It is quite possible for someone who knows all of the PzKpWg 1-6 tanks, a load of British, American, Russian, Japanese, Italian tanks to not know about the 38t. They just are not mentioned that much.
Numbers wise for Poland and France you are correct yet you fail to mention how many out of those numbers actually made it to the battlefield. The German panzers were notoriously unreliable whereas the Pz 38 was notoriously reliable. This would change the effective numbers more in favor of the Pz 38t in its influence in the Polish and French campaigns.
Panzer Aces like Otto Carius started their career in the Panzer 38(t). In his book Tigers in the mud he points out that the crew felt invincible at the start of Operation Barbarossa and that the tank was great for travelling.
Good infantry perspective of the eastern front is "In Deadly Combat" by Gottlob Bidermann. He survived the war with a gold wound badge and an Iron cross. Most gold wound badges were posthumously awarded so his survival is some miracle
Otto carius' also criticised it as having " brittle armour" after one of his crew was severely injured in a 38t. The Rumanian army used them skillfully (as they didn't have much else).
My grandfather was a tank commander on the eastern front, he loved the 38(t). Fast, maneuverable, and very easy to shoot well. He considered them the overall best tank he ever ran.
Really pz38t was very good tank in battle of France Predecessor pz35t was also comparable in this class with French tanks. Pz38t was fastest tank in battle of France 1940. Only Soviet's BT was faster , not too much.
Technically, the LT-35 is better described as an older cousin, being developed before the LT-38 and sharing little in common with it. The LT-35 doesn't get much attention because it was not a popular nor very successful vehicle design. Germans used it because they could form a handful of complete battalions from the 240 or so they acquired from the Czechs in 1939, but the vehicles were rather unreliable and a bit too slow to really meet the needs of the Panzerwaffe. The Germans ran them until 90% of them were destroyed or broke down, deeming even the manufacture of spare parts to be a waste of time. The LT-38 was pretty much better in every way, so that is why the LT-35 is a footnote while the LT-38 is an all-star.
@@genericpersonx333 While reliability wasn't it's strong side, for tank in late 1930's, I'd say Pz 35's reliability wasn't bad, it was simply meh (while 38 was known to be extremely reliable). Problem was that factories were no longer producing spare/replacement parts, so 35s weren't that easy to fix, which magnified impact of its only average reliability.
I don't know about that. WoT community memed the Hetzer even before GuP came out; and the Pz 38(t) is well known among a lot of people like me who were Rommel Fanatics, because they were in his division. GuP probably only brought it to people who watched it, but weren't tank/history enthusiasts or players of tank games to begin with.
In my reading, the Czech 38 which became the Pz 38t was always highly regarded as a top tank of its day. And like the PzIII the tank chassis was used throughout the war after the tank itself became obsolete.
It had the flaw of the parts being riveted together, instead of welded. So if the armor was impacted, the rivets turned into shrapnels inside the tank, killing the crew like a meatgrinder. The reason it became obsolete is having too weak weapon for later stages of war. But since it was very reliable, armored enough to protect crew from rifles or schrapnels and it moved well through terrain, the tanks were repurposed. I think the FLAK was the most often modification.
Of course it's good us Czechs made it lol. Not many people know just how many amazing tanks and firearms we've designed. Poland doesn't get enough credit either that Polish 7TP and the 10TP were amazing then the Soviet's stole it from them.
One could argue that the 38(t) in the french campaign, although only accounting for 9% of german panzer force was actually quite important because it has to bee seen in relation to the number of medium tanks rather than tanks in total. Considering the low production numbers of Pz.Kpfw.III / IV until the beginning of Fall Gelb, and considering that mainly the medium tanks were able to penetrate most of the allied tanks armor in direct combat, the 38(t) seems to be an important part of german forces , already at the french campaign.
Thanks, I was going to write exactly the same, Pz38t was a vital addition to the German forces, because in 7th and 8th division (and in 6th division using the Pz35t) it replaced the Pz IIIs completely (and Pz IIs partly). So it was vital for 3 out of the 10 divisions in total (accoding to Panzertruppen: The Complete Guide to the Creation & Combat Employment of Germany’s Tank Force). So the french betrayal (Munich treaty 1938) was bitter and costly for the French army eventually contributing to strengthening the German army.
@@zikmunddvorak4816 oh, i never saw the connection between the french betrayel and the "czech revenge". Its an interesting point you brought up there. I wonder if there was some kind of a "polish revenge" as well. I cant think about one.
Could you do a video about the Panzer 35t because no one really talks about it? Because people usually talk about the Panzer 38t when people talk about Czech Panzers in German service.
@@USSChicago-pl2fq Germans did not gave the LT vz. 34 to Slovakia. When Czechoslovakia ceased to exist and Czech troops stationed in Slovakia went home or into emigration, they left all their equipment in Slovakia. There was 27 LT vz. 34 (or LT-34 in Slovak designation) left in Slovakia and 23 in Czechia. 23 Czech pieces were seized by Wehrmacht and due to their old age they were (probably) scrapped. Source: KLIMENT, Charles; FRANCEV, Vladimír: Československá obrněná vozidla 1918-1948, p. 59.
You don’t really need to talk about it unless you want to say it’s origin design. There were About 3X less then the 38(t) and it had less of what made The 38 good.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 The 35(t) and 38(t) are not all that similar, beyond visual profile and basic lineage. Their drivetrains, suspension, layout, turrets, armament and dimensions are all significantly different from one another (the 35(t) is actually slightly larger and heavier, interestingly).
Oddly enough, I find the Pz 38(t) as a fine rolling box that could laugh at tankettes as well as likely laughing at the BTs. I kinda forgot what the 38(t) struggled against apart from likely encountering early T-34's and KV-1's and the occasional KV-2 since it could have whacked the shit out of any tankette or early light tank
The soviet 45mm gun (the one in BT and T-26 tanks) could very well knock it out, And the BT-7 front hull was better armored with 40mm sloped armour, instead of 30mm almost vertical on the 38(t).
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Well the BT-7 armor was all welded instead of riveted, was faster, the BT-7M (the last version) had a diesel engine which gave it better fuel economy and longer range as well as making it less prone to catching fire. But its biggest downside was the 2 man turret, and the lack of radios and intercoms on every tank. Unlike the germans which where very thorough in equipping all their combat vehicles with them. And those two things (among others non related to the tank itself) gravely affectes the performance of the BT-7 which otherwise was a fine tank for the time.
I had asked for a video about the 38t, sorry if I didn't make myself clear, what I wanted really was an analysis of its design, employment and production, the german takeover of the factories in Czechoslovakia, performance in combat, maintenance, etc. I didn't mean to imply that they were underrated in any way. In fact, when I was a kid, the first book about tanks my father bought me, there it was, the famous 38t, and the book didn't have any articles about the PzKpfw I or II nor pictures of them, though it covered well the PzKpfw III and IV.
You used the term correctly. Typically when people talk about underrated they mean it doesn't get much talk about in the public eye or media. As someone who knows slightly more about WW2 tanks then the average person (no way makes me an expert) I hardly ever anyone talk about 38t.
There were 187 Panzer 35t tanks available for Barbarossa as well, so a total of 941 tanks of Czech origin. That's 32% of a total of some 3398 tanks used. I would suggest that that is a very significant number of these two tanks and that you are underplaying their significance to the operation.
I recently got into building gundam model kits. I had done a couple as a kid. At a hobby store recently, this one was more of a traditional hobby shop with lots of military models. They had airplanes both old and new and tanks. The standout was a model kit for a GERMAN t-34 tank. Wasn’t interested in model tanks until I saw that. Wasn’t a panzer, it was in fact a model of a t-34 but was painted with the iron cross. Maybe the idea is it is a “captured t-34”
Perhaps You have missed the mark of appreciating its involvement in both pre-Barbarossa Campaigns cited...what could have possibly filled their slots in the OoB's and as effectively? And what of the 35(t) in any of these momentous campaigns? Lastly, no mention of the occupational uses of the Czech-design tanks on the defensive fronts during said campaigns...nor any uses in the Danish and Norwegian invasions/occupations, nor the Balkan subjugations/garrisons. Nevertheless...I still think your channels are among the most informative and comprehensive available...so keep up the great work!
Great video! Thanks and I have to say that I very much enjoy your work. I’m wondering if perhaps you could do a video on the Wehrmacht‘s use of motorcycles during WW2--I’ve seen them so much in newsreels and footage but I’ve always wondered how they used them tactically. Thanks!
As part of army organization charts they're always with the recon units, something small that can go places quickly and with an MG on the sidecar suppress infantry if they were encountered. That said I would love to know more because like you said they're in the videos but never actually discussed.
During Barbarossa some 300 of them were also in service with Hungary, and I imagine with otjer axis minors as well, making their impact even more significant.
The Slovak Fast Division had some 80 38's and the Romanian 1st Armoured Division had 126 35's tanks; both divisions fought in the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa along side Germans.
Your viewers might be interested in Steven Zaloga's "Panzer 38(t) vs. BT-7. Barbarossa 1941.", published by Osprey. The book contains much technical discussion about both tanks, as well as battlefield encounters. And the Romanian Army was equipped with a number of Panzer 38(t)s as well. Viewers can find more information about Romanian employment of the tank in Mark Axworthy's "Third Axis, Fourth Ally", Mihai Filipescu's "Reluctant Axis: The Romanian Army in Russia 1941-1944", and "Three Kings: Axis Royal Armies on the Russian Front 1941."
Your use of the term underrated is just fine. I consider itself more informed then the average person on this subject, I'd not heard of this tank,. Thank you for the education you bestow upon us all.
4:11 THANK YOU VERY MUCH! I been calling the 11th panzer div. the ghost divition for years and everybody allways corrected me... Saying that the 7th PD had that nickname... I said I knew that but the 11th also was called that way and nobody belive me...Or didn't care...Because - OFFCOURSE - the 7th was ROMMEL'S divition...
fun fact, only the 11th had the Ghost as a symbol. The whole issue btw. is "under further investigation", since I was not particularly happy with the source situation.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized There you have it! That white ghost with a sword apears in many panzer's pictures and draws... But nobody ever remember the 11th... Thank you again, bro!
Yeah, the thing is that 38t and 35t are mentioned many times together in a lot of documentaries in the context of their addition to Reichs tank numbers (with other CSK equipment which importance gets overlooked a lot), coupled with the fact it had decent gun (early war standard) making them a bit more important than Pz1 and Pz2, so I can see the argument of them beeing important in those campaign. To be honest those are like 2 superstars of Czechoslovak tank construction (there are far more bizzare things in there) and even from them the 35(t) was decent on paper, but after some insight from the guys who drive/roleplay the Lt vz. 35 crew in Lešany museum it sounds more like late WW2 panzer with issues with gearbox and setting itself on fire, the guys were kinda amazed the Germans kept them running from Poland, to France, to Yugoslavia and then through halfway of European part of Russia... If you ever happen to be in Czech rep, definitely visit museum in Lešany (about 40 minutes from Prague).
It is good to remember that the Pz.Kfpw 38(T) although was a good tank, good off road capabilites and very reliable that permitted long distance without breaking down it, being very useful during the blitzkrieg and operation Barbarossa it did had it's share of drawbacks as it was mainly bolted/riveted and quite cramped. It was also difficult to bail out but it's hull was invaluable service providing quite a few variants and lastly the Hetzer by enlarging it's hull....
Actually, BT-5 and BT-7 had 45mm 20K cannon, which had weaker penetration than 37 mm of czech Škoda A7. Difference wasn't big, but I wouldn't call it worse armed.
Der Panzer 38(t) in Munster ist schon sehr beeindruckend. Einfach ein schönes Ausstellungsstück. Interessant wäre ein Einblick darin, wie sich der Panzer wirklich im Gefecht geschlagen hat, besonders im Vergleich zum Panzer III.
When the 38t was first introduced it was a superior tank in the 10 ton class which compared favorably to heavier U.S. Stuart tanks and German Panzer 2's. With its small turret mantlet diameter it couldn't be mounted with the 50 mm German anti-tank gun so conversions to Tank Destroyers were its best option for practical use after 1942.
When I made that comment about Panzer 38 (t) as also underrated during battles for Poland and France, I looked at that more from the angle that at that specific time it was very well armed tank till the Panzer III got 50mm gun. You are absolutely right in the video, it is not underrated, my mistake. Do you see any significant difference in mobility or fire power between divisions equipped basically only with Panzer 38 (t), and divisions that included combination of German light tanks with few dozen mediums? As always, great job! Thank you.
You shouldn't worry about how you use of the word "majority". Politicians do the same all the time. They are elected by a relative majority, they talk as if they had an absolute majority, and they act as the leaders of the entire people. In short, for them: 27% = 51% = 100% Politicians are master mathematicians. That's why they are so good in keeping a budget on tracks.
@Findlay Robertson I really don't understand why anyone votes Labour when they put someone like her in their cabinet... Or most of their cabinet in general actually. Like I'm not a fan of the Democrats in the US but at least people like Obama and Clinton aren't national embarassments.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Clinton's issue is being slightly sociopathic and a weird amount of conveniences involving dead people. She's not actually retarded. Diane Abbot is the kind of moron who thinks Mao Zedong was a good guy and who "did more good than harm" despite the fact that Mao's policies killed 10-15% of the Chinese population at the time
*just to clarify* Injuries from metal shrapnel caused by the hole made from the round, not the round itself. Whereas the steel used by the Germans for the regular panzers had more bend to it.
Panzer 38.(t), my favourite German tank of the early war, especially during the invasion of France, pretty good medium tank and could hold it's own against a Matilda, A13, or even Char B1, until a panzer 3 or panzer 4 showed up. Even against early Soviet tanks like the T-26, BT-5, or T-28 it could hold it's own.
Most underated Panzer for me is still Panzer 4. People who play games do not like panzer 4 because it has average armor, but armor is not most important part of the tank. panzer 4 had great gun, big space and good speed. also best gun depression of all tanks.
If you refer to "good speed" and "great gun", you have to be more specific, because both changed drastically over the years 1937 - 1945. 1. The Panzer IV (or PzKpfw IV, NOT Pzkw) was uparmored several times during the production, while the engine wasn't changed. So while the Panzer IV B hat a powerratio of 17 hp/t, the Panzer IV H and J were down to 12 hp/t (Panther had 15,6 hp/t, Tiger still 12,3 hp/t). So the late versions were in the matter of speed comparable to a Tiger, which isn't known as a fast tank. 2. Until the Panzer IV F it had only the shortbarreld 7,5-cm-KwK 37 L24. This gun was ok against light armoured tanks (british cruiser-tanks, pre-war Soviet tanks), but against more heavy armoured tanks (most of the french ones, british Matilda and Valentine, soviet T-34 or KV) it was quite useless. This changed with version F2 and the longer 7,5-cm-KwK 40 L43 and the even longer L48 in the version G upwards. With this gun it could fight all tanks on the western front. In the east it was superior to the early T-34/76, but the later T-34 with the 85 mm gun outclassed the Panzer IV again (not to mention the IS). So you see: both gun and speed characteristics changed over time. And while the early versions had quite good speed but a weak gun, in the later versions it was the other way around.
Pz 3 and 4 had an excellent ergonomic layout, were quite reliable, and had good guns. they were quite cheap to produce. Their crews were well trained. They had a good combined arms doctrine. So yes, great tanks.
@@Mortrag The russian 85mm was actually comparable to the 7,5cm KwK L43 in tank battle since both had roughly the same penetration power. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_40 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/85_mm_air_defense_gun_M1939_(52-K)
Two factors make the Pz 38 inferior to the early Pz III, riveted vs. welded armor, and the brittleness of Czech armor vs. the resilient hardened German armor. The Pz 38 had a very reliable power train, which made it an excellent platform for turretless AFVs, but those are not "tanks." I still think either Panzer III, IV or II are most underrated. The Pz 38 never had more than the 37 mm gun used on early Pz III, and was never upgunned to 50 mm, while the Pz II was the first panzer with genuine anti-armor capability. Panzer IV because it is so often overlooked by admirers of the Tigers and Panther. As we all know, it was still the most numerous turreted tank in the Heer, even in April 1945.
Well, there are also two factors that make the LT 38 superior to the early Panzer III. German 37mm cannon of early Panzer III was quite inferior to LT 38's 37mm cannon. Also, it was a smaller target, which could also be advantageous, especially since it had superior cannon. Also, "brittle czech armor" is german fabrication. Perhaps it was true later in war, when germans used best steel they had on their own vehicles and supplied Czech factories with lesser quality one.
The only bad thing that I recall hearing about the Czech tanks was that the German crews didn't like their inferior steel, as it tended to shatter when hit by AP rounds. This would cause injuries even though the machine was still operable and the projectile had hit no crew member. [I remember hearing it on a documentary one time. If I find it I'll reply with the source] That said; this is definitely a favourite tank of the era, for me. Especially the boost it gave to the overall tank numbers, due to being ready to be built (after tweeking) in their own undamaged factories! Especially when considering how the alternative was the panzers going up against them and their fortifications, while the Luftwaffe cut down the industry ....definitely made a big difference in Poland 🧐 Love the channel!! 🧡
I know this tank very well. I read below where someone learned it from girls and amine? WTF? For me, it is a gift that the German's got after invading. It was a small but well made and designed tank. And it was "free".
I think the problem with rating any weapon is it is relative to the time and actual use.We tend to look at the war from its end not what was available at the time. ( I think I agree with your analyst of the PZKW 1 ) As you pointed out only 57 T 38's were used in Poland. Thats still about 4 companies of tanks!. The real measure of effectiveness would be were they used effectively ( After battle reports). We concentrate on battles . ..But did those companies accomplish their missions.?( which may not have resulted in combat) Look at the Swordfish .. out-dated and yet they were important to at least 2 of the greatest Naval-air attacks of WW2. I think the actual use of out-dated weapons is underrated. ( Great idea for a video! ) One irony is that the U.S. Navy was so enamored with their New Battleships that they were sent cruising all over the Pacific itching to get into action while the old Battleships were used to pulverize enemy islands.
Otto Carius on the 38t: (as a green loader): "I was the loader and we were all bursting with pride when we received our Czechoslovakian Panzer 38t's. We felt practically invincible with our 37-mm cannon and two Czech machine guns. We were enthusiastic about the armor protection and didn't realize until later that it would only serve as moral protection for us. If necessary, it would stop small arms fire." And in comparison to the Pz. III: "The Panzer 38t roughly corresponded to the Pz III. Besides having a poorer quality of steel, it also had the disadvantage of only having four men in it. The tank commander had to observe and fire simultaneously"
"[The 8th div had a lot of Pz38.]" In Barbarossa the 8th was in Manstein's Korps heading for Leningrad when it was almost destroyed. The 8th was recalled to be refitted and Manstein was sent to the rear. Germany's first major defeat of Ost, if I'm not mistaken. Was the 8th's TOE Pz38s then too?
I learned about the Pz 38(t)A from Panzer General (1994, DOS). It was a great tank, available at the onset of the 1939 campaign. Just as good as the Pz IIIE, but with better spotting range. The Polish TK3 stood no chance at all. Hmm, I have a sudden desire to load up DOSBox.
Basically exactly what I expected to hear, I’ve never seen anything particularly negative about the tank .... it’s basically rated about where it should be. (Maybe because national pride isn’t a factor?) It’s also no surprise it was deployed in large numbers for Barbarossa. It had all the capabilities the Axis needed and was available. Perhaps also because the peacetime annexation made it easier to produce spare parts?
As a tank it might quickly fallen behind in tank warfare, its hull and suspension does not. Its hull later converted to Marder III, Grille artillery, Jagdpanzer 38(t) and later involved in waffentrager project. With so much involvement during the whole course of war I don't think the German army undervalued the panzer 38 (t), they love it.
Otto Carius wasn't so fond of it: "It happened like greased lightning. A hit against our tank, a metallic crack, the scream of a comrade, and that was all there was! A large piece of armour plating had been penetrated next to the radio operator's seat. No one had to tell us to get out. Not until I had run my hand across my face while crawling in the ditch next to the road did I discover that they had also got me. Our radio operator had lost his left arm. We cursed the brittle and inelastic Czech steel that gave the Russian 47mm anti-tank gun so little trouble. The pieces of our own armour plating and assembly bolts caused considerably more damage than the shrapnel of the round itself."
Slightly off topic but I'm actually seriously considering moving to the Czech republic. Anything I should do beforehand? (Besides learning Czech of course)
@@firestorm165 Interesting question. Im from Czech Republic so let me help you a bit. I assume you are going to live in a town or a city. Then you will have no problem. Czech cities are pretty international like many other european cities. They are used to foreigners and welcome them. Especially Prague. You can speak english in cities and Im pretty sure you will find someone who will understand you. You can learn Czech dring your time there. Czech Republic can offer nice culture and beautiful nature. But you are obliged to drink couple of Czech beers and you have to say that Czech beer is the best beer in the world. That is mandatory.
Considering Czech beer is so far the only kind of beer I actually like I think I can handle it. I'm honestly half tempted to bring some of my mates over and order them a MLÍKO just to mess with them lol.
@@firestorm165 That would be cool. Czechs have great sense of humor. We know lot of jokes and like to laugh. Some people say Czechs smile too little. Thats true, we dont smile at everyone we met but give us a chance, make some friends and you will know that we have no problem to smile and laugh.
Thank you. What about the Panzer 35t? It was also appreciated for ruggedness and performance, which was apparently almost comparable to the 38t .The Germans took some 112 to Poland and 132 to France and I would tend to consider the two Czech tanks together. I would suggest the 35t at least warrants mention.
The best evidence that the Czech tanks were not as good as their German counterparts is probably because the Czech machines were considered stopgaps when Germany wanted more Panzer divisions for Barbarossa, after decommissioning their Panzer I and II machines.
The 38(t) was used as an ersatz Panzer III. And it was not a good substitution. The Germans had a slow development, and initial production, of Panzer III. So, they reduced the amount of Panzers in the PD, and substituted 38(t) in the expanded PD. Generally, the 38(t) was not used in PD that also used Panzer III. It is easy to find the number of Panzer Types in the PD at the start of Barbarossa. FYI, In the period of June to December 1941, the Germans produced 401 of the 38t, and lost 796. They stopped production in early 1942.
People not understanding the basics of language (underrated and unknown are not synonymous!) and spewing factually wrong information. Then saying the 38(t) was very important is a misconstruction of the fact that they represent Germany capturing the Skoda factory and suddenly having an extra ready-made production line in a time where tank production was still very much lagging behind expectations. It was a highly welcome and very decent stopgap solution for at least a part of that problem.
At that time it was decent and modern tank on par with german pz III but due to fast advancement in tank technology it was quickly rendered obsolete as it was not designed to be upgraded. Both Pz III and IV were also pre-war designs but due to being able to be upgraded were usable much longer.
General Gudarian was known for extolling the virtues of the 38t, because of its durability and dependability. This is what prompted the Marder Tank Destroyers; a dependable chassis with a tank killing gun.
Didn't Otto Carius in his book call the Pz.38(t) that he started his career with to be the worst tank he ever had anything to do with? I know it's nitpicking,but it's the only instance I can recall of this tank being reflected negatively.
Otto Carius didn't like the Czech mettalurgy, which wasn't up to German standards (particularly since the 38t was pretty lightly-armored, with the initial variant only having 30mm maximum thickness). That, and they were still armed with the wonderful Pak 36 "Heeresanklopfgerät", Germany's least-effective anti-tank gun.
@@BrigadierBill I think you must be mistaken, as far as I know, LT vz. 38 never had German Pak 36. It was equiped with Skoda A 7 that greatly outperformed german 37 mm cannon.
I always think the Pz-38t is what the Panzer-II should have evolved into in the late 1930s. You could built twice as many as Pz-III/IV beefing up the Panzer and motorized units through the early years. Then when the SHTF in 1942 the entire inventory of Pz-38 t [could be thousands by then] could be converted into MARDER PzJager, while production lines could continue to build new MARDERS plus build Grille and/or Wespe.
As a lover of German WW2 tanks, I think it was the crew inside the tank that made German panzers so famous. I really love the panzer iv and tiger 1, but they weren't that great than a lot of people think. They didn't have good sloped armour, but used a lot of vertical armour, and were expensive to manufacture compared to allied tanks such as t-34.
KOLMEKAKKONE If the Germans had invented the T-34 and produced it to their standards with the simplicity of the design itself... Germany would be pretty big right now.
MemeLover your comment completely missed the point of mine. If the Germans used a T-34 style tank pre-Soviet invasion, they’d have the oil they’d need, because the tank would’ve been so successful.
I have read anecdotal evidence from veterans that the 38T was not liked by it's crews. Although a very well made tank for it's time, the steel was extremely hard but brittle. If it took any significant hits the steel tended to crack and break sending a shower of red hot steel splinters and rivets flying into the interior. This had a tendency to take off arms, legs and heads of crew members.
In this case I think underrated actually means underrepresented in the media world. The 38 (t) was easily the best tank the Germans had in Poland and to start the French campaign. It had great firepower and enough mobility to allow the Blitzkrieg style of combat. With the French relying on slower heavily armored tanks, the 38 (t) had the mobility to outflank them and could penetrate the heavy armor. Where it begins to feel underrated is how quickly other tanks surpassed and replaced it. With the deployment of PZ IIIs and IVs, the 38 (t) lost its role in German tank forces. Given that it had a short effective service life and began to struggle in 1941 against the sloped armor of T-34s it tends to fall off the radar. The big tank battles of WW2 were headlined by other more modern tanks. Still one of my favorites in war games dealing with early war German offensives because it's easily the best tank you can field. It's also a prime target when playing as the Allies because it's the one tank that can do more damage.
License produced by Scania in Sweden as well. Sweden had previously ordered 90 "Strv. TNH Sv CKD" of these tanks, which were then confiscated by the Germans. If you want to see some funny variants developed during the war, google: Pvkv II/III or Stormartillerivagn m/43 and Strv. m/41 for the main light tank.
I can't tell you for certain but apparently the m/41 was somewhat cheaper and simpler to produce. The L60 was welded, had a torsion-bar suspension, pretty good optics apparently and a cupola. Which back in 1934 were quite modern concepts. The m/41 was riveted (although the swedes discussed welding, but deemed too expensive). Also it had a tried and tested leaf spring suspension. Partially I think the order was placed to supplement homegrown production capacity. Why it was still license produced I can only speculate to with the information above.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 There is no reason a tank could not be more or less expensive and be exported. Ireland acquired only 2, Austria and Hungary bought 1 each. The Dominican Republic got theirs in the 60's. Also we actually know there was a lack of production capacity according to (Fst till UD 15/7 1940. Fst H Mtrlavd. BI:2. KrA).
It was very good it’s hulls were used to mount the marder3s gun and body as stop gap tanks against the T34 gnome spam,also being used as said the jagdpanzer 38t which was one of the best tank destroyers of Germany (besides the later stug variants
The 38t was an early-war tank whose contemporaries were the PzI, PzII, and PzIII (37mm-armed). It had superior armor and better reliability compared to all those, and the gun was on-par with the MkIII. It's wrong to try and compare it with later designs. And the 38t was present in France.
I like this video because it is of general interest (and not just when it comes to tanks). What does "underrated" mean? What's not the meaning of "underrated"? Maybe it is a internet problem of making such lists. Don't get me wrong. Such lists are fun. But are they useful? Well, they can be if someone brings on interesting arguments. But perhaps a good way to handle this is to take it not too serious. And from a ill-fated construction something can be learned too. Even if it is "just": "If you send yiur men to battle in this tank you could have killed them yourself."
Well, it all depends on the time when you want to deploy it. If you want to deploy it on the battlefield in 1939 or early 1940, it is definitelly a must-have for any panzer-division commander. If you want to deploy it in late 1940 or 1941, you have to send some recon and find out if the enemy has medium/heavy tanks or good AT guns. If he does, then dont even try to deploy those vehicles, if not, then you are free to go and smash... If you want to deploy it later than 1941, then you really have to rebuild it into at least Marder (or equivalent open top TD) or better into Hetzer (or equivalent "hard top" TD). Since these vehicles were riveted, you should be easily able to convert existing vehicles.
Sensing a lot of anti LT.38 rhetoric here. j/k What was the involvement of the LT35\Pz.35(t) tanks in France? The common figure I heard was around a quarter of tanks rolling through France were Czechoslovakian.
j/k = just kidding for those who don't know (like me). 35(t) in France, 106 according to Frieser. Yeah, I checked those numbers as well, since I thought, maybe there is the source of the confusion, NOPE. So in total about 330 Czechoslovakian tanks in France, which is less than a quarter.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized and how do you see the Panzer 35 (t) tank? Was it a good tank as well? In Russia, rasputitsa seems to have took it's toll on it. Germans then passed the thing to the Romanians.
@@G_v._Losinj2_ImportantPlaylist If you can spare $3 a month on patreon you get early access to videos. www.patreon.com/mhv It's one of my favorite channels on youtube that touches subjects others might not think about. So a few dollars a month are a great investment for me. :) /shilling
Most people can't identify ANY tanks. That's why the 1973 film "Patton", the movie was a hit, even though all the "German tanks" and "Allied tanks" were American-made post-1945 tanks. Likewise, in "Band of Brothers," despite all the fantastic uniforms and equipment, the "Tiger" tank is a mock-up built over a T-34 tank. That's just how it is.
Be sure to follow me on instagram if you want to see more from my museum visits: instagram.com/militaryhistoryvisualized/
There's a Game called war thunder where the Panzer 38(t)
where this tank is a reserve vehicle
ive used it still think its my personal favorite
The problem is Lt. vz. 38 Isn´t german but CZZEEEEEEEEEEEECCCCHHHHH. *distant Kde domov můj starts playing*
It is quite possible for someone who knows all of the PzKpWg 1-6 tanks, a load of British, American, Russian, Japanese, Italian tanks to not know about the 38t. They just are not mentioned that much.
"Ach, I liked zese panzers so much, I annexed zer country" - Adolf Hitler. :)
Numbers wise for Poland and France you are correct yet you fail to mention how many out of those numbers actually made it to the battlefield. The German panzers were notoriously unreliable whereas the Pz 38 was notoriously reliable. This would change the effective numbers more in favor of the Pz 38t in its influence in the Polish and French campaigns.
Panzer Aces like Otto Carius started their career in the Panzer 38(t). In his book Tigers in the mud he points out that the crew felt invincible at the start of Operation Barbarossa and that the tank was great for travelling.
I was going to make a similar comment about Carius starting out in a 38t.
Good infantry perspective of the eastern front is "In Deadly Combat" by Gottlob Bidermann. He survived the war with a gold wound badge and an Iron cross. Most gold wound badges were posthumously awarded so his survival is some miracle
Otto carius' also criticised it as having " brittle armour" after one of his crew was severely injured in a 38t. The Rumanian army used them skillfully (as they didn't have much else).
My grandfather was a tank commander on the eastern front, he loved the 38(t). Fast, maneuverable, and very easy to shoot well. He considered them the overall best tank he ever ran.
Really pz38t was very good tank in battle of France
Predecessor pz35t was also comparable in this class with French tanks.
Pz38t was fastest tank in battle of France 1940. Only Soviet's BT was faster , not too much.
The Pz38(t) is easily the cutest, most adorable tank of the war. Just look at that thing!
What about the Luchs II though?
@@TheCleber96 worthy submission! The PzII Luchs is the first runner up in my Miss Panzer Competition.
Boppinabe what about the Italian L3/33?
@@mistertree553 as a tankette, the L3/33 would be in a different pageant.
@@Boppinabe Sorry but the Hotchkiss 1935 is cuter than both the 38(t) and the Luchs.
Personally I love the Panzer 38(T), it's a great vehicle. Its younger brother the 35(T) isn't in the spotlight as much though.
Both were personal favorites of mine in WOTB before they got rid of them. *insert teardrop*
Technically, the LT-35 is better described as an older cousin, being developed before the LT-38 and sharing little in common with it. The LT-35 doesn't get much attention because it was not a popular nor very successful vehicle design. Germans used it because they could form a handful of complete battalions from the 240 or so they acquired from the Czechs in 1939, but the vehicles were rather unreliable and a bit too slow to really meet the needs of the Panzerwaffe. The Germans ran them until 90% of them were destroyed or broke down, deeming even the manufacture of spare parts to be a waste of time. The LT-38 was pretty much better in every way, so that is why the LT-35 is a footnote while the LT-38 is an all-star.
@@genericpersonx333 While reliability wasn't it's strong side, for tank in late 1930's, I'd say Pz 35's reliability wasn't bad, it was simply meh (while 38 was known to be extremely reliable). Problem was that factories were no longer producing spare/replacement parts, so 35s weren't that easy to fix, which magnified impact of its only average reliability.
Logan Degnitz IKR
Juraj Zeman - Not successors of the Czech tanks, the very same tanks. Same pigs, just wearing different (German) lipstick.
"...you can't underrate something you don't know anything about." -- Beautifully spot on :-)
I think the Panzer 38(t) and the Hetzer might be more known and memed because of the Girls und Panzer anime.
Well the Hetzer is a tiny monster in WarThunder if you got all the parts, use it right and don't get sniped in your driver viewing hatch.
+@@day2148+ You get flanked in a Hetzer; you're dead meat on a stick.
Anime is for degenerates
Meanwhile in WoT the Hezer is tier 4 and has a Spladge Gun. I like it.
I don't know about that. WoT community memed the Hetzer even before GuP came out; and the Pz 38(t) is well known among a lot of people like me who were Rommel Fanatics, because they were in his division.
GuP probably only brought it to people who watched it, but weren't tank/history enthusiasts or players of tank games to begin with.
In my reading, the Czech 38 which became the Pz 38t was always highly regarded as a top tank of its day. And like the PzIII the tank chassis was used throughout the war after the tank itself became obsolete.
It had the flaw of the parts being riveted together, instead of welded. So if the armor was impacted, the rivets turned into shrapnels inside the tank, killing the crew like a meatgrinder. The reason it became obsolete is having too weak weapon for later stages of war. But since it was very reliable, armored enough to protect crew from rifles or schrapnels and it moved well through terrain, the tanks were repurposed. I think the FLAK was the most often modification.
Of course it's good us Czechs made it lol. Not many people know just how many amazing tanks and firearms we've designed. Poland doesn't get enough credit either that Polish 7TP and the 10TP were amazing then the Soviet's stole it from them.
One could argue that the 38(t) in the french campaign, although only accounting for 9% of german panzer force was actually quite important because it has to bee seen in relation to the number of medium tanks rather than tanks in total.
Considering the low production numbers of Pz.Kpfw.III / IV until the beginning of Fall Gelb, and considering that mainly the medium tanks were able to penetrate most of the allied tanks armor in direct combat, the 38(t) seems to be an important part of german forces , already at the french campaign.
Thanks, I was going to write exactly the same, Pz38t was a vital addition to the German forces, because in 7th and 8th division (and in 6th division using the Pz35t) it replaced the Pz IIIs completely (and Pz IIs partly). So it was vital for 3 out of the 10 divisions in total (accoding to Panzertruppen: The Complete Guide to the Creation & Combat Employment of Germany’s Tank Force). So the french betrayal (Munich treaty 1938) was bitter and costly for the French army eventually contributing to strengthening the German army.
not to mention even almost 10% is actually really significant
US War Plans ....... 🤔
th-cam.com/video/vgQ1rvTrPLU/w-d-xo.html
@@zikmunddvorak4816 oh, i never saw the connection between the french betrayel and the "czech revenge".
Its an interesting point you brought up there.
I wonder if there was some kind of a "polish revenge" as well. I cant think about one.
Could you do a video about the Panzer 35t because no one really talks about it? Because people usually talk about the Panzer 38t when people talk about Czech Panzers in German service.
Also why did Germany leave the LT vz 34 alone and leave them to Slovak and Hungry
@@USSChicago-pl2fq Germans did not gave the LT vz. 34 to Slovakia. When Czechoslovakia ceased to exist and Czech troops stationed in Slovakia went home or into emigration, they left all their equipment in Slovakia. There was 27 LT vz. 34 (or LT-34 in Slovak designation) left in Slovakia and 23 in Czechia. 23 Czech pieces were seized by Wehrmacht and due to their old age they were (probably) scrapped. Source: KLIMENT, Charles; FRANCEV, Vladimír: Československá obrněná vozidla 1918-1948, p. 59.
They are very similar probably thats why.
You don’t really need to talk about it unless you want to say it’s origin design. There were About 3X less then the 38(t) and it had less of what made The 38 good.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 The 35(t) and 38(t) are not all that similar, beyond visual profile and basic lineage.
Their drivetrains, suspension, layout, turrets, armament and dimensions are all significantly different from one another (the 35(t) is actually slightly larger and heavier, interestingly).
As an easily irritated, native (American) English speaker, your use of “underrated” is spot on.
native (American) as in a American-Born person or as in a Native American so called "Red-Indian"
Easily irritated, eh? * unlatches science pole *
Tamlan Dipper I didn’t say I was proud of it.
yummyNikNak technically I am both. I am on the rolls of the Cherokee Nation. Although I’m only 1/16. For some reason fractions are accepted. :)
BUt more to your question I was using “native” to mean born in the US.
Oddly enough, I find the Pz 38(t) as a fine rolling box that could laugh at tankettes as well as likely laughing at the BTs.
I kinda forgot what the 38(t) struggled against apart from likely encountering early T-34's and KV-1's and the occasional KV-2 since it could have whacked the shit out of any tankette or early light tank
It wasen't build for weather on the western front so there were some reliability issues. But overal it was a realy good tank by its time.
The soviet 45mm gun (the one in BT and T-26 tanks) could very well knock it out, And the BT-7 front hull was better armored with 40mm sloped armour, instead of 30mm almost vertical on the 38(t).
@@ComissarZhukov It was relatively even match Id say.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Well the BT-7 armor was all welded instead of riveted, was faster, the BT-7M (the last version) had a diesel engine which gave it better fuel economy and longer range as well as making it less prone to catching fire.
But its biggest downside was the 2 man turret, and the lack of radios and intercoms on every tank. Unlike the germans which where very thorough in equipping all their combat vehicles with them.
And those two things (among others non related to the tank itself) gravely affectes the performance of the BT-7 which otherwise was a fine tank for the time.
@@ComissarZhukov It is fascanating how long it took to work out the ergonomics of the tank in general.
I had asked for a video about the 38t, sorry if I didn't make myself clear, what I wanted really was an analysis of its design, employment and production, the german takeover of the factories in Czechoslovakia, performance in combat, maintenance, etc. I didn't mean to imply that they were underrated in any way. In fact, when I was a kid, the first book about tanks my father bought me, there it was, the famous 38t, and the book didn't have any articles about the PzKpfw I or II nor pictures of them, though it covered well the PzKpfw III and IV.
You used the term correctly. Typically when people talk about underrated they mean it doesn't get much talk about in the public eye or media. As someone who knows slightly more about WW2 tanks then the average person (no way makes me an expert) I hardly ever anyone talk about 38t.
I’d say the Goliath was the most unappreciated vehicle of all time!!!
*Not really though*
thing had excellent anti-air tho..
GOLIATH ONLINE.
People forget about Borgward
THAT THING GOES
*BOOOOOOOM*
@@patrickcummins79 You made an old Starcraft player very happy with that, Sir. #BattlecruiserOperational
thank god, I thought you'd list a bunch of negative points on the 35 and 38t and make me dislike the tank
even tho theres an abundant amount of tanks in WW2 the Pz. 38 T and the Luchs have a special place in my heart
There were 187 Panzer 35t tanks available for Barbarossa as well, so a total of 941 tanks of Czech origin. That's 32% of a total of some 3398 tanks used. I would suggest that that is a very significant number of these two tanks and that you are underplaying their significance to the operation.
I recently got into building gundam model kits. I had done a couple as a kid. At a hobby store recently, this one was more of a traditional hobby shop with lots of military models. They had airplanes both old and new and tanks. The standout was a model kit for a GERMAN t-34 tank. Wasn’t interested in model tanks until I saw that. Wasn’t a panzer, it was in fact a model of a t-34 but was painted with the iron cross. Maybe the idea is it is a “captured t-34”
Perhaps You have missed the mark of appreciating its involvement in both pre-Barbarossa Campaigns cited...what could have possibly filled their slots in the OoB's and as effectively? And what of the 35(t) in any of these momentous campaigns? Lastly, no mention of the occupational uses of the Czech-design tanks on the defensive fronts during said campaigns...nor any uses in the Danish and Norwegian invasions/occupations, nor the Balkan subjugations/garrisons.
Nevertheless...I still think your channels are among the most informative and comprehensive available...so keep up the great work!
Fun fact, the 38t performs really well in the Tropical regions and the Amazon Rainforest.
Great video! Thanks and I have to say that I very much enjoy your work. I’m wondering if perhaps you could do a video on the Wehrmacht‘s use of motorcycles during WW2--I’ve seen them so much in newsreels and footage but I’ve always wondered how they used them tactically. Thanks!
As part of army organization charts they're always with the recon units, something small that can go places quickly and with an MG on the sidecar suppress infantry if they were encountered. That said I would love to know more because like you said they're in the videos but never actually discussed.
Frank Easton thanks! Much appreciated!
During Barbarossa some 300 of them were also in service with Hungary, and I imagine with otjer axis minors as well, making their impact even more significant.
Used extensively by Army Group North.
The Slovak Fast Division had some 80 38's and the Romanian 1st Armoured Division had 126 35's tanks; both divisions fought in the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa along side Germans.
One of the best tanks in history definitely on the top of my tank list! Great video as always cheers!
Your viewers might be interested in Steven Zaloga's "Panzer 38(t) vs. BT-7. Barbarossa 1941.", published by Osprey. The book contains much technical discussion about both tanks, as well as battlefield encounters. And the Romanian Army was equipped with a number of Panzer 38(t)s as well. Viewers can find more information about Romanian employment of the tank in Mark Axworthy's "Third Axis, Fourth Ally", Mihai Filipescu's "Reluctant Axis: The Romanian Army in Russia 1941-1944", and "Three Kings: Axis Royal Armies on the Russian Front 1941."
Your use of the term underrated is just fine. I consider itself more informed then the average person on this subject, I'd not heard of this tank,. Thank you for the education you bestow upon us all.
Ready for the new Sabaton album?
Pestilence Plague
Eye
Aye.
4:11 THANK YOU VERY MUCH! I been calling the 11th panzer div. the ghost divition for years and everybody allways corrected me... Saying that the 7th PD had that nickname... I said I knew that but the 11th also was called that way and nobody belive me...Or didn't care...Because - OFFCOURSE - the 7th was ROMMEL'S divition...
fun fact, only the 11th had the Ghost as a symbol. The whole issue btw. is "under further investigation", since I was not particularly happy with the source situation.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized There you have it! That white ghost with a sword apears in many panzer's pictures and draws... But nobody ever remember the 11th... Thank you again, bro!
You are spot on. Great video.
Yeah, the thing is that 38t and 35t are mentioned many times together in a lot of documentaries in the context of their addition to Reichs tank numbers (with other CSK equipment which importance gets overlooked a lot), coupled with the fact it had decent gun (early war standard) making them a bit more important than Pz1 and Pz2, so I can see the argument of them beeing important in those campaign.
To be honest those are like 2 superstars of Czechoslovak tank construction (there are far more bizzare things in there) and even from them the 35(t) was decent on paper, but after some insight from the guys who drive/roleplay the Lt vz. 35 crew in Lešany museum it sounds more like late WW2 panzer with issues with gearbox and setting itself on fire, the guys were kinda amazed the Germans kept them running from Poland, to France, to Yugoslavia and then through halfway of European part of Russia...
If you ever happen to be in Czech rep, definitely visit museum in Lešany (about 40 minutes from Prague).
It is good to remember that the Pz.Kfpw 38(T) although was a good tank, good off road capabilites and very reliable that permitted long distance without breaking down it, being very useful during the blitzkrieg and operation Barbarossa it did had it's share of drawbacks as it was mainly bolted/riveted and quite cramped. It was also difficult to bail out but it's hull was invaluable service providing quite a few variants and lastly the Hetzer by enlarging it's hull....
Its chassis served well thru out the whole war. Marder,Hetzer,..many more.
The Panzer 38 (t) is a slower, better armored, worse armed BT-5/BT-7. Best used in Scouting and in minor amount in Infantry Support.
Its a fine MBT from the mid 30s, comperable to any of its contemporaries, better than some of them.
Actually, BT-5 and BT-7 had 45mm 20K cannon, which had weaker penetration than 37 mm of czech Škoda A7. Difference wasn't big, but I wouldn't call it worse armed.
Der Panzer 38(t) in Munster ist schon sehr beeindruckend. Einfach ein schönes Ausstellungsstück.
Interessant wäre ein Einblick darin, wie sich der Panzer wirklich im Gefecht geschlagen hat, besonders im Vergleich zum Panzer III.
When the 38t was first introduced it was a superior tank in the 10 ton class which compared favorably to heavier U.S. Stuart tanks and German Panzer 2's. With its small turret mantlet diameter it couldn't be mounted with the 50 mm German anti-tank gun so conversions to Tank Destroyers were its best option for practical use after 1942.
It actually compares well to the early panzer III
for me its not Panzer 38 (t) but LT-38 , it was designed to protect my country borders but it never had the chance to do that
When I made that comment about Panzer 38 (t) as also underrated during battles for Poland and France, I looked at that more from the angle that at that specific time it was very well armed tank till the Panzer III got 50mm gun. You are absolutely right in the video, it is not underrated, my mistake. Do you see any significant difference in mobility or fire power between divisions equipped basically only with Panzer 38 (t), and divisions that included combination of German light tanks with few dozen mediums?
As always, great job! Thank you.
You shouldn't worry about how you use of the word "majority". Politicians do the same all the time. They are elected by a relative majority, they talk as if they had an absolute majority, and they act as the leaders of the entire people. In short, for them:
27% = 51% = 100%
Politicians are master mathematicians. That's why they are so good in keeping a budget on tracks.
@Findlay Robertson I really don't understand why anyone votes Labour when they put someone like her in their cabinet... Or most of their cabinet in general actually. Like I'm not a fan of the Democrats in the US but at least people like Obama and Clinton aren't national embarassments.
@@lokenontherange depends on who you ask.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Clinton's issue is being slightly sociopathic and a weird amount of conveniences involving dead people. She's not actually retarded. Diane Abbot is the kind of moron who thinks Mao Zedong was a good guy and who "did more good than harm" despite the fact that Mao's policies killed 10-15% of the Chinese population at the time
“Hetzer gonna Hetz...”
HE SAID IT HE SAID IT!
Do not worry, your use of English is better than some English people I know.
im pissed of when people say 38t is german tank, please remember forever lt38 and lt35 are ČESKÉ tanks.
It was produced for Germany, therefore Panzerkampfwagen 38(t) A - E IS a German tank.
Now you can pass off to your sad safe space.
@@AKUJIVALDO (t) means tschechien which means czech in german. By your logic Panzerkampfwagen B-2 740(f)¨would be a german designed tank.
@@AKUJIVALDO No it produced Czechoslovakia in 1938 for itself and its defence... The germans just stole IT after annextion
*just to clarify*
Injuries from metal shrapnel caused by the hole made from the round, not the round itself. Whereas the steel used by the Germans for the regular panzers had more bend to it.
Outstanding video and presentation.
Panzer 38.(t), my favourite German tank of the early war, especially during the invasion of France, pretty good medium tank and could hold it's own against a Matilda, A13, or even Char B1, until a panzer 3 or panzer 4 showed up. Even against early Soviet tanks like the T-26, BT-5, or T-28 it could hold it's own.
Excuse me, but Czechoslovakia created the tank first.
@@yeboxxx_channel_2505 I know, but most of the action the tank was involved in was in the German army after the annexation
Most underated Panzer for me is still Panzer 4. People who play games do not like panzer 4 because it has average armor, but armor is not most important part of the tank. panzer 4 had great gun, big space and good speed. also best gun depression of all tanks.
I like the Pzkw IV's. 😀
If you refer to "good speed" and "great gun", you have to be more specific, because both changed drastically over the years 1937 - 1945.
1. The Panzer IV (or PzKpfw IV, NOT Pzkw) was uparmored several times during the production, while the engine wasn't changed. So while the Panzer IV B hat a powerratio of 17 hp/t, the Panzer IV H and J were down to 12 hp/t (Panther had 15,6 hp/t, Tiger still 12,3 hp/t). So the late versions were in the matter of speed comparable to a Tiger, which isn't known as a fast tank.
2. Until the Panzer IV F it had only the shortbarreld 7,5-cm-KwK 37 L24. This gun was ok against light armoured tanks (british cruiser-tanks, pre-war Soviet tanks), but against more heavy armoured tanks (most of the french ones, british Matilda and Valentine, soviet T-34 or KV) it was quite useless. This changed with version F2 and the longer 7,5-cm-KwK 40 L43 and the even longer L48 in the version G upwards. With this gun it could fight all tanks on the western front. In the east it was superior to the early T-34/76, but the later T-34 with the 85 mm gun outclassed the Panzer IV again (not to mention the IS).
So you see: both gun and speed characteristics changed over time. And while the early versions had quite good speed but a weak gun, in the later versions it was the other way around.
Pz 3 and 4 had an excellent ergonomic layout, were quite reliable, and had good guns. they were quite cheap to produce. Their crews were well trained. They had a good combined arms doctrine. So yes, great tanks.
@@Mortrag
The russian 85mm was actually comparable to the 7,5cm KwK L43 in tank battle since both had roughly the same penetration power.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.5_cm_KwK_40
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/85_mm_air_defense_gun_M1939_(52-K)
Two factors make the Pz 38 inferior to the early Pz III, riveted vs. welded armor, and the brittleness of Czech armor vs. the resilient hardened German armor. The Pz 38 had a very reliable power train, which made it an excellent platform for turretless AFVs, but those are not "tanks."
I still think either Panzer III, IV or II are most underrated. The Pz 38 never had more than the 37 mm gun used on early Pz III, and was never upgunned to 50 mm, while the Pz II was the first panzer with genuine anti-armor capability. Panzer IV because it is so often overlooked by admirers of the Tigers and Panther. As we all know, it was still the most numerous turreted tank in the Heer, even in April 1945.
Panzer III was a medium tank. Lt-38 (Panzer 38t in German markings) was more like a light tank.
Well, there are also two factors that make the LT 38 superior to the early Panzer III. German 37mm cannon of early Panzer III was quite inferior to LT 38's 37mm cannon. Also, it was a smaller target, which could also be advantageous, especially since it had superior cannon.
Also, "brittle czech armor" is german fabrication. Perhaps it was true later in war, when germans used best steel they had on their own vehicles and supplied Czech factories with lesser quality one.
The only bad thing that I recall hearing about the Czech tanks was that the German crews didn't like their inferior steel, as it tended to shatter when hit by AP rounds. This would cause injuries even though the machine was still operable and the projectile had hit no crew member.
[I remember hearing it on a documentary one time. If I find it I'll reply with the source]
That said; this is definitely a favourite tank of the era, for me. Especially the boost it gave to the overall tank numbers, due to being ready to be built (after tweeking) in their own undamaged factories! Especially when considering how the alternative was the panzers going up against them and their fortifications, while the Luftwaffe cut down the industry ....definitely made a big difference in Poland 🧐
Love the channel!! 🧡
I know this tank very well. I read below where someone learned it from girls and amine? WTF? For me, it is a gift that the German's got after invading. It was a small but well made and designed tank. And it was "free".
3:25 Sometimes, I wish I too could activate a "diplomacy mode" but then again, sometimes not....
I think the problem with rating any weapon is it is relative to the time and actual use.We tend to look at the war from its end not what was available at the time. ( I think I agree with your analyst of the PZKW 1 ) As you pointed out only 57 T 38's were used in Poland. Thats still about 4 companies of tanks!. The real measure of effectiveness would be were they used effectively ( After battle reports). We concentrate on battles . ..But did those companies accomplish their missions.?( which may not have resulted in combat) Look at the Swordfish .. out-dated and yet they were important to at least 2 of the greatest Naval-air attacks of WW2. I think the actual use of out-dated weapons is underrated. ( Great idea for a video! ) One irony is that the U.S. Navy was so enamored with their New Battleships that they were sent cruising all over the Pacific itching to get into action while the old Battleships were used to pulverize enemy islands.
Otto Carius on the 38t:
(as a green loader): "I was the loader and we were all bursting with pride when we received our Czechoslovakian Panzer 38t's. We felt practically invincible with our 37-mm cannon and two Czech machine guns. We were enthusiastic about the armor protection and didn't realize until later that it would only serve as moral protection for us. If necessary, it would stop small arms fire."
And in comparison to the Pz. III:
"The Panzer 38t roughly corresponded to the Pz III. Besides having a poorer quality of steel, it also had the disadvantage of only having four men in it. The tank commander had to observe and fire simultaneously"
I wonder if Erwin requested all those 38t's specially in '40...might have recognized the great tradeoff of speed v. armament/armor
I dont think its underrated because of all the variants of the tank, the marder 3, hetzer, flakpanzer 38 etc.
I like the 38(t). Question; was it important to invade Cecheslovakia early in the war to gain accees to it's weapons like the 38(t)?
Main bad thing about the panzer 38t is the rivited armour and weak cannon but it was also serviced past its effective time frame
I never thought of this tank at underrate and a huge stepping stone for later tanks of the German warmach
"[The 8th div had a lot of Pz38.]"
In Barbarossa the 8th was in Manstein's Korps heading for Leningrad when it was almost destroyed. The 8th was recalled to be refitted and Manstein was sent to the rear. Germany's first major defeat of Ost, if I'm not mistaken.
Was the 8th's TOE Pz38s then too?
I learned about the Pz 38(t)A from Panzer General (1994, DOS). It was a great tank, available at the onset of the 1939 campaign. Just as good as the Pz IIIE, but with better spotting range. The Polish TK3 stood no chance at all. Hmm, I have a sudden desire to load up DOSBox.
Basically exactly what I expected to hear, I’ve never seen anything particularly negative about the tank .... it’s basically rated about where it should be. (Maybe because national pride isn’t a factor?)
It’s also no surprise it was deployed in large numbers for Barbarossa. It had all the capabilities the Axis needed and was available. Perhaps also because the peacetime annexation made it easier to produce spare parts?
A lovely panzer IV in the background.
As a tank it might quickly fallen behind in tank warfare, its hull and suspension does not.
Its hull later converted to Marder III, Grille artillery, Jagdpanzer 38(t) and later involved in waffentrager project. With so much involvement during the whole course of war I don't think the German army undervalued the panzer 38 (t), they love it.
Can it be converted to the Hetzer on a school ship using a conversation kit you bought somewhere?
As a panzer it was pretty good, but, soon became outdated. But, its chassis, in various other forms, it was amazing!
Any tank that appears in Girls Und Panzer cannot be unknown!
Otto Carius wasn't so fond of it: "It happened like greased lightning. A hit against our tank, a metallic crack, the scream of a comrade, and that was all there was! A large piece of armour plating had been penetrated next to the radio operator's seat. No one had to tell us to get out. Not until I had run my hand across my face while crawling in the ditch next to the road did I discover that they had also got me. Our radio operator had lost his left arm. We cursed the brittle and inelastic Czech steel that gave the Russian 47mm anti-tank gun so little trouble. The pieces of our own armour plating and assembly bolts caused considerably more damage than the shrapnel of the round itself."
I like this tank too. It wasen't underated at all at least from what I have experienced.
And yes I am from Czech Republic the name is apperent.
could be Polish also....
Slightly off topic but I'm actually seriously considering moving to the Czech republic. Anything I should do beforehand? (Besides learning Czech of course)
@@firestorm165 Interesting question. Im from Czech Republic so let me help you a bit.
I assume you are going to live in a town or a city. Then you will have no problem. Czech cities are pretty international like many other european cities. They are used to foreigners and welcome them. Especially
Prague. You can speak english in cities and Im pretty sure you will find someone who will understand you.
You can learn Czech dring your time there.
Czech Republic can offer nice culture and beautiful nature.
But you are obliged to drink couple of Czech beers and you have to say that Czech beer is the best beer in the world. That is mandatory.
Considering Czech beer is so far the only kind of beer I actually like I think I can handle it. I'm honestly half tempted to bring some of my mates over and order them a MLÍKO just to mess with them lol.
@@firestorm165 That would be cool. Czechs have great sense of humor. We know lot of jokes and like to laugh. Some people say Czechs smile too little. Thats true, we dont smile at everyone we met but give us a chance, make some friends and you will know that we have no problem to smile and laugh.
3:09 Ah, but we are initiated, aren't we Bernhard?
It was a great tank one of the best tanks in the early war period in the german arsenal.
And it is far from unknown atleast to Me as a Swede
And we czechs were selling the tank into Sweden
As a Brit I do find it amusing that a German has to teach Americans to speak English.
The likely source of errors/confusion is not your choice of phrases but Joe Bloggs actual understanding of the actual meanings of words!
Thank you. What about the Panzer 35t? It was also appreciated for ruggedness and performance, which was apparently almost comparable to the 38t .The Germans took some 112 to Poland and 132 to France and I would tend to consider the two Czech tanks together. I would suggest the 35t at least warrants mention.
Panzer 38 (t) : *exists*
German Tank projectants: *Hippity Hoppity your Hull is now our property*
The best evidence that the Czech tanks were not as good as their German counterparts is probably because the Czech machines were considered stopgaps when Germany wanted more Panzer divisions for Barbarossa, after decommissioning their Panzer I and II machines.
The 38(t) was used as an ersatz Panzer III. And it was not a good substitution. The Germans had a slow development, and initial production, of Panzer III. So, they reduced the amount of Panzers in the PD, and substituted 38(t) in the expanded PD. Generally, the 38(t) was not used in PD that also used Panzer III. It is easy to find the number of Panzer Types in the PD at the start of Barbarossa. FYI, In the period of June to December 1941, the Germans produced 401 of the 38t, and lost 796. They stopped production in early 1942.
People not understanding the basics of language (underrated and unknown are not synonymous!) and spewing factually wrong information. Then saying the 38(t) was very important is a misconstruction of the fact that they represent Germany capturing the Skoda factory and suddenly having an extra ready-made production line in a time where tank production was still very much lagging behind expectations. It was a highly welcome and very decent stopgap solution for at least a part of that problem.
At that time it was decent and modern tank on par with german pz III but due to fast advancement in tank technology it was quickly rendered obsolete as it was not designed to be upgraded. Both Pz III and IV were also pre-war designs but due to being able to be upgraded were usable much longer.
General Gudarian was known for extolling the virtues of the 38t, because of its durability and dependability. This is what prompted the Marder Tank Destroyers; a dependable chassis with a tank killing gun.
The Kaiser approves of your beard
I didn’t care for the Pz. 38(t) in World of Tanks, but it’s TD variant, the Marder 38(t) was one of my favorite tanks.
I'm assuming that you are including the Pzkw35t as well.
Didn't Otto Carius in his book call the Pz.38(t) that he started his career with to be the worst tank he ever had anything to do with? I know it's nitpicking,but it's the only instance I can recall of this tank being reflected negatively.
Otto Carius didn't like the Czech mettalurgy, which wasn't up to German standards (particularly since the 38t was pretty lightly-armored, with the initial variant only having 30mm maximum thickness). That, and they were still armed with the wonderful Pak 36 "Heeresanklopfgerät", Germany's least-effective anti-tank gun.
@@BrigadierBill I think you must be mistaken, as far as I know, LT vz. 38 never had German Pak 36. It was equiped with Skoda A 7 that greatly outperformed german 37 mm cannon.
@@Dakerthandark My mistake, not sure if I conflated the guns or assumed they were functionally identical.
The dragon 38t model,is the best I have ever built,,and is still my favourite,
There somekind of good outro music there! :P
Your beard is spot on 👌
I always think the Pz-38t is what the Panzer-II should have evolved into in the late 1930s. You could built twice as many as Pz-III/IV beefing up the Panzer and motorized units through the early years. Then when the SHTF in 1942 the entire inventory of Pz-38 t [could be thousands by then] could be converted into MARDER PzJager, while production lines could continue to build new MARDERS plus build Grille and/or Wespe.
As a lover of German WW2 tanks, I think it was the crew inside the tank that made German panzers so famous. I really love the panzer iv and tiger 1, but they weren't that great than a lot of people think. They didn't have good sloped armour, but used a lot of vertical armour, and were expensive to manufacture compared to allied tanks such as t-34.
KOLMEKAKKONE If the Germans had invented the T-34 and produced it to their standards with the simplicity of the design itself... Germany would be pretty big right now.
MemeLover your comment completely missed the point of mine. If the Germans used a T-34 style tank pre-Soviet invasion, they’d have the oil they’d need, because the tank would’ve been so successful.
I have read anecdotal evidence from veterans that the 38T was not liked by it's crews. Although a very well made tank for it's time, the steel was extremely hard but brittle. If it took any significant hits the steel tended to crack and break sending a shower of red hot steel splinters and rivets flying into the interior. This had a tendency to take off arms, legs and heads of crew members.
The last time I was this early the Munich Agreement hadn't been signed yet.
In this case I think underrated actually means underrepresented in the media world. The 38 (t) was easily the best tank the Germans had in Poland and to start the French campaign. It had great firepower and enough mobility to allow the Blitzkrieg style of combat. With the French relying on slower heavily armored tanks, the 38 (t) had the mobility to outflank them and could penetrate the heavy armor.
Where it begins to feel underrated is how quickly other tanks surpassed and replaced it. With the deployment of PZ IIIs and IVs, the 38 (t) lost its role in German tank forces. Given that it had a short effective service life and began to struggle in 1941 against the sloped armor of T-34s it tends to fall off the radar. The big tank battles of WW2 were headlined by other more modern tanks.
Still one of my favorites in war games dealing with early war German offensives because it's easily the best tank you can field. It's also a prime target when playing as the Allies because it's the one tank that can do more damage.
License produced by Scania in Sweden as well. Sweden had previously ordered 90 "Strv. TNH Sv CKD" of these tanks, which were then confiscated by the Germans. If you want to see some funny variants developed during the war, google: Pvkv II/III or Stormartillerivagn m/43 and Strv. m/41 for the main light tank.
Sweden had its own Strv L60 though, what use did they have for Czech alternatives?
I can't tell you for certain but apparently the m/41 was somewhat cheaper and simpler to produce. The L60 was welded, had a torsion-bar suspension, pretty good optics apparently and a cupola. Which back in 1934 were quite modern concepts. The m/41 was riveted (although the swedes discussed welding, but deemed too expensive). Also it had a tried and tested leaf spring suspension. Partially I think the order was placed to supplement homegrown production capacity. Why it was still license produced I can only speculate to with the information above.
@@hermanlindqvist7238 I dont think it was capacity, noreso budget, as the L60 was built for export too.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 There is no reason a tank could not be more or less expensive and be exported. Ireland acquired only 2, Austria and Hungary bought 1 each. The Dominican Republic got theirs in the 60's. Also we actually know there was a lack of production capacity according to (Fst till UD 15/7 1940. Fst H Mtrlavd. BI:2. KrA).
@@hermanlindqvist7238 Ah. So foreign production was licens based.
It was very good it’s hulls were used to mount the marder3s gun and body as stop gap tanks against the T34 gnome spam,also being used as said the jagdpanzer 38t which was one of the best tank destroyers of Germany (besides the later stug variants
Then what about the 35(t) ?
I think when people assume its important they speak not about the numbers but the fact that it was more cable in tank to tank combat then Panzer 1&2.
The 38t was an early-war tank whose contemporaries were the PzI, PzII, and PzIII (37mm-armed). It had superior armor and better reliability compared to all those, and the gun was on-par with the MkIII. It's wrong to try and compare it with later designs. And the 38t was present in France.
What about the Bob Semple tank ?
Make a video about Panzer 38t! Pretty please!!!
Its only real failing is all the rivets. But it was not alone in that. Especialy at the time it was built.
I like this video because it is of general interest (and not just when it comes to tanks). What does "underrated" mean? What's not the meaning of "underrated"?
Maybe it is a internet problem of making such lists. Don't get me wrong. Such lists are fun. But are they useful? Well, they can be if someone brings on interesting arguments. But perhaps a good way to handle this is to take it not too serious. And from a ill-fated construction something can be learned too. Even if it is "just": "If you send yiur men to battle in this tank you could have killed them yourself."
you kidding? I LOVE the 38T glorious glorious Skoda
Well, it all depends on the time when you want to deploy it. If you want to deploy it on the battlefield in 1939 or early 1940, it is definitelly a must-have for any panzer-division commander. If you want to deploy it in late 1940 or 1941, you have to send some recon and find out if the enemy has medium/heavy tanks or good AT guns. If he does, then dont even try to deploy those vehicles, if not, then you are free to go and smash... If you want to deploy it later than 1941, then you really have to rebuild it into at least Marder (or equivalent open top TD) or better into Hetzer (or equivalent "hard top" TD). Since these vehicles were riveted, you should be easily able to convert existing vehicles.
I wouldn’t call the 38(t) underrated. I think it was a good light infantry tank, very similar to the U.S. M3 Stuart tank. Both are my favorites.
Sensing a lot of anti LT.38 rhetoric here. j/k
What was the involvement of the LT35\Pz.35(t) tanks in France? The common figure I heard was around a quarter of tanks rolling through France were Czechoslovakian.
j/k = just kidding for those who don't know (like me).
35(t) in France, 106 according to Frieser. Yeah, I checked those numbers as well, since I thought, maybe there is the source of the confusion, NOPE. So in total about 330 Czechoslovakian tanks in France, which is less than a quarter.
Military History not Visualized how is this comment 3 days old. btw your great from ny
Tour the France 1940: German riders on Czechoslovakian bikes.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized and how do you see the Panzer 35 (t) tank? Was it a good tank as well?
In Russia, rasputitsa seems to have took it's toll on it. Germans then passed the thing to the Romanians.
@@G_v._Losinj2_ImportantPlaylist If you can spare $3 a month on patreon you get early access to videos. www.patreon.com/mhv
It's one of my favorite channels on youtube that touches subjects others might not think about. So a few dollars a month are a great investment for me. :) /shilling
Most people can't identify ANY tanks. That's why the 1973 film "Patton", the movie was a hit, even though all the "German tanks" and "Allied tanks" were American-made post-1945 tanks. Likewise, in "Band of Brothers," despite all the fantastic uniforms and equipment, the "Tiger" tank is a mock-up built over a T-34 tank. That's just how it is.