A Deep Dive into the Tiger I, by the Chieftain

[@WorldWarTwo]

Big thank you to Chieftain for an excellent episode! Check out his channel at kzbin.info

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

And to the US Army's Armor and Cavalry Collection and Rob Cogan for access to the tank and his presentation. It took time out of his very, very busy day, I appreciate it.

[@InterestedAmerican]

I loved the Kelly's Heroes reference in describing the Tiger. Very funny.

[@gmnotyet]

Just in time for Kursk!

[@typxxilps]

Survived decades outside in the nature so must be quite good cause what has last so long from WW2 ? V2 rockets , a few planes, a few 8.8 and that is it

[@oldmangimp2468]

For the TGA... If you haven't already established one, I have a suggestion for the Army motto: "Nunc tempus est" The time is now.

[@Valdagast]

"If you want to see an intact Tiger or King Tiger, they're still out there." This made me think of hordes of Tiger tanks, roaming the wilds looking for ammunition and fuel.

[@jaydenwilliams6885]

In the beautiful fields and forests of Europe, one can sometimes see herds of Tiger 1s in their natural habitat. They are known to coexist and cohabitate with flocks of Stugs. But there is still danger around, Tigers are often preyed on by brutal ground attack aircraft.

[@WorldWarTwo]

They live near Bielefeld and are just as real as that town

[@johnjones_1501]

Didn't Netflix have a whole documentary a while back about Wild Tiger Kings?

[@ABrit-bt6ce]

Bovington or Arsenalen are their natural habitat.

[@voiceofraisin3778]

@@ABrit-bt6ce Those are captive specimens and the breeding programme hasnt worked so far.

[@ericsommers7386]

Me to the Chieftain: "Don't hit me with them negative waves so early in the morning."

[@AtomicBabel]

It leaks gas everywhere! But we still love it

[@ridethecurve55]

No Way In Hell would you ever get me into one of these Beasts. I can imagine getting injured from a hit and not being able to get myself out all the while the ammo is starting to brew up and I'm like, OH SHIT! WTF ^@(*(&@%$!!

[@AtomicBabel]

Did no one else get the reference???? 🙃😮🙁

[@Archeangelous]

@@AtomicBabel Kelly's Heroes ofc

[@chrisearles4836]

Love the movie reference daddy-o

[@FLORATOSOTHON]

A very interesting presentation of the Tiger 1. The turret traverse speed, explains why tank ace Michael Wittmann preferred to rotate the entire tank rather than the turret. He was using his Tiger like the tank destroyers he was previously experienced with.

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

Every tank commander worth his payment would turn the thickest armor towards the enemy. 1 min for a 360° isn't too slow to begin with and this is a substantially heavier turret than on Sherman or T-34. Since you will barely turn more than 90° in an engagement and you can increase the rotation speed by just pushing the pedal, the roation isn't bad at all. When you have to turn your turret 180° or 360°, either recon was very bad or something has gone horribly wrong or both. From personal experience on Leo 1, 360° high speed turret rotation while being buttoned up is a theme park attraction. Have your spit bags ready. 🙂

[@hourlardnsaver362]

He did use his Tiger like a StuG. And it came back to bite him in hilarious fashion when he charged headlong into a textbook tank ambush during his last battle.

[@frankcasella423]

​@@ottovonbismarck2443 why turn 360 degrees when you can turn 0 degrees

[@mt1885]

@@hourlardnsaver362 Every country that has challenged or invaded Russia ends like that. Vastly under estimated, like today people laugh at their tanks and hardware. But having over complex machines that require vast amounts of maintenance and supplies always loses on the battlefield.

[@hourlardnsaver362]

@@mt1885 True, but Wittmann’s last battle wasn’t against the Russians. It was against the British and Canadians. He was tasked with attacking Canadian tanks massing north of the French town of Cintheux and given seven Tigers. Wittmann, being the ex-StuG commander and hyperaggressive maniac he was, took them and charged straight toward the objective, through an open field and into the line of fire of the British 1st Northamptonshire Yeomanry and the Canadian Sherbrooke Fusiliers. Only two Tigers made it back after the ambush. Neither of them was Wittmann’s. Of the five destroyed Tigers, three were taken out in quick succession by a Yeomanry Firefly called Velikye Luki, with Joe Ekins acting as the gunner. Another was taken out by a Firefly belonging to the Sherbrookes. As for Wittmann’s Tiger, there’s been disputes over who killed it (and him). Ekins claimed responsibility, but recent evidence seems to point to the Sherbrookes as the ones who killed him. His Tiger was apparently hit in the left rear fuel tank by a Sherman III with a 75mm gun from 500 feet away. So the most overhyped Tiger tank commander may have been killed by an “inferior” tank.

[@ForgottenHonor0]

"Always with the negative waves, Moriarty!" 🤣🤣🤣 Kelly's Heroes FTW!

[@firstcynic92]

"Crap."

[@ForgottenHonor0]

@@firstcynic92 "Mooooooooove OUUUUUUUUUUUT!!!!" _yodels_

[@MadMonk_]

I must admit I do like the “cutaway” views of the tank. Apart from allowing a great insight into the various thickness of the various Armoured plates. Equally, if they hadn’t cutaway the collection, they would have gone to the scrap yard decades ago. Once again thank you for sharing

[@billd2635]

And an excellent view of just how thin the top deck and top turret armor is. People who say you couldnt KO a tank with MG rounds from aircraft need to see this.

[@hansvonmannschaft9062]

@@billd2635 Before you tell anyone to see this, find out how "thin" the thin parts really are. In this case, an early model, 25mm. Then it went up to 40mm. People who say you couldn't KO this tank with MG rounds from aircraft either knew why, or guessed right. The latter would need to see this, so their correct assumption becomes knowledge.

[@stevebarrett9357]

An interesting talk. I was reading an article in the inet 'tank encyclopedia' which suggested that in addition to replacing the wide tracks for rail transport, it was also necessary to remove the outer road wheels. This talk got me thinking about the Soviet 'beast slayer', SU-152 and I found The Chieftain's talk on the ISU-152. It was interesting to learn of the 'log' on the Soviet vehicle. I'm glad you folks at World War Two chose to partner with The Chieftain.

[@markfryer9880]

A damn fine choice!

[@Chiller01]

Yes, too bad they couldn’t swing a deal with C&Rsenal again.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Steve. We're privileged to have The Chieftain in our corner providing his expertise & good humor.

[@poiuyt975]

@@WorldWarTwo Don't forget about his beautiful face (11:02) ;-)

[@ryanj610]

Yep. You can see that removing the tracks alone doesn't reduce the width of the tank at all. Mud guards, too

[@joshuasill1141]

On of the interesting things I've read about Germany's production is that much of the forced labor that built these machines sabotaged them every chance they could. It wasn't something very blatant or easily noticeable. They did things like stuff rags and cigarette butts into oil and coolant lines. Put gears in transmissions and drives in backwards or wrong. Put flywheels together backwards. Leave off piston rings. Crimp or bend or not connect oil and coolant lines. Put in parts rejected from QC. Not fully torque down bolts or nuts. All these little things would allow the tank to pass all the initial tests and procedures, but once it hit the field it would break down faster.

[@yetanother9127]

Happened in non-tank arms manufacture too--you'll hear occasional stories of an Allied fighting position or vehicle being hit by a shell that turned out to have no explosive filler in it.

[@Castragroup]

Eh at least they saved money on food

[@hernerweisenberg7052]

Thats probably part of the reason there are serial numbers on every single part, so they could catch and shoot the saboteurs.

[@yetanother9127]

@@hernerweisenberg7052 Actually, serializing many different parts was standard practice in the German arms industry going back decades. Even with a serial number, you could at best trace a part to a certain factory. Every part would've passed through the hands of dozens or hundreds of workers, so tracing an act of sabotage to a specific person would've been all but impossible. (The Nazis were thorough record-keepers, but not _that_ thorough.)

[@voiceofraisin3778]

It might not even have been deliberate. Machining takes skil, you can learn it but it takes a long time to get good. Instead of having skilled trained workers you have prisoners and 'guest workers' who are being trained on the job, have a high mortality and illness rate so you have a high turnover. You have underfed worker forced into long hours so theyre tired, losing concentration and are just not physically cappable of precision work. Many of the factories are in quickly built underground bases, air raid tunnels underpasses and other areas, these have limited lighting, limited space for moving materials and product. Precison work is difficult. An artillery fuse has the precision of a decent swiss watch and your trying to get it built in low lighting by a half starved amateur. Add production targets that may be faster than the production line can physically produce product and you have a recipe for disaster.

[@theonlymadmac4771]

I hab a patient, an old guy 15 years ago, former German tank commander. He thought, the Tiger was a good tank „ because I survived the war in it“. He also changed my understanding of the effectiveness of WW II airpower against tanks. „How did you protect yourselves against enemy airplanes?“ „ we closed the hatches“. And:“ why should they try to kill our tanks, difficult, dangerous, when they could blow up our fuel supply“

[@Idahoguy10157]

excellent reasons from a man who’d know

[@minuteman4199]

@@Idahoguy10157 You try to blow up the tanks AND the fuel supply. You try to blow up the tanks when troops on the ground are desperately calling out for air support. They don't care if the tanks run out of gas in two hours, they want to stop getting shot at NOW!

[@Idahoguy10157]

@@minuteman4199 …. I grasp that. that wasn’t what I said or implied. My father and uncles were WW2 vets. They had their own experiences

[@zzirSnipzz1]

Tiger's and panthers were vulnerable to Airburst artillery shells in testing the shell would go down in and perforate parts like the radiator etc one of the things the old churchill tank was underated for it could drive through artillery fire and almost be safe from it they say

[@Electricfox]

Fantastic points, both of them.

[@ldmitruk]

in this example of a Tiger I the cut away sides make it easier to deal with "Oh bugger! The tank is on fire."

[@zimms87]

But it's a big disadvantage for "Oh bugger! The tank is under fire."

[@andypaine7489]

When I was a kid (1974-6) my dad was stationed in Aberdeen Proving Ground and our neighborhood was literally across the street from the Tank Museum (you can image how many times I was kicked off of playing on the tanks!). Like your Tiger, they also had a Panzer 3 (maybe early 4) that had its hull opened up so you could see inside on display.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks Andy, glad to hear your experiences.

[@spaceman081447]

Wow! You and your friends must have been in "hog heaven."

[@The_god_of_reeeeeeeee]

@@WorldWarTwoI can’t believe you didn’t take the opportunity to make a 501st joke (Star Wars)

[@PanzerdivisionWiking]

This was a really cool surprise video! Thank you everyone at Time Ghost Army, Chieftain, & everyone at Fort Benning.

[@buildthings79]

I live 20 miles from Aberdeen MD. Now I can no longer see any tanks because of this place which is not open to the public. Tanks...Tanks alot.

[@Ulrich.Bierwisch]

31:21 I cant imaging a better viewing angle to make another final point. That is as badass as it can be and nobody will ever dare to dispute this.

[@markfryer9880]

This was a very thoughtful and informative video. All I can say with my knowledge of fixing things is "Thank God I didn't have to service the damn thing!" Mark from Melbourne Australia

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Mark 🇦🇺

[@OneLeatherBoot]

There are a bunch of videos on YT from the Australian tank Museum up in QLD where they restore/ fix/ remake/ bodge various tanks, including a bunch of German WW2 models. Well work a watch if you haven't seen them, as it gives a pretty good impression of dealing with machines & parts that weigh a lot, as you can likely appreciate.

[@markfryer9880]

@@OneLeatherBoot Thanks for the tip, I am already watching the Aussie Armour and Artillery Museum. Lots of hard work being done!

[@OneLeatherBoot]

@@markfryer9880 good stuff. My wife doesn't know it yet, but i'll be doing a trip to go through the armour museum in the near future.

[@canigetanoorah]

Many interesting points made in the video, there has been a shift more recently in downplaying the effectiveness of the Tiger 1. I've been reading the book Tiger Battallion 507 which is made up of diary entries and combat reports from veterans of the unit and they certainly had some incredible successes on the eastern front, in 3 days of fighting around Karnievo in Poland 3rd company had destroyed 170 enemy tanks with no losses. They do report a lot of breakdowns however the repair company was very effective in getting vehicles repaired and back in action. Fielded in the right terrain with experienced crews and good supply and maintenance the Tiger was certainly an effective vehicle

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for the recommendation, cold warfighter

[@joaogomes9405]

I think a lot of the tiger's reputation is owed to the fact that the big cats were the bogeymen of allied tank crews, but the much more ubiquitous and common panzer IV F2/Js and StuG IVs were just as dangerous, especially in hit and run tactics. When you don't know what's hitting you but you know it's putting holes through all the tanks around you, it's natural to assume it's a big cat doing it (especially if the culprit was able to slip away after an ambush), when really the more common tanks and assault guns can do it just as well. A Sherman, jumbo non-withstanding, or a T34 is not going to fair any better against a 76mm high velocity gun than it would against an 88mm high velocity gun. So reports on how scary tiger ambushes were could be inflating that tiger reputation without it actually having anything to do with tigers or panthers.

[@CastleGraphics]

I guess my observation would not be that there has been a recent 'downplaying', but a recent 'reality check'. I think quite a few people over the years have over-hyped the good points without balancing out with the not-so-good points. As you mention, a good, well-supplied unit was a serious threat...but as always, that's not the entire story.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Castle Graphics, The opening posters point was that in recent years there has been an exaggerated fashion to declare the Tiger as useless, a waste of resources, ineffective, a pile of junk etc. That's not a "reality check". That's just nonsense. People still want to fight WW2 in 2022.

[@chartreux1532]

I'm German as well as a Historian for the IFZ and like most Germans of my Generation, i grew up with Grandfathers and Granduncles who served which included also one Relative who served on a Panther and later Tiger Crew both in the East and then the Battle of the Bulge (Ardennenoffensive). And what i learned from both Veterans & Historical Research is that the Tiger both had great Advantages and was devastating in many Cases, especially against the Soviets. However there was also a lot of Disadvantages ans catastrophic Cases of Tigers. But we are on the Internet and especially Axis Fanboys tend to overhype it while the Soviet Fanboys do the exact opposite and both are wrong. Sadly there are also Historians & Researchers out there who have their Biases and like to present a Topic as either Good or Bad. Instead of doing what every Historian learns to do and presents both the Good and Bad. "Pop-Historians" are especially guilty of that, but Pop-Historians sell more Books, so it's lucrative to present only half the Story of a Topic. Prost & Cheers from the Bavarian Alps

[@657449]

Thank you for the detailed view of the tank and it’s strong and weak points. As a tank crewman in M48 and M60 tanks, I can see how the designers had conflicting views on the final product. The tank originally was designed to support the infantry. Second roll was anti tank sniper. They were not hard to work on if you had one knowledge person to run the show .

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching

[@AtotheZ7]

Loved how you had a person who was or is clearly in the Army, possibly commanding a tank at some point, and talking about it. It gives a better analysis of it. Also, gotta feel sorry for the crews. For a while I thought being a tanker would easy, nope!

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Both Rob and myself are armor officers.

[@shawnr771]

​@@TheChieftainsHatch Salute. From an 11M3. Excellent video. There was a plethora of new information.

[@shaider1982]

One nice thing about the new KF51 Panther was they advertised that it took into account being able to travel in European roads and railcars, something that the Tiger has some difficulty due to its wide tracks. This is possible due to reduction in some of the passive armor to lighten in more than the Leo 2.

[@copter2000]

KF51 recreational vehicle when?

[@shaider1982]

@@copter2000 😂 Yup, I guess with capability to launch drones to scout out nice camping areas, it can function as such. Seriously, though, hope it does work as said in the tin if it ever is mass produced.

[@_ArsNova]

Absolutely nothing unique to the KF51. Basically all postwar tanks have had to meet rail requirements. Most tanks from WWII even had to meet them still, the Tiger was just a rare case where size trumped simplicity of rail logistics.

[@zeitgeistx5239]

You leave out WW2 European roads had trouble sustaining its weight, let alone road bridges. Which was why the Hermans desperately stuck to rail transport for armor.

[@OneLeatherBoot]

@@zeitgeistx5239 Any tank wears out their transmission, tracks, engine etc etc and usually have only a few hundred km before requiring various rebuilds/ spares. Longer trips are always planned by truck low bed, or rail; plus it is faster. The heavier the tank, generally the faster it occurred. Not to mention the fuel required to road march, as well as road and bridge considerations.

[@danielnavarro537]

Very interesting learning the outside, inside, background, and how and why it was transport during the war and much more. Overall very good video explaining the tank and how the Tiger Tank was in the war and the schematics of the exterior and interior of the tank. Hopefully from this more videos of different tanks can be viewed. Such as the Soviet T-34, British Churchill Tanks, American Sherman, and many other. Good video overall.

[@catharsis3881]

Check out the Chieftan's Inside the hatch videos. He has many in a similar style, showing exactly what your looking for.

[@TacoSallust]

It was great listening to Rob Cogan talk about this early-model Tiger. Huge fan of the Chieftain, TimeGhost, and World of Tanks! (console)

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching, TacoSallust!

[@PAcifisti]

Don't be sad for it being cut. This is far more informative and gives a lot more clue with how things worked. Would've loved to see people inside on the crewspots to get a proper idea of the space they had for each.

[@WorldWarTwo]

@PAcifisti Indeed, the cut-away and its use as a teaching aid is as much a part of this vehicle's story as its wartime service. You might also be interested in The Tank Museum's excellent video on their 'Cut In Half Centurion' kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2emoYSOis-Vb6M complete with dummy crew 😉

[@louisavondart9178]

The WW1 tanks in the musuem in Brussels have parts removed so you can look inside through plexiglass panels. In the Israeli tank musuem in Latrun, they have cut a Merkava tank completely in half, lengthwise, so you can see everything inside. Brilliant....

[@TheLouHam]

It served a valuable purpose as a teaching tool. People who whine about it seems to have some warped priorities. Sorry the people who captured this tank wanted to use it as a valuable tool rather than preserve it so decades later, people could ogle it like it’s their tank waifu.

[@johanrunfeldt7174]

25:25 Michael Wittmann (who had a backgrund as a StuG-commander) preferred to turn the entire tank, rather than wait for the slow traverse of the turret. this was a tactic/technique he - according to his own account - used at Villers-Bocage for instance.

[@thefantasyreview8709]

You got to get the gun on the enemy and kill him before he kills you. You get it there the quickest way you can.

[@tapeesa2866]

And Michael Whitman got turned to paste for doing that

[@thefantasyreview8709]

@@tapeesa2866 He eventually got taken out by a Sherman Firefly I believe..in 1944.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

@tapeesa2866 Wittmann was killed because his unit was tasked with the impossible. He wasn't even supposed to go (as he was acting battalion commander when he was killed) but he felt the task was too much for Heurich. He was ordered by Kurt Meyer to make a preemptive strike at allied positions and try to catch them napping, biding time for the German army to withdraw towards Falaise. Though Wittmann was killed, the next day the rest of his Tigers knocked out most of the 44 Shermans that the Canadian 28th Armoured Regiment lost near Estrees la Campagne, with zero Tiger losses, and prevented the Canadians reaching Falaise quickly.

[@rotwang2000]

The unsung heroes of the Tiger story are the maintenance crews, they performed real miracles to get damaged tanks from the field and get them working again.

[@alpharius4434]

@@michaelpielorz9283 Provided you'd have the good engine. Tiger necessitated specific tractors built only for the Tiger to permit the reparation crew to operate adequately.

[@memonk11]

Not "heroes".

[@lyndoncmp5751]

And the Tiger had an impressive, for a heavy tank, overall operational average of 65% to 70% (West and East Fronts). This was close to the Panzer IV. Source, Tom Jentz. Tiger I and II Combat Tactics.

[@phildicks4721]

Reminds me of a spinoff manga story from Girls und Panzer where Erica and the rest of her crew are removing their Tiger's mulitple wheels to fix a broken inner wheel. Erica gets angry at Germans and their obsession with complex engineering.😁

[@Token_Civilian]

As a late pre-teen / early teen, I learned about the torsion bar suspension from a model of a Tiger that had functional tracks / suspension.

[@larryzigler6812]

Might be easier just to give your age.

[@pierremauboussin3527]

You can see on newsreels that the torsion bars gave German tanks a very stable ride, almost like having a hydraulic leveler. Must have been a real asset with the Zeiss optics.

[@Ydmaster]

Thank you Indy. You are the reason why so many viewers anticipate new videos on your channel. You deserve an Emmy award for all your hard works. Also congrats to your team. You are awesome.

[@iupetre]

You know you've been waiting for this special. We all have.

[@sladjanteodosin4607]

These Indy's impressions of Winston Churchill will never stop to amuse me.

[@troidva]

Despite all the stories American soldiers told about battling hordes of Tiger Tanks, GIs only confronted them in battalion-sized numbers twice in the war: Feb. 14-21 1943 during the fights leading up to the debacle at Kasserine Pass; and December 1944 in during the Battle of the Bulge. All other encounters were against company-sized units or smaller in Italy or France. During the Normandy battles, it was the Brits and not the Americans who fought the Tiger units. Allied soldiers often mistook up armored Panzer IVs for Tigers.

[@alpharius4434]

This kind of bias case is happening often in any army. The average russian Soldier called any German fighting fiercely an SS, and the average Landser were ofen calling any Russian soldier fighting fiercely a "Siberian", especially in winter. The same goes with German, who often told that allies airplane where the decisive factor in many battle, yet, the Allied soldiers often stopped the offensive without much support.at the Battle of the Bulge or the counteroffensive of Mortain. The air support playing a role of accelerator of defeat, but not so much a decisive factor.

[@Paciat]

Thats because you dont know what a horde is. Its 50 to 500 men. A battalion is up to a 1000 men.

[@randymcfarland8585]

I live in the midwest , the Patton museum at ft Knox was one of my favorite places to visit. It pissed me off immensely when they moved the majority of the exhibits out east.

[@plunder1956]

almost 20 years ago I was chatting to one of the younger maintenance team who worked on the Tiger, he was actually standing beside it at the time. He did say that the Tiger was a pain in the bum to work on - even in a nice dry workshop. Partly that is due to it's complexity, but so many of the design decisions will make transport logistics and regular field maintenance really difficult. It might be a very effective tank, but it was really expensive to make. I do wonder if it was really a sensible design, even for the doctrine it was designed to meet.

[@whirving]

I think some of that is the engineering design difference between US and Germany. If you've ever owned a German car that you worked on you may get what I'm talking about. Once you "get it" about how things are done, say with a 1979 VW Sirocco, then it becomes easier and more predictable to diagnose . I've owned several German cars, they are fun to work on once you understand them... still, I prefer American and Japanese cars.

[@gustaveliasson5395]

@The Silenced Russia didn't even exist during WWII. Sure, the USSR allowed its constituent republics some self-governance in terms of culture and traditions and stuff, and technically every republic had the right to leave the union (collective voluntarism being a prerequisite for a successful communist society and all that), but matters of infrastructure and development of military technology were the domain of the central government and not something an individual republic would have much say in.

[@whirving]

@The Silenced Yes, but I think that Germany had something like it but it was just a matter of a different approach. Certainly no other nation had the capacity, or the potential for the production levels that the US had. That gets into manufacturing rather than design/engineering philosophy, which is also fascinating.

[@whirving]

@The Silenced Yes, at some point in the past when I did manufacturing work we studied the various methods that arose during and after the war. These were introduced to Germany and Japan to help the rebuilding effort. One of the books was called "Just In Time for Toyota" which really says it all. The existence of Statistical Quality Control in US and in some British Manufacturing was a total sea change from hand fitting and bottleneck heavy methods used by other countries.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

And yet the Tiger's overall operational average in 1944/45 of 65% west front and 70% east front wasn't much different to the Panzer IV, which was 71% west front and 68% east front in the same period. Source. Tom Jentz. Tiger I and II Combat Tactics.

[@johnlinley2702]

(22:28) "that vision block system would have had ballistic glass inside" to protect the driver and prevent someone from shooting into the driving compartment. This is true. When the ballistic glass became damaged with use, it had to be replaced with new glass, which was supplied. When the supplies ran out, the port had to be left open, and the metal shutters used. There was nothing odd about running across vision block without glass. The glass got rarer and rarer as the war dragged on. American films on tank killing shown to the troops recommended shooting into these slits, which could blind the tank, or if without glass, could kill the crew. Some of these films recommended using mud to fill these slots, if possible. Private Ryan was not wrong.

[@daveybyrden3936]

Have you any documented examples of Panzers running without a glass block for the driver? It seems like one of the last things they would want to lose. Because he wasn't just at risk from soldiers shooting into the slot, he was at risk from shrapnel sprayed by nearby explosions.

[@johnlinley2702]

The fact that a small satchel of replacement glass was issued to each tank is the proof most people use. It had, as I remember, 7 replacement blocks. When they were all used, you went without until new replacements were supplied. The first mention I found of this unavoidable weak point was the US mention of it in books and pamphlets published for our solders. It was as well mention in such classic training films as "Tank Hunting". I think that was the name. My memory is not so good as it once was. Nor is my promptness. I did not see your reply. @@daveybyrden3936

[@neilgriffiths6427]

Say what you like, when the vid shifted to the frontal view, I nearly choked on my coffee - it's not sleek like the Leopard 2, it's not hi-tec like the Abrams, it's not capable like the Challenger II - this tank is all about menace. That is a SCARY tank to be standing in front of.

[@alamore5084]

Menace with a capital M. When operating and well supplied, if you encountered one of these you were finished. Hence Allied forces feared the Tiger and would see them even when they weren't there.

[@chejlr]

When i was in fifth grade i was crazy about tanks. I checked out a book on military equipment. I saw pictures of German tanks and on the credits i kept seeing Aberdeen proving grounds in Maryland. The name stayed with me. Fast forward to 1978 i had been in the Army for almost two years and stationed at Ft Gordon Ga. I got orders for Germany and got a couple weeks leave. I was going to drive my big block Chevelle SS home to Massachusetts which is another story. So i got a road atlas and mapped out my drive home. I noticed that interstate 95 passed right by Aberdeen and decided i was going to try to find the proving grounds. I did find it and for a guy that loved German tanks that place was heaven. I spent the afternoon loking and climbing on my favorite tanks. Many years i on a trip down south i planned a stop there and was surprised that all the tanks had been away. Im too old now to try to make it to Ft Benning to see that great collection they have but im glad i made that stop when i was a young doggie.

[@dr.johannesmunch891]

the inline MG was used with tracer-ammo for pointing out targets. A very useful tool in early joint-arms combat.

[@FutureBoyWonder]

Ive been patiently building up episodes and i can no longer wait. Im starting back up ive waited longer than i imagined i could but it feels good to start watching again. Love your guys work one of my favorite big time channels along with "Voices of the Past" "History Time" "Fall of Civilizations" and "Real Time History" Of course there are many smaller individual historians that are amazing but its too many to list History with Cy honorable mention

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching

[@anarchopupgirl]

The cuts decreased the historical value, but increased the educational value, and ultimately that's what these museums are about at the core

[@Red_Four]

The cuts were done mainly to save them from being scrapped as that was the only way to justify keeping them as training aids. There are Tiger fanboys all of the time coming on the National Armor and Cavalry facebook page demanding that they be restored to running condition and calling for Rob's resignation over something that was done long before even his father was born. It's nice to see people that are understanding of why doing such a thing was necessary.

[@thefantasyreview8709]

The cuts don't really matter. Some WW2 tanks are rebuilt from smashed up frames, and the whole tank is in pieces. The cut out pieces could be put back in if they wanted to.

[@randomDIYguy-k4r]

Arguably increases the historical value because it's a better teaching tool.

[@edh6841]

Lots of neat tanks out at Aberdeen 30 years or so ago when I used to visit, dont know whats still there now. Great show Chieftain!

[@thanos_6.0]

I am really glad to finally see a video on the channel discussing the tiger. I hoped you would release one when the Tiger first entered the Battlefield in late 1942 on the eastern front around Leningrad. Better late then never ;) Especially since I have a Revell model 1:35 of the Tiger on my shelf.

[@tapeesa2866]

It also got captured near Leningrad in January

[@Kouki240sx]

I’ve always loved the look of Tiger 1.

[@markfryer9880]

Plenty of Allied tank crews didn't like to see a Tiger I!

[@joezephyr]

I have a Jeep Wrangler. In my previous vehicles, on a narrow road I would always give way. Today the others give way. I think in their minds, they are seeing a Tiger Tank :)

[@mcnuggets2825]

There’s just something so appealing about a big box with a big gun. Love the t-34 and Sherman too angels are nice and all but there is just something about a combat box.

[@simplymadness8849]

Why are people no longer using “the” in front of these tank model names?

[@wayneantoniazzi2706]

The Tiger 1 looks formidable indeed, but a bit "antique," if you follow my meaning. The Tiger 2 on the other hand looks terrifying, even by modern standards. Just my opinion.

[@leo020671]

Thanks!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching, Leo!

[@Tom-th1oy]

Really enjoyed this video, many interesting facts about the Tiger not necessarily talked about in other videos.. The curator Rob knew his stuff and provided some good outtakes too!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Tom!

[@marksasahara1115]

"Always with the negative waves, Moriarty! Always with the negative waves". I love that Chieftain made a Kelly's Heroes reference in the opening. Thank you Rob & Chieftain!

[@spiraling6980]

When I look at the frontal armor always get two impressions. One is that wow, it's a really thick and heavy slab of steel! Then the other impression I quickly get is that it doesn't really look that thick considering its expected to defeat rounds flying thousands of feet per second! Such an interesting beast of a tank. Absolutely fascinating!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, very glad you enjoyed it

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

Tiger drivers were trained to angle their tank against threats at 45 degrees - nearly doubling the effective armor.

[@DovahFett]

@@TTTT-oc4eb They'd also preferably engage their targets at long range. The T-34 didn't even have an engagement range as far as the Panzer III due to poor optics and communication devices. It would have never had a chance against a Tiger that had spotted it first.

[@polarvortex3294]

@@TTTT-oc4eb Never hear that before. Seems like it could be a good move, but, wouldn't that necessarily expose some of your weaker side armor? And wouldn't you be a bigger target, too, since the sides of a tank are longer than the more narrow front of the tank?

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

@@polarvortex3294 Unlike a Panther, the Tiger's side armor was almost as thick as its hull front armor. Its user manual has several pages dedicated to this.

[@stenmoeller]

I am a big fan of down-to-earth, no-nonsense narrative, and this is a brilliant example. Great stuff!

[@majinojinn]

"They don't just say what's the biggest gun we can put on it... there's a doctrinal framework." Soviet engineers: "hold my vodka!"

[@emberfist8347]

And most of the Soviet designs that tried that don’t work. The KV-2 didn’t last long for a reason putting a 152mm howitzer in a turret of a tank which an already huge turret and has trouble crossing bridges is going to add more drawbacks.

[@majinojinn]

@@emberfist8347 entire SU, ISU, and IS family of vehicles... not commenting of efficacy, just trend to design big.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

The Tiger 1 was arguably the first true "super tank". There had been earlier candidates, like the Matilda II, Char B1 and the KV 1, but all these had several factors that limited their value. In the Tiger 1 it "all came together"; firepower, ammo quality, superb sights, armor (both thickness and quality), excellent offroad mobility, veteran crews, proven tactics and even (relatively) reliability. Arguably no tank, sooner or later, had the margin of superiority that the Tiger enjoyed from its introduction in late 1942 to early 1944, when the Panther finally became combat ready and the Soviets introduced the IS-2. Even so, the "old" Tiger 1 remained at least the equal to any new Allied tank introduced until the end. Its mental value was such that it basically upgraded the entire fleet of German AFVs - after all, any engine sound out there COULD be a Tiger. Of course, when it comes to weapon systems there is nothing like a free lunch, and the Tiger came with the usual disadvantages of heavy tanks; cost, extreme weight and high maintenance.

[@joaogomes9405]

I guess it's going to depend on what you consider "equal". Yeah sure it could stand up to a sherman long 76 or a t34-85 with ease, but these tanks could also stand up to it. The allies had tools to put holes in tigers before the IS-2 got introduced. And they were being produced in droves while the tiger could barely keep up. All for a tank that pound for pound, had more or less the same performance in defensive warfare as the cheaper, more reliable, more effective and more ubiquitous panzer IV F2/J and stuG, which could just as easily punch straight through shermans and t34s.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

@@joaogomes9405 Both the US 76mm and the Soviet 85mm was plagued with poor quality standard ammo and underperformed in the AT rolle. The Tiger was at least as reliable as the Panzer IV.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Yes. The Tiger I was truly the first real "battlefield dominating" tank.

[@viceralman8450]

@@TTTT-oc4eb The american 76mm using the M62A1 APC shell was able to perforate it from 800 meters and shells were made with excelent quality so cut the bs.

[@TTTT-oc4eb]

@@viceralman8450 The quality problems of the armor piercing rounds for the 76mm M1 and 90mm M3 are well known. The rounds were too soft and in addition the HE filler often detonated on impact, causing the round to shatter.

[@_ArsNova]

Funny how at 23:16 the museum curator (incorrectly) completely contradicts Chieftain. Claiming the Tiger was built entirely around the 8.8cm gun, when in reality the Tiger had initially no plans to even use it, and the fact that it did really being more a product of circumstance. The German Army wanted the 7.5cm gun, the 8.8 only won because of a better HE charge and simplified logistics.

[@timothyhouse1622]

I think the confusion is because there were parallel development programs for the Tiger; one headed by Porsche and the other by Henschel. The Porsche design started with the chassis developed by Porsche and the turret was designed by Krupp around the 8.8 cm. The turret would be kept and put on the Henschel design. So, as Obi Wan Kenobi said, it is true from a certain point of view.

[@_ArsNova]

@@timothyhouse1622 Perhaps I'm just being pedantic, but what he said is indeed totally untrue. He says: "The Germans quickly embraced the 88 as their new tank gun. So really this whole tank starts out based on that weapon system." When in reality, the Porsche and Henschel hull designs were developed before a gun had even been selected for the tank. The request for a turret design only came after, with Krupp submitting what would become the Tiger's turret for the Porsche hull, based around the 8.8cm gun. As was typical of German tank design, the tank began development to meet a requirement, the gun came later. It wasn't until Tiger II that this trend was bucked.

[@WorldWarTwo]

I brought this up with the chieftan before we premiered and timothy is right the porche turret was designed around the 8.8 even though the gun wasnt the primary consideration when making the tank. Its a little confusing, i know.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

It comes down to frame of reference. The Tiger as it eventually was built turned out the way it was because it was based around the turret which was designed to hold the 8.8, once the 8.8 was selected. The entire 'breakthrough tank programe' was not designed about any specific gun, the 8.8 just ended up being selected. Once that was done, that was the end of that. So both of us are correct.

[@twt000]

Regarding museum...........Anyone know if that Tiger 1 in museum has original type paint? Or extra glossy for display.

[@geodkyt]

"OMG! They destroyed a Tiger by cutting the left side out!" Well, yes, but at the time, the US Army was rather interested in destroying Tigers in job lots. That is, after all, why they bothered shipping it back to the US. Even in 1946 when they actually chopped it, this wasn't a "priceless historical artifact" - it was an example of recent enemy equipment that *could* well end up being seen in combat on the other side in some theater. German WWII equipment ended up *all over the place* , including ComBloc armies and smaller, poorer nations (look at how much German WWII stuff Israel had in 1947...)

[@daveybyrden3936]

Pretty much nobody wanted Tigers even if they tried to purchase the other kinds of German tank.

[@neganrex5693]

In the 1960's Israel was using upgraded M-4 Sherman's to fight Panzer 4's as was used by the Siren army. In a way the Jews got their revenge on German tanks if nothing else. LOL.

[@jeffleach2668]

I had the opportunity to visit the Aberdeen proving ground around 2010. When we were leaving I saw a Tiger tank sitting out in a field with a bunch of other tanks neatly on display. Unfortunately I was with two other people and couldn’t stop to take a closer look. I guess that was this cutaway tank.

[@ColburnFreml]

Kelly's Hero's reference? I'm hooked, I'll watch the whole thing now.

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

I'm a tanker. Why would I not use any opportunity to put in a Kelly's Heroes reference?

[@ColburnFreml]

@@TheChieftainsHatch I don't know, I'm just happy for the reference. Not enough people have seen the best war movie of all time

[@joezephyr]

@@TheChieftainsHatch I associate Kellys Heroes with Jeeps. Watch the opening as Kelly splashes the German chow line :)

[@NathanOkun]

Armor sloping. Up to about 45-60 degrees from right angles, especially when using thin armor (under half the impacting projectile's diameter in thickness) sloping gives less improvement against old-fashioned steel AP/APC projectiles than simply making the plate thicker. So any low-angle sloping is usually based on other design requirements where a slope gives only a small added effect. Above the 45-50 degree range, sloping can get progressively more effective, though at the cost of internal space inside the thing being protected and, remember, only from certain directions, so sloping is kind of "virtual". The more pointed the nose shape, the better against thin plate, with the reverse against thick plate at higher angles.

[@TheJojoaruba52]

Thanks for this video. It was more thorough than previous videos I have seen. I appreciate your hard work in preserving history.

[@billd2635]

Defo the best channel covering the war on KZbin. You also have very good guests! Thanx so much for this. I learned some things and re-learned a whole lot more.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you so much! We're so happy that we were able to facilitate some learning for you 🙂 that's what we're here for. We love our guests too! -Will

[@davidhutchinson8301]

Thank you Chieftain and Rob, this is an excellent episode on the Tiger 1 #712, would like to see similar explanation on the other tanks in the U.S. Army Armor & Cavalry Collection

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, David

[@robertcogan7109]

Thank you for the kind words David. We're grinding through the final stages of moving into this new building but after that I'm hoping to reenergize our outreach on youtube.

[@jkcarroll]

Had to stop the video before the 30 second mark. It took me a while to connect the dots between "Moriarty" (who?) and "Kelly's Heroes" (one of THE best WW2/bank heist films of all time.) "Always with the negative waves!" I salute you, sir. Well done!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Jim!

[@jonathanpersson1205]

Thanks it was great to watch a documentary that tells us what we didnt know about the Tiger well done

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you Jonathan

[@jonL88]

Fantastic video! Nice to see the Chieftain again!

[@ronaldfinkelstein6335]

I like the "Kelly's Heros" reference.

[@shockwave6213]

My summary of the Tiger 1: A product of its time. An awesome machine that did the job it was given well for the time it was made in but started to show its age in a time of EXTREMELY rapid technological advancement.

[@KMac329]

Thank you, Chieftain. This is the most detailed, "nuanced" presentation of the Tiger I I've ever learned from.

[@americanpatriot2422]

Outstanding video with a lot of detailed info!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching

[@markreetz1001]

Enjoyed the analysis. It was nice to hear there were some good things, but German logistics couldn't keep up with it. The story of the Eastern Front. How many times have we heard of stalled attacks because they ran out of fuel...not to mention spare parts and supplies.

[@Nightdare]

"An army marches on its stomach" In more ways than 1

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Mark. Perhaps the armies have learnt their lesson by now about supply lines… but I doubt it

[@eldorados_lost_searcher]

@@WorldWarTwo We've only had a few thousand years of historical precedent to pay attention to and learn from. It's not as though a major power, in this day and age, and especially not a former participant in the war being presented by you, would disregard all of the lessons they should have learned from hard experience and doctrine. Right?

[@ToddSauve]

@@eldorados_lost_searcher Does a 40km long traffic jam outside Kyiv ring a bell? I don't think more of us could agree with you more! Ha, ha! Like who would forget to bring fuel and food? No one, right? The Keystone cops come to mind ... 🤷‍♂🙄😂😂😂

[@wanderschlosser1857]

And how many times we have heared of stalled attacks because there were a couple of Tigers in the way?

[@johnallison820]

Speaking of cutaways. When I was instructing at Todd Hall (no longer in existence but the LST packing trainer that stood behind it is still there) at Ft Knox, late 80's early 90's, the Patton Museum traded an XM803 iirc to APG for a Tiger II, at the time not cut away. Created quite a stir on post when it was towed down Eisenhower Ave to Todd Hall where it was parked next to my setup. I used to tease Marine master gunner students that it was the new M1A3 specifically built for the marines. After a year or so it was towed to Boatwrong maint facility where it was cut open and subsequently put on indoor display at the museum. Then moved to Ft Benning with the rest of the museum's assets.

[@paoloviti6156]

A very interesting video on the Tiger I that is the oldest Tiger in existence. It was conceived as a breakthrough heavy tank and therefore it was heavily armored but it was overall a difficult and expensive tank to to produce with high quality materials. I must point out an issue regarding the sloped armour: both Germany, Italy and France knew the advantages of the sloped armour since the 1st WW but it was never seriously adopted on the tanks. But curiously it was adopted on the Sd.Kfz 251 and the Sd.Kfz 250 so by the by planning Tiger it could be said that it was only because of the inherent conservationism of the planners and some generals that it was not implemented. In fact if you read carefully the original manual of the Tiger it emphatically stated no to stand at 12 o'clock in front of the enemy but to turn the front more side way in order to ricochet the incoming shots. Good job 👏 👍👍

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you Paolo. Very interesting

[@paoloviti6156]

@@WorldWarTwo you are welcome! 👍👍

[@blueduck9409]

Tiger had a good reputation, from both the crew and the enimies it faced on the battle field. It was likely one of the most advanced tanks during ww2.

[@Mechanized85]

Even Tiger is good, wasn't in the end asking you how to use them properly also aware of logistics and maintenance? even combat was done by combined arms teamwork efforts?

[@Dan-zq8dz]

I'm only a casual WWII buff, but I'm pretty sure at 12:00, that's a Panther, not a Tiger. I'm certain The Chieftain would never make such a blunder, so can only assume it's a hidden 'spot the mistake' contest. The customary reward in these occasions is an afternoon at the controls of said tank, with limited supervision.

[@esmenhamaire6398]

You're right, that IS a Panther! It was on and off the sceen so quickly that I didnt ntice when I watched teh video first time! :-}

[@Tepid24]

Might be an issue with the video clip in question being miscut. It looks like that footage of a Panther and the following footage of a Tiger came from the same film.

[@WorldWarTwo]

@Dan @Esme n'haMaire It is indeed a Panther and that is our mistake not The Chieftain's. We are working on getting it changed

[@mathewfines8727]

Rob Cogan: amazingly detailed view I have never seen before of the Tiger One. Thanks! Chieftain: Thank you for this great presentation!

[@AlexV-gi3wu]

This is really cool that it’s still intact after all these years. I pass by this building all the time on my way to work on Ft Benning and I never knew what treasures lay inside!

[@kennethflaming8606]

i hear ya, here in belgium in the ardennes we have the last fully preserved king tiger, you can visit it cause its outside next to the road

[@allensarsenal6161]

Always fun to see that museum. I went there when I was a basic trainee nearly two years ago and those pictures are some of my favorite. I gotta get back up there one day when everything is complete

[@Starfals]

That was very interesting to watch, as a fan of the Tiger tank and tanks in general. Thank you for the video!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching!

[@Starfals]

@@WorldWarTwo Thank you (the whole team) for the channel!

[@Carstuff111]

This, is epic that it still looks this good inside and out.

[@TheGixernutter]

Brilliant. That guy did a great job, with some real interesting knowledge and a good delivery BRAVO. Get him to do some more!! The other guy, yeah he's OK too. 🤣

[@sfs2040]

Excellent stuff as always!

[@myyou2b]

Absolutely fascinating! Well done.

[@z_actual]

Im sure most people realise that if they wanted to replace the armour cut outs on this tank they could simply weld new sections back in. Since the tank isnt meant for physical combat they dont really need to, likewise nor do they have to source armour plate to do it.

[@daveybyrden3936]

The smoke thrower assembly is missing from the left side - it was taken off along with the armour. So that would have to be replicated too. The same item on the right side was lost in battle.

[@calvingreene90]

A Tiger 1 working and armed was great but the cost of achieving that was possibly more than it was worth.

[@donaldhysa4836]

No it wasn't

[@alamore5084]

A wise statement. If they had grasped this it could have altered the outcome of the war. That said I love the Tiger.

[@jabezhane]

I remember reading "Panzer Commander" and noted that 80% of a Tiger Platoon Leader's job was going back the next day with your one working Tiger to go pick up and tow your broken down ones off the battlefield or the swamp 5 miles away. It was quite pathetic.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

Tigers actually had an overall operational ratio of 65-70%, which is pretty darn good for a heavy tank. Very few broke down on the battlefield.

[@jabezhane]

@@lyndoncmp5751 Possibly but the war memoirs of those who fought in them seem to spend more time doing recovery than fighting.

[@Wyrsa]

@31:25 I've seen a lot of inside the hatch videos that have a head on shot like this, but there's something about staring down a Tiger that makes my eyes widen just a bit.

[@andrewstevenson118]

I have a book about the 4th (NZ) Armoured Brigade. It recounts a story when some Kiwi tankers in a Sherman encountered a Tiger in an Italian town. My two favourite lines were "it was so big it seemed unfair!" and "before we could surrender, they did". 🙂

[@j.4332]

massa lombarda the germans lost a load of tigers in a small village.

[@torturebear]

0:12 Nice reference to Kelly's Heroes.

[@taboovsknowledge1603]

With heavy tanks, could it be said about, one pound of tank is 1000 pounds of maintenance following up from behind? Can't kill the tank, kill the support from the air. You would need air cover of the maintenance to be added to the total tank support. Can't have the enemy destroying the maintenance camp. Today it looks like small drones can cause havoc with just a well placed dumb bomb on the fuel or ammo. If quantum portation signals to the drone or self smart drones, the counter would be to shoot them down. This could lead to madness in layers of countermeasures for both sides!

[@ottovonbismarck2443]

Repairing tanks is a 24/7 job, no matter what model. From first hand accounts of Tiger maintainance units, they were usually hidden well away some 10 km behind the frontlines. This wasn't necessarily a forrest but preferably a built up area with some infrastructure, preferably a railway station close by. They had some light Flak and of course some immobile Tigers to defend themselves. They usually only came under fire when recovering vehicles from the frontlines or when the frontlines shifted rapidly, i.e. during "Bagration".

[@taboovsknowledge1603]

@@ottovonbismarck2443 Bagration? Sounds dreaded!

[@MyBoomStick1]

I REALLY appreciate you guys having another (relevant) youtuber do the hosting. Obviously can’t replace the regular hosts, but still great

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching, Nick

[@RJN82]

Your reference to "Kelly's Heroes" immediately brought back great memories of Big Joe, Crapgame, Oddball, and Pvt Kelly. Outside of this group of viewers, how many others would have a clue about this awesome movie?

[@Egilhelmson]

It is still on weekend movies, once every so often. Still too often to force me to buy the Blu-Ray or DVD version.

[@steffenritter7497]

Thanks very much! My father was a Sherman driver in the US 3rd Armored Division. His greatest fear was the Tiger, and second on the list was the Panther.

[@gunman47]

With Rheinmetall recently announcing the Panther KF51 tank recently a few weeks back, I wonder if we may also get to see the reincarnation of the Tiger tank in the near future too. Hmmm...

[@shaider1982]

Hope they also make a robot tank that can be used with the new Panther and name it Goliath.

[@PanzerdivisionWiking]

They are making a new Panther from the old spec? Edit: I just Looked up the article it’s a modern panther in mostly name only, still pretty cool though!

[@mathiasbartl903]

Tiger is an attack helicopter in current service.

[@j.b.macadam6516]

Outstanding and informative video of an iconic WW2 tank. Hearing the Chieftain quoting Moriarty from 'Kelly's Heroes' (my favorite movie), made me laugh! Thanks, guys!

[@mikepette4422]

I'm not sad at all that the tank was chopped and cut away because 1stly it's a lot better than being totally chopped up into gillette razors or some other random item. 2ndly yeah I think its cool you can look in an dsee what it was like rather than just imagine from the outside.

[@kgsvvgla2i]

Also, what people often tend to forget is that back in the day when these things were produced and used in warfare, they were commodities, not historically valuable rare items like today. A person responsible of deciding the fate of say, a Tiger I tank back in 40s would primarily think of an actual potential use like target practice. Pretty much no one in those days would have predicted that these vehicles would become anything more than scrapmetal. Same applies to numerous other things. Take guitars for an example. A brand new Les Paul sure was not a cheap guitar in the 50's but who could have imagined that it's price would be like twenty-fold in a few decades?

[@tomporemba1217]

Thanks to both of you for an interesting presentation. What really put the tiger into perspective, for me, was when I was at Bovington in '10 with my son. There was a very nicely presented area showing a fine mix of WW2 tanks. It had large graphics and full wall paintings - a well designed display. In front of each tank was a wood crate with a glass cover. the box was displayed mounted vertically, trying to look like a period ammo box. There was one round in each box representing the size of each with respect to the tank it was in front of. The other rounds in front of the other tanks all looked puny. Except for the 88mm round with the tiger tank. Wow. Not even close. Nice comparison.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching, tom. Great that you took your son to Bovington. It needs more support

[@captinobvious4705]

IMO the Tiger I is the most average tank in the war It's got a big gun and thick armour, but it's a heavy breakthrough tank It's slow and expensive, but again, it literally got the word heavy in the name It's heavy on the maintenance, but it was not bad It also had a moderately high K/D ratio, but again, it's a heavy tank, it's kinda the point! Real fearsome reputation, but again, it's a heavy tank, being scary is one of the points so again, the more I learn about the Tiger I, the more I see it as just an average tank; did it's job well enough, but nothing special

[@noobster4779]

An average tank in the middle of a war between below average tanks is still a very good vehicle

[@michelhedley1805]

Not slow for a heavy tank with a Tiger tank getting to 35 plus kms/hour on roads and getting about 20kms/hour doing cross country.

[@johnashleyhalls]

Of the comments I read, most of what you all have said I generally agree with. HOWEVER! The mechanical genius Moriarty who said "its a peice of junk" was the character played by Gavin MacLeod in the movie Kelly's Heroes. Also staring Telly Savalas, Don Rickles, Harry Dean Stanton, Carol O'Connor, Donald Sutherland and Clint Eastwood. Check it out!

[@billwilson3609]

Remember Oddball mentioning that Moriarty modified the transmission so the tank could go just as fast in reverse and forward? The M4 users were pestering the Army after D-Day for a reverse gear that would allow them to back out of trouble faster so Ordnance got someone like Spicer to work on that. They came up with a gearbox that attached to the rear of the transmission that allowed the driver to use all 5 forward gears in reverse. The Army decided not to put it into production since they felt that the war would be over within two months by the time any were ready to be shipped over to Europe.

[@SampoPaalanen]

My opinion is that the Tiger was decent design overall but a really bad design for the German Army when it came into service as by that they needed more easy to maintain "jack of all traits" tanks and the Tiger was neither.

[@TheEvertw]

In other words, they needed the Sherman, or, even better, the T-34 ;-) Well, luckily, the Allies were happy to give it to them.

[@SampoPaalanen]

@@TheEvertw In essence yes though a German designed and built version would be better. In a theoretical 1v1 fight in a flat featureless plain in clear weather Tiger would beat a Sherman or T-34 every single time and the allied tanks broke down about as often as well, but the difference here was that allied tanks were much easier to maintain so that the allies were able to keep their units close to full strength most of the time. While German units were pretty much constantly under manned and sometimes Tiger crews just left their tanks to rot as it was easier then to try towing them to be repaired. After all best weapon system in the world doesn't matter at all if it ain't in the frontline and the allies exploited the German issues to the fullest by bypassing the undermanned German Tank units thru gaps or weak points in the line and then struck at supply depots and similar real line targets that made the German logistics issues even worse. The one who makes best use of the resources they got is most likely gonna win a war over someone who is using their resources based on the war they'd want to fight rather then the war they're fighting.

[@jacquesstrapp3219]

The Tiger was never intended to be an all purpose tank. It was intended for a special role in heavy tank battalions. The Panzer IV was the general purpose medium tank and was roughly equivalent to Allied medium tanks.

[@SampoPaalanen]

@@jacquesstrapp3219 Yes I know that, but the truth of the matter was that there was not enough GP tanks so the Tiger was pushed into a role it was never meant to fill. That's why I said it was bad design for the German Army when it came to Service since what they needed was more Panzer IV or Panther tanks aka general purpose tanks, not highly specialized heavy break thru tanks. So the flaw wasn't in the design but rather with German HQ needing something else and then pushing the Tiger into a role it wasn't meant to be in and still reallocating resources to what they needed. Which is what I meant with "fighting the war they wanted to be rather the war they were in" so the Germans wasted resources building heavy break thru tanks when they needed general purpose tanks.

[@jacquesstrapp3219]

@@SampoPaalanen The Tiger I was necessary to deal with heavy Russian tanks. Only around 1300 were built. Over 8000 PZ IVs and 6000 Panthers were built. Tigers were deployed in independent heavy tank battalions that were used in specialized roles. They were not used in divisional tank battalions like medium tanks were. The numbers and the historical usage of heavy tank battalions do not support your statement.

[@Zolnierzu]

31:22 that shot is awesome, really brings home the size of that tank

[@msspi764]

There are three major needs of an army leader. The best have a good handle on strategy, tactics, and logistics. Very few are great at all three. The one that is usually missing is logistics. Not very sexy, but without it strategy and tactics don’t get you s**t. So weapons design has to take support into consideration. It took a while for the less enlightened leaders to figure that out.

[@polarvortex3294]

That's one reason I worry about Ukraine. They seem to be getting small batches of different weapons from everywhere. Even if they were designed to be easy to maintain, as you rightly say should be a design priority, they'll still need many different types of replacement parts and ammo. Seems like a big logistics challenge, if not a true nightmare.

[@msspi764]

@@polarvortex3294 That's a similar situation to what Grant's Army of the Tennessee faced. They still had units carrying the smoothbore muskets they were issued in their state arsenals, and so the ammunition supply was .72, .69, .58. .577, and .54. This caused a problem during an attack when the wrong ammunition was supplied to a unit that was out. The Confederates at Vicksburg were almost all outfitted with new .577 Enfields. When those weapons were surrendered instead of being turned over to the ordnance depot Grant had any unit with smoothbores resupply themselves with the Enfields. In a stroke his ammunition needs were down to .58 and .577 which are somewhat interchangeable, and .54 for cavalry. My point is that, as you say, standardized weapons are hugely important. Having a mix of weapons is a major problem for supply. That's one of the reasons that so many insurgent groups are outfitted with 7.62 Russian or Chinese weapons, the army they fight is outfitted with the same weapon so supply can come from the enemy.

[@lyndoncmp5751]

This is why Montgomery was the most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2. He knew all about supplies and logistics.

[@bigwoody4704]

ah the Lyndon Library lies again - LMAO - no - not - nada - never you nutthugger,only won when the allies not him provided overwhelming advantages in men,materiel,airpower and ULTRA - he advanced then barely and poorly.Anyone can read how he got 1,100 Paras *killed in one day* crossing the Rhine at Wesel. When Bradley,Patton and the 291st Engineers crossed 70 miles down river at Remagen and Oppenheim with less that 70 killed/wounded 2 days earlier. Kind of proves that Monty Garden debacle was no fluke - he kept it up.

[@WheelsRCool]

@@lyndoncmp5751 Yes, ironically he gets accused of being a sub-part idiot, yet the two lionized generals, Rommel and Patton, consistently outran their supply lines.

[@FrancisSullivan-j7t]

The Curator did an EXCELLENT JOB explaining the history and operation of the Tiger 1..Great video!!!

[@David-if9vi]

Great videos as always, many thanks for sharing this with us. At 31:35! As a veteran I am very glad that I never had to face a view like that in combat.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching! -TimeGhost Ambassador

[@Uncle_Roadkill]

Don't hit me with them negative waves so early in the morning, baby.

[@finncarlbomholtsrensen1188]

Even in Germany they haven't got a Tiger today. Some years ago I visited the German Panzer Museum in Munster, south of Hamburg, and they have a 1 to 1 model made from glasfiber, to act the part. And I know that the Swedes got a Tiger 2 (King Tiger) after the war, which they did cut up!! Luckily some of those are still to be found around, also one which did ran out of fuel in Belgium, during the last German, Ardenne Offensive! It was then sold to, I think a local female owner of an Inn by the crew (!) before leawing for Germany!! They have a little museum to the side, which I sadly never got to visit during my years as a long distance walker in Belgium. I didn't know it was there, but visited several other museums during that.

[@Link2edition]

The Tiger 1 is slowly becoming my favorite tank, with my previous favorite being the KV-2. I like tanks that ultimately failed apparently.

[@tonyporter6712]

I mean a tiger with a great crew was deadly on the battlefield

[@Link2edition]

@@tonyporter6712 sure, but it ended up getting used outside its intended role, and suffered as a result. It could also be I like big metal boxes

[@lyndoncmp5751]

It was very successful in the defensive fighting that characterised the war 1943-45 and it had the highest kill ratio of any tank of WW2. It didn't change the war, but Germany was already losing the war before the Tiger battalions were even deployed.

[@viceralman8450]

The KV-2 was a tremendos failure in reality but popularized by videogames nowadays.

[@poormanselectronicsbench2021]

I thoroughly enjoyed this presentation, and commentary, without the loud annoying music overlayed in it that the presenter uses on his channel! I am hoping he can make an adjustment.