If you like in-depth military history videos, consider supporting me on PayPal, Patreon or SubscribeStar or PayPal: paypal.me/mhvis --- patreon.com/mhv/ --- www.subscribestar.com/mhv

"So lately my content was a bit tank-heavy, so I thought I'll end the year with some heavy tanks." I love you so much, man :D

The 501st had the second lowest losses? That's good, they watched out for those wrist rockets.

Academic citations, critical approach to data, authentic sources. You surpass 99% of all pop-history content. If only more people took your approach...

The pointy end of the spear suffers the most damage. Combat loses of typewriters was pretty low.

Artillery General wanted more artillery. Who saw that coming...

"Using Tİgers as mine-clearing vehicles" What in da name of Guderian.....

Love when a German who speaks English actually sounds German 😂👌🏻

"War is a team effort" Tell that to my team in any fps!

In my youth i spent some time conducting interviews with world war 2 veterans for a military history society mainly British and Germans one interview with a British tank veteran (churchill gunner) told me all i needed to know about the effectiveness of the Tiger. He said as they advanced from Caen they were approaching a village twelve churchills and other assorted armoured\unarmoured vehicles in strung out column the first four tanks went in less then a minute with no one even knowing where the fire had come from over the course of the next half hour all churchills including his were knocked out and as he bailed out of his tank all he could see was burning tanks and vehicles. As he looked at a ridge to the side of the village three Tigers advanced from the woods then retreated with no damage and no losses the next day the British abandoned that avenue of advance moving the advance 12 miles away. Even at the age of 73 the look on his face as he talked about the attack was full of fear and he said if there were rumours of Tigers and later Tiger 2's his unit would wait for infantry or artillery to clear before advancing. Were they effective yes if in no other way then their psychological impact on both enemies and their own forces getting a boost from knowing they were near. It took sometime and a considerable amount of document digging but i found the after action report of the attack he described compiled by a colonel whose final recommendation was not to use British armour in area's with verified heavy tank battalions as the British at that time (September 1944) had no effective armoured counter to them. I also tried to interview a soldier who was at villers bocage but wasn't able to complete the interview as he became very emotional describing the desperation in trying to fight off the Tiger and failing. Whatever the material cost or effectiveness they left a lasting impression on any troops that faced fully operational and experienced crewed Tigers more then any other tank.

Jingle’s salt is highest quality salt. Solid choice.

Tank effectiveness is often thought of as how it performed one on one with lighter tanks such as the Sherman. -A nightmare scenario for almost any western front tank (save for the Firefly and Chaffee). Problem is, factors such as allied control of the Air, lack of fuel and difficulty of repair also figure into the Tiger's effectiveness. As one German ex-tanker told me (in 1982), "Its hard to boast of your tank's superiorty when youve been sitting by your [captured] broken tank for hours watching many thousands of American and British troops, tanks and planes rushing past you"

"Okay we need a plan to fight the Tiger tanks" "Okay, simple. We don't!" "What" "They're out of fuel, just go around them and let the artillery deal with them" "But that will destroy the French town" "Better that than our entire tank force"

Germany: *builds heaviest tanks in the 1940s world* Also Germany: "Wtf why cant we cross any bridges???"

A most thorough and contextual overview of the Tiger tanks effectiveness. Meanwhile the half hour "documentaries" continue to spew bullshit to the masses with alarming success. If there is any salt with me, it is that your see stuff has never killed the phoney docs.

Have you ever heard the legend of King Tiger the Heavy?

Tiger used: *Neutral Steer!* _It hurts itself in it's confusion!_

11:59 A R T I L L E R Y O N L Y

I once watched a great documentary which interviewed former tiger tank crews who fought in the Battle of Kursk, and obviously beyond - and they interviewed every member of the crew from the commander to the driver. Perhaps surprising was the former tank commanders somewhat scathing assessment of the tiger's Power to weight ratio - or Horsepower per tonne. He called the tiger a 'limp crow' on the battlefield due to the fact that it was seriously underpowered. He explained that the minimum requirement for a tank with good mobility was 14 horsepower per tonne. He recalled the tiger could only muster just over 10 hp/t and that this was a serious handicap especially on the Eastern front given the comparably much better power to weight ratio of the Soviet tanks. He said that only academics would record optimum high speeds of a Tiger I, King Tiger and other variants but, in reality, during training, crews were cautioned not to exceed a given speed or rpm.

The reason why you'd track the location of the Heavy Tank battalions was not due to their effectiveness. It was because they were specialized units controlled by higher headquarters. Thus, their deployment would give a clue about the higher headquarter's intent on fighting the next battle. The same would be true of certain heavy artillery or engineer units.

The artilery general has a very strong point actually :D At first, one thinks a Tiger is a terrible force to reckon with, surely something else would not match it... but putting myself in position of a tank commander, I dont think I would be excited to face the alternative of 20 tank killing cannons hidden all over the place :D

The only tank my grandfather mentioned by name were the tigers. He would not have confused it with other panzers. In one engagement he focused all of his guns,12-16, and effort of his unit, 1000+ men, on one visible muzzle brake of a supposed Tiger. The psychological impact is difficult to measure.

The first recording of the artillery only meme?

"how effective was the tiger tank really ?" French : *"A LOT"* British : "it was good" Italians : "MY PIZZA IS BETTER" Soviets : "behold my t-34 and my wall of men" Americans : "MY M4 SHERMANS MAKE THE LOUDEST SOUND , AND THAT SOUND IS THE SOUND OF *F R E E D O M* (and 50 tons of pure democracy)" German : "it is actualy not a tiger but a the Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausführung E"

“Preferably from jingles salt mine” lol I very much appreciate that reference

9:37 21 artillery pieces out of one Tiger worth of steel. What about the towing vehicles for those artillery? Manufacturing, manning, fueling, maintaining, supplying them? How would that effect the equation?

Recently found your channel while in search of real-life tank tactics to apply to my video games when I play them & I can't get enough of your content. Armor has always been fascinating to me & the Tiger series of tanks has always been the archetypical "Tank". When someone says tank I think of a Tiger. Your videos have truly helped me understand more about tanks, tactics & warfare in general. The fact that you have a German accent when speaking about Tigers is so cool for me. Feels like Model or Rommel talking to me about it; I don't mean any offense when making that comment as I know you're not a Nazi etc. Thank you so much for making these videos & all the best to you.

Wouldnt the well trained and seasoned crew be the highest priority asset in this case? So not loosing experienced crewmen by providing them with maximum firepower and protection, especially combined with fuel shortage and eventual inevitable numericap inferiority and fighting defensively would go over pure cash spent and metal used argument often used?

German engineers when making the tiger: “Hey fisher any ideas for our next tank” Fisher: *BOX*

*HE PRONOUNCED 'BIBLIOGRAPHY' RIGHT!!!*

Effective or not, they're badass af

A Scary piece of excellent German Engineering. While being English, I cannot help admiring such a formidable weapon. Respect.

Thanks for an informative video.One thing I have read with regards to potentially just spamming the front with Pz.IV in the latter years of the War is that apparently, even though the Pz.IV were relatively cheap in terms of _steel_ they did have excessive use of other materials that Germany could not source during the conflict - rubber for the suspension being a key component mentioned in the reading I did. Panzers III and IV, with their small roadwheels, demanded relatively decent rubber for the suspension, whereas the larger roadwheels of the Tiger and Panther could get along with home-grown substitutions without simply tearing the rubber off.It may be that the Tiger, expensive though it was, could at least be built, something that might not necessarily have actually been the case with the Pz.IV and III.

I think that an important consideration in the choice to make Tiger tanks may have been Germany's shortage of men. The Tiger tank in that regard has the important virtue of creating the greatest effect with the fewest men. So, the cost of creating and operating the tank had to be balanced against the cost of the men that would have been needed, and the higher attrition rate, with other methods.

After hearing over 40 years of debates about this subject, I would choose to be in a Tiger 1 for these reasons, excellent gun and optics, really thick armor. I would just make sure I had plenty of ammo and also know where the gasoline trucks were. The Pershing would be my second choice although it was late to the party. The German Mark 4 with the long 75 m/m gun is also to be considered. It's much shorter in height than the Sherman with a good gun. In regards to the Tiger 1, it could hit and destroy many allied tanks at a range of almost two miles, that's a LONG ways away. The scene in Fury where 3 Shermans took on a Tiger was the most stupid war scene I've ever seen in my life, all the Tiger crew had to do was traverse the turret. BANG,BANG, AND BANG.

Perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of the PzKpFw. V and VI was the naming. The names facilitate the perception of the tanks as fearsome, sentient beasts by both the germans and their enemies. Having something like that on your side, or on the other side, is absolutely going to affect your confidence and willingness to fight aggressively.

The Tiger had its flaws. But it was one of the best tanks for the roles it was designed for and that was to function as a line breaker and also could fill defensive roles during its down time. The problem was that German commanders wanted to use the tiger as a MBT and tried including it in almost any battle. That significantly reduced the tanks down time and the tiger just wasn't set up to do that. They should have just left that to the Panzer 4s. Also the Germans didn't have the logistics to support the Tiger in a MBT capacity. Limited parts and fuel supply is another reason why the tiger was better suited to be a line breaker because the idea is to use those types of tools only in your important battles. When the battle is over you send them to the rear to do your repairs and move them along the line saving fuel and taking it easy and preventing break downs. This would also make it logistically more viable cause you don't spam line breakers they are niche tools. But I think people were impressed with the initial results and went ham. The Tiger gets a bad rep cause it wasn't used properly. There is a tool for every job.

Thank you so much...Ive learned WAY more from this channel than just about any other WW2 YT channel in years. Its completely factual and in-depth, sites documented sources, and has very little uninformed conjecture or opinion...something that's sadly lacking on many channels.

Ahahhaaha I love the joke in beginning XD

“1 German tiger tank was worth 5 Sherman tanks yet the Americans always had 6”

My friend, keep the videos coming! Your research is beautiful and your delivery is great. And this can be a steady diet for those of us who study warfare. Keep up the good work, brother! 🤘

400k subs and still growing, up the 500k mate! ´´as always, sources are linked in the description´´... I wish more channels would do this. Been here since 20k, still love your work man! Keep it up.

Great analysis, and some very good perspectives on the Tiger tanks, often overlooked. Great stuff! :)

The next time I find myself in charge of a Schwerepanzerbatallion I'll be kicking myself for not having bookmarked this video.

Fantastic review!! I enjoyed this thoroughly. As much as I love the Tiger, and King Tiger tanks, the information that you lay on the table is far more factual than most of the videos you can find on UKposts. Well done!!

iSaludos desde Mexico! Just wanted to say how I appreciate your videos on both of your channels (VW enthusiast-got my own 68 beetle)

I mean, it's a heavy tank in large parts fighting medium tanks. While also fighting a defensive war, Of course it's gonna do well. if you start putting Panzer IV's en masse against entrenched pershings you'll see similar kill counts.

Brief but very high quality analysis and overview. Thank you for posting!

This doesn't seem to take into account that hundreds of Tigers never even reached operational units. Their deliveries were paralysed by the breakdown of German communications towards the end of the war. There were also numbers of Tigers never built due to disruption by Allied bombing.

To conclude the effectivness of Tiger tanks one needs to consider the general supply situation, crew training and the battlefield conditions. Three negative examples for this would be the 1./SS101 which lost all(?) it's King Tigers after refitting in late August/early September '44 in because it served as rear guard in the German retreat from France, when one machine was out of fuel or needed repairs it automatically was lost since there was no one left to help them. SS501 in the Ardennes lost somewhat around ~50% of its King Tigers in a few days because they had to fight in tank unsuitable terrain and got cut off behind enemy lines. And last but not least there is the story of a rookie Jagdtiger commander from the 512 who got himself and his whole crew killed in the Ruhr pocket. He drove his JT over an ridge, spotted Shermans and started to panic despite his 25cm/15cm front armor and ordered his driver to turn around instead of simply backing up. The Jagtiger was spotted and got destroyed, when a shell flew through the open rear door after it was turned around.

Excellent, multi-factor analysis. I get so annoyed by all of these 1-dimensional "which weapon was better head-to-head?" questions. As you mentioned, the larger operational context of the weapon matters as much as the individual comparison. Each nation involved in the war was highly motivated to find the most effective solutions for their unique combat needs and resource constraints, so second-guessing their decisions usually seems a bit silly to me. In the final analysis, there was no version of reality where the Axis powers could've won, but it is interesting to say "what if"?

Thank you for such well researched insight. It’s fascinating.

A superb analysis young man, absolutely brilliant

Oh God I have been watching your videos for an year and only now I understand that the U-Boat over 'liminal message' makes it say SUBliminal messages!!!

I am in command of 503 Schwere Panzerabteilung and don‘t know what to do. Thanks for giving me some advice

I feel that this is a very factual an honest evaluation of the tigers I & II.

Brilliant channel. Thank you for your diligence...

From Steven Zaloga's review of Sledgehammers: "The book's analyses are sometimes weakened by dependence on secondary sources. Since the author often lacks tangible evidence of the combat performance of the Tigers in roles other than tank-vs.-tank fighting, he relies on Tiger battalion kill claims against Allied tanks to assess their effectiveness. He accepts these at face value, stating that the evidence from British and U.S. sources backs the German claims and that Soviet unit histories lack tank loss data. The small number of instances where Tiger claims against British and American tank units can be verified does not warrant a blanket acceptance of such claims, especially given the widespread tendency of combat units to exaggerate aircraft and tank kills. The author seems unaware that the Wehrmacht's own intelligence service on the Eastern Front, Fremde Heere Ost, regularly discounted German army tank kill claims by thirty to fifty percent. The author's assertion about the lack of Soviet tank loss data is unfortunate as there is no evidence in the book that the author reads Russian, has read many of the Soviet tank unit histories, or has conducted any archival research on Russian issues. The appendix on Allied heavy tank doctrine is weak and unevenly researched."

lol the Jingles salt mines, nice one. On the issue of reliability, do we have any info on the ratio of combat losses to total losses of the Tiger in comparison with other German tanks, or tanks from other nations?

The note at 7:43 about the Heavy Tank battalions being the only units bellow Divisional size being posted on the Allied Intelligence maps should not be interpreted as an indication of incredible respect or fear of these formations. This should be interpreted as what it was, a distinctive unit possessed of unique equipment which by identifying and following one can gain Intelligence insight into enemy postures, movements, and intentions. By following the Tigers the Allied Intelligence people could potentially identify not just the Heavy Tank battalions themselves but their higher units as one did not go anywhere significant without the other.

Amazing. Great video. Well-researched. Well done.

It was a great tank - IF you could get it to the battlefield and IF you had enough of them in one place and IF it didn't break down when you got it there and IF you had fuel to keep it going. The capabilities of the tank were extraordinary. But so were its limitations in terms of the Germans' abilities to get enough of them onto the battlefield and keep them operational. Nothing exists in a vacuum.

M5A1 shoots tiger in the turret "TrAnSMiSsIoN bReAkS

*Destroying an entire convoy of enemy tanks* Tiger: "Pffft give me a challenge!" *Move 100m without breaking your transmission* Tiger: "tHaTs uNfAiR!!!"

you rock! It is so cool to hear a German talk about German WWII vintage tanks!! BTW, I am thinking about switching careers, and have been looking in the want for openings fur ein Schwere Panzer Abteilung commander....

No number-analysis would correctly measure the morale effect of seemingly unstoppable steel behemoths

5:17 - Interesting. Would be nice to see such numbers for the M4 sherman and the t-34

Fantastic content mate. Love your perspective on the German side, especially given you can read all of the historical reports!

I get the argument that the Tigers were very expensive, but at the same time, I'm wondering whether producing more tanks would have solved the problem, as they presumably would have required more fuel. That would support a quality over quantity argument. Is the fuel argument the idea behind the more Howitzers and anti-tank guns in 1943 argument? But at any rate, I'm glad they didn't go for the optimal solution.

I know you have talked about the issue with tipping points in the past but I sort of find it hard when trying to look at good or bad decisions on the strategic level when, especially by 1943-34 nothing matters because Germany could not complete its strategic/grand-strategic objectives. Without a meaningful objective I find it hard to make statements of effective or in-effective. The only one I can think of is stalling for time...to...what?

Germany did not have the industrial capacity to produce the Tigers effectively (or other tanks for that matter) but I think ultimately the Tiger I was the right choice when it came to evening out the odds. If you can't match them in quantity, figure out something else.

You produce the best military economics and technology / doctrine documentaries; beat hands down Discovery's ones. Thanks a million.

This is a very good channel up there with Mark Felton and the history guy in my opinion 👍🏻 keep up the interesting work and thank you.

You watch videos made by the Mighty Jingles? Well, he is a great man. This video shows why the Tiger I will always be my favorite tank of all time; it is a psychological weapon that scares the living soul out of people. Good video man.

I propose a new show called "Who Killed This Tank?" where a group of experts travel to a war zone to investigate the cause of death of each tank, and then find and track the killer, to give them a very prestigious and expensive medal. They soon find out their mission, noble as it might be, is not as straight forward as they assumed.

Two of my favorite models I built as a kid were 1/72nd Scale Panther and Tiger tanks. (I had better eyesight then!) The interleaved wheels were the biggest challenge: they looked great compared to those on my Stuart, Lee and Sherman, but what a pain.

Many tanks for the great content.

Very good job as usual. I wonder how the "effectiveness of the Tiger", when compared with combat loss ratios, accounts for Tigers destroyed by non tank to tank engagements. Specifically how to factor in the large number of tanks destroyed by aircraft and artillery during combat. The other thing to consider is the morale effect the Tiger had on both German and allied forces. My Father served in the 94th Infantry Division during WW 2 and always said that "every German tank looked like a Tiger when You were scared to death".

Excellent video. I first started playing World of Tanks a long time ago because I wanted to play the Tiger. Wonderful piece of machinery (however complicated) and a tough nut to crack. Thank you!

I love the visual arts and graphics so much !!!

I was looking into the interleaved wheels and there is documentation that says the german had a simple mud solution ( either it was spokes, or a scrapper) and it resolved this issue.

21 artillery and anti tank guns seems to be more useful than one tiger tank, but you can't make a breakthrough with only artillery guns. One has to wonder how many trucks, half tracks and artillery pieces the tigers had also destroyed. If you take all that into account, at least the tigers paid off materially.

One thing over looked, Amount and quality of personal. The Tiger and King Tiger gives a survival of crew benefit. This is one point the Israelis put in their tank design.

Always enjoy your vids. Even the ones i may disagree with. Keep up the great work.

I dont know what your credentials are, but you present a very concise set of facts in a short time and make it interesting. Keep up the amazing work! Ausgezeischnet.

That was brilliant. I shall now relay my new found knowledge to my nonplussed family at the dinner table.

Starting in mid 1941, Germany should have begun investing in Argentinian mail order brides. More or better tanks weren't going to solve the problem.

Another thing to consider is that a non cost effective but an overly combat effective unit can be a combat multiplier. Not only as a fear factor for the enemy, but also forcing the enemy to over dedicate or under dedicate resources to counteract a target can allow for the friendly forces to take advantage of the situation. This brings up a few additional questions to analyze: #1 Could the germans win with just Panzer 4's without innovating? #2 Was the long term plan to essentially use the tiger and king tiger as a combat capable prototype they intended to turn to mass production later if they had the time? #3 Would the situation of having a Panzer only force end up being a known capability/quantity that the allies could more easily counter strategically even if in greater number and cost effectiveness? #4 How many battles were not engaged because the allies knew they had no way or limited ways to deal with a Tiger? If battle was prevented just from the mere presence of tigers, then it wouldn't even be included in the statistics. We know in retrospect it may have been a potentially wrong move to start using tigers, but what were the thought processes of the Germans back then when it came to the subject? I suspect it may have been along the lines of innovation for the sake of innovation given the fact they tried to make the Maus tank rather than trying to fix the issues they were already having with cost, production, parts, and supply.

Lol, I started laughing immediately when you open up with “mere Kittens...” l You’re the best, keep it up!

The fear that every tank was a Tiger says a lot! It's reputation far exceeded it's numbers

Mission success rate seems like a rather flawed way to measure of effectiveness. If the missions are against overwhelming forces they will usually fail even if individual tanks are very effective.

I absolutely appreciate the level of precision that you put into your videos. It’s very German and I don’t mean that in a negative way. 👍

If you have watched “WWII Greatest Events In Color” Knowing you as I do, I’m sure you have. Unlike you, I do not have any expertise in Tank War-far nor do I desire too ( I’ll leave that up to yourself and other Tank enthusiasts ) the problem with Tigers as they mention in the Documentary. Are they simply didn’t have the replacement parts and or the Mechanics to fix 🔧 Tigers as they wore out & or broke down by either just normal wear & tear from driving them, and or damaged from Combat action... Your teaching methods are GREAT & have a sense of humor, on a dark subject, which I personally appreciate! Thank you

I still love this tank in Company of Heroes 2. Especially as the Oberkammando West

This comment section will be pure comedy gold.

Another factor to non-combat losses to be considered is 'crew experience'. Often quoted in the Ardennes offensive, for example an inexperienced driver on Tiger could certainly grind those gears

Fantastic content! Love your videos!

Thank you very much, as a cat person, i still value the Tigers for what they were, luxury weapons :D :D merry cristhmas and happy new year

Hm... if 1 HT scored on average above 5 kills then they were a worthy investment. It's oftentimes raised that Germans would be better off scrapping all heavy tanks and replacing them with mediums... but would they built 5 medium tanks instead of 1 heavy tank? Would they /really/? It doesn't add up resources-wise at all, which was their biggest issue, it might add up in terms of work-hours, but does it /really/? I think not. And manpower was something Germans weren't as short on as they were on resources. So overall German idea of investing in King Tigers and Tigers seems to be very well thought-out. And that's without going into morale impact, which was by far better for King Tigers than it would have ever been for medium tanks, even if there would be 5 or 10 times as many of them as there were King Tigers. Though Germany assaulting all fronts with artillery pieces alone would be quite an epic sight ;)

I love this channel. The analysis in each is well researched and as objective as one could hope. No “rah rah” cheerleading for this or that. It could almost be a Dutch channel. 😉