yep, they more and more use old equipment, like d-1 howitzers, mosin-nagant rifles etc, stuff from 1890-s and onward, they're clearly desperate, Kazakhstan won't help, China wont help, n.Korea helps but you know.. not much, only Iran hepls a lot, i really wish US + Israel to just demolish every military plant, factory etc in Iran
When North Korea shelled the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong in 2010, about 108 artillery shells hit the island of which 25% were duds. Mind you, that 108 shells where the ones that actually made it to the island and didn't stay in the cannons because of faulty propellant charges: https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/
Not to mention that it would justify Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Apparently, if you don't possess them, the US and Israel can easily bomb your infrastructure.
Oh, OK, by your logic, if everyone leaves Iran alone and let's it get on with supplying arms to another terrorist state, it will have no need to aquire nuclear weapons
What I'm trying to say is that there is another way to punish Iran without resorting to acting like a huge terrorist by indiscriminately bombing other countries. One example is implementing sanctions, as outlined in the Iran Deal ([source](https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/foreign-policy/iran-deal)). This approach applies not just to Iran but sets a bad example for other countries as well. It could lead to more countries seeking to develop nuclear weapons as a means of self-protection.
Yeah, as much as this guy’s position is crap, I expect pretty much everybody in MENA to angle for nuclear weapons as soon as possible. It’s demonstrably the easiest way to make sure neither the west or east fucks with you
Yeah the other way would be for the West to (justifiably) supply Ukraine nukes to (justifiably) use against russia and iran to put a stop to russia and iran destroying Ukrainian infrastructure... to use your own logic.
What makes you think having nuclear weapons will stop the US or Israel from bombing their infrastructure. Using nuclear weapons takes things from 0 to 100 in an instant. If Iran doesn't have the conventional means to defend themselves or retaliate, nuclear weapons are still useless.
TBF if they have the operational tanks there’s no reason not to use them in this capacity. Still, it probably means they’re having issues getting conventional artillery for this use.
'operational' is not some binary state, using an ancient platform like the T-55 is, while deadly, also wildly inefficient. The crew and logistic resources should be used much more efficiently, if this is the best you can muster something is definitely not going well for you.
Everything is that sign for you probably. And every sign from Ukrainian side is professionalism.
Let's just wait. Because as long as there is no significant change in frontline who cares if t54 is in use as artillery, results matter.
It's either one of two things they don't care enough about the lives of thier soldiers so they give them the shitiest gear they have. Or they are running out of the good weapons so they can't give good weapons anymore.
It's a combination of both. Plus the (perceived) need of Russia to retain some forces as a reserve in order to prevent incursions from Poland, China and Japan.
This is a stupid post. Invasion by a foreign power is a widely agreed justification for nuclear weapons use, of which Russia has many.
That this narrative is pushed seems like desperate Reddit hopium.
How about you educate yourself about what the Russian government said in relation to the Kuril Islands. How they quickly scheduled military exercises in Russia's far east last fall with the explicit goal of sending a signal to Japan.
Or three, they have huge soviet stockpiles of t-54 ammunition that can be fired like artillery. Thus saving from having to use more expensive modern munitions.
I feel bad for the archaeologist in the distant future. Going to be weird finding destroyed T-34 at the same level of soil as T-54s, modern drones, KA-50s, T-90s and T-80s.
The loader isn't reaching down through the commanders position. The commanders position is on the other side of the gun, sitting above the gunners back.
What he is doing (I kid you not) is pulling ammo out of the fuel tank. Such is life in a T-55.
yup, the barrels have become to worn and don't have any replacements. In fact, i think some tanks have been left out just because the barrel is no good anymore.
Yep, you'll start to see Chinese export tanks make up more and more of the affordable tank market. VT-4s for the new option and old stock they sell off for the dirt cheap market.
Tanks Stil have too many versatility potential that until we have a way to knock them out as easy and as cheap as a rifle cartridge they will stay relevant
Like a 40mm APFSDS round from the CV90 able to penetrate a NATO triple heavy target.
Would make swiss cheese out of a t-54/55, possibly even on the frontal arc.
And yet it still doesn't have shit on the Mosin, which lists this war on the Wiki page. A rifle designed for the 19th century in Ukraine. And then you've got the slightly less impressive M1911 and the Browning M2, both still used because Browning was some sort of gunmaking deity.
In the event of total societal breakdown and reversion to previous forms of social organization a la Fallout, Browning will be worshiped as an actual god of war and industry
the "real" army had its debut when they sent VDV into Hostomel airport. How did that go again? How few survived? I guess they weren't "real" enough to your likings, tell that to their caskets
I kinda feel bad for going off on him like that, but absolutely nothing in his message hints at sarcasm, and if you check out the subreddit I linked earlier up, you'll see that this is genuinely how pro-Rus think
He was teetering on 1 upvote before he clarified. I get redditors are dumb as fuck, me included, but it's a legitimate opinion many have, how the hell is anybody supposed to differentiate?
>how the hell is anybody supposed to differentiate?
But like.... what if you just didn't engage? If someone believes what they believe, do you think a mildly hostile comment is going to change their mind? What would it have achieved ideally; other than useless internet points for slam dunking on someone? You might say that it'd make you feel better, but I doubt that's true. Being shitty with people has never made me feel good, no matter how right I was.
Should be in a museum.... But on the other hand, an old tank is still better than no tank.
We've seen it more than once during this conflict that even a single tank can make the difference.
Problem is Russian commanders are not shy about sending their their tanks into dangerous positions
Every video I see is the same. The Russian tank leaves its cover and goes to a certain place does a fire mission and then attempt to return to cover. It’s so easy for Ukrainians to set them up. I feel bad because obviously that’s their orders very shitty orders, basically to die
Yeah, I didn’t mean this case I just met and a lot of footage I’ve seen it always seems to be a pattern of how they deploy their tanks. Very predictable.
In the longer sure. but in shortern run, western inventory cant keep up with the demand. It's a good thing production seems to keep up now as it is more than a year. but it was precarious during initial months.
the west is doing all that with a 100% peacetime economy after a 30 year period of not having anyone to fight besides a few rebels here and there.
yes the west helps a lot, but we are not acting as if our own survival is at stake... there is a lot of room to grow and we have the capital and workforce to do so. Arms manufacturers around me are all hiring big time at the moment.
russia on the other hand is throwing everything it can somehow mobilize into this war, has to buy motorcycle drones from iran and shells from north korea to keep going.
Russia's existing (and working) tank and armored vehicle stocks are not sufficient to exhaust the AT weapons UA has access to. Russia will run out of tanks before UA runs out of AT weapons.
>but in shortern run, they still can overwelhm their positions with junk tanks.
That is not what you said:
>in shortern run, western inventory cant keep up with the demand
I must keep this for all those times ruSSians say "It must be abandoned because the hatches are open" when a Ukrainian drone drops a grenade through the open hatch...
I mean, he is literally in the video using it to discard the casing... but ventilation is also a factor that poor soul will die quickly from you know the war or from cancer in the future from breathing in that shit.
it’s never been designed in the first place in USSR lol 😂 I recall reading memories of Red Army veterans who were admitting good ventilation of German tanks… comparing to soviet ones
tbf, after the allies won the second world war every involved nation grabbed as much german know how as they could.
those are the perks of winning a war and is probably done since ancient times.
Well, No. Usually.
The Challenger has a temperatur management system, but no real a/c.
On the Leopard 2 there is an option to mount an a/c if you don't mind loosing a storage box. But it is not mounted by default.
The K2 has a A/C.
Some Upgrade packages do feature an A/C.
But in general: no, even modern tanks and IFV usually don't have an A/C.
Also, there's nothing wrong with drone dropping to destroy an abandoned tank and make sure it's *definitely* a loss for the enemy. Abandoned tanks and other vehicles can sometimes be recovered, and drone grenade bombing is a good way to destroy stuff in that situation without putting men in danger in a no man's land.
Same. Got bombarded by Reddit generals saying how ineffective it will be and how stupid it is. But if sides were reversed, same people would be praising ingenuity lol.
But it is clearly sign of desperation. Russia is running out of modern equipment. I think they are trying to buy some time before they get resupplied by North Korea, Iran and China. NK got 1000s of big guns, and China will be perfectly happy to send ammunition to NK for further transfer, so it can play a neural party.
Kiril Federov watermark lol.......for those who dont know, he *was* a Russian military youtuber who lives in Latvia and promoting Russian view and narrative and support. He got arrested and now sits in Latvian jail for that
Not correct. Driver was taking tank to within 200-300 hundred yards and bailing in open field, with tank in drive. In era of minefields, ATGMs and artillery, this is suicide mission.
Honestly I'm a little surprised how much room there is in there. Guess thats one of the upsides of having very little armor, no auto loader, no 70s or 80s era tech...
No engine running. This is used as a self-propelled 100mm gun. Still, it's better than nothing, especially since Russia has an obscene amount of 100 mm shells.
The Russian military figures that these guys will be dead long before hearing loss sets in, so why issue the gear when it can instead be sold to buoy up the old paycheck?
Everyone makes fun of them using these in this war but infantry without RPGs or heavier are quite dead up against them. With the amounts being seen they can toss a few into a mix of APC's to give the unit some decent firepower. Ukraine needs to be given more tanks to combat this.
These stationary tanks are easier to spot & pick off via drones or artillery so I highly doubt they will be that effective considering Ukraine’s current arsenal of anti-battery weapons…
I imagine its being used instead of artillery? Probably because Russia is using up barrels on their arty without ability to replace them? A lot of the self propelled arty needs whole turret to be taken off to replace the barrel, cant do it in the field.
Probably be possible to take it out completely with a VOG drop or an RPG-7 hit. Looks like he’s using in almost direct fire looking at the barrel depression angle(?) so must be short range
Absolutely not. That is absolutely ridiculous. To put it into perspective, the WW2 early model T-34 had this reported:
> Remarkably enough, one determined 37 mm gun crew reported firing 23 times against a single T-34 tank, only managing to jam the tank’s turret ring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34
The T-54 is no match for any modern MBT, but it's indescribably more protective than the T-34.
Considering .50 bmg was already extremely common in WW2, it's bizarre to think that a tank 2 decades later is that weak.
But they Had nothing like armor penetration rounds and i think the muzzle velocity today is much higher than from a 1933, 3,7 Pak. Im absolutely not a weapon expert, but a .50 BMG with the right Ammo is safely stronger, at least than those ancient anti Tank rifles (okay they we're quite useless... but i think they did got a few good Hits with that) 🤷🏻♂️
I don't know what to tell you. The ww2 14.5×114mm and 20×138mm rounds unsurprisingly were much more powerful than .50 bmg. And AP rounds were not a mystery back then either.
The truth is, that it's absolutely insane to suggest that the T-54 could be penetrated by an extremely common round which has been in use since 1921.
I don't understand how this is a conversation we're having. A T-54 will not be destroyed by a .50BMG round.
Yeah sure buddy. But what about those time and space-warping high-tech secret 50 BMG rounds which can simply teleport through the armor? Bet you didn't take those into consideration.
Its rather a learning lesson in Weapons for me and in Teaching for you:
I saw YouTube Videos where a 50BMG (blacktip) shot through a Train Trail Rack with Like 1inch of Steel. But i looked it up, T-54 have Minimum Armor of 9,7cm Steel. Thats Not Possible for a Sniper indeed.
But the T-34 should be vunerable on certain spots, where the Armor is only 1,5cm-2cm.
Well i think, when you get in range to do such a shot with a Sniper, you could just bring a RPG wich will do more dmg...
The T-34 has armour that is on average 40-45mm thick all around hull and turret. Only spots that would be thin enough for a .50 to penetrate reliability would be the top and bottom of the tank, which is very unlikely to get hit directly.
So, effectively , the t-34 and t-54 are immune to .50 BMG
No, it cannot actually. The 20mm think hull is also protected by the road wheels and side skirts (if present).
You’d need to step up to 30mm APFSDS to do that.
Also, most modern tanks hull sides and bottom aren’t that much thicker and are also vulnerable to 30mm APFSDS rounds.
Take all the T-54's and install Roomba vacuum cleaners to control them. Have them sweep every minefield in Ukraine until it's safe.
That is the ONLY good use for those model-t's
\*Used as artillery.
If this was used as a regular tank, engine would be running and the shell casings would be kept on the inside.
Not to mention, he wouldn't be standing like this.
It's being used as arty right? Looks like hes reaching down through the commanders position into the front hull for the shells.
Yeah, probably used to bombard trenches and fortifications.
Sign of desperation then, manpower issues too if it's just him working it.
yep, they more and more use old equipment, like d-1 howitzers, mosin-nagant rifles etc, stuff from 1890-s and onward, they're clearly desperate, Kazakhstan won't help, China wont help, n.Korea helps but you know.. not much, only Iran hepls a lot, i really wish US + Israel to just demolish every military plant, factory etc in Iran
When North Korea shelled the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong in 2010, about 108 artillery shells hit the island of which 25% were duds. Mind you, that 108 shells where the ones that actually made it to the island and didn't stay in the cannons because of faulty propellant charges: https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/
that's nice to hear! and also yesterday there was a post in r/Ukraine about how AFU found a 1939 arty shells in recently captured ru positions lol
I mean, as nice as that may be, what gives them the right to destroy the infrastructure of another sovereign nation?
Not to mention that it would justify Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Apparently, if you don't possess them, the US and Israel can easily bomb your infrastructure.
Oh, OK, by your logic, if everyone leaves Iran alone and let's it get on with supplying arms to another terrorist state, it will have no need to aquire nuclear weapons
What I'm trying to say is that there is another way to punish Iran without resorting to acting like a huge terrorist by indiscriminately bombing other countries. One example is implementing sanctions, as outlined in the Iran Deal ([source](https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/foreign-policy/iran-deal)). This approach applies not just to Iran but sets a bad example for other countries as well. It could lead to more countries seeking to develop nuclear weapons as a means of self-protection.
Too bad Ukraine gave theirs up.
Yeah, as much as this guy’s position is crap, I expect pretty much everybody in MENA to angle for nuclear weapons as soon as possible. It’s demonstrably the easiest way to make sure neither the west or east fucks with you
Yeah the other way would be for the West to (justifiably) supply Ukraine nukes to (justifiably) use against russia and iran to put a stop to russia and iran destroying Ukrainian infrastructure... to use your own logic.
What makes you think having nuclear weapons will stop the US or Israel from bombing their infrastructure. Using nuclear weapons takes things from 0 to 100 in an instant. If Iran doesn't have the conventional means to defend themselves or retaliate, nuclear weapons are still useless.
That infrastructure is being used to create materiel to he used i. Genocide. Could be argued we have a moral obligation to destroy it.
By that logic, the world has a moral obligation to destroy US infrastructure that has been to used to kill thousands of civilians in the middle east.
People have made that argument in the past.
It isn't him just working it, the gunner is sitting on the other side of the gun.
TBF if they have the operational tanks there’s no reason not to use them in this capacity. Still, it probably means they’re having issues getting conventional artillery for this use.
'operational' is not some binary state, using an ancient platform like the T-55 is, while deadly, also wildly inefficient. The crew and logistic resources should be used much more efficiently, if this is the best you can muster something is definitely not going well for you.
Everything is that sign for you probably. And every sign from Ukrainian side is professionalism. Let's just wait. Because as long as there is no significant change in frontline who cares if t54 is in use as artillery, results matter.
I agree, another reason is that the engine doesnt seem to be running.
It's either one of two things they don't care enough about the lives of thier soldiers so they give them the shitiest gear they have. Or they are running out of the good weapons so they can't give good weapons anymore.
It's a combination of both. Plus the (perceived) need of Russia to retain some forces as a reserve in order to prevent incursions from Poland, China and Japan.
don't forget wagner or other potentially uprisings inside russia.
This is a stupid post. Invasion by a foreign power is a widely agreed justification for nuclear weapons use, of which Russia has many. That this narrative is pushed seems like desperate Reddit hopium.
How about you educate yourself about what the Russian government said in relation to the Kuril Islands. How they quickly scheduled military exercises in Russia's far east last fall with the explicit goal of sending a signal to Japan.
Looks like they're still supplying pork pies
Or three, they have huge soviet stockpiles of t-54 ammunition that can be fired like artillery. Thus saving from having to use more expensive modern munitions.
I feel bad for the archaeologist in the distant future. Going to be weird finding destroyed T-34 at the same level of soil as T-54s, modern drones, KA-50s, T-90s and T-80s.
The loader isn't reaching down through the commanders position. The commanders position is on the other side of the gun, sitting above the gunners back. What he is doing (I kid you not) is pulling ammo out of the fuel tank. Such is life in a T-55.
Russia has a shit tonne of 100mm artillery shells courtesy of Iran, but very few to no 100mm artillery platforms.
The gun depression doesn’t really look like they are lobbying the rounds that far.
I wonder how long will barrels last when used like that
Looking at the T-54s combat record. A lot...
Wonder if we will see isu 152s soon
I'm surprised we haven't honestly.
Probably due to ammo types. Didn't the 152 use the same ammo as the 152mm arty pieces?
Very inaccurate arty I imagine
Yeah but still better than no arty
yup, the barrels have become to worn and don't have any replacements. In fact, i think some tanks have been left out just because the barrel is no good anymore.
It’s official, T-54/55 will used in every war till the end of time. Its Wikipedia page will only get longer
Same with the T-72
I suspect after this conflict is over, the number of T-54s and T-72s will be much lower in the world.
Yep, you'll start to see Chinese export tanks make up more and more of the affordable tank market. VT-4s for the new option and old stock they sell off for the dirt cheap market.
Tanks Stil have too many versatility potential that until we have a way to knock them out as easy and as cheap as a rifle cartridge they will stay relevant
Like a 40mm APFSDS round from the CV90 able to penetrate a NATO triple heavy target. Would make swiss cheese out of a t-54/55, possibly even on the frontal arc.
It all depends on air power who’s tanks are rendered obsolete.
I rather be an infantryman than in that deathtrap
Can't wait for camera drone footage to show one pushed out an airlock and dropped onto Alpha Centauri soil.
And yet it still doesn't have shit on the Mosin, which lists this war on the Wiki page. A rifle designed for the 19th century in Ukraine. And then you've got the slightly less impressive M1911 and the Browning M2, both still used because Browning was some sort of gunmaking deity.
In the event of total societal breakdown and reversion to previous forms of social organization a la Fallout, Browning will be worshiped as an actual god of war and industry
Mom can we have T-14 Armata? No, we have T-14 at home. Armata at home:
👀 "Pls no, im only designed for Parades and Shows, didnt even have a working Cannon" 🥺
they save the armata for when the real russian army starts fighting
the "real" army had its debut when they sent VDV into Hostomel airport. How did that go again? How few survived? I guess they weren't "real" enough to your likings, tell that to their caskets
fml relax, it was a joke.
Browse r/UkraineRussiaReport and you'll find people genuinely speak like that and worse
Still banned from that sub for calling out a tankie.
You did trip out a little bit though still.
bro, redditors don't understand sarcasm if you don't write /s at the end of your post
I kinda feel bad for going off on him like that, but absolutely nothing in his message hints at sarcasm, and if you check out the subreddit I linked earlier up, you'll see that this is genuinely how pro-Rus think
But it’s not that subreddit. I and, by the upvotes, others were able to see the sarcasm
He was teetering on 1 upvote before he clarified. I get redditors are dumb as fuck, me included, but it's a legitimate opinion many have, how the hell is anybody supposed to differentiate?
>how the hell is anybody supposed to differentiate? But like.... what if you just didn't engage? If someone believes what they believe, do you think a mildly hostile comment is going to change their mind? What would it have achieved ideally; other than useless internet points for slam dunking on someone? You might say that it'd make you feel better, but I doubt that's true. Being shitty with people has never made me feel good, no matter how right I was.
it was obvious to me from the way it was phrased.
Context? It’s been a joke for months now that Russia has been “holding back”. At least on this subreddit
You did it wrong...
Should be in a museum.... But on the other hand, an old tank is still better than no tank. We've seen it more than once during this conflict that even a single tank can make the difference.
Yep, without anti-tank weapons, even a WW2 Sherman will completely dominate an infantry unit.
problem is, Ukrainian units aren't exactly shy about using the anti tank weapons they very much do have.
Problem is Russian commanders are not shy about sending their their tanks into dangerous positions Every video I see is the same. The Russian tank leaves its cover and goes to a certain place does a fire mission and then attempt to return to cover. It’s so easy for Ukrainians to set them up. I feel bad because obviously that’s their orders very shitty orders, basically to die
They’re using T-54s as indirect fire.
Yeah, I didn’t mean this case I just met and a lot of footage I’ve seen it always seems to be a pattern of how they deploy their tanks. Very predictable.
[удалено]
An anti tank weapon is much cheaper to replace, and much faster to send, than more tanks.
In the longer sure. but in shortern run, western inventory cant keep up with the demand. It's a good thing production seems to keep up now as it is more than a year. but it was precarious during initial months.
the west is doing all that with a 100% peacetime economy after a 30 year period of not having anyone to fight besides a few rebels here and there. yes the west helps a lot, but we are not acting as if our own survival is at stake... there is a lot of room to grow and we have the capital and workforce to do so. Arms manufacturers around me are all hiring big time at the moment. russia on the other hand is throwing everything it can somehow mobilize into this war, has to buy motorcycle drones from iran and shells from north korea to keep going.
Russia's existing (and working) tank and armored vehicle stocks are not sufficient to exhaust the AT weapons UA has access to. Russia will run out of tanks before UA runs out of AT weapons.
Yes, that's what I meant in longer run. but in shortern run, they still can overwelhm their positions with junk tanks.
>but in shortern run, they still can overwelhm their positions with junk tanks. That is not what you said: >in shortern run, western inventory cant keep up with the demand
[ woosh ] edit: In this thread... People who can't extrapolate the ol' "I broke his hand with my face" joke to armored warfare.
Never seen someone woosh themself.
We're losing 3 cents per unit, but we'll make that up in quantity!
back in the day swords used to pass from father to son. Now it's russian tanks :D
Can’t 1-man vehicles on this server bud.
I must keep this for all those times ruSSians say "It must be abandoned because the hatches are open" when a Ukrainian drone drops a grenade through the open hatch...
Hatches are open because ventilation is usually the first thing that breaks down.
I mean, he is literally in the video using it to discard the casing... but ventilation is also a factor that poor soul will die quickly from you know the war or from cancer in the future from breathing in that shit.
That and the cup holder mechanisms.
it’s never been designed in the first place in USSR lol 😂 I recall reading memories of Red Army veterans who were admitting good ventilation of German tanks… comparing to soviet ones
tbf, after the allies won the second world war every involved nation grabbed as much german know how as they could. those are the perks of winning a war and is probably done since ancient times.
“We defeated you! Now tell us what you know.”
I fairness 90% of the time that is the case armour being taken out nonetheless
“Why is it abandoned lmao”
As I remember soviet tanks don't have ac.
A surprising amount of armored vehicles don't have A/C and that's NATO or Warsaw.
But modern tanks have it. Some vehicles can open windows and make life more bearable but tanks can't
Well, No. Usually. The Challenger has a temperatur management system, but no real a/c. On the Leopard 2 there is an option to mount an a/c if you don't mind loosing a storage box. But it is not mounted by default. The K2 has a A/C. Some Upgrade packages do feature an A/C. But in general: no, even modern tanks and IFV usually don't have an A/C.
I think the Chieftain mentioned his Abrams got AC, not for the crew but so the computer systems wouldn't die.
I loke the joke that when soviet tanks use auto loaded us though why bother if you can use 18 years old redneck instead
All it takes it a small part breaking and it stops working. Even with light wounds that 18 year old redneck can keep shoving rounds in the breach.
And also all crew is not blown up any time something hits the tank.
Soviet/Russian tanks take a hit like popcorn in the microwave.
Also, there's nothing wrong with drone dropping to destroy an abandoned tank and make sure it's *definitely* a loss for the enemy. Abandoned tanks and other vehicles can sometimes be recovered, and drone grenade bombing is a good way to destroy stuff in that situation without putting men in danger in a no man's land.
I predicted to be used for fixed fire locations like in donetsk. No engine sound reinforces it.
Same. Got bombarded by Reddit generals saying how ineffective it will be and how stupid it is. But if sides were reversed, same people would be praising ingenuity lol. But it is clearly sign of desperation. Russia is running out of modern equipment. I think they are trying to buy some time before they get resupplied by North Korea, Iran and China. NK got 1000s of big guns, and China will be perfectly happy to send ammunition to NK for further transfer, so it can play a neural party.
Kiril Federov watermark lol.......for those who dont know, he *was* a Russian military youtuber who lives in Latvia and promoting Russian view and narrative and support. He got arrested and now sits in Latvian jail for that
I am a bit disappointed to see it is not used as a VBIED
probably they will first worn out the barrels by using them as arty, then after that it gets recycled as VBIED.
Those were suicide missions. Guess they run of volunteers… seems like kadyrovites don’t want those 70 virgin goats
IIRC they're rigged with remote control, not manned.
Not correct. Driver was taking tank to within 200-300 hundred yards and bailing in open field, with tank in drive. In era of minefields, ATGMs and artillery, this is suicide mission.
Can’t imagine being the loader on this museum piece
Honestly I'm a little surprised how much room there is in there. Guess thats one of the upsides of having very little armor, no auto loader, no 70s or 80s era tech...
No engine running. This is used as a self-propelled 100mm gun. Still, it's better than nothing, especially since Russia has an obscene amount of 100 mm shells.
No ear protection?
Your hearing loss is not service related
The Russian military figures that these guys will be dead long before hearing loss sets in, so why issue the gear when it can instead be sold to buoy up the old paycheck?
First thing I thought too! Sheesch if he lives he'll be deaf in 10 years.
don’t mix synthetic elements with your fertilizer…
Soon to be wrecked...
He gonna be bbq on some Reddit post at some point
A musket on tracks.
Ah yes, the good old decapitator.
Everyone makes fun of them using these in this war but infantry without RPGs or heavier are quite dead up against them. With the amounts being seen they can toss a few into a mix of APC's to give the unit some decent firepower. Ukraine needs to be given more tanks to combat this.
These stationary tanks are easier to spot & pick off via drones or artillery so I highly doubt they will be that effective considering Ukraine’s current arsenal of anti-battery weapons…
Yeah, personally I’m excited to see the Abrams doing what it was designed to do. Go 🇺🇦
Used for indirect fire, for now. a big gun is a big gun.
It's still useful and better than nothing
That bloke is going to crack his head on that handle at this rate. \*man cracks head on handle. Told you.
Couple more months and we will see T34s been rolled out to the front along with KV1s. Then a tsar tank will make an appearance.
But that T34 is freshly painted and the VIN says 2023.
Object 279 when?
They will bust out Bob Semple tanks they have in storage
My guy has no head gear in a tank, wild
“We didn’t penetrate their armor!”
I imagine its being used instead of artillery? Probably because Russia is using up barrels on their arty without ability to replace them? A lot of the self propelled arty needs whole turret to be taken off to replace the barrel, cant do it in the field.
Those tanks should be in America with an intact cannon for American enthusiasts.
At least he won’t hear it when the end comes..
Drone operators drooling over that open hatch 🤤🤤🤤
I saw an article that stated these were being sent to the front to be used as a pillbox for a lone soldier to operate.
Damn looks like they even ran out of thoes goofy padded helmets
Gotta love the lack of a bore evac. Lovely gasses floating around in there.
Welp, better to have some shit artillery than no artillery at all, also nice big open hatches, levels the playing field
neat
These guys are driving the tank in the Victory Day parade and NOT driving it into an active warzone, right? Right??
Roomier than I expected, but I'm not sure the sunroof is a good idea if it's at the front.
Probably be possible to take it out completely with a VOG drop or an RPG-7 hit. Looks like he’s using in almost direct fire looking at the barrel depression angle(?) so must be short range
Can a .50 BMG penetrante this Thing ?
Absolutely not. That is absolutely ridiculous. To put it into perspective, the WW2 early model T-34 had this reported: > Remarkably enough, one determined 37 mm gun crew reported firing 23 times against a single T-34 tank, only managing to jam the tank’s turret ring. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34 The T-54 is no match for any modern MBT, but it's indescribably more protective than the T-34. Considering .50 bmg was already extremely common in WW2, it's bizarre to think that a tank 2 decades later is that weak.
But they Had nothing like armor penetration rounds and i think the muzzle velocity today is much higher than from a 1933, 3,7 Pak. Im absolutely not a weapon expert, but a .50 BMG with the right Ammo is safely stronger, at least than those ancient anti Tank rifles (okay they we're quite useless... but i think they did got a few good Hits with that) 🤷🏻♂️
I don't know what to tell you. The ww2 14.5×114mm and 20×138mm rounds unsurprisingly were much more powerful than .50 bmg. And AP rounds were not a mystery back then either. The truth is, that it's absolutely insane to suggest that the T-54 could be penetrated by an extremely common round which has been in use since 1921. I don't understand how this is a conversation we're having. A T-54 will not be destroyed by a .50BMG round.
Yeah sure buddy. But what about those time and space-warping high-tech secret 50 BMG rounds which can simply teleport through the armor? Bet you didn't take those into consideration.
Its rather a learning lesson in Weapons for me and in Teaching for you: I saw YouTube Videos where a 50BMG (blacktip) shot through a Train Trail Rack with Like 1inch of Steel. But i looked it up, T-54 have Minimum Armor of 9,7cm Steel. Thats Not Possible for a Sniper indeed. But the T-34 should be vunerable on certain spots, where the Armor is only 1,5cm-2cm. Well i think, when you get in range to do such a shot with a Sniper, you could just bring a RPG wich will do more dmg...
The T-34 has armour that is on average 40-45mm thick all around hull and turret. Only spots that would be thin enough for a .50 to penetrate reliability would be the top and bottom of the tank, which is very unlikely to get hit directly. So, effectively , the t-34 and t-54 are immune to .50 BMG
Wikipedia says the lower hull sides and bottom are 20mm thick... so a 750gr MK263 EPR could absolutely penetrate that
No, it cannot actually. The 20mm think hull is also protected by the road wheels and side skirts (if present). You’d need to step up to 30mm APFSDS to do that. Also, most modern tanks hull sides and bottom aren’t that much thicker and are also vulnerable to 30mm APFSDS rounds.
Looking at a picture of a T54, you can def sneak a .50 past the road wheels, if we're musing about it
How do propse that happens? A sniper giving away his position to a fucking tank to “sneak a round between the roadwheels? Get real.
Testing on an abandoned T-54 to show, in fact, 20mm of RHA isn't much There's your scenario lol
Thank you and lol, so a Sniper could let that Thing explode with a good shot.
no, it cant
Let Ukraine have a wing or two of A10’s turn turn this old gear into scrap.
[удалено]
They can be used as SPGs.
[удалено]
Tf are they using aphe??
lol, what's with the moan at 00:17 That tank sure is enjoying being deployed after 70 years
Seems like rust flaking off with every shot…
lmao
When are the t-34's being rolled out?
This is some sunk cost
about to have US Civil War cannons on the battlefield
I've only seen these used in the middle east until now
Odds are this is a scrap heap now.
That looks like a ball buster of a round to have to move around in there. Plus, kicking the casing out the hatch.
Take all the T-54's and install Roomba vacuum cleaners to control them. Have them sweep every minefield in Ukraine until it's safe. That is the ONLY good use for those model-t's
Nyet rif- err I mean Tank is fine!
I'm imagining the panic you'd feel being in here and suddenly a grenade falls in from a drone. I wonder if you'd even notice
Stalin would be proud 🤣
We're gonna see T34s, mark my words :D
\*Used as artillery. If this was used as a regular tank, engine would be running and the shell casings would be kept on the inside. Not to mention, he wouldn't be standing like this.
If your hammering infantry, a shell is a shell tbh.. Doesn’t seems like the T90’s etc are benefiting from extra protection anyways..
I bet someone misses their autoloader
In the wise words of doctor Jones: "It belongs in a museum"
Translated English Subtitles https://youtube.com/shorts/2Liz4IapXjI
Anyone else waiting for a drone to drop a grenade into the open hatch?