What can be said about the result? The K-5 cannot defeat a projectile on its own, but it can effectively reduce its effectiveness if there is adequate armor behind it. The armor materials and their arrangement are not accidental and have their own functions. Determining its effectiveness on the basis of the passive efficiency of individual layers does not make sense.

@IanAwfuls

Жыл бұрын

I'm curious about one thing, how it's possible that the projectile (M829A2) made specifically to defeat tanks like T-80U and T-72B(1989) after Cold War ended, when USA knew composition of their armor and after testing their armor is not penetrating it in your simulation? Is it due to some specification of the round that are classified which you don't know so you didn't include them or is it simplified model or maybe a little bit of both?

@williamt2334

Жыл бұрын

@@IanAwfuls 🤡

@288gto7

Жыл бұрын

@@IanAwfuls there was no t72b3 just after cold war 😑. Also really doubt the effectiveness of the m829a2 considering how fast a3 came out after a2 and radically changed its design concept with a sacrificial tip instead of the brute force a2. This rapid change with a completely new working principle suggests a2 did not achieve its main goal very well

@ashkii508

Жыл бұрын

Dont more modern APFSDS rounds have a tip to set off ERA earlier before the main penetrating body makes contact? Or am i simply misinformed? Im pretty sure the Scottish Koala talked about it in Armour Cast. Pls correct me if im wrong here

@Ropetor

Жыл бұрын

@@IanAwfuls No, M829A2 despite some claims does not have real anti ERA capabilities, it lacks any kind of brake off tip or non initiating tip like M829A3 and DM53 Having a better alloy that increases the quality of the sabot and a higher overall penetration only means the round would be less affected from era then M829A1 etc

I am genuinely surprised how little loss was there when it hit the first Textolite but when it hit the second,there was little to practically none of the penetrator left Good simulation

@za_pravdu1943

Жыл бұрын

well, the first armor plate and the first textolite messed up the shape of the penetrator, it warped the penetrator

@hypernova3527

Жыл бұрын

The Kontakt explosion almost cracked the rod in half. By the time the first half of it disintegrated, what was left was like a secondary projectile hitting at a much steeper angle.

@superuser7743

Жыл бұрын

The whole concept of APFSDS (I'll be surprised if I write it right) has one weakness - they don't like difference in armor. They waste much more energy when armor isn't homogenous and it has combined structure. Especially, when different lays of armor has different hardness.

@alexrims1892

Жыл бұрын

Парни, Гитлер и Наполеон тоже были уверены в своей победе. И почему никто не учитывает наличие у России ядерного оружия?

@superuser7743

Жыл бұрын

Если ты вспомнишь ситуацию в Польше с трактором и ракетой, то там довольно быстро признали что это не российская ракета, ибо если бы пошла эскалация со стороны того что на Польшу напали и вступил бы в действие 4 статья, то по российской доктрине был бы дан зелёный свет на судный день.

The Textolite by the 2nd SHA plate is the real MVP. The back ~half of the projectile goes from looking like it's going to pen everything to practically disintegrating as it goes through that region!

@CyberneticArgumentCreator

Жыл бұрын

That plate is the recipient of the benefit of the disruption to the rod the reactive plate's force causes. Without that, it's a pen.

@user-fe7bo5mm1o

Жыл бұрын

yeah I thought it was going to pen

@JoJoJonnSinn

Жыл бұрын

Pen IS though

@rayotoxi1509

Жыл бұрын

Yall forget the real MVP The back plate

@oguz9670

7 ай бұрын

Textolites being used against chemical energy rounds because textolites helps spread the jet effect. They are not meant against kinetics.

The Kontakt really puts into perspective how fast these rounds are really going

@InfiniXCat

Ай бұрын

The way the metal acts like liquid

This comment section is going to be a dream :')

@okakokakiev787

Жыл бұрын

You have high expectations

@ravenkk4816

Жыл бұрын

Here😂goes nothing.

@belgianfried

Жыл бұрын

Full of slavaboos and freeaboos alike who don't understand that things aren't great nor terrible

@chost-059

Жыл бұрын

Everyone is an armor protection expert or metallurgy/physics masters degree

@belgianfried

Жыл бұрын

@@chost-059 Yeah, which is why I want to assert dominance and get engineering degree for this. My country doesn't have enough domestic designs

Seeing this simulation, it makes so much sense why the Soviets moved away from “single stack” textolite to this design.

Keep up your amazing work, and thank you for taking community requests.

This one was outstanding! Fantastic work on the era and just simulation overall. Keep it up

M829A3 was made because A2 cannot defeat Kontakt-5 on the UFP of T-80, T-72 and T-90s. It’s a given that the ERA doesn’t stop the apfsds alone but in combination with the UFP; makes it immune to M829A2.

@devin5139

Жыл бұрын

I wouldn't say immune... at the right angle (the battlefield is not a very smooth, flat plane) it could achieve penetration in this simulation.

@maverick8697

Жыл бұрын

IIRC even the M829A1 had a chance to penetrate armor covered with Kontakt-5, though I don't remember what tank was it against. And I think that it was against the turrent and not the hull.

@agt155

Жыл бұрын

When the UK tested T80 with Kontact-5 they found it gave almost no extra protection.

@crusher1080

Жыл бұрын

Well now we have malachit designed to counter that.

@CyberneticArgumentCreator

Жыл бұрын

@@crusher1080 Designed but not implemented - empty ERA holsters draped over a tank aren't the same as the design they're supposed to hold.

Excellent showcase of how ERA and NERA works.

@Genuinespaceman

Жыл бұрын

Wait I thought it doesn’t counter APFSDS…

@Nitrous_oxide_addict

Жыл бұрын

@@Genuinespaceman not directly like it does heat-fs but it still deforms it and slows it down

@Psydvckthefirst

Жыл бұрын

@@Genuinespaceman well, after 1 round armor is rendered useless. Just shoot the second one, with auto loader it would take like 25 seconds.

@Genuinespaceman

Жыл бұрын

Ahh I see

@MalisKrieg

Жыл бұрын

@@Psydvckthefirst uhhh I think most MBTs are comfortably in the range of 4-8 seconds for reload times.

Awesome to finally see a DU penetration simulation, nice work

Incredible! Thank you very much!

I'm not sure if you've done this before but could you show the impact of adding spare track to the front of a hull like they did in world war II.

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Someday

@95keat

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174thanks, I think it would be interesting to see the effect the gaps in the track would have since it won't be one solid slab

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

@@95keat It's not armor steel, so I doubt the effect will be noticeable.

@jintsuubest9331

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Iirc, the is a increasingly higher armor efficacy as angle increase and projectile diameter decrease. Granted that's true for all type of armor. Maybe compare a 75 vs 57. I'm not sure

@devin5139

Жыл бұрын

Considering the amount of RHA that a modern APFSDS or HEAT round can penetrate, you could stack as much track on it as you want and it would hardly make a difference.

Would you consider simulating this against 1987 T-72B UFP with K-5 (i.e. T-72B mod. 1989 state) to compare performance?

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Maybe

@TheTeKuZa

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 should be

@makarizhevsky9563

Жыл бұрын

Результат должен быть идентичный, так как конструкции верхней лобовой детали и передней части башни т-72Б и т-80У очень схожи

@user-CPU-APF

Жыл бұрын

@@makarizhevsky9563 это украинской модификации или оба русские? Просто аббревиатур много а запоминать их сложновато.

@makarizhevsky9563

Жыл бұрын

@@user-CPU-APF 1) уркаина в принципе не родила ничего кроме т-64- его разработали в КБ имени Малышева в Харькове и делали на ХТМ предприятии там же. Но машина была переходная, а СССР один на всех, поэтому когда прекратили выпуск т-64 на ХТМ дали выпуск части объема Т-80. Знаю точно ,что там выпускался Т-80УД- "д" дизельный 6 цилиндровый оппозитный двигатель ( на т-64 всю дорогу ставили 5цилиндровый оппозитник); 2) на уркаине не выпускался Т-72 в принципе, всё что вы видите в новостях, это остатки вооружений 3х советских военных округов, базировавшихся на территории УССР и " ленд-лиз" стран бывшего варшавского союза за зерно и донорские органы безвести пропавших укровоинов ; 3) все серийные Т-80 от начала до конца -есть инженерная разработка Ленинградского Кировского Завода выпускавшаяся на 3х заводах в СССР.

I understood nothing, but it was very interesting! Keep up doing that again!

Well i guess that old tanker saying of "keep shooting until the enemy vehicle catches fire or charges shape" really is applicable here

Great work , I’m sure this took you a good amount of time

0:28 is very interesting. The corner of the armor bounce back and make 1/3 of the rod falls apart in the channel created by the rod itself, and does not contribute much to the ap performance.

God damn, that pucker factor gets real at the end!

It did better than I expected

The craziest part of this simulation is the K-5 actually containing its explosive charge.

@mikhail-yug-9581

Жыл бұрын

_Reddit moment..._ ☝️

@PeterMuskrat6968

Жыл бұрын

@@mikhail-yug-9581 Getting bombed by NATO AirPower moment☝️

@mikhail-yug-9581

Жыл бұрын

@@PeterMuskrat6968 *POV:* _a British convoy in Iraq._

@PeterMuskrat6968

Жыл бұрын

@@mikhail-yug-9581 You’re goddamn right. If there is one thing we Americans hate more than Commies… it’s Brits💪🥴☝️

@mikhail-yug-9581

Жыл бұрын

@@PeterMuskrat6968 Hehe, I didn't expect that, lad. *POV:* You dropped this. 👉👑

Love seeing modern stuff like this

I'm not sure about what I expected with this, but after fighting my patriotism I can accept the results. Penetrating any tank through one of their most armored spots is difficult. I wouldn't expect a T-80U to blast through the cheeks of an Abrams, so I guess at the end of the day, these crews are equally matched

@bastikolaski8111

Жыл бұрын

but T-80U can penetrate M1A2 hull front

@ivanvukadin3194

Жыл бұрын

Would love to see how 3BM60 would work against the Abrams turret cheek, the lower Front plate and the 83° Hull roof

@youlaughyouphill842

Жыл бұрын

@@bastikolaski8111 he said cheeks, nato tanks are made for hulldown positions, thats why the actually have gun depression 🤦‍♂️

@termitreter6545

Жыл бұрын

The simulation is based on assumptions and public data. In reality the projectile and armor might perform worse or better, nobody outside of militaries knows the real data. And heck, even "leaks" might be intentional to spready fake data and confuse other militaries. These sims are fun, but dont take them for anything more than a fun guess.

@slowlydying6967

Жыл бұрын

@@bastikolaski8111 source? 🤓 Jokes aside, I'm curious, my familiarity is with WW2 american armor and I'd like to know more about modern armor

glad to see more WT lore

We're going full cycle from bolts in a ballista to round cannon balls to pointed tank rounds and now back to arrow tank rounds.

@CyberneticArgumentCreator

Жыл бұрын

APFS-DS came out 60 years ago?

@qwertyuqwertyu7481

Жыл бұрын

"now" ?? ... LOL,🐐

Honestly i'm not surprised to see this result, as i said in the past community post about this sim, it would hold if the Kontakt was struck and not only the composite armor. The logic is also simple to believe why the M829A2 was not enough based on the sim, if it was enough powerful the A3 was not necessary to be developed and fielded. New technology are fielded on both sides (armor and projectile), it's an eternal fight; new rounds with improvements on their composition (new alloy or new material used), design and propellant replace the old flaws, if there are any, as new materials are placed inside the armor package for the tank. Nice sim as always, i'm sure this will set some new debates or fuel the relative side's story about the shell being useless/the ERA-composite overperforming, but i'm confident the truth is the same thing i thought in the early lines i wrote (i'm not an expert with titles or studies behind me, i'm just an enthusiast with an opinion. Pure and simple).

@igorvuk4454

10 ай бұрын

the difference is that USA can field M829A3 and M829A4 in sufficient numbers while Russia can't deploy modern APFSDS in any meaningful numbers

@gasparferrandisromero1075

8 ай бұрын

​@@igorvuk4454definition of a person eaten by propaganda, you surely must believe Russians are carrying rubber and cardboard era, right?

Great thank you! Will be nice to see m1a2 vs K5 and t72b of 1989

Incredible lets see another shot at the exact same place

Interesting video. Can you test Kontakt-5 vs old full caliber AP rounds? ERA was never designed with these rounds in mind since they had been rendered obsolete by the 60s thanks to APDS and HEAT-FS rounds. But I wonder how effective heavy ERA would be against these old rounds. Can you test T-34 UFP + Kontakt-5 vs some German rounds that would otherwise penetrate it?

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

I'm sure it would more damaging to the T-34's brittle armor than the heavy full caliber shell.

@permanenttimes2624

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Good one.

Marder 1 [20mm] vs BMP1 in front Bradley [25mm] vs BMP3 in front PLEASE !

Fantastic work !

I humbly suggest to start doing artillery shells vs tanks, because we are seeing more tanks lost to artillery fire than other tanks.

I know this is likely never gonna happen irl, but could you do a simulation, where ERA such as K-5, is double stacked, as in one over thw other with some gap between them, and how effective it would be?

@tankman66

11 ай бұрын

That's not how K-5 works, you can't really just stack it. Relikt is the successor of K-5, and it works more like that, in layers.

Results were kind of as expected. Though reading your description there may of been some minor issues with the projectile model. Actual penetrator rod mass should be 4.74kg. Diameter is close to correct for a simplified model, length though may be the main issue. M829a1 has a rod length of 680mm. A2 is longer but not sure by exactly how much, it's hard to say by the pictures I have. I've been using 695mm for L-O calculation, as it produces the correct mass with a simplified 21.6mm diameter. But that's simplifying the tip to a flat end, in reality it could be closer to 700 or 705mm.

@kralicidoupe385

Жыл бұрын

Source: Trust me bro Edit 2: The Soviet/russian tanks have superior hull protection but the western countries have much better turret protection due to a larger turret and more space for composites or NERA. ( sorry for my goofy English )

@typicallynamed6718

Жыл бұрын

@@kralicidoupe385 he never said the results were innacurate, just said the rod could have some changes learn to read

@aidanacebo9529

Жыл бұрын

@@kralicidoupe385 tell that to the Iraqis using T-72s with this armor setup in 2003.

@Dukeringo

Жыл бұрын

@@aidanacebo9529 Iraq never had the k5 ERA on thier tanks. Nor did thier 72 hulls have the 80 armor layout.

@76456

Жыл бұрын

@@aidanacebo9529 t72M1 has totaly different and older armour composition when compared to T-80U

Seems like that little flex of the penetration at the end was enough of a disruption to stop total penetration.

Iam surprised by how mature everyone is being on this comment section maybe I just haven’t scrolled down far enough.

Epic! I kinda wonder if it conforms to any secret testing.

Interestingly , this particular ''simulation'' will soon be put to the test.

What abrams AP rounds lack the most is a little bit of velocity maybe 200m/s more and it's done.

Isnt the A2 like 2 generations old? They dont even use these anymore right?

@glizzyman3956

9 ай бұрын

Yes they were retired long ago, m829e3 was able to fully defeat kontakt-5 and nothing will be able to stop the monster that is m829a4

Holy.....a modern video. I wonder what would make M829A3 different; it has a longer penetrator and lower velocity

@itsthatguyfromthething

Жыл бұрын

More energy via increased weight

@cyrusjacksonCSTL

Жыл бұрын

M829A3 would cut straight through. It has a breakoff tip that activate K-5 leaving the remaining APFSDS rod largely unscathed.

@itsthatguyfromthething

Жыл бұрын

@@cyrusjacksonCSTL that's A4, not a3, and that's not exactly how it works but close enough lol

@cyrusjacksonCSTL

Жыл бұрын

@@itsthatguyfromthething So confident yet so wrong. M829A3 has a break off tip made specially against heavy ERA like Kontakt-5. As the name implies, it break off when striking the ERA. M829A4 has a rumored datalink tip separating before hitting the armor and detonating the heavy ERA. Work gainst Kontakt-5, Relikt, and most likely APS.

@DefinitelyNotAnAddict

Жыл бұрын

@@itsthatguyfromthething A4 is supposedly designed to defeat reflect era

Interesting, what if we make the ERA plate thicker?

Is it possible to make the armor and penetrator material have a higher contrast. Like green for the penetrator instead of grey. KZread compression make seeing what's going on hard when all layers are visible.

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

I can make penetrator color brighter, but the green would be a little weird.

As expected and thats why the US developed M829A3

Can you simulate DM53 or M829A3 Vs T80 series tanks using Kontakt-5, these are segmented apfsds slugs specifically designed to defeat Kontakt-5 reliably era up to 2km away, the nose of the round breaks off on the era, leaving the main penetrator unaffected.

nice simulation

Amazing

Would it make sense to have textolite instead of era inside the added bricks? It'd make it worse against heat rounds I guess?

@RomanianReaver

Ай бұрын

Textolite works well but the ERA's main purpose is distorting the trajectory of the projectile. That makes the Textolite's job much easier.

Sir could you simulate the 2A5’s turret wedge, and compare it with the 2PL’s turret armour? As well as Strv 122 UFP?

@jugganaut33

Жыл бұрын

There’s already simulations of this on KZread

@Zosterias

Жыл бұрын

@@jugganaut33 the other one that I found isn’t that high quality like this one.

Can u make the panther vs jumbo ?? Shooting on the frontal plate

Can you try “real “ Kontact-5 that without Charge but EVA panels?

And this folks, is why ERA and other such things became important it can save you or your friends life.

@spakes6561

Жыл бұрын

Yeah but Kontakt 5 which is still in service will now only see A3 and A4 which both essentially negate it totally

@Hi_Im_Kalash

Жыл бұрын

@@spakes6561 laughs in Relikt

@krashd

Жыл бұрын

How could it save my life?

@Hi_Im_Kalash

Жыл бұрын

@@krashd reduce effectiveness of a round so it doesn’t penetrate your tank.

I remember someone saying "the Late Cold War would be interesting since there was tanks from both sides that could shoot at each other without being able to pen each other"

@user-vp9lc9up6v

Жыл бұрын

Well it is until you realize tanks don't just fight other tanks so while it is something to consider it won't matter if you're melted by some of the other wild shit the US and USSR had laying around

@gerfand

Жыл бұрын

@@user-vp9lc9up6v I know but if you fire and it fire backs and nothing happen... You need to agree its interesting

@user-vp9lc9up6v

Жыл бұрын

@@gerfand they don't need to pen eachother either they can also just simply be disabled

@gerfand

Жыл бұрын

@@user-vp9lc9up6v I know but I'm talking about Pens when its related to tank combat, which is very relevant.

@user-vp9lc9up6v

Жыл бұрын

@@gerfand it is very relevant but so is a tank disabling another without ever penetrating

great to see this simulation. your most interesting to date

Gotta love the Saint George ribbon armor

T-80U have a really strong armour, when it relased, NATO countries dont have any weapon to penetrate ıt on the front armour.

Thank you, I've always been annoyed by the people that say M829A2 has anti ERA capabilities when it lacks any kind of brake off tip or non initiating tip. Having better DU alloy and overall better penetration does not give you anti ERA capabilities it only slightly decreases the effectiveness of the ERA

@seanmurphy7011

Жыл бұрын

Funny thing: M829A2 was tested against actual T-80s with actual kontact-5 at Eglin in the late 90s and perforated all the way through. Relikt prompted the development of M829A3.

@288gto7

Жыл бұрын

@@seanmurphy7011 got any link for that? Also how is a3 supposed to defeat relikt when it literally has twin plates flying in opposite directions. Sure the sacrifical tip will be useful on first plate, but you still have the second flyer plate and your sacrificial tip is gone. Sure It ll reduce its effectiveness but its not gonna "defeat" it like how it completely defeats k5 with the sacrificial tip

@jameshodgson3656

Жыл бұрын

@@seanmurphy7011 that's a myth, the T-84s the US bought from Ukraine in the 90s still exist and have been seen as recently as 2018. They haven't been fired on.

@Ropetor

Жыл бұрын

@@seanmurphy7011 There is no source I could find of M829A2 ever being tested, only M829A1 which failed to penetrate. Can you please provide a source

@Ropetor

Жыл бұрын

@@seanmurphy7011 M829A3 started being developed long before relikt as an upgrade against Kaktus ERA that was supposed to be used on object 640. Relikt utilizes 2 flying plates much heavier ones then K5 and more sensitive explosives to counter brake off tips and non initiating tips.

can you do a failed kontakt 5 simulation aswell what happens if it doesnt explode

Could you do a heat shell vs early Soviet composite armour with that anti heat plates between the rha?

Would the round have penetrated without the ERA? Also, I'd like to see the reverse. 3BM60 vs M1A2 turret cheek. (Would easily pen the hull so that is a non-factor)

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

There will be a video without ERA

@patriktoth3346

Жыл бұрын

ERA basically made against Chemical-based rounds.. Like ATGM missiles and Heat rounds in tank.

@jonathonspears7736

Жыл бұрын

@@patriktoth3346 Kontact 5 was designed to provide KE protection as well as Chemical protection.

@patriktoth3346

Жыл бұрын

@@jonathonspears7736 How many KE protection does it have? I havent heard about that armor.

@jonathonspears7736

Жыл бұрын

@@patriktoth3346 I am uncertain on that. I don't know the actual numbers. Just that it does prove KE protection

Would it be possible to run the situation again with M829A3 or is it still too classified to accurately simulate? Given I haven't seen any penetration simulations using it I'm thinking that might be the case.

@kumat0ra672

Жыл бұрын

There are patents that give a pretty good ideal of what M829A3 is like, with a breakaway steel tip of approximately 100mm in length.

@localdrugseller6431

Жыл бұрын

@@kumat0ra672 Can you tell me one? No need for link just tell me what i should search on the net cuz i am curious about it

Please do a simulation with the same projectile and the forehead of the M1 Abrams hull, and then add the T-72B 1989, I really look forward to the comments

what about spaced armour e.g super pershing or super conqueror turret . also could you do a ww2 v slightly more modern comparison i.e jagpanther vs chieftain or t62a vs m48 patton

Can you do trailing telescopic to see if that will defeat the era?

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Maybe

And this is why A3 was designed, because A2 was just a standard step up from A1 while A3 was for ERA.

@TacticalEd

Жыл бұрын

And that's why Relikt was designed. Stopping the A3

@sanderheide6102

Жыл бұрын

@@TacticalEd And that's why A4 was designed Not having issues with relikt

@288gto7

Жыл бұрын

@@sanderheide6102 thats BS, from what we ve seen so far, a4 doesnt incorporate anything new worth even talking about. The adl has nothing to do with "anti era capability". A3 also reached peak length anyway which means a4 is also same length

@okakokakiev787

Жыл бұрын

@@sanderheide6102 t90m, armata, malachit era make a4 obsolete

@sanderheide6102

Жыл бұрын

@@288gto7 The A4 has enhanced abilities against heavy explosive reactive armour compared to it's predecessor.

Like so many things in life, it is not the individual but the sum total of its parts.

Can you do a comparison with and without k5 and also simulate the turret armour with k5 maybe even the turret armour of t80ud???

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Yes

could you do DM-53 from a leo 2a6 vs a T-80BVM front plate? the BVM had Relikt so it would be cool to see!

@user-xo1kl4kf1r

Жыл бұрын

Lol I thought the same

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Little is known about this APFSDS. They are not verified.

@pilot_p4nzer

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 ah ok then is there any other apfsds you can model?

@mr.waffentrager4400

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 i am seen a lot of dm 53 simulations i don't know that particular channel's sources but we can ask

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

@@mr.waffentrager4400 The DM53 has a complex design that helps defeat the ERA. I doubt anyone has done more than a tungsten monobloc.

Контакт 5 это не просто пустая коробка со взрывчаткой, нет. Там идут две пластины расположенные под разными углами, при детонации каждая из них движется в заданном направлении как бы пересекая путь пенетратора, что снимает значительную часть кинетической энергии.

@bobboboff5326

Жыл бұрын

Да кому ты это объясняешь 🙄

@zero_51q58

Жыл бұрын

Но мало кто занает это и в свободном доступе я увидил только у helef555. Канал на ютубе

@user-ex5mr4rm7s

Жыл бұрын

Мне кажется ,что они для поднятия чсв запиливают ролики .контакт 5 вообще не та начинка .влд у 80 ки были разных видов .с подбоем и без .

@user-nx5jg5xi9v

Жыл бұрын

Как показывает практика, зачастую внутри коробочек дз российских танков никакой взрывчатки нету. Просто кусок резины или фанеры валяется для виду

@Radbot776

Жыл бұрын

@@bobboboff5326 у технологически продвинутых людей, весь текст очень легко переводится на английский Ты наверно пользуешься каким то старым компьютером

I did not expect that... XD Do one about the RKG-3 AT Grenade.

Do you have a simulation of the new multi-purpose round that is being developed in u.s.

The ERA didn't erode the projectile as much as I woulda thought

Can you sim the A3. The A3 was made thicker (unusual for long rod penetrator) the steel tip. The assumption is that it is to improve performance against ERA as those changes aren't going to improve raw RHA penetration.

I am waiting for copium supplies by NATO Metallurgy EXPERTS

Yo what simulation software do u use again I forgot

Which material model do you use for metal and composite materials?

У вас кажется отсутвует задержка от детонации блоков 4С20/24. Движение плиты происходит слишком рано, ОБПС не успевает начать внедрение в бронепреграду. К тому же от взрыва происходит деформация самой метаемой пластиной. И максимальную скорость блок ДЗ в реальности так же приобретает не мгновенно.

@goats-are-awesome

Жыл бұрын

Поделитесь ссылкой на данную информацию, возможно, автор воспроизведёт симуляцию с более правильной работой ДЗ

@fvmk9903

Жыл бұрын

@@goats-are-awesome все ссылки при желании легко найти в интернете. Ютуб не даёт просто нормально скидывать ссылки сам по себе.

@goats-are-awesome

Жыл бұрын

@@fvmk9903 Нет, не легко. Про время задержки, например, я не могу найти. Согласно описанию принципа работы этой ДЗ, подрыв происходит от контакта с осколками, т.е вскоре после преодоления метательной плиты. В симуляции так и произошло Ссылки можно скидывать разделяя их пробелами или переносами строки

@Fulcrum683

Жыл бұрын

Я можт шас буду неправ но инициации ДЗ вообще быть не должно, как мне кажется из за особенностей М829А2 (из за сегментированного сердечника) который без труда преодолевает эту ДЗ...И тут "Контакт" это как бы доп.слой брони(эти 2 тонких листа из коробки именно здесь) Это так мое мнение, автор походу не в курсе....И у ДЗ здесь вообще не тот принцип действия...

Would it have penetrated without the reactive armor?

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

I will show the video.

the first and the only armor that has resisted, will it be?

I am genuinely surprised. My first thought was no way, this tank is dead.

I think with ERA simulation it would be interesting to show the same result both with ERA like here and without ERA In this circumstance its obvious this shell woulda penned but still would be interesting for thw future

@Player_228

Жыл бұрын

Its called RELIC not ERA

@os1nt

Жыл бұрын

@@Player_228 RELICT *

@Adlumairsoft

Жыл бұрын

@@Player_228 ExplosiveReactiveArmor and the UFP of a T-80U uses Kontakt-5 and not Relikt

Aren't we on m829a4 now?

@raf9826

Жыл бұрын

Yes, that one just melts right through r*ssian rolling coffins.

Can u do armor penetration of 125mm vs t84 oplot? Oplot is supposed to have the best armor of any other tank in the wrold not including its aps that can be mounted anywhere on the tank that has the ability to degrade penitration of even apfsds shells by typically about 40 to 60 percent if its 2 core and if my memory servers me correctly 80 if its single core

ERA the real MVP. Only really see the new t90s fully covered though

On late t80u, textolite is replaced by ceramics, I guess it's even more stronger than textolite ?

@okakokakiev787

Жыл бұрын

Textolite is only good vs heat. Ceramics work both vs heat and sabot.

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

Textolite alone is not effective, but when properly arranged, it can help the steel effectively damage the rod. Ceramics have hardness.

@jintsuubest9331

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 Can ceramic between steel in this array provide nera effect we see at 0:28? If Im seeing things correctly, some of the steel at plate 1 get push into the bottom of the rod from textolite expanding? Or ceramic will have an entirely different working mechanism?

@dejmianxyzsimulations4174

Жыл бұрын

@@jintsuubest9331 It wouldn't, so it must assume a different mechanism of action. Passive action without a doubt.

@okakokakiev787

Жыл бұрын

@@dejmianxyzsimulations4174 so you are saying Textolit is somewhat useful not only against heat but also ap ammo 🧐 it's even hard to believe. How can Textolit expansion bend and bulge steel armor plate?

MIC-brained couch generals: "ITS NOT TRUEEE."

Can you did the same but whit te upper front plate of the t90m?

Is it possible for you to simulate how much shrapnel would a fuel tank absorb? Like the sides of a Leopard 2 or hitting a soviet MBT at an engle to the side.

@jintsuubest9331

Жыл бұрын

Assuming the initial impact is the side armor? Not enough to matter.

It looks like the penetrator is outrunning the ERA explosion and not being heavily affected by it

@user-zu4nl7bm9e

Жыл бұрын

1 or 2 degree is heavily affected on such angle of AOA. you know, it's 60 degree UFP.

@seennotheard8888

Жыл бұрын

The main purpose of ERA for KE threats is to feed intact armor plate into the incoming round, which you can clearly see happening in the video.

Haters gonna say Russian bias at top tier

@doozledorf7036

17 күн бұрын

Well, he's using an old outdated round so it is Russian bias by definition

@georgeouroussoff3830

17 күн бұрын

@@doozledorf7036 he is using an old outdated round on an old outdated tank. The modern one is t-80bvm. So everything checks out

I wonder ehay spall damage would do to compromise the surrounding textolite

One last thing. I HAVE read Aberdeen ballistic metallurgy reports that are older. The materials used have molecular properties that avoid blunting to a round cross section. They always fracture in ways that increase oblique penetrations. It’s key.

@DanielJoyce

Жыл бұрын

Yep. Called self sharpening. They under conchoidal fracturing at the tip maintaining a pointed shape during penetration.

"Our Armor is hard And our tanks are fast " -soviet ww2 song

@user-ts3oy6ho4s

Жыл бұрын

So our tanks are small in themselves, so they are fast. Tipo, they solidly just have a good slope of armor, and so there is not very much of it there.

@mr.waffentrager4400

Жыл бұрын

@@user-ts3oy6ho4s it is 1250hp though plus thicc flat turret armor Also due to Era...it's best performance to weight ratio.

@avtomat6471

Жыл бұрын

🇷🇺💪😉😎👍

@PeterMuskrat6968

Жыл бұрын

I think I can make one for the current situation “Our ammo is gone, and our reverse speed is slow”

@prigam

Жыл бұрын

Until they come across a well trained and determined army with modern weapons.

now stop your complaining 10.7 american mains

@Hi_Im_Kalash

Жыл бұрын

They won’t stop doing so they are brainwashed idiots

Can we see a test without the ERA?

0:09 no 0:17 no 0:24 yes!

It's a 2003 missile, so 20 years ago, but the A2 version has almost the same characteristics as the 1991 A1 version, and the two missiles differ only in production technology. The penetrability of the bullet is 540 mm RHA at a distance of 2000 meters.

@warr666pigg

Жыл бұрын

Missile?

@ark_dd438

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, and T80U is 1985 lol)

@joeynyesss1286

Жыл бұрын

@@warr666pigg he probably doesn’t speak English as a first language so used this word instead

Wow, thanks!

Could you do a King Tiger vs a modern anti tank mine?

definitely me when the