Some sources suggest it was shot in Mariupol. The original video was recorded on the BTR-4’s onboard system the version online looks like it was filmed during playback on a phone, with the bottom portion of the screen left out to exclude time and location data. This may be the squad dismounted from the BTR-4 from which the action was filmed. In the video, Ukrainian infantry can be seen very close to the action, apparently working in co-ordination with the armor. As Benham-Crosswell notes, the accepted approach is combined arms, with infantry and armor supporting each other, the vehicles bringing heavy firepower while the foot soldiers provide situational awareness and lay down suppressive fire on anyone pointing an anti-tank weapon. As in other cases, Russian armor seems to be operating on its own without infantry to act as their eyes and ears, an extremely dangerous approach in in built-up areas. Driving around at this range, when an enemy vehicle can appear around any corner and destroy you with one shot, requires the proverbial nerves of steel.Īnother feature is the presence and absence of foot soldiers from the two sides. The 30mm cannon is effective out to 2,000 metres or so, but the fighting is at a hundred meters or less. This may be because the crew had little idea of where the enemy was and they may have been taking fire from other directions.Ī couple of other features stand out in this video. “No sign of smoke being popped, fire returned or, particularly the T-72, any attempt to reverse.”Ĭloser inspection shows that the T-72 does appear to move forward slightly (from 23-24 seconds) during the engagement, but does not get out of the way. “Lack of reaction from either vehicle was a surprise,” says Benham-Crosswell.
For their part the Russians failed to react quickly enough either to get out of danger or deal with the fast-moving threat. While the 30mm cannon is not the weapon you would want to take into a fight with a T-72, with sufficient courage, skill and knowledge of your enemy’s weak spots, it is still possible to win. secondary fires - to take off,” says Benham-Crosswell. “Having penetrated with a relatively low-energy round it will take a while for some behind-armor effects - i.e. The T-72’s ammunition storage is in the hull in the area struck, so the most likely explanation seems to be that this was hit enough times. Diesel fuel is notoriously difficult to ignite and some tank designers actually put fuel tanks in front of vital components to protect them. While some commenters suggested that the rounds must have hit a fuel tank to cause the fire, this is not the case. M2 Bradley vehicles was reportedly effective against the side armor of Russian-made tanks in Iraq, though normally the Bradley would use guided missiles. It is worth noting that the 25mm round fired by U.S. “It’s no surprise that 30mm knocks holes in it,” Benham-Crosswell. The lower 40%, which would normally be less visible to the enemy due to uneven terrain or the tank being behind cover, only has armor 20mm thick: a weak point which the BTR-4 gunner knew to go for. While the frontal armor may have an effective thickness of 500mm, the side armor is only 80mm for the upper 60% of its height. In the case of the T-72, a detailed 2015 study on tank blog Below The Turret Ring gives the lowdown gleaned from a number of open-source works on just how effective the armor is in individual parts of the tank. Side and rear armor are invariably lighter, especially on Russian tanks. Because the enemy is most likely to be in front of a tank, most of the weight of the armor is put on the ‘frontal arc’ to stop threats from ahead. However, tank armor is not the same from all angles. So it seems unlikely that something like a 30mm cannon, which can only penetrate about 45 mm or armor at typical combat ranges, would be able to do more than scratch it. This armor was designed to defeat the 105mm guns of NATO tanks, and early anti-tank missiles like Dragon and TOW. Its frontal armor is slanted to give an effective thickness of over 500 mm (20 inches) of steel plate, or at least ten times as much as the BTR-4. The T-72B3 is one of Russia’s most modern main battle tanks, a 45-ton steel beast with a 125mm cannon capable of destroying other tanks at long range.
This is one of the most modern tanks in the invasion.
Russian T-72B3 main battle tank in Moscow.
0 kommentar(er)
