Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 11:34

hornetfinn wrote:Here is the video of the destruction of that T-90M:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1523925065909342210

According to that, it was Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle that did the damage. From the video it seems that it was a relatively fast projectile (but not as fast as tank rounds) that hit the tank and it flew near the ground as it kicked up some dust. It also seemed to hit the back of the turret and was not a top-attack weapon like MBT-LAW. So Carl Gustaf is very possible weapon for that and penetration (>500mm after ERA) would be very sufficient for where it hit. Ammunition inside definitely detonated given how much smoke and flames was coming out and where.


Nice video hornetfinn!
Interesting to see the Carl Gustaf still being very effective against something like a T-90M.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4014
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post10 May 2022, 11:46

ricnunes wrote:Interesting to see the Carl Gustaf still being very effective against something like a T-90M.


Yes, such manportable weapons are still very dangerous to any tank from the rear or sides. Even M1A2 or Leopard 2A7 could get killed or at least seriously damaged if hit like that (but with far better crew survivability rate). That's why infantry support is essential for tanks in that kind of area and that definitely seems to be one major weak point for the Russian forces which Ukranian forces can regularly exploit.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 11:49

If I'm not mistaken someone asked about tank vs tank engagements before. In the link below there's a video that shows what it looks like a tank/armored vehicles versus tank/armored vehicles engagements. The video is identified as being "Russian armoured column targeted and destroyed by the Ukrainian 54th Mechanized Brigade in Donetsk Oblast":

https://twitter.com/Blue_Sauron/status/ ... 0578321415

I just wish that the Ukrainians or however shares these videos stopped adding ridiculous "soundtracks" to these same videos!! :bang:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

zhangmdev

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 01 May 2017, 09:07

Unread post10 May 2022, 12:08

That isn't the main gun, which is invisible at that angle. That is a piece of bent metal ripped apart from the turret. Marked by yellow arrow.

t90mx.jpg
t-90m gun not
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4014
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post10 May 2022, 12:14

That could also be guided artillery rounds, which Ukraine has also been using. They have their own "Kvitnyk" semi-active laser guided artillery projectile for 152 and 155 mm guns. It might also be a combination of tank vs tank combat and artillery used by Ukranians.

I totally agree with your "soundtrack" sentiment... :evil:
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4858
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post10 May 2022, 12:28

ricnunes wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:Here is the video of the destruction of that T-90M:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1523925065909342210.


Holy smokes! The T-90M goes up in flames just as easily as the T-72/T-80, or so it seems. Do the Russians not have a tank that can take some hits? Because it's not just Javelin that's decimating them, it's a variety of anti-tank systems. If I were Russia, I'd go back to the drawing board and come up with a clean sheet design.

Yes, I know the T-14 is supposedly that tank. But with 3 planned to participate in yesterday's May Day parade (only 2 did) and no other signs of progress, it's not looking feasible. If they're dumb enough to deploy them to Ukraine, they'll no doubt suffer the same fate. And really, who's going to buy Russian tanks going forward?

You're going to pay (and lose) millions plus the lives of the crew, likely to Javelin anti-tank missiles costing less than $200,000.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 12:42

zhangmdev wrote:That isn't the main gun, which is invisible at that angle. That is a piece of bent metal ripped apart from the turret. Marked by yellow arrow.


Yes, you're correct zhangmdev!

I indeed thought that bent piece metal was the main gun. But it now seems clear that it isn't. Thanks for clearing this up :thumb:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 12:50

hornetfinn wrote:That could also be guided artillery rounds, which Ukraine has also been using. They have their own "Kvitnyk" semi-active laser guided artillery projectile for 152 and 155 mm guns. It might also be a combination of tank vs tank combat and artillery used by Ukranians.


I also believe that there's indeed artillery falling in the mix.
But I think that's combination of tank vs tank combat and artillery used by Ukrainians since I believe one Ukrainian vehicle can be seen in the 0:40 frame mark:

ukraa.jpg
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1744
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post10 May 2022, 17:40

hornetfinn wrote:Here is the video of the destruction of that T-90M:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1523925065909342210



If we look video couple of times, we can see armor column probable Russian one, first tank is destroyed one. Also you see some folks around second tank in column.

When first one goes in flames you will see dust is coming from above of first tank and then zoom out we see second tank is in dust.

This indicate second tank fired on first one.

Folks around second tank at beginning of video is probable crew of first tank informing others tank can't be repaired (damaged) and it is better to destroy it.

Because both tanks are quite close hit from second tank will surely destroyed first one, it is almost point blank and it hit tank in side armor.
Offline

zhangmdev

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 01 May 2017, 09:07

Unread post10 May 2022, 18:06

First, I am not sure if the 2nd in line was a tank.
Second, the dust kicked up was visible after the blow out. It was caused by the 1st one explosion, not 2nd firing.
Third, the closest dust kick up to the 2nd one was off the line of fire.
Fourth, there is a follow-on video shows a tanker's helmet near the T-90M wreck in the midst of the debris. I won't post the screenshot.

The "2nd one destroyed the 1st one to prevent capture" theory seems unlikely.

final_627a261eebce250074d46ab8_49121x.jpg
2nd
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1744
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post10 May 2022, 19:25

zhangmdev wrote:First, I am not sure if the 2nd in line was a tank.
Second, the dust kicked up was visible after the blow out. It was caused by the 1st one explosion, not 2nd firing.
Third, the closest dust kick up to the 2nd one was off the line of fire.
Fourth, there is a follow-on video shows a tanker's helmet near the T-90M wreck in the midst of the debris. I won't post the screenshot.


https://imgur.com/TznfuAd

This is something much more powerful then Carl Gustav especially because there wasn't classic autoloader detonation.

It could be tank round hit this tank or artillery but atillery is very unlikely.

What is also interesting is upper middle you see clear tank fire mark on ground. Where 2nd tank would be.

What I think is Gustav hit left side of tank, probable wounding someone you mentioned (helmet on ground probable bloody). Gustav can do that especially with newer warheads, side of tanks aren't that well armored.

Also we see one of wheel was torn off so repairing tank is out of question especially in that sitation.

So 2nd tank destroy it. That is my POV could be wrong but it damage on tank turret and no fire on hatches indicate it was heavy round from tank then artillery or Gustav.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 19:27

zhangmdev wrote:The "2nd one destroyed the 1st one to prevent capture" theory seems unlikely.


Exactly!
And lets not forget that whoever shared the video initially, confirmed that the T-90M was hit and destroyed by a Carl Gustav.

For those who don't know what a Carl Gustav is:

iw_rr_carlgustav_v1.jpg
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1744
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post10 May 2022, 19:40

mixelflick wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:Here is the video of the destruction of that T-90M:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1523925065909342210.


Holy smokes! The T-90M goes up in flames just as easily as the T-72/T-80, or so it seems. Do the Russians not have a tank that can take some hits? Because it's not just Javelin that's decimating them, it's a variety of anti-tank systems. If I were Russia, I'd go back to the drawing board and come up with a clean sheet design.

Yes, I know the T-14 is supposedly that tank. But with 3 planned to participate in yesterday's May Day parade (only 2 did) and no other signs of progress, it's not looking feasible. If they're dumb enough to deploy them to Ukraine, they'll no doubt suffer the same fate. And really, who's going to buy Russian tanks going forward?

You're going to pay (and lose) millions plus the lives of the crew, likely to Javelin anti-tank missiles costing less than $200,000.



Flames are from external ammo rack, turret hatches don't have burn marks:
https://imgur.com/ZRdbeXQ

In fact crew was probable already outside tank when it was hit, if theory of 2nd tank kill it is true. I mean why would hatches would be open?

Btw they did had excellent design in 1990s but it state need to fund it so nothing happened:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRCekXW_4Cs

It was low turret with bustle autoloader, crew is 100% separated from ammo. Also Omsk design turret and put in on T-80 chassis but it could be easily fitted on T-72 too.

Disadvantage was weak bustle armor, so T-95 was favored which was monstrosity of tank, just look size of it:
https://i0.wp.com/www.globaldefensecorp ... 1024&ssl=1

Also they put everything they could on it, no wonder state said no, scale it down a lot, which Armata is.

Problem with Armata is new engine. Only recently they were able to fix bugs. I mean they want tank engine with 10.000h of service life in normal conditions! Also it is design to be able to double is HP in war conditions, from 1000hp to 2000hp if I remember right.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4082
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post10 May 2022, 19:48

milosh wrote:This is something much more powerful then Carl Gustav especially because there wasn't classic autoloader detonation.


That's seems to be an ammo storage detonation!

And the Carl Gustav has been constantly updated and receiving new ammo including the FFV751 which is a tandem-warhead HEAT round which is capable of defeating and penetrate armor with more than 500 mm of thickness. So yes, more than capable of penetrating the sides of your beloved super-mega T-90M (which is where the T-90M was hit by the Carl G).

Carl-Gustaf_M4_CGM4_multi-role_anti-tank_rocket_weapon_system_SAAB_ammunition_details_925_002.jpg


And I fully agree with zhangmdev - the origin of the explosion is NOT in line of sight with that "tentative" second tank that you talk so much about!
Last edited by ricnunes on 10 May 2022, 19:59, edited 2 times in total.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

zhangmdev

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 01 May 2017, 09:07

Unread post10 May 2022, 19:54

Tank round, NLAW, Javelin usually will not cause instant blow out. This event is peculiar because the destruction was instantaneous and complete. No burn mark on hatches? Everything was burned. The commander hatch was nowhere to be found. Three KIA I guess.

Edit1: the commander hatch should be there if it was opened when blow out. The small hatch for stub ejection was also missing. The back of the turret also looks like breached. It is reasonable to assume that the blow out spreaded from the ammo box into the turret.

t90hatch.jpg
T-90M commander hatch


Edit2:

UKR: the hospital was bombed.
RUS: no, UKR did the bombing.
UKR: we hit Moskva.
RUS: it was an accident.
UKR: TB2 got a helicopter.
RUS: that was a UKR helicopter.
UKR: we caught a T-90M
RUS: we destroyed it ourselves.

See the pattern here?
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests