The NLAW didn’t fail. The operator failed by firing the weapon when the target was too close not giving the weapon time to arm itself.

@mikehunt5934

2 жыл бұрын

I was about to, but then I watched the whole clip and he explains that the safety didn't activate because it didn't travel to the safe zone.

@oliverduguid685

2 жыл бұрын

This is correct also it didn’t have time to engage it’s main propellant

@diesela3

2 жыл бұрын

@@mikehunt5934 Most all weapons from western countries have something similar. This could have been a 1 minute video condensed to most UK and US missile and grenade systems have either a minimum rotation or flight time requirement to arm.

@maninifarmer1338

2 жыл бұрын

Back to school!

@shawalvalley6411

2 жыл бұрын

actually the second blast in this video can be seen shortly after firing that is 20 meters away and anything away from that distance is in the effective range the reason why this weapon failed is because before hitting the tank there is a self defaince mechanisms on the tank which activated very fastly killing the rocket before hitting the target and the debris is landed softly harmlessly on the tank

Arming distance

@mastermariner490

2 жыл бұрын

No shooting in direct attack mode

@lucianoalvarez2214

2 жыл бұрын

Tenes razón, quizas el que disparaba no configuro bien al nlaw

@chrissmith7669

2 жыл бұрын

Captain Tupelov is removing that the safety features on all his weapons , he won’t make that mistake twice.

@patgould2586

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrissmith7669 lol…… I think he pronounced it ‘twische’.

@AgentSmith-ci8pv

2 жыл бұрын

The taliban would have had that tank on fire 🔥 with the old reliable rpg 7

The weapon was used out of parameters, hence why it "failed". In fact it behaved as designed when hitting a target that's closer than the minimum arming distance.

@Screwball70

2 жыл бұрын

Bang on! Pardon the pun lol

@diesela3

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly prevents the user from blowing themselves up too. There isn't gonna be a "respawn" button. That tank crew still got their bells rung. Hopefully they had new underwear.

@akulkis

2 жыл бұрын

@@diesela3 Nah. In this case, no more of an effect to the crew than if someone slammed the outside of the turret with a single blow from a 2-lb hammer. Gunner: "What was that?" Vehicle Commander: "Don't know. Continue to proceed normally to the objective."

@deven6518

Жыл бұрын

Nope. Direct attack mode. Turning off the distance limit is a thing yk. This is not the first occurrence.

that explosion is from the rocket fuel not missile warhead. Minimum range is 20m for warhead to be armed as safety measure. If the warhead explode at this range it might cause injury to the person who fired it

@ypvsypvs

2 жыл бұрын

And is over all more likely to have been a hit of something not intended than a target. Like a branch or whatever the operator didn't see because of being concentrated on something a mile away.

@AaronKwekbeloved

2 жыл бұрын

if the tank explode at this range, with munitions inside the tank. How big the explosion going to be. Even with RPG. That is too close.

@parazitdetected

2 жыл бұрын

ROCKET fuel, because this tank runs on it or wut ? 😂

@AaronKwekbeloved

2 жыл бұрын

@@parazitdetected it is from the missile's propellant.....

@Milieboy

2 жыл бұрын

@@parazitdetected from the NLAW missile. Not the tank

too closed range. it's less than the minimum range 20m

@mastermariner490

2 жыл бұрын

No shooting in direct attack mode,operator failure

The downside of RPG-7V is that it's not suitable to be fired from inside the buildings. The backblast is too strong.

@EngineerReact.

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Saur. True! I could have been more clear that you can´t fire rpg-7 from inside buildings. They could use the AT4 CS which they have gotten more then 10 000 of. The AT4 CS shots saltwater to dampen back blast. Leaving a salt taste in the operators mouth after firing.

@SonsOfLorgar

2 жыл бұрын

@@EngineerReact. but not as salty as the unit commander for the tanks would be at loosing a T-72B The AT4 CS also has a 30m arming distance

@ghostmousewolf1453

2 жыл бұрын

Backblast too strong? Doesnt he want to be superman? Flying through the skies

@mr.spider6859

2 жыл бұрын

@@ghostmousewolf1453 More like the Human Torch.

@hotboyjones9551

2 жыл бұрын

You obviously haven’t encountered a terrorist mercenary high on narcotics They rip em right off buddy

The missile didn't arm due to the target being within the minimum arming distance. Duh.

@MantodeaBLN

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly 😅 In order for this weapon to cause significant destruction, it would have to accelerate for at least 100 to 200 meters, which was not the case here. The shooter fired it at a distance of about 20 meters and therefore the impact was minimal, and thus the destruction of the tank.

@Prod_TKJ808

2 жыл бұрын

@@MantodeaBLN no, arming distance

@calvinm99

2 жыл бұрын

@@MantodeaBLN what? It's a chemical warhead. Not a kinetic shell. velocity has no change in destructive power. It was simply arming distance was not achieved

@brigadgeneralvoid2508

2 жыл бұрын

@@MantodeaBLN you're wrong there bud, it's a shaped charge, their effectiveness has nothing to do with velocity (shaped charges utilise an explosive to propel a penetrator to hypersonic speeds via the Munroe effect) and as mentioned above, it's a chemical based warhead which does not rely on the kinetic energy of the entire round, rather the energy of the chemically propelled penetrator

The explosive didn’t have enough time to arm itself, because it was fired too close to the vehicle, that’s literally the only reason the crew and tank survived, from a greater range, the atgm would have made easy work of the tank.

@deven6518

Жыл бұрын

Nope, happened before. Why do you think the nlaw / javelin hype died?

The dude firing the NLAW would have injured himself being that close, the round not going off probably saved his life. Which is another reason they have the minimum arming distance.

This would have been perfect for a Panzerfaust 3

@dariozanze4929

2 жыл бұрын

It would. That's the beautiful part of sending so much different AT systems to Ukraine, even those really cheap ones. Some of those systems work from closed rooms at close range, some of them snipe tanks at 5km, some can fire different warheads. Some are cheap and cannot take on tanks frontally, but are so light that soldier can carry 3-4 warheads...

@Termileon

2 жыл бұрын

No Panzerfaust 3 need to fly 15m first before armed so it would be same result

NLAW didn't fail, the operator didn't meet the requirements of 20metres for it to arm. It's the rocket that exploded, not the warhead.

@donarthiazi2443

2 жыл бұрын

Really? Where'd you learn that? Perhaps you watched the video like everyone else?

This shows why so many buildings get destroyed. Troops hiding in buildings

When you just press "Skip" during the tutorial and f*ck off on the actual combat but you can't go back since there's no "replay tutorial" button! 😂

As well as the 20m minimum arming range, another point to consider is the downward angle of flight. NLAW will not arm if fired at a downward angle of less than 45° , that firing looked to be on the cusp of that angle !

@mastermariner490

2 жыл бұрын

Only in overfly attack mode,not direct attack mode as used here Problem is direct attack mode wont scratch the paint on a tank

@clivedunning4317

2 жыл бұрын

@@mastermariner490 Which beggars the question . . ."why use 'direct attack mode ' against a main battle tank" ? . . .

@mastermariner490

2 жыл бұрын

@@clivedunning4317 Operator error most likely,probably not trained on the NLAW Direct attack mode is for light armour,trucks helicopters and soft targets Looking at the video you can feel the stress from the soldier firing it

@TM450FI

2 жыл бұрын

@@mastermariner490 if you are shooting on the top armor Is the same thing lmao

@mastermariner490

2 жыл бұрын

@@TM450FI Did i not explain what direct mode is,Einstein Dont let me repeat myself

So it was operator error, can't fault him or her though because I'm not the one who is having to fight tanks out of my village. Got so much admiration for these people its unbelievable

Rpg wouldn't be better in this scenario because of the backblast. Dude should have waited a little longer so the tank would a have been little further away and the rocket could arm.

@akulkis

2 жыл бұрын

UFA isn't exhibiting much tactical prowess beyond m committing war crimes against civilians.

It seemed to me that the missile glanced the tank at a corner too, so setting one of the reactive armour cassettes on fire by friction rather than explosion. Your explanation of failure to detonate makes sense - a lot of explosive munitions have that safety feature to protect the operator.

Saw the video originally and wondered. Good info, thx.

The more sophisticated the system is, the more requirements it has.

Him:RPG Russia:Afghanit Active Protection System is on the work bois

you couldn't use an RPG in the confined apace of that room without the back blast killing the operator

@UnicyclDev

2 жыл бұрын

This is not true anymore. The NLAW has been designed to be fireable indoors. The new technology is interesting.

@jamesporter1123

2 жыл бұрын

@@UnicyclDev please read my comment carefully, i said the RPG couldn't be fired from a confined space or inside a small room, NOT the NLAW

You would think that 20m safety feature is bad, but I've seen plenty of videos where the missile barely skims some obstacle nearby the operator such as the wall they are using for cover, same with Javelin.

That makes sense if there’d have just let it drive further up the road one less tank and three less invaders to worry about lesson learnt hopefully

minimum arming distance not reached

The missile would have been calculating the detonation timing when it made impact. The motor only started a few few away from the tank so the missile probably wouldn't have even had time to see the tank, let alone arm the warhead.

@deven6518

Жыл бұрын

Doesn't matter when the motor started. When armed to detonate at firing, the missile will explode leaving the tube, if it has to.

That was exactly where I was wondering about.

on the last frame one can see fire coming fom under the turret ring and the engine changing sound. It seems the NLAW did penetrate.

Amazing analysis

The attack failed not because of the NLAW but because of lack of proper training.

It was a glancing hit in direct mode. Could be the minimum distance too.

RPG never gets old,

I was a TOW anti-tank missile gunner for about 7 years and one thing they pretty much all have in common is a minimum distance to arm the warhead. That particular shot looks like it was too close for the warhead to arm itself.

As most of you out there know tht the closest range the NLAW can be effective is 20m(66ft) to 800m(2625ft) looking at the video we can see tht the distance between the initial point of firing and impact is far too less than 20m which gives very less time for the projected NLAW to gain velocity in the video it did explode but not enough velocity to penetrate which resulted in a wasted round (Velocity is also a key factor in penetrating a tanks armor) (Disclaimer:most T72-B's doesn't have ERA's on back and top of turrets)

@AllanFolm

2 жыл бұрын

No, when an explosive charge is used to penetrate a tank, the initial velocity of the round is totally without any meaning. The explosive penetrator moves so much faster - orders of magnitude - than the missile that carries it. And no, it did not explode. Just the fuel in the missile ignited.

@smolboi7789

2 жыл бұрын

@@AllanFolm mhm intersting I'll not hem down cuz iam still a novice

@AllanFolm

2 жыл бұрын

@@smolboi7789 If you're talking about APFSDS - projectiles, they have a limited range, because they are purely kinetic and have no warhead. Only a pointed stick of hard and heavy metal coming at you at 4.000 m/s.

@donarthiazi2443

2 жыл бұрын

@@AllanFolm A long rod might have 'limited range' but it still has exceptional killing power for a looong distance. A British Challey killed an Iraqi tank from over 3 miles away with a long rod. It was an older model piece of Soviet crap... but a kill is a kill.

The missile can be armed to detonate anytime and the safety distance is something that's turned off almost immediately since an atgm is highly directional, much like a claymore. Some say there's timing. Actually, there really is no timing to do. It's a set process, triggered by a pressure or proximity fuse. That is sometimes referenced to a laser back at the firing position, if it's not fire and forget mode. People expect that atgms make a big explosion, but they don't. The only reason you see a noticable fireball in the stills is because it's slowed, recorded at thousands of fps. The large fireball you'd see is a secondary explosion from the target. In the real world, all you see is a little flash and puff of smoke. The missile worked as intended and detonated as intended. It simply didn't work

This is the only time a t-72 crew survived a hit, and by the looks of the reaction of almost stopping, looks like they won't be learning anything

@moisesaguila1875

2 жыл бұрын

I see a lpt videos that javelin dont due nothing to the tank, rate is close to 50% , is not me, is the rwal world, media only show hit not the fails,

Rpg usually doesn't detonate until 50+ meters down range. Depends on the model tho I think.

a bit of patience goes a long way . so does a rocket .

To close. Nlaw have two options. Armed after 20 or 100 meters. This was to close to engage.

Interesting observation!

So ur basically saying that the m1a2 abrams is also old?

how does NLAW missiles arm? Is it burn timer? if it is burn timer then soft launching like in the video will extend its arming distance to more than 20 meters hypothetically

@Milieboy

2 жыл бұрын

I think it would be counting the rotations and not burn time.

@core-experience

2 жыл бұрын

@@Milieboy missiles like this dont spin tho, it is very different from rpg which is a unguided rocket

Very good explanation

Good explanation!

Can it destroy an M1A2 Abrams,or Challenger 2, Leopold Ii tanks??

I don’t like the sound , is it bot ?

Thats why its best to have RPG in urban areas due to close quarter encounters.

A recoilless rifle like AT4 or Carl Gustaf M2 could have been useful here. Or, you know, just giving the NLAW some arming distance. Not much more was needed.

@ArruVision

2 жыл бұрын

The AT4 has a 30 m arming distance, so wouldn’t have made any difference.

@mfuchs2004

2 жыл бұрын

Either could have seriously injured or killed this gunner. The CG does have the ability to fire a special confined space round, but it needs 100m minimum distance to target. In addition, the CG requires up to 70m of travel to arm itself. Saab says 50% chance of arming at 20m, up to 100% chance of arming at 70m.

@Sombody123

2 жыл бұрын

@@mfuchs2004 This is why KZread replies are cool sometimes.

This is why retraining is important, if they was using a RPG-29 this might have result in a tank taken down

@Bandera51

2 жыл бұрын

Bro what? The NLAW is very easy to use and it requires very little training.

What bollocks, if the MLAW warhead had gone off this tank would be dust, this tank crew was just lucky

@peteralleyman1945

2 жыл бұрын

The NLAW warhead won't detonate at this close range to protect it's operator.

Always have your Molotow-Cocktails (or similar tools) ready in close-distance-combat-situations, save your expensive weapons for longer distances. 🤔

@peteralleyman1945

2 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately a molotov cocktail is only effective when the hatchbis opened. If not, it can do some damage when the burning fluid enters through imperfect sealings, but the automatic fire extinguisher will keep the tank operational. Little chance for an orc-meat frying festivity...

@papab34r

2 жыл бұрын

@@peteralleyman1945 I wonder if this is actually true, I mean sure it should be the case with modern tanks, but you still got exposed parts such as sensors and optics that should be able to be damaged by fire. Im also curious how the crew would react to being on fire, panic might set in and the tank might get stuck or otherwise rendered unusable. Besides there are examples of armored vehicles being knocked out by fire, for instance during the Kiev protest/uprising, there is a famous video of molotov coctails burning an Ukrainian APC to bits kzread.info/dash/bejne/hqya2quofcirdtI.html I guess even automated fire suppression systems have their limits.

@peteralleyman1945

2 жыл бұрын

@@papab34r I already said that it can do some damage. If sensors are damaged. the tank will become at least less effective indeed. But that's different from taking it out. And crew panicking could happen, but would als depend on training. And a tank is a bit larger and heavier than a police armoured vehicle.

The long answer i was looking for! :)

This round more or less hit the machine gun of the t72, saying that the NLAWs user has missed his target pretty bad as well. You can watch the missleitete hit the edge of the turret of this tank.

Aside from hitting the commanders coupola and aa Dshk?

It is not "A conflict between russia and ukraine". It's aggresive war caused by russia. And its not just a naming issue; this should be pointed every time when we addres this war

@Streloski

2 жыл бұрын

It is a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. We’ve been at war with Ukraine since 2014, when most people didn’t care about it and couldn’t even pinpoint Ukraine on a map.

@xaxaszaposznikow175

2 жыл бұрын

@@Streloski what a sweet answer. Everything was ok until World realised what Russia is doing?

The angle is pretty extreme probably would of been better the operator fire it at the engine deck of the tank.

Before I watch it's because he was to close and u don't want a tank exploding that close to u

It was to close to its target not enough time for second stage to be implemented the person using it should have known this . So in theory the NLaw never failed it was the person using it failed 400meters is it’s best distance

Good explanation

They could just trow Molotov cocktail or a thermite bomb.

Why does the system allow to fire if it is too close to the target?!?

I was about to say... dont these rockets have an armign distance of like 20-30 yards/meters..... probably didn't arm yet xD...

RPGs armying distance is also 25 meters so last point doesnt make much diference

Before I even watched the video I knew the answer was it was too close for the warhead to arm. I knew because I remembered when mythbusters tested that movie scene where Bruce Willis shoots a RPG midair from just a few meters away 😂

It looks that the missile struck the heavy machinegun at the top of the turret. So the warhead was not in contact with the turret roof...

Guess the Missile is a bit useless in urban areas then… and in the countryside the missile operator would have been taken out by the supporting infantry… so.. all in all.. Ukraine has been sent some duff equipment..😏

@jayden7945

2 жыл бұрын

it works in urban areas, it is one of the few anti tank weapons that can be used from within a building, the arming distance is a safety feature. If the warhead had armed at that short of a distance it most likely would have wounded or killed the user.

Good point

This was fires from too closed distance. Therefore it could not activated fully & could not caught full speed.

That NLAW is Joe Biden who forgot why its flying towards the tank

From what I've seen of russian tanks blowing their top that ukraine soldier is very lucky it didn't explode as he was way to close.

@donarthiazi2443

2 жыл бұрын

"too"

Simple answer, the range was too close to activate the warhead. Or else the person shooting it probably wouldve died from the explosion being only 20 feet away. It did NOT fail. The user failed to wait till it was far enough away

But rpg could kill the gunner in such apartment.

Yupyup...not enough distance for NLAW to arm itself.

I have fired this weapon system...the warhead doesn't arm right away

Terlalu dekat

This is a Situation for Panzerfaust 3

It was clearly fired inside its arming distance

So that was a feature not a bug?

Expensive fireworks…

to close plain and simple

@ruzziasht349

2 жыл бұрын

too close - duh

But why did it still damage an armoured target? Just impact shouldn't do it right???

@rclipse1985

2 жыл бұрын

The fuel for the rocket ignited on impact probably.

I dont think it failed. At the very last few seconds one can see how flame came out beneath of the turret of the tank

But the nlaw fires straight down and has sensor to tell when above target… very steep angle to try to use a charge that fires straight down and also sensors are more diagonal/slanted than usual. Maybe it needed time to arm but even if it did a charge firing diagonally to the tank wouldnt work so well. Maybe it was a sensors fail due to the diagonal position of the missile… making detecting the tank difficult because if it use a laser the laser not pointing straight down and may not have been in line with the tank and therefore didn’t register the tank. This missile system is designed to shoot straight down with its charge and sensors probably also. Therefore it not as good at urban warfare as I’ve heard some theorise over javelin. Whether it not arm in time or not…the charge really meant to be straight above target cuz otherwise the charge will partially and maybe completely miss target. Personally I think sensors not work because at a steep angle and the sensors not pointing at the tank

The rocket already expired

Yeah the NLAW worked exactly how it was intended it barely had time to star its motor much less arm the warhead. It's fucking how a misile can be flying over the tank and shoot a shaped charge down while in mid flight. There are plenty of videos showing these missiles popping the turret off every kind of tank the Russians operate. There's another video of a tank being hit multiple times and after the first or second hit the driver or commander bails out when a third detonates a good 15-20 yards away from him in top attack mode bursting a little before the tank it seemed and he is severely injured even though he is about as far away as this soldier was when he fired it so I think if the warhead had detonated this warrior would have been severely injured if not for this safety measure.

An RPG would be better, but also impossible to use where this shot came from, It would've had the back of the tube aimed for the ceiling less than 2m away in an appartment or similar. But, they could've waited for the tank to get 2-3 seconds further away and still been able to use what they used with better chance of success I guess. Keeping calm in that situation can't be an easy thing though. Certainly concidering that there might have been other vehicles behind this tank further down the street or maybe soon coming around a street corner into line of sight of this situation. It might have been now or never. It's impossible to know what situation they were in. I am sure of one thing though, this clip has already been seen by most operators of Nlaw and similar in the Ukraine by now. So the next tanks going under the "same" windows in the future, wont be so lucky. These Russians lived so that many others can die... so to say. Plus, no matter if extreme stress caused this or lack of knowledge about arming distance for the warhead - they still fucking took the shot. If stress or lack of training was reason for this they at least gave the world more data to calculate the size of Ukrainian balls with. And by now we are starting to realize that the preliminary calculations unreal as they seemed, actually WERE correct. Female or male, they drag boulders around with them. So that taken into account maybe RPG would've been an option anyway. I mean if they got their own balls into that place it must be a pretty big place after all, and as such possible to use an RPG in. Hang in there Ukraine! It is a fucked up situation and you have not deserved any of it - but you have also caused Russia to experience hurt on a cataclysmic level. 15k dead in 6 weeks might not feel like enough in the middle of things but it is 10 times as bad as most armies has ever experienced in a war, 1st and 2nd WW included. Even if we compare with especially bloddy operations of a war instead of over all war wide losses. Here are a few surprising facts to appreciate what has already been done. The Commonwealth combined lost about 1000ppl per month during the North African campaign in the 2nd ww, divided on many nations even if one bore the brunt of it. Russia lost 10k first month and seems to the next one as well. Even during Barbarossa Germany "only" lost about 25% of their soldiers, over 3 years. In an operation that history has shown to have been nothing short of Hell on earth for the German soldiers. Operation free "Ukraine from Nazis" will have cost Russia 25% in under 3 months though. Maybe even 2. Meaning: Ukrainian forces have chewed up Russians more than 10 times faster than the Soviet Union destroyed German lives in 1941-44. (Adjusted for size of operation) No military force can sustain a loss of 10-15% per month without something every soldier feel worth dieing for - to fight for. It's impossible. And means a 50% war wide chance of being alive less than 6 months in. If still alive you WILL HAVE lost more than 50% of those you started fighting with. Afghanistan and Chechnya was for a Russian soldier a safe vacation compared to what 6 weeks in Ukraine has been. Even Vietnam for the US which became impossible to keep up because of losses, without something worth fighting for - was NOTHING compared. The US lost 60k soldiers in Vietnam over 9 years there, which led to so low morale among US forces and population they had to back out, beaten and in shame. All lives they lost and took having been for nothing. Ukrainian fighters will have scored 60k dead Russians in 5-6 months. and that out of a "pool" of Russians to kill that is FAR smaller than Viet Cong and the NWA had to do the same with. Meaning, units will become decimated on a whole other level. And every Russian soldier sees death of friends on a level 20-40 times higher than a US soldier saw in Vietnam where deaths were spread out more due to a bigger fighting force plus spread out over time in a way that made single soldiers rotate back to the US before it all had hit his unit. Every guy saw only snippets of the 60k dead. Russia just took 15k dead and certainly another 15% hurt before any soldier has done 1/8th of their time in the conflict. What was needed to make generations of Americans declare themselves against a US war you did 20 TIMES as bad to Russia so far. 20 times what it took to turn the US against their own presidents, during war. And if we know something about americans it's that they always support their troops and presidents when at war if they get even a bad reason it is what needs to be done. You are the destroyer of worlds, seen from a Russian perspective. The stuff of nightmares.

@richlopez5896

2 жыл бұрын

Backblast is too strong to fire and RFG-7 inside a building

@ypvsypvs

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly

@AgentSmith-ci8pv

2 жыл бұрын

@@richlopez5896 that don't stop the taliban

@alekseylebed4945

2 жыл бұрын

46 000 Ukrainian soldiers killed, captured, wounded and missing

@ypvsypvs

2 жыл бұрын

@@alekseylebed4945 Numbers for the Ukrainian side makes the outrage because of the crime committed against them bigger for each one. For Russia, every one makes what they are trying to steal more expensive. And worth it for fewer and fewer.

The projectile maybe hit the sloped edge of the turret

That's not the day to die....

Isn't the safety for a rpg basically a plastic bottle cap that's screwed on the tip?

First peace keeping missile I've seen.

A Molotov cocktail or two might have been more effective from that range and position.

He hit the PKM tho 👀

Rpg-7 arming distance is at 25m. If the nlaw did not trigger, neither would rpg-7. In fact none of the warheads fired from rpg-7 would activate.

Yes....but rumor has it that three pair of Soviet underwear were soiled so badly, they had to be burned.

It looked like the munitions failed to detonate.

Por la corta distancia, no se armo el detonante, explocivo. Fue también suerte para la tripulación del TB, si no ya estarían calcinados... como sus compatriotas.

Either dud or target to close to arm.

потому что т 72 сделан не из фанеры)

It failed because it was fired to close to the target it's designed to do that for safety reasons

To close those things are just as good as javelin but needs more range

It wasn't an NLAW.. It was a hand held old Soviet Bazooka style Bazooka weapon ,, & being Soviet it wasnt going to wok l anyway, Dont let it worry you !!