The War To End all Wars: A History of the Helmets of World War One 

If you hadn’t said that I would have had to.

I've also heard that troops started taking risks because they thought they safe. No idea if the stats and reports actually bear this out.

@@heneagedundas yes, i recall reading this. for some reason they assumed it would be bullet proof.

​@@thurin84because some officers told them they were

Dead people don't tend to complain that their head hurts.

I have ALWAYS wondered about this nickname! Thank you for finally solving the riddle for me!

I always thought it was Jerry for German.

Stahlhelm simply means steel helmet. In german language every military steelhelmet is called Stahlhelm, not only german ones.

It is the worst design however, the early ones had badges secured with pins which could pierce the head if hit

@@mr_incognito9305to reiterate: the most elegant.

@Koelebig I agree on that point but ultimately a soldier doesn't care how his helmet looks as long as its practical and offeres good protection. The Adrian is the worst in this regard

@@mr_incognito9305 oh, I definitely agree.

​@@mr_incognito9305Ok, you listed one problem that only applied to early versions. How else was it the worst among in providing protection?

Stahlhelm helmet? You mean a steelhelmet Helm? Stahl- steel, Helm- helmet. When people of german language countries speak of a Stahlhelm, this is an umbrella term for EVERY military steel helmet. When german Stahlhelm is realy meant, we pronounce the der in der Stahlhelm stronger.

A lot of the research was already done through hard lessons. There are only so many practical ways to protect the head. Different dangers and new materials can encourage changes, but the principals.are the same.

Protecting the head remains the same concept. Back then it was from swords, pikes, and sabers. Then it was from shrapnel and bullets. While bullets shooting straight into a helmet can puncture it, there have been numerous instances of rounds hitting the current US "Fritz" Kevlar helmet that were deflected saving the wearer's life.

RAF strikes again.

Je vais essayer de faire une petite vidéo qui la présente bientôt

Like WHO exactly? Everyone knows it is negative

Yes, people do know it's a negative, but some younger (30s) do have a habit of saying infamous to insinuate something a little naughty for no reason. Ie "the infamous Diana Dorrs and her many lovers." When what they actually mean is Diana Dorrs was a Famous actress who made no secret of her sexual encounters. Who would dream of using a word like infamous for most of the female "actors" of today no matter how many men they had slept with. I heard in a documentary about old Hollywood in which it described the infamous antics of mainly female but also male actors. When in fact they were probably no worse than many adults today that have had sexual encounters with more than one person. I use this as an easy example but there are many other ways people wrongly use Infamous.

@@4rumani How many times have you heard "Can I?" vs. "May I?" when someone is asking for permission they use the latter instead of the former? Not everyone knows the difference, but I'll have to check my list of names of those using improper use of meaning that I carry with me everyday and everywhere.

I suspect that "do not strap your helmet or a nearby explosion will break your neck" is rather folklore. After all, if an explosion is close and strong enough to do that, you'll be dead anyway from splinters and shockwave.

@@zelts I don't quite agree, artillery, yeah, you're right, but German handgrenades were more blast than shrapnel, and mortar shells do funny things like split at the seam upon exploding, leaving one stunned, but whole.

I was going to say the same thing. A look at the liners and how they differed would have been a nice touch since I think that most people aren't that familiar with helmet liners and how they look and work m

Just FYI, it's Brodie.

The British helmet was introduced in 1915 and adopted by the Americans as the M1917 a bit later. The M1917 remained in service until 1942. The more Germanic designs are being withdrawn now because it has been shown they increase the frequency and severity of brain damage from blast concussion by funnelling the blast against the head. Tighter fitting replacements are now in vogue to prevent this.

more will come!

@@hathistorianjc More videos, or more beard? I'm down for either one of course

Hahaha, more helmet ones. The beard comes once a year (I grow it to keep my face warm when I go skiing :p )

Oui pourquoi pas

They did end up switching sides once the war actually started, though originally they were allied with the central powers.

And I thought they were for ventilation. See the Wikipedia article.

​@@iskandartaibThe lugs, as mentioned in the video, were for both attaching an armored plate as well as hiding vent holes. The lugs weren't solid but hollow and other videos out there do a better job at showing this detail. The stahlhems of WWII kept the vent holes but got rid of the lugs covering them with just an open holed rivet.

It must be: About ten years ago ...

Perfect.

It's not a windsor it's a four in hand knot which I prefer

What do you mean?

@@heinzelmann6502Unless the bullet just grazed the side the helmet it was better at keeping soup in then bullets out. They gave a feeling of safety instead of actualy providing it

@@bearlogg7974 Yes, the soldiers who didn't know it was meant for shrapnel sadly learned it the hard way.

I did make one on the cowboy hat

@@hathistorianjc oh ok. Thanks for the reply. Keep up the good work.

It is planned

Usually American M1 helmets, or British Brodie ones.

@@hathistorianjc Your answer has come with the speed of lightning! Thank you.

You were lucky to catch me right as I passed by ;) De rien!

I forgot to mention that most of those soldiers escaping German Nazi occupied Poland came first to France in late 1939 or early 1940 where they got equipped with Adrian helmets.

This notion needs to die, it's nonsense from people with a limited understanding of history. Since the civil war there had been two major wars in europe, the Prusso-Austrian war, and Franco-prussian war. Both had been major wars, and especially the Franco-Prussian war would be seen as a much better example of modern war then the US civil war. The civil war was mostly fought with muzzle loading rifles, right up to the end (yes, before you comment, some breech loaders and a limited amount of pistol caliber lever actions were in service with cavalry troops). In the Franco-prussian war both sides were using bolt action needle guns. While the Gatling was a very rare thing in the civil war, the mitrailleuse was much more common. While in the civil war round shot was still the most common artillery round, by the franco prussian war exploding shells were becoming much more common. Also, while the CSS Virginia and USS monitor were the first ironclads in battle, you can't forget that when they were build, France and Britain had had full on ocean going ironclads for a decade. The gist of it is, people look at the civil war, see the trenches around petersburg and think "oh look, trenches, like WW1". But trenches had been common in european war since the 1500's, and they had never fully gone away. And that's ignoring that almost all of the other major battles were basically fought with napoleonic tactics and dense lines of infantry, a practice that was already going away in europe. (WW1 did not in fact, have large scale linear warfare, even at the start, not even at Mons, not even by the french in Alsace). Oh yes, and in 1905 there also was a major war, the Russian-Japanese war, that had european observers, and was much more modern then the civil war.

I mention it in the video description.

Climate, rawmaterial, industrial capacity?

@@brittakriep2938 So which one is it? That's what I'm asking. Is there an answer or only guesses?

@@korayyy440 : Only Guessing!