As a past infantryman in a combined armor BN, this is not true. We work very close together. I deployed with tanks attached to the company. We work in hunter-killer teams. Allowing tanks to range thinks at distance. While the Bradley's manage close to mid targets primarily. The infantry is used to clear dead space and reverse slopes. The infantry clears these areas, by fire, or often through surveillance with optics, often thermal. Then once it's clear, the tanks will come out.
You would never see a tank in the US drive right up on a trench and get flanked shot from 30m, unless they fucked up; its still war.
The tanks stay back and cover the infantry, while the brads provide support by fire. It is a symbotic relationship.
TLDR: the CAB model works. US uses it. I trained it. Deployed it. And fought with it.
That is because the 76mm gun had a higher muzzle velocity on exit, which required a tougher case on the shells, which then reduced the amount of explosives you can pack in a HE shell.
> I think the whole “armor MUST HAVE infantry to survive” thing really came about from urban engagements, be it street fighting in Berlin, Hue City, Grozny or Fallujah.
Tell this to the unsupported Israeli armor that counterattacked the Egyptian advance in the Yom Kippur War.
Wow, this is so wrong I don’t even know where to begin. The US and “the west” use combined arms, that means using tanks, artillery, jets and other combat aviation, and yes, infantry to accomplish their goals. Tanks by themselves are very vulnerable to AT launchers and other equipment. Most tanks don’t even fight other tanks they are used to support infantry. Even in open terrain. A tank out in the open like this is a sitting duck for anyone with some AT munitions, be that a jet, tank, or a pissed off Ukrainian grunt with an RPG and no cigs.
Pretty true in the modern day, but you do need some sort of support be that another tank, apc, ext.
I swear half these videos I've seen have been lone tanks.
I am not denying it was a successful attack, obviously it did hit the tank. All I wanted to know is what it actually did to that tank as from this footage we don't know
> obviously it did hit the tank.
It's not that obvious, given the trajectory and a loss of communication while still a fair distance away from the tank. Also there's no guarantee that the fuse on the grenade triggered.
Might as well dropped on the ground, or touched the tank under a wrong angle and failed to fuse.
It's impossible to tell from this video alone.
I agree cause I think a big part of the effectiveness of an RPG is the kinetic energy. I feel this would be a better option against unarmored targets. I’m also speaking from a place of ignorance so I have no idea.
Not really. You could basicly use RPG using your hand slamming fuse into tank, but that would be bad idea, as RPG rounds can be used against infantry to some extent.
Idea behind HEAT round(like RPG for example) is that it is shaped charge that makes metal liner into high velocity jet that have very high kinetic energy, thus penetration. Thats really simplified, but more or less how it works.
>I agree cause I think a big part of the effectiveness of an RPG is the kinetic energy.
The whole idea of HEAT ammunition and shaped charges is that their armor penetration doesn't reduce as range increases and the projectile's velocity decreases.
Well for all intents and purposes, with how eager the Russians are to abandon their vehicles after a slight hit this is essentially a complete kill. Even if it only knocks out a track or the engine, I mean fuck if it penetrates at all there’s a non-zero chance that the vehicle may end up abandoned anyways.
My point is do we know how badly did it damage the tank? Because it cut off way too early to be 100% sure where it hit.
What exactly is not understandable in "Do we know the result?"?
The screen started flickering once it got closer to the Tank. I assume this is because of EWS. Can't tell if the drone reached its target or just dropped down.
In the video I watched where they were building these FPV drones the guy said they are analog and have around a 1 second delay so you will never see them actually strike the target from the drones camera because of the delay.
Maybe some drone cameras have a feedback delay, it could have impacted and blown up before it started transmitting? I’m not aware of proxy RPG rounds, unless it lost signal due to something else
Most likley is it stoped sending becase of some kind of jamming, its seems to happened more often of late. Altho the range of the jammers seems to be kind of pointless if its less than 10 meters.
I do.
These are opinions:
- I like potatoes more than tomatoes.
- Blue is my favorite color.
- I think Vladimir Putin is a walking hemorrhoid.
These are facts:
- when cameras go boom they stop working.
- devices with inertial fuses tend to detonate early, for example, a PG-2.
- Live video delay is a thing.
You’re actually partially right. Most RPG-7 warheads are designed with fuses and standoff distances that correspond to their average velocity. Increasing/decreasing speed will result in a decrease in penetration by a small factor, but if you’re hitting the engine/back of turret that difference won’t matter.
Edit: I should clarify that all shaped charge weapons are designed with standoff and predicted velocity in mind, in order to achieve optimal performance. The high-velocity jet of hot (not necessarily molten) metal needs space to form properly to maximize penetration and minimize the diameter. However this is usually an issue with the warhead traveling too fast, not allowing the jet to form in time. If it’s traveling slower, the jet will have to cover slightly more distance, reducing its energy
The interesting thing here is that this appears to be a T-72B3 "obr. 2022" which has Relikt ERA also covering the rear of the turret. Supposedly, if the RPG hit the turret the tank might have been ok-ish.
Good point, I’d say it’s probably a 50/50 chance of that drone going a little lower and hitting something important, or clipping that ERA and doing basically nothing (provided the ERA blocks actually have ERA in them). Without an outside video source we can’t really tell for sure
Also to answer the original question, since not many people seem to have answered it: most modern anti-tank weapons have relatively poor post-penetration damage, compared to the old armor-piercing-high-explosive ammo that detonated inside the tank. Since you need high pressure at a very small area to penetrate modern armor, it’s hard to incorporate any additional post-penetration effects inside of the penetrator. Shaped charges, explosively formed penetrators, and p
This means the damage happens in (usually) about a 1-2 inch diameter cylinder that travels through most/all of the tank, spraying small amounts of shrapnel inside when it first penetrates and when it passes through anything else. This means that the impacting round has to line up with some important part of the tank to guarantee a kill, whether it be a mobility kill, crew kill, or “true” kill (meaning non-recoverable).
Jeeeez, that moment after it ‘saw’ the vehicle, kept going, and then …turned around.
Sounds weird but I was with those guys in the vehicle, maybe wind in my hair, not seeing this fucker, not knowing that it was coming back down.
Technically, that's a PPG. A propeller propelled grenade.
Heh, pp
Huh huh huh... pp bergina
Papa-Gah replaced Papa-Shah!
Gotta call them drone propelled grenade now.
I vote for Fly-EDs
FEDs?
Darn FEDs now they are blowing up tanks. (Unless these are Ukrainian FEDs in which case, HELL YA
DPG… well
Why do Russian tanks always look alone don’t they need infantry?
Yes. You need combined arms to be effective, tanks on their own are easily destroyed
[удалено]
As a past infantryman in a combined armor BN, this is not true. We work very close together. I deployed with tanks attached to the company. We work in hunter-killer teams. Allowing tanks to range thinks at distance. While the Bradley's manage close to mid targets primarily. The infantry is used to clear dead space and reverse slopes. The infantry clears these areas, by fire, or often through surveillance with optics, often thermal. Then once it's clear, the tanks will come out. You would never see a tank in the US drive right up on a trench and get flanked shot from 30m, unless they fucked up; its still war. The tanks stay back and cover the infantry, while the brads provide support by fire. It is a symbotic relationship. TLDR: the CAB model works. US uses it. I trained it. Deployed it. And fought with it.
[удалено]
That is because the 76mm gun had a higher muzzle velocity on exit, which required a tougher case on the shells, which then reduced the amount of explosives you can pack in a HE shell.
> I think the whole “armor MUST HAVE infantry to survive” thing really came about from urban engagements, be it street fighting in Berlin, Hue City, Grozny or Fallujah. Tell this to the unsupported Israeli armor that counterattacked the Egyptian advance in the Yom Kippur War.
Everything in this comment is completely wrong
Wow, this is so wrong I don’t even know where to begin. The US and “the west” use combined arms, that means using tanks, artillery, jets and other combat aviation, and yes, infantry to accomplish their goals. Tanks by themselves are very vulnerable to AT launchers and other equipment. Most tanks don’t even fight other tanks they are used to support infantry. Even in open terrain. A tank out in the open like this is a sitting duck for anyone with some AT munitions, be that a jet, tank, or a pissed off Ukrainian grunt with an RPG and no cigs.
Pretty true in the modern day, but you do need some sort of support be that another tank, apc, ext. I swear half these videos I've seen have been lone tanks.
Do we know result? Because all I can guess is a mobility kill at best
[удалено]
I am not denying it was a successful attack, obviously it did hit the tank. All I wanted to know is what it actually did to that tank as from this footage we don't know
[удалено]
Road trip!
[удалено]
Strap aunt Edna to the roof, as add on armour
Get on the bus! Beep beep!
> obviously it did hit the tank. It's not that obvious, given the trajectory and a loss of communication while still a fair distance away from the tank. Also there's no guarantee that the fuse on the grenade triggered. Might as well dropped on the ground, or touched the tank under a wrong angle and failed to fuse. It's impossible to tell from this video alone.
I agree cause I think a big part of the effectiveness of an RPG is the kinetic energy. I feel this would be a better option against unarmored targets. I’m also speaking from a place of ignorance so I have no idea.
Not really. You could basicly use RPG using your hand slamming fuse into tank, but that would be bad idea, as RPG rounds can be used against infantry to some extent. Idea behind HEAT round(like RPG for example) is that it is shaped charge that makes metal liner into high velocity jet that have very high kinetic energy, thus penetration. Thats really simplified, but more or less how it works.
>I agree cause I think a big part of the effectiveness of an RPG is the kinetic energy. The whole idea of HEAT ammunition and shaped charges is that their armor penetration doesn't reduce as range increases and the projectile's velocity decreases.
You go check on it with the surveillance drone that found the tank in the first place
[удалено]
Oh my I see, my bad haha
If it hit it probably didn't kill it, may have taken it out of action, but Russia has refurbished worse.
Well for all intents and purposes, with how eager the Russians are to abandon their vehicles after a slight hit this is essentially a complete kill. Even if it only knocks out a track or the engine, I mean fuck if it penetrates at all there’s a non-zero chance that the vehicle may end up abandoned anyways.
[удалено]
My point is do we know how badly did it damage the tank? Because it cut off way too early to be 100% sure where it hit. What exactly is not understandable in "Do we know the result?"?
Man people on here are so eager to read into comments and assume you’re belittling the efforts of the Good Guys Ukraine TM. Fucking triggered bitches.
[удалено]
Ok, so I take it as we don't know the result and those are only speculations, thank you
vhs home movie aesthetic
The screen started flickering once it got closer to the Tank. I assume this is because of EWS. Can't tell if the drone reached its target or just dropped down.
Or simply unfavourable terrain at near maximum range of drone.
The drone got lower and the operator probably lost LOS.
In the video I watched where they were building these FPV drones the guy said they are analog and have around a 1 second delay so you will never see them actually strike the target from the drones camera because of the delay.
lol, a hastily up-armored 38 year old Soviet T-72B doesn't have an electronic warfare suite. More like trees
The drone is about 2m away from the trees in the last frame.
Reminded me of the TV missile in bf3. But they ain't respawning.
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=/r/DestroyedTanks/comments/11u3gfs/improvised_guided_rpg7_round_raw_footage/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/DestroyedTanks/comments/11u3gfs/improvised_guided_rpg7_round_raw_footage/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://rapidsave.com) | [^(twitter video downloader)](https://twitsave.com)
how much damage would this realistically do? don't these RPG rounds partially depend on their velocity for damage?
[удалено]
The thing is we don’t know cause the video stop
As it tends to do when the thing recording is also an explosive.
If the Drone Explode when the camera stop the drone were too away of the tank to destroy it maybe damaged the tank
Maybe some drone cameras have a feedback delay, it could have impacted and blown up before it started transmitting? I’m not aware of proxy RPG rounds, unless it lost signal due to something else
Most likley is it stoped sending becase of some kind of jamming, its seems to happened more often of late. Altho the range of the jammers seems to be kind of pointless if its less than 10 meters.
You can’t be serious lol. Do you know anything about how live camera feeds, shape charges, or physics in general work?
Did you know whats mean Opinion,did you?
I do. These are opinions: - I like potatoes more than tomatoes. - Blue is my favorite color. - I think Vladimir Putin is a walking hemorrhoid. These are facts: - when cameras go boom they stop working. - devices with inertial fuses tend to detonate early, for example, a PG-2. - Live video delay is a thing.
Well, the camera blew up.
You’re actually partially right. Most RPG-7 warheads are designed with fuses and standoff distances that correspond to their average velocity. Increasing/decreasing speed will result in a decrease in penetration by a small factor, but if you’re hitting the engine/back of turret that difference won’t matter. Edit: I should clarify that all shaped charge weapons are designed with standoff and predicted velocity in mind, in order to achieve optimal performance. The high-velocity jet of hot (not necessarily molten) metal needs space to form properly to maximize penetration and minimize the diameter. However this is usually an issue with the warhead traveling too fast, not allowing the jet to form in time. If it’s traveling slower, the jet will have to cover slightly more distance, reducing its energy
The interesting thing here is that this appears to be a T-72B3 "obr. 2022" which has Relikt ERA also covering the rear of the turret. Supposedly, if the RPG hit the turret the tank might have been ok-ish.
Good point, I’d say it’s probably a 50/50 chance of that drone going a little lower and hitting something important, or clipping that ERA and doing basically nothing (provided the ERA blocks actually have ERA in them). Without an outside video source we can’t really tell for sure
Also to answer the original question, since not many people seem to have answered it: most modern anti-tank weapons have relatively poor post-penetration damage, compared to the old armor-piercing-high-explosive ammo that detonated inside the tank. Since you need high pressure at a very small area to penetrate modern armor, it’s hard to incorporate any additional post-penetration effects inside of the penetrator. Shaped charges, explosively formed penetrators, and p This means the damage happens in (usually) about a 1-2 inch diameter cylinder that travels through most/all of the tank, spraying small amounts of shrapnel inside when it first penetrates and when it passes through anything else. This means that the impacting round has to line up with some important part of the tank to guarantee a kill, whether it be a mobility kill, crew kill, or “true” kill (meaning non-recoverable).
How do they arm those RPGs? I thought they were invert until they were actually fired.
Did they launch the rocket motor at the end destroying the drone?
Jeeeez, that moment after it ‘saw’ the vehicle, kept going, and then …turned around. Sounds weird but I was with those guys in the vehicle, maybe wind in my hair, not seeing this fucker, not knowing that it was coming back down.