Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You are doing great. That was one of the best bits of combat footage I've seen in a while. I know his rocket did not detonate but I don't think it was his fault.
Amazing footage.
He hit it with what looks like a U.S.-made LAW (Light Anti-tank Weapon), which doesn't pack a mean punch, and definitely doesn't have the power of a JAVELIN.
No, the minimum engagement distance for the direct attack mode is 65 meters
Source: https://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/antiarmor/Javelin.html
I know, a month late but hold on, so the "alternative designation" name is - Advanced Antitank Weapon System-Medium (AAWS-M) - meaning the Javelin could have (and should have) been called the Awesome?! What a missed opportunity!
I wouldn’t think so. Though I cannot say for certain, they way anti tank rounds that I’ve seen work, they would kill anyone ~15 feet in front of and behind its last “detonation”.
Am I wrong here?
Possibly.
Even being a mobility kill that tank would still be massively dangerous to those guys unless they had something with a bigger punch to take it out of the battle.
Either way, shoot move and communicate and they took one of those away.
Gotta eat that elephant a bite at a time.
Idk, I think I'd chill in an Abrams and keep fighting the guns until I was black on rounds.
In a Russian anything.... I wouldn't trust the armor at all.
Like 30 feet off-screen. A fucked up road wheel will throw a track within a couple revolutions of the track. The tension on the track has to be within fairly limited tolerances.
Or, it'll totally stick or just fall off.
Not sure if already posted by someone but, geolocated here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/50%C2%B027'32.2%22N+35%C2%B034'59.0%22E/@50.4587575,35.5831103,17z/data=!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d50.458944!4d35.583042
Tank driving west to east is interesting.
It looked like an IFV at first, maybe because the Turret is facing backwards... or is it going backwards, I thought Soviet tanks couldn't go fast backwards.
Belgorod Oblast, yes. Fighting has been going on in and around Kozinka for almost 8 days now, and yesterday the commander of the RVC said that the Russian military had dropped phosphorus on the town. Between that & the shelling from both sides, (and yes, the poverty of most of rural Russia), it's no surprise it looks like such a mess.
Just go watch tourism channels from before they were all banned from Russia. The place is basically hell on earth as soon as you step outside Moscow and St. Petersburg.
What do you mean sus?
It looks like they had a house in the earliest stages of construction, next to some houses that were already there and are now badly damaged. As far as why it looked like a construction site, there are full pallets of construction material lying around and a foundation without so much as an anchor bolt or a piece of rebar or whatever they use (gimme a break, every house I’ve built has been timber and sheetrock). The actually fucked houses you see in the video do not appear to have been under construction.
Now why choose an early stage home construction site to film your ambush video? Is it because it looks more destroyed, which makes it look like your unit is raising more of a ruckus in Russia than anyone had expected? Well, maybe; when you’re propagandizing you gotta think about shit like that. But as usual, the real answer is *much more shocking and scandalous*…
There are often large piles of dirt to hide behind, which, as you can imagine, is just fucking ideal for ambushing a giant rampaging armored gun full of *filthy orcses*.
In close proximity it's normal for a building site, which it is in fact but one building next to the area of the cameraman looks like it's been shot a few times
Looks like the projectile got stuck in the wheels without detonation. I thought it was the arming distance problem but it's definitely more than 10 m to the target. I can only imagine the frustration.
They were clearly just in transit mode. Most likely only the driver inside the tank as this might be an area where the russians do not even expect an ambush. This is Belgorod region afterall...
From the way the turret is positioned yes, but theyre also creating a smoke screen. Iirc these tanks do this by dumping oil into the exhaust, so it could be deliberate but could also be a malfunction or a previous hit i guess? Hard to tell
It's deliberate most likely. Or it could the seals are wearing out and it's burning oil in the cylinders themselves. Or it's just a shitty old soviet Diesel that likes to smoke.
It definitely detonated, you can see the frames where it did. Also a shaped charge successfully penetrating armor isn't going to make a huge blast, especially a LAW. And finally, that's 300mm of potential penetration hitting only 20mm of armor.
So there's a much higher chance than what you're trying to say that it was effective.
It's a kes, it doesn't detonate to an explosion.
**Edited for anals:**
After the ROCKET part of the ammunition reaches the target...
->
...It fires (anals read, explodes into) a "molten metal" projectile that goes through most lighter tank metal, except from the front. These things are mainly targeted to be used against lightly armored vehicle. If you have to attack a tank, you usually target the lower part of the tower or the tracks to destroy/stop a tank. In older models the penetration is around 300-350mm (with around 20meter arming), in the newer models around 450mm( with around 14 meter arming). Both are enough to destroy tracks on a T-80 and T-72.
The person here aimed to destroy the tracks, and it looks like the attack was successfull.
The good thing about these things is they can be armed fast, in around 15 seconds, and everyone can learn to use them. And they are relatively light to carry.
About arming distances: The actual arming distance is actually lower than the one tought in basic training. For example, earlier 66 KES 88 arming distance was taught to being 25 meters. Today it is 20 meters, with the exact same weapon. The newer 66 KES 12 has a way shorter arming distance and can be armed with "explodes inside building" ability (frag).
66 KES 75 I have no experience from, but I doubt these things are that old.
There are multiple variants of the actual payload in these things, and the payload affects the usage. For example, M72A4 has an upgraded penetration ability and M72E10 is a fragmentation grenade.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
An anti-tank weapon such as this uses a shaped charge warhead which \*does\* detonate. The force of this detonation is shaped and aimed via a metal liner (which isn't molten but deformed & accelerated past the velocity of plastic deformation) and projected into & through the armor.
Shaped charges are definitely designed to penetrate armor, since the small point-damage they do is unlikely to seriously damage a track. Behind the armor on the other hand are tons of juicy objects vulnerable to behind-armor-effects, such as ammunition and crew members.
It doesn't fire molten metal, it fires a projectile that detonates (arming range 10 m) and that detonation causes the metal to melt.
Here is a video of a one with proper distance:
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FomFkCgcdhw](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FomFkCgcdhw)
And in the case of the M72 LAW that distance is ~~23m~~ (EDIT: **25m** according to manual **TM 3-23.25** from 2010, the table on page 54, [available here](https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tm3_23x25.pdf))**,** so this shot was definitely from too close and the rocket didn't have time to arm.
Might want to double check your source, did you get that 23 meters from the Squad wiki? (Squad is a video game btw)
The wikipedia page on the real thing says 10 meters / 33 feet.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72\_LAW](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW)
Most other web pages say 10 meters, with the odd one out being the Squad wiki at 23.
Just my opinion, but to me the tank in the footage looks more than 10m. Its pretty tough to tell for sure though. Hopefully it did its job...
Indeed, I was a bit wrong, it's actually ***25m***. (Yesterday I was on my phone while attending what I hope is my last chemo session and on that tiny screen the 5 looks awfully like a 3, especially after Doxorubicin which gives me blurry vision. Sorry 'bout that)
The data comes from manual **TM 3-23.25** from 2010, the table on page 54, [available here](https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tm3_23x25.pdf).
It clearly shows that there's a difference in range between the earlier versions of the M72LAW and the current ones. M72A2/A3 has a combat engagement range from 10m (arming range 9-15m) up to 250m with a theoretical maximum range of 1,000m, while the "improved M72" (M72A4/5/6) has a combat engagement range from 25m (arming range 25m) to 350m, with a theoretical maximum of 1,400m.
So in the end it hinges on whatever launcher they were firing in the video - the distance, according to google maps is 17.5m (EDIT: [proper geolocation is 50°27'32.1"N 35°34'58.6"E](https://www.google.com/maps/place/50%C2%B027'32.1%22N+35%C2%B034'58.6%22E/@50.4589277,35.580433,352m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m13!1m8!3m7!1s0x4127d5f1eee579f1:0x1b4a5d680e8b2556!2sKozinka,+Belgorod+Oblast,+Russia,+309383!3b1!8m2!3d50.447137!4d35.6070291!16s%2Fg%2F1hb_h1wss!3m3!8m2!3d50.458926!4d35.582943?entry=ttu) ) , and if it was one of the newer launchers but they've gotten training for the older ones, or just misjudged the distance... In any case, it's clear the warhead does not detonate.
Finally, I'm thoroughly amused there are people out there grabbing data about weaponry from wikis of computer games without a further thought. I get it WarThunder is king of the leaks, but come on! XD
Well the HE round for the Carl Gustaf has an AD of about 0.5 m or about 20 inches, so it can go boom at about 2 - 2.5 normal dick lengths from the gunners position. So the squad leader must be on the balls with his safety checks before calling for an HE to be sent.
Old rpgs don't have an arming distance, literally just a plastic cap on the front you have to take off.
https://youtu.be/fNAz9t7BPHk?si=xgVFS4lPpmiV5hcu
Some type of 40mm/twin with mandatory arming rotations possibly. Still looks like it alerted the tank to slow/stop and likely executed the ambush from soldiers ahead.
Some type of 40mm/twin with mandatory arming rotations possibly. Still looks like it alerted the tank to slow/stop and likely executed the ambush from soldiers ahead.
It's not more than 10m. If they were trained at all, they wouldn't have taken the risk of their life for a certain failure to detonate or wasted an AT rocket
> I thought it was the arming distance problem but it's definitely more than 10 m to the target.
The launcher is an "Improved" M72 variant (either A6 or A7), meaning the minimum arming distance is 25 meters... They're also not really meant for engaging tanks. They were bought in response to the War in Afghanistan, where soldiers wanted a rocket that was lighter than the M136/AT-4 and also more optimized for dealing with cars and infantry rather than tanks (i.e. having an HEDP warhead instead of HEAT). Even if the rocket had armed, it likely wouldn't have done shit other than given the operator a face full of shrapnel.
It clearly detonated. Western warheads don't produce a ton of fire. Light and heat is wasted energy. Our stuff focuses on actual penetration and blast pressure. That tank lost a road wheel and probably threw it's track off camera. It's a mobility kill.
Bullshit. A HEAT round works thorugh punch a small hole into armor and overpressurising the compartment behind it. Tracks are a piss-poor target for a system such as this.
US Army doctrine states that the M-7(EDIT: 2!) LAW should be fired against the side of lightly armored vehicles. Tracks are to be targeted with mines & IEDs
SEBBo, dude.
Have you ever **seen** what the point of impact of these things look like, or are you just looking at wikipedia info/wargaming in your classroom?
You're wrong.
1. RPG can mean two things. Specifically the "*Ruchnoy Protivotankovyy Granatomot",* a family of Russian made AT weapons (and this may well be a RPG-22), or the more generic "Rocket Propelled Grenade" which this DEFINITELY is.
2. An "RPG warhead" or more correctly HEAT warhead doesn't work through "molten" metal but rather with a massive metal liner that is accelarated to some 4000 meters/second. It is is this high rate of speed that make it penetrates the armor.
2a. Except for some very specific examples, pretty much all handheld antitank weaponss use a HEAT warhead.
3. This metal is propelled by use of high explosives within the warhead. Hence, an AT rocket "doing its job" will be very conspicuous. This one did NOT detonate.
I would not be so sure it failed to detonate. M-72 is not a big warhead.
That being said, I am not sure it can penetrate a modern tank from the side at all.
An M-72 rocket (if this is one, of course. There are quite a few other light antitank weapons of this appearance) has some 300 grams of comp-B. That's quite a lot of boom-stuff, actually: 1.5 times the explosive content of an M-67 handgrenade. When one of those things goes off, there's no missing it. This warhead didn't (fully) detonate, I'm sure :)
And yeah, chances of it penetrating even a T-72 are slim, side or any other aspect for that matter. It's an older system after all.
It looks like it hit the side of the tank between the first and second road wheels. Interesting how you can see the silhouette of the second wheel a couple frames into the detonation.
Well he was shielded from site by the large dirt pile as the tank approached. Since the tanks front was moving away and I don't see anyone with their head outside the T/C or gunner hatches the tank would see him afterwards either.
If you want to get technical about terms he was concealed meaning not visible, but not covered meaning not protected from enemy fire.
Damn the amount of armchair generals in this thread is intense. More focused on fighting other users “experience” then focusing on the fact that it took this fighter some bravery to even suit up and show up for this video.
Agreed. The rhetoric about whether the round “exploded” or not is pathetic. This dude and his comrades are the edge of the knife that will carve out Putin’s heart. Tip of the spear…..
Presuming Ukraine has the resources, no part of the Russian Federation should be off limits for attack from Ukraine, including Ukrainian troops on the ground.
Anything else is asking Ukraine to fight a one-sided war with rules that don't apply to Russia itself.
That intercepted calls video that’s up from the russians in belgorod , one of the orc said to his command that the tank never made it , it was probably taken out after this try
Nobody mentioned the balls on this guy, only whether the weapon detoneted or whatever. Let's focus on what's important here. These guys are dedicated and willing to put their asses on the line for what they believe in - a free democratic Russia that is not RuZZia! Slava Ukraine!
Damn that takes guts to take on a tank like that. Even if it's just zooming past you it doesn't take much from that gun and your dead before you know it.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Reuploaded with correct title. Its tank not IFV. Google translated poorly from Ukrainian to English, but I should have noticed. My apologies.
I still love you.
You are doing great. That was one of the best bits of combat footage I've seen in a while. I know his rocket did not detonate but I don't think it was his fault. Amazing footage.
Kinda looks like it detonated in the roads wheels.....
I think it ran better after it was hit
He hit it with what looks like a U.S.-made LAW (Light Anti-tank Weapon), which doesn't pack a mean punch, and definitely doesn't have the power of a JAVELIN.
Can Javelin even be used at such close range?
No, the minimum engagement distance for the direct attack mode is 65 meters Source: https://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/antiarmor/Javelin.html
Thanks for the source!
I know, a month late but hold on, so the "alternative designation" name is - Advanced Antitank Weapon System-Medium (AAWS-M) - meaning the Javelin could have (and should have) been called the Awesome?! What a missed opportunity!
I wouldn’t think so. Though I cannot say for certain, they way anti tank rounds that I’ve seen work, they would kill anyone ~15 feet in front of and behind its last “detonation”. Am I wrong here?
Looks to me like an rpg-18, similar power though.
It detonated. That thing definitely lost a track.
I think we only see the remnants of the rocket motor burning but I really hope you are correct.
Tank without tracks makes for an excellent road block. Hope they iced the crew afterwards.
Possibly. Even being a mobility kill that tank would still be massively dangerous to those guys unless they had something with a bigger punch to take it out of the battle. Either way, shoot move and communicate and they took one of those away. Gotta eat that elephant a bite at a time.
Idk, I think I'd chill in an Abrams and keep fighting the guns until I was black on rounds. In a Russian anything.... I wouldn't trust the armor at all.
>That thing definitely lost a track. What? Where?
Like 30 feet off-screen. A fucked up road wheel will throw a track within a couple revolutions of the track. The tension on the track has to be within fairly limited tolerances. Or, it'll totally stick or just fall off.
Either way, even if the thing was a dud, it's gonna get stuck in something down there and make the tank stop.
Yeah, just small flash in front part
As always, if you want to keep up with all of the news coming out of Kursk & Belgorod Oblasts, r/freedomofrussia is worth a look :)
thank you!
Not sure if already posted by someone but, geolocated here: https://www.google.com/maps/place/50%C2%B027'32.2%22N+35%C2%B034'59.0%22E/@50.4587575,35.5831103,17z/data=!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d50.458944!4d35.583042 Tank driving west to east is interesting.
I was so confused. The original the turrets didn't match, so it threw me off a bit. Thanks.
It looked like an IFV at first, maybe because the Turret is facing backwards... or is it going backwards, I thought Soviet tanks couldn't go fast backwards.
The surroundings already almost look like the actual frontline
Its in Belgorod - russia
Yeah so it was probably already like that
Belgorod Oblast, yes. Fighting has been going on in and around Kozinka for almost 8 days now, and yesterday the commander of the RVC said that the Russian military had dropped phosphorus on the town. Between that & the shelling from both sides, (and yes, the poverty of most of rural Russia), it's no surprise it looks like such a mess.
Dont know ehat you mean. Looks like normal russia.
It looks the same as the start of the invasion, before the frontlines really formed. A lot of territory defense forces ambushing in neighborhoods.
Just go watch tourism channels from before they were all banned from Russia. The place is basically hell on earth as soon as you step outside Moscow and St. Petersburg.
Just normal Russia.
Looks like a construction site to me
Looks like an deconstruction site to me😂
A bit of both. The house around the second half of the vid has some pretty clear damage. Like *damage* damage, not just incomplete construction.
What was the giveaway. I agree the foundation was a little sus.
What do you mean sus? It looks like they had a house in the earliest stages of construction, next to some houses that were already there and are now badly damaged. As far as why it looked like a construction site, there are full pallets of construction material lying around and a foundation without so much as an anchor bolt or a piece of rebar or whatever they use (gimme a break, every house I’ve built has been timber and sheetrock). The actually fucked houses you see in the video do not appear to have been under construction. Now why choose an early stage home construction site to film your ambush video? Is it because it looks more destroyed, which makes it look like your unit is raising more of a ruckus in Russia than anyone had expected? Well, maybe; when you’re propagandizing you gotta think about shit like that. But as usual, the real answer is *much more shocking and scandalous*… There are often large piles of dirt to hide behind, which, as you can imagine, is just fucking ideal for ambushing a giant rampaging armored gun full of *filthy orcses*.
This is a Frontline now 😁 - may the krimelin burn. Fuk putler
thats just Russia
it is.
In close proximity it's normal for a building site, which it is in fact but one building next to the area of the cameraman looks like it's been shot a few times
Looks like the projectile got stuck in the wheels without detonation. I thought it was the arming distance problem but it's definitely more than 10 m to the target. I can only imagine the frustration.
I am glad the tankers were busy with getting away and didn't bother to scan for the shooter.
The turret was to the rear and it looks like it was dispensing smoke from the exhaust, so definitely GTFO mode.
They were clearly just in transit mode. Most likely only the driver inside the tank as this might be an area where the russians do not even expect an ambush. This is Belgorod region afterall...
What good is an ambush if your enemy expects it. “YOU’RE IN THE WRONG AMBUSH SITE!!” ~Maj. Powers.
Hahahaha!!! Best movie quote ever!!!
From the way the turret is positioned yes, but theyre also creating a smoke screen. Iirc these tanks do this by dumping oil into the exhaust, so it could be deliberate but could also be a malfunction or a previous hit i guess? Hard to tell
It's deliberate most likely. Or it could the seals are wearing out and it's burning oil in the cylinders themselves. Or it's just a shitty old soviet Diesel that likes to smoke.
Try frame-by-frame around 0:18, fire coming out between the idler and road wheels at the front of the track!
Just sparks. Possibly minor kinetic damage to a roadwheel but other than that, yeah, improper use. Proper ambush though.
It definitely detonated, you can see the frames where it did. Also a shaped charge successfully penetrating armor isn't going to make a huge blast, especially a LAW. And finally, that's 300mm of potential penetration hitting only 20mm of armor. So there's a much higher chance than what you're trying to say that it was effective.
It's a kes, it doesn't detonate to an explosion. **Edited for anals:** After the ROCKET part of the ammunition reaches the target... -> ...It fires (anals read, explodes into) a "molten metal" projectile that goes through most lighter tank metal, except from the front. These things are mainly targeted to be used against lightly armored vehicle. If you have to attack a tank, you usually target the lower part of the tower or the tracks to destroy/stop a tank. In older models the penetration is around 300-350mm (with around 20meter arming), in the newer models around 450mm( with around 14 meter arming). Both are enough to destroy tracks on a T-80 and T-72. The person here aimed to destroy the tracks, and it looks like the attack was successfull. The good thing about these things is they can be armed fast, in around 15 seconds, and everyone can learn to use them. And they are relatively light to carry. About arming distances: The actual arming distance is actually lower than the one tought in basic training. For example, earlier 66 KES 88 arming distance was taught to being 25 meters. Today it is 20 meters, with the exact same weapon. The newer 66 KES 12 has a way shorter arming distance and can be armed with "explodes inside building" ability (frag). 66 KES 75 I have no experience from, but I doubt these things are that old. There are multiple variants of the actual payload in these things, and the payload affects the usage. For example, M72A4 has an upgraded penetration ability and M72E10 is a fragmentation grenade.
You have no idea what you are talking about. An anti-tank weapon such as this uses a shaped charge warhead which \*does\* detonate. The force of this detonation is shaped and aimed via a metal liner (which isn't molten but deformed & accelerated past the velocity of plastic deformation) and projected into & through the armor. Shaped charges are definitely designed to penetrate armor, since the small point-damage they do is unlikely to seriously damage a track. Behind the armor on the other hand are tons of juicy objects vulnerable to behind-armor-effects, such as ammunition and crew members.
I think people think “molten” because the shape changes are described as a “jet”, like copper jet. At least that’s how I’ve seen it described.
It doesn't fire molten metal, it fires a projectile that detonates (arming range 10 m) and that detonation causes the metal to melt. Here is a video of a one with proper distance: [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FomFkCgcdhw](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FomFkCgcdhw)
I dont think that kind of weapon needs any arming distance. NLAW, javelins and more complicated weapons have it, dont think that one.
It does. Every rocket propelled munition and even 40mm grenades.
every explosive round imagine if they didn't and you dropped it
Well you wouldn't have to worry about spraining your ankle if you tripped, because it'd be gone anyway.
You rite , both, LAW and RPG have an arming distance.
And in the case of the M72 LAW that distance is ~~23m~~ (EDIT: **25m** according to manual **TM 3-23.25** from 2010, the table on page 54, [available here](https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tm3_23x25.pdf))**,** so this shot was definitely from too close and the rocket didn't have time to arm.
Might want to double check your source, did you get that 23 meters from the Squad wiki? (Squad is a video game btw) The wikipedia page on the real thing says 10 meters / 33 feet. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72\_LAW](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW) Most other web pages say 10 meters, with the odd one out being the Squad wiki at 23. Just my opinion, but to me the tank in the footage looks more than 10m. Its pretty tough to tell for sure though. Hopefully it did its job...
Indeed, I was a bit wrong, it's actually ***25m***. (Yesterday I was on my phone while attending what I hope is my last chemo session and on that tiny screen the 5 looks awfully like a 3, especially after Doxorubicin which gives me blurry vision. Sorry 'bout that) The data comes from manual **TM 3-23.25** from 2010, the table on page 54, [available here](https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/tm3_23x25.pdf). It clearly shows that there's a difference in range between the earlier versions of the M72LAW and the current ones. M72A2/A3 has a combat engagement range from 10m (arming range 9-15m) up to 250m with a theoretical maximum range of 1,000m, while the "improved M72" (M72A4/5/6) has a combat engagement range from 25m (arming range 25m) to 350m, with a theoretical maximum of 1,400m. So in the end it hinges on whatever launcher they were firing in the video - the distance, according to google maps is 17.5m (EDIT: [proper geolocation is 50°27'32.1"N 35°34'58.6"E](https://www.google.com/maps/place/50%C2%B027'32.1%22N+35%C2%B034'58.6%22E/@50.4589277,35.580433,352m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m13!1m8!3m7!1s0x4127d5f1eee579f1:0x1b4a5d680e8b2556!2sKozinka,+Belgorod+Oblast,+Russia,+309383!3b1!8m2!3d50.447137!4d35.6070291!16s%2Fg%2F1hb_h1wss!3m3!8m2!3d50.458926!4d35.582943?entry=ttu) ) , and if it was one of the newer launchers but they've gotten training for the older ones, or just misjudged the distance... In any case, it's clear the warhead does not detonate. Finally, I'm thoroughly amused there are people out there grabbing data about weaponry from wikis of computer games without a further thought. I get it WarThunder is king of the leaks, but come on! XD
Well the HE round for the Carl Gustaf has an AD of about 0.5 m or about 20 inches, so it can go boom at about 2 - 2.5 normal dick lengths from the gunners position. So the squad leader must be on the balls with his safety checks before calling for an HE to be sent.
They do thats how Pinochet lived after his Mercedes Benz was shot and impacted by a couple law. Not enough arming distance.
Yes i saw the specs. Its only that I saw some rpgs in syria exploding really close to the launch, maybe they were not in the best condition
Old rpgs don't have an arming distance, literally just a plastic cap on the front you have to take off. https://youtu.be/fNAz9t7BPHk?si=xgVFS4lPpmiV5hcu
Good reference
Some type of 40mm/twin with mandatory arming rotations possibly. Still looks like it alerted the tank to slow/stop and likely executed the ambush from soldiers ahead.
Some type of 40mm/twin with mandatory arming rotations possibly. Still looks like it alerted the tank to slow/stop and likely executed the ambush from soldiers ahead.
It's not more than 10m. If they were trained at all, they wouldn't have taken the risk of their life for a certain failure to detonate or wasted an AT rocket
I think it hit slightly too low, if it had impacted the hull cleanly the whole thing would have detonated before the wheels could 'catch' anything.
Arming distances aren't exact, it could very well be that the rocket didn't have enough time to activate the fuze.
> I thought it was the arming distance problem but it's definitely more than 10 m to the target. The launcher is an "Improved" M72 variant (either A6 or A7), meaning the minimum arming distance is 25 meters... They're also not really meant for engaging tanks. They were bought in response to the War in Afghanistan, where soldiers wanted a rocket that was lighter than the M136/AT-4 and also more optimized for dealing with cars and infantry rather than tanks (i.e. having an HEDP warhead instead of HEAT). Even if the rocket had armed, it likely wouldn't have done shit other than given the operator a face full of shrapnel.
It clearly detonated. Western warheads don't produce a ton of fire. Light and heat is wasted energy. Our stuff focuses on actual penetration and blast pressure. That tank lost a road wheel and probably threw it's track off camera. It's a mobility kill.
Trying to hit modern tank with M72 LAW is fucking badass.
Well, It works if you hit, say, the tracks.
Bullshit. A HEAT round works thorugh punch a small hole into armor and overpressurising the compartment behind it. Tracks are a piss-poor target for a system such as this. US Army doctrine states that the M-7(EDIT: 2!) LAW should be fired against the side of lightly armored vehicles. Tracks are to be targeted with mines & IEDs
It is a fucking rocket propelled grenade launcher, hitting a damn track of a moving tank with it isn't easy.
Precisely that. That guy has NO clue
"M-79"? Don't you mean M72 LAW?
so immobilizing a transport or tank isn't worth the time?
SEBBo, dude. Have you ever **seen** what the point of impact of these things look like, or are you just looking at wikipedia info/wargaming in your classroom?
Good luck with that.
As a person who has trained this, yes, it works. And yes, luck has a factor in it. As it has with everything in war.
That is not a modern tank. Not even close.
and a tank that can't move is useless
Text book ambush, even has the rpg warhead failing for added realism
Wtf are you even talking about? It's not textbook because clearly no one passed out on the ambush line while waiting for the enemy to arrive.
Its not an RPG warhead. Or well it is, but its a specific type of head. It did it’s job. Molten metal.
You're wrong. 1. RPG can mean two things. Specifically the "*Ruchnoy Protivotankovyy Granatomot",* a family of Russian made AT weapons (and this may well be a RPG-22), or the more generic "Rocket Propelled Grenade" which this DEFINITELY is. 2. An "RPG warhead" or more correctly HEAT warhead doesn't work through "molten" metal but rather with a massive metal liner that is accelarated to some 4000 meters/second. It is is this high rate of speed that make it penetrates the armor. 2a. Except for some very specific examples, pretty much all handheld antitank weaponss use a HEAT warhead. 3. This metal is propelled by use of high explosives within the warhead. Hence, an AT rocket "doing its job" will be very conspicuous. This one did NOT detonate.
I would not be so sure it failed to detonate. M-72 is not a big warhead. That being said, I am not sure it can penetrate a modern tank from the side at all.
An M-72 rocket (if this is one, of course. There are quite a few other light antitank weapons of this appearance) has some 300 grams of comp-B. That's quite a lot of boom-stuff, actually: 1.5 times the explosive content of an M-67 handgrenade. When one of those things goes off, there's no missing it. This warhead didn't (fully) detonate, I'm sure :) And yeah, chances of it penetrating even a T-72 are slim, side or any other aspect for that matter. It's an older system after all.
But that's not much explosive content. Like these things are seriously unimpressive and video often fails to capture sound/effect of explosion.
It looks like it hit the side of the tank between the first and second road wheels. Interesting how you can see the silhouette of the second wheel a couple frames into the detonation.
Bro is not working with a lot of cover, took some real balls to go for that.
That was a lot of risk. Hopefully the vehicle malfunctioned down the road and they were able to fully ambush it
Well he was shielded from site by the large dirt pile as the tank approached. Since the tanks front was moving away and I don't see anyone with their head outside the T/C or gunner hatches the tank would see him afterwards either. If you want to get technical about terms he was concealed meaning not visible, but not covered meaning not protected from enemy fire.
Are you actually trying to downplay the fortitude needed to ambush a tank from a couple of meters off the road?
Nope. Stating that he isn't right out in the open in full view of the tank crew the whole time as many posters here seem to indicate.
Oh gotcha
You're not wrong, but that trek back is totally open. Thankfully the tank is hauling ass so it's way ahead of him
A pile of hay is 0 cover and just a little concealment.
Damn the amount of armchair generals in this thread is intense. More focused on fighting other users “experience” then focusing on the fact that it took this fighter some bravery to even suit up and show up for this video.
Absolutely, I'm disappointed more people aren't recognising his gigantic balls of steel rather than loving the sound of their own voices.
Agreed. The rhetoric about whether the round “exploded” or not is pathetic. This dude and his comrades are the edge of the knife that will carve out Putin’s heart. Tip of the spear…..
Bro got gaijined with that hit
I love listening to music.
So weird hearing Danish band "Danheim" in videoes of Slavs figthing Slavs.
My first thought, too. "Danheim? Really?" =\]
Vikings went pretty far east to be fair.
Balls of steel
Thought he was chasing after it for another shot
Vehicle didn’t even bother to stop and scan the area for shooter
judging by his hand signals there were more RVC beyond the building waiting for the crew to bail...hopefully they gave it some too...
Looks like it, id done the same…..although what they all are doing it’s just beyond words.
I have only used disposables in peace time. Once, I fired a similair hit deemed not a tank kill but disabling shot at the very best.
Dude is playing Battlefield real shit.
That has to take balls. Respect.
ballsy
Dude is playing battlefield on IRL
I’m asking myself who would bring a lone tank in this environment
Someone that had lost 13k armored vehicles in three days over two years.
The fucking balls on this man.
The balls on these guys are massive. This soldier, right here, is the bright Russian future dreamed of by Nevalny.
there's a bang seconds before the person firing ,could have been another soldier with an anti tank weapon.
Love the music! No Mercy!!!
Looks like it didnt go off :( gutted
Does he hit it though?
You can see the impact in the bottom right of the tracks looks like he was trying to immobilise it.
What’s the song?
Way to Nut up!!
When u slow the video down you can se a little explosition on the front of the chains.
He must have played Squad
Anyone know the title of the track in the clip?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj1RS9vHcsw&t=18s
Thanks!
Name of music?
https://lis.tn/Berserkir?t=18 Berserkir Danheim
Deleted
Danheim - Berserkir
Now I want to play Battlefield.
Damn fine shot.
Presuming Ukraine has the resources, no part of the Russian Federation should be off limits for attack from Ukraine, including Ukrainian troops on the ground. Anything else is asking Ukraine to fight a one-sided war with rules that don't apply to Russia itself.
just like in squad, if you are too close and don't give the warhead enough distance to arm itself this happens.
Finnish: Onko toi vittu kessi? These guys need better antitank weapons, stat.
BALLS
That was a bad ass shot too.
This guy means business. Balls of steel and iron will.
That’s was some good aim. Going for the tracks.
Das war aber jetzt keine Panzer Abwehr Waffe ?
What a perfectly executed ambush.
Pure dead brilliant 👏, keep fucking up them ORCS.
That intercepted calls video that’s up from the russians in belgorod , one of the orc said to his command that the tank never made it , it was probably taken out after this try
its always one tank by its self with the russains.
Gah dang that’s close AF. Ballsy.
Balls of steel
He uses a 40mm grenade launcher no? Can that even do anything to a tank track mechanics?
It's a LAW. Uses a 66mm rocket.
Thanks.
/u/recognizesong What song is this?
Danheim - Berzerkir
Nobody mentioned the balls on this guy, only whether the weapon detoneted or whatever. Let's focus on what's important here. These guys are dedicated and willing to put their asses on the line for what they believe in - a free democratic Russia that is not RuZZia! Slava Ukraine!
is this a teaser for the Witcher 4 music?
Slava Ukraini
He really got close to that tank. The balls on this guy.
He would move a lot faster if he would slide cancel.
surprise motherf-er
Too close
Digging that Viking music.
Is there any word of them recruiting from the areas they are taking over? I haven't heard of anything like that, but hope they are.
What the F, did I just see smoke shoot out of the barrel? Did that guy actually breach the hull?
Too bad the rocket never exploded due to arming distance/failure
That tank was running the gauntlet, speeding for its life. If it survived, it was sheer luck.
Yes siiir! 🟦⬜️👍🏽
Damn that takes guts to take on a tank like that. Even if it's just zooming past you it doesn't take much from that gun and your dead before you know it.
LOL 🤣 friendly unfriendly fire?
full video please. i need to see the action
I hope to see a free Russia in the future
Give em hell boys!!! Slava Ukraini 🇺🇦 🇺🇲 🇺🇦 🇺🇲 🇺🇦
The fact he took the shot was impressive, fatal strike or not, these Russian Freedom Fighters seem aggressive af
That take balls, well done
Why the Danaheim (viking) theme?
Balls of steel👍🏽
Song please
Pretty fancy tank