Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

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...

AndreiBtvt's profile picture

Andrei_bt

19,583 subscribers

44,726 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

Science & Technology
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

A battle with a "Leopard" A German tank, in a carefully camouflaged hiding place, was destroyed on the outskirts of Konstantinovka. The enemy vehicle was spotted by an FPV drone operator from the 6th Motor Rifle Division's BpS unit of the "South" troop group. The first strike helped to unambiguously identify the combat vehicle by exposing the corresponding "German" elements, and after that, our fighters could not be stopped. Strike after strike, and the small FPVs finally destroyed the tank completely.
1:14

A battle with a "Leopard" A German tank, in a carefully camouflaged hiding place, was destroyed on the outskirts of Konstantinovka. The enemy vehicle was spotted by an FPV drone operator from the 6th Motor Rifle Division's BpS unit of the "South" troop group. The first strike helped to unambiguously identify the combat vehicle by exposing the corresponding "German" elements, and after that, our fighters could not be stopped. Strike after strike, and the small FPVs finally destroyed the tank completely.

🇷🇺 STANISLAV KRAPIVNIK 🇷🇺

14,404 views • 1 month ago

"We Were Drowning In Blood And Hydraulic Fluid" Official Preview Of Episode 41 With The Lionheart Crew The “Lionheart” tank crew was a four-man United States Marine Corps team from Charlie Company, 4th Tank Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Augmented to Alpha Company 1st Tanks deployed to Al Anbar Province, Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. On May 8, 2005, Mothers Day, their M1A1 Abrams tank, callsign Lionheart, was struck by a massive improvised explosive device (IED). The blast was catastrophic, completely destroying the tank and marking the first Abrams tank lost to an IED during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Against all odds, every member of the Lionheart crew survived. This is a story about modern armored warfare, the evolving threat of IEDs, and the resilience, training, and brotherhood of U.S. Marines operating in one of the most dangerous combat environments of the Iraq War. It’s also a reminder of the thin line between life and death in combat and the warriors who continue the mission, even after surviving what should have been impossible. Their Names Are: Staff Sergeant Chad Brumpton – Tank commander Lance Corporal Joseph Lowe -- Gunner Lance Corporal Mitch Ehlke – Loader Lance Corporal Fernando Lazalde (later Sergeant) – Driver
4:15

"We Were Drowning In Blood And Hydraulic Fluid" Official Preview Of Episode 41 With The Lionheart Crew The “Lionheart” tank crew was a four-man United States Marine Corps team from Charlie Company, 4th Tank Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Augmented to Alpha Company 1st Tanks deployed to Al Anbar Province, Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom. On May 8, 2005, Mothers Day, their M1A1 Abrams tank, callsign Lionheart, was struck by a massive improvised explosive device (IED). The blast was catastrophic, completely destroying the tank and marking the first Abrams tank lost to an IED during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Against all odds, every member of the Lionheart crew survived. This is a story about modern armored warfare, the evolving threat of IEDs, and the resilience, training, and brotherhood of U.S. Marines operating in one of the most dangerous combat environments of the Iraq War. It’s also a reminder of the thin line between life and death in combat and the warriors who continue the mission, even after surviving what should have been impossible. Their Names Are: Staff Sergeant Chad Brumpton – Tank commander Lance Corporal Joseph Lowe -- Gunner Lance Corporal Mitch Ehlke – Loader Lance Corporal Fernando Lazalde (later Sergeant) – Driver

Kagan Dunlap Show

14,012 views • 6 months 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.
0:20

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_bt

81,636 views • 1 year ago

⚡️🇷🇺🛠 A new video has surfaced showing the replacement of a T-72 tank gun barrel in field conditions. Tank crews from the Alexander Nevsky Brigade carried out a scheduled replacement of gun barrels on their active combat vehicles. The brigade’s Telegram channel shared footage of the process on a T-72B3 tank. At the start, the interior of the old barrel is shown, revealing the extent of wear caused by intensive use. By the time of filming, the thermal insulation sleeve had already been removed. The fume extractor, which channels propellant gases away from the breech, was the last component left to be dismantled. Thanks to modern tank designs, there’s no need to remove the turret. The barrel tube can simply be unscrewed in place using a sledgehammer and the crane of a maintenance vehicle. Once that’s done, a brand-new smoothbore barrel is installed in reverse order. It was noted that, after final testing, the tanks would be returned to combat missions.
1:34

⚡️🇷🇺🛠 A new video has surfaced showing the replacement of a T-72 tank gun barrel in field conditions. Tank crews from the Alexander Nevsky Brigade carried out a scheduled replacement of gun barrels on their active combat vehicles. The brigade’s Telegram channel shared footage of the process on a T-72B3 tank. At the start, the interior of the old barrel is shown, revealing the extent of wear caused by intensive use. By the time of filming, the thermal insulation sleeve had already been removed. The fume extractor, which channels propellant gases away from the breech, was the last component left to be dismantled. Thanks to modern tank designs, there’s no need to remove the turret. The barrel tube can simply be unscrewed in place using a sledgehammer and the crane of a maintenance vehicle. Once that’s done, a brand-new smoothbore barrel is installed in reverse order. It was noted that, after final testing, the tanks would be returned to combat missions.

SIMPLICIUS Ѱ

104,918 views • 1 year ago

🚨🇷🇺 NATO IN PANIC: RUSSIA’S T-80BVM TANK GETS NEW ARMOR FOR DRONE WAR A previously unseen T-80BVM configuration has appeared with a tighter roof screen and expanded side protection. Russian engineers are turning lessons from frontline crews into a more coherent armor package built around the threats tanks actually face in Ukraine. 🔸 The lower anti-drone screen sits closer to the turret and covers more of its upper surface than many early field-built cages. It is designed to trigger FPV warheads away from the thin roof and disrupt clean top-down attacks. 🔸 Additional Relikt explosive reactive armor and side screens strengthen the hull flanks, fuel-tank areas and engine compartment against shaped-charge weapons — the sections drone operators repeatedly try to reach. 🔸 The upgrades preserve the T-80BVM’s main advantage: mobility. Its 1,250 hp gas-turbine engine can push the tank to around 70 km/h, allowing crews to fire, relocate and avoid remaining exposed in one position. 🔸 The tank retains its 125 mm gun, modern fire-control system and ability to launch guided missiles through the barrel, giving it the firepower to engage armor and fortified positions from range. 🔸 Uralvagonzavod says recent T-80BVM batches incorporate combat experience and direct feedback from the front, with the main emphasis placed on crew safety and overall survivability. 🔸 Russia has also increased production of the T-80BVM, T-90M and T-72B3M severalfold. New batches continue to reach the troops as anti-drone protection becomes a standard part of the upgrade process. The T-80BVM keeps its turbine-powered speed while adding protection where FPV crews look first: the turret roof, hull sides and engine deck. Every clean attack angle is becoming harder to find. Which matters most for tank survival now: roof armor, electronic warfare or speed?
0:38

🚨🇷🇺 NATO IN PANIC: RUSSIA’S T-80BVM TANK GETS NEW ARMOR FOR DRONE WAR A previously unseen T-80BVM configuration has appeared with a tighter roof screen and expanded side protection. Russian engineers are turning lessons from frontline crews into a more coherent armor package built around the threats tanks actually face in Ukraine. 🔸 The lower anti-drone screen sits closer to the turret and covers more of its upper surface than many early field-built cages. It is designed to trigger FPV warheads away from the thin roof and disrupt clean top-down attacks. 🔸 Additional Relikt explosive reactive armor and side screens strengthen the hull flanks, fuel-tank areas and engine compartment against shaped-charge weapons — the sections drone operators repeatedly try to reach. 🔸 The upgrades preserve the T-80BVM’s main advantage: mobility. Its 1,250 hp gas-turbine engine can push the tank to around 70 km/h, allowing crews to fire, relocate and avoid remaining exposed in one position. 🔸 The tank retains its 125 mm gun, modern fire-control system and ability to launch guided missiles through the barrel, giving it the firepower to engage armor and fortified positions from range. 🔸 Uralvagonzavod says recent T-80BVM batches incorporate combat experience and direct feedback from the front, with the main emphasis placed on crew safety and overall survivability. 🔸 Russia has also increased production of the T-80BVM, T-90M and T-72B3M severalfold. New batches continue to reach the troops as anti-drone protection becomes a standard part of the upgrade process. The T-80BVM keeps its turbine-powered speed while adding protection where FPV crews look first: the turret roof, hull sides and engine deck. Every clean attack angle is becoming harder to find. Which matters most for tank survival now: roof armor, electronic warfare or speed?

NewRulesGeopolitics

40,988 views • 16 days ago

When the Germans advanced towards Moscow in 1941, Soviet troops were in a nearly hopeless situation because they lacked effective anti-tank weapons. Out of desperation, highly trained military dogs were used to destroy the enemy.... In the early years of World War II, Soviet anti-tank dogs posed a major threat to the German advance. Strapped with explosives, these animals were sent on missions to destroy enemy equipment. While today this fact might seem disturbing to animal rights activists, it's important to remember how desperate those times were, when a formidable and evil enemy was almost at the Kremlin gates. Machine guns on German tanks were too high to reach the low-running 'suicide' dogs, and thanks to cover from Soviet infantry the Germans couldn't easily emerge from their tanks and shoot the dogs with rifles. German tank units often stopped their attack if they saw tank destroyer battalions with dogs on the battlefield. The only effective method to prevent such an attack was to use flamethrowers. Often, when German forces went on the offensive, they shot all dogs along the way. Even Luftwaffe planes opened fire on them. The Soviet Union didn’t start using anti-tank dogs in response to the Nazi invasion of 1941. In fact, they began training such dogs in the 1930s, well before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War. The anti-tank dogs were trained to crawl under enemy tanks while carrying explosives on their bodies (12 kg of TNT). A long lever set off an explosion upon contact with the target. The dogs were instructed how to climb under tanks. They were starved for several days, and pieces of meat were placed under practice tanks to fool the dogs into thinking that food could be found under all tanks. They were also taught not to fear heavy artillery, and were trained to crawl under the back of a tank to avoid fire from enemy machine guns. The first anti-tank dogs were introduced into the Red Army in 1939, and two years later the dogs were put to the test in battle. Anti-tank dogs from the 1st special battalion (212 dogs and 199 trainers) were first deployed in battle near Moscow. The dogs' first major attack was a complete disaster because there was no cover from Soviet infantry. As a result, the Germans easily shot the dogs. In addition, the trainers had made a serious tactical error by training the dogs with Soviet tanks, which ran on diesel. The animals were accustomed to the smell of diesel, but German tanks used gasoline. Thus, the dogs were completely confused on the battlefield. Those soldiers who weren't killed, surrendered with their dogs. During interrogations, the captive trainers revealed Soviet methods used to train anti-tank dogs. Even though the 1st special battalion was wiped out, the Soviet Union continued to use dogs against the Germans. Tactics were changed and dog training resumed. By the end of 1941, over 1,000 dogs were fighting on the front and the next year the number exceeded 2,000. On July 21, 1942, suicide dogs helped determine the outcome of a major battle near Taganrog on the Sea of Azov. When 40 enemy tanks smashed through a battery of anti-tank guns and compromised the position of the naval infantry brigade, the 4th company of anti-tank dogs was the only thing that stood between the command post and the Nazis. Simultaneously, 56 dogs launched an attack and destroyed many enemy tanks. Not only did those dogs stop the offensive, but they also forced the Germans to flee the battlefield. During the Siege of Leningrad, a group of dogs blew up enemy tanks and fortifications. They had slyly made their way around barbed wire, identified the enemy’s location and ran towards the entrance of the bunkers where they had detected human presence. They managed to blow up several bunkers, as well as an ammunition depot. #archaeohistories
0:53

When the Germans advanced towards Moscow in 1941, Soviet troops were in a nearly hopeless situation because they lacked effective anti-tank weapons. Out of desperation, highly trained military dogs were used to destroy the enemy.... In the early years of World War II, Soviet anti-tank dogs posed a major threat to the German advance. Strapped with explosives, these animals were sent on missions to destroy enemy equipment. While today this fact might seem disturbing to animal rights activists, it's important to remember how desperate those times were, when a formidable and evil enemy was almost at the Kremlin gates. Machine guns on German tanks were too high to reach the low-running 'suicide' dogs, and thanks to cover from Soviet infantry the Germans couldn't easily emerge from their tanks and shoot the dogs with rifles. German tank units often stopped their attack if they saw tank destroyer battalions with dogs on the battlefield. The only effective method to prevent such an attack was to use flamethrowers. Often, when German forces went on the offensive, they shot all dogs along the way. Even Luftwaffe planes opened fire on them. The Soviet Union didn’t start using anti-tank dogs in response to the Nazi invasion of 1941. In fact, they began training such dogs in the 1930s, well before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War. The anti-tank dogs were trained to crawl under enemy tanks while carrying explosives on their bodies (12 kg of TNT). A long lever set off an explosion upon contact with the target. The dogs were instructed how to climb under tanks. They were starved for several days, and pieces of meat were placed under practice tanks to fool the dogs into thinking that food could be found under all tanks. They were also taught not to fear heavy artillery, and were trained to crawl under the back of a tank to avoid fire from enemy machine guns. The first anti-tank dogs were introduced into the Red Army in 1939, and two years later the dogs were put to the test in battle. Anti-tank dogs from the 1st special battalion (212 dogs and 199 trainers) were first deployed in battle near Moscow. The dogs' first major attack was a complete disaster because there was no cover from Soviet infantry. As a result, the Germans easily shot the dogs. In addition, the trainers had made a serious tactical error by training the dogs with Soviet tanks, which ran on diesel. The animals were accustomed to the smell of diesel, but German tanks used gasoline. Thus, the dogs were completely confused on the battlefield. Those soldiers who weren't killed, surrendered with their dogs. During interrogations, the captive trainers revealed Soviet methods used to train anti-tank dogs. Even though the 1st special battalion was wiped out, the Soviet Union continued to use dogs against the Germans. Tactics were changed and dog training resumed. By the end of 1941, over 1,000 dogs were fighting on the front and the next year the number exceeded 2,000. On July 21, 1942, suicide dogs helped determine the outcome of a major battle near Taganrog on the Sea of Azov. When 40 enemy tanks smashed through a battery of anti-tank guns and compromised the position of the naval infantry brigade, the 4th company of anti-tank dogs was the only thing that stood between the command post and the Nazis. Simultaneously, 56 dogs launched an attack and destroyed many enemy tanks. Not only did those dogs stop the offensive, but they also forced the Germans to flee the battlefield. During the Siege of Leningrad, a group of dogs blew up enemy tanks and fortifications. They had slyly made their way around barbed wire, identified the enemy’s location and ran towards the entrance of the bunkers where they had detected human presence. They managed to blow up several bunkers, as well as an ammunition depot. #archaeohistories

Archaeo - Histories

258,061 views • 2 days ago

RUSSIAN TANKS are now 90%+ used as MOBILE MORTAR TYPE engagements Up to 5 to 10 kms accuracy to within 5 meters The crews of the T-90M "Prokhod" tanks of the 25th Combined Arms Army of the "West" group of forces, while carrying out fire tasks, destroyed camouflaged bunkers, strongpoints and live forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine units in the Krasnolimansk direction The high accuracy of fire not only led to the destruction of enemy live forces and equipment, but also triggered the detonation of ammunition stored nearby. The details of the combat work were described by the tank commander with the call sign "Kalach". Subscribe
2:46

RUSSIAN TANKS are now 90%+ used as MOBILE MORTAR TYPE engagements Up to 5 to 10 kms accuracy to within 5 meters The crews of the T-90M "Prokhod" tanks of the 25th Combined Arms Army of the "West" group of forces, while carrying out fire tasks, destroyed camouflaged bunkers, strongpoints and live forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine units in the Krasnolimansk direction The high accuracy of fire not only led to the destruction of enemy live forces and equipment, but also triggered the detonation of ammunition stored nearby. The details of the combat work were described by the tank commander with the call sign "Kalach". Subscribe

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺🇮🇪

35,535 views • 3 months ago

The first known appearance of the Russian T-72B3A main battle tank equipped with the Arena-M active protection system (APS) on the frontlines in Ukraine. The Arena-M APS was designed to protect Russian armored vehicles from ATGMs, RPGs and FPV drones. In this case, the system appears to have failed to do its job as the tank was successfully struck by a Ukrainian FPV drone. The footage comes from the recent Russian mechanized assault near the settlement of Mayak in Dobropilla direction, Donetsk front. The attack ended up in failure.
0:21

The first known appearance of the Russian T-72B3A main battle tank equipped with the Arena-M active protection system (APS) on the frontlines in Ukraine. The Arena-M APS was designed to protect Russian armored vehicles from ATGMs, RPGs and FPV drones. In this case, the system appears to have failed to do its job as the tank was successfully struck by a Ukrainian FPV drone. The footage comes from the recent Russian mechanized assault near the settlement of Mayak in Dobropilla direction, Donetsk front. The attack ended up in failure.

Status-6 (War & Military News)

40,021 views • 28 days ago

First Drone vs. Manned Fighter Combat? On December 8, 2025, the Ukrainian Air Force confirmed the loss of a Su-27 fighter jet piloted by Lieutenant Colonel Yevhenii Ivanov, who was killed during a combat mission in the eastern direction. Yesterday, December 17, one Mi-24 was downed in same circumstances. Russian sources allege the aircraft was shot down, but Ukrainian statements describe the circumstances as under investigation, with no official confirmation of the cause. There are unverified Russian claims linking it to a modified Geran-2 drone equipped with an R-60 missile. Ukrainian intelligence has confirmed the existence of Geran-2 variants armed with R-60 air-to-air missiles, designed primarily to counter aircraft or helicopters approaching to intercept drone swarms. If independently verified, such an engagement could represent a significant milestone in drone-vs-manned aircraft combat. This development aligns with broader trends i mentioned in my previous article on Chinese high-altitude drones conducting air-to-air target acquisition from positions well above potential threats. Elon Musk has indeed argued that the future of warfare lies with unmanned aircraft, stating that manned fighter jets are becoming obsolete in the drone era and predicting a shift toward autonomous or remotely controlled systems. But i believe that it’s something to the next two decades. Sixth-generation aircraft concepts often emphasize manned platforms controlling swarms of drones (loyal wingmen), but the question pushes further: How will manned fighters compete against high-altitude unmanned systems operating 10–15 km above their service ceiling and potentially launching air-air hypersonic missiles? In January I will post an article on China's development of layered high-altitude drone systems for ISTAR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance), one optimized for aerial threats and another for naval targets. Recent Chinese programs, like high-altitude stealth drones, recharge stations and mothership concepts capable of deploying swarms, suggest active progress in this direction.
0:29

First Drone vs. Manned Fighter Combat? On December 8, 2025, the Ukrainian Air Force confirmed the loss of a Su-27 fighter jet piloted by Lieutenant Colonel Yevhenii Ivanov, who was killed during a combat mission in the eastern direction. Yesterday, December 17, one Mi-24 was downed in same circumstances. Russian sources allege the aircraft was shot down, but Ukrainian statements describe the circumstances as under investigation, with no official confirmation of the cause. There are unverified Russian claims linking it to a modified Geran-2 drone equipped with an R-60 missile. Ukrainian intelligence has confirmed the existence of Geran-2 variants armed with R-60 air-to-air missiles, designed primarily to counter aircraft or helicopters approaching to intercept drone swarms. If independently verified, such an engagement could represent a significant milestone in drone-vs-manned aircraft combat. This development aligns with broader trends i mentioned in my previous article on Chinese high-altitude drones conducting air-to-air target acquisition from positions well above potential threats. Elon Musk has indeed argued that the future of warfare lies with unmanned aircraft, stating that manned fighter jets are becoming obsolete in the drone era and predicting a shift toward autonomous or remotely controlled systems. But i believe that it’s something to the next two decades. Sixth-generation aircraft concepts often emphasize manned platforms controlling swarms of drones (loyal wingmen), but the question pushes further: How will manned fighters compete against high-altitude unmanned systems operating 10–15 km above their service ceiling and potentially launching air-air hypersonic missiles? In January I will post an article on China's development of layered high-altitude drone systems for ISTAR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance), one optimized for aerial threats and another for naval targets. Recent Chinese programs, like high-altitude stealth drones, recharge stations and mothership concepts capable of deploying swarms, suggest active progress in this direction.

Patricia Marins

49,124 views • 8 months ago

🇩🇪 The German defense company Helsing, specializing in artificial intelligence, has presented the concept of its unmanned stealth bomber CA-1 Europa. The aircraft, whose design took only 14 weeks, is 11 meters long with a maximum takeoff weight of 4 tons, and is presumably going to use a business jet-class engine to achieve subsonic speed. According to the company, the project is based on a Software-First approach, where high performance is achieved through the complex AI pilot Centaur and an open modular architecture, using relatively simple and inexpensive hardware. Helsing plans to invest hundreds of millions of euros to make the first flight of the CA-1 Europa as early as 2027. The main idea: to create an "intelligent mass" of systems, the losses of which can be quickly and cheaply compensated, since one drone will cost only a fraction of the price of a manned fighter. The aircraft, likely with a payload of about 0.5 tons, will be equipped with internal weapon bays and designed to perform reconnaissance missions, electronic warfare tasks, as well as air and ground strike operations at low altitude. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
1:01

🇩🇪 The German defense company Helsing, specializing in artificial intelligence, has presented the concept of its unmanned stealth bomber CA-1 Europa. The aircraft, whose design took only 14 weeks, is 11 meters long with a maximum takeoff weight of 4 tons, and is presumably going to use a business jet-class engine to achieve subsonic speed. According to the company, the project is based on a Software-First approach, where high performance is achieved through the complex AI pilot Centaur and an open modular architecture, using relatively simple and inexpensive hardware. Helsing plans to invest hundreds of millions of euros to make the first flight of the CA-1 Europa as early as 2027. The main idea: to create an "intelligent mass" of systems, the losses of which can be quickly and cheaply compensated, since one drone will cost only a fraction of the price of a manned fighter. The aircraft, likely with a payload of about 0.5 tons, will be equipped with internal weapon bays and designed to perform reconnaissance missions, electronic warfare tasks, as well as air and ground strike operations at low altitude. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

158,385 views • 10 months ago

❗️❗️❗️🇧🇪🇺🇦GOOD NEWS | Belgian company Cockerill has proposed upgrading the Leopard 1 tanks currently in service with the Ukrainian Armed Forces by installing the Cockerill 3105 turret developed by the company. 🔻 For reference: In May 2025, Ukraine received a Leopard 1 tank equipped with a Cockerill turret for testing. In addition, back in the 2010s, the Ukrainian company Luch developed the Falarick guided anti-tank missile, which is designed to be fired from the 105 mm gun of the Cockerill 3105 turret. 🔻 The Cockerill 3105 turret is armed with a high-pressure 105 mm cannon that uses the same ammunition as the Leopard 1 tank gun. It is equipped with an automatic loading system and a modern fire-control system, and is operated by two crew members — the commander and the gunner. See the latest updates with us: @NSTRIKE01
0:22

❗️❗️❗️🇧🇪🇺🇦GOOD NEWS | Belgian company Cockerill has proposed upgrading the Leopard 1 tanks currently in service with the Ukrainian Armed Forces by installing the Cockerill 3105 turret developed by the company. 🔻 For reference: In May 2025, Ukraine received a Leopard 1 tank equipped with a Cockerill turret for testing. In addition, back in the 2010s, the Ukrainian company Luch developed the Falarick guided anti-tank missile, which is designed to be fired from the 105 mm gun of the Cockerill 3105 turret. 🔻 The Cockerill 3105 turret is armed with a high-pressure 105 mm cannon that uses the same ammunition as the Leopard 1 tank gun. It is equipped with an automatic loading system and a modern fire-control system, and is operated by two crew members — the commander and the gunner. See the latest updates with us: @NSTRIKE01

NSTRIKE

47,776 views • 5 months ago

Units of the Unmanned Systems Forces grouping carried out a series of strikes on key enemy targets, including an ST-68 radar, a "Pantsir-S1" anti-aircraft missile and gun system, logistical support and ammunition depots, railway tank cars with fuel and lubricants, mobile fire groups, and logistics facilities. Here are more details about the operations: 🎯In temporarily occupied Feodosia, operators of the 1st Separate USC destroyed a radome inside which an ST-68 radar was located. Immediately after that, the unit's operators struck the radar itself, which was designed to detect and track air targets and was an important element of the enemy's air defense system. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck a "Pantsir-S1" anti-aircraft missile and gun system in temporarily occupied Crimea. The estimated cost of the struck complex is about 15 million US dollars. The "Pantsir-S1" is one of the key elements of the enemy's air defense. 🎯The 414 Magyar's Birds , the K-2 , the "Phoenix" border guard unit, and the 412th "Nemesis" Brigade struck enemy logistics targets in the Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Luhansk regions. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck railway tank cars with fuel and lubricants in the Donetsk region. 🎯The 412th "Nemesis" Brigade struck a logistical support depot in Mariupol. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck an ammunition depot in the Luhansk region. 🎯The "Phoenix" border guard unit struck an enemy mobile fire group in the Luhansk region. The operations were conducted in coordination with the Deep Strike Center of the USF grouping. The Unmanned Systems Forces consistently dismantle the enemy's defense: destroying air target detection means, eliminating air defense systems, and disrupting the supply of ammunition, fuel, and logistical support. USF: One step ahead!
2:24

Units of the Unmanned Systems Forces grouping carried out a series of strikes on key enemy targets, including an ST-68 radar, a "Pantsir-S1" anti-aircraft missile and gun system, logistical support and ammunition depots, railway tank cars with fuel and lubricants, mobile fire groups, and logistics facilities. Here are more details about the operations: 🎯In temporarily occupied Feodosia, operators of the 1st Separate USC destroyed a radome inside which an ST-68 radar was located. Immediately after that, the unit's operators struck the radar itself, which was designed to detect and track air targets and was an important element of the enemy's air defense system. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck a "Pantsir-S1" anti-aircraft missile and gun system in temporarily occupied Crimea. The estimated cost of the struck complex is about 15 million US dollars. The "Pantsir-S1" is one of the key elements of the enemy's air defense. 🎯The 414 Magyar's Birds , the K-2 , the "Phoenix" border guard unit, and the 412th "Nemesis" Brigade struck enemy logistics targets in the Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Luhansk regions. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck railway tank cars with fuel and lubricants in the Donetsk region. 🎯The 412th "Nemesis" Brigade struck a logistical support depot in Mariupol. 🎯The 1st Separate USC struck an ammunition depot in the Luhansk region. 🎯The "Phoenix" border guard unit struck an enemy mobile fire group in the Luhansk region. The operations were conducted in coordination with the Deep Strike Center of the USF grouping. The Unmanned Systems Forces consistently dismantle the enemy's defense: destroying air target detection means, eliminating air defense systems, and disrupting the supply of ammunition, fuel, and logistical support. USF: One step ahead!

🇺🇦 Unmanned Systems Forces

49,980 views • 2 months ago

🇺🇦⚔🇷🇺The Ukrainians is deploying tanks in a counteroffensive in the Kharkiv region. ▪️ The Ukrainian Armed Forces command is deploying troops in the Velykyi Burluk-Melove area, attempting to break through Russian defenses. ▪️The enemy's equipment was met with fire by the Anvar special forces unit, along with the 11th Army Corps. ▪️Yesterday, it was reported that the enemy is counterattacking in the Rubtsovsk direction near the villages of Redkodub, Novoye, Katerynivka, and Karpovka, deploying personnel from the 3rd Army Corps.
2:21

🇺🇦⚔🇷🇺The Ukrainians is deploying tanks in a counteroffensive in the Kharkiv region. ▪️ The Ukrainian Armed Forces command is deploying troops in the Velykyi Burluk-Melove area, attempting to break through Russian defenses. ▪️The enemy's equipment was met with fire by the Anvar special forces unit, along with the 11th Army Corps. ▪️Yesterday, it was reported that the enemy is counterattacking in the Rubtsovsk direction near the villages of Redkodub, Novoye, Katerynivka, and Karpovka, deploying personnel from the 3rd Army Corps.

Military Summary

22,514 views • 21 days ago

The video shows the defeat of a Russian tank assault column by Ukrainian Warriors of the 79th Air Assault Brigade. In the area of Kurakhove, Donetsk region, the Russians tried once again to break through our defenses by sending a column consisting of three newest T-72B3M tanks, two APCs with paratroopers, and a group of motorcyclists. The tanks were equipped with additional protection in the form of a shed on the turret, electronic warfare systems, mine-sweepers. Despite such preparations, the column did not reach the Ukrainian positions - 3 tanks hit mines and were completely destroyed by drones. Both APCs were also hit. At least 6 Russian soldiers were destroyed by grenades that were dropped by from Mavic drones. One of the Russian soldiers tried to hide in the basement of a large dilapidated building, and then the building was destroyed by a Ukrainian guided aerial bomb. Another brilliant work of the Defenders of the 79th Brigade. Glory to the Heroes!
1:27

The video shows the defeat of a Russian tank assault column by Ukrainian Warriors of the 79th Air Assault Brigade. In the area of Kurakhove, Donetsk region, the Russians tried once again to break through our defenses by sending a column consisting of three newest T-72B3M tanks, two APCs with paratroopers, and a group of motorcyclists. The tanks were equipped with additional protection in the form of a shed on the turret, electronic warfare systems, mine-sweepers. Despite such preparations, the column did not reach the Ukrainian positions - 3 tanks hit mines and were completely destroyed by drones. Both APCs were also hit. At least 6 Russian soldiers were destroyed by grenades that were dropped by from Mavic drones. One of the Russian soldiers tried to hide in the basement of a large dilapidated building, and then the building was destroyed by a Ukrainian guided aerial bomb. Another brilliant work of the Defenders of the 79th Brigade. Glory to the Heroes!

Anton Gerashchenko

285,350 views • 2 years ago

🚨🇷🇺 ZELENSKY IN PANIC: RUSSIA UPGRADES T-90M TANKS WITH FRONTLINE COMBAT FEEDBACK Russia's T-90M main battle tank is getting smarter and tougher in real time — Rostec upgraded armor, electronic warfare suites, and active protection systems. 🔸 T-90M has grown more powerful and better protected through continuous upgrades driven by new frontline tasks and direct soldier feedback from Ukraine operations. 🔸 Arena-M, Russia's first hard-kill active protection system, entered service late 2024; an updated version for intercepting drones and loitering munitions completed development in January 2026. 🔸 Uralvagonzavod is expanding both passive and active defences while improving operational and technical characteristics, with heavy focus on crew safety in drone-heavy fights. 🔸 T-90M remains Russia's main battle tank, it matches current Leopard 2A8 and M1A2 Abrams performance but sits below next-generation platforms like the Russian T-14 or China's Type 100. 🔸 Rostech is locking in long-term gains by routing SVO veterans into a new preparatory engineering faculty at Bauman University so they can design future systems at key plants. Will Russia's battlefield-to-factory iteration cycle give the T-90M a decisive edge over slower-updating Western tank programs in future high-intensity conflicts? Is the T-90M becoming the most combat-adapted tank of the drone war?
1:01

🚨🇷🇺 ZELENSKY IN PANIC: RUSSIA UPGRADES T-90M TANKS WITH FRONTLINE COMBAT FEEDBACK Russia's T-90M main battle tank is getting smarter and tougher in real time — Rostec upgraded armor, electronic warfare suites, and active protection systems. 🔸 T-90M has grown more powerful and better protected through continuous upgrades driven by new frontline tasks and direct soldier feedback from Ukraine operations. 🔸 Arena-M, Russia's first hard-kill active protection system, entered service late 2024; an updated version for intercepting drones and loitering munitions completed development in January 2026. 🔸 Uralvagonzavod is expanding both passive and active defences while improving operational and technical characteristics, with heavy focus on crew safety in drone-heavy fights. 🔸 T-90M remains Russia's main battle tank, it matches current Leopard 2A8 and M1A2 Abrams performance but sits below next-generation platforms like the Russian T-14 or China's Type 100. 🔸 Rostech is locking in long-term gains by routing SVO veterans into a new preparatory engineering faculty at Bauman University so they can design future systems at key plants. Will Russia's battlefield-to-factory iteration cycle give the T-90M a decisive edge over slower-updating Western tank programs in future high-intensity conflicts? Is the T-90M becoming the most combat-adapted tank of the drone war?

NewRulesGeopolitics

31,655 views • 1 month ago

A kamikaze drone with a range of over 160 km and Starlink control has appeared in the arsenal of the Russian Armed Forces. The long-range barrage weapon BM-35 has just appeared in the zone of the special military operation and has already surprised the enemy. It hits targets deep in the enemy's defenses at a distance of over 160 kilometers. At the same time, it is guided in real time, which allows it to attack rapidly moving targets. Its cost is much lower than that of anti-aircraft missiles, so even its destruction causes losses for the enemy. And recently, the enemy found a Starlink Mini dish in the wreckage of a downed UAV, with which drone operators receive images from cameras, and now complains that it cannot suppress it with electronic warfare. - AN
0:35

A kamikaze drone with a range of over 160 km and Starlink control has appeared in the arsenal of the Russian Armed Forces. The long-range barrage weapon BM-35 has just appeared in the zone of the special military operation and has already surprised the enemy. It hits targets deep in the enemy's defenses at a distance of over 160 kilometers. At the same time, it is guided in real time, which allows it to attack rapidly moving targets. Its cost is much lower than that of anti-aircraft missiles, so even its destruction causes losses for the enemy. And recently, the enemy found a Starlink Mini dish in the wreckage of a downed UAV, with which drone operators receive images from cameras, and now complains that it cannot suppress it with electronic warfare. - AN

Zlatti71

64,897 views • 7 months ago

💥☠️ Did he Make it ??? Fighting in the Kharkov Region: Destruction of a Ukrainian Armed Forces Truck with Ukrainian Nationalists During aerial reconnaissance of the enemy's main logistical routes, our UAV operators detected the movement of an enemy military truck carrying a combat group of Ukrainian nationalists. The command of the Ukrainian Armed Forces sent the personnel to certain death. The section of the road near the village of Prikolotnoe, along which the vehicle was moving, has been under our complete fire control for a long time. It is important to note that both our servicemen, engaged in fighting on the Volchansk front, and the "Northerners" carrying out tasks in the Velikoburluk direction are operating in this section of the front. The enemy had no chance, not even a slim one, of breaking through to their forward positions, let alone in a truck in broad daylight. In the footage, you can see the combat work of FPV drone operators from the 34th Guards Mountain Motorized Rifle Brigade "North." They destroyed the enemy's vehicle with a series of accurate strikes and eliminated the truck driver. The last moments of his life were captured on video... It should be reminded that the most effective way for a Ukrainian soldier to avoid such a senseless death is to contact Russian servicemen in advance. 📹Northern Wind 🇷🇺
0:24

💥☠️ Did he Make it ??? Fighting in the Kharkov Region: Destruction of a Ukrainian Armed Forces Truck with Ukrainian Nationalists During aerial reconnaissance of the enemy's main logistical routes, our UAV operators detected the movement of an enemy military truck carrying a combat group of Ukrainian nationalists. The command of the Ukrainian Armed Forces sent the personnel to certain death. The section of the road near the village of Prikolotnoe, along which the vehicle was moving, has been under our complete fire control for a long time. It is important to note that both our servicemen, engaged in fighting on the Volchansk front, and the "Northerners" carrying out tasks in the Velikoburluk direction are operating in this section of the front. The enemy had no chance, not even a slim one, of breaking through to their forward positions, let alone in a truck in broad daylight. In the footage, you can see the combat work of FPV drone operators from the 34th Guards Mountain Motorized Rifle Brigade "North." They destroyed the enemy's vehicle with a series of accurate strikes and eliminated the truck driver. The last moments of his life were captured on video... It should be reminded that the most effective way for a Ukrainian soldier to avoid such a senseless death is to contact Russian servicemen in advance. 📹Northern Wind 🇷🇺

𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝 𝐙 🇷🇺🇮🇪

17,302 views • 21 days ago