Depleted Uranium Tank Ammunition | DEADLY DARTS 💀☄️
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 жов 2018
- To understand why DU makes a good anti-tank weapon you have to enter the Alice In Wonderland world of high-energy collisions. When metal meets metal at five times the speed of sound, hardened steel shatters like glass. Metal flows like putty, or simply vaporises. A faster shell does not necessarily go through more armour, but, like a pebble thrown into a pond, it makes a bigger splash.
Armour penetration is increased by concentrating the force of a shell into as small an area as possible, so the projectiles tend to look like giant darts. The denser the projectile, the harder the impact for a given size. DU is almost twice as dense as lead, making it highly suitable. The other metal used for anti-tank rounds is tungsten, which is also very hard and dense. When a tungsten rod strikes armour, it deforms and mushrooms, making it progressively blunter. Uranium is "pyrophoric": at the point of impact it burns away into vapour, so the projectile stays sharp. When it breaks through, the burning DU turns the inside of a vehicle into an inferno of white-hot gas and sparks.
Today we talk about Depleted Uranium Tank Ammunition
Hope you enjoy!!
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: #attire_for_effect
💰 Want to support my channel? Check out my Patreon Donation page! www.patreon.com/user?u=3081754
💰PayPal: paypal.me/Matsimus?locale.x=e...
Matt’s DREAM: www.gofundme.com/f/matt039s-c...
👕 Check out my Merch: teespring.com/stores/matsimus...
📬Wanna send me something? My PO Box: Matthew James 210A - 12A Street N Suite No. 135 Lethbridge Alberta Canada T1H2J
📸 My instagram: Matt_matsimus
🎮 Twitch: / matsimus_9033
👋DISCORD: / discord
📘 Facebook: profile.php?...
🐦Twitter: / matsimusgaming - Наука та технологія
💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: #attire_for_effect
you wil never get rid of the tank or its rounds we have so much DU. and after seeing the war in Ukraine we see the need more and more. because as you can see Russia has ran out of smart bombs nearly. noting beats a hard dart. and the army has just changed to a new round that drops the round type count down to 2. DU and a new HE type that's just bad ass. DU is only needed vs tanks so they made this round./
Yeah little dirty bombs that contaminate the environment with radio active material and cause massive cancer rates after we leave for thousands of years
@@MRsolidcolor We haven't sent any to Ukraine yet. (let alone 10 months ago.) But I imagine we will eventually, possibly when we finally send the Abrams. Has anyone read, seen, or heard that there are DU rounds being used in Ukraine? so much miss-information
Back in 1994, when I first became an Armor Officer in the WIARNG, this was all classified info. Imagine what we will learn in 25 more years.
I was with 1-37 AR out of Germany, I loved my job, gunnery was a blast, except when we thought the deer were targets and they took a heat round
@@texaskippen I got a deer with an APFSDS in Ft Knox . I do remember a flock of turkeys and my M2 in Ft. McCoy, WI.
@@ericlarson9386 that is where I did my basic, I think it was 2-81, been a long time, oh and that damn 15m hike up that damn hill, but yep, lots and lots of deer there, good times
@@texaskippen those 3 damn hills. I remember watching the CO ride by int a van to the top, get out and yell to us "If I can do it, you can to."
@@ericlarson9386 hahahahahaha, sounds about right
Finally, a non-clickbait and non-robot voiced UA-camr talking about military stuff. Subbed
I love Heavy Metal.
Uranium, Tungsten, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, all of it.
I'm have
Jake
Thalsa Doom approves
@@Loki52020 content me ,,, +923028880662
Dont forget about grandpa lead
These Shells: Exist*
War Thunder: *_R I C O C H E T_*
Russian Bias lol
Bigi Ty
War thunder really needs to change and fix their shit
Russian bias, nobody would wanna fight America if the tanks were how they actually are lol
lol
War thunder just count it as Ricochet what the hell war thunder
1:30 "[..]Uranium. The heaviest, naturally occuring element on earth"
Nope. Tungsten is heavier by a little more than 1% (Naturally occuring Uranium is lighter). Gold, platinum, indium and osmium are even heavier, but Gold is the cheapest one of these four. You would bankrupt your entire army by ordering a few rounds of those.
It's not that DU is cheap, it's actually that it is rather useless. Tungsten has a wide applicability in machine tools, so it has some intrinsic value. That makes DU the perfect alternative for when you have cheap dead weight that does not accupy much space, like aircraft ballast and trim weights.
Natural uranium has a 0.77% of fissionable uranium. Reactor designs vary, but you have to crank that percentage up to turn it into fuel rods, the most being 3% Uranium 235. You have to extract that 0.77 from more uranium, depleting it of it in the process. In the end, for every kg of reactor fuel (3% enrichment), you end with about 4kg of DU. For weapons grade uranium, every 1 kg of 80% pure uranium leaves you with about 104Kg of DU. The Little Boy bomb design built in Hiroshima had 64kg of Uranium enriched to an average of 80%. The US built 26 of them. And that was only the very first design they "mass produced".
The way they do it is through Isotopic Separation.
The uranium enriching process involves turning natural Uranium into Uranium fluoride (UF4), a fine yellow powder known as "yellowcake". You take that powder and throw it into a centrifuge. Much like Plasma separating from blood cells in medical centrifuges, uranium centrifuges make the heaviest elements go to the outer casing of the centrifuge drum whereas the lightes ones stay in the center. But there's so little of the slightly lighter U235 compound they have to scrape off the outer layer of the thing and repeat the process over and over and over again until you end up with the desired concentration. Industrial scale uranium refining involves scraping off most of the powder from the inside of the centrifuge and sequentially throwing it into the next, each step containing more and more U235. For reactor grade uranium, dozens of centrifuges are used. For weapons grade (80% and up), the number of centrifuges running, each scraping off that little bit more of U235, numbers in the thousands.
As stated above, Depleted Uranium is indeed rather useless. There have been some developments in it's use as fuel in the MOX and Breeder cycle, but their use involves plutonium, and you know, no proliferation and stuff. The alternative is developing the Thorium Fuel cycle that turns U238 in U232 withouth going through Plutonium, but I don't know how close to a practical reactor we are (India is investing heavily in it, though).
Using it in ammunition or armor was only natural. Because it's heavy weight favors it as a cheaper alternative to Tungsten. It was then when the "self sharpening" property was discovered and the use proliferated through nuclear capable countries. Some countries, like Germany itself, insist in using Tungsten penetrators still.
The Dart KEP round is not good because of the Uranium. It is a good design by itself. Projectiles have a measurement taken into consideration when you want to design them for penetration, not only through armor, but through flesh and air as well. It is the Ballistic Coefficient, which is basically a relationship of the length and the diameter of the projectile. You can see it as a bunch of mass trying to get through the same hole. It's easy to picture that a dart will have a much easier time getting through a flat piece of steel than a ball, right? That's, in simple therms, because there's a lot more mass carrying momentum behind the tip of the dart rather than spreading it out like the ball. That stream of thought is what made them design a "dart" as a kinetic energy penetrator for tank guns, known as a Long Rod Penetrator. The concept has been applied since the T-62.
And finally, a topic I think you broached briefly.
Depleted Uranium is, by itself, pretty much harmless. You can handle them all day and carry some in your pocket withouth deviating from the mean chance of Cancer in the general population. DU still has some leftover U235 in it, but overall it's pretty inert. It's half life is like 4.5 billion years (that's almost the age of the Earth itself...), meaning it is still radioactive, but releases it's energy sooooo slowly it's pretty much harmless. In fact you'll be exposed to more radiation in an 8h flight than by sitting all day in a DU ammunition storage shack. DU is actually used as radiation shielding, and it's better than Lead at it. The health concern with it is not the practically nonexistent radiation, but rather because it is still a heavy metal, very much like lead in that regard. The controversy about DU rounds it's because their impacts pulverize the projectile and creates a fine heavy metal dust that can be inhaled.
And one final note, about the monocristalinic thing people get wrong all the time. Even prof. Martyn Poliakoff (from Periodic Videos) got that wrong, and I too was taught that wrong until I studied Engineering an actual expert in the matter taught me otherwise.
You said in 8:08, It is not the monocristalinic nature of a material that makes it strong. Get that out of your head. It's the other way around *The finer the grains in a metal, the stronger it is*. This is due to the way the crystals are arranged. They form an homogenous, orderly crystal, so if you have "large metalic crystal" *that's the weakest it can possibly be*.
Materials do not break by severing the atomic bonds with eachoter, but rather by atoms sliding off one another. This is the Sliding Planes theory, and if you look deeper into material science, you'll see this orderly structure crystals arrange themselves in has a ton of sliding planes. When a piece is made out of a mess of tiny little crystals, that means that there's a tangled mess of these sliding planes a crack has to go through. As the atoms on a crystal slide off one another, rather than going into a single direction as they would in a monocristalinic piece, they have to change directions as the orientation of the cristaline structure (the sliding planes) of the next crystal is totally different. *This is why the finer (and the more there are) "chaotic mess of tiny crystals" is much stronger than a monocrystaline piece!*
I would recomend R. C. Hiebbler's Mechanics of Materials if you want to learn more. That's a staple engineering book and the best one about it around.
You may have reached that erroneous conclusion because jet engine parts are made of monocrystalinic pieces. And that's true. They have to be monocrystalinic because they have to be strong, right? Wrong. Turbine parts work at very high temperatures. And high temperatures tend to erase any work you try to do to refine the grain structure of a material, turning it into a single crystal. So to get that out of your head *turbines are monocrystalinic because they have to be designed at their weakest due to high working temperatures".
There has been a lot of research done in this regard to alloying and how they affect the crystaline structure of a metal, which are especially important for high temperature applications. There's also vacancies, substitutive elements and other stuff that break the sliding plane thing and help make a material stronger, but this comment is already too damn long. I would only recommend you read some of Hiebbeler's book again if you want to learn about them.
did this take all nite to research n write down hahaha
bla bla bla
bla bla bla hahaha
((every 1 kg of 80% pure uranium leaves you with about 104Kg of DU. The Little Boy bomb design built in Hiroshima had 64kg of Uranium enriched to an average of 80%. The US built 26 of them. And that was only the very first design they "mass produced".)) = So for one bomb of 64kg pure uranium: they had to create/waste 6656kg of DU (Depleted Uranium)... 3 tones of waste DU.
From the infantry part: once guys had to search these zones... Yeah by logic they must using mask or avoid the search at these chemical hazardous zones or using robot. As you said the projectile itself is not dangerous. But the mix with other combustibles that makes death/toxic smoke around. This type of heavy smoke can travel for miles. From a legal view it can turn to be friendly fire by chemical asset/biological warfare. ((lot of sh*t)) Like those who exposed them self in search inside enemy vehicles and fortifications at first Iraq war in 90's.
Thank you for your comment. I hope you find a work/status right for you. I might read about R.C. Hiebbler's mechanics of materials. I feel myself too old and I do like my style of life now to get myself back at school. Plus I do not have any ear problems except I still must be careful on my personal training. I was lucky to have the ear fix.
Contrary to what others think about infantry, if you dont think... you die. If you can not think you die. So yeah it's all about managing his own drama and his future actions. But most men are not managing their emotion by proper perceptions and they become more childish and children are not managing their emotion. Children needs supervision for emotional support and social skill abilities. Then they build their own as teenagers.
The first step to really think is knowing how to stop thinking and switch on focus when it need to done it with all means possible. That is earned in infantry course. We do it without knowing it that is the true. You must to be 100% there is you say no to supervisor and you can not back down after words. ((No I won't check this metals scraps Sir... I need the right tool for this.)) A true leader will visual himself first in the same action, giving to the men.
Thorium is the 39th most common element in the earth's crust, Uranium is 51st.
Uranium also has to be heavily refined to be able to use in reactors, much more then thorium which can almost be used as is.
Kirk Sorensen compared it to burning up platinum when it reached the end product. (I'm no nuclear theorist, but your claims are far away from what little knowledge I've gathered on the subject so far)
Deadliest game of darts ever known.
Yes the radioactive type...
@@comradedog4075 look at the mamę
DEPLETED uranium it Has minimal radiation
You never played real Darts I see
@@kajetus0688 still don't want to be kicking up or breathing in dust left over
You've never played in my local
It’s not only used as a munition, it’s also in the armor. ( former 2146 main battle tank mechanic for the USMC )
EXACTLY !
Only the “battle ready tanks” had the du armor. I was a 19k in the army and I never got on a du armor tank.
Cool. The US is poisoning the world. Babies with birth defects off the charts in Iraq. My USA is the REAL EVIL EMPIRE. And F all these young dumb-F’s who play these call of duty video games. Get a life losers. Haha
@Lercher21 do you even hear yourself? What dust? As in if the projectile penetrates the armor? You’re worried about dust when the armor is penetrated??? Wow. Jfc. Again. Only certain tanks have the du armor. Not all.
@Lercher21 it has an nbc system that can filter nuclear contamination. Wow
If they could only harness the destructive power of being in a long term marriage.
Zach Jensen or the destructive power of being friend zoned
Or the destructive power of stupidity one comes across in FB
😆
you okay my dude?
@@itsnotallrainbowsandunicor1505 FB stupidity seems to be unlimited. And potentially very destructive. If only it could be harnessed for good.
Interestingly, the Germans with the same gun do not use DU. They use a tungsten mono-block penetrator. Given the possibility that Germans would be fighting on their own territory, they didn't want DU dust/shavings littering their countryside. What they lose of course is the dramatic incendiary behind armour effect (DU burns like a mad bastard when it gets super compressed). But there's no indication that German rounds are ineffective against the threat (Russian tanks).
Well germany could always face america in a potential war
Actually germany is not sure wether they can pen the Front of a t14.
@@ignisg715 Well im pretty sure they cant pen it yet.
@@ignisg715 im pretty sure they can, with the L55 and DM63
+KarlP Well, "too bad" they are allied with the US and they still use the A10 with DU ammo as default. That is the cause of the negative environmental impact. A10 spreading the shit all over the place and using it on "everything". Do A10 in Afghanistan today need DU or could they settle for HE or something when they only attack jalla guys with AKs.
Well done Sir! I was the Chief of Armor Force DS/S Lessons Learned for the U.S. Army & you absolutely nailed all of the key points about the round & the Abrams.
Well, there were a few minor points he got wrong but very good for a civilian.
@@TheJimtanker he's not a civilian
@@d17a2dude So Matsimus was in the military? He needs to do better research then.
@@TheJimtanker He's in the canadian military at the moment from what i understand
@@d17a2dude OK, maybe he still could have done more research.
Former tank crew here. I do have a distinct preference for depleted uranium because its pyrophoricity means that APFSDS shells using depleted uranium end up detonating behind the armour that they have penetrated despite theoretically being kinetic warheads, which is quite the spectacle. That said tungsten carbide isn't exactly a pushover either given that it can still cripple tanks by damaging critical subsystems like propulsion and fire control
I'm an old "Dino Tanker" and we used the 105mm SABOT rounds. We were told the "dart" cuts thru the armor and the fragments it makes doing so spreads them around inside the turret to destroy equipment and personnel. Possibly causing a catastrophic internal explosion, especially sionce Soviet era tanks have exposed ammo under the floor.
@@cavalryscout Out of curiosity, how did you guys deal with the brittleness of the tungsten carbide? When I was in as an aviation mechanic, we had to replace our "big boy" tungsten drill bit (2 inches by 3 feet for drilling out titanium shims) around every other month from it breaking in half when some idiot dropped it. Did the shell enclose the projectile, or did you have to pray the tip didn't land sideways & snap off every time someone dropped one, or did the guys dealing with them come up with something clever the brass would have never thought of?
These darts have a discarding case (sabot) that protects the dart during handling and flies off when fired.
@@davidelliott5843 I was worrying particularly about the part of the tip that sticks out the front of the sabot in the pictures of the rounds on display - that's the part I assume is somehow jacketed or protected from the kind of abuse GI's like me put them through loading them into (and throwing them out of) helicopters and C130's.
P.S. If no one finds out about the extra round made of styrofoam, we'll keep bringing a case of beer with every delivery - dry countries SUCK.
@@muninrob the penetrator bar is tungsten alloy, not carbide. Tungsten/nickel/iron.
I’m not sure what the windshield ie the tip is made from.
Well, at least the debate about that ammo is healthy!
Awesome as always Matt! Great explanation of this fantastic munition and it’s capabilities. And thank you Matt, for finally giving UA-cam, a video that does not go off on the mandatory tangent, detailing the possible harm of DU.
Dang it. I will never unsee APFSDS rounds as over glorified Lawn darts
Colonel Striker 251 🤣😂👍🏻👍🏻🇺🇸🇺🇸
Lawn darts are banned from being sold... APFSDS DU rounds are just spicy anti tank lawn darts
Another health risk is an enemy tank surviving long enough to take you out.
The health risk mentioned in the video is to the civilian population in the area during the following decades, not to the crew of the tank during war time.
@@TheAdriyaman 👍👍
@@TheAdriyaman don’t think for a second they didn’t use radioactively hot shit
@@robertlennihan3113 you got evidence of that?
@@rc59191 Yeah right here
Just stumbled upon your channel and I am blown away by the content and in-depth information with each video.
My roommate is a Gulf war veteran with severe PTSD and after watching a couple hours of your videos I haven't seen him as engaged and happy with anything as your videos in such a long time.
It may not seen like much, however, many people don't understand the suffering, mental breakdowns and the plethora of other debilitating health issues they go through.
You don't know how grateful I am for you and your work and wanted to pass along the amazing difference you made in a Marine veterans life.
Thank you greatly and be well.
Tell him thanks for his service for me. thank you.
You wouldn’t think a video about tank ammunition would be an aid for ptsd sufferers ,but whatever works. A Vietnam vet.
The depleted uranium dart used in tank rounds has been proven effective, and while there have been arguments about the “health or environmental impacts” we have to remember these darts are used only in a real war. In a real combat situation, a tank commander wants to know his or her tank is fully capable of engaging and beating an enemy. All war is brutal and harsh, and trying to tease out what is more humane or environmental when we talk of weapons of war seems to be idealistic. When this round was used in the first Gulf War, the results were stunning. In almost every engagement, the Iraqi tanks were blown apart or pierced. The very high velocity, high density and flat trajectory of this depleted uranium dart are huge advantages. Yes, it is harsh and the results would stun us, but this is why deterrence and diplomacy are always the best approaches.
Gulf War syndrome depleted uranium poisoning kidney failure all kinds of that elements. basically like Agent Orange for tanks.
Iraq is covered with radio active dust from du projectiles .
Do a bob semple tank overview!
This!!!!
Yes
Omg yes
Omg yes do it
NZ Represent
For those wondering, DU shells are NOT RADIOACTIVE. The real danger is that it is a heavy metal (like lead and osmium) and is rather toxic to the human body as a result.
The least of your worries is RadPois
5:30 I'm surprised more people haven't commented about this; all ballistic projectiles are affected by windage and gravity - no matter how fast and/or brief the flight, they all fall, from the moment they leave the barrel.
Yes, laser-like no drop over 2000m is complete BS.
@@JimBillyRayBob I’m sure what they mean is the drop is negligible since the flight time is so short, but yes, there is no way it doesn’t drop at all 🤣
g=32feet/s/s (acceleration due to gravity) Dart drop = 0.5 x g x t^2
According to @kirklamb3270 we can assume 7,500fps velocity. At this velocity, it will take 1 sec to go 2.286km (7500ft), and the dart will drop 16ft. Definitely not negligible.
Even at 229m, the dart will drop around 2 inches.
It's definitely not a laser, but the firing computer can easily calculate the drop if there is an accurate range finder (which there is). Assuming that the dart spins, the computer also needs to calculate the effects of precession and the Coriolis effect. That's a lot harder math, but easy enough for the computer. They also need to account for air friction and they probably have an experimental calibration factor taking into account air pressure and temperature. But the computer can handle all that.
The dart doesn’t spin. These are fired from smooth bore guns because spin stabilization is ineffective on long, skinny projectiles. The tail fins perform the job of stabilization in flight.
@@bradnail99 Meaning what in the context of this discussion? I think you're missing the point.
Ugh I love your videos so much mat. True quality military content. So interesting and somehow quenching my big bullet curiosities
But Are they as deadly as lawn darts?
Nah
Maybe
But pretty sure nah
Nah, they’re deadlier than lawn darts.
Deadliness is not measured on a scale. Dead = dead!
Bullet, dart, arrow, blast or shrapnel; ALL the same amount of deadliness.
Hit in the foot, lose your foot. Hit in the head (from ear to ear), you die.
One of the most destructive effects of penetrators (all types) is spall. The very hot bits of YOUR external armor that are now zipping around INSIDE your tank starting fires, breaking equipment and hurting people.
Those du rounds could conceivably punch through a Iowa class battleships main armor belt. Now that is incredible.
At 5:40 there is mention made that the round incurs NO ballistic drop out to 3000 meters. This is not possible. If the barrel were completely horizontal the round would begin dropping at with an acceleration of G as soon as it leaves the barrel. Any round from any weapon system will encounter ballistic drop, unless it is powered (like a rocket). It's just physics.
Its true it will encounter a drop....I think the guy used the engineer's point of view where due to high velocity of the round, the round covers the 3000 meters so fast that that the drop is negligible...i.e it does not make it deviate in a significant angle that can compromise point accuracy.
Angular momentum may explain the apparent lack of drop in that if the projectile can exceed the distance required to overcome the drop/Earth curvature it would appear to have no drop, much like a satellite orbiting the planet!
true, but i would assume that the idea is no drop in the practical sense, as in having a very long point blank range.
You are so correct.
When any projectile leaves the barrel it has two things working against it.
~Gravity and AIR ! ~
@@lbbradley55 No such thing as gravity bro.... the earth is pushing up on the round...
As a retired nuclear engineer who spent a significant part of my career
working with U, I suggest you re-think your comment about the toxicity
of U. I'll leave it to you to look up the LD50 does of the various
heavy metals. U isn't at the top. If it were, I'd have been dead a
long time ago. So would a large numbers of infantrymen who went poking
around in killed enemy tanks in the middle east and afghanistan.
The two main reasons to use DU are a) We have a huge stockpile of the stuff
and not much of anything to do with it. and b) unlike Tungsten and the other very
heavy metals, U is easy to machine. The machining must be done in an
argon inert atmosphere because the stuff is so flammable. The
government and contractors machine it in large glove-boxes. A private
entity who has only a small amount of machining to do can simply wrap
the machine tool in plastic sheeting and feed in the argon.
U is spoken of as pyrophoric but not really. Pyrophorocity is the property
of a substance to spontaneously ignite and burn in air. Potassium or
white phosphorous for example. Uranium, along with aluminum and
magnesium, would do so except that as any of these metals sit in air, an
oxide shield forms. Aluminum's oxide is so tough and tenacious that it
isn't considered flammable. Magnesium forms a less tenacious oxide
layer so that it CAN be ignited in air. Once lit, it burns to
completion and not much short of a Class D fire extinguisher will
extinguish the fire.
U also forms a tenacious oxide layer but as
it grows, the oxide layer separates into thin, very sharp (ask me how I
know!) oxide plains that provide just enough protection to prevent
spontaneous combustion.
Try to do anything with it and the
situation is much different. Chuck a chunk up in a lathe and start
making a cut. The swarf comes off as strings of burning metal. Get the
workpiece too hot and it too will catch fire. U will react to nitrogen to form uranium nitride. It'll strip the oxygen out of water molecules. It'll strip the oxygen out of the carbonate charge used in dry chemical extinguisher. It'll do the same thing to sand. Only a Class D extinguisher which consists of very finely powdered copper can do the job on a small fire. Bigger fires are allowed to simply burn out.
As you are a nuclear engineer from the US, I'm not impressed at all. Especially as a retired engineer. It's well known you guys didn't know shit about any nuclear risks.
@@miskatonic6210 actually, it appears you dont know shit about what he is talking about. Do your research, this man is correct. By the way, I'm not even from the USA and I know that america has some of the strictest nuclear safety regulations in the world.
@@semtheprogamingmaster8610 yeah, maybe about 60-70 years ago during the cold war. Ever since the cold war ended the US has been incredibly careful about disposing of nuclear waste. Nowadays all nuclear research that is done is observed under a microscope by the federal government to ensure that nothing goes wrong and that all safeguards are in place to protect the environment as much as possible.
It doesn't matter how careful we are today. We enslaved black people at some point so we are the literal Hitler Devil or something.
*shrug*
NATO be like : Sorry for droping 10 tons of uranium on ur land
Guns dont kill people do
Just killing people acting like that where’s Geneva convention allow weapons for mas destruction who ever do like that it’s really bad nation
@@jonclarkson7433 Maybe you don't realize most people in the world don't actually like America. If you want to understand why, read your own comment.
Merica...
When you kill this generation and laid natural landmine for next generation ,yeets in nato
10:26 that soldier looks so proud of that patreon round xD
"Flat-shooting" rounds (whether from a tank gun or a rifle) are not immune to the effects of gravity. Gravity works on all projectiles as soon as they exit the bore (and are no longer supported by the barrel). The apparent "flatness" of the trajectory comes from a projectile's speed. All other considerations being equal, any two projectiles flying through the air both drop at the same rate - gravity effects all objects equally. So let's imagine the comparison of two projectiles, one traveling at 10,000 fps and the other at 2,000 fps. (We'll ignore velocity loss due to drag to make this simple.) If they are both fired at a target 10,000 ft away, the first round gets there in one second, while the latter round gets there in five seconds. That means that gravity acts on the first round for only one second, but acts on the second round for five seconds. If both are fired from level barrels (that is, no hold-over for range) the first projectile falls approx. 16 ft from line-of-sight while the second falls a whopping 402 ft! So the hold-over (to put it precisely on target) for the first projectile is minor, while the hold-over for the second is considerable. (This also greatly increases the flight time of the second projectile because it has to travel a much longer, arcing path. The first projectile must also arc - no projectile actually "shoots flat" - but the increase in distance traveled, and therefore flight time, is minimal. This creates the impression the former "shoots flat" while the latter needs a large hold-over because it does not "shoot flat.") The faster the projectile, the less flight time to target. The less flight time to a target, the less time gravity exerts its pull on the projectile, and therefore the less it will drop before it hits its target.
Also note that after one second of flight time, both of these projectiles (ignoring other effects as if fired in a vacuum) if fired from level barrels will fall exactly the same distance from line-of-sight after one second (and will both eventually hit the ground at the same time if fired from barrels the same height above level ground). To put it another way, any two similar projectiles (again ignoring effects other than gravity), when fired from a level barrel, will both begin to fall as soon as they leave their barrels, and will both fall at the same rate regardless of their velocities. If the two projectiles postulated above both hit the ground after one second of flight (i.e., they hit the ground at the same time), the first does so 10,000 ft from where it was launched and the second lands 2,000 ft from its launch site. (If you have a barrel that's level to the ground, you can get a very close approximation of how long any projectile fired from that barrel - at any velocity - will remain in flight if fired over flat terrain. Take a bullet or nut or hammer - something dense that won't be affected by air resistance - hold it at the height of the barrel's muzzle, and drop it. The time the object spends falling is the same amount of time it will take gravity to act on the projectile coming out of the barrel. All other things being equal, two objects dropped from the same height will both hit the ground at the same time because gravity acts equally upon all objects over time.)
Bullets, artillery rounds, and rocks are ballistic projectiles. They are not flying objects, they are falling objects, and they are all subject to the same forces when they are launched through the air and in a gravity well.
The 120 with DU rounds is a killer combo, even the training rounds could do alot of damage on there own and those were fun to shoot
Man shooting a Russian tank with one of those has gotta be fun. The terrible ammo placement basically means it cooks no matter where you shoot it.
Once again great informal video! Learned a lot more about this kind of round and what DU is all about. It’s insane how powerful it is.
I was always wondering about this, thanks!
My dad did work on the depleted uranium round. The shape is the trick. At high speed it makes a jet of melted metal at super sonic speed inside the tank hit. The thing turns into liquid and melts the target metal impacted, everything inside is shredded. The ammunition also is hit by high speed melted splash and helps to keep the suffering inside the tank on the short side. 😁
Pfft, nokia's are far superior ammunition. Its indestructible so it can go through anything.
Science.
Did you know that a Nokia is so indestructible that it melts through the earth's crust and reaches the core cuz of how much energy it releases. That's why Nokia are very rarely found on the surface.
@@thraxironhide1674
Nah - Nokia gets yoyo effect - once it passes the Earths crust - it goes out in... Australia.
@@wino0000006 There's several hundred million of them out in the Outback scattered around and I intend to find them.
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING !!!
YOU'RE WELCOME...............
TRUMP- PENCE-2020
DEMONRATS 0
But then what happens if it impacts Nokia armor plates?
So glad I found this channel, love your work. Thanks Mat.
I Know nothing on this topic, but I do know this video was complex, extremely well made and your knowledge astonishing! My step dad was a supper big buff on battle guns, tanks and more and would custom model them to the finest detail, his work was like art. I remember sitting in the kitchen with him watching TV on Dessert Storm back in the day. Great video!
Thanks, I understand DU rounds far better now. Well explained and good vid. I subbed.
Answered most of my questions about this munition. Thanks.
What I learned from this video:
All tanks are considered beautiful.
I feel I must agree. :-)
Have been watching a lot of your videos over the last few days .... excellent content and well narrated too!
For what it's worth I appreciate that you didn't completely gloss over the ethical implications of such 'dirty' weaponry. Yea we came here to learn the science but that aspect, even if only the debate surrounding it, deserves mention. Respect
Ahhh nothing makes me harder than a good ole Abrams. God bless you matsimus you're one of the few supplying us military addicts* without the shitty robot voices
Just don't play the M1A1 Abrams mod that was added to Operation Flashpoint back in the day.
Whenever you were fighting that tank, the turbine was so loud that you had to stop the tank, switch off the engine, communicate, then start it back up again and execute the plan.
Yes, it was so bad that even with VOIP volume cranked up, you couldn't hear the other guy over VOIP... Suffice to say, the more silent diesel engine of the T90 became the mainstay vehicle of choice :D
Finally!; a video that delivers.
Ethical considerations aside, that was fascinating. To the point, well researched, plain language, not overloaded with technical wank. Spoke of past present and future to give a context of The Now.
It caused me to Google 'smoothbore' before continuing and that was most interesting also. On the basis of that I then Googled 'Rheinmetall Rh-120'.
The pretty pictures contained within the vid caused me to pause the vid and study the pics and the reasons for DU. Those pictures graphically (literally and figuritively) illustrated the fin stabilized smoothbore DU projectile.
The ballistic drop info was outstanding.
Before this vid I had little interest in war army tanks with huge death cocks, and I still feel that way, but this vid caused me to come away satisfied, educated, informed.
Really a top notch vid this. If only all the vids on YT were this good.
I will indeed view the link you posted below - mostly just because you recommended it.
Ahh, the journey from soy boy to man...
Excellent presentation....Excellent education. I must have read 100 articles which just touched on DU ammo. Finally, I understand. Thanks again. Subscribed !!!!
Excellent. Straight in with information and no bull. I’m subscribed.
When it comes to deadly darts, it's important to keep them out of the black and into the red... nothing in this game for two in a bed...
Can't beat a bit of Bully... 😁😁😁
Graeme you shit pump lol
@Matsimus haha!! You tankies and your obsession with penetrating vulnerable regions from behind... You should merge with RMs 🤣🤣🤣
Put a shirt on Graham. Your moobs are showing. Spell your name right as well. Shambles.
hi mastimus! could you please make video on rocket assisted projectiles and hypersonic projectiles?
The US unloaded several hundred tons of DU ammunition in Iraq alone for mostly no good reason (on not armored targets) with horrible consequences for the people there...
One of the big reasons for using the smooth bore120 in the Abrams is that the 105 could only fire a limited number of combat SABOT rounds before the rifling started to rip out and the gun became useless. Can't remember exactly how many, but it was about what a tank could expect to fire in a good fight.
Also at longer rangers (1500 meters? Been a long time since I was at The Armor School at Ft. Knox) you also had to start allowing for the round drifting to the right because of the projectile's spin.
It was becoming obvious that the sights were getting better than the gun and that armor was getting thicker so it was time to upgrade.
That is super cool! I never knew DU rounds existed! Thanks for the video!
The Bradley has them for its 25mm cannon as well.
Now let's getting into a pissing contest between DM63A1, M829A4, and Vacuum-1. xD
Matsimus: Uranium, the heaviest naturally occurring material on earth
Iridium: Am I a joke to you?
Osmium: Hold my beer.
UA-cam algorithm has finally figured out what I like. Factual, complete, concise information on a video. I actually learned something on a subject for a change.. Reactive armor would be a great subject in the future. Subbed up bro, nicely done. peace
I have mixed feelings with "DU" rounds, I see the tactical benefit of it, hell I seen it with my own eyes but on the other hand, I also dont like the complications with "DU" killed wrecks and how toxic they are. After the was have been won allot more people have to go near and live with these wrecks.
Tungsten is actually just as toxic to humans when inhaled.
+CoyDK. No military is going to give up a tactical edge, specially when its cheaper as well. However, just because you have "nukes" doesnt mean you have to "nuke" everything. To use an analogy.
Tungsten won't stay in your lungs and irradiate you though, I'd rather go for tungsten if I had to make the choice.
Tungsten also stays in your lungs just like most other heavy metals, either way you still get lung cancer.
Looking up tungsten hazard... "Symptoms: irritation eyes, skin, respiratory system; diffuse pulmonary fibrosis; loss of appetite, nausea, cough; blood changes" www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0645.html
So I don't think it is as bad as DU. for which "... studies using cultured cells and laboratory rodents continue to suggest the possibility of leukemogenic, genetic, reproductive, and neurological effects from chronic exposure." www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17508699
When I was a kid I used to think depleted uranium rounds meant tank ammo that detonated a nuclear blast and that's why they were controversial.
What a moron I was. lol
Judean People's Front: Yeah, I know that now, I was talking about my dumbness when I was a child.
Judean People's Front
DU was never used as nuclear fuel. DU is a by product of making nuclear fuel by removing the radioactive parts from uranium (creating DU) and concentrating it in other uranium, this is called enrichment. DU is inert and has about as much radiation as other heavy metals. What makes it toxic is the fact that it is a heavy metal like lead. How ever the amount used compared to natural heavy metals in the ground is extremely small.
As far as birth defects are concerned, that has been happening since long before the US showed up. This is because people in the middle east have been inbreeding through rape for generations.
It kinda did inside the tank that got hit by it since the crews inside just get one ticket to another dimension
@@SteveMHN hey that sound awesome, probability in some sci-fi faction with space ship firing nuclear warhead at enemy ship.
Nice job. Very informative and well spoken!
Love your stuff!! Keep it up!
In soviet russia we use satlinimiun more denser then a neutron star and its not toxic also used ib armor du rounds when shot at a russian tank just miss beacuse they dont want to get near stalinimium
It is toxic. But only to capitalist scum.
How many dissidents you have to send to gulag to produce 1kg of stalinium?
@@shi01 1000 capitalist pigs per g
THat sounds like a good return on investment comrade, can I have a kilogramme?
We in the West aren't worried - shit, you can't even spell it correctly........
I wonder what it would have been like to be at the meeting where someone said for the first time, "Hey, we just came up with a way to make the most powerful tank armor penetrating rounds out of garbage."
loved this video, now i have more infor about Du ammo to talk about with my friends XD
I worked for a contractor that made these but in a 30mm round,I worked as a inspector in the DU room..WICKED STUFF !
imagine seeing one of these stuck on your “wall” 2 feet off of target
I liked thinking about this stuff before the internet existed.
Now everybody knows.
cat is out of the bag now man. it means they have found something far deadlier and is feeding everyone this antiquated line of bs. lol
One of the most impressive displays of tanks firing I ever saw as a tank gunner was at night in summer 1968. It was the last firing session with Centurions. A whole squadron of Centurions firing sabot at night together at the same time ! Fantastic !
How old are you
@@NikoBellic-hg4un Fucking old, why ? How old are you ?
Strykers are by far my favourite toys of deployment. 7 continuous years of battlefield experience here.
I actually worked on tests of du tank rounds during their development in the late 80's. We stepped them up to over 7500 fps and shot many tank turrets. I like to think our tests are why the Gulf War went the way it did!! We also tested Russian ammo for the same reasons!! We knew exactly their capabilities going in!!
lol thats funny. you're a funny guy.
@@kirstyblack3432 What's funny?? It's the truth.
*JOHNNY LOAD THE THUMB TACK!*
Great Job. I was just curious and this upload laid out all the prevalent data💯
This round was developed by the Army's weapons testing lab at Picatinny Arsenal in NJ. The original dart had only three fins which resembled a 50's scify rocket and was stated to have a 1/2" drop at five miles. Further the nose of the dart had an approximately 1/64th inch diameter radius with a slight swail behind it an was reported to create a shock wave in front of the round that would begin to affect the armor, heat it up, several feet before it actually made contact with it. I don't know if this version of the round made it into production but this was in the report at the developmental stages of the dart. I hope this info is declassed by now as I only came by it from working for the company that designed and made the original plastic cover that was used to protect the dart from damage during shipment. I guess I'll find out.
The big advantage depleted uranium shells have over anti-tank rocket systems, is it is pretty much impossible to intercept and fully stop a DU dart as it is such a highly concentrated mass moving at ridiculous speeds. Basic physics are at play here. It needs an equal force to stop it, and active protective systems relying on explosive shrapnel shells/rockets simply don't provide enough kinetic energy to stop the DU dart.
The same idea is why Pk 1 & 2 Patriot missile defense systems suck at intercepting higher density (than air craft) ballistic missiles, as the the anti-air shrapnel missiles struggle against the higher density of missiles vs aircraft. Future Patriot systems moved on to direct intercepting missiles to fix this.
Contrast that to man portable anti-tank rockets. Their slower, fatter explosive warheads are more vulnerable to active protective systems that rely on shrapnel explosive devices. Not to mention their electronics are vulnerable to electronic warfare systems.
"active protective systems relying on explosive shrapnel shells/rockets simply don't provide enough kinetic energy to stop the DU dart"
They don't stop it literally, but they do reduce its effectiveness, preferably to a significant degree. You don't need to destroy a projectile to make it ineffective.
@@Dimetropteryx
I said fully stop. Yes, in theory they can still interrupt the dart, and significantly alter the angle/effectiveness, but it still is going to hit and hit hard.
But that is besides my main paint. In comparison to anti tank rockets, DU darts are astronomically harder to stop with an active protective system.
Anti tank rockets are fatter, slower (often sub sonic or low super sonic), have a large heat signature, and are full of delicate electronics.
DU darts are smaller, denser, MOVE AT ALMOST HYPER SONIC SPEEDS, and have no electronic or mechanical components to be damaged or misdirected or tricked.
Might hit and will hit less hard. And since it relies on its own structural integrity to do its job, anything that compromises that will affect its performance significantly. That it's harder to do is not really interesting or relevant, especially since there are already claims of functioning systems and it's just a matter of continuing to develop a concept that by now could be considered proven. Designers are already close, there is no reason to assume that success isn't imminent.
You can't entirely stop a APFSDS, but reduce its effectivness drastically. Launcher based systems like Iron Fist detonate their interceptor in a distance of 50-80 cm from the APFSDS, with the goal to tilt it. A tilt of only 10° reduces armor penetration about 50%. But since it's really hard for a launcher based systems to be that fast and accurate, they are generally not very effective against KE. Distributed systems like Rheinmetall ADS don't aim to only tilt the rod, but to shatter and break it. That's more effective. The reaction time is not a problem either.
Agreed. Try guiding an anti-tank missile at a target moving between tall buildings or big trees, the missile loses it's window of opportunity very quickly, but a 120mm gun will reach it quickly and pass through a building or a tree if necessary, what would cause a missile to explode prematurely. Also, in the case of wire guided missiles, which are limited to the speed at which the wire can unspool and have very little chance at winning a war in the woods of Europe or the Jungles of Asia...cuz the trees would get in the way & mess up the wires.
"Gunner, Sabot, Tank!" "Identified" "On the Way.'
I was an armor officer with M-60s and M-60A1s.
The fire command was "Driver stop. Gunner, HEAT, Tank. (no stabilized guns and HEAT, not SABOT was the primary anti-tank round. Sabot was only used on side or rear shots.
Heat was primary battle carry load. So in combat the intercom communication was tc: driver stop, gunner heat tank, loader: heat battle carry up. Gunner: target aquaired, lazing tc: fire gunner: on the way tc: load sabot loader: sabot loaded up, gunner: on the way, this would continue until the tc: target distroyed cease fire.
"Im not gonna discuss the health effects of this ammuntion. I think there is already a healthy debate about this topic" got me rollin🤣🤣
Love the video. My wife is listening this and asked me if Marvin the Martian was narrating it. LOL
You've got to team up with Chieftan for you tank videos. You are good, you two putting out material would be awsome.
Hi Matsimus can you do video about Georgian APC Didgori
You can't focus on the risk to life, using this munition can pose, but the number of lives the use of this munition has saved.
Imagine having a round so dense and ripping so fast through the air that pure kinetic force is enough to defeat latest generation era. That is terrifying
"I went to a couple of those wars."
Great presentation, thanks for the clear description of these types of munitions.
Good passive opinion man, no joke, you've done a great job keep it up.
I remember in the 1960s firing the 25pdr Field Gun in the Anti Tank Role. I was firing a 20Pound Solid Tungsten Round ahead of Charge Four Cordite this was in Senny Bridge Range in Wales the targets were large cardboard tanks so no idea of penetration in steel but it was lot of fun.
Is there a Stalker edition for these?
UA-cam "Depleted Uranium Firings West Cumbria" test footage on reducing DU discharge.
Privet Western Partners/Counterparts! "...at least 90% KILL rate aimed for..."! Wow! Let's not disable the Killing Machine (Tank), but those operating it! Imagine opening top hatch, and look at the daddy of 2 kids (even western counterparts) minced up with body parts found even behind in storage bays and engines!
The A-10 also use DU and we as well, but we normally target engines, hoping tank operators drop down out of Turret, because next target is blowing Gun turret off from tank's superstructure (only if "enemy" tank can still fire after engines are destroyed).
You know Matt, you said something which I can also relate to, that is where you said she's just a *beauty...,* I look in awe at our SU-30, 35, 57, and top-class MiGs, and the way pilots dance and play with their "Ladies" are *beautifully crafted machines* (even F-22, B-2 Spirit, our white Swans etc), but then I'm reminded that those Ladies are what my pilot friends call their Mermaids...for they are extremely sexy machines to behold...until their fangs come out and they can kill thousands with *one* strike (depending on the munitions)! so, at the Airshows one can truly say:
What a "View to a Kill"!
С уважением
Commander Mikhail Rimsky-Korsakov
(FSB: Research, Information & Internet (Social Media))
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНАЯ СЛУЖБА БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ
Solid info, thank you!
Fun fact all APDSFS sabot rounds more, or less lose 40-100 m/s of velocity for each kilometer traveled
For previous AP shells such as APCBC, APCR....and etc, they would lose more velocity. Idk the exact figures, but perhaps a few hundred meter/sec per kilometer travelled
When the tankers use DU the enemies DI
Interesting video. Thanks for the effort to make it. A few physics corrections: 1. Naturally occurring Uranium starts out at 0.72% U235, 0.01%U234, and 99.27% U238. Your graphic states that depleted uranium is 89% U238. I think you derive this because Uranium is enhanced to 11% U235 for use in fission reactors. DU projectiles are alloyed with other metals. Depleted Uranium has to be 99.27% U238 minimum before being alloyed. 2. Stating that a projectile has no drop over 2 miles would be disputed by Sir Isaac Newton’s laws of motion. Gravity cannot be erased from any moving (or static)body on the earth’s surface. The drop may be small, but it can never
be zero.
Beautiful M1A1, I couldn't agree more.
A small conical object made with one of the densest materials known to man with a very aerodynamic shape with a very pointy nose moving at mach 5 can kill just about anything
I have a particle accelerator with a barrel and laser sights. A proton moving at near light speed has LOTS of mass. Will obliterate anything it hits.
Thanks for the video Matt I learned a lot. I think, you started to point out to some extent that the value of tanks on a battlefield is still there but its time is running out. The tank is an idea that was developed in ww1 but not fully implemented until ww2. Militaries commonly hold onto previous success for a very longtime verse outside the box development. In conflicts the US and NATO forces are currently involved in, tanks are still the master of ground combat. However, if large scale war broke out today between major powers the effect of tanks on the battlefield maybe less then preferable. Protection will always be at the forefront of military prowess but if history has showed me anything weapons development will always to some extent surpass this. Example, the potential power of railguns or lasers. To some up the age of tanks is close to an end, but the need for protection always exists. What will replace such an amazing weapon on the battlefield, I don't know. Let me know what you think about the future of tank use or what may replace them. I would also like to know if you agree to some extent with what I am saying or if I misinterpreted. Disclaimer: I really do love tanks and this is just my opinion.
Love your videos brother!
I am a retired munitions engineer on these 120mm and 105mm munitions. and others I enjoy your spectacular videos.
the first clip is the tank range for camp burhering in kuwait. been there and wont go back again.
Kuwait is dump.
absolute insanity anymore, this push to the envelope of who can punch through my big ass armor. Everything being fielded anymore, army, air force, navy, space its all 95-100% accurate, 100% lethal. I fear the future in 20 years.
In my (educated) opinion, the shock of weapon advancement is going to be greater than it was in the world wars. People could not comprehend the machine gun and artillery, people could not comprehend mechanized warfare, and the next major global conflict is going to show those technologies at full maturation and unnatural speed.
We're like the fish swimming in the ocean and the machines of war are the bird killing us from a dimension we cannot understand. It's going to be bad.
Collected via the epa website
Studies indicate that an elevated pH in soil may
increase the solubility of tungsten by decreasing
its sorption coefficient, which may cause it to leach
more readily into the groundwater table (ATSDR
2005; ASTSWMO 2011).
Tungsten has been shown to accumulate in plants
in substantial amounts. The extent of
accumulation appears to be related to the
tungsten content in soil and varies widely,
depending on the plant genotype (Koutsospyros
and others 2006)
Studies on female rats have shown that oral
exposure to tungsten caused post-implantation
deaths and developmental abnormalities in the
musculoskeletal system.
Studies on rats also found that tungsten primarily
accumulated in bones and in the spleen after oral
exposure (NIEHS 2003).
The EPA’s Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Interagency Testing Committee has included
tungsten compounds in the Priority Testing List,
which is a list of chemicals regulated by TSCA for
which there are suspicions of toxicity or exposure
and for which there are few, if any, ecological
effects, environmental fate or health effects testing
data (EPA 2006).
The American Council of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (ACGIH) has established a threshold
limit value of 5 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3
)
as the time-weighted average (TWA) over an 8-
hour work exposure and 10 mg/m3 as the 15-
minute short-term exposure limit (STEL) for
airborne exposure to tungsten metal and for
insoluble tungsten compounds (ACGIH 2008).
The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) recommends a permissible
exposure limit of 5 mg/m3 for insoluble compounds
of tungsten and a PEL of 1 mg/m3 limit for soluble
compounds in the construction and shipyard
industries as a TWA over an 8-hour work
exposure. OSHA also established a PEL of 10
mg/m3 as the 15-minute STEL for airborne
exposure to insoluble compounds of tungsten and
3 mg/m3 as the 15-minute STEL for airborne
exposure to soluble tungsten compounds (OSHA
2013)
Collected via academic.oup.com/milmed/article/172/9/1002/4283401
Studies in experimental animals and cell culture indicate that pellets based on heavy metal tungsten alloy possess carcinogenic potential previously unseen for depleted uranium and/or lead. Other metals in the tungsten alloy such as nickel or cobalt may contribute to such a risk. Accordingly, the long-term tungsten-related health risk is reason for concern. This article reviews toxicological and clinical literature and provides new perspectives on tungsten and tungsten-based alloys.
That uranium is called depleted because it had had the fisionable isotope removed from it. In reality each one of those rounds, used in a Molten Salt Breeder Reactor could fuel the energy a FAMILY uses in their LIFETIME. The breeder develops regular isotope into fuel isotope with neutron bombardment and then burns the resulting fusionable (a mix of uranium and plutonium) to make more neutrons and more fuel.
Could you make a vid on the colt c8nld and c7nld
A shell traveling two miles without any drop due to gravity is mind-boggling.
Really? Is that true. If so thats crazy. I didnt know that. I dont want to believe it
Follow The Grow its from a smoothbore gun, not rifled with makes it even more mind boggling. (Mind boggling because rifled guns should have more range)
@@dead_againonblitz6462 Yup. Truly frightening.
It does too! That's what the laser range finder is for!
dead_again on blitz smoothebore should have more range than rifled. Rifling slows the projectile down as some forward energy is converted to spin. Rifling keeps the projectile from tumbling, but apfsd rounds have fins instead.
The guys who shoot those rounds need ant- radioactive suits lol.