maybe a video on the zis41, 43 or half-tracks in general? I find very half-tracks to be both a very interesting and underrated concept. As always, love your content and have a happy new year.
This is so fake and such Clickbait. Tank’s don’t actually exist. They were a propaganda tool in World War I, and were never actually produced. There are no legitimate or official records of any kind showing any tank ever used in combat in any war. Tanks are not real!!
As a none native speaker, when I hear "... they were pressed into service!" I have a picture of 18th century recruiters dragging these vehicles from their families and farms and force them to fight.
Apparently 11 Renault R35s and 3 Panzer I Befehlswagens were rearmed with 20mm ShVAK cannons. Some Panzer 38(t)s were at the very least requipped with Soviet DT machine guns. There is also a photograph of a Panzer II modified as a factory crane in 1946. Even more interesting however, are a few more possible SPG conversions that a source I found mentions: "Generally questions Re Tronfeina Technology Domestic Weapons permanently Controlled technical management NKV under Guidance E.Satelya. Ranbots along Rearm Trophy Tanks Domestic Artsisgechami were conducted up to mid-1944 GODET. Behind This period Enterprises The NKV were Made and tested Following Experienced Self-propelled guns samples: -SAU ZIS-57 Ch L57-mm Anti-tank ZIS-2 cannon on the chassis tank 38(T)╗ H developer Ny 92 plant (Gorky); -76 mm Cannon on PzKpfw II chassis (more likely total H rearmament Self-propelled guns lMapder╗) H developer Research Institute 13; -85 mm Zenithnaya Cannon model 1939 d. on chassis PzKpfw IV Ch tank Developers Plants No. 8 and No. 9; -SU-122G H 122 mm M-30 howitzer on the chassis Trophy Easy tank with Martial Department From the back (rather altogether rearmament Self-propelled guns lVespe╗) H developer Unknown; -SG-152 H 152 mm D-1 howitzer on the chassis PzKpfw IV Ch tank developer Unknown. However No Details self-propelled guns data, except list of them in the Summary Report Technical Management People's Commissariat Arms until Found." Source in question: vetrabotnik.narod.ru/Texts/TWW/USSR/Panzer/T008.htm
@@alan6832 capturing ammo would probably be a bit easier than whole vehicles but making it themselves without having the original production machinery would be a pain and basically not worth it unless the ammunition of the original nation and the capturee is almost identical.
@@grigss3027 If the allies didn't have ammo plants to devote to enemy caliber ammo; then I would suggest just limiting use of captured vehicles to the numbers that can be maintained with captured ammo and parts.
@@alan6832 The standard British co-axial machinegun for tanks., the 7.92 BESA, used the 7.92 x 57 Mauser cartridge, so they had some ammo production capability devoted to a standard German cartridge. The US and UK are not good examples for captured use, because they possessed and produced sufficient equipment for their needs or had no amount of captured equipment to speak of. The Germans were never able to produce enough stuff, so they were glad to capture usable equipment. After the evacuation of Dunkirk, the Germans captured enough British 3.7" heavy AA guns to justify manufacturing ammunition for them. Of course, the ammunition was abandoned with the guns, so the Germans were able to carefully measure enough pieces to estimate the design characteristics and the allowable range of tolerances.
I love the fact that Germany recaptured a previously captured Pz. III, but this time it came back with a different coat. It's like that picture of a mostly well-dressed family and then you have the one child rocking a heavy metal outfit.
Soviet Union: Helps Germany kickstart their tank development after WWI and the Treaty of Versailles Germany: Invades Soviet Union Soviet Union: Mom said it's my turn to play the the StuGbox
Nice thought - best wishes to you too. And to Cone of course! Can't see a normal life arriving in the UK for a very long time. Things are totally bonkers - it's all we know now! Normality is a distant dream.
Thanks. Good topic. I don't remember ever seeing the 122 version. It is interesting to note the Soviets were really impressed with the Panzer III Germany gave the SU before the war. It was a major influence that led to the T 34M ... which could have been the iconic Soviet tank the Germans would have faced if Barbarossa had happened a year or so later. I've read many German tankers preferred the Panzer III even to the Panzer IV for comfort and dependability. It seems to me the Panzer III was the German workhorse in Barbarossa... there were just not enough Panzer IVs and the Panzer III then , was about as good as IT could get in armor and Gun. Germany needed every piece of rolling stock .. tracked and wheeled it could get so it pressed everything useful into service. . I think we tend to forget in the first part of the war , all countries were stressed to find really good weapons . Most of the weapons they had were designed for another era of warfare .
At the time of Barbarossa the Panzer IV was a infantry support tank with horrible armor. Not surprising that the tankers preferred the high velocity 50mm gun
Kudos to you my friend for giving mention to the Su76I. That was a actual Soviet TD built on the chassis of captured Stugs. The Soviet Su76 was having major production problems at the time. It stepped in to fill the void which it did. It even fought in numbers at Kursk. The Soviet crews loved it. It has a special place in soviet TD operators hearts. Its no made up TD like so many WOT TDs are. Its history is epic.
For a LOOOONG time I had only 1 of maybe 50 examples of the SU-76i in WoT on the NA server. I got up to go to work and decided to log into WoT to see what was new for the week. (It was Friday morning and new stuff was added on Fridays then) Lo and Behold there was this new thing called the SU-76i, which, as a tank collector I bought forthwith. And verily it was broken. How broken? In the time it took for me to log out, drive the 10 minutes to work, log into my work computer and run the daily worksheets (another 15 minutes) and text my brother it had already been yanked from the store. Limited preferential tier 3 matchmaking, 65+% camo, a 3 second reload, with 110 alpha damage (This is before the HP buffs of 2016 and 2017).
Yeah I got mine long ago on a complete whim. I was gaming with a friend at work on our gaming laptops on break and I saw it on offer. It was only a few dollars so I figured what the hell, why not and bought it. Immediately started clubbing baby seals with 8-12 kill games, even worked with a guy on a review with some of my replays. It was fun.
I was an avid user of theSU-76I when I played it in WoTB. Though slightly slow, it has a 11 second reload and aiming time, I still like its good damage it inflicts on enemies. It's a good damage support tank.
@@onEmEmbErstudiosHe may be referring to the troublesome steering or the open top on the SU-76. The open top was a flaw because germans could easily throw grenades into the vehicle or shoot up the crew if they had an automatic weapon if they could aim down on the tank.
Yo Cone, iforce2d just uploaded a video about him using hoverboard motors to make a small tank. He goes over his engineering and decision making process. Hes approaching it from an engineer's standpoint and not as a tank historian. Would be cool if you could give it a watch.
Could you possibly make a video about the Belgian T13/T15 tank(ette)s? I honestly find it a very interesting vehicle but no attention is given to it and it gets overlooked all the time. It would be great to see someone make a video about it, but if not possible I totally understand. If you do, thanks in advance!! Keep up the great work!!! 👍
I mean the German tank being capture and rebuilt it is nice and it show that any capture tank can be use for something else or just upgrade it cause need more tank
@@ConeOfArc He was also the one that converted the Mk VI Lt tanks which were used at Leningrad, which earned him a grade of his Iron Cross, in defense of Normandy converted H 39’s into a battalion used during the invasion. I suspect that he also did the 150 mm conversion of a Panzer II in North Africa. He was trained as an engineer and was a member of the family that made the conversion kits (Alkett?). There might be more.
These redesigns negated one of the StuG's main advantages: its low profile! I can't help but wonder if a Soviet main gun could have been fitted into an unaltered casemate.
it is always very interesting to see both countries with their captured counterparts are being repurposed to fight against their former user, especially when they modified it to accommodate their ammunition supply.
although any adoption of a captured enemy vehicle and adapting a domestic main weapon in a fixed superstructure mounting is bound to result in a "cluster-fuck" vehicle, it at least represents a cheap way of getting a large field gun onto the battlefield with mobility. All sides made use of re-purposed enemy equipment, or produce their own copies. Building their own modification of a Panzer III or StuGIII made sense, because although, save for the Panzer IIIN, that used the turret from the A or D models of the Panzer IV with its short L24 75 mm weapon, effectively swapping the original roles of the Panzer III versus Panzer IV, the "III" was retired as the Panzerwaffe's medium tank, in favor of the up-gunned Panzer IVs, there were relatively large numbers of StuG IIIs with the long 75mm (L43 or L48) gun. Obviously the Soviets figured on captured enough German stock to keep their Su 76i or Su 122i vehicles running. Given the same logistical problems of supplying ordnance and keeping the engines and drive trains going, let alone front line "friendly fire", the Germans didn't use T-34s themselves in quite the relative proportions "as is", though they made up most of the "Beute-Panzers" they did use on the Eastern Front. In the West, it was a different story, there was actually a sort of "bounty" for capturing any M4 Sherman intact. But they did make free use of captured Soviet ARTILLERY pieces; even producing ordnance for Soviet-made 76.2 mm, 122 mm, and 152 mm guns. In the case of the 76.2 mm weapon, the Germans even re-tooled them to accept the longer German-style tank rounds, and used these rather cumbersome pieces on re-purposed Panzer II and 38(t) tank chassis. The latter, which was deemed Marder III, was an even more extreme example of the forced resourcefulness of the German war production, since it was derived from the original Czech 38(t) vehicle, being too good for the Germans to not find further roles!
StuG/StuHs have been very, very influential basic designs. The number of PzIII chassis captured & used by the Red Army surprised me, they even made a reasonable copy with the Su-76i. (Somehow, the Finns didn't have iff problems with their Sotkas.)
I hear your intro music and instantly know its coneofarc , I normally listen like a podcast only sometimes glancing at what’s on the screen, but when the video goes to the next and I hear your into, I know its gonna be good, no skip needed
In regards to spare parts question, haven't you posted a photo of T-34 with... can't recall the exact order of which parts came from where, but it was something like A13 sprockets and Pz. III tracks? Or Pz IJ or Pz IIF. Can't even recall it, just remember that it was T-34 and that tank, track and sprockets came from different nations
"Remained at Kubinka until the late 60's until it was written off. I assume that means it was scrapped but i dont know." Watch it appear somewhere in Ukraine.
I've been following your channel for some time, but I don't speak English, and so sometimes I feel like I'm missing part of the explanations because of the quality of RU-vid's automatic subtitles. So, could you dub your videos into Portuguese? It is very difficult to find quality content like yours in Portuguese on this subject.
Hey cone, you should make a video regarding the design/Unique aspects regarding the Renault UE-57 from world of tanks/World of tanks blitz. It’s a unique tank with a powerful gun at its tier and most importantly, it’s cursed by design.
Just wondering if you would make a video on tank suspension and especially the some of the ww2 german tank suspension designs because they look a bit weird and I want to understand them better.
I have a video planned soon covering one particular suspension system as I have been working on a project which required doing a lot of research on it. As for a more general video I can certainly do it at some point
They mostly moved over to torsion bars in the second half of the war. Long torsion bars went crossways to be held firmly on the other side of the hull. The ability of the bars to twist gave the road wheels the ability to go up and down. The Panzer 2 and many other early war designs had leaf spring suspension that you can see from the outside. Those were the 2 main types that the Germans used.
the dicker max and sturmer emil prototypes were combat tested in barbarossa as part of Panzerjäger Abteilung 521, they were also used in case blue (stalingrad). they were captured by the soviets in december 1942.
Its one of those situations where anything will do to replace armoured vehicle losses until your nation is able to mass produce its own equipment. Hanz: what happened to the stug it was parked right here a few minutes ago. where could it have gone Ivan: Assault Gun is property of the USSR are now and drives off Hanz: frustrated German noises.
11:49 A very German problem, just have to say that their whole supply chain is an absolute nightmare even for the stuff that HAD spare parts. Seriously, reading about all the equipment Germany used, especially the foreign stuff, and thinking about the logistics of keeping it all supplied with spare parts, ammo, and fuel is near nightmarish. The German Army may as well have been half Ork because of how much they used looted gear on various fronts.
I can't remember which channel it was, but recently I watched a video saying that the Soviets didn't use captured weapons that much. They would just recycle the materials to make their own stuff.
I don't believe any of the German guns used the same ammunition as Soviet guns so it would be far more difficult to keep the guns in service. Not to mention it adds an additional headache to logistics
Could I make a video about char 2c, that french colossus, recently it was added to the war thunder with its original version i a version with a monstrous cannon, I really like its design, it seems to have come out of a dieselpunk, some french tanks I really like the style like char 1 bis others I find it as strange as the fmc c1, another colossus that was only left in the model but its design is so strange that it makes you imagine what it would have been like if they had been made , Anyway great video.
I remember playing the SU-76i back in WoT Blitz, it was fun in a 1v1 brawl against other TDs and some Mediums. i wonder if you could cover some of the French Tanks (iirc you already did the FCM.36) that were used by the Germans back in ww2, i am specifically interested in the H.35s that were rumored to have mounted with Wurfrahmen 40 rockets as i was reminded of Company of Heroes 1 Panzer Lehr.
Going through the effort of converting captured Vics has always seemed odd. Why not leave them as is and send them to less active fronts, like in this case the borders with Japan & Finland. Or use turrets as defensive emplacements and hulls as recovery vehicles or troop transports (like the kangaroo). Unless there is a surplus of guns & factories for conversions it seems like a waste. And if there is surplus factory time then they can be more efficient on other things
They would make good low tier event rewards, other than that they don’t fit a tech tree tank (ie captured tanks are always premiums) and the premium tree is massive already for those tiers
@@ConeOfArc But, if the armor is "what's available," then one sample is unlikely to be representative. It could be an anomaly. But if you have a list of all surviving examples, you might be able to ask local school children to take measurements; maybe having high school students build a magnetic resonance tool, or an ultrasound depth sensor, in an electronics or shop class, and either use it themselves or pass it to a child for a group of students to use as a class project on their local history and monuments.
@@davidgoodnow269 it's certainly possible the armor values varied but there is no mention of that in the sources I have. Could be something that could be found by measuring the surviving examples but it's hard to say
@@ConeOfArc I see it as a _possible_ answer to the difference in thickness you described in the video. It's perfectly understandable if, during wartime conditions, one facility does one thing and another facility with different supplies and equipment does something else.
I would assume his figures are correct as well but when sources disagree it's hard to say who is right unless you have the original documentation in hand
Communist vandalism of nice equipment 😆 I consider myself a big tank nerd and am pretty knowledgeable on the subject of armoured vehicles, but I'd never seen these before. I've seen soviet captured German equipment and knew about the plans to install British and American tanks with soviet guns, but I never knew there was conversions of stugs and panzer iii's There is always something new to learn which is super interesting when it comes to tanks and military history in general.
