Why a Parachute Panzer-Division? 

Heeresfliegerei ist Frevel! Hätte Gott gewollt, dass das Heer fliegt, hätte er den Himmel oliv gemacht! ;-)

I really like your interviews with experts. I give big 👍 to the them. English is not their native language, and yet they come and talk you your audience anyway. It is really gratifying to watch them speak.

Great video, a very informative piece of history, but it would make more sense to create a Waffen-SS Fallschirmjager Division running in competition with the regular Luftwaffe one. I think they had plans for it but it was never implemented with green or even black parachute division helmets etc. If tankers were wiped out in an airdrop by a well-placed flak division or two or ambushed and obliterated at the drop-zone like in an Operation Market Garden style situation before the tanks were being brought up anyway it seems kind of silly.

@@RangaTurk en.wikipedia.org/wiki/500th_SS_Parachute_Battalion?wprov=sfti1

Hey, great work as always. I was wondering if you might be able to do a video on the 'bandenbekampfung" anti-partisan operations carried out in ww2. Of particular interest to me is there is any evidence as to if a more brutal approach was effective compared to a more humane one.

Got his ass

But do drop Göring a new bigger place would have been developed....made up of 2 BV-222 combined like He-111Z

Hilarious my friend !

Lol I almost woke the whole house up with how hard I laughed at that. 😅

Dropping Germany's "Fat Man" 🤣

Well done!!

It's a men thing. You don't even think, you just know it. Like when you see a full garbage can and a box of fireworks, you just know what to do.

Best quote from Jurassic Park!

@@pavelcheckov9288 here's a bloke with whom I'd gladly share a beer.

@@marcelozerbini5411 Haha would love to!

Hope you’re not American cuz they cut pathfinder school *cries*

Well, that led to what I was going to ask as a question. They got the StG-44 instead of the FG-42 (approx 9:35 of the video). Seems odd.

@@jimsackmanbusinesscoaching1344 there are several reasons why they weren't equipped with them the first and most obvious is the fact that there were only 7,000 made by the end of the war with 2,000 being made in the late war years there was not enough to equip them and most had already been issued or damaged by late war. Second they cost a lot to make .... Not cost effective . Third was never used or planned to be used by all troops .was issued in very limited numbers to units . Finally I 95% sure they used some in German gerring dev but would again be limited in numbers

@@nonebusiness2023 Great answer with one huge hole in it. The FG42 was designed and given to Paratroopers exclusively. Since the division here is a Paratrooper division organizationally it makes sense to give them the same weapon. Tankers and such should get SMGs anyway. But having the infantry not get the FG42 means that it was different than every other Paratrooper division.

The next logical step is wholesale Luftwaffe secession. They shall live amongst the clouds, free from the meddling of mere ground dwellers.

@@jimsackmanbusinesscoaching1344 irrelevant if there weren't enough guns for even a fourth of the division support troops

Not that surprising; Kurowski's not the most reliable of authors.

cherish this opportunity. soon enough, no soldier that fought the war will be alive, it will be really sad day for humanity. all ww1 vets have already passed away

or the murricans, when designing the Sheridan

@@NaturalLanguageLearning but the Sheridan was air-droppable, unlike anything the Germans had

@@austinduong-van6071 Das war ze Joke

@@austinduong-van6071 I guess you could have used Me 323s? Though how effective the vehicles even these could have carried is debatable, assuming they even reached to landing point.

Goering “I want my own Panzer division “.

lol, I assumed an airhead was a person that was on drugs or something.

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Airhead,;somebody with nothing between the ears…..

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Good point. The term "airhead" when used of a person (in America, at least) does not refer to drug use, but to somebody who is vapid, or just plain stupid. The word especially brings to mind the stereotype of the very pretty woman with no apparent brain activity. ^_^ Edit: we do have a number of similar terms that do refer to drug use, such as "pothead" or "crackhead." I actually reenact the US 502nd Parachute Infantry regiment ca. 1944-45, and "airhead" is a term that comes up when you read about the doctrine of vertical envelopment. I forget offhand if I've ever seen it in a primary source, but it's been used in several historical works that I've seen. It is, of course, an adaptation of the term "beachhead." :)

@@Archangelm127 thank you!

Jarheads - based on Marine Corps tradition of collecting sands around the world. Just woke up, without a lid on (or a hat in civilian jargon), that’s what spilled out so it must be true. Rah. Where’s the damn jim beam bottle?

I love the joke German soldiers made in France, "If you see a dark plane, that is the British, if you see a bright plane, that is the Americans, if you see no planes, that is the Luftwaffe."

The Russians actually tried it in the 1930s. The tried air dropping the T-27 tankette from a TB-3 bomber in 1935 and later on they tried adding glider wings to the T-60 light tank. They didn't have aircraft that were powerful enough to carry the weight of the vehicles and the idea was abandoned until the 1970s when they managed to air drop the BMD-1 IFV with its crew.

The 2nd HG division was a Panzergrenadierdivision and formed around a core cadre taken from the 1st HG Panzerdivision with the intention to form a full Fallschirm-Panzerkorps. That means that some elements like infantry (Panzergrenadiere), artillerie etc. were just doubled while tank numbers in the whole corps stayed the same as in the 1st HG Panzerdivision. Panzergrenadierdivision "Großdeutschland" went through a similar process.

Görings personal army forces were outside the Military chain of command, like the SS.

@@watcherzero5256 Yet nost of tge time under command of the Army.

He had his own industrial conglomerate as well, Reichswerke Hermann Göring. A bit of an inflated ego I suspect.

@@watcherzero5256 No, they were part of the Luftwaffe, and as such part of the Wehrmacht.

Glad you enjoyed it!

When I first learned about this division some 30 years ago I assumed the concept was to insert the unit using Me 321 and Me 323. (Doable in theory but dangerous in reality.)

Glad you liked it!

Sadly they did not paradrop the tanks

So I am not the only one remembering that part from his video on YT

@@tenarmurk Yet I think we can all picture a Panzer Mk IV being pushed out the back of a Me 323.

@@DD-qw4fz Well done, D D.

Hitler - correctly - assumed a very shaky loyalty among the largely monarchist/conservative Heer. The only time when they weren't actively planning to get rid of him was between 1938-1942. But he did not have enough time and support to actually get rid of the Wehrmacht and replace them. So of course he supported the empire building by his cronies.

The USAAF had it's own airborne unit (engineers). Also the Army had an armored airborne unit.

The US Naval Aviation is the second biggest Air Force of the world

That is the most uncomparable thing ever

The US Army does have ships and aircraft. The US Air Force probably has some search and rescue boats, if nothing else.

It has been done for over 60 years

Ha, I understood that reference! xD

Then there were the "flying/gliding tanks" the Soviets considered. Commissar Blyat: "Attach these wings and that tail section to the T-26." Private Zhodnik: "But sir, how do tanks fly?" Commissar Blyat: "Giant rubber bands." Prviate Zhodnik: (mutters under his breath) "Crazy Moscovite."

Wasn't the Wehrmacht already divided into regular and SS Divisons? So I guess they just shrugged and tried to keep quiet about it lest they find themselves out of rank.

Hello, usually there should be auto-captions, but there are none, they might appear. Sadly, I don't have the time to transcribe the talk, this would likely take 1-2 hours.

@Marcelo Henrique Soares da Silva All Schützen-Regiments of the Panzer-Divisions were renamed to Panzergrenadier-Regiments on 5th July 1942. Both terms describe the same.

Sie waren nicht in der Wehrmacht. Sie waren Teil der Luftwaffe.

@@jacquesstrapp3219 Die Luftwaffe war Teil der Wehrmacht.

Just like in modern politics and msm....critical thinking was frowned upon in the German Hugh Command the more the war progressed

there is a video on the FJ uniform planned, but not on details like "comfort, durability, storage space (i.e. pockets)", it will be a bit more detailed than this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QPd0fBkV6po.html

I'm not familiar with the term "German humor" -- are there any primary sources on the subject?

@@oopswrongplanet4964 I found this to be rather amusing myself: "In a popular but criticized article in 2006, English comedian Stewart Lee put forward the theory that misconceptions about German humor among English speakers might derive from differences between the English and German languages. In German, new ideas are often named by creating compounds, sometimes resulting in long, quite specific words. Some English-language jokes, according to Lee, do not translate well because German grammar is different from that of English and there is not always a direct translation for a delayed punchline, one of the most common joke formats for English speakers, and such language based humour. Direct translation is often possible, but is often perceived as artificial, and many puns are lost in translation."

You might call it second level suicidal attacks.

You are correct sir.

Yeah, because everyone reads subtitles and transcribing is not a tedious task at all.

They could have dropped light tanks, but Germany didn't really have suitable planes for it

I see no reason a Pz1 or perhaps even 2 couldnt have been parachute dropped from a heavy transport. Kubelwagens were parachute dropped succesfully afaik, a tankette is not that much heavier.

@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Parachute drop - not likely. Air landed - yes. Just as Allies did. Light tanks that would be loaded into gliders and then landed to support the paratroopers. But to actually throw it out of the airplane at altitude and have it land, ready to go... not likely. Even today no one does it with MBTs, I think that the biggest one air dropped were some IFVs - and even those require a very complex set of parachutes in order to remain stable until they reach the ground. But to parachute drop a light tank in WWII, nope.

@@Wustenfuchs109 I am not certain of ths panzer 1, but the italian tankette was a mere 3.3 tons. A far cry from evsn a moder IFV at 25 tons minimum. Gliders could land actual light tanks in the 10-15 ton range with a proper gun and at least snough front armour to matter some.

@@Wustenfuchs109 light tanks, tank destroyers, and ifvs have been dropped successfully since the early 50s. Further more airdropping amphibious light tanks onto the ground by the Soviets (without parachutes) successfully in the 1940 annexation of bessarabia (via very low flieing aircraft). I wouldn't say paradropping a light tank was impossible in ww2. Also, MBTs are closer to heavy tanks than to light tanks. So saying we can't drop one isn't really linked to light tanks at all.

I wonder how that worked out for the British? www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/flying-tank-the-m22-locust.html Spoilers, for those who don’t like clicking on links Although the M22 Locust was theoretically a decent anti-infantry vehicle, it was clearly not useful as an airborne tank. Unfortunately for the Locust, its weak armament and very light armor made it obsolete for any other role.

@@CGM_68 The Locust was still better than the Tetrarch and both were better than nothing. If you're airborne and the choice is between one of those and your regular support weapons you'll go with the light tank every time the terrain suits them. The inability to use them as intended was due to the failure to produce sufficient specialist gliders and, when the transports were available, the failure of commanders to recognise they were never supposed to go up against tanks. Their battlefield performance once on the spot and used as intended was adequate, they performed better than the Valentine tanks in Madagascar and worked well in Normandy. The Locust was used in the same role during Operation Varsity where it also did its job as well as could be expected. Proof that the concept worked is in the success of the AMX-13 in the post war period that not only worked well as an airborne tank for the French but as a successful armoured vehicle for many countries around the world.

@@Matt_The_Hugenot Yes, but... at this stage in the war Germany had fewer well trained crews to man any such “new” tanks. So not only was the military doctrine getting ahead of itself, but in the field the men on the ground couldn’t implement it anyway. The paras were being annihilated at Monte cassino and the Herman Goring lot had left their new equipment in Sicily. Gordon L Rottman summed it up best for me in his publication German Field fortifications 1939 - 45. “Ultimately, the Germans were rarely able to develop complete mobile or elastic defenses as specified by doctrine. ... in remote areas of Germany, France, the former USSR and other countries, traces of trench lines and shallow overgrown depressions can be found, marking the vanished frontiers of the Third Reich.” I pass them each and every day, it’s poignant, my friend. Also bear in mind, much of these defensive works were dug by slave labour or the local civilian population. So parachutists wouldn’t even be able to implement this doctrine by themselves anyway. Even the mighty Tiger didn’t roar for very long. On paper the Tiger was unstoppable, in the field untrained crews managed to break most of them down, or they simply ran out of fuel. Which was unfortunate, since the Germans were retreating and had to abandon their unstoppable (& irreplaceable) kit. I suspect a German Tetrarch would have met a similar ignominious end. Any theoretical German Parachute drop in the Urals and Siberia was doomed to failure. The tank support wouldn’t have the fuel to reach that far behind enemy lines. It was little more than pipe dreams at this stage in the war. Just like Armeeabteilung Steiner’s long awaited counter attack, experienced commanders in the field realized Hitler had completely lost it.

@@CGM_68 Absolutely. The concept is fine but the ability to to implement was not there. Much like the various wonder weapons during the late war, either out of reach entirely or a waste of resources.

@@CGM_68 The ISU 57 and later 85 parachute tanks of the soviets predate ths sharriden by a decade. Granted, they are closer to a ww2 light tank destroyer than an actual tank, but a mobile gun immume to small arms fire is still a force multiplier.

It did not disappear. It went east.

Efficiency was not the goal. The Army was loyal to the state and their prussian officers, the WaffenSS was loyal to the Party directly to circumvent the state, and the Luftwaffe originally had only Flak and Fallschrimjägers whivh bloated (like Göring) into this monstrosity

@C De yeah i know, but still completely unnecessary to have essentially 3 different armies instead of standardising as much as possible.

@@yochaiwyss3843 yeah göring was a serious asshole. claimed he could destroy the english at dunkirk and claimed he could save the german 6th army at stalingrad. he probably had a lot to do with the massive amount of casualties at crete also.

@@stayhungry1503 The casualties at Crete are not as much as his own fault, but rather serious miscommunications one the field and failure of troops to land properly due to terrain and having sub-par parachutes (They couldn't steer them, at all)

@@yochaiwyss3843 Waffen-SS was not loyal to the Party. They looked down on Party officials as fat lazy bureaucrats. They were loyal to Hitler and to a smaller degree to Hitler. Starting in 1943 They recruited as well. Some recruits were loyal to the Führer some just fought the war for their country. Then there were the 33% of Waffen-SS members that were not German nationals

> according to NARA ROLL T78 412(H1-132) "Div.Verbande, Teil II", never called so does that roll specifically note that it was never called that way? I doubt so. It likely lists a different name there, correct? Considering the fact that Jentz, Doyle and Spielberger generally have a list of around 20 different names for a single type of a German armored vehicle, I am rather sure that at some point somewhere in a document called it was called "Luftwaffen Panzer Division Hermann Göring". (This is even more apparent to me, since I edited a video today where Dr. Pahl lists a lot of different sources for another naming issue, which goes into extreme details and various unpublished sources.) One thing I learned in the last 5 years is that the "never" rarely applies to the Wehrmacht, especially it combination with "called", e.g., here is a list of what the MP 43 was called in various reports: • M.Pi. 43 • M.P. 43 a, M.P. 43 (a), M.P. 43, M.P.43, MP 43 • Maschinen-Karabiner 43A • M.P. / A 43 • M.K. 43 • M.K.B.43A

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I have dozens of pages of 'HG' primary documents on my PC including monthly reports, Kriegsgliederung, divisional KTB's, Panzer Lage tables etc etc and not a single one of them refers to the 'HG' as being the Lufftwaffen Panzer Division Hermann Göring. As to NARA ROLL T78 412(H1-132) "Div.Verbande, Teil II" it contains a seperate card for some 150 units and clearly shows the change in name or designation of those units,if the 'HG' had been called Lufftwaffen Panzer Division Hermann Göring" it would clearly show that on the 'HG' card but it doesn't. Just because weapons and vehicles that went through different agencies from the manufacturer to the WaffenAmt and they all gave it a different name doesn't mean the same occured with the Armies divisions.

fair enough, I will "forward" your comment to Dr. Pahl, although it might take a while, since he is currently on vacation. There is generally a lack of consistency in naming from what I have seen, or even lack in basic terminology I have at least once seen that someone called a division an "Einheit" and someone else crossed it out and noted "Verband".

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized you are correct. As you have already reminded me the road to hell is paved with good intentions. This late in the war the whole army was imploding. What the general staff intended was becoming more academic, every passing month, since it could no longer be implemented in the field. Wow, you want a Parachute army. Great idea, pity you didn’t implement it BEFORE you invaded Poland though.

35000 makes no sense, that would be far too large for a division.

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized yes I know that a division usually contains 15000-18000 men , but that is what I read was in Sicily , helping to stall the Allies , whilst the Italian and German soldiers were evacuated to mainland Italy . These two guys just said there were two Herman Goring divisions , which would roughly amount to 35000 men ?

@@johnchalmers who?

@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized that's a hard one to reply to ?

They used the "semovente", a good "tank". Since it's italian made, people like you tend to criticize.

@@danih487 - people like me? No, that's not so. Using foreign equipment is never ideal and implies a lack of adequate equipment of your own. The Semoventes (not tanks by the way but assault guns) had quiet acceptable performance but were not particularly state-of-the-art for time. The 75/34, for example, was not the equal of a German Stug 3.

As has happened to most airborne units tbf.

The WW2 “Locust” tank?

@@samobispo1527 the locust was a bit shit. Tetrachs on the other hand were succesfully inserted via glider by british airborne.

The guy on the right is Dutch 😊 Greets from Cologne to ze UK 😉

@@MegaJJ1968 Actually he's Austrian.

@@gwtpictgwtpict4214Oh really? I was pretty sure he's Dutche. But anyway, was an interesting video 😊

@@MegaJJ1968 He very clearly is Austrian(studied in the same university as I do now), you even hear it in his english accent.

Well the Soviets droped tanks into Afghanistan, and the brits dropped tanks into Normandy D-day - 1.so it was infact done in battle

After a checkered history of war crimes the corps eventually surrendered to the Red Army on 8 May 1945. Not so glorious as they might have wished, murdering civilians was about all they are remembered for today.

Sicily and afterwards , as well as before the autumn of 1943 .

@@johnchalmers as Bernhard points out elsewhere, official records of unit names can be a right tangle. The idea came in October 1942, as the brigade was still being reformed in Britanny. After this brigade had been fed piecemeal into North Africa from October 1942 until its surrender in May 1943, few, if any escaped to Sicily. From the ashes rose Panzer-Division Hermann Göring - June 1943 to April 1944. Only then was it named Fallschirm-Panzer-Division 1 Hermann Göring - April until October 1944, when it became a Korps. Of course, without relevant sources listed this info should be taken with a grain, or two of salt.

I was gonna say! Tetrarch that actually landed in a glider: Am I a joke to you?

What’s with anime pfps

@@looinrims what is with them ?