“It has a tank, so I’ll give it a one.” Most guests give a 5 to be generous. Nicholas keeps it as fair as it should be. Admirable

@KasFromMass

9 ай бұрын

Nicholas takes away points for physics.

@louiswilson3865

9 ай бұрын

I like that statement as it has a tank so I can give a 1, literally mean I'm looking for scene with tanks involved fair enough 😂

@a2falcone

9 ай бұрын

Batman: no tanks = 0 points

@outofturn331

9 ай бұрын

​@@a2falconebut it has a bat(tle)

@aSSgoblin88

9 ай бұрын

after heli vs tank, you can see death creep in his eyes

"And so the enemy pilot dies the death that his stupdity would deserve", Thank you for saying out loud what 99.9999% of us thought.

@jangustl_wt2358

9 ай бұрын

9:19 average War Thunder experience

@TheKaiTetley

9 ай бұрын

Yeah! The two choices he had. Fly out of range of the tank and attack from rear? Nahhhhhhh….RAMMING SPEED!

@mercenarygundam1487

9 ай бұрын

​@@TheKaiTetley The ONLY time I can think of doing that is when you are cut off from resupply and have no ammo and backup left.

@anilachar323

9 ай бұрын

Sly Stallone to the director: "I don't want to shoot the Soviet attack helicopter and down him. I want to head butt him." Director: "Can we do it like the medieval knights charging at each other with lances?"

@inisipisTV

9 ай бұрын

@@mercenarygundam1487- only if you want to "Tenno Heika Banzai" the Tank. Either way, win/loose, you still end up dead.😅

A documentary in the 90's had an interview with a guy who had commanded a Tiger Tank in WWII. When asked about the Sherman his answer was something like "One Sherman was no problem," he paused and smiled then said "Problem was you never saw just one Sherman tank."

@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa

8 ай бұрын

For a military that got their asses kicked, the Wehrmacht sure liked to engage in self-aggrandizement after the war lol. Just don't ask them to talk about Arracourt. At one engagement four Shermans were attacked by eight Panthers. They destroyed all eight without suffering a loss. It wasn't a fluke either, Shermans maintained a positive kill ratio against Tigers and Panthers across the entire war. More Panthers and Tigers were destroyed by Shermans than the other way around.

@kellrik66

8 ай бұрын

@@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa Tends to happen when you choose "the world" as your opponent. See - Norm Macdonald on Germany

@user-es4su1kl5y

7 ай бұрын

@@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa Arracourt was the perfect example, where unexperienced germans set themselves in a death trap, it's notable that german's armored units were mostly destoyed by AT guns and air support, you should had that to get a kill on a panther it common to get up to five hit on them ......but you're right the sherman was the perfect weapon against the panzers units .. with corrects tactics, reserves, number, aerial support and reco and trained soldiers .... 5 shermans to kill a panzer is a myth, with corrects tactics 5 shermans used to flanked the panzer and kill it before it could open fire ..........if panzer was in ambush situation shermans were killed ..... then germans let the tank and flee the scene running for lives !!!!!

@Ridge1139

3 ай бұрын

@@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa it's fairly easy to get a positive kill ratio whe you have anything in greate numbers. A couple of situations don't give a whole perspektive. Tigers and panther was better than sherman on tank vs tank battle but only in tank vs tank battle and in tank good enviroment. That's where sherman got their advantage. Was more universal tank and close quoters batlle in normandy prove that. I'm sure that in large open field like in Ukraine or Russia, shermans would suffer more losses.

@Erikaaaaaaaaaaaaa

3 ай бұрын

@@Ridge1139 Again, look up Arracourt.

Band of Brothers continues to clean up the 10/10 category across these expert videos. Really amazing just how many things they got right.

@albinandersson1154

9 ай бұрын

Thats what you get when you do it right. I listened to the book and every scene is pretty much reflected accuratly from the pages. It gets pretty realistic when its straight from the veteran mouth :)

@AeneasGemini

9 ай бұрын

@@unnhkp8mza522 define "a lot", there were a couple of liberties taken with one or two characters for the sake of dramatic tension, but the historical details were almost entirely spot on. In terms of historical adaptations BOB is better than some documentaries, and the best you're going to get from a tv show

@JoshuaTootell

9 ай бұрын

I literally just ran across a letter my grandfather wrote to a veterans newspaper where even he forgot a detail of his service. And my grandfather was shot down during WWII. Memories aren't infallible.

@LoisoPondohva

9 ай бұрын

​@@unnhkp8mza522 band of brothers a film is not a documentary, it's a drama. You can downplay or emphasize character strengths or weaknesses for story's sake.

@user-ye3zj9dz7z

9 ай бұрын

​@unnhkp8mza522 sounds like a fail to me. Winters was an excellent officer underscored by the admiration of his soldiers. And yes, we know about Dike and the kid shot in the neck. Explain how this equates to "lots". As pointed out, it is not a documentary.

I like how he tries to explain the possibility of certain scenes happening (i.e., the AT crews missing under stress in Fury) rather than ridicule/criticize the scenes completely.

@aslamnurfikri7640

9 ай бұрын

In his own words those guys are having significant emotional event

@andrewpiltenko9432

9 ай бұрын

Well sure, but giving it a 9...

@Mares1113

9 ай бұрын

He was one of the assitant of the film

@flex-ic2sf

9 ай бұрын

Yes but I like how german miss every shots because of stress and stuff but American are immune😂

@convolutedconcepts

9 ай бұрын

I would also say that some of the crews are civilians as well.

For those who unaware the man on screen also has a KZread channel where he goes very in depth on modern fighting vehicles across all military branches and nations his channel name is “The Cheiftain” He covers the history of most if not all tanks that have served in the us military, as well as the rest of the world.

@KennyNGA

9 ай бұрын

He looks like a boy scout

@Reckless150681

9 ай бұрын

His name ("Chieftain") and the Tank Museum channel are the reason why I associate all tank-related discussions to be conducted with British accents lmao

@neilwilson5785

9 ай бұрын

@@Reckless150681 I'm sure he won't mind, but that is an Irish accent.

@aslamnurfikri7640

9 ай бұрын

I like when people trolled him to review TKS which is a ridiculously small tank to see if he fits in it (spoiler: he fits)

@Tuning3434

9 ай бұрын

@@KennyNGA Got more medals than you got, buddy. Even decided to switch nationality to serve. But on more positive side, I can highly recommend the panel (Operation Think Tank) he presented 10+ years ago with Zaloga, Yeide, Doyle, Griffin, Estes and the MOUSTACHE man himself, mr. Fletcher.

Im so glad to see the chieftain being picked up for more gigs like this. Not only is he really entertaining, but he actually knows what he's talking about so people watching not familiar with him or tanks, actually get the proper info and not "Tracks and gun, must be a tank". Keep up the good work sir.

@JoshuaC923

9 ай бұрын

He's the best

@Ryuu1010YT

15 күн бұрын

he hasn't watch the anime Girls und Panzer, Series And Films

@hoilst265

10 күн бұрын

Too bad they didn't film the bit at the end of this vid where he goes "Oh, bugger. The studio is on fire" and exits. Or tries to.

This is a Really good representation of why i like Nicholas "Chieftain" Moran's content. He manages the conflict between reality, honesty, entertainment, & necessity Very well. From noting incorrect tank types used where real models were unavailable, to good vs bad technique, to 0 scores for particular horrors, to high scores where the errors are minor but the tanker-joy was high. He keeps it real & accurate, but maintains a nice balance between that, personality & the actual horrors of war.

@Zack_Wester

9 ай бұрын

Plus I feel like he understand that sometime movie studies will dress something as something else because good luck finding a X where your recording the movie.

@jsullivan2112

8 ай бұрын

He's the best, always look forward to more with him.

What should also be mentioned about the scene in All Quiet is that since the armor on those tanks is so poor, even if a bullet has no penetration it makes a lot of noise inside the tanks. Especially early on but also later in the war tanks would retreat sometimes because the noise became so unbearable (also psychologically) that tanks would retreat from infantry that didn't actually have the means to reliably kill the tank. And as Nicholas said there was a chance of some penetration and if a crewman was injured or killed the tank would always retreat even if it was still functional.

@khan82185

9 ай бұрын

Exactly. I wish he would have reacted to the beginning battle in T-34. Especially when they first take a hit to sort of prove your point.

@JediBrah

9 ай бұрын

I trust what he says more than you tbh

@inisipisTV

9 ай бұрын

He stated more on his Channel it’s more the toxic engine fumes and extreme heat that’s the problem, that they have to rotate the tank crew for every mission, giving the tank crew a few days rest before rotating back.

@aymonfoxc1442

9 ай бұрын

The tank didn't always have the ability to retreat (particularly if a crew member was injured or dead) and this would lead to tanks being abandoned or overran. The Germans captured a large number of tanks during World War 1 and pressed many into service. World War 1 era tanks were slow, prone to getting bogged down or stuck, and vulnerable to a wide array of arms. Still, there were occasions when injured crew members fought on because they knew they could not escape the enemy's withering small arms fire or artillery fragmentation on foot. So, they hunkered down in their immobilised tank until they were rescued or the enemy's focus moved on.

@KalleKantola

9 ай бұрын

Exactly. And to add about the psychological effect of hitting the tanks and noise, when you're being hit over and over (or even once for that matter) you start having doubts. "Are they shooting at us with regular rifles or with things that are supposed to penetrate and were just being lucky? Will they start piercing if I get closer?" This was also an actual fear for tankers in WW2 with AT rifles. Something hits your side and makes a lot of noise, you're gonna start sweating a little.

That tank running over the German soldier in all quiet on the westernfront might be one of the most brutal things I've ever seen in a movie to date besides the other scene of that Frenchman dying with Paul

@username3788

9 ай бұрын

even worse than the tank running over the german soldier in fury?

@Courierman6

9 ай бұрын

@@username3788tbf I'm pretty sure that soldier in furry is just a corpse and doesn't feel pain and horror anymore. But do correct me if I'm wrong

@tangofrown3352

9 ай бұрын

⁠the new movie blows

@jordanwalsh1691

9 ай бұрын

It is very brutal indeed. In my view the tank scene in AQotWF is not meant to be a realistic depiction of battle, it is meant to be the apotheosis of the film's depictions of the horrors of industrialized warfare. The low synth horns, the fog, the mud, the clanking metal, the screaming, all contributes to the feeling of horror in the face of a killing machine. To your point, this theme is summed up perfectly by the visual of a machine literally grinding a man into pieces. What better metaphor for WWI as a whole?

@Courierman6

9 ай бұрын

@@tangofrown3352 no it doesn't it's probably the best war film of the century and imo destroys the 1979 version

Chieftains dry Irish delivery makes him one of the best talking heads I’ve seen. Hope he gets more mainstream gigs and stays real.

@guyfawkesuThe1

Күн бұрын

And in the US Army?

"It has a tank, so I'll give it a one" best line ever.

Another war film featuring tank-infantry combat that Nicholas Moran could review is _Stalingrad_ (1993). There is a climatic winter battle scene where the German infantry end up facing against a wave of T-34s and their supporting SMG infantry using Molotov cocktails, magnetic anti-tank mines, and a single 5-cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun. That scene is also notable for showing the Red Army using tank desant tactics where the infantry ride into an attack on tanks and then dismount to fight on foot.

@CAP198462

9 ай бұрын

Ja ja, Leutnant von Witzland.

@KingSNAFU

9 ай бұрын

Cross of Iron and A Bridge Too Far would be great movies too cover as well.

@schaddenkorp6977

9 ай бұрын

@@CAP198462 Vorwarts menne, mir noch!

@nm7358

9 ай бұрын

Yep, except that the soldiers in that scene were in a penal batallion so they were given the absolute minimum for the operation - they were not expected to survive that. Unsupported Infantry against heavy tanks is a one-ticket way to your death.

@CAP198462

9 ай бұрын

@@schaddenkorp6977 Vorwärts Männer, mir nach! Wir sollten alle Feinde nehmen.

I love how fairly he analyzes the characters’ decision-making processes. It’s always great when these reviewers do that.

00:33 - The Fate of The Furious 02:30 - Band of Brothers E3 04:50 - All Quiet On The Western Front 07:33 - Rambo III 09:45 - T-34 12:35 - Operation Red Sea 15:18 - The Dark Knight Rises 17:12 - F.U.R.Y. 19:40 - The Beast

@Courierman6

9 ай бұрын

Legend

@sam8404

9 ай бұрын

Goatest of goats.

@isaacdavis7979

8 ай бұрын

Thanks for helping me out by putting out the times for the Video's!!!

@ShinkuRosetta

6 ай бұрын

No Girls und Panzer? 😢

@isaacdavis7979

6 ай бұрын

@@ShinkuRosetta nope sadly.

Some of these reviewers are so much better than the others. This guy, the Ditch guy, and the sub commander are my favorites by far.

@hoilst265

9 ай бұрын

"The Ditch Guy". He may be one of the most qualified academics in his field...but he's The Ditch Guy. :D

@TheChieftainsHatch

9 ай бұрын

@@hoilst265 So I google "The Ditch Guy" and get "Ancient Warfare Specialist". I presume if I watch it, I'll understand the reference?

@ihavegymnastics

9 ай бұрын

Dig a ditch. Now dig another. Fill them with water. Submarines in them now. And, tanks *behind* the ditches.

@gergelyfulop2406

9 ай бұрын

@@TheChieftainsHatch Yes, he tends to ask 'Where are your ditches?' when looking at medieval sieges.

@klas666

9 ай бұрын

@@TheChieftainsHatch oh yes, you better believe you will. You will also dig a ditch around your house, and when it's done, you'll start digging another one

I like this guy. Pragmatic, yet bemused.

@cfranko1860

9 ай бұрын

His youtube channel is very good

@inisipisTV

9 ай бұрын

He’s presently a Lt. Colonel in US army. Formerly a tanker in the Irish Republic military before migrating to the US. His YT channel "The Chieftain’s Hatch"

@5t3v0esque

9 ай бұрын

Not quite, he was a tanker in the US army though he was a reservist in the Irish defense force before moving but I don't believe in armor since Ireland doesn't have much.

19:46 YES THE BEAST. An absolutely underrated film. Not to mention one of the most realistic ones on this list.

@schaddenkorp6977

9 ай бұрын

I loved the scene in the early part of the movie, just after the hand is removed from the track where they start to take fire from the guys on the ridge and the crew is hastily mounting back up and getting the tank ready to roll. While that’s going on the TC (Daskal) is calling out a fire command to the crew while standing in the open using his binos to get the range and still under fire, absolutely no shits given whatsoever to the bullets whizzing and ricocheting off the ground near him. Man just the way he shouts “Frag!” as he climbs up into the turret, I can tell that actor was really into it.

@Conserpov

9 ай бұрын

"Taliban are the good guys!" propaganda. That aged well 😆 And as realistic as Saddam's WMD too.

@jacquesstrapp3219

9 ай бұрын

@@Conserpov We know that Saddam had nerve gas at one time because he used it on the Iranians and the Kurds. In the Halabja chemical attack mustard gas, along with unidentified nerve agents killed between 3,200 and 5,000 people and permanently injured up to 10,000 more.

@Conserpov

9 ай бұрын

@@jacquesstrapp3219 Sarin that was supplied to Saddam by his buddy USA to use against Iran? That one? Step 1:💁 Step 2:🤦

@jacquesstrapp3219

9 ай бұрын

@@Conserpov Most precursors for chemical weapons production came from Singapore (4,515 tons), the Netherlands (4,261 tons), Egypt (2,400 tons), India (2,343 tons), and West Germany (1,027 tons). Do a little more research next time.

I love it when they get people in like this bloke who are just straight down-the-line honest. If the movie does things right, he acknowledges that and hands out a high score. If the movie gets things wrong but at least puts some effort in, he acknowledges that too. And if the movie is just straight-up fantasy, he doesn't pull his punches. Fantastic guest.

Being a veteran of 34yrs served, it’s refreshing to listen to someone that knows his shizzle. Thank you Nick, that was excellent. It’s so hard to watch a movie, without having it ruined by incorrect poor content.

Every time the Chieftain is on this channel is a Significant Emotional Event.

@Plaprad

9 ай бұрын

I've still got that shirt in my closet.

It has been a while, but I think Batman ground vehicles were supposed to be for military bridging use. That is, they would put some sucker in it, have him drive fast toward ramp, hit the jet booster and jump the water obstacle trailing a wire. It was a silly idea since a rocket alone would send a lead wire across such a thing, and the landing would be brutal on the vehicle and the crewman inside. But because Batman needed it to jump... What bothered me more was how they missed "The Bat" at such close range and those missiles were so slow they probably couldn't have flown.

@marvthedog1972

9 ай бұрын

you're correct the original movie stated that the bat mobile was originally supposed to jump over water crossings towing a cable which would be used to erect bridging equipment. however they could not get the bridging part to work correctly and abandoned the project. The ones in the third movie were never given a reason as to why they exist and it is assumed (at least my me) that they were experimental variants on the chassis in order to make user of the design. Not unreasonable for a military contractor to do that in order to make the most of a failed project design that had potential

@theragingben5393

9 ай бұрын

Front wheels are designed that way to absorb shock. Still ridiculous concept.

@aslamnurfikri7640

9 ай бұрын

@@theragingben5393 yeah. Calling a bridgelayer would be much cheaper

@aslamnurfikri7640

9 ай бұрын

@@marvthedog1972 reminds me of the Elefant which was a bad tank that can't handle a lot of weight got improved by giving it more weight

@88porpoise

9 ай бұрын

​@@aslamnurfikri7640The thing about the Ferdinand/Elefant was that it wasn't supposed to be some amazing thing. It was just an attempt to make something usable out of the Porsche Tiger chassis. The vast majority of resources required had already been used up, so better get some value out of them than toss it all away.

It is very interesting to see the difference in perspective from historian vs Tank Expert when showing the same footage of French tank attacking German Infantry. Historian would point out how this would not happen at the time it is depicting, while tank expert point out the details like wheels and armor protection.

@dennis-mariusthieme8128

9 ай бұрын

The historian pointed the wheels too out, but I finde he also gave a lot more of interesting informations as the tanker did.

@homie8437

9 ай бұрын

I think the historian kinda missed the mark on the WW1 scene anyway. He was asking why the tanks stopped a short distance away and would fire stationary instead of shooting from afar. Stuff that's pretty self explanatory when you do even cursory research on the primitive gunsights of the time. It was not easy to hit trenches from afar like a video game. Virtually all tanks, up to WW2 had to stop in order to fire accurately too.

@CallioNyx

9 ай бұрын

@@homie8437 If I recall correctly, he was mostly questioning why you would do it at all, as tank guns were poor weapons against trenches. But then again, if all you have is a hammer...

@homie8437

9 ай бұрын

@@CallioNyx That's a bit of a non-argument though. They're designed to attack trenches, why wouldn't they shoot at them? And there's not a similar weapon available to do the same job really.

@UsoundsGermany

7 ай бұрын

@@CallioNyx After the inf was either killed or seperated from these S.Chamont tanks the attack was pretty useless... as the tanks could not cross the trenches (one at least got stuck)..but yes historian questioned that the tanks stopped cause the engine power is low to move again. ALso you got a pretty big target for art w/ these light armored but big and slow WW1 tanks (however it seemed the Germans did not have art support at call there otherwise we had seen some)

I was an Ordnance Corps officer in heavy mech units and the very first Stryker unit. Tank movies drive me nuts at how comically inaccurate they are. "The Beast," is one of my favorite films as they used water-filled heads of the blank rounds to the guns were go into full recoil. I know people who are still convinced they used live ammo in this movie. I'm surprised you didn't cover that, as the "attacking the village" sequence is one of the most impressive tanks scenes I've ever seen

@dannya1854

7 ай бұрын

I really hate such movies as that as they obviously have a strong overblown political propaganda bias but I guess it's good to hear they were at least accurate on a technical level.

@nematic529

4 ай бұрын

He did mention that it was one of his favorite movies tho.

The M4 Sherman was not the best tank to win tank-on-tank battles, but it was an excellent tank for infantry support role. After all it was designed for that specific job. Also as he said, it was great at showing up in the first place when needed. The Sherman was not to win a battle, but to win the war.

@fidjeenjanrjsnsfh

9 ай бұрын

Against French and Czech 37mm, 50mm Panzer 3s, and short 75mm Panzer 4s which were the main German tanks throughout the war? Piece of cake for the 75mm Sherman.

@xxnightdriverxx9576

9 ай бұрын

​@@fidjeenjanrjsnsfhincorrect. The guns/tanks you listed were the German mainstay in the EARLY years of the war, up until the invasion of the Soviet Union when they hit bricks like the KV-1 and T-34 where they couldn't penetrate the armor. At that time, the M4 Sherman didn't exist yet. After that basically every German armored vehicles, so tanks, tank destroyers, assault guns etc all got the long 75mm guns (43 to 48 calibers) which were pretty equal to the guns on a Sherman. And those guns were the mainstay of the Wehrmacht and the most likely one a Sherman would encounter.

@tuehojbjerg969

9 ай бұрын

@@xxnightdriverxx9576 the pz4 was the mainstay tank of the wehnmact thruu the entire war, only diffrence was gun but hull was the same

@jimmysundberg2376

9 ай бұрын

Plus the survivability of tank crews on Sherman tank is the highest in ww2

@Pixilated

9 ай бұрын

@@xxnightdriverxx9576 Panzer 3's and 4's were the most common tanks germany had and were used throughout the entire war and the panzer 4 was the produced all the way up to the final days of the war.

Can’t believe he missed the opportunity to say “tanks for watching”

I always love seeing the good sir, Nicholas "The Chieftain" Moran be the invited expert in videos. He always says it straight and easy to understand. Love his work with Word of Tanks and on his channel "The Chieftain" here on KZread .

I love this guy, he's absolutely hilarious..... "i got nothing it's a zero" and " it has a tank in it I'll give it a 1" 😂

Always nice seeing the Chieftain.

Every American tank in World War Two had to be loaded on a cargo ship and transported across an ocean. German and Russian tanks were most often transported to the front by rail and sometimes on their own power. Logistics explains why the Americans employed mostly medium tanks and the Germans and Russians had more heavies.

@lyndoncmp5751

8 ай бұрын

Logistics plus a very lax attitude that what they had was good enough. That's why they didn't bother to send the new Sherman 76mm across for D-Day, unlike the British who knew they'd need the Firefly. It was a kind of a nonchalant attitude.

@tihomirrasperic

6 ай бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 exactly, why make it complicated if you know that the tank will survived 2 hours of combat and has to be overhauled the US Navy built aircraft for aircraft carriers that were designed to last 25 hours of flight time. Why? because statistics have shown that 90% of planes do not survive 15 hours of flight without damage, major or minor

@nickvanachthoven7252

4 ай бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 not really, while the 76s were available. there was no time to train the crews on the gun and it would have made logistics more troublesome as there would now be two times of m4 ammo that had to be shipped over. the 75mm was plenty effective against anything they had to go up against and the downsides of rushing the 76mm into use for d-day did not weigh up against the added firepower wich would be wasted in most situations.

@lyndoncmp5751

4 ай бұрын

@@nickvanachthoven7252 Yes really. Lax attitude. And the 75 mm had already experienced problems with Tigers in North Africa and Italy. No time to train the crews on the 76mm? The British managed it with the 17 pounder, because the British didn't have the same lax attitude. They realised they'd be facing more Tigers and Panthers in Normandy. After encountering Panthers in front of St Lo in July the Americans certainly then made sure the 76mm Shermans were brought over for Operation Cobra.

@darbyheavey406

3 ай бұрын

Patton, Wood and Abrams cannot be described as lax.

When Nicholas is talking about Rambo and he explained tanks would have other anti air vehicles with them. The insider editor cut to a picture of a armored vehicle with its gun pointed up. That was not an anti air vehicle, that was a self propelled artillery system. It's going to shoot a shell at a target far away on the ground. I realize to the uniformed a big gun pointed to the sky might look like an anti air vehicle, but that is not the case.

@TFGhunter

9 ай бұрын

Exactly what I thought.

@Conserpov

9 ай бұрын

Fits the silliness of "Taliban are the good guys!"-3 (that aged well 😆)

@Grubnar

9 ай бұрын

I m pretty sure that there IS an AA tank in that scene, one of the Soviet ZSU-23-4 Shilka that Nicholas mentions when talking about "The Beast". Rambo blew it up just before the start of that clip.

@zdj1013

9 ай бұрын

I thought it was a joke

@2ndcomingofFritz

9 ай бұрын

I couldn’t see very well (it’s 2 am and I’m tired) so I thought the vehicles around the SPG were meant to be the AA vehicles and the SPG the vehicle they were defending, but I see now this is not the case

There is an interesting account by tank commander Corporal Stew Baird of the King’s Royal Hussars about Operation Dagger. An operation that made use of a pair of Challenger 2 tanks to break into a prison holding two SAS officers in Basra 2004. The mission was a total success and the officers were retrieved. Sometimes only a tank will do.

Atleast they finally viewed T-34 but not the first tank scene!? Cmon that was the best one

"I can think of no reason... why a tank would have a grappling hook attached." That was something we did with humvees in light cavalry. We kept grappling hooks tied off to our bumpers to throw over or wrap around obstacles and drag them out of the way. Great for concertina, gates, fences, heavy brush, telephone poles, etc. We usually needed to dismount someone to do it, or else before we get to the obstacle we'd pass the grapple off to the gunner in a safe area and have him toss it. We'd need to get out to detach, so the plan was always to just keep dragging until we're out of the kill zone. A lot of that is just down to the very high likelihood of humvee cavalry facing light barriers without engineer support. Enemies are very likely to try to box humvees in so we had grappling hooks, prepared C4 "pop & drops", chainsaws, reinforced bumpers, etc. I couldn't imagine heavy vehicles like an M1 using something like that, but its conceivable that any track under about 10 tons might be blocked by obstacles light enough to be dragged out of the way. The movie harpoon thing is about useless though

13:56 “it’s good to see armor actually work”

A stug is definitely a serious threat to other tanks and vehicles. It has the highest amount of kills in the entire war in terms of anti tank/vehicle numbers

@TheBruceGday

8 ай бұрын

Light armor though, easily penned by a Sherman’s 75. In an ambush, yes, the Stug is a serious threat. Out in the middle of the field where Shermans know where you are, the Jagdpanther is clearly the main threat. I think Chieftain knows what he is talking about.

@TheChieftainsHatch

7 ай бұрын

I'd observe that Shermans likely killed more StuGs than any other AFV, so the argument evens out. Problem is that you can't take an aggregate figure and apply it to an individual situation. The odds of an encounter have already happened, now the situation has to be taken as it is found.

You'll have to look very hard to find anyone close to as knowledgeable about tanks as Nicolas. If you enjoyed this you should check out his talks and tank 'review' videos. They're excellent!

@p_serdiuk

9 ай бұрын

Well, David Fletcher is very easy to find, iykyk :D

@qasimmir7117

9 ай бұрын

Perhaps David Fletcher MBE or Chris Copson might compare.

@michaelcort1763

9 ай бұрын

@@p_serdiuk he's also retired.

@shaider1982

9 ай бұрын

His videos on the M4 definitely corrects misinformation against it.

@Lonewolfmike

9 ай бұрын

Oh he knows some people that are more knowledgeable than he is and he gets giddy when he finds them. He has a some videos with Hilary Doyle doing a Panzer IV tour.

I'm iraqi, we used to hide under the stairs when we hear the tracks of a tank. as if that would do anything compared to such metal beasts. although they didn't care to shoot our house, they didn't care IF they shot it either, and you will ( or won't ) be surprised of how many civilians died in such way.

@qasimmir7117

9 ай бұрын

Such a tragedy that my government at the time decided to participate in such heinous act of colonialism. Though it is interesting of your accounts of the psychological effects of tanks at war. Can I ask, where in Iraq did you live?

@bugwar5545

9 ай бұрын

You'd be even more surprised how many terrorists died using civilians as meat shields.

@duitk

9 ай бұрын

​@@qasimmir7117I get really pissed off by the Iraq war, I think colonialism is evil, but it usually transfers wealth from the victim to the colonial power . The Iraq war was worse, because it was not even colonialism, the US did not get the oil and resources or Iraq. Those went to Europe and China, the US went in, killed a bunch of people and threw away lot of money for ideology, not even colonialism it was for the republicans to prove that they could conquer a nation and make it into a first world western state by force. Completely idiotic and wrong and a waste of lives, both Iraqi and American. Worst excuse of a war for the US in it's history.

@questionmaker5666

9 ай бұрын

@@duitk That misses some context, it was so the Republicans cold prove they could conquer a nation run by a dictator and turn it into a First World Western state by force. Most would argue that regime change is less bad than colonialism and/or genocide. None of which chances the fact that the Second Gulf War was wrong.

@schaddenkorp6977

9 ай бұрын

@@duitk Glad to see someone understands 1. what colonialism is and isn’t and 2. that the US essentially went home broke. I would like to remind folks though that it wasn’t just the US in Iraq. There were at least a dozen other countries, some major some minor, but there were a lot of nations looking to get those resources while others participated in the bullshit reconstruction efforts going on. A lot of local corruption was overlooked as well, but honestly it’s so entrenched there that everyone from the bottom up was on the take in one way or another; local police, civil workers, community leaders, power plant workers, fuel haulers, it goes on and on.

Honestly love his insight. I just saw him yesterday for the first time and he appeared again today. Can't wait for the next one!

I like how brutally honest he is.

Expecting realism in a Fast & Furious movie, is a humongous leap of Faith. 😂

@eternalbeing3339

9 ай бұрын

Lol

@nickl7209

2 ай бұрын

I burst out laughing when he started talking about the tank shooting a Lambo with a grappling hook. 😂

14:12 he appears to hit the thumb button on the right handle to fire, but that button is to pulse the laser rangefinder. There's a trigger for the index finder that fires the cannon.

@oleksi9336

9 ай бұрын

Good catch, for a chasseur such as your self

As a former M1A1HA TC, I concur with this whole vid. One of the best of these breakdowns I’ve seen yet. Forge The Thunderbolt and Courage Conquers!

I was pleased to see Beast in the list, while there is plenty to pick at I do think it is an under appreciated film, lots of clever camera angles and several well acted roles (not everyone but most of them) and such an original script idea.

HECK YEAH! More Nicholas Moran, please!

The oddest tank movie I've seen is 'The Steel Lady' about a bunch of guys stranded in the desert who find a buried WW2 German tank, get it running (!) and then drive it to civilisation in between fighting off a group of Arabs.

@Appletank8

9 ай бұрын

Panzer of the sand, what is your wisdom?

@userequaltoNull

9 ай бұрын

​@@Appletank8 "Save your breath, Amerikaner, I have terrible fuel economy"

Tanks are great in 1s or 2s, but when they show up in 5s or 17s! Wow, that’s so steel. The Sherman was definitely mass produced.

@steveaustin2686

9 ай бұрын

A tank platoon in WWII for the US was 5 tanks and as The Chieftan has said in one of his talks about the Sherman, when they would send tanks, they sent a platoon at the minimum. A tank company was 3 platoons and 2 command tanks, for 17 total.

@cm275

9 ай бұрын

Ukraine War videos aside, tanks rarely operate alone but you see it a lot in movies to save costs and ramp up the drama.

@Justowner

9 ай бұрын

@@cm275 the problem with that plan in WWII was that very few tank designs were reliable enough to not break down often, and had substantial enough spare production so that you could fix the problem when it broke down. And in WWII it was a when, no tank was reliable enough such that you wouldnt need to worry. Hence the sherman's advantage, probably the most reliable tank of the war with some of the most user friendly maintenance around, AND produced in huge numbers with way more spares than anyone knew what to do with.

@taistelusammakko5088

9 ай бұрын

Do you know anything about militaries? Tanks arent just thrown into the field to have a free for all match

@ChakatBlackstar

4 ай бұрын

I recall my history teacher telling us it took 5 shermans to ensure victory against 1 tiger, but unfortunately for the germans we were producing 10 shermans for each tiger. A gross oversimplification but for kids just learning about WW2 it was pretty impactful.

I was hoping to see Kelly's Heroes in here somewhere. I've often found, while out and about tanking, that thinking a bridge to be there, will actually cause it to be there. It's a mother beautiful bridge, you see. And it's gonna be there. :) Surely a 10/10

Ey, we got another one with Mr. Moran! Thank you Insider, always cool to see more from him

The tank in the fast in the furious reminds me of the bolt armored vehicle in battlefield 2042

@Canilash

9 ай бұрын

Of course it is, The Bolt in BF2042 is based on the ripsaw shown in the F&F movie.

Great to see BOB getting the props it deserves. Great series with a lot of attention to detail.

The second clip that was rated a 10/10 was basically a dramatization of an actual battle that occurred and a lot of it was spot on. I'm glad it got that rating.

Always great to hear his expertise.

Nicholas Moran is a gem

I just got into tanks and The Chieftain is incredible! Please go watch more of him if you have any interest in what makes tanks, well tanks. Thanks for making this great content!

I've seen a lot of videos "The Chieftain" Nicholas Moran has done. He knows tanks extremely well. It's nice seeing him do this video for Insider, as I trust what he says is both reliable and complete.

Yaaaaaaaas!!!!! I have been impatiently waiting for part two ever since part one!

The Chieftain is a cool dude, I saw him in the thumbnail and thought "Ooooh its The chieftain, he knows what he is talking about" mostly just because I already subscribe to his content.

Great to see the Chieftain again. Every single episode of this series could be him and I would be satisfied.

All that great commentary, and then the ending comment of "if you liked this (etc., etc.) add one form, traverse right, and click that box". THIS MAN KNOWS HIS AUDIENCE! PERFECTION! 😁

This dude is super knowledgable! Great video

Always a good day when Nicolas does tanks

When I was in the army (french infantry) they used band of brothers to show examples of proper behavior in combat. It’s a 10 for realism in combat to me

I got to hang out with the chieftain in Boston some months ago. Awesome guy to have some beers with and talk military history and movies

Just keep ‘em coming Chieftain, priceless comments.👏🏻

Hooray for more Chieftain!

All hail the educator of armor Nicholas Moran! aka "The Chieftain" on KZread! I know I'll enjoy this installment!👍

10:22 by the way, he didn‘t actually go through a building. It was just a wall leading to a passage between two buildings. T-34 may not be the most realistic movie, but it‘s one of the few movies that actually shows us the effects of shrapnel when the armor gets penetrated

@stonefox9124

7 ай бұрын

Pretty sure the engine died or something so he had to crank turret manually

@Vincerama

6 ай бұрын

T-34 was very engaging to watch. I mean sure, you have to suspend belief in many movies, but that movies is just great.

Lt. Col. Nick "the Chieftain" Moran in an Insider Video. Absolute must watch. Rambo: I'm gonna give that Russian a Significant emotional experience. 😅

Now do "civilian tank expert" rates containing vessels movies

@jkent9915

9 ай бұрын

“So these blokes in a submarine-, oh you said a movie.”

@garrettharriman6333

9 ай бұрын

He's also a decorated, veteran tanker officer.

@glhmedic

9 ай бұрын

He served in the us army and before that the Irish army. Do your due diligence next time before slamming people.

@andresmartinezramos7513

9 ай бұрын

@@glhmedic He is making a joke. Tanks as in holding fluids.

@Yandarval

9 ай бұрын

That's Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas Moran to you.

This guy seems fairly unique for these vids. He doesnt just go "this is wrong, that is wrong" and just dismissing every depiction. He tells you exactly how the tanks work and what they do, different types etc. Accepting that the film makers are making an effort (except Rambo etc) to showna realism to it.

When you look at the historical context behind the the Band of Brothers battle, it was around 60 US Sherman’s vs. about 12 German Tank Destroyers (Jadgpanzer IVs I believe), and it makes much more sense why they retreated.

@lyndoncmp5751

8 ай бұрын

At Carentan they were Stug IIIs and Stug IVs of 17th SS Panzergrenadier Division. No Jagdpanzer IVs. The Germans lost two Stugs that day.

@benjaminbuchanan7151

8 ай бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 Thanks for the info. Was it in the book?

@lyndoncmp5751

8 ай бұрын

@benjaminbuchanan7151 No, the book is quite sparse on details (every tank is a Tiger and every gun is a 88mm) with some very inaccurate claims. The info is from The Panzer and the Battle of Normandy by Georges Bernage. On page 92 there is a picture of one of the two Stugs lost, number 133 commanded by Ustuf. Simon. He was killed, along with most of the crew. 17th SS had to pull back and call off the attack because they were being cut off at the rear and were being overwhelmed by numbers. Cheers ✌️

@Rob.S859

4 ай бұрын

Speilberg and Hanks seem to be obsessed with the Waffen SS in both their movies and mini series. Fact. The Americans never encountered any Waffen SS units until December 44. The Canadians and British fought the 12th, 2nd and 1st SS Panzer divisions in the Caen area. I’m not sure what message they’re trying to drive home here? What? That the whole German army was Waffen SS? Maximum was about 900,000 on both fronts. And that included Walloons, French,Croatian,Bosnian,Latvian, Dutch,Danes. There was even a Spanish division and yes, a Ukrainian division.

One part he missed is that during a sand storm the IR (Infra Red) sights are of little to no use and also Heavy Fog they don't work so well either !!!

Always a pleasure to see a new video presented by The Chieftain.

Good to see you again doing part 2 Lt!!!

I made fuel lines for the tanks in afganistan.. they said the sand was so fine they required replacing entire lines every 2 weeks. Crazy.

I am a simple man, i saw the Chieftain, i like

Even if you have a basic knowledge of something it's most wiser to consult an expert of the matter. Thanks God we have somebody like Nicholas!!

PaK 75 = Panzer Abwehr Kanone ("Antitank Gun") 75 milimeter Note the white rings on the barrel, these are "victory markings" showing the number of claimed tank kills

I played a lot of war thunder and my favorite tank being the t-34-85, the panther is my absolute nemesis. From the front it's only weakness is the turret, more specifically under and on the side of the gun's mantle. If you got a shot from behind, a shot at the engine will destory the tank but the crew may not instantly die. Meanwhile a shot under the gun's mantle will go straight to the turret killing the crew and detonating some shells.

The Chieftain! Yes! Love this guy.

This guy has more tank knowledge in his hang nail than I will ever obtain. Thank you! Now I have to go watch Fury and T34 again, for the teenth time.

9:39 The chuckle/giggle is pretty consistent whenever any army/airforce expert start to watch a Rambo movie. It's usually the veterans who were already in service when the Rambo franchise came out in the 1980s into the 2000s. Wonder how many of the current in-service personnel grew up as kids rooting for Rambo, then joined the Army/Airforce/Navy, and subsequently suppress a smile while rewatching the one man army.

Interesting, informative and so full of wonderful dry humour

Let's worship the Chieftain in the comment section.

"the big problem you're going to have is called depression" yeah me too 6:12

Hey Insider, tanks a lot for bringing this guy back

I see the chieftain, i like.

Informative analysis and super spot on for ratings. I'll go even one further in Band of Brothers. In 'Replacements' Bull Randleman is running ahead of the British Sherman. The Sherman gets hit and Bull is thrown to the ground. You can see the piece of tank shrapnel (fuzzy as it may be) come from the tank and hit Bull in the left should. That is the attention to detail paid in the making of this great series. One movie that always got me was Patton. The Germans had the M-48 Patton as their tank while the US used the M41 Walker Bulldog and M47 Patton. Patton was fighting himself. The Brits were using the M24 Chaffee.

@lyndoncmp5751

8 ай бұрын

Except in reality the Sherman didn't roll forward. A quick second shot blew the turret off. It didn't keep rolling. There is a picture of this Sherman lying on its side with its turret off in Market Garden Then And Now by Karel Margry. The commander, Lt Benton, survived but two crewmen (Nichols and Stothard) were killed. B Squadron 44th Royal Tank Regiment. Band of Brothers is quite inaccurate in places due to the poor research of Ambrose.

@ChuckJansenII

8 ай бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 I think you miss the point that they create a bit of drama by having the tank keep rolling. This drama was set up by Episode 3 Carentan when the German soldier was run over by the tank. It's called artistic license.

@lyndoncmp5751

8 ай бұрын

@ChuckJansenII Im just pointing what actually happened. Band of Brothers is not the super accurate, super realistic, super attention to detail series that many think it is. Episode 4 is notably BS in places due largely to the shoddy research of Stephen Ambrose. Cheers.

@ChuckJansenII

8 ай бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 And I say what they were doing was for dramatic effect. What they got right is a lot more than you give them credit for. Look at Winters leg bag in Day of Days. That's what I was pointing out. moron.

I'd be grateful if Nicholas could review the tanks battles in "Kelly's Heroes".

There is a tank movie Lebanon (2009). Its follows a lone tank and its crew in the First Lebanon War in 1982, their task is to escort a paratroopers platoon on a mission. Interesting to see the mental stress on the crew and how they react to it. They experience horrors of the war spiced with the constant dark, claustrophobic atmosphere of the tank.

@z000ey

8 ай бұрын

12/10 for a tank movie

Very nice choice to go with The Chieftain! I thoroughly enjoyed this.

Band of Brothers is one of my personal favourite because it was based on actually eyewitnesses account of the paratroopers who survived the war.

again you bring your expertise and charm. i enjoyed this much

Nick Moran returns! Woohhoooo!

8:33 Dear editor. That's an artillerty piece. About as far from an SPAA as you can get

@paulmurgatroyd6372

9 ай бұрын

It's pointing upwards, which is near enough for Hollywood work. Mr Accurate Details has been given the day off. 😆

The man him self- The Chieftan: "That's why you go in with AA Vehicles in company with your tanks" Insider: *shows a self propelled artillery gun firing" ooof couldn't find footage of a Flak-panzer IV or any other real AA tank? I rate Insider 8/10

P.S. Your reaction at the end of the Rambo clip was priceless!

You have explained everything very nicely sir.

I could argue with the evaluation of the "Fury" scene. Being a combat veteran, a professional in artillery myself, who trained and commanded AT and mortar platoons for a few years, I am well aware of the effect of battlefield stress on gunnery skills, but these PAKs were doing an ambush. Prepared for the first shot, lots of time for fine aiming with no interruption from enemy fire, from a well concealed position, with infantry around to provide protection... In this phase there is not much room for "Oh God I am about to die", because in this phase the gunners are occupied with the thoughts like: "Oh God this will be an easy kill." I admit that after the Shermans begin to light up the forest line, some of the gunners probably go from "This will be an easy kill" to the "I am about to die" mode, but all in all I still think that this scene with zero tank losses has little ground in reality... especially knowing the rest of the movie, with the Tiger I ambush scene and the ending battle.

@SeanCSHConsulting

6 ай бұрын

Exactly. The whole movie has little ground in reality. Those PAKs would likely have obliterated those Shermans almost as soon as they poked through the hedge. Fury is utter garbage.