Lindybeige | Bottom 5 Tanks | The Tank Museum 

Hahahaha! Down! Get back! Bad tank! Shame!

It's what makes him so much fun, such passion lol

The main reason it's not the #1 on this list: it's beige!

To be fair judging by his shoes 8:45 the pay isn’t that great 😳

The Tiger of course famous for trimming its collar into a rounded point

@@BD-yl5mh eccentricity has to start somewhere 😀

He said his name was in the Carden Lloyd Carrier. So his name must be Lindy Carrier

He does!! 😂 Absolute wildman!

It gets old really fast

@@DrLoverLover REALLY fast! Agreed!!

@@skeletonmakesgood Why? It's hilarious and also great he's so passionate about it.

@@dudeguybro I am glad that you and many others enjoy his schtick. I just find it becomes tiresome. Only my opinion, which I likely should try harder to keep to myself!

YES

Need chieftain in there as well.... Possibly a few others for special things. 👀😅

Wow what a great call

​@@dillonpierce7869The Chieftan would be playing the part of James May.

@@wbertie2604 I mean Nick Moran chieftain on that one not the tank itself. 😅

I kinda understand the renaming, Bovington Tank Museum sounds very provincial and somewhat unimpressive. The Tank Museum on the otherhand is a pretty good description of its scale lol

it has PRESENTATION!!!!

I was at junior leaders regiment in the 80’s directly across the road and we always called it The Tank Museum. As far as I’m concerned there is only one Tank Museum….

@Anthony Gaughan @Robbson These are fair point. Similarly, the English F.A. Cup is simply called 'The F.A. Cup', it doesn't need to be distinguished with an adjective - everyone the world over (who is interested in football) knows exactly what that specifically means. But then again, that's how it's always been referred to, not after re-branding.... So, all-in-all, I side with Lindybeige on this one, but.... if officially calling it 'The Tank Museum' is essential to the museum's functional survival, then so be it.

_Musée des blindés Saumur_ or _Panzermuseum Munster_ are nice names! Why not Bovington?

you need to do some ww1 tanks!

You can't spoil your own video that you haven't made yet! (Or is it a fake spoiler to throw us off the scent?)

As a French-American, this is one we just can't justify or defend. Somua s35!

Lloyd said all those things about the Char B, but I have seen his model kit of it. He took quite a while to make that thing very well made 😂

@Jjohnno 87 How about "least bad?"

It´s like calling the German national team Die Mannschaft. Like, no. Don´t do that.

BOVINGTON FOREVER!

"Satan's paperweight"

It will destroy your watch if you get too close.

It's also the basis of a bunch of yo-Mama jokes

@@Angrybogan Du jadtiger est so über das... Your jadtiger is so big that it... (sorry, we only spoke a spattering of German at home).

And the crazy part? It was STILL not as bad as the Ferdinand.

At one point he was living in the WWI trench display.

Well, at the least he's still mad at the French, that's for sure!

By now he's dug his way out and he has a tunnel that lets him enter at will through the back of a supply closet.

Lindy Berg and Solfien should get together sometime. Would be interesting to see who out speed talked the other - ! 😁

@@simongee8928 given the weird sexual tension when she met Chieftain - it would be a...very strange video.

Concerning the Tiger he presented made up babble as fact.

The WWII equivalent of anything with a Dodge/Jeep/Ram badge on it today. 4WD trails are littered with those things.

He tried to scold the German one, but that one politely suggested to go somewhere else and Lindy found smaller opponent

I think he is a little bit mad... He hates the tiger too... 🙄

The tortoice and T95 actually seem to make sense to me. They were designed as specialist instruments to smash extremely powerful defensive lines. Not to be used as traditional tanks. In that context the extremely poor reliability and heavy support demands they would have inveitably have had make sense as a reasonable trade off.

@@CS-zn6pp well yes the tiger is kinda overrated dont get me wrong still a great tank

It's a Basil Fawlty reference. I was expecting him to start hitting it with a tree...

I can't wait until the day I get to go to bovington tank museum!

I’m going next week

I'm gonna be the geek that points out you all got the name wrong. It's: "the tank museum; bovington". Lindy is wrong. But only on this. 🤣

Merry Christmas all

Its more Rick Myall. Less smarm and more shouty.

That's who I was thinking, he sounds like.

Carden Lloyd:💥 *scoots back 40 feet*

“You ever played Halo and laughed at the ragdoll physics?”

@@PanzerFalcon2232 I don’t think that can legally be classified as a scoot.

I just want to know how they made to put the gun in the carrier

I'm imagining a man holding a string well away from it when they test fired that.

Athefumen 👌🔫

Two fish in a tank. One fish says to the other, "You know how to drive this thing?" Merry Christmas 🇨🇦

This was a big treat to wake up to! Merry Christmas!!! 🎅🎁🎄

Yes indeed merry christmas

It´s not that hard to read the hoax book to learn that your lil magician was not born in winter. Even the pope said it.

The Canberra war museum is also cool. It has a MkIV tank.

There are more A7Vs again. In the shape If Leopard 2s.

And the story surrounding its capture is violently, unapologetically Australian.

Mephisto! I'm wearing it on a T-shirt as we speak. I don't know if the A7V was an effective vehicle, but as a kid growing up and visiting the Queensland museum it was pretty cool to see a 90-year-old tank and wonder how exactly it got all the way from Europe to Brisbane.

@@Ninjat126 playing on that thing was a core childhood memory for alot of Queensland kids!

Unfortunately some of it is just historically incorrect, particularly the Tiger I spiel.

Hey man, just want to say that I love your videos!

Its really bad actually. Its entertainment for people who play "world of tanks" rather than serious information the subject. The Tiger I commentary is mostly wrong. He doesn't understand what the JagdTiger was or what it was for (Hint - its a self-propelled anti-tank gun not a tank). And someone should explain to him that they had these things called "trains" for moving things around. And you have to put things in the context of when they were built (like the Char-B) and what they were in opposition to. The Char-B was an early 1930s design.

Seemed pretty accurate to me.

@@Jim-Tuner Gosh Jim - I bet he didn't know *that* about the JagdTiger much

I just read it a few weeks ago.

A heavy, expensive tank killer with a 2 round per minute rate of fire was the last thing the Germans needed at that juncture. Much like Zimmerit, it represented a fundamental misunderstanding of the actual enemy they were facing & the needs of an Army eating it's shoelaces while trying to fight a defensive battle against said numerically-overwhelming enemy. You don't use a 20lb sledgehammer when you've got one arm in a sling and you're being zerg rushed by 50 rats at a time. If they'd been playing with a full deck, they'd have made StuG IIIs with KwK40s until the end of the war.

I remember particularly his story about an engagement against a column of Shermans at long range with his platoon of Jagdtigers. They shot them, Shermans shot back, and he ordered his driver to reverse. The driver, who was an idiot, turned around. The Shermans got a clean penetration on the now exposed side.

Yup... If you need to kill something (anything, really) right in front of you, really, Really, REEEEEEEEEEEEALLY hard? The Jagdtiger is your vehicle. If you need anything even slightly resembling functional utility? LOL, nope.

@@builder396 There was another case when 2 Jagdtigers were facing a column of allied tanks but opted to withdraw rather than engage. 1 Jagdtiger promptly broke down, the second tried to tow it away and also broke down and both vehicles had to be blown up having achieved absolutely nothing!

While this is very true, Tortoise, T95 and Jagdtiger (and I have the KV-.2 on that same list) were all useless. No one in WW2 ever broke through a bunker line with heavy or super-heavy tanks. I think every country at some point just overdid it. The 8,8 cm L71 was perfect for killing every enemy tank uncludiing IS-2. Why mounting a gun which theoretically belongs on a destroyer on a platform that is notoriously unreliable ? They knew it from Tiger II and they could never sort it out (which would have meant melting the thing and rebuild from scratch).

There's a reason basically no one makes this style of massively armored, casemate tanks anymore. It's a fundamentally flawed, inflexible design

@@Yourantsally yes and technology has come a long way since then. But at the time it was a solution to get a mixture of a ridiculously large done and armor into a usable package. A lot of the Soviet case-mates we're not actually designed to fight tanks but to assault fortification. By not having a turret it allowed them to fit a larger gun onto the vehicle and a little bit more armor. But yes they're definitely something of a bygone era.

@@clonescope2433 as soon as subcaliber rounds and heat became the standard, it wasn't necessary

@@ottovonbismarck2443 While I am inclined to agree with most points, the Jagdtiger would have had the only gun on the field which could have had any success taking out an IS-3 if the Soviets had completed them just a few months earlier. The Germans saw where Soviet armor was going and attempted to preemtively counter it. Although, it should have been mounted on a reliable, light and fast chassis. I wonder if the Panzer 4 could have accomodated the gun on an open mounting. The KV-2 was more or less a leftover (Pretty successful in theory) concept vehicle from the Winter War. Its incredibly specific and they dropped production of it as the game changed. The story of how 1 KV-2 kept Kampfgruppe Raus of the 6th Panzer Division at bay for a full day during the Battle of Raseiniai was a testament to its psychological effect and its ability to take hits. In that case, a mobile bunker with a bunker killing gun was just what the doctor ordered.

But sadly he already told you in the video that he doesn't care what you ( or anyone else) thinks. 😮

Better yet, name it "The Tank".

Also non English speaking countries "the" does not often mean anything, so it would be just a tank museum. Not very informatic. What, where...

Not to mention when places like the Kubinka tank museum exist.

The Tank Museum at Bovington would be my name of choice. Best of both worlds.

What maroons came up with this crap?

Foreign tourists didn't recognize it, which (to an outside consultant who specializes in these things) means they were leaving fat wads of cash on the table by not scraping and bowing to every wallet that flies in from Heathrow and might be persuaded to buy a ticket to the museum simply on the novelty aspect. A ludicrous concept, but one I've heard made many, many times in my business. Bovington has delusions it is the Smithsonian just waiting for the right kind of branding to make it self-sustaining on tickets alone. It isn't, and it never will be. It's a specialized museum with a long, specialized tradition based on the tank establishment at Bovington, and will require donations from tank nerds until the day the planet is swallowed by the sun. Why not just be really good to the people who care about you?

It makes me want a nice mug of Bovril and I'm not even British

Ive been in bovington for the summer festival, for 4 times, and its a Great show of a Great museum. But in my opinion, the Musée des Blindés at Saumur in the north of France, near the belgium border, its more complete. Afterall is got the biggest collection of tanks, armored cars, AG, Apc's, AFV's, etc in the world, abaut 800 vehicles, wich is Mad, and not all of them are in the exposition because There are no room available for so many veichles. And got the only mint condition and runnig KingTiger, wich by the way, my favorite tank of all times. And like in bovington you can see all of them running around. Brilliant, like bovington, But a little better to me.

@@jpmtlhead39 I've been to both and I prefer Bovington. Yes, Saumur has a better collection, but they don't put any care or attention into the presentation of the collection. If you've been to the back rooms/storage area in Bovington and seen all those tanks in a blank empty hangar, packed in like sardines, that's the entirety of Saumur but bigger. Saumur's vehicles are placed in rows like sardines in hangar after hangar, with very sparse areas of theming (the display of notable tank generals seemed interesting but I can't read French, and they don't give translations). Bovington on the other hand has large boards full of historical photos, videos, a recreation of a WW1 trench network with a landship cresting it over you, as well as a more interesting layout. Even the temporary exhibit on the Afghan/middle east wars with the most modern stuff they had, was fully kitted out to look like a military camp with tents, gear, and artifacts. Saumur had tanks, and if you wanted more than tanks, sorry buddy.

@@Spidehman sorry for what,buddy...??!!!! Its your opinion. Other people have diferent opinions. If you dont like it,its your problem,and if you cant read French,its your problem also,because between the 7 and 9 grade i had English and French as mandatory disciplines,with the option of having German has a third language,wich i did. So,dont Blame Saumur for your shortcomings,buddy.

I love L3's

He clearly knows very little about the Tiger though. He's presented made up babble as fact.

Jingles is more for the vibes, entertaining in his own way, but not that informative. Lindybeige is informative, and he is like that one teacher from your childhood that was actually passionate about his job, and extremely inspiring

@@miltoska9708 Eh he definitely can be, but the less opinionated he is on a topic im trying to be informed in, the better usually. Unless i'm just watching for the eccentric opinions for the lulz

@@miltoska9708 I wish Jingles would do more videos like what he did in his early career ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tTEBkzPlSrQ.html

@@luwkseam They remembered to add air holes, right?

Lol

@@fuzzyhead878 Oh, air hole. I thought you said something else, sorry.

Slightly funnier if you had said tranquilizer darts on standby.

Two fish in a tank. One fish says to the other, "You know how to drive this thing?" Merry Christmas 🇨🇦

Comes off as sligytly mad... Bad tortoise! BAD!!

HAHA!

And you fell for it

Or butt hurt.

@@lostalone9320 I started to reply to this and realised that (a) basically I was procrastinating and (b) no one was going to read over 750 words discussing how engineering works in the real world, the reasons they built Convenanters and how much I like the colour green the Tortoise is finished in. This is RU-vid. No one comes here to read anything longer than 150 words. So... basically - Lindybeige is a successful entertainer who has large amounts of passion and excitement which distracts from the fact that more often than not he is openly displaying a very poor understanding of the topic. That is my claim. The Tortoise does not need to be a valuable piece of equipment to disprove my claim. To be honest if Lindybeige did know what he was talking about he would more likely than not have never reached the success he has achieved. He is passionate. He gets excited. Watching one of his videos is like going on an adventure as we bounce around getting really excited about things. He himself openly admits in many of his videos that he is making a video because he has no idea why a Something is a Something and wants to work out why. A lot of people enjoy his personality and his style and he gets to go home each night and roll around on his massive piles of RU-vid Dollars. Probably. That's how RU-vid works once you get over 1000 subscribers, right? All of this make him a successful entertainer. None of that makes him a subject matter expert.

it was also built using pre-war notions for a tank, that it would be a way to bring a big gun up to the enemy with armor. Both britain and france built examples of this principle, though the brits rightly abandoned the concept and moved onto the romboid tanks

@JZ's Best Friend Lolz :D

@JZ's Best Friend : In swedish language a ,stridsvagn' is a tank. In german language a ,Streitwagen' is a war chariot.

@JZ's Best Friend : Not really , this ,Stridsvagn' would be in current german , Kriegswagen'/ war waggon. Nowadays we germans call war Krieg. But: A battle axe is in german a ,Streitaxt' and a mace is a , Streitkolben'. Also in german funeral song ,Ich hatte einen Kameraden'/ the good comrade ( written 1809) , die Trommel schlug zum Streite'/ the drum called to war( battle) . Once ,Streit' meant war, not like nowadays tension/ quarrel.

Fun fact Leopard 2A7V is the newest and best tank of NATO.

No... Tank you...

To be fair, the french do have some good or silly things

@@osmacar5331 as shown in the latest Grand Tour 😄

I hear that reverse worked quite well

*The World:* -Let's use some existing designs, maybe change these a bit, or maybe let's combine the strengths of all. Also, let's use only the things that are proven to work. Let's use common sense and keep it ergonomically as correct as possible. It could also look neat and tidy. Does not need to be beautiful! *Le French:* -Le German et Britanniques - ceux miserable designé... Not very the solution d'ingénierie révolutionnaire. Not weirdé enoughé! These Britishé... Le petits dessinateurs. What a hideux et terrible... le horrible dessigné! Ouffx.. Non! Le non originale conception. Extrêmement! We need the designê du exceptionnel L'remarquablê innovant et inhabituel designêux!

@@osmacar5331 What the French don't do, is mediocre. only the extremes!

I’m just stunned that there are people who think the Tiger has a good turret traverse.

Bren gun is superior to the mg42

Ps France sucks 😅

@@samholdsworth420 oh boy I can hear the wheraboos screaming right now about how you’re wrong lmao. However I agree with you lol

_Cannot disagree with anything this gentleman has brought up_ Word of advice: don't take what Lindy says at face value. He has been wrong many times before. His hilariously partial take on Napoleon or the whole Spandau affair are two good examples.

I thought the only German tank he used in his top 5 was the jagdpanther…

I believe that was Al Murray...

@@martinwebb3017 It was. Unless you didn't enjoy it, in which case it was Dan Snow.

There was no tiger in his top 5..?

@@sirspaceface See the two comments immediately above yours.

No Tiger battalion was destroyed in a week in Italy. Half a battalion was self sabotaged in summer 1944 when they ran out of fuel and the battalion commander was fired.

And the other tank says “Best job I ever had!”

IIRC at least one Polish tank commander achieved Ace with a TK tank using the 20mm.

@@lostalone9320 At least two of the claimed tanks were Pz 35(t)s and one was a Pz IV Ausf B and I'm too lazy to find exactly what was attributed to him at Sierakow...

@@lostalone9320 ...HOW? THEY ARE TANKS for the love of god

me too.. did it have a little diorama with a house?

That was the Airfix kit if I recall.

At least it was'nt a Citroen.

@@OrlandoDibiskitt Same here

@@OrlandoDibiskitt - A section of street with a ruined wall. It came with two nicely detailed French soldiers. I gave one of mine a bike from an old Airfix kit.

It's like getting an Official Red Ryder carbine action two-hundred shot range model air rifle on Christmas morning. 🇨🇦

🎁🎅🌟☃️🎄 ❄️🦌

You know it's going to be full of annoying British patriotism. Even when he picks a British tank he acts proud over it because it's worse than the Jagdtiger.

It's cuz of the tight collar I recon..

Throw a two-foot rock in front of it and it has to stop!

@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547 And the driver wouldn't know why because he can't see anything !

The first model. But do you english language ,betterknowers/ Besserwisser' laugh about german tanks of 1940 to now?

@@brittakriep2938 LOL - love that German "sense of humour".

😂😂

So in other words, Hitler was insane.

Correct! From another comment of mine: It is easy to say "Oh, we can make two Panzer IVs for every one Tiger I. Easy choice!". Except tanks don't operate in a vacuum. Panzer IVs are organized into Panzer battalions, each with an authorized strength of around 75. They are part of a Panzer regiment. But a Panzer regiment doesn't fight alone, it is part of a Panzer division. First off, it needs infantry support. So in come the Panzergrenadier regiment (with the infantry being transporte in Sd.Kfz. 251 halftracks), and the adjacent Grenadier regiment, motorised, with everyone on trucks. You then need artillery support: enter the artillery regiment, with three batteries, mixed, heavy and light, all either self propelled or towed. That means Wespes, Hummels, leFH18, sFH18, prime movers... you know the drill. Moving on, the division then needs an anti tank battalion for defensive purposes, which would be equipped with Jagdpanzer IVs and towed PaK 40s (so more halftracks) All this concentration of men and material is sure to draw the attention of enemy aircrafts. So the Flak battalion forms part of the division, equipped with 2 cm, 3,7 cm and 8,8 cm AA guns. Everything that is not self propelled has to be towed and transported too, of course. Lorries and halftracks are required. You are also going to need some 600 mm searchlights. And finally you need engineers, to guarantee the safe crossing of obstacles and the construction of field defences. The Pioneer battalion assumed those duties and, of course, it was also self propelled, which meant even more vehicles. And I am leaving a lot of stuff uncovered: signal battalion, the motor pool, the sanitation services, clerks, medis, food services, postal services... and everything has to be motorised, of course. In the end, for each 160 new Panzer IVs, we need: * 14.500 men * 9.000 rifles * 3.000 pistols * 1.500 submachineguns * 1.300 machineguns * 70 mortars * 60 howitzers * 120 FlaK guns * 4 600 mm searchlights * 13 PaK 40s * 11 Pz Bef Wg Panzer IV * 4 Bergepanzer III * 86 Flakpanzers * 280 Sd.Kfz. 250/251 halftracks. * 16 recon vehicles * 21 Jagdpanzer IVs * 6 Hummels + 12 Wespe, and a similar number of munitions vehicles. * 5 Observation tanks * 300 Kettenkrads * 170 motorcycles * 650 cars * 1443 trucks (!) * 136 Maultier * 58 ambulances * 18 buses * 160 trailers * 125 prime movers. Having more tanks at onces is incredibly expensive. And I haven't even mentioned how much fuel this would require, or the strategic resources, nor the crews needed to operate them...

@@VRichardsn Oh wow geez that's quite extensive, I knew about all this in broad strokes but I didn't have the numbers, thank you! Honestly, the thing that seems the strangest to me is the presence of the 18 buses, I would have assumed trucks would have done their job and that buses would be somewhat unsuitable for operating in the field.

@@lowesmanager8193 My take is that they would be strictly rear area vehicles, for non combat personnel. Like moving clerks, medics, etc.

Another factor is that by the end of the war the Panzer 4 was also rather unreliable (to a similar extent as the Panther), so making more of them wasn’t going to help reliability either.

I would dearly love one of the Australian Bren carriers that they put a 2lbr onto!

I wouldn't get much use out of it, having no Cardon Loyds to carry in it.

It's like a tank equivalent of the Austin Seven.

it should also be noted that although in a mobile battle of 1940 the B1 performed badly in 1944 when fighting against entrenched German forces they performed exceptionally well where they were used to great effect against the German fortifications at Royan, Pontilliac, and La Rochelle proving to be much more effective than the Sherman's as the shell on the Char b1s 75mm Howitzer had a much bigger High Explosive charge than any other Allied tank except the Churchill AVRE.

Thank you.

It was the French Tiger in terms of cost vs effectiveness. Brilliant when it worked, a liability when it didn't and to be fair most of the tanks he considers bad fall into that category. I like the Char B, it has personality and it's armour and guns were effective for it's time.

I would also like to add that the side armor is the same thickness as the front, its just the lack of slope. It was still practically immune against all German guns of the time short of maybe 10.5cm howitzers, but I doubt Germans were that desperate at the time.

@@builder396 From what i understand, during the rush into France, the German tanks juts kind of ignored the B1's, they just went around them.

You can see precisely where the tankette fitted in at the time of its conception. Last war, trenches, machineguns massively effective on defence, but not mobile enough to accompany the attack. Big tanks can break the deadlock. Why not put our machinegunners in a little tank so they can accompany the advance. Great idea until the "proper tank" Mobile, armoured and 3 man turret arrives.

ya germany and russia used tanklettes to train and develop tank doctrine and crews before they had proper tanks

It obviously could be an ammo carrier like a jeep. Transport stretchers. Maybe a tea brew station on the front.

id say the ft17 was the 1st tankette.

@@thurin84 Excellent point. There was a crop of little tanks - designed to accompany the breakthrough. FT17, Whippet, and the German one that looked like the whippet (Maybe didn't enter service). Mostly machinegun armed, but designed for speed (relative to their big brothers and sisters). Likely conceived to do the job that the armoured cars of 1914 did, but with improved offroad ability. Guderian reckoned the Whippet was the most terrifying British weapon, nerfed because the British insist it operate alongside horsed cavalry. So something that could have rolled through a machinegun barrage (fingers crossed), had to halt every time the Germans started brassing up the horses.