Andrei_bt
@AndreiBtvt • 20,207 subscribers
https://t.co/1HwYYjdNhE Support https://t.co/1HwYYjdNhE PayPal [email protected]
Shorts
Videos
Versuchsträger Scheitellafette VT-S1 during testing, WTS-Koblenz, 1978. The vehicle is not in its full intended configuration, which is perfectly normal for a running mock-up based on the MARDER chassis. As early as 1977, Thyssen-Henschel began developing a concept with externally mounted armament (Scheitellafette) on the MARDER chassis. The MARDER chassis seemed ideal for testing this idea – it offered sufficient internal volume and a layout that left space behind the remote weapon station, where an automatic loader was planned to be installed. The main advantage of this layout was the vehicle’s relatively low silhouette. However, a major drawback was the completely unprotected gun. Although the blueprints included breech protection, it only guarded against automatic cannon fire. On the other hand, actually hitting such a small target with the main gun would still have been extremely difficult. The external armament mount itself was very close in concept to the ideas behind the Soviet “Object 450” in its 1973 configuration. Several engineering solutions were developed for the necessary rotating sighting systems and automatic ammunition feed. After the test program was completed, work on the project was discontinued. Thyssen-Henschel tried to apply the technical solution to other experimental vehicles in the company’s lineup, but those attempts also proved unsuccessful.
Andrei_bt50,849 views • 18 days ago
Комментарий за кадром - Закончились танки. Новый эшелон с Т-54/55 в Воронежской области.
Andrei_bt948,932 views • 2 years ago
Ersatz BTR of the Russian Armed Forces “Zhoga” on a T-55 chassis after multiple FPV strikes. The video author claims around 30 FPV drone hits, and traces of impacts are clearly visible on the rear. As additional protection for the superstructure and roof, casings from expended rounds filled with chark, expanded clay, or similar material can be seen.
Andrei_bt28,804 views • 23 days ago
Uralvagonzavod fulfilled its 2024 contracts for T-90M and T-72B3M tanks and sent two trains to Russian troops, the press service of the concern told journalists. The last transfer of equipment from UVZ was in September. The footage shows a train with 4 T-90M tanks in new drone protection configuration and the rest, traditionally T-72B3. In total, approximately 200 old T-72B3 and 60-80 new T-90M tanks, not counting the piece production of BMPT.
Andrei_bt323,484 views • 1 year ago
Fortification installation UFS-5 with a T-54 turret. The turret was installed on an underground standardized structure, which contained shelters for the crew, ammunition supplies, and an emergency exit. It could be accessed through the hatch visible in the photos.
Andrei_bt124,241 views • 9 months ago
Today’s Tanker Day news from UVZ chief: The return of gas turbine. It showed a lot of advantages during the war. New tank on T-80 chassis is required and will be manufactured, and is now in manufacture. TOS system will be installed on T-80 chassis with longer range rockets. BMPT production to increase newt year. Everything else is standard rhetoric’s like western tanks are not so good.
Andrei_bt118,469 views • 8 months ago
On May 9, UVZ and Omsktransmash reported the festive handover of tanks to the Russian Armed Forces.They delivered T-72B3M, T-90M, and T-80BVM tanks.The T-80BVMs came with the standard factory-fitted “lopukhi” (large side ERA panels) with dynamic protection straight from the production line. Everything else on them is the old configuration.However, the T-72B3Ms and T-90Ms now feature new “mangals” (cage armor). These mangals are part of a kit for additional all-aspect protection. In the video footage, only the supporting frame is visible — the rubber screens, cables, and chains have not yet been installed. The smoke grenade launchers have also been relocated to the false roof.Compared with the old short/stubby mangals, this is undoubtedly a step forward. But it is a belated one and does not fundamentally solve the problem.
Andrei_bt15,627 views • 1 month ago
Hezbollah’s FPV drone operators have succeeded for the first time in inflicting serious damage on a Merava Mk4M tank. The impact of the shaped charge, after striking the tank’s cope cage, was sufficient to penetrate the turret roof above the isolated ammunition compartment. At the same time, the tank cannot be considered a total loss; after repairs, it may return to service.
Andrei_bt17,184 views • 1 month ago
How was it possible to enhance the armor of Abrams and what opinion AFU tank crews who work with them on a daily basis give it? Find the answers in our video. - about additional armor protection “Kontact 1” - about Abrams weight and cross-country mobility. Claims about weight and poor mobility turned out to be groundless. - at ARAT repair. - from the words of the tankers at - the problem was ATGMs - the turret without “Kontact” can be penetrated by the ATGMs used by the RF Armed Forces.
Andrei_bt143,521 views • 1 year ago
The video shows the trials of the VT-1-1, a turretless tank with 2 x 105 mm guns, firing on the move at the Putlos training ground in 1976. The casemate (turretless) tank, designed for combat while moving, was introduced in Germany in the mid-1970s as a twin-gun casemate tank (the Soviet term for a "turretless tank"). For practical firing tests in the "target pass" mode, two prototypes were built in the mid-1970s. The first prototype, VT 1-1, was armed with two 105 mm guns, while the second, VT 1-2, was equipped with two 120 mm smoothbore guns. Additionally, the VT 1-2 featured a functioning autoloader behind one of the guns, with a firing rate of 10 rounds per minute. The vehicles were developed as part of the KPz 3 or Leopard 3 project. In both prototypes, the main guns were semi-fixed (with aiming and stabilization only in elevation). The chassis solutions were derived from the KPz 70 (MBT 70) program, with the running gear shortened by one road wheel (five road wheels per side). The vehicles weighed 36.8 and 43.5 tons, respectively, with a chassis rotation speed of 60 degrees per second. To achieve high maneuverability on rough terrain, 12-cylinder diesel engines from the MB 873 series with enhanced power were used, equipped with four turbochargers: 2000 hp for VT 1-1 and 2200 hp for VT 1-2. This provided an impressive power-to-weight ratio of 54 and 50 hp/ton, respectively, with acceleration to 55 km/h in 11 seconds, though only in a temporary "turbo" mode, as the standard power was 1600 hp. The accuracy of firing with two guns was unmatched by single-gun tanks, as confirmed by the tests. However, due to the novel combat approach, this revolutionary tank concept was rejected by the customer after trials in favor of the conventionally designed Leopard 2. In essence, although the project was developed as the Leopard 3, a tank for the future, it was, in reality, a parallel project and a potential competitor to the Leopard 2. Achieving the firepower, protection, and mobility of the Leopard 3 within reasonable weight limits was impossible with a conventional layout. At the same time, a significant tactical drawback of the casemate concept (including twin-gun casemate vehicles) is the linkage between the direction of fire and the direction of movement, which in many cases could complicate unit and formation control (according to German experts in the 1970s). Moreover, the VT 1-1 and VT 1-2 can hardly be considered balanced vehicles—they could have been simpler. The vehicles' mobility was exaggerated, with the main engine, transmission, auxiliary engine, batteries, and other systems occupying two-thirds of the vehicle's length. Pros and Cons of VT 1-1 and VT 1-2: Considering the key challenges, the twin-gun casemate concept can be evaluated as follows: Pros: Compact design due to a small internal volume. Two guns provide high firepower and hit probability. Cons: The weight advantage of the casemate design is largely offset by the integration of a second gun. Fire control alone results in high complexity, leading to increased maintenance costs and overall expenses. In 1975/76, five Gefechtsfeldversuchträger (GVT, combat test platforms) were developed and built for further mobility and concept trials. These were smaller than the VT 1-1 and VT 1-2, weighing 30 tons. The GVT 01-05 were equipped only with mock-up guns and laser firing simulators (TALLISSI) and telemetry systems, built using chassis components from the Leopard 1. The GVTs were used at the IABG facility in Lichtenau and the tank training school in Munster to test the twin-gun turretless tank concept in realistic exercise conditions, which is why five vehicles were built. However, the Leopard 2 was already in production, and tank crews showed little enthusiasm for this unconventional vehicle requiring a new approach.
Andrei_bt81,477 views • 10 months ago
Strange Tests – Firing at a T-64B Tank from "Hyacinth" Almost Point-Blank.Comendante wondered, "Will the Ukrainian T-64 tank withstand a point-blank shot from the 152mm Hyacinth?" It's worth clarifying here that the hull design, including the VLD on the T-64 (T-64B = 30+80+105+20), is similar to that of the T-72.1st shot – tank displacement from the impact impulse, destruction of part of the plate welded to the VLD, damage from barrel fragments and destruction of the weld seam of the support (the lower 20mm part of the VLD), destruction of the turret ring. 2nd shot – shot at the joint between the turret and hull over the driver's hatch – breach of the hull roof.Further shooting 4 more times at the turret, glacis, and gun. What can be said here? – For a design developed in 1961 without requirements to withstand hits from a 152mm OFS from "Hyacinth," it's actually not bad.The breach of the front part of the hull roof upon explosion of an OF projectile is well-known, see - problem with the stability of the MV hatch on the T-64(A) when hit over the MV hatch is also known - raises another question – why haven't these issues been improved in 65 years? On the "newest" T-90M, it's the same hatch as on the 64. Cracks and detachments of parts also occur the topic of researching the damaging effect of high-explosive fragmentation shells on armor, see -The effectiveness of a 152mm high-explosive fragmentation shell against armor significantly depends on its velocity and angle of impact. At velocities over 800 m/s, the impulse force of the shells can reach 40-50 kN·s, which is 2-2.5 times greater than that of a 125mm high-explosive fragmentation shell; when the velocity decreases from 400 to 250 m/s, it decreases by 2 to 4 times... The impulse force when a 152mm shell hits a tank (at 800 m/s velocity) is 1.4-2 times greater compared to the impulse of a 125mm HE. INVESTIGATION OF THE DAMAGING EFFECT OF HIGH-EXPLOSIVE FRAGMENTATION SHELLS ON ARMOR (
Andrei_bt26,662 views • 3 months ago
Russian military inspects a damaged “Abrams”, the main goal is to collect dynamic protection (ERA), the production of which in Russia is insufficient to equip tanks, see - Application of Non-Explosive Reactive Armor in Tank Protection Systems under Conditions of Limited Availability or Insufficient Supply of Dynamic Armor Elements - It seems that ARAT modules will also be used.
Andrei_bt88,880 views • 1 year ago
Russian Armed Forces equipment convoy. T-54, T-62, and BMP-2M with additional protection kits.
Andrei_bt63,396 views • 10 months ago
Soviet optionally manned tank from 1980-s. Based on T-80U design, equipped with remote controls with stereoscopic cameras, also front hull was changed to accommodate 2 operators. Soviet doctrine for optionally manned tanks included – The idea of creating units of Robotic Tank Complexes (RTCs) emerged long ago. The main component of an RTC unit is an optionally manned tank. When operated in manned mode, it must address the full range of combat tasks faced by a main battle tank in modern warfare conditions. In remotely controlled mode, the optionally manned tank is advisable for the following tasks: Breaking through the enemy's prepared defenses in the first line of the attacking echelon, which reduces losses among the manned tank crews following behind, improves visual communication with deeply echeloned combat formations, and ensures a higher tempo of the offensive. Conducting reconnaissance by fire to reveal the enemy's fire systems, detect mine-explosive obstacles, and identify gaps in defenses and intervals between strongpoints. Defending against the enemy's main strike direction, providing target illumination, electronic warfare, and deploying aerosol screens.
Andrei_bt44,726 views • 9 months ago
The 216th Repair Battalion of the Russian Armed Forces is converting a decommissioned PRP-4 into an ersatz APC. The video mentions that the vehicle is written off. It’s visible that the interior is covered with a layer of rust, which is being manually removed. Everything is stripped out of the vehicle, leaving only the armored hull. The vehicle is intended for use in the autumn-winter period, as currently, everything is on wheeled vehicles and motorcycles, according to the video. Additional protection is traditionally provided by rubber-fabric screens following GABTU guidelines, with an extra screen installed at the rear. The footage also shows a similar upgrade for a BMP.
Andrei_bt41,223 views • 10 months ago
Report on Korean folding mangals (anti drone protection). What we’re seeing: on the K2 tank, the folding hood is completely identical to the design developed by Ukrainian specialists. The K21 IFV also features a folding structure. The key question is what kind of mesh they’re using. Some versions can survive multiple hits, while others instantly bare a large surface area, making the solution far less attractive. Also, despite the fundamentally correct conceptual approach, the Korean designs can hardly be called ideal – they still leave significant uncovered areas, for example on the rear of the turret.
Andrei_bt11,368 views • 2 months ago