Tank Chats #62 KV-1 | The Tank Museum
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ธ.ค. 2018
- Tank Chats playlist • Tank Chats from The Ta... It was decided to put the KV heavy tank into production in December 1939, alongside the T34-76 medium tank.
The invading Germans received a major shock when they encountered the KV1 heavy tank in June 1941.
SUBSCRIBE to The Tank Museum TH-cam channel: ► / @thetankmuseum
Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► / tankmuseum
Visit The Tank Museum SHOP: ►tankmuseumshop.org/
Press the little bell above to enable NOTIFICATIONS so you don’t miss the latest Tank Museum videos.
Follow The Tank Museum on FACEBOOK: ► / tankmuseum
Follow The TIGER Tank Collection on FACEBOOK
: ► / tigertankcollection
Twitter: ► / tankmuseum
Tiger Tank Blog: ► blog.tiger-tank.com/
Tank 100 First World War Centenary Blog: ► tank100.com/ #tankmuseum #tanks #tankchats The Tank Museum E-Newsletter sign-up: mailchi.mp/e6fae2ac8bee/newsl...
David Fletcher is a treasure! This man can make a video about paint drying and I would still watch every second of it!
I think you will find he is a National Treasure. When not at the Tank Museum he is kept under guard in the Tower of London alongside the Queens Royal jewels.
@@bigblue6917 probably next to Sir David Attenborough...
Yeah tell me about it. Lol
I went to the tanks museum back in oct. 2015 and saw the man. But i didnt have the guts to ask for a picture to be taken with him. Damn it
I agree.
KV-1 always looks small from pictures, I think it's the turret or something but when you see him next it you can see it is actually quite large.
I had the same reaction. I never appreciated the actual size difference between the medium T34/76 and the heavy KV1 until I saw David standing there, giving it perspective. I realize he's not a big man, but neither were many Soviet tankers.
For a tank of its weight I think it is quite compact. With the tracks and suspension not considered it is also remarkably narrow. It isn't much bigger than a PzKpfw IV, a tank of nearly half its weight.
@kartoffel Salat I actually feel really sorry for those Nazi tank crews, something I didn't think would ever happen. I mean.....KV-1 is a really scary tank, not to mention the KV-2.
nice name
you bring us all pride and accomplishment with your service to battle EA
@@legogenius1667 , the KV-2 by Soviet Standards was a disappointment it had the very high and ungainly turret and if memory serves a very slow turret rotation with the 152 mm gun , they most likely had two loaders one for projectile at least 90 pounds , the other loaded the charge.
Now the KV-85 on the other hand your talking a different animal.
Only David Fletcher has the authority to refer to Joseph Stalin as Joe Stalin - only he has the facial folicular fortitude for such a right.
In case anyone without a moustache is wondering, Stalin should be referred to as 'That miserable sadistic Georgian gangster' not 'Joe'
He’s old enough to have met Stalin personally
@@maxstr he is a good lad
Fearsome whiskers sir. Fearsome.
My mustache approves
I didnt realize how big this tank is holy crap...
Even a Sherman is pretty large when you stand beside it. KV-1 is much larger and heavier even, the stripped down KV-1S is 42 tons
Oh yes! even if you have seen other tanks, and know kw1 from pictures once you stand next to it, the size ie overwhelming.
You need to see it in the flesh for the first time. It is NOT a small tank.
@big ian
"Bigger" than the Tiger?... Maybe you mean taller or something?
Crevetta happens with age
David fletcher could sell ice to the eskimos.
.
i'd listen to him talk about torsion bar suspension and drive sprockets 'til the cows come home.
Where did the cows go?
Sooo true😂😂😂
Ice to the Eskimos no problem. Torsion bar suspension for British MBT problem.
I'd like to drink beer with him at the pub.
Living in Greenland, I can relate that Inuits like ice-cream. I have rewarded my students with it today.
I don't suppose he's popular with lip readers...
brianhopkins81 never trust a man with a moustache he’s definitely hiding something.
What you really need is a mustache reader.
That mustache was installed by MI6 at great taxpayer expense for precisely that reason. The man's a national asset.
You took the joke right out of my...where's my mouth? Oh, there it is, under me mustache.
how can he eat with this?
Dear "Tank Museum" as a russian i can understand how an english speaking can make a mistake. The "3a" its not a number of some division or brigade. "3" is a russian letter "Z" and it should be written "За Ленинград!" this means "For Leningrad!" Maybe sometimes its helpful to ask some russian tourists for help with translations or writings.
Sory for my english.
And they are sorry for their Russian. )
Well your English is better then the Tank Museums Russian so no worries. But thanks for your input. Much appreciated.
I find it ironic that the only bad English in your comment is you apologising for poor English.
Not to mention it not actually said "From the women of Leningrad - to the frontlines!", but something more about delievering women from Leningrad to the frontlines.
Which is... i dunno, might work, but is a bit dark lol.
Not bad English at all! Although my Russian is horrific, but I can read Russian Cyrillic.
Poor KV-1, always overshadowed by the T-34. But it was a great tank in its own right.
except the exceptionally poor visibility
That's because it was never built in the get numbers as the T-34 and the T-34 was just as effective or even more there are many accounts of crews not liking the KV-1 that much that's why they replaced it with the "IS" hevy tank series especially after the Tiger entered service
@@theprfesssor The IS didnt replace the KV because of the crew's preference. It was replaced, because it couldnt keep up with the German tanks anymore, when the Tiger showed up.
I suppose the Russians didn't really care about crew satsifaction...
@@thesayxx that's one of the reason why the tankers didn't really prefer kv.
It can't be upgraded anymore and also the problem they feel on the tank' s mobility as well
The only thing they get wrong about Davids videos is, they're just too damn short
and not enough of them.
Agreed.
I could listen to this man all day long
The videos are great.
Though no source should be taken without critical confirmation.
This video, in particular, is wrong in part of crew functions.
The tank Sir David has behind the back was manned by five and there was a dedicated loader in it, commander was loading the gun only if other crew members dot killed. At least according to KV service manual issued in 1941.
Is he supossed to be something like an expert?
I never realised how enormous these things are! Impressive beast. It's funny how the T34 gun looks so puny on the KV compared to how it looked on the T34. Looks like a toothpick on the KV! Lol
dustisdeadbodies85 yeah I would not like that
It proved to be quite a shock for the Germans, who didn't know it existed until they met it in combat.
''The KV1 is a very heavy tank ... that means it weighs a lot ...''
This is the sort of information u just can't get anywhere else ...
"at least we hope its in Russian"
would make a great t-shirt with a tank on it
Please do the ram 2
It is in wrong Russian indeed. Unless you see some sense on the sentences
"Leningrad! For
Leningrad's women [for]*
Front!"
(Leningrad! Za
Leningradskie Zhenshchini
Frontu!)
I think they painted the order of the words backwards or something. I mean, the slogan reminds to the sentences (in Russian):
"Za Leningrad!!
Zhenshchini Leningradskie Frontu!"
Which, translated, means: "For Leningrad!! The women [give for the] Leningrad's Front!!**"
*Weird Russian grammar here. Basically, Russian (like Latin and German) has ending cases, and in this case it's the one standing for "giving to/for".
**Leningrad's front was an Army Group HQ tasked on defending the city of Leningrad and the surrounding areas.
@@markmonoton6224 Yes, that could be another way of saying that. Also, many Soviet tanks had markings that said "Za Leningrad!" or "Za Moskva!", reminding the tankers what they were fighting for.
@@markmonoton6224 I mean: It should be "Za Leningrad! Leningradskie zhenshchini frontu!" (or Zhenshchini Leningradskie frontu, it depends wether you mean that "women of Leningrad gave this to the front" or "women gave this to the Leningrad front", again, the Leningrad front [Leningradskie frontu] was a military unit).
ah one of my favorites... "it is a a heavy tank even by Soviet standards" :)
at 1:20 is that Roz in the background?
Military History not Visualized ooh my boi is here with some intellectual jokes =)
Military History not Visualized, they had a KV1 for test at St Valentine tank factory. They thought its was good but construction was poor, not acceptable to the Wehrmacht. That simple statement encapsulated the strategical problem with German construction at the time. Looking into Kursk, I was surprised at the number of German captured T34’s which were used.
@@DC9622 because the Germans liked interlocking plates huh? Any idea what else they didnt like? I remember the Soviets found the German steel itself unacceptable as they deemed it too hard and therefore brittle for armour.
Oh dear, don't tell Matt! I'm usually sneaking about trying to keep the place quiet...
ScuffyNZ , Good point, the CIA analysis of the T34 after capture in Korea is available worth a read, I was surprised, I thought they were given one and a KV 1, to review during the war. However, they comment on the high standard of the steel armour. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, the Daimler Benz Panther design, was a reverse engineered copy of T34, with torsion bar and petrol engine. They did not like the Russians Two-man turrets, with the commander being the loader as David Fletcher explained.
The argument it would confuse, appears rubbish, because the Wehrmacht used a lot of captured T34’s. Albert Speer, preferred it over the MAN design, but the MAN design won, because they thought it was nearer production, with hindsight they got that wrong, it took two years to sort. Have a look into the Eisenhower, gun tests July 1944, when they found only the British 17 pounder and 6 pounder with APDS could deal effectively with Panther and Tiger head on, the US Army 76mm was not up to the job creating a tank panic. There are photographs of a Panther with the front armour blown off by a 17 pounder during the test, they concluded the armour was brittle.
The German manufacturing approach was distributed production brought together at assemble plants, but using craftsmen to assemble individual units who addressed the variances in the component’s parts. The nearest modern approach I can think of is Morgan in Worcestershire or the Jaguar and Aston Martin classic factories. Sherman and T34 assemble, was consistent with any modern manufacturing plant. Though looking at the films, the Sherman plant looks a lot better place to work than the T34 plant
The torsion bar suspension in KV-1 tank.: in fact, according to the report of the military commission, the Torsion bar suspension was supposed to replace the Christie suspension on the the T34-76 medium tank after the winter tests of 1940, but the Russians did not have time to change the production technology of the t-34 tank, therefore the entire war the t-34 tank was with the Christie suspension (Russian engineers returned to the torsion bar suspension in the next generation of the T-44 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-44 )
KV-1 is the most tanky looking tank. Period. That thing just screams tank.
@dustisdeadbodies85 *Shows IS-7
for me it's the Centurion mk 1 that's the tankiest looking tank to ever have tanked.
@Some Shenanigans Incorrect, Tiger 1's. A box on top of a box with a box for a gun. More Tiger Like than T-34
Nah that belongs to a panzer 4 or 3 or a tiger, a box with a turret
@@bobmcbob49 good choice, yeah Centurion is a good looking verhicle.
He's back. He's the man behind the 'tache. And he's after your soul!
A breather before he dons his red suit and hooks up the reindeer! Mind you that kv will need a few to shift that!
@@gunner678 You do realise you've forced me to listen to that Alice Cooper song now Matakshaman? ^oo^ th-cam.com/video/S6hm4ZVMW-I/w-d-xo.html
Heavy is good - heavy is reliable; ...if it doesn't work, you can always hit 'em on the head with it!
Boris the Blade approved
D' Ya Like Dags?
@@JackIsMe1993 I like caravans a lot more
Remember that Stalingrad vet interview where he said he’d killed 60 odd fascists with his shovel. “Good shovel, that one!”
You're on thin ice; my pedigree chums...
I wish my college professors were this good. I could listen to this man forever.
for first,he reads card,for second he make many mistakes about...
@@Fn-sw6jn someone's salty.
The russian is right for the most part, except for the word order in the first sentence: "Ленинград! За" ("Leningrad! For) instead of "За Ленинград!" ("For Leningrad").
Sounds like the start of a "In Soviet Russia..." joke.
ShyTentacle Да не чувак, а что за « за Ленинградские женщины», это же бред. C’mon dude, wtf is “for Leningrad’s women” [in russian it is wrong]
B. e.: politikus.ru/articles/70114-bitva-za-leningrad-vs.-vysadka-v-normandii.html
Maybe it's a 3 and an a, as some sort of unit indicator. Wouldn't make much sense otherwise.
(It's not, the inscription is correct on the other side of the turret. The painter might have thought so though)
It's not a 3 - it is the voiced alveolar fricative in its capital form (sounds like the french or english 'Z')
Any tank chat or history chat with this gentleman is awesome. He is very entertaining as well as full of the best stories connected to the topics.
3:25 - When there was no shortage of tankisti, the usual crew was made up of 5. The fifth crewman fired the rear facing, turret MG and relieved the driver or helped him to engage the gears!!!
David Fletcher is an absolute legend. Love listening to this man speak. My favorite historian.
Just saw the tank in the museum last weekend. Totally worth the visit and recommended!
I love all of these, but i really love the David Fletcher ones the most. The mans brittishness and humor is my high point of the day.
"It is a heavy tank... and that means it weighs a good deal."
You can tell he's the expert. 😉
What Soviets considered a "Heavy" tank was 10-20 tonnes lighter than what the American, Germans or the British considered to be heavy. This goes for all tank classes at all times, right up to T-90 being 12 tonnes lighter than the Abrams.
Psytinker
T-90 lighter than Abrams while better armor?
Seems The Chieftain took notes from his good teacher.
"this arc of traverse is ya big"
It would be cool to see the interior of the tanks in the museum, even if they are incomplete! Its a part of the tank that the average person does not usually get to see!
Inside The Chieftain's Hatch takes you inside.
wonderful dissertation, magnificent paint scheme, perfect contrast seen down the lands and groves of a bore sighted pak 40.
Thank you, Mr. Fletcher and also Bovington tank museum.
The KV-1 is a personal favorite of mine. It looks very menacing. And when you get the KV-2, you lose a city block.
Germans used captured KV-2s for scouting, because exceptionally tall turret made for perfect mobile observation post.
I see kv round a corner peek over a hill and I get pissed . Well there goes my aced crew and maxed out tank with talisman. And every blasted time , help is off smelling flowers.
And when the Chinese borrow it, you lose a Schitty Wok!
@@pex_the_unalivedrunk6785 haha
I made 3 model scale of KV1: 2 in 1/72 and one 1/35
The figure of this massive tank is really threatening... The figure of the turret, the long hull with gaz outfits on each side. The tracks are a piece of fear by themselves: from the side they looks like a snake and from the front they looks like a large meat masher.
But in comparison, the KV2 looks ridiculous with the overweight turret, imo
Dear Tank Santa,
All I want for Christmas is...
....is to have more Fletcher videos!
DemolitionBlueCheese that kv 1
KV2
MrKansai1 teghe how much u got? Seen them for 30,000
BMP are one of the cheapest tracked vehicles there are.
Excellent video. Thanks for posting.
Love the KV-1, Probably the first truly successful heavy tank of the war.
The Char B1 would be a contender for that I think... Just not enough of them. It was to the Germans (in 1940) what the Tiger was to the western allies. Their shells would just bounce of it and their tanks would blow up if it so much as sneezed in their direction.
Great tank for it's day! As good as the KV1? Maybe not. But it was in action earlier, so
I've made arrangements to go to Europe. First stop , the British Tank Museum !!!
I visited the U.S. Army Training Grounds at Eastern Washington...great demonstrations and enjoyed that too.
It's Europe next year , yea :)
Thanks Tank Chats . Your services are wonderfully appreciated
as far as early WW2 tanks go, it is impressive. The closest Western comparison of that time would be French Char B1
I'd say the matilda 2 is a bit more akin to it.
I love this tank, absolutely one of my favourites. Nice channel, keep up the good work.
Thank you very much for all the wonderful info!
seeing Mr. Fletcher next to the KV is reminding me to the first moment when I actually saw a tank, it was a Hungarian T72 and the first thing that came into my mind is: 'Jeez, that f*cking tank is huge'
Same with me. I was standing in front of a 72 in a military regiment, and imagined that this thing rolls towards me and I somehow got to stop it, like my granddads used to do to German tanks. And I've got all dizzy and short of breath. Tanks are menacing, no effing Darth Vader can compare to it.
t72 is much smaller then kv1 :-)
reminds me about when i climbed on a G6 Rhino SPH at a farm fair (no idea why the army was letting kids play on expensive military equipment or why they participate in the farm festival), only 'tanks' i had seen before were stuarts
(edit we had one at our church) lol.
I had a similar feeling. I grew up knowing that the Ural truck is big and mighty. Then once I stood in front of a KrAZ-255, and couldn't see the top of the hood (I'm 1.83 m).
Zinovy Grigoryevich Kolobanov Commander of the KV-1 tank.His crew shot down 22 enemy tanks from ambush.They came out of the battle winners, like all his tank company.The company consisted of 5 tanks, the KV-1.A total of 43 German tanks were shot down.
viya70 I just wonder how to shot down a tank
You mean destroyed, shot down is for airplanes
How do you shoot down a tank? Think about it. Geezus man.
@@UkrainianPaulie Not all people are fluent in english
There was a movie based on that, no? The Tankers. It was amazing to see a running KV-1 (well, other than i5 being broken down for most of the movie)
This guy is a legend. His humour, his moustache !! Could listen to him all day long with a pint of bitter with twigs and mud in it. Like real men !
I've been to this amazing museum twice and missed the KV1 both times! Guess I will have to go again.
That beast is huge !!!!
The mustache or the tank?
Yes
Always made sense to me having the drive sprockets at the rear, that's how I'd design a tank, transmission close to the engine.
Puts more weight at the rear which is fine if you've put the turret (or more armour) more to the front to compensate. Equally if transmission is at the front the turret can be in the middle and the gun doesn't overhang as much. Transmission can also act as armour to some extent.
The Israelis prefer to put the engine in front - that way to get to the crew a shell has to go through the front armor, transmission and engine.
@@gleggett3817 Chieftain pointed out the difference it makes as far as the shifter linkages between a front or rear drive system. With a front drive M4, the shifter is directly attached to the transmission, like a floor shifter in a car with a 4 speed manual. A rear transmission like this KV-1 means a shift linkage running the full length of the vehicle, similar to a car with the shifter on the steering column. In such a car the linkage has to run down the column to the other side of the firewall, over to the transmission tunnel, and then back to the transmission. That adds several places for slop to develop as there are multiple joints needed to make it work. The end result is the Sherman driver can easily change gears as needed, the KV driver will forever be fighting the linkage to do so.
If you get hit in front you only lose a track adjuster not the sprocket that drives that track
Great video David thank you.
Thank you for that very informative and professional presentation!
Fun fact: commander in reality never was supposed to serve as a loader, but Birtish experts who were studying this tank in 1942 decided for some reason that commander is a loader and the third crew member, who was actually intended to be a loader, is a "second driver/mechanic and also the rear gunner" (that's how it was stated in report). How they even came to this conclusion is beyond my understanding.
True. The KV had a dedicated loader. The commander was not the loader. Some Russian manuals list the 3rd crewman in the turret as 2nd driver/mechanic, but other manuals do call him a loader as well as the 2nd driver/mechanic. That is probably where the confusion started, but I question calling these guys "experts" if they decided that this crewman just sat there while the TC loaded the gun. They probably didn't have access to the Russian manuals (or the correct ones) that describe the crew duties.
Get it while its hot!
Thanks I had my first high caliber with KV-1 while grinding, now I've started to grind IS-3. But I still like the KV-1 and intend to hold onto mine.
Tanks a lot!
David Fletcher MBE: the Uncle we all wish Dad would start talking to again.
Tank Santa is HERE!!!!!!!!
Thank you
I love there video and always informative made by people who have a passion for what they do you can sense it in the videos keep up the good work 👍
I know nobody cares but I really enjoyed that.
shame about the money begging at the end
Thank you for the video. Slogan on the turret is on russian, but on bad russian (as my english are). It says "Leningrad! For"(Ленинград! За) insted of "For Leningrad!" (За Ленинград!). Everything else is correct.
You never realize how big these machines are until you stand next to one. It's mind blowing.
I did not knew that the KV1 was such a massive tank... I thought it was a little smaller but that thing is just enormous
I'm a simple man, I see David Fletcher, I upvote.
David Fletcher needs to come out with merch.
He does! Thank you for your support tankmuseumshop.org/products/david-fletchers-tank-chat-t-shirt
I giggled with the "at least we hope it's Russian" and "Joe Stalin" 😂
Awesome Video!!!!
Thanks a lot, good Sir.
his mustache is aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawesome haha love it! :'D
It was a great effort to put a Russian phrase on the tank, but it’s backwards. “Leningrad! For”
This was excellent. The KV is fascinating. Oh and your moustache is EPIC!
Excellent as usual
#TEAMFLETCHER
I'm just happy places like this exist... Like the German muesem working on their content... Get this stuff out there
Reasons why the british don't used torsion bars:
- too lightweight
- too easy to build
- less parts than spring based systems
- no rivets needed
- too beautiful
so at all a too smart and intelligent design for british standards.
Torsion bars pass from one side of the hull to the other and hence take up space inside the tank that could be otherwise used for stowage or making the vehicle lower.
(by comparison Christie has the springs and suspension on the side of the hull, taking up side inside the tank that could otherwise be used for stowage or having a bigger turret ring. Each to their own and all that)
Speculating, but the thing about torsion bars is that there is a little bit of effort behind making the buggers. It has been suggested that since British Industry was forced to work flat chat for all of WW1 it missed out on the technological advances nations that weren't fighting in the war were able to introduce into their industry. Take an entire production line offline for 6 months to install new equipment? What?! Don't you know there is a war on?!
Then, post war no one really wanted to build anything so the investment money was not there to replace technology. Hence leading into WW2 British industry was still, well, 'rivets' while all the cool kids were welding.
So, maybe the British Industry at the time did not have the confidence to make torsion bars in large quantities?
Open question. I am speculating here.
Dexter Treehorn there was me thinking it was because of inside space
horstmann suspension is both cheaper to make and repair. it also has quicker maintenance, especially in the field, and provides similar off-road capabilities.
this was the main suspension of British post ww2 tanks.
they only stoped using Horstmann after Hydropneumatic suspension (in challenger tanks) became available. that being said I read a report that many in the British army would like the next battle tank to go back to the Horstmann (or create a similar suspension with new tech) as the benefits of Hydropneumatic suspension does not significantly outway the negatives as compared to Horstmann.
We do use torsion bar suspension, just not on heavy armour.
The CVR(T) and FV-430 series use torsion bar suspension.
The difference between rear-wheel drive and front-wheel drive on a tank is enormous.
In general, an entertaining review of the KV.
The good KV-1 model in the Museum is probably one of the late 1942 modifications.
I have been really enjoying the tank chats from all the people, producing these from the tank museum.
Though for me, the KV1 is one of the most important tanks of WWII!
Yes it was totally eclipsed by the T34, & the IS series that were developed from it!
However considering the stories that could be told about it!
I found this video very dissapointing & very short, considering it's deployment!
Although nothing disparaging was said about it, I feel it deserved more!
I will quickly add, that I remember the story about, when the Germans 1st met one of these on the battlefield...
It deserved a bit more...
Thank you in general though for a very appreciated series of video's
Oh boy, some recognition to Soviet tank designers.! :O Thumbs up
I am blessed. A sermon from gun Jesus on forgotten weapons then a lesson from tank Einstein. Can it be any more perfect?
So we at our house call the fletcher tank Einstein. I thought I was the only cheeky cat doing that . So it's now part of his lore. I here by dub the sir tank Einstein of that English land mass on the other side of the pond.
I watch those two also 👍
This guy needs his own tv show... he’s fantastic
Thanks!
Thank you!
May we please have more David Fletcher, please.
". ...he was a friend of Stalin's...for a while". Yeah, like most of Stalin's friends
Yeah. You cant be a friend of Stalin for a longtime!
Yes I actually laughed at that point in the video, you beat me to it. Have a thumbs up:)
At least he didn't get purged and outlived Stalin, what more can you wish for.
Wonderfully explained
My favorite tank I’m glad to see it’s getting some love
Slogan reads:"Leningrad! For"
wow, 51 views and 51 likes.
Good job guys, you deserve it!
Thank you ,
Brilliant! I would like to hear more about how the kv1 compared, and was used, with the T34 please.
There is an error in inscription. It should be not Ленинград За but За Ленинград :))))
Or the 3 is a number 3
@@rembrandttip4861 nope. On the left-hand side of the turret the inscription is correct. And it has got it's number already - 716 :)
You'd think they wouldn't make a mistake like that... oh well.
I know
its Ленинград! За ленинградский женщины фронту!
Seriously? The Tank Museum couldn't hire a Russian student to spell check before painting wrong grammar on top of the tank?
За Ленинград! Ленинградские женщины фронту!
For Leningrad! The Women of Leningrad [provided this] to the Front!"
@ArmchairWarrior hwat?
@ArmchairWarrior Even though it's probably a joke, no, it's a letter ) З in particular (Z). Compare З and 3.
We even used to write (in cursive) Z that way 50 years ago ^^
But truth be told, the second arc of the 3 would be _below_ the bottom line.
cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/204890308960321536/533100238685077526/unknown.png
Russians still write Z the way on the right, while we have shifted through the whole line to the right.
People named Roman, they go, the house?
I agree mate, it does seem a bit lapse and like you demonstrate it wasn't hard to get it right but you know, at the end of the day the cyrillic writing on the side of a tank turret is redolent of the passion that most Russians felt during the war and I for one think no less of this particular KV.
But you are right mate, it should be sorted out!
Neat concise overview
Well said!
The Chieftain’s Hatch need to do this tank next!!
Unfortunately it is sealed due to radium contamination from the old instrumentation
Alex Wade is it realistically that dangerous or just PC nonsense?
@@ElysiumNZ I feel like that PC crap is less prevalent in organizations like the Tank Museum, and radium can be dangerous. I could be wrong though.
@@ElysiumNZ Normally it'll be a virtually harmless amount of radiation, especially for a short time. However as its old the radium paint has dried into a fine dust and breathing that in would be very harmful especially the alpha particles emitted that would normally be stopped by your skin.
Alex Wade Well what’s stopping them putting a go pro cam inside the tank then? They don’t have to enter the thing.
ЗА ЛЕНИНГРАД!
Ленинградские Женщины - Фронту!!!
I agree
I think it should be ´´От Ленинградских женщин - Фронту´´
With means ´´From womens (women are giving) of Leningrad to the Front´´.
Because Ленинградские Женщины - Фронту!!! means ´´womens of leningrad to
the front´´ with does not make sense, since it means giving women..
The true meaning should be that the women working on Leningrad factories
are giving tanks to the front line, not themselves.
There was Leningrad factory ´´Leningrad Kirov Plant´´ that made KV-1
tanks.
@@Mrrshalyou EGE victim, I fill sorry for you.
Mrrshal both slogans correct in Russian (I am Russian)
What a wonderful tea time treat, a tank chat with David Fletcher...great lift on a dismal afternoon! KV1 great tank except when its deployed badly against the Finns in the winter war, where a carefully placed molotov cocktail saw off many a Russian beasty!
David Fletcher I can listen for hours.. definitely the go to guy in respect to tank history
Damit its a giant
The KV-1 is impressive for it's era it came out pre-war it was easily the most powerful tank out there at the time, but like most Russian vehicles there reliability was not the best, its said driver's had to regularly beat the shifter into place with something just to change gears but thanks to its solid gun and armor the Germans had a hard time with them especially Early on
The Germans captured some KV-1 and turn them into KV-1B 756(r) which have the Panzer 4's long 75mm gun it's pretty much to what the Tiger was originally supposed to be a heavy tank with 75mm armor and a 75mm anti-tank gun, but we now know it was turned into even more of a monster before it saw combat
As if german tanks had no reliability issues...*cough, cough*Panther*couch, cough*...like...breaking transmissions by their own friction heat, or setting engines ablaze with fuel leaking from the plugs...
@@paavobergmann4920 He never said that they didn't have problems, but on average they weren't as bad as the russian tanks.
Besides the Panther and early Tigers, most German tanks were average or even above average with their reliability.
I love this man
David is a champ. Loving that stache man.
When you guys suppose you'll get an up-and-working KV6?
the commander was also the loader? what did the third man in the turret do then?
he was probably the party member waiting with a loaded pistol in case someone said something unpatriotic lol
Singing russian anthem.
I've seen him described in some sources as an "Engineer" or something to that effect.
What he actually did I have no idea.
Radio operator/engineer i would guess!
Radio operator was the fifth man in the hull, Fletcher made a mistake
Beautiful paint job on the KV-1.
Really like these videos
The KV1 had a very stiff transmission; so stiff that early tanks were issued with a rubber mallet to aid in shifting gears. Unfortunately, this did not work and most KV type tanks burned out their transmissions very quickly as they could not be gotten out of first gear.
"The KV-1/KV-2 models of 1940-41 had very poor mobility due to inadequate
transmissions and horsepower-weight, which greatly reduced their impact on the
battlefield. Faulty clutches also made some KV tanks virtually unsteerable, which even
occurred in front of Stalin during the parade in Moscow on November 7, 1941. KV
transmissions tended to fail after as little as 800km (500mi) of road marching. Unlike
the T-34 tank, which had its mobility well tested by Koshkin during road trials in
1940, the KV entered service after negligible testing and operators soon found out that
it could move only short distances without breaking down. In combat, KVs typically
advanced at speeds of only 3-4km/h (2-2.5mph), which made them large, slowmoving
targets. Their top off-road speed was 16km/h (10mph) and their turning
radius was poor. The KV did very poorly on marshy or soft ground, with many lost
simply because they became stuck in the mud - no way for a superior weapon to
perish. Simply put, the early KV models did not have adequate mobility to conduct
their breakthrough role successfully. Retreats were also very hard on KVs, with many
being lost or abandoned because of a plethora of mobility issues (such as difficulty in
crossing bridges or handling hilly terrain). Eventually, the introduction of the KV-1S
model in 1942 and further refinements gradually improved the KV’s mobility to the
point where it could accomplish its breakthrough mission, although by then improved
German Panzerjäger capabilities made that increasingly problematic.
Kapitan Zinoviev K. Slyusarenko, commander of the 1st Battalion/19th Tank Regiment, noted that:
“The enemy shells could not penetrate our armor, but damaged treads, knocked off turrets.
KV tanks were powerful vehicles, but sorely lacking in speed and maneuverability.”
I didn't know that the Russians speak like Master Yoda. The British Tank Museum just taught me that with their KV-1 turret inscription.
Top stuff dave
My favorite tank in the museum.