What are the implications that dropping 3 RKG drone grenades on the top of a T-90m can cause it to catastrophically explode? Would a western tank have fared better?
>>57533695tanks are obsolete
A western tank would have fared better because they don't have the T-series carousel loader thing. The top part is still the weakest part of any tank so they might penetrate like the radiator or whatever. Not sure if hard kill APS like Trophy or Iron Fist etc. can shoot down drone grenades.
>>57533695why was it abandoned in the first place?engine?
>>57533695
>>57533701not if you want to gain ground, dimwit
>>57533695Wouldn't cope cages help with drone grenades?
>>57533721A bird probably took off in flight suddenly and spooked the crew
>>57533695Western tanks have blowout panels and don't keep ammo with crew.
>>57533721uhhh comrade, are you trying to imply the engines are shit or something? Don't make me gulag you
>>57533726gaining ground is a meme, all you need is standoff weapons and the ability to attrition the enemy, like Ukraine is doing.
>>57533695Western tank would have been killed and likely the crew too.The difference is doctorine and supplies, the west would have an SPAA attached to the tank platoon if drones where a major threat.
>dropping grenades on a abandoned tankanybody can do this, it isn't impressive. call me when grenades are used to take out a moving tank by dropping it through an open hatch or something.
>>57533871How hard could it possibly be to drop a grenade on a moving tank
>>57533719>T-seriesRetard.
>>57533879probably difficult, closest I saw was a grenade drop through a hatch on a M113 that had unloaded its troops and had a few guys still inside.
>>57533814>western tank>that obvious autoloader catastrophic explosionYeah bullshit. I buy that it could be immobilized/optics/gun/engine fucked but not destroyed by three fucking grenades
what the fuck
>>57534027It wouldn't fucking explode like that but a hit to the top of a turrent kills everyone except the driver and takes the tank out of action for a very long time. The only reason we bother repairing damage like that is we don't make new hulls, if we did it would be sent to scrap.
>>57533721Poor storage and lack of maintenance can horribly fuck up vehicles. Things like batteries matter when you need thousands of them and the same batteries fit heavy equipment and trucks making them theft bait over decades.Marginal battery can overload charging system. Shorted cells can kill alternators for example. One fine day under high load tank quits running and a mobility kill you cannot recover becomes a hull loss.
>>57533771No, my dear supreme leader. It was the best idea and best engine anyone could ever create. You were right to give the engine contract to your son in law. The west bows to your might and wisdom.
>>57534053>but a hit to the top of a turrent kills everyone except the drivera 125 mm direct hit? probably3 fucking grenades? yeah no
>>57534053We don't repair K-kills and making new hulls is avoided for economy reasons, not due to some lack of ability.The hull handling equipment (rotisseries etc) remains in use for mods (hulls are just large weldments and not particularly difficult, electronics are the sophisticated part).
>>57533871>call me when grenades are used to take out a moving tank by dropping it through an open hatch or something.Not exactly the same but there was some clips of rpgs attached to drones kamikazing into moving APC and tanks…
>>57533695Is the final explosion ammo?
>>57534142No, it was a nuclear grenade
>>57534090Look at the open hatch in the lower right, do you think that's more than the ~220mm RHA a RKG-3 can pen?>>57534103I know it's economics but I didn't know k-kills aren't refitted, thanks for the info anon.
Would it really be that surprising if it actually detonated one of those external bustles they installed to hold shells? You know, the ones the put on there to stop the tank from violently exploding.
>>57533814No it would not likely have killed the crew you retard
>>57534191Why not? See >>57534166I think the Abrams is the best MBT in service but I hate the "it can't be killed" bullshit the internet is filled with.Or are Americans just so strong that hypersonic molten copper bounces off them?
>>57533721Crew read the Ukrainian performance review, and disgustedly left the poor chap.
Could AMAP-R be used to stop drone dropped grenades?
>>57534230
>>57533871>they abandoned the tank first it doesnt count!The end result is the same, but the crew live to abandon another day.
>>57533727No, all that happens is the cope cage works as a habitrail for the grenade as it travels around the cages inlines and outlines, rollovers and playfield; resulting in the tank crew being treated to Frank Zappa's "One two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven tweeeeeeeelve...... Eleven!" before being blown to smithereens.
>>57533695Strv 122 has some extra protection on top of the turret.
>>57534201You're likely gonna get a 1/3 of the crew in a rough state and mission kill the tank
>dropping AT grenades on the roof of a tank destroys it!Wow, nu/k/ really is filled with tourists.
>>57533871
>>57533695war crime?war crime!
>>57533727Unironically yes.Where is cope cage when you finally need it lol?
>>57534234oh wow. thats super clever, reminds me of Zimmerit - the pine tar coating used to prevent magnetic mines sticking to tanks
>>57534230What is you cover the roof in ballistic gelOr just use a tarp to make a tent on top so mortars might just bounce offThe cope cages would have been a lot more useful against this stuff
>>57534269Sadly still not moving when it hits the hatch.
>>57534311Anon, zimmerit is 3D anti glare camo coat.
>>57533695Actually that's a tank that hohol piggies stolelmfao roasted piggies)))))
>>57533871Why did the brave Russian tankers abandon their wunderwaffe T90M Vladimir?????
>>57534269
>>57534230>>57534234Hedgehog armour supposedly is able to block Lancet drones, at least thats what people implied on the damaged Pzh2000 one, that it was a Lancet
>>57534230Some types that have opening to the cone. Not all shaped charge munitions have it. RKG-3 for example doesn't.
>>57534315As a follow up to this, has anyone done any studies on the effect of water upon liquid copper laser beams?
>>57534491you would need like ~1m of water to help even a little, are you gonna put 10t of liquid on top of your tank?
>>57533954I've seen it done. You literally just match the tanks constant speed, drop near the front, and it hits near the middle due to wind resistance.
>>57533701Because the russian usage of tanks is such a great example on how to utilize them? That's leaving completely aside the shit state of their tanks.
how many T-90Ms are left?
>>57535070>are you gonna put 10t of liquid on top of your tank?That's the idea
>>57533883I cant imagine what kind of dipshit can take umbrage with the use of the phrase "T-series" to describe the various models of tanks most commonly found in russian use. Kill yourself.
>>57533695>>57534090>>57534166>>57534230>>57534234OUT OF MY WAY, FUCKING SHITS
>>57535204Don't worry, I've noticed tourists, mostly from /pol/ or lefty/pol/, calling /k/ posters tourists or bitching about "muh nu/k" like this faggotron --> >>57534266 that doesn't think AT grenades won't work on the roof of a T-90M for some reason.
>>57533695Its abandoned.
>>57533807Standoff weapons and attrition can't do shit if you're an invading force. It didn't save us in Afghanistan in Iraq. We didn't get to own the victories we achieved there. We just sat idly by, taking potshots at insurgents as a power vacuum played out right in front of us.
>>57533695based rkg-3
>>57535454Guerilla warfare is another thing, but in symmetric warfare against an equal enemy, if your pushes are met with heavy losses, might as well hold your ground and attack from afar. If the enemy tries to attack you then you're on the defensive. Does it help you get ground? No. Does it give you a quick win? No, but in the end, you can sit at the peace table and say I killed more people than you
>>57535281>Russia didn't lose T-90M because they already abandoned it
>>57535475Must take quite a lot of practice to be good at throwing.
>>57533695god damn that's a nice cookoff
>>57535500thats like all the wheraboos bitching>Rodney didn't sink the bismark! The kreigsmarine scuttled it!A loss is a loss.
>>57533721It was the notorious abandooner.
>>57535475Always was curious how that looked in practice. Funky.>>57535501>Must take quite a lot of practice to be good at throwing.That and you have to be stupidly close. There's a reason disposable tube lunched RPGs largely supplanted AT grenades.
>>57535475that looks hella close in range, one way trip
>>57534234What happens if you cover your cone tho and don't let those spikes inside???
>>57534269looks abandoned at the end
>>57534106
>>57534234huh? how does it work?
>>57534090Rkg3 are shaped charge anti tank grenades. These aren’t vog17s
>>57535698Was wondering how soon the RPG ones would start showing up.
>>57535698Sweet. No drops of RPG's yet? If you attach some fins they would likely bust through top armor easily
>>57535161Waterbenders will usher in the new era of maneuver warfare.
>>57533695https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQlOZQ5oqas
>>57533695Kinohttps://files.catbox.moe/fl8kza.mp4
>>57537321It's literally the best absorber of thermal energy
>>57533695>Would a western tank have fared better?Abrams, maybe.Leo 2A4 definitely not with all the ammo stored in the hull.
>>57536100AT grenade can penetrate top armor
>>57533807>Enemy only has standoff weapons>Hides>enemy_pikachu_face.jpg
>>57535662I'm guessing the point is still to trigger it prematurely to disrupt the jet, like with spaced armor. >>57535719HEAT needs contact with the armor it is trying to penetrate. If you can detonate the weapon prematurely or disrupt the jet you will seriously decrease its effectiveness.
>>57534269Wow we were taught bullying is bad.
>>57533721crew heard a loud noise and thought the tank was haunted
>>57534269>all they had to do to deny the final kill was closing the hatches after ABANDOOONING>they didn't 2nd army in the world, everyone
>>57538662ok now i see ithowever image is mislabeled last picture (D) is actually in fifth row not forthaka undisturbed explosion isn't picturedalso i don't think any new rounds are bare, meaning that there is some sort of barrier between contact surface and copper liner
>>57535511Mf who is Rodney
>>57533695>Would a western tank have fared better?No tank is going to do very well when you leave the hatch open and drop an explody thingy into the interior.
>>57535475I'm having a hard time believing that collateral shrapnel isn't a very significant danger.
>>57535475there's an awesome 20 minute compilation of iraqi's throwing these at zogbots
>>57533727Probably cope nets
>>57533701*Russian tanks are obsolete
>>57533701Tanks with big guns and thick armor are obsolescent. Future ground war will probably feature a common AFV that can be configured for a variety of roles like the Boxer. 1 wheeled, 1 tracked chassis with a whole bunch of assault, engineering, transport modules that can be fitted in a shop as needed. Everything that is armed will have at least some kind of guided missile and we will see at least 1 kind of laser turret "tank" for swatting drones and low cost PGMs.
>>57541808The future of warfare is the frog ebrc jaguar
>>57539531Post it faggot
>>57533701This, aircraft are way more important.The precision of airborne munitions has become so absurdly high theirs no need for a tank, or at least an MBT with a big gun.Aircraft is what causes breakthroughs and decisive losses to the enemy.All the missles and drones used by Ukraine are what I’d call “entry level aircraft”
>>57533727>>57534306No, if anything it would make it worse. RKGs have impact fuzes, not whats basically a primer at the frontend of a rocket like on the RPG7 (How slat armor defeats RPGs) Longer standoff means that the "molten" (I know thats technically not correct) jet of copper can pierce armor better. A net might work tough
>>57533695>$6.5 million dollar Tankdoes that include active countermeasures ?
>>57541808Neverserved take. Main battle tanks will continue to be the mainstay of offensive formation tactics, because offensive operations necessarily require units that can apply direct fires to defending enemies, who will employ direct fire to defend themselves. Ultra-light SHORAD will be added to address the ultra-light drone threat.This is just another round in the constant armor vs armament arms race. All of the weapons that can defeat MBTs were developed decades after the MBTs that they defeat, in response to those MBTs being undefeatable and for the purpose of defeating those MBTs. When someone creates a brand new MBT instead of slapping half-hearted upgrades onto 50 year old chassis designs, it's going to be essentially impervious to existing threats when correctly employed. And then the cycle will continue.
Two hand grenades. The tank is gone.One sniper alone can kill the entire crew.
>>57533728underrated, kek
>>57535161Ok, this is the first part of the designThen weld steel walls around the outside perimeter of the turret, and fill with waterThe snorkel can be flooded, then pumped empty as needed with a simple systemHaha
>>57533701i hope that is a take away for the russians
>>57533871>he hasn't heard of mud seasonThere are no shoetages of russian tanks holding still
>>57533701
>>57533871someone post the webm of the drone flying into the crew compartment of a moving BTR
>>57542460its on liveleak :P
>>57533726post your stars general, tell us of all the ground you've gained
>>57533695why didn't they put a cuck cage on top? Wouldn't that help?
>>57533695>that third grenadeholy fug
>>57534149*nuka-grenade
>>57533701First post as always is the best post
>>57533701*Russians are obsoleteFTFY
>>57534201>Or are Americans just so strong that hypersonic molten copper bounces off them?Yes
>>57535719Sets off the charge further away. Molten jet is way less effective
>>57534234At best, none of those scenarios except (c) is going to happen, because when was the last time you saw any shaped charge exposed like this? This is just differently shaped slat armor, deflecting the angle of the shaped charge along with stand-off.
>>57533728Lewl
>>57548705>Wouldn't that help?No because an RKG-3 uses a shaped charge which basically has unlimited range
>>57534201Not so much strong as severely obese
>>57542487>Longer standoff means that the "molten" (I know thats technically not correct) jet of copper can pierce armor better.But too long of a standoff makes it worse. Most explosives with a EFP have an ideal standoff distance and that’s factored into the design. I don’t know about these grenades specially, but I assume they do.
>>57542559What task can a large tank cannon (+machine guns) accomplish that an autocannon + ATGMs (+machine guns) can't accomplish as good or better?The only things I can really imagine are silly situations where somehow you have a single tank engaging 3+ other tanks and expect it not to get it's shit kicked in, which frankly isn't a realistic situation nor is it nearly common enough to optimise around.The other scenario I can imagine is permanent concrete fortifications which I'm not really sure how common they even are nowadays, and if that was what you really wanted to build tanks to kill, then we would be seeing a lot more designs like the british HESH lobbers like the centurian AVRE, and to my knowledge that sort of thing is pretty much obsolete.Meanwhile, autocannons are pretty much unquestionably superior at taking out infantry and light vehicles, which are going to be by far the vast majoiry of what anyone is going to face on the batlefield, and ATGMs have proven themselves to be more than enough to take out heavily armored vehicles and are only getting more efficient as technology improves, while also costing a whole hell of a lot less financially and in terms of weight than a tank cannon.Am I missing something obivous?
>>57548445link it faggot
>>57535698I hope the drone is ok.
>>57553088>What task can a large tank cannon (+machine guns) accomplish that an autocannon + ATGMs (+machine guns) can't accomplish as good or better?Destroying vehicles, destroying buildings, drawing fire and being able to take it. Bradleys look like tanks but they don’t have the same armor. Three other people already explained that tank cannons shoot faster and farther than ATGMs. And they carry much more ammo.
>>57533695I don't think any tank, western or eastern can survive repeated HEAT rounds to the top. Depending on where the penetration was a western tank may or may not have saved the crew. It's worth noting that Russian tanks are a lot smaller than western ones, which is why the ammo and crew cohabitate.
>>57534201Americans are so fat that the first crew member hit will use his lard and act as NERA protecting the rest of the crew.
>>57534269Why isn't the unmanned mg shooting at the drone?
>>57534491NERA basically is what you're describing, and yes it does work rather well. You see for example in the OP video ERA which works similarly to NERA protects the T90 from the first two hits.
>>57534311a bit stupid when germany was the only one using magnetic mines
>>57533695you know, wouldn't cope cage stop at least first one?
>>57533701Tanks as they exist today are definitely obsolete. However tanks will adapt like they adapted to the anti tank rifles in the 30' and to shaped charges like RPG in the 50s and 50s. What will come next?1) APS Active protection to stop all the javelin, suicide drones, drone dropped munitions and other shaped charges warhead subsonic missiles. 2)front mounted ground penetrating radar for mine detection 20 yards/meters in front of the tank.3) possibly the tank will have more of hybrid Anti air and breakthrough use, something like the Otomatic from Oto Melara would have been extremely useful in this war, in particular if they can give it a bigger gun able to go up against MBTs.Something like the panzer 2000spg but with 120mm instead of 155mm and a much faster firing rate more similar to the 76mm Oto Melara autocannons with AA systems (which are to a degree anyway necessary to operate advanced APS systems).
>>57555320What if we just mounted the Brrrp cannon of an a-10 in a somewhat light vehicle. Maybe give it a mounted minigun for aa purposes.
>>57555320>>57555429
>>57535454>It didn't save us in AfghanistanSave us from what?
>>57550280Look at pictures better, that spike is inside the copper lined cone. I don't believe those thing happen often.
>>57554322Only in hindsight. It's too late to develop countermeasures if you wait and only start development once you find out an enemy is doing something.
>>57555530losing
>>57533726>muh territorial gainsIrrelevant meme. The war is fought until one side cannot fight anymore. You can do this without the ground moving an inch.Unless you have an overwhelming advantage in tech and manpower (such as the USA vs anyone else), then all war from here on out is purely attritional in nature.
>>57557161To be fair wasn't the US military almost entirely out before Biden bungled the final pass? Could swear the ANA was almost fully "running" the show by that point.
>>57534333I'm really curious as to the life expectancy of a non-abandoning Russian tank crew on the front.
>>57533701I HATE THIS WAR I HATE THIS WAR I HATE THIS WAR I HATE THIS WAR
>>57557537The ANA wasn't running shit, they fgolded like paper man.
>>57557859It's almost like I put that in quotes for a reason or something.
>>57535719The plasma/copper jet is formed by the way the explosion reacts inside the cavity of the bomblet. The shape of the chamber matters to the formating of the jet. If there is something inside the chamber, the jet gets malformed. Becomes less of a jet and more of spray.>>57538662>detonate the weapon prematurely or disrupt the jet you will seriously decrease its effectiveness.You're retarded. Slatted armor works by trying to mangle the jacked/cavity of the projectile. If the cavity is deformed, the jet is either non-existent or is greatly mangled. That, or by separating the trigger mechanism from the explosive cavity. Depending on how lucky the target it. If the round is triggered successfully, all it means is that the jet will need to go through a couple of inches of air before eating into the armor.
>>57557905IMMA FIRIN' MAH LAZOR
>>57533701only when in the hands of russians
>>57533701Tanks sent in for frontal assaults without any form of air and ground support are obsolete. When used properly in a combined arms operation they work extremely well, it's just that Russia isn't capable of doing anything more complicated than throwing a bunch of men and equipment at a problem and hoping it will sort itself out.
>>57559968Everything works well when used properly, by definition.
>>57559019kek, it's been so long since I last saw that. dear oldfriend, I've probably argued with you several times over the years. love you
>>57559019based
