ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ธ.ค. 2021
- As the quantity and quality of Soviet armoured vehicles increased, Nazi Germany realised that countering them would require more than just tanks and antitank guns. It required a tank-killer that could be used by any infantryman.
The Panzerfaust or tank was introduced in 1943. Tests proved that the weapon was reliable, and achieved excellent ballistic results.
The Panzerfaust was always a short range weapon, requiring German forces to sneak up close to their targets before depressing the firing mechanism.
However, in the hands of a trained marksman, a Panzerfaust fired from the correct angle and colliding with an Allied tank in the right spot, could ignite the fuel tank or ammunition, and kill the whole crew with a single shot.
Music Credits: All This Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Copyright fair use notice
All media used in this video is used for the purpose of education under the terms of fair use.
All footage and images used belong to their copyright holders.
#Panzerfaust #Panzerfäust #WW2
My German Uncle was a 15 year old Fallschirmjäger part of a Panzerfaust team who took part in the Battle of the Bulge.He was credited with the destruction of 5 Sherman tanks and received the Iron Crosses 1st and 2nd class.He surrendered in January 1945 outside of Bastogne.Said he was tired cold and hungry.To listen to the stories he told me of the war didn't seem real coming from him.He was such a nice polite soft spoken old man.
15 year old Fallschirmjäger ? Even in 1944 entry age was 17.
Not according to him.Volunteers were taken young as 15.You can see in some Videos of Fallschirmjäger riding on tanks that were nothing more than young boys.Plenty books on Battle of the Bulge showing kids with weapons.One kid was even holding up his pants with a piece of rope.My Önkel Hans was just shy of his 16th birthday when he surrendered
And now they’re almost gone, every single one. The history of this era is being forgotten.
@@barebowhunter1850 No, just dead *. . .*
@@steffenrosmus9177 Even the fanatics of the 12th SS Panzerdivision _"Hitlerjugend"_ weren't younger than 17 *. . .*
The two most famous Russian infantry weapons post-war, the RPG and the AK-47,.are based on WW 2 German weapons.
RPG maybe, but not the AK-47.
The Sturmgewher 44 look like it, but it's only superficial.
@@alpharius4434 The basic concept of the Stgw 44, short massive gas pressure loader with curved magazine and short rifle cartrigde was very well taken over for the AK-47, as Kalashnikov himself admitted. Without Stgw 44 (and Mkb 42, MP 43, MP43-II) no AK-47. Kalashnikov must have known better than you smartshit.
The Soviets encountering the intermediate 7.92x33 round led directly to the 7.62x39 which the Soviets used to test prototypes in the closing weeks of the war involving SKS's in and around Berlin .
@@alpharius4434 AK47 is a copy of the MKB42 not stg44, kalashnikov capture few MKB42 assault rifles and mixed it with the soviet semi-auto rifles, MKB42 has different system than MP43/Stg44.
@Clovis Point there is so much cope by AK fanboys today. Interesting that when people who knew were still alive it was seen as typical Soviet copycat behavior (i.e. change it just enough for plausible deniability, if that).
One very important aspect is missing: Morale. Tanks can shatter cohesion of an infantry unit without support of artillery or own tanks just by existence. They are causing fear. It took real guts to confront a tank with explosives. The panzerfaust enabled an ordinary infantry man to kill a tank from a certain distance, no longer having to run three or less meters while exposing, so making the tank less scary.
Allieds: finally 80mm armor on the tanks.
Germans pointing at the panzerfaust: this baby can pierce 300mm.
If you like a Panzerfaust (tank-fist) , take a look at the Ruhrstahl X-7 . Wire guided anti tank missle or rocket , range 1.2km . Still impressive for 1944 .
Thanks SC07.I had no idea there were wire guided anti tank weapons in 44.Even though I was aware of wire guided bombs fired from HE-111 that in fact sank some warships!
@@markpaul8178 Ah yes the Fritz-X , there are wire guided air to air missles as well , the Ruhrstahl X-4 . To take down heavy bombers from far away , so the back gunners don't hit you . Tested with FW190's and should be used by 262's , but it's hard to control the plane and the missle . So you would need a second man that control's only the missle , like in modern jets or choppers .
It was a very interesting wire guided missile Ruhrsthal x-7 that was produced only a few hundred of them. Apparently it was very successful...
@@5co756 well they could use in Me-110 or the Me-410 i guess?
@@felipescheuerman614 This second pilot or gunner was only there for the back guns , not to fire foreward missles . And the 110 or 410 were outdated at this time of the war , not good enough for hunting down bombers .
What is not mentioned is the üs of Panzerfaust in close combat fights especially in villages, as houses blocked direct fire. Panzerfaust used in high angle to shoot over roof to hit unarmoured targets behind houses. Very effective. Most Panzerfausts in last months of war were used in this way, not against armoured vehicles.
It sounds like they used it as a short-range mortar.
Shaped charges are no0t very effective against infantry though, as the blast is focused like a dart towards the front as opposed to 360 degrees, like a normal HE rounds.
Add to that the total absence of shrapnel inside and it really makes it ineffective, unless a VERY close, or direct hit.
@@terraincognita3749 Neither the Panzefaust or the Panzerschrek had an fragmentation ring so could not be used against personnel. The only such weapon was the British PIAT which could be loaded with both Shaped Charge and Anti Personnel rounds. It could be used like a mortar up to 600 yards. The Germans were planing a framentation ring for the Panzerfaust 150.
@@williamzk9083 Thanks for the detailed info William, I learned something today!
By the time of the Volkssturm, the easiest way to even make old men or children effective fighters were things like panzerfaust, cheaply produced (stamped), a "point and shoot" weapon, and one that didn't require lots of rounds of ammo like a rifle would.
The Panzerfaust was a very effective tank killer in the hands of well trained troops but in the hands of ill-trained Hitlerjugend troops or the Volkssturm the effectiveness was ambivalent because it wasn't easy to judge the distance or even to aim if not trained. Nevertheless it was practical and easy to use but have to be really careful to avoid the very hot blast...
Safety by numbers. Lethal weapon in any hands, is scary to think. Any bush and building corner might be dangerous.🥵
@@jarikinnunen1718 watching TH-cam especially the civil War between Iraq rebels and regulars, you can see how vulnerable the tanks are around the urban areas especially when they shoot from the upper floors on the top of the turrets!
@@paoloviti6156 That's why Russian armor was busy being eaten up in Grozny during the Chechen War. Armor used offensively in urban warfare doesn't mix well.
@@JRyan-lu5im correct but don't know if it was true but those tanks was badly supported by the troops...
@@paoloviti6156 Russian counteracted the Panzer Faust by having their infantry sweeping the german infantry in urbans area.
Tank killing in the Seelow highs and Berlin, mostly happens because Zhukov and Konev were made by Stalin competing with each other to take Berlin.
While on the French Commando Course, we were taught how to make shaped charges with a wine bottle and C4 explosive..it fired the glass through 3, one inch plates stacked on each other about a one inch diameter hole. KaBoom! Good training!
Taught this also
french, wine bottle. Of course
@@tatotaytoman5934 I volunteer to produce these empty wine bottles. Show me to the wine cellar. How many do we need? 100? 200?
Thank you so much for the total info on the panzerfaust.I learned a lot about this weapon that I always wanted to know.
Did you know they were built by Adidas?
(And many other non war-essential industries)
Well, now you can add that piece of weird random knowledge.
Great informative & useful video. Thank you! Peace & Health
Ingenious weapon.
The vast majority of modern weaponry, say as used by the US Army, are directly derived from German WWII weapons.
Such an intense game, of research, breakthroughs, copying and countermeasures, throughout the war.
Yet the Germans copied and improved upon captured American bazooka after seeing its destructive qualities in Africa and the Eastern Front.
@Ich bin Staatsfeind time marches on skippy
Derived is the optimum word. The Germans made a lot of shitty weapons too.
Not only US army, all the modern weaponry possess by big powers are directly derived from German WWII weapons. The biggest transfer of technology in the history took place after Germany surrender in WWII.
@@rb1179 US bazooka is a propoganda used by the US after the war so as to take the credit of Panzerfäust technology. All the films of Bazooka are made after the war. Before war the allies are not capable of making a good assault rifle so making a rocket launcher is far from reality.
Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
That stock footage at the end of rail line being destroyed is maybe the the most used footage of all. At least this one didn't put it in a false place.
The Panzerfaust was hands down the best infantry anti tank weapon of the war. Some argue the panzershrek due to longer range but the shrek was much heavier, expensive, required more specialized training, and was limited in issue.
An unimportant sidenote. From perhaps 17th to 19th century in Germany/ HRE , Landsturm' was the term for oldstyle levy of fightable, but not welltrained or wellequipped men.
Good video, thank you
I like it when he says that when the warhead explodes it sends a blast of hot air through the tank's armor. It was hard to take the rest of the video seriously after that.
It's actually a spray of molten metal. That's really how they work. Basically a very high powered cutting torch is created that burns through the plate armor spraying the crew cabin with molten metal. It's not like the charge explodes through the plate. That is far fetched. 200 mm is almost 8 inches thick of armor plate steel.
Well done video and relaxed told. Try to say Panzerfaust like in HALL: pAntserfoust. I have several Panzerschreck parts. Regards from the Battle of the Bulge area, Belgium.
Very interesting indeed!👍☘️
Thanks for visiting
Allied Soldiers liked it so much that the US Army produced a field manual on its use.
One "Panzerfaust"/Two "Panzerfäuste"
Best Panzerfaust video I’ve seen. 👍
The birth child of modern warfare's most scary weapons.
it's hard to believe something that small and light and that can be held by a man can penetrate through that much steel . 200MM is close to eight inchs thick
That's the beauty of the shaped charge. Beyond that there's copper involved too. When the explosive detonates it vaporizes the copper and propels it in a jet stream that vaporizes the steel in front of it. It's kind of black magic how it works. It's sort of like an instant cutting torch. The hole made is very small. But all of the molten steel from the armor ends up in the crew cabin of the tank which can initiate a secondary explosion. Today we use composite and reactive armor to combat the effect. Modern shaped charges can penetrate over a foot of plate. Which makes it impractical to use plain plate steel anymore.
@@1pcfred those guys or guy who discovered or thought of that must be smarter than me . i see what you're saying about modern shells being able to penetrate over a foot of plate . if a tank had steel that thick on all sides it would surely weigh a hell of a lot . it seems like there isnt really any point in using tanks anymore when they can be disabled by something that costs a tiny fraction of what a tank costs and only needs one man to operate it . and those german sceintists had the technology way back in the 1940'S
@@warrenbuchanan2718 we have defenses against the shaped charge on tanks today. We had them back then. Anything on the hull of the tank that isn't steel would stop it.
Hmm I wondered if any was used with strapping shrapnel/marbles etc.. when a emergency to counter infantry.
Later panzerfaust produced shrapnel to help "clean the tank of infantry" (as in Soviet infantry riding tanks).
First real handheld anti tank weapon..
Why was the last film shot, of railway lines being blown up, added?
Brutal weapon.
YOU are right--thx rollf
thank - you .
Germany Panzerfaust,japanese type 89 grenade discharger,american semi auto M1 garand,russian PP submachinegun,germany MG42 machinegun, still deadly if you using this on battlefield today
“In-fan-tree-man”. What a truly bizarre mispronunciation.
Those in-fan-tree-men needed those panzerfausts pretty badly.
An ammunition 🔥 fire burning tank is the definition of the word "Hell." An horrific weapon in capable hands.
Our museum has an original PF60M on display. Check out Memorial Mini Golf and WW2 museum in Austin, TX
Who can forget the picture of a Volksturm grandpa who is shown with his spent Panzer Faust beside a knocked out IS-2 tank? Oddly, the Germans equipped the mundane Mark IV better against such devices (i.e. the bazooka) than did any of the Allies.
a 30-year state-of-the-art weapon
I guess this was the reason why Berlin was a grave for many Russian tanks. Sending tanks was suicide. But when they figured this out, they just switched to artillery barrages, untill an area surrendered, then moved to another block of the capital.
Panzerfaust a tank graveyard … funny - it was responsible for 3,2 % tank kills
Point blank Soviet artillery fire into the Reichstag amongst other German held buildings was extremely effective.
Historically No one surrenders to Russians because they mass rape the women and either don't take prisoners or if they do engineer their death by slow starvation and poor conditions. That's why everyone was prepared to surrender to the US and UK forces but not Russians. So Russians have to flatten cities because they are by nature abusive and oppressive. If its the US Army surrender is usually the best option.
The panzerfaust was indeed the best of the anti tank portable weapons, it has more penetrating power than the bazooka, it's cheaper than the panzerschreck and the bazooka combined and it's also lighter
IIRC there was a chance of 50% for the antitank soldier to survive
Thanks for that guy who designed that excellent at-gun. It was a part for that why we are now independents.
Impressive weapon.
Wrong.... a hollow charge in anti-tank application is not a jet of hot air but the metal lining of the hollow charge concentrated in a clump on one point created by the shape of the explosives
Everytime when I am watching WW2 documentary videos, I really wonder how Germany lost the war while they had best army, best weapons, technology, and tactics at that time.
Leadership. Hitler was corporal never in command of a military unit of any size.
Also Germany was badly outnumbered and the Soviet Union (Stalin) though nothing about killing peasants. Russia blood 🩸 and American supplies.
German had 2 major problems:
1. Political Leadership had taken over military decisions
2. Mass Production consist still on too much „hand“ work
Simply put, they were overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Hard to compete against the Soviets and the Western allies at the same time. Had they been able to defeat the Soviets as planned, then they might have stood a chance but I doubt it.
Germany lost as they had a limited one time supply of canon fodder.
@@rb1179 You mention what a lot of people forget. Sure there are many factors involved, resources, leadership, equipment, men, etc. But the main thing to remember is that Germany, being one country, was inevitably up against Russia, Britain and their Commonwealth forces, America, the remains of armies initially defeated, e.g. the Poles. Combined with the land area they needed to defend, a defeat is expected. Then add the complexities of leadership, resources, etc
That's where RPG was Born.
cool
Great weapon. Copied & improved upon in different ways in postwar years by both US Army & also USSR
What do you think about the translation "Tank-Fist"?
German genuis. One of the real "Wonder weapons". If it had come bit sooner it could turned the tide of the war.
Smash Cultural Marxism, I love that, 👍👍😁
Bit? It needed to be in common use by 1941 for it to have turned the tide.
If Panzerfaust 100 and StG 44 (as MP43) had of been available in 1943 (they could have been) a German infastry squad would have been formidable against armour. The extra range of the Panzerfaust 100 over the Panzerfaust 30 and the fire power of the StG 44 in ranges below 300.
Could they be reloaded/reused?
No. But it was planned, the Panzerfaust 250 *. . .*
Not reloadable by the soldier, but they send the "pipes" back to reload.
I asked my wife for one of those under the ole Christmas tree. Apparently, they aren’t on the Amazon menu….. bummer
"Armoured fist" is in terms of semantics very poorly translated.
I think panzerfaust translates to “armoured fist”, not “tank fist”. And what weird pronunciations of “infantrymen” and “Adolf”.
Nah, it's a Faust to use on a panzer - > tank fist (I'm Austrian)
Panzer means panther. Germans have a peculiar sense of humour regarding nomenclature….: tiger, leopard….
@@markolytviak1062 what? Panzer means armour
@@markolytviak1062 no it doesn’t. Panzer means armour or tank depending on the context of the sentence
@@cooncheese2209 thx. I thought I saw apparent pattern . Good to know
Many of the Old Men where First War Veterans.
This seemed interesting, but by the second time I heard the word "in-FAAAN-tryman," I was done. I'm just funny that way...
When did the Finn's fight the Germans?? Missed that in history class I guess
Since September 1944 *. . .*
Google Lapin sota aka Lapland war.
10 ten year olds with 10 Panzerfaust can do a lot more damage than one highly trained American soldier with one Bazooka.
when your down to sending in 10 year old's you have already lost.
2 million rounds fired, 370 tanks confirmed destroyed. The panzerfaust was practically useless.
@@BeaufighterGaming I doubt you understand how war is fought....you can blow out a wall in a building with a panzerfaust to advance troops, also at soft targets like trucks or even groups of soldiers. The use of weapons is not limited to their designed function. And in the heat and terror of battle you just cant always aim a perfect shot either. It was not a failure , if you think so then rifles are failures since most of the killing was actually done by ARTILLERY !
@@TruthSetsUfree100 that is true, most of the time though the kids using these things would run over to a window, shoot at a tank and then die to machine guns.
@@BeaufighterGaming Tell that to the guys inside the 370 tanks. They might have something to say about that.
Panzerfaust, the tank killer of the German infantry!
8 million panzerfausts produced took out about 3000 tanks. That is 2666 panzerfausts per tank.
Not exactly out of over 8000 known tank kills 264 were by Panzerfaust = 3.2%
You are right
I'm trying to watch this but I can't stop laughing at "Infantry men."
There is still a equivalent used in German Army today.
classic skit @ 5'00" mark bottom center of screen watch guy duck to avoid losing his teeth when guy in front of him shoulders weapon
You get to "fist a tank" whats more to say about it?
If it was not reloadable of what real use was it?
Killing tanks?
It was reloadable. If possible, they collected the shot pipes and send them back to the Division.
same as a m72 law a light anti tank weapon unlike a boozka/ panzershrek you would not need a ammo bearer and it doesn't weigh you down as much, you can't reuse grenades we still issue them lol a one shot weopon is not a bad weopon
it made soviet tanks fearful of closing in with German infantry. Tanks must close in with infantry to enable a breakthrough. Yes, tanks may hang back as armored vehicle support, but it is when the tanks run over the trenches and get behind troops that organization collapses and you know longer have to fight a unit. Stopping that (or at least making the enemy hesitate long enough) is crucial.
Panzerfaust doesn t mean armoured fist. IT means fist against armour. There also was a Fliegerfaust. And IT meant fist against Flyers, Hintergründe not Flyers fist.
The first RPG
We got hundred or thousans panzerfaust 1944.It was our safety, that weapon destroy all T34 and other tanks.Thanks Germany.
Germany need that weapon in 1942,stalingrad .....💀🔥💥
You’re brown😂😂😂
Maybe the panzerfaust one one of the best but there was also the American Bazooka and the British pait. This is the only video I seen from you but if you have then never mind my comment
💪Deutschland
"In-FAN-tryman?"
Grand daddy of rpg-2,
It took someone with either a lot of courage, or severe lack of good sense, to use a Panzerfaust against tanks.
You had to be very close to get the rocket where it needed to go, and if there was infantry accompanying the tank it was likely to be a suicide mission!
In FANT tree Man . Ok .
It's all about quality for germans...
Shaped charge explosive rockets could turn any "capable" soldier into an anti-tank gun. As the Soviet armies discovered when they finally took Berlin
the soviets had more tanks in 1941 than in 1945!! so why do you say the tank core increases ? the armor got thicker yes. but the number of soviet tanks diden't go up. If you compare the number of soviet tanks of on the eve before Barbarossa with the number of soviet tanks of may of 1945.
Most of rhe Soviet "armored" things of 1941 you hardly could call "tank" *. . .*
@@letoubib21 you ment to say like the German Panzer 1 and Panzer 2. Yes they made up more than 50% of the German Tanks. The Soviets diden't have a tank that was as bad as they where.
The Soviets had 1100 T-34 and 500 Kv 1 when the Nazis invaded.
That huge quantity of tanks in 1941 is why Moscow wasn't captured. The lifetime of a Soviet tank was about one tank of gas (Seriously). In a small part due to the panzerfaust. It is very hard to fight against multiple modes of attack. Any one, infantry can easily be trained to defend against and even attack. Multiple? That is tough. From the chieftain, the modes of attack:
1. Infantry (riles, machine guns)
2. Indirect fire (mortars/howitzers)
3. Direct fire (Anti-tank guns, capable of firing HE at infantry)
4. Tanks
5. Aircraft, yes, they killed few in WW2, but man are they distracting preventing effective fighting if used in coordination with infantry. There is a reason the Stukas had sirens despite the pilots hating the sirens. The Stukas would wagon wheel (follow each other in a circle) around a battlefield driving the infantry to distraction (are they coming this way? Will it drop a bomb?)
You might argue how useful one or another is, but when combined, it becomes exceedingly distracting to fight. Russian tanks supported by conscript infantry could break through; they did even better when supported by mortars or artillery. That is one reason the light tank concept was so successful until late 1941. At that point, there weren't enough to make enough breakthroughs. (One small breakthrough will be plugged, a front collapsing is a different event.)
@@External2737 The concept of building a Tank to a last 3 months was invented during the war. wasn't done before the factories where moved to the east..
But yes they did build them to last 3 months. that's why its so difficult for Museums to keep wartime build soviet tanks in running condition.
The US had the "bazooka" which was not nearly as effective as the panzerfaust. It was the capture of US Army bazookas early in 1943, which prompted the Germans to develop the panzerfaust. The Russians had nothing like it, until they captured and copied the panzerfaust after the war.
Bazooka had much greater to hit probability, much longer range, flatter trajectory, greater impact angle tolerance, and above all, dedicated well trained teams. Bazookas had instead much less targets and much greater competition - numerous planes, tanks and tank destroyers. In 2-nd half 1944 Germans on Eastern front used up ~2 mln panzerfausts destroing ~350 (7%) soviet tanks. How many soldiers died trying? Every machinegunner and tank accompanying infantryman shoot panzerfaust bearerer first and seeing that old german soldiers often gave them to younglings. This reduced effectiveness even more. It was morale boosting but semi-suicidal weapon.
@@p.turgor4797 interesting stat: 2mln vs. 350 tanks.
@@p.turgor4797 : My father was a .30 cal machine gunner in the 84th infantry division. He was also trained with bazookas. He told me the bazookas were nearly useless against panthers and tigers, other than to blow a tread off. A lucky hit, where the turret met the hull, could jam the turret. He and his company had better luck with anti tank mines.
Sorry your wrong the PF was in development before the Germans fought Americans, the capture of bazookas did, however, result in the Germans copying it and producing the panzershreck (tank fear) which was basically just a larger projectile copy.
@@p.turgor4797 there’s a picture you’ll find if you search of a Jagdtiger blown up by an American bazooka although what’s true and what actually occurred is debatable. There’s also the Sturmtiger in the battle of France which wrecked havoc on the Americans until it ventured into a town and was taken out by a Molotov dropped from a window onto it’s engine compartment.
In-fan-tree men??? lol
Panzerfaust , not Panzerfäust.
Znalazłem cały , kompletny Pancerfaust został rozebrany a w wyrzutni było 5 ślepych naboi , , więc nie był użyty .
podzieliłem się na stronie to mnie wręcz wyśmiano , że nie było takich .
Znalazłem w internecie coś o tym , a tam piszą , że takie z wyrzutnią wielorazowego nie było w produkcji
Ma ktoś informacje o takim P-fauście ? i uratuje mój honor ,znalezisko w Gubinie dawniej Guben .
This shows us that better weapons make only marginal differences if you are out manned and out armed. The very reason Germany could never win the last war.
You had to be up close to kill a tank, which meant you were "dead meat" to the advancing Enemy infantry. One shot killed the tank, the second bullet killed you.
In the Battle of Berlin, when Soviet tanks were initial,y killed by these weapons, Soviet commanders then ordered their artillery and tanks to blow out the first floor of buildings, which buried both German infantry and civilians to death.
Simple solution.
Unfortunately to their regret, German infantry did not utilize this same tactic when attacking Stalingrad. If so, they might have won that battle.
.
@@sjb3460
Or a tank with a bigger gun that fires first.
We went to the moon because of the Germans....
Wonder why the US didnt copy it.
For the last 6 six months, I dont think it was a priority. But soldiers did used them when looted as spoils of war.
The USA had the bazooka. We actually pioneered the hand held propelled shell. The Germans copied us. Well, the British had the PIAT but no one wanted to copy that. That looked like something Acme would sell to Wile E. Coyote.
Because It was German. Simple...
So were those tanks that couldn’t go more than 100Km without breaking
wish we could own one
If it was so “effective”, why did they lost the war? 😂😂
It’s pronounced INfantry not inFANtry. Computer voices, Hah.
Can't we send these to Ukraine instead of javelin at $200k each?
Ukraine got already a bunch of Panzerfaust 3.
And despite this , the Russians just did not learn from all of this ??!🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻
Ukraine any one ?
The people who watch these videos don't need a five minute WW11 tutorial on each video. Get to the point quicker.
…inFANtry…😂😂😂😂
Automated Narration sucks.
In fact germany m0re m0dern fr0m weap0n very nice
It took the Russians 2 weeks to conquer Berlin so it can’t have been that good.
With a bombed infrastructure, no oil, 2nd front in Germany, air supremacy preventing daytime movement of anything by the Germans... It is amazing how long the Germans held on actually.
The panzerfaust was used mainly in 1945. People dont know that in fact there were more panzerfausts in soviet hands than in german ones ! Hahahaha. !
"infant-treemen"???
yeah, stopped and disliked , right there.