All books are 15 % OFF! Full catalogue: militaryhistorygroup.com » Tank Assault - Combat Manual of the Soviet Tank Forces 1944 - stm44.com » Stukabook - Doctrine of the German Dive-Bomber - stukabook.com » The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com » Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com » IS-2 Stalin's Warhammer - www.is-2tank.com » StuG: Ausbildung, Einsatz und Führung der StuG Batterie - stug-hdv.de » Achtung Panzer? Zur Panzerwaffe der Wehrmacht - panzerkonferenz.de

I wonder if those calls to fire on the move only refer to tank machine guns, since some other phrases explicitly call for cannon fire.

It must be remembered that this is a manual for an army almost constantly on the attack. The tactics given are designed to combat the German forces of the period, their particular tactics and doctrine and the strengths and weaknesses of equipment and logistics of that force.

Nice to see a visualized video where we have both organization diagrams and tactical diagrams!

Wow, such a coincidence. Just've watched the video about soviet rifle squad manual, and now there is a tanks tactics video posted. Weird to see comments written 5 days ago, while video was posted an hour ago

Firing on the move is not as crazy as it may seem. In Panzer Gunner by Bruno Friezen his panzer IVF2 company was hull down stationary and smaller number of T-34/85s rushed them. The Russians fired on the move and weaved somewhat. The Russians actually destroyed a German tank and several decoys before any German could hit them. The Germans finally won the contest but the Germans were impressed that the Russians could shoot and hit on the move.

I think one very possible reason for the Soviet Manual to actually call for firing on the move could be that ammo just wasn‘t as big of an issue for the Red Army as it was for the Germans, and they could afford to spend a few extra shells. I feel like for suppression purposes this should definitely still work, as long as a decent percentage of the shots actually hit *something* rather than just going overhead. But hitting the ground in front of or landmarks near the enemy positions, anything within 30-50 meters is probably gonna have plenty of suppressive effect. Especially since those tanks don‘t just have the cannons, but MGs as well, often more than one per tank. Chieftain once pointed out that one tank platoon already has the firepower similar to a whole battalion (?) of infantry. If I‘m sitting in my fighting position and *that* amount of ammo is being fired in my general direction by a couple of tanks, I‘m probably going to keep my head down, even if technically their chances of hitting me aren‘t even all that good. Although of course, the sheer volume is also going to play against me here: one shell fired on the move might have no chance of hitting me, but say, 10 of them, plus any number of MG-rounds are much more likely to. Plus if the tanks are moving, that also means they are moving towards me, which is also pretty intimidating for added suppressive value. Overall, compared to the sometimes endless artillery preparations performed before a major attack, spending a few tanks shells for suppression at relatively close range doesn‘t sound all that wasteful, as long as you‘re not running out of shells because you‘re Germany.

"And they agreed...about the optimism....not Lenin" Now I'd like to see people's thoughts on Lenin's ability to guide shells towards aircraft.

Im glad to see that you're getting into tactics, it's certainly interesting to get a grasp of how they were supposed to act

Thanks, I'll go try this on WarThunder right now

Very intersting Video. I need to get that book. Shrapnel shell against a plane from a tank? I didnt know Battlefield 1942 came out in 1942 :)

Super wonderful explanation. Thanks

Loving the new stuff!

Great video

This looks like a manual designed for tankers who have had limited training. Keeping in mind that a tanks lifetime on the Ostfront was measured in weeks, replacements were more important than in-depth training. Lastly, the fragmentation AA shot could be guided by the spirit of Comrade Trotsky, the founder of the Red Army! Да здравствует Четвертый Интернационал, товарищ! (Long Live the Fourth International, Comrade!)

I had never seen a tank strut, but then I saw your thumbnail. That T-34 has Russian Runway Model levels of attitude.

This is great unless there is already something like this it would be awesome to see similar videos made for the Americans and Germans if the information is available.

Regarding the book, what's the difference between the limited edition and the future regular edition? are there any plans for hardcover?

I guess that in Enveloping and Flanking maneuver, you should start with a frontal attack with Heavy Tanks to fix the position of the enemy, and then flanking with MBT at maximum speed...??

6:03 It sounds like you intend to post the enemy. The joys of English. :) "Envelope" means the container you put a letter in. "Envelop" is the tactical task. The publication is probably trying to provide an overview and principles to be used. Most tactical publications are not overly specific (e.g. "A support by fire position need to be effective", as opposed to "a support by fire position needs to be 75m from the enemy"). In this publication's context for example, a IS-2 Platoon's effective range would be much different to a T-34/76 Platoon's effective range. As to the diagram, the envelopment is usually selected when there is an obstacle on one flank (e.g. there maybe a river on the left that the enemy can be pinned against). Also it avoids the main strength of the position (out of the primary arc of the AT gun) and it allows the Company to attack in enfilade, where it can hit the right hand strong-point first and then move on the remaining strong-points on the left which are being suppressed by the fire support Platoon.

How much was this manual applied in practice and how much was simply teoreticaly and remains only on paper?

Does it say anything at all about using variants of armour piercing ammunition?

10:51 Perhaps they're trying to suppress the enemy rather than destroying them? And we all know that Soviet shells are guided by the directives from STAVKA.

MHV is that an AI gen'd thumbnail?.. im not disappointed its just... odd... looks like a kit bash of a T-34-85, Panther and IS-2 in such a way that if you focus on one area for too long it looks like a different tank altogether.

The vast majority of German diaries/reports I read talk only about Russians in frontal assault. My guess is that Russians, being less well equipped with radios, more complex manoevers were difficult to coordinate.

I am suspicious about the T34 shooting on the move. I wonder if they were trained to fire the MG on the move.

4-8 seconds stop to fire any kind of accurate shot seems very optimistic in several ways: -Most war time Soviet tanks had a turret far to the front, which made oscillation worse. -Overral poor visibility from Soviet tanks. At least late models had cupolas, but these were always as low as possible, making commader's work difficult. -The turret and gun controls were average at best. Interestingly Soviets rarely saved from electric turret drive, but these were so imprecise, unreliable and even hazardous that Americans recommended to take it off. Even today they seem almost obsessed about this. It's said their BMP crews were at least in the past trained to fire their ATGMs on the move. I have never seen that being done in real combat footage, but I have seen plenty of videos showing just how much those ATGMs swivel during flight.

It is more difficult to hit using HE. The shells are slower and they have no tracers.

Recently the Russians said that they are restarting the production of T-80s. It was said that they have 5000 T-80s of all types in reserves and I think 3500 were in service until...the early 2010s I think. It doesn't make sense. Why start production when you have thousands (they a couple of hundred of those tanks that were in reserves already but they still have thousands) in reserves. What happened to those tanks? I know that some were cannibalised for parts but starting production like you don't have more than just several hundred left is just weird.

Is achtung panzer in full german?

You mention a "bilingual" version, does this include the original Russian text?

11:00 Quite possibly the finest Austrian joke I have heard so far in 2023. ;-)

the palm tree have the same design as afrika korps logo

Does anyone know the russian name of this manual?

'Armoured personnel carriers'? What armoured personnel carriers? I didn't think the WW2 Russian army had any. And, as others have stated, manuals only take you so far. Disecting manuals can result in incorrect conclusions about the way troops actually fought. But this video is at least a useful start.

I can’t help it but I have to laugh a little every time I hear Bernie or someone from “his neck of the woods” say “wehicles” I’m sorry, I really am and don’t mean nothing by it, but I know I can’t be the only one 😁

jeez, that was a bit lite on content.

All tanks in a line Move forward

Can you make a video about the Panzergrenadiere Divisions of the Bundeswehr meanwhile the Cold war? I wanna try to use it in Hearts of Iron IV, Warnow and the Wargame trilogy

Carius said his tank shot down an aircraft, so you can always have hope! I read a German report on how to engage a T-34 with Panzer 3s; it simply said while one tank attacks the T-34 from the front, the other tanks in the platoon should try to attack from the enemy's left/right flank or rear! Rocket science, boys!

I mean... you could call them that.

It is possible that the Soviets relied more on information in manuals because there was less opportunity for new recruits to learn from veterans when they joined units, s the Soviets seemed to continually be raising new units while the Germans were feeding new recruits as replacements in existing formations. Does this make sense?

" and they agreed with the optimism, not Lenin." 😂😂😂

Is that thumbnail AI generated? It looks like there's 2 MG ports and a muzzle brake on the T-34-85 in it.

bruh

Some of these comments are hilarious.

Is there really nothing about supporting infantry? Are you sure this wasn't British doctrine?

danke für Ihre #Panzer Videospiele. I wonder if Ukraine order Israel is using these tactics. If not, how are they combating.

The spirit of comrade Lenin lives in us all.

The sovets……..

sooo the soviet aktually used ther tnaks as a kind of "close quarter" weapon?. That would explain why germany was much more efficient with its way fewer tanks. iirc germany used its tnaks as a kind of direct fie support suppresing and destorying targets with precision from a distance.

I can't believe I have to learn about military tactics for a videogame 😂🫥