Can you make a video about Evolution of helicopter?

The crass language...really ? You think you're cool or trying to appeal to a 10 year old demographic ?

wowww the pro-ukrainian stuff at the end really set me off, you clearly know nothing about the conflict, and you seem to not know or care that atleast quarter of your subs do not share your opinion, most of the world does not support Ukraine you know? most of the world's population support Russia, majority Africa, central asia, middle east, parts of south america, parts of the carribean, most of Asia and of course Russia itself, you are really shooting yourself in the foot with this even though Ukraine is losing the war.

@@valyshknee4203 www.economist.com/media-assets/image/20220409_WOT949.png just look at the map...

T-34 Ukrainian tank or Soviet but not russian.

Yea, that Mark I tank kinda cute tho😂

War is a game. Yet people still play it

Viva lé France, Napoléon

Tanks are not terrifying they are cool

@@retrogamer545well the enemy will be terrified

I know right!?

I totally agree with you 👍🏾

real

And yet, they do! Like fucking Call of Duty!

real

Isnt the tsar tank the biggest operational tank?

@@Kammerjagerr I don't even know if that even classifies as a tank 🤣

@@federovsquared5646 Everyone else calls it a tank 🤷‍♂️

​@@Kammerjagerr Probably because calling it an armoured fighting vehicle is too long of a name.

The Renault FT-17 is mentioned in the World War I video.

Yep, I agree, FT-17 set the benchmark for all modern tanks to come, and it was a superb light tank of the period too. Plus it's soo damn Cute! I just want to hug it and pet it on the turret, such a good boy.

it was the first mass produst turret tank but lil willy did have a turret.but yay why no ft17.

It is a very, very watered down history of the tank.

I mean the FT-17 was the first to have been set up like the modern tanks we know. Surely didn't look like it, however the driver front, combat center and engine back was pioneered by the FT-17

they also forgot about the austrian "Burstyn Motorgeschütz" from 1911/12 It was even designed for crossing trenches and had a rotatable turret. In my eyes the only true first tank

Same, I love rts game especially modern military ones

or make model kits of them, that would be amazing

@@nozzatron01gaming11oooooh 3d printer time lol 😂

I think in their patreon have models of things used to people who want to print them, not sure

nice idea

Exactly

The russian military dosent learn Same mistakes cann be seen from war in chechnya

​@@rayotoxi1509I from Russia and I think, for we haven't for massive motorised defender for drone and rocket, and many tank. USSR he got 12k, Russia got 1,2k-5k. That so small for large country.

​@@user-vl1me5vv2gspeak english.

​​@@rayotoxi1509yeah, Russians never learn, Napoleon and Hitler thought the same, but then justified themselves being crushed by winter (but not by bushes at least). but somehow T-72s survive drone attacks and get drone cages first. What happens with glorious leopards and other democratic coaches under focused attacks, remind me plz.

Eh, this video was uploaded waaaaay before the Abrams tanks were deployed in Ukraine, cut the makers some slack.

@@mekingtiger9095 then don't make stupid assumptions or try to predict things about the war if they want to be cut some slack

The authors did not forget to lick the US tanks 👎, the Shermans were burning then - especially against the Tigers, and now the Abrams are burning in Ukraine.

@@Zloy_moskovit23 abrams doing fine

@@spudgun3982thank you for spreading truth my friend

And not only that, it was also the most produced tank from the Great War, 3700 of them, that's more than the Germans and Brits combined. Another thing they missed, Czechoslovakia had a decent tank production just before the war, the Germans used quite a lot of Panzer 35(t)'s and 38(t)'s well into 1941 until their own tank production finally caught up!

It's the father of modern tanks, as you said it had a rotating turret but it also had a compartment specially for the engine.

@@_MaitreuPanda___ carbon monoxide poisoning was a serious issue in the early tanks.

Couldn't agree more. It set the standard for most tanks put into service: A fully rotating turret; driver in the front, fighting compartment in the middle and engine compartment in the rear. Absolute unit of a little tank.

Not surprising, this channel is anti-french for some reason

Advanced Wars on the Gameboy. Good times.

Deep inside we like cartoonish art style even in our 20s

Same man it looks awesome.

Hell yeah!

Same Thought it has Potential.

there was a game like this, but dont know the name anymore.

​@@mr.flupsurf2860shield wall

This didn't age well.

@@keithcraig506the Abram’s are also burning in Ukraine

@@peterwolanyk3428 And?

@@keithcraig506 You said it didn't age well, Abrams got delivered and they get destroyed just like every other tank.

@@peterwolanyk3428 OP's prediction was that they would never be delivered. Obviously they were delivered. Thus, OP's prediction didn't age well (i.e. it was incorrect). No one said they were indestructible.

Only 2500 Sherman crew died in WW2. It has the best crew survival rates. The T34 was unreliable and killed it's crew. Probably the second most overrated tank ever after the Tiger. At the end of the day trained tankers are the most precious resource in armored warfare, the tank that protects that best is the best tank.

Especially since T-34s usually don't have spall liners the whole WW2, a non-penetrating shot for a Sherman is a very deadly metal shatter to T-34 crews. Soviet crews were relatively expendable since they are easily replaced anyway.

Just compare the numbers The Eastern Front had 6 million Germans and 9 million Soviet soldiers over the course of 4 years The United States had and the Allies landed 300 thousand soldiers in Normandy. At the same time, the operation was clearly planned by a member of the Kuklusklan movement

I've heard one British tank vet say that he was in his 5th tank when WW2 ended. He also said the British didn't get a decent tank until *_after_* the war.

@@duitkreminder that the Soviets put the fuel tanks in the fighting compartment to either side of the driver, which is less then ideal when you get hit

Don t expect to much of a channel that potrayed us as coward in a different video French bashing is still a thing twenty years after iraq

@@aurelienthietard7636 hahaha

With just how much it gets wrong I'm not suprised. Like how it never touches on the long barrel revolution and it mentions the importance whilst degrading the very tanks which inspired it. Or how it quite litterally makes it look like the maus was anything more than 2 prototypes and actually saw service (neither of which is true and if we compare it to other german prototype programs it's obvious how little attention it was given). Or how it perpetuates myths about german manufacturing (which is sad because the importance of allied bombings and the supply situation almost never gets stated) Honestly I might have to do a full writeup.

The 2c bis and charmond too

It's crazy, he completely swept the French subject...

Gaming

They also had a stabilized main gun, which was so top secret, that they... didn't distribute the manuals... to their own troops... sigh.

Sherman had it's faults for eastern Europe landscapes. However mediums often determined battlefields

ahahha, ok )))

@@lancepharkerThe good news is that if a crew/armoured division knew how to use it, then the Sherman just became even more effective on top of all the other factors. If the crew didn’t know how to use the stabilizer, then the Sherman would be on par with other tanks instead of being worse.

Adding the fact that is bassicaly like a limousine for the crew considering the standard of the time

That’s one of the reasons why Soviet tankers who had Shermans preferred it over the T-34.

Yep, but it use very inflamable fuel and the shell compartment where not very well protected. Not for nothing that one of the sherman nickname was bronson. Shermans was just super easy to blew up.

​@gaetantreib4163 early shermans were prone to becoming bonfires however 1943 onward they were just as likely to set alight as another tank.

@@gaetantreib4163 isnt its called "Ronson" not "Bronson" also that is only used post war. Also sherman is not that easy to blew up, study says they have similar explosion rate to other tanks of similar class or size at the time (Except the one british used as they have the brightest idea to overload the tank with ammo and still wonder why their tanks explosing everywhere) even an account from Russian that have Hero of the Soviet honor that use Sherman says he was pinned down while using his Sherman once from german attacks but his Sherman survives despite receiving multiple hits.

Согласен, странно что ещё Леклерк не упомянули. Самый технологичный танк запада того времени.

Первый ОБТ - советский Т-64

@@alexeievgenievich5556 Первым основным боевым танком мог стать "Центурион" или "Пантера".

​@@petrf-rw4pwcenturion was made 1946

@@petrf-rw4pwthat’s not even the first soviet MBT bro

The author hates French and russians

The animation is gold, however the writting is really, really bad. It feels like they copy & pasted some biased british/american article, inserted some old myths and as you said above, completely forgot about the really important designs like the FT-17, T-55 and the introduction of ERAs.

they post like every month, if you aren't satisfied with it why are you watching em? if you want those many tanks watch a full tank documentary telling all the tanks in history, they aren't national geographic.

Yep, they even forgot to mention that the French had superior tanks during the start of WW2 but didn't know how to incorporate them in their armed forces.

@@TrafficTheConeyou not aloud to have a opinion ? He was not criticizing it he was just saying his opinion

You can bet when someone invents something new, some prick will pop up next to them asking two questions; 1. How can we kill people with this? 2. How can this help to make things more comfortable for the lives of MY people who are going out to kill OTHER people?

Its a bit more natural than you think

The key is to put more effort into killing your enemy than your enemy is putting into killing you.

Well, simply put, if the other guy has a sharp stick, then you need a sharp rock on a stick, because otherwise he can come over and steal your stuff. Humans can operate well in groups, but groups rarely work together if it's not against something else.

@@WG55I’d argue the key is to put in more effort in the factory so the guys in the field put in none.

I think you made a mistake. The Renault was armed with either a single barrel cannon or a machine gun. We hadn’t really figured out how to put those two together at the time, and it’s not like there was enough space in the turret anyway.

@@manofironthathasntturnedcr9817 Thank you for pointing that out, I had meant to say that but I forgot to fix that line of text when I rewrote this like 5 times, I’ll fix it now

afterwards, I think Mitsi doesn't like French, given the treatment they had in previous videos

@@CascouPrime In which video ? It's a real shame, if for such a reason, they didn't mention France at all in this video. I mean that country is kinda a pioneer in tank developpement.

@@adddaddda7748 in the video where they prtray how different countries fight, France shows up and instead of... idk Napoleon's grand armee, or ww1 french soldiers, or hell even the french resistance in 1940, they just showed a stereotypical french dude waving a white flag at the first sign of trouble. I wasn't surprised afterwards that the FT wasn't even mentionned in this video considering the previous french bashing...

Bohemia would might not survive the russo ukrainian war If it still existed ofc or uh survive by improving their tanks and smart soldiers

Or that dude with the elephants.

he cant show every tank that was shown to humans, its not a documentary

та буд-то леоперди а бабрамси вежі не метають XD

без нахрюка никуда, всё таки хорошо что у них есть только мультики

Читаешь мысли) Ток хотел про этот анимационный высер написать...

Не, ну про отлетающие башни, превратившиеся в доп. артиллерию реально смешно.

@@montecarlo2684 Смешно будет нам, когда ты гавно будешь 5ый угол искать после захода Русских в Авдеевку.

Ну, вот такая у них пропаганда...

4

​@@user-hk1qn9ue2t, 6

5

FT is a critical development. Oscilating turrets can go straight to hell though

it's not a bad turret configuration the question is Why did we built Oscilation turrets? Oscilating turrets have his advantages like placement saver, smaller size and could on certain tanks equipped with autoloader so on lighter tanks ist an absolute monster killer (see the ebr in WT annoying) but on heavy tanks in another hand is pointless, poor elevation degrees @@latch9781

​@@latch9781Oscillating turrets were the best design at that time, plus the French did come up with other amazing things during that time. In my opinion Amx 30 is also a superior counterpart than the German leopard 1.

​@@latch9781Oscillating turrets wonky asf

​@@latch9781 Oscilating turrets were amazing, not by the design neither armor protection (which was not really good), but because they were the consequences of a really fast automatic reloading system.

It's just that Russia doesn't know how to use Soviet tanks. The KF-51 tank can smoke both tank and drone on the bbq.

@@WolfeSaber9933 Training is also key. Yes, your statement is somewhat correct.

​@@WolfeSaber9933Its not only that, but people seem to think that just because tanks are being destroyed that makes them obsolete. Engines of war will be destroyed in the course of their use just by being Engines of war. Doesnt matter what it is.

@@WolfeSaber9933 now they do, they didn't in the begining of the war

@@whispofwords2590 B-b-but MY countries MBT that isn't in Ukraine and has never saw combat against a conventional army would do SO much better guys, it has all these better traits, trust me!

True Story

Good armor means nothing if you are getting outproduced by vehicles like the sherman or the T34 that can get larger guns that can go through the tiger 1 and similar

Why? Germany was using flat armor when Angle was already confirme to be better... Wasn't until bastard trying to copy T-34 and make they own version that the panther was born. They only reason they tank look better at the start was because they're were the only one investing in going to war..

@@Rek1emMScargermans used flat armor to give bigger free space to crews and ammunition, while soviet tankers were cramped in small steel coffins barely being able to reload the germans had enough space to dance, also germans werent the only ones investing in going at war, soviets are basically red fascists they have fought finland, poland , baltics and japan to say that they didnt invest in warmachines because they werent interested at bloodshed is delusional

@@Space_Muffin45 You have a serious case of German bias .. If URSS tank were Small steel coffins. German were big and slow steel coffins. Not even bullshit crap like MAUS was safe. German steel was also trash mid-late war.. So wasting material in big useless shit was really stupid. Germany did have better Tank gun.. But their tank design was pathetic. Its fucking war. They where Delusional thinking big Wunderwaffen would win a war. Maybe they should have to perfect what the T-34 did for Soviets. But not because even the Panther was big as fuck. Panther is in the same weight class as IS2.. And is2 is still smaller and better protected. Not talk that you need almost two time the material to build 1 panther if you compare it to the T-34. YEA useless wunderwaffen shit and waste of material that they didn't have.

Watch their introduction video about themselves

3 years

3:54 ... Definitely. XD

And enjoying US propaganda :D

По задумке, эти танки должны были доставляться на транспортных самолётах в тыл немецких войск и объеденившись с силами ополчения СССР - "партизанами" наносить удары по немецким линиям снабжения, держу вкурсе

Abrams also flies off in the new addition

turrets blowing off leopards is a rare sight unlike russians they dont store ammo right under the turret ring

​@@Space_Muffin45 If you don't understand russian, use Google translate Потому что в русских танках все делает автомат заряжания, а в американских голодный негр Джимми. И посреди боя Джимми могут ранить, контузить или убить. Или он может устать. Снаряды- то тяжёлые. А автомат заряжания всегда одинаково быстр. Как вы правильно отметили, башни наших танков подлетают вверх от любого пробития в башню. Но давайте будем честны. Если снаряд пробил башню - экипаж погиб. Что в Абрамс, что в т90. И да. Один Абрамс может быть лучше одного т90. Но у России танков все ещё в несколько раз больше, чем у остального мира. А, кстати ваши абрамсы и челенджеры немного тяжёлые. И застревают в украинской грязи. А ещё они больше и заметнее танков РФ.

@@ellez0ne No they dont. Its funny cus the interior is immaculate while the exterior looks like it was shit out the backend.

They didnt even mention the french as tank makers XD, so sad...

Or the Renault FT.

morser karl or shwerer gustav

Also, Little Willie never went to France and the A7V could fall over 🤣🤣🤣

​@@arrowoneomega4649those aren't tanks, they're artillery

I thought that as well, re Centurion and Challenger series

To also follow up Italy was expecting combat in mountain terrain(but ended up in the desert) and the Japanese were fighting in island jungle thus lightweight/easy to maneuver tanks made more sense than heavy armored tanks, also the Japanese was aiming for a naval victory thus Battleships Aircraft Carriers and Torpedoes were prioritized over tanks.

Plus the Japanese tanks usually were required to be able to perform amphibious landings or at least brought on shore by a smaller landing craft, which limited their weight and therefore armor and gun caliber

japan just had bad tank designs lol

Makes sense, explains a lot

Japan was building ships so they couldnt build as much tanks

Now I can’t unhear it💀💀💀💀

i hear the loud moaning meme 😭

It did, because as everyone know tanks aren't indestructible!

​@@bigman6424 Your "everyone" doesn't include Ukrainian TV target audience that is being fed with tall tales about GAYM CHAYNGER Western wunderwaffe.

Russia has lost more than 2500 tanks.

@@derekschoots and its the 1st genuine peer fight since the Korean war. whats ur point? I'm sure if the NK/Chinese had ATGMs they'd have used them.

I assumed your comment was a reference to the handful of leopards knocked out in Ukraine.@@DShawWIU

Not to mention that Ukraine also uses Russian tanks so it’s not the tank that is performing poorly…

Sabaton 😎😎😎

SABATON!

Ah, a man of culture.

Basically the entire video: Steel commanders rule the battlefield

@@szaboaron8966spearhead flanders, tankers leading the storm of panzers

Minor Correction: Heavy tanks like the Tiger never technically stopped working, so much as they became tactically redundant decades later. The US and USSR both adopted version of their own during the Cold War. Germany's issues during WW2 largely stem from its resource poverty. It never had the fuel reserves to function as a modern mechanized army in the way that the US, UK and USSR did. So, I guess they kinda did stop working, but in a more literal sense than you seem to imply.

​@@Kingfisher_2376The key to German heavy tanks was reliable logistics and maintenance. A dedicated tank regiment with excellent radio based coordination and proper support was expected to punch through the enemy lines and wreak havoc whilst mechanised and motorised troops followed up. This is a doctrine that is still used to this day, but what Germany suffered in WW2 was the horrible state of their logistics. Not only they had sabotaged production lines and faulty supply points, their comms were also tapped in late war meaning that any and all moves they made were known to their enemies. Also, the lost of air power was one of the biggest damnings to happen to them. With the threat of getting annihilated from above, german armour was unable to play any active roles during daytime and had to move under the cover of darkness. The last bit may also be where the term 'Army of the Night' became popularised from.

The Tiger 1 was a good heavy tank but it was too heavy and over engineered compared the sherman or t34. Plus, as early as Kursk the Soviets had devised ways to kill or disable Tigers. Anti tank trenches, anti tank mines, new Ptab anti tank bomblets dropped by Il-2s, and positioning t34s, anti tank guns and spgs into positions where they could shoot Tigers in the much thinner side or rear armor. Also, don't forget that after Kursk things like the Sherman firefly, Sherman 76, M36 jackson, Su-85, Su-100, Isu-122 and Is-2s started rolling onto the battlefield. Also also, the germans forgot to provide enough recovery vehicles in the event a tiger was disabled or broke down.

Bastante errónea tu información, es sabido que en EEUU y Europa están borrando la historia pero te aviso que el Tiger I no fue el primer tanque pesado, fuera de modelos prototipos, el primero en producirse en números decentes fueron los modelos KV rusos, los cuales para inicio de Barbarroja no tenían rival y solo un cañón antitanque de 88 o un bombardero eran capaces de neutralizarlos (La película estadounidense "Fury", esta basada en la historia real de como un solitario KV-1 fue capaz de frenar toda una división panzer por su cuenta y tras destruir todos los cañones de 88 que los alemanes poseían, fue destruido junto con su tripulación por unidades de granaderos) y el Tiger I fue la respuesta a los KV 1 y 2 soviéticos.

​@@generalhorse493the tiger wasnt t 34 or m4 sherman. It had a designated role as a breakthrough tank, such as no medium tank wouldnt be enough to replace it

And how many T-72s have died to one shot again? In how many ways?

That makes me wonder why we even bother with tank armor at all nowadays.

never happened lol

@@mekingtiger9095 we do bother. No Abrams has been destroyed by a T72.

@@adrian4596 Has any T-72 ever had the chance to fire at an Abrams to begin with?

Viva le France

Me attempting to find the funny

Made of the strongest armor and weapons

It's armor looked like simple corrugated iron, but was actually made of a secret material known as New-Zealandium!

The main gun could kill any human, and it was equipped with many of them. That's horrible😱

Awesome!!!

u wrong Italian tanks are the best Edit: I love it when I make stupid nonsense statements, people dumber than my comment come along to attack something so obvious. Xdddd

​@@darkleaf5167The only thing better about Italian tanks is that the reverse is faster than forward.

@@ApacheBruvAnd smoll look cute

​@@mitsistudiocan you do magic? I kinda want sword and magic

Да просто автор занял прохохлятскую позицию, вот и всё - это заметно по некоторым его роликам 😌

It's not the father of French tanks in fact there was other before it but it is the father of modern tanks with a 360° turret and an engine in the back but you are right tho there should have been at least one French tanks since they were some of the biggest designer of those

they will never do that XD this channel is part of the stupid french-bashing clan ... they just act like they're an history channel lol

Indeed

I agree, they don't drink vodka there, they drink technical alcohol there 😂

​@@iachelovek-ib8rw Nothing, just a few obscene words... Well, okay, a lot of obscene words and everything will be fine.

Друг, я из России и я тебе говорю с полной ответственностью, в моей стране самые тупые инженеры и если у них каким то чудом получается сделать что то нормально, в процессе завершения они наверняка поставят туда какую-то хрень которая поломает всю концепцию, ЗАПОМНИТЕ РАЗ И НАВСЕГДА ЕСЛИ ЧТО ТЫ ДЕЛАЮТ В РОССИИ ЭТО НА 100 ПРОЦЕНТОВ ПОЛНАЯ ФИГНЯ, НЕ ВЕРЬТЕ ПРОПАГАНДЕ.

@@jzsbff4801 fully agree

​@jzsbff4801 I love how they just slapped the swastika right in your face not giving any craps about demonitization

Heck, it could even cover the Iowa's conversion, and potentially some of the future concepts of a 'battleship' (I.e a bigass ship containing hundreds of VLS launchers)

@@amhuman5138 Ah yeah, didn't thought about the future of battleships (and why it has been raplaced by aircraft carrier too ^^')

@@debilus7921Yeah, that's a good one too.

​@@amhuman5138either that or they gonna use railguns when they become available

The performance in question: womp womp

Yup not sure how France wasn't one of the main tank producing nations. They certainly produced more and more capable tanks than the Japanese or Italians that's for certain. The Chars were impressive tanks, just sadly the French army was stuck in WW1 mode.

@@stephen4121 France had a pretty big anti war sentiment during the interwar. So why would we have produced massive quantitities of tank that we wouldn’t have needed in an ideal world ? And by the time we realised we needed more tanks, it was too late anyway. One of said chars, the B1-bis had been in development since 1920. Very much stuck as a WW1 type of design. And intended to be used in a trench war scenario. It was still a nightmare for every german unlucky enough to encounter one during the short lived conflict. The only counter for the B1-bis the german had at the during the rather short war against my country was the 88mm anti air gun, whose effectiveness as an anti tank weapon was only discovered by pure accident. Probably a gun crew saw a B1 approaching, panicked, pointed the gun at the tank in desperation and fired. In terms of effectiveness, think about this: At one point, a single B1 tore apart a small german armored column. 13 tanks destroyed in a single engagement. And not a single penetrating german shot out of the dozens that hit the aforementioned B1. They were so good the germans salvaged the ones they could, and stuck a flamethrower where the 75mm was. You know, for extra nastiness. And then threw those at the soviets. To quote a comic about it, it was a « slug with enough armour to pass as a swiss safe, and with sharp teeth ». Comic is named « The butcher of Stonne », if you are interested.

@@manofironthathasntturnedcr9817 B1 Bis wasn't developped in 1920'. The "Char de Bataille" trials was in 1924, and the B1 was develloped from its contestants in the beginning of the 30', it wasn't made to reach trenches, but instead to assault fortifications like the Siegfried line and to be used as support for the Maginot Line guns.

France also producted more than 1000 infantry tank in 1940 and 500 cavalry tanks, along side many armored cars

the panther and the tiger were pretty bad actuallythe US made alot of tanks after ww2 and also alot of bad info on the T-34, the armour and the quality was pretty bad, hence why they made so many T-34’s

Ikr

"quick" lol (not that I have a problem with a video a month)

@@itsamefroggie yeah its not quick at all but the animation and research done for the videos aswell as how long they are is well worth the wait👍

Ob Stürmt oder schneit Ob die sonne uns lacht

Der Tag glühend heiß Oder eiskalt die Nacht.

Are you from indonesia?

Verstaubt sind die Gesichter, Doch froh ist unser Sinn,

man its biased asf, abrams are burning in ukraine rn

Хотя не один десяток уже лепиков и другой натовской шушары подбито

You mean the ones who aren’t even in theater yet?

​@@Mets2015WorldSeries В музей на Кубинке уже притащили Леопард-2 и Абрамс. Ну и остальные бронегробы тоже

when your t80bvm gets turret tossed because a drone flies against the back of the turret then it quite so a shitty tank my friend,crew survivability is very questionable but why care about that when you got millions of men comrade))

​@@jayzandstra1830Ок. То, что от прямого попадания башня Абрамса осталось на месте поможет его экипажу? Какая разница? Экипаж все равно погиб. Как минимум в башне Разница в том, что в российском танке есть автомат заряжания, а в супер современных натовских танках негр Джимми. И поэтому за раз в танке РФ народу гибнет меньше. И да. Может быть 1 Абрамсы лучше одного Т80 или т90. Но количество - это самое главное качество

radial engine

Awesome!!!

Khohol?

It's nevertheless unfortunate that they chose the name of a tank that was activly used by the Nazis during WW2, especially if you consider that there are other "predatory feline animals" whose names could have been used. Löwe (Lion) was the name of an experiemental design during WW2, while Jaguar (both the same in English and German, so a huge plus) wasn't used as a name for a tank during WW2 at all. Looking at all these facts, the decision to reuse the name "Panther" looks odd at best. Considering that Germany is currently again frowned upon for taking a leading role in Europe, it's downright distasteful - and I say that as a German.

@@EllroyMcBong Ah yes, the brainwashing of Germans to not take pride in anything they do comes into full effect. Theres nothing wrong with taking pride in certain aspects of your history, especially small things like the performance and name of a tank. No one is telling you to strap on hugo boss and goose step around the parade square, but an acknowledgement of German tank design history is not distasteful.

It's just surprising they'd want to reuse the name. I see nothing wrong with it, but the German government is pretty touchy about WW2.

​@@EllroyMcBongyour defeatist mindset is at it again hm?

@@jacqirius It seems to me that you don't know the meaning of the word "defeatist". Should you look it up, please also look up the term "Wehrboo". I'm fairly sure that you will read that word quite often in the future regarding you as a person.