PokeVideoPlayer v23.9-app.js-aug2025_
0143ab93_videojs8_1563605_YT_2d24ba15 licensed under gpl3-or-later
Views : 87,775
Genre: Entertainment
License: Standard YouTube License
Uploaded At 3 months ago ^^
warning: returnyoutubedislikes may not be accurate, this is just an estiment ehe :3
Rating : 4.927 (123/6,626 LTDR)
98.18% of the users lieked the video!!
1.82% of the users dislieked the video!!
User score: 97.27- Overwhelmingly Positive
RYD date created : 2025-07-14T16:57:32.240664Z
See in json
Top Comments of this video!! :3
Basics. Everyone compares the Sherman, a medium tank, to a frickin Tiger, a heavy tank. There is no comparison, because they are designed for different jobs. The Sherman was much more flexible and while it struggled to penetrate the front mantle of a Tiger, it was fast enough to drive around it and shoot it where it COULD be penetrated. You could also field four or five Shermans for the cost of one tiger. That's not just a "money" question, it's how much of your available resources do you put into building ONE tank. Add in the modularity of the Sherman and you have a platform that is ten times as effective as a single Tiger.
74 | 7
In an analysis by the US Army after Normandy, 56% of those penetrated by cannon brewed up in British service, 63% in US service. At this point, wet stowage was rare on US tanks and the ones the British for never had it. So about 60%. It rises to 80% including mines. About half of the fires were minor. The total rate for the Pz. IV? 80%. Tiger 80%. Panther 63%. The Sherman was average.
81 | 4
Seems like the stats show that on average ond crewman was lost per Sherman destroyed, where the comparable loss rate per tank for the T34 was four. The Chieftain did a series "my God the tank is on fire" that explored this. Those sprung hatches on the Sherman seem to have saved thousands of crewmen.
4 | 1
@mattrinck7503
3 months ago
"Kraut roast" sounds like something you have the neighbors over for in the backyard.
337 | 6