Tank Cage vs Javelin and NLAW

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 12 бер 2022
  • The russian tanks have been seen with metal cages on top of there turret during the invesion of Ukraine. While looking like something home made quick throw on, what benifit are these cages suppose to do?
    Please like and subscribe for more! :)

КОМЕНТАРІ • 843

  • @logoseven3365
    @logoseven3365 2 роки тому +822

    The “cage”, is actually a BBQ grill for when the tank is on fire.

  • @zach11241
    @zach11241 2 роки тому +286

    I put a cage around my house. My in laws still managed to get in.

    • @bite-marx
      @bite-marx 2 роки тому +1

      wokka wokka wokka

    • @helterskelter416
      @helterskelter416 2 роки тому +26

      you didn't putin enough effort in building it i guess

    • @bphenry
      @bphenry 2 роки тому +3

      @@helterskelter416 OMFG!! This is the most under-appreciated comment stream ever! I'm ded. 🤣🤣

    • @razminka.7522
      @razminka.7522 2 роки тому +1

      Killer comment!

    • @MrGraywolves
      @MrGraywolves 2 роки тому +1

      You need to add the reactive armour system....some people use Rotties, others Pitties...I personally prefer the older Dobies...

  • @greva2904
    @greva2904 2 роки тому +399

    Apparently many experts in the west were worried that the Javelin, which is now quite an old system, would become obsolete in about 2025, so it’s good to see that it’s still up to the task. The Ukrainians seem to prefer the NLAW though as it’s much easier to use, requires much less training and is more suitable for use in urban combat. But if you’re in a Russian tank right now both systems must be scaring the crap out of you.

    • @KFCLOVERMY
      @KFCLOVERMY 2 роки тому +8

      I think they'll squeeze out a countermeasure soon enough, either the ruskies or Chinese, now they seem what they can do.

    • @SonOfTheDawn515
      @SonOfTheDawn515 2 роки тому +32

      Javelins do require more training compared to point and click AT weapons. Such anti-armor weapons are better for issuing en masse. Once fired you just break the sights and leave the tube as trash. However, they shouldn't (and aren't) eschewed for one over the other. Both styles of weapons have their strengths and weaknesses.

    • @edwinalexis593
      @edwinalexis593 2 роки тому +12

      @@KFCLOVERMY yet the offensive technology is easier to create/improve than the defensive ones, so the battle results can also provide valuable info on how to make the Javelin and NLAW systems even more lethal

    • @sirxavior1583
      @sirxavior1583 2 роки тому +6

      It's debatable. Active Protection Systems (APS) and the Trophy system should in theory stop ATGMs. But it also depends on the location of the sensors. If i'm not mistaken the APS on the T-90 is located on the front turret and is only effective in the direction that the Turret is pointing...so a Javelin should still be effective if you target the tank from the rear and out of sight of the APS. A planned Javelin saturation with each operator firing at the tank from diffrent sides may also overwhelm the APS, provided they all fire at exactly the same time.

    • @neutronalchemist3241
      @neutronalchemist3241 2 роки тому +22

      It seems the Panzerfaust 3 is gaining popularity. No guided, no top attack, but it's the handiest of them all, and the penetration is enough to disable a tank from any direction.

  • @Sparta_121
    @Sparta_121 2 роки тому +126

    I was anti tank platoon in the parachute regiment and was trained and fired the javelin. Wicked weapon system. Top attack, fire and forget unlike the milan system it replaced in the british army. The tracking gates in the sight system are easy to use and locks onto the target with ease. The only problem i had with the kit was it wasnt durable enough. We done alot of tank recognition and learned how to recognise nato and russian tanks by just showing us a certain part of the tank and we had to identify them.

    • @cesaravegah3787
      @cesaravegah3787 2 роки тому +3

      Very interesting points and shows that the system though vastly superior to others it still can be improved, hope that the Ukranians get more of them anyways

    • @coreliousc8915
      @coreliousc8915 2 роки тому +3

      This guy is literally copy pasting this every where.
      really doubt he was in an anti tank platoon. More likely a bot given how many videos I've seen his comment on.

    • @thamwaikeong5885
      @thamwaikeong5885 2 роки тому +1

      MILAN is a SACLOS system. The 2T is still quite potent, rated for one metre of armor or three metres concrete.

  • @757Poppy
    @757Poppy 2 роки тому +95

    I thought the cages were a means of stopping the crews running away.

    • @sumitd500
      @sumitd500 2 роки тому +11

      🤣

    • @nicholasmuro1742
      @nicholasmuro1742 2 роки тому +4

      In mother Russia, you do not run from tank.
      Tank runs you

    • @blackcountryme
      @blackcountryme 2 роки тому +4

      Ooooo

    • @chriswalker7555
      @chriswalker7555 2 роки тому +1

      Too soon!

    • @markjackson7467
      @markjackson7467 2 роки тому

      Saying "COULD" is not an analysis - try presenting actual energy and timing details with experimental data

  • @danboyd2725
    @danboyd2725 2 роки тому +134

    It's like in the Roadrunner cartoons when While E Coyote pulls out a small umbrella to fend off a bolder.

    • @danboyd2725
      @danboyd2725 2 роки тому +2

      @True South
      Like the Javelin Missile System, they all worked as designed.

    • @skinnybub5237
      @skinnybub5237 2 роки тому +3

      Omg 😱 🤣 #1 UA-cam comment of the day!!!

    • @jamesm3471
      @jamesm3471 2 роки тому +1

      Screw Wile E Coyote. He was always the aggressor and deserved everything he got…

    • @bear76009
      @bear76009 2 роки тому +2

      I worked for UPS and picked up from an ACME Co in Texas one time. They asked me what I was there for and I said Rocket Boots without missing a beat.

  • @daveholmes5540
    @daveholmes5540 2 роки тому +111

    The cage is not for protection, its to keep the soldiers in and stop them running away from ukrainian soldiers. 😂

    • @taliakron641
      @taliakron641 2 роки тому +1

      from what? does this savagers have an army? lol

    • @tomgreene7942
      @tomgreene7942 2 роки тому +3

      Or perhaps it is to make the soldiers feel like they have extra protection, even if it doesn't work.

    • @edi9892
      @edi9892 2 роки тому +6

      This reminds me of that my grandfather claimed that they shot a Soviet tank and it kept moving in circles. They shot it again and then discovered that the hatches were locked from the outside...

    • @claygamer3657
      @claygamer3657 2 роки тому

      @@taliakron641 what

    • @markjackson7467
      @markjackson7467 2 роки тому

      Saying "COULD" is not an analysis - try presenting actual energy and timing details with experimental data

  • @bellezayverdad
    @bellezayverdad 2 роки тому +57

    It's also called ESA or 'Emotional Support Armour'. It doesn't help much against antitank weapons though.

    • @classicforreal
      @classicforreal 2 роки тому +4

      Alternatively Cope Cage

    • @Wallyworld30
      @Wallyworld30 2 роки тому

      @@classicforreal I heard Speak the Truth call it a Cope Cage and that's the best way to describe it.

    • @markjackson7467
      @markjackson7467 2 роки тому

      Saying "COULD" is not an analysis - try presenting actual energy and timing details with experimental data

    • @Wallyworld30
      @Wallyworld30 2 роки тому

      @@markjackson7467 Nobody in this thread said "Could" wtf are you even talking about?

    • @markjackson7467
      @markjackson7467 2 роки тому

      @@Wallyworld30 The idiot making this video did and presented no evidence - there is plenty of video showing Russian tanks with reactive armour being hit multiple times and being repaired on telegrm/twtr.

  • @Exitlad27
    @Exitlad27 2 роки тому +109

    The cage is more psychological I think, it gives the tank crew a false sense of security. But that will be gone now I would imagine as everyone knows it doesn't work.

    • @joselimjoco3367
      @joselimjoco3367 2 роки тому +11

      It's like putting an umbrella in their tanks.

    • @FlyboyHelosim
      @FlyboyHelosim 2 роки тому +5

      If the cage is able to detonate the second, main charge then it may actually be more effective than you think.

    • @volairn70
      @volairn70 2 роки тому +11

      I heard them jokingly called "cope cages" ;)

    • @PaperThinArmor
      @PaperThinArmor 2 роки тому +6

      They probably were meant to defend against older atgms and things like rpgs being launched from buildings atop of tanks as experienced in Chechnya but these things no way can withstand javelins and nlaws

    • @DerDop
      @DerDop 2 роки тому +15

      Emotional support armour.

  • @gregwasserman2635
    @gregwasserman2635 2 роки тому +67

    The cage does a great job of increasing the profile of the tank and making it easier for the enemy to locate, defeating the nest asset of the Russian tank- it's low profile.

    • @zeffy._440
      @zeffy._440 2 роки тому +2

      the cage still leaves a smaller tank when compared to it's western counterparts while protecting against standard rockets and drones.

    • @gregwasserman2635
      @gregwasserman2635 2 роки тому +10

      @@zeffy._440, so far it hasn't stopped the early versions of the Javelin while letting the Ukrainian forces let them know where they are. But believe what you wish, this sort of rationalization is why the Russians are bogged down right now.

    • @Jsynq
      @Jsynq 2 роки тому

      @@zeffy._440 the cages only use is to just cope that they cant even protect themselves from those javelins

    • @zeffy._440
      @zeffy._440 2 роки тому +1

      @@Jsynq the cages aren't designed against Javeline's. They are great against drones that drop explosives from above and work great as an additional area to store gear.
      Cope harder out of curiosity how did Mariupol go? Siberia treat you well so far?

    • @bitterbutter1000
      @bitterbutter1000 2 роки тому +2

      The Americans put cages around their vehicles in the last 2 wars they lost. 😃😄😁

  • @ivanstepanovic1327
    @ivanstepanovic1327 2 роки тому +141

    Actually, this cage was not meant to protect against Javelin and similar missiles. It just can't do that.
    It is put there on tanks meant for urban combat. In those conditions, enemy uses RPG-7 and similar systems from tall buildings, shooting downwards on top of the tank (proven very effective in Chechnia). Also, RPG-7 is widely used and there are A LOT of those in former USSR republics. Also, most of its ammo still going around was produced in 1960s and 70s, so it is less effective and with less advanced fuses, so cage armor might have some use. Also, note that under this cage, there are still ERA blocks. So, cage plus ERA (old Kontakt-1 is small enough to fit there) will defeat RPG and other low penetration older ordnance.
    Also, drone missiles are relatively small and have less penetration compared to Javelin and this might help to some extent against those as well.
    But against Javelin? Forget it, it will go through no problem! Tandem warhead and massive penetration... There is only a slight chance this cage might fool the seeker about the actual position of the tank's turret and cause the HEAT jet to hit engine compartment. However, the chances of it working every time are slim and the tank will still be out of battle (crew might survive this, though).

    • @zipz8423
      @zipz8423 2 роки тому +8

      To be honest we can only speculate about the reasons, but what you have said does have logic attached to it. I agree on the Javelin, the thinking - if Javelin is a consideration it might be for the umbrella to initiate the warhead fuses - but that isnt going to work all of the time because the javelin fuses arent in the front of the round but a good enough impact will make it go bang early according to the field manuals.

    •  2 роки тому +6

      Cope cage

    • @knoahbody69
      @knoahbody69 2 роки тому +9

      That cage might be able to stop Molotov Cocktails, possibly a grenade. An RPG-7 wouldn't be stopped unless the grenade doesn't go off. The top of the tank is always the weakest point. I mean, how are soldiers going to get into the tank? That cage is pretty much useless and the other thing about tanks in urban fighting is they can be easily trapped and immobilized allowing infantry to overwhelm in close quarters.

    • @keithjurena9319
      @keithjurena9319 2 роки тому +1

      ERA is of limited utility in MOUT. ERA adds fuel, once the molotov cocktails start flying, that means 5 minutes until BBQ communists are ready to serve. The dish is done when the Jiffy Pop tank pops its top.

    • @georgepalmer5497
      @georgepalmer5497 2 роки тому +1

      I'm wondering if they could develop this system into iterations that do make a difference on top down rocket attacks on tanks. While this approach might seem useless now, it can be further developed, and it seems so much more efficient than the Trophy system.

  • @alastairbarkley6572
    @alastairbarkley6572 2 роки тому +97

    Ukrainian forces got large numbers of NLAW first - as their primary anti-tank weapon. There weren't any complaints about it, despite it having lower specs (and lower weight and cost). The British Army has both Javelin and NLAW but uses them in a complementary, not competitive, way.

    • @konfunable
      @konfunable 2 роки тому +15

      agree. NLAW is shorter range, so better in norther part of Ukraine with woods and cities. Javelins are much better in south where the steppes and farms are, so you need long distances.

    • @Weakeyedominant
      @Weakeyedominant 2 роки тому +20

      NLAW disappointed in the export market but this was down to militaries not expecting to use them and selected more expensive options with more bells and whistles in much smaller numbers. As terrible as war is, it does tell everyone what works and what is just a shinny expensive waste of money on a defense stand. The Baltic States are all now putting in orders for NLAW. The Ukrainians so far have preferred it to javelin which is heavier, slower to setup and more complex. Great if firing from a remote turret on a light vehicle, but at infantry level they are crying out for NLAW.

    • @ReadmanJ
      @ReadmanJ 2 роки тому +8

      @@Weakeyedominant Oh, and they'll get them.

    • @sashakyrus6934
      @sashakyrus6934 2 роки тому +14

      I'm from Ukraine and I can complain that NLAW has some problems with the battery, so we have to modify it a little bit

    • @ReadmanJ
      @ReadmanJ 2 роки тому +7

      @@sashakyrus6934 Good luck friend I'm pulling for you and everyone over there. Cherers m8

  • @TheGrrson
    @TheGrrson 2 роки тому +6

    There is something incredibly satisfying about watching a guy with a rocket take out a tank.

  • @bigblue6917
    @bigblue6917 2 роки тому +48

    When Russia was fighting in Grozny they lost a number of tanks to RPGs being fired from the upper floors of buildings. That is what the cage is there to stop. It was not designed to stop Javelin or NLAW missiles. As for hitting the side of the tank video footage has shown that the reactive armour of the Russian tanks is in a very poor state or even missing entirely. So a side shot could penetrate without much problem.

    • @TimKellerLinuxNinja
      @TimKellerLinuxNinja 2 роки тому +4

      Now that the Ukranians are being supplied with German PanzerFaust's as well, those are known to defeat skirt ERA as well.

    • @pulaski1
      @pulaski1 2 роки тому +8

      If you hit it with anything that removes a track, the crew will apparently run away and abandon the tank.

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому +1

      i think you confusing russian and dnr/ukraine tanks. Russian tanks t72b3 pretty modern with new reactive armor.

    • @SueMyChin
      @SueMyChin 2 роки тому +1

      @@trololoev No, he's not confused. He's saying that the Russian tanks that have ERA have been poorly maintained and in many cases it's in poor condition or missing.

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому

      @@SueMyChin t-72b3 has or kontakt-5 or relict armor, both of them placed under armor, how it can be missing or damaged? only way you can lost it is after receiving AT rocket in it.

  • @trevortrevortsr2
    @trevortrevortsr2 2 роки тому +10

    At the start of the Conflict Ukraine had 2,000 NLAW and 47 Javelin launches - Quantity has a quality of its own

  • @peterkwolek2265
    @peterkwolek2265 2 роки тому +48

    When I found out about shape charges I was borderline traumatized just from photos of the people in our IED training course that were in armored HMMWVs and charges punched through like it was a soda can.

    • @jazztheglass6139
      @jazztheglass6139 2 роки тому +12

      South African army strapped full water tanks to sides of their armoured vehicles, helped against rpg's

    • @timothywilliams1359
      @timothywilliams1359 2 роки тому +21

      Way back in the 1980s, when I first went through ROTC at Knox, I realized my chances of survival on a modern battle field would be a lot higher as an infantry soldier than sitting inside a huge metal target. Never regretted that decision.

    • @SonOfTheDawn515
      @SonOfTheDawn515 2 роки тому +3

      Shape charge AT weapons have been used since at least WW2. Panzerfausts come to mind. They didn't have to worry about velocity or trying to penetrate with some sort of dense metal core.

    • @zipz8423
      @zipz8423 2 роки тому

      And Strykers.

    • @zipz8423
      @zipz8423 2 роки тому +2

      @@jazztheglass6139 Nice, the water would still transmit the energy hydrodynamically but initiate the fuze early preventing penetration. A bit like water ERA.

  • @grievetan
    @grievetan 9 місяців тому +1

    Whoever designed Javelin is a genius

  • @RaedwaldBretwalda
    @RaedwaldBretwalda 2 роки тому +14

    [I am not an expert] The purpose of cage armour is to damage the detonator of a contact fused shaped charge. Such as for the ubiquitous RPG. The NLAW, as the video shows, is not contact fused (magnetic or IR, I guess). The front of a Javelin is the IR sensor, so it's detonator can't be damaged by a cage. But, as another poster pointed out, the cage would still be useful against RPGs fired down from buildings in urban areas, and the Russians might reasonably expect THAT to be a problem.

    • @joeharris4353
      @joeharris4353 2 роки тому +3

      The principle is to detonate it at a distance. The shape charge is designed to concentrate the piercing material right in front of the payload. If it's detonated a foot away from the armor, it will defuse the material that's being projected into a wider beam, thus lowering its effectiveness. The beam remains focused by the armor if it enters as intended. Just a basic RPG 7 can defeat 24inches of steel. With a cage 12 imches from the armor. Made of half inch sheet material cut into 2 inch slates can defuse the beam enough for 6 inches of steel to stop it

  • @golong1343
    @golong1343 2 роки тому +4

    The cage installed above the tank is for the crews to have a false confidence as their engineers knew that the cage will not do anything to stop the penetration.

  • @hihi9674
    @hihi9674 2 роки тому

    great video!! I have always wondered about those cages on top of the tanks. Subscribed!

  • @stevefitzpatrick4260
    @stevefitzpatrick4260 2 роки тому +1

    Good analysis on these systems

  • @slavetool9066
    @slavetool9066 2 роки тому +2

    If the cage causes the charge to activate far enough away from the tank it may be effective. The shape charge effectiveness is definitely subject to detonation at a specific distance from the armor; make it detonate further away and penetration will be reduced.

  • @pirobot668beta
    @pirobot668beta 2 роки тому +2

    William Fairbairn taught Cops in Shanghai to hold their off-hand arm up like a shield, covering the heart and throat.
    Put one fist under you chin, back of your hand facing the Enemy...that's the stuff.
    It didn't afford that much protection, but anyone shooting at you will sub-consciously be trying for a 'clear shot' around the obstacle.
    These cages are that same kind of 'protection'.

  • @venox3811
    @venox3811 2 роки тому +4

    Each system has its purpose in the battlefield. They can complement each other.

  • @usarmyfl1
    @usarmyfl1 2 роки тому +5

    Ahh your's is one of the rare videos that actually shows the missile go up, then down and follows the whole thing in top attack mode.

  • @cageordie
    @cageordie 2 роки тому +9

    NLAW isn't just a shaped charge, it's an EFP, or SFF. The explosive forms a metal dish into a solid slug which it simultaneously accelerates to about 2km/s. The range is not limited to a specific ideal standoff the way a conventional HEAT or shaped charge is, it will work at up to 100m. I don't know how the detonating sensor works, so I don't know the vertical band that it can work in.

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому +1

      SFF? Is that another name for EFP? And yes, every overfly AT system uses EFP, including the latest TOWs.

    • @benthurber5363
      @benthurber5363 2 роки тому +1

      From what I've read, it uses a camera with profile recognition and a selectable magnetic sensor.

    • @davidm.4670
      @davidm.4670 2 роки тому

      Thanks for explanation!, 100m out seems like a lot - but possible - like gun-fired from close range ...

    • @francislaguna9142
      @francislaguna9142 4 місяці тому

      Correct

  • @viper29ca
    @viper29ca 2 роки тому +15

    Javelin also has a fly over top attack mode, as well as a much longer 4.5km range vs the NLAW, but both are excellent systems

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому

      but in comparison with for example cornet with 10km or spike with even bigger range range they are pretty outdated as AT weapon.

    • @viper29ca
      @viper29ca 2 роки тому +1

      @@trololoev the results would prove that statement as false

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому

      @@trololoev You most likely meant "not quite as advanced"

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому

      @@getsideways7257 if i remember correctly, cornet are pretty old, if someone worse that old AT system, i think it is pretty outdated.
      But nlaw is something between rpg-7 and atgm, so it has pretty unique place. This is more like great rpg that bad atgm.
      Fun fact - all tells aboun javelines but noone see it effect and noone tell about nlaw but many see it effect.
      Maybe it is rude, but if you need to go in tank firing range to use weapon, then against modern army it is pretty suicidal.

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому

      @@trololoev Well, I was mostly talking about Spike. That's seems to be a really formidable AT system - and not just because of its range (which also varies).

  • @jonmassey8124
    @jonmassey8124 2 роки тому +46

    Love the fact that the worlds MBTs cost millions 💲 and can be blown to pieces with something like the NLAW that costs about $20,000 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

    • @eeiko321
      @eeiko321 2 роки тому +21

      No different to a torpedo that can sink a battleship

    • @AstrusEminus
      @AstrusEminus 2 роки тому +3

      @@eeiko321 I get what you mean but not really. You can't launch a torpedo from your shoulder, it gets a lot more expensive since you need to facilitate them.

    • @colincampbell767
      @colincampbell767 2 роки тому +3

      However - the Trophy Active Protection Systems (APS) are currently being fielded (although much too slowly) to US armored fighting vehicles. This system not only shoots down incoming missiles - it also provides an aiming cue towards where the missile came from.

    • @jonmassey8124
      @jonmassey8124 2 роки тому +2

      @@colincampbell767 yeah, tbh I thought that Russia would have reactive armour but going by the destruction rates they obviously don't.. not sure about the latest Armata as I'm sure they do BUT not seen a single one in Ukraine which implies Putin is fearful that they could be destroyed..🤔

    • @colincampbell767
      @colincampbell767 2 роки тому +2

      @@jonmassey8124 They do have reactive armor. It's the brick like material on the tanks. And the plates bolted to the turret at odd angles. The problem is that the NLAW and Javelin are top attack missiles and hit the tank where the armor is thinnest. And reactive armor does not stop a HEAT warhead - it just reduces the amount of armor it can penetrate. Also the Javelin has a small precursor charge to detonate the reactive armor before the actual warhead hits it.
      The M1 series tank is quite frankly - something that should have been replaced 20 years ago. I suspect that the tank may be at the limits of what it's electrical system can power.

  • @Maks-Yarysh
    @Maks-Yarysh 2 роки тому +6

    You may also check Ukrainian AT sydtem Stugna P whick is often using by Ukrainian forces at the moment. It is less complicate, less accurate but more cheap and from the footage seems has also powerful detonation and penetration force.

  • @nanyafahkinbiznes1352
    @nanyafahkinbiznes1352 2 роки тому +1

    Cages were meant for single HEAT type ammo but the javelin missile is twice that HEAT, it might block the first explosion but the second one will definitely pen the armor with ease.

  • @juicyj3819
    @juicyj3819 2 роки тому +14

    You need a voice guy? I'm available

    • @Imad_Oofus
      @Imad_Oofus 2 роки тому +2

      “My name is Casey Miller, and I’m in the third grade. Ever since I can remember, people have told me I should read the morning announcements. My friends always say to me “dear Casey, your voice is like butter to our ears. Could you please find a way to get that audible chocolate on the airways?”.

    • @juicyj3819
      @juicyj3819 2 роки тому +2

      @@Imad_Oofus you know!

  • @brianbozo2447
    @brianbozo2447 2 роки тому +6

    Russia had 10 -15 years to develop countersystems against Javelin missiles and seemingly did very little to protect their tanks and now they are exposed as weak and incompetent and young Russians are beingburned alive in their armor as a result Russian should never have invaded if their tanks were this vulnerable.

    • @KekusMagnus
      @KekusMagnus 2 роки тому +2

      They developed effective APS systems even in the Soviet Union, they have new and improved versions too. It's not about developing them, it's about actually putting them in the tanks that see combat. They're not even that expensive, Putin is just an idiot and cheaped out on the wrong thing (or rather his corrupt military officials did)

    •  2 роки тому +3

      @@KekusMagnus He is the head of the corruption.
      How the hell do you think he is worth 200 billion on a President's salary in Russia.

    • @user-hd4bn8zs7p
      @user-hd4bn8zs7p Рік тому

      Вместо тысячи слов - ua-cam.com/video/_y0wbcVFn8g/v-deo.html - ua-cam.com/video/RhotLbQti3s/v-deo.html

  • @amitkp6957
    @amitkp6957 2 роки тому +20

    Having layered sheets of ERA 6 inches apart instead of bar cage can work better. When first layer explodes as missile hits, the 2nd and 3rd layers move in the opposite vertical direction instantaneously and thus hitting the missile like a baseball bat, not only exploding themselves and the tandem charge but also deflecting it somewhat. Also an upward looking radar/sensor that releases HE rounds vertically can kill off missile at much higher distances. Both can be also be cheap like less than $10K to protect $3M tank average price.

    • @KFCLOVERMY
      @KFCLOVERMY 2 роки тому +7

      Adding tonnes of weight and overbearing the engine.

    • @amitkp6957
      @amitkp6957 2 роки тому +4

      @@KFCLOVERMY Maximum 1 tonne of weight added for whole tank but here we are talking only turret surface area for 2 layers so reduce it to around half a tonne at most. " A Kontakt ERA tile with two reactive sandwich plates has a weight of 5.7 kilograms without attachment bolts. About 151 tiles are used for a tank (although the number varies depending on tank type and surface area)."

    • @knerons
      @knerons 2 роки тому +1

      So which tanks are using 2+ layers of ERA armor today? Kind of sounds like a loot of armor and added weight. Not seen any tanks using so many layers at the front.

    • @supportmalphite8769
      @supportmalphite8769 2 роки тому

      Russians aren’t smart enough to do this for one and for two they could care less how many of their troops die.

    • @KFCLOVERMY
      @KFCLOVERMY 2 роки тому +2

      @@amitkp6957 sure thing, pal. Don't forget to write about your 'keyboard scientist qualification" when you submit your designs to the kermlin

  • @nogod7184
    @nogod7184 2 роки тому +11

    Tank cage? It's like wrapping your body in plastic bags to protect from rifle's bullets.

    • @FlyboyHelosim
      @FlyboyHelosim 2 роки тому +3

      Depends on a multitude of factors. It's actually more effective than you may think.

    • @ligametis
      @ligametis 2 роки тому +1

      They don't in particular have to protect from Javelin, they can protect from less advanced tandem missiles or shape charges. US also use cages on their vehicles.

    • @Minedeployder
      @Minedeployder 2 роки тому

      No. Dude, USA used wood against japan in ww2. You think modern HEATs are much different?

  • @alexanderr5682
    @alexanderr5682 2 роки тому +2

    Ukrainians call the cage - brazier or barbecue grill

  • @jamesrosella529
    @jamesrosella529 2 роки тому

    Excellent posting Engineer/React. What the Russian tanks need top side is geometrically formed plating to deflect the force of shaped charged laterally, and outwardly. Think of a cube placed its corner at an angle.

    • @r6201sk
      @r6201sk 2 роки тому +1

      well whan russian tanks really need is GTFO from Ukraine

  • @Zolwiol
    @Zolwiol 2 роки тому +1

    I really think we're seeing the Dusk of a tank as a main battle weapon and into the support role.

  • @wargame2play
    @wargame2play 2 роки тому +2

    It’s there to “ improve “ the morale of the crew… doesn’t do a thing to protect them….

  • @williamlloyd3769
    @williamlloyd3769 2 роки тому +1

    Nasty and effective weapons. Also Panzerfaust 3 and other anti amour systems are in the mix.

  • @DrDLightful
    @DrDLightful 2 роки тому +1

    A cage would work ok against and RPG. Problem is even with a NLAW detonating high above the tank, if it penetrates down, the crew is probably dead anyways. Usually what kills the crew is either the oven effect or the blast concussion. Similarly with tank rounds... I've heard that if a Sabot from an M1 tank gets through the enemy armor, you can clean the dead crew out with a hose.

  • @cesaravegah3787
    @cesaravegah3787 2 роки тому +7

    Being an internet troll with no real military experience but able to read the estimated russian looses Idare to say that those makeshift defenses are not working that great. Glory to Ukraine 🇺🇦

  • @SonOfTheDawn515
    @SonOfTheDawn515 2 роки тому +4

    The cages are more effective against Soviet designed RPGs since they are more likely to hit and detonate on the cage. Having HEAT almost completely negates it.

    • @MORDOR7379
      @MORDOR7379 2 роки тому

      Тандем ные выстрелы забыл, на РПГ!

    • @KekusMagnus
      @KekusMagnus 2 роки тому

      only the cheaper RPG rockets, the tandem warheads will go through the cage just like the Javelin does

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому +1

      And what do you think the RPGs have? It's exactly HEAT. Look up "slat armor" to understand the idea behind these cages.

  • @lex1945
    @lex1945 2 роки тому +7

    These cages even don't protect you from rain. And even if it would do anything, the tandem warhead would still penetrate the tank and kill it.

    • @ligametis
      @ligametis 2 роки тому

      They don't in particular have to protect from Javelin, they can protect from less advanced tandem missiles or shape charges. US also use cages on their vehicles.

    • @SonOfTheDawn515
      @SonOfTheDawn515 2 роки тому +1

      @@ligametis for RPG protection, not for HEAT weapons which aren't as fielded by non-NATO entities.

    • @edwindelossantos29
      @edwindelossantos29 2 роки тому

      Can't even Protect you from Molotov cocktails thrown on top of the building, Maybe tank cages are more applicable in Israel or the IDF Tank from Stone-throwing Palestinians, Lol!

  • @danmur15
    @danmur15 2 роки тому +2

    from what ive heard, the cope cages arent designed for the NLAW or Javelin. They are supposedly designed in response to previous urban warfare instances in the middle east where weaker RPGs were used from buildings above the tanks.

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому +1

      javeline work same as rpg from roof so it wotks against it as well.

  • @NIKOinIRL
    @NIKOinIRL 2 роки тому +3

    you call it tank cage, i call it BBQ grill😅

  • @azmodaiNO
    @azmodaiNO 2 роки тому

    The cage is more likely there to protect the crew from the bomblets of DPICM artillery munitions

  • @tomaschovan3675
    @tomaschovan3675 2 роки тому +1

    So let's say it... Those bars are good for barbecue. ☠️

  • @marianchicago4002
    @marianchicago4002 2 роки тому

    Curious what countermeasures could be used against the 2 anti tank systems besides armor increases which would have to be addressed on the design and production side of things. I am talking soldiers on bases or on the Ukrainian front,

  • @kennethschultz6465
    @kennethschultz6465 2 роки тому

    Great job..

  • @raylast3873
    @raylast3873 2 роки тому +1

    Nicholas Moran has pointed out we don‘t really know that the cages don‘t work and that at least from what evidence we have, all the tanks that got busted didn‘t have them. Though of course this could be due to other factors.
    Of course it could be just a psychological thing, but we‘ll have to wait and see until the history of this war gets written.
    Incidentally, it‘s not exactly a new thing for tankers to be DIYing non-standard extra armor for their vehicles.

  • @EnigmaG
    @EnigmaG 2 роки тому

    I wonnder what happens if you put a layer of ERA on top of the case and another layer of ERA under the case above the tank, will this be enough to defend against javelin?

  • @stewartstewartstewart
    @stewartstewartstewart 2 роки тому

    That is a mad voice over. Great video though!

  • @slavarodu5062
    @slavarodu5062 2 роки тому +5

    Looks like everyone here completely misses the point of cage armour. Its made to stop RPGs and other smaller munitions which does not include javelins. Thats because russians got a bloody nose in the chechen wars where chechens fired RPGs down the rooftops and since ukrainian army is equiped mostly with russian and soviet stuff they falsely thought that ukrainians will greet them with RPGs. Javelins were a BIG suprise for them.

    • @phishy261
      @phishy261 2 роки тому +2

      The turret cages did not appear on their tanks in Ukraine until like two weeks into the invasion. xD Long after the whole world knew about thousands upon thousands of NLAWs and Javelins. Soo.. No.

  • @j.i1503
    @j.i1503 2 роки тому

    Hy bro, which instrumental or music did you use that's in the video? I really like the sound.

    • @GboiGabe
      @GboiGabe 2 роки тому

      ua-cam.com/video/bvan6cy3Ej4/v-deo.html

  • @comentedonakeyboard
    @comentedonakeyboard 2 роки тому

    I wonder if ERA tiles would improve the (under)performance of the cage?

  • @JuckFoeBurden
    @JuckFoeBurden 2 роки тому +1

    Makes the Rushky's feel better just before going to HELL!

  • @RogerOnTheRight
    @RogerOnTheRight 2 роки тому

    Given the improvised nature of many cages, it seems impossible to assert the failure of such cages, since they cannot all be test. There are probably knowable limits to protection, based on structure and materials, but this is not discussed.
    Also, no real mention of the primary charge and its purpose. My understanding is it is to pre-detonate reactive armour, such that the main, shaped charge can penetrate the target after the reactive armour is expended. I wonder how effective this primary charge is against cages, given its purpose being to merely detonate reactive armour.

  • @murraydupley9330
    @murraydupley9330 2 роки тому +1

    Could the cages make the first charge go off higher above tank making it and 2nd charge alittle less effective?

    • @erikmansson7087
      @erikmansson7087 2 роки тому

      Yes a little but the protection on the top is way to weak however

  • @Aeronaut1975
    @Aeronaut1975 2 роки тому +1

    They may as well use cocktail umbrellas.

  • @herbertkeithmiller
    @herbertkeithmiller 2 роки тому +1

    The way cage armor operates is not to explode a shaped charge but to deform the charge or short out the electrical current used to initiate it from the nose tip fuse. This causes the explosive to fail. What seems to be the purpose of the cage armor on the top of the tank is to keep RPG 7s from being fired at the top of tanks from buildings. The possibility is that it was installed with the Russians expecting to invade cities like Ukraine and fighters shooting down on them from the upper stories of buildings. It also is useful in defeating improvised explosives such as anti-armor grenades which have a smaller explosive from being dropped on to the week upper armor of the tanks. The ukrainians have a large number of these anti-armor explosives. The cage armor is ineffective against the javelin which isn't a shape charge but a forced formed penetrator. The explosion occurs well above the slat armor and the penetrator passes between or through it.

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому +1

      More like it disrupts the forming of a proper shaped-charge jet.
      And surely, you meant "countries like Ukraine", not "cities like Ukraine"? Or maybe cities *in* Ukraine...

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому +1

      And no, as far as I remember, NLAW uses EFP, not Javelin. Javelin has a typical tandem HEAT warhead without EFP.

  • @pete49327
    @pete49327 2 роки тому

    I believe the Javelin is made in Troy, AL., with some components in Iowa.

    • @erwin669
      @erwin669 2 роки тому +1

      It actually is made in Alabama. Apparently the workers at the factory have been writting "Greeting from Alabama" on the missiles that were being sent to Ukraine. They also make either TOW or Hellfire in Annistan, AL

  • @zzodr
    @zzodr 2 роки тому +1

    The only Cage that could stop a Javelin is Nicholas Cage.

  • @Matt-ur3dm
    @Matt-ur3dm 2 роки тому +1

    They'd get more protection from an umbrella

  • @chriswalker7555
    @chriswalker7555 2 роки тому

    Thanks for collecting those films. I've now got a better idea of how those missiles fly :)

  • @peters972
    @peters972 2 роки тому

    Creepy music! Thanks

  • @someboi4535
    @someboi4535 2 роки тому +2

    This is the problem with allowing ignorant kids to say whatever they want on the internet
    Who told you that the cage was even supposed to protect against Javelin and NLAW systems? It was mainly designed to stop drone attacks and RPGs coming from above and mortar fire

  • @SUNDREDSTAR
    @SUNDREDSTAR 2 роки тому +2

    These shopping trolleys they've duct taped on their tanks is no doubt the bleeding edge of Russian technology and ingenuity.

  • @ravenmoon5111
    @ravenmoon5111 2 роки тому +2

    The cage is a joke: it might as well be an umbrella ☔️

  • @randallsanchez3161
    @randallsanchez3161 2 роки тому +1

    NLAW is more effective against this the cage. The cage is called "slat armor" and we used it extensively in Iraq and Afganistan where it worked exceptionally well against regular RPG-7 including those using tandem warheads. The slat armor would often destroy the detonator or cause the explosive material to become segmented/cut making the primary charge either a full dud or much less powerful. The secondary charge would then come at a bad angle or sometimes not detonate at all.
    The NLAW will detonate above the slat armor and either miss the slats all together or hit one. I've yet to see a video of one hitting a caged tank or one that had ERA on the roof like the T-80. So far it's worked very well against regular T-72's which make up a large portion of the force. The biggest worry is that the NLAW may impact the cage from the side and potentially detonate early away from the roof or become a dud as the it's fuzed for top down not direct attack. Note that you don't get to choose unlike the Javelin.
    The Javelin is the wildcard here. The top attack mode which is the most common and effective could be affected by this. Tandem warheads are meant to destroy Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA). If the first explosive is detonated by the slat armor then the primary main charge will be effected by ERA and possibly fail. Again, most of the tanks have been T-72s with no top ERA. I would love to see some videos of the slat armor failing.

    • @getsideways7257
      @getsideways7257 2 роки тому +1

      Indeed, not sure how people seem to miss this, but it's just vertical slat armor that mostly meant to disrupt the first shaped charge that hits it or detonate it prematurely (depending on where the slats will come into contact with it).
      NLAW shoots an explosively formed penetrator - that thing couldn't care less about slats, since it comes down at the speeds of a sabot round, easily mangling any slats, tank wheels, sandbags or whatever additional useless weight there is on the roof. ERA could be effective to fend it off, but the whole geometry of the impact is not sloped enough in such a case, and what's worse - the "thickness" (more like thinness) of the armor behind it doesn't really leave the tank much chance anyway, as the video poster mentioned too.
      And speaking of Javelin, I'm pretty sure the main shaped charge is powerful enough to take out both the ERA behind the slats and the turret top armor itself after that.

  • @viteslavjedlicka7138
    @viteslavjedlicka7138 2 роки тому

    Hello , can with camera see homing infra laser beam ? thanks

  • @graveperil2169
    @graveperil2169 2 роки тому +3

    all its doing is putting more wear and tear on the gearbox leading to more disabled tanks

  • @nigelmansfield3011
    @nigelmansfield3011 2 роки тому +1

    Tanks seem to be redundant now unless a new kind of armour is invented.

    • @davidm.4670
      @davidm.4670 2 роки тому

      Proper use = mutual support with infantry = either alone poor vs other.

  • @sanfayyaad
    @sanfayyaad 2 роки тому +10

    The infamous cope cage

    • @eane7238
      @eane7238 2 роки тому +1

      HuRr DuRr cOpE CaGe🤓

    • @jjcoola998
      @jjcoola998 2 роки тому +2

      The cope cage is just the funniest shit I’ve seen so far tank meme wise in this conflict. Don’t mind the neck beard above

    • @413.
      @413. 2 роки тому

      @@jjcoola998 i saw a meme where someone put a trampoline on a Russian tank and showed how a missile would bounce off of it... Hilarious 😭😭😭😭

  • @torlil
    @torlil 2 роки тому

    I'm only here for the mesmerizing accent of the VO.

  • @thunderbear0
    @thunderbear0 2 роки тому

    Thats a cage armor to protect tanks top side from RPG when in urban combat

  • @jamesrosella529
    @jamesrosella529 2 роки тому

    If they are going to the cage system, two are needed. One externally with wire winding around it and grenades strung on wire. Second cage is basically two I-Beams, on front, back, as well either side one top, another bottom, slanted outward. I-Beams could be enforced with cement, or round bars. As incoming projectile makes contact with wire on outer cage grenades are triggered causing the missile to explode prematurely, or veer off its original trajectory, before impacting on the geometrically shaped second cage.

    • @trezapoioiuy
      @trezapoioiuy 2 роки тому

      Because fuel consumption isn’t high enough

    • @jamesrosella529
      @jamesrosella529 2 роки тому

      @@trezapoioiuy Yes. However there are two considerations, first Russian has got plenty of petrol, and secondly skilled Tank crews don't grow on trees. So they are faced with the choice of lower mileage, or maintaining a continuity of the unit.

    • @trezapoioiuy
      @trezapoioiuy 2 роки тому

      @@jamesrosella529 what I mean is they can’t just build a bunker on top of their tanks.
      Also if you’ve seen any news about this war, one thing is having petrol one thing is having enough logistics to keep tanks going.

    • @jamesrosella529
      @jamesrosella529 2 роки тому

      @@trezapoioiuy A Tank is essentially a mobile bunker. As for logistics, things will get better once the season of rasputitas concludes at the end of April. Should have started this campaign a month earlier when the ground was frozen.

    • @trezapoioiuy
      @trezapoioiuy 2 роки тому +1

      @@jamesrosella529 shouldn’t have started at all and minded their fucking business

  • @ansonang7810
    @ansonang7810 2 роки тому +6

    I saw tanks in videos surviving hits.
    still operational from ambush. 1 tank keep moving trying to escape survive 3 hits 1 miss but burned then exploded on 5th hit.
    I guess charge they need to hit ammunition , crew or engine to stop the tank.

  • @williamthomas2278
    @williamthomas2278 2 роки тому

    Those metal cages are built to trap the soldiers in the tank so they won't abandon their post when the missiles fly

  • @remydaitch9815
    @remydaitch9815 2 роки тому +3

    Funny thing is much of the footage shows tanks without cages knocked out. Would love to see footage of caged tanks knocked out. Lots of heavily edited combat footage hard to draw conclusions.

    • @trololoev
      @trololoev 2 роки тому +1

      well, maybe if tanks with cajes wasn't knocked out this is means they are worked as intendend.

    • @remydaitch9815
      @remydaitch9815 2 роки тому +1

      @@trololoev Thank you Master of the Oblivious. Didn't I say that!?!?!?!?!?!

  • @Dr.Kananga
    @Dr.Kananga 2 роки тому

    How does the NLAW work? Does it explode atop the tank to concuss crew?

    • @biddyboy1570
      @biddyboy1570 2 роки тому +4

      It penetrates the armour with a bolt of molten metal. You can imagine that's not a good day for the crew inside.

  • @danemyburgh
    @danemyburgh 2 роки тому +2

    Imagine being inside the tank and then you see a NLAW fired at you from a distance... Evacuate now! Go go go!

    • @SonOfTheDawn515
      @SonOfTheDawn515 2 роки тому +1

      Already too late. Just hope it was made on a Friday and doesn't work.

    • @chrisward4576
      @chrisward4576 2 роки тому +2

      If you see it, it's already too late🤣🤣🤣

  • @joselimjoco3367
    @joselimjoco3367 2 роки тому +12

    Putin's tanks are sitting ducks for the Javelins and at the rate they are getting destroyed, getting them replaced will be a difficult task for Putin's war machine.

    • @ikemreacts
      @ikemreacts 2 роки тому +6

      There's a high sense of delusion amongst Kremlin-haters, about the true power of the Russian war machine. If they wanted to conduct a Shock & Awe campaign, they could wipe out the Ukrainian Army overnight, but also every civilian in the country. They are holding back. Don't be daft.

    • @thedudeabides2531
      @thedudeabides2531 2 роки тому +1

      @@ikemreacts If they get really pathetic and use nukes, sure. But their military is absolute crap. If they use nukes, they risk wwIII.

    • @ikemreacts
      @ikemreacts 2 роки тому +1

      @@thedudeabides2531 When was the last time the Americans fought anybody with a pulse? You have no idea what the Russians are capable of.

    • @MikeBrown-go1pc
      @MikeBrown-go1pc 2 роки тому +1

      Yeah, they only have 10,000 tanks laying around for parts and/or ready to be refurbished and upgraded. I'm sure it will be nearly impossible!

    • @MikeBrown-go1pc
      @MikeBrown-go1pc 2 роки тому

      @@ikemreacts Are you saying the Taliban didn't have a fighting pulse? The Russians sure thought they did.

  • @535tony
    @535tony 2 роки тому +1

    The Ukrainians are starting to get AT-4's now. The cage will be more effective against the single charge AT-4 or RPG in City fighting where they would be fired from buildings down on the tanks.

  • @vladimirerfan7721
    @vladimirerfan7721 2 роки тому +2

    They’re called “cope cages” for a reason.

  • @Rafael-up2hp
    @Rafael-up2hp 2 роки тому

    Cage is not designed to stop NLAW and Javelins. This kind of armour was made for older anti tank weapons like the old RPG-7 and is fairly effect against it. They were probably expecting enemies at high buildings using rpg's and firing in the top of the turret (just like in the second chechen war). Cages like these are more likely to disarm the heat charge in the rocket than really stop the incoming led jet from it. Good idea, bad application.

  • @longrider188
    @longrider188 2 роки тому +1

    They are pergolas. I've seen them in gardening.

  • @willisdaddy6100
    @willisdaddy6100 2 роки тому +1

    Might that cage be to catch the turret?

  • @rickysuds9075
    @rickysuds9075 2 роки тому

    The cage is a modification kit for the tank to compensate for the money the top took for themselves.

  • @jerga2002
    @jerga2002 Рік тому

    The best option for home defense

  • @parrotbrand2782
    @parrotbrand2782 2 роки тому

    Some Carl Gustavs would be also good for some close combat

  • @AlleNamenSindWeg
    @AlleNamenSindWeg 2 роки тому +2

    You should check your terminology. They are called cope cages.

  • @BeardofBeesPool
    @BeardofBeesPool 2 роки тому +1

    3:14 that's just awesome

  • @gamer-yc6zd
    @gamer-yc6zd 2 роки тому

    us troops been using this since mid to late 2000 in humvee's sides the rpg will detonate or disintegrate on the grill and cannot penetrate the thin armor

  • @robkunkel8833
    @robkunkel8833 2 роки тому

    Somebody tell me … 1. Should I we assume anyone in the tank will die? 2. If so, how, by concussion or by heat? 3. If not what kind of injuries are sustained. A surgeon’s nightmare? This is an awful question to ask but nobody discusses this part of war. Thanks for your work. God bless 🇺🇦🥲and all human beings devastated by this sad event in history.

    • @williampatterson3683
      @williampatterson3683 2 роки тому

      I'm no expert on this but my u derstandong is that once the ordnance penetrator the armour the weapon sprays molten metal ( copper?) into the interior. You can pretty much guess the outcome for the occupants...

  • @vk3dgn
    @vk3dgn 2 роки тому +1

    When a warhead penetrates to the inside of a tank it ricochets around mincing up any sort of flesh. Not the place for me.

  • @JeffBourke
    @JeffBourke 2 роки тому

    Next they will try mounting beach umbrellas up too 😂

  • @chrissmith7669
    @chrissmith7669 2 роки тому

    Slat or cage armor is very different than some angle iron haphazardly stuck on top

  • @Master-AGN
    @Master-AGN 2 роки тому +1

    Reminds me of US tanks in France in ‘45.

  • @Malsum
    @Malsum 2 роки тому +2

    I'd say this is more an attempt to boost the Russian soldiers morale. Either that or the Russian engineers are completely clueless to the workings of NLAW, or Robot 57 as we call it here in Sweden. The shaped charge will blast right through a little cage like that, and today I saw a clip from one of our military strategists where he literally laughed at the idea that this will make a difference.😁 ...on the contrary this will make it worse. Russian tanks have a low profile, and adding a freaking tower on them will only make them easier to spot, as well as make them harder to get out of once they are blown up.

  • @chillywilly4126
    @chillywilly4126 2 роки тому +1

    Does absolutely nothing to protect anyone in that tank.