Military Tank Expert Rates 8 Tank Battles In Movies And TV | How Real Is It? | Insider
Armor officer and military tank historian Nicholas Moran rates eight tank battles in movies, such as "Saving Private Ryan" and "Fury," for realism.
Moran breaks down the accuracy of World War II tank history and battle tactics in "Kelly's Heroes" (1970), "Saving Private Ryan" (1998), and "Fury" (2014). He looks at the realism of features and capabilities of tanks used in "GoldenEye" (1995), "Fast & Furious 6" (2013), and "Batman Begins" (2005). He also breaks down the development of tanks from World War I to modern times in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" (1989) and "Courage Under Fire" (1996).
Moran is an armor officer on M1 Abrams tanks and M3 Bradleys, with combat deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is the in-house historian for the online game "World of Tanks," and he has a KZhead channel covering armored history.
You can follow Nicholas here:
/ thechieftainshatch
/ chieftain_armor
WATCH MORE HOW REAL IS IT VIDEOS:
Afghan War Veteran Rates 9 Afghanistan War Battles In Movies
• Afghan War Veteran Rat...
Urban-Warfare Expert Rates 11 Urban-Warfare Scenes In Movies And TV
• Urban-Warfare Expert R...
Military Experts Rate 70 Military Battles In Movies And TV
• Military Experts Rate ...
------------------------------------------------------
#TankBattles #HowRealIsIt #Insider
Insider is great journalism about what passionate people actually want to know. That’s everything from news to food, celebrity to science, politics to sports and all the rest. It’s smart. It’s fearless. It’s fun. We push the boundaries of digital storytelling. Our mission is to inform and inspire.
Subscribe to our channel and visit us at: www.insider.com
Insider on Facebook: / insider
Insider on Instagram: / insider
Insider on Twitter: / thisisinsider
Insider on Snapchat: / 4020934530
Movies Insider on Snapchat: / 9616609930
Insider on TikTok: / insider
Military Tank Expert Rates 8 Tank Battles In Movies And TV | How Real Is It? | Insider
His explanation of why tankers don't like driving through a building also explains a mystery of the King Tiger found in a basement.
Also a Panther on a man's basement (he also owned a 8.8 cm flak, a torpedo, and a V-1 flying bomb)
Do you mean the tank that was confiscated a few years ago in northern germany? That was a Panther not a King Tiger
I stand corrected. I am in the mist of building a Tamiya model kit for a King Tiger and I guess it "stuck" in my mind. Let me make it right: In 2015 in Heikendorf, Germany, a Panther tank and a stash of ammo that took 9 hours for the Germany authority to haul away was found in the basement of an 84 year old homeowner who was subsequently convicted and sentenced to 14 years (suspended) and fined 250,000 Euros (about $293,000 USD)
@@aslamnurfikri7640 I remember that, not going to lie, when i first heard that i laughed my head off. I mean, in what world would you expect to hear "a World War 2 Panther tank, along with a Flak 88, a Torpedo and a V1 Flying Bomb were found in a mans basement yesterday!" on the news!? So outlandish!
Killdozer was the first thing that came to my mind. Someone armored a big dozer and in the end his rampage of wrecking buildings was ended by a basement.
One of the better “expert rates” videos I’ve seen. As a former tanker, it’s cool seeing tanks getting some attention!
same, now im not a vet but I have driven a tracked vehicle an FV432 to be precise but idk if that would count me as a "Tanker" would it?
@@punisher3607 I mean. He's only rated one scene. But there's true to that. No one shoots the last tank first. You need to create a traffic jam. So first and last. In that order. Also going head on onto a tiger would've only resulted in death. There's been cases when a tiger or a panther would get a double digit amount of kills before getting into any real danger. And having to disengage.
@@5gvaccinator343 yeah it's pointless to shoot the tank in the rear first. Tiger would have shot fury first and then the movie would be over.
There was a really good one about armored fighting. I forget what museum the guy was from, but let's just say it was big, it was European, it was prestigious.
Especially with a reputable subject matter expert, this time, and not just some guy who did 5 years and got out.
I served with this man, he’s one of the best tankers I’d ever had the pleasure of gunning for. A lot of people don’t know but he was also part of the team that trained the cast of “Fury”. Salute to you Lt. Moran!
WOW!
How many third world colonized people did you murder?
@@arzhvr9259 Not as many as you’d think, but they all deserved it
On his video about the Abrams he said you guys used to listen to audio books inside the tank, during downtime. He also teared up a bit thinking about you guys
I sure wish I had cooler TCs. I was a tanker in 1st Cav for a bit but man I worked for a lot of awful people.
This guy was my commander for a time. Not only was he the best vehicle ID person I've ever seen, and not just for armor, he was a great commander and an upstanding individual who took care of his troops.
He seems like a good chap
"Unexpected Chieftain is the best Chieftain" Great guy, great channel, great knowledge. So glad to see him on this episode.
When he said he was a producer for world of tanks that’s where I knew this guy knew his things, didn’t care about the other stuff 💀.
His accent is super hard to figure out. Obvs Ireland somewhere, but with some Canadian?
@@James-fg8rf was in the US army
@@treborsirrah7916 aha interesting!! I was very wrong haha
@@James-fg8rf no, not wrong. he is from Ireland.
I could listen to this guy for hours. He does a great job of explaining while not being boring and monotone.
He has a ton of amazing stuff on youtube under The Chieftan. Everything you could ever want to know about tanks
Definitely check out his channel. His Q&As are great. Also there is a great interview with him on a Forgotten Weapons Q&A that I highly recommend.
@@wingracer1614 He's done two with Ian, if memory serves.
Trust an irishman to be a tank commander
Years of practice killing Soldiers with PowerPoint has perfected his ability to entertain. He actually makes you enjoy being lectured to death. It's a sign of a good leader.
This is why we need actual people who fought with tanks to design tanks in games.
squad is probably the most accurate and realistic tank battles we will get in video games.
Lol I remember a few cases when actual tankers were giving out classified information just so WoT could be more accurate
@@seregarublev8915 you mean war thunder right? Not world of tanks
War thunder
Or instead we can be more pragmatic and ask tank drivers (and other real specialists) to instruct the game designers on how their tools work exactly.
You could not had chosen a better expert for this video. Nicholas "Chieftain" Moran served in Desert Storm. What he didn't tell you was how close he came to getting kill. The doctrine of tank commander sticking his head out during battle comes with obvious risks and in his case an enemy rifle round struck the vision block of his cupola; another 2 inches higher and it probably would had hit him in the neck or head.
Scary but he does have a point that sometimes, you have no choice but to stick your head out to assess your surroundings. He isn't kidding about how blind you are sitting inside a tank. That's why if I was a commander, I'd send a tank with at least 20 foot soldiers armed with at least one TOW or Javelin launcher in case it's needed. But still, sometimes, the best solution against enemy tanks is to fight back with your own.
In the 04--05 OIF deployment I was on we were shot at once in a friendly fire incident (I was a tanker but we did a lot of missions in trucks) and a 240 round hit my passenger side window of the HMMWV I was driving where my TC was sitting. When we took it out there was like maybe a millimeter of polymer left before that bullet would have gone through. Not even the closest either of us came to death that year either. Definitely a lot closer to it than we ever came in the tanks, though.
Live by the sword, die by the sword
You're misremembering what he said in that Q/A where he told that story. While the rest is true, it happened during Operation Iraqi Freedom and not Desert Storm. In fact he wasn't even in the service in '91(he only started college in '92).
@@largol33t1 In the course of recent events, TOW and Javelin have proven to be a little less effective than they used to think 😂
Side note for 11:11 : While it's a Soviet tank that would ordinarily run on steel track, the tanks used for filming ran modified Chieftain track (which has rubber pads) to avoid damaging the roads in Saint Petersburg. They achieved the drifting shots by getting the track pads mostly worn down and coating the street with copious amounts of dish soap.
Why was t-34 not included here... Its one of THE BEST tank war movies of all time... I really really reeeealllyyy suggest to anyone reading this comment to check it out... Not just cuz of the tanks, but just for the sheer adrenaline and good storytelling that it has...
@@benjackson6260 From what I've seen, half the movie's run time is probably just slowed down scenes. Think I'll pass.
@@dapperfield595 That's a bot anyway.
@@kuddles29 Doubt it, probably just a spammer, unless you use the two terms synonymously which I have been seeing recently.
@@dapperfield595 Really guys, Bot, Spammer... To clarify my point of view in the calmest manner possible, I meant to refer the fight choreography and soundtracks of that movie... I admit that the story was a bit empty, but these are Tanks we are talking about, not Humvees... To make those scenes that much good need a lot of effort... So if u believe that storytelling is the only way a movie can be good then stop watching movies... Plus it's a Russian movie... Most of their movies are about Russian resolve and willpower and patriotism... So just take it for what it was... A popcorn tank action movie...
One of the best "expert videos" I've seen. This guy is not just very knowledgeable, but also a very good communicator, and even an entertaining and enjoyable person. I can easily imagine this guy being loved at his job.
m8 he just gave the totally illogical Fury scene 9/10... :DD if this is one of the best then Im scared how bad the other "expert videos" are..
@@MisoElEven I'm guessing you missed the part where he said the movie misses on the technical stuff but captures the tanker's experience very well. Clearly the scene wasn't drawn up with the tactical expertise of Lieutenant Colonel Obvious (the guy points out the tactical errors himself), but from a tanker's perspective it's gripping; the movie is centered around the experience of being in the tank with the men. This is why hollywood makes military movies aimed at a general audience and not to stroke the ego of milsim gamers who think they know everything :)
@@MisoElEven Very well sad. He might be a tank driver or whatever he was but giving fury 9/10 ...
yup, 20 mins just flew by then. fascinating. very good job
@@cristinavuscan5610 he was a tank commander and Bradley commander and is currently a Lt. Colonel in the national guard. He has said before In some of his long video presentations how the 76’s could have easily shot the tiger from the road and all the tactical mistakes. Based on the human experience though he feels it is genuinely true and realistic.
I agree with most of what he said. I am a veteran of the Gulf War 3rd Armored Division. It is very rare that I find concensus with these types of "expert" videos but this guy was spot on. Good job.
Lt Col Moran also served in the gulf war, Which unit I do not know. That might be why you find yourself in agreement with him.
He did not serve in the Gulf War. He did however was deployed to Iraq in the early 2000s and also did a tour in Afghanistan.@@lewisgann280
Good to see some fellow vets! I played Battlefield 3, and this guy is pretty accurate
@@CrowAndRedStringlol
Ok@@lewisgann280
Those discussing “Fury,” keep in mind the The Tank museum at Bovington didn’t want them turning tiger131(tiger used in it) or doing any maneuvers beyond forward and back. Obviously tactics used are still skeptical but it is a movie and no one wants to see the protagonist die an hour into the film. I think it’s a pleasure to see the only running tiger tank remaining move under its own power so I think it gets a pass.
As a former Ordnance officer who only served in heavy-mech units, I really appreciated this list. All the while I was thinking, "He can't POSSIBLY rate these and not mention 'The Beast'!" That movie is amazing for the details, as they used real T-55s and used water-filled casings to simulate the HE rounds, so the guns recoiled as they would with live rounds, all that water made steam and the dust around the area, coupled with perfectly-timed ground effects had led many to think they used live ammo in the film
He mentioned it at the end! He said it was one of his favorites
Yeah I have this movie at home not many people know about it. It was sick when they ran over that guy then later found his hand in the track
Recoil is something I don’t see in many films I watch
In The Beast it was a T62, not a T55/54.
"If you run out of fuel, you become a strongpoint. If you run out of ammo, you become a pillbox. If you run out of luck, you become a hero."
I love the Chieftain! Can't get any more expert than him on tank matter.
Oh yes, David Fletcher (MBE). I'll listen to that old man talk about all things armoured all day long.
Or boring lol
We need the 2hr Chieftain cut
@@velocity790 Fletcher is old.
@@HiyoruMikiyazoya k
"Kelley's Heros" has been one of my favorites since I was a kid and to hear an expert say "Every Tanker I know wants to be Oddball" brings a smile and a tear! Thanks!
Disappointed to hear no such thing as a paint tank shell......yet.
This guy knows his stuff. I'm a retired history teacher and I learned a ton. Great video
Mr. Moran is a retired tanker so he is also speaking from experience. I'm glad he was asked to comment on this video, he was an excellent choice.
Except for that Fury one, in that case, in RL Fury would have been the first tank dead, because its the biggest threat, and it was at the front of the collum.
@@erika_itsumi5141 You`re saying that the actual experinced tank expert is wrong? Even when he says that either taking out the first or last tank is classic?
@@valkyria20chronicles Not wrong, but it's definitely better to shoot the Front of the Convoy rather than the rear. Think about it: Shoot the rear? The rest can just floor it and get away. Shoot the front? They'll need time to switch gears to reverse. Shoot the front to stop the convoy, then shoot the rear to prevent their reversal, and then pick off the one that is a bigger threat (Which in this case is the Shermans with the 76s) before moving on to lower threats
Love this guy! Roofs are not "usually" designed to hold 40 ton tanks. This implies that there are roofs designed to hold tanks.
The old Fiat building in Turin, Italy with the test track on top might possibly manage it.
im using my special build tankramp to park my tank on my roof.
Well there are roofs designed to hold choppers and other aircraft
Public buildings like supermarkets are usually obligated to have a security factor of 7. So if they have a need to accommodate a 6 ton vehicle for some reason, they might be able to hold a 40 ton tank.
@@RyanVR7 choppers don’t usually way 40 tons or more though.
I love how accurate his interpretation of Batman's Tumbler was. He says it would only protect from small caliber rounds and something like a rocket propelled grenade would do serious damage. That is exactly what we see destroy the tumbler in The Dark Knight. The Joker uses an RPG in an attempt to kill Harvey Dent and takes out the tumbler in the process.
Wow, nice catch.
Also when Fox describes it's specs to Wayne he describes it as a prototype reconnaissance vehicle so it's exactly what he described here.
more proof that joker was possibly ex-military
@@fateburn9019 actually Joker wasn't aiming at the tumbler, he was aiming at the police van, so Batman tried to protect it with his tumbler
@@sajjadhossain5277 RPG was going to get that too.
As an infantryman who was licensed to drive every vehicle I was allowed (including tanks), I can appreciate how uncomfortable some of these scenes make the crew look. I didn't mind being a gunner, but absolutely hated driving them, mainly because I was 6'0 and 220 pds. I'm also glad he mentioned how slow tanks accelerate and move, I hated the tank scene in fast 6 for the same reasons he mentioned.
The tank scene in Fast 6 reminded me a lot of GTA V, same sort of physics, same sort of capability. :D
I'll be honest I loved it. Completely unrealistic but if you go into a movie like that with all expectations of reality suspended then you can still be entertained.
@@Generalscorpio Agreed. Same reason I enjoyed battleship (no way a Iowa can turn like that), the transformers series (first couple at least) and even get a chuckle at the Girls Und Panzer anime series (tanks can't do that but even they get some historical elements correct).
@@TheDrew2022 The transformers series was good for the first three and Bumblebee was decent, Age of Extinction and Last Knight were boring and felt like the same ending. Battleship, loved it. This is also why Die Hard 4 is my favourite Die Hard, it's daft but that's why you watch it.
touch grass LOL
I would imagine the 'head out' philosophy would also be influenced by the lack of the 4th crewman in Warsaw pact tanks that have autoloaders. Makes your tank commander a much more valuable kill because you're particularly neutered with a 2 man crew.
Make sensw thoufh we need more observation about soviet school of though are originated from this condition
Autoloader has no relation to this, 2 man crew in T-72 works just the same as a 3 man crew in a T-55. "Button up" is because Soviets had 100x times more experience with tanking and combined arms in WW2, which also includes artillery support raining fire on top of friendly tanks, and also expectation of NBC environment.
@@ConserpovI find it incredibly hard to believe losing your TC in a Soviet tank to be so nonchalant the gunner now has to do two jobs and the divers lost his eyes 😂
@@razalfraz6618 How exactly this is supposed to be different from any other tank?
@@razalfraz6618 From what I've read (SOVIET TANK COMPANY TACTICS, released 1979, declassified), there was no cross training, so now the gunner would be decentralised and relegated to rearline of the battle formation
We definitely need a part two. Bring the chieftain back with more tank scenes.
Have him watch Girls und Panzer. Edit: Have remembered that he is a military advisor on the show. But still want it.
especially "Tank"
Would love to see him react to any of the scenes from T34; loved that movie, unexpectedly
And the tank scene from Stalingrad (1993) too!
@@totallynotminx4682 thats the movie i first thought of when i saw the title
"The Beast" is actually the most compelling, down-to-earth tank movie I've watched. I'm not using a term "realistic" because I don't have a personal experience of being a tank crew member. Cheers to the Chieftain!
The 1st movie that came to mind.
why is it?
Great movie but also quite brutal and depressing at times. Of course that's appropriate for a movie about the Soviet war in Afghanistan but still something I personally can only watch on rare occasions.
Saw it while scanning for channels on cable tv. Sadly I didn't know the title at first and had to search for it years later.
Yea, I really liked that one too.
First time I saw GoldenEye, I was laughing joyously thru the whole tank chase - it was the funniest thing I’d seen in a Bond flick in a LONG time. Martin Campbell and the writers obviously went for the humor in that chase and it worked brilliantly.
The thing with the Bond movies is that they rely heavily upon Artistic Licence and Suspension Of Disbelief. Sprinkled liberally with Complete Fantasy, tongue firmly in cheek. They're not intended to withstand deep factual scrutiny. If the viewer is happy to accept the premises, then the movie will be a pretty wild ride and immensely entertaining. The tank chase is a firm fave with me. I also think you've identified that humour that often gets inserted into the chase scenes in Bond movies. It's kinda their thing. But there are serious car chase scenes, too. OHMSS, when the bride gets topped in a drive-by, say.
Pierce Brosnan was the best bond. Everything about Goldeneye just worked. The Best Bond Movie and best Video Game.
@@justinlast2lastharder749He was very good as Bond, but - like all of them - he had his time. Daniel Craig really moved things on with his version of the role, and that's kinda how it's meant to be in that franchise. Both he and PB had a damn good run in the role. As did the various actos in the M and Q and villain roles. The introduction of new actors is one of the things that keeps this film series working so well. It's an evolution within the framework of essentially limited plot structure. options Hard to pick out a "best" from these movies, because each one is so good in its own way, but it's defo ok to have favourites.
One thing on Fury: I absolutely understand why Lt. Moran gave it a 9/10; he’s rating it purely on “could it happen.” And he’s 100% spot on with that rating. But an important thing to note is that if you were rating on “would it happen” it would score a fair bit lower. 1) German tank doctrine would have the tiger shoot the head of the formation, more disruptive and guaranteed to slow down the column. 2) unless the tiger TC was a novice, they would have identified and targeted the Shermans with the longer 76mm guns. As the Lt. mentioned, they’re the one’s capable of engaging a Tiger at range. 3) Again, unless the Tiger’s TC was a novice, they would have stayed in cover. They have a great firing position, a gun with a significant advantage at range against the early Sherman’s with 75mm guns, and great frontal armor that should protect them from anything a 75mm gun could throw at them. They have absolutely no reason to throw all of those advantages away by closing into a knife fight and exposing their side and rear armor.
The "Tiger would have stayed in cover" is one of those several nitpicks at Fury which are being repeated over and over again. Just why? Am I the only who's seeing the Tiger getting completely blinded by the smoke shell from Brad Pitt's Sherman?
@@jackiemortes it was sitting in a hedgerow, when people say “stay in cover” they (or at least I) don’t mean be completely still, they mean don’t leave the long line of soft-cover, and especially don’t close the distance when your biggest advantage is your main gun’s immense range and you’re facing multiple enemies that are themselves trying to close the distance and surround you. And even humoring that they couldn’t shift to a different point of cover: why did they not just push past the smoke and then fire from there? There was just absolutely no reason to throw away the range advantage in a tank who’s biggest advantages come from range.
@@jackiemortes Think of it as this, the Tiger is a sniper rifle, the shermans are marksman rifles. Both are used for longer ranges than typical fire arms but the sniper rifle just does it much better. So why bother closing the distance where a marksman rifle has a better chance of hitting you? (Correct me if I am wrong for those people who actually know their guns)
One of my favorite bits of trivia about Kelly's Heroes is about the attack on the town. Someone walked the town and realized that if you were a small squad with a tank, you would attack the German garrison exactly the way it's shown in the movie. The filmmakers didn't just pick pretty angles, they thought about what they were doing.
The platoon of infantry and that Tiger platoon DESERVED to get decimated. Think about it. There's a major battle raging, and by then, the bridge that Bellamy supervised the building of was finished...just in time for General Colt to arrive, congratulate him, and unknowingly screw him out of his perceived share of the gold. So the unit (division? Appropriate for a Major General, or Corps, never mentioned, or ARMY?), finally able to break through the German lines, is on its way to Clermont, which just a few days before was some THIRTY miles (about 50 km) behind the front! At least that Tiger platoon should be on the alert, which is what "Cowboy" (Jeff Morris) thinks they're doing ("It looks like they're getting ready for some 'heavy-duty' action!") and they couldn't post one lousy sentry post with a machine gun on the road leading into town? Ridiculous. Oddball is almost right, they can't just sneak in on the Tigers, but not because they'd hear the Sherman's "Detroit motor", but because any commander with a lick of sense would at least post a sentry, especially since there's a major battle coming their way! And yes, though the Tiger platoon is assigned to protect that bank, w/o necessarily knowing its contents, certainly once they had word of a big fight going on and heading their way, they'd prepare to go into action! That's exactly what Tigers were there for!
It's also interesting to think about a lot of the guys on the film crew etc were probably WW2 vets..and in likelihood did this for real...
@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ "Repent to the Lord of light Lucifer, the only salvation! Forsake the false genocidal God Yahweh, and his wicked messenger Jehud." My grandma
@@apgmk1970 Lucifer wasn't kicked out of heaven, he left of his own free will, because god is not all good, but quite evil indeed.
Although the Tigers would have been positioned OUTSIDE of the town, on the outskirts. Not in the centre of town.
I'm so happy to see Nicolas on a show like this! The Chieftain has always been terrific in all of the "Inside the Hatch" videos!
The Beast is a extremely underrated movie of the 80ties.. Can only recommend to watch, the cast, the technique and the atmosphere are fantastic.. Very strange they did not include it in the list that he commented
It's been ages since I saw it, did they include any tank combat of note? Recommended movie though.
80's
@@Ascending11 grammar-nazi?
The Beast show the issue with a lot of Soviet (and now Russian) equipment. A lot of stuff are just alcohol which the crew will just drink. The driver of that tank literally drank the brake fluid (which is unadulterated vodka).
@@dyingearth and when the gun didn't fire and they were afraid it would explode! The Beast was a Good movie.
Love seeing Lt Moran’s wise words being enjoyed by so many people who wouldn’t usually be into tanks!
My grandfather was a tank commander in the third armored division during ww2. Appreciate all the info here, also tank crews dont get enough credit for being elite mechanics. By the end of the war my grandad prob could've built a tank from spare parts
Recommend the book "Spearhead: An American Tank Gunner, His Enemy, and a Collision of Lives in World War II" (2020), by Adam Makos, if you're interested in a biography about a tanker in the 3rd Armored. It was a very good read/listen.
@@MrDarrylR yeah thats a great book
I think alot of people could build half a tank before they joined the army and a complete tank after the war during WWII
American tank crews were renowned for knowing how to fix their tanks and get them running again. Your grandpa probably had done some work on the old Model T back home. If the Sherman broke down, he knew how to change the spark plugs, or switch parts. The average German or Russian crew had no idea how to repair their Panther or T-34, so they'd just abandon it and start walking.
@@PolarizedMechs To be completely honest though, the issues that popped up with the Panther and the T-34 weren't usually of the field-reparable type. You *might* rig a way around a broken gearset somehow (doubtful) but at the biggest jump on T-34 production the engine plant was "cheating" by assembling engines with rough machined cylinders and harder tight-gapped rings to skip most of the honing step. After the first hard start it would "self hone" while running, which "worked" but if you had to get further than 500 miles you were absolutely hosed because that 'self honing' feature never really stopped eating the cylinder away. You were also taking a gambit whether or not the oiling system would catch all the particles before the bearing surfaces adopted them as forever pets and chewed up cranks/cams/pumps.
When the Insider asks you to host 1 of their "How Real is It?" video, you know you've made it in that field. Well deserved for The Chieftain!
No, when The Chieftain agrees to host one of YOUR videos.... then you know you're being taken seriously ;)
@@f500raptor I rate your perspective a 10/10, well done sir! 8^D
I would have said "When the Insider asks the Chieftain to host a "How Real is it?" video about tanks, you know they made the right choice." . Either will do.
One of the best expert that has been on this show. He knows all there is to know about anything on tracks.
The concept of "mission command" that he discusses when looking at Fury actually goes back at least as far as Nelson if not further. Between battles Nelson would routinely brief his Commanders and Captains on what his overall plan was in any possible upcoming battle, but he also gave them the room to take initiative. This was because he trusted them to see things that he couldn't, in the midst of a 19th century naval battle there was usually a lot of smoke and signaling between ships was a non-starter so if an individual captain saw an opening or opportunity, it was perfectly acceptable for him to take it without asking for orders.
A small detail from that Kelly’s Hero’s scene is when the Tiger tank traverses the turret, the engine could be heard revving. The Tiger turret was was hydraulic operated which was powered by a mechanical drive from the engine. Increasing the engine RPM would allow for hydraulic pump to increase speed allowing the turret to traverse quicker.
also to mention, the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes isn't an actual Tiger I, it's actually a Soviet T-34 that was mocked up to resemble the Tiger I, the Tiger in the movie Saving Private Ryan is also a T-34. And as you might know, the only movie that actually featured an actual Tiger I was Fury and the Tiger tank in the movie is the World Famous Tiger 131 that was caputered intact by the British in Tunisia 1942. There's also another Functional Tiger I (mid production) that was recently restored and is located in Australia.
@@evilfingers4302 If it's the one from the museum in Cairns, it has no functionality at all. Not that they don't want it running, but it will be some more years yet.
@@thoughtengine Tiger 131 is in Bovington Tank Museum. In Dorset, Great Britain
@@ufoash440 Yes, it is. It's also not the vehicle in question, which was mentioned in Evil Fingers' LAST paragraph and is definitely NOT Tiger 131, which is completely irrelevant.
Thata awesome
The transition from Fury to FAST 9 is equal to going from "understanding the experience of being a tank crewman" to "tanks don't go from 0 to 60 just like that" LMAO .. that was brilliant
None of the F&F films should be included in a How Real Is It vid for any reason. They are dumb special effects movies that all defy physics and plausibility. I can see including them in a How Fake Is It series, however
They do, when they roll with me.
Why was t-34 not included here... Its one of THE BEST tank war movies of all time... I really really reeeealllyyy suggest to anyone reading this comment to check it out... Not just cuz of the tanks, but just for the sheer adrenaline and good storytelling that it has...
but he also said that it was a futuristic tank, in my opinion he did give it abit of a too low score for just windows and speed
I feel the need to not only like this video but to like everyone's comment alongside it. This is really the most explanative, reasonable and rational analysis I have ever watched on this channel. No sentimental rating and judgement from the him and he really is a good documentary narrator and historian. I love him!
The Tiger Tank in Saving P Ryan was actually a T-34 dressed up as a tiger. You can clearly tell from the tracks and wheels.
"Roofs are not usually designed to hold armored vehicles on top of them" This guy is great.
He has a way with words
You should see his T shirts. Significant Emotional Event being a favorite of mine.
At the beginning of "Kelly's Heroes", when Oddball is introducing his tanks to Kelly,he actually mentions they made their own munitions. Something along the lines of "It's like we are painting something big time and that scares the enemy". I must have seen that movie a dozen times easily.
i don't really understand the point of the paint rounds. why did he do that? obviously i have not seen the movie. lol
This guy is so interesting and such a good communicator. I'd love to chat to him for hours about tanks. I'm not sure how can be so seemingly down to earth when you've fought in conflicts.
His channel name is The Chieftain. He’s a great narrator and is really good at presenting his points. I HIGHLY recommend watching his videos.
Always a good time with Nicholas Moran talking about tanks.
I’m very glad you brought up courage under fire. Fun fact About that film: the film script was sent to the Hollywood liaison for the pentagon to try and get M-1 Abrams tanks budgeted into the film by the U.S. Military. It was denied. Because in the script, one of the main narratives is blue on blue or friendly fire incidents. The military and the government REALLY goes above and beyond to keep fratricidal incidents from being talked about or portrayed to civilians. Because of one simple reason: it’s bad for recruiting. It makes them look bad. That film, in my opinion, is one of the better war films out there. It really shows some of the actual ways the military and government tries to cover up incidents like that, and the ways in which such awful events can effect those involved. I would know. I was a Bradley crew member in the first two years of the Iraq war, and I witnessed blue on blue incidents. They are very sensitive subjects for the powers that be.
While the movie has its schmaltz, I adore it. The performances are great and even though I knew Meg Ryan's character wasn't getting out of it alive, I was always rooting for her in the flashbacks. For all the Pentagon's reluctance (and the less savory elements shown), the film presents a fine picture of military honour, exemplified by both of the protagonists. And the blue on blue incident is, of course, gut-wrenching. Denzel was typically stoic yet emotive. Aside from THE MIGHTY QUINN*, I can't think of a performance of his I didn't enjoy. ___ * As a Jamaican, I have ... issues with his accent.
@@AngeloBarovierSD Jamaican seems like one of those accents that you think could be very easy to imitate but is actually incredibly hard to get right.
@@sirapple589 True! I think because it's so pronounced and the dialectal aspects are colorful, people believe it's easy to mimic. Like Irish. And, for such a small island (and like the Irish), we have variation of accent and diction within the nation. From the newscaster British/Jamaican to the deep country patois to the mixed accents from international cultural pockets, there's a wide variety. I mention Ireland because there's a strange and wonderful kinship between Jamaicans and Irish throughout the world. Plus, there's a weird similarity in some of our cadences and accents. If fact, there's a famous interview of an Irish Olympian who sounds more Jamaican than Denzel did! Anyway, sometimes people get it right. Sometimes they don't.
I hated the blue on blue scene .. the TC is screaming at the Gunner to ID the target. That .. is the responsibility of the TC .. NOT THE DAMN GUNNER when said gunner is unable to ID.
Impressive that they didn't just take the Marvel route and change the script to get that sweet sweet govt assistance!
"Tankers hate going through buildings because of one word, basements." *Killdozer relates that*
"This vechicle is probably not gonna stop a rpg." As proven in the second movie when Joker shot it with one and Batman had to bail out.
My two favourite tank movies are both comedies and both star the same type of tank. They are Kelly's Heroes which you have already covered and "Tank" with James Garner. My father drove tanks during WWII, starting with the Sherman and then changed to the Cromwell, the version that persuaded the enemy infantry to surrender just by revving the engine.
“Ok so oddball has fired a paint round such things do not exist but oddball is oddball” hands down the funniest line in the entire video!
@weibo coiu He has a KZhead channel called "The Chieftain"
VERY surprised by the positive review he gave the Tiger Battle from Fury, even though he does point out multiple flaws in that scene. I've seen so many videos of people just ripping that scene to shreds in terms of its inaccuracies.
I kinda think his score was a bit influenced by the film overall, more than that particular scene. Specifically that the film nailed the experience of being a tank soldier. Alternatively, as he pointed out, the Germans did have the whole 'Auftragstaktik' thing. And I guess that just because the local commander had the authority to make the call, it didn't mean it he would make the 'right' call. So you could give the film a bit of slack form that perspective...
Fury was fantastic almost the entire time. The battle at the end became ridiculous cartoon foolishness, yes, totally inaccurate but fun if you're willing to accept it. And I think it is easier to accept it because up until that point, the grit, emotional energy, realism, and intensity was unbelievably strong. And if anything, the moment when Shia's character realizes they're going to stay and fight is so incredibly well acted and emotional that it is basically the climax of the entire movie. Everything after that is just war movie fun.
Even still a 9 is too much. There's a shot were the tiger lands a shoot on Brad Pitt's tank after it came out of hiding (meaning it was very very close from a tank perspective) and it ricochets because the tank has some wood on the side. Also knife fights, as he mentioned, were rate to say the least. If we're being generous, I'll give it a 6 at best cause it does show what's like to be in a tank crew, you could say since it's the end of the war, the tiger crew was inexperienced and don't know what they're doing for that matter. Still a 9 is too much. That was bias on his part
Biggest issue with that fight is the Tiger stupidly giving up it's advantages of range and concealment. He could have taken out all of the Shermans by staying where he was, strongest armour facing the enemy.
I downvoted him for this and did not watch the rest. This was so super unrealistic. Most of the movie was a fantasy. In fact its hard to think of any US made WWII movie that is good or even passable, most are uter trash - similar to Soviet / Russian movies but on higher budget.
Love listening to the people who love what they do and are experts in that field.
I loved "The Beast". It was an HBO Movie, not as popular but it is one of my favorites. Really drove home how vulnerable tanks were when they were by themselves without help
If I remember correctly, they put soap and water on the road in Goldeneye, so it would be easier to make the tank drift. Also the real driver is sitting in the tank and looking through cameras at the road. He's on the left side, while Pierce Brosnan is just standing on the right side, so he can be seen clearly. It's pretty obvious, when you look at any other T-55, where the driver is on the left side.
they had to replace the Russian tank tracks with British Chieftain rubber pad tracks because the city wouldn't let them drive a steel tracked tank on their streets!
@@andreww2098 Makes sense. You would have to repair the road after filming otherwise and that would be expensive.
Sounds a lot like what they did during the 1956 invasion of Hungary . Put soap down a street and laughed as the Soviet tanks slid around.
Still, it's doable. There is around a video of a russian T80 in Ukraine (Mariupol?) drifting in doughnuts on standard steel tracks.
@@andreww2098 - That whole sequence was filmed in Pinewood studio. All the roads, the buildings, the river was all fabricated.
In Oddball's defense, I never had a Tactical Jukebox (Loudspeaker) on my Bradley in country, but when we ran CET (Convoy Escort Teams) in MRAPs, I ***DID*** have one on my Caiman+. We played Low Rider by War when entered the ECP, the Imperial March when we left it. And Michael Jackson whenever we passed a checkpoint on the MSR's. If an Iraqi Army trooper manning the point didn't automatically get up and dance to Mike, we knew he was up to no good. They LOVE Michael Jackson. They can't speak English, but know every word he ever sang by heart.
Fell in love with tanks back in the 70s when I was young. First tank was a Sherman. Love the later M-4s. Wider tracks, flash suppressors. Chieftain rocks. KELLEY'S HEROS. Coolest war movie ever. Thanks guys!😎😎😎
I met this guy once years ago when he was going around to different cities to meet up with players that played World of Tanks. Of which I played avidly years ago, and insta-clicked when I saw him on the thumbnail. "Meet the Chieftain" on September 27th, 2013 for me. Every bit as cool as he is here. Gave out prizes for questions he asked and we answered correctly. I got a mousepad (which I still use) by naming a tier II German tank he asked for lol. Was at a bar called Bohemian Brewery, UT. Me and my buddies who went with me had to be chaperoned by my parents cuz we were underage haha. Plenty of us showed up, was a good time, but...many were parked where they shouldn't have been. That day, the tank didnt win. It was the tow truck lol.
Given how well known the Chieftain's explanation style is online, and how in depth he goes with his answers this actually serves as a really great way to gauge the editorial style of Insider itself, especially given that most of these topics he has previously given full answers to. In a few cases, as I imagine is pretty typical of most of these you do, it seems as though you have cut what was actually the most important part of the answer out
I agree, would not mind a few extra minutes of video for more details, as that's the premise of the video right? A guy explaining in detail with his knowledge, why cut his explanation off.
@GonTar TC You've missed the premise. The premise of this video is *get views from people who aren't that into tanks and won't know what's been left out.* If they kept in all that stuff you and the person you replied to would be willing to watch, normies say "2 hour video? #### no!" and this video has a view count in the low thousands 10 years later instead of being over 1 million views in 3 days.
@@GonTar_X, I agree with I Grim. However, what _exactly_ is the most important part of the answer, that they left out? Are you able to explain to everyone, or are you going to continue to be as vague as the OP?
The main problem with the tiger scene in fury is that decision making. Although independent thinking was encouraged in the German army, the choice here to take the tiger out of cover and engage on the move is a miserable decision on the commanders behalf. The tiger had no gyroscopic turret so would be very inaccurate whilst moving. He also has the ability to kill all of those Shermans through their front armour at that range and can’t even be sure they know his exact position. Essentially, the commander is a tool.
Yeah exactly. These are late-war Shermans (the movie is set in April 1945 -- probably a month or less before VE Day) engaging a lone, 1941-era tank. The Tiger was old by this point especially compared to the E8 Sherman.
BigMikeMcBastard, That Tiger is a 1943 production tank, not 1941. It still had superior armour and gun to the Easy Eight Sherman. Without HVAP (rare, and not readily replaced in US 2nd Armored Division after Operation Grenade in March 1945), its going to have big problems getting through the front of a Tiger.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Actually not true, HVAP helped but it was in no sense actually necessary. The 76mm M1A2 gun mounted on Fury, which was shown to be an M4A3E8 "Easy Eight" as aforementioned, could frontally penetrate the Tiger 1's upper glacis at about 800m with standard AP and roughly out to 1,400m with HVAP (or APCR, they're the same thing with a different name). At the range shown Fury would never have bounced a shell against that Tiger 1. But similarly that Tiger 1 definitely wouldn't have bounced a shell off of Fury either like it happened in the movie. The M4A3E8 and Tiger 1 had very similar frontal armor when discussing their frontal hull. The Tiger had a flat 104mm thick plate with minimal sloping. The M4A3E8 had a 63.5mm plate with severe sloping to the effectiveness of 92-95mm. This meant in reality the hull of the Tiger 1 would be practically vulnerable at nearly any range the M4A3E8s would be. The biggest problem for American tanks in the Second World War was never their armor because up until Panthers and Tiger 2s started rolling around on the field their armor was very comparable, excellent when you take into account that the M4 was a medium tank. Their problem, and the main source of disdain within American armored crews, was the gun. In most books you read, outside of the horrible and discredited "Death Traps", very few crews complain about their armor. They complain about the 75mm M3 gun. The crews loved the gun when they weren't facing tanks for it's excellent anti-infantry and anti-structure capabilities with a fantastic HE shell but in every book I've read after every battle where their tank forces lost numerous vehicles they always lamented at the gun, not the armor. This was rectified by the 76mm and the crews saw the 76mm as a godsend of a gun. However, it was still a pretty lack luster solution to Panthers (only able to kill frontally within 500m or less) and a complete non-solution to Tiger 2s (frontally immune) unless they got it's side and the crews more or less knew this after awhile. The crews were not completely satisfied with their tanks till the very end of the war when they started to get the M26 Pershings (or rather the T26E3s as all the Pershings that made it to Europe were pre-production tanks). The M26 Pershing arrived too late to have a material or tactical affect on the war but the morale boost was immense as revealed in "Spearhead" a copy of which I was gifted by the son of the man who the book was written from the perspective of, Clarence Smoyer "The Hero of Cologne". The gunner of "Eagle 7", a Pershing that saw heavy action in the closing days of the war. The crews loved the 90mm, the crews loved the armor, the crew could accept it's average speed. The really only thing they didn't like about it was how heavy it was and the fact that it was notably less reliable than the M4. The thing's effectiveness would shine through in it's action record in it's small amount of time in theater as well. 11 tanks and a tank destroyer knocked out or destroyed in action against M26s for the cost of only 3 knocked out during the war and only 1 Pershing permanently destroyed. Crew fatalities were minimal with the most dying in a Pershing being 2/5 at it's worst which happened during the infamous duel between Tiger 201 and the M26 "Fireball".
Spoken like a true virgin good comment
Also you need to consider that the Tiger has no reason to close the gap and get into kill Range for the Shermans. Also the first thing german tank commanders learn is "Hit the lead Tank, then the rear, then the rest"
One of the best tank movies that I hardly ever seen getting mentioned or the appreciation that it deserves is the 2009 film _Lebanon._
Love The Chieftain's tank videos and that he was able to provide his expertise to this video. Expert as always, but adding his humor makes this video top notch.
The best series. Nothing better than listening to an expert who has the gift of explanation.
Amen
I see the Chieftain, I upvote. He's the first guy I met that got me star struck when I met him at Tankfest a few years ago. And I did work in a TV production company before, with various celebrities. But The Chieftain is the only guy ever that got me to lose all my verbal skills immediately.
The only issue I have with fury is that the back tank was destroyed first. Often the front tank was destroyed to stop the tanks, then they would destroy the last tank in the tank column
If you shot the first tank, why would the tanks behind stop? They are in tanks. They can drive wherever, and the fact that they are being shot at is really obvious to even the sleepeiest crew behind.
The tanks behind the first one would slow down because their path would be blocked by the burning tank at the head of the column. It creates a choke point that slows down the other tanks in the column and gives the Tiger more time to aim and fire.
@@edpatel713 You don't think the immediate response would be to put the foot down ok the accelerator and go around the obstacle? (Or in this case, pop smoke and move to cover)
@@TheChieftainsHatch Lol the people driving those tanks are human right?! You think they’d be maneuvering that fast, right after their platoon sergeant got wiped out?
@@edpatel713 If they are trained, yes. That's why we have battle drills, immediate responses which are trained into you for certain situations so that you don't need to waste time waiting for instructions. What do you think is the default action to be carried out in the "React to ambush" battle drill? Feel free to research manuals to support your answer.
this guy knows so much and offers that information that well... it was fun watching him talking
Kelly’s Hero’s is one of my favourite war movies. For a movie about a bank heist behind enemy lines, with Don Rickles in the cast and Carrol O Connor doing a George Patton character, the action scenes and set pieces are very good and exciting. Don’t ignore this one.
This is a mother beautiful tank. Always with the negative waves, Moriarty, always with the negative waves.
@@georgesakellaropoulos8162 Cue: _"Burning Bridges"_ and play it LOUD!!
@@pauz9776 What on God's green earth are you gibbering on about?!
@@pauz9776 most sane youtube watcher
As a scale model builder, i enjoy identifying what movie tanks are based on. When i saw that sprocket at 15:17, i knew it was Centurion. Tiger in "Kelly's heroes" seems to be built on T-34 or any of it's derivatives, based on the tracks. When Chieftain was talking about tanks being easy pickings without support, two very different scenes, depicting British tankers in WWII, came to mind. 1. In "A bridge too far" an American office, played by Robert Redford, is furious at British 30th core tankers, who "just sit and drink tea" while waiting for infantry to link up with them before advancing into the nearby town. 2. In "Band of brothers" British tank commander is warned by American paratroopers who saw German ambush, quickly looks through his binoculars, exclaims "I don't see any Germans" (who are obscured by buildings) and orders his column to advance which results in total carnage. I always thought it was reckless for a commander to risk his tanks and completely ignore the advantage of the intelligence provided by ground troops. Since both portray events of the same Operation Market Garden, it makes me wonder, which depiction was an actual British doctrine of the time and which takes too much creative liberties for dramatic effect.
“He’s gonna see you real soon” great scene
I'm pretty sure the T-34 Tiger in Kelly's is the same one in Saving Private Ryan. I think it's been in a few films and re-enactments beyond that as well....
@@crasyhorse44 They are not the same one. For Saving Private Ryan they made two Tiger look-alikes out of T-34s, one of which was used later in Band of Brothers in ep 4. From what I've read the one for SPR was a better look-alike than the Kelly's one.
The Bridge too Far is great movie but made too many inaccuracies and omitting key information that is vital to get the context of decision made by Command. Like that Tea Drinking thing. Totally wrong. In the book and in real life, while the British and Americans are still fighting trying to secure the Nijmegen Bridge, 5 British tanks rush into Arnhem Bridge, but the route is already covered by German Artillery and Anti-tank guns. The British tanks where driving by a single road that is elevated above ground. Two tanks were easily destroyed another was damaged, the rest can only reverse since they cannot turn from road or else they would fall below into low ground 3 meters down. The reason also the main Tank group cannot go forward is because the Scottish Guards infantry that were to support the tanks, where sent back down the road because the Germans made a Counter-attack into the American 101 Airborne sector, and captured the road, blocking supply route for while. This is one of the Omissions from the film. There are a lot more.
@@Daedalus94 Ah you're right. I got my t-34 tiger replica's mixed up. The SBR/Bob one is the one that still runs around at re-enactments and then the Kelly's tigers were from that yugoslavian film.
Always a lot of fun watching Mr Moran critique movies. And Kelly's Heroes is a guilty favourite of a film. A rollicking good time.
As a life long tank enthusiast, It was great to watch this video. I also play World Of Tanks, so I've watched a lot of Nick's videos. I'd love a film that was just a love letter to tanks.
Mr. Moran is THE BEST. Can we please get more of these featuring him. More tanks. More Moran.
definitely would want a part 2, wonder how he would rate those in sci-fi movies like Transformers, Hulk, Star Wars, or Captain America, if those even deserve to be on the list
I was with my fellow mechanics in Iraq when we first saw Hulk. Lots of problems. First, that tank he threw? He killed everyone in it. That's obvious, but they show a guy walking away from it. He's dead. Second, none of those are M1 tanks. I don't know what they actually used, but it's important. When he rips the gun tube off the tank, it wouldn't look like that, or even be possible without ripping it in two first. When he picks up the tank by the gun tube, the turret would've come off. And the tube would've bent. An M1 weighs 72 tons. That tube will never support that weight. There's a few more nitpicky things, but a big one is that no actual tank crew would use an explosive (HEAT) round to kill the Hulk. If you want to end something quickly, you use a SABOT round. It's basically a solid spike made of depleted uranium. That's the bread and butter of the M1 when it comes to killing anything.
Agreed, I'd like to see some more of this.
@@dotjackel Not that I'm disagreeing with your real world view on the Hulk film but it's a Hulk film, suspend your knowledge and have fun with it.
@@Thurgosh_OG you do understand this video was about how realistic tanks are depicted in movies, right? Like, you get that that's why this whole thing exists?
He's there to analyze actual tanks, not stupid bullshit that doesn't exist.
The ONLY reason I didn't click on the video above is because I want to watch more tank videos of yours! This man is disiltinguished and well spoken. Excellent video
"The beast" is one of my favorite movies. I'm so glad you mentioned it.
A better tank scene from Kelly's Heroes was when they were rolling through the railyard. I'd give that a 10/10. Everything was correct from giving instructions to other tanks to fire commands, to the trail tank having its gun over the back deck as they left the battle scene.
Kelly’s Heroes is fun and irreverent and just feels honest. It also breaks what I feel is the trope of showing this super heroic army that wins the war signal handed when it’s just a bunch of people. Also Making Clint making deals with the enemy to rob the bank is awesome 😎
Why did odd ball fire paint on the enemy? To trick the commander out? I've never seen that movie.
@@madisntit6547 but what about those negative waves baby
You've been working on the railroad.
@@madisntit6547 woof woof
I've trained scores of soldiers--and a handful of security officers--in the care and operation of M113-series vehicles. Many of the soldiers were timid about operating a 12-ton machine and had never driven a motor vehicle--one hadn't even ridden a bicycle. I started them on the tracked vehicle to get them used to operating a moving platform because the track was easier to drive, far more controllable. This also served to give the new driver confidence because if a "heavy" tracked vehicle could be operated under control, then the lighter wheeled vehicles were no longer intimidating. Precision driving was important when rail loading--and my electronic warfare platoon was usually assigned to be loaded first because we'd typically load up and chain down in under 15 minutes. It was a matter of planning, practice, and doing what the Bahnmeister said to do.
I volunteered for rail head thinking it be an easy job. Granted I was 90% right we had a lot of freedom and down time, but getting vehicles that are wider then the track your putting them on while moving up and down is freaking terrifying. Darn good training though, definitely helped prepare us for navigating very narrow canal roads in theater.
@@lunaticbz3594 Good teamwork means establishing trust--and an armored vehicle crew requires mutual trust because the crew is blind and deaf to the outside world. Rail loading or moving down very narrow streets and roads required practice so that the entire crew had trust in each other--it had to be earned. For the M113 tracked vehicles and narrow gates I did two things--I carried a 25' tape measure, and my SOP was "guide left." If there was any doubt about the size of a gate, I dismounted and measured the gate--with help. My usual mounts were either an M577A1 or the M1009 or the HMMWV--and later I got to play with the very nice LMTV and MTV tactical trucks. The M113 is 106" or about 2.7 meters--and if I had 120 inches (ten feet) it would be tight, with only 14" of play, but by watching my left front corner and driving through the gate square, I could hug the gate post three to six inches from the left side and lose no paint. Ground guides were recommended when navigating narrow places, especially when those narrow roads were bridges or flat cars. Practice of arm and hand signals (I've forgotten, it's been decades) until everybody understood them was a key to communications around those noisy beasts--today, small two-way radios with ear buds make it easier but there's still practicing until the crew operates as one entity. For hand signals in cold weather I used some blaze orange ski gloves--highly visible for that mission, left hanging in the track when not in use. Couldn't get anybody else on board with those things. Part of trust required that the crew chief be knowledgeable and technically proficient. Tanks and other AFVs are heavy. One time I had to guide my platoon across a bridge marked with a 10-ton load limit--combat loaded vehicles in my electronic warfare platoon weighed up to 18 tons. If the bridge had been a 3-ton bridge, absolutely not! Tracked vehicles have a different load distribution than wheeled vehicles and so by driving slowly, one-at-a-time, we made it across without the bridge failing. I think we drove the heaviest vehicle last--besides, it was the slowest. My unit was combat support--not combat arms--but even that required tactical road march line-up. I would have preferred to have the command post at the back and the platoon leader's vehicle up front with the slowest (and heaviest) unit right behind the platoon leader--so we could avoid that accordion effect when the slowest vehicle had to run at maximum RPM to catch up and the front vehicle had to stop and wait. That's the next step in crew training--getting multiple crews to coordinate their vehicle movements and firepower. Later, I spent five years as an anti-terrorist security guard and one of the tools my guard outfit used was the M113--it was available. Sometimes I was the only trained operator on that vehicle; fortunately, the M113 was mostly used as a road block and as an armored machine gun post -- it was too slow for convoy escort through dangerous areas. Chieftan lived in armored combat. I only drove light armored vehicles more-or-less administratively, and even in combat zones nobody shot at me.
I love the way he says DELOUSING!! The way he puts emphasis on words in general is fun
Gotta love Nicholas Moran aka Chieftan in his own KZhead Channel, he covers and narrates just about every Military Vehicle, and Prototypes that has been built since WW1 to the present especially WW2 German Panzers.
The film 'The Beast' , about a Soviet T-54 lost in an Afghanistan desert fighting the Taliban, was a slow-moving but really good film about the tank crew.
I was glad it got a shout-out in the end of the video. It's my favorite tank-film.
it was recently on amazon and watched it again. i watched it the first time in the mid 90s as an elementary kid while i play games such as battle city. now as an adult rewatches it and play games such as world of tanks 😄 glad the chief like this classic as well, definitely one of the best tank film ever!
In my opinion, it is a bad movie, it is full of Amercian Cold-War propaganda and inaccuracies
@@pechkin9474 So it showed the reality of how shitty the Soviet Army actually was.
@@HerpDerpNV if Soviets acted like this tank crew, the whole of Afghanistan would be empty of humans
Having been an avid Chieftain fan for many years now, I knew this would be a brilliant How Real Is It episode.
I'm so glad that you included Kelly's Hero's. Even though it came out long before I was born it was the first movie that came to my mind when I clicked on this video. One of my favorite movies of its kind and non of my friends have even heard of it lol.
The mention of "The Beast" at the end was perfect. Looking at the list of movies, I wondered why it wasn't included, so was surprised to hear that shout out at the end. I'd love to see some comments about that specific movie. Great job in seeking out an actual combat vet and tank historian for this video!
Yeah, it have frustrated me also. The first thing I waited is to see comment about "The Beast" and in my opinion it is the tankest tank movie ever. Strange that it is not included in the list.
"RPG Kaboom Tank" It is an underrated and not very well known flick, but pretty well summed up Russia's failed attempt to subdue Afghanistan.
I loved that movie - seen it only once, long time ago. The whole płot was not very realistic according to me but movie was great…
"Why can't we fly out?" "Because your Tankers!" Gotta love that spirit, lol.
@@craftpaint1644 "We should just dismantle the Dodge Gun and F*ing *walk* to Kandahar!!..."
I am a member of the German army reconnaissance forces (which use the Spähwagen Fennek) and we sometimes actually call our car the batmobile. Also, we still very much work with Auftragstaktik, most likely more than any army in the world.
Als ehemaliger PzAufkl. (Blt10) kann ich nur sagen das wir damals mit dem SpPz2(a) Luchs die selbe Gangart hatten....und bei Manövern und Vergleichsschießen haben wir öfter (fast immer) Cpt. America gezeigt wo der Frosch die Locken hat.
But you have no experience of combat whatsoever.
@@williamwilliam5066 Me myself, I really don't, as I am still in training, but I know comrades who already did stand their ground in combat. By the way, who are you to judge?
@@williamwilliam5066 There are a lot of issues with the Bundeswehr in Germany, but lack of combat experience? They served side-by-side with the US in Afghanistan.
@@williamwilliam5066 Shut your face.
would love to see this guy talk about t-34 the movie
Or talk about the movie White Tiger. I was a Tanker myself but before his time. I served on the M48, M60, M60A1, M60A3, and just a month or two on the M1 before I left the Army. I agree with most of what he said except for Fury which was so full of historical inaccuracies that I actually did not like that movie at all especially since the US Army did not encounter any Tigers until the Battle of the Bulge and then only a very few times.
Is T-34 the one where they're trying to hunt down a phantom Tiger tank that teleports/is a ghost? Or is that White Tiger? I saw one of them and remember thinking the battles and stuff were cool, but found it odd they decided to go with the whole "supernatural tank built by Nazis using occult technology" story kind of odd.
@@nekrataali T-34 is about a soviet tank commander and captured crewmen who has to fix and refit a captured T-34 so it can be used as target practice by german trainees during WWII. They plot to escape with it instead. Great movie!
You want western media to recognize the briliance of russian war movies? omegalol
Stryker VC here! Strikers and abrams are fairly similar for operations, and best way to explain is “it’s a big, very expensive go-kart” The biggest difference is the turret, instead of a cannon, you have a mortar, missiles, 40mm, 50 caliber options, among the other types like medic, command, etc.
Finally as a former armour officer I am soooooooo happy to see an expert commenting on these tank scenes. For me nothing spoils a movie more than when tanks, armored cars or any other military equipment are used in ways they are not designed to or totally non realistically.
@Robert Sears I am not a Lt Col. I said as a former armour officer meaning myself as the former.
@@pavo76 Except he totally flopped with explanations of the Tiger scene from "Fury", as he gave it 9/10. If the scene was realistic, those Shermans would be erased from existence in under 60 seconds.
@@damyr eh, not confident it could have knocked them out so quickly but the engagement range and the actual kinetics of the fight was idiotic.
@@grantjohnstone9787 With the rate of fire of 6-7 projectiles per minute (in practice) that's not questionable. And the scene was practically an ideal scenario for the Tiger tank.
@@damyr 6 to 7 shots a minute? That is a very high and unlikely rate of fire. There are a lot of factors involved that would make that kind of fire rate highly unlikely even in practise
He himself served as a tanker, driver of the T-80 in 2011-12. The tank scenes in the movies always made me smile.
It’s so fascinating but also wow he really just described shooting men off a tank like spraying an infestation of bugs.
Well yea in war thats how you describe it to someone so they understand the visual threat. Used the term a lot in the Pacific Theater of war with Vietnam and Japan. Also note, the people who actually design bombs, speak in a way that treats causalities as numbers, and higher the numbers the more they feel accomplished.
His comments in fury are exactly my thoughts when i watched it. Fury could have destroyed that tiger at that range, but the scene captured the terror of having to engage a enemy tank at any distance where you were in its kill zone. And shermans often had to maneuver closer to destroy heavily armored gran tanks, just not that close, more in the range 4-500 yards, well within the 88mms kill zone.
I love the fact he mentioned The Beast as one of his favorite tank movies. Very underrated film.
that is beast of a movie. And israelis have few good ones, I liked Walley of tears.
@@sjoormen1 It's funny you mention the Israelis, because the tank in The Beast is an Israeli modified captured Soviet tank, one of the Tiran series and the movie was filmed in Israel.
@@MrDgwphotos I was aware of tank, but location of shooting is new to me, thanks.
A Finnish war movie called "The Unknown Soldier" - 2017 has a very compelling tank scene were a finnish infantry man tries to destroy a soviet T-34 with a AT mine. The scene is done with such a great atmosphere. I think you can find the scene here in KZhead. And actually the whole movie is one of the best war movies ever made.
Seconding The Unknown Soldier as one of the best war films ever. I've seen it with a friend in a movie theater and was stunned by the cinematography. I don't think I've ever seen a better depiction of a firefight in a dense forest than in The Unknown Soldier.
"Tali-Ihantala" has tank scenes as well, even KV-1s. IMO a better fit for tank scenes than "The Unknown Soldier" (not knocking it as a movie generally).
Why was t-34 not included here... Its one of THE BEST tank war movies of all time... I really really reeeealllyyy suggest to anyone reading this comment to check it out... Not just cuz of the tanks, but just for the sheer adrenaline and good storytelling that it has...
@@benjackson6260 Wonderful, brilliant, insightful. Thank you for sharing this on EVERY COMMENT. You can stop now.
@@benjackson6260 That entire movie is hilarious propaganda that requires the suspension of belief usually reserved for Bollywood movies or American war recruitment movies, it is not that good
so knowledgeable ! I learnt a lot. Thank you tankdaddy
Thanks that was very enjoyable! Of course, a couple of big tank movies were left out, like the Battle of the Bulge, the Beast mentioned in the video or even a Russian movie called White Tiger
It really is remarkable how little pressure is exerted on the ground by tracked vehicles. When I worked at an excavation company, the biggest excavator we had put less PSI on the ground than we did walking.
Does that mean you could not kill a person by running a tank over them?
@@hrgwea you definitely do, because 60 tons are 60 tons. Unless they are made out of pavement...
@@hrgwea If the person was as wideand rigid as the ground, maybe. The size of people causes the pressure to become concentrated instead of being spread out over the entire contact area.
There is a book of which I forgot the name, and older one, it calculated the pressure on the ground you are talking about. A tank weighing about 60 tonnes created the same psi as a 5 tonne, 4 wheeled truck. So yeah it's really impressive.
@@hrthrhs Another interesting thing is that on a surface like loose beach sand, you can let an excavator run your foot over without feeling much more than some moderately heavy pressure pushing it down. I actually let a guy in an excavator do this to me while barefoot once. They were dredging the entrance to the Swan River (technically I think it is called Swan Pond River, but nobody calls it that, not even the road signs) on Cape Cod. Combined with the sand and the flotation of the tracks, the pressure is so evenly distributed and it just presses you into the sand. Nothing really as interesting as just how little ground pressure tracks exert, but still interesting imo as it seems counterintuitive at first. Even if it is just essentially a log pressing a wedge down into loose sand. edit: by foot, I am only referring to the front half, toes and most of the arch, I was standing, its not like I laid down and let the guy run my entire foot over.
Him picking 'The Beast' as one of his favourite tank movies really made me like this guy. That movie was amazing
Ever hear of a movie called The Misfit Brigade? It's an all star cast tour de force no one ever saw.
@@rynehall9990 Awesome! Thanks for the recommendation! Looks like I have something to watch tonight
"Every tanker wants to secretly be Oddball." I love that line! I lived on Kelley's Heroes in the '70s. CBS would play it every so often after the late news. My mother stayed up one night and watched it with me. Such a great movie: funny, dramatic, tense and a great ending. It got me into building tank models as a kid and I still do to this day.
In fury it infuriated me that the German tank decided to blow his cover and close the distance with the Shermans. The tiger had an amazing advantage but blew it all away
Yup from what i know even rookies wouldn't do that and also that tiger didn't focus of easy eight aka biggest treat or that fury would be able to penetrate tiger from the front from that distance
They used the only running Tiger 1 on Earth and weren’t allowed to turn the tank. They were only allowed to go forwards and backwards because the Museum didn’t want to damage the Tiger
@@diooverheaven6561 exactly it is common sense.
@@jerjee I heard a different story - they *did* break the Tiger and it would no longer turn, just run in a straight line. In any case, having a damaged transmission is pretty realistic for a Tiger.
@@klausstock8020 sumthin like that
Hey, the Chieftain invades another KZhead channel! Well done! And speaking of The Beast, one of my weird memories from mobilization happened while training at Ft. Riley, KS to deploy to Afghanistan as a military advisor to the Afghan National Army (ANA). We were on a field training exercise, but since it was January, we stayed in the barracks at the training area with some of our Afghan counterparts who had been flown in to participate in the joint training. So, there we were that night in the barracks with a snow storm going on outside with some of the U.S. Soldiers watching The Beast with some of the ANA soldiers! Oh yes, and the weather was too bad for the dining facility to get our chow to us, but not too bad for the Chinese restaurants and pizza delivery joints to get food to us, so it was like a big slumber party with pizza and U.S./ANA Soldiers watching The Beast--surreal, yes?
totally!
Would love to find out what they thought about it.
Love how the clip they use during “gun stabilization” is of the gun locked vertically to the hull
I thoroughly appreciate and enjoy the Chieftains expertise and analysis!
I thought Band of Brothers deserved a good shout in particular the scene at the Dutch village where the Germans laid an ambuscade to knock out the lead British armor which didn't have similar orders and were autonomous to American command on the ground (infantry support). The resulting exchange was the front Sherman would be knocked out by the camouflaged Tiger tank and followed up with Jagdpanther that drove out from the bushes to adjust the TD to fire at the British tank column. It also gives the perspectives of the mechanized or supporting infantry in a combined arms urban battle.
I recall the scene from Band of Brother has the back Cromwell getting knocked out first, causing the British TC to yell "BOLT IT" on the radio.
This scene was completely changed from what really happened.
"My orders are no unnecessary destruction of property!" Proceeds to get destroyed.
@@Edax_Royeaux FORWARD! BOOT IT! Great scene
That was a great series. I hate watching a series like that, but it changed my mind.
Somebody else here playing World of tanks for 12 years, "knows it all" and watched the entire video with a hanging jaw? I've never watched such great and plausible comments before! Great video! There is indeed a difference between sofa tank commanders and the real deal. My favorite: "Basements!" So unexpected but yet so clear. Thanks for uploading!
Warthunder is better
@@lazysidekick7039 Alright your game is great kid, but unfortunately no ones asked
Do you mean to say that you're not familiar with The Chieftain's content? In all seriousness, do yourself a favour and go enlighten yourself.
Well yes WOT doesn't exactly give you a realistic perspective but thats okay cuz its just a game. Def watch the Chieftains stuff I bet you'll learn a lot!
You will like his own channel then, The Chieftains Hatch. It's full of very fact heavy walk arounds and sit ins in all sorts of tanks. Also I played both WoT and WT since their release. I'd say I have more hours in WoT total, it's a more fun skill game. WT is a great sim but its also super grindy.
The deloussing explanation is top tier 👌
LOVED IT!!! Bring back the Chieftain anytime 😊
I'm surprised how they didn't give him footage of T-34, that movie had some spectacular tank duels and CGI scenes
because Russian
B movie
yeah, there's plenty of significant emotional event in that movie
This was immensely enjoyable, we need more with Loremaster Moran!
@fouoii gyhh is a bot report :)