Actually in the parade the T-14 driver was inexperienced and accidentally hit the emergency brake and so the vehicle couldn't be moved. Since it was so new the recovery crews didn't know what was wrong with it and so recovery vehicles couldn't move it. It was a really embarrassing moment.

25:51 Yes, that number is false, there are about seventy of those tanks built. Also, it neither broke down, nor did it happen at the military parade. It happened at the parade rehearsal and it didn't break down, an improperly trained driver (his training was short because they were in hurry to get him trained on time before the parade) accidentally pressed the hard reset button. That's why on the video that everyone knows the combat recovery vehicle can't tow it away - its brakes are engaged. They later had reseted the system and the tank drove away by itself. If you want to know more about the Armata tank type "RedEffect T-14 Armata" in YT. This guy (RedEffect) really knows his Russian armor.

@tristansalagoste4486

2 жыл бұрын

I like wathcing him too, a really good tank youtuber.

@tobilikebacon

2 жыл бұрын

good idea, he should do that

@Kilo_11

Жыл бұрын

Yea I bet that’s what happened lol

Not all Soviet tanks were bad the T34 was a beast even the Germans didn't like to face

@Belnick6666

2 жыл бұрын

T-34, T34 is an american heavy tank

@Belnick6666

2 жыл бұрын

T-34 was a beast vs pz1, 2, 3 and 4, but vs the panther? lol

@ComradeHellas

2 жыл бұрын

@@Belnick6666 If you are fantasizing about an 1vs1 scenario, it's unfair to put a mass-produced medium tank against Germany's better designs. In such case compare it with the IS-2, who could destroy a Tiger tank facing front from 1500 meters. If on the other hand want to discuss the overall quality of the tank, it's effectiveness and it's abilities, I would say T34-85 was much better (slopped armour giving it a 90mm thickness, a 85mm gun and 53km/hour speed, matching light tanks).

@walangchahangyelingden8252

2 жыл бұрын

It wasn't that good. They just had a lot of them. The Sherman did the same thing.

@EnemyAtom65

2 жыл бұрын

@@Belnick6666 85mm gun.

Man the bias was too much, can't even finish

11:41 First of all, not German tanks, but heavy tanks in general, and second of all, German tanks were outgunning generally everything with exception of things like IS heavy tank series or a Sherman Jumbo, but as opposed to Soviet ones, yes, AS OPPOSED TO SOVIET ONES weren't as reliable and were notoriously hard to repair (the transmission meme didn't appear out of nothing).

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

The Jumbo still only carried a 75mm ( The Firefly had a more powerful gun). They DID have better armor than the M4. But only 234 were made. They made no difference in the war.

@olekzajac5948

2 жыл бұрын

@@protonneutron9046 Yes, I know that Jumbo Shermans were a rarity, but I was proving the point that Artur is biased against Russian weapons, from tanks to firearms.

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

@@olekzajac5948 Could be but the Jumbo couldn't take out German tanks any better than the M-4 Sherman. The first good heavy tank the US got in WW-2 was the M-26

@thesandtiger

2 жыл бұрын

i think you guys sould spend a few week watch the chieftains hatch an learn some more about tanks before you talk like you know it all lol and he even said he was biased

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

@@thesandtiger Why? My Uncle taught me much about the tanks of that era. All of which he knew.

Fun Fact: Canada has less than 100 tanks and is 214.5 times bigger than Estonia. PS: The thing tractors use to plow fields are called Plough (or Plow)

@NoobNoobNews

2 жыл бұрын

@@klassikality Tanks are expensive and require a lot of infrastructure to support. an invasion of Canada requires tanks, but it also requires an infrastructure to get them to Canada. The USA is one of a very small list of nations that can bring their tanks outside their own borders.

@emptybucket1988

2 жыл бұрын

Fun fact: Belgium only has 35 tanks

9:00 the T-34 was actually not a bad tank, at the beginning of the war it was even better than the german tanks with more effective armor and a better gun, later during the war the tigers and panthers were better than the T-34 but it could still keep up

@ComradeHellas

2 жыл бұрын

Artur doesn't know what he says most of the time, so I am not surprised he called T-34 a bad tank, two minutes before that, the video said that A20 was equipped with a 45mm gun, he misheard it for 35mm and paused the video and started questioning whether the tank was an infantry support vehicle. Back to the main subject, not only the T-34 wasn't a bad tank, but it was probably the best tank design of WW2, it had an effective slopped armour of 90mm, its new version featured an 85mm cannon able to destroy a Tiger tank from the front at 500meters, it's speed of 53km/hour was comparable to that of light tanks. So all in all you have a tank with 90mm effective armour, 85mm cannon and 53km/h that its cheap to produce. Best tank of WW2 hands down. Those who disagree with that logic are mostly individuals who portray war as an 1vs1 duel and are obsessed with a wunderwaffe, such as the insane designs and prototypes the Germans created, that didn't work on the field, namely the Maus tank, sitting ducks for any pilot craving a medal.

@astromitediscontinued7627

2 жыл бұрын

​@@ComradeHellas Hello, Comrade with a Soviet banner. The T-34's frontal armor was 45mm thick, but this was heavily sloped up to 60 degrees, resulting in comparable effectiveness to that of a Sherman and Cromwell; but its effective thickness was not 90mm. Barrels are not fixed on the hull. The T-34s armor was a key player on the battlefield because of its ability to withstand assaults from contemporary anti-tank weaponry. But against German tanks the armor and gun were virtually useless, with 44,900 lost during the war; it also suffered the most tank losses ever recorded in history. If the Tiger's front plate is not angled, the Tiger does not use its superior range and armor, and the Tiger doesn't shoot you, sure. The Tiger I had the best armor and armaments Germany could produce, and a small number of Tigers could take over a battlefield. The design did contain serious flaws that led to frequent track problems and mechanical failures, but its battlefield performance compensated for its shortcomings. No single tank did more to change the course of history than the Soviet T-34, but to say it's a perfect design is fable. Sources: Krivosheev, G. I. (1997). Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses. Greenhill. p. 253 “World War II Tanks Used in Battle.” Norwich University Online “Tanks Reigned Supreme on Wwii Battlefields.” U.S. Department of Defense

@eurasian8492

Жыл бұрын

@@ComradeHellas The 53 kilometers per hour is complete bullshit. Most T-34 couldnt even get to half of that. Ever seen video of a wartime T-34 going 53 km/h? Yeah thats what i thought. Even the post-war models with the newer gearbox couldnt get to that speed. German tanks were faster, and surprisingly more reliable (except for tiger).

Soviets never fought the Taliban, it was the Mudjahdeen(sp)...

12:17 the soviets launched the first satellite, they had tech but when you have to fight a total war you need cheap equipment

I really enjoy how you can give practical perspective from your personal and national history. The only Russians I have ever met were fellow tourists in a French museum. My father was a WWII veteran, but served with the Merchant Marine, so we never got any stories about Russians or tanks.

Arther React to the American Tank evolution

@jzisers

2 жыл бұрын

He’s not gotta watch it any time soon. You know?

@austinlowrance5943

2 жыл бұрын

He has to show us what makes Russian tanks average so he can show what makes American tanks so great. 👍

@DenseOxide

2 жыл бұрын

@@jzisers yeah Probably

@terryhiggins5077

2 жыл бұрын

Id honestly like to see him react to some of the Chieftain's hatch vids

@miniard11b

2 жыл бұрын

@@jzisers are you a veteran of OEF or OIF?

the most produced tank is actually the T-55, its also Soviet and it is actually a decently good tank (with a good crew) even to this day for attacking infantry and fortified positions.

I know you have a rather big bias against russia as a whole for obvious reasons, but i assure you that the t-34 was a decent tank at the time including the t-34-85 the germans hated facing them even though they had better tanks, most aliied tanks weren't as good as the russian tanks even during the last days of ww2, not to bring any hate pal but i think its very silly that you attempt to down play the russians at any given chance.

@Alan-qf9gf

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. Using any point to abuse anything related to Russia is a childish way of thinking. Opinion is cool, but forcing it like that is just stupid

@johnnyanderson2-roblox185

2 жыл бұрын

I completely agree, I love his channel but his bias can legit make me not want to watch him sometimes.

@thesandtiger

2 жыл бұрын

so where Shermans

@patrickstar9237

2 жыл бұрын

@@thesandtiger shermans werent as good as the t-34

@christophedurand9083

2 жыл бұрын

@@patrickstar9237 The easy eight outclassed thé t-34-45 in korea

I think you’re being a bit too biased against the Soviets and Russians which is understandable. I think the two most critical myths you said was the Battle of 73 Easting and T-55s in the Russian army. In Iraq, our tanks were completely superior, Iraq was supplied the T-72 Ural, which is the original version of the T-72 with an infrared night vision system which was outdated by then. Furthermore, unlike Russian T-72s, these were fully steel with no composite armor or ERA and were armed with outdated and ineffective surplus ammunition that had no hope in damaging Coalition armor. Iraqi crews were also not trained as well and a fair amount of their armor also consisted of the very outdated T-55 or Chinese Type 59 or 69. As for T-55s being in Russian service, they are stored in stockpiles ready for reactivation if in dire need during wartime, but are not in active service. For some reason people think when T-55s and T-34s are shown in parades, that means it’s an active vehicle when they’re actually symbolic. Also please don’t hype up Cold War American quality, we admitted to ourselves that often our stuff was garbage and the Soviets had the upper hand. This went from rifles to tanks to jets to missiles to submarines. It was only through the threat of the advanced Soviet equipment that NATO developed its own to specifically counter new threats. That said, you are very correct that no matter how good Armata is, the Russians don’t seem to be able to make them in numbers anywhere close to NATO.

@lancevarrell711

2 жыл бұрын

@The Elapid King T80s were never even exported, are you on something???

11:43 Nope, And that's something a lot of people tend to belive, for some reason. German tanks were Not Entirely Better, And no, They were not the Best of the war. Yes, They generally had the Firepower Advantage, And sometimes the Armor Advantage, But they were also Infamous for being Extremely Over-Complicated and easy to break down, Specially on the Suspension and Transmission, The "Ah scheiße transmission broke again!" Meme didn't pop out of thin air. Its due to this that Tigers and Panthers generally would be Abandoned or would need to be recovered after Battle if their Suspension or Transmission was damaged, As the Roadwheel arrangement or the Design of the Transmission made them Very hard and Slow to repair, To the point sometimes you'd even need to pull out the entire track and the roadwheels even if you just got a little bit of mud stuck in between the roadwheels. They were Good Tanks, More when on the Battlefield, But they had a Plethora of reliabity and mechanical issues, Which simply does not allow them to hold the title of "Best tanks of WW2", And i belive no other nation could hold that title either.

I gota say, I usually love you're videos, but you're opinion on the T-34 just doesn't match with the historical record. The Panzer III was seriously out gunned and under armored when facing it, with most being armed with a 50mm gun that was of little use against the T-34's slopped armor. The Panzer 4 was a little better off, but it was still outmatched. The later Panther was designed to Deal with the T-34, but that just goes to show that the Germans considered the T-34 a dangerous opponent. A German General wrote that the T-34 was the best Tank on the Battlefield in 1941 or 42 ( i can't remember which). It had some serious short cumings, but many of those were ironed out with the T-34/85 (such as a bigger 3 man turret).

@michaeld.uchiha9084

2 жыл бұрын

Wrong the 50mm was built into the PZ3 after meeting the T34 because the long barrel 37mm gun wasnt powerful enough. The long barrel 75mm of the PZ4 could pen a T34 frontal at 800m.

@dexionsgamingcorner310

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaeld.uchiha9084 That actually just makes the point even clearer. The Pz3 was so outclassed by the T34 that even after upgrading the gun from 37mm to 50mm, they found it necessary to upgrade again to a 75mm. The fact is, calling the T34 a "Bad Tank" in 1941 is laughable.

@neokranjc2845

2 жыл бұрын

The thing is the early t-34s were really not that good. They had poor armor welding and really bad vision. So even if the t34 was better on paper, in reality sometimes the crews of the (early) t34 couldnt even fight back because they couldnt see the target and just got shot over and over until the tank was basically destroyed. But the later (t34 85) was a really good tank when it came out. Also the sloped armor of the t34 made for some really bad crew conditions while the pz3 was quite comfortable

It is worth noting that Russian tank crews were well known during ww2 as writing of relatively minor damage to their tanks as being lost to enemy action. Because of this a lot of these lost numbers are inflated post war. Russian tanks had surprising parity with their German counterparts.

@ComradeHellas

2 жыл бұрын

90% of the time, the tank that spots the other tank first wins, that benefited the Germans who went on the defensive following their defeat at Kursk, August 1943. You are also right about the Russians calculating damaged tanks as lost. As for the overall quality of the Soviet tanks, they were equal if not superior to German tanks if you compare similar designs. A T-34 was better than a Panzer IV, an IS-2 was better than a Tiger tank. Wehraboos enjoy comparing German Heavy tanks with allied Medium tanks, because it fits their narrative, 1 tiger = 10 Shermans/T34, ugga bugga.

@coltonannunziata1274

2 жыл бұрын

My man over here.

If 57 000 tanks were made in 4 years, that would mean that every minute, 36 tanks were produced.

@devon5154

2 жыл бұрын

There were civilians building tanks whilst Stalingrad was underseige

He has slandered the t-34 and I’m mad because it actually was really good the tiger tank was made to destroy it

Cool topic/video! Thanks Artur.

Love your vids!!!❤️🔥

The T-34 was decent. It’s optics were bad, it’s space was bad, it broke down a lot (but was easily repaired), but it had a decent gun, good speed, and some good armor

The dislike for anything russian is real

When it comes to the T-34 versus German armor the old adage "quantity has a quality of its own" held quite true. Let's also not forget that unlike the German tanks that tended to bog down in soft ground the T-34's wider base and tracks gave it far superior mobility over snow, but most importantly over muddy terrain.

My favorite WWII Russian tank film is “White Tiger.” 😁👍

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

T-34 wasn't bad either.

@michaelmccall8067

2 жыл бұрын

Try 'Tankers' based on a true story of a lone KV1 v German armoured breakthrough. Russian with English subtitles

@kimharding2246

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelmccall8067 Thanks, I will.

Shame that Estonia has no tanks, but it was fascinating that they used to have tanks, the British Mark V tank of WW1!!

We have a T-28 in my ex home town. One of three left in the world. Captured by us in the winter war.

Artur ,that 54000 was the upgraded T34 thus only the 44 to 45 production numbers. 1038 tanks per month - 148 per day - 6/7 per hr

@booran.

2 жыл бұрын

Also over 70,000 we’re built

T34 production was so streamlined and cheap. For perspective, a Sherman took 480,000 man hours to create. A t34 took 9,000 man hours.

11:41 Another thing here. For anyone that thinks that the T-34 is shit, here are two videos covering myths about it: kzread.info/dash/bejne/dKCgssWumL22aJc.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/hnqh1JmzkauZg6w.html. The first one is by Potential History and covers the reliability and quality topic and the second one is by The Chieftain and covers 5 most popular myths about the tank.

Atrur, please get new headphones or something. You are constantly mishearing and misunderstanding things said in the videos! For example, the A20 was CLEARLY stated to have a 45mm gun, not 35mm, and it was very powerful for a light tank. In fact, some of the very successful tanks in early WW2 only had 20mm or 37mm main guns! Most early tanks could be killed by high velocity 20mm guns. And, the USA and USSR were ALLIES until after WW2, and the US supplied many weapons, including bombers, fighter planes, and tanks to the USSR during the war. The problem with the Armata in the parade was not that it could not start. The problem was that the poorly trained crew accidently activated the emergency brakes and could not figure out how to clear it. The video also left out major tank series like the KVs and ISs. The video's description of how reactive armor works is oversimplified to the point of being WRONG. PS: At least, you have learned that people who give you money are called PATRONS, and Patreon is the name of the website. Also, the service life of the Gustav recoilless rifles could be extended if Estonia developed HESH rounds for it. To help mitigate the lack of tanks, perhaps you guys could mount heavy mortars on modified pickup trucks.

I love this channel; great content, great personality. Pertinent to the theme of this video: I recommend a movie called “The Beast” about a Soviet tank crew lost from its column in Afghanistan. It was filmed in Israel with assistance of the IDF, and the tanks used were actual Soviet-era armor captured from Arab armies during the Yom Kippur War. The reviews I’ve read from armored cavalry veterans praise the accuracy of the depiction of armored duty service during that era in that class of tank; it made for a better experience watching the movie than watching the CGI take over the more recent “Fury”.

The longest hit that wrecked a t-34 was from an elephant tank destroyer, which was a record that held for some time, 5600+ meters

One, the T-34 was not a bad tank. It was meant to work, and it did. It did not break down as much as you were saying. Also, the T-34-85 tank was able to defeat the German heavy tanks. That's why so many were built. They were relatively small, they had a great gun that could penetrate the Tiger and even the Panther, but they were still cheap. Two, the T-54 was more produced higher than the T-34. Three, The Russian Federation's tanks are being produced in slowly higher numbers, and these tanks have proven to be effective against or better than some NATO/NATO ally tanks (including America, Germany, South Korea, and Japan's.) The T-14 Armata is also possibly set to receive a 152mm gun, rather than the 122mm gun. (Like the T-95 152mm gun, which the T-95 was a scrapped tank that was later used for inspiration in the T-14 Armata.) The Armata also has the ability to destroy projectiles in the air. This was proven to work, as well. The Soviet tanks were not bad, they were just constantly being one upped by the American tanks. That's what the Cold War was, Like you said. Side note, the reason some older Soviet tanks are still in reserves (notice I said RESERVES, not active service.) In the Russian Federation because of Ukraine, as it wouldn't need to use the best against tanks like that. Look, I know you don't like our nation. I understand and respect that. I wouldn't want us to be invaded by America or China. You want your independence, and that's fine. I'd just rather us to look more at the numbers and the effectiveness. If you did read this, thank you. If not, well you don't see this so... I'm going to go get a drink. Cheers, my ex-soviet friend!

@eurasian8492

Жыл бұрын

Oh god, its vatnik copium bunched up in one comment, what happened to those "numbers and effectiveness", im sure its just because of mutant soldiers. "soviet tanks werent bad, just that the american ones were better" so their main enemy had better tanks? that literally means they had worse tanks, what is this argument, youre just openly admitting the soviets had worse tanks how is that an argument Yes the T-34 did break up as much as he was saying. No they were not cheap. The design was rather expensive, they just made it as cheaply as possible in the factories. Which is why %90 of all wartime built T-34s miss some component that was originally listed to be added, like the lights, radio, one of the fuel tanks etc. also the bad welding. "In the Russian Federation because of Ukraine, as it wouldn't need to use the best against tanks like that." Lets say that im responding to this comment before the Russo-Ukrainian war and thus dont have foresight. Even so, the Ukrainian T-84 is a great competitor for Russian tanks, any tank like the T-64 or T-72 would fall to it. And with the Russo-Ukrainian war we saw that even the T-90s dont work. Probably because the T-90 is just a modernized T-72, it even uses the old T-72s autoloader which is known to rip conscript arms off, and not the T-80s autoloader which is literally better in every way. Its almost as if the T-80 is the only "decent" soviet tank made after the T-64. "The Russian Federation's tanks are being produced in slowly higher numbers, and these tanks have proven to be effective against or better than some NATO/NATO ally tanks" when? Literally prove it. Hows the T-14 coming? Oh wait, yall were supposed to have thousands by now in service but currently there are *drumroll*, 0, in service.

@EnemyAtom65

Жыл бұрын

@@eurasian8492 Fucking wehraboo

Farmers can win for several reasons part is both countries were geared and trained to fight other countries with strong armies not for fighting insurgency.

Estonia used British Mark tank during 1920s independence war

Hello Artur. I suggest you react to the L.A. Speed story. It's a great story from an SR71 BLACKBIRD pilot.

@christaylor6654

2 жыл бұрын

Is that the one where pilot hears air traffic control being confused

@dianecomly6132

2 жыл бұрын

@@christaylor6654 it's where the controllers have to read out ground speed and the SR71 verbally bitch slaps all the pilots!

If the T54s arent still serving in russia, I would say North Korea they have alot of old russian equipment

@booran.

2 жыл бұрын

A lot of countries still use extremely modernized and heavily upgraded T-55’s like Ukraine, Algeria, Egypt, North Korea, Mongolia, Afghanistan, etc.

Actually, weren’t T-34’s kind of designed around destructiveness and cost-efficiency, at the expense of accuracy and durability (but then: Soviet philosophy: Easy to fix)? They were simple powerhouses. As for German tanks, most of them kind of sucked, I’ve heard, being either too backwards, or too ambitious and thus impractical. Except, of course, Tiger, which was (pardon the pun) the ”King” of WWII. I don’t know, how many years it took for the Allies (the Americans *OR* the Soviets to top that design). So, to me, a tank not being able to best a Tiger in a 1v1 does not imply that said tank sucks donkey shit from a truck-stop-bathroom.

German tanks were not reliable though. One of the things I like about the American Sherman, how easy it was to fix, parts were easily available. Even though people keep saying the gun wasn't big enough, it ran very well & the machine gun was an absolute beast. Even though large numbers of Shermans were destroyed, the crew survivability was the highest.

A few have already pointed out errors/clarified some things so I won't rehash. But I will say he got a few things misconstrued. Mainly I want to point out that "599mm" and "900mm" of armor are impossible numbers. You can't put that much armor on a tank that doesn't have a15,000 HP engine. That number should be stated as "900mm RHA Equivalent," that is, it is a composite that will stop projectiles with an effectiveness equal to that thickness of rolled homogeneous armor, the "classic" tank armor by which all are measured. Battleships never had 900mm of armor plate, let alone a tank.

Hoi4 Estonia 🇪🇪

man forgets that a t34 could bust most german tanks when they were produced, superior in design to the german tanks if you're looking at armour and the gun

@eurasian8492

Жыл бұрын

Me when half of all T-34s destroyed in 1942 were destroyed by the Panzer III, even if tankies always rant about how it actually was superior in design and armour and only the 88mms could penetrate it!!!

FINALLY! Maybe now Artur will change his mind about Russian tanks and at least a bit and stop thinking that they are totally useless. Spoiler: No, he totally didn't.

@csanadvarga7842

2 жыл бұрын

I agree t 14 will be mass produced the US didn't just pull out thousands of their abrams tanks from nowhere. Rehi belives so much american propaganda

@airbus_3209

2 жыл бұрын

i hate how rehi thinks america is the best, and hates russia. typical estonians tbh...

@razier5299

2 жыл бұрын

@@airbus_3209 Technically military wise the US is better than Russia. The main rival military wise for the US today is China more so than Russia. If you're excluding things such as nukes obviously.

@olekzajac5948

2 жыл бұрын

@@razier5299 True, but still, some things that he says about Russian military equipment are just ridiculous. I remember that in one video he said that Russian tanks use steel armor to these days (!).

@boof-7599

2 жыл бұрын

@@razier5299 he's shitting on engineering that had nothing to do with the regime, his bias is exhausting

Haha my favourite tank is russian the t34. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA It isn't a shit tank, 1 it was meant to be built crude so keep that I mind when you hear abouts drawbacks. 2 its 76mm (later 85mm) cannon could destroy most german tanks up to the panzer 4 or 5 and bigger. 3 it was quite fast and had decent off road capability. The king of the Russian winter. 4 it was easy to build, maintain and use. A practical tank for a war like the great patriotic war. It's not much worse than the sherman However unlike the t 34 that was meant to be a proper tank. The t 34 was just there to plug gaps and help on winning the war of attrition that was the Eastern front. It was one of the few tanks that actually did what it was meant to do.

@Caktusdud.

2 жыл бұрын

I also want to add that it's design or production was not the main reason why it suffered. Like virtually everything that the Soviets had during ww2, it was how it was used and command system that made it suffer. Don't get me the production and design didn't help it it, but it was getting a lot if attention so it was getting constantly improved over time. And to be honest both the Russians and the germans knew that it was more capable than what it actually achieved. Watch the series "soviet storm" to see what I mean. The tactics that the Russians started employing with the t34 and literally everything started improving by the time of the battle of Kursk that started to see its true potential. So yes it's cost effective and really effective as a tank in general. A hell of lot more than what it did in real life and what people seem to think. Just don't forget that the way it was used was its main cause.

@ComradeHellas

2 жыл бұрын

slopped armour, 90mm effectiveness 85mm gun able to destroy a Tiger facing front from 500m 53km/hour able to keep up with most light tanks easy and cheap to produce Best all rounded tank of WWII.

The T-34 is a good design but the quality of each build varied a lot as sacristies of certain parts and overall quality was done to meet production quota's leading the T-34 having a sub-par performance

The ground cutters are called plows. The harvesters are called combines now because they combine both tasks of cutting and separating the wheat from the stalk.

The T-34 was produced for about 18 years (from 1940 to 1945 in the Soviet Union, 1951 to 1955 in Poland and 1951 to 1958 in Czechoslovakia) and in that time they produced at most 168 140 T-34s. 365 days × 18 years = 6 570 days but let's say 4 of those 18 years were leap years so we'll add another 4. Now we have 6 574 days but I don't have any specific dates so we can be generous and round it up to 6600 days. 24 hours × 6 600 days = 158 400 hours in those 18 years. 168 140 tanks ÷ 158 400 hours = 1,0614898989898 tanks per hour ≈ 1 tank per hour, meaning that the Soviets were far from producing one T-34 every ten minutes if they, the Czechs and the Poles could only produce about one T-34 per hour at most. But if we're talking about the Soviets alone who produced them for about 5 years, they made about 80 000 T-34s in 5 years. 365 days × 5 years = 1 825 days + 1 leap year = 1 826 days. 1 826 days × 24 hours = 43 824 hours. 80 000 tanks ÷ 43 824 hours = 1,8254837531945 tanks per hour ≈ 2 tanks per hour, so the Soviets made nearly one T-34 every 30 minutes at most. Also the tank in the thumbnail is a T-26 light tank that was captured by the Finns with the conical turret. Also also (11:16) any T-34 could easily take a hit from a tiger, but surviving that hit wouldn't be as easy. Also also also I don't like that they call the T-54, T-55, T-62, T-64, T-72, T-80, T-90 and T-14 армата MBTs medium tanks and the T-28 medium tank a heavy tank. Also also also also you can't outrun a tank that goes 37km/h unless you're Usain Bolt. His top speed was less than 45km/h and his average speed was barely enough to outrun a tank that goes 37km/h.

25:32 I love how EVERYTHING Russian = "outdated" for some people by default. T72 was finalized by roughly same time first Abrams variant came along. And first T90 variant originated in 1993.

i dont like russia but russian tanks to me are pretty cool.

Yeah 2300 built my ass! There was supposed to be 2300 by 2022 but that was delayed until 2025 and then canceled until the 100 test tanks are supposed to be delivered in 2022 and once they've passed all the state tests then it will start the production of rest of the 2200

You need to watch the Chieftain videos. He not only tells you the history of all of these tanks but he actually takes you on tours inside and out of the actual vehicles not to mention that he is a current US Army armored officer.

They actually did a video on American tanks like this too.

I love you're vids but you're opinion on the T34 is wrong compared to the historical data like the PZ III was so outclassed they had to upgrade the gun twice the gun of the PZ III the long barrel 37 mm wasn't good enough so they scaled it to a 50 mm and it still wasn't affecting so they got a 75 mm on the PZ III when Germany attacked the USSR they introduced the T34 (I believe) in mid 1940 the guns the Germans used didn't do any shit also when the T14 Armata stopped the inexperienced driver accidentally hit the emergency brakes so it didn't fail

Greetings from Ohio, USA. Keep up the good work, Artur.

Hey brother. Keep it up! I like hearing your opinions about topics like this. I always enjoy your videos. Also, don't let all the experts and veteran tank crews get you down lol. Love from 11b!

26:23 No the T-14 Driver activated the E-Brake not knowing what it was he tryed to drive the tank but it didnt move you cann even see the other tanks trying to tow it away but the tracks are glued to the ground becuse of the E brake if the engine would have been broken down the Tracks would still move and later the same t-14 drive away on its own power with no problems

I love your channel so much, but it really gets annoying when your biases against Russia makes you believe you knew better than the actual historians who did research. I could honestly go on a rant about how you blast Russia for things the US does, but I'm not on PC at the moment, and I hate to typing on phone.

@aricowens2289

2 жыл бұрын

To be fair, Estonia has been the victim of cyber crimes, national crimes, occupation, war crimes etc by Russia their neighbor for their entire existence. They are sworn, hateful enemies of each other. Imagine being neighbors with someone who desperately wants to kill you, attacks you, hacks everything you own, takes over your puppet government, and just bullies you for your entire life and the only reason they haven’t killed your country is because you’re friends with strong people.

@CC-ff6ji

2 жыл бұрын

@@aricowens2289 yeah it’s pretty understandable why he’s so biased again them, really and I don’t think it’s really wrong considering what Estonia as a nation has been put through by the Russians.

@schmittian1313

2 жыл бұрын

@@aricowens2289 Every thing you just described, with the exception of cyber warfare, is what every great power has done in human history.

@aricowens2289

2 жыл бұрын

@@schmittian1313 so by your logic, you shouldn’t be upset at the people who do these things to you, because everyone is doing it? Is that a good representation of your statement?

@schmittian1313

2 жыл бұрын

@@aricowens2289 What I'm saying is that you shouldn't hold grudges over historical injustices that happened in the past, going by Artur's logic everyone should hate the Americans, British, French, Spanish, Japanese, etc. Honestly, I'm not even sure Artur is even truly against powerful countries bullying weak ones considering that he always praises America, the country that has been interfering, overthrowing, and invading countries non-stop since 1945. Also, the crimes against Estonia weren't committed by the Russian people they were committed by the Russian government, big difference.

The USSR had better tanks than the USA until after WW 2. Then the USA stayed ahead of them. Brits too.

@sorokabeloboka8818

2 жыл бұрын

Wasn't that the other way around? I think US stayed superior in tank department until Korea, when T-54s started appearing and then Soviets took the lead up to 80s. With T-80s having rounds and enough protection against Abrams when it first rolled out in 1980, but Abrams having no rounds to properly combat T-80s. Then Soviets went oof and US stays ahead up until now with it's Abrams madifications.

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

@@sorokabeloboka8818 ???!!!! No. In WW 2 Soviet and German tanks could destroy US tanks at will. During Korean war US tanks destroyed FAR more enemy tanks than enemy tanks did US tanks. FAR more.

25:28 Oh no, that's the last russian tank besides the Armata platform that you can call outdated.

you should see potantial history, its pretty good!!

Long live estonia 🇪🇪

obj 704 is pretty impressive as well like obj 279, I would not want to be in a building or tank when an obj 704 hit it(when or if it did I mean)

The T34 was an ok tank prewar, pretty good but soviets decided to streamline production

artur the response to the armada tank is upgrades to the abrams and leopards and the Altay tank produced by turkey

*tank out of gas* Do we got Gas?... Hell no How about we use Vodka?... Hell yeah

Artur could you react to more Geography Now videos? :)

You can never really predict the future. In the (if unlikely) event that the paper tiger starts failing, I foresee Russia starting to mass-produce these tanks with great rush.

you should check out the strv 103 s aka the s tank

I feel like you have a vendetta against ww2 Soviet tanks

My Uncle was a tanker from that War and the German tankers he talked to in '45 all agreed that the best tank of the war was the T-34. The German tank commanders on the Eastern front had asked for a German made replica of the T-34 after they started encountering them in their Type IV panzer. They were disappointed in Berlin's response. The V (Panther) because it was inferior to the T-34.

@TomasLeGamer

2 жыл бұрын

Wow, first time i've ever heard anyone say that the panther is inferior to the t34

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

@@TomasLeGamer Well, you are young and uneducated.

@TomasLeGamer

2 жыл бұрын

@@protonneutron9046 in a 1v1 and in any scenario, panther would win most of the time.

@ultranationalist.

2 жыл бұрын

@@protonneutron9046 if a tank can't move than that is a sitting duck

@protonneutron9046

2 жыл бұрын

@@TomasLeGamer wrong. Read Guderian's reports little boi.

This vid induced memories of learning about these tanks when I was in an anti-tank platoon in the 80s, fond memories. Please Please Please can you do a reaction to Timeline vids What it takes to with the VC and The greatest raid of them all. I think you will like them as their full of history and very entertaining. All my best to all.

German ww1 A7V tank has a crew of 12 and the char 2c French superheavy has a crew of 10 or so

K-v2 brings to mind. The battle of rosenai.

The tank could be old, but if the crew is professional then it can take on a modern tank

It would be nice to react to the American tank vid as well

I would hate for a war with Russia or China or for that matter even a small country. One thing I had to learn in all my years is that war gains nothing but lost youth and the survivors pay for being in it. It is obvious that there is loss by Artur's family of his father by the soviets.

This video was interesting and made me wanna watch a tank movie... so of course, I watched Fury! I love Brad Pitt in this movie.

The t-54 was the most produced tank in the world. Rehi please check out Us tanks are better than russian tanks (sarcasm) by red effect. In the video he talks about a video what is filled with mistakes and there he talks about russian and nato tanks also there is a bit of other things

Got no tanks either, one day I guess.

You should react to Matsimus or Red Effect's video on the T-14 Armata.

There are other more poorer countries that can produce tanks mainly homemade armor vehicles like troop transport although Estonia should also be able to build tanks without any problems if the main industry is technology

Just curious, do you ever play World of Tanks?

Hey Artur don't forget a German and American tanks evolutions 😉👍

The T-34 was not perfect, but it was better than most German tanks during operation Barbarossa. The main reason the USSR struggled back then was mostly because of how disorganised they were; the design of the T-34 itself had little to do with it. In fact, the Germans had a lot of trouble piercing through its sloped armor. There were problems with it, sure, but it was better than you give it credit for. Of course, when Germany started building tanks like the Tiger or the Panther, the T-34 had a harder time keeping up with them, but we need to keep in mind that German heavy tanks tended to break easily on their own, and were difficult to repair. Soviet tanks generally didn't suffer from that problem as much; even when they broke, they were fairly easy to repair. Again, I'm ok with talking about the shortcomings of Soviet tanks, but when I hear that German tanks were always better in every way, it just makes me want to laugh. That's just Wehraboo lies.

I see ads! Yay I'm making sure I watch them without skipping

You should react to the B-29.

Soviets after loosing against the Taliban: a shit Finland all over again

OT: Sabaton has released a new song - Christmas Truce. Highly recommended...

Man you guys need to hit up uncle Sam for some old M60 tanks if you have none.

💚

Could you please watch the evolution of german tanks next???

The US and Britain both passed on the tank design so Christie took it to the soviets.

Hello athur

Arther pls react to Sabaton. I recommend Bismarck and they're new song named Christmas Truce

Next Geography Now when?

lol *panic attack* dont ask me why it gives me more panic attacks

Sir, react to the battle of marawi in mindanao philippines...react to the training of philippine army scout rangers & philippine army special forces...thank you sir...

English agriculture language: Ooh arr

Finnish vs Estonian country name comparison when?