Oh My God, The Tank Is On Fire (Comparison) 

Thank the youtube algorithm, it's been throwing up a lot of video suggestions for everybody for years old videos. Mind, it hasn't been doing all that bad of a job with it's suggestions. Thumbs up for the vid.

Heres my Second video aswell ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1WH5bF-Mvd8.html

you probably dont give a shit but if you are bored like me atm you can watch all of the latest movies on instaflixxer. Been watching with my brother for the last few months :)

@Giovanni Anthony Yup, I have been watching on InstaFlixxer for years myself :)

@Giovanni Anthony Definitely, have been using InstaFlixxer for months myself :D

Lol.

Hehe

Except you got blown up first

Better hope the ammo is safe and sound

What if im an is2 lmaoooooooooo

But I dont have parts or FPE

man of culture as well i see

JakeTheTankmaster Well idk about you but I got a free Abrams.

its ok bro i i died about 20 times because i was on fire with no parts and fpe, but atleast i got a free abrams, t-80b, and some golden eagles.

Are you kidding me ? They had to earn that FPE. Obviously some of those knocked out sherman tanks haven't been to Sinai or kursk or other ww2 tank battle sites.

Nice

Imagine not having to worry about airbust shells, or high caliber armor piercing bullets.

Imagine not having tanks. This post was made by the Polish Army.

@@supernight.mp4 You are either saying that Poland had tanks (which they did) or you have failed successfully with the meme….

Imagine going to war This comment was made by the Swiss gang

The fire is in the kitchen!

Sir, the fire's encroaching on the magazines!

@@kabob0077 HMS Barham: Not again!

wdym, just dive in the olympic pool inside and you're saved

@@West_Coast_Gang "oh blimey Collins! Their is also a fire in the cinema, could you please pass trough bulkheads 3-7 and on your way back grab some scones from the pantry will you?"

That ignites the ammo... an instant suicide for the crew. Well, on the bright side, I guess you’re no longer burning to death.

Lmao

Lul

Ace Falcon XD

yep that's what i do most of the time

Bruh 😂. Tbh though , I bet Japanese tankers didn't get out when hit and burning to death. I bet they thought the pain and suffering by burning to death were all for the emperor.

Most of the Japanese tanks had armor thin enough to be penetrated by standard issue rifle rounds. Hell, they were probably more unlucky to die by fire in one of their tiny tanks...

@@torquejx875 seems like someone in the research facility decided to do some origami during work hours.

Surviving?! DISHONORABLE!

Japanese : You saved yourself? DISHONOR

was the camps just revenge for all their crews burning to death?

@@bodybagwilliams4054 lol

Oh yeah, because in 5 seconds the whole fighting comöartment is on fire. What are the shooting? Fucking incendiary?

@@betaium first off mate, it's a joke, second off yeah fire spreads quick.

@@legraff78 first: i know second: not thats fsst

Ahahahahaha

good ol british engineering

sadly, in the video on the universal carrier it turns out that the driver's position is terribly cramped.

The tank wouldnt catch on fire, it would instantly detonate due to how weak universal carriers are

shit that must have been scary. and yup, when the tank is on fire you are indeed well motivated to get out and in all of these cases you'd get out even faster including the Sherman aswell.

My friend’s grandfather was an m4 driver and when the hatch jammed, he took a sawed off shotgun next to him and started pounding, funny thing was, it was a German Wehrmacht that helped him get out

Dat face doe lol no person wishes that on another

Grant Nelson plz elaborate

Is there more to this story?

Nope, they'd just stay inside their flaming tank, since bailing out would see them mown down by the NKVD blocking detachments for their unforgivable, traitorous betrayal of the motherland, for daring to try to avoid burning to death

Lol

@@weldonwin thats... excessive

@@weldonwin HERESY!

tiny german 76 vs glorious 152. what do you think makes bigger hole

Lol 😂

Should have used the side hatches.

I had a friend that operated in one of those things back in '06 in Iraq. Didn't look too roomy.

As with Tunnel Rats, smaller is better.

I thought being small was a requirement for being a tanker?

@@WingMaster562 Eh depends. Most modern western MBTs are actually quite spacious - of course still claustrophobic coffins but a 6'2 person could fit without problem. I've even heard about a 6'6 Abrams commander. The Soviet/Russian tanks are very cramped though.

First, thank you for your service Brother. Second, I was a Bradley Gunner for many years as a Cav Scout. Sometimes I was never happier to only be 5' 6". 🤣 *Especially* when wrestling the Bushmaster around. Woof that thang was hefty!!

dentistguba I thought the way they got out was by cooking it some pasta

What *armour* ? :D

Actually, the first hit likely popped more than a few rivets, so.....

Get a pasta strainer

dentistguba not required, in the event of a penetration the rivits pop and create an emergency exit

Statistically, you won't be on fire as the war will end soon, and the Germans have a few tanks manned by fourteen year olds. Not sure about Panzerfaust tho. Nasty.

@@neilwilson5785 The 23rd Hussars seemed to prefer the Comet over the Sherman in terms of defeating Panzerfaust

XD this is the one master coment

*Console peasants:* "Well Fuck"

I instantly thought of this in my brain once I read the comment, man was that a good laugh, haven’t had that in probably 2 months

@@Felix-xw6du Damn same here, I can just imagine the chieftain just floating away standing completely upright

Hurrah for the Sherman

@@mikhailv67tv He underrated Panther, cuz it unlike Tiger I, Panther had an emergency hatchet at the bottom, but it was also a bad spot as you had to crawl under the tank. Imagine being the 4th or 5th man, and it explodes due to the fire reaches fuel tanks or ammo rack.

@@privateerbouncher9622 there is a brilliant Russian film where a con man poses as a Tank officer veteran. He gets outed for stolen honour due to his lack of burn scars

What the movies called it sounds interesting

@@quin2553 It's called the Thief in English or Vor in Russian. It is a brilliant film very sad. Heaps of awards.

exactly he's 6,3

Yes you can't discount size and age. A small 20 yo Soviet tanker would probably be able to leap out of that hatch in one move. .

@@alanpatrick8899 you gotta factor in survival instincts too, adrenaline makes pretty much anything possible. Absolutely need to get through a tiny hatch to save your life? Thousands of years of evolution has your back

Ichxho Sherman evac easy, ruski tank hard

The near starving Soviet soldier would have an even easier time

Ya forgettin something.... People were actually train to escape the tank and were 18-19 yrs old and not as tall as chieftain sook

Well most tanker still very is around 20 to 30 so yea

@@alisholst255 Yeah but usually in a war like ww2 there were waaaaaay more 18 or 19 yr old boys

The Stalinium thing is just a meme for Soviet tanks in games like World of Tanks. German fanboys honestly worship the tanks like the retards they are.

I try to escape from a t34 hatch before in a different way still very hard to get out the hatch is not as big as you think it is :|

Jesus 😂😂

Cowabunga it is.

What’s small arms fire going to do to flames?

@@asdfg2560 fighting fire with fire

@@asdfg2560 It allows you to eject yourself away from the flames

Imagine having fpe researched

Because Sherman had its suspension on the side, it could also have an escape hatch in the bottom.

The Bradley has a big ass door on the back.

Grren but that big door is hydraulically sealed by electric motors, and if the APC gets hit typically the electricity is lost. Yes there’s a smaller door on it, but it’s much easier to use the hatch right above your head.

@@Sgt_Chevron don't you have like 50 fucking batteries in that thing, how did you manage to lose power in all of them

that big ass door in the back is mighty hard to get to from the front, same reason why LAV 3/6s have a hatch on the side right beside the driver, because no way is he going to be able to crawl around the turret and get to the ramp

KazooLordHD T34 doesn’t have a hatch like the Sherman’s because T34 made of stalinium. Therefore. You don’t need to get out because it won’t get on fire.

I great grandfather is Ukrainian , he told me once he came across a Panther or big German tank some sort , the Panther missed his T-34 seven time in a row while his T-34 was stuck in a ditch while the track is blocked by a tree , the enemy shell bounced most time but a shell got through but stop right between the molded part of the turret.The driver was very frightened when the shell impact into the turret , he wanted to get out to escape but OG pointed his gun at him telling him sit a traverse the tank , he did then the enemy tank fired again but this time hit the tree infront of them , my OG tank fired at the enemy but only missing it by a few meters , the enemy tank fired again this time ricocheting off my OG tank side. Then my OG tank shot at the enemy again , the enemy tank did not respond so he shot it again and again for 6 time and the enemy by them has smoke coming out from it.

Aleksi134 You cannot penetrate stalinium!

Ūnited Statesss _OF_AMERICA Wow that really is cool~!

there will be reason to get out of the tank

Also with some of those its a matter of technique. I'm about 6ft tall but rather flexible, so I'd be interested in how I'd fare in the "oh bugger the tank is on fire" challenge. Some of these would be vastly easier with a flexible person, especially the T-34. In that case I'd just fold myself forward, grab the hatch and pull myself out. Panther however would be doomed to be slow. Comet would also be a challenge, a corner hatch just doesn't make sense. Stuart also wouldn't be as bad in real situation, he said so himself that he could have gotten out much faster but preferred to not risk injury to himself. IRL you'd more or less skip the suppporting stand and just get the hell out asap, disregarding any minor injuries to your body in process.

i'll tell you what, if i was at on the t-34, i'd position my feet so they are facing backwards (easier if you were shorter unlike him and more flexible) and push and slither down the front 😂

I'm 5'10" and 160 I'd have gotten out the stuart without the bottom part being open.

There is some footage of a panther getting knocked out in 1945 by a Pershing and they all got out pretty fast, and as far as I can tell the tank was buttoned up. Hence, the panther crews probably practiced evacuation during training.

+Sean F Yup. The last panther to be ckocked out during the war to boot.

Tall and broad shouldered, both traits the chieftan definitely has!

The Chieftain was tanker

That is one major thing to take into consideration.WW2 tankers were much smaller, physically. They would be 5-2 to 5-8,110 to 140 in weight. So yes, the relative difficulty is noteworthy, but the reality of getting out was much easier with smaller people. Better test would have been to use a 13 year old boy who plays soccer. That's about the right size and flexibility.

Erik Trimble Heh... Or me. I’m 21 and about 120. Maybe a bit tall at 5’ 9”, but someday I’ll find out how well I can maneuver in a WWII tank... I hope. 😏

At 6'1" and 290 my fat ass would get lodged part way.

Bear with Wikipedia numbers, please Panzer IV Units Made: 8500 (of ALL variants) Panzer V Panther Units Made: 6000 Panzer VI (Tiger I) Units Made: 1300 Panzer VI (Königstiger) Units Made: 500 All the numbers are rounded down... This means that the absolute backbone of the Panzerwaffe was the Panzer IV, with the Panther being a relatively close second. The Panther is well-armored thanks to the sloped plate and the oval mantlet (disregarding the shot trap on the earlier Panthers now) but it is not manufactured in sufficient numbers to fully replace the Panzer IV. The Tiger has only some 1300 units made and the Königstiger only around 500. The Tiger could be penetrated by the later Shermans even frontally (the scene in Fury is absolute nonsense - a real M4A3E8 Sherman would simply blow the Tiger apart from inside the killzone). However, the Panzer IV has a roughly 80mm straight plate up front, and that's talking the late-war variants. The Sherman, meanwhile, has comparable thickness of armor (around 70mm if memory serves) under a SLOPE. Thus the Sherman is actually better protected than the backbone of the Panzerwaffe, and with 76mm up-gunned variants, it may even be better armed. Also almost fifty thousand (!!!) Sherman tanks of all variants were built, and the M26 Pershing that brings many of the German Cats to absolute shame, was delayed on a political base. In the end, the Sherman was a good tank, unfairly put down by Wehraboos because the Germans manufactured miniscule amounts of something that wasn't even easily comparable. Feel free to copy over, Wehraboos need a good putting down.

indeed and I like the fact that its guns are now buffed in war thunder

@@SGTcz90cz Dont forget the Sherman that had more frontal armor when slopped then the tiger

Until they met me

Good joke my dude

Heavier cats that it rarely if ever encountered.

Alex Francey especially so given Germany’s garbage war economy.

it gets a bad rap because of the book "Death Traps"

Not the Hot take: Sherman where designed knowing that they where failures and thus more effort was put into crew survivability

German heavy cats were well designed in case of inside , they were just to mal formed (boxy tiger I , enormously big tiger II ) but panther and it's water turret ring (sorry for my English ) was really good solution. (Allowed to turn turret in different speeds ) . Just the material and doctrine of landship was bad. Even though Tigers are still cool tanks for video games.

That's when the pdw becomes a psw.

Oh my God my lower half is on fire

Ian Davidson *I'll just let the fire consume me*

*(Sits in the flaming tank)* "This is fine..."

Guess I’ll die

It’s the video game logic. Or more specifically, the FPS tank logic. Everybody think over which gun is better and who have more armor, and forgets that 90% of the war is just moving around and not fighting. Out of the 10% that is combat, 90% of what you are shooting at are infantry and soft skin that doesn’t require the most powerful gun or heaviest armor to deal with. People for left that real life is not a gladiator duel to the death.

@@artruisjoew5473 indeed.l war rarely involves 1 versus 1 action. I never heard or read any records of Battleships or battlecruisers engaged in a 1 on 1 fight like in age of sail... Where there are written records of ships broadsiding each other. But times change and tactics too... They say it's not viable to Battleships to battle for too long...as there fuel, ammo and other resources in play

That's also why there's lots of German tank Aces with insane kill counts like Wittman, or Heartman and Marseille in Luftwaffe, But not so much in the allied forces, because like US, they often pull skilled operators back to weapon school to teach their experience, while the axis keeps their aces in the fronts because they can't afford them leaving the frontline.

Matsimus! Huh. 😂 🇨🇦

@@wantdatcadpat44 Should I notify local authorities that you're having a stroke?

@@essentialjazzforaspiringmu1605Authorities? hi 911? Police please. Yeah there's this guy having a stroke, could you get rid if him?

opps, i wish i put that in the video goddamn it.

Do I see a part 2 coming?

He almost brained himself on that one.

If you do it again, with all the vehicles in it, cut out anything before "oh my god the tank is on fire", make it a much shorter video. (Also preferably with less editorialising: The results should speak for themselves!)

The_Chieftain if possible it would be interesting to get comparative stats for modern tanks. Also what of tanks with floor mounted escape hatches?

Ben D Jr yep, because tanks are cramped.

Well, the best choice is still a zombie, because they won't need to exit, but yes, tankers, like B-17 Ball Turret Gunners and Olympic acrobats, should be short, all other things being equal.

The Zombie Local 666 changed that. They are permitted to get out of the tank when on fire but they tend to wander around and eat the soldiers brains

Keep in mind, though, the shorter/smaller you get, the heavier every part of the tank seems to get. Unsprung hatches, sledges, wrenches, spare track and links, etc. While the Chieftain is at a severe disadvantage for squirming around and wriggling though hatches, he is probably significantly stronger than the normal 5'7" tanker from the era, which means opening some of those hatches is even more ridiculous

+Ben D Jr generally speaking, if the tank has good controls that don't require that much strength(unlike the T-34 driver controls) Yes. infact, all armies across the world have height restrictions for tankers esspeically the Russians, in fact, the only way Nickolas Moran even became a tanker was through a loophole, he was already part of another branch of the military (officer related jobs i think.) and then transitioned to be a tanker. if he went to enlist to be a tanker as a civilian, he'd be rejected as he was too tall.

Not really. The enemy usually have more important things to shoot at than barely armed tank crews without their tank

@Nut yeah, more urgent things, you know like the 3 other tanks shooting at you? you mean like the accompanying infantry that are shooting at you with actual rifles and MGs? crews bailed out of the tank is the least of the enemy's concerns. real life is not a video game you know.

@@artruisjoew5473 nah my allied infantry regiment will take care of their infantry regiment and my friendly tanks will cover me from other enemy tanks

@@redsnowleopard im sure your friendly tanks will appreciate you wasting time shooting at harmless bailed out crew instead of the enemies who can actually hurt you. with allies like you, who needs enemies?

@@artruisjoew5473 the infantry have anti tank weapons, the other tanks have cannons that can deal with tanks, we have a hull mounted machine gun that can fire independently, one less enemy crew is one less enemy tank in the future

Genius

@@hmsrenown7801 hello from the deep

LMFAO when someone makes a jack-in-the-box joke. 10/10

10/10 putting ammo all over the turret side best engineering blyat)))

Lmao

Insert joke about Soviet space program here

Hilarious joke.

WeBe Flexin yes because an unarmed tank crewman is far more of a threat than any other thing on the battlefield.

Most bailing tank crews get to run away as they are never taken our alone. Your crew runs while the enemy faces the rest of your friendlies. But yeah that can happen too

Bran Johnson That same “unarmed crew” can always get a new tank, but they only live once...

WeBe Flexin that's an interesting thought, but the amount of tanks on the battlefield are more limited by the actual tanks not amount of crewman. But ya, if there was a veteran tank crew responsible for the death of your comrades you probably wouldn't want the crew coming back to fight you again.

Bran Johnson The same can be said about bailed-out airmen. They can live and return to the fight. Prisoners are a bother too: you have to feed them and treat them when sick. That still does not make killing bailing airmen and unarmed soldiers any less of a crime.

htet arkar i see a fellow weeb is among us

I mean... if you think about it... if the petite girls are manning the tanks, they're going to have a much better time maneuvering around in those cramped quarters.

Miho is lucky enough to already to be half way out

Ah yes, the "the armor will protect us" tanks, so what do you do? Be halfway out at all times

Don't forget the bullshit spall liner for their tanks cuz a schoolgirl's burning corpse doesn't exactly make for good TV.

thats a good point hate to have a jammed hatch as my only escape

That's why the hatch of the T-34 is better armoured than the rest of the hull. With 75mm instead of 45mm the hatch was well protected. Not even a Tiger was abeled to penetrate this hatch from a distance of 500 meters.

Tyler Foley Why so impolite? Yes, APCR can penetrate. Maybe. I don't know. But PzGr 39 couldn't penetrate the hatch. It has a penetration of 120mm at 100 metres. And if you don't know yet, the hull of T-34-76 and T-34-85 is angled, so the 75mm hatch turns into 144mm. Any questions?

IdioticNuke No I didn't. Of course you'll penetrate T-34-85 with a Tiger when you're only 10 metres away, also through the hatch. But I was talking about 500 metres. It doesn't matter that the gun was higher placed than the hatch.

Schnitzel 03 You forgot about the loss of power from the impact of the shell on the angled plate, so that also cuts down the penetration capabilities of the shell itself.

Especially with the soviet military where they had an endless supply of men due to national service laws.

Magnus Bergner *lose. Why is this so difficult to spell?

@@steviefordranger198 ever heard of typos dumbass.

@@wetlettuce4768 no, they didnt. As soon as 1942 they had manpower shortages.

@@pcz1642raz They did start having manpower shortages during late WW2 they had no more reserves and lowered the enlistment age 16 and 17 year olds were now being conscripted maybe even younger were slipping through the net with false declarations during recruitment. Declassified CIA doctuments suggest the soviet army was well staffed after WW2 right up to the mid to late 80s where troop numbers started falling.

If I recall the Soviets generally selected men below 5.6ft for tank crews during the time of the T-72

rare Short king W

EXACTLY, everyone else here has been stating that when your well motovated and practiced you'd get out faster which is true but they're are factors working against you like being hit by shrapnel.

Here is an interesting RU-vid clip of a tank duel at cologne you see the crew baling out of a Sherman and a Panther during combat. Just might be a bit graphic. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6gkyFNRw9NY.html&t 0:49 for the Sherman 3:30 for the panther

yes i have seen it many times and have read the analysis on the battle, the Commander was able to escape with a missing leg thats just how easy it was to escape, unfortunately he died about 15 minutes later as he couldn't seek medical attention.

Robert H. Goddard: The Father of Rocketry plus when you got out of the tank you would be greeted with bow mounted mg fire

You'd probably have a lot of adrenalin so might not release at the time. And yes when your in danger you do move a hell of a lot faster.

@Craig Dillon Exactly. I could only test one tank using your method . Time to rethink. I know, we will show what it is like for someone who is too tall not trained etc etc to get out then we will see how much RELATIVELY easier/harder it is to get out of other tanks. That way no-one dies for what is basically just a show you how relatively easy/hard it was.

"Untrained"? he is a US Army Tank officer who has served in war. His height is a valid criticism but untrained is bunk

@Sean Gilday "Untrained" as in he has NOT been trained in WWII tank bail out methods. He quite probably is trained on exiting (QUICKLY) from an Abrams but NOT WWII tanks.

He served in an M1A1 but he's also a big person and its not like he had all day to practice in one of these tanks

How much training do you think a Soviet conscript had? Probably less than a late war panzer crewman with his measly 2 hours.

yup same with their tactics aswell. They'd always get supreme intel about the enemy, send in airpower then bombard them with artillery and then finally send the Men into finish what was left. They were very conservative with their advancing with a High emphasis on preserving human life and if the had been as aggressive as say the Russians, they probably would have taken Berlin by October of 1944 most likely.

Robert H. Goddard: The Father of Rocketry You can replace your weapon but you cant replace good soldiers. Better for them to be drilled to the head for losing a tank then to be drilled by a tank shell when they cant get out

Is this "collapsible fuel bladder" the same as a self-sealing fuel tank (used on most planes during the war)? If not can you direct me to a source on this feature?

Let's not forget that when the self-sealing tanks were introduced to F4F series, the expert pilots hated them as they made the plane more sluggish :) Though I guess Solomons campaign kinda vindicated the decision - as while it curtailed top fliers a bit, it also allowed many new pilots to survive mistakes and learn from them (I guess aircrew loss comparison from Santa Cruz is telling. It was a Japanese victory, sinking Hornet, damaging Enterprise etc... But air crew losses were some 140 vs. 26 - meaning Japan basically lost two carrier's worth of air groups while US Navy gained a ton of pilots with combat experience to put on new carriers).

It was a self-sealing tank, but it was different from the normal ones of the time. The US (Goodyear actually) developed a multi-layer self sealing tank with a sandwich design with an inner layer that was designed to contract/collapse once it was punctured. It was heavy/bulkier than the more common self-sealing tanks used by European powers of the time, but it also provided a lot more protection.

your point is?

@@kahlil2638 His point is he would get out faster bcs you are in a life threatening situation with no care if you get mildly hurt

@@glorifiedcouch648 but then again so is the guy with the spring-loaded hatch. But the sad reality is, because of these design flaws, a lot of these soldiers did die tragically inside these tanks.

@@kahlil2638 ehh yeah? What does that have to do with your first comment?

@@glorifiedcouch648 I believe his point was to insist their hatches were sufficient because as he is insisting, these tanks could be escaped faster than depicted in this video.

Yes it's a big lad. But imagine doing this in thick winter clothing.

He mentioned in a Military History Visualized video that he was 198cm, or 6'6

G3 Heathen yes. How unfortunate for all involved.

salt

Spandau

HerrWayne45 Lebel.

Probably that he talks like he knows everything but most of it is assumptions or otherwise pulled out of his arse

Jonnydodger I can’t point to a source on this, but I recall reading that the Churchill had the highest crew survival rate of any Allied tank to see widespread service.

You could run raw numbers, per capita, or general effects per battle. The Sherman still comes out on top. Threats were no different than any other tank. Spalling effects weren't always fatal because you could get out of the tank and it was much easier to get someone out of a tank if injured. On the wide hatches you could pull someone out without having to manuever their arms up. In a T34 you strained to pull out dead bodies after the battle. There was no helping anyone who couldn't move themselves and it was already a strain on a healthy person in many cases just to get out. The best example of this was the classic film of a Panther knocking out a Sherman which is then taken out by a Pershing later on. After being hit in the chassis the turret crew bails out quickly. This included a guy with a freshly amputated leg. Try doing that in an A36! Tanks like the Panther had 3 points of entry/egress but one (loader hatch) was tiny, heavy, and meant to pass ammo through it. The other two were the commanders hatch and drivers. The driver's hatch was only really accessible for the driver. The loader and gunner had to get around the gun and through the commanders hatch. If there as a fire then they would still have to wait in line for the commander to get out or to move the commander's body out of the way. The fact of the matter is that if your tank was penetrated then the chances of dying were less from the shell than from that shell and more from the subsequent chance of fire or from the follow up shots. The longer you were in a tank the higher your chance of dying. Zaloga talks about his survivability after his own tank was knocked out and how other tankers fared in Russian tanks (they didn't).

gandalfff literally just watch the video comparisons, its clear as day that the Sherman was easier to get out of, not only because of hatch placement (and assisted hatches) but also because of the spaciousness of the tank, which not only allowed greater freedom of movement, but also meant a penetrating shot (and its shrapnel) could potentially miss crew members inside.

Well shermans design compared to panthers, is2's t34's or tigers.... its just bad.

Stein871 Haha, exactly but you forgot about 75mm on the panther D

It's not though, the Sherman was used by militaries up until the 80s, while the panther only saw very limited use after WW2 with the french because it wasn't a good design.

no Wehraboo applies to ALL fanboys of the wehrmacht not just tanks. and it's a well established word like Weeaboo.

So, is hypocritic Shermanboo also a word or we just continue using typical "patriotic" yankee?;)

panzerwerfer 42

I like to call slavaboos "stalinium swallowers"

+TheArklyte Sherman supporters don't resort to distortions bordering on mythology (they don't have to). Also nice that you added the nationalist bigotry ;)

Wilco Wortel with Tommycoocker was meant that the Sherman Ammo easily went up in flames after getting hit by grenades or the old panzerschreck. And when your ammo is burning in your tank... you probably getting coocked more than well done. BUT i aggree with you! The Sherman wasn't a bad tank like everyone is saying :)

yea, i know.. but all tanks had this problem. With the wet storage, the M4 even had an advantage :) . Must have been some kind of propaganda, And some things just showed up after the war, like the "lights like a ronson", which came from a commercial long after WWII.. wasn't it 1953 ? And also the name hetzer, for the German 38T tank.. These things are made up by people after the war.

Rather what you say is propagandy, and a sorry excuse for a desperate defence of a mediocre machine, brought to religious praise decades after the war because you can't swallow up the truth.

@@TheTeodorsoldierabvb just watch "the tank is on fire" parts from the chieftain. See which one you'd rather be in.. GE tanks had the big advantage of being in retreat the whole time and so ambush allied tanks. Most GE had low FOV on gunner sights, no stabilisation, difficult to repair etc.. you can believe what you want.. you might marry a supermodel with that fantasy...

Dude, I watched this whole shit show, that's why I'm saying it's shit. Shall I start with how flawed these pathetic arguments are? First off, difficult escape wouldn't be such a problem if only your tank was well armored, which it wasn't. So now that you inevitably have to deal with the fact that it's outgunned and outarmored, you gotta think of ways to save the crews. How about the petrol engines that caught fire so easily? How about the tall and obnoxious silhouette, making it spacious and beign the only reason for this tall scrawny guy to be able to get out? How about the ammo racks on the sides? Believe what you want, as you yourself said. I personalyl wouldn't enter a tank that's so likely to get fucked, it's focus is on escape hatches.

One of the reasons the primary design criteria for the M1 series tank was protection of the crew.

@PasoFreak It's almost like this retarded channel's only purpose is to shit on tanks that aren't American with bs like this - comparing escape time from different hatches in unrealistic conditions to feed his ego.

@@veliki_dlek yep Lindy and the Chief are both over 6 feet tall and during the time period of those tanks most of the men were 5,6 and shorter

@@veliki_dlek A Soviet WW2 veteran (Dmitry Loza) praised the Sherman for being more spacious than the T-34. I'd say that says something about the Sherman and especially about getting out of it.

It was designed to accomodate those big American soldiers, not to require only smaller than average crewmen. We could have built MUCH better armored tanks if we had not had to build them to fit every West Point football full-back that wound up in the Tank Corps in WWI.

,,,and therefore a big ass target! XD

@@weseld1 If the Sherman had a longer barrel gun to begin with, it would have done much better as a tank. If it had a high velocity 75mm with 3in penetration at 1000 meters, it would have made up for the crappy 2in of armour. Now I know the Sherman was later upgraded with a higher velocity gun, but I'm just saying if it had a high velocity to begin with, it would have gotten more kills on German Panzers and may have even pushed through Nazi lines even quicker thus possibly resulting in the wat ending a month or 2 earlier and maybe the US reaching Berlin first. That's just my opinion.

@@chiefwolfinx5179 Unlikely. For the most part, tanks were used to support infantry by killing enemy infantry and destroying hardpoints like bunkers or trenches. They also needed the ability to take out anti-tank guns. All of these jobs required a tank with a good high-explosive filler, which the Sherman had. Besides, more often than not, if the 75mm Shermans were facing up against a tank, it was a Panzer IV which they could pretty comfortably deal with using APHE or HVAP (the latter actually being able to penetrate Tiger Is from the front at close ranges).

@@chiefwolfinx5179 The high velocity gun was pretty poor at anything but penetrating the armor of other tanks. And other thanks were about 3% of the targets a Sherman shot at. The 75mm was a much better 'all around' gun because it was the better gun 97% of the time. And even then it was perfectly good against a Panzer 4. Shermans vs. Panthers and Tigers were rare events.

if there was a Pz Sfl The side armor is just like a Curtain, and you have a large opened space

If they included Katyusha...

If they included the Char B1, he would have to go to the burning engine bay to acess the escape hatch.

The driver in tge pz3 looking up realizing how fucked he is

Nooo they did not. At least the government anyway. The Tank designers did though. If you look at some of the government designed tanks.... Tank crews were fucked. Thankfully, the sherman was bought, and made instead of the other options.

Logan Mainord did you not see the fucking m3?

@@Alucard-gt1zf The M3 Lee and the M3 Grant were both well received and generally effective in the time period for which they were designed.

Well, what can you say about a Sherman tank as high as a King Tiger, while having no armor?

@@dmitriytheloader4477 no armour Factoring the slope it had decent armor particularly in the later models

Is this a joke? I've seen so much tank related stupidity that I can't tell anymore. In the 1980's M60 was the still the core of first-rate US armored units stationed in West Germany and M48s were actively used by NG. M60s are still in service all over the place.

Notice I said reserves also derivatives and almost all were either out going or already in mothballs so even though they weren’t any active M4’s in the U.S. arm forces by the 80’s, however they were derivatives of it still around also when I joined the M60’s was a reservist tank and M48’s was already removed from active service this is 1990 !? Also the tanks I saw as a child was the derivative M51 and artillery models that was in 1981 at the age of 10 years old and I have pictures of it of course my stepdad was a U.S.M.C. reservist, may he rest ever more in peace 2-17-1987 Fort Bliss Texas

iirc Paraguay is using Shermans right now

The funny thing is in 1939 when the design for what would become the M4 was rejected by U.S. services only after 12-7-1941 did the U.S. official except it long after Great Britain and it’s allies! The real funny part is that it wasn’t mothballed until the late 1960’s and even then they continue in reserve duty until finally replaced by newer tanks!! Also M4 was weak against very big caliber guns but against same or even bigger it could hold its own, the sad part is the U.S. didn’t expect to have to fight Soviet tanks and didn’t inspect captured T34 for weaknesses were as Soviets did, although they did pass on some information they didn’t teach the North Koreans to use them properly. On plus side the gun on the M4 was constantly upgraded from 7.5cm to 7.6cm to 3” to 9cm to 10.5cm and to say nothing of multitude of derivatives it spawned!!! A bad tank no, a bad rap yes

D eh anything is a good tank if all your enemies have to fight you is an automatic rifle.

especially when you consider that 1/3 of fighter planes in ww2 were lost in Training accidents on your own country's soil and another 1/3 lost in Mission take off and Landing accidents having a plane thats easy to get out of and Preserve the pilot is a bloody good idea. And that's the land-based aircraft, the Carrier based ones were much worse.

But why is a sliding cockpit better?

+ya boi because you only have slide it back which doesn't require too much strength unless it's jammed. the Cage like hinge opening BF109's cockpit you have to lift it against the force of Gravity and wind resistance which obviously requires more strength and is even worse if it's jammed also because it's caged even if you managed to break the glass you can't fit through the small holes.

Robert H. Goddard: The Father of Rocketry Also the air flow helps as generally once you unlatch it'll start sliding

Thx for the help :)

MamboJambo thats cuz they knew a lot of those tanks would be shotdown

Fair, but same happened with German, Britt, and Russian tanks. Yet..? Who cared? Nobody.

MamboJambo well actually a lot of german tanks were made to be more potent then to have sheer numbers

Yea, but they still got shot to pieces sooner or later.

MamboJambo yeah but some could take down 4 Sherman's before going down

JT Outdoors - fractionally. The differences are exaggerated by the media - you'd have to go back to medieval times to notice any substantial differences.

Neil Griffiths the average European has gained 10cm more height than the people in the 1930s

And smoke. Lots of smoke. And incoming arty. Perfect.

With adrenaline comes panic and well, things you know by heart can go out the window.

You said everything i wanted to say

Found the wehraboo

The problem is that people say its the best tank in ww2, when its not, yeah, it has good cannon and good armour, but after going 30 kms the tank lost his engine, transmission and went on fire.

@@croesuslydias6488 I'm not a wehraboo. I just like the tank, Nothing wrong with that. Its my interest, You should read better before saying that.

got the massive door in the back?