I am surprised no one said “Stug life” within 1 hour of this video until now

@flake1139

10 ай бұрын

Stug life indeed bro

@johnd2058

10 ай бұрын

It chooses you.

@deepred6041

9 ай бұрын

@@johnd2058 it definitely does

@johnd2058

9 ай бұрын

Especially if you're an early-war tank chassis.@@deepred6041

@chpet1655

20 күн бұрын

We should just assume it’s said no need to even bother

The Ausfürung D added an improved internal intercom for the crew and new transmission access locks over the Ausfürung C. And the last ~20 Ausfürung D were finished on Ausfürung E chassis. Additionally, four, not three, StuG III Ausfürung D were sent to North Africa. Only three made it as the Italian dock workers dropped one off the ship.

@joeyj6808

9 ай бұрын

Those Italians! Always such helpful allies!

@dannyzero692

4 ай бұрын

I can’t imagine the faces of the Italian dockworkers who had to report to the military why they lost a combat vehicle

@Trupp42

4 ай бұрын

Did he get fired ?

I've ridden in the sole surviving DAK stug III D, very tight sqeeze.

Ausf. means „Ausführung „ comparison in the sense to series/ Mk for example used for the Sptfire

Babe wake up new tank encyclopedia vid dropped

This channel is an hidden gem !!

@alsanchez5038

10 ай бұрын

It is a gem!

@zulubeatz1

9 ай бұрын

I concur. It's great to have a politically neutral and purely historic and technical overview of these vehicles. Refreshing

In my mind the StuG III, and then primarily the G version, was the best AFV in German use during the war. I'm looking forward to see a follow-up covering the later versions.

@SlavicCelery

10 ай бұрын

Just curious, why the best, in your opinion?

@ollep9142

10 ай бұрын

@@SlavicCelery A combination of factors: * Relatively easy and cheap to produce. * Good reliability. * Did WELL in all roles where used; assault gun, tank destroyer and as a regular tank.

@SlavicCelery

9 ай бұрын

@@ollep9142 So why III over IV? Personally, I've always thought the IV had a better arrangement of suspension for a cheaper vehicle, but that's just me.

@ollep9142

9 ай бұрын

@@SlavicCelery The StuG IV was essentially a StuG III on a PzKw IV chassi. The only reason for it being produced in the first place was that the Alkett factory producing StuG III was badly damaged in a bombing raid. The production of StuG III was considered more important than the production of PzKw IV, so one of those factories had to switch. The overall production number of StuG IV was significantly lower than that of StuG III.

@SlavicCelery

9 ай бұрын

@@ollep9142 IV is still lighter, better weight to power ratio, longer road range, more ammo and easier construction. I get the III has a higher number of units constructed. But units constructed doesn't mean the best. Heck there were nearly 3k Hetzers produced in 14 months. And that guy has some issues to be sure.

Ah, the little Stug Nose. Sweet little Tank. The interresting Story of a Infantry Support Assult Vehicle, to on of the most Effectiv Tank Destroyer of WWII. and a Beauty of it, too.

13:26 That is a picture of von Rundstedt not Manstein.

@nightvisiongoggle4100

10 ай бұрын

Right on. They should stick to tanks and not generals.

You guys are just killing me over. I cant wait for the continuation of the panzer 3 series

Factual, accurate info. Great delivery by narrator.

@chpet1655

20 күн бұрын

Some small pronunciation errors but whatever it’s German we can’t assume everyone has command of this arcane language. And I’m glad it’s not a dang robot voice. Far too many of these Bot voiced channels are popping up. I auto ban them as soon as I hear that standard robot voice.

Very informing and think you for sheering.

Probably the most overall useful AFV of the war. The French and Russians were lucky they didn't build the Stug in quantity early on.

I hv read lots about tanks and Stugs - this docu is very pointing - my opinion.

StuH fan.. Failure to product the H was critical to the StuGH program.. The H's also lacked the elevation for mountainous and indirect fire roles. (L28).. another thing that you overlooked is that the StuGs often were used at tow vehicles..

I love seeing the unit patches

To help: Ausf. = Ausfürung is pronounced ouse-fer-oong (ouse as in mouse). You'd sound more professional using the word

Whats funny is that the Germans were fightinf T34s from day 1 of Operation Barbarossa. Most T34s were taken out by the Panzer 3...yes with the 37mm gun. Yes they should have have better anti-tank guns, but when the Soviets were that bad off it almost moot.

Do one on the long barreled versions! One of my favs!

Nice vídeo Nice tank

it just looks right with the low silhouette

The vehicle was deadly and simple.

Regarding command vehicles. I always thought that a separate design that was just a command vehicle designed and built as such. A vehicle that could function as a command tank for any and every type of unit including Stug units. Because command tanks are basically a standard tank will nothing inside but space for tables, maps and radios. A vehicle that was perfectly designed for this task and was lighter and more mobile maybe even significantly faster to escape unwanted enemy attention. The other command tanks relied on fake wooden guns that couldn’t possibly fool anyone anyway.

Excellent video. The pronunciation of Ausf. is funny though. Ausf. is the abbreviation for Ausführung (type, model) which might be easier to pronounce despite the umlaut.

Ausf = Ausführung = version (like Mk. 3)

The 75mm low velocity L/24 gun fired a relatively weak HE shell. It only contained 1 pound of high explosive filling. It could have held much more HE filling. The Sherman 75mm HE shell had 1.5 pounds of high explosive filling. When the Stug III was upgraded with the 75mm L/43 and L/48 gun, it fired an HE shell that held 1.42 pounds of high explosive filling.

I know this is a Stug episode but if the Semple had gone into production eventually one would be called Simon. Semple Simon. Anyway. I need to restart the video because of a stray thought.

Could you talk about the mystery of the Tiger 1 in the Italian army? Or for example about the panzer 3 in Hungarian service.

@Paciat

9 ай бұрын

Its there in numbers needed for propaganda camera. Thats the mystery.

bro really said "infantry" like "dysentery"

I have often wondered if the Germans ever tried to fit the superb 7.5 cm / L70 main gun from the Panther into the Stug IiI. This would have dramatically increased its tank killing ability in the 1944/45 time period!

@SFCKNZSD

10 ай бұрын

It has a weak HE round because the gun is high velocity so it wouldn’t be a self propelled gun anymore itd be a tank destroyer which would have stugs be under the panzerwaffe instead of artillery

@gort.3296

10 ай бұрын

​​@@SFCKNZSD indeed , But by the end of the War the balance was Swinging in Stopping the Beasts of the Soviet Hordes! In the shape of the IS 2 heavy tanks ! Ps the StuH 42 / 105 mm armed Stug III at this time period 1944/45 . Was more effective in infantry support than the 75 mm - long or short barrelled!

@Panzermeister36

10 ай бұрын

It could not fit. The recoil system of the L/48 StuK 40 was already taking up a lot of space inside the vehicle. There is more to the L/70 75mm gun than a longer barrel. It uses longer ammunition and larger recoil system.

@gort.3296

10 ай бұрын

@@Panzermeister36 Indeed it is a bigger gun / recoil / breach and rounds ! But then again the British managed to Fit the huge 17 pounder with all of the above size issues into a relatively small early model Sherman turret . They cut a hole in the rear of the turret for the longer recoil. It worked after must fetterling and they successfully created the formidable Firefly! Ps , maybe the Germans just concentrated their Up gunning with the 7.5cm/ L70 into their new Jagdpanzer IV Lang model.

@Panzermeister36

10 ай бұрын

​@@gort.3296no, not the same issues as it is a different vehicle and a different gun. It could not fit in the StuG as the recoil guard is already against the rear of the fighting compartment. In the firefly, they could cut a hole in the back of the turret and move the radio further rearward. Well, in the StuG, you'd be cutting a hole in the firewall and then removing the engine. How is that going to work?

I just want the shorty 75 StuG in Enlisted.

Still seems so unbelievable that the german weapons procurement couldn't come up with an effective A/T gun for tanks

Why didn't the Germans introduce fully sloped armour on the Stug? It would offer better protection, make the front easier to manufacture and perhaps offer a little bit more space inside?

@theronin942

5 ай бұрын

Sloped armor actually decreases internal space as shown with how cramped the t-34s were. Also they had already standardized production so rebuilding the chassis wasn't seen as necessary as the armor strength was already deemed adequate, if i had to guess. This is not a 100% fact just my opinion on why they wouldn't have used sloped armor.

@mikebikekite1

5 ай бұрын

@@theronin942 Thanks for the reply. If you look at a Stug side on then having a single sheet of frontal armour should actually increase internal space, it might even use less steel but it would definitely make it better protected and easier to manufacture. I think the Stugs had continual changes made to them throughout the war so it just seemed odd they didn't go for this. I suppose it's a bit pointless me arguing why certain things weren't done 80 years ago during the middle of a war but hey ho :)

When did the pronunciation of the StuG III go from Stew-Gee to Stug?

👍👍

My all time favorite WWII vehicle (Long gun).

6:32 what is the name of this truck?

Stug Life👊

So few, Soviet union has 30k units of all kinds of tanks before the start of the war

You are quite wrong with your claim that the 75mm. L.24 KwK.37 / StuH.37 never had PzGr.40 APCR developed for it, as Kummersdorf range tests reports exist for. However, it was only issued to Pz.IV tanks, never StuGs. 75mm. L.24 KwK.37 / StuH.37 anti-armour munitions: K.Gr.Rot.Pz. APHE (hard nosed HE shell with base fuse) = Up to 48mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ 100 metres. PzGr.39 APCBC-HE (shot with exploding grenade tail) = Up to 57mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ 100 metres. PzGr.40 APCR (tungsten carbide cored solid shot) = Up to 76mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ 100 metres. Gr.38 H1/A HEAT (lighter long range shaped charge) = Up to 84mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ all ranges. Gr.38 H1/B HEAT (middle weight medium range shaped charge) = Up to 91mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ all ranges. Gr.38 H1/C HEAT (heavier close range shaped charge) = Up to 120mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ all ranges. From 1939 to 1941, the most common munition issued to short barrelled StuGs & Pz.IVs was K.Gr.Rot.Pz. APHE, due to its 50% HE filling being ideal for destroying dugouts, bunkers, fortifications and weakly armoured early war tanks. This was the standard German army post WW1 and interwar 75mm. APHE projectile also used with the Fg.16 NA field gun, Ig.18 infantry gun & Ig.37 infantry gun.

Infanterry?😊

the superstructure was just a overly busy mess of shottraps

Stug Life 4 life.

It's " In-fun-tree", not sure why you pronounced infantry the way you did. Just letting you know.

Ausf. A.... just call it Modell A ok?

The main Problem with German tanks is the numbers built .

StuG 4 Life.

Just an fyi. Nobody pronounces "Ausf". You either say "Ausführung" or just leave it out. It's no an abbreviation, it's just to shorten the name.

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

We don't pay nor hate our narrators enough to force them to say Ausfuhrung 20 times per video. But hey, if you want us to be able to do so, do consider donating so we can make better videos.

@donr444

10 ай бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT It's easier to say than the awkwardness of "Ausf", at least if you're a native speaker. But like I said, just leave it out and say StuG A. I'm sure your narrator will thank you.

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

We're not native speakers, and English standard, as shown again and again by everyone in the field, is to say Ausf, not just the letter, not the full Ausfuhrung. You can check out Bovington, Chieftain, Military History Visualized, TIK, etc.

@donr444

10 ай бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT I know, it's been irritating me everywhere else as well. Someone needs to break that pattern of saying it that way, because nobody in German does.

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

Sorry it is irritating, but we're not speaking German. We try to give some designations as correctly as we can, but if it's something that has to be said 20 times, we go to the English standard. I am sorry, but there is no other way we can do it

while I enjoy the videos and the informations in them, the german is full of errors. For Example you wrote Zuge instead of Züge( and tried to pronounce it as Zuge aswell). The most painfull one was the "Ausf" B, C,.... its allright to just say version and just show the german text in your video but saing "Ausf" does not work in german, like at all, it is just the short version of Ausführung so it can fit on the documents better but nobody would use it when speaking. Still love your videos tought. Keep it up!

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

We are not Germans. We do not speak German. We do our best and that's all that can be done. Also, and we'll say this the 100th time, saying Ausf is English standard at this point and we'll keep doing it.

"Ausführung"

The early Ausf of the StuG III always seemed to me as being a lot of vehicle for not a lot of gun.

@danielhurst8863

10 ай бұрын

That is because they were manned by soldiers from the artillery, not anti-tank or tank arms. The short barreled 75 allowed for lobbing shells into bunkers, and the protection allowed for the vehicle to get close to the bunkers. For assaulting a bunker, the short 75 was superior to the longer 75, it was only the lack of German mobile anti-tank vehicles that lead to the longer 75 being used.

@christineshotton824

10 ай бұрын

@@danielhurst8863 My point was that a modification of the 10.5cm leFH 18 would have fit and gotten the job done much better. This was proven with the StuH 42. But that seems to be a common theme in early war vehicles; namely that they are significantly undergunned when compared to late war models.

@ollep9142

10 ай бұрын

@@christineshotton824 I'm not so sure the StuH 42 was generally seen as "better", given that it had a more limited amount of rounds on board. The regular StuGs typically carried as many rounds they could get into the vehicles, more than 80, whereof half in dedicated racks and the rest on the floor and wherever else they could be squeezed in. The supported infantry would often lose momentum (at best) or even begin to retreat if/when the StuGs pulled back to resupply during an attack, so having lots of ammo was crucial.

@Panzermeister36

10 ай бұрын

​@@christineshotton824that was only proven with modification of the roofline of the vehicle. As designed, the 75mm gun was all that could fit into the Ausfürung A-E superstructure.

Why are english speaking KZreadr using the word "Ausf." ? Its short for the word "Ausführung" wich means model or version.

Please stop calling it "Ausf. C" That sounds so wierd for a german speaking person "Ausf. C" is short for "Model C" or for "Mark C" "Ausführung C" Germans did number the different versions by letters, not by numbers. Just say it in your native language, because this is an english channel🙂

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

It has become English standard to say Ausf. Check out Bovington, Military History Visualized, Chieftain, etc. Welcome to having your language bastardized in English. First time?

@MRUD

10 ай бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Not bastardized, nor butchered😅 It just sounds weird. Then better call it "Ausführung" instead of "Ausf." (even if you butcher the pronounciation) No insult. You guys do a great job. Deepest respect Greetings

I know what else is short and mighty 😂

I had to resist stopping to watch several times because of *Ausf* - for the love of god: Use the complete word Ausfuehrung or a fitting translation (implementation, model, Mk,...) And *why* did you play Germany's national anthem in an endless loop in the background? Yes: We had the same anthem from 1933 to 1945, but we only use the third verse today and the anthem certainly is among the last things people associate with Nazi Germany - just an incredibly poor choice for this video - which is a shame, because the technical content is pure gold!

Ausf is just an abbreviation for Ausführung (ouz-phy-roong) and you can stop pronouncing it OUsph all the time, just say version after mentioning the german written form ONCE.

@Panzermeister36

10 ай бұрын

Agreed

@thhseeking

10 ай бұрын

It's pronounced "ows-foo-roong".

@MTB571

9 ай бұрын

Or use 'Mark' as in Mk I, II, ...

I think, the footage is quite OK, but the pronunciation and emphasize of "Ausf." let me p***. If you are unsure, how to pronounce it, inform yourself and don't just overemphasize it - especially as the focus is not on the word itself, but on the type (A, B, C ...). Or just say "type".

I swear to god, please stop saying ausf. You don't see any German pronouncing mk. As "macuh". If you can't say Ausführung Just call it mark, it means the same

I find the constant and unnecessary German words annoying

@thhseeking

10 ай бұрын

Well, it *is* about a German vehicle :P

@Tutel0093

10 ай бұрын

​​@@thhseeking 05:35 What's the point of translating words like Platoon o Artillery Battalion? Unnecessary cringe

By making videos like this, you are presenting yourself as an authority on the subject. By mispronouncing the word "infantry", you discard your own hard work

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

We're not misspronouncing it, the narrator's Irish, it's a regional thing.

@dcross6360

10 ай бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT thank you for clarification

@TanksEncyclopediaYT

10 ай бұрын

Would've been nice to ask before throwing harsh words.

@dcross6360

10 ай бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT apologies

Stug life