Interesting how the Char B1 has a similar mythic status like the German Tiger I tank. Both were heavy tanks designed for offensive operations, only to be used on the defensive, too expensive to make and operate, and had some obsolete features.
The French did use them in counter attacks in the Battle of France to great effect but usually ended in failure due to penny packets being used and not in force. See vid below at 12.56. th-cam.com/video/AGZquUAgGVI/w-d-xo.html
About the Naeder. Bernard Lemaire, 28th BCC - 2nd DCr, reported the following: - The chain of the pump is too weak and often broke. (12:53 extreme left "pignon de chaine") - The Naeder use pressurized oil. 8:44 The hub of the drive sprocket has bad gaskets: porrus at low pressure, brittle at high pressure. It result a constant spiting of oil from the drive sprocket. The oil flows on the tracks, because of the elevated trackroad of the tank, the tracks spread the oil on the flanks of the hull. On the pictures, (black and white, not colorized of course) you can often notice some dark lines from the center of the drive sprocket to the exterior, it's oil. Same for the dark lines from the top of the hull. At Abbeville, 20 minutes after the start of the attack, 8 B1bis were burned down by ignition of this oil after a gasket failure. The high rate of fire from the Pak36 heated the armor of the B1bis to the red, unable to penetrate, the Pak 36 could burn down or crumble the armor into incandescent pieces into the tank. This just about the Naeder (and a few about Pak 36 vs B1bis), I could carry on with the crazy fuel addiction,, the radio that drinks fuel too (!), the single man turret, the large aeration grid on the left flank or the multi gun concept. The B1bis can't be operated. So it can't be powerful. An illusion of power, this tank is the most overated tank of 1940.
There was also the Char B1 Ter. This had 75mm. of frontal armour and the hull 75mm. could be traversed left & right across 18 degrees. The crew of the Char B1 Ter was 4 men.
Like the Italian M11/39, it is more 'correct' to think of this as a STuG for WW1 trenches with a self defence turret, than an actual tank. At least that is what they were thinking when they designed it.
More like it was a phony war tank. The WWII western front was static for the first 9 months of WWII. The French captured land roughly the size of Luxemburg (city, not country). And its Poland in 1939 that made the largest allied counteroffensive till 1941 to brake out of encirclement. This means after 8 months of mobilization France took less effort do defend its capital then a attacked by surprise and only partly mobilized 21 year old country of Poland did. France didnt want to fight alone and the size of the British corp was a joke. Britain was giving Hitler everything was such a joke that Monty Python made a sketch about Chamberlain. When in the early 20s Poland and Germany argued over some rich in coal lands with mixed population British prime minister Loyd George said that giving it to Poland is like giving a gold watch to a monkey. So Britain's attitude to treat their enemies better than allies what made French politicians passive. And then the generals became as passive as the politicians.
Video game montage aside, this was a good video. Looking at the B1 bis from a modern perspective the obvious question is "why not delete the hull howitzer and include a large turret with a serious main gun?" But such questions are only obvious in retrospect. For its day, this tank was a monster. Compared to Pzkpfw IIs and 38ts it was a serious threat.
It was designed to blast through German defensive fortifications (Siegfried Line).... bunkers and pillboxes. The turret was added just in case it ran into a German tank. For these purposes the design was good enough despite any shortcomings. The main misuse of the B1 was using them in a "reserve" roll. Basically insuring they would likely never be where they were needed. If the B1 armored divisions had been used as a spearhead in Belgium along with the S35 armored Cavalry divisions, the German forces there may have been so hard pressed that significant German forces heading for the Ardennes would have had to be diverted to deal with the situation...and possibly the entire battle of France may have turned out differently.
@@michaelpielorz9283 the radiator grill fins were staggered and designed to be of equal thickness of the tanks side armor. I've never seen where a B1 was actually hit in the grill. Most ran out of fuel/ammo or had tracks blown off. There's some that appear to have been hit by Stuka bombs. In "Panzer Leader" Guderian says how the German 37mm AT gun bounced off the B1s ...that they tried and failed with a captured French 47mm AT gun. Only the 88 AA could penetrate. But since 88s weren't usually on the front lines, not that many tanks were knocked out by the in the Battle of France. If the Germans had been the ones with the B1s ...they would have been used to devastating effect. French high command was seriously out dated.
the B1's 75 SA35 fires a 75x245mm cartridge, which is the same as the 75mm Mle 1931 casemate mortar develloped by Puteaux and used in the Alps fortification.
"Nothing's working against those things!" "The FlaK cannons are 88mm, right? It's the only thing we have that's of higher caliber right now!" [a couple of shots later] "...I can't believe that worked."
Automotive Castor Oil = Castrol R, etc. as used mixed with petrol on 2 stroke engines. Speaking from experience of using the stuff, automotive Castor Oil is extremely sticky when cold, resembling a runny sort of treacle.
The war thunder footage is a good idea. Somtimes historical footage is really hard to come by, and the armor viewer and x ray can be very usefull.keep it up!
Good point, but I remember them saying they avoid using pictures of models, and for me footage of a videogame fall into the same category, so i do not like it.
Audio police here: 1) Bad edit at 15:35. 2) Narration good except for a couple of plosives. Check 1:44-1:55. 3) Please, please, PLEASE mind your "dynamic range." Someone else commented here about "their head being taken off at the beginning." Try to "reign in" the level differences between, narration and music/sfx. 4) "Pacing" I felt that the narrator was reading a little bit too quickly. If it was slowed down about 20%, I think that I would have been able to learn a little more. Does that make sense? A little more relaxed. Check out the pacing of Laurence Olivier's narration in the "World At War" series. Yes, he's among the best, but one can learn from it. Play you completed videos on differing AUDIO systems to check for quality. That is: headphones, ear buds, speakers, with and without, subwoofers. Play your videos for others while you observe their reactions. You'll learn a lot from this. I learned that from a BIG producer. Lastly, this is constructive criticism. I LOVE this channel! I have learned things here that I haven't anywhere else. Someone else also said to not use video game footage as content. I couldn't agree more!! While you have some great photos here, some of which I have never seen, there is film footage on the Char 1. I'm a proud Patreon. Thanks!!
I really enjoy watching these videos. Very informative and with some great historical reference photos. Also good color illustrations. However, I can do without the video game footage. Kind of a turn off.
14:48 - The Naeder caused excessive fuel consumption because "it required the engine to be on to operate"...isn't that the same with ANY gearbox? No engine output = no input to the gearbox therefore no movement. I don't understand.
Commander as gunner and loader was a step backward. Driver as gunner was a step off a cliff. Drivers should concentrate on driving and Commanders cannot maintain situational awareness while squinting through a primary gunsight. It seems evident that French armored vehicle designers were blind to exigencies of war well understood elsewhere. Even Mk IV-Mk VIII rhomboidal tanks had a dedicated commander . . . in World War One. You'd think a Frenchman would remember.
The gun on the hull is useless firing on the move anyways so it's only natural for the drive to park somewhere and shoot , the top turret more for firing on the move(not really)
The designer understood that a gunner in an oversized turret with near zero situational awareness is the new normal, meanwhile empowering the gunner is still a good solution when soldiers don't need an officer to explain them when to lace their shoes.
they were aware and capable to design multi-crew turrets (FCM 2C, Renault ACG1, Panhard 178), however the army wanted armour, and to have correct armour within a specified weight, you have to sacrifice something. they went with one man turrets because after World war one, the country which already had a birth deficit compared to it's main opponent was bled white and a lot of the younger population was dead or disfigured by the war, also they were ruined by WWI, a situation which wasn't made better by the great depression. there was also the fact that originally the turret on the B1 was only a close defence system with machine guns, the anti tank gun was an afterthought and the B1bis is just an armour upgrade over the B1, kinda like how the Germans went from the Pz III C to the Pz III D.
It makes the tank to either had a smaller gun (impotent by the set standards) or become wider. Which makes the whole design heavier and more expensive. There's also an embargo of sorts in the 1920's, similar to the "Washignton Naval Treaty", which limited the size of warships. But for tanks.Nobody was allowed to build tanks over 20 tons. This troubled the Char B1's development, because the french wanted a tank with good protection but withing weight limitations (contradictory requirements) which explains why the tank looks narrow. As dumb as it looks, the Char B1 is actually a somewhat sensible design and a lesson in tank build. What to do and what NOT to do when building a tank.
It's the same as the abbreviation in English "no. 201". It's short for "numero". I'm not sure why it was said as "nth degree". Almost as if the script was put through text-to-speech...
This script is a bit-uh, embarrassing. The B-1 was a poor tank, & the Bis fixed none of the issues with the design, while being more difficult to produce & maintain. FFS, they still didn't give the 75mm any appreciable traverse, & the insistence on including every company's design element meant that the B-1 & Bis both used nearly a half dozen different types of oil from multiple sources. And in the case of the Bis, they boosted an already thirsty engine to drag around a heavier hull. Creating a "breakthrough tank" that had no tactical range. Genius! Puts sort of a double meaning on the statement "the Tiger tank of France."
I would love to do help but I don't think my skills would be good enough to help, but if you need anyone to help review the scripts for grammatical or word choice errors, I would gladly help. Most of the work you produce is great but occasionally something slips through the cracks for example in one of your previous tank videos regarding French equipment you describe the French 75mm Howitzer as "infamous" which is an error as infamous is not a synonym of famous but actually means famous for being bad and the French 75mm Howitzer was a gun that revolutionised light artillery and is the progenitor of all light field guns today. (it's a common error among non-native English speakers)
@@BHuang92 In the UK military parlance (later adapted used by all NATO members) a field gun is any piece of Artillery up to 4.5 inches (115mm) in diameter and thus can be moved around a battlefield that includes small howitzers like the French 75mm as a Howitzer is a type of artillery that can fire indirectly (although at only 18 degrees elevation it was limited indirect fire capability, the idea that a Howitzer has to have a maximum angle of elevation of over 45 degrees is a more modern distinction and while used in the US military, it is not universally accepted even within NATO with the main UK field Howitzer of the 20th Century only having a maximum elevation of 45 degrees). The French 75mm was always a Howitzer as it always had indirect fire capability and was not meant to be fired solely in direct fire.
I am a new low tier war thunder player, and whenever I’m playing Germany and this thing shows up out of the corner off building scuttling along you could have two people trying to pump it at once and it still won’t die. Like Arnold Schwarzenegger walking into the room and punching everybody’s panzer 3 and 4s in the face
As much as I like War Thunder I don't think it should have been shown in this documentary on the Char B1 Bis it should have been done with a bit more respect historically. Example link below the channel Panzer Picture maybe you could ask him to be an editor. th-cam.com/video/_5ECKnnta1Q/w-d-xo.html
i did not expect warthunder montage lol
I was in my car, music got loud, and at a stop sign, I pull out my phone and saw a B1 wrecking house. I was pleased.
Interesting how the Char B1 has a similar mythic status like the German Tiger I tank. Both were heavy tanks designed for offensive operations, only to be used on the defensive, too expensive to make and operate, and had some obsolete features.
The KV wins!
When your tank has a “corridor” it might be too big
I never stopped to appreciate this tank, it was always awkward to me, so I thought it was 100% a pile of shit.
The French did use them in counter attacks in the Battle of France to great effect but usually ended in failure due to penny packets being used and not in force. See vid below at 12.56.
th-cam.com/video/AGZquUAgGVI/w-d-xo.html
@@Stribog1337 France's idea of a heavy tank never works, they're a medium tank on top of a light one
About the Naeder. Bernard Lemaire, 28th BCC - 2nd DCr, reported the following:
- The chain of the pump is too weak and often broke. (12:53 extreme left "pignon de chaine")
- The Naeder use pressurized oil. 8:44 The hub of the drive sprocket has bad gaskets: porrus at low pressure, brittle at high pressure.
It result a constant spiting of oil from the drive sprocket. The oil flows on the tracks, because of the elevated trackroad of the tank, the tracks spread the oil on the flanks of the hull.
On the pictures, (black and white, not colorized of course) you can often notice some dark lines from the center of the drive sprocket to the exterior, it's oil. Same for the dark lines from the top of the hull.
At Abbeville, 20 minutes after the start of the attack, 8 B1bis were burned down by ignition of this oil after a gasket failure. The high rate of fire from the Pak36 heated the armor of the B1bis to the red, unable to penetrate, the Pak 36 could burn down or crumble the armor into incandescent pieces into the tank.
This just about the Naeder (and a few about Pak 36 vs B1bis), I could carry on with the crazy fuel addiction,, the radio that drinks fuel too (!), the single man turret, the large aeration grid on the left flank or the multi gun concept.
The B1bis can't be operated. So it can't be powerful. An illusion of power, this tank is the most overated tank of 1940.
Finally someone that can look past the weird myth. thanks for knowing your stuff and i totally agree with you.
There was also the Char B1 Ter. This had 75mm. of frontal armour and the hull 75mm. could be traversed left & right across 18 degrees. The crew of the Char B1 Ter was 4 men.
Like the Italian M11/39, it is more 'correct' to think of this as a STuG for WW1 trenches with a self defence turret, than an actual tank. At least that is what they were thinking when they designed it.
Solid observation.
More like it was a phony war tank. The WWII western front was static for the first 9 months of WWII. The French captured land roughly the size of Luxemburg (city, not country). And its Poland in 1939 that made the largest allied counteroffensive till 1941 to brake out of encirclement. This means after 8 months of mobilization France took less effort do defend its capital then a attacked by surprise and only partly mobilized 21 year old country of Poland did.
France didnt want to fight alone and the size of the British corp was a joke. Britain was giving Hitler everything was such a joke that Monty Python made a sketch about Chamberlain. When in the early 20s Poland and Germany argued over some rich in coal lands with mixed population British prime minister Loyd George said that giving it to Poland is like giving a gold watch to a monkey. So Britain's attitude to treat their enemies better than allies what made French politicians passive. And then the generals became as passive as the politicians.
Video game montage aside, this was a good video.
Looking at the B1 bis from a modern perspective the obvious question is "why not delete the hull howitzer and include a large turret with a serious main gun?"
But such questions are only obvious in retrospect. For its day, this tank was a monster. Compared to Pzkpfw IIs and 38ts it was a serious threat.
It was designed to blast through German defensive fortifications (Siegfried Line).... bunkers and pillboxes. The turret was added just in case it ran into a German tank. For these purposes the design was good enough despite any shortcomings.
The main misuse of the B1 was using them in a "reserve" roll. Basically insuring they would likely never be where they were needed. If the B1 armored divisions had been used as a spearhead in Belgium along with the S35 armored Cavalry divisions, the German forces there may have been so hard pressed that significant German forces heading for the Ardennes would have had to be diverted to deal with the situation...and possibly the entire battle of France may have turned out differently.
except the radiators, but that story would shatter you r beloved myth XD!
@@michaelpielorz9283 the radiator grill fins were staggered and designed to be of equal thickness of the tanks side armor. I've never seen where a B1 was actually hit in the grill. Most ran out of fuel/ammo or had tracks blown off. There's some that appear to have been hit by Stuka bombs. In "Panzer Leader" Guderian says how the German 37mm AT gun bounced off the B1s ...that they tried and failed with a captured French 47mm AT gun. Only the 88 AA could penetrate. But since 88s weren't usually on the front lines, not that many tanks were knocked out by the in the Battle of France. If the Germans had been the ones with the B1s ...they would have been used to devastating effect. French high command was seriously out dated.
Amazing video thank you. I had always wondered about this tank
So cool u use WT footage❤
the B1's 75 SA35 fires a 75x245mm cartridge, which is the same as the 75mm Mle 1931 casemate mortar develloped by Puteaux and used in the Alps fortification.
capable to punch through 25 mm armour, poor panzer 1`s!!
0:40 when a Wikipedia goes to war.
"Nothing's working against those things!"
"The FlaK cannons are 88mm, right? It's the only thing we have that's of higher caliber right now!"
[a couple of shots later]
"...I can't believe that worked."
A War Thunder opening montage? You know your audience, that’s for sure : D
meanwhile in WoT this tank is kind of the worst tier 4
Nice video
Automotive Castor Oil = Castrol R, etc. as used mixed with petrol on 2 stroke engines.
Speaking from experience of using the stuff, automotive Castor Oil is extremely sticky when cold, resembling a runny sort of treacle.
I’d guess you’re British as treacle is less well known on this side of the Atlantic. Molasses yes, treacle not so much.
2:31 wow what a cursed image its got a d1 turret and an fcm 36 turret on it on a b1 hull ..truly a mutt
2:38 holy shit, world of tanks ware are you on this one. its perfect for tier 6 premium. TAKE MY MONEY!
Ngl i prefer to see a few images looping around over war thunder gameplay.
Well, most of the video is just that honestly
@@marisacursedisame8413 tbh gameplay ent event that bad but it still having audio was kinda bothering me
YES!
They say they avoid to use "pictures of models" on their videos, you can consider video game footage as such. I don't approve
The war thunder footage is a good idea. Somtimes historical footage is really hard to come by, and the armor viewer and x ray can be very usefull.keep it up!
Good point, but I remember them saying they avoid using pictures of models, and for me footage of a videogame fall into the same category, so i do not like it.
@@Stribog1337 video games reach a depth models cant, how ever i see why you say they fall into the same category.
6:30 The abbreviation is for 'number', not 'nth degree'.
🤦♂️🤷♂️
We use it in the Portuguese language too;
Full: Número (Number)
Abbreviation: N° (NúmerO)
The ° acts as a miniaturized "o" here
Dang Frenchies
Good vid
Audio police here:
1) Bad edit at 15:35.
2) Narration good except for a couple of plosives. Check 1:44-1:55.
3) Please, please, PLEASE mind your "dynamic range." Someone else commented here about "their head being taken off at the beginning." Try to "reign in" the level differences between, narration and music/sfx.
4) "Pacing" I felt that the narrator was reading a little bit too quickly. If it was slowed down about 20%, I think that I would have been able to learn a little more. Does that make sense? A little more relaxed. Check out the pacing of Laurence Olivier's narration in the "World At War" series. Yes, he's among the best, but one can learn from it.
Play you completed videos on differing AUDIO systems to check for quality. That is: headphones, ear buds, speakers, with and without, subwoofers. Play your videos for others while you observe their reactions. You'll learn a lot from this. I learned that from a BIG producer.
Lastly, this is constructive criticism. I LOVE this channel! I have learned things here that I haven't anywhere else. Someone else also said to not use video game footage as content. I couldn't agree more!! While you have some great photos here, some of which I have never seen, there is film footage on the Char 1. I'm a proud Patreon. Thanks!!
As you probably know, we have a load of new narrators, they're still learning
Good stuff.
I really enjoy watching these videos. Very informative and with some great historical reference photos. Also good color illustrations. However, I can do without the video game footage. Kind of a turn off.
Plosives are a bit bad but otherwise good.
Yes, plosives between 1:44-1:50 approximately.
The WW2 Online version is an actual challenge to play and is actually as slow as it should be.
Would this tank be technical if they removed the bottom 75mm made bigger for 3 men and put a 57mm anti tank cannon?
Does anyone know why the 75mm looks so thick compared to all other 75mm guns ??
14:48 - The Naeder caused excessive fuel consumption because "it required the engine to be on to operate"...isn't that the same with ANY gearbox? No engine output = no input to the gearbox therefore no movement. I don't understand.
Most tanks didn't need to steer the entire hull to aim a gun
the issue is more that the engine had to be kept on to be able to use the hull gun
If I saw this monster going against me, with shells bouncing from it as if they were marbles, I would probably have sh*tted myself...
How do I go.about joining the team?
Message us on Discord.
Commander as gunner and loader was a step backward. Driver as gunner was a step off a cliff. Drivers should concentrate on driving and Commanders cannot maintain situational awareness while squinting through a primary gunsight. It seems evident that French armored vehicle designers were blind to exigencies of war well understood elsewhere. Even Mk IV-Mk VIII rhomboidal tanks had a dedicated commander . . . in World War One. You'd think a Frenchman would remember.
The gun on the hull is useless firing on the move anyways so it's only natural for the drive to park somewhere and shoot , the top turret more for firing on the move(not really)
The designer understood that a gunner in an oversized turret with near zero situational awareness is the new normal, meanwhile empowering the gunner is still a good solution when soldiers don't need an officer to explain them when to lace their shoes.
Much of the one-man turret philosophy has to do with money, The_Chieftain makes this point a few times in his videos on French tanks and doctrine.
they were aware and capable to design multi-crew turrets (FCM 2C, Renault ACG1, Panhard 178), however the army wanted armour, and to have correct armour within a specified weight, you have to sacrifice something.
they went with one man turrets because after World war one, the country which already had a birth deficit compared to it's main opponent was bled white and a lot of the younger population was dead or disfigured by the war, also they were ruined by WWI, a situation which wasn't made better by the great depression.
there was also the fact that originally the turret on the B1 was only a close defence system with machine guns, the anti tank gun was an afterthought and the B1bis is just an armour upgrade over the B1, kinda like how the Germans went from the Pz III C to the Pz III D.
The big canon was anti infantry. Thats bright.
I don't know why they didn't just make a gun mount that allowed horizontal traverse. Instead of designing an entire steering system to do it.
It makes the tank to either had a smaller gun (impotent by the set standards) or become wider. Which makes the whole design heavier and more expensive.
There's also an embargo of sorts in the 1920's, similar to the "Washignton Naval Treaty", which limited the size of warships. But for tanks.Nobody was allowed to build tanks over 20 tons. This troubled the Char B1's development, because the french wanted a tank with good protection but withing weight limitations (contradictory requirements) which explains why the tank looks narrow.
As dumb as it looks, the Char B1 is actually a somewhat sensible design and a lesson in tank build. What to do and what NOT to do when building a tank.
Warhammer tanks in real life dont work
Warhammer tanks in real life:
Interested in joining you for video making
Join our Discord server and drop us a message!
discord.gg/3VjQ8Zq
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Hey guys the link isn't working now
can you send another ?
@@mahmoodali5043 discord.gg/rq2wTwZX
Mispronounciation Allert:
France fell is spelled:
"The war started unfortunately" en gauliste
*[Doriftus in a Cromwell]*
Um, where it say's "nth degree 201", that nth degree bit is just an old abbreviation for the word 'number'. So it's just number 201.
It's the same as the abbreviation in English "no. 201". It's short for "numero". I'm not sure why it was said as "nth degree". Almost as if the script was put through text-to-speech...
@@thhseeking seems the script writer wrote using french abbreviations and did not explain them to the American narrator.
This script is a bit-uh, embarrassing.
The B-1 was a poor tank, & the Bis fixed none of the issues with the design, while being more difficult to produce & maintain.
FFS, they still didn't give the 75mm any appreciable traverse, & the insistence on including every company's design element meant that the B-1 & Bis both used nearly a half dozen different types of oil from multiple sources. And in the case of the Bis, they boosted an already thirsty engine to drag around a heavier hull. Creating a "breakthrough tank" that had no tactical range. Genius!
Puts sort of a double meaning on the statement "the Tiger tank of France."
What i learned with french tanks is keep your frontarmor infront
I would love to do help but I don't think my skills would be good enough to help, but if you need anyone to help review the scripts for grammatical or word choice errors, I would gladly help. Most of the work you produce is great but occasionally something slips through the cracks for example in one of your previous tank videos regarding French equipment you describe the French 75mm Howitzer as "infamous" which is an error as infamous is not a synonym of famous but actually means famous for being bad and the French 75mm Howitzer was a gun that revolutionised light artillery and is the progenitor of all light field guns today. (it's a common error among non-native English speakers)
The 75mm howitzer is an adaptation to the revolutionary 1895 field gun which is what you mean.
@@BHuang92 In the UK military parlance (later adapted used by all NATO members) a field gun is any piece of Artillery up to 4.5 inches (115mm) in diameter and thus can be moved around a battlefield that includes small howitzers like the French 75mm as a Howitzer is a type of artillery that can fire indirectly (although at only 18 degrees elevation it was limited indirect fire capability, the idea that a Howitzer has to have a maximum angle of elevation of over 45 degrees is a more modern distinction and while used in the US military, it is not universally accepted even within NATO with the main UK field Howitzer of the 20th Century only having a maximum elevation of 45 degrees). The French 75mm was always a Howitzer as it always had indirect fire capability and was not meant to be fired solely in direct fire.
Should have went with the ARL40...
Wtf is a ARL 40
@@pavelalexe9254 B1 hull without the fixed gun, with a ARL fortress tank turret
Seems a lot of the design features were unnecessarily complicated. Others, not complicated enough.
I am a new low tier war thunder player, and whenever I’m playing Germany and this thing shows up out of the corner off building scuttling along you could have two people trying to pump it at once and it still won’t die. Like Arnold Schwarzenegger walking into the room and punching everybody’s panzer 3 and 4s in the face
It is pronounced "shardøbataï"
5 forward and 1 reverse gear. Rather ambitious for a French tank, eh?
As much as I like War Thunder I don't think it should have been shown in this documentary on the Char B1 Bis it should have been done with a bit more respect historically. Example link below the channel Panzer Picture maybe you could ask him to be an editor. th-cam.com/video/_5ECKnnta1Q/w-d-xo.html
I agree.
Char B1, the best French tank of ww2!
No, the best is the S35.
And because of the single man turret: *ALL* french tanks are bad in 1940
M41 bulldog
War Thunder is the best tank game ever
Ok....piss on the nadair. POS
Thumbs down and unsub for the video game footage. I came for history, not a mobile game review.
Wants to be taken seriously, proceeds to put WT footage, oh , and please stop trying to pronounce french words man , you're killing people
Really? I checked with the french native speakers and they said I did alright.
What did I pronounce wrong?