Thanks for watching guys, this is I think at the moment the most comprehensive video looking at appearances of these tanks. Sources and full article available here - armourersbench.com/2024/05/12/the-turtle-tank-evolves/ Thanks - Matt.
Should the exposed tracks now be the priority of the FPV drones? If successful, once immobilised an open hatch or artillery strike should sort them out. How much of a punch is needed to break a track?
These tanks are the natural evolution of Soviet artillery focused doctrine. Both sides use their tanks for indirect fire, so we will likely see these tanks repurposed for that role as well since they have the added benefit of protection against drones. I can see the future of the war heading towards heavily armored, drone resistant vehicles shelling everything into oblivion.
No, its more like Robot wars. Robots in that show also slowly evolved and then one appeared that tended to make mincemeat out of all the others until a better one came along.
Indee, with americans fielding the M10 Booker for this purpose (Newest one at least). Other countries using dedicated IFV with cannons for this purpose or wheeled armored vehicles.
@@jonathanpudim Since the Booker main gun is only .51 inch bigger than the smaller Stuart's, I think that tanks of about that size would be better. Retro fitting a Stuart would be cheaper.
@@leondillon8723 we must be thinking of different light tanks cause there's no way you suggested a century old light tank could be retrofitted with modern engines, electronics, hydraulics, servos, weapon platforms, armor and made compatible to modern fuel systems. Let alone done at anything close to the price of a new vehicle? Not to mention theres probably only a hundered or so still operational on the whole planet.
@@rennscott5808 The WW I Renaulr Ft 17 was in service for 80+ years. India sold their Sherman Tanks. Israel bought a 100+ and SLEPed with modern electronics and upgunned them. The tanks were still very effective.
its not a joke of a vehicle dude the tank is very very effective against drones since drones explode upon contact which is an issue when the surfare they're blowing up against has a giant space between the place its hitting and where it wants to hit
They've ruined the functionality of the vehicle for everything but being a mostly-blind easily-bogged-down troop transport, in order to reduce the risk of one specific threat. But the fact that it seems to have reduced the risk of said threat is leading to everyone doubling down on the idea.
@@valyshknee4203yeah era can’t cover everything so this honestly might be worth the trade offs shits fucked everyone keeps celebrating about these modern invincible tanks being destroyed but all of them are helpless to drones
I love that the design looks like a tank that's smashed through a barn and had the roof comically stuck on its turret. I bet that's how it was invented.
@@sporehux8344The lookout turns his head to his teammate: were there sheds in this field? Go back and look at the screen and see that the sheds are getting closer like a cat
Little story: There is a game called "Crossout". A PvP battles between vehicles, that players can craft from scratch. Developers were expecting players to come up with cool designs for their vehicles, mounting weapons and armor and show creativity. What instead happened is minmaxing. Moving abominations, fitted with ridiculous decorations. One of the most powerful and meta weapons was a massive cannon. That deals insane amounts of damage. Completely destroying the part it hits. So players placed on their vehicles... chrmistmas tree decorations, that had 1health point and large hitbox. So these massive cannons hit tree, destroy tree, but dont deal damage to the other components. Basically those trees acted as protective one-time use layers. And here we are. With people placing metal sheets on top of a tank to take drone strike. Same concept. Same execution.
@@neirucha sadly i wasnt playing this game. It was my long forgotten friend who tried to get me into game and we played couple games where he showcased his meta build. it was vehicles on legs. with 2 massive cannons, trap harpoon mine and covered with christmas tree decorations. Each tree could tank 1 shot from these massive cannons, which were meta. It costed nothing. And protected vehicle. This forced developers to change how decorations work. They no longer block bullets or smth. Dont quite remember. It was like 7 years ago
@@romanpyatibratov4361This reminds me of the "Free WiFi APCs" in the Philippines, they would outfit GKN Simba APCs with wooden palettes to prematurely detonate RPGs
The evolution of the cope cage. But yeah, cross out was fun but got overly complex. I remember when they introduces races and everybody (myself included) was trying to make the fastest non kamikazi rocket car. XD
What isn't mentioned in this video or others is that this is only one tank in a formation. This "turtle" tank leads other tanks and is fit with a signal jammer. It is also fitted with mine protection. This tank will lead others through a minefield and will also protect the other tanks.
@Jean_023 I like the New Atlas, but he can get a bit preachy at times. Also, this Belarusian guy called Military Summary. However, you have to be able to see biases to get relevant information.
Relevancy is key. I wonder if we'll see new purpose-built casemate designs in the coming years considering that this is one of the few designs that has proven useful against drones which is the biggest threat now. If it looks stupid but works...
A solution would be spaced armor which modern tanks rerely have because they are useless against anti tank shells or rpgs. But actually usefull against explosions.@@freedomisntfreeffs
This is top-tier desperation. It’s called “we don’t have anything to fight off what our opponents are throwing at us anymore, so we’re throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks.”
@@OneBiasedOpinion Just like when Americans put everything including sandbags on their tanks just to stop a tiger from blowing a hole straight through them.
Its just a one part of the "drones problem" solution. Jammers, cheap anti-air defence, cloud-type goose hunting style. War is never change but it changes everything else.
Does it though? You're protected better against one weapon, but now far bigger, somewhat slower, your own situational awareness is weakened, your guns have far less fire angles, you're going to have less range with the vehicle, you're going to be pushing the engine and suspension to or past their limits, you're going to be harder to recover if broken down, and you aren't really going to be protected against traditional threats like ATGMs or Artillery. Seems like a lot of drawbacks on the tradeoff to me, which is probably why these vehicles seem to be going on one way missions most of the time we see them.
@@Del_Sit's useful in the Pointman role, it draws FPVs freeing the other tanks in the column and paves the way through minefields. It's not a combat tank but a supporting tank.
@@Del_S A tank like Abrams and Leopard is useless, where due to the weight you cannot install protection against drones. and Russian soldiers know better what works in a real war.
@@Del_S yerrr; but that arty salvo is going to be directed by a drone with a thermal camera anyway. And the purpose of the tank is probably to get the arty to fire so I can be counter-batteried. And it's not like Russian tanks have a reverse gear so you're probably better off abandoning the tank. So the fpv fuel bomb drone is probably the highest threat target. It's not like these Russian crews are making turtle shells to get more views on tik tok my man
Fascinating development. Drones are cheap and difficult to stop, but compared to a kinetic projectile they have barely any penetrative power. I wonder what the next gen of tanks will look like.
Drones also keep troops with traditional anti-tank weapons hiding from sight, meaning these layered armors might become more common - unless we soon see cheap drones equipped with wespons able to deliver piercing power of NLAWs and comparable systems. Indeed fascinating to follow.
I think if the drone is carrying a shaped charge warhead, kinetic energy is not needed as they themselves do not penetrate the tanks amour, but instead it is the super hot gasses from the explosion that melt through the armour.
And a cheap drone with a basic explosive can still do worthwhile damage to the tank's ancillaries, and force them to button up. That's an economical way to reduce effectiveness.
Einstein said that whatever weapons WWIII would be fought with, WWIV would be fought with rocks and sticks. Bet he never thought WWIII would be fought with corrugated metal garden sheds with extra chicken wire...
Love/hate to see that crossouts spaced Armour meta is actually realistic under certain conditions, looks like when it comes to anti-drone precautions this will be the new norm for those without electronic defences
I do not speak the language well enough, so I will write through a translator, I hope I will be able to convey the meaning. The bottom line is that this is not like any other war that you are used to seeing, there are no lightning and fast offensives or superiority of one side over the other. This is a very difficult and slow war of attrition, where fierce battles are fought for every km of the front, in this regard, most of the troops on both sides dig in some regions where they can stay for a very, very long time, global offensives with a large movement are rare. Why am I saying all this? Due to the inability to advance and break through the defenses, tanks become an easy target, a little step to the left or right and you are insignificant, minefields are everywhere, drones and artillery, so soldiers on the ground come up with means that will at least slightly increase the survival rate of their tanks. I'm sure people don't quite understand what I'm talking about, you probably think, well, there are active protection complexes, you can equip tanks with technological modules and everything so that they are not an easy mess, but the fact is that 1) you need to develop this and put it into production, since there has never been such a need before it was not, 2) it will come out in decent money, but it will not give any security guarantees. You also need to understand that such turtles can be outdated tanks, or tanks with technical problems, this, no matter how stupid it may sound, is just convenient, any welder on the spot can upgrade the car the way it is needed right here and now. Whatever tanks entered this war, they are doomed to complete failure, since there were no such wars and the tanks were absolutely not ready for them, all leopards, Abrams, Leclerc, challengers and so on, these are all wonderful machines of their time, but time has changed and this war clearly shows that the the approach to tank building that was previously completely incorrect now. You can laugh and joke, but believe me, you don't know what this war is, your idea is a maximum representation of the picture from the telegram channels, but you don't know what it really is, it's not what you used to see before this time, it doesn't look like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, This is not like the companies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran, this is a completely new war. Of course, both the Russian side and the Ukrainian side have disadvantages, flaws, there is always room to grow, the Russian economy is inferior to the United States, so the United States most likely has more modern and technological weapons, but this plays almost no role in such a positional war. Believe me, the war has been going on for 2 years and both sides have huge military experience, they are not fools, if something is being done, then it must be done, no matter how ridiculous it looks from the outside. I wrote all this so that you understand that war is not a toy, it looks to you like a shooting game somewhere far away, well, war is much scarier than you might think, so every, even the most ridiculous thing, if it helps save the life of 1 person, then it has already been done it's not in vain, believe me, a beautiful picture is cool, all this cool and modern technology, stylish, futuristic and technological, but in the conditions of a "dirty war", and not exhibitions and landfills, all this beauty has not surrendered to anyone, like all this technology, they burn from mines and from drones, like leopards 2a6, so are the old t-64 and t-72, they all burn the same, if they wanted to destroy them, no one will leave.
вся технологичность американского оружия заключается в его запредельной стоимости. в остальном - металлолом. если не верите - езжайте в Москву на Поклонную гору, посмотрите сами.
An advantage of them being ad hoc is that the enemy will likely not make concentrated counter. Or if the enemy does invest in production lines to make counter turtle weapons and spread them, that is a gain in itself. An anti turtle fpv drone will be heavier / have shorter range or some other cost. And if ad hoc turtles become ineffective, the Russians can just stop making them. So it is not just tactical struggle between fpv drones and turtles. It is also strategic struggle between investment in production lines.
@@JimmyVaught The Turtle tanks do seem to work in mitigating drone damage, I would agree. But British Challenger tanks in Ukrainian hands have actually been outrunning drones simply by employing shoot and scoot tactics. These cheap drones do not have the technology to lock unto things from high in the sky, as they have simple cameras from which the operator must spend hours finding targets in. A Challenger just needs to shoot a few times and leave, much like long range artillery. This is why artillery losses from drones are not common. By the time a drone arrives to an area, the artillery it's meant to be targeting has already left.
Now in fairness, if a Challenger was charged through the frontlines as an assault vehicle, it would just be as vulnerable to the drones as T-90s are. But so long as they are used in a long-range, shoot and scoot role, they still perform their jobs as tanks without being damaged by drones.
@@SniperSamir How is it useless if it can do a tanks job and break through defensive lines? Tanks do not face tank guns, they face infantry fired munitions, artillery but primarily drones strapped with high explosives. An assault gun is more usefull than a burnt out tank. If the war continues on for half a year more, you will see Ukranian tanks equipped with sheds, yes, even leopards and abrams. Remember your comment then as we will then hear about how ingenious it is.
@@Procrastinater Tank do face other tanks, infantry will also usually not come from the front so having awareness around you is kind of important. I don't know if it is still the case but at the beginning of the war the Russian also had too many tanks for the amount of infantry to accompany them and keep them from being loused so if it is still the case and the tank has even worse vision it is sacrificing defence in one way to gain it in another. Putting a bunch of metal on the tank also increase its weight, which reduce its speed and mobility to position itself in all battle situations on top of just putting more strain on logistic and reducing range because you will need more fuel for the same distance. I'm also curious how this would interact with reactive armour since reactive armour itself explode but with a cage around that explosion would be contained.
@@ponytoast1231 Thought I replied to this, yet it's not here now? weird. Anyway. What I said then was: Those are all pretty big drawbacks for sure, but do you know what is an even bigger drawback? Exploding into pieces because a 500 dollar drone flew 20kg of high explosives into the turret side.
The initial reaction I had to these modifications was that the Russian tank turret is now limited in its ability to traverse to engage targets to the flanks or rear. They may as well bring back the SU series of casemated guns, no turrets and a built-in turtle back!
So far the Russians are only using them in areas where they don't encounter enemy tanks or even IFVs (like Bradleys or CV90s). The limited traverse is a drawback, but in the areas where they're used the advantages are worth the drawbacks.
It wouldnt really matter when they could just use it as a mobile artillery while the armour at the back does the job. Tank on tank battle in this war is so rare.
i made a bet with my feeind when the Ukraine war started that it would devolve into ww1 like trench warfare the turrtle tanks are just the cherry on top
It´s funy how in science fiction war goes back to the middle ages in combat style and aesthetics as consequence of high tech innovations. For example, warriors using personal force-field shields make fire weapons obsolete, so the enemy adapt and use plasma swords that can cut through the new shields.
@@lmeseguer001 You will look at the variety of cold steel assault units of the First World War: from homemade daggers and machetes to brass knuckles and morgensterns and other crushing weapons. The same creativity of ordinary soldiers trying to survive in the difficult conditions of the massacre.
I consider the reason why this works is because Russia and Ukraine have such vast terrain that need to be crossed. In dense and urban areas I see the downsides would take over.
@@adison6340 it'll probably cost you hundreds of thousands of artillery shells to pull that off. Not to mention, that such a constant barrage will definitely put your artillery and crews in rather vulnerable positions, to be targeted by counter artillery. A war of attrition is basically what russia tried so hard to avoid and failed miserably
@@adison6340 say that to the russians and germans at stalingrad. blown up cities are nightmare environments for any living thing. it was hell on earth then, i cannot imagine what a modern day equivalent would be like now.
Comment feels like a bit of bad taste. People are fighting and dying. Hardly feels like there's anything joyous about what's happening as your comment seems to suggest, even if it is ironically.
@@NATESORDon’t care. If you have the energy to sit here and poor your heart out about how strongly you feel for poor Ukraine and muh “bad taste” then how about you get off your ass and go fight with them?
During WW2, United States soldiers (and I'm guessing soldiers from every country involved) attached sandbags, cement, and even furniture to their tanks to add extra protection. The army actually did a study regarding the practice and found that the amount of protection added was negligible, and in some cases detrimental, but the moral boost it gave the soldiers was well worth the drawbacks.
but the difference here is that its spaced farther from the vehicle and its to protect against fpv drones not ap or apcr shells ap/apcr could shred through the extra sandbags/cement/etc. easily but an fpv drone cant pen sheet metal or even chain link nearly as easily
Problem with add on armor in all cases, as even Patton realized, is that it puts additional strain that the tank was probably not designed for on all of the mechanical components, and can slow the vehicle down or make it less maneuverable. It's certainly a tradeoff, and depends on your particular battlefield whether it's worth it, for Patton it was unacceptable because he knew that anything slowing down his advance and giving the enemy more time to respond was the real risk.
it might not have added any significant protection against tank shells but that crap on the outside did help deflect panzerfausts, which were becoming a more common threat during the end of the war.
@@SassyTheSasquatch96 10 or more? 1 or 2 fpv drones with rpg rounds can already stop the tank. And a tank that can not move will be abandoned. We already seen too many videos of that.
@@SassyTheSasquatch96 For Western tanks one is enough because it hits the weak top turret armor and immediately detonates the shells stored in the blast door
This actually reminds me of russian game called Crossout i used to play some time ago. In the game you could actually build your own vehicle with various parts and basically it looked very similiar to these improvised setups. Especially one time javelin type of weapon was favored and people started to counter it by straping some more armor on the roof.
Russia is nothing like Warhammer! Meanwhile Russia: Eternal leader, war churches, priests with guns, imperial guard, tanks are starting looking like ww1, Wagner's heresy...
I dont get why all of a sudden people are making fun of russia's improvised slat armor. The israelis invented it and caught no ridicule. The u.s. uses cope cages as well 🤷♂️.
That tank was disabled and the jammer didn't work. All drones lose signal near the ground, because there are obstacles there. Which is why there's copious amounts of aerial drones but virtually no terrain drones.
@@michaelbuckers I saw the drone hit but I noticed the interference just before the hit from the Radio emissions I'm assuming from the jammer was all I hope none the jammers are totally effective not until every t72 t80 and T90 Russia has is on fire anyways
@@jberry1982 The tank was dead. And so was the jammer. DUH. Loss of signal near ground is a purely natural effect. Additionally, jammers affect only the drone, not the control point. Even if drone is fully jammed, if it sends any footage it'll get received fine.
Jammers can scramble any signal whether outgoing or incoming. So if it was working properly no the control point wouldn't be getting *any* information from the drone. That could be defeated with the use of tethered drones... Also just because a tank isn't moving doesn't mean it's "dead". The batteries in a tank can keep auxiliary hydraulic pumps and other primary systems (sights, communication equipment) going for many hours. This includes powering a jammer.
@@leongibson5429 Mate, picture for a minute how radio data transmission even works. And tell me again how is it supposed to jam the command post. I'll clue you in: in order to have radio data transmission, receiver must pick up a signal with good enough dynamic range (noise to signal ratio) to decipher the contents of the signal. Jammers work by radiating broadband noise, as to reduce dynamic range to the point that the radio receiver cannot extract any data from the signal. As per common radiation traits, inverse square law applies. For a drone this means that as it moves away from controller and closer to jammer, it gets weaker command signal and stronger jammer noise. The same is NOT true for the command point video receiver, because it's not getting any closer to the jammer. That's not to mention, the jammers are specifically tuned to block drone control signal bandwidth, and usually completely ignore the feedback footage bandwidth (because the real life physics are not conducive to jamming it). Now I'd appreciate if you stopped making things up as you go just to prove a point (hint: made up "facts" don't prove anything)
@@darugdawg2453 ??? No this shit works because it keeps drones for flying onto their rooves. Otherwise all you need is a drone with a small shaped charge. Shaped charge ain't gonna do shit from 5 feet away.
so why does it work? should the shells hitting it not just rip it apart?
8 місяців тому+18
Again very good Video on the subject. I know how much time it takes to find all these Videos and Photos. It is going to be intersting to see the further development of this.
If you are interested in the further development of this all you need to do is to sponsor both sides of war. Donate to UA army and to RU army if you want next series of this show.
I've heard it called 'standoff armor,' and it has been used on tanks since WW1, when some British tanks were equipped with wire cages to prevent the enemy from heaving grenades onto the vulnerable roof. AP rounds will punch through this add-on armor like tissue paper, but many shaped-charge and high explosive shells will detonate on the thin supplemental armor instead of against the hull of a tank.
The term cope cage is ironic. Because the Russians are just doing what works. The coping about the cages is coming from NATO because they'd rather look stylish than not get their leopard tanks BTFOd by drones.
And drones generally rely on HE, so the shell combined with a jammer makes for an effective defense. The jammer takes most attacking drones out, and the surviving drones won't be enough to blow a hole through the shell and then exploit that gap and damage the actual tank underneath.
@@jodofe4879 ukraine was filmed using RPG Tandem Rounds on Big drones to take out Tanks, ofc they will use HE aswell because u cant always have the right Ammunition for the right job but if they specificly want to hit a tank they have "anti-armor" drones for it. They will have less of those because they are bigger and probably harder to make and more expensive but they do have them :D
Still completely and utterly useless against Javelins and NLAWS lol, not to mention it might as well not even be there when shot by an enemy tank (which the Russian tanks already lose out on penetration and armor protection compared to western designs). Some thin sheet metal isn't going to do anything to deter these types of weapons. This only helps against FPVs and simpler AT missiles, and the limited visibility and maneuverability makes this clearly only something suited to tanks on the front column with mine rollers.
Subbing for development updates in technologies that are adhocratic. thank you so much for this rare glimpse, wouldn't expect less from The Armourer's Bench!
@@ThatGuyWayOverThere the job of these vehicle arent to destroy the enemy with weapons, these vehicles is more of a "shield" to the columns behind it whos actually gonna destroy the enemy and the turret doesnt entirely stuck on one position it still can traverse in some degree. it succesfully breakthrough the ocheretyne line and you can see the video it survived 8 fpv drone hits.
@@circleboi4900 How does it shield other vehicles against drones? The EW units on these turtle tanks have very little range. How are they even going to use the guns if they can't see around them?
@@ThatGuyWayOverThere you're missing some points of the video above. By placing turtle tank as the spearhead of a column, it draws the attention of an fpv drone operator to target that turtle tank because it's the spearhead and it's the biggest target that's why you see all 8 fpv drones spent on that turtle tank and it prevented the column behind it getting targeted, so yes it's a "shield". They don't look for enemy, the Friendly drones are the one who look for enemy then report it to the turtle tank and it's more effective than the tank commander looking by himself (a tanker in the comment said this). As for guns, the turtle tanks only look for a target in front of it, the column behind it is the one who cover the sides. These turtle tanks works fine in the battlefield, one video shows it survived multiple mine and dozens of fpv drone attacks. By doing these, the ukrainians would need to spend more of their shortening drones supply on a single tank and it benefits the ruskis.
@@circleboi4900 You think the drone operators can't see the other vehicles from above? 8 fpv drones and a couple of landmines are still way cheaper than a turtle tank with crew. A tank has to be able to see its surroundings. Its why every tank build after ww1 has multiple visors to look around.
I don't know about much, but i love this, it's hard to articulate why. Uniqely modified designs, cheap add-on spaced armor, scrappy yet effective, adapting to the environment.
it's much harder to target vulnerable spots because you can't see them i think they also hide drone jamming equipment which is hard to destroy because you can't see it either
@@53ns3iSo what. Tank v. Tank engagement are not the common at the moment; drones are more likely to be encountered than another tank. Is it any wonder why so many of the new Western tanks aren't getting utilized so far unlike armored vehicles like the Bradleys.
@@mmmhmmm8236 But when you make your tank blind and useless then why shouldn't tank v tank take place? War is about adapting. Just because something is, doesn't mean it always has to be.
@@mmmhmmm8236 People around here think it's cool as a returning ww2 idea, but failed to mention that these tanks were fought in specific ways by allied forces to counter them. Sticky bombs, or point blank RPG fire or taking advantage of the fact that it's vulnerable to more mobile vehicles and fire from the sides or just better tanks overall.
@@53ns3i Those are not comparable to traditional casemate designs, they didn't change the armor layout of the tank, it's still a normal tank bellow, just added a heavily spaced armor, more comparable would be the sideskirts in some WWII german tanks for instance.
@TheArmourersBench I saw the U.S. sign a contract a week or two ago to purchase more Israeli Trophy systems for Bradley's. It would be interesting to see how successful Trophy would be in the Ukraining operations.@@TheArmourersBench
@@TheArmourersBenchI’ve been wondering if the Russians will start using the KS 23. It seems perfect. 12 gauge just doesn’t have the reach or capacity of shot even in 3.5 inch shells I would think. Even though the modern 3.5 out performs 10 gauge. Never shot a drone but can imagine they are harder to bring down than some birds and the birds I’ve shot if they carried bombs would be too close for my comfort.
@@dustyak79 I comes down to spread more than range. At 100yrd using Federal Flight Control shells, you can get a chest sized pattern using buckshot and an improved cylinder choke. At further distances the spread gets too big to be reliable. However, most FPV drones that drop munitions do so well within that envelope as the higher they go the more likely atmospherics affect the drop and it becomes very difficult to aim even under the best conditions. The average drop distance is 50yrd to 75yrds which can be accomplished by goose hunting loads. But first you have to see the drones. With no noise you can hear them but even with slight gust of wind their sounds blend out.
Still wild to see T-62s in active frontline combat in 2024. Also shoutout to "and possibly an EW module" while the drone flies within spitting distance.
Well, war is chaotic. Fancy electronic and stuff can reduce those chaos, but not completely make them gone. That makes a chunk of steel is still a chunk of steel. No matter how it shaped. T-62 is still a chunk of steel whether in 1960 or 2024.
General dynamics = we think that upgrade will cost about 100 billion, sir. Some random Russian guy = get me a welding machine, electrodes, bottle of vodka, as much sheet metal and mesh you can find, pack of cigarettes' too. DAVAAAJ, SYKA!
@@shonemumy traversing the hull isnt a good solution when you can only fire forwards, specially with the horrible reserve speed of russian tanks Also, drones are looking for them? You mean the same drones they are supposed to be jamming?
@@shonemumy and how do you stop enemy drones from using the same radio frequency as friendly ones? When it comes to EW you cannot JUST allow friendly drones
A track ciclyst once built a home made, low budget revolutionary new bike out of washing machine bearings, junk metal parts and steel tubes and people were laughing at him, but it was so good and it gave hum such an unfair advantage, which made him very successful, that they banned his bike and design from racing. His story reminds me of the turtle tanks.
Amazing technical knowledge on the small details, like the manufacturer and resolution of the driver's camera. Sure it wasn't the whole video about those, but they didn't go unnoticed 🙂 It's fun to see, too, that drones were found to be a really cheap alternative to fight expensive or tough targets, and now with an ever cheaper alternative: Welded trash, they're fighting those drones. Anyway, a random but welcome YT recommendation, thank you for putting the vid together.
Thanks for watching! Yes, it was worth tracking the camera down just to see how cheap it was! Glad you enjoyed this one, hope you'll sub and check out some others.
@@TheArmourersBench Will definitely do! Specially now, that your reply implies two important things: It was not an AI-generated vid, and thus, subbing/interacting/watching other vids also means that the creator gets... let's call it, a well deserved "financial support" 🙂Have a great one mate!
People have been doing this for decades. the same concept as what they were doing in 2017 in the Philippines. making plywood and cardboard armor. as long as that armor is at least a foot or so off of the actual tank or truck itself. when the RPG or drone dropped grenade hits it that plywood armor metal armor whatever it is. make the blast happen over a foot away from the actual tank/ truck. So the enemy does not get penetration.
1 foot of spaced steel is not enough to defend against RPG warheads. I wish I could link images here but there's a photo of the turret of an american Humvee that was through-and-through penetrated by an rpg-7 warhead. The two sides of the turret are almost 4 feet apart and yet the warhead was still able to go in one side and out the other, creating nice little holes on either side. Search humvee rpg holes on google images and it shows up.
You need a LOT more than a foot. You need at least a meter, and then some serious armor after that. That stuff in the Philippines was the same as concrete armor in WW2.
I find all this interesting cause it shows that we have in many ways been evolving in a vacuum for too long and now have to jurry rig ourselves back to reality of whar near peer war is
One idea I had was a rotating shaft with flailing chains orbiting the tank, like a carousel or maypole. Replacement chains can be installed by anyone too
That’s the difference between making military hardware immediately applied and tested in the field, and making them in a boardroom and designing them to look cool to be sold on brochures. What works ain’t that glamorous but gets the job done, what sucks is expensive to make and is sold to people who have the money to spend to look threatening but dread having to lose the equipment in a real fight - making it money going down the drain.
@@Robocop-qe7le There are often a whole bunch of anti-drone jammers under these sheets of metal and welded fences, which are a much bigger problem. One such tank covers everyone around it. It looks stupid but effective.
Us WWII nerds know exactly what they are. Schurzen, or those metal plates German tanks were covered with. At first they were improvised, then standarized. It's the same thing, only today you need them from the top as well to protect the vehicle from drone drops, a thing WWII guys didn't experience.
Jammers will be rendered useless soon, as automating drone to find way to the tank from visible distance is quite easy nowadays with cheaper cost for computer vision.
This is just an ad-hoc form of spaced armour, and spaced armour works well to defend against certain types of munitions. This style of armour will likely become broadly adopted if it works well, although it will be better engineered to allow for better visibility and turret traverse.
US will probably mount some cameras on a rotating turret shell, hook it up to an AR helmet for a 360° battlefield view, and charge a $500,000 premium. It will work well in small volumes and be completely unsustainable in modern war if our tech manufacturing is outsourced.
I think an "umbrella" turret shroud would be better. This turtle armor is useless against A.T rockets, its just to stop drone dropped grenades and such. So why lose turret traverse? Why not just make an umbrella or some kind of slanted grill ontop of the turret
Yeah my thought was "Well, if nothing else the Ukraine is making Russia waste time and money building turrets on what are becoming essentially assault guns."
@@Hongobogologomo because making it function like an umbrella instead of a cover that completely limits the tower rotation requires some real engineering and thought behind it, not a dozen of Ivans with close to no engineering skills. You think it's made this way because they had some kind of plan or genius idea? No, they're simply desperate and throwing shit at the wall in hopes it'll work. As of now, they're just limiting tanks functionality without any real benefit. Since pretty much all of their assaults fail and they manage to capture anything only because they're literally wiping ukrainian positions and villages by using artillery and KABs non-stop, it's very hard to tell if there's any real difference from a normal tank
@@Hongobogologomoпотому, что поворот башни и не нужен, зато десант нужен, и орудие для кинжального огня с навесом разминирования. Это все для узких целей.
Seems like the bigger solution would be to disable the drones before they can get in range rather than to beef up the tanks As a side note, I think people all assumed that future wars would be fought with the most elite tech, but underestimated the sustained cost of said tech. In both of the world wars, as the conflict stretched out, more and more cheaper solutions were utilized and we're seeing it again here
You simply can't. Everyone seems to forget that technology can't make the impossible become possible, it just makes the very very very hard become possible... there are still physical limits... There will never be a 'force field' like that because it is impossible, not because it's difficult. Building nukes is difficult, and that's been done for nearly 100 years at this point. Not even to mention, if there were some kind of 'force field' which could do that, it would be impossible to control what is affected by it, the only control you would have is where you turn it on. Anything within range, including your own stuff, would get fried. That's why EMP pulse tools & EMP "grenades" aren't common... they aren't any good...
They are using effective ew. It’s the density of drones. If there are 40 in the area you can jam most of them but some will get through. These vehicles are for clearing paths into contested areas not normal fighting. The longer that one keeps moving the longer the rest of the column behind him isn’t stuck in a minefield.
@@jimjamauto Microwaves (as well as lasers) affect everything around them. Have you seen how they shoot from laser pistols in movies? Well, in life, after the first shot in the air, all people within a radius of a couple of hundred meters will go blind forever - laser radiation of such power, reflecting from the target and from the dust in the air, will burn their retinas. I have no idea what a laser of such power will do to the skin, but I would expect oncology. Even a very directed beam has scattering. As for radio waves, any directional antenna has lobes directed backwards. And those who work with microwave radiation (even just high-frequency radiation - hundreds of kilohertz in an induction melting pot are already enough) are going bald. So it will never become a battlefield weapon. There is some potential in air defense and, perhaps, when used on unmanned vehicles away from living beings.
The drones are having useful effect by coercing the opponent to disable their own vehicle whose turret traverse is severely limited and whose MGs can only shoot in that same limited arc. While cope sheds excite children of all ages they also make the vehicle beneath unable to defend itself from the sides and rear even if it can see opponents via camera. Light weapons (RPG, Panzerfaust, Carl Gustav, LAW etc) can still break track after which the vehicle is only useful in one direction and only then if the crew prefer dying in place to bailing and bugging out before something else ends the tank. Stugna, TOW, Jav etc can easily kill one if necessary as can arty.
@@billjones8950 Nah it'd be a grossly overpriced tank still. What won WW2 was simple tools that were both effective and cost efficient. German tanks were neither simple nor effective, nor cost efficient, and that is especially true for the Maus. T-34s were. Also since it's German made its reliability would probably still be shit.
And the toilet bowls! The Ukrainians say we're stealing their toilets. At the same time they say we're shitting in a hole in the street. I'm having cognitive dissonance.
You are a soldier and you want to survive. During battle breaks you try to improve your equipment. As a tank crew you take whatever you can get your hands on from your environment and you produce something. If something increases the chances of survival, you expand it. There are no expensive studies here, no engineers developing a product, just common sense and an army leadership that is okay with everything as long as there is fighting. In the army I served in, this factory was not even allowed because it did not comply with the rules. You live by the rules and you die by the rules.
I wonder how much weight it adds and what the effect is on the bearings for example. I imagine the turtle is a bit of a maintenance nightmare in the sense of accessibility and extra wear due to the added weight.
The turtle tank is incredibly dumb. So now Ukrainian drone pilots will have their drones approach Russian turtle tanks from the exposed front, fly under it and blow up there, between the tank's tracks. Usually the underside of tanks are not very well armored, because tank armor is designed to take impacts from the front and the sides. (From field guns, enemy tanks and RPGs) Even if it doesn't end up blowing up the tank, it will certainly destroy the tanks tracks, immobilizing it and effectively reducing it to a big field gun that cannot rotate and aim only within a 20 degree field of view right in front of it. Just a matter of time before Ukrainian infanterists with RPGs come and blow it up. A turtle tank stranded like that will most likely be abandoned by it's crew.
@@aizenbob "russians shovels win the war" I think you mean russian bodies. What have "russian shovels" done to protect them against HIMARS, stormshaddow, and ATACMS?
Thanks for watching guys, this is I think at the moment the most comprehensive video looking at appearances of these tanks. Sources and full article available here - armourersbench.com/2024/05/12/the-turtle-tank-evolves/ Thanks - Matt.
Should the exposed tracks now be the priority of the FPV drones?
If successful, once immobilised an open hatch or artillery strike should sort them out.
How much of a punch is needed to break a track?
a
a
Seems as though I remember (being a child during the 80s) that there was a lot of concern about reactive armor on Soviet tanks, and that was defeated!
These tanks are the natural evolution of Soviet artillery focused doctrine. Both sides use their tanks for indirect fire, so we will likely see these tanks repurposed for that role as well since they have the added benefit of protection against drones. I can see the future of the war heading towards heavily armored, drone resistant vehicles shelling everything into oblivion.
I wonder how long it takes, till it evolves to a full scale medieval siege tower
waiting for a scorpion turtle tank, a mangonel turtle tank and a trebuchet turtle tank.
Till the moment when artillery and Javelins will arrive
MFers will build titans from WH 40k xddd
That would be worth a look.
@@5.45x39_ All praise the Omnissiah
That ain't a turtle, that's a tank evolving into a crab, the ultimate form.
The longer I think about it, you are absolutely right!!
Waiting for it to turn into robot.....
Feels like a tank destroyer tbh
From their track record, it's most likely a tank destroyed.
hermit crab
War in 21st Century Expectation: Lazers and Robots
Reality: Turtle Tank
Man that's funny, darn 80's movies got our hopes up
Weld a Dumpster on your D-8 and still get shot up
Well drones really a thing nowadays, and lasers used for guiding also
WARHAMMER 40K
"Assault sheds"
- Captain! There is a barn over there!
- And?
- It's charging at us!
Russia's war thunder tree gonna look like mad max vechiles
Just play Crossout at this point
Good enough reason for mad Max April Fools event
@@MrLuzakman crossout somehow became a worse trainwreck than warthunder though lmao
Lol. Thats hilarious.
LoL for real
It looks more and more like Mad Max. Every tank becomes a unique piece of hardware.
Crossout
... There is literally no difference.
No, its more like Robot wars. Robots in that show also slowly evolved and then one appeared that tended to make mincemeat out of all the others until a better one came along.
WARHAMMER 40K
skibidi toilet defence simulator
The assault gun concept returns, didn't see that coming.
Indee, with americans fielding the M10 Booker for this purpose (Newest one at least). Other countries using dedicated IFV with cannons for this purpose or wheeled armored vehicles.
@@jonathanpudim Since the Booker main gun is only .51 inch bigger than the smaller Stuart's, I think that tanks of about that size would be better. Retro fitting a Stuart would be cheaper.
@@leondillon8723 we must be thinking of different light tanks cause there's no way you suggested a century old light tank could be retrofitted with modern engines, electronics, hydraulics, servos, weapon platforms, armor and made compatible to modern fuel systems. Let alone done at anything close to the price of a new vehicle? Not to mention theres probably only a hundered or so still operational on the whole planet.
@@rennscott5808 The WW I Renaulr Ft 17 was in service for 80+ years. India sold their Sherman Tanks. Israel bought a 100+ and SLEPed with modern electronics and upgunned them. The tanks were still very effective.
The "assault shed" you mean.
I love that "cope cage" became standard nomenclature for the drone shields.
“But sir we can’t see the other 350 degrees…”
“Don’t worry, you’re only going forward.”
its not a joke of a vehicle dude the tank is very very effective against drones since drones explode upon contact which is an issue when the surfare they're blowing up against has a giant space between the place its hitting and where it wants to hit
They've ruined the functionality of the vehicle for everything but being a mostly-blind easily-bogged-down troop transport, in order to reduce the risk of one specific threat. But the fact that it seems to have reduced the risk of said threat is leading to everyone doubling down on the idea.
@@valyshknee4203yeah era can’t cover everything so this honestly might be worth the trade offs shits fucked everyone keeps celebrating about these modern invincible tanks being destroyed but all of them are helpless to drones
@@karenrobertsdottir4101 if they're doing indirect fire the loss of vision isn't really an issue.
"No step back!"
I love that the design looks like a tank that's smashed through a barn and had the roof comically stuck on its turret.
I bet that's how it was invented.
Oh you've seen White Tiger have you?
lol, i can envision a lookout noticing an increase in farm sheds appearing in a field scratching his head.
If it's effective against a certain type of shell, does it matter?
@@sporehux8344The lookout turns his head to his teammate: were there sheds in this field? Go back and look at the screen and see that the sheds are getting closer like a cat
And these tanks also look like they can be included in the mortgage program
Let's just go full circle and start making casemates.
but on tracks this time
@@nikitaivanow9099
**SU-54-122 ignition sounds**
We will be using ww2 tanks by the time we run out of modern stuff 😂
@@LordOfChaos.x Going back to sticks and stones.
@@LordOfChaos.xlet’s see if what Porsche is cooking
Little story:
There is a game called "Crossout". A PvP battles between vehicles, that players can craft from scratch.
Developers were expecting players to come up with cool designs for their vehicles, mounting weapons and armor and show creativity.
What instead happened is minmaxing. Moving abominations, fitted with ridiculous decorations.
One of the most powerful and meta weapons was a massive cannon. That deals insane amounts of damage. Completely destroying the part it hits.
So players placed on their vehicles... chrmistmas tree decorations, that had 1health point and large hitbox. So these massive cannons hit tree, destroy tree, but dont deal damage to the other components. Basically those trees acted as protective one-time use layers.
And here we are. With people placing metal sheets on top of a tank to take drone strike. Same concept. Same execution.
Would love to see pictures
@@neirucha sadly i wasnt playing this game. It was my long forgotten friend who tried to get me into game and we played couple games where he showcased his meta build.
it was vehicles on legs. with 2 massive cannons, trap harpoon mine and covered with christmas tree decorations. Each tree could tank 1 shot from these massive cannons, which were meta. It costed nothing. And protected vehicle.
This forced developers to change how decorations work. They no longer block bullets or smth.
Dont quite remember. It was like 7 years ago
@@romanpyatibratov4361This reminds me of the "Free WiFi APCs" in the Philippines, they would outfit GKN Simba APCs with wooden palettes to prematurely detonate RPGs
Or Highfleet, the box ships the best ships.
The evolution of the cope cage. But yeah, cross out was fun but got overly complex. I remember when they introduces races and everybody (myself included) was trying to make the fastest non kamikazi rocket car. XD
Dang, the hetzer made a return
SU85?
@@steveblanchard7293SU-85 reporting.
That's the A7V
Stugs ??
Would traversing the turret into the cage knock off its calibration at all?
Appears the Killdozer is making a comeback
With upgrades
Megaweapon! Megaweapon! Megaweapon!
That guy was ahead of his time
guy wasnt wrong,or stupid
🙏
The Elefant and ISU-122 are making a comeback
Hetzer 2 baby
Omg where
@@pitivan3895 that's basically what these are, 125mm assultguns
RammTiger
Jagdtiger returns
So, MADMAX is evolving from a work of fiction to a documentary 😅.
in this case it'll be called "Mad Ivan" XD
@@sadge0 🤣 You can easily knock it out from above with the drone.
I didn't expect a T-72 tank to evolve into an apc with a smoothbore cannon
Literally merkava
@@OGTacitus If the Merkeva was built out of a chicken farm.
The sheds look like they’re sometimes being used for camouflage too, to blend in with local rubble.
I am surprised that not shit what is on the fields
Yes and each one being different might interfere with any AI image processing too
Everybody gangsta till the shed starts shooting high explosive
and then gangsta again when they see that it fires and hitsnothing because this shed-tank is almost blind
Every day we stray closer to WH40K walking churches
@@misterdark-pl3jo would make a good fire to stay warm by. all that cardboard im sure loves flame lol
@@ASGerner Damn turtle tank was just trying to show god but its participants found god within its depleted cardboardranium composite armor sanctuary
@@ASGerner at least they weren't cold tho right?
What isn't mentioned in this video or others is that this is only one tank in a formation. This "turtle" tank leads other tanks and is fit with a signal jammer. It is also fitted with mine protection. This tank will lead others through a minefield and will also protect the other tanks.
Yes this is the point.
cool.
Just asking cause I'm not as well informed, were do you get your news about the war?
Yep, that's what they do. Mentioned in the previous video I did about these actually.
@TheArmourersBench I have not seen the previous video, but I will check it out, Thanks.
@Jean_023 I like the New Atlas, but he can get a bit preachy at times. Also, this Belarusian guy called Military Summary. However, you have to be able to see biases to get relevant information.
This reminds me more and more about Marvin Heemeyer's Killdozer.
Remember, a better and bigger radiator next time!
Sometimes reasonable men must do unreasonable things.
They saw whistlindiesels video and went buck wild
True pioneer
@@hansblitz7770 Sounded like a prick to me.
Just because a strategy is old doesn't mean it's obsolete.
"Old, but not obselete" -T800.
@@nw2861"I'll be back" - T800
Relevancy is key. I wonder if we'll see new purpose-built casemate designs in the coming years considering that this is one of the few designs that has proven useful against drones which is the biggest threat now.
If it looks stupid but works...
A solution would be spaced armor which modern tanks rerely have because they are useless against anti tank shells or rpgs. But actually usefull against explosions.@@freedomisntfreeffs
@@LordOfChaos.x it's also a lot harder to aim right if you don't know your enemies real shape.
can't wait for these to be added to warthunder
in war thunder we call these "vegetation"
@@linemat7887 i hate bush users
@@Ice_elitesame mostly those russian bias cause green effective camo on top of an already concealing painting
65€ premium
@@RosenwinklerSolutions +$30 for the V and Russian tricolor barrel stripes design package
The most interesting thing is that this is an ingenious solution in the current realities, when drones are thrown into the roof.
Overhype. Id say the jammers make more sense an practical
@@darugdawg2453 a jammer is more practical than a piece of metal? are you serious?
This is top-tier desperation. It’s called “we don’t have anything to fight off what our opponents are throwing at us anymore, so we’re throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks.”
@@OneBiasedOpinion Just like when Americans put everything including sandbags on their tanks just to stop a tiger from blowing a hole straight through them.
Its just a one part of the "drones problem" solution. Jammers, cheap anti-air defence, cloud-type goose hunting style. War is never change but it changes everything else.
It's almost Skynet vs. Mad Max at this point, and it's kind of hilarious how the war in Ukraine becomes simultaneously more high and low-tech.
Starsector hegemony vs tri tech Ai
@@cideltacommand7169tri tech versus lud path would be more acurate
[REDACTED] has entered the chat
@@dudupintarolas5214 There is quite literally a faction the is just a re-skinned Space-USSR...Sindrian Diktat
@@cideltacommand7169
"Starsector hegemony vs tri tech Ai"
Thats right lmao
Remember, it’s not stupid if it works.
Does it though? You're protected better against one weapon, but now far bigger, somewhat slower, your own situational awareness is weakened, your guns have far less fire angles, you're going to have less range with the vehicle, you're going to be pushing the engine and suspension to or past their limits, you're going to be harder to recover if broken down, and you aren't really going to be protected against traditional threats like ATGMs or Artillery. Seems like a lot of drawbacks on the tradeoff to me, which is probably why these vehicles seem to be going on one way missions most of the time we see them.
@@Del_Sit's useful in the Pointman role, it draws FPVs freeing the other tanks in the column and paves the way through minefields. It's not a combat tank but a supporting tank.
It does not😂😂 🇷🇺🤡
@@Del_S A tank like Abrams and Leopard is useless, where due to the weight you cannot install protection against drones. and Russian soldiers know better what works in a real war.
@@Del_S yerrr; but that arty salvo is going to be directed by a drone with a thermal camera anyway. And the purpose of the tank is probably to get the arty to fire so I can be counter-batteried.
And it's not like Russian tanks have a reverse gear so you're probably better off abandoning the tank.
So the fpv fuel bomb drone is probably the highest threat target.
It's not like these Russian crews are making turtle shells to get more views on tik tok my man
Me: I spotted tank!
The one guy holds an anti-tank launcher: okay... wdym it's just a house
Tank: it's working!
Worse... you fire the AT weapon. Its self guidance programs... misses because it sees no tank.
that could be the worst thing to happen
@@nickl5658 most are at misiles platforms are heat guidet, it sees the tank anyway
@@ratatataget who knows how well that insulates, perhaps white paint could be an evolution to use albedo to keep temps down.
@@spookyweeb5563 its metal. the engine has to have some space and the metal around it heats up.
Fascinating development. Drones are cheap and difficult to stop, but compared to a kinetic projectile they have barely any penetrative power. I wonder what the next gen of tanks will look like.
Drones also keep troops with traditional anti-tank weapons hiding from sight, meaning these layered armors might become more common - unless we soon see cheap drones equipped with wespons able to deliver piercing power of NLAWs and comparable systems.
Indeed fascinating to follow.
I think if the drone is carrying a shaped charge warhead, kinetic energy is not needed as they themselves do not penetrate the tanks amour, but instead it is the super hot gasses from the explosion that melt through the armour.
A total about turn. Little Willies probably.
And a cheap drone with a basic explosive can still do worthwhile damage to the tank's ancillaries, and force them to button up. That's an economical way to reduce effectiveness.
Einstein said that whatever weapons WWIII would be fought with, WWIV would be fought with rocks and sticks.
Bet he never thought WWIII would be fought with corrugated metal garden sheds with extra chicken wire...
So turtles of WW4 will be covered by rocks and sticks? Sounds interesting.
Didnt know that Ukraine and Russia are fighting WW3.
@@serch3ster they are tho, if we count all countries participating in a war, that would be more than WW1 at very least.
Since the world agreed using the biggest weapon of WW2 will destroy us all, the war is literally WW1 all over again.
Crab :)
Love/hate to see that crossouts spaced Armour meta is actually realistic under certain conditions, looks like when it comes to anti-drone precautions this will be the new norm for those without electronic defences
Yes! I was looking for this.
Ahhhh man that game and that stupid spaced armour meta!
Did not expect a crossout reference, but is a welcome one.
does that game still have a playerbase? i'm genuinely surprised to see a crossout comment here
*"This isn't even my final form!"* 😆
W40k Rhino travelled back in time and fell in love with a Stug.
I do not speak the language well enough, so I will write through a translator, I hope I will be able to convey the meaning. The bottom line is that this is not like any other war that you are used to seeing, there are no lightning and fast offensives or superiority of one side over the other. This is a very difficult and slow war of attrition, where fierce battles are fought for every km of the front, in this regard, most of the troops on both sides dig in some regions where they can stay for a very, very long time, global offensives with a large movement are rare. Why am I saying all this? Due to the inability to advance and break through the defenses, tanks become an easy target, a little step to the left or right and you are insignificant, minefields are everywhere, drones and artillery, so soldiers on the ground come up with means that will at least slightly increase the survival rate of their tanks. I'm sure people don't quite understand what I'm talking about, you probably think, well, there are active protection complexes, you can equip tanks with technological modules and everything so that they are not an easy mess, but the fact is that 1) you need to develop this and put it into production, since there has never been such a need before it was not, 2) it will come out in decent money, but it will not give any security guarantees. You also need to understand that such turtles can be outdated tanks, or tanks with technical problems, this, no matter how stupid it may sound, is just convenient, any welder on the spot can upgrade the car the way it is needed right here and now. Whatever tanks entered this war, they are doomed to complete failure, since there were no such wars and the tanks were absolutely not ready for them, all leopards, Abrams, Leclerc, challengers and so on, these are all wonderful machines of their time, but time has changed and this war clearly shows that the the approach to tank building that was previously completely incorrect now. You can laugh and joke, but believe me, you don't know what this war is, your idea is a maximum representation of the picture from the telegram channels, but you don't know what it really is, it's not what you used to see before this time, it doesn't look like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, This is not like the companies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran, this is a completely new war. Of course, both the Russian side and the Ukrainian side have disadvantages, flaws, there is always room to grow, the Russian economy is inferior to the United States, so the United States most likely has more modern and technological weapons, but this plays almost no role in such a positional war. Believe me, the war has been going on for 2 years and both sides have huge military experience, they are not fools, if something is being done, then it must be done, no matter how ridiculous it looks from the outside. I wrote all this so that you understand that war is not a toy, it looks to you like a shooting game somewhere far away, well, war is much scarier than you might think, so every, even the most ridiculous thing, if it helps save the life of 1 person, then it has already been done it's not in vain, believe me, a beautiful picture is cool, all this cool and modern technology, stylish, futuristic and technological, but in the conditions of a "dirty war", and not exhibitions and landfills, all this beauty has not surrendered to anyone, like all this technology, they burn from mines and from drones, like leopards 2a6, so are the old t-64 and t-72, they all burn the same, if they wanted to destroy them, no one will leave.
вся технологичность американского оружия заключается в его запредельной стоимости. в остальном - металлолом. если не верите - езжайте в Москву на Поклонную гору, посмотрите сами.
An advantage of them being ad hoc is that the enemy will likely not make concentrated counter. Or if the enemy does invest in production lines to make counter turtle weapons and spread them, that is a gain in itself. An anti turtle fpv drone will be heavier / have shorter range or some other cost. And if ad hoc turtles become ineffective, the Russians can just stop making them.
So it is not just tactical struggle between fpv drones and turtles. It is also strategic struggle between investment in production lines.
@@JimmyVaught The Turtle tanks do seem to work in mitigating drone damage, I would agree. But British Challenger tanks in Ukrainian hands have actually been outrunning drones simply by employing shoot and scoot tactics. These cheap drones do not have the technology to lock unto things from high in the sky, as they have simple cameras from which the operator must spend hours finding targets in. A Challenger just needs to shoot a few times and leave, much like long range artillery.
This is why artillery losses from drones are not common. By the time a drone arrives to an area, the artillery it's meant to be targeting has already left.
Now in fairness, if a Challenger was charged through the frontlines as an assault vehicle, it would just be as vulnerable to the drones as T-90s are. But so long as they are used in a long-range, shoot and scoot role, they still perform their jobs as tanks without being damaged by drones.
@@АндрейМарков-д4т на один Абрамс, у которого, в отличие от вышибной башни тэшек, сработали вышибные панели, спасшие экипаж?
"Tanks are obsolete"
*Tank equips armor effective against munitions it will encounter*
Mobile Shed are not "Tanks".
If a tank has to wear a turtle shell that restricts a massive amount of its vision, it might as well be useless.
@@SniperSamir How is it useless if it can do a tanks job and break through defensive lines? Tanks do not face tank guns, they face infantry fired munitions, artillery but primarily drones strapped with high explosives. An assault gun is more usefull than a burnt out tank. If the war continues on for half a year more, you will see Ukranian tanks equipped with sheds, yes, even leopards and abrams. Remember your comment then as we will then hear about how ingenious it is.
@@Procrastinater Tank do face other tanks, infantry will also usually not come from the front so having awareness around you is kind of important. I don't know if it is still the case but at the beginning of the war the Russian also had too many tanks for the amount of infantry to accompany them and keep them from being loused so if it is still the case and the tank has even worse vision it is sacrificing defence in one way to gain it in another. Putting a bunch of metal on the tank also increase its weight, which reduce its speed and mobility to position itself in all battle situations on top of just putting more strain on logistic and reducing range because you will need more fuel for the same distance. I'm also curious how this would interact with reactive armour since reactive armour itself explode but with a cage around that explosion would be contained.
@@ponytoast1231 Thought I replied to this, yet it's not here now? weird.
Anyway. What I said then was:
Those are all pretty big drawbacks for sure, but do you know what is an even bigger drawback? Exploding into pieces because a 500 dollar drone flew 20kg of high explosives into the turret side.
After a hundred years of armor and tank advances, we come back to the square boxes that we first built.
The initial reaction I had to these modifications was that the Russian tank turret is now limited in its ability to traverse to engage targets to the flanks or rear. They may as well bring back the SU series of casemated guns, no turrets and a built-in turtle back!
So far the Russians are only using them in areas where they don't encounter enemy tanks or even IFVs (like Bradleys or CV90s). The limited traverse is a drawback, but in the areas where they're used the advantages are worth the drawbacks.
Yeah, all bradleys and tanks are busy in moscow exhibition.
@@fiendishrabbit8259 CV 90 are uselles in this war. Bradlay against tank are also questionable.
It wouldnt really matter when they could just use it as a mobile artillery while the armour at the back does the job. Tank on tank battle in this war is so rare.
@@stolek6908 3 days ago there was a video of a bradly killing a t-80. TOW missile is hardly questionable
Holy crap we are going old school with tank design again. 4:30 It looks like ww1 Saint Chamond tank with a mine roller in the front.
funny cause the tactics are ww1 like too, obviously apart from the drones.
I was thinking that they are reverting to the WW1 German 'Landschiff' design. The tank's track are still the most vulnerable part.
i made a bet with my feeind when the Ukraine war started that it would devolve into ww1 like trench warfare the turrtle tanks are just the cherry on top
It´s funy how in science fiction war goes back to the middle ages in combat style and aesthetics as consequence of high tech innovations. For example, warriors using personal force-field shields make fire weapons obsolete, so the enemy adapt and use plasma swords that can cut through the new shields.
@@lmeseguer001 You will look at the variety of cold steel assault units of the First World War: from homemade daggers and machetes to brass knuckles and morgensterns and other crushing weapons. The same creativity of ordinary soldiers trying to survive in the difficult conditions of the massacre.
I consider the reason why this works is because Russia and Ukraine have such vast terrain that need to be crossed. In dense and urban areas I see the downsides would take over.
Густонаселённый район всегда можно превратить в мало населенный. А потом спокойно кататься на танках 😉
@@adison6340 it'll probably cost you hundreds of thousands of artillery shells to pull that off. Not to mention, that such a constant barrage will definitely put your artillery and crews in rather vulnerable positions, to be targeted by counter artillery.
A war of attrition is basically what russia tried so hard to avoid and failed miserably
@@adison6340 say that to the russians and germans at stalingrad. blown up cities are nightmare environments for any living thing. it was hell on earth then, i cannot imagine what a modern day equivalent would be like now.
They dont use turtle tanks in close combat
@@bobgatewood5277 провал у тебя в штанах, проверяй
close enough, Welcome back ferdinand!
I'll admit I'm not upset to see the good ol' tank destroyer making a return.
im with you on that one
Are we finally returning to the golden age of armored vehicles?
Casemate Tanks? What a time to be alive.
These turtle 🐢 tanks also have a Jamming system, to make drones useless, they're breakthrough tanks opening the way for other vehicles to advance
Comment feels like a bit of bad taste. People are fighting and dying. Hardly feels like there's anything joyous about what's happening as your comment seems to suggest, even if it is ironically.
@@NATESORDon’t care. If you have the energy to sit here and poor your heart out about how strongly you feel for poor Ukraine and muh “bad taste” then how about you get off your ass and go fight with them?
@@Veknr44 you will care if or when a conflict affects you or someone you personally know. lol
These guys don’t leave their basements where they live as armchair generals. They will never have empathy for those who actually fight and die.
There's some very confused Farmers out there when they woke up and realized the roof of their sheds are missing.
they will get their roofs back with 'interest'
Who stole my chook house!
First the farmers stole the Russian equipment and now the Russians are stealing the farmers' barns.
@@Hadrian9707 lmao
@@Hadrian9707 Haha golden comment.
Its amazing how quick people adapt to field conditions like this.
My mum, still alive (and evacuated from London during the Blitz), has always said "War is the mother of invention"!
Necessity breeds innovation. The crews seem to fund them worthwhile, so that's something to remember at least.
We welded fences and bed frames onto US Army tanks in Iraq....until they came up with grills
In WW2, they added hedgerow cutters to the tanks in the field. Eventually they added them before leaving England.
yes...i dont know why people think Russia invented something new. THis is common practice everywhere.
@@PanterusPinkus I mean its commonsense😂 If you need more protection what do you do? Pray?
@@PanterusPinkus People don't think that it was invented by the Russians, they ridicule them for it
@@iirosiren5120 i agree...im just bothered by people who making jokes out of it not knowing its common practise to use such armor.
During WW2, United States soldiers (and I'm guessing soldiers from every country involved) attached sandbags, cement, and even furniture to their tanks to add extra protection. The army actually did a study regarding the practice and found that the amount of protection added was negligible, and in some cases detrimental, but the moral boost it gave the soldiers was well worth the drawbacks.
If they were studying Italians no doubt
but the difference here is that its spaced farther from the vehicle and its to protect against fpv drones not ap or apcr shells
ap/apcr could shred through the extra sandbags/cement/etc. easily but an fpv drone cant pen sheet metal or even chain link nearly as easily
@@cyb3r._. Yes shells are penetrating, but their impact is greatly diminished, therefore not much damaging to the tank.
Problem with add on armor in all cases, as even Patton realized, is that it puts additional strain that the tank was probably not designed for on all of the mechanical components, and can slow the vehicle down or make it less maneuverable.
It's certainly a tradeoff, and depends on your particular battlefield whether it's worth it, for Patton it was unacceptable because he knew that anything slowing down his advance and giving the enemy more time to respond was the real risk.
it might not have added any significant protection against tank shells but that crap on the outside did help deflect panzerfausts, which were becoming a more common threat during the end of the war.
1980: George miller: "Yes this is going to happen in the future of course after a full war!"
2024: *Mad Max Music intensifies.*
Russians know Mad Max is going to be reality soon so they are preparing.
See through mesh seems like it would make by far the most sense. Allows you to maintain that critical gap while actually being able to see.
The tank appears at 4:00 actually have 2 part clip showing it taking multiple fpv drone and keep moving like nothing happens.
@@SassyTheSasquatch96 10 or more? 1 or 2 fpv drones with rpg rounds can already stop the tank. And a tank that can not move will be abandoned. We already seen too many videos of that.
@@SassyTheSasquatch96 For Western tanks one is enough because it hits the weak top turret armor and immediately detonates the shells stored in the blast door
@@SassyTheSasquatch9610 or more from Atgm's, drone usually only need 2, one to disable and the second for final blow
@@haythemsandel8303 Do you like know what a door is?
@@hedgehog3180 Enlighten us
I love the layered shopping cart look.
But what are the homeless people going to use to move their stuff around?
This actually reminds me of russian game called Crossout i used to play some time ago. In the game you could actually build your own vehicle with various parts and basically it looked very similiar to these improvised setups. Especially one time javelin type of weapon was favored and people started to counter it by straping some more armor on the roof.
Spaced armor was/is king in that arena. Stopped playing that game because they're basically owned and operated in by Russian companies.
@@jenkem4464 I stopped playing because it gets dull quickly, couldn't give a turtles fuck who made it. US corporations are far worse by any metric.
@@jenkem4464 You should also stop playing games operated by American companies you NPC
@@jenkem4464 and what did those companies do bad to you??
@@jenkem4464"i didn't buy a russian game, that will deal a major blow to the russian government"
Russia is nothing like Warhammer!
Meanwhile Russia: Eternal leader, war churches, priests with guns, imperial guard, tanks are starting looking like ww1, Wagner's heresy...
The Hetzer returneth. God the tank at 4:12 looks fucking sick. I'd love to make that thing with LEGO or COBI bricks.
Maybe you’ll fight it in some years, fingers crossed!
hetzer 2.0 russian edition
Your cope cage has evolved, you now have a turtle shell!
I wonder how long it takes, till it evolves to a full scale medieval siege tower
@@Shadow25720 basicly thats what you have , weak spot in tracks , get them the taker yer time distroying it
if you turn a turtle upside down he will go nowhere.
I dont get why all of a sudden people are making fun of russia's improvised slat armor. The israelis invented it and caught no ridicule. The u.s. uses cope cages as well 🤷♂️.
@@SDLXVImost ppl who follow this conflict on social media are bots, trolls and random kids who hype things for no reason 😂
You can tell when those jammers effect the drone within 25-50ft of the tank
That tank was disabled and the jammer didn't work. All drones lose signal near the ground, because there are obstacles there. Which is why there's copious amounts of aerial drones but virtually no terrain drones.
@@michaelbuckers I saw the drone hit but I noticed the interference just before the hit from the Radio emissions I'm assuming from the jammer was all I hope none the jammers are totally effective not until every t72 t80 and T90 Russia has is on fire anyways
@@jberry1982 The tank was dead. And so was the jammer. DUH. Loss of signal near ground is a purely natural effect. Additionally, jammers affect only the drone, not the control point. Even if drone is fully jammed, if it sends any footage it'll get received fine.
Jammers can scramble any signal whether outgoing or incoming. So if it was working properly no the control point wouldn't be getting *any* information from the drone. That could be defeated with the use of tethered drones...
Also just because a tank isn't moving doesn't mean it's "dead". The batteries in a tank can keep auxiliary hydraulic pumps and other primary systems (sights, communication equipment) going for many hours. This includes powering a jammer.
@@leongibson5429 Mate, picture for a minute how radio data transmission even works. And tell me again how is it supposed to jam the command post. I'll clue you in: in order to have radio data transmission, receiver must pick up a signal with good enough dynamic range (noise to signal ratio) to decipher the contents of the signal. Jammers work by radiating broadband noise, as to reduce dynamic range to the point that the radio receiver cannot extract any data from the signal. As per common radiation traits, inverse square law applies. For a drone this means that as it moves away from controller and closer to jammer, it gets weaker command signal and stronger jammer noise. The same is NOT true for the command point video receiver, because it's not getting any closer to the jammer. That's not to mention, the jammers are specifically tuned to block drone control signal bandwidth, and usually completely ignore the feedback footage bandwidth (because the real life physics are not conducive to jamming it).
Now I'd appreciate if you stopped making things up as you go just to prove a point (hint: made up "facts" don't prove anything)
I been telling y'all. They gonna slap ERA on those turtles.
I feel like that would make it way to heavy.
Nope, they can't afford it. @@oisinmurphy8747
@@oisinmurphy8747 That depends on the ERA used
@@oisinmurphy8747 Russian tanks are about 25-30% lighter than western ones so they can add whatever they want.
Wouldn’t that just blow all the outer steel off in the first hit?
Looks like shack on tracks. MAD MAX STYLE!
That's not done in tank plants. That's just creativity of soldiers on font. That's hand-made things and each tank is unique.
Soldiers make some shit just to feel safe. Ive seen people put wood as an armor. Obviously its just for morale
@@darugdawg2453 wood actually work against heat shells and rpg by making them explode early. does not work too well for kinetic shells.
@@darugdawg2453 ??? No this shit works because it keeps drones for flying onto their rooves. Otherwise all you need is a drone with a small shaped charge. Shaped charge ain't gonna do shit from 5 feet away.
so why does it work? should the shells hitting it not just rip it apart?
Again very good Video on the subject. I know how much time it takes to find all these Videos and Photos. It is going to be intersting to see the further development of this.
These are a direct result of a lack of significant artillery ammunition for UA. Once they have more artillery these things become extreme frag hazards
If you are interested in the further development of this all you need to do is to sponsor both sides of war. Donate to UA army and to RU army if you want next series of this show.
I've heard it called 'standoff armor,' and it has been used on tanks since WW1, when some British tanks were equipped with wire cages to prevent the enemy from heaving grenades onto the vulnerable roof. AP rounds will punch through this add-on armor like tissue paper, but many shaped-charge and high explosive shells will detonate on the thin supplemental armor instead of against the hull of a tank.
Yeah the Russians are masters of simple cheap yet effective tactics and fabrications the Ukrainians don't stand a chance
The term cope cage is ironic. Because the Russians are just doing what works. The coping about the cages is coming from NATO because they'd rather look stylish than not get their leopard tanks BTFOd by drones.
This man speaks truth.
And drones generally rely on HE, so the shell combined with a jammer makes for an effective defense. The jammer takes most attacking drones out, and the surviving drones won't be enough to blow a hole through the shell and then exploit that gap and damage the actual tank underneath.
@@jodofe4879 ukraine was filmed using RPG Tandem Rounds on Big drones to take out Tanks, ofc they will use HE aswell because u cant always have the right Ammunition for the right job but if they specificly want to hit a tank they have "anti-armor" drones for it.
They will have less of those because they are bigger and probably harder to make and more expensive but they do have them :D
And people were joking about why all tanks in warhammer look like bricks, they work and tank shots? Perfect.
The Warhammer universe is far more deadly and lethal than ours, they need all the armor and weapons
Still completely and utterly useless against Javelins and NLAWS lol, not to mention it might as well not even be there when shot by an enemy tank (which the Russian tanks already lose out on penetration and armor protection compared to western designs). Some thin sheet metal isn't going to do anything to deter these types of weapons.
This only helps against FPVs and simpler AT missiles, and the limited visibility and maneuverability makes this clearly only something suited to tanks on the front column with mine rollers.
@@weasle2904 3 Javelins hitting BMP 2.
BMP 2: Huh? Something tickels me.
And Russians think if the paint it red it will move faster.
Still waiting for the baneblade to show up. " ready to unleash all 11 barrels "
Subbing for development updates in technologies that are adhocratic. thank you so much for this rare glimpse, wouldn't expect less from The Armourer's Bench!
"Sir, we're being attacked by a tool shed, chicken cage and something from Mad Max.
If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid.
Its not really working. These vehicle cannot properly use any of their weapons.
@@ThatGuyWayOverThere the job of these vehicle arent to destroy the enemy with weapons, these vehicles is more of a "shield" to the columns behind it whos actually gonna destroy the enemy and the turret doesnt entirely stuck on one position it still can traverse in some degree. it succesfully breakthrough the ocheretyne line and you can see the video it survived 8 fpv drone hits.
@@circleboi4900 How does it shield other vehicles against drones? The EW units on these turtle tanks have very little range. How are they even going to use the guns if they can't see around them?
@@ThatGuyWayOverThere you're missing some points of the video above. By placing turtle tank as the spearhead of a column, it draws the attention of an fpv drone operator to target that turtle tank because it's the spearhead and it's the biggest target that's why you see all 8 fpv drones spent on that turtle tank and it prevented the column behind it getting targeted, so yes it's a "shield". They don't look for enemy, the Friendly drones are the one who look for enemy then report it to the turtle tank and it's more effective than the tank commander looking by himself (a tanker in the comment said this). As for guns, the turtle tanks only look for a target in front of it, the column behind it is the one who cover the sides. These turtle tanks works fine in the battlefield, one video shows it survived multiple mine and dozens of fpv drone attacks. By doing these, the ukrainians would need to spend more of their shortening drones supply on a single tank and it benefits the ruskis.
@@circleboi4900 You think the drone operators can't see the other vehicles from above? 8 fpv drones and a couple of landmines are still way cheaper than a turtle tank with crew. A tank has to be able to see its surroundings. Its why every tank build after ww1 has multiple visors to look around.
Russian tanks look like they were made by raiders from Fallout.
'Funny' thing is they also behave like Fallout raiders
@@adrianlopezfernandez2088 I mean raiders are actually an effective fighting force
@@theevilrat2 You must suck at the game, raiders are the weakest enemies in the game, totally easy mode
@@adrianlopezfernandez2088brainwashed hamburger i quess?
@@tofu9052 blind incel neocon i quess?
I don't know about much, but i love this, it's hard to articulate why.
Uniqely modified designs, cheap add-on spaced armor, scrappy yet effective, adapting to the environment.
it's much harder to target vulnerable spots because you can't see them
i think they also hide drone jamming equipment which is hard to destroy because you can't see it either
It seems however less of a threat to other tanks. Sooooo
@@53ns3iSo what. Tank v. Tank engagement are not the common at the moment; drones are more likely to be encountered than another tank. Is it any wonder why so many of the new Western tanks aren't getting utilized so far unlike armored vehicles like the Bradleys.
@@mmmhmmm8236 But when you make your tank blind and useless then why shouldn't tank v tank take place? War is about adapting. Just because something is, doesn't mean it always has to be.
@@mmmhmmm8236 People around here think it's cool as a returning ww2 idea, but failed to mention that these tanks were fought in specific ways by allied forces to counter them. Sticky bombs, or point blank RPG fire or taking advantage of the fact that it's vulnerable to more mobile vehicles and fire from the sides or just better tanks overall.
@@53ns3i Those are not comparable to traditional casemate designs, they didn't change the armor layout of the tank, it's still a normal tank bellow, just added a heavily spaced armor, more comparable would be the sideskirts in some WWII german tanks for instance.
Blyatmobiles!
Quick Robinski, to the Blyat mobile!
😂😂
the maximum expected creativity of foreigner inventing a name be like: ^^^^^^
@@worldoftancraft The maximum expected mental capacity of a schill for totally the bestest military in the world be like: ^^^^^^
❤ it!
history repeats itself, a toaster on tracks is again trying to breach the trench warfare stalemate
trve
And the fact that drones, in general, are the reason why there is no stalemate
@@andy_NQLol
They do look like German WW1 tanks!
It’s kind of obvious how to deal with this problem, but every time I post about it, the post disappears.
It has certainly been interesting watching the evolution of counter-drone TTP's.
It really is. Got some content on shotgun-based counter-measures coming up too. That's really proliferating now.
@TheArmourersBench I saw the U.S. sign a contract a week or two ago to purchase more Israeli Trophy systems for Bradley's. It would be interesting to see how successful Trophy would be in the Ukraining operations.@@TheArmourersBench
@@TheArmourersBenchI’ve been wondering if the Russians will start using the KS 23. It seems perfect. 12 gauge just doesn’t have the reach or capacity of shot even in 3.5 inch shells I would think. Even though the modern 3.5 out performs 10 gauge. Never shot a drone but can imagine they are harder to bring down than some birds and the birds I’ve shot if they carried bombs would be too close for my comfort.
They should start using KS-23s. Things are made out of (rejected) AA barrels it's in their DNA :D
@@dustyak79 I comes down to spread more than range. At 100yrd using Federal Flight Control shells, you can get a chest sized pattern using buckshot and an improved cylinder choke. At further distances the spread gets too big to be reliable. However, most FPV drones that drop munitions do so well within that envelope as the higher they go the more likely atmospherics affect the drop and it becomes very difficult to aim even under the best conditions. The average drop distance is 50yrd to 75yrds which can be accomplished by goose hunting loads.
But first you have to see the drones. With no noise you can hear them but even with slight gust of wind their sounds blend out.
thing about putting a shell like that on the tank is it limits the degree the cannon can swivel
Excellent. Well put together and a great unopinionated analysis.
Still wild to see T-62s in active frontline combat in 2024.
Also shoutout to "and possibly an EW module" while the drone flies within spitting distance.
Well, war is chaotic. Fancy electronic and stuff can reduce those chaos, but not completely make them gone. That makes a chunk of steel is still a chunk of steel. No matter how it shaped. T-62 is still a chunk of steel whether in 1960 or 2024.
@@snails6997 exactly. A steel tank in 2024. That's not something you want.
@@TheJayjam better than having nothing thoiugh, thats what he's getting at.
@@rusty2983 So "better than nothing, and even then only sometimes" is the standard of the russian army at this point. gotcha.
The best "chunks of steel", mah friends, is on the NATO trophy tanks exhibition in Moscow lol
General dynamics = we think that upgrade will cost about 100 billion, sir.
Some random Russian guy = get me a welding machine, electrodes, bottle of vodka, as much sheet metal and mesh you can find, pack of cigarettes' too. DAVAAAJ, SYKA!
Only problem the tank now cant see anything or traverse the gun properly
@@joseaca1010 Drones are looking instead of them, and they still can traverse the hull. I know it looks ridiculous; but it obviously works.
@@shonemumy traversing the hull isnt a good solution when you can only fire forwards, specially with the horrible reserve speed of russian tanks
Also, drones are looking for them? You mean the same drones they are supposed to be jamming?
@@joseaca1010 I meant friendly drones probably acquire and relay targets for the crew. Not my first language.
@@shonemumy and how do you stop enemy drones from using the same radio frequency as friendly ones? When it comes to EW you cannot JUST allow friendly drones
A track ciclyst once built a home made, low budget revolutionary new bike out of washing machine bearings, junk metal parts and steel tubes and people were laughing at him, but it was so good and it gave hum such an unfair advantage, which made him very successful, that they banned his bike and design from racing.
His story reminds me of the turtle tanks.
Amazing technical knowledge on the small details, like the manufacturer and resolution of the driver's camera. Sure it wasn't the whole video about those, but they didn't go unnoticed 🙂
It's fun to see, too, that drones were found to be a really cheap alternative to fight expensive or tough targets, and now with an ever cheaper alternative: Welded trash, they're fighting those drones. Anyway, a random but welcome YT recommendation, thank you for putting the vid together.
Thanks for watching! Yes, it was worth tracking the camera down just to see how cheap it was! Glad you enjoyed this one, hope you'll sub and check out some others.
@@TheArmourersBench Will definitely do! Specially now, that your reply implies two important things: It was not an AI-generated vid, and thus, subbing/interacting/watching other vids also means that the creator gets... let's call it, a well deserved "financial support" 🙂Have a great one mate!
My car has the same canlmera quality. Shocked
People have been doing this for decades. the same concept as what they were doing in 2017 in the Philippines. making plywood and cardboard armor. as long as that armor is at least a foot or so off of the actual tank or truck itself. when the RPG or drone dropped grenade hits it that plywood armor metal armor whatever it is. make the blast happen over a foot away from the actual tank/ truck. So the enemy does not get penetration.
Just like crumple zones in cars.
1 foot of spaced steel is not enough to defend against RPG warheads. I wish I could link images here but there's a photo of the turret of an american Humvee that was through-and-through penetrated by an rpg-7 warhead. The two sides of the turret are almost 4 feet apart and yet the warhead was still able to go in one side and out the other, creating nice little holes on either side. Search humvee rpg holes on google images and it shows up.
You need a LOT more than a foot. You need at least a meter, and then some serious armor after that. That stuff in the Philippines was the same as concrete armor in WW2.
works against old ww2 AT weapons. it's useless against modern tandem warheads.
But when your enemy mostly uses drones, this is a pretty good idea.
@@Gorbag100 -а давайте вы не будете использовать тандемные боеприпасы а мы не будем использовать термоядерные?!
-Давайте
-🤝
I find all this interesting cause it shows that we have in many ways been evolving in a vacuum for too long and now have to jurry rig ourselves back to reality of whar near peer war is
Looks like something that I would build in Crossout.
One idea I had was a rotating shaft with flailing chains orbiting the tank, like a carousel or maypole. Replacement chains can be installed by anyone too
That’s the difference between making military hardware immediately applied and tested in the field, and making them in a boardroom and designing them to look cool to be sold on brochures. What works ain’t that glamorous but gets the job done, what sucks is expensive to make and is sold to people who have the money to spend to look threatening but dread having to lose the equipment in a real fight - making it money going down the drain.
we don't know if the turtle shell works. it certainly block the view.
@@Robocop-qe7le There are often a whole bunch of anti-drone jammers under these sheets of metal and welded fences, which are a much bigger problem. One such tank covers everyone around it. It looks stupid but effective.
@@Morneir if is under the sheets of metal then it doesn't work because Faraday and his cage. Jammers can only be fitted outside the shell.
you mean takticool
Yes, generals are focused on looks. Totally not on testscand statistics.
Us WWII nerds know exactly what they are. Schurzen, or those metal plates German tanks were covered with. At first they were improvised, then standarized. It's the same thing, only today you need them from the top as well to protect the vehicle from drone drops, a thing WWII guys didn't experience.
That was my tought , too! This is no more than modern-day schurzen, and the FPV drones are the anti-tank rifles.
New warthunder premiums based on these will come out one day.
Schürzen
Well, yes, but to be fair, this was used before the advant of drones, it was used to stop RPGs warhead, in AFG and Iraq
@@Boopboob Schurzens were used to stop anti tank rifle fire from the sides
Jammers will be rendered useless soon, as automating drone to find way to the tank from visible distance is quite easy nowadays with cheaper cost for computer vision.
This is just an ad-hoc form of spaced armour, and spaced armour works well to defend against certain types of munitions.
This style of armour will likely become broadly adopted if it works well, although it will be better engineered to allow for better visibility and turret traverse.
US will probably mount some cameras on a rotating turret shell, hook it up to an AR helmet for a 360° battlefield view, and charge a $500,000 premium. It will work well in small volumes and be completely unsustainable in modern war if our tech manufacturing is outsourced.
I think an "umbrella" turret shroud would be better. This turtle armor is useless against A.T rockets, its just to stop drone dropped grenades and such.
So why lose turret traverse? Why not just make an umbrella or some kind of slanted grill ontop of the turret
Yeah my thought was "Well, if nothing else the Ukraine is making Russia waste time and money building turrets on what are becoming essentially assault guns."
@@Hongobogologomo because making it function like an umbrella instead of a cover that completely limits the tower rotation requires some real engineering and thought behind it, not a dozen of Ivans with close to no engineering skills. You think it's made this way because they had some kind of plan or genius idea? No, they're simply desperate and throwing shit at the wall in hopes it'll work. As of now, they're just limiting tanks functionality without any real benefit. Since pretty much all of their assaults fail and they manage to capture anything only because they're literally wiping ukrainian positions and villages by using artillery and KABs non-stop, it's very hard to tell if there's any real difference from a normal tank
@@Hongobogologomoпотому, что поворот башни и не нужен, зато десант нужен, и орудие для кинжального огня с навесом разминирования. Это все для узких целей.
and it continues! i love this series so far lol keep it up pls
Seems like the bigger solution would be to disable the drones before they can get in range rather than to beef up the tanks
As a side note, I think people all assumed that future wars would be fought with the most elite tech, but underestimated the sustained cost of said tech. In both of the world wars, as the conflict stretched out, more and more cheaper solutions were utilized and we're seeing it again here
that's already done, but it only works for a few meters and also affects your own allied drones.
I thought DARPA was developing a microwave array that just sweeps them out of the air? It was the size of a semi truck trailer though
You simply can't. Everyone seems to forget that technology can't make the impossible become possible, it just makes the very very very hard become possible... there are still physical limits...
There will never be a 'force field' like that because it is impossible, not because it's difficult. Building nukes is difficult, and that's been done for nearly 100 years at this point. Not even to mention, if there were some kind of 'force field' which could do that, it would be impossible to control what is affected by it, the only control you would have is where you turn it on. Anything within range, including your own stuff, would get fried.
That's why EMP pulse tools & EMP "grenades" aren't common... they aren't any good...
They are using effective ew. It’s the density of drones. If there are 40 in the area you can jam most of them but some will get through. These vehicles are for clearing paths into contested areas not normal fighting. The longer that one keeps moving the longer the rest of the column behind him isn’t stuck in a minefield.
@@jimjamauto
Microwaves (as well as lasers) affect everything around them.
Have you seen how they shoot from laser pistols in movies? Well, in life, after the first shot in the air, all people within a radius of a couple of hundred meters will go blind forever - laser radiation of such power, reflecting from the target and from the dust in the air, will burn their retinas. I have no idea what a laser of such power will do to the skin, but I would expect oncology.
Even a very directed beam has scattering. As for radio waves, any directional antenna has lobes directed backwards.
And those who work with microwave radiation (even just high-frequency radiation - hundreds of kilohertz in an induction melting pot are already enough) are going bald.
So it will never become a battlefield weapon.
There is some potential in air defense and, perhaps, when used on unmanned vehicles away from living beings.
They really are Orks now, but from warhammer 40k.
4:44 put hens inside the cages, youll get also a supply tank!!!!
Fresh egg every morning 😂😂😂
A final touch would be some chain style slat armor besides the tracks to protect them as well.
This is like having drone footage of the Mad Max universe.
The drones are having useful effect by coercing the opponent to disable their own vehicle whose turret traverse is severely limited and whose MGs can only shoot in that same limited arc. While cope sheds excite children of all ages they also make the vehicle beneath unable to defend itself from the sides and rear even if it can see opponents via camera. Light weapons (RPG, Panzerfaust, Carl Gustav, LAW etc) can still break track after which the vehicle is only useful in one direction and only then if the crew prefer dying in place to bailing and bugging out before something else ends the tank. Stugna, TOW, Jav etc can easily kill one if necessary as can arty.
Idea: connect 4 tanks and encase them in a turtle shell. Make the top an anti-air plattform. Oh no... thats just the maus.
If the tech humans have today was available back then the maus would have probably worked great
@@billjones8950 Nah it'd be a grossly overpriced tank still. What won WW2 was simple tools that were both effective and cost efficient. German tanks were neither simple nor effective, nor cost efficient, and that is especially true for the Maus. T-34s were.
Also since it's German made its reliability would probably still be shit.
@@saint8257 Bruh German craftsmanship is good wtf you on about
@@GreenLeafUponTheSky 😂😂 Is that why all of their WW2 tanks were infamously terrible?
German makes nice looking things, sure. I'll give them that.
@@billjones8950 If modern tech was available they obviously wouldn't have built The Maus they'd have built Leopard 2s.
I think Russia is missing the opportunity to weld old washing machines to the outside of their tanks.
hahaha damn now that would be a statement. Bonus points if said washing machines are european brands!
And the toilet bowls! The Ukrainians say we're stealing their toilets. At the same time they say we're shitting in a hole in the street. I'm having cognitive dissonance.
They already 'liberated' all the washing washines back to russia
To be fair they would offer quite a bit of protection
@@alispeed5095 Best if they were American :p
You are a soldier and you want to survive. During battle breaks you try to improve your equipment. As a tank crew you take whatever you can get your hands on from your environment and you produce something. If something increases the chances of survival, you expand it. There are no expensive studies here, no engineers developing a product, just common sense and an army leadership that is okay with everything as long as there is fighting. In the army I served in, this factory was not even allowed because it did not comply with the rules. You live by the rules and you die by the rules.
Aww man the shovel has been dethroned as king of the battlefield. That's a bummer.
Shovels are still needed. RuZZ troops use they to plant sunflowers 🌻
480,000 sunflowers 🌻 planted so far.
This meme needs to fucking die. Anyway, I welcome the arrival of neo-hetzers! The tank at 4:12 looks sick, like some Mad Max stuff.
@@pechudin9086 it'll die out when western media & governments stop blasting ridiculous narratives at us
Well shovels still play a role. I heard they are still hammering the power grid.
@@pechudin9086 The meme will fade away once western governments & media stop pushing such ridiculous narratives on us.
I wonder how much weight it adds and what the effect is on the bearings for example. I imagine the turtle is a bit of a maintenance nightmare in the sense of accessibility and extra wear due to the added weight.
Bearing life of an unprotected tank in fpv-rich environment is shorter still
They lifted their designs right out of the Mad Max movies
I guess every tank crew designs his own turtle tank
A super heavy tank may finally be viable
The ingenuity from both sides in this war is so cool I love how they just do whatever creative thing they can come up with to get results
The turtle tank is incredibly dumb.
So now Ukrainian drone pilots will have their drones approach Russian turtle tanks from the exposed front, fly under it and blow up there, between the tank's tracks.
Usually the underside of tanks are not very well armored, because tank armor is designed to take impacts from the front and the sides. (From field guns, enemy tanks and RPGs)
Even if it doesn't end up blowing up the tank, it will certainly destroy the tanks tracks, immobilizing it and effectively reducing it to a big field gun that cannot rotate and aim only within a 20 degree field of view right in front of it.
Just a matter of time before Ukrainian infanterists with RPGs come and blow it up. A turtle tank stranded like that will most likely be abandoned by it's crew.
@@allonifrah3465 Sounds like some copeing from seeing russians shovels win the war.
Same nation lol
@@aizenbob "russians shovels win the war" I think you mean russian bodies. What have "russian shovels" done to protect them against HIMARS, stormshaddow, and ATACMS?
@@ThatGuyWayOverThere how comes it is Ukraine that conducts the mobilization then?