Your conclusion are sometimes a little bit off. According to Doyle the Panther was planed as the next generation tank platform for multiple roles from the beginning, so we are talking about the time frame 1941/42 when these concepts were made. The plan to turn the Panther into a flak panzer, a ARV or tank hunter predates the events of 1943/1944 when Germany finally starts losing the war and lost control over their airspace. The coelian wasn't a reaction to something that just happened. It was a concept which could not be realized anymore because of the critical industrial situation. A Panther hull could be assembled much quicker than a panzer 4 hull, because it was streamlined for mass production. Using old panzer iv hulls and rebuild them as flak Panzers definitely made sence, but producing new panzer IV hulls for flak Panzers would have been a waste of time and resources in the long run.
@@madhie-kun8614 why would double 88mms be called a 128cm… and you probably mean 12.8 cm, as a 128cm is a shell so massive that it would make a battleship look pathetic.
@@onebritishboi9892 what was it supposed to do there that justifies the armor? against infantry the armor is way too thick and other armor you cant penetrate
I wonder how useful the Skink turret might've been. 4x 20mm Polsten guns. Pretty well armored, if the turret that came off the target range is any indicator.
Well there was a couple (like 1 or 2) sent to Europe, however they couldn’t find any air targets to engage so found themselves engaging infantry more. However the military didnt need more vehicles for fighting infantry and since the Luftwaffe was nearly nonexistent in the ground support role by that point, it was cancelled.
I guess we can not know for certain but i would compare it to the wirblewind, the german AA tank that is very simillar to it in terms of arms and possabliy the same issues.
It's interesting that the Germans decided to mount larger caliber armaments (ie. 37mm & 55mm) on these projects when their own published assessments showed that the 20mm Flak guns were far more effective against Allied fighter bombers than any other of their anti aircraft guns.
A 20mm can only go so far up into the sky. Though the 20mm was in the aircrafts which is why it was effective when firing head on but you had to get into range. If we look into the US, the 40mm was the best when dealing with aircraft while on a level plain, on the ground or nn a aircraft carrier.
@@GideonStahl The discussion relates to German Flak guns usefulness against Allied fighters, not whether the US 40mm is an overall better Flak gun than the German 2cm. As such the German report summery on the effectiveness of the 2cm Flak is as follows: "The problem whether to use the 2cm or 3.7cm anti-aircraft gun [for a Flakpanzer] has been decided completely in favor of the 2cm. The Jabo (ie Allied Fighter Bomber) is a Mistvieh. He attacks at low heights. In every case at an elevation where the 2cm is effective. The majority of Jabo kills are credited to 2cm. When bombers attack in saturation raids they are at height ranges [neither the 2cm or] the 3.7cm can reach." -- 2cm vs 3.7cm Flak effectiveness assessment as reported by Major Petri, 30th January 1945
@@calessel3139 That's interesting, because the re-mounting of the 30mm MK103 looks to be the be best compromise between caliber, range, size, & weight. Based on pictures, they seemed to have made a lot of them, right in the last couple months of the war (so very few got into action). The ground mountings had vibration problems, but he vehicle mounts worked pretty well. Mostly truck/halftrak mounts (and a few Kugelblitzes). There were plans for a "Super-Whirblewind" with quad FlaK 103s, but it never got past drawing stage, I believe.
@@dphalanx7465 Yes, the Mk103 was an excellent weapon, but you have to remember few were produced by January 45. The report given only assess those Flak guns deployed in large enough numbers that would allow widespread field reports and I doubt there was much data on the Mk103 at that time. Weapons scrutinize would, of course, include 2cm Flak38, 2cm Flakvierling, 3.7cm Flak 18/36 and 3.7cm Flak43. I would also assume it probably included the 2cm MG151/20 since it had been fairly well incorporated into late war Flak units but no distinction is given between 2cm and 3.7cm weapons, so I'm guessing on this point.
On the vehicle at 9:02: It's a field mod of a field mod. The base vehicle is a Panther that got turned into a Bergepanther engineering vehicle. It was common for Bergepanthers to have the hole left by the removed turret to be covered with wooden planks. Another indicator for it being a Bergepanther is the removed hull roof on the drivers and bow machine gunners position (this one got really fancy and got a movable cover for it!). And then somebody just decided to put a regular stationary 3,7 cm flak on the wooden platform. In the end it's basically the same as putting an aa gun on a flat bed truck just with an engineering tank.
Yeah I figured as much. I'll probably cover that vehicle in a future video of its own I only included it because otherwise I'd get comments like "ummm actually you forgot about the panther with a 37mm on it"
You should take a look at the missile program of ww2 Germany. It would fit perfectly in line of “Cursed by design” even though it isn’t a tank thing. Some of them influenced the development of future anti tank missiles. I guess ATGM would also be a interesting topic.
They really were ahead of their time, though one critical advantage the Allies had was in proximity fuses without which these missiles weren't practical.
@@Zorro9129 as far as I know they had a proximity fuze that worked by detecting the sound of the propellers of the bombers. They even tested the missile from a flying aircraft.
The Skink has been mentioned in the comments, and for one would love to see an episode dedicated to it. If not in the "Cursed by Design" series, then just a video would be cool. I would love to see it put in War Thunder, too.
Good that you displayed the message at 09:00, I was about the hit the keyboard ;-) Great video, motivates me to quickly finish my Panther with Flakvierling. Was also surprised that they were considering used Panther II parts for the 8.8 cm vehicle.
It's interesting to see the small similarity between the Coelian's turret and the modern Oerlikon systems produced by Rheinmetal, mostly in their shape.
None of these actually seem actually cursed by their design, being basically useful designs or design concepts. Rather, they were cursed by the logistical and developmental environment.
@@ConeOfArc again, that's a *logistics* and *prioritization* issue. It's not like those parts didn't exist, or didn't work... There was just too much demand for the supply. Designing *entirely new* systems and parts *would* have been cursed, as it would have called for an entire new supply chain, which would have been a truly obscene waste of effort and resources.
@@anzaca1 *if* they're genuinely hard to source. Multiple demands for an existing part which is made in large volumes, however, does not make a part scarce. It demonstrates a logistics chain failure, not a design flaw. Considering that the designs were drawn up during the crush of a losing war, such prioritization constraints are hardly unpredictable.
And, Germany had a major fuel shortage, especially late in the war. There were many, many newly produced vehicles and aircraft sitting idle for lack of fuel.
I have a VFW on War Thunder. The most interesting feature of the design was that you could raise the side skirts for extra protection, which would also limit the horizontal traverse of the cannon, or leave them down, in which case the cannon could traverse the full 360 degrees. It may have made a reasonable tank destroyer, but of course Germany had plenty of those, including a Flak 8.8 cm mounted on an armored truck chassis. It's true that they were better off using the Panther chassis for actual Panthers.
An enclosed turret with really poor outward visibility makes the whole concept moot. If you can't spot and track targets that may be coming at you from any direction, the vehicle is pointless.
An enclosed turret provides a vast advantage in protection however, especially as killing every incoming aircraft wasn't going to be possible. Eventually enclosed SPAA did become the norm, though they probably had better visibility.
Fully enclosed turrets only became common on SPAA after search radar also became common. ZSU-23-4, Sergeant York, Flakpanzer Gepard: these all had closed turrets and search radars. VADS, M19/M42 Duster, ZSU-57-2: these all had open turrets and no search radar.
It would have taken very little time for them to add a first gen Night Fighter radar to it. The germans had those as surplus since bombers (but back then NOT the single engine craft) could/did carry jammers against them and the Night Fighters got a second gen. And german tankers are used to fight from the open hatch
one question: IN WHAT WAY PANTHER CHASIS IS MORE "APPEALING" THAN USING PZ 3 OR 4? like, seriously, it is more expensive both production and maintanance (like, didn't they need MORE SPARE PARTS?), more ground pressure, requires more training for the crew, bigger target, so on and so forth
Panzer IV and Panzer III chassis were supposed to go out of production in 1945, so then the only available tank chassis would have been Panzer 38(t), Panther and Kingtiger. Panzer 38 is too smol for a project like this and Kingtiger hulls are even more precious than Panther ones
It’s a matter of simplifying the amount of parts German had to build. Bo need for pz4 parts if you don’t use the ps4 hull and anything producing pz4 parts switches to panther parts
Love these videos man! Keepit up! Can you maybe also make a future video in which you discuss the many artillery / self proppelled gun variants on tiger and panther chassis'?
Might want to get in touch with Tank Encylopedia with this one, as they have conflicting info on the Coelian, especially the 5,5cm variant saying it would've looked more like an Ostwind with a bigger gun.
im glad i got mine before they moved it in WT, i still prefer it over any other AA and find its an amazingly effective light tank killer too shame that 5.5cm wont be added, it looks very cool
the Coelian? Ive killed more of those things than been killed by them.....I even killed one in a fisticuffs match as a freaking Crusader Mk.II SPAA for cryin' out loud!
I’m always surprised why the Germans didn’t use the Pz 38 t chassis for some light SPAAs, having such an armored SPAA seems like a total waste of material
I have seen old b/w pics that showed an unknown AA vehicle that appeared to be either a Pz38 chassis or built from a Hetzer. A Tiger II was the main subject of the pic, but in the book they pointed out that no one knew what that was. A second pic from the battle off Berlin, another unknown AA vehicle that was with other destroyed vehicles
Between so many records being destroyed, field mods, the wrecks being buried or sold for scrap so fast and the fact that the Russians didn't share much information, we're lucky to know what we do! It wasn't all that long ago that no one believed a Maus was ever built, then one shows up in a Russian museum!
man imagine what kind of beast that 55mm panther would have been. great anti air and more than capable as a tank destroyer as well. yea would not have won the war but man it could have been a menace.
If you look at the post WW2 german development it may become clear why. They tried to build what later became Gepard on the "new IFV" (later Marder) hull and it failed. They then went for the heavier/larger Leopard 1 hull and the weight problems with having an enclosed, 2x35mm armed and radar equiped tank vanished. The mass produced hull in the Leopard 1 class in WW2 was Panther. And when the projects started it was still planned to replace both PIII and PIV in production by it
COelian coulda been a BMPT Terminator before the BMPT Terminator was cool. Imagine that thing pulling up as ground infantry support. Unload its guns into an entrenched US position in a house...RIP.
Hearing this it's a bit outrageous that Germany had so many spare Panzer IVs and it's components and hulls, that they mounted AA guns onto the hulls, which is unnecessary as AA vehicles are support, not front line vehicles so don't need much protection, and considering they are open topped and the superstructure is incredibly weak, a strong hull won't help the vehicle in any way. Yet at the same time, Germany's allies such as Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, etc. who were desperately in need of capable modern tanks asked for Panzer IVs and Germany denied them (only giving over Panzer IVs very late in 1944 and 1945). And then Germany was surprised it's allies performed so poorly in tank combat (well except Hungary). If the Germans would have given their allies Panzer IVs rather than pointlessly equipping them with Flak turrets, maybe the Axis would have avoided situations like Stalingrad.
If there is any humor to be found among Germany's war effort, it is exactly this, too little, too late... These would have needed to be in production by '41 to be effective by '44. Prototyping a solution long after it was already a decided issue on the battlefront was a German hallmark of design philosophy. But still, who doesn't want a Flaktiger with twin 37mm, twin 20mm, and a pair of MG-42's on top? Can you imagine it a direct fire ground support role?
SPAA without radar assisted aiming in an enclosed, armored platform seems pointless to me. None of these vehicles ever being effective when they were actually deployed puts paid to that theory, I think.
@@Zorro9129 You can’t really expect a vehicle meant to engage aircraft and similar targets to succeed with an enclosed turret with no tracking systems. It’s main job is to shoot down distant, small and fast targets that could emerge from anywhere, and that’s difficult to do with only a few vision ports, don’t you think?
@@fluffyskunkboy4596 If there is a commander hatch he can look for a target and direct the gunner before "buttoning up." The benefits of an enclosed turret are obvious, as SPAA with poor vision is still more effective than SPAA that has its crew knocked out quickly.
The Germans created so many bizarre inventions in WW2 that if the war carried on a couple more year, they would’ve made an auto cannon version of the 8.8cm kwk put on tigers.
Ooh! Imagine a jet plane like the Me-262 built around an 88mm anti-aircraft gun! Fly up, aim at a bomber, fire a three round burst, recover from the stall conditions.
I heard that the Coelian was called ''Goliath" or is another variation? also nice intro i hope you make more cursed by design videos about the left flackpanzers like the flackpanzer E-100
Thinking about how good the Gepard II turned out to be in West Germany those early SPAAGS where anyway a good learning experience. But mounting BIGGER Guns on the Prototypes was really stupid. 2x MK-103 would have been their best choice I believe. 30mm High Velocity Good Range and Reliability.
Can u maybe do an episode about the Tiger ausführung F or the Projekt NM because according to what i did read now most people can‘t find any information about them except that they were planned
That would depend mainly on the gun(s). Obviously multiple 2cm Flak guns would be nearly useless but the 5.5cm and 8.8cm ones could likely have been very useful in a secondary AT role.
I was wondering about this as well, how much is the pen of those guns? Dual barreled 5.5 sounds like to be a fun gun to be used in WT (if they haven't already). Heck, I can even see they to use it for WoT as a weird premium.
@@zeroyuki92 The velocities are close, so probably a bit better than the 5cm KwK 39 used on the later Panzer III Ausf L. Not great on a frontal target, but perfectly capable against most side or rear armor.
why exactly do you need an SPAA with massive armor? doesnt really help against bombs and even little armor is immune to aircraft guns. especially the panther hull is pretty terrible against aerial attack, as the top and side armor is quite low. kinda puzzling to me
hey idk if im the only one but I only notice the text bubbles you put into the video like right before they disappear. maybe you could make them last longer? or... idk. maybe make them flash to get my attention? cuz I'm too busy looking at the cool tanks 🥴🥴
@ConeOfArc do you think it would have been possible to simply cut the existing Panther turrets in half so that the front of the turret could be a normal Panther turret but the back of the turret could have been for Flak guns?
I wonder how the Tiger and Panther would have performed ifbthey gave their regular tank guns an anti-aircradt traverse? They would definitely need a bigger turret, but I wonder if it could have helped them during the later stages of the war? I also don't know how impractical it would have been.
I once bullied a Coelian in a fisticuffs battle as a Crusader SPAA on Sweden in War Thunder. I think I was the Mk. II variant, the one with twin Oerlikon autocannons. I somehow won. It was an awkward battle between two idiots who couldn't pen each other's turrets, but could only hit each other's turret.
Ah yes, the 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341. I think 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 really rolls off the tongue, the crisp snappiness of 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 is hard to deny. However, that said, if you were to have a differing opinion about 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 then I would respect that, regardless of how I feel about the name 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341.
Cool video but... On your ending comments I would have to disagree to a degree. While they would do little to reduce the amount of Allies' aircraft and the over all strategic bombing campaign, they would be useful SRAD and on a local level. SPAA like the wirblewind and other AA,while effective against dive-bombers had been hard counted by Rocket based CAS like the Typhoons with RP3s which these Panther based AA would be resistant too. While it would not win them the war the ability to defend their exsisting armour would be quite useful, even if they are just driving aircraft off. Explanation asside, love your channel! And thanks for the videos~~
You know that Rocket attacks were mainly psychological shock, right? The Brits did a series of tests after Normandy--rockets hit less than *10%* of the time! What was more effective was that near-misses would scare crews into abandoning their vehicles, either temporarily or (less often) permanently.
@@dphalanx7465 When a typhoon carries 8-12 RP3s and come in group of 4 at least meaning that at the worst 32 rockets fired. That's still 3 hits on targets. It also should be noted that only tank would need a direct hit to knock out. Half tracks and soft skinned targets like SPAA would be knocked out by near misses due being open guns. A fully enclosed SPAA would eliminate the near miss kills rp3s enjoyed by putting armour plate In-between the shrapnel and blast. An Spaa that stays operational longer has increased chances of breaking up air attacks or driving aircraft off
![Eminem - Like My Shit [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vx_IMvFkrfA/mqdefault.jpg)
Support the channel and get some merch featuring the Coelian and other German tanks: coneofarcs-merch.creator-spring.com/listing/br-compression
Your conclusion are sometimes a little bit off.
According to Doyle the Panther was planed as the next generation tank platform for multiple roles from the beginning, so we are talking about the time frame 1941/42 when these concepts were made. The plan to turn the Panther into a flak panzer, a ARV or tank hunter predates the events of 1943/1944 when Germany finally starts losing the war and lost control over their airspace. The coelian wasn't a reaction to something that just happened. It was a concept which could not be realized anymore because of the critical industrial situation. A Panther hull could be assembled much quicker than a panzer 4 hull, because it was streamlined for mass production. Using old panzer iv hulls and rebuild them as flak Panzers definitely made sence, but producing new panzer IV hulls for flak Panzers would have been a waste of time and resources in the long run.
I like seeing Cone give notes, I think that's a good Idea.
@@Servo_M I've been wanting to find a way to incorporate her into the videos organically and it seemed like a nice way to do it
@@ConeOfArc And it works well.
*Fahrgestell ;)
Coelian: *is more real than the Ostwind II*
Gaijin: im gonna pretend i didnt see that
the waffentrager also only had a wooden mockup
@@friedrichwilhelmvonsteuben6659ok but the Waffenträger looks cool, Flakpz. 341 Coelian is sillyy
@@friedrichwilhelmvonsteuben6659Thats just not true, full prototype was made and multiple other waffentrager project vehicles were made.
weirdest flakpanzer I've seen is the fake tank with an E-100 hull and double 88mm guns.
ever seen a maus with 4x 37mm kwak cannons?
@@mahtabalam3972 wasn't that a kit bash someone did?
that would probably exist cuz that double 88mm guns actually exist... its called 12.8 cm flak zwilling
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12.8_cm_FlaK_40
@@madhie-kun8614 why would double 88mms be called a 128cm… and you probably mean 12.8 cm, as a 128cm is a shell so massive that it would make a battleship look pathetic.
@@LockheedRep Lol 🤦♂️
vehicle is made to shoot down planes
Germans: HANS PUT 100MM ARMOR ON THE TURRET
It was still meant to be at the frontlines so makes sense! And didnt have to be super fast
@@onebritishboi9892 it had to keep up with tanks tho
@@valhalanguardsman2588 tanks which were getting heavier!
@@onebritishboi9892 what was it supposed to do there that justifies the armor? against infantry the armor is way too thick and other armor you cant penetrate
@@Obelion_ not die, the armour is so it can be RIGHT at the frontline.
I wonder how useful the Skink turret might've been. 4x 20mm Polsten guns. Pretty well armored, if the turret that came off the target range is any indicator.
Well there was a couple (like 1 or 2) sent to Europe, however they couldn’t find any air targets to engage so found themselves engaging infantry more. However the military didnt need more vehicles for fighting infantry and since the Luftwaffe was nearly nonexistent in the ground support role by that point, it was cancelled.
Would've been verry effective, especially to protect tank units against Stukas.
I guess we can not know for certain but i would compare it to the wirblewind, the german AA tank that is very simillar to it in terms of arms and possabliy the same issues.
Closed top, so I don't imagine it being that effective.
@@bibendum452 worse visibility for better armour. Since most normal AA guns got taken out by planes.
It's interesting that the Germans decided to mount larger caliber armaments (ie. 37mm & 55mm) on these projects when their own published assessments showed that the 20mm Flak guns were far more effective against Allied fighter bombers than any other of their anti aircraft guns.
A 20mm can only go so far up into the sky.
Though the 20mm was in the aircrafts which is why it was effective when firing head on but you had to get into range.
If we look into the US, the 40mm was the best when dealing with aircraft while on a level plain, on the ground or nn a aircraft carrier.
@@GideonStahl A 40mm Bofors could take out most fighters and other single-engine aircraft with a single shell.
@@GideonStahl The discussion relates to German Flak guns usefulness against Allied fighters, not whether the US 40mm is an overall better Flak gun than the German 2cm. As such the German report summery on the effectiveness of the 2cm Flak is as follows:
"The problem whether to use the 2cm or 3.7cm anti-aircraft gun [for a Flakpanzer] has been decided completely in favor of the 2cm. The Jabo (ie Allied Fighter Bomber) is a Mistvieh. He attacks at low heights. In every case at an elevation where the 2cm is effective. The majority of Jabo kills are credited to 2cm. When bombers attack in saturation raids they are at height ranges [neither the 2cm or] the 3.7cm can reach."
-- 2cm vs 3.7cm Flak effectiveness assessment as reported by Major Petri, 30th January 1945
@@calessel3139 That's interesting, because the re-mounting of the 30mm MK103 looks to be the be best compromise between caliber, range, size, & weight. Based on pictures, they seemed to have made a lot of them, right in the last couple months of the war (so very few got into action). The ground mountings had vibration problems, but he vehicle mounts worked pretty well. Mostly truck/halftrak mounts (and a few Kugelblitzes). There were plans for a "Super-Whirblewind" with quad FlaK 103s, but it never got past drawing stage, I believe.
@@dphalanx7465 Yes, the Mk103 was an excellent weapon, but you have to remember few were produced by January 45. The report given only assess those Flak guns deployed in large enough numbers that would allow widespread field reports and I doubt there was much data on the Mk103 at that time. Weapons scrutinize would, of course, include 2cm Flak38, 2cm Flakvierling, 3.7cm Flak 18/36 and 3.7cm Flak43. I would also assume it probably included the 2cm MG151/20 since it had been fairly well incorporated into late war Flak units but no distinction is given between 2cm and 3.7cm weapons, so I'm guessing on this point.
On the vehicle at 9:02:
It's a field mod of a field mod. The base vehicle is a Panther that got turned into a Bergepanther engineering vehicle. It was common for Bergepanthers to have the hole left by the removed turret to be covered with wooden planks.
Another indicator for it being a Bergepanther is the removed hull roof on the drivers and bow machine gunners position (this one got really fancy and got a movable cover for it!).
And then somebody just decided to put a regular stationary 3,7 cm flak on the wooden platform. In the end it's basically the same as putting an aa gun on a flat bed truck just with an engineering tank.
Yeah I figured as much. I'll probably cover that vehicle in a future video of its own I only included it because otherwise I'd get comments like "ummm actually you forgot about the panther with a 37mm on it"
You should take a look at the missile program of ww2 Germany. It would fit perfectly in line of “Cursed by design” even though it isn’t a tank thing. Some of them influenced the development of future anti tank missiles. I guess ATGM would also be a interesting topic.
Yep. The infamous "Sagger" got its start as a German Air to Air wireguided missile.
Same with the French SS.10/11 that are basically upgraded Ruhrstahl X-7's.
That reminds me to "Penemünde West". A book i stiil need to finally read after finding it at work
They really were ahead of their time, though one critical advantage the Allies had was in proximity fuses without which these missiles weren't practical.
@@Zorro9129 as far as I know they had a proximity fuze that worked by detecting the sound of the propellers of the bombers. They even tested the missile from a flying aircraft.
The Skink has been mentioned in the comments, and for one would love to see an episode dedicated to it. If not in the "Cursed by Design" series, then just a video would be cool. I would love to see it put in War Thunder, too.
Good that you displayed the message at 09:00, I was about the hit the keyboard ;-) Great video, motivates me to quickly finish my Panther with Flakvierling. Was also surprised that they were considering used Panther II parts for the 8.8 cm vehicle.
Not to mention multiple specific parts for specific panzer variants complicates production priorities.
But designing those parts keeps you away from the ostfront.
1:50 "Fahrgestell" is missing an "l" at the end
It's interesting to see the small similarity between the Coelian's turret and the modern Oerlikon systems produced by Rheinmetal, mostly in their shape.
We need a tank that can shoot enemy planes on the production line!
the stuart: i have been summoned
at least in war thunder... that thing is a better aa than most aa vehicles
So... a self-propelled artillery then?
@@ravenouself4181 The Soviet T-28 land ship is easily the best AA in game
@@civilrebel3743 T-34-85 best AA
@@civilrebel3743 Sturmpanzer II is way better. Sure you need to be creative while aiming but 150mm he will down any plane.
None of these actually seem actually cursed by their design, being basically useful designs or design concepts. Rather, they were cursed by the logistical and developmental environment.
True but the failure still stems from the designs which used components which weren't going to be readily available.
@@ConeOfArc again, that's a *logistics* and *prioritization* issue. It's not like those parts didn't exist, or didn't work... There was just too much demand for the supply.
Designing *entirely new* systems and parts *would* have been cursed, as it would have called for an entire new supply chain, which would have been a truly obscene waste of effort and resources.
@@lairdcummings9092 If a design uses hard-to-source components, that is a flawed design.
@@anzaca1 *if* they're genuinely hard to source.
Multiple demands for an existing part which is made in large volumes, however, does not make a part scarce. It demonstrates a logistics chain failure, not a design flaw.
Considering that the designs were drawn up during the crush of a losing war, such prioritization constraints are hardly unpredictable.
And, Germany had a major fuel shortage, especially late in the war. There were many, many newly produced vehicles and aircraft sitting idle for lack of fuel.
WarThunder be like: *WRITE THAT DOWN, WRITE THAT DOWN!*
i hope they do😅
Gaijin pls!!!
7:42 Eyyyyy toaster
I was looking for a FlakPanzer video. Thanks.
Oh boy maybe there is some information on the elusive gerat 58 armed coelian
Let's goo Panther zsu-57-2
I think it would be interesting if you took a look at some of the wacky assault guns "used" by the Swedish in WW2
I have a VFW on War Thunder. The most interesting feature of the design was that you could raise the side skirts for extra protection, which would also limit the horizontal traverse of the cannon, or leave them down, in which case the cannon could traverse the full 360 degrees. It may have made a reasonable tank destroyer, but of course Germany had plenty of those, including a Flak 8.8 cm mounted on an armored truck chassis. It's true that they were better off using the Panther chassis for actual Panthers.
An enclosed turret with really poor outward visibility makes the whole concept moot. If you can't spot and track targets that may be coming at you from any direction, the vehicle is pointless.
An enclosed turret provides a vast advantage in protection however, especially as killing every incoming aircraft wasn't going to be possible. Eventually enclosed SPAA did become the norm, though they probably had better visibility.
Fully enclosed turrets only became common on SPAA after search radar also became common. ZSU-23-4, Sergeant York, Flakpanzer Gepard: these all had closed turrets and search radars. VADS, M19/M42 Duster, ZSU-57-2: these all had open turrets and no search radar.
It would have taken very little time for them to add a first gen Night Fighter radar to it. The germans had those as surplus since bombers (but back then NOT the single engine craft) could/did carry jammers against them and the Night Fighters got a second gen.
And german tankers are used to fight from the open hatch
Hi ConeOfArc! Your channel is amazing, keep it up!
coned man thank you for upload
This is great. Like the video's you make ConeOfArc. Can't wait for what's next.
one question: IN WHAT WAY PANTHER CHASIS IS MORE "APPEALING" THAN USING PZ 3 OR 4?
like, seriously, it is more expensive both production and maintanance (like, didn't they need MORE SPARE PARTS?), more ground pressure, requires more training for the crew, bigger target, so on and so forth
Believe it or not, at the end of the war it was actually slightly cheaper to build a Panther than a Panzer 4.
Panzer IV and Panzer III chassis were supposed to go out of production in 1945, so then the only available tank chassis would have been Panzer 38(t), Panther and Kingtiger. Panzer 38 is too smol for a project like this and Kingtiger hulls are even more precious than Panther ones
yeah if the war continued for couple more year, they would have mounted a 14 inch battleship cannon on a maus!
Transmission: *(sad noise)*
@@Shaun_Jones The secret ingedient is forced labour
It’s a matter of simplifying the amount of parts German had to build. Bo need for pz4 parts if you don’t use the ps4 hull and anything producing pz4 parts switches to panther parts
Love these videos man! Keepit up! Can you maybe also make a future video in which you discuss the many artillery / self proppelled gun variants on tiger and panther chassis'?
Great Video again, allthough you had a typo at 1:54 (it‘s „Fahrgestell“ Not „Fahrgestel“)
Thanks for video cone
Might want to get in touch with Tank Encylopedia with this one, as they have conflicting info on the Coelian, especially the 5,5cm variant saying it would've looked more like an Ostwind with a bigger gun.
I'm mainly going off of information from Hilary Doyle but it is possible that more information has come out more recently.
Yooo! Your new intro is so much better
im glad i got mine before they moved it in WT, i still prefer it over any other AA and find its an amazingly effective light tank killer too
shame that 5.5cm wont be added, it looks very cool
the Coelian? Ive killed more of those things than been killed by them.....I even killed one in a fisticuffs match as a freaking Crusader Mk.II SPAA for cryin' out loud!
7:38 The Death Toaster 2.0
I’m always surprised why the Germans didn’t use the Pz 38 t chassis for some light SPAAs, having such an armored SPAA seems like a total waste of material
In the late war, the pz38t chassis was on its absolute limit. No way you could mount an antiaircraft gun big enough to be worth it.
I have seen old b/w pics that showed an unknown AA vehicle that appeared to be either a Pz38 chassis or built from a Hetzer. A Tiger II was the main subject of the pic, but in the book they pointed out that no one knew what that was. A second pic from the battle off Berlin, another unknown AA vehicle that was with other destroyed vehicles
@@dougmulle2627 I'm an idiot, the flakpanzer 38(t) exists, late war design with a 20mm
Between so many records being destroyed, field mods, the wrecks being buried or sold for scrap so fast and the fact that the Russians didn't share much information, we're lucky to know what we do! It wasn't all that long ago that no one believed a Maus was ever built, then one shows up in a Russian museum!
1:54
You forgot the 2nd "L" in "Fahrgestell"
Excellent vid ! Thanks
With these gems secured hope is not lost to find traces of the KV-1 double barrel 57mm.
man imagine what kind of beast that 55mm panther would have been. great anti air and more than capable as a tank destroyer as well. yea would not have won the war but man it could have been a menace.
I have a model of the Zweiling Panther. Pretty interesting that the Panther chassis was chosen for so many concepts.
If you look at the post WW2 german development it may become clear why. They tried to build what later became Gepard on the "new IFV" (later Marder) hull and it failed. They then went for the heavier/larger Leopard 1 hull and the weight problems with having an enclosed, 2x35mm armed and radar equiped tank vanished.
The mass produced hull in the Leopard 1 class in WW2 was Panther. And when the projects started it was still planned to replace both PIII and PIV in production by it
Ah, the Coelion. Also known as the Unteroffizier York.
I love these late war prototypes that went nowhere. They are up resources and vehicles ;)
COelian coulda been a BMPT Terminator before the BMPT Terminator was cool. Imagine that thing pulling up as ground infantry support. Unload its guns into an entrenched US position in a house...RIP.
Hearing this it's a bit outrageous that Germany had so many spare Panzer IVs and it's components and hulls, that they mounted AA guns onto the hulls, which is unnecessary as AA vehicles are support, not front line vehicles so don't need much protection, and considering they are open topped and the superstructure is incredibly weak, a strong hull won't help the vehicle in any way.
Yet at the same time, Germany's allies such as Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, etc. who were desperately in need of capable modern tanks asked for Panzer IVs and Germany denied them (only giving over Panzer IVs very late in 1944 and 1945). And then Germany was surprised it's allies performed so poorly in tank combat (well except Hungary). If the Germans would have given their allies Panzer IVs rather than pointlessly equipping them with Flak turrets, maybe the Axis would have avoided situations like Stalingrad.
I really like the new intro mister cone
If there is any humor to be found among Germany's war effort, it is exactly this, too little, too late...
These would have needed to be in production by '41 to be effective by '44. Prototyping a solution long after it was already a decided issue on the battlefront was a German hallmark of design philosophy.
But still, who doesn't want a Flaktiger with twin 37mm, twin 20mm, and a pair of MG-42's on top? Can you imagine it a direct fire ground support role?
SPAA without radar assisted aiming in an enclosed, armored platform seems pointless to me. None of these vehicles ever being effective when they were actually deployed puts paid to that theory, I think.
How do you know they were not effective? You would have to look at the hard data to know that for a fact.
@@Zorro9129 You can’t really expect a vehicle meant to engage aircraft and similar targets to succeed with an enclosed turret with no tracking systems. It’s main job is to shoot down distant, small and fast targets that could emerge from anywhere, and that’s difficult to do with only a few vision ports, don’t you think?
@@fluffyskunkboy4596 If there is a commander hatch he can look for a target and direct the gunner before "buttoning up." The benefits of an enclosed turret are obvious, as SPAA with poor vision is still more effective than SPAA that has its crew knocked out quickly.
@@Zorro9129 an SPAA with poor vision not effective!
The VFW II/8.8cm Flakpanther's shape looks a bit like a mbt.
no it doesn't
Have you ever gone down the rabbit hole of randomly gunned American anti air mgmcs and gmcs
it's amazing how the war industry kept developing new designs up to the end of the war, where most nations would have long since imploded.
The Germans created so many bizarre inventions in WW2 that if the war carried on a couple more year, they would’ve made an auto cannon version of the 8.8cm kwk put on tigers.
To be honest an Auto Canon Tiger sounds quite interesting, just imaging a Tiger with maybe a 6 Shot Drum giving out shots
Skoda designed a 6 round automatic loading system that was intended to be tested in the Jagdpanther.
Ooh! Imagine a jet plane like the Me-262 built around an 88mm anti-aircraft gun!
Fly up, aim at a bomber, fire a three round burst, recover from the stall conditions.
@@MonkeyJedi99 Like The A-10 with the Drawback that the Guns Knockback is to much for engines to handle
@@Hunter12396 Skoda was big on Autoloaders; they were also developing one for the 75/70 gun. Look up "Skoda Panther."
flakpanzer 341 looks the coolest (imo)
c h a n g e .
m y .
m i n d .
You forgot a "L" in Fahrgestell.
Steve try to make a video about the Flakpanzer IV Zerstörer 45 with mk103 gun
I read the title as flatpack tanks. Was expecting ikea tanks.
Ahh yes, the 37mm wehraboo whoflungunpoo panzer aus F with rocket assisted blitz engines.
7:45 wait, the toaster UNFOLDES?
what is the "emergency production program" he mentions at 06:43?
Do the Soviet Object 282, essentially a missile carrier with a T-10/IS-8 chassis.
Where do you get your tank models at? Cone of Arc
I heard that the Coelian was called ''Goliath" or is another variation? also nice intro i hope you make more cursed by design videos about the left flackpanzers like the flackpanzer E-100
Very cool
awesome video as normal keep it up ^^ - just curious where you got the little models shown from?
At 4, 36 It seemes there is a Sherman in German use? Interezsting movie, thanks!
For an AA idea the M48 Gau-8 brrrrt.
@ConeOfArc just curious , why is one of your maus models in a case and the other isnt ?
Nice dust on the E-100 box 🤭🤭
We had access to the Coelion in Panzer General II.... 👌😎
Gud vid
Funny Panther flak thingies or smth
gonna enjoy fo sho
When are we getting a vid on the P1000?
oh ik that
that was once in WT now they removed it idk why
before i don't really play much WT
i just noticed that you wrote "Fahrgestel", theres an "l" missing there
ah that explains why the coelion lost its name in WT
So disappointed they never got around to putting a Flakzwilling 40 on a King Tiger hull.😢
Thinking about how good the Gepard II turned out to be in West Germany those early SPAAGS where anyway a good learning experience. But mounting BIGGER Guns on the Prototypes was really stupid. 2x MK-103 would have been their best choice I believe. 30mm High Velocity Good Range and Reliability.
Gajin soon:
*Write that down, write that down!*
Does the rheinmetall skorpion g from WoT was based on those Flak Panthers prototypes?
1) New tank branch spotted
2) Is this video at 90% speed?
Flakpanzer 341 use the panther g chassis "i think?" Maybe got a little better mobility because main gun smaller and the turret also smaller
All they would have needed is the Ostwind II and some WT players... Since apparently that thing has built in airlock to my wings and engine.
Can u maybe do an episode about the Tiger ausführung F or the Projekt NM because according to what i did read now most people can‘t find any information about them except that they were planned
Actually a question, how good would a flak tank be against other armour?
That would depend mainly on the gun(s). Obviously multiple 2cm Flak guns would be nearly useless but the 5.5cm and 8.8cm ones could likely have been very useful in a secondary AT role.
@@jarink1 I can imagine that any tank crew being targeted by one of these tanks would be shitting bricks.
Useless.
I was wondering about this as well, how much is the pen of those guns? Dual barreled 5.5 sounds like to be a fun gun to be used in WT (if they haven't already). Heck, I can even see they to use it for WoT as a weird premium.
@@zeroyuki92 The velocities are close, so probably a bit better than the 5cm KwK 39 used on the later Panzer III Ausf L. Not great on a frontal target, but perfectly capable against most side or rear armor.
why exactly do you need an SPAA with massive armor? doesnt really help against bombs and even little armor is immune to aircraft guns. especially the panther hull is pretty terrible against aerial attack, as the top and side armor is quite low.
kinda puzzling to me
hey idk if im the only one but I only notice the text bubbles you put into the video like right before they disappear. maybe you could make them last longer? or... idk. maybe make them flash to get my attention? cuz I'm too busy looking at the cool tanks 🥴🥴
These things would do GREAT in WT
next thing you know
somebody comes up with a fake flakpanther with twin 88mm as it's gun with a closed large ass turret
Now if only we had a Tiger Spaa
@ConeOfArc do you think it would have been possible to simply cut the existing Panther turrets in half so that the front of the turret could be a normal Panther turret but the back of the turret could have been for Flak guns?
I wonder how the Tiger and Panther would have performed ifbthey gave their regular tank guns an anti-aircradt traverse? They would definitely need a bigger turret, but I wonder if it could have helped them during the later stages of the war? I also don't know how impractical it would have been.
Very impractical, and utterly useless.
88 Flak Panther look not-cursed and cursed at the same time.
I once bullied a Coelian in a fisticuffs battle as a Crusader SPAA on Sweden in War Thunder. I think I was the Mk. II variant, the one with twin Oerlikon autocannons. I somehow won. It was an awkward battle between two idiots who couldn't pen each other's turrets, but could only hit each other's turret.
Finally a tank video...
WT: you can shoot down both airplanes and lightarmor vehicles with SPAA no prob
I feel like German spaa is hard to find evidence of
1:50 Fahrgestell with double l
Another try:
You know anything about the alleged 'midgardschlange' Mole Tank project?
I Like all Geman ww2 Tanks .the Tiger Tank is pure Power and soooo sexy
Ah yes, the 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341. I think 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 really rolls off the tongue, the crisp snappiness of 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 is hard to deny. However, that said, if you were to have a differing opinion about 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341 then I would respect that, regardless of how I feel about the name 3.7cm Flakzwilling auf Panther Fahrgestel 341.
Ah, i had NEVER EVER heard the name "Coelian", but the 3.7cm Flakzwilling, oh yes.
And the 5.5cm guns were IIRC, seriously NOT good guns.
Thier anti air would be better as anti personnel
Cool video but... On your ending comments I would have to disagree to a degree. While they would do little to reduce the amount of Allies' aircraft and the over all strategic bombing campaign, they would be useful SRAD and on a local level. SPAA like the wirblewind and other AA,while effective against dive-bombers had been hard counted by Rocket based CAS like the Typhoons with RP3s which these Panther based AA would be resistant too. While it would not win them the war the ability to defend their exsisting armour would be quite useful, even if they are just driving aircraft off.
Explanation asside, love your channel! And thanks for the videos~~
You know that Rocket attacks were mainly psychological shock, right? The Brits did a series of tests after Normandy--rockets hit less than *10%* of the time! What was more effective was that near-misses would scare crews into abandoning their vehicles, either temporarily or (less often) permanently.
@@dphalanx7465 When a typhoon carries 8-12 RP3s and come in group of 4 at least meaning that at the worst 32 rockets fired. That's still 3 hits on targets.
It also should be noted that only tank would need a direct hit to knock out. Half tracks and soft skinned targets like SPAA would be knocked out by near misses due being open guns.
A fully enclosed SPAA would eliminate the near miss kills rp3s enjoyed by putting armour plate In-between the shrapnel and blast. An Spaa that stays operational longer has increased chances of breaking up air attacks or driving aircraft off
@@dessertfoxo4096 Definitely agree with your second & third paragraphs.