Historically Accurate Panzer '46: Super-powered Soviet Tank Destroyers

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 4 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 54

  • @gognhere1307
    @gognhere1307 День назад +46

    "Penetrates Maus frontally at 2000m" Yeah this Panzer 46 thing isn't gonna work out for Germany

  •  8 часов назад +2

    Its so funny that the Germans unintentionally spured the Allies on to develop much more dangerous tanks by deploying a small number of unicorn tanks that didnt have much influence on the war as a whole for them

  • @Othgerius
    @Othgerius День назад +15

    I love your video series on the "Panzer '46". Please keep making them

  • @jsplicer9
    @jsplicer9 День назад +10

    Always found the SU-122-54 to be an interesting case as well, the Soviets did not abandon the concept of a casemate tank destroyer for some time, and the SU-122-54 is sort of the pinnacle of that concept

    • @bocktordaytona5656
      @bocktordaytona5656 19 часов назад

      I love that tonk also but I guess that some nations proved that concept with things like the weird german M113 apc with a gun to be a weird cross of stug and M113... other vehicles based on the leopard 1....
      And/or the italian vespa with recoiless rifle.
      That thing should be added for war thunder

  • @mq7447
    @mq7447 День назад +15

    Gaijin: "write that down, write that down"

  • @darthcalanil5333
    @darthcalanil5333 День назад +5

    And finally I learned where on earth did the infamous WoT IS3 BL-9 come from

  • @whocares435-z9v
    @whocares435-z9v 8 часов назад +1

    What about smaller stuff? All of the giant '46 vehicles on all sides get the most attention. But smaller new vehicles would also be produced.

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  5 часов назад +2

      Definitely, you would have seen the Jagdpanzer 38D, SU-85B, Alecto, and HMC M37, on the battlefield at the very least.

  • @bradyelich2745
    @bradyelich2745 День назад +13

    So many tank nerds I can't be first anymore.

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад

      so, we are going with no Tiger 2has ever been penned from the front. I did find two pictures where Russian 152mm almost went through. Those were end of battle pics. We all know, the shell does not have to pen, but penetration ... U fucking virgins

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад +2

      Sorry Peter.

  • @bocktordaytona5656
    @bocktordaytona5656 19 часов назад +1

    All of this is very interesting for the panzer 46 series... who does not want to see an IS 3 vs an E 50 or maus.... or the different ISU assault guns.. But we need the real fluff of the panzer 46.
    The real "the new order" what if scenario.
    The absolute and definitive battle between 2 titans.
    The kugelpanzer Vs the Vespa with recoiless rifle

  • @lawLess-fs1qx
    @lawLess-fs1qx 2 часа назад +1

    The super bazooka was fielded 5 years after the war. 275 mm penetration. Imagine a Maus trundlind around at 15mph and 2 squaddies taking it out from the sides. German high command gets sick in their Helmets as their 5 Maus Tanks use up all their Strategic Petrol reserves to drive 100 miles to their end by Ivan and GI Joe firing super bazookas.

  • @mladenmatosevic4591
    @mladenmatosevic4591 22 часа назад +1

    It is easier to find gun capable of destroying superheavy tank then bridge capable of supporting it.

  • @luvr381
    @luvr381 День назад +3

    In the battle between warhead and armor, warhead always wins eventually.

  • @TheCrapOnYourStrapOn
    @TheCrapOnYourStrapOn День назад +16

    Sure but that armor won’t help much against 500lb air dropped munitions. Or large shaped charges. Or even small shaped charges. Or mines. Or really anything but tank cannons firing kinetic ammunition

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад +6

      The British pattern brigades has 24, 25 pounder QF with air burst at 28 ft would kill all nme tank in engine deck. Most German tanks killed by arty, example Falaiase. By 1943, 25 pounders had the new proximity fuses. 25 pounders were given 20 rounds of antitank rounds. The guns that had those rounds can b identified by having a muzzel brake.

    • @TheCrapOnYourStrapOn
      @TheCrapOnYourStrapOn День назад +1

      @ I’ve made shaped charges at home that could penetrate the roof armor

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад

      Still waiting to someone to confirm Tiger 2 231 in Belgium got those dents in battle or practice. from what I read, it was all 6 pounders and infantry that stopped Tiger 231. Those dents were made by a 25 pounder at 50 yards. The big dents in the fascia. There might be a Canadian 25 pounder gun crew that really stopped Tiger 231, even though there were 6 pounder shots through the sides of the turret.

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад

      @@TheCrapOnYourStrapOn Ur full of shit. and that is how you make ur ammonia and nitrates. Don't fucking bother my Peter. (punny) Or Canada will come down on you. Would you like me to tell where you are at?

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад +4

      You need to be banned

  • @MildyHistorical
    @MildyHistorical День назад +3

    Hey Peter is there anything out there regarding the Soviets assessing the effectiveness of HE filler in their AP shells? As far as I know they manufactured 76mm AP with and without filler during the war but never heard anything else about it beyond that. Also great video it’s always fun to do Soviet Panzer 46

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  22 часа назад +3

      76 mm solid shot was played around on an experimental basis with but the Red Army always considered HE filler to be necessary for AP shells. Not having HE filler was one of the biggest drawbacks of British tanks and not a single report on their effectiveness omits this drawback. AP shells were tested "fused inert" though so that their fragments could be studied after penetration.

  • @easel15
    @easel15 День назад +4

    I was unsubscribed to you for some reason. Thankfully this video appeared in the recommendations.

  • @Panzermeister36
    @Panzermeister36 16 часов назад

    Another excellent video. I will have to purchase your books. Is there a best place to do that in Canada? I believe you are local in that regard.

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  16 часов назад

      Probably Amazon, it somehow turned out that all my publishers are UK-based and ordering directly from them means paying a king's ransom in shipping.

  • @Veniczar_pa
    @Veniczar_pa День назад +7

    I was curious about something;
    In 1941 I heard some bureaus and factories were working on designs for multiple high-power penetrating anti-tank and divisional guns. Usually in parallel with the KV projects and etc. Most of them were 107mm but their muzzle velocities were quite impressive. I was wondering if there were any thoughts about possibly reviving those projects in the later half of the war like with the naval gun on the T-100y that you mentioned. If it was even something that was thought of.

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  День назад +8

      The 107 mm gun idea came back briefly, but 107 ammo was no longer in production so there was no advantage over using a 122 or 100 mm gun.

  • @sanchez231996
    @sanchez231996 23 часа назад +1

    Hello Peter are you planning to add all this as well as other objects and projects that you described previously in your blog in a book? I would love to have everything combined in a nice manuscript. You are one of the few people that brings this cool info to the western area of military enthusiastics

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  22 часа назад +1

      It would have to be more specific than "all the prototypes" but I'm not opposed to it. Maybe even more than one.

  • @o-hogameplay185
    @o-hogameplay185 День назад +3

    14:26
    according to WT calculator, the guns would have the follwoing flat pen at those super high velocities:
    122mm at 1300m/s (using BR-471B): 450mm
    100mm at 1500m/s (using BR-412B): 508mm
    128mm at 1200m/s (using PzGr 43): 368mm
    EDIT:
    irl none of those shells would be able to go through that much armor especially at an angle due to all of them having really high velocity and a large hole for the filler since they were APHE. the shells would just break apart/shatter on impact
    also, can you make a video about the high power 107mm guns, like the ZiS-24?

    • @TankArchives
      @TankArchives  День назад +5

      Yeah, 1500 m/s from a conventional AP shell is going to be very difficult to achieve and then not just splatter the projectile onto its target. I suppose it's possible to design a whole new shell for those velocities, but at that point just go with APFSDS.
      I probably have enough content for a video on 107 mm guns. It would have to center on the ZIS-6 (this is Tank Archives after all) but I would make a mention of anti-tank artillery as well.

    • @o-hogameplay185
      @o-hogameplay185 День назад +1

      @@TankArchives IIRC there was a very realistic idea for the Object 279 to use a 85mm gun with a shell velocity of 3000 m/s (the gun was named 85mm Streal AK IIRC).
      from what i remember a prototype was made and it maxed out at 1500m/s but was deemed impractical (what a shock).
      also the ZiS-24 is the gun on the KV-4 in WoT, so i am interested in what that project archieved as to my knowledge the gun was made and tested around 1940-41

    • @bradyelich2745
      @bradyelich2745 День назад +1

      Not even realistic. Even the 152 mm could only pen the front armour of tiger 2 at 650m. But that big gun would spall the crew, even if it did not penetrate. I found a couple pics. So, I will stand by the fact no Tiger 2 was ever frontally penetrated. Tiger 231, those big dents were made by a 25 pounder at 25-50 yards. That gun was not mentioned in the battle report. I would like to know if it was testing or in battle and nobody writes about Canadians.

    • @sanchez231996
      @sanchez231996 23 часа назад

      Where are those pics?​@@bradyelich2745

  • @aisir3725
    @aisir3725 День назад +1

    No armor could counter allied air superiority