Thoughts on the T-14 Armata Tiff

I throw my oar in to muddy the waters on the topic a bit more and divert into almost entirely irrelevant territory. Whilst editing this video, I have been reminded of Jack Nicholson's "can't we just get along" speech in Mars Attacks!, and Tim Curry's Wadsworth in Clue. But anyway. Why the Tank Internet World is spending so much time on this subject is beyond me.
0:00 Background
1:02 Rant asking why this is such an important argument anyway.
2:48 Appropriate responses to disagreements, and FOLLOW THE LOGIC, NOT THE CREATOR!
5:11 Did the Americans develop their own torsion bars?
6:24 The Tank Engine of Theseus
6:58 The Tank of Theseus
8:23 The T-14 breakdown on parade
9:09 Final thoughts

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

No, I didn't delete the previously pinned comment either. I'm happy to believe it was some automated KZbin thing I haven't found the report of, and you know, it's probably for the best anyway. We know what was said by both parties and we likely don't need a monument to these events ten years from now so I'm not going to go looking for it to resurrect it in any case. That would hardly let us move forward. ConeofArc has indicated he'll be issuing an apology on a forthcoming video for his being out of bounds as well in his response video, and that should put an end to it. Not least, I think folks misinterpreted a few of the previously pinned statements as being addressed at me, and not the wider webizenry. Part of the idiocy is that half my comments were directed at the audiences at large, not creators (A reverse of the above!), and have been validated through events such as an attempt at doxxing me on one creator's Discord (To their credit, the server mods banned him immediately... but what on Earth was he trying to achieve? My name is public record!), and a number of the (currently) public 3,411 comments below who apparently didn't hear what I was saying about being cult members, for one creator or another, which I am leaving up as monuments to themselves. The KZbin Spam filter has caught a bunch more which we have as a group at large been spared. As an aside, I had to google 'clout chasing', which some of the posts (Not, I would observe, the formerly pinned one, contrary to mis-interpretation) have accused me of. I'm in a position where I can walk into most any major tank museum in the world and immediately be recognized by staff (Hell, my local gun shop staff recognized me). How much more 'clout' do I need? Idiots. Anyway, back to editing my Kurassier video...

[@hzmt12]

Don't take lp or his fans seriously, the only reason he was mad is because you didn't side with him

[@cuhyotepowered1201]

I’m not a Stan for any content creator out there but the backlash was obviously inevitable. Cone outright attacked LP so you only pointing out that LP is immature made it appear that you were biased towards cone. the fact that now you only name one content creator and don’t dare to name the other also speaks about how badly this was handled. It is best if everyone can just sweep this under rug and stop talking about it.

[@No_Feelings]

All is well that ends well i guess. I hope. *God i hope this is the end of it* Edit: I love how he brought up his point of not being cult members for or against creators AGAIN and y'all still completely ignored it. Some of you are sitting here arguing with messages hours apart over the course of the past 3 days. You have too much free time.

[@michaelkarnerfors9545]

​@@hzmt12Not cool man. Not cool at all.

[@p0xus]

Deleteing LPs comment and lying about it? There goes the last of my respect for Chieftain. I unsubscribe from people that are liars. What a shame it went down this way.

[@AnimarchyHistory]

I’m sticking to aeroplanes. Tank nerds are scary.

[@jimjamauto]

haha airplane go nneeeeoooowww

[@ifureadthis_urgay]

Ong you dipped your feet on the T-14 civil war 😭😭

[@RG001100]

The comments seem hotter than his video on the troubles.

[@imbatman8040]

Lol good to see you here regardless, but where the heck is my next waifu Ship video

[@b.elzebub9252]

Maybe you should call Bismark from military aviation history a chode and the engine of the SU-57 a direct copy of the Junkers Jumo 004B-1, and then have a fight about it behind a dumpster somewhere? Might be good for both your channels?

[@specialagent1868]

I feel like the only solution is for you, Lazerpig, ConeofArc, and RedEffect to smuggle a T-14 out of Russia and take it apart on a livestream.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

A godundme to bribe the customs officials?

[@joeclaridy]

​@@TheChieftainsHatchI'd laugh if that wasn't plausible

[@Vulpinaut]

​@@TheChieftainsHatch Wouldn't be the first time the "it's a tractor" excuse has worked.

[@jimjamauto]

And then bring it to Mastermilo82's garage so he can smash more cars

[@aqui1ifer]

I’m sure the DoD would pay handsomely for such a prize

[@daiakunin]

There's only one way to truly settle this dispute: take all the arguing to the war thunder forums and keep arguing until someone from the Russian MOD leaks all the classified documents about the T-14 to definitively answer all the questions about it.

[@timbauer399]

Lol

[@karl0ssus1]

It's bizarre that we live in a world where this isn't a totally outlandish outcome

[@parazitkolol]

Honestly, the only rational way to conclude the situation. I give it a month before the files get leaked.

[@sir0herrbatka]

Perhaps that is a psyops organized by CIA :P

[@thecommenter9678]

BRILLIANT!

[@ZenizhivGreen]

Amazing, the T14 have destroyed a community without firing a single shot

[@skaldlouiscyphre2453]

T-14 stronk!

[@Edax_Royeaux]

"We were trained to turn men's minds to our will. This is Stalin's psychic legacy." - Yuri

[@Nathan-jh1ho]

Must be the new APS that implements psyops

[@pyrobytee]

T14 is Russian propaganda designed to destroy westoid communities on youtube 💪💪💪

[@Stratigoz]

@@Edax_Royeaux Nah, this is just the stupidity of our average western audience. They don't want to read and learn. They want bias. Chieftain is an oasis of logic (even if I disagree with him in some subjects) in a sea of stupidity.

[@certifiedrat863]

This gives me the vibe of your dad saying "I don't care who started it, I'm finishing it" when you had an argument with your sibling as a kid.

[@Nyx_2142]

You leave out the part where the dad in that situation is often wrong. Lol.

[@kfeltenberger]

The adult has entered the room.

[@CrayonEater255]

@@Nyx_2142He’s not wrong, he’s the most knowledgeable here

[@Saffi____]

Reminds me of that line from the film Ice Age.

[@tonyvan8688]

@@Nyx_2142he’s literally the guy which the biggest tank game company literally ask for tank facts and advice so he’s the most knowledgeable here lmao

[@rickydicknut6352]

The t14 tank has now, only successfully attacked the online historian community to great affect.

[@AimlessSavant]

It was as the tankies intended! There are no sources on purpose God damnit! They played us like a damn fiddle!

[@carval51]

historian? really?

[@p4nnus]

None of the people included are historians. Some of them try with sources and so on, but they clearly arent historians.

[@erikgranqvist3680]

I have from a very unreliable source that the T14 is powered by a 4 boiler setup stolen from the battleship Bismark. That is why the Germans paddeled around in the ship with oares.

[@old_guard2431]

Must be a tank guy. If he was a ship guy, “oares” would be “oars” and the pride of the Kriegsmarine would be rowing rather than paddling. Although, in the interest of a fair and balanced presentation, it is possible to paddle with an oar: indeed, if there are no oar locks it is preferable to no propulsion whatsoever. However, it would not be efficient.

[@justingilmore4595]

With Cardboard Era on some of their tanks it's highly likely it was also using Flintstone brakes as well

[@acedogboy8421]

@@tamamalosi cardboard and cardboard derivatives were meant to be off the table!

[@acedogboy8421]

@@tamamalosi damn that was my goto! Flex seal it is then

[@acedogboy8421]

@@tamamalosi damn that was my goto! Flex seal it is then

[@Grashan]

Well to be honest, in my humble opinion, of course without seeking to offend anyone who thinks differently to my point of view, but also by looking into this matter with a different perspective, and without being condemning of other's views, and trying to be objective, and considering all available evidence, I think that I have completely forgotten what I was going to say.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I thought you were aiming for Sir Humphrey there. Fell at the last hurdle!

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

@@tamamalosi Why would I be saying T14 is a good tank? I've not as much as seen one to form an opinion

[@Spoderman5000]

😂

[@RandomDeforge]

thats basically this video in a nutsehll

[@o_gpotterhead]

@@TheChieftainsHatchdepends on which t14 the ww2 US one might have worked but the armarta not so much

[@toasterbathboi6298]

I am here to act as an ambassador for The History Channel and say: It was aliens. Humans simply arent smart enought to put 2 V shaped engines together and make an X, the aliens did it for us

[@MajinOthinus]

Always knew Rolls Royce was a front for the secret alien invasion HQ!

[@toasterbathboi6298]

​@MajinOthinus rolls royce, BMW, Allison, pratt and whitney... ITS ALL ALIENS! learn more on tonight's special episode of ANCIENT ALIENS!

[@MajinOthinus]

@@toasterbathboi6298 I watched it, but got lost at how the Atlanteans figure into this?

[@thurin84]

but how much will rick harrison pay for it?

[@luciusvorenus9445]

The T-14 power train is the ACTUAL secret of Oak Island!

[@gallendugall8913]

I suspect the engine for the T-14 was developed by gnomes deep beneath the earth. I base this on the amount of whiskey I have consumed prior to watching this video, and I stand by my conclusion.

[@echo_9835]

I disagree entirely! The engine of the T-14 was clearly built by elves hidden in tunnels beneath the Ural Mountains. I base this off the voices in my head.

[@killergames391]

@@echo_9835 ELVES? Those pointed ear leaf lovers cant make a damn thing right, i base this off slurs my dwarven friends say

[@nick_steele9790]

Damn knife wars 😉

[@Sir_Godz]

knomes dont live deep, they are very shallow and we know this because they are dutch and ground water is no more than a few feet below the surface at any given time

[@MrWolfstar8]

Pretty clearly designed by trolls of stanglethorn vale.

[@justakerbal4340]

Here is lazerpig’s deleted comment for those who want to see it “Thank you Cheftain, thank you for wandering into a drama fest you had nothing to do with, that had already calmed down, that I specifically stated I want nothing further to do with, to state your opinion that essentially surmounts to everyone needs to just get along". I'm extremly dissapointed that this is the angle you choose, and that you opted to critque me for being unprofessional and for making a response video in a response video you yourself made about a situation to which you have no involvement with absoloutly no sense of irony. it has been three months since RedEffect made his initial video crtiquing my thoughts on the T-14 and, as I acknowlegded, I am only finally responding to this because Cone decided to jump on the bandwagon and I realized this was something I needed to address rather than ignore. Do we honestly need every KZbinr on the planet vaguely related to tanks waddling into this argument with nothing more to say than "everyone needs to calm down"? Of course not. As I've stated before we are not going to find any credable source that will state with 100% confidence that the T-14's engine is related to the German WW2 SLA 16, that we can state with any degree of confidence to be 100% factual. That kind of thing very rarly happens in history, of which you are fully aware of. Therefore in the need to be honest and truthful with my audience I have to state that I don't know for sure, but I am convinced it is related and I went over a lot of the reasons and evidence why i think that, I've been very open and I've been very honest with what I beleive, and so far no-one has yet to provide any reasonable counter which has made me doubt those beliefs. We can never honestly be sure of anything, and I've made a KZbin Career going over many things people were sure about which, on closer inspection, turn out to be questionable. But I suppose if we cultivate a culture where no-one is sure of anything and everyone is encouraged to question what is being said, then we enter an age of endless, unwinnable, debate where the only victor is the one who presents to be reasonable and asks for calm. I have a business email address listed on my channel. If you wish to get involved I would actully appreciate your input on my research which I would be more than willing to share” I foresaw this comment getting deleted a mile away considering how controversial it was lol

[@BlueSpaceRanger]

Let this comment be immortalized.

[@fulcrum2951]

Glad you saved it

[@jedispartancoolman]

My man deleted it himself I aint hearing it

[@stephennelson4954]

Looks like he deleted it and then decided to take a break from the internet.

[@socialjihad5724]

Holy fucking shit this is a dog shit comment... Ngl, cones initial response and attack on Lazerpig was out of line, but has basically been vindicated by LP's response

[@pacifist11]

This is what happens when David Fletcher retires. We need his moustache to provide guidance in these dark times.

[@HawkTheRed]

love this comment, gonna steal it and share it everywhere

[@BizzLeVrai]

No one can be mad when David is around.

[@ferdonandebull]

So say we all!

[@samadams2203]

"Well I don't know about its engine, but it's Russian, so it's probably uncomfortable to be inside."

[@harley3282]

@@samadams2203 Its uncomfortable to be in most engines, with the pistons and all.

[@JackaWilko]

Maybe this was the reason the T-14 was built after all; not to win wars, but to sow social discourse. We’ve been bamboozled.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

An auto magazine website used this brouhaha to make such a claim a few hours before I set this video live. www.autoevolution.com/news/t-14-armata-the-main-battle-tank-that-fights-wars-in-comment-sections-not-battlefields-219179.html

[@crapphone7744]

Russian disinformation.this tank was designed by Trump!!

[@TheNecromancer6666]

As a powertrain engineer, if you keep a basic engine design, without major changes int the basic concept, its the same engine family. Thats why the AVDS 1790 is still the same family, as the original AV1790, despite it changing from a naturally aspirated, aircooled Carburated Petrol to a Turbocharged Diesel, still aircooled. Thats why the W92SF in the T90M is still the same engine family as the W2 of the BT7M and T34 fame. In that special case, except for evolution in metallurgy and manufacturing technology, there was very little change, except for the addition of a Super- and Later Turbocharger. Then again, tank engines are quite long lived compared to car engines for example. A 45 year old Tank engine is still perfectly viable in modfied form, see the MTU 873 in the Leopard 2. A 45 year old car engine, is close to useless. Most new tank engines of the last years were copies of the MTU 873. The only major exception is MTUs 892 series engine.

[@TheNecromancer6666]

@@imnobody4244 your comment is appreciated!

[@DanielWW2]

I imagine there also is a production rational to it. Such high power designs, especially dedicated ones for usage by armies, tend to be fairly low production volume and very long lifespan designs. It doesn't help either that to get the performance, those engines tend to have, by civilian standards, extremely low service life's. Lost of WW2 engines would be replaced after a few thousand kilometres. The Germans where the ones who had to keep using their engines until they gave out. And people wonder why the Germans tried to give their engines such long service lives. There was no production capacity to make two more mediocre service life engines. The one engine you got was often it. But I digress. If I recall correctly even something like the very highly regarded MTU 873 seems to last for about 10.000km. Imagine buying a car and having to replace the engine after such a distance. And its not just the engine, tracks, wheels, transmission and possible also suspension would also need to be replaced. Its pretty much a complete drive train replacement. I would think its fair to state that no Leopard 2 tank build in the 1980s, like most Leopard 2 tanks still around where, still uses its original MTU 873 without at least a rebuild. No military is going to throw away their tanks and get new ones every few years. Thus these vehicles keep being rebuild over and over again for decades now. And if some money is available, this is when an army would upgrade its vehicles to a newer standard. This is why you get all the M1, T-72 or Leopard 2 upgrades. The vehicles are back at a factory being partially stripped anyway. Lets check the rest and upgrade some bits. But from the perspective of a company like MTU, this does not warrant spending R&D funds in designing new engines that then can't be fitted to existing vehicles. Most armies would have zero interest in such designs. It would also be a massive investment in retooling, driving up costs per engine. And lets not forget about production numbers if every so many years, armies had to replace all their engines for new designs. It would force a cycle of large and quickly produced production runs and then retool again for the next engine. Thus more investments would have to be made into tooling up a production line. Production lines that don't produce that many engines in the grand scheme of things. Instead companies like MTU keep their portfolio stable. Like that, they can also work out any small flaws their products still have. Militaries tend to care about something working on demand, regardless of conditions. They are inherently conservative in that regard. Because if something new doesn't work, people die. Its quite a strong incentive to not experiment too much with new technology.

[@TheNecromancer6666]

@@DanielWW2 I have no clue what Service life a Tank engine has, but their specific output and Performance is absolutely laughably low by roadcar Standards, so hours wise I would expect them to last a lot longer and with less Maintenance then a car engine. Just saying, if the Leopards MTU-873 47,6L V12 had the same specific Power output as a Audi or BMW 6 cylinder, top of the line Diesel it would have around 5400hp instead of 1500.

[@duncanhamilton5841]

@@TheNecromancer6666 Don't overlook that it isn't just about the engine - it's about the entire powertrain enclosed in a removeable unit. The transmission (arguably the most difficult part of a tank to get right), the systems, the fuelling, etc are all part of that system. Having spent heaven knows what refining that complete unit, a new engine would likely result in new everything else the engine is immediately attached to. In my ill-judged opinion, specific output probably isn't really relevant - tanks haven't really gotten much heavier since the 70s, and giving them the power to do 100mph cross country opens up a whole new load of problems. The most important things for military engines are, in order; 1) it should be cheap, 2) it should be reasonably soldier proof, 3) it should have compatibility with a vast stock of spare parts already purchased for something else, 4) politics. (See the Chieftain's engine for how wrong that can all go)

[@superfamilyallosauridae6505]

@@TheNecromancer6666 Tanks often have engines with lives in the hundreds or low thousands of hours. It's not super duper long. An Abrams engine is expected to live a minimum of 1400 hours maintained correctly. Doing the math, a Ford Fusion engine could be expected to live about 4,000 hours.

[@gavincross5719]

Can’t we all just come to the agreement that T-14 is a later modification of “Little Willie”, and continue with enjoying tanks peacefully?

[@willbxtn]

Aren't tanks by their nature not enjoyed peacefully?

[@kulot-ki1tu]

@@willbxtn the tank community is not allowed to have fun so yes, hyperspecificism is rampant literally everywhere here this is why i stick to naval related stuff, BIG guns on BIG boats

[@rayotoxi1509]

Since when were we allowed to enjoy our tanks in peace Jeah right this tank community is am gonna say active And i love it xD

[@wand222]

I like to think of it as a further evolution of the Bob Semple

[@samoldfield5220]

The Russian word for tank is "tank".

[@Xostriyad]

Ok, but would you rather fight 100 pig shaped cones or one lazer shaped arc?

[@mrtno4582]

100 pig shaped cones definitely

[@3rr0r4o40]

The laser shaped arc, then I would fight nothing

[@willw8011]

Air Support... that is the answer to every military minded question. Make a call on the radio, and things disappear.

[@JohnSmith-mk5jt]

Lazer shaped arc. Considering that a "pig-shaped cone" is a complete non-sequitir, they could be capable of so much more if they can simply exist and ignore basic human logic.

[@sammiller6631]

@@JohnSmith-mk5jt "pig-shaped cone" is not a complete "non-sequitir" _[sic]_ if you recognize it as a spoonerism inside the "Would you rather..." snowclone. It's got the comic effect of square pigs in the movie _Space Truckers_

[@nicholaswalsh4462]

It is my speculation that the T-14 Armata was grown from the seed of a destroyed T-34 somewhere in central Russia. However it was harvested too early, which is why it hasn't done anything.

[@lamwen03]

"It Came From Chernobyl"

[@jloiben12]

This is good

[@jloiben12]

@@lamwen03 This would explain a lot. Ukraine’s ultimate revenge

[@k1200ltse]

You've been watching too much Ranzar....😂

[@nicholaswalsh4462]

@@k1200ltse I have no idea what that is.

[@Windhox_cz]

Wait a minute. Did LazerPig delete his pinned comment under this video after he said "but I'm not going to delete it because that would be disingenuous of me (source: his community post)"?

[@altamont6585]

Since when you can trust his words and what he said?

[@fulcrum2951]

Yes

[@Dracorex235]

No, he did not delete his own comment.

[@fulcrum2951]

@@Dracorex235 he did I previously put a reply in it and its gone

[@Dracorex235]

He did not deleted it. It was either mass reported by his detractors of erased by Chieftain@@fulcrum2951

[@madigorfkgoogle9349]

T-14 Armata, definitely the best tank on Ukraine battlefield, not a single one lost in combat so far.

[@MediumRareOpinions]

It's stealth capabilities are a marvel of engineering

[@madigorfkgoogle9349]

@@MediumRareOpinions oh yeah, I totally forgot about that feature...as I said best tank.

[@unsuisseegare1291]

Its cloaking device is truly a great leap forward

[@TheRussian1]

Abrams has not been lost yet either, though that will change in a few months.

[@canadianoctopus1479]

The T-14 is a genius tank actually, the drama is causes makes it by far the most effective tank in the world far bypassing tanks such as the Abrams and Challenger tanks lol.

[@deptusmechanikus7362]

I'm subscribed to pretty much all the aforementioned channels, but I ignored all their T-14 videos specifically because of how little we know about the tank and how politically charged the whole topic of russian armors is at the moment. But I clicked on this one, because I know, no matter what, The Chieftain will have the most level-headed and rational take on the topic.

[@lobstereleven4610]

Yup

[@cde9952]

I don’t know a single one of those arm chair generals

[@hoobisha9256]

@@cde9952 lazerpig is actually a pretty good and fairly level headed one

[@MistahFox]

Exactly my thoughts

[@tonyvan8688]

Exactly

[@admiraltiberius1989]

The California Irishman has waded into the fray with his golden shillelagh......absolutely fantastic 👏

[@Sir_Godz]

that just means he uses weed instead of peat to make whisky

[@rundownthriftstore]

Shillelagh: a thick stick of blackthorn or oak used in Ireland, typically as a weapon i.e.: what your parents used to beat you with

[@tisFrancesfault]

@@rundownthriftstore You wouldn't (typically) beat your child with a shillelagh unless you want to hospitalise them. Assuming its a proper one and not just a stick.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

@@rundownthriftstore what the Chieftain used as his PDW when in an Abram.

[@sawyerawr5783]

@@rundownthriftstore It's also the googly-eyed ATGM in the background of his videos, just sayiing

[@testinghydra5652]

The T14, certainly one of the tanks of all time. It has an engine, and is capable of breaking down, just like ever other tank in existence.

[@OhNotThat]

T-14 is an implacable tank, NATO forces will try as hard as they can but they will never be able to move the T-14 aside once it's parking brake is engaged!

[@niksonrex88]

@@OhNotThatsuch a funny and original joke

[@captainautism8221]

indeed, my favorite was when the T-14 said, "It's T-14in time!" And T-14'd all over NATO. T-14 is true kino.

[@TheLucanicLord]

Very stealthy - none have ever been detected in combat.

[@neilcameron7705]

My view of the tiff is that it is an image file format for storing raster graphics images, popular among graphic artists, the publishing industry, and photographers.

[@ifakman2431]

I want you to know i really appreciate this joke.

[@saintriley6702]

I'll be saving my next photos in tiff format in your honor.

[@guillaumelalonde7945]

Fucking tiffs

[@DavidManser]

Akshually 🤓 I think you'll find it's pronounced TIFF 😉

[@klobiforpresident2254]

When I first saw the video title I actually thought someone had leaked a graphic with sensitive T-14 information. A T-14.TIFF, not a T-14 kerfuffle.

[@Graphene_314]

I'd say the biggest hit of the question whether or not T-14 is a capable modern tank is that it isn't fielded in meaningful numbers. Who cares if someone claims it has this or that if the tank isn't used. If the tank isn't used its just an expensive box of steel.

[@johndunlap1143]

And the comments section just ignores this : )

[@domaxltv]

No, this is a very stupid way to look at it. It has not passed trials to be accepted so this means they are not fielded at all, and not produced in large numbers, just like any weapons undergoing development... By this logic, anything new in development is terrible because there is no stockpile of 60gorrilion of it sitting in army warehouses somewhere Making modern tanks takes time, just making a relatively simple modification of an MBT takes a few years between conception and fielding, and the T-14 is maybe at most a few years behind schedule, considering it is pretty much scratch building every componenr... Though its not what you read in news articles, because news articles are not very keen on telling the truth, instead telling a message (russian media of "we will be drowning NATO in them by Christmas and western media of "oh look how good we are compared to them, they can't even make any!") when the real truth is usually something a lot less... Dramatic If a story sounds very onesided, no matter told by who, you shouldn't listen to it blindly For a system as complex as a modern MBT, I doubt a turnaround of less than 10 years is possible, as time progressed, making new military hardware became more complex, in WW2 designing a tank took maybe 3 years at most, the M1 abrams according to wiki started design in 1972 (probably in reality a bit earlier) and only entered service in 1980 and the Abrams was a relatively simple system back in the day compared to what it is now

[@LenaMel]

@@domaxltv I think the logic isn't that its a terrible tank because its in development, but that it doesn't matter how good the tank is if you can't field it in sufficient numbers.

[@johndunlap1143]

@@domaxltv sounds like it's still years or potentially decades from being in service then? So it wont be available for the war in Ukraine? So it's non-factor in the war in which it is touted as being relevant? Show me one on the battlefield and I will believe Russia's claims about it's capabilities.

[@MS-wz9jm]

People misunderstand the Armata platform. They just think of the T-14 tank rather than the platform. The whole purpose of it was simplifying logistics across multiple vehicles as part of the Armata platform. The is absolutely no point fielding the T-14 without fielding the other vehicles of the platform, all it would do is make logistics worse. The other point is i still dont think they are completely sold on the expensive tank, as the current conflict has shown all tanks will be destroyed by mines, atgms, artillery, bombs etc.. Very few tank vs tank battles have happened in this conflict, majority of tanks are destroyed by artillery. This raises a question, whats more important - a very expensive high tech tank or numbers? Its just way to easy to destroy a tank now.

[@MemoryofSouthVietnam]

A good opinion to have - no piece of equipment sucks or is amazing until we actually see how it performs in battle. And, more often than not, it heavily depends on exactly how its military uses it.

[@ThorneyedWT]

In some cases flaws are so obvious that it is much better not to put it anywhere near battle. M6 heavy and T-35 are good examples.

[@Nyx_2142]

The desperate copium and defensiveness around the T-14 by tankies is funny.

[@springbloom5940]

​@@Nyx_2142 Dont use words you don't understand

[@thomasnorge2245]

@@Nyx_2142 it's mainly russians who defend the t14 tho

[@mitri5389]

​@Nyx_2142 no one who likes military related stuff cares about a countries political leaning. This is what normies think about.

[@rolandlee6898]

Actually if we trace back tanks we end up with armored wagons from 500BC. Therefore the Abrams is actually just a bronze age wagon.

[@Semmarv]

I think the not at all biased historical manuscripts from the time describe them as "Chariots of Iron". Worth looking into for sure

[@CrispBaker]

*Baal Liked This*

[@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh]

Tanks actually came from the deception "water tanks" which superseded the earlier "water carriers" designation because it would shorthand to WC which can also mean water closet or toilet. So the M1 Abrams is just a metal porta-loo.

[@CrispBaker]

@@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh well someone's taking the piss

[@jaysontadlock1871]

There’s a book called chariots of iron... it unironcially makes this case

[@kiliaapo]

I've only once watched LazerPigs channel and as a former tanker I know he's not one.

[@mrkeykush693]

you the shi is going to be wild if actual tankers start debunking wathever Lazerping said

[@mattsharkey311]

Seems like everyone’s running to the chieftain like dad help us with our stupid argument and he’s just like I don’t care you’re all wrong. It’s great keep up the great work.

[@jimduffield7822]

Russians are not prioritizing it so t-90 is good enough for SMO and perhaps provides more bang for the buck. Anyone that tries to go on an armored offensive will just run into minefield to get bogged down and picked off by artillery so for the moment the tank is just infantry support.

[@epicstyle1000]

🤣

[@impguardwarhamer]

But he doesnt say youre all wrong, its pretty much just lazerpig who messed up lmao

[@gansior4744]

@@impguardwarhamer even tho he had better argument than both RedEffect or ConeOfShit, who provide nothing

[@FulkNerraIII]

​@@jimduffield7822The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a war, you can say it. That is unless you're Russian, which is probably likely. SMO is word salad and means nothing. If not please define the parameters that make a conflict a SMO and not a war.

[@luis9308]

This sounds a bit like when the Foxbat Mig came around. There was a world of speculation over it, and turned to be nothing close of what the westerners kept imagining.

[@Leon_der_Luftige]

Why can't we just fund AT-ATs?

[@luis9308]

@@Leon_der_Luftige I don't see a problem! Let's make the AT-ATs with the F1 AT paint scheme. And let the whole world speculate of what the paint is made of.

[@Real_Claudy_Focan]

And then evolved to the Foxhound and is a respectable heavy interceptor ! We are expecting russians to perfect it with time and ending up with some "M" variant after the SMO

[@luis9308]

@@Real_Claudy_Focan I'm curious to see the result of the development. It's a lovely heavy interceptor.

[@CrayonEater255]

@@Real_Claudy_FocanPretty useless aircraft

[@Thomas_Abel_Anderson]

I just had a thought: If Germans had built the Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte, it would have been based on a battleship. Its engine and main armament would have been typical battleship components.

[@avus-kw2f213]

It’s obviously a land ship not a tank

[@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh]

Cruiser not battleship. It would be Landschlachtschiff if it was based on a battleship.

[@pedrofelipefreitas2666]

With 1000 tons the ratte would be a destroyer at best, and a very light one. The german type 1936 destroyers were 2600 tons, and the american Benson-class was 1600 tons. The average battleship in WW2 was around 30000 tons. A single of the 8 cannons of a Bismarck class ship weighed 120 tons that's basically two tiger tanks. The scale of warships is pretty insane.

[@zacharywoudstra5917]

Thanks for the update Chieftain. I just discovered this whole flustercluck yesterday, and have been VERY confused as to what happened, so the explanation was appreciated.

[@Maverick0420]

Chieftain: "Spookston, go outside and cut me a switch to deal with these children!"

[@Spookston]

🏒 best i could do is this hockey stick

[@rt_goblin_hours]

​@Spookston oh damn you're here

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

@@Spookston Irish folks would use a hurley...

[@Endermann111]

yoo theres like every tank historian on the whole platform in this comment section!

[@Maverick0420]

​@@Endermann111Just need Malzi to do a drive by "Bruhhhhhh" now

[@dominuslogik484]

am I the only one that feels this whole argument getting brought to The Chieftain feels like a group of kids asking their teacher or father to settle an argument for them? its just funny

[@Wolkebuch99]

Chieftain is the Tank KZbin E-Daddy 🤣, I'm just waiting for the IBS Apocalypse styled stream where Chieftain tries to moderate LP and Cone screaming artistically at each other

[@werewolfnar]

@@Wolkebuch99 I'd watch a stream of MHV, Cheiftan, Tank Museum, LP, Red Effect, and Cone. Might be a cage match, might be highly informative. But it will be entertaining.

[@DefaultProphet]

It's more like kids asking their teacher which of their favorite sports team is the best. Cone, LP, Red, etc didn't run to Chieftan to ask for help, youtuber commenters on the other hand...

[@ElysiumNZ]

I’m honestly think the Chieftain should have only talked about the tank itself, not the KZbinrs as he basically contradicts himself by becoming involved in this stupid “internet drama”

[@DefaultProphet]

@@ElysiumNZ yup

[@phill2065]

This why I love this channel, because it’s so professional. I appreciate your work and diplomatic way of addressing the debate.

[@kajwis2675]

there is a reason why he is a respected historian and creator

[@Studio23Media]

Except the Chieftain is the only one creating drama here... He's doing the exact thing he's telling others not to do. The argument was pretty much over with. 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@jusus222]

@@Studio23Media hes settling it

[@zachowon]

Chieftan, you helped me realize my love for the tank building hobby and my love of tank and military history. I definitely am getting my degree in military history because of you and the knowledge i have recievwd through you in all forms.

[@fruitlessdog6304]

I know it was a small part of the video, but I really liked the very short description of the Patton line. It solidified the differences between the versions in my mind in a concise way, whereas before my brain remembered it as a big ol' jumble

[@rogersmith7396]

"Americans love a winner and won't tolerate a loser. Losing is hateful to Americans". Trump you listening?

[@rccola5167]

​@rogersmith7396 he's not listening to you L

[@SteamCrane]

@@rogersmith7396 Seek help.

[@isleofthecheetah]

Finally someone's word I actually care about

[@stephenrickstrew7237]

And Trust ..!

[@berryreading4809]

Yet it just fueled the drama even more while providing no information on the original topic... I understand Patreon wanted this video, but it's kind of just getting views for criticism... Although unintended unlike Cone's view chasing... I'm not sure why anyone keeps making videos about this entire subject while not adding info, other than possibly red-effect or lazerpig if they wanted to clear up sources or add additional information about the actual original videos... 🤦‍♂️

[@SidIcarus]

Lazerpig over The Chieftain.

[@BleedingUranium]

@@berryreading4809 Because the point of this video wasn't really the T-14 specifically. The topic here is about how to properly and professionally deal with both disagreements and also speculation on the internet. If you could somehow cut out the specific words that refer to the T-14, you'd still be left with all the *actually* important elements of the video here, which can be applied to basically any topic out there.

[@voidtempering8700]

​@@SidIcarusEntertainment over being informed, I get it.

[@noobypoo]

>Cries RE didn't use primary source. >The tank is Russian. >Primary Sources would be mainly Russian. Truely is a shame I believed it when Russian propaganda told me a shitty car engine DOESN'T have more torque than a tank's engine. ✊😔

[@jamesmandahl444]

One thing that rubbed me the wrong way was LPs response of "you could have contacted me privately". The arrogance and slithery quality to this mind of statement is astounding.

[@Hunter12396]

Although the exact linage of the T-14 isn't known, it is a safe assumption many of the late Soviet "super tank" projects went into it, specifically the Objects 640, 195, 490, and 477. The former two were based on the T-80UM, which was based on the T-80A, which was based on the T-80B (yes, it's backwards), which was based on the plain old T-80, which was based on the T-64, which was an offshoot of the T-62A, which was based on the T-55, which was based on the T-54, which was based on the T-44, which was based on the T-34-85, which was based on the T-34, which was based on the A-20 and A-32, which were based on the BT-SV, which was based on the BT-7, which was based on the BT-5, which was based on the BT-2, which was based on the BT-1, which was simply a purchased Christie M.1931. Therefore I'm sure you'll agree, the T-14 Armata is the same tank as the Christie M.1931.

[@Silver_Prussian]

The armata is based on the object 195.

[@jonathanj8303]

So that means it's actually clockwork, right?

[@werewolfnar]

I concur entirely.

[@o-hogameplay185]

but the Christie M.1931had an engine, that was based on a bunch of prior engines, that were based on steam engines. therefore the engine on the t14 is a steam engine

[@LOLHAMMER45678]

Object 195 was based on Object 477, it had little to do with T-80U or UM. Also, T-64 wasn't an offshoot of T-62A. It was based on Object 430, which was a clean sheet design. This is why it has so many issues compared to T-72, which used lots and lots of proven components (engine. Transmission, road wheels, etc)

[@reubensandwich9249]

I find it interesting that none of them discussed track tension for obvious reasons.

[@feedingravens]

But the "My God, the tank is on fire!" might be relevant, when seeing what happens in the Ukraine.

[@Space_Racer]

That is how you know they don't know what they are talking about.

[@matteocesa9017]

Or the gunner's control handle, amateurs

[@rogersmith7396]

It all boils down to oh buggar the tanks on fire. Nothing else matters.

[@Ciborium]

Or even how much coolant and engine oil it requires. Sheesh! Such basic information was ignored.

[@Mrcookieonyt]

The clear worship of lazerpig is obnoxious but not something i should be suprised by. He is heavily steeped in pro nato propaganda and redditors love that shit.

[@Mr_Bunk]

Russia is the aggressor in this war and that’s a fact. Take your pro-kremlin bullshit and get out.

[@alanthefisher]

Its so bazaar hearing you say "Lazor Pig" out loud haha But yeah engine blocks can be used for years but still have major changes. An example being the EMD 645 made originally in 1965 is still in use in many new railroad and maritime uses. Or how GM is still using a pushrod version of LS that in itself is a version of the Small block that came before it in the 1950s originally. Yes it can be the same "engine" as the old one, but vastly upgraded. The whole T-14 is a similar situation.

[@Cyarrick1]

Can't get over the fact that you're here too. Anyways. TGV uber-alles. SNCF state owned sugar daddy, Aslthom Alsatien hunky company

[@genericytprofile852]

Alan watches badempanada and the chieftain? Truly a most educated individual. But yeah true it is an interesting question on when a thing gets changed enough to become something different. I suppose it really does come down to semantics and personal preference. Sometimes a design just works for a particular instance and only receives minor adjustments as technology advances. Nothing wrong with having an old original design.

[@ICECAPPEDSKY]

The thing Lazerpig was trying to push is that they took an engine that wasn’t particularly reliable and modernized it for modern use such as the V2 which also was notoriously unreliable. Like yes Ford could’ve kept using the 5.4 Triton but there is a good reason it was short lived. Unreliable, a very small aftermarket parts supply, hard to work on, less fuel efficient, and more expensive. Hence why Ford just doubled down on the tried and true 5.0 which now resides in the trucks and sports cars and has a ludicrously large aftermarket parts variety. Point is an old engine can be fine to use for decades but if the engine didn’t work to begin with at all well then why would you try to modernize it and use on tanks of all things. Also X engines are needlessly complex hence why nobody uses them except the T14

[@louielouie7806]

The whole point was LP doesnt KNOW elbows from his asshole concerning engine design let alone what Russian engineer intentions are, but ASSUMES this is what Russian engineers are doing. He sources NOTHING for these claims which is why the overwhelming majority, including Chieftain put him in his place, but you guppies stay true to that clown are crying about being called out by an actual expert, lol. @@ICECAPPEDSKY

[@hungrybraineater2]

What the heck are you even doing here? Even the train nerds are in this video. We even have the aviation guys. What's next jays2cents and louise rossman?

[@RaptorJesus]

Our Tank-Messiah hath spoken. Praise be, praise be.

[@killergames391]

The one true in the military history, praise be upon him

[@Fedaykin24]

@@killergames391 Praise be Praise be! He walks amongst us the Tank Messiah! Blessed be the one who knows about track tension!

[@MarkGoding]

Tank you Jaysus!

[@napalmninja45]

I think saying the T-14's engine is a copy of the Sla 16 is like saying the AK is a copy of the Sturmgewehr. Did the Soviet's get their hands on some? Yep. Did they think the weapon was interesting and would fit into their doctrine and therefore work on the concept? Yep. Is the AK-47 a copy of the Sturmgewehr because they're both select fire long stroke piston operated rifles shooting intermediate caliber bullets from detachable box magazines? Nope. And thank you to the Chieftain for appreciating for how big a deal changing V shape, piston sizes, transverse vs longitudinal, etc. is It's like saying a Honda J30 is a copy of a Honda C30 because they're both 3L V6s.

[@Coffreek]

Observations based on research and facts, delivered with a dash of understated and occasional self-deprecating humor, are why I'm here. Keep it up, for what it's worth, I will watch for as long as you want to make content.

[@lottiethetankwhisperer]

Well said. As a regular viewer of most of the mentioned channels, I hope everyone can get along. Until proven otherwise, I still believe the T14 is powered by Gerbils in a hamster wheel.

[@silentdrew7636]

It seems like they all agree the tank is a piece of junk, they just can't agree on how or why.

[@jloiben12]

It is about as reliable as that lol

[@jloiben12]

@@silentdrew7636 There are just too many ways that it is trash for us to agree on how it is trash

[@bachelorchownowwithflavor3712]

No, it's powered by a big spring connected to the turret. That's why the turret is constantly spinning: it's the spring slowly unwinding as the tank moves along. Come on man, do some ACTUAL research. :)

[@jonathanj8303]

​@@bachelorchownowwithflavor3712that's what I was saying, it's got to be clockwork, nothing else makes sense.

[@ConeOfArc]

I appreciate you taking the time to throw your hat into the ring on this situation. Things certainly have gotten out of hand and I'll admit it wasn't handled the best it could have been on my part. As you said it's a lot of wasted watchtime which could have been better spent on actual content rather than back and forth on the drama regarding something so minor. Thanks for being the voice of reason between party's.

[@SCH292]

@@mitchp2404 Ohhhhhh! Lol

[@tisFrancesfault]

I do feel as though all parties got rather dizzy on lemonade, got ever so over-excited, and everyone needs to have nice lie-down.

[@Mishastone560]

​@@tisFrancesfault Everyone seemed to go too far. Everyone should either own up, work together, or at the very least tell their communities to stop harassing the other and let this moment fade away.

[@ConeOfArc]

@@tisFrancesfault as many have pointed out the tone of my video was not really the best which overshadows the point I was trying to make. Definitely something I plan to apologize for in my response video and something I have already told to LP directly even though he didn't seem to believe it was genuine.

[@trentonfairley5451]

@@ConeOfArc Whether or not he believe's your apology is up to him, all you can do now is be the bigger man. Tone aside, and for what it's worth, I still think you were in the right for trying to stop a new tank myth from becoming prolific. For all we know "Did you know the armata uses the same engine as a WW2 tank?!" was about to become the new "Did you know it took a million shermans just to kill one tiger?!". Thier is enough of that sort of thing going around online....

[@johnreally6390]

thank you for being you - your sense of humor and respect for the "people" making such suggestions that you have to comment on makes it's a really lovely video to watch...if only those "others" would see the bigger picture that you truly illuminate.

[@53gaDr34mc4st]

You know shit has gotten real when the Gaelic Giant decides to get involved. Great video btw

[@BigUziVert2190]

I didn’t go into this expecting an oversimplified on the patton tanks but it honestly helped me understand them a bit better lmao

[@EmyrDerfel]

At least we can call them all Pattons and agree there's a lineage.

[@ushiki2212]

​@@EmyrDerfelno... The m60 isn't a Patton lol.

[@hedgehog3180]

@@ushiki2212 I'm upvoting you solely to stir more arguments.

[@ushiki2212]

@@hedgehog3180 lol... But it's true. You can search it up...

[@UniversalReiska]

Ive not seen Nicholas so riled up in a long while about something, but good video!

[@Shade01982]

Once. In one of the videos about the fight in Ukraine. He was a tad annoyed about people drawing conclusions about tank combat there without looking at all the angles.

[@ThePrimaFacie]

I just now know that you made this. Its pretty cool. I have seen this type of back and forth between others over different topics. I hope that they may learn from this, although I doubt since watch time is a thing. Thanks for all the vids

[@ballin3048]

Wanted to ask Chieftain but if you have watched the new Red Effect and Coneofarc videos, what did you think about the information they provide. Now im not gonna ask you who is right in this argument, but Red's video in particular brings forth a lot of interesting data and information on both the Sla-16 and 2V16. Wanted to hear your thoughts on it

[@robertbennett106]

You are now the father of tank channels keeping the kids in line!

[@talon262]

Some might say, the Godfather...

[@Klovaneer]

@@germanjak /me chants "Tank Jesus, Tank Jesus, Tank Jesus"

[@MediumRareOpinions]

​@@talon262Nah, Fletcher Retired but retains that title.

[@robertbennett106]

@@germanjak Yah, just a guy that happens to be a combat armor officer that has actually had his ass in the crap and used or come up against many of the systems he talks about in combat! How many other you tubers say the same? I'll go with his option quicker the the others!

[@matthewkaseman7457]

Wait, if we get enough patreon support, the Chieftain will answer arbitrary questions? Quick - let's get him to answer something silly and fun. Who would you rather have as a loader - Washington, Grant, or Patton?

[@josephahner3031]

Washington, legend has it he could swing an axe like no one's business, he'd surely be able to sling rounds like a champion. I'd want Patton in the Driver's seat where he's within TC boot range and he can channel all that aggression of his somewhere constructive. I get the feeling General Grant would make a decent gunner, man set up a howitzer in a church steeple and made it work during the Mexican-American War so I think he'd do pretty well with a laser rangefinder.

[@amethyst83tanith]

I just wanted to compliment you on your explanation of how to form an opinion on a topic. I'll admit that tanks are not generally my choice for video watching but having overheard this video as my husband watched it I felt the need to comment. As a historian and researcher I loved the way you formed your argument that opinions should be based on research and facts not whether you like the content creator etc. There is so much misinformation spread across the internet, and pointless debates about a topic that has been researched by none of the parties involved, and it was very refreshing to hear you explain so clearly, and entertainingly, the flaws in this method of obtaining information. Thank you.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Thank you for your comments and for stopping by. If tanks aren't your cup of tea, well, so be it, but maybe you can make it a new thing to do with your husband in the evenings!

[@user-ug7vk8hx5i]

​@@TheChieftainsHatch Damn good one chieftain!

[@imagremlin875]

When I saw you made a T14 video, I knew we would finally get an adult's take on the matter. Thank you good sir. I am a fan of both Cone of ARC and Lazer pig. I find both channels entertaining and informative.

[@haldorasgirson9463]

You can't fight in here. This is the war room!

[@thurin84]

this is the comment that shouldve been pinned!

[@ReptilianLepton]

The T-14's engine is, above and beyond all else, utterly irrelevant unless Russia will become capable of serial production some time before the heat death of the universe (spoilers: not happening).

[@klutzspecter3470]

The true secrets of the T-14 will only be revealed if we get the Ukrainian to steal one.

[@Fedaykin24]

Thumbs up for hitting the nail on the head!

[@domaxltv]

People vastly underestimate the development times of military equipment... The T-14 was put through trials a few times and couldn't match requirements fully, noone is going to mass produce it, same way noone mass produced F-35s as soon as the first prototypes were flown (which was approximately 20 years ago by now or something like that). There were numerous slowdowns in the development cycle, yes, including possibly a complete redesign of electronics post 2014, but the people who go like "never entering production hahahaa" are the same ones who have 0 clue about military procurement anywhere. I have no doubts they could be producing T-14s in large numbers even with these current prototype designs they've made so far.. But it would hardly be a good way to spend money instead of keeping current production lines going as is until they are confident they fixed the most glaring flaws in the design, of which there are still quite a few to iron out... Most pressingly the sensor suites were judged to he inadequate to provide enough awareness in the modern battlefield, and a tank with insufficient sensors is no tank at all, as we know from the very real battlefields that tanks are present on today.

[@LenaMel]

@@domaxltv T-14 may enter production eventually, but Russia has proven incapable of financing the production of other high-tech systems at a large scale before, and considering the mess in Ukraine I doubt they much feel like pouring resources into the development of a new tank when they can produce models already in service that mostly do the job fine. So while people are kind of wrong in saying T-14 will never enter production, they are probably right in that it probably never will enter production in a way that matters as far as assessing its capabilities or it making an impact is concerned.

[@demomanchaos]

@@LenaMel You say "they can produce models already in service" but the fact T-54's are being fielded indicates that producing anything is not something they are too well versed at currently.

[@Kav.]

Well, that's really quite excellently and succinctly put. Ship of Theseus is actually an excellent point to make in a lot of cases like this. I've had to use it before to explain to a very passionate Kalashnikov enthusiast that actually whether the AR-15 or AK is better is largely subjective as to when you consider it no longer being an AR-15/AK and now a variant or a different gun entirely. It was one of the first things I thought of with this whole set of shenanigans actually. It's also the reason I've repeatedly suggested laserpig DOESNT do a video on the AK, because with the amount of conflicting, subjective and speculative sources out there you can come to just about any conclusion on it.

[@Beef7347]

This feels like a teacher getting involved in a student argument outside of school.

[@Studio23Media]

Except the teacher is wrong 😂

[@MaLva500]

​@@Studio23MediaBut he's not. Chieftain is an actual historian. All the others are just KZbin influencers.

[@kryzzan7039]

L take.@@Studio23Media

[@jusus222]

@@Studio23Media lazerpig was wrong get over yourself

[@docbill224]

I have had the same axe for 50 years, I've changed the handle 3 times and the head twice.

[@Kamitorrorga]

The Ax of Thaddeus.

[@ashleygarratt4961]

Thank you for the sober assessment of this debate and keeping your content as grounded as possible given the conflicting information we get online.

[@chrisivan_yt]

“Oh bugger, the LazerPig is on fire”

[@biornr.4031]

Nice to see a voice of calm in all of this. Thanks

[@jerrysmooth24]

The Chieftan is tank God the last beef he settled was with Saddam and hes dead now.

[@loh1945]

Finally, someone with sense. Cone was too harsh on Lazerpig, Lazerpigs presentation style and exaggerations detract from academic discussion, and Red Effect was just kind of there. Nobody is perfect, and they should just debate it politely. And it’s all speculation anyway…

[@Grimshak81]

Sorry but I don’t watch LazerPig for a dry academic debate. He does research, but presents it in an entertaining and exaggerated way. Not everyone needs to like it, but that is what his followers expect and want to see.

[@wonkagaming8750]

@@Grimshak81 and if that reseach is wrong?, but Lp continue to use them?

[@aralornwolf3140]

@@wonkagaming8750, LP issued a video a several days ago on that very topic.

[@voidtempering8700]

​@@aralornwolf3140Yes, what about it?

[@voidtempering8700]

​@@aralornwolf3140You just believe it?

[@jeffnorsegod8080]

I appreciate your professionalism and tact as always. Love your content Chieftain!

[@NUSensei]

Kerfuffling aside, the Tank of Theseus is a pretty good illustration on how we can be pedantic over what is or isn't a direct lineage.

[@pavelslama5543]

Yeah, if we go far enough, we may find out such things as for example that the Leopard 2A7 is a copy of the Renault FT, because it also uses a rotating turret, a single driver in the hull, and the engine in the rear, which also occurs to be a copy of a 1893 diesel engine. (ad absurdum)

[@scottlangley5596]

I see what you're getting at but it's not really relevant. The tank of theseus would be a tank that has all but a few of its parts replaced with identical parts so it looked the same but the question is whether that's the case.

[@stalkingtiger777]

The T-14 Engine is clearly based on the Étienne Lenoir since it compresses and burns fuel in the presence of oxygen to produce rotational motion. Also, I'm sure we'll learn more soon enough since they're being deployed again. Just wait for a war prize to show up at Aberdeen eventually.

[@foowashere]

Isn’t the Lenoir engine specifically without compression? But I concur still, the combustion and rotation lineage is clear!

[@pavelslama5543]

@@foowashere definitely a straight up copy of a 1893 Diesel patent engine!

[@jacob_B02]

Thank you for being a voice of reason. Too many arguments, whether tank related or otherwise, end up polarized, with either side being certain that they are right. People forget that we can agree to disagree.

[@zacklewis342]

Especially regarding topics where the only thing everyone knows for sure, is that we just don't know for sure. People just can't accept that security dictates a lack of publicly available knowledge. Get over it; there is so much actual, factual knowledge to learn instead of arguing over assumptions. The Chieftain may be the only adult left on YT.

[@buffalowt]

tbf that is where the argument is at this point. People criticized the pig and they responded with an attempt to justify their initial video. There does not seem to be any new relevent information. I was really hoping that The Chieftain would be attempting to verify information or dredge up any documents on the tank. Then we could actually be able to say "this is fact, this is speculation, and this has conflicting information"

[@jamesmandahl444]

@buffalowt It is not thr same engine. One water cooled the other not. One sixteen cylinders thr other twelve. Different kinds of pumps, different sized cylinders. Come on.

[@buffalowt]

@@jamesmandahl444 interesting reply as I never mentioned the engine. Your reply is irrelevant anyways as there has not been strong evidence for or against the engine being a modification of the ww2 german design. Assuming it is based on the old german design it would likely be referred to as a different engine developed from the old design like the W16 Volkswagen has. Though there is argument you could treat it more like the Ford Modular Engine.

[@davidmiller9485]

@@buffalowt Did you watch the vid?? he covers both what he's going to discuss and why, plus why he's NOT going to go into the T-14. Instead he covered something far more important, acting like an MATURE adult.

[@OsborneCox.69.420]

anyone have the text from LP’s deleted comment?

[@NosferatuandFriends]

Thank you Cheftain, thank you for wandering into a drama fest you had nothing to do with, that had already calmed down, that I specifically stated I want nothing further to do with, to state your opinion that essentially surmounts to "everyone needs to just get along". I'm extremly dissapointed that this is the angle you choose, and that you opted to critque me for being unprofessional and for making a response video in a response video you yourself made about a situation to which you have no involvement with absoloutly no sense of irony. It has been three months since RedEffect made his initial video crtiquing my thoughts on the T-14 and, as I acknowlegded, I am only finally responding to this because Cone decided to jump on the bandwagon and I realized this was something I needed to address rather than ignore. Do we honestly need every KZbinr on the planet vaguely related to tanks waddling into this argument with nothing more to say than "everyone needs to calm down"? Of course not. As I've stated before we are not going to find any credable source that will state with 100% confidence that the T-14's engine is releated to the German WW2 SLA 16, that we can state with any degree of confidence to be 100% factual. That kind of thing very rarly happens in history, of which you are fully aware of. Therefore in the need to be honest and truthful with my audience I have to state that I don't know for sure, but I am convinced it is related and I went over a lot of the reasons and evidence why i think that, I've been very open and I've been very honest with what I beleive, and so far no-one has yet to provide any reasonable counter which has made me doubt those beliefs. We can never honestly be sure of anything, and I've made a KZbin Career going over many things people were sure about which, on closer inspection, turn out to be questionable. But I suppose if we cultivate a culture where no-one is sure of anything and everyone is encouraged to question what is being said, then we enter an age of endless, unwinnable, debate where the only victor is the one who presents to be reasonable and asks for calm. I have a business email address listed on my channel. If you wish to get involved I would actully appreciate your input on my research which I would be more than willing to share.

[@harrycullen6515]

OK, that's.........actually kinda reasonable

[@chriswerb7482]

I have always found you incredibly eloquent, entertaining, intelligent and knowledgeable. Keep up the good work!

[@mitchverr9330]

I think the only way this could have been better is if David Fletcher himself came out and said "stop being silly" xD. Lovely words to help remind us all to keep calm and to argue the points a bit more over the way they are made and to not take things too seriously/angrily.

[@rogersmith7396]

Or his usual "Its just another tank". The Einstein of tanks.

[@KenTails]

Where is Colonel Graham "Too Silly" Chapman when we need him the most?!

[@M4A3Sherman]

Excellent insight into the debate/fight. I always enjoy your videos. I like the torsion bar example, and have wondered myself on how the U.S. developed it. Maybe someday we will have the answers.

[@stevewatson6839]

Folk have the same ideas as others independently and in roughly the same time frame all the time. That said "Why do the R&D when we can just nick it when the other bugger has spent the dosh & gotten it to work?" is a tried and tested methodology.

[@danielstickney2400]

Torsion bars first appeared on a production automobile in 1920 and at least a dozen automobile manufacturers were using or experimenting with them throughout the 20s and 30s. So it was a known technology with obvious potential advantages and some decisions just seem so obvious that no one bothers to note who made them. As for how the U.S. Army developed it, Fred W. Crismon's "US Military Tracked Vehicles" has photographs of most if not all of the many prototypes so we've got a pretty good record of everything they did try even if we don't know who decided what and when.

[@comentedonakeyboard]

I think there are more takes on the T14 then tanks in service.

[@Jaddeel]

That's probably less of an accomplishment than you're making it sound.

[@comentedonakeyboard]

@@Jaddeel well with something like a dozen or so tanks in "service" yes.

[@HunterLee2600]

"There is no clan of cone or legion of lazerpig" meanwhile r/lazerpig...

[@calebdean2440]

Just because an engine is old doesn't inherently make it a bad engine. The Chevy small block is 70 years old now and companies are still producing new ones that have no problems doing about any task (within reason) a modern design does. As an engine enthusiast I have wondered just how many parts would interchange between a T34s engine and a T90s.

[@MLaak86]

Only so much you can do to an engine after 70 years or more vs building a new one from the ground up.

[@evil993]

Dude, my first car had an LT1 under the hood, not THAT long ago lol. Good ol Roadmaster, the shaggin wagon. I owned it around a decade and some change ago, but that thing was basically STILL a sleeper haha.

[@calebdean2440]

@MLaak86 I'll agree to a point, but as long as the technology itself doesn't change, an old design can still be effective enough to be relevant. Heck let's take the ultimate example of old design the Browning M2. Sure you could start with a clean slate and make a better weapon system than that 100 year old design, but it's still good enough to be plenty viable in the present. Being is military engines are having to meet increasing emission or efficiency standards, their old designs aren't necessarily obsolete.

[@payday510]

Missing the point entirely, the Mosin Negant is old but it'll still unalive any poor sap down range of one being fired but you don't see Pvt. Conscriptavich being issued them as standard kit. Because in the hundred something since it was first produced, we've made BETTER. SBC is a great engine, but better options exist so chev uses those better options in their new vehicles.

[@Alex-og3ev]

Probably none that would make properly working engine. Like with M2 mentioned above, it's literally still the same machine gun but using one assembled from parts made 70 years apart from each other is... not the wisest idea.

[@Imbeachedwhale]

I personally know only the basics of the T14 argument, but I have recently been digging into the details of submarine diesel engines (particularly Japanese and American). I have discovered that the subject is incredibly complex and you can’t simply rely on photographs to discuss details of the engines unless you are an expert in the field of diesel engines. We’re talking valve construction and the details of how the cylinders are built, things I don’t understand in the slightest (I’m just trying to find out which Japanese engines were reversible given how the reports I have disagree). Until I see a diesel engine expert tear apart a T-14 engine and the WWII engine and compare them in detail, I’m going with “Maybe, but I doubt it as these comparisons seem too surface level.”

[@Conserpov]

The basics of the argument is "Jingoist American teenagers desperately grasp at straws to say Russians copied German engine, while in reality it has zero relation to it, being a doubled 2V-06 opposite-piston engine".

[@thundereagle4130]

@@Conserpov An X engine is not a opposite-piston engine. From what I can find the X engines in general are mostly known for being unreliable compared to other piston engines. The nazi's tried to fit one in a tank, but it was unreliable. Since than nobody used it in a tank until the Armata. They saw some succes in some US boats, but in US Tang class subs they where so unreliable they where replaced by normal engines.

[@thundereagle4130]

@@Conserpov Imagine being so indoctrinated by Russian propaganda you even denounce info you can find on the Wikipedia page of X engines. I'm not even into Lazer Pig's ridiculous argument that the Russians just copy-pasted the SLA-16 engine. This is just general information.......

[@manolisiatrou5537]

@@Conserpov fucking z even here,don't you have some RT news to watch?

[@cheyannei5983]

@@thundereagle4130 An X engine was under development for T95 Medium Tank and it's developmental delay was the excuse given to cancel the project.

[@StaK_1980]

Reading the pinned comment of Pig down here: Pig, missing the point and becoming defensive... as usual. _"Do we honestly need every KZbinr on the planet vaguely related to tanks waddling into this argument with nothing more to say than "everyone needs to calm down"?"_ Chieftain is NOT _vaguely related to tanks_ (sic)... and apparently, yes, as he seems to be the only grown up in this whole drama in a bucket.

[@solidtank7957]

"The lady doth protest too much" vibes from Lazer on this, ridiculous overreaction.

[@kilosbyte415]

Pretty sure lazerpig was just referring to people in the tank community who just saw 2 documentaries about ww2 and think they are experts in armored warfare

[@StaK_1980]

@@kilosbyte415 Well, he specifically wrote KZbinrs, I am fairly certain that he was NOT referring to the plebs.

[@matchesburn]

@@kilosbyte415 He was replying to the Chieftain and even after the Chieftain gave a very thoughtful and respectful reply to LP's pinned comment, LP replied with "Thanks dad" sarcastically. ...So tell me with a straight face he wasn't talking about the Chieftain. You and I both know he was. That's why he went full damage control and deleted his pinned comment (of shame).

[@DeeEight]

The bit about doing research and bringing it to your attention (or lazerconeeffectopotamus) is how I came to solve the question of why were the 250 production (and four pilot vehicles) M4A3E2 Shermans all built with 75mm guns. For those who missed my comment on an earlier Q&A of yours, Fisher did all the production of them at the Grand Blanc, Michigan factory and they didn't have any 76mm guns available for M4A3 production until Sept '44 (Oldsmobile made the M1 guns and couldn't keep up with demand) which was two monthsl AFTER the Jumbo production ended in July 1944 because the plan was to have them shipped to europe to be distributed to the troops in September. So it was either miss the scheduled deadline to get them into the hands of the troops until enough 76mm guns were available, or build them with the 75mm guns which they had plenty of available. Fisher also btw didn't produce any of the 105mm Howitzer armed shermans so that wasn't ever at any time an alternative available to be considered (though in historical hindsight the howitzer would have been better suited to the assault tank role , especially as the M67 HEAT round then available to them offered 4 to 7 inches of penetration). Fisher also built the majority of the T26E3/M26s including the 20 sent as part of the Zebra mission, and they were also responsible for the majority of the M10/M36 tank destroyer production, and 98% of the hulls (and 60% of the turrets) for the Buick assembled M18 Hellcat. And the reason why Fisher got the Jumbo contract was because they had the capacity and the know how to do it right, they had just finished 40 T25E1s and 10 T26E1s when they began the M4A3E2 production and were already building the M4A3(75)W large hatch shermans which the E2s were based upon. And they'd just about to start production of the M4A2(76)Ws as well so they were already building the T23 turrets and the mantlets for the 76mm guns that were used as the basis of the the E2 variant. The redesigned thicker lower hull final drive housing came from another GM division as did most of the armor plates and turret castings. As to the question of the origin of torsion bar suspension in US Army tanks, Ordnance Department issued the requirement for a fast tank destroyer with a 76mm gun and using Torsion bar suspension as the T70 program replacing the earlier T42 with its Christie suspension and the T49 and T67 which had coil spring suspension. Now General Gladeon Barnes had been the head of the Research and Engineering office at Ordnance since 1938, and he had filed a patent for torsion bar suspension himself in 1934 along with Warren E. Preston (granted in 1936) so well...he kinda knew their advantages and we can SPECULATE that he was probably responsible for its inclusion in that requirement issued in late '43. Now he couldn't very well insist that it be exactly the version he patented (which included what is now known as the tube-over-bar design) but he probably hoped some manufacturer or engineer would look at the existing patents and choose to license his. As to Porsche inventing Torsion bars...that's false. Their invention and first automotive use can be traced back to 1920 by the chief engineer of Leyland Motors, J.G. Parry-Thomas and used in the Leyland Eight manufactured from 1920 to 1923 (though his first patent for a torsion bar assisted leaf spring design was granted in 1919, and later he filed for a updated patent for a torsion bar design without leaf springs in 1923 but its development ended with his death attempting to take back his land speed record in 1927). Porsche's patent for torsion bars basically copied the 1923 filing which became abandoned by Parry-Thomas's death, and was granted in 1931. And the T70 tank destroyer which became the M18 Hellcat, derived from the Panzer III's design largely because they didn't have to pay royalties to any germans during wartime (which they would have had to if they licensed the Barnes-Preston patent). Finally, getting to the original Kerfuffle issue, the X-engine of the Armata program, when THAT is considered one of only four X-pattern engines to reach production status (all the others are considered experimental engines) and only one of the other three was judged to be successful (the GM 16-184 used in a number of USN sub-chasers in WW2) , and the majority of other limited-production/experimental engines were also unreliable and overly complicated, I would speculate that a Russian engine manufacturer with a history of failed efforts to sell an engine design widely considered as a poor configuration over even a radial engine, is also going to be unreliable and unsuccessful. I'll attach a link for the only successful production X-engine. oldmachinepress.com/2014/08/17/general-motors-electro-motive-16-184-diesel-engine/

[@BleedingUranium]

This was super interesting, thanks!

[@kerryzhuo5693]

Good research, thank you.

[@TheArcticFoxxo]

"Finally, getting to the original Kerfuffle issue, the X-engine of the Armata program, when THAT is considered one of only four X-pattern engines to reach production status (all the others are considered experimental engines) and only one of the other three was judged to be successful (the GM 16-184 used in a number of USN sub-chasers in WW2) , and the majority of other limited-production/experimental engines were also unreliable and overly complicated, I would speculate that a Russian engine manufacturer with a history of failed efforts to sell an engine design widely considered as a poor configuration over even a radial engine, is also going to be unreliable and unsuccessful. I'll attach a link for the only successful production X-engine." The manufacturer doesn't at all have a history of failed designs, they've made 4 X designs, 2 of which outputted close to 2000 horsepower at their high end. The A-85-3A is the epitome of these trials, using new materials, a slightly refined and simpler design to lessen failure, and so on. It itself makes more than any diesel in the world, though for short intervals, while being the same size as opposed piston engines. Nobody sees it as a "poor engine design", they see it as overcomplicated. It's pricey, it takes parts, but when made properly it is very compact and powerful. The A-85-3A has compact and powerful, now with more reliable than the prior designs.

[@elaqgarahulelpon1479]

Incorrect, the reason there was only 250 M4A3E2s was because they contracted fishermen to make them, and civilians only get military equipment that has already seen service, therefore Fisher only had access to 75mm guns.

[@DeeEight]

@@TheArcticFoxxo yeah whatever mr Russian propaganda source....

[@mattmccartney5996]

I think the only thing that we can reasonably conclude given the sparcity of evidence is that the T14 Armata is: 1. STRONK. 2. Made of advanced Stalinium alloy. 3. Has kerfuffle resistant armor.

[@burningphoneix]

4. Likes to spin

[@jukebox_heroperson3994]

Stalinium is just steel, so yeah, it is actually.

[@freakingabagool3510]

@@burningphoneix5. Tends to break down in the middle of parades

[@ngarewyrd]

@@burningphoneix Just the turret though

[@City1Tiger]

@@freakingabagool3510 Stop spreading misinformation, real reason was because the driver had the handbrake on

[@BleedingUranium]

Thanks for this, and for continuing to be a source of level-headed reason. The best thing about this video is that these points apply to all topics and debates like this; the T-14 isn't really important here, in that sense.

[@AimlessSavant]

That's the worst(funniest?) part of it all. Its fucking pointless to debate the merits of the t-14. It's just a shitty putinmobile that will never enter full production before the Russian state collapses. All the drama of "intellectual dishonesty" and ad hominem attacks is over a stupid fucking tank. I am aghast at how many people got roped into this because of Conehead. Like goddammit SacredCowShipyards has a parody video addressing this shitpile.

[@aidenbailey2402]

LAZERPIGS COMMENT HAS DISAPPEARED!

[@SussyImposter9856]

I think a good thing worth mentioning is that Red Effect both throughout, and especially at the beginning, made it clear that his video was in no way a personal attack on Lazer Pig, and that he didn't want his video to be a source or reason for hate towards LP. Despite this, it seems that in his response, LP seems to keep driving his audience to believe that this is clickbait youtube Drama, and multiple times claims that Red Effect is spouting Russian propaganda, all the while glossing over the points Red Effect made in his video, and downplaying his own mistakes rather than having a civil disagreement. A great example is the "Breakdown" of the T-14 during a parade. Red effect does a good job of pointing out how despite attempt's too tow the Armata with and engineer vehicle it wouldn't budge despite being only slightly heavier than most Russian Tanks. Eventually, without any repairs done too the vehicle, the driver is able to get back in the Tank and drive Away no problem. All of this was caught on Video and it would seems reasonable as Red effect argues that the Armata Driver made a mistake and activated the emergency break without realizing, and after realizing the mistake, deactivated it and drove away. Not only does video evidence seem to support this, but it seems the most reasonable explanation, and yet Lazer Pig rather than admit he was wrong, doubles down, and attempts to claim that Red Effects claim is using tactics of Russian Propaganda, and is meant to distort the truth....somehow. Lazer Pig even tries to appeal too the viewer's own sense of intelligence, insinuating that only some who was foolish or gullible would believe this parking break story...which is pretty Ironic since hes trying to use emotional manipulation to steer the viewer towards his side.

[@Windhox_cz]

Agreed. Red Effect was very civil and respectful in his video (that cannot be said for Cone but he did it in a "rant" video where he talked about stupid comments under his videos so I guess he got carried away a bit) but Laser Pig was not. I hear people say that it is his whole youtube persona and that his attitude is purposely exaggerated. But the situation is staying the same no matter how they try to justify it. (edited a few typos)

[@SussyImposter9856]

@@Windhox_cz I mean his personality is on full Display in the comments he left under this Video lmao. The Cheiftan made some very reasonable remarks about this situation and het Lazer Pig can't help but feel insulted as the chefitian didn't take his side and even criticized him for his unprofessional behavior.

[@BleedingUranium]

@@Windhox_cz Yeah, it's basically the "it was just a prank bro" kind of attitude and defence. This odd idea that if you just act like a loud, obnoxious asshat, you can simply claim it's for "comedy" and not it's "not supposed to be taken seriously"... despite that always being the intent.

[@blackore64]

Yeah, Lazerpig is clearly not great at taking criticism. He's the first to see any criticism as personal attack on him, and this just shows on his post at this very video. I feel like this is a part of him thinking himself serving an ideological mission with the War in Ukraine, which is why he frames his 'opponents' (he made himself) as Russian trolls

[@spetzo1212]

He said "surely no one could forget the parking brakes" and I’m there like I literally did it a few times when I started driving

[@genericytprofile852]

It was super weird too seeing how hostile lazer was towards red effect. I mean red literally said that he agrees mostly with lazer that the t-14 is not as good of a tank as the russians are portraying it as. He just wanted to point out alot of the mistakes he made while making that video. Especially the one about a literal tank having less torque than a commercial car.... Instead of taking that with stride, he called red yet another vatnik and tankie and tried to portray him as someone trying to start up drama for clicks. Yet red's was probably the most professional and well meaning refutation. Not to mention lazer decided he's a "real historian" and refused to cite his sources out of pettiness lmao

[@maplegumm]

I mean. Red Effect is a fairly vatnik sided KZbinr

[@jackbiliny2435]

​@@maplegummPersonally i dont think so you may need to wach more of his videos and I dont mean it in sarcastic way, just watch more of them...

[@gnarl12]

Yep

[@MajinOthinus]

@@maplegumm Because...? About the only serious criticism I have for the dude is that he is very obviously a fan of Serbian vehicles and somewhat biased towards them; I have however seen no such bias where other nations' vehicles are concerned, so I don't get what about him is supposed to be "fairly vatnik sided".

[@karakarakiri9568]

@@maplegumm He is not. I think he live in a NATO country (croatia). Saying that would be like calling lazer pig the f-word because he is homosexual.

[@johnathanjarrett63]

This reminds me of the old story. "I had to change out the handle 4 times, and the head 3 times, but it is still my Grandpa's Axe."

[@LackofFaithify]

Well, yeah, the parts were from his other axes.

[@dougsundseth6904]

That's an updating of the Ship of Theseus thought experiment that LTC Moran referred to. AFAIK, the first expression of the concept that we have in writing is in Plutarch's "Life of Theseus", from the first century AD..

[@RG001100]

I love the skit 'grandpa's axe' told as a joke: "Moon TV - The Same Axe". I understand the point of "grandpa's axe" to be reductio ad absurdium of the Ship of Theseus. When you say it as "I replaced the head and the handle of the axe", intuitively it feels like it's not the same axe.

[@alan-sk7ky]

No no no, Trigger's broom... ;-)

[@dekyras]

Excellent video and an eminently sensible encouragement to a more rational approach to research and dialogue

[@johnsorge3034]

Your M26 to M60 evolution reminds me of the old James Burke series Connections. Well done.

[@eta320]

Perfectly summarized, tanks are tanks, lets all just love them!

[@Grebogoborp]

Some tanks are not tanks though. Some tanks are for high pressure gas some are for armored combat and some are Italian. Some are even submarines. Some have even become coral reefs. In fact some tanks might be French and we all know France isn’t real and they never made any tanks.

[@waffles.4368]

omg eta320 in the wild-wisteria

[@priestoffrogsandfatherofam8659]

ETA we need to get ban ban 4

[@Camilo_Z]

This

[@maplegumm]

Hit youtuber eta320

[@nobodyherepal3292]

7:56 great. Now I can’t stop thinking about how the Patton series tanks are literally just upgraded Pershing’s….

[@firestorm165]

This vid needs to be shown in every school at every level day 1 As a side note you just gave me some inspiration for some worldbuilding in my sci-fi book I'm writing so cheers for that

[@joeatwood6905]

Loved your comments about the T-14 breakdown. Reminds me of the near universal decrial of turbo-electric drive in American battleships based on a single incident aboard Saratoga .

[@jvaski]

We have overwhelming evidence of the M-1 functioning properly aside from the incident he points out whereas breaking down is practically all we've seen from the T-14. It's sad. This is my first Chieftan video (the guy's reputation proceeds itself) and here he is basically arguing: because we don't have a lot of evidence of the T-14 we have to dismiss the little evidence we do have.

[@andresmartinezramos7513]

​@@jvaskiPerhaps witholding judgment is a better suited expression. And I find it very reasonable.

[@fulcrum2951]

@@andresmartinezramos7513 a concept that lazerpig fans just recently heard of

[@FRGBlackBurn]

@@andresmartinezramos7513 yep, because at the end of the day military vehicles are complicated and there are a lot of stuff in them that can go wrong at any time.

[@rayotoxi1509]

@@jvaski the little video evidence of the t14 breaking down is false Like red effect said if it truely broken down it would still be able to be towed away and you see how the tank tracks are glued in place It was some sort of an brake being engaged May be driver fault or may also be system error if its a E-brake what well you could classify as a breakdown but we dont now

[@jamesschardt]

Now I want to see you do a video on the origin of the current headlight switch so we can show how all US military vehicles are derived from this vehicle 😅

[@rogersmith7396]

No headlight switch no B 2.

[@mpetersen6]

All US Army vehicles are derived from Summerian Chariots. Because of wheels .

[@EmyrDerfel]

​@@mpetersen6width of a horse's arse etc

[@johnbaker1256]

​@@EmyrDerfelIf we develop narrower horses we can fit more of them to the chariot.

[@imagifyer]

It's a common problem I've noticed across my studies with regards to historical literacy ; the historical layman (that is someone enthusiastic for the topic but perhaps not versed in the actual nuances of research and analysis) tends to operate from an exclusive paradigm of Right Vs Wrong, that being there is an objectively correct answer to a question and much like the highlander there can be only one. Hence rather than treating the matter as a robust exchange of ideas, during which we gain increased perspective about our assumptions of the past (history is after all never the whole picture), people get caught up fighting the corner of whatever argument they've hitched their proverbial wagon to. If anything this whole thing just sounds like a rehash of the classic arguments about Tiger and the M4 that have been going in circles for the past 70 years

[@Grimshak81]

Just want to add some info here: lazerpig is a professional researcher (history master). I doubt this for RedEffect and ConeOfArc. Also, lazerpig didn’t do the research alone.

[@imagifyer]

@@Grimshak81 I'm aware of his credentials (broadly but not in specific), but thankyou for your concern. My comments were directed more towards the viewers of said channels who seem to be holding the binary right/wrong position without considering the perspective and relative merits of the arguments provided. I commend you for contributing to a positive and pleasant exchange of ideas.

[@chaosXP3RT]

@@Grimshak81 It doesn't matter what LP's credentials are if he fails to act like it lol

[@jamesrowlands8971]

And when this meets serious topics of engineering, it's equally problematic. Ask an engineer why he designed something that resembles something else and he'll tell you that this is the proven way to meet the requirements. Ask a layman entertainer on KZbin and he'll try to infer some of ideological link between a modern day tank plant half way to Siberia and the narrow moustache man, because he thinks two things look similar.

[@jamesrowlands8971]

@@Grimshak81 being a professional researcher and at the same time an utter clown and completely unserious person does make for someone worth ideologically fixating on. It just means you like to wallow in the mud too.

[@cliffmullen6751]

LOL!!!! "Take a chill pill". Haven't heard that since i retired. Solid video

[@andrewreynolds4949]

Excellent, this is similar to my own thoughts on the matter (but with more detail and expertise!)

[@richardautry8269]

I think that the Chieftain has a conspiracy to mention track tension in every video. :P