The Elefant isn't, and never was, a "tank". It's a long range tank-destroyer. The problem was in it's mis-use. It was pressed into service at Kursk before it was ready, and used to try and fulfil the role of tank. Being rushed into service it was mechanically unsuited to the distances and terrain on the Eastern Front. There is no doubt that at Kursk, it was a disaster. However, when employed in Italy, with minimal movement being required and static defences, it was a formidable vehicle, especially when on higher ground. In other words, when used for it's proper role, it did well, when it wasn't, it didn't. And that's been true of many tanks over the years.
Use a weapon in the manner it was designed to perform and they work fine. The 88 was designed to take out tanks at long range, not in close contact with infantry. Nearly all tanks of WWII had a bow mounted Mg with very limited ark of fire and a coaxial MG with even less. A tanks (or SP) best defense against infantry if friendly infantry.
The Ferdinand/Elefant may have been the most successful mass-produced tank destroyer employed during the war in kills per loss, reaching an average claimed ratio of approximately 10:1. Despite its shortcomings.
You do forget the Infamous Elefant Tank that had a 10 to 1 killl ratio the highest killl ratio of any tank during WW2. So I don't think that the Elefant Tiger was not that bad of a tank destoyer. They just could not make enough of them. You did not tell the full story about the Elefant tank where it could of been a Tiger tank.
The Ferdinand was born out of scrap parts. The Germans never planned on this thing being a game changer. It was something to do with the 50 odd rejected Tiger chassis that they had lying about. It actually had a pretty good kill loss ratio but yes, it was too heavy and unreliable. Still, the Germans got something out of those rejected chassis.
That was my reading. 91 chassis built by Porsche in its losing bid in the Tiger 1 competition, converted to be something useful. It was also beginning times of a flood of Soviet tanks were being built so anything with tracks that could mount an AT gun was converted to TD. Really, the fully mature TD was the Jadgpanther and less than 500 could be built during the war.
Actually the bow machine gun wasn't introduced until after the battle of Kursk. The original Ferdinands had no secondary armament at all except the small arms that the crew had.
The British Churchill had 150mm frontal armour and had good climbing ability but was woefully undergunned. I wonder what would have happened if the 17lb AT gun had been able to be installed
The Elefant isn't, and never was, a "tank". It's a long range tank-destroyer. The problem was in it's mis-use. It was pressed into service at Kursk before it was ready, and used to try and fulfil the role of tank. Being rushed into service it was mechanically unsuited to the distances and terrain on the Eastern Front. There is no doubt that at Kursk, it was a disaster. However, when employed in Italy, with minimal movement being required and static defences, it was a formidable vehicle, especially when on higher ground. In other words, when used for it's proper role, it did well, when it wasn't, it didn't. And that's been true of many tanks over the years.
Use a weapon in the manner it was designed to perform and they work fine. The 88 was designed to take out tanks at long range, not in close contact with infantry. Nearly all tanks of WWII had a bow mounted Mg with very limited ark of fire and a coaxial MG with even less. A tanks (or SP) best defense against infantry if friendly infantry.
The Ferdinand/Elefant may have been the most successful mass-produced tank destroyer employed during the war in kills per loss, reaching an average claimed ratio of approximately 10:1. Despite its shortcomings.
He's right too.
I was going to sat the same.
@@markgreiser464yes😮
You do forget the Infamous Elefant Tank that had a 10 to 1 killl ratio the highest killl ratio of any tank during WW2. So I don't think that the Elefant Tiger was not that bad of a tank destoyer. They just could not make enough of them. You did not tell the full story about the Elefant tank where it could of been a Tiger tank.
The Ferdinand was born out of scrap parts. The Germans never planned on this thing being a game changer. It was something to do with the 50 odd rejected Tiger chassis that they had lying about. It actually had a pretty good kill loss ratio but yes, it was too heavy and unreliable. Still, the Germans got something out of those rejected chassis.
That was my reading. 91 chassis built by Porsche in its losing bid in the Tiger 1 competition, converted to be something useful. It was also beginning times of a flood of Soviet tanks were being built so anything with tracks that could mount an AT gun was converted to TD. Really, the fully mature TD was the Jadgpanther and less than 500 could be built during the war.
It was let down by it's single machine gun......if you get into a position where you've got enemy infantry scrambling all over you, you've lost!!
Actually the bow machine gun wasn't introduced until after the battle of Kursk. The original Ferdinands had no secondary armament at all except the small arms that the crew had.
The tank audio that fades in and out is extremely annoying and takes away from what is otherwise an excellent video.
Thx , excellent feedback
He's right you know.
Agreed. And what is up with the repeated aerial footage of the old pillboxes?
@@veiledzorba my little brother requested that footage.
The blaring tank track audio ruins this video, that is why I stopped it @ 2:25 minuets & gave it a 👎.
I noticed, I cried for a while , but eventually recovered
Did someone forget it was Self igniting
Would have been a good video if not for the idiot tank noise.
The British Churchill had 150mm frontal armour and had good climbing ability but was woefully undergunned. I wonder what would have happened if the 17lb AT gun had been able to be installed
It wasn't a bad tank, it was used wrong.!
Not a tank. A tank destroyer. Wish you so called historians could get it a tad more accurate.
we should hire you
This video was created by Invideo AI - the voice over and the video clips are obviously drawn from their library.
Actually no mate, I used WeVideo and is not AI footage. Sorry Mr Hand Grenade. you clearly got it wrong chap[
How do you figure it was the worst.....? When the Japanese absolutely had THE Worse equipment on the planet...
The Japanese told us this was the worse
Sound effects doing you no favors, Bruh.
weak armor and no MG
Nice narration, but mine gott! Mistakes in the research are ...great. Who still calls an SPG , with no turret, a tank?
Worst background effect ever.
I gave up watching after 4 mins.
we gave up on you also :(
The M-1 is a little bit like the elefant
Voice over by Father Stone
thx Dad
Hmm did you foor