The lengthy and involved German nomenclature always feels as though it would be a perfect fit in a Monty Python skit, with John Cleese giving it in a deadpan delivery.
Yes, we love our lengthy words. I assume Mr Cleese would be able to deliver them correctly. Isn't he fluid in German ? The French would have made at least five sentences out of one word, just because they think their language sounds so good. The Americans would have used another M. For the simple-minded. I mean, what's wrong with "Sonderkraftfahrzeug" (today: Sonder-Kraftfahrzeug) ? Kraftfahrzeug means "motor vehicle" (motor-bike, lorries or car) and "sonder" means "special", designating it is a purpose-built vehicle. Ausführung means sub-variant, exactly the same amount of letters. Say it with me: Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sonder is pronounced the same as "wonder" just with an S, the h makes the a bit longer, make a milli-second pause after the t to make sure you get the second f right, z pronounced as c, eu is pronounced oi) again: Sonderkraft-faarcoig Special tip: have some "stiff ones" before trying. :-)
Lol. Hitler getting everything he wanted from the British in 1938 got a Monty Python skit: th-cam.com/video/pmwmuPTa0To/w-d-xo.html Not very funny, but Chamberlain looks like one of the Pythons.
@@ottovonbismarck2443 My friend purchased used BMW series 5 from Germany. I sit inside for the 1st time "Wow onboard computer has some very wide display! Like 7x wider than the one from Mazda or Mitsubishi." He starts the engine and there is a 20 character word in German, fitting the whole width of this display... 😆🤪👌
harmdallmeyer6449 Many of them remained through 1944 with a few even surviving until Berlin in 1945. Apart from Kursk, the rest of them took a LONG time to be whittled down.
Not true. German crews liked the Ferdinand, appreciating its massive firepower and exceptional armor. Even the Soviets recognized that Ferdinands lost during Kursk were not knocked out, but burned out by their crews when they were unrecoverable.
@@TheSonicfrog well it is true that a ferdinand destroyed 60 to 80 T-34 before getting destroyed. But most where destroyed in engine fire before even entering combat.
WHAAAAAAAAT I've been thinking that I wish you guys would do the Ferdinand... looked in your channel search and got sad... and I've seen the comment about how we should go add it to the list along with any resources we have (I don't) so I decided to just wait instead of asking. And after three gruelling night shifts and a good sleep to recover, I see that you've dropped a three-parter on my favourite? Well that gets a subscribe AND a bunch of likes. Thanks team!
Like the vid, but some of the audio feels off, sounding like it's jumping around or skipping at points. IDK the reason, but maybe look into eliminating that in the future, since it made it a little hard to focus with how noticeable it is.
One might wonder what's the reason for that ridiculously (for 1943) heavy front armor, as it was supposed to stand back and engange at very long range? And at the same time let the heavy break-through tank have "only" 100 mm of front hull armor?
So you can affiord to give the vehicle 80 mm side armor. What anti tank wepen from 1943, that was used on a large scale can reliable defeat 100 mm armor on a realistic range/angle ?
Larger guns were beginning to become common place but it was also likely to be an inheritance from the development of the Tiger program. 100mm could be penetrated by various 75mm, 76mm and larger guns.
For a huge Tank Destroyer with so many internal problems and for number of them produced and fit for combat the only word that comes to mind to describe the combat history of this Massive Machine is Outstanding. Despite all the mechanical issues and the tiny number of Elefant's (Ferdinand) produced they did an Outstanding Job against more than Overwhelming odds. The 8.8cm Pak43/71 gun of the Elefant/Ferdinand was the most Powerfull AT gun of WW2,and in 1943 no allied Armor had the slightest chance against this Beast of a gun even at 3 kms away,and in some cases even farther.
Imagine if those electric motors were installed in a medium tank. Or a td. The perfect manuvability would be great. Especially for a nutruel steer on a td.
One of the most interesting stuff on your videos (not the only one, definitely) is the background music. It always feels like playing Return to castle Wolfenstein every time I watch some of your videos :)
Anyone else notice the audio stutters?? like it keeps cutting voice audio except bgm audio. also, does the Porsche Tiger use two sets of sprocket wheels, front and rear?? or is it only driven by the front sprocket wheels??
The great debate. A sturmgeshutz would be an artillery piece, a panzerjager would be a “tank”, and used in a completely different role. If it would be a sturmgeshutz, it would be deployed with the regular army, not with the panzerwaffe...
Highly successful and extremely useful after Kursk though. Many were still fighting a year later. Highest kill ratio of WW2 and losses were few and far between.
Didn't this thing have a shit ton of problems due to its improved design and rushed development? i believe engine fires were common due to a severely underrated powerplant.
Actually the gearbox / transmission were quite good. The problems lay with overheating engines, which was eventually, kind of worked out. Mechanically speaking, this transmission and final drive was much better than that on the Henschel Tiger and Panthers. However, it required a lot of copper and that was needed for other projects in Germany, notably the U-boats
These things each blew up about 10-20 russian tanks in their initial battles. Later when the russians got better at countering these, the effectiveness dropped to only 3.
Ah yes the scariest tank destroyer of the war by far so deadly the allies had to create hills to stop it 😂😂😂 in all seriousness tho who's idea was it to send these to Italy
@@SchleiferGER yes, it was. They used the Ferdinand as an assault weapon at kursk without a machine gun. The russian infantry climmed the vehicule and disabled the engine by spraying their flamethrowers on the ventilation shafts, or planting anti tank mines or explosive satchels.
@@danydierickx3228 This has been shown elsewhere, with records of the fate of each vehicle, as mostly a myth. They were closely supported by lighter tanks and panzergrenadiers. Still a failed vehicle relative to the resource investment.
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 read [8] Guderian, H., "Panzer Leader", Smolensk, 1999, chapter 10, page 426-427, where he clearly complained about the ferdinand lacking close protection armemend against infantry
@@danydierickx3228 Reports from both Ferdinand units indicate something very different. The blast wave of the Ferdindand's gun turned out to be unconfortable enough that it kept the infantry at bay. The real problem with not having an MG is that you only have one solution for infantry: your main gun, which is most of the time overkill and an ammo drainage. It leads to Ferdinands having to go back and rearm a lot sooner than with mg.
Field officers: These Ferdinand are a total pain in the . . . GHQ: We are going to withdraw them for upgrades and fix some of the major problems. Field Officers: NEIN!!! We need these now! Maybe later... Maintenance Crew:🙄Damn you all!
It should have been able to if it was head on, but we have no idea how APDS would have behaved because it was not a solid 200 mm plate, but two 100 mm ones.
That is true, but sub-caliber rounds also behave differently when dealing with gaps and stuff, so it is a bit more complicated than "It had penetration over 200 mm"
@@dylanmilne6683 what you've heard is wrong. Part of the penetration physics at work involve the fact that a solid piece of metal transmits the shock and energy that a penetrator imparts throughout it's entirety. Separating the armor plates allows a lot of the kinetic energy to disperse once it exits the first place. The deformation of the penetrator and the dispersion of it's energy allow the secondary plate presents less susceptibility to the remaining penetration potential. This effect is more pronounced when dealing with shaped charged chemical penetrators but the same holds true for kinetic energy rounds.
@@chrishamilton2559 I don't believe I have. There have been multiple studies as to the effectiveness of monolithic armour vs layered armour of same total thickness. The Monolithic armour always wins as for the reason you say it fails - the whole plate takes the impact and disapates it. Just to be clear we are talking about essentially butted layers of armour, not spaced, there is negligible room for energy to dissipate.
There were two units equipped with Ferdinand at Kursk. One was a former StuG battalion, the other came from SP AT background. The former StuG unit understood combined armored warfare AND its limits, the AT unit thought now that they had thick armor, they could roam around and literally hunt tanks. They were the ones who found themselves "stranded" and close-assaulted. The StuG unit performed excellent. Error of judgement. Engine and transmission were designed to be used on a 50 ton tank, not the 65 tons of the Ferdinand. Compare Tiger II. Error of trusting a "salesman". Deployment of the Elefant in Italy was just madness. Any tank in 1943 except the Churchill had problems with steep mountain roads, let alone one that is already troubled on flat ground. The M-26 Pershing had trouble in the Korean hillsides as well. But in both cases that is not the tanks' fault. Error of deployment. I always wonder why they had not just put turrets on the things (or simply scrapped them).
@@Kyle-gw6qp And still they added 10 tons to the Porsche tank, respectively 15 tons to the Henschel tank. While Tiger(H) was already at the limits, although not as bad as Tiger(P), how could they think of getting away with even more weight ? I know that Ferdinand Porsche had his head deep in Hitlers ass, but ... Throwing Pershing into the mix, I have a strong feeling towards corruption in the arms industry. What a surprise !
Hello Mentos, While such articles are within our sights and within our scope, they are not currently in the works. You can add them to our Public Suggestion List and you can help by adding more sources (or other suggested articles) docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p0Ll9TITGDiF9_fdS-tv1797JBs0_-pB70ReE_kIRkE/edit#gid=1911430820 Also, in order to help us with illustrating and publishing, please do consider donating through Patreon or Paypal. www.patreon.com/tankartfund Paypal.me/tankartfund
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT unless the NAZI Germans designated it that, I don't think it is because its gun would be terrible to use against lighter targets in an urban environment which AFVs like BMPs and Bradleys have guns for. Although they're shit in urban too (not enough armour against single or double charge HEAT projectiles depending on armour) but not as bad as this vehicle lol
I could do video editing after some due diligence. I am a professional engineer with credentials from securities background so have to do some due diligence
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Usual anti-scam checks, anti-slavery checks. I will not be a slave or get into something only to get scammed in some short fraud racket. Your religion, skin tone or bank credit history is of no concern to me but I prefer to work with decent people and do quality work with lasting value.
Holy moly man, you must think we're way more professional than we are. Let me see if I can answer some of your questions quickly: Anti-scam check: I have absolutely 0 idea how to prove this. Uhm, we've been around as a team and website for over 8 years over on tanks-encyclopedia.com. Haven't scammed anyone into anything as we're all volunteers. We work in our free time on this stuff because we like it. Anti-slavery check: I have absolutely no idea how to enslave people over the internet :)). We're not a company, we're a bunch of volunteers working on this of our own volition. If people don't want to be a part of the team, they just get up and leave (a message beforehand would be appreciated, though). There's no contracts as there's currently no company. Our team manager is working on establishing a not-for-profit NGO in Romania to cover the legal side of the whole project, but that will take several months. Company solvency check: again, not a company, but our financials are public over at docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Nkeuu4gI9vTR4Lc2RDN1je-mp-UP2nZGKHfoorXNvbU/edit?usp=sharing Check with your colleagues and former colleagues: If you want, you can talk to pretty much all of us over on our Public Discord: discord.gg/3VjQ8Zq Don't exactly know where to tell you to find former colleagues, but there's a bunch of them in that server as well. If you want any more info, let me know and I'll help you get it :)
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Good enough but romania might not be the easiest country to formalize a non-profit education group. I did some education based non-profit start ups and lawyers and civil servants can be greedy and slow. But I am interested and your story is consistent and accurate from what I can ascertain from here. I do have a shared file server and remote access server for teamwork but I have to move shortly.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT I definitely consider helping the channel to get a better mic but since they are so many narrators Im not sure this will solve the poor mic quality..
The few hundred German mechanized infantry advancing with the panzerjagertruppen might have made that a little difficult. As a rule, panzerjagers (whether ponderous Ferdinand, or nimble Stug III) didn't charge solo through enemy lines.
Killed on a ten to one ration on the Eastern Front. It was lethal and could knock out a Soviet tank at 4000 meters, yes 4000 meters. My source is Hilary Doyle.
I know Hitler liked the “biggest and baddest tank” in the field, but it was the German 88 artillery situated in protected, hidden positions that took out the most Allied tanks and they could be more massively produced in numbers and they were cheapest to produce too. He made the same mistake with his Navy too. He wanted the “biggest and baddest” battleships too, at the expense of making more U-boats too. He delayed the Germans’ use of the first known Assault rifle. The trouble with Hitler was that he was “inhaling his own supply”, judging that he had the most daily injections of “uppers, downers and mood stabilizers”. He thought he was the only Military genius in Germany and he made anyone know it. Here is a point. British Intelligence called off all assassination plots against him in 1942. Why? Because his bizarre military decisions were actually aiding the Allies’ Strategy guarranting their inevitable Victory.
it's the most forgivable of the big German tanks made using a rejected chassis that would of been scraped otherwise it performed well at kursk for a rush job
The truth struggles to be told.The kill rate for the tank was very good. The Petrol engines were the problem. The electric motors worked well. Just needed copper.
Technically that is not true, because the engines were the same as on the Pz IV, the trusty HL120 TRM. The problem is that with the electric engines and the 65 tons if weight you cannot drive the vehicle in low rpm. Additionally the engines have to run pretty much all the time for the vehicle being able to turn if needed. All this leads to additional wear and a life exspectancy of about 800km per engine compared to over 4000km in a Panzer IV.
Erase the infantry escort with artillery and mortars. Let the thing on the path of mines and several groups of Stalin fearing anti tank hunters with more mines and AT rifles after their...or let the Il-2 do their job. Or let time do the job and capture it after a nearly assured mechanical breakdown.
Yea scariest tank my butt it can't go up hills with it's weak engine without blowing out its engine prosses and too much heavy weight get stuck i mud easily a waste of resource for germany i would rather build stug 3 assault gun then a large amount of scrapheap.
Delta Red, we have a 3-part video series (the first part on which you are commenting right now) plus an insanely long and detailed article on the thing. So maybe read/listen to that and get informed? tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/panzerjager_tiger-p_elefant
@@deltared7455 Given that we have the primary records from the Germans that tells us this, yes. I highly advise that you don't take your information from Potential History's video on the vehicle as his video is to put it bluntly, utter garbage.
Well... I aready ask with the Tank e encyclopedia my self and nother member in discord server which they also have discord server And i ask them about Ferdinand Then my friend ask "why they dint scrap the The Hull and make the stug" Same Like your question and they replied the Its *Waste of time* because scraping At the time was a Long long process and at the time as well the German Dint have Much time and hitler also want the Power tank with a Powerful gun and thats how Ferdinand was Born And They(the german army) believe it was the successful tank destroyer ever , the major problem that Ferdinand Production is on Rush and They also Forget to add the MG port on its hull make it easy target for infantry
Scariest? LMAO!!! Russian infantry at Ponyri took one look, called the artillery boys and reached for their molotov cocktails, satchel charges and AT mines. :)
@@ThatZenoGuy Most of those "Elephants" either broke down or were attacked by Russian tank hunters because the infantry supporting them was driven off or killed by artillery and mortars. The SPGs didn't even have machine guns ffs. They were largely worthless on the battlefield. Go learn something and then come back and talk to me.
@@porsche911sbs Link me to anything you can find where an SU-152 went up against a Ferdinand. It will be news to me. The Ferdinands gun was very effective, yes but the Russians just avoided them and nuked them with artillery, airstrikes or took them out with infantry. For the most part they were useless in battle. I think the Russians may have used some for target practice at Kubinka and the armor held up but the shocks involved caused the Ferd to be put out of action.
@@Scrat335 Your statement of the Ferdinand being useless in combat just isn't true. It was very useful in combat, it's problem was it wasn't able to fight often due to mechanical and logistical issues. The Ferdinand and the SU-152 engaged in combat at Ponyri, during the Battle of Kursk: warfarehistorynetwork.com/2020/05/01/weapons-the-elefant-tank-destroyer/
Right, right. It's best if you have to take fractions of an inch, and multiply by twelve inches, then by three feet, then by (skipping furlongs, leagues etc) 1760 yards to get a mile. Great system. I'll be over here taking a millimeter times ten to make a centimeter, times ten for a decimeter, times ten for a meter. Then times ten again for a decameter, again for a hectameter, again for a kilometer. And converting to liquids? Super easy. One cubic centimeter is the same as one millilitre. Converting to weight? Multiply that millilitre up to become a litre, fill it with water, and put it on a scale. Presto, one kilogram. And while you're talking about how great Apollo was for using inches and pounds, don't forget about that time that a multi-billion dollar space probe went splat on Mars because the rest of their partners on Earth provided measurements using a logical system, but NASA wanted to make sure that their measurements were compatible with Liberia.
The lengthy and involved German nomenclature always feels as though it would be a perfect fit in a Monty Python skit, with John Cleese giving it in a deadpan delivery.
Yes, we love our lengthy words. I assume Mr Cleese would be able to deliver them correctly. Isn't he fluid in German ?
The French would have made at least five sentences out of one word, just because they think their language sounds so good.
The Americans would have used another M. For the simple-minded.
I mean, what's wrong with "Sonderkraftfahrzeug" (today: Sonder-Kraftfahrzeug) ? Kraftfahrzeug means "motor vehicle" (motor-bike, lorries or car) and "sonder" means "special", designating it is a purpose-built vehicle. Ausführung means sub-variant, exactly the same amount of letters.
Say it with me: Sonderkraftfahrzeug (Sonder is pronounced the same as "wonder" just with an S, the h makes the a bit longer, make a milli-second pause after the t to make sure you get the second f right, z pronounced as c, eu is pronounced oi)
again: Sonderkraft-faarcoig
Special tip: have some "stiff ones" before trying. :-)
Lol. Hitler getting everything he wanted from the British in 1938 got a Monty Python skit:
th-cam.com/video/pmwmuPTa0To/w-d-xo.html
Not very funny, but Chamberlain looks like one of the Pythons.
@@ottovonbismarck2443 My friend purchased used BMW series 5 from Germany. I sit inside for the 1st time "Wow onboard computer has some very wide display! Like 7x wider than the one from Mazda or Mitsubishi." He starts the engine and there is a 20 character word in German, fitting the whole width of this display... 😆🤪👌
@@HanSolo__ Just in case you wondered what that "TV screen" was for ... :-)
Now you know. :-)
@@HanSolo__ Your friend got a BMW? Did you tell him about the turn signals, or are you keeping it secret?
the scariest
for both the enemies and its own crews
Can relate
Whole new meaning to firebomb
literally an improvised JagdTigre using leftover hulls.
@Manfred K longevity? These things went up in flame often even before the battle started
harmdallmeyer6449
Many of them remained through 1944 with a few even surviving until Berlin in 1945.
Apart from Kursk, the rest of them took a LONG time to be whittled down.
The german troops:- This tank is underpowered, can't even climb a hill, we don't want this.
Porsche:- How about I built 90 of them anyways.
Not true. German crews liked the Ferdinand, appreciating its massive firepower and exceptional armor. Even the Soviets recognized that Ferdinands lost during Kursk were not knocked out, but burned out by their crews when they were unrecoverable.
@@TheSonicfrog well it is true that a ferdinand destroyed 60 to 80 T-34 before getting destroyed. But most where destroyed in engine fire before even entering combat.
@@ThatZenoGuy Well has a fun fact they used a bus engine in that freaking thing. 🤣🤣🤣
@@ThatZenoGuy Yep.
@@TheSonicfrog Yeah, but still they didn't ask for it...
WHAAAAAAAAT
I've been thinking that I wish you guys would do the Ferdinand... looked in your channel search and got sad... and I've seen the comment about how we should go add it to the list along with any resources we have (I don't) so I decided to just wait instead of asking. And after three gruelling night shifts and a good sleep to recover, I see that you've dropped a three-parter on my favourite? Well that gets a subscribe AND a bunch of likes. Thanks team!
Is it raining or are they shooting at us again ? - Pissed Ferdinand Crew COH 2
It’s definitely not the prettiest tank destroyer is it. Great video! Thanks for the part two as well!
Outstanding video and presentation. Thank you!
ah yes the scariest afv
that cant go up a hill
Like the vid, but some of the audio feels off, sounding like it's jumping around or skipping at points. IDK the reason, but maybe look into eliminating that in the future, since it made it a little hard to focus with how noticeable it is.
I guess that’s why they asked for video editors at the beginning
One might wonder what's the reason for that ridiculously (for 1943) heavy front armor, as it was supposed to stand back and engange at very long range? And at the same time let the heavy break-through tank have "only" 100 mm of front hull armor?
So you can affiord to give the vehicle 80 mm side armor. What anti tank wepen from 1943, that was used on a large scale can reliable defeat 100 mm armor on a realistic range/angle ?
Larger guns were beginning to become common place but it was also likely to be an inheritance from the development of the Tiger program. 100mm could be penetrated by various 75mm, 76mm and larger guns.
For a huge Tank Destroyer with so many internal problems and for number of them produced and fit for combat the only word that comes to mind to describe the combat history of this Massive Machine is Outstanding.
Despite all the mechanical issues and the tiny number of Elefant's (Ferdinand) produced they did an Outstanding Job against more than Overwhelming odds.
The 8.8cm Pak43/71 gun of the Elefant/Ferdinand was the most Powerfull AT gun of WW2,and in 1943 no allied Armor had the slightest chance against this Beast of a gun even at 3 kms away,and in some cases even farther.
In line with German ingenuity the Ferdinand had 22 different names during it's service life.
A tank so heavy that my mother barley competes.
Am I the only one hearing the half life 2 music in the back
Let's build the biggest baddest tanks that we don't have either the steel or the oil for. At least the engine sounds epic!
Imagine if those electric motors were installed in a medium tank. Or a td. The perfect manuvability would be great. Especially for a nutruel steer on a td.
Thank you for this Great info:) God Bless.
One of the most interesting stuff on your videos (not the only one, definitely) is the background music. It always feels like playing Return to castle Wolfenstein every time I watch some of your videos :)
My favorite Tank destroyer :D
Sick!, Now do a Barrel roll with Me-264
@@noevalop5088 barrel roll no
But do rotation roll yes
It is so good at destroying that it even destroy itself.
Highest kill ratio of WW2.
I don't know anything about video editing and I'm extremely busy, I think I'm the perfect fit for the job
Are you also a chronic procrastinator?
@@johnladuke6475 absolutely
Excellent narration on this one 👌🏻
Once you notice the wet mouth noises between lines, you can't unhear them.
nice half-life soundtrack ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥
Anyone else notice the audio stutters?? like it keeps cutting voice audio except bgm audio.
also, does the Porsche Tiger use two sets of sprocket wheels, front and rear?? or is it only driven by the front sprocket wheels??
Just the one set of drive sprockets. The one at the other end is an idler.
Ah yes, the great tank destroyer, being able to destroy enemy armoured forces as well as itself!
Love the HL2 background music.
That end photos an Elephant! Good info 👍
The great debate. A sturmgeshutz would be an artillery piece, a panzerjager would be a “tank”, and used in a completely different role.
If it would be a sturmgeshutz, it would be deployed with the regular army, not with the panzerwaffe...
The fact that even Hitler thought that the vehicle was bad shows how problematic the project was
Highly successful and extremely useful after Kursk though. Many were still fighting a year later. Highest kill ratio of WW2 and losses were few and far between.
Ferdinand TD - i fear no obstacles but that thing
*Hill*
It scared me
Didn't this thing have a shit ton of problems due to its improved design and rushed development? i believe engine fires were common due to a severely underrated powerplant.
I believe the gearbox was the main problem but yes it was plaged with problems
Actually the gearbox / transmission were quite good. The problems lay with overheating engines, which was eventually, kind of worked out. Mechanically speaking, this transmission and final drive was much better than that on the Henschel Tiger and Panthers. However, it required a lot of copper and that was needed for other projects in Germany, notably the U-boats
What's so scary about it? Just make sure to have a swamp between it and Yourself.
Ravenous Elf standing in the step looking for a swamp :))
Or some infantry
@@lennarthumpf8031 it didn't even have a single mg for a while I think
These things each blew up about 10-20 russian tanks in their initial battles. Later when the russians got better at countering these, the effectiveness dropped to only 3.
@@natalieorlando6583 exactly hahaha
Ah yes the scariest tank destroyer of the war by far so deadly the allies had to create hills to stop it 😂😂😂 in all seriousness tho who's idea was it to send these to Italy
who else but shitler himself
Oeps, we forgot the machinegun
Like on any other Stug in existene until late war? Seems like that really wasn't considered a problem
@@SchleiferGER yes, it was. They used the Ferdinand as an assault weapon at kursk without a machine gun. The russian infantry climmed the vehicule and disabled the engine by spraying their flamethrowers on the ventilation shafts, or planting anti tank mines or explosive satchels.
@@danydierickx3228 This has been shown elsewhere, with records of the fate of each vehicle, as mostly a myth. They were closely supported by lighter tanks and panzergrenadiers. Still a failed vehicle relative to the resource investment.
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 read [8] Guderian, H., "Panzer Leader", Smolensk, 1999, chapter 10, page 426-427, where he clearly complained about the ferdinand lacking close protection armemend against infantry
@@danydierickx3228 Reports from both Ferdinand units indicate something very different. The blast wave of the Ferdindand's gun turned out to be unconfortable enough that it kept the infantry at bay. The real problem with not having an MG is that you only have one solution for infantry: your main gun, which is most of the time overkill and an ammo drainage. It leads to Ferdinands having to go back and rearm a lot sooner than with mg.
Field officers: These Ferdinand are a total pain in the . . .
GHQ: We are going to withdraw them for upgrades and fix some of the major problems.
Field Officers: NEIN!!! We need these now! Maybe later...
Maintenance Crew:🙄Damn you all!
Could the front be peirced by 17 pounder early APDS? I know it wasn't very accurate but if it did hit could it go through?
It should have been able to if it was head on, but we have no idea how APDS would have behaved because it was not a solid 200 mm plate, but two 100 mm ones.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT anecdotal but I've heard that armour with 2 layers has less structural integrity than a single plate of the same thickness.
That is true, but sub-caliber rounds also behave differently when dealing with gaps and stuff, so it is a bit more complicated than "It had penetration over 200 mm"
@@dylanmilne6683 what you've heard is wrong. Part of the penetration physics at work involve the fact that a solid piece of metal transmits the shock and energy that a penetrator imparts throughout it's entirety. Separating the armor plates allows a lot of the kinetic energy to disperse once it exits the first place. The deformation of the penetrator and the dispersion of it's energy allow the secondary plate presents less susceptibility to the remaining penetration potential. This effect is more pronounced when dealing with shaped charged chemical penetrators but the same holds true for kinetic energy rounds.
@@chrishamilton2559 I don't believe I have. There have been multiple studies as to the effectiveness of monolithic armour vs layered armour of same total thickness. The Monolithic armour always wins as for the reason you say it fails - the whole plate takes the impact and disapates it. Just to be clear we are talking about essentially butted layers of armour, not spaced, there is negligible room for energy to dissipate.
There were two units equipped with Ferdinand at Kursk. One was a former StuG battalion, the other came from SP AT background.
The former StuG unit understood combined armored warfare AND its limits, the AT unit thought now that they had thick armor, they could roam around and literally hunt tanks. They were the ones who found themselves "stranded" and close-assaulted. The StuG unit performed excellent. Error of judgement.
Engine and transmission were designed to be used on a 50 ton tank, not the 65 tons of the Ferdinand. Compare Tiger II. Error of trusting a "salesman".
Deployment of the Elefant in Italy was just madness. Any tank in 1943 except the Churchill had problems with steep mountain roads, let alone one that is already troubled on flat ground. The M-26 Pershing had trouble in the Korean hillsides as well. But in both cases that is not the tanks' fault. Error of deployment.
I always wonder why they had not just put turrets on the things (or simply scrapped them).
The engine and transmission suffered in the original tank as well.
The Pershing was famously underpowered. A horrendous example.
@@Kyle-gw6qp And still they added 10 tons to the Porsche tank, respectively 15 tons to the Henschel tank. While Tiger(H) was already at the limits, although not as bad as Tiger(P), how could they think of getting away with even more weight ?
I know that Ferdinand Porsche had his head deep in Hitlers ass, but ...
Throwing Pershing into the mix, I have a strong feeling towards corruption in the arms industry. What a surprise !
Hello there!
General kenobi
@@noobplayer_23 you are a bold one!
general Kenobi!
Can you guys do the only tiger (p) that saw service on the eastern front.
Hello Mentos,
While such articles are within our sights and within our scope, they are not currently in the works. You can add them to our Public Suggestion List and you can help by adding more sources (or other suggested articles)
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p0Ll9TITGDiF9_fdS-tv1797JBs0_-pB70ReE_kIRkE/edit#gid=1911430820
Also, in order to help us with illustrating and publishing, please do consider donating through Patreon or Paypal.
www.patreon.com/tankartfund
Paypal.me/tankartfund
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT ok
Good video thanks
If they had a couple MGs they'd been great.
You do something wrong, if you come anywhere near enemy inf. with that thing.
It wasn't that bad.....they didn't know how to use them.....
Almost like listening to a scp or scary story with your tone.
This guys narration is quite good. But there are so many cuts/edits!
EDIT - I thought AFV meant IFV
Its not an AFV...
It is not an Armored Fighting Vehicle? Interesting. Why would you think that?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT unless the NAZI Germans designated it that, I don't think it is because its gun would be terrible to use against lighter targets in an urban environment which AFVs like BMPs and Bradleys have guns for. Although they're shit in urban too (not enough armour against single or double charge HEAT projectiles depending on armour) but not as bad as this vehicle lol
Also, it doesn't even have a turret lol
You are referring to IFVs, which are Infantry Fighting Vehicles.
AFV is an umbrella term that covers any armored vehicle meant for the military. Any.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT oh sorry lol, I thought AFV meant the same thing.
I could do video editing after some due diligence. I am a professional engineer with credentials from securities background so have to do some due diligence
What would that due diligence entail?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Usual anti-scam checks, anti-slavery checks. I will not be a slave or get into something only to get scammed in some short fraud racket. Your religion, skin tone or bank credit history is of no concern to me but I prefer to work with decent people and do quality work with lasting value.
Company solvency check, check with your colleagues or former colleagues, its not a police check as they are not reliable
Holy moly man, you must think we're way more professional than we are. Let me see if I can answer some of your questions quickly:
Anti-scam check: I have absolutely 0 idea how to prove this. Uhm, we've been around as a team and website for over 8 years over on tanks-encyclopedia.com. Haven't scammed anyone into anything as we're all volunteers. We work in our free time on this stuff because we like it.
Anti-slavery check: I have absolutely no idea how to enslave people over the internet :)). We're not a company, we're a bunch of volunteers working on this of our own volition. If people don't want to be a part of the team, they just get up and leave (a message beforehand would be appreciated, though). There's no contracts as there's currently no company. Our team manager is working on establishing a not-for-profit NGO in Romania to cover the legal side of the whole project, but that will take several months.
Company solvency check: again, not a company, but our financials are public over at
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Nkeuu4gI9vTR4Lc2RDN1je-mp-UP2nZGKHfoorXNvbU/edit?usp=sharing
Check with your colleagues and former colleagues: If you want, you can talk to pretty much all of us over on our Public Discord:
discord.gg/3VjQ8Zq
Don't exactly know where to tell you to find former colleagues, but there's a bunch of them in that server as well.
If you want any more info, let me know and I'll help you get it :)
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Good enough but romania might not be the easiest country to formalize a non-profit education group. I did some education based non-profit start ups and lawyers and civil servants can be greedy and slow. But I am interested and your story is consistent and accurate from what I can ascertain from here. I do have a shared file server and remote access server for teamwork but I have to move shortly.
The mic sound is really quite poor
Well, we work with what we have. Would you care to pitch in to help us buy people better equipment?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT I definitely consider helping the channel to get a better mic but since they are so many narrators Im not sure this will solve the poor mic quality..
audio is really weird
You should review the audio on your videos before you show them. A very distracting thump sound was heard throughout.
More scarier if you were sat inside this when it became an immobile brick due to breakdowns and Soviet tank killing squads closing in on you.
With only 90 units you couldn't do much excellent defensive weapon to smash the reds and the British
all you had to do is let it pass by and attack it from behind with a teller mine or Molotov cocktail
The few hundred German mechanized infantry advancing with the panzerjagertruppen might have made that a little difficult. As a rule, panzerjagers (whether ponderous Ferdinand, or nimble Stug III) didn't charge solo through enemy lines.
Nothing about its combat record?
This is Part I?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Oh ok - looking forward to that then! Nice work!
Killed on a ten to one ration on the Eastern Front. It was lethal and could knock out a Soviet tank at 4000 meters, yes 4000 meters. My source is Hilary Doyle.
Rather good German!
Agreed. Just 1 gripe. "Typ" is pronounced "tupe" in German.
Amazingly well done documentary!
I can't speak the same for this vehicle though.
Kind of a turd.
T34tank(?)
"Cranking out a whole lot more videos than we used to lately" at 1:39 .... That should be, "a lot more videos lately than we used to".
I know Hitler liked the “biggest and baddest tank” in the field, but it was the German 88 artillery situated in protected, hidden positions that took out the most Allied tanks and they could be more massively produced in numbers and they were cheapest to produce too.
He made the same mistake with his Navy too. He wanted the “biggest and baddest” battleships too, at the expense of making more U-boats too. He delayed the Germans’ use of the first known Assault rifle.
The trouble with Hitler was that he was “inhaling his own supply”, judging that he had the most daily injections of “uppers, downers and mood stabilizers”. He thought he was the only Military genius in Germany and he made anyone know it.
Here is a point. British Intelligence called off all assassination plots against him in 1942. Why? Because his bizarre military decisions were actually aiding the Allies’ Strategy guarranting their inevitable Victory.
When are ya gonna change that intro song, it's too upbeat and doesn't fit the subject at all
But we are upbeat people :D
@@rembramlastname3631 blood on the risers instrumental 👍
Hi sir if you could please use MPH and Ins etc some for US viewers Thank you. THESE ARE GREAT VIDEOS:) 👍
Just use metrics like all world around
"Scariest" Well, that's one opinion.
It's so scary that it breaks itself down even before it reaches the battlefield. 😂
Needed some much better electric motor controllers, that just weren't possible in the 1940s.
Weren't really even possible in the 1970s.
👍
Comments for the algorithm God
Audio was horrid.
it's the most forgivable of the big German tanks made using a rejected chassis that would of been scraped otherwise it performed well at kursk for a rush job
Weird robotic voice
He's not a robot
The truth struggles to be told.The kill rate for the tank was very good. The Petrol engines were the problem. The electric motors worked well. Just needed copper.
Technically that is not true, because the engines were the same as on the Pz IV, the trusty HL120 TRM. The problem is that with the electric engines and the 65 tons if weight you cannot drive the vehicle in low rpm. Additionally the engines have to run pretty much all the time for the vehicle being able to turn if needed.
All this leads to additional wear and a life exspectancy of about 800km per engine compared to over 4000km in a Panzer IV.
The electric motors overheated.
@@Kyle-gw6qp maybe they did. But the kill ratio is not even mentioned!
@@SchleiferGER I am just reading what Jentz and Doyle wrote. Kill ratio was not even mentioned btw!
@@simonrooney7942 Kill Ratio doesn't matter in a war of attrition where you can't replace your losses
🐘👍😊
Honestly this thing gets too much of a bad rap.
Ah, the 65 ton 10 kph offroad speed battering ram with a 3km arm to punch anything with a red star on it.
My favourite vehicle in il2 tank crew^^
That background music is not very fitting. This is not a Bedtime Stories video. :-D
... and the ugliest AFV of the whole war.
Second to the video
Erase the infantry escort with artillery and mortars. Let the thing on the path of mines and several groups of Stalin fearing anti tank hunters with more mines and AT rifles after their...or let the Il-2 do their job. Or let time do the job and capture it after a nearly assured mechanical breakdown.
Tanks need infantry. All tanks need infantry. Tanks are not supposed to be used on their own.
Yea scariest tank my butt it can't go up hills with it's weak engine without blowing out its engine prosses and too much heavy weight get stuck i mud easily a waste of resource for germany i would rather build stug 3 assault gun then a large amount of scrapheap.
Except that it could.
@@Dreachon are you sure about that seem rare what you said
Delta Red, we have a 3-part video series (the first part on which you are commenting right now) plus an insanely long and detailed article on the thing. So maybe read/listen to that and get informed?
tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/panzerjager_tiger-p_elefant
@@deltared7455 Given that we have the primary records from the Germans that tells us this, yes.
I highly advise that you don't take your information from Potential History's video on the vehicle as his video is to put it bluntly, utter garbage.
Well... I aready ask with the Tank e encyclopedia my self and nother member in discord server which they also have discord server
And i ask them about Ferdinand
Then my friend ask "why they dint scrap the The Hull and make the stug" Same Like your question and they replied the Its *Waste of time* because scraping At the time was a Long long process and at the time as well the German Dint have Much time and hitler also want the Power tank with a Powerful gun and thats how Ferdinand was Born
And They(the german army) believe it was the successful tank destroyer ever , the major problem that Ferdinand Production is on Rush and They also Forget to add the MG port on its hull make it easy target for infantry
Scariest? LMAO!!! Russian infantry at Ponyri took one look, called the artillery boys and reached for their molotov cocktails, satchel charges and AT mines. :)
@@ThatZenoGuy Most of those "Elephants" either broke down or were attacked by Russian tank hunters because the infantry supporting them was driven off or killed by artillery and mortars. The SPGs didn't even have machine guns ffs. They were largely worthless on the battlefield. Go learn something and then come back and talk to me.
@@ThatZenoGuy not propaganda, kursk turned into a CQC nightmare and the ferdinand was basically useless there because it was just overrun by infantry
The Ferdinand proved quite deadly against Soviet armor. It was so heavily armored it could even survive high explosive blasts from the mighty SU-152.
@@porsche911sbs Link me to anything you can find where an SU-152 went up against a Ferdinand. It will be news to me. The Ferdinands gun was very effective, yes but the Russians just avoided them and nuked them with artillery, airstrikes or took them out with infantry. For the most part they were useless in battle. I think the Russians may have used some for target practice at Kubinka and the armor held up but the shocks involved caused the Ferd to be put out of action.
@@Scrat335 Your statement of the Ferdinand being useless in combat just isn't true. It was very useful in combat, it's problem was it wasn't able to fight often due to mechanical and logistical issues.
The Ferdinand and the SU-152 engaged in combat at Ponyri, during the Battle of Kursk: warfarehistorynetwork.com/2020/05/01/weapons-the-elefant-tank-destroyer/
screw mm, liters,meters and that other foreign BS
remember, NASA use metric system to send their man to moon
Isn't it funny that even American engineers use metric? Turns out that a decimal system makes far more sense.
@@rembramlastname3631
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_program
here you uneducated swine
Right, right. It's best if you have to take fractions of an inch, and multiply by twelve inches, then by three feet, then by (skipping furlongs, leagues etc) 1760 yards to get a mile. Great system. I'll be over here taking a millimeter times ten to make a centimeter, times ten for a decimeter, times ten for a meter. Then times ten again for a decameter, again for a hectameter, again for a kilometer. And converting to liquids? Super easy. One cubic centimeter is the same as one millilitre. Converting to weight? Multiply that millilitre up to become a litre, fill it with water, and put it on a scale. Presto, one kilogram.
And while you're talking about how great Apollo was for using inches and pounds, don't forget about that time that a multi-billion dollar space probe went splat on Mars because the rest of their partners on Earth provided measurements using a logical system, but NASA wanted to make sure that their measurements were compatible with Liberia.
@@johnladuke6475 Apolla was designed in metric...
Even though I'm not a guy aka man I pay attention to your TH-cam channel videos so don't exclude the gals aka women next time dear...