazis also had problem with the lack of officers, but the annexation of Austria (and then Czechoslovakia) helped a lot with military supplies and the stuff. Besides the Germans recieved the military experience gradually - from Poland to France.

[@luckiller019]

>the_Chiefteain explaining interwar Soviet armour doctrine >take a deeo sip of apple juice "It all had started with Hegel"

[@NodDisciple1]

Who? Is this a running joke?

[@thepatrioticpopulist768]

@@NodDisciple1 a German philosopher that many ideologies trace their lineage through. Most notably communism and fascism.

[@Canhistoryismylife]

The Patriotic Populist fascist “ideology” as such owes more to a bastardization of Nietzsche. Overall fascist “ideology” doesn’t have a deep philosophical tradition in the same way that Marxism does.

[@docmike8601]

Don't know how I missed this work of art when it first came out, but I would offer that infantry riding tanks careening through an enemy line was just an early form of ERA...

[@alibizzle2010]

I remember reading recently in The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact With Stalin, 1939-1941 by Roger Moorhouse about a dinner in with Stalin and his generals. One got up and gave a speech advocating infantry over armour, following brief applause Stalin interjected to call him and idiot and state that of course a modern military needed the most modern military equipment and tactics

[@clothar23]

@@lostalone9320 The man did turn a backward and illiterate peasant population into a industrial nation that bitch slapped Hitler so heard Germans are still afraid of Russia. Still a monster though.

[@jidk6565]

@@clothar23 I mean How many Russians died in ww2? I feel like both parties are terrifying

[@Pechenegus]

@@jidk6565 28 millions, 22 is civilians.

[@clothar23]

@silakka pihvi The USSR still won the Winter War. I mean it's like the Finns think killing a few Russians mattered to the USSR. Dead soldiers meant very little to the Soviets , only victory mattered.

[@Apodeipnon]

@@clothar23 then the finns got help from the Nazis and got beaten again. perhaps a small nation like Finland needs to make up for it's size with an inflated sense of self importance.

[@maxpower3990]

Although rank amateurs jumped up quickly because not revolutionary zeal did quite well in 19th century France. They had some very good victories over professional officers of noble rank.

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

Probably because croniism in that age ensured the officer cadres were incompetent.

[@mikefay5698]

@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Normal in Semi Feudal Military. Commissions could be purchased by Wealthy Aristocrats in all 19th Century European Armies except Revolutionary France.

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

@@mikefay5698 Thats what I was alluding to. The Armée Natiinal was merit based.

[@plkngtun]

Hey Chieftain - Loving your videoes and way of presenting! Would you consider a video about the french armored doctrine from early 20th century until the conclusion of the cold war? I ain´t even french, I am just dying to learn more about french armored doctrine during the Cold War, and why it seemingly was such a big shift from the (pre) WW2 doctrine.

[@nathanokun8801]

This talk is the kind that a good school would like to be able to give its students. Interesting, informative, and entertaining, all at the same time. BRAVO!!!

[@TheSunchaster]

11:25 - Михаил Николаевич Тухачевский and Александр Ильич Егоров. Yep, they were executed.

[@pxrays547]

Thank you for the video. Regardless of the branch, peace time tactical and equipment development is always interesting when the pressures of profit/ financial gain, politics, career self-interests, opponent behavior assumptions, etc. override the wartime immediacy of blood and lose and you shine some light on this perspective.

[@podemosurss8316]

1:15 In Soviet WW2 field manuals there was a comparison between Clausewitz and Marx saying that Clausewitz's theory had supposed such a change of though as Marx had in political science. Really.

[@brettknoss486]

The success of the USSR, was during NEP, and the liberal wing, before Stalin took advantage of this faction to go full collectivist. In millitary doctrine, it can be succeful under the right conditions. Sherman's March, and the 40 acres snd a mule plan ix a good example. It would have been better if Johnson hadn't vetoed the recognition of such land afterwars, but that is another matter.

[@podemosurss8316]

@@brettknoss486 Not really, those field manuals were from when "Stalin went full collectivist"...

[@AwesomeFolds]

Love your content, but some timestamps would be wonderful for these sort of long-form style videos

[@jancoil4886]

Budienny does get criticism. He loved the cavalry, had an impressive mustache and was brave as they come. Soviet Generals, as a group, did not do so well in the early months of Barbarosa. I have read that Budienny did better than most. It can't be denied that while he survived the Purges and Stalin, no small achievement, men like him were on the way out and the new men, Zhukov, Koniev etc..., were the rising stars.

[@yuyuyu25]

He largely survived the purges because he was best buds with Stalin.

[@petriew2018]

one doesn't survive a stalinist purge because of merit, so i'm not entirely sure it's much of an achievement.

[@MothaLuva]

6:14 …which is also astonishing considering the fact, that of the 7.92 by 57 only the 7.92 part flew away while the „by 57“ thingy usually stayed in the Karabiner 98. At least a bit longer.

[@paulclarke1207]

I can't decide whether my favourite part of this video is The Chieftain's "apple juice" , or Jason Isaacs' cameo.

[@RexKarrs]

1:04:23 "Enter then, stage right, Jason Isaacs!" He looks more Zhukov than Zhukov. Great choice.

[@mettahuttravels3183]

Thank you sir. Very interesting indeed & just a touch of Dave Allen there as well.😂🥃

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Dave Allen? There’s a name I haven’t heard in a while.

[@markwilliams2620]

I still play the intro theme now and again.

[@tokinsloff312]

Well done, that commenter. Guess what 2 words are going to be my next search. :)

[@mettahuttravels3183]

The_Chieftain One of my favourite comedians 🙏🏻❤️

[@Luda3x]

happy to see my two favorite historians on KZbin working together

[@WatcherMovie008]

As once person said it, Russia's history in a nutshell: *And then it got worse*

[@StaffordMagnus]

That person would be Drach!

[@alfa99121]

One of the worst and most annoying stereotypes about Russian history.

[@edward9674]

To tsar, to red fascist dictator to modern oligarch.

[@TheSunchaster]

After collapse of the USSR too.

[@TheArklyte]

@@TheSunchaster how dare you imply that USSR wasn't all bad and nowadays it somehow didn't get better under democratic™ government with free market™ economy?! I should have used commas instead of ™ to signify sarcasm about this kleptocratic dictatorial oligarchy, but then I remembered that those are actually dead for good on this planet at least since Eisenhover's presidency. So ™ to signify their use as marketable semireligious icons instead:(

[@markhonerbaum5789]

An encyclopedia of tank information an a great into the details of which I'm appreciative and I thank you.

[@rexfrommn3316]

An interesting video in many respects. Soviet armored corps may have been a sound idea on paper for Tukhachevsky's "Deep Battle" concept. But serious Soviet logistical shortcomings such as a lack of trucks to support the tanks in battle to resupply them made large scale independent maneuvers of tanks in large units difficult. Khalkin Gol was actually more of a combined arms counterattack using a classic double envelopment against the Japanese infantry divisions on the Mongolian frontier. We need to look at the Zhukov/Timoshenko reforms coming out of the 1939-40 Finnish War. Also these military reforms were accellerated by the time of Operation Barbarossa. 1. Armored corps were reduced in size to armored brigades. These armored brigades had about 90 tanks with 3400 soldiers with a mixture of light tanks and medium heavy tanks. These armored brigades were attached to Soviet rifle divisions in modular fashion. This process never was completed by the time of the June 22, 1941 German invasion. 2. Soviet training for the infantry was substanitally improved. This training including the urgent reexamination for the need for submachine guns in large numbers in every Soviet rifle company. The Finnish Suomi submachine gun was an excellent in close quarters battle. The combination of infantry assault groups armed entirely with submachine guns supported by tanks became a staple of Soviet tactics in WW2. 3. Soviet rifle divisions were reduced in size from 14,000 men down to 10,000 men. The heavy artillery was stripped away and reorganized into artillery divisions, especially artillery of 152mm and higher caliber. The Soviet rifle divisions received far more antitank guns, antitank rifle units, 82mm battalion and 120mm regimental mortars/a couple regimental 76.2 guns with more 76.2mm field guns with some 122mm howitzers remaining in the divisions. These streamlined rifle divisions were easier for inexperienced officers to command. The artillery divisions and later artillery corps were centrally managed with much staff time required for breakthrough barrages. The Soviets sometimes put artillery corps close together on breakthrough fronts with 300 guns per kilometer to pulverize enemy positions. 4. The Soviets organized enormous numbers of militia brigades of about 3400-3600 men. These infantry brigades increasing had more submachine guns platoons in every rifle company and a submachine gun company at the brigade level. Many of these infantry/militia brigades were given more submachine guns as the war progressed including DP light machine guns, three antitank rifles and a heavy weapons section in each rifle company with Maxim machine guns and some 50mm mortars. Many of these infantry brigades were turned into rifle divisions later on in the war. Some of these rifle brigades achieved Guards status. 5. Soviet armored training with repair, mechanical maintenance, driver training and gunnery training were substantially improved after 1941. Soviet tank crews got a whole lot better at their jobs in 1942. The Zhukov-Timoshenko military reforms greatly improved Soviet battlefield performance. General Chuikov's submachine gun armed 80 to 100 man teams with a few antitank rifles, light machine guns and heavy machine guns and sappers were replicated for assault groups in the tank rider battalions. These became the assault groups for rifle divisions.

[@emiliodesalvo7024]

What about the Soviet Armour Doctrine, 1941-1991? Are we getting another video on that? Or did I miss it?

[@julmdamaslefttoe3559]

been waiting for this for a while.

[@isthatrubble]

I don't think he's doing any post war videos in this series, unless he's mentioned it elsewhere? since it's a collaboration with a WW2 channel? I think these are supposed to just be primers on where each country started the war at with regards to tanks.

[@F1ghteR41]

24:54 Yuri Pasholok, however, argues the opposite. His point of view is that German technological contribution during the existence of Kama/TEKO school was massive, dwarfing any practical experience Germans themselves gained. Sights, coaxial mountings, T-28 suspension, welded hulls, radios - you name it. Even the famous Soviet tank helmets descended from the designs the German trainees in the school were equipped with. And that's not to mention the number of influential designers and commanders who were trained by Germans, chief among them A. Ginsburg. 33:14 At such a cadre shortage barely anyone got shot. Plenty of talented designers were imprisoned, however. 33:38 As far as I remember, machinegun BTs were somewhat of an improvised solution to the shortage of 37-mm cannons. 40:20 It seems that he was for the most part correct. 41:31 Arseny Vedenin here have already commented on the tendency to overestimate the political side of Soviet military decision-making, but I'm going to point out once again that with the shortage of tanks one has to compesate for them with any resources at hand, and infantry is the most obvious solution. 41:44 Indeed it was, especially if one is to look into Fuller's pro-Fascist political affiliations. 46:52 It wasn't that good of a 76-mm cannon, though. 49:29 The history of the early Soviet APCs is quite complicated and not fully understood yet. T-26 chassis were intended for converting into self-propelled guns, however, which might be the reason why other APC designs were prioritised in the immediate pre-war years.

[@looinrims]

Hm, wouldn’t be too shocking as the Russian government have tried to hide all their cooperation with Germany prior to the war

[@40beretta1]

Your research is impeccable...Chieftain. do you have an inside the hatch: Tiger I

[@comrademcsalty7676]

Except everything about internal soviet politic and reasons (or lack thereof in this video) for purging (incidentally only fatal in a small minority of cases) is complete and utter rubbish. But hey never say no to free propaganda (i guess).

[@13jhow]

@@comrademcsalty7676 Living up to your name, I see.

[@Ivan_I99999]

"There's one thing tanks can't do; feed your men! You can eat a horse but you can't eat a tank!" ~Budyonny, Probably

[@GIGroundNPound]

Chief, your videos are just so damned awesome sir! Thank you for your work! o7 [salute]

[@JohnRodriguesPhotographer]

While I haven't done the pure research you have obviously done, I have done a lot of reading since about 1970. I will agree the convoluted history of the interwar years of Russia makes my head spin. Bravo in the apple juice. I hope it is Kraken good and not a chase after a Wild Turkey.

[@donaldtwiss8403]

Great show - I see the 11ACR sheet. we you part of the 11 ACR Guard round out unit at FT Irwin. I work with the unit in 1997-20 as part Force on force rotation (OPFOR) and late when I was a OC when the 11th was deployed and Guard filled in (2006-07).

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Correct unit, but I joined it in 2008 or so.

[@Paveway-chan]

Friends don’t let friends play the ”take a drink every time the Soviets purge someone” game.

[@davidbrennan660]

It is a Russian game, there is no problem that cannot be cured by the state expenditure of small arms ammunition.

[@RussoCatSly]

Amazingly detailed video! Well done.

[@Blancinnoir]

My favorite take from this is: cavalry isn't very prone to mechanical breakdowns.

[@dropdead234]

But, can your horse take multiple hits from a .50 cal?

[@HanSolo__]

And as long as there is some grass around, it will not run out of fuel. Mechanical - not much. Still can get horse colic or get lame. But there is something more dangerous. Your tank or any IFV can not be stupid, lazy, nor crazy...

[@madzen112]

Btw, your video is excellent, obviously deep knowledge on a complex subject, very well presented. Would you mind leaving at least a few notes on your sources for this? Mainly to show the paths you took in order to make this video, not to check on your work, it speaks for itself.

[@stamfordly6463]

Get yourself a bottle of Calvados, after all it's made from apples (well, mostly apples).

[@ryebedandbreakfast]

Could you post your sources and reading list as for the other doctrine videos, thank you very much for making them- very interesting!

[@Kalumbatsch]

7:06 bore evacuation

[@le_floofy_sniper_ducko]

lol nice one

[@PatFarrellKTM]

Wonderful video. Clearly the result of a ton of work. Well done

[@TheSunchaster]

6:49 - "военспецы" ("военные специалисты"). It`s Lenin`s wording. ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Военспец

[@markholm6955]

A bit off topic for this video - but still about a AFV - and one that gave the Red Army a bit of trouble - any chance you will be visiting drivetanks - so you can do a video on their new Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. D?

[@spazbauer]

I shall be the first! And i say good job! Also! Drinking game! Take a drink when the soviets screw up!

[@Bird_Dog00]

There don't seem to be many views (for me, the counter is at 21). Might have something to do with the lack of notification and the video not showing up under new uploads on the channel. YT's arcane and inscrutable algorythms being at it again, I guess...

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I just haven't released it yet.

[@Bird_Dog00]

@@TheChieftainsHatch lol wut?! How come that I can watch it then?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

You came across the link, somehow. Maybe through the doctrine videos playlist.

[@Bird_Dog00]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Yea, I found it in the doctrine playlist, as this is where I expected it to be. Since your updated schedule pointed to some time yesterday, I went looking and found it there, assuming that it was an error in YT's software why it hadn't shown up under new uploads.

[@samiamrg7]

1:00:17 Wait, why would they give the tanks LESS infantry attached to them if their doctrine was that tanks are meant to support infantry and also are more vulnerable without infantry escort?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

They would attach the tank units to support infantry units. A bit like the French armored divisions.

[@UkrainianPaulie]

Was bored. Now I'm not. Thanks Chief. Need a larger glass lol.

[@m60a3tts2]

Chieftain mentioned at the end that the Soviets formed their eight mechanized corps. What he didn't mentioned was that subsequently, and as the war grew closer, it was decided if eight mechanized corps were good, twenty eight would be better. One can only imagine the added issues that were created in the course of trying to pull this all together.

[@BufusTurbo92]

Soviet doctrine: *exists* Chieftain's liver: *explodes*

[@rayjon237]

He is Irish, they have genetics on their side.. . That is just a start.

[@liqurmeup]

A shout out from an old trooper of 1221 Lemma Troop Yerington, NV 2008-2013. I was watching a video explaining the realism in the film Fury and the editor quoted you. You ran L troop well. Sad busnses that it was run into the ground and shut down years latter. I had to come over and say hi. Hope all is well.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Was it? I thought it got transferred to Engineers? What was the fury video?

[@liqurmeup]

It was somthing I heard in passing years ago. I dont know it's current state. Just saying hi and thank you, I quite enjoyed my service there.

[@seanchan7167]

*sees Darjeeling behind Cheiftian* SO THAT IS HIS WAIFU

[@looinrims]

That’s slightly concerning to see an Irishman with Darjeeling considering Everything

[@tommyestridge9301]

Excellent presentation, I can only imagine the hundreds of hours it must have taken you to research and put this together.

[@chexquest87]

Fully semiautomatic! Sadly my AR is only standard semiautomatic 🥺

[@tophatminion.7558]

But it still has the chainsaw attachment right.

[@ernstschmidt4725]

quarter automatic was a common thing in big guns, it closes automatically when a shell is pushed in and extracts the case after fired. no clue how loaders don't snap their fingers on those things.

[@DeliveryMcGee]

​@@ernstschmidt4725 I''d word it as "ejects the case and locks open, closes on loading", but semantics. I would assume loaders that weren't capable were weeded out fairly early in training. AFAIK, you open-palm slap the cartridge in with a glancing blow and the breeckblock kisses your wrist if you're slow or too straight-on with the push. If you do it wrong, well ... fingats are lost. That's how the Rheinmetall 120mm works, innit? So @The Chieftain knows it well.

[@DeliveryMcGee]

@@tophatminion.7558 I'm kinda surprised I haven't seen a picture of a bigass logger chainsaw (4-foot bar, basically a small motorcycle engine) speed-taped to the muzzle of a tank gun.

[@eezaak21]

So how many refills did you go through while filming this? Interesting stuff regardless.

[@TheJollyRapscallion]

07:12 "Was a counter revolutionary and would be shot" - Russian history for the next 40 years pretty much summed up.

[@CallanElliott]

I'm loving this already.

[@mitchlol5710]

Listening to this while playing War Thunder

[@bankerduck4925]

This is a VERY good video. Thank you Nicholas!

[@crichtonbruce4329]

Greetings sir. I very much enjoy your channel, I recently re-watched your lecture on the Sherman and was struck again by the quality of your research and presentation. A question if I may... Why did Soviet tank design seem to have had so little influence on the British or US?? The Soviets had the highly successful T34-85 and the IS and KV heavys , while the British especially seem to have wasted much time and resources on inadequate types.

[@F1ghteR41]

54:54 Voroshilov (by the way, the third syllable of his surname is stressed) wasn't that incorrect, though - one has to give tanks a lot of mobile firepower and infantry in order to cope with the tasks of efficient breakthroughs and deep penetrations. Soviet artillery at that time was poorly motorized and barely mobile, and even to this day no post-Soviet military achieved full mechanisation of it. So, you have to deal with any problem at hand with towed artillery, and slow and horse-drawn at that. You cannot rely on railway artillery to the same degree as the French, since your railway density is much lower, and the existing network would be overloaded with supplies in the rear and armoured train combat at the frontline (remember, those were seen as one of the important breakthrough assets as well). Thus any tanks you have would be lacking proper infantry and artillery support if they were to attempt a deep penetration, thus you're basically fighting in late-WW1 conditions. 58:48 One has to remember, however, that while all the accusations of treason were later proven false, Tukhachevsky was heavily biased in his decision-making and favoured some rather questionable inventors, which led to enormous overspending with little to no return. 1:00:01 The effects of Purges on the Soviet military performance are discussed in this video by TIK: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJ-6f6F_a76fh7M 1:02:16 His ancestor was a serf and got his nickname after the Prussian general for his martial spirit from his landlord, apparently. This nickname stuck (as they do) and became a surname. 1:06:11 Where are you getting these figures from? It's double the figures even Polish hsitorians state, and we're talking tanks and armoured cars altogether. A total of 43 tanks lost irrecoverably is the figure one might use if we were to use German system (Wehraboos, I'm pointing at you). 1:07:39 We've seen the shitshow on the WW2 channel, that's for sure, but that load of propaganda aside, Finns were put on the brink of national collapse by the spring of 1940, and, may I add, it was very unwise of the Soviet leadership to allow them to peace out only to face an invasion a year after.

[@F1ghteR41]

Also, I failed to mention here, but Spanish experience hardly made such an impact on the Soviet decision-making in regards to the tank corps disbandement, as detailed in this video by Bernhard Kast: kzbin.info/www/bejne/epWVk4qVeLOCbKs

[@danielsteger8456]

@@F1ghteR41 'video by someone else' isnt really a good source

[@F1ghteR41]

@@danielsteger8456 Herr Kast, despite all of his shortcomings, tends to research his videos on WW2 rather well, being a historian by training, having access to various Germanic archives and counting notable researches in the field among his acquaintances. Maj. Moran himself featured in several of his videos and have commented on others on this very channel.

[@scrubsrc4084]

The classic soviet doctrine of "casualties to be expected"

[@tutzdesYT]

Do really think that they were the only people with some kind of common sense around?

[@scrubsrc4084]

@@tutzdesYT should be "desired"

[@ScottKenny1978]

If you don't think casualties should be expected, you're doing your job wrong as a military leader. Your job is to expect casualties, and then do everything you can to make sure they don't happen.

[@icebluecuda1]

Excellent delivery.

[@andrewcox4386]

After the first 2 minutes I was wondering how long the "Apple juice" would last

[@kacperslowik2410]

Thank you for the video. Have you ever been in a Soviet/Russian MBT, if so what did you think of it.