I did part of my service on this tank in the mid 1980. By this time, all units were looking exactly like the one in this video. I think, the conversions were made just a few years after the introduction of the vehicle. It would have been a pretty good tank, if it wasn’t for its two major shortcomings: Unstabilised gun and pathetic armor. It had good mobility and great firepower though, a good crew got the third round off before the first one hit, firing HESH at 1500m. A full platoon could lay a pretty impressive barrage. Loading the gun was much easier than it appears in the video, because unlike in the video the gun was never in the fully elevated position in reality. It was usually more or less level, making the loaders job a lot easier. The large lever was used to open the breach for the first shot, to unload the gun and to mount and dismount the breach block for servicing. The range finder was normally operated by the gunner, not the commander. The gunner simply reached up with the left hand to set the distance. However, since this tank could not fire on the move, it was basically used in the role of a tank destroyer, operating out of prepared positions with the relevant distances known to the commander. The use of the range finder was thus often not required, the TC usually called the distance along with the target and the gunner just set the distance for the chosen weapon and round on the scale and fired away. The sight had switchable magnification. The small magnification (2.5x, if I remember correctly) was used to observe and to acquire a target, then one switched to 8x to fine tune and fire the gun. The padding was required because the tank was too light for the gun. If you didn’t firmly lean against the padding when firing the gun, the sight jumped into your face and its eyepiece gave you a black eye, known as „Richteroug“ in swiss (gunner-eye). If one kept that in mind, the gunner had a very comfy place, actually. I always managed to get a few hours of extra sleep on the march down there. One only had to make sure the throat mic was off, otherwise ones snoring eventually ventured off into the ether and if worst came to worst into the Bataillon commanders ear. The coaxial MG boxes held 600 rounds each. The rate of fire could be selected: 550 and 1000 rpm, which made for 2 x one minute or 2 x half a minute of sustained fire, with a gap of roughly 20 seconds between the two, to swap ammo box, barrel and lock. Underneath the turret floor was another 2000 rounds stored in boxes containing belts of 200 rounds. These smaller boxes were used to feed the turret roof MG and to replenish the coaxial‘s boxes. What you call pistol port was used to eject spent cases. It was left open at all times, because a great deal of fresh air was sucked in through it, which made life a lot easier for the crew, once the spent cases started piling up and their fumes started poisoning everyone. This port also offered itself to the platoon commander to test a crew’s NCB skills by covertly slipping a teargas grenade through it into the turret. There was an identical port in the hull above the roadwheels on the left side, which served to comfortably load new shells into the tank. “Tank on fire“ was a regular exercise. The CO picked up the telephone and yelled “abandon!“ and if not everyone was standing in attention in front of him within 10 seconds, the crew was due for a good round of push-ups. The Chieftain seems to be past his prime, eh? Bailing out the belly was a whole different story though...
mannys9130 Thanks mate! I made a comment in the first part as well, concerning the running gear and the like, just in case you are interested. It’s 30 years since I last sat in one of these and obviously I forgot a lot. Before going through officers school, I was transferred to a Leopard II Bataillon. The Leo is a much more powerful platform as a fighting vehicle, but I still think the Pz61 was far more comfortable, far, FAR superior in terms of maintenance friendliness, easier to control on a TC‘s level (but much harder on platoon and higher levels!) and it‘s canon could fire at tripple the Leo II’s rate and it was considerably easier to hide. Obviously its level of armor protection was hopeless, its NCB equipment was useless, its ranging and fire control systems completely outdated, communication gear dated back to Korea war aera, etc. But a lot more attention and detail had been devoted to making a tankers everyday life easier and more comfortable and I always preferred it over the Leo in this regard. It was also much easier to train a crew to make use of its full potential (which was obviously far more limited) than was the case with the Leo. The Leo II clearly demonstrates the limitations of a militia system. I strongly believe that the average Pz61 crew was more capable than the average Leo II crew could ever dream to become. I thus am not entirely convinced the Leo serves the Swiss better than the Pz61 did, even though it is a far better fighting machine. Considering who could possibly be the enemy in a war in the very heart of Europe, the best a Swiss Tank unit dare hope to achieve is to deal a hard first blow before being wiped out, taking a few of the opposition down with them. This only works if they can retain surprise. Since it’s easier to hide a Pz61 and it can fire at a much higher rate (due to lack of crew safety measures and open storage of ammunition inside the fighting compartment) and because the technology and tactics are easier to manage given the time available for training, it’s very well possible the ancient platform could actually do more damage. However, having seen the reality of war and considering the circumstances necessary for Swiss armed forces to go to war, I think it really doesn’t matter in the bigger picture of things. Cheers!
@TheChieftainsHatch I know this is an older video, but the comment above should probably be pinned. I figured someone would answer your question about the handle in the comments and this poster did far more than just that.
"Most commercially available foreign products are decent, but as they are not equipped with polished wooden handlebars, we have no other choice but to produce our own domestic weapon system." - The swiss. Gotta' respect integrity.
zepter00 Yes, I can see the threat imposed by such vast quantities of wood, next to 600 litres of diesel and 56 life 105mm rounds inside the fighting compartment.
@@badbotchdown9845 Astonishingly enough, or let's say counterintuitively, two diesel tanks in the front of the vehicle considerably improve crew safety and survivability in case the frontal and first third of side armor is penetrated. That's a fact, not something the Swiss made up.
My theory on the loader's cupola is that it is mainly to provide more light into the turret. This allows the crew to really ensure everything inside is completely neat, tidy and clean in true Swiss fashion.
I know in cannons they are less common but in addition to a manual breach opening system due to how to operated I caught an eye of a manual cocking/recocking device in it aswell.
I guessed something like that. To be more precise, I guessed some sort of manual extraction method. Also makes sense it would be foot operated as there is a good chance opening the breech manually, especially if the automatic mechanism has failed, might require some extra force.
“Not of huge use to you if you’re a re-enactor or anythin” Am I the only person who’d love to show up to a re-enactment and set up a Swiss camp in the middle of the battlefield and from behind your barb wire laugh and taunt the guys fighting while eating chocolate in comfort?
Panzer 68 was the best one. You had to make sure that there was no round in the gun when you turned on the heater because that could cause it to fire while using the radio at full power could cause the turret to rotate.
Well, that with the gun firing when using the heater is a bit of a myth. Yes there were worries about that happening because the heater and the gun did run of the same electrical circuits. But there was no case recorded were the gun was actually fired by activating the heater.
Let me guess, while most of the systems in the tank seemed to have been developed by companies from the German and French parts of Switzerland, they gave the electrics to the Italian part?
The Pz 61/68/88 had an absolutely amazing sound when accelerating... a unique mix of high pitch compressor whistle and deep growl. I loved to hear them back in my military service days ;) - thanks for the interesting 2 vids about the Pz 61.
Hello Chieftain, swiss man here! We've got 4 languages spoken here in switzerland. German is the most spoken(+/-50%), but there's a catch: we write and read german as germans do, but the spoken swissgerman differs quite much, germans don't understand it. Second is french (+/-40%), italian (+/-10%) and somewhat around 400'000 people still speak rumantsch, an ancient roman language. Here in german part we have to learn french first as second language, the other 3 have to learn german at school. Military units are mostly mixed, but are allways stationed in another part of our country than their origin. The idea of this is, if you have to bomb own houses/roads whatever in defense to slow down the incoming enemy, people would not do it in their own region nearby their own family... I hope my long writings are understandable and make some sense:) If I recall correctly, crew hight restrictions for Panzer (and all other armoured vehicles) are 1.80m Edit: I don't know how many feet that is, most swiss people have only two anyways... :)
@@JohnnyWishbone85 yes it is, and they differ quite much. but in an effort of saving the language from extinction a written language was created which is a mix of them. it goes by the official name "rumantsch grischun". it's like german in the rest of switzerland, written but not spoken between the people in everyday use. only towards outsiders who learned it as it is with the german. hopefully i could explain it somehow understandable:) as english is neither my first nor everyday language...
@@JohnnyWishbone85 I can only answer for myself: I'm quite insecure at writing english (inconsistent/silent letters f.ex.), putting s(c?)entences together and spelling. Speaking is no problem, that works, I could fluently explain most stuff in english. But I really don't write much, a small comment like this answer can take me 2-3 minutes, because I really want to get it right!
Hey Chieftain, I found a channel a few months ago called Master Milo when they bought an old T-55 used by Saddam's forces. It was in awful condition (left outside in the UK since the 90s) and I would have called it a total loss, but they are restoring it amazingly well so far! It looks like when they're done, literally every single part of the tank (aside from the gun) will be fully functional. It's an interesting process since they aren't really historians, just skilled mechanics who have a passion and a LOT of patience. It might be worth checking out, I've already learned so much about how tanks work and what goes into them, the T-55 in particular. You'll have to watch with subtitles though, because what I first thought was crazy Scottish is in fact Dutch.
LegoGenius16 The tank Mastermilo bought is a Chinese Type 69-IIA tank, not a soviet T-55. Although it is almost a direct copy. They are different tanks.
After 8 years living in Switzerland, I still did not know that the Swiss are among the tank building nations. Thanks for closing this serious knowledge gap.
Switzerland also had jet fighter projects going during the 50's and also designed and had run a nuclear reactor which had a partial core meltdown. And no, i'm not joking, that really happend.
That is such a neat little tank. Its amazing that it looks like the crew stations are more like man sized (but not quite Nick sized) cut-outs in the machinery than crew stations.
I really like the B-roll of the tank moving around. I know it's not going to be possible all the time. But I would love to see more of that. Keep up the great work.
Always liked the Pz.61 and 68 both of them are great tanks for there time period they where built in Swiss are very talented in making military hardware awesome video brother
Why wouldn't you want to be a Swiss re-enacter? While everyone else is fighting you look after their valuables and whichever side loses, you just keep hold of their stuff.
The Chieftan: Great host, excellent channel content, knowledgeable chap. As well as military service the Chieftan has also has several acting credits. We liked him in the lead role of the Father Ted comedy series. Brilliant.
the elevation system with the curved rack was used in older swiss fortress guns. mechanically strong, and easy to make electric, instead of hydraulic- fire danger! seems a good choice.
On that rear gun ratchet, Richard Ogorkiewicz wrote that in order for the Merkava tank to achieve 8 degree gun depression with a low turret, it was necessary to move the gun trunnion back near the breech. This Swiss design was perhaps for getting extremely good gun depression and elevation out of this tank, which makes sense due to Swiss topography
Nick, the primary purpose of the quadrant elevation and azimuth indicator in our old dino tanks was for range card engagements during night gunnery with out illumination. The old M60 table VIII had a range card engagement. If you need more info on how it was done let me know a proud Dinotanker.
@@TheChieftainsHatch It sure did. I'm sure you noted them in them in your travels. When you fired a range card engagement you had to have alot of faith in the crew who made the card and the ground guide putting the tank in the exact spot.
Right. But that doesn’t help in the case of the Pz61’s elevation bubble as it is about as precise as a spirit level you might use at home, with no markings on it which would make it suitable for firing purposes.
Mr. Chieftain. I'm guessing the 13% Made in America reference from Janes had more to do with trade treaties. Europe was very protective and often conducted military trade in a quid pro quo. For example Germany's decision to buy Boeing E-3 AWACS aircraft was contingent on America installing Germany's Rh-120 gun in our M-1 Abrams tanks.
The sloped engine deck is actually a neat feature in the mountainous Swiss environment. As you will have to park your tank on a hillside most of the time, you just rotate it until the engine deck is level. Tad-ah a perfect place for a few sleeping bags and a mug of hot chocolate.
I suspect, the foot lever for the Loader actuates the Semi-Automatic Cam (SA Cam). The L7 in my old Leo C1 had silver lever under the gun that when actuated kept the breach closed after firing a 105 rd. This was used for firing in NBC conditions to minimize any possible Nerve or Blister agents entering the tank. Not having the casing ejected immediately after firing, would help create a "vacuum" so that the loader could pick up another round, hold it in the right arm, open the breach with his left hand and eject the fired casing and load the next round as fast as possible to close the breach again.
It seems that this tank has a lot of "feng shui" going on in it . Most of these tanks look like someone backed a truck up to the turret and dumped all the equipment through the hatch. This Swiss one...is more neat and comfy .
One thing that stands out to me is that the Commanders Cupola looks very similar to the commanders Cupola on the Durchsbruchswagen 2 /VK 30.01H which came out about 1938-1940.
Does the fact that this Pz61 has been fitted with the 105mm gun mean that it has been retrofitted to the Pz68 standard? The original design incorporated a 90mm Bofors low pressure gun. I ask, because this tank does not have the gun stabilization system or the rubber road pads on its tracks that came with the Pz68.
I think that foot lever is the manual breech opener for when there is a misfire or a jam. Because there really is not much else It can really be and its on the loaders position.
I really like this tank and the Swiss thinking in it. The Swiss should be tasked with end-engineering/user-aproval of tanks. Yes they would change many details on modern tanks like the Leopard and M1 Abrams, like the grills over the engine compartment and adding lovely wooden knobs and practical stove-away spaces/boxes. I'll bet there will even be a Swiss Army knife of appropriate type, for every crew member. Well, I think the tank should absolutely have an inbuilt clock !
The loader steps on the lever to manually open the latch. When using an inserted barrel (20mm) in training, the latch had to be closed and opened manually.
I’m assuming that the extra cupola for the loader and his machine gun is due to the terrain in Switzerland. The hill sides are steep and infantry up hill of you that would not be able to be engaged by the main gun or coax could be engaged by the roof mg
To be fair, this tank was basically worthless by 1970, the tanks this thing would come up against, T62, T64 and T72 would chew it out and spit it out in a ball of molten steel, I think they doctinierely knew that engaging other tanks was a suicide mission with this thing, setting it up for anti infantry, thus the most vision possible makes sense, it also explains the armored gunsights, the many spare parascopes, it seems to be really designed to suffer little damage from machineguns and infantry weapons trying to spray it down.
@@sotabaka Yes, yes they could, the soviet tanks, particularly the T64 and T72 have wider tracks, lower center of gravity, more horsepower.....they would do a better job navigating the alps then the Panzer 61 and 68 would lmao.
@@deepbludreams yeah, but the swiss would only fight a defensive war with prepared positions (look up swiss fortifications and the "réduit national" on the wiki) so they would engage enemy tanks from good positions, and while the T-something would have been able to chew through the armor of the Pz 61, so they could against every western tanks of the 70s (save maybe for the chieftain), the Pz 61 could do the same, some of the shortcomings were fixed in the Panzer 68 which came in the 70's (notably wider tracks and more powerful engine, later production also had a wider turret)
@@quentintin1 the 105 cannot penetreate the frontal armor of a T72 let alone a T64 [weirdly the earlier tank had better armor] at combat range, it's why the 120 program got rushed along, plus the 125MM guns on said tanks outranged the 105. Really the T72 and T64 where so many decades ahead of the west it's funny because the soviets where decades behind the west in everything else.
I don't know if it actually is one, leftover from the upgrade which gave it larger main gun ammo capacity, but there appears to be an Ammo hatch on the loaders side of the Hull between the idler wheels and road wheels.
Perhaps the foot pedal is/was to crank the now missing 20mm? Given the limited space, and the force required to crank something that chonk, it would make sense to have it being a foot pedal or similar?
I'm going to ask this here and I'm going to talk about a certain Jadzpanzer 38t. Those idler wheels look rather Jadzpanzer 38t/G13 like from a few of these shots. Really do. At least you're way more comfortable in this vehicle, it looks like you actually have some space, if not so much in the gunner's position.
Great video as always. It would be even more informative if you could provide an overall assesement at the end. What is your impression of the tank and how did it stand up to the opposition of the time? Looking forward to the next one.
Regarding the loaders cupola. Don't know if this is what they had in mind, but if the crew was reduced to three it would allow the TC/Loader to load the main gun and retain some situational awareness while buttoned up.
@@johnyricco1220 Thanks Johny. At 3:15 in part one Chief said, "The 20mm was replaced by the seven-five." I looked at the bore in the coax position and thought, "that's different, a 75 low-velocity coax." Now that I see it again, it was an absurd thought.
Looks like the loader got the best draw in the "oh bugger, the tank is on fire" sweepstakes, which makes this tank the anti-(first generation) Sherman.
@The_Chieftain Ehmm 56 rounds in the tank - 11 ready - 1 in the tube = 42??? Is it 44 elsewhere in the tank, 13 ready rounds, or does the tank carry 54 rounds?
@@flare9757 Jacks, hacksaws etc. are somewhat less controversial among customs officials and other law enforcement personnel than artillery ammunition. I'm just saying.
Certainly it's not of huge use to you if you a reenactor or anything, but if you enjoy werfing Nebels, this is certainly an interesting one to put into your garage.
When I was 18 years old, I got a call from the army and went to the draft. I had three branches that interested me and tanks were one of them. The muster officer explained to me right away that I was "much too high" for a tank man. Mind you, I'm 178 cm (5 ft 8 in). A school friend, at 170 cm (5 ft 5in) became a tank soldier (first gunner, then corporal / commander and after officer school he became a platoon commander) but on the Centurion and later on the Leo 2. I only know the Panzer 61 from the other Side. Since they looked a bit like the Soviet tanks, they were often the "bad enemy" in our maneuvers, the red ones.
How cool would you look driving to work if you bought this? 🙂 On serious note, how does this compare to it's adversarial Soviet tanks from that era? Could it go toe to toe with a t54 or t60
Why put the fuel tank between the driver and ammo? Wouldn’t it be better for the fuel tank to be in front of the ammo to catch spalling like in the T-55?
When I was drafted to army the recruiting officer have said to me why you don't wanna go in mechanized or tanks troops I ve answered they are destroyed after 7 minutes on the field. That's for what I was in the artillery. After seeing this about our tanks it was a good choice.
I did part of my service on this tank in the mid 1980. By this time, all units were looking exactly like the one in this video. I think, the conversions were made just a few years after the introduction of the vehicle. It would have been a pretty good tank, if it wasn’t for its two major shortcomings: Unstabilised gun and pathetic armor. It had good mobility and great firepower though, a good crew got the third round off before the first one hit, firing HESH at 1500m. A full platoon could lay a pretty impressive barrage.
Loading the gun was much easier than it appears in the video, because unlike in the video the gun was never in the fully elevated position in reality. It was usually more or less level, making the loaders job a lot easier.
The large lever was used to open the breach for the first shot, to unload the gun and to mount and dismount the breach block for servicing.
The range finder was normally operated by the gunner, not the commander. The gunner simply reached up with the left hand to set the distance. However, since this tank could not fire on the move, it was basically used in the role of a tank destroyer, operating out of prepared positions with the relevant distances known to the commander. The use of the range finder was thus often not required, the TC usually called the distance along with the target and the gunner just set the distance for the chosen weapon and round on the scale and fired away. The sight had switchable magnification. The small magnification (2.5x, if I remember correctly) was used to observe and to acquire a target, then one switched to 8x to fine tune and fire the gun. The padding was required because the tank was too light for the gun. If you didn’t firmly lean against the padding when firing the gun, the sight jumped into your face and its eyepiece gave you a black eye, known as „Richteroug“ in swiss (gunner-eye). If one kept that in mind, the gunner had a very comfy place, actually. I always managed to get a few hours of extra sleep on the march down there. One only had to make sure the throat mic was off, otherwise ones snoring eventually ventured off into the ether and if worst came to worst into the Bataillon commanders ear.
The coaxial MG boxes held 600 rounds each. The rate of fire could be selected: 550 and 1000 rpm, which made for 2 x one minute or 2 x half a minute of sustained fire, with a gap of roughly 20 seconds between the two, to swap ammo box, barrel and lock. Underneath the turret floor was another 2000 rounds stored in boxes containing belts of 200 rounds. These smaller boxes were used to feed the turret roof MG and to replenish the coaxial‘s boxes.
What you call pistol port was used to eject spent cases. It was left open at all times, because a great deal of fresh air was sucked in through it, which made life a lot easier for the crew, once the spent cases started piling up and their fumes started poisoning everyone. This port also offered itself to the platoon commander to test a crew’s NCB skills by covertly slipping a teargas grenade through it into the turret. There was an identical port in the hull above the roadwheels on the left side, which served to comfortably load new shells into the tank.
“Tank on fire“ was a regular exercise. The CO picked up the telephone and yelled “abandon!“ and if not everyone was standing in attention in front of him within 10 seconds, the crew was due for a good round of push-ups. The Chieftain seems to be past his prime, eh? Bailing out the belly was a whole different story though...
AMAZING comment. Thank you very much! This should get pinned for sure.
mannys9130 Thanks mate!
I made a comment in the first part as well, concerning the running gear and the like, just in case you are interested.
It’s 30 years since I last sat in one of these and obviously I forgot a lot. Before going through officers school, I was transferred to a Leopard II Bataillon. The Leo is a much more powerful platform as a fighting vehicle, but I still think the Pz61 was far more comfortable, far, FAR superior in terms of maintenance friendliness, easier to control on a TC‘s level (but much harder on platoon and higher levels!) and it‘s canon could fire at tripple the Leo II’s rate and it was considerably easier to hide. Obviously its level of armor protection was hopeless, its NCB equipment was useless, its ranging and fire control systems completely outdated, communication gear dated back to Korea war aera, etc. But a lot more attention and detail had been devoted to making a tankers everyday life easier and more comfortable and I always preferred it over the Leo in this regard. It was also much easier to train a crew to make use of its full potential (which was obviously far more limited) than was the case with the Leo. The Leo II clearly demonstrates the limitations of a militia system. I strongly believe that the average Pz61 crew was more capable than the average Leo II crew could ever dream to become. I thus am not entirely convinced the Leo serves the Swiss better than the Pz61 did, even though it is a far better fighting machine. Considering who could possibly be the enemy in a war in the very heart of Europe, the best a Swiss Tank unit dare hope to achieve is to deal a hard first blow before being wiped out, taking a few of the opposition down with them. This only works if they can retain surprise. Since it’s easier to hide a Pz61 and it can fire at a much higher rate (due to lack of crew safety measures and open storage of ammunition inside the fighting compartment) and because the technology and tactics are easier to manage given the time available for training, it’s very well possible the ancient platform could actually do more damage. However, having seen the reality of war and considering the circumstances necessary for Swiss armed forces to go to war, I think it really doesn’t matter in the bigger picture of things.
Cheers!
That was a pretty good insight to life as a member of a tank crew. Thank you for sharing your experience!
@@blueduck9409 Glad you liked it and thanks for letting me know.
@TheChieftainsHatch I know this is an older video, but the comment above should probably be pinned. I figured someone would answer your question about the handle in the comments and this poster did far more than just that.
"Most commercially available foreign products are decent, but as they are not equipped with polished wooden handlebars, we have no other choice but to produce our own domestic weapon system." - The swiss. Gotta' respect integrity.
Woods one of the last things what you want inside the tank.
zepter00 Yes, I can see the threat imposed by such vast quantities of wood, next to 600 litres of diesel and 56 life 105mm rounds inside the fighting compartment.
@@adrianguggisberg3656 You could get a splinter!
@@adrianguggisberg3656 you're so right specially if the fuel tanks are on both front sides of the figthing compartment
Swiss cervelas fest
@@badbotchdown9845 Astonishingly enough, or let's say counterintuitively, two diesel tanks in the front of the vehicle considerably improve crew safety and survivability in case the frontal and first third of side armor is penetrated. That's a fact, not something the Swiss made up.
My theory on the loader's cupola is that it is mainly to provide more light into the turret. This allows the crew to really ensure everything inside is completely neat, tidy and clean in true Swiss fashion.
And the loader can pop his head out every hour...
Damn bro you looking fine in your profile pic sussy baka
17:10 that lever is for manualy opening the breech (according to the Panzer 68s manual)
I know in cannons they are less common but in addition to a manual breach opening system due to how to operated I caught an eye of a manual cocking/recocking device in it aswell.
danke für die info :)
I guessed something like that. To be more precise, I guessed some sort of manual extraction method. Also makes sense it would be foot operated as there is a good chance opening the breech manually, especially if the automatic mechanism has failed, might require some extra force.
@@volrosku.6075 That would make sense to integrate that as well since a common use of that might be a misfire.
@@volrosku.6075 The shells are fired electrically, no recocking is needed
Man I've got a bunch of nebels and nothing to werf them from:(
A sad problem that can affect the best of us. :(
Man powered werfing of the Nebel makes you a Nebelwerfer!
Don't let yourself down, even you can be your very own Nebelwerfer.
@@DrunknBraindead I had to stop werfing my nebel because it was affecting my eyesight.
“Not of huge use to you if you’re a re-enactor or anythin”
Am I the only person who’d love to show up to a re-enactment and set up a Swiss camp in the middle of the battlefield and from behind your barb wire laugh and taunt the guys fighting while eating chocolate in comfort?
don't forget to shoot them if they violate your neutrality (the swiss shot at both allied and axis forces during ww2 when they got to bold)
Weren't a few of these modified to look like German Tanks for Enemy at the Gates?
Mexican chocolate. ❤
@@matthiuskoenig3378 Screw the Cheese nibbling neutrality monkees.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 switzerland is like that crazy guy on a ranch who will shoot any tresspassers for violating the NAP
16:26 I wonder if that new chip in the paint will raise the value of the vehicle as sort of a "Chieftain's signature."
"Chieftain was here"
Panzer 68 was the best one. You had to make sure that there was no round in the gun when you turned on the heater because that could cause it to fire while using the radio at full power could cause the turret to rotate.
Chevrolet designed tank
Well, that with the gun firing when using the heater is a bit of a myth. Yes there were worries about that happening because the heater and the gun did run of the same electrical circuits. But there was no case recorded were the gun was actually fired by activating the heater.
@@shi01 Spoil sport. Sometimes the apocryphal stories are best.
Let me guess, while most of the systems in the tank seemed to have been developed by companies from the German and French parts of Switzerland, they gave the electrics to the Italian part?
Or it was part of the 13% that is not Swiss-made and came from Lucas Electric...
The Pz 61/68/88 had an absolutely amazing sound when accelerating... a unique mix of high pitch compressor whistle and deep growl. I loved to hear them back in my military service days ;) - thanks for the interesting 2 vids about the Pz 61.
The Nebelwerfer, for if you want to werf nebels....
Werfing nebels is a fun but expensive passtime.
Best part of the video.
it is actually a surprisingly accurate interpretation.
Das ist eine Panzerwerfer, it wefers.... panzers!
It's a classic.
"Oh bugger the tank is on fire"
"My leg is stuck"
RIP Chieftain's ass, burned away in 2019.
He should try it again with the cannon in the horizontal position....
Hello Chieftain, swiss man here! We've got 4 languages spoken here in switzerland. German is the most spoken(+/-50%), but there's a catch: we write and read german as germans do, but the spoken swissgerman differs quite much, germans don't understand it. Second is french (+/-40%), italian (+/-10%) and somewhat around 400'000 people still speak rumantsch, an ancient roman language.
Here in german part we have to learn french first as second language, the other 3 have to learn german at school. Military units are mostly mixed, but are allways stationed in another part of our country than their origin. The idea of this is, if you have to bomb own houses/roads whatever in defense to slow down the incoming enemy, people would not do it in their own region nearby their own family... I hope my long writings are understandable and make some sense:)
If I recall correctly, crew hight restrictions for Panzer (and all other armoured vehicles) are 1.80m
Edit: I don't know how many feet that is, most swiss people have only two anyways... :)
Isn't Romansch more of a bundle of related dialects?
@@JohnnyWishbone85 yes it is, and they differ quite much. but in an effort of saving the language from extinction a written language was created which is a mix of them. it goes by the official name "rumantsch grischun". it's like german in the rest of switzerland, written but not spoken between the people in everyday use. only towards outsiders who learned it as it is with the german.
hopefully i could explain it somehow understandable:) as english is neither my first nor everyday language...
@@samuelbhend2521 Why are foreigners always apologizing for their English when they write better than most native speakers? :P
@@JohnnyWishbone85 I can only answer for myself: I'm quite insecure at writing english (inconsistent/silent letters f.ex.), putting s(c?)entences together and spelling. Speaking is no problem, that works, I could fluently explain most stuff in english. But I really don't write much, a small comment like this answer can take me 2-3 minutes, because I really want to get it right!
Hey Chieftain, I found a channel a few months ago called Master Milo when they bought an old T-55 used by Saddam's forces. It was in awful condition (left outside in the UK since the 90s) and I would have called it a total loss, but they are restoring it amazingly well so far! It looks like when they're done, literally every single part of the tank (aside from the gun) will be fully functional. It's an interesting process since they aren't really historians, just skilled mechanics who have a passion and a LOT of patience. It might be worth checking out, I've already learned so much about how tanks work and what goes into them, the T-55 in particular. You'll have to watch with subtitles though, because what I first thought was crazy Scottish is in fact Dutch.
LegoGenius16 The tank Mastermilo bought is a Chinese Type 69-IIA tank, not a soviet T-55. Although it is almost a direct copy. They are different tanks.
@@Ruben97-i3b True, I just keep seeing it and recognizing the shape of a T-55.
Top teeda geiger :)
After 8 years living in Switzerland, I still did not know that the Swiss are among the tank building nations. Thanks for closing this serious knowledge gap.
Switzerland also had jet fighter projects going during the 50's and also designed and had run a nuclear reactor which had a partial core meltdown. And no, i'm not joking, that really happend.
That is such a neat little tank. Its amazing that it looks like the crew stations are more like man sized (but not quite Nick sized) cut-outs in the machinery than crew stations.
Chieftain does the "Oh Bugger the tank is on fire" in the Mig 21 and breaks all records and makes a hole in the roof!
I really like the B-roll of the tank moving around. I know it's not going to be possible all the time. But I would love to see more of that. Keep up the great work.
Wonder if the mysterious foot pedal is the charging handle for the old 20mm coax.
Always liked the Pz.61 and 68 both of them are great tanks for there time period they where built in Swiss are very talented in making military hardware awesome video brother
Why wouldn't you want to be a Swiss re-enacter? While everyone else is fighting you look after their valuables and whichever side loses, you just keep hold of their stuff.
And drink hot cocoa
And get angry at lost German and American aircraft.
Look up 'Wehrhafte Schweiz' here on TH-cam. It shows exactly why I want to re-enact Cold War Swiss Army.
When your country fails to take a stand against evil you aren't worth a damn.
@@UkrainianPaulie Evil is always the other side.
The Chieftan: Great host, excellent channel content, knowledgeable chap. As well as military service the Chieftan has also has several acting credits. We liked him in the lead role of the Father Ted comedy series. Brilliant.
"O and I" Is zero and one. Zero being off. Standard on\off switch on anything electric.
Today. Not in the 50's and 60's it wasn't. But The Swiss. Ahead of their time.
Wait...i thought the 0 stood for On and the I stood for if?
I always thought O meant "on" because it displayed a complete circuit.
@@pex_the_unalivedrunk6785 Or it stood for "Iiiiiiiiii" that is a hot wire
Actually it's Out & In. As in Out if battery & In battery.
Oh Bugger!.. The Tank is on Fire!.. *"BONG"*… and now the gun shroud is "Dented", oh bother! >_
that was funny AF!
Funny
@@rickmoreno6858 The look on his face when the hatch hit the gun shroud was priceless. >_
@@benniehazelwood3088 It was a comedy gold moment at team of writer couldn't make up..
the elevation system with the curved rack was used in older swiss fortress guns. mechanically strong, and easy to make electric, instead of hydraulic- fire danger! seems a good choice.
On that rear gun ratchet, Richard Ogorkiewicz wrote that in order for the Merkava tank to achieve 8 degree gun depression with a low turret, it was necessary to move the gun trunnion back near the breech. This Swiss design was perhaps for getting extremely good gun depression and elevation out of this tank, which makes sense due to Swiss topography
I would love to see some kind of episode about ammo types and how it was developed!
Nick, the primary purpose of the quadrant elevation and azimuth indicator in our old dino tanks was for range card engagements during night gunnery with out illumination. The old M60 table VIII had a range card engagement. If you need more info on how it was done let me know a proud Dinotanker.
Right, but I'll bet that your elevation quadrant had more than five tick marks on it. Maybe even a mil scale.
@@TheChieftainsHatch It sure did. I'm sure you noted them in them in your travels. When you fired a range card engagement you had to have alot of faith in the crew who made the card and the ground guide putting the tank in the exact spot.
Right. But that doesn’t help in the case of the Pz61’s elevation bubble as it is about as precise as a spirit level you might use at home, with no markings on it which would make it suitable for firing purposes.
I somehow managed to stay interested without loud, repeating music blaring over all of the Chieftain's dialog.
I personally prefer to pan fry my nebels. Gives them that great crispy taste.
Baguette-werfer?
This is one of the most magnificent machines you've displayed for us so far.
From a production sense, these two videos on the Panzer 61 might well be your best work so far.
I LOVE the fact this ‘inside the hatch’ isn’t backed with a horrendous, annoying, cancerous, looping music track. 👍🏻👌
Finally, the "Oh bugger, the tank is on fire" segment is back! I much appreciate this development.
Swiss tanks been designed for fighting from inclined positions, so the spirit level in the floor is for the gunner to adjust.
Mr. Chieftain. I'm guessing the 13% Made in America reference from Janes had more to do with trade treaties. Europe was very protective and often conducted military trade in a quid pro quo. For example Germany's decision to buy Boeing E-3 AWACS aircraft was contingent on America installing Germany's Rh-120 gun in our M-1 Abrams tanks.
Oh my God I'm on fire....
Just a guy that knows a lot about tanks talking about tanks with no annoying music!!!!
🔥🔥🔥🔥
Thankyou and your team for the great information on the tanks and armoured cars it's great to know all about them.
Looks to be a solid well thought out tank.
This tank is in fantastic condition
Yeah the littlefield collection was immaculate. A real travesty that it was broken up and scattered
The sloped engine deck is actually a neat feature in the mountainous Swiss environment. As you will have to park your tank on a hillside most of the time, you just rotate it until the engine deck is level.
Tad-ah a perfect place for a few sleeping bags and a mug of hot chocolate.
Oh my god, the tank is on fire! *CLONK*
Good hatch!!! He would just need a few practice runs, and he would fly out faster than any other tank he has been in. He should of mentioned that.
You should do an inside the hatch on AMX-30!
" A little more room..."? Looks like you could fit a small sofa in the loaders station.
I suspect, the foot lever for the Loader actuates the Semi-Automatic Cam (SA Cam). The L7 in my old Leo C1 had silver lever under the gun that when actuated kept the breach closed after firing a 105 rd. This was used for firing in NBC conditions to minimize any possible Nerve or Blister agents entering the tank. Not having the casing ejected immediately after firing, would help create a "vacuum" so that the loader could pick up another round, hold it in the right arm, open the breach with his left hand and eject the fired casing and load the next round as fast as possible to close the breach again.
The large foot lever is the breech opener
Oh how I missed the "Tank is on fire" test.
Very good two videos on this tank. Glad you got them done before being auctioned off to points unknown. Many thanks
The AMX-30 would be an interesting subject :)
Is that a MiG-21 in the background?!?!
...I want a MiG.
It is and you can.
@@RockIslandAuctionCompany Does it run/fly?
It seems that this tank has a lot of "feng shui" going on in it . Most of these tanks look like someone backed a truck up to the turret and dumped all the equipment through the hatch. This Swiss one...is more neat and comfy .
Das ist ein Nebelwerfer
ES WERFS NEBELS!
NEBEL WERF ES
The spigot for the drinking water tank folds out from between the corkscrew and the saw/file/prong of unknown function.
While watching this I thought " I really like the switch gear in this tank".....I have watched waaaay to many Inside Hatch videos! :D
One thing that stands out to me is that the Commanders Cupola looks very similar to the commanders Cupola on the Durchsbruchswagen 2 /VK 30.01H which came out about 1938-1940.
Quite interesting discussion on what constitutes tank build percentages.
Does the fact that this Pz61 has been fitted with the 105mm gun mean that it has been retrofitted to the Pz68 standard? The original design incorporated a 90mm Bofors low pressure gun.
I ask, because this tank does not have the gun stabilization system or the rubber road pads on its tracks that came with the Pz68.
I think he explained it in the first part. It's a 61 aa2 or something like that. A Panzer 61 with some of the 68 Upgrades. It's still not a 68 tough.
i loved seeing the suspension working! i wish you got to drive more of these things around
I think that foot lever is the manual breech opener for when there is a misfire or a jam. Because there really is not much else It can really be and its on the loaders position.
I really like this tank and the Swiss thinking in it.
The Swiss should be tasked with end-engineering/user-aproval of tanks.
Yes they would change many details on modern tanks like the Leopard and M1 Abrams, like the grills over the engine compartment and adding lovely wooden knobs and practical stove-away spaces/boxes.
I'll bet there will even be a Swiss Army knife of appropriate type, for every crew member.
Well, I think the tank should absolutely have an inbuilt clock !
I can see a lot of AC1 Sentinel in the hull, well from the turret aftward, the drivers compartment less so
It reminded me a bit of the Strv 74
loaders foot leaver = BML. Force the breach/gun back 15 Cm and the extractors hold the breech open.
O and I can also be 0 and 1, which is binary for off and on respectively, so maybe that's why?
Good show
What may be the purpose of the round cutout in the recoil guard of the gunnner with the plastic cap at around 11:05 ? Chocolat slot??
Not sure. I didn't notice it at the time so did not investigate.
The loader steps on the lever to manually open the latch. When using an inserted barrel (20mm) in training, the latch had to be closed and opened manually.
I’m assuming that the extra cupola for the loader and his machine gun is due to the terrain in Switzerland. The hill sides are steep and infantry up hill of you that would not be able to be engaged by the main gun or coax could be engaged by the roof mg
To be fair, this tank was basically worthless by 1970, the tanks this thing would come up against, T62, T64 and T72 would chew it out and spit it out in a ball of molten steel, I think they doctinierely knew that engaging other tanks was a suicide mission with this thing, setting it up for anti infantry, thus the most vision possible makes sense, it also explains the armored gunsights, the many spare parascopes, it seems to be really designed to suffer little damage from machineguns and infantry weapons trying to spray it down.
@@deepbludreams ... you are assuming that a soviet tank could climb those alps ?
@@sotabaka Yes, yes they could, the soviet tanks, particularly the T64 and T72 have wider tracks, lower center of gravity, more horsepower.....they would do a better job navigating the alps then the Panzer 61 and 68 would lmao.
@@deepbludreams yeah, but the swiss would only fight a defensive war with prepared positions (look up swiss fortifications and the "réduit national" on the wiki) so they would engage enemy tanks from good positions, and while the T-something would have been able to chew through the armor of the Pz 61, so they could against every western tanks of the 70s (save maybe for the chieftain), the Pz 61 could do the same, some of the shortcomings were fixed in the Panzer 68 which came in the 70's (notably wider tracks and more powerful engine, later production also had a wider turret)
@@quentintin1 the 105 cannot penetreate the frontal armor of a T72 let alone a T64 [weirdly the earlier tank had better armor] at combat range, it's why the 120 program got rushed along, plus the 125MM guns on said tanks outranged the 105.
Really the T72 and T64 where so many decades ahead of the west it's funny because the soviets where decades behind the west in everything else.
What's the comfort and thickness rating?
I don't know if it actually is one, leftover from the upgrade which gave it larger main gun ammo capacity, but there appears to be an Ammo hatch on the loaders side of the Hull between the idler wheels and road wheels.
Perhaps the foot pedal is/was to crank the now missing 20mm? Given the limited space, and the force required to crank something that chonk, it would make sense to have it being a foot pedal or similar?
I'm going to ask this here and I'm going to talk about a certain Jadzpanzer 38t.
Those idler wheels look rather Jadzpanzer 38t/G13 like from a few of these shots. Really do.
At least you're way more comfortable in this vehicle, it looks like you actually have some space, if not so much in the gunner's position.
Great video as always. It would be even more informative if you could provide an overall assesement at the end. What is your impression of the tank and how did it stand up to the opposition of the time? Looking forward to the next one.
Regarding the loaders cupola. Don't know if this is what they had in mind, but if the crew was reduced to three it would allow the TC/Loader to load the main gun and retain some situational awareness while buttoned up.
@17:09 Breech operating lever? Now disconnected because the gun is de-miled?
Could that foot lever be for recocking the gun?
The tank appears to be in perfect condition. I wonder how much it went for. I live about 20 miles from there.
About a 130 grand or so.
That paint chipping off at 16:26
Oops
😬
Ohnoo
That lever for the loader, it isn't a manual extraction for stuck/misfired rounds is it?
What was the rational for the 75mm secondary gun? What type of gun and what was it capable of?
7.5mm coax
@@johnyricco1220 Thanks Johny. At 3:15 in part one Chief said, "The 20mm was replaced by the seven-five." I looked at the bore in the coax position and thought, "that's different, a 75 low-velocity coax." Now that I see it again, it was an absurd thought.
@@daveduffy7254 ... other channel and four hundred andtwenty was mistaken for 420mm ... on a destroyer gun
4x 120mm four ... hunderd and twenty
The gun is supposed to be angled about 11 degrees right to allow for access to the drivers hatch. For long road marches, the turret was reversed.
Nobody's werfing _my_ nebels, I'll tell you that for nothing.
Touch my "Nebels" & things will get nasty fast
Looks like the loader got the best draw in the "oh bugger, the tank is on fire" sweepstakes, which makes this tank the anti-(first generation) Sherman.
Did the BII include a knife? IT has to have a knife, right?
@The_Chieftain
Ehmm 56 rounds in the tank - 11 ready - 1 in the tube = 42??? Is it 44 elsewhere in the tank, 13 ready rounds, or does the tank carry 54 rounds?
I love your videos. Keep them coming. You're doing them really well!
It seemed to get real for a second when the hatch hit the gun tube and his leg stuck during the 'Oh, bugger!' drill.
16:10 ... is that a live 105mm APFSDS round?
That seems... let's go with unlikely.
They left the exterior fully stocked...
@@flare9757 Jacks, hacksaws etc. are somewhat less controversial among customs officials and other law enforcement personnel than artillery ammunition. I'm just saying.
It wouldn’t be the first time it had happened though.
Seems to be a pretty smol tonk to be packing a 105.
Could you maybe Do an in deph Review of an Chieftain sometimes?
"An" Cheiftain?
Certainly it's not of huge use to you if you a reenactor or anything, but if you enjoy werfing Nebels, this is certainly an interesting one to put into your garage.
as usefull as a mig28 was in top gun ?
When I was 18 years old, I got a call from the army and went to the draft. I had three branches that interested me and tanks were one of them. The muster officer explained to me right away that I was "much too high" for a tank man. Mind you, I'm 178 cm (5 ft 8 in). A school friend, at 170 cm (5 ft 5in) became a tank soldier (first gunner, then corporal / commander and after officer school he became a platoon commander) but on the Centurion and later on the Leo 2. I only know the Panzer 61 from the other Side. Since they looked a bit like the Soviet tanks, they were often the "bad enemy" in our maneuvers, the red ones.
How do you do track tension on the drinking water tank?
@The_Chieftain could that foot leaver be to manually kick the extractors to unseat an unfired round from the breach?
Wet stowage?
Best thing ever according to my uncle who was a Sherman gunner in WW2 combat
How cool would you look driving to work if you bought this? 🙂 On serious note, how does this compare to it's adversarial Soviet tanks from that era? Could it go toe to toe with a t54 or t60
8:42 Blue Curacao dispenser, all mod cons!
Blending in well with that 61 paint job, chief
There appears to be a casing chute under the coax. any idea where the casings end up? Looks like scattered on hull floor by the looks of it.
I took a look at it, and the only thing I can think of is that they hung a detachable canvas bag under there
Why put the fuel tank between the driver and ammo? Wouldn’t it be better for the fuel tank to be in front of the ammo to catch spalling like in the T-55?
When I was drafted to army the recruiting officer have said to me why you don't wanna go in mechanized or tanks troops I ve answered they are destroyed after 7 minutes on the field.
That's for what I was in the artillery.
After seeing this about our tanks it was a good choice.
How many nebels can I werf in a Panzer 61?
I hope you've got a video on interwar American tanks coming. I want to laugh at all the machineguns