Comments by "Quizmaster China" (@QuizmasterLaw) on "WW2 American, British, Soviet and German Rifle Squad FIREPOWER Comparison" video.

  1. I would never say the German logistics were bad let alone worst. Russia without lend lease would have been a logistical impossibility. You cannot occupy nearly all of Europe without at least some logistical capability. Sure, Italian or Japanese logistics might be questionable (half of Japan's problem was U.S. submarines though). Sure, the German army had logistical problems. So did the allies; we just don't hear much about them. Feel free to look up the red ball express or the supply situation during the battle of the bulge (fought explicitly for logistics btw).
    29
  2.  @simplicius11  you believe soviet statistics how quaint
    4
  3. thanks; though ... on paper in practice most anything is possible. usually around 8 men an SMG or 2 maybe a machine gun (or not) usually no radio. mostly rifles, even in the later years of the war.
    3
  4.  @simplicius11  You don't suppose that Stalin might ... lie? You know, downplay the contribution of the western allies, inflate the five year plans successes? Of course he wouldn't. Good boy. Want a cookie?
    3
  5.  @colinkelly5420  his premise is so wrong that i haven't bothered to go into the details of the actual weapons.
    2
  6.  @haroldchase1881  US WW2 tactics indeed focused on rifle marksmanship. Post WW2 it focused on also making sure soldiers actually fire their weapon and shoot to kill not to suppress.
    2
  7.  @zaccoste8510  depends on the unit and army of course.
    2
  8. 18 seconds uploaded and FOLLOW ME! I AM THE SQUAD LEADER!
    2
  9. Bitte. Hitlers Knochensaege. https://www.google.com/search?q=Hitlers+Knochensaege.&client=ubuntu&hs=jcu&channel=fs&sxsrf=ALeKk029Jzd4MZHKATFj_BGBwz7r1o9koA:1600100192230&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjv-L_chenrAhUNVN8KHR9GDA8Q_AUoAXoECFAQAw&biw=1525&bih=687&dpr=0.9 Zipper is Reissverschluss. Like I said, i know WAY too much about this topic.
    1
  10. Hitler's Bonesaw. https://www.google.com/search?q=Hitlers+Knochensaege.&client=ubuntu&hs=jcu&channel=fs&sxsrf=ALeKk029Jzd4MZHKATFj_BGBwz7r1o9koA:1600100192230&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjv-L_chenrAhUNVN8KHR9GDA8Q_AUoAXoECFAQAw&biw=1525&bih=687&dpr=0.9 Not "zipper" (which would be Reissverschluss).
    1
  11. all that RPM really indicates how quickly the unit will burn through its ammo load out btw. higher rpm is not in itself good excepting for the LMG which could literally saw small trees down.
    1
  12.  @TheImperatorKnight  ofc Western allies had the advantage in ammunition.
    1
  13. at wars start squad might have a light machine gun usually had all rifles germans had the most and best squad level machine gun by end of war automatic rifle and submachine gun or guns also featured in the squad. 45 Squad 1 lmg 1-3 smg 1 automatic rifle is typical for german units by then.
    1
  14. what was overwhelmed was precision and accuracy. ideally germany would engage at 400-600m whereas USSR infantry would engage at 150-200m.
    1
  15.  @matrixnorm6672  USSR tended to organize as sotniks 100s. These should have been around 100 men but were often well understrength as few as 60 or even 40 due to combat losses and lack of replacements. It's for this reason not possible to say what Exactly Any squad had for kit. the actual units varied significantly from their To&E which you should see as a starting point. Indeed as few as 8 as many as 12 and anything in between. Maybe a machinegun as the war progressed several submachine guns. ATRs at the start never any RPGs though they were post-war. No AKs or automatic rifles either also post-war kit. Scavanging even by the Germans was common. Each side used the others' weaponry, at times, exceptionally, but regularly.
    1
  16. sniper rifles rare in the west 1 per platoon or even 1 per company. ubiquitous in the USSR. Though the usual bolt action rifle would be good to 400 or more meters which was more than adequate for most combat situations (rural). In urban, you want automatic weapons lots of them, and ammunition, even more.
    1
  17. typically squads would also scavange weapons from the enemy where they thought them more effective or where they had ammunition for them. Shotguns don't appear in U.S. formations in WW2 but DO feature in Vietnam.
    1
  18.  @Red-jl7jj  In Vietnam? No. Unfortunately the U.S. didn't use SMGs in Nam. In the pacific? Also unlikely: I've never once seen a shotgun in any picture from WW2.
    1
  19. you would be much better focusing on training (or lack thereof) especially in marksmanship. it's understandable to think RPM matters but it really doesn't. German superiority lay in superior leadership and better communication. I still see not one reference either to command structure or radios. Those are both critical factors in a unit's effectiveness. It's understandable to start with squads, but in fact you also need to consider the platoon, at least, if not also the company. In WW2 you usually only have one radio per platoon, if that. You also usually have an officer and a platoon sergeant. Stick to tanks.
    1
  20.  @nickbot3520  as a measure of a units effectiveness it does not.
    1
  21.  @nickbot3520  in untrained hands an automatic weapon is likelier to be more effective -- until the newbie burns through his ammo.
    1
  22.  @nickbot3520  depends on terrain. in mountains or desert i wanta rifle squad. in urban i want an SMG squad. in between i want in between.
    1
  23. Possibly because Japanese automatic weapons were horribly bad.
    1
  24. satchel charges, demolitions, bangalore torpedoes, hollow charge weapons (panzerfaust panzerschreck bazooka), well... WHERE'S THE FUCKING MEDIC!
    1
  25. yeah, no mention of forward air controllers either. a german innovation, later taken up by the u.s.a. idk how if at all the sovs had them or british for that matter. tac air was something the Germans excelled at and the U.S. got really good at.
    1
  26.  @Elmarby  yeah you had me wanting a source till that last line which looks a lot like hyperbole. redeem yourself with citations.
    1
  27.  @mikehunt3436  Britain was even more casualty averse than the U.S.A. This is why their tanks and aircraft carriers had much more armor than their U.S. equivalents. Britain expected to refight WWI, yes, but wished to do so better which means faster with fewer casualties. For their doctrine, cautious advance with few casualties, their tanks certainly make sense. I never saw UK small arms as particularly different from the U.S. Though why they used Bren carriers really escapes me; too small to hold enough men or materiel, too lightly armored to be much protection. Why did Britain need lots and lots of fully tracked jeeps? Probably so they could claim large numbers or for planned exports which never happened? But Fletcher LOVES them so they must be good, right?
    1
  28. SHQUAD? WAS IST DANN EIN SHQUAD IN ENGLISCH!?
    1
  29.  @simplicius11  millions of Ukrainians starved to death were unavailable for comment unprecedented in history all right.
    1
  30. can you strip clean and reload your weapon blindfolded? because If you are properly trained you can. If you can fight at night you are at a great advantage. Neither of these is reflected in this video. p.s. weather also matters and is likely also not mentioned.
    1
  31. By fixating nearly exclusively on rate of fire this video simply fails to properly analyze the squad. Training and leadership matter even more than weapons. Radios (or their absence) matter at least as much as having a squad automatic weapon or weapons. Having automatic weapons doesn't mean knowing how and when to use them and in untrained hands are just a logistical waste. Automatic weapons have a tendency to draw enemy fire unlike single shots from e.g. a bolt action rifle. Bolt action rifles have greater range and accuracy than carbines and automatic rifles to say nothing of submachine guns. There's so many errors and ommissions in this video that I would not show it to an actual squad or platoon leader. While it's interesting to watch a civilian's perspective there's so much wrong that it undermine's TIK's credibility, really. Anti-tank weapons are not mentioned. Light mortars not mentioned. Rifle grenades not mentioned. Radios not mentioned. Training and tactics not mentioned. Weather, night: not mentioned. The NVA had fuck all for gear yet fought the USA to defeat. It's not because they had better or more weapons or steel downrange.
    1
  32.  @TheImperatorKnight  in the follow on please try to address all the things i talk about here because they matter much more than rate of fire.
    1
  33.  @yulusleonard985  depends on the army/year/unit. Some armies issue/d 50mm mortars to squads, others rifle grenades, others grenade launchers, others still various AT weapons ATR, Pfst Pzchrk Bazooke RPG. FACs and radios easily can be found as standard equipment in squads especially in elite unites. Snipers too are a squad level resource in some armies/units. FRF2 and Dragonov are integral to some units at the squad level in some armies.
    1
  34.  @yulusleonard985  sure, generally light mortars (40-60mm) are a platoon asset. There are however squad organizations which include organic mortars. E.g. heavy weapons squad.
    1
  35. German light machine guns nickname was Hitler's Bonesaw. And yeah it had an incredibly high rate of sustained fire and usuall you had to carry 2-3 spare barrels. No one did mad minutes in WW2. that's a U.S. Vietnam war thing.
    1
  36.  @TheImperatorKnight  NEIN. HITLERS KNOCHENSAEGE.
    1
  37.  @TheImperatorKnight  you are wrong in this video repeatedly.
    1
  38. Knochensaege means bone saw. Not buzz saw.
    1
  39. if you really want to talk about tactics rather than kit (and I recommend talking about kit) be aware Military History Visualized already covered the topic of squad tactics i believe for the wehrmacht and also the red army. maybe others too (USMC SNLF)
    1
  40. what matters is rounds which actually hit their target ... which is why training is so vital to an effective squad. I know way too much about this topic... No mention so far of rocket grenades or light mortars... or forward air controllers. or political kommissars.
    1
  41.  Lovecraft  if your unit can't even train up on how to shoot it is also not going to be trained in how to move. shooting is simpler than movement and so it gets prioritized in training for that reason and because if you kill the enemy no need to move. Tell me more, you clearly know this topic lol
    1
  42.  Lovecraft  you're literally advocating human wave tactics (which repeatedly prove to fail) while misrepresenting Soviet tactics.
    1
  43.  @TheImperatorKnight  possibly deleted tho!
    1
  44. Jesus TIK it's like your entire arugument just got defiladed by a hasty ambush AND sniped. You need to take a basic combat course. There's so much wrong, it's horrific.
    1
  45. anyone who thinks they actually know this topic: what is the correct tactical response when a sniper shoots your platoon radio bearer dead?
    1
  46. still waiting. in the time it took our Co. Commander to reisssue his standing order an entire squad was eliminated by 1 sniper.
    1
  47. oh and one of the platoons is pinned down but that didn't need said by ONE sniper.
    1