T5rux Lee 0 seconds ago No aposthing needed for plural possessive, mate, according to the Yanks. You are missing an "s" ending for "sit" and "jump", tho. "I usually sit ..." also works. lol . "But he speaks perfect English. Why do you think he is a ... Oh ! I see ! !" . "Exactly, sir. Could not be an more obviously of a give away !"
@@DickHolman He meant the text on the thumbnail (the picture associated with the video) that says 'idiots guide to the T34', a kind of fitting omission haha 😂
For this guy to be able to answer these questions non stop without missing a beat AND to add even more interesting information to the answer is amazing. Awesome presenter.
19:30 This is a reversible periscope constructed in early 1934 by Rudolf Gundlach, a captain in the Polish Army. The device is considered an ingenious solution due to its simplicity. Prior to its development, the tank's surroundings were observed through observation slits at intervals around the entire vehicle's fighting compartment. Gundlach came up with the idea of making it so that it was not the man who would spin inside the vehicle, looking through successive visors, but that the visor would spin around the vehicle. Gundlach's invention was accepted by the military and put into production as the G wz. 34 reversible periscope. Assembly of the first periscopes was not undertaken until 1936 in Lvov. The periscope was patented on 3 I 1936 at the expense of the Military Ministry as the property of Gundlach. The licence was bought by Vickers, which then mass-produced the periscope for the British Army. The invention was passed on to the Americans as part of arms co-operation, and also to the Soviets, who received the periscope along with tanks from Britain. They copied it and produced it for the T-34 tank.The British initially gave the G wz. 34 periscope the designation Mk IV, which the Americans changed to M6 and the Soviets to MK-4
“Flying tank” is a nickname for the Mil Mi-24 Hind helicopter, but if you mean something else you might mean the Object 279, which was a tank with 4 tracks that reminded people of an UFO. (I might also be missing something out, but im not sure)
@@ruota4796 I was referring to The Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka but I guess you can also add the Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik. I was just trying to be humorous.
@@HiroNguy The only thing the A-10 is good at is taking small arms fire and dropping bombs. The gun is inaccurate and the recoil of it slows the plane down, its slow, and is hardly ever flown at high altitudes. So its just a more dangerous version of ANY plane.
@@patchouliknowledge4455 Soviet tankers was selected from 1.5m to 1.7m. Even cold war era Soviet tankers was shorties. I am 1.96m, and once I try to get in T-34-76. That was.... complicated
The Radiator Louvers served two functions guys. In cold weather they could be closed for better engine performance and in combat they could be closed up to keep Molotov cocktails from being tossed into the engine. They no doubt were also used for crossing deep streams.
@@princeofcupspoc9073 Well, yes. We’re not talking about art, when it comes to tank design, it’s practical engineering. But Francis did a good job, and Chris asked good questions. Including the all-important log.
in my town (to the 90s) there was a T 34/85 in a park. The hatches were all rusted shut, but there was one at the bottom through which you could reach in as a child and turn the turret and elevate the cannon....the bottom of the tank was covered with empty ammo boxes..what beautiful memories
But, not with the T-34..... with a T60 and it was a real mess.
2 ปีที่แล้ว +19
Very nice Video. He knows his stuff. I really need to get his book at some point. Also nice to see how the chieftain has influenced the TH-cam history World in auch a way that the track tensioning absolutely needs to be mentioned 🙂
Great video! The only thing i dont understand why everyone speaking of soviet/Russian tanks alwais mantions on how crumble space it is and never mantions those tanks not designed for people 6FT high. As a Russian i only knew one guy who got drafted to tank force. And that guy was 5ft high and very skiny. And it was preatty easy for him to move in and out of the tank
When I was a kid we used to play inside and Sherman tank that was in front of the VFW building the hatch was not locked . We use to take turns . One of us would sit on the end of the barrel and when he was ready one of us would turn the control wheel and when we had the barrel all the way up and give it a good spin the gravity would take over and when it came to a rest with a loud thud and if you didn’t fall off you you were in first place. It was very hard to stay on.
Yes, there is not much space in modern Russian tanks, the armored volume of the Abrams is 20 cubic meters, the T~90 is only 11 cubic meters, so the tankers are short, small people.
Would have really liked to actually see a POV perspective inside the tank. I know it must be cramped in there, but maybe a head-mounted go pro or something?
I think the difference in space available between cockpits and tank hulls is that the occupants have to move more inside a tank. the body movements in an airframe seem more reduced, so less space is needed.
Also, considering the forces acting on pilots, body movements are probably a pretty bad thing. Nestling your fighter pilot in so that he can be thrown around by G forces is likely ideal for keeping him intact and functioning
Absolutely awesome! Thanks a lot! Btw, when doing time ( lol ) in the Polish Communist military in 1985 - 87 they had T-72. I live in Canada now, thank God!
Hello, could you please point me to a link where I can find a picture of the "Track tension tool". I'm expecting to receive your book soon. Beautiful video, congratulations!
My father fought battle Tali - Ihantala june 1944 and a soldier from his group estroyed 10 T-34 tanks during one day 28.6.1944. He used german panzerfaust or tankfist. Guy who made that destroying died during that battle. Finland took a fine defense victory and because of those soldiers we are still independent..
You are independent because you had a smart government all along (from 1944 to 2022), who understood very well that it was more profitable to trade with Russia than to go to war. Well, thank Sanne Maureen for dragging your country and you into NATO. Congratulations! You are now targets for Russian missiles...
19:18 Important correction, this is not the British periscope, but the POLISH one! Constructed in the early 1930s by Polish engineer Rudolf Gundlach, patented and produced in Lviv since 1936. Used, inter alia, in TKS tankettes and 7TP tanks. 🙂 Only later was the patent sold to the British who started to produce it as the Tank periscope Mk IV. The Russians simply stole it and copied it from Polish tanks committed during the 1939 aggression. 😕
Aye-aye! The Russians stole a periscope from the Poles... You, peckerwood, do you realize what nonsense you've written?!! As part of pre-war Polish-British military cooperation, Gundlach's patent was sold for a penny (actually 1 Polish zloty) to Vickers-Armstrong. It was produced as Vickers Tank Periscope MK.IV and was built into all British tanks (Crusader, Churchill, Valentine, Cromwell). In the USSR the Gundlach periscope was known as MK-4 (in accordance with the British designation, as Russian sources openly confirm that it was copied from samples purchased with tanks supplied by Britain) and was used on all tanks (including the T-34 and T-70). The technology was later transferred to the USA and as an M6 periscope was introduced in all US tanks (M3 / M5 Stuart, M4 Sherman and others). At the end of World War II this technology was adopted worldwide and was used virtually unchanged for almost 50 years until it was replaced by electronic devices. Hear that, half-wit, "...copied from samples.... of GREAT BRITAIN tanks!!!"
the Pz IV also had a single escape hatche at the bottom, ive had the (mis)fortune to be able to attempt an exit from the lower hatch once. basically youre half cooked by the time you make it out
If I was heading to a big fire fight I would use up the reserve gas tanks first. Their only going to get shot up leak out anyway. What’s the difference if you use it now or later?
There is no direct connection between these and the internal fuel system (that was mentioned in the video). So it is not possible to use reserve fuel first. You still can detach those before the fighting begins. The diesel fuel makes those safe enough, it is not easy to ignite.
About the tow hooks on the back, what is the benefit of such relatively complex cast piece, compared to a simple ear cut from a thick plate and equipped with a standard shackle?
If the factory makes cast parts already it is much cheaper and simpler to make cast parts. For cast parts the complexity of shape does not directly translate into manufacturing difficulty. So it is quite possible that these cast hooks are in fact cheaper to make and more ergonomic than those of same function but cut from a plate.
Taking into account the time that the T34 was designed it was probably the most innovative tank ever made. Reliable Diesel engine, wide tracks to go over soft ground, sloping armour, Christie suspension and simple to maintain. Idea weapon for the red army.
But with still some really elementary mistakes like the lack of radios and cupolas and the cramped 2-man turret in the early version. Drawbacks that don't really matter in video games but mattered a lot in actual war. I don't think it's fair to call the t34-85 innovative as it's no longer a ground-breaking design with mistakes but just an upgunned version that fixed the elementary mistakes of the first design. Which was great for extreme mass production. But I'd say the panther was a more innovative tank at this stage of the war. I always wondered why sloped armor wasn't used more early, it seems like such a simple innovation that you would quickly discover when testing out anti-tank guns. Still, the T34 is probably the first tank that really embraces it as an important feature, which was innovative for sure.
I find there's always been something unnervingly sinister about the T-34. Yes the German cats such as the Panther, Tiger and King Tiger are far more imposing and have a greater presence. But the T-34's crude cuts, ugly welds, rough construction and ungainly movements give it a really terrifying and intimating quality. Simply put, the German cats are Hannible Lecter. They do what they do with incredible efficiency, precision and finesse. The T-34 on the other hand, is Jason Voorhees. It's savage, brutal and does what it does with a bestial, homicidal ferocity.
you mean like an AK facing a German machine gun, or like an AK facing a German "assault weapon"? Being ugly doesn't help when the bullets start flying.
"planes can't tow eachother" - that's right, but they can PUSH! check the incident in the Vietnam war that a Phantom pushed another wrecked Phantom to safety!
Rudolf Gundlach, who created this peroscope wasn't British but Polish. Funny fact: it was so revolutionary design that it was copied and adapted litrerally on all sides of conflicts: Poles, British, Americans, Russians and Germans.
Do you have a video on the p-47 it was one of my favorite aircraft from ww2. If not is there a possibility that there could be a video for on it in the future?
Im very interested about these flags which were used for signaling. I cant find detailed information about color, size and the use of it. Does anyone know how to find some information?
If someone finds the apostrophe that seems to have gotten lost on its way to the thumbnail, please return it to me
‘ Here you go!
I think one fell out of my copy of the Stuka book, was wondering where it came from.
Unless you've already edited, I see 2 apostrophes.
T5rux Lee
0 seconds ago
No aposthing needed for plural possessive, mate, according to the Yanks. You are missing an "s" ending for "sit" and "jump", tho. "I usually sit ..." also works. lol
. "But he speaks perfect English. Why do you think he is a ... Oh ! I see ! !"
. "Exactly, sir. Could not be an more obviously of a give away !"
@@DickHolman He meant the text on the thumbnail (the picture associated with the video) that says 'idiots guide to the T34', a kind of fitting omission haha 😂
For this guy to be able to answer these questions non stop without missing a beat AND to add even more interesting information to the answer is amazing. Awesome presenter.
Yeah he quit his job and married a t-34/85! Probably not a bad decision!!
19:30 This is a reversible periscope constructed in early 1934 by Rudolf Gundlach, a captain in the Polish Army. The device is considered an ingenious solution due to its simplicity. Prior to its development, the tank's surroundings were observed through observation slits at intervals around the entire vehicle's fighting compartment. Gundlach came up with the idea of making it so that it was not the man who would spin inside the vehicle, looking through successive visors, but that the visor would spin around the vehicle.
Gundlach's invention was accepted by the military and put into production as the G wz. 34 reversible periscope. Assembly of the first periscopes was not undertaken until 1936 in Lvov. The periscope was patented on 3 I 1936 at the expense of the Military Ministry as the property of Gundlach. The licence was bought by Vickers, which then mass-produced the periscope for the British Army. The invention was passed on to the Americans as part of arms co-operation, and also to the Soviets, who received the periscope along with tanks from Britain. They copied it and produced it for the T-34 tank.The British initially gave the G wz. 34 periscope the designation Mk IV, which the Americans changed to M6 and the Soviets to MK-4
come on - this is just a periscope! Used on U-boats in WW1 and even much earlier, inside every camera. This story looks very politic to me.
If it was just a periscope why did Vickers buy the license?@@volhv2548
I heard Soviets experimented with flying tanks so it all makes sense Chris that he would check one out.
“Flying tank” is a nickname for the Mil Mi-24 Hind helicopter, but if you mean something else you might mean the Object 279, which was a tank with 4 tracks that reminded people of an UFO.
(I might also be missing something out, but im not sure)
@@ruota4796 I was referring to The Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka but I guess you can also add the Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik. I was just trying to be humorous.
@@rtello45 ohhh i see, my bad
Flying tank: Fairchild-Republic A-10 👍👍👍👍🤘🤘🤘🤘
@@HiroNguy The only thing the A-10 is good at is taking small arms fire and dropping bombs. The gun is inaccurate and the recoil of it slows the plane down, its slow, and is hardly ever flown at high altitudes. So its just a more dangerous version of ANY plane.
Thanks! I was a M60A1 tanker US Army. It was far more spacious than about any USSR tank. That T34 triggers my claustrophobia 😄.
Russians back in the late 30's/early 40's were a hell of a lot smaller than the average American grunt.
@@andreinarangel6227 I was a hellva lot smaller in 1976. Ain't no way I'd even try to fit in one now.🙂
@@andreinarangel6227 The North Koreans had a hard time in em, and we Asians are much smaller than our European counterparts...
@@patchouliknowledge4455 Soviet tankers was selected from 1.5m to 1.7m. Even cold war era Soviet tankers was shorties.
I am 1.96m, and once I try to get in T-34-76. That was.... complicated
@@PyromaN93 Clearly even those had problems getting out under duress, from the T-34 crew survivability statistics...
The Radiator Louvers served two functions guys. In cold weather they could be closed for better engine performance and in combat they could be closed up to keep Molotov cocktails from being tossed into the engine. They no doubt were also used for crossing deep streams.
One more purpose - defence against shraphel and attacks from air too
Actually you did a good job Chris. Chieftain will be impressed.
Why thank you, I just asked some questions though. Francis is a natural at this!
Nothing impresses "Chieftain" unless it already fits his biased pre-conceptions.
@@princeofcupspoc9073 Well, yes. We’re not talking about art, when it comes to tank design, it’s practical engineering. But Francis did a good job, and Chris asked good questions. Including the all-important log.
chieftain? what a joke of an "historian", several people have pointed out his bias in his comments about tanks.
@@Kenny212_2 I have a question for you and that is who isn’t biased? I know I have my own biases because of various reasons.
in my town (to the 90s) there was a T 34/85 in a park. The hatches were all rusted shut, but there was one at the bottom through which you could reach in as a child and turn the turret and elevate the cannon....the bottom of the tank was covered with empty ammo boxes..what beautiful memories
Chemnitz maybe?
@@antonmothes3160 nope … Artern Thüringen
I'm sure all those reservists will find this video helpful in the near future.
Better hide that one, it’ll get recalled for service.
@@c1ph3rpunk Only the turret is russian... so they will recall the turret and 4 reservists have to carry it around the battlefield xD
@@Rhinozherous The Ukrainians would soon have the turret off of that !
Damn it. you beat me to it
It'll be the most accurate Soviet battle reenactment ever. Mosins and T34s back in action.
Good to hear a guy with a real love of the subject speak.
10:54 that hatch looks oddly familiar... also why does my foot hurt... 🙃
New drinking game: Take a shot every time Chris says "Fantastic!"
I counted 14 but fell asleep before the video ended
Great Chris, would be great to see more inside the cockpit of other types of vehicles and weaponry!
But, not with the T-34..... with a T60 and it was a real mess.
Very nice Video. He knows his stuff. I really need to get his book at some point.
Also nice to see how the chieftain has influenced the TH-cam history World in auch a way that the track tensioning absolutely needs to be mentioned 🙂
I can go to my grave satisfied.
The tank is serveral times called T-44 but this is a T-34/85 otherwise a very interesting and informative video.
I enjoyed this. Good to see Francis who I met via our mutual interest in the T-34. His book is very good too.
thank you both (and camera person). great tour and narration.
Very interesting! Thank you!
We used to play with these helmets when we were kids.
I learned some cool stuff about the T-34. Fantastic video.
Bravo! Absolutely wonderful video…. You did very well in asking the questions we all wanted the answer to.
Thanks guys, your video is 5 STARS. Great work. Thanks for showing off this great tank..
20:21 still under restoration? For a t-34 that's supposed to be a ww2 production variant it is very fortunate as it is already
Great video! The only thing i dont understand why everyone speaking of soviet/Russian tanks alwais mantions on how crumble space it is and never mantions those tanks not designed for people 6FT high. As a Russian i only knew one guy who got drafted to tank force. And that guy was 5ft high and very skiny. And it was preatty easy for him to move in and out of the tank
Oh, BTW Frances' book is great.
When I was a kid we used to play inside and Sherman tank that was in front of the VFW building the hatch was not locked . We use to take turns . One of us would sit on the end of the barrel and when he was ready one of us would turn the control wheel and when we had the barrel all the way up and give it a good spin the gravity would take over and when it came to a rest with a loud thud and if you didn’t fall off you you were in first place. It was very hard to stay on.
Thank you. I have ordered Francis’ book through the link.
As an old man who actually reads books every day I will buy this book! Look forward to reading it!
I don’t think that plane will be able to take off… oh that’s a tank? Hmm interesting 😂😂
Wonderful! This video was very informative. Muchas gracias comrade.
I would've loved to see a Oh no my tank is on fire drill.
He definitely needs to practice that...
I really enjoyed that Chris
Thanks
Now if Chris can get his hands on documentation for the Soviet Experimental Flying Glider Tank.... Would certainly qualify as Inside the Cockpit.
Interesting to see the T34 is parked next to a British Cromwell tank which is used the same Christie type suspension.
Yes, there is not much space in modern Russian tanks, the armored volume of the Abrams is 20 cubic meters, the T~90 is only 11 cubic meters, so the tankers are short, small people.
Drinking game: Cheers when he says "Fantastic!"
Bismarck was it fantastic? Fantastic video
Would have really liked to actually see a POV perspective inside the tank. I know it must be cramped in there, but maybe a head-mounted go pro or something?
I would love to see you do other tanks as well like a Panzer IV.
Great video and very interesting review. Btw, I live 300 meters from the Morozov Design Bureau, where the earliest version of this tank was born.
I think the difference in space available between cockpits and tank hulls is that the occupants have to move more inside a tank. the body movements in an airframe seem more reduced, so less space is needed.
Also, considering the forces acting on pilots, body movements are probably a pretty bad thing. Nestling your fighter pilot in so that he can be thrown around by G forces is likely ideal for keeping him intact and functioning
"Fantastic!" Great video!
Good video. Bought the Kindle version of the book while watching.
thanks to Francis a lot for explaining so well
First time viewer here. This is an outstanding production.👍
This video is definitely fantastic.
Outstanding video and presentation.
The British periscopes are in turn based on a Polish design.
Absolutely awesome!
Thanks a lot!
Btw, when doing time ( lol ) in the Polish Communist military in 1985 - 87 they had T-72.
I live in Canada now, thank God!
@@canuck64 Thank you!
May God bless Canada!
Hello, could you please point me to a link where I can find a picture of the "Track tension tool". I'm expecting to receive your book soon. Beautiful video, congratulations!
Even track tension has been asked for, very good! :D
Chris: "What an odd looking aircraft you got there, Sir".
come on man! A T-34 without a log is hideous! haha great video guys. thanks
Very informative thank you!
My father fought battle Tali - Ihantala june 1944 and a soldier from his group estroyed 10 T-34 tanks during one day 28.6.1944. He used german panzerfaust or tankfist. Guy who made that destroying died during that battle. Finland took a fine defense victory and because of those soldiers we are still independent..
You are independent because you had a smart government all along (from 1944 to 2022), who understood very well that it was more profitable to trade with Russia than to go to war. Well, thank Sanne Maureen for dragging your country and you into NATO. Congratulations! You are now targets for Russian missiles...
Вы даром никому не нужны.
It's cool that Chris and Bernard work together more often now.
Great video, very nice.
Francis was very cool! Knowledgeable!
Interesting stuff as always Chris..
1080 cranks per revolution of the turret. That's amazing.
Nice video friend
Hi Bis, I'm considering buying your stuka book released a year ago. Is it by any chance available in hard cover?
fantastic!
19:18 Important correction, this is not the British periscope, but the POLISH one! Constructed in the early 1930s by Polish engineer Rudolf Gundlach, patented and produced in Lviv since 1936. Used, inter alia, in TKS tankettes and 7TP tanks. 🙂
Only later was the patent sold to the British who started to produce it as the Tank periscope Mk IV. The Russians simply stole it and copied it from Polish tanks committed during the 1939 aggression. 😕
Aye-aye! The Russians stole a periscope from the Poles... You, peckerwood, do you realize what nonsense you've written?!! As part of pre-war Polish-British military cooperation, Gundlach's patent was sold for a penny (actually 1 Polish zloty) to Vickers-Armstrong. It was produced as Vickers Tank Periscope MK.IV and was built into all British tanks (Crusader, Churchill, Valentine, Cromwell). In the USSR the Gundlach periscope was known as MK-4 (in accordance with the British designation, as Russian sources openly confirm that it was copied from samples purchased with tanks supplied by Britain) and was used on all tanks (including the T-34 and T-70). The technology was later transferred to the USA and as an M6 periscope was introduced in all US tanks (M3 / M5 Stuart, M4 Sherman and others). At the end of World War II this technology was adopted worldwide and was used virtually unchanged for almost 50 years until it was replaced by electronic devices.
Hear that, half-wit, "...copied from samples.... of GREAT BRITAIN tanks!!!"
the Pz IV also had a single escape hatche at the bottom, ive had the (mis)fortune to be able to attempt an exit from the lower hatch once. basically youre half cooked by the time you make it out
Brilliant and informative.
That turret is cramped. I can't begin to imaging how chaotic bailing out would be if that thing was hit and on fire. People have suffered.
If I was heading to a big fire fight I would use up the reserve gas tanks first. Their only going to get shot up leak out anyway. What’s the difference if you use it now or later?
There is no direct connection between these and the internal fuel system (that was mentioned in the video). So it is not possible to use reserve fuel first. You still can detach those before the fighting begins. The diesel fuel makes those safe enough, it is not easy to ignite.
Inside the Bismarck's Hatch?
Now we need one on the Kv-1 and Is-2
Fantastic video
the interviewer loves the word "phantastic".
About the tow hooks on the back, what is the benefit of such relatively complex cast piece, compared to a simple ear cut from a thick plate and equipped with a standard shackle?
If the factory makes cast parts already it is much cheaper and simpler to make cast parts. For cast parts the complexity of shape does not directly translate into manufacturing difficulty. So it is quite possible that these cast hooks are in fact cheaper to make and more ergonomic than those of same function but cut from a plate.
Taking into account the time that the T34 was designed it was probably the most innovative tank ever made. Reliable Diesel engine, wide tracks to go over soft ground, sloping armour, Christie suspension and simple to maintain. Idea weapon for the red army.
But with still some really elementary mistakes like the lack of radios and cupolas and the cramped 2-man turret in the early version. Drawbacks that don't really matter in video games but mattered a lot in actual war.
I don't think it's fair to call the t34-85 innovative as it's no longer a ground-breaking design with mistakes but just an upgunned version that fixed the elementary mistakes of the first design. Which was great for extreme mass production. But I'd say the panther was a more innovative tank at this stage of the war.
I always wondered why sloped armor wasn't used more early, it seems like such a simple innovation that you would quickly discover when testing out anti-tank guns. Still, the T34 is probably the first tank that really embraces it as an important feature, which was innovative for sure.
Okay design, terrible execution
@@mr.thiemo1406 For the time, I'd say exceptional design.
@@Jajalaatmaar not really, if it was a good design then the fuel tanks wouldn’t have been in the fighting compartment.
Wait.. tanks don't fly😄😄😄.. just messing with you.. you have been one of my favorite WW2 history channels for a while.. good vid😎
I thought the little tubes at the back of the engine deck were armoured conduits for the wiring to set off BDSh-5 smoke canisters.
the little boy girl erklärt uns die Welt ….. wonderful
We will probably see these on the battlefield soon
Fantastic!
The title should've been something like "Flyboy inside the "C0ck-pit" of some tank or sumtin' "
Chris, where are you? Why are there tent behind you? Looks likes the U.S. ‘s EAA Air venture aka OshKosh. Love the video.
T34/85 started production early 1944 so not at Kursk.
I find there's always been something unnervingly sinister about the T-34. Yes the German cats such as the Panther, Tiger and King Tiger are far more imposing and have a greater presence. But the T-34's crude cuts, ugly welds, rough construction and ungainly movements give it a really terrifying and intimating quality. Simply put, the German cats are Hannible Lecter. They do what they do with incredible efficiency, precision and finesse. The T-34 on the other hand, is Jason Voorhees. It's savage, brutal and does what it does with a bestial, homicidal ferocity.
You also should remember that there were about a dozen Jasons for every Hannible.
you mean like an AK facing a German machine gun, or like an AK facing a German "assault weapon"? Being ugly doesn't help when the bullets start flying.
Ah yes, I remember that part where Hannibal Lecter's legs spontaneously broke and he just laid there on the floor waiting for someone to find him.
Fantastic.
So, I guess we'll skip the "Oh bugger! The tank is on fire!" portion of the video?
Fabulous walk around. I'm being picky - it's a shame to see any rust on such an iconic and important vehicle.
Thag things literally the biggest pile of crap made. Fits it well
@@idontknowwhattoputhere1933 ok american
So funny when a aviation historian calls the inside of a tank a cockpit. Military Aviation History make great (and sometimes funny) videos.
So, which part of inside of the tank were we supposed to see?
Oh my gosh! The tanks on fire! :)
Challenge: Take a shot each time he says "Fantastic"
why call a canon for a gun lke its a handhold pistol...
"planes can't tow eachother" - that's right, but they can PUSH! check the incident in the Vietnam war that a Phantom pushed another wrecked Phantom to safety!
How do you rate the periscopes and the commanders cupola? Good vis?
well done biz
Ok fantastic
Rudolf Gundlach, who created this peroscope wasn't British but Polish. Funny fact: it was so revolutionary design that it was copied and adapted litrerally on all sides of conflicts: Poles, British, Americans, Russians and Germans.
german
@@joperamod5760 Polish
@@James28R nope
Do you have a video on the p-47 it was one of my favorite aircraft from ww2. If not is there a possibility that there could be a video for on it in the future?
Have you watched Gregs Airplanes video on the subject ?
Im very interested about these flags which were used for signaling. I cant find detailed information about color, size and the use of it. Does anyone know how to find some information?
Soviet army semaphore flags.
@@garynew9637 Thank you very much.
Chris is about 30 percent larger than anyone that was supposed to fit in this.
How long of a runway does this tank need to take off?
that turret is also chec made.. little bumb on turret left side is mark what is not on cccp made t-34