Some of the breaking sounds are misaligned with their respective events and aren't mixed correctly. There was nothing I could have done about this, they were done properly in VEGAS but every time it rendered it ended up like this.
Hey Can you do a M6A1 heavy tank review I honestly believe it is the most underrated tank in the American tech tree and it is mostly overlooked by everyone, I did something looking around and research and it’s a pretty interesting tank.
@@aegeanharrier6648 true .but for the engine/transmission problem it was a problem for almost any tank heavier than 40 tons look at the m26 for example only medium and light tanks didn't have them except the t34
Soviet tanks were only ever fit to be crewed by AI or robots. totally unfit for human operation hence why they were massacred in every war theyve fought.
@@TheBelrick they weren't. The reason they tended to perform poorly is because they 1. were often significantly cheaper tanks than Western models (so a 1vs 1 ratio of tanks is not a fair comparison), and 2. The models that saw combat were often outdated variants used by countries with bad economies. Tanks like the T-55 have proven themselves capable of beating contemporary models of Centurion and Patton in the middle east on multiple occasions, most notably in the Iran-Iraq war. Soviet tanks were generally behind Western models in performance, but they were all but bad.
Captain Nyet Their crew training is not all impressive at all neither, Apparently the T14 Armata didn’t break down but one drive hit the breaks without knowing what it does
IRL the IS-1 basically didn't happen. It started out as the KV-85 but due to the guy who gave the KV line it's name falling out of favor it was renamed to IS. However from the KV-2 until the IS-2 no Soviet heavy tank saw significant combat, this was because the entire heavy tank line was at risk of being canceled because of transmission issues that seemed unfixable. One engineer managed to design a working transmission though and based on that the IS-2 was designed with the IS-1 not being much more than a test bed for hull design. For that reason 1. There isn't really much test data and 2. The IS-1 is really just an IS-2, the difference between the two is basically the same as the difference between a 75 and 76 mm Sherman, actually even less as the 76 Sherman had some thicker armor that the first 75s didn't have. The IS-2 itself is a bit of a masterpiece of engineering though, it manages to pack the largest gun any WWII tank that actually saw operation had and has better frontal protection than a Tiger II while weighing a bit less than a Panther. And it was not even very expensive and had few reliability issues. It being such a success is probably the sole reason the Soviet heavy tank program lasted so long compared to most other countries that made like one heavy tank after WWII and then dropped the concept. Whether that is a blessing or a curse is another debate, the heavy tank concept arguebly didn't even work that well in WWII and the IS-2 and KV-1 are more of an exception than the rule and even then the US did just fine without ever having any heavy tank.
@@hedgehog3180 "has better frontal protection than a Tiger II " - not true. However, it is not as tall of course (=smaller target) EDIT: later IS-2 variants of course had improved hull, probably comes closer to Tiger II. I remember that these later IS-2's have effectively the same frontal hull protection as T-54/55s.
@@Orphican the short version of most obvious shit: M1 due to reasons, M1 has overengineered bits that raise the cost by a lot leopard 2A4 and A5: the A5 turret spike nose is able to block all APDSFS in use until it's broken from the turret Leopard 2s are cheaper than M1s to build, so purchase cost is lower than abrams T80B and U T80s cannot mount the thermal image system unless it's a commander variant or a late retrofit version Type 90 and type 90(B) both serve the JGSDF, so they cannot be used outside japanese maps they are too heavy for Japan's own infrastructure, limiting the amount per match Leclerc it's the most expensive MBT being produced, so purchase costs are higher than normal add info you can find of these and other top tiers
" Only one Tiger can be spawn per match due to low production rate" 1300~ 'Only 2 IS-4 can be spawnped per match due to low production rate' 200~ Bruh, am I missing something
From what I have read, it was kinda of rare to have multiple tigers fighting together at one place, apparently the Germans liked to spread them amongst their armor with them only concentrating at important battles, but I don’t have a source to back that claim up
The IS-2 interior was almost 'spacious', especially compared to other Soviet tanks. It was even better than a lot of German or allied tanks. Here is a review of one at the American Heritage Museum and they go into the tank and talk about its ergonomics. th-cam.com/video/I3TGDi7SpOQ/w-d-xo.html The guy ranks it an '8' on a scale of 1-10 against its Soviet counterparts and '6' (better than average) overall on its interior layout and ergonomics. That's probably why it was so popular with its crews, and indeed why it was maintained in service until well after tater IS series tanks were retired. The driver has an escape hatch out the bottom if the tank, and doesn't have to go out through the top of turret. As for David Higgin's book, I have that, and David gets wrong even many of the basic specifications of the IS-2. Some of what you posted was certainly true about the later IS series (although weld cracks on the IS-3 you mentioned was from a production run of a single factory, so so I've read, and not indicative of all IS-3s). But if cracking armor and failing engines and transmissions are a complaint, then I doubt any of these beasties can compete with their German counterparts. And War Thunder doesn't have the King Tiger or JadgTiger break down on people or have its armor crack by stress, so why should it do it with these Soviet tanks?
@Dassault Mirage 2000 I guess you didn't see the video? They go into the IS-2 and rate its interior and ergonomics as fairly good, and excellent for a Soviet tank.
Outside of their often meme like firepower and protection the T-44 and then T-54/55s are often more dangerous to my poor Leo and M48s than IS tanks. Fast, armored and well armed. They may be Mediem tanks, but they are more MBT than the IS tanks ever will be.
I mean that's because the medium tank much more gave rise to the MBT than heavy tanks did. I know that in the War Thunder tech tree MBTs are placed after heavies but that's complete bullshit. While the MBT is a marriage of the heavy and medium it resembles the medium a lot more and it's heavy armor owes more to the development of highly advanced armor rather than a deliberate attempt to make it invulerable to anti tank fire. If you look at the Sherman, the T-34 and the Pz III and IV they most of the time ended up doing both breakthroughs and exploitations during the war and obviously the Sherman in US hands had no heavy support so it always did everything. As an example if you look at early MBTs like the Leopard 1 it actually doesn't have very thick armor and instead focuses on speed. Modern MBTs just have very heavy frontal armor because of the development of composite armor which is a lot lighter than steel. But War Thunder just seems to place MBTs in the heavy tank line because they know that uneducated people, and unskilled players, are gonna value heavy tanks much more than mediums so by putting MBTs here they make sure that players think of them as the ultimate of the best. It doesn't have anything to do with history.
@@hedgehog3180 I can see that point. I always class it as an MBT based off of what the US military calls it. When my dad went to Somalia he had a book that told him and his squad members about the weapons the Somalis used. One of those weapons was the T-55, and the book classed it as an MBT.
Of all IS tanks, the IS2 had the least disadvantages of being a heavy tank that is light enough to cross bridges and reliable enough not to break down constantly. Kudos to whoever designed it
The year is 2027: Worldwide tensions have risen after an economic depression because of Corona. Germany makes a major technological breakthrough: Engine and transmission not prone to breaking down!
german tank trasmission and engine tend to break down cause of bad pilot skill and of the logoration of the vehicle parts surely an panzer VI tiger well tested and ready to roll out never break is trasmission at the first march
@Donetsk People's Republic Indeed, not only that the M1 Abrams is about as heavy as a Tiger II and guzzles thrice the amount of fuel. IS are easy to maintain in comparison.
@@Nothing_._Here The difference is that the Tiger was running on standard gasoline, while the M1 Abrams burns through jet fuel. Even starting the M1 turbine costs 10 gallons and it burns though another 10 gallons per hour when idle. It's a logistical nightmare to run a fleet of M1 and i seriously doubt that the USA can deploy them in significant numbers, seeing how broke they are and the collapse of their Oil industry.
Сейчас бы ссылаться на книги людей, которые писались, чтобы подбодрить солдат- соотечественников😏😏😏 Все танки имели свои плюсы и минусы, теснота советских танков, обеспечивала им лучшую защищённость, из-за сложности попадания в малый силуэт, во-первых, во вторых, советские двигатели отличались плохими показателями скорости поворота корпуса на месте, но вместе с этим двигатели были надёжные, и в высокой степени ремонтопригодные, про ремонт танков ис в данном ролике говорят крайне поверхностно, что позволяет автору контента манипулировать понятиями. В общем и целом хочу подметить, что этот ролик имеет низкую актуальность, конкретных фактов здесь нет, а потому, вся информация рассчитана на зрителей, которые слепо верят всему, что им говорят
@@andruyxabotov1702 Ну, если честно, то информацию про расхождение швов встречал, но после достаточно длительной эксплуатации, что в условиях войны просто неактуально))
I love the change in the sound track when it reached IS-7. It really gave the impression that the IS-7 was the biggest and the baddest tank of the bunch.
I like how Soviet tanks are judged by western magazines and historians. If IS-3 was historically accurate, he'd weigh at around 45,5 tons and not 48-49 as said in Wiki or War Thunder.
And here I thought that because they were more "modern", most of the issues common with heavy tanks were going to be addressed. Seems like the T-10M really was the culmination of the project.
Whenever IS-2 has to reload, the gun has to be lowered significantly to allow the the shell and the propellant charge to be loaded seperately. As such, effective rate of fire reduced to 2 rounds per minute.
According to bullshit yes, yet according to factual reality IS-10 served as a front line tank from 1953 to 1967, after which was rotated to secondary units and was retired form service in 1996. If IS-3 platform was unreliable, it would not have been kept in service for 53 years.
@@karkovb152 It wasn't "to make the total number bigger". There was apparently an issue with calling the tank the IS-122, (and it's predecessor the IS-85) as these designations of course betrayed the calibre of their main gun. Why this wasn't an issue with the SU self-propelled guns i'm not sure. (or indeed the KV-85). The IS-2 was redesignated the IS-2, with the IS-85 becoming the IS-1. The Red Army never bothered to define individual model designations, but the improved variant that was introduced towards the end of 1944 was known as "Model 1944" in German and Allied documentation. (with the earlier variant becoming Model 1943). Post war (1950s) improvements were known in the USSR and abroad as the IS-2M
Would’ve liked to see a mention of how much the D-25T overperforms. The common test source says the test gun could penetrate the front glacis of a Panther and pass through the engine block, but that was with the A-19, which was cut down into the D25, meaning it had a notably higher muzzle velocity. Realistically, I think the pen was closer to maybe 170mm tops, at point blank, with no angle to combat, but that’s not to say it still couldn’t probably frontpen a panther, or at the very least, demolish it through kinetic energy. Likewise with the HE, I know it’s a common fact by now, but they had a characteristic worthy of mentioning, I.E. breaking drive sprockets and sticking the turret ring, and usually killing the crew through pressure wave or spall in some cases. I’ll refrain from mentioning the whole ‘blew turrets off’ because it might be a smidgen biased, but there are also accounts of the AP round causing the front plates of Tiger IIs to fall off, so that’s amusing.
Nice video, straight facts, but you could have also mentioned that the 2 HE rounds (122mm) could crack the Kingtiger's hull, an AP shell that would fail to penetrate the armor on the Tiger 1's turret would push the whole turret back to the engine compartment (because of kinetic energy) and would render the vehicle useless. Keep up the good work though!
only problem was hitting it with HE, which was a lot slower than AP and IS due to having cramped space inside and heavy ammo, rate of fire was quite slow... statistically, you needed to fire around 10-15 projectiles to kill the enemy tank, mostly because accuracy in combat is way lower than on training ground (or in game) so single IS usually had enough ammo for two engagements at most....
@@JaM-R2TR4 Well yes, but if you were to shoot the HE shell at an enemy tank (i think they had 20 HE and 8 AP, correct me if im wrong) and actually hit it, it would, first of all, break the inside armor acting like a HESH round, killing basically everyone inside, if not break the entire thing. Now i know we are talking about the IS-2 but just to show how deadly it was you can look up how a Panzer IV got hit by the ISU-152, half the turret is gone. Basically the same effect would apply to when you hit a tank with the 122mm. Yes, it was inaccurate, but if you hit, he died (most of the time). I dont think they shot 10 rounds at a tank. The commanders of german tanks were specifically instructed not to engage IS-2s alone, as they would most likely lose that fight.
@@valacarex5752 IS tanks were breakthrough tanks... therefore most often, they would face German tanks on defense, in ambush positions... which means they would be using hull down position or any sort of camouflage to prevent being spotted... which means that IS would have to absorb several hits from German tanks, and its return fire would be very low (1 round per minute in combat vs 6-10 rounds fired by stationary 75mm gun tank ).. IS armor was not that thick to survive 6-10 hits to its side armor (sane tank commander would definitely chose his position to get good shot at approaching enemy side instead of firing at front armor) so IS would still be in quite precarious situation even when facing Panzer IVs....
If you took this to its logical extreme, some tanks could spawn 0 on a map due to never even reaching prototype. Or French WW2 tanks don't get to have external views and fire the guns (one man turret). Ditto T-34, early and late Valentines with two man turrets. Or WW2 British tanks break down all the time. Or German late war tanks have poor armour and tungsten rounds limited to one per battle (for all tanks), etc., etc. But then rarely would tanks be fighting at close range or without infantry or would aircraft be so desperate to crash into the ground. Also, WW2 rockets would be almost entirely ineffective.
tfw the tank scaring the allies to shit right at the end of the war and led to the developement of long dong tanks was just big cat II: communist boogaloo.
Honestly I don’t blame em. If you gotta deal with em and all you know about item is that they can take hits and are well armed might as well kill em if you can.
С такой философией давайте недостатки всех танков перечислять, тигр например потреблял очень много бензина, до боя доехать (середина карты), уже полбака нет. А звук танкового двигателя и так за киллометр слышен.
There is no such word as "motherland" thus noone of natives calls Russia as "motherland". Stop transposing your languages habits to the ph-oreign ones and stop repeat the unchecked fact.
The problem with transmission breaking is that if the vehicle is at speed and the transmission fails many more critical engine components can also be damaged.
All I got out of this was how trash these tanks were historically, BUUUUT in War Thunder they’re apparently the best things to ever grace the battlefield lol
The funny thing about the diesel-electric drive of the IS-6 that burst into flame constantly is that the germans had a similar design concept in the Porsche Tiger prototype and the Ferdinand (petrol-electric drive)... which also constantly burst into flames :)
Most tanks in war thunder should have problems with certain bridges. Even the light scout tanks can sometimes be too heavy for bridges found in world war II settings. Bridges and water barriers that cannot be crossed in tanks are not well covered in the scenarios. In fact they're not used at all. This would make for a much more interesting tactical situation if aircraft come into bomb bridges cutting off the enemy.
А тот факт что броню танка ИС-3 не брала НИ ОДНА пушка времён второй мировой, это конечно же не упомянули. Зато рассказали из какой то книжонки написаной американцем который в глаза не видел танки ИС-3 и уж тем более не ведал о обстановке в СССР по ремонту и производству этих танков.
I hope war thunder can make totally historically accurate matches as a separate game mode, not taking into account any factors and even ignoring them for historical accuracy
Some of the breaking sounds are misaligned with their respective events and aren't mixed correctly. There was nothing I could have done about this, they were done properly in VEGAS but every time it rendered it ended up like this.
As long as only the sound is the problem here then we are OK I guess XD
its fine enough my dude, don't beat yourself over it
Hey Can you do a M6A1 heavy tank review I honestly believe it is the most underrated tank in the American tech tree and it is mostly overlooked by everyone, I did something looking around and research and it’s a pretty interesting tank.
Alrighty
How about an Everything Wrong with Video about EndWar my guy?
"IS4 cooling fans are loud enough to be heard kilometers away"
Baby's at 3am: Finally a worthy opponent!
This is fking nice meme
OUR BATTLE WILL BE LEGENDARY!!!
* babies ... but you're right xD
@@ungabunga9451 I don't think so.
my PC
Oh boy, I sure did spend hours grinding for the IS-6, I hope it was worth it! *immediately bursts into flames*
*Gets Tiger(P) Flashbacks*
Lmao. But.
It's a premium.
@@longinusc Grinding in real life to get the money
I thought it was an event vehicle...
Well I mean you didn't because it's a premium.
IS1: “OuR eXiStAnCe Is PaIn”
Now that's funny
f
@@cc-bk3tx Indeed it is
@@justsomeguywithasurprisede4059 Hello fellow Wizard
kv-2 suspension and engine: first time?
Any tank ever to exist: Burst into flames, Breaks down or just dies
Tiger, IS, some Sherman etc.
Indeed, the *B I G B O B* shall be immortal
My lawn mower be like -
I have reignited myself lmao time to get the fire extinguisher bitch
Kinda like people
right, my thoughts exactly.
Tank *exists*
The engine: Adios!
The transmission: Arrivederci!
auf wiedersehen
The fuel tank: do svidaniya!
I'm giving all of y'all a like lol
@@sopmodtew8399 italian?
IS-3: *exists*
Engine & Transmission: *OUR Time has come.*
or: Ima head out!
German heavys:first time
@@SalamanderBattleBrother At least germans had to deal with engine and transmission. IS-3 is like a combination poorly wielded metal plates
@@aegeanharrier6648 true .but for the engine/transmission problem it was a problem for almost any tank heavier than 40 tons look at the m26 for example only medium and light tanks didn't have them except the t34
@@aegeanharrier6648 both unreliable.
2:36 I like that you really see an IS fall from a bridge
Soviet tanks were only ever fit to be crewed by AI or robots. totally unfit for human operation hence why they were massacred in every war theyve fought.
"Ayy blyat!"
@@TheBelrick they weren't.
The reason they tended to perform poorly is because they 1. were often significantly cheaper tanks than Western models (so a 1vs 1 ratio of tanks is not a fair comparison), and 2. The models that saw combat were often outdated variants used by countries with bad economies.
Tanks like the T-55 have proven themselves capable of beating contemporary models of Centurion and Patton in the middle east on multiple occasions, most notably in the Iran-Iraq war.
Soviet tanks were generally behind Western models in performance, but they were all but bad.
Captain Nyet Their crew training is not all impressive at all neither, Apparently the T14 Armata didn’t break down but one drive hit the breaks without knowing what it does
Captain Nyet I mean the metal the Soviets used on them were subpar as well. They’re still doing it.
I can't believe spook forgot about the is-1, literally crying,
Well, it was more of just referred to as the IS, over IS-1
@DAS ist gut Exactly. Only difference is one has a tiny 85mm and one has a giant 122mm.
@DAS ist gut Im still crying smh
IRL the IS-1 basically didn't happen. It started out as the KV-85 but due to the guy who gave the KV line it's name falling out of favor it was renamed to IS. However from the KV-2 until the IS-2 no Soviet heavy tank saw significant combat, this was because the entire heavy tank line was at risk of being canceled because of transmission issues that seemed unfixable. One engineer managed to design a working transmission though and based on that the IS-2 was designed with the IS-1 not being much more than a test bed for hull design. For that reason 1. There isn't really much test data and 2. The IS-1 is really just an IS-2, the difference between the two is basically the same as the difference between a 75 and 76 mm Sherman, actually even less as the 76 Sherman had some thicker armor that the first 75s didn't have.
The IS-2 itself is a bit of a masterpiece of engineering though, it manages to pack the largest gun any WWII tank that actually saw operation had and has better frontal protection than a Tiger II while weighing a bit less than a Panther. And it was not even very expensive and had few reliability issues. It being such a success is probably the sole reason the Soviet heavy tank program lasted so long compared to most other countries that made like one heavy tank after WWII and then dropped the concept. Whether that is a blessing or a curse is another debate, the heavy tank concept arguebly didn't even work that well in WWII and the IS-2 and KV-1 are more of an exception than the rule and even then the US did just fine without ever having any heavy tank.
@@hedgehog3180 "has better frontal protection than a Tiger II " - not true. However, it is not as tall of course (=smaller target)
EDIT: later IS-2 variants of course had improved hull, probably comes closer to Tiger II. I remember that these later IS-2's have effectively the same frontal hull protection as T-54/55s.
1:36
My PC´s cooling fans: "Finally a worthy oponent!"
You should fix that
PS4 cooling fans would like to talk
John Smith nah it gives me authentic background Sound in air battles
@@Lukas-tn6go lol
Hahahaha i identify with this one
Can you make "If MBTs in War Thunder are historically accurate" and talk about most top tier tanks
He actually did it with the abrams
It's hard (nearly impossible in some cases) to find info on vehicles still in active service without committing some pretty serious crimes.
@@Orphican Haha, yeah you're right.
@@Orphican
the short version of most obvious shit:
M1
due to reasons, M1 has overengineered bits that raise the cost by a lot
leopard 2A4 and A5:
the A5 turret spike nose is able to block all APDSFS in use until it's broken from the turret
Leopard 2s are cheaper than M1s to build, so purchase cost is lower than abrams
T80B and U
T80s cannot mount the thermal image system unless it's a commander variant or a late retrofit version
Type 90 and type 90(B)
both serve the JGSDF, so they cannot be used outside japanese maps
they are too heavy for Japan's own infrastructure, limiting the amount per match
Leclerc
it's the most expensive MBT being produced, so purchase costs are higher than normal
add info you can find of these and other top tiers
@@andrehashimoto8056 FBI OPEN UP
" Only one Tiger can be spawn per match due to low production rate" 1300~
'Only 2 IS-4 can be spawnped per match due to low production rate' 200~
Bruh, am I missing something
Final drive
Yes,you missed something.
"only on soviet maps"
I've seen 5 Object 279s in one match - production rate - 0
@@patricklioneljonson2747 One were built
From what I have read, it was kinda of rare to have multiple tigers fighting together at one place, apparently the Germans liked to spread them amongst their armor with them only concentrating at important battles, but I don’t have a source to back that claim up
I suggest this gameplay - the round starts.
Then 70% of each team randomly brakes, catches fire etc.
Nobody would play Germans
Then the survivors get into combat and the soviet tanks fall apart when shot
Carnal Decay nobody would play russia pre 1944 either
The americans would just be plug walking around in their mostly reliable Sherman's with the shortest repair times.
Us: Do the sound, Spookston! Do the sound!!!
Spookston: The transmission has a tendency to break down. *CLUNK*
The IS-2 interior was almost 'spacious', especially compared to other Soviet tanks. It was even better than a lot of German or allied tanks. Here is a review of one at the American Heritage Museum and they go into the tank and talk about its ergonomics.
th-cam.com/video/I3TGDi7SpOQ/w-d-xo.html
The guy ranks it an '8' on a scale of 1-10 against its Soviet counterparts and '6' (better than average) overall on its interior layout and ergonomics. That's probably why it was so popular with its crews, and indeed why it was maintained in service until well after tater IS series tanks were retired.
The driver has an escape hatch out the bottom if the tank, and doesn't have to go out through the top of turret. As for David Higgin's book, I have that, and David gets wrong even many of the basic specifications of the IS-2.
Some of what you posted was certainly true about the later IS series (although weld cracks on the IS-3 you mentioned was from a production run of a single factory, so so I've read, and not indicative of all IS-3s). But if cracking armor and failing engines and transmissions are a complaint, then I doubt any of these beasties can compete with their German counterparts. And War Thunder doesn't have the King Tiger or JadgTiger break down on people or have its armor crack by stress, so why should it do it with these Soviet tanks?
@Dassault Mirage 2000 I guess you didn't see the video? They go into the IS-2 and rate its interior and ergonomics as fairly good, and excellent for a Soviet tank.
@@stewartmillen7708 he losed way too many neurons foe understand that
@@the_bane_of_all_anti_furry bro you shouldn't be talking.
I mean, isn't literally everyone dies except the final guy when the crew is knocked out anyways?
152mm HE blows up in commander's face. "unconscious"
Outside of their often meme like firepower and protection the T-44 and then T-54/55s are often more dangerous to my poor Leo and M48s than IS tanks. Fast, armored and well armed.
They may be Mediem tanks, but they are more MBT than the IS tanks ever will be.
Well the T-54/55 is an MBT, it was technically one of the first Soviet MBTs before they started working on the T-64.
The T-10 was originally gonna be named as an IS tank. I'm sure the T-10 gives Leo's trouble. Not to mention the old Is-7
McPancakeBites It was designated a medium tank but it arguebly already filled the role of an MBT and certainly was a shock to the west.
I mean that's because the medium tank much more gave rise to the MBT than heavy tanks did. I know that in the War Thunder tech tree MBTs are placed after heavies but that's complete bullshit. While the MBT is a marriage of the heavy and medium it resembles the medium a lot more and it's heavy armor owes more to the development of highly advanced armor rather than a deliberate attempt to make it invulerable to anti tank fire. If you look at the Sherman, the T-34 and the Pz III and IV they most of the time ended up doing both breakthroughs and exploitations during the war and obviously the Sherman in US hands had no heavy support so it always did everything. As an example if you look at early MBTs like the Leopard 1 it actually doesn't have very thick armor and instead focuses on speed. Modern MBTs just have very heavy frontal armor because of the development of composite armor which is a lot lighter than steel. But War Thunder just seems to place MBTs in the heavy tank line because they know that uneducated people, and unskilled players, are gonna value heavy tanks much more than mediums so by putting MBTs here they make sure that players think of them as the ultimate of the best. It doesn't have anything to do with history.
@@hedgehog3180 I can see that point. I always class it as an MBT based off of what the US military calls it. When my dad went to Somalia he had a book that told him and his squad members about the weapons the Somalis used. One of those weapons was the T-55, and the book classed it as an MBT.
IS-4: *Cooling fans can be heard from kilometers away*
Germans: “Prepare the Luftwaffe, the Soviets are launching an air attack!”
1:39 Jesus, now that's hard to believe...
What desperate government would let this issue come through
You forgot, "due to the time travel machine built by the british and swedish, IS-7 fights tanks that were built 30 years later." Sekrits dokumints.
Don't forget mario and luigi in there mushroom powered speedy bois
Don't forget tiger IIs fighting against late t54 versions. Or bmps. Or is3s. Is6s.
@@carlitosskater89 BMP ? it's machine for attack heavy tank?
Of all IS tanks, the IS2 had the least disadvantages of being a heavy tank that is light enough to cross bridges and reliable enough not to break down constantly.
Kudos to whoever designed it
Meanwhile in the game: Only one weird guy in a battle goes for a soviet heavy tank on higher tiers, dies immediately, and rage-quits.
The year is 2027: Worldwide tensions have risen after an economic depression because of Corona. Germany makes a major technological breakthrough: Engine and transmission not prone to breaking down!
no worries, germans already build the best tank in the world again. those tank nerds lol
BRRRRRAKA MONOGAAAA
@@Mr_Bunk DOITSU NO KAGAKU WA SEKAI ICHI
german tank trasmission and engine tend to break down cause of bad pilot skill and of the logoration of the vehicle parts surely an panzer VI tiger well tested and ready to roll out never break is trasmission at the first march
1:16 The inside of the IS-3 is so cramped the suspensions died again.
Heavy tank:*exist*
Engine: *Adios*
No
This guy just casually copied a comment
There's something common between failures, engines, transmissions and heave tanks.
The expenses this caused is largely why the concept was abandoned when infantry AT weapons became too good for even the heaviest armor.
@Donetsk People's Republic Indeed, not only that the M1 Abrams is about as heavy as a Tiger II and guzzles thrice the amount of fuel. IS are easy to maintain in comparison.
@Donetsk People's Republic The difference is that a modern MBT have far more armor, far mroe mobility, more range and a lot better firepower.
@@die1mayer False, Please provide contradictory evidence. The Tiger II is 0.5MPG, The abrams is 0.6 and 0.8 when the turbine is properly going.
@@Nothing_._Here The difference is that the Tiger was running on standard gasoline, while the M1 Abrams burns through jet fuel. Even starting the M1 turbine costs 10 gallons and it burns though another 10 gallons per hour when idle.
It's a logistical nightmare to run a fleet of M1 and i seriously doubt that the USA can deploy them in significant numbers, seeing how broke they are and the collapse of their Oil industry.
Сейчас бы ссылаться на книги людей, которые писались, чтобы подбодрить солдат- соотечественников😏😏😏
Все танки имели свои плюсы и минусы, теснота советских танков, обеспечивала им лучшую защищённость, из-за сложности попадания в малый силуэт, во-первых, во вторых, советские двигатели отличались плохими показателями скорости поворота корпуса на месте, но вместе с этим двигатели были надёжные, и в высокой степени ремонтопригодные, про ремонт танков ис в данном ролике говорят крайне поверхностно, что позволяет автору контента манипулировать понятиями. В общем и целом хочу подметить, что этот ролик имеет низкую актуальность, конкретных фактов здесь нет, а потому, вся информация рассчитана на зрителей, которые слепо верят всему, что им говорят
И ссылаются на книги иностранных авторов. Сомневаюсь что они эксплуатировали технику победы...
Если бы тигры были реалистичнее, вот было бы весело))
а ещё меня прикольнули сварочные швы на ИС-3, которые лопались при движении!!!!! Блин, да на 34-х при попадании в них лопалась броня, а сварка нет!!!
@смотришь мемное видео
@начинаешь бугуртить
@пишешь в комментариях "не реалистично, автор всё выдумал"
@@andruyxabotov1702 Ну, если честно, то информацию про расхождение швов встречал, но после достаточно длительной эксплуатации, что в условиях войны просто неактуально))
I love the change in the sound track when it reached IS-7. It really gave the impression that the IS-7 was the biggest and the baddest tank of the bunch.
Literally every heavy tank ever: exists
Engine: breaks down
I like how Soviet tanks are judged by western magazines and historians. If IS-3 was historically accurate, he'd weigh at around 45,5 tons and not 48-49 as said in Wiki or War Thunder.
Maybe.... You are forgetting ammo?
Last time I was this early the Tiger 1 didn't have a broken transmission
You forgot that when the IS-2 fires it’s gun, the gunner has to lower the barrel to load another shell.
Nice
And here I thought that because they were more "modern", most of the issues common with heavy tanks were going to be addressed.
Seems like the T-10M really was the culmination of the project.
Nobody:
Literally every tank: 𝘽𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙆𝘿𝙊𝙒𝙉 𝘽𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙆𝘿𝙊𝙒𝙉! 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯, 𝘽𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙆𝘿𝙊𝙒𝙉 𝘽𝙍𝙀𝘼𝙆𝘿𝙊𝙒𝙉!
Whenever IS-2 has to reload, the gun has to be lowered significantly to allow the the shell and the propellant charge to be loaded seperately. As such, effective rate of fire reduced to 2 rounds per minute.
Good grief the is-3 needed better quality control
So basically everything in the IS3 breaks down
According to bullshit yes, yet according to factual reality IS-10 served as a front line tank from 1953 to 1967, after which was rotated to secondary units and was retired form service in 1996. If IS-3 platform was unreliable, it would not have been kept in service for 53 years.
It's almost if having a vehicle that weighs several tons be powered by what is esentially a glorified tactor engine, causes them to break down a lot.
5.7 is-2 needs to be renamed to is-122 while is-2 (1944) named just is-2
Why though? That sounds kinda dumb
@@karkovb152 It wasn't "to make the total number bigger". There was apparently an issue with calling the tank the IS-122, (and it's predecessor the IS-85) as these designations of course betrayed the calibre of their main gun. Why this wasn't an issue with the SU self-propelled guns i'm not sure. (or indeed the KV-85). The IS-2 was redesignated the IS-2, with the IS-85 becoming the IS-1. The Red Army never bothered to define individual model designations, but the improved variant that was introduced towards the end of 1944 was known as "Model 1944" in German and Allied documentation. (with the earlier variant becoming Model 1943). Post war (1950s) improvements were known in the USSR and abroad as the IS-2M
Would’ve liked to see a mention of how much the D-25T overperforms. The common test source says the test gun could penetrate the front glacis of a Panther and pass through the engine block, but that was with the A-19, which was cut down into the D25, meaning it had a notably higher muzzle velocity. Realistically, I think the pen was closer to maybe 170mm tops, at point blank, with no angle to combat, but that’s not to say it still couldn’t probably frontpen a panther, or at the very least, demolish it through kinetic energy. Likewise with the HE, I know it’s a common fact by now, but they had a characteristic worthy of mentioning, I.E. breaking drive sprockets and sticking the turret ring, and usually killing the crew through pressure wave or spall in some cases. I’ll refrain from mentioning the whole ‘blew turrets off’ because it might be a smidgen biased, but there are also accounts of the AP round causing the front plates of Tiger IIs to fall off, so that’s amusing.
No one:
Tanks in WW2: *breakdown noises*
tanks never got breakdown that event appear only when pilot show bad skill and the tank suffer of massive logoration and poor quality materials
Nice video, straight facts, but you could have also mentioned that the 2 HE rounds (122mm) could crack the Kingtiger's hull, an AP shell that would fail to penetrate the armor on the Tiger 1's turret would push the whole turret back to the engine compartment (because of kinetic energy) and would render the vehicle useless. Keep up the good work though!
only problem was hitting it with HE, which was a lot slower than AP and IS due to having cramped space inside and heavy ammo, rate of fire was quite slow... statistically, you needed to fire around 10-15 projectiles to kill the enemy tank, mostly because accuracy in combat is way lower than on training ground (or in game) so single IS usually had enough ammo for two engagements at most....
@Valacarex source?
@@JaM-R2TR4 Well yes, but if you were to shoot the HE shell at an enemy tank (i think they had 20 HE and 8 AP, correct me if im wrong) and actually hit it, it would, first of all, break the inside armor acting like a HESH round, killing basically everyone inside, if not break the entire thing. Now i know we are talking about the IS-2 but just to show how deadly it was you can look up how a Panzer IV got hit by the ISU-152, half the turret is gone. Basically the same effect would apply to when you hit a tank with the 122mm. Yes, it was inaccurate, but if you hit, he died (most of the time). I dont think they shot 10 rounds at a tank. The commanders of german tanks were specifically instructed not to engage IS-2s alone, as they would most likely lose that fight.
What does all that have anything to do with these videos tho lol
@@valacarex5752 IS tanks were breakthrough tanks... therefore most often, they would face German tanks on defense, in ambush positions... which means they would be using hull down position or any sort of camouflage to prevent being spotted... which means that IS would have to absorb several hits from German tanks, and its return fire would be very low (1 round per minute in combat vs 6-10 rounds fired by stationary 75mm gun tank ).. IS armor was not that thick to survive 6-10 hits to its side armor (sane tank commander would definitely chose his position to get good shot at approaching enemy side instead of firing at front armor) so IS would still be in quite precarious situation even when facing Panzer IVs....
Would you consider doing a "if X was historically Inaccurate" episode
Well anyone can do it
I've been asking for this one for a long time. And I gave up hope that it would ever be made. Glad to see it's finally come around!
If you took this to its logical extreme, some tanks could spawn 0 on a map due to never even reaching prototype. Or French WW2 tanks don't get to have external views and fire the guns (one man turret). Ditto T-34, early and late Valentines with two man turrets. Or WW2 British tanks break down all the time. Or German late war tanks have poor armour and tungsten rounds limited to one per battle (for all tanks), etc., etc. But then rarely would tanks be fighting at close range or without infantry or would aircraft be so desperate to crash into the ground. Also, WW2 rockets would be almost entirely ineffective.
Let me guess.....
*Transmission failure*
Soooo it had problems like every medium to heavy tank of that era.
Every heavy tank seems to have been unreliable.
You can't have one of these videos without one of the flaws being the engine is prone to faults.
tfw the tank scaring the allies to shit right at the end of the war and led to the developement of long dong tanks was just big cat II: communist boogaloo.
lol nice one
Honestly I don’t blame em. If you gotta deal with em and all you know about item is that they can take hits and are well armed might as well kill em if you can.
Your choice of music is phenomenal
0:26 so it would just randomly Hull Break in WarThunder? lmao
Yes
It probably wasn't that radical but it would make is susceptible to HE
If the cooling fans could be heard from kilometers away, imagine standing next to it
С такой философией давайте недостатки всех танков перечислять, тигр например потреблял очень много бензина, до боя доехать (середина карты), уже полбака нет.
А звук танкового двигателя и так за киллометр слышен.
IS 3 just sitting in the hangar, match hasn't even begun yet... breaks.
Tiger Transmissions: Soviet Edition
@The Kugelblitz smh I think humanity is down with people like you
@@ali_ing069 he make an shitty joke and got what he deserve
@The Kugelblitz hey i remind i see you argue with an indian about the arjun tank in an red effect video
the halo music is really fitting, nice touch mate.
IS-3 “I am the exemplar of the Motherlands post war armor force”
Vibrations: *”Are you sure about that?”*
There is no such word as "motherland" thus noone of natives calls Russia as "motherland".
Stop transposing your languages habits to the ph-oreign ones and stop repeat the unchecked fact.
forget to talk about the power of those 122mm shells that can destroy the hull of even a King Tiger or a Panther
Ну тогда мауса и кучу американских танков, вообще, нужно убрать из игры!
The problem with transmission breaking is that if the vehicle is at speed and the transmission fails many more critical engine components can also be damaged.
All I got out of this was how trash these tanks were historically, BUUUUT in War Thunder they’re apparently the best things to ever grace the battlefield lol
The is3 is very terrifying to look at from the front.
Сборник слухов
А теперь попрошу осмотреть ваш вселюбимый "абрамс" который в пустыне глохнет каждые 5 минут, а стоимость его как страна в африке
good tipp for engine breakdowns just turn the engine of so the engine exhaust dosent ruin the imerssion xD
The funny thing about the diesel-electric drive of the IS-6 that burst into flame constantly is that the germans had a similar design concept in the Porsche Tiger prototype and the Ferdinand (petrol-electric drive)... which also constantly burst into flames :)
Historians: King Tiger vs IS-2
Gaijin: Tiger H1 vs T34, take it or leave it
You forgot that IS-7 was simply too heavy to even get it to field
Every WWII tank engine/transmission: *I've decided that I want to die*
dumbhead that never happened only when the tanks was in poor condition and with an untrained pilot
Most tanks in war thunder should have problems with certain bridges. Even the light scout tanks can sometimes be too heavy for bridges found in world war II settings. Bridges and water barriers that cannot be crossed in tanks are not well covered in the scenarios. In fact they're not used at all. This would make for a much more interesting tactical situation if aircraft come into bomb bridges cutting off the enemy.
"armor magazine 2002" - looks like a worst historical source I ever seen.
IS-3 crews: why did my engine break down again!
King Tiger crews: First time?
You should have included the T-10M as it was called the IS-8 before de-Stalinization. Still a good vid though!
Oooh i've been waiting for this one! Keep up the good work!
What if tank was realistic: *exists*
Comentaries: EnGiNe BreAks - TRanSmIsSiOn: fAiLs
Can't believe I recognized "We're the Desperate Measures" from Halo 3 ODST 2:16
Ага источники 2002 года точно знали, каков был ис 3 в 1945ом
Gotta love spookston's way of messing with gaijin for wanting to be "realistic" but having so many inaccuracies and balancing problems
War Thunder:historically accurate game
This dude:say sike
this channel is gonna be very big some day
this is more of a facts compilation then historical accuracy's. (we once tested a transmission, it didn't work very well)
I saw that IS-3 in the Thumbnail and that sums up alot of IS-3 Gameplay in World of Tanks Blitz
tank drives
*loud snap
tank stops
WW2 and post WW2 tank:exist
Engine and trasmission: adios
No one:
Spookston with making war thunder historically accurate:
"AND NOW IT'S COMPLETELY UNUSABLE!"
Imagine driving your newly bought IS-3 thinking you own the battlefield only to be hull broke outa no where.
After "EXTRA Realistic" Update in WT
IS-6 Instantly Burns when spawned in
He called it a IS now everyone will fight over IS vs JS
I'm waiting for an episode where the engine and transmission aren't a problem
The germans may had dificulties with theyre transmision breaking down but at least they did not disasemble themself like the is 3
IS3...you need a bucket of Spackle just in case your turret cracks open...
А тот факт что броню танка ИС-3 не брала НИ ОДНА пушка времён второй мировой, это конечно же не упомянули. Зато рассказали из какой то книжонки написаной американцем который в глаза не видел танки ИС-3 и уж тем более не ведал о обстановке в СССР по ремонту и производству этих танков.
Он здесь всегда рассказывает про то, чего нет в игре.
@@worldoftancraft какой ещё игре? Под названием жизнь?)))
*Laughs in petrol filled fire hose*
IS-M just sits and waits his turn to come
IS-4: Comrade, I'm trying to sneak into Berlin, but I'm dummy thick, and the claps of my cooling fans keep alerting the Tigers.
I would love too see tbe historically accurate series for planes next
IS-series **Exists**
*Also IS-series existing*: **BREAKS DOWN ONCE TRAVELED ONE KILOMETER WITHOUT STOPPING**
tank: exists
transmission: aight imma *die*
I hope war thunder can make totally historically accurate matches as a separate game mode, not taking into account any factors and even ignoring them for historical accuracy
Not everyone or a single tank
Is 7: Guns all over the hull and turret.