Panzerfaust in WW2 Movies 

The classic quote, "History doesn't repeat itself, it rhymes."

Difference is a RPG can be reloaded.

@@roskcity The RPG-2 and later RPG-7 trace the lineage back to a german prototype/development called "Panzerfaust 250" not the weapon that made it into service. The USSR captured plans and used those to start development of the RPG series. And the west germans did the same and came up with the "Panzerfaust 44mm" aka Leichte Panzerfaust or Lanze (Lance) during the cold war. That also looks like an RPG-7

Sad it is but conflicts rarely could be avoided, war just add bloods in it.

... Panzerfausts were simple (...) rocket launchers* that found their* way ... / RPG-7, a system that traces its* design (it's = it is) ...

Ah well, it’s Hollywood

Death and glory yanks in action.

@@patricklamshear6662 I'll never understand why Hollywood thinks people want to see unrealistic movies these days. Sure, they make a large amount of money at release, but few people hate seeing inaccurate American action flicks like Fury more then Americans. The old days of 'Murica Fuck yeah! films being the most engaging are long gone. American Sniper, Lone Survivor, We were Soldiers and Sicario are praised endlessly for giving people an action film with a message that's grounded in reality. Every nation wants to see their soldiers and people displayed as being more heroic, brave, and effective then other nations, but I (and many other Americans) feel like the hollow and reality defying feats of most modern film characters are just insulting. I am very glad to see the trend of shitty action over plot films being the bread winners disappearing here in the States.

@@epluribusunum5318 I’ll never understand why people can’t get most realistic films are 1) boring as shit 2) won’t attract a lot of people and 3) won’t last long, last one depends on the scenario tho

@@epluribusunum5318 You may have answered your own question there: "they make a large amount of money at release". Unfortunately the operative word in show business is business. Makers of movies that don't make money tend to be movie makers who don't get backing. Another element is that the people making the movies, and all involved, are artists rather than history professors and so come at it from that angle. Also, there are limitations with accuracy, budgetary, health and safety, what works on the screen etc. then just sourcing the right equipment (I'm sure you've seen move than one movie with Germans in American tanks and halftracks). Fury was the first movie where an actual Tiger tank was available and even then they also used a mockup. Some of the best quality 'movies' of late have actually been TV series. Band Of Brothers, The Pacific, Generation Kill (top of my list). Largely due to budget and the people involved having a good track record.

I suspect the Panzerfaust would have been dramatically more effective had the 100m version been in service during the allied invasion instead of the 30m range version. I really would add a lot more ambush options. -The Panzerschrek wasn't a direct copy of the US Bazooka. The Germany army had a 28mm squeeze bore gun the 2.8 cm sPzB 41 that was deployed at Platoon level. (12 men to a squad, 3 squads to a platoon). When this became too weak in power they developed an 88mm rocket launcher called the 8.8 cm Raketenwerfer 43. This was a breached weapon with a small carriage weighting about 140kg. When examples of the American Bazooka captured from Russia were sent to the German armies test range at Kumsdorf the Panzerfaust & -Raketenwerfer 43 were being evaluated and naturally compared to the Bazooka. The Germans immediately realized the value the Bazooka and modified the Raketenwerfer 43 by modifying the round with electrical ignition and firing it from an open tube. They used a magneto to stop the problems of batteries freezing. -The Panzerschrek needed a gas mask or shield as the round hadn't quite finished its burn as it exited but late war versions had a faster burn rocket that didn't need a shield. -Panzerschrek had a much higher muzzle velocity than the Bazzooka but whereas the German weapon had crude iron sights the American weapon had an optical sight of greater precision and this is the origin of the greater range capability. -Raketenwerfer 43 was produced in small numbers. It had much greater range and accuracy due to its precision of construction. -Panzerchrek seems to have had low build quality which mitigated its potential greater range. Panzerschreks were issued at Platoon level because they had more weight and range. Panzerfaust were much lighter and went to squads directly.

I remember reading John Toland's In Mortal Combat: Korea 1951-1953, where it was mentioned that when North Korea invaded, the South Korean soldiers and their American instructors defending the border towns tried the original bazooka on the T34-85s, and their shots bounced off the front armor of the T-34s "like pingpong balls". It wasn't until much later when the bigger bazookas arrived on the front lines that they started taking out North Korean tanks.

This one, a scene, featured in the film Downfall in 2004, when a young boy, a member of the Youth Corps, used his weapon by knocking out a T-34 tank in Berlin in 1945.

Good additional info thank you!

What is the name of this movie?

Did he kill himself with the Panzerfaust?

@@roskcity yes

Late correction but this is a change from the real story. The man did speak Finnish but he only arrived at the end of the instructions and asked to hear it again, the instructor gave the short version: Pull pin, aim and press button. There are several small changes like this in the movie that doesn’t make sense to me and I could go on about them all day.

I gotta work that movie into a review it's a good laugh

Why would you consider it a revolutionary weapon, I would say the STG since it was the framework for modern assault rifles but the Faust just seems like a cheap solution to the Germans anti tank problem

@@rustyshackleford1011 It was the first light, easy to use and effective HEAT weapon in service. The Panzerschreck and Bazooka are older but require more training.

@@mbr5742 never thought it about it that way thank you for the explanation

Bravery and fanatical group thinking walk hand in hand down the road of waste for common people's. The power families and their banker's count their profit margins. Have a great day 😌

The projectile couldn’t have accelerated much in the half foot between the boy and the tank…..makes ya wonder

@@offdeadeye88 это не реально, это же не противотанковая граната , подорвать фауст под днищем танка, не получилось бы

Curiosity No panzerfaust in italian war movie

@@offdeadeye88 The velocity of the projective doesn't matter with a shaped charge. The penetration is achieved when the warhead explodes.

If I recall, the Americans did something similar when retaking fort drum in the Philippines. The fires burned for days.

... standard*. And a gas mask filters harmful gas out of the air, but does not enrich it with oxygen. So, if there is no oxygene left, you suffocate even with a gas mask on.

Thanks for adding some extra information for everyone 🙏

A reloadable panzerfaust? I guess Sniper Elite 3 wasn't so inaccurate after all, when it came to panzerfausts.

@@rickoshay5525 the variant he is mentioning was never produced, and never even left the drawing board

But now after the war, it was succeeded by the highly-advanced Panzerfaust III RPG by the German Army which serves not only as an anti-tank weapon, but also as an anti-bunker weapon, in a disposable launcher with a rangefinder.

I recall specifically the SMAW when I was in the Marines, which was the single loudest thing I've ever heard. How such a tiny weapon could produce such a fearsome back blast defies belief!

Exactly.

Называется - бревно для самовытаскивания

@@Region040??

@@frankmetcalfe9391 русское название бревна. Не переводится на другой язык

Yeah good luck dislodging a 50 ton MBT with logs.

Might do in the near future. 😊

Sounds great 🤩

Немецкая была лучше в время второй мировой войны. Только в время войны в Корее американцы сравнялись по пробитию т 34

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq I'd love a discussion of ALL the hand-held anti tank weapons. The game Heroes & Generals has about 90-95% of them.

PIAT had a very low launch signature: there was little sound or smoke and the enemy would have trouble finding the launcher allowing the troops to escape. Range was reasonable and the ammunition was light. It had its advantages.

Thanks so much brother. I really appreciate hearing this as I try to ramp up the quality of new videos 🙏

I enjoyed Talvisota.

m in something like the sherman they had very good survival rates they were especially good when compared to there german counterparts which had higher burn rates and lower survival rates when penetrated

@@banegas0411 They also started putting the ammunition in wet ammo racks toward the end of the war.

Being an average infantryman, you are exposed to the element and every type of weapon the enemy possesses, especially artillery, which is responsible for 70% of the battlefield casualties.

Okay just make sure you are not using it in a small room or fallout shelter!

considering that 1. that sherman eariler caught fire so quick not even the commander managed to get out - actual reports vary on this 2. all the shit hanging and dangling inside of fury is just arsonist wetdream - that amount of stuff might characterise the crew more but it's highly against any regulations. verdict - fury might be a good tank movie but it sucks as any other movie since established laws don't apply to the titular tank and it's crew.

That's why smart tanks have infantry support. The infantry shoots the lil Nazis, the tanks shoot the big nazis and in the end we have lots of living allied soldiers and lots of good Nazis.

The only invulnerable armour is plot armour. It's just a shitty movie, can't help it.

Not, if there is Brad Pit ( known as F...ck-Daddy ) inside ! F....., f....,f....( most used word ! )

Well made with thoes clips visualizing what said about the weapon. I like.

I do love battlefield I'm just extra terrible at it these days

Planning on it in the near future!

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq awesome! can't wait

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq are you serious about Fury being an ok movie? It was horrible and inaccurate beyond reason. Pure American propaganda. This old movie you showed clips of, "Die Brücke" is MUCH better.

@@gulliverthegullible6667 Well I can certainly agree with you that Die Brucke is a superior film.

@@gulliverthegullible6667 Did you see the remake of that same movie? The Bridge?

I have a buddy who is a 20th century conflict history major and that is his view as well. He says it explains the videos and the medications being given to Hitler.

Swedish speaking guy did not understand the instructions given in Finnish.

It'd be a struggle just to reach the trigger holding it like that.

... collateral* damage

JoJo rabbit (2019). It’s a comedy/drama about the life of a young German boy during the last months of the war

I didn't get what happened the first time I saw the scene. I thought the guy was killed by the tank's machine gun, and the other guy meant the tank's front by "chest" : )

Thank you! Panzerfaust = tank fist. Panzerschreck = tank fear. If you were wanting the translation. Overall the weapons are fairly different in use and effectiveness.

Panzerfaust doesn't mean "tank fist", it means "mailed fist" (i.e. a medieval knight's armoured glove used to punch and smash). The Panzerfaust user manuals even showed a cartoon of a mailed fist smashing a T-34. In a Panzergrenadier vehicle recognition manual from 1944, tanks are actually called "Panzerfaust des Heeres" - "The army's mailed fist")

@@HO-bndk I gave a very basic translation but you are correct about the etymology of the word Panzer with it's relation to armor worn not tanks. Of course in relation to WW2 the word panzer is associated with tanks as is the weapon. It would make sense that there is some fluidity and double meaning to the word in reference to an armored fist in that drawing.

The Panzerfaust was a one time use weapon against tanks (but also infantry if the fragmentation belt was put on the warhead) and it was extremely cheap and didnt need much training. The Panzerschreck on the other hand was more or less an improved bazooka that could be reloaded but it also required good training to be effectifly used. If you are realy interested i could dig up some videos that explain both in detail if you want

Faust was an imaginary character. Shrek was real.

Cool video!

The Panzerschrecks* used* to* be like ...

Best war movie period not just German. American war movies are absurd hero fantasy propaganda films...

Absolutely on my to do list

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq you’ll need to include ‘The Beast’ “RPG-tank-KABOOM!”

... there are *SS-soldiers talking ...

JoJo Rabbit

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq thanks

I'll work on it 🥸🙏

I doubt it. The RPG is in its basic function very similar to it and modern armor is seriously good at defending against those. Although this highly varies fromt ank to tank. The best place to be a crew member of would propably a MErkava tank do to its main funciton beeing crew protection (arent that many Israelis to use for the army so humans are ins hort supply, better keep them safe) while I would be to sure about the russian tanks, especially the remaining cold war ones, because russian doctrine during the cold war was basically to expect total loss of the initial tank force within 2 weeks of WW3...so they designed them about easy replaceability with comparably more expendable crews.

Define modern and tank. Leopard 1 - yes. Leopard 2 - maybe from the rear

oh big time

It fausts Panzers...

Very simple blackpowder propellant charge in the tube. Recoilless as the propellant exited behind the tube. Just don't stand behind anyone using these.

@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq but it seems like it has power behind it while flying. If that’s a controlled black powder rocket that’s interesting because usually a fuse in black powder is 💥

RPG is the launcher. The PG-2 projected grenade was based on the Panzerfaust but the launcher (RPG-2) is not disposable. Neither the Panzerfaust or the PG-7 have a sustain motor. All propellant is burnt on launch. The later PG-7 propelled grenade has a sustain motor and is fired from the more famous RPG-7 launcher.

@@bob_the_bomb4508 I understand the rpg 7 I guess it’s a very specific load of black powder to keep it from going 💥 on launch in the tube

@@chacdogful to be very picky it’s not ‘black powder’, but a different type of low explosive propellant. The low velocity of detonation of the launch cartridge, combined with the recoilless design, means there isn’t a great deal of shock imparted to either the PG-2 or PG-7 warheads on launch. Also they have piezoelectric-initiated detonators which requires a contact against the nose of the warhead to initiate them, plus a couple of other safety mechanisms built in. Also the HE charge itself is very stable.