Russia: "Do the tank crews really need actual seats?" Germany: "HALT PRODUCTION! They say they need a larger beverage holder."

I know this is 9 years on, but if I could give this a triple thumbs up I would.

For my reference: Narrative of the Battle of Kursk: 4:27 Tank Production Methods of the Belligerents: 26:20 Q&A: 50:00

US factories to US planners: "How many of these do you need?" Planners: "Yes... plus a lot more."

That production presentation was fascinating.

The tank production information is some of the best facts about World War Two I have even seen. Everyone who loves history should see and study this.

The tank factory in suburban Detroit is still operational and makes the Abrams. Also, all large auto factories maintain plans and are legally obligated to transform their facilities into war machines within 45 days in times of emergency.

Lend Lease to the USSR was most important not in tanks and planes, but radios, steel, aluminum, trucks, and items that allowed them to concentrate on making tanks, their best product.

1:04:27 I see a wild Chieftain!

Omg I died laughing "Hand Forged by the best dwarfen smiths in the mines of moria"... Let's me know I'm paying attention when I feel like I'm not.

I realize it's been more than 5 years since this conference. But at 45:00, he mentions that "visiting the boeing factory in seattle, you'll see a lot of stand based manufacturing". Well, I have taken that tour a few time (I recommend it to everyone). But they've almost completely shifted 737 production to a more automotive fashion, where the planes are actively moving around the plant as they're being built... and they were completing ~1.5 full 737-800s per day at the time (probably even more now)

John Parshal explains the difference in the production of Ford\Chryslers, Mercedes, and Ladas.

Potential History brought me here.

great dwarf impression lol

The Dwarven joke is absolutely hysterical! If I was there I would have to step out and catch my breath id be laughing so hard. The way he said and the accent and then the lame crowd reaction

44:07 - "Hand forged by dwarven smiths in the Mines of Moria!!!" I got a good chuckle out of that.

What a great panel and 2 very interesting topics! Bravo Gentlemen! And great questions too!! If I were there then I would’ve ask the “go on defensive” question.

Super interesting! On the side, even if germans managed to produce as many tanks as the soviets or the americans did, they wouldn't have been able to run them due to fuel shortage. They knew this, so maybe the focus on quality rather than quantity was somewhat influenced by the inherent problem of their economy.

Please tell me that I am not the only person who has watched this more than once.

well, *I thought the dwarven smiths joke was funny. tough crowd! superb video and thanks 🙏

2022 , just watched a scene in Band of Brothers in which this enraged American was shouting at the lines of retreating Germans shouting," say hello to Ford,and General Motors...." as well as some other choice words....Jonathon Parsnall (sp?) nailed it.

I'm already a big fan of Jonathan Parshall, but I'm super impressed by Robert Citino! I will have to check out more of his stuff

Historical battles can be a complex event. The Battle of Brody was a larger tank battle. German logistics were inadequate (non standard rail gauges, industrial base shortages, parts shortages, fuel shortages, taking over the rail system, etc.). The German Army was still using horses as prime movers, but Russian grass was not nutritious, so feed had to be shipped in. The German high command actually planned that units should "live off the land" because supplies were inadequate. As supply lines failed, German soldiers were starving (2 pieces of bread/day and maybe some watery horse soup), so horses became food. Eventually, the loss of horses meant units couldn't move heavy equipment. Hard to capture all that complexity in a short presentation.

Both of these presentations are awesome. I really enjoyed the 2nd presentation on production - really great stuff and not talked about very often.

Citino should know that the Big heavy German tanks did not make up the majority of the tank units at Kursk.

I personally think the remark at 45:09 underlines so elegantly how Germany lost the war. The Americans were spending less building the plane to bomb the German tank factory then the Germans were spending to build the tank to defend it. Eye opening!

There are plenty of pictures of destroyed US tanks in Russian service. They were used in combat and not "training vehicles".

Until now, I'd not heard of these economic aspects of WW2 production. Interesting and illuminating.

The Soviets relentlessly drove costs out of production? Sounds like Walmart!!

yeah the factory production topic was fantastic..did he write a book?

Some excellent points made about German problems with mass production. However, Germany could never have put many more tanks in the field, due to energy shortages and logistics problems. So maybe, quality over quantity was their only option

Dr Cintino, (had a friend named Dintino, lol) talks about German military intelligence being bad. Yea it was, it was totally compromised as the head of the Abwehr ( German M.i.) was anti-Hitler, that being Admiral Wilhelm Canaris. And he purposely put out bad reports, wrong reports, misleading reports. The Germans naturally had a hard time believing an Admiral like Canaris would betray the fatherland. But he was eventually caught and hung for his treason in late 1944.

1:04:20 of course the chieftain is also there lol

I really enjoyed watching this conference thanks for posting it

The fact that the Detroit tank still make the Abrams series of Tank is enough said in itself..amazing seminar

His comments at 36:00 regarding USA involvement in building Russian tractor factories that turned in tank factories is correct. In the early 1960s I was hired as a sales trainee by a Cicero, Illinois company. We'd been in business by then for more than 100 years, having been, for a while, the factory source making the revolutionary McCormick Reaper that changed world wide agriculture. As the US auto industry arose and gradually concentrated in the midwest, the company evolved away from the Mc Cormack relationship. although a beautiful, shiny, meticulously made, 3-foot-long, working, model sat in a glass case in the company offices through the 1960s. They soon became what was - at that time - this country's largest manufacturer of industrial cleaning productions lines. Making things of metal inevitably involves grease, oil and other contaminants that must be removed at various stages in manufacture to prepare them for whatever follows, right up to packing and shipping. Performing that on a production basis involves a lot of non-human, material handing, pumping, heating, cooling, feeding of chemicals and then their removal and disposal. Designing and installing these cleaning systems was the company's profitable specialty. As part of my training, so I would know the machine intimately, I was put in charge of the parts department. That meant I was also in charge of the blueprints for every machine we had ever made. I was soon fielding orders for obscure gaskets, pumps, motors, cables, belts, couplings, valves, control panels, switches and even small light bulbs for specific machines and huge 50 foot long systems we had made decades before. Often that item's source had stopped making it. Often an operator seeking to rebuild a machine was not the original owner. All they had was our name and the machine's serial number. It was my job to dig through that specific machine's blueprints and the related parts list - and sometimes our source's manual we'd filed away 40 or 60 years ago - and specify a suitable modern replacement at the right capacity, voltage, sizes, etc So, - and the point of may story is - in 1963 - I got an order from the Ford Motor Company for parts we had supplied as part of a group of large parts washing production lines that we had built to their order but shipped directly to the Russian tractor factory Ford built for them back in the 1920s. Those are the factories that had been converted to making tanks during WW2. Our machines were still in service. With the help of our engineers I bought or remade the required parts, often upgraded thanks to the decades of development of better electric motors or pumps, packings, seals, switches, etc - and shipped them to Russia. I suspect some of those machines are still in use making tanks.

Two of the best lectures ever.

...a duet of lucid, info-rich presenters regaling a keen, multi-aged audience, including steady-eyed veterans...I wish my father, ex-Luftwaffe, and I had been there!...

damn usa had a very efficient system. tooling is important guys

Really excellent and informative, thanks!

This was fascinating. Thank you

when it comes to analyzing production figures, and man-hours, wouldn't a better apples-apples comparison be the Sherman:t-34:PzKw IV? That tank was produced throughout the war and was consistently upgraded.

GOD BLess YOU ALL!!!!!!!

I saw Chieftain at 1:04:22! My youtube life is complete.

"Armor steel had a special place in these shipments, especially in the production of tanks, self-propelled guns and other equipment. Mobilization reserve of armored steel in the Soviet Union before the war was small and did not cover even 6-month industry needs. According to some data, 525.4 thousand tons of rolled steel of all types was delivered to the USSR under Lend-Lease. Every month, the country received about half of average amount of Soviet production of armored steel. Special steel for gun barrel drifting was also delivered." page 118 "During the war, 622 thousand tons of rails were delivered under LendLease. This represents about 56.5% of the total domestic production of rails from mid-1941 to the end of 1945. If excluding narrow gauge rails that were not supplied under lend-lease, then the American supplies made 83.3% of the total production of the Soviet broad gauge rails." page 119 Food and other strategic deliveries to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease Act, 1941-1945 pdf

Robbie Robbie Robbie!!! Love this guy

What a wonderful video.

Kursk. The largest clash of armour the world has ever seen.

Imagine trying to make something extremely complex and built to last and the final drive has the lifespan of 150km

The Hummel and Nebelwerfer were also new weapons used at Kursk.

The soviets called the Grant "a coffin for seven brothers" so, not exactly a machine they had high confidence in. They were apparently pretty keen on the Sherman, though I believe they criticised its abilities with crossing snow and ice in comparison to the T-34. In terms of reliability, erganomics, and chances of bailing out if hit it was considered to be very good.

John Parshall was on fire this presentation.

This is a stupendous channel.

Ferdinand tank destroyer is after Ferdinand Porsche who built it!

Shockingly, one of the few American academics I know is a US Army / Vietnam veteran. That is David Glantz, and you could expect him to be totally biased against USSR because he is from US Army. Not at all. He is a beast, reads Russian and German in the direct sources. He does know about Prokhovka being a Stalin's myth, but he knows also that Kursk was just a massive German fail. Just as the biggest German defeat in the WHOLE history of Germany is Operation Bagration (June 1944), however unknown that is for so many historians-wannabees.

So, every country produced their tanks following their respective automotive industry model: The Soviet Union: rough, unsophisticated, cheap (an agricultural tractor) The USA: massively produced, not too technologically complicated, standard products (a Chevrolet) Germany: complex engineering, highly skilled workforce, specifically designed, short production runs (a Mercedes-Benz)

Jon Parshall: “You got peanut butter on my chocolate!” Rob Citino: “You got your chocolate in my peanut butter!” Two GREAT tastes that taste great together, whom you don’t often get to see presenting together, given their respective areas of expertise. Just an excellent use of time watching this video.

The comments about US tank use are just wrong - the M4A2 had significant use - over 4000 of them - by the Soviets especially in their mechanized units where it was valued for its reliability - which matters if your the exploitation force. Also, wrong is that its hard to find pictures of Lend lease Shermans in action. And there's a whole book by a Soviet veteran that fought in them too: Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks: The World War II Memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza. Citino is also off by a factor of 10 on how many trucks went - more like 300-500K. The picture of where and how each made their tanks was very good though - had heard all that on the Tiger - more expensive by far than the Panther to make.

I read somewhere that ramming was often the effect of disabled or dead drivers. The tanks plowed forward on momentum.

Though General McNair's philosophy of fast and mobile tank destroyers is often criticized as short-sighted, the M-18 Hellcat had the highest kill ratio (over 2 to 1) of any American armored vehicle in WWII, and saved the day at the Battle of Arracourt and Noville (Bastogne).

Uncredited cameo by the Chieftain at 1:04:22.

Masterfully presentation

Brilliant lectures. Thank you

I really enjoyed this video. I wish I was there for I myself have a lot of questions that wer not answered in this video. Anyway it was very productive. My grandfather was in WW2.

Soviets called the Grant/Lee tank "grave for seven brothers".

Whenever the turning point (25:38 to 25:44) in favor of the allies was, the Red Army made a statement at Stalingrad and added the exclamation point at Kursk.

A well presented dissertation.

1:02:42 - guy asking about the M26 and McNair had me irk a little bit having watched Nick Moran’s “Myths of American Armor”. If only he were there I wonder what he’d think? Then I realized his talk wouldn’t happen for another year and a half. Also, 1:04:22 well lookie who we have here!

Thanks

The battle of Kursk was won in.. Bletchley Park...

Excellent panel

Recommend ,it is here in youtube,the conference of Dr.Roman Toppel,he paints a different picture about Prokhorovka and the myths that sourrounds it,very interesting

One thing that a lot of people forget is that the Germans had a real problem getting fuel, so if they were going to fuel a tank it had better be good

Really great talks!

Did anyone get the PDF linked inside the video, i'd love to see that too.

On Tank Production Methods: 26:20

I heard a story about a UK engineer who was taken to a US tank factory. He couldn't understand why he never saw a bench with a vice,, where stuff could be filed. Of course the answer was everything came in to tolerance so nothing ever needed to be fitted to anything else. Bravo USA. A different bravo USSR. You did it your way.

Where can I find an official Tiger tank maintenance bible (47:27)

Supposedly model didn't have much faith in citadel. He didn't go all out and he held back to prepare for the soviet counter offensive.

Excellent 👌

Chieftan in the crowd 👌

The Boeing plant in Everett uses a moving assembly line, it is fantastic.

Parshall's presentation was brilliant. Answered many questions I had about World War II tanks. A major question is how the Sivirts with a much smaller heavy industry sector managed to outproduce the Germans in tanks. Parshall addresses this with important points, but does not give adequate importance to the war in the West.

Why is John Parshall so amazing?

Albert Kahn, great back story, born a German-Jew, migrated to the U.S., a classmate of Henry Bacon (1893 Chicago Worlds Fair, Lincoln Memorial) studyed reinforced concrete, Packard plant 1903, Ford Highland Park plant 1909 (consolidating model T manufacturing and assembly line), Ford River Rouge 1917, work with the Soviet Union 1929-1932, Detroit Tank Arsenal 1940, and Willow Run Bomber Plant (Ford). The bomber plant despite Ford mismanagement early on (planes don't assemble like cars, wouldn't hire women), by 1943 they were producing one B24 every hour, 24/7

Great speaker

Can you help please? What is the name of the famous factory planner? Albert ....? I cant understand of find his family name.

This question was asked in the Q&A, but numbers weren’t readily available to the presenters. The United States provided the Soviet Union with more than 13,000 tanks in WW2. Also, the US lend lease/program provided the Soviets with 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles.

The importance of Kursk was just over stated as even the Germans expected (especially Hitler himself) little out of it. The Germans were hoping, judging from their past experiences, to have a chance of destroying the salient thus providing themselves with other “opportunities” such as reaching a deal in Switzerland or prolonging the attrition or delaying the Soviet initiatives... they knew by then that they could not win the war or even turn the tide in their favor. Therefor one of question of moving back 100-200 miles or even back to 1941 border was out of question as Germans needed not only resources, Soviet territory (men power living there) but also the room to trade for time. Second speaker is excellent from tank production perspective! Well done!

Fantastic view of the real bones of warfare.

‘Ferdinand, 100mm of frontal armour’ - try again!

1:04:30 nice to see the chieftain in the audience, hopefully to improve his knowledge

If the lifetime of a car was 2000 miles would you build a Mercedes s500 or a Civic?

Planned obsolescence is used in modern home building now. Don’t make 18 inch thick walls and thick subfloors if the other materials can only last 100 years.

To simplistic. It says absolutely nothing abut the battle, only the German propaganda. The truth is that some vehicles have been repaired three or even four times. When the Germans pulled back in the south, they lost all the damaged vehicles forever. In one hour the had more irrecoverable losses in vehicles than in the previous six days, around 300 tanks and at least as many TDs. The Soviets also recovered hundreds of damaged vehicles.

At 1:04:21 is that the Chieftain (Nicholas Moran) to the left of the audience member asking a question?

If you ask me, Jonathan Parshall's talk's contents were of much more significance than that of Robert Citino's, simply because the combat effectiveness of armies in WW2 were so very closely tied to the ability of one nation in out-producing another. To be brutally honest, Kursk was an offensive operation on an obscure salient, to allow for another offensive operation onto Moscow to take place, generally agreed upon by historians such as David Stahel, that another offensive operation after Moscow would be required to win. Rather than the 'successes' of Barbarossa (1941), the historical community should focus on the economics and logistics of warfare as topic that deserves more attention. For ultimately an army without food is no army.

They called off an operation with 70 divisions when they got news of the Anglo-American debarkment in Sicily? They lost 500 000 men in the Kursk operation versus 8 000 men (German and Italian) in the Sicily fighting. Sicily was a minor sideshow, though with a political effect among German allies.

Can I still submit a question for General Petraeus :)

I-10 closed 2am to 10am, allow extra time to get to airport