Thanks for watching, check out the accompanying article for this video here: armourersbench.com/2022/09/18/ptkm-1r-russias-most-advanced-anti-tank-mine/ If you'd like to support the channel check out our Patreon for perks: www.patreon.com/thearmourersbench Thanks! - Matt
@@jr.fidelcastro8890 No pal. Were for Ukraine to Neutralize all the Orc's from the Sovereign Country Land, that Russia Invaded for more land and money in his and the Oligarchs pockets, Ukraine 🇺🇦 will defend it's Land, People and Freedom's from a Dictator, now take your meds.
Super interesting. Weirdly enough a few weeks ago I googled "bouncing anti tank mine" to see if somebody had already invented the concept but couldn't find any references. The concepts makes so much sense. If I were producing BONUS or SMART 155mm rounds, I would look for a way to turn them into mines. The PTKM-1R doesn't seem to go that far up in the air. Launching it at up to 200m would give the warhead a great search radius.
There's actually another video on this channel on the DM22 mine, which is basically a single-shot mortar that lobs a HEAT round at the target. These so-called "off-route mines" are actually pretty commonplace nowadays; no more are anti-tank mines restricted to the roll-over kind.
@@yetanother9127 Good point about the DM22 lobbing a HEAT round but it's not really what I had in mind. Asside from this PTKM-1R, most (all ?) off-road mines rely on the operator pointing the mine in a very specific direction and then waiting on a target to cross that magic line. Having a mine that you can just place around the area of interest seems increadly usefull. I would probably not even bother too much about it being automaticaly activated. A manual trigger would do very well in many cases.
I've watched every video I can find on the BONUS round but this is by far the best view I've seen of an explosive penetrator firing and hitting the target. Being able to blast a jet of molten metal that far and accurately from a falling object still blows my mind.
I'm real curious how long these things can operate once armed. If it's listening to data and crunching the numbers constantly, I could see that sucking down any batteries they might fit in the available space within a few days. And then it still needs power to tilt and slew once a target is identified.
they'd probably have better luck with battery life if they put it in hibernation mode so to speak until a Certain Decibel is reached then it does it full numbers crunching identifying vehicles mode.
This very much reminds me of an air-dropped cluster munition developed in the 1980s by the British for use against massed Soviet tank formations. The sub-munitions would fall like wobbly sycamore seeds to scan a large area. If a tank was detected the sub-munition would detonate and send an explosively formed projectile through the top of the tank. If no tank was detected and the sub-munition made it to the ground, it would act like a directional anti-tank mine.
According to Wikipedia, the CBU-97 is US made and does something similar, but the sub munitions are all supposed to self destruct before hitting the ground. I'd love a citation on anything that turns straight into a mine on landing.
Brutal. Usually people riding on tank tops think they're fairly protected from AT mines since the tank track will absorb it. This completely flips that. I imagine this would be fairly easily countered with people walking in front looking for this. It's pretty big and has to be in a somewhat open area.
@@ScottKenny1978 If your way to deal with anti tank mines is to get have the infantry get out an walk in front like its WW1 then your not using either right. Anti tank mine are mixed with anti personnel ones and are covered by some form of observation.
maybe the reason why this mine hasn't been shown in action, is due to the fact that the ukranians and russians use a lot of the same equipment. (T-72's ect) so either its not in the autistic database or there's fears of friendly fire.
Interestingly, many years ago Norway was looking into maybe purchasing an acoustically triggered off-route mine that was said to differentiate between different vehicles based on sound profiles. I forget which one, maybe the German model. Anyway, they needed to test the manufacturer's claim so asked the Russians if they would please send one tank across the border for a dry fire test. The Russians obliged, of course they were just as eager to know whether the system worked or not. That's the only time a Russian armoured vehicle has taken part in a military exercise on Norwegian soil, I recall there was a fair bit of media attention at the time. Don't know if the mine worked or not, but I'm pretty sure we didn't buy any.
That is some scifi shit right there 😯 I've started to have a healthy respect for explosively formed penetrators since I learned about Nuclear EFPs, a 1 kiloton nuke can throw a 20 tonne penetrator at 9 km/s IIRC. Spacedocks did a video about it 😅
@@herrhaber9076 paired up with passive IR sensor rolled in the sand coverd in fresh expanding foam and a straw for the apature attached to a transmitter and turned on outside of the ecm bubble from kilometer away There deadly
@@ifv2089 An EFP as the name implies uses explosive to form a projectile from a ductile material. The liner material in a shaped charge isnt really what defeats the armor, it only contributes. Standoff distances are also extremely different since the solid slug from an EFP wont dissipate as fast as the jet from a shaped charge (you can see that in the video). In reality they both use different effects. An EFP is closer to a Claymore mine than an RPG for example. I could build a shaped charge in minute if necessary. Building an effective EFP would be a different story. If it helps you picture things: using a compressor and an air gun on packed sand would be a shaped charge. Firing a bullet at the same sand would be an EFP. I hope that last comparison didnt confuse you :)
@@herrhaber9076 the size of a bean tin and would smash clean through our chalenger two MBT imagine ! Was just a copper plate and some explosives with a detonator! the hardest part for the insurgents was not pulling out the detonator when covering it in expanded foam to look like a rock
@@JohnJones-k9d Because anti-armor mines would have been so useful in the type of wars fought in the American wars fought since the 80s... /s This mine is merely a simplified BONUS round fired by an acoustic/vibration triggered mortar. NATO allies already had all the required tech to build those already in 1990 if they wanted to. Hell, it doesn't even use a microwave radar for target-identification , only visual motion detection so it's much more easily fooled/obfuscated.
@@Emtra_ Electric tanks are probably one of the dumbest ideas, they are just too underpowered and need too much maintenance to be effective, let alone the cost of them.
i remember for the first time seeing a video of the full deployment of a POM-2 mine, and was already amazed at how that one works. this one is even more insane
War was always the reason for innovations in these fields. It's tragic as it is but true. Werner von Braun's rockets bombed England before his Mercury, Gemini and Apollo rockets explored space. Well and war pushes medical advancements.
Yeah the IMS stations have been around years, they do more or less the exact same thing. Fires out 2 different types of sublets. It can distinguish what a vehicle is, if its a target vehicle or friendly, it also works on acoustics and can work autonomously or with a soldier. One part goes out into the field and the other half stays at home. Fires out a projectile sublet upwards that spins rapidly over the target area with a infrared beam that spins outwards further and further in a circle searching as it spins for its intended target. Soon as it finds its mark it dets and sends a penetrator straight down into the target as you've just seen in this video.
what everyone seems to be forgetting is tht in a forest environment u dont need fancy mines like that, which can be seen visually and can only work for 10 days, a normal underground anti tank mine would work without batteries and wouldnt be detected by the enemy and the bottom portion of the tank is flat moslty and any shaped charges from below would utterly desteoy the tank
guys, guys everybody end everything you are doing. We got general keyboard over here who knows some shit. For your normal anti tank mine would work just fine, yeah because theres no way that they can check the route right? But tbh, this thing is easily planted by Russian ground drone or recon soldier and its supposed to be ambush mine far away enough from the tank to see it. Another thing is that Russians already doing behind enemy lines drone planting anti personel mines. Few videos can be seen on Rumble because RUclips doesnt allow it for some reason. They plant it on trenches during night or on tree lines.
It's an improved copy of the hornet. My last unit that I was Armorer in, I had an M93 Hornet controller in my arms room and we were trained on how to use them. Amazing little piece of tech, but prohibitively expensive to deploy, which is why I'm certain Russia has very few of these in use. That's probably why no footage as of yet of them being used. The Volcano system referenced in the hornet video is a helicopter mounted mine discharger that can blanket areas with multiple mine types. I'm glad Ukraine is hard at work creating their own now thanks to Russia donating a few.
Ukraine creating... Its industry is in ruins, they cant produce an arty shell. Ukraine decommunizated itself pretty well long before russian invasion. Even world-renowned Antonov Aircraft is more dead than alive. They cannot create, constantly destroying what was given by others.
These things can’t be “2021 new” as these exact same concept were in a game called “Combat Arms” since 2010. And yes, near identical model and in the game, the things would bounce up in the air as well.
so does this thing have a long battery life even with all those sensors and microphones running and processing? seems to me like these things will go inert with months passing.
Yes the US ones are turned on and off as needed and the waiting lifetime is weeks or so and the operational lifetime is a few days depending on temperatures.
For something to be activated by vibrations I don't think the battery needs to be running. If it's activated by vibrations and then boots the mics and software I think it should be able to last a pretty long time considering how big it is.
Clever idea, like a deadly Amazon Alexa. Can def see why it would be much more effective to make these now vs the 80s (advanced in area acoustic sensors & miniaturization). Would assume these are still pretty expensive to make/deploy esp with all the sanctions. Wonder what the cost is
Western Countries have supplied SMArt 155 and BONUS ammunition which uses MMW radar and infrared (SMART 155) and LIDAR ,Infrared (BONUS) to destroy tanks using EFP perpetrators. These technology was perfected by the US by 1993 in the form of SADARM "Sense and Destroy ARMor". This is application of the technology to a land land mine (effectively a mortar) using acoustic and seismic sensors.
@@TheArmourersBench I mean, 70mm should probably be enough for roof armor but that statement surprised me, too. What an interesting device, id love to dick around with one
This us old technology that goes back to the late 1960s. The USA had a secret pattern analysis and recognition sensor program that were used along the Ho Chi Min trail. Adding a munition package was the next logical step.
Anyone seen a slomo video of Russia’s 2K25 Krasnopol laser guided artillery at work? Bloody amazing seeing a artillery shell make an obvious detour to hit a tank.
New slant on an old idea, delivering the mines from artillery to have them fall by parachute to be magnetically attracted and once locked on fires penetrator from above
I wonder what the cost and weight impact is for the top attack feature and if this couldn’t be traded for increased power. Even front glacis can be penetrated with a strong enough duplex charge. On a separate note, I don’t see “turtle tanks” doing well against remotly formed EFP devices. The steel bar mesh might act as grate armour against an inbound contact detonated device like RPG by cutting the shaped charge, but would have little benefit against remotly firmed EFP such as the weapon here. Anyone see otherwise? BTW in one example I saw where a turtle tank was damaged, there was no ERA beneath the thin metal sheets and mess of rebar.
Could it differentiate a MBT from a wheeled vehicle, or even different kind of engines ? if not, i suppose it has some anti manipulation measures to make sure the ennemy doesn't capture it and return it against your armor...
Interesting and neat concept. I'd have some concerns about it though. It's very big and due to its' nature has to be in open area and cannot be obscured from above. Theoretically infantry would have to do look for it which isn't ideal, however if Ukrainians would encounter these in some large quantities, and if they would be facing difficulties with using infantry to find these, then it shouldn't be problem for them to use even cheap commercial drones flying low to look for these mines. They're big enough that you could spot them from the air even if you'd be relatively high.
@@SoloRenegade Wasn't that just prototype? At any rate, if it was designed decades ago then my concern still applies. In the current battlefield conditions in Ukraine, it should be quite easy to spot them with drone.
@@fanta4897 no, it was not just a prototype. It was being taught o frontline soldiers decades after being a prototype. you don't give prototypes to trainees during peacetime to train on 1-2 decades after something was a prototype and still call it a prototype. The US army was capable of fielding it, but never did. the US doesn't use mines as they are defensive weapons and we've never fought a war in which such a mine was useful since its development. also, mines are widely frowned upon. Yes, if you have a whole field covered in these that can start to stand out like a sore thumb as they are not buried and reasonably large. But one or two strategically placed can be effective. But they are defensive only. you place them when expecting an enemy advance on your position. but these mines are more expensive to, with lower probability of kill, as you have to be sure the enemy will approach it otherwise it's wasted. Air power, artillery, drone strikes, AT missiles, etc. are more cost effective, and better for advancing. The US hornet mine has a few days to 2week self destruct to avoid littering lands with mines after a war. so if it never finds a target or is never retrieved, it is lost. Waste of money if it self destructs, and it's not cheap. Whereas something like a javelin, NLAW, etc can be used both offensively and defensively and has greater range from point of firing.
I have to wonder if lack of evidence of operational use of this weapon means that, like it’s much earlier American predecessor, it doesn’t really work well.
Where would such evidence come from? Drones have built in cameras so there's always video evidence of them hitting their targets. These mines are supposed to stay hidden for days or months and attack a passing tank without any warning, someone would have to record it by accident.
we were still training on teh US Hornet mine in 2004 and beyond, don't make teh mistake of thinking it was shelved. We have just had no use for it in our modern conflicts. the US largely has no need to deploy mines of any type. It is a defensive weapon, US is offensive.
@@TheArmourersBench they are not using them in masses, thats for sure and iirc these mines can be destroyed by a signal from their device which can arm them or unarm them. Nearly all new mines have ability to being tracked tbh.
whats the batterie life after deployment?, what happens after the batterie runs out? Are they gooing to selfdestruct, or can someone pick them up, change the batterie, and redeploy them?
sounds like something out of star wars for that supposedly 2nd army in the world, no doubt a general or two bought nice villas in Italy or Spain thanks to research that went into this
@@azkrouzreimertz9784 I doubt it. Probably used acoustics to "wake up" and seismic for range, though with 4x acoustic sensors it may be able to do range finding that way. I doubt that either sensor alone would trigger the mine.
@3:28 I originall thought the flat fins were to provide a stable platform, but they clearly dont. Instead those flat fins orientate the device to be upright, after it was thrown on the ground, or landed on the ground, shown @3:06
The Russian mine isn't described as self righting in any available literature and is probably too delicate to be MLRS deployed. But who knows. Thanks for watching!
the way that shaped chemical charge shot down in such a perfect stream. beautiful. but if it actually works and can accurately target and hit a tank, then this is a huge issue for nato.
Pretty effective piece of hardware but I wish they would stop using butterfly mines. Also vacuum bombs, not difficult to see they've been deployed more than once.
@@Artix902 T64 BV is from 1985. Since then, after the fall of the Soviet Union Ukraine continued to upgrade their T64. They continued with the T64BM2, T64U (with T80 targeting)... Latest is the T64 BM Bulat of which there are only 75 units. About 12000 T64 were produced in total (all variants). As of June 2022, among the 460 Ukrainian T64 around 133 BV, 4 B1M and 6 BM Bulat were either captured or destroyed.
For those who are asking how does this thing know who is friendly and who is enemy it is simple. Friendly vehicles will have an acoustic emitter with certain "key" frequency which the mine will recognise as friendly and disarm the mine.
When exactly would you use this mine? It's too big and heavy for special forces to deploy behind enemy lines. It doesn't look particularly air droppable as it looks a bit fragile. You can't use it to hold a position or protect your flanks for more than a few days due to battery life. It strikes me that the only obvious time that you would use this mine would be when you are retreating !! Mmm, that might make it a bit difficult to sell to the generals.
A selling point is likely, that it can cover quite an area. Or when you got terraint where it is hard to dig in mines, but easy to hide one of those. Overall mines are quite a mess anyway and should be used rarely if at all...
That looks a very complicated bit of hardware, labour intensive to build & each in it’s own wooden transport crate suggests it may not be very robust in transit.
Javelin has low penetration so ERA on top of tank protects perfectly against it. For tandem Javelin charges Russia now makes second layer of ERA on special platform 50 cm higher than first ERA layer
Traditional AT blast mines do that. But it takes several minutes to dig in each mine, and you have to lay several to achieve the necessary density or ‘stopping power’. The advantage of smart mines like this is that one mine can cover a large area so it’s comparatively quick to achieve the necessary coverage
@@bob_the_bomb4508 also, traditionally an advancing unit only had to clear the actual path or road of mines. Now, they may have to cover quite some distance out to either side, which multiplies the effort needed and significantly slows any advance through mined areas.
Thanks for watching, check out the accompanying article for this video here: armourersbench.com/2022/09/18/ptkm-1r-russias-most-advanced-anti-tank-mine/
If you'd like to support the channel check out our Patreon for perks: www.patreon.com/thearmourersbench
Thanks! - Matt
Well that's another trophy for Ukraine 🇺🇦, now it will be sent to UK then the US for examination, take it apart to see how it functions.
@@randygillespie4952 You guys really need some medication.
@@jr.fidelcastro8890 No pal. Were for Ukraine to Neutralize all the Orc's from the Sovereign Country Land, that Russia Invaded for more land and money in his and the Oligarchs pockets, Ukraine 🇺🇦 will defend it's Land, People and Freedom's from a Dictator, now take your meds.
Interesting. You can assume that something as expensive as this will be protected by anti-personnel mines…
it seams so large though? couldn't it just be shot at range?
@@phill2065 you’d have to spot it first. I’d they just put like a 5gallon bucket in front of it or surround it with trash it’d be all but invisible
I assume it's planted automatically via cassets from aircrafts and MLRS's so there is no way you can leave le funi surprise
I don't believe they're air dropped or MLRS deployed, too delicate. Hand deployed it seems.
@@phill2065 sure, if you can see it.
Super interesting. Weirdly enough a few weeks ago I googled "bouncing anti tank mine" to see if somebody had already invented the concept but couldn't find any references. The concepts makes so much sense. If I were producing BONUS or SMART 155mm rounds, I would look for a way to turn them into mines. The PTKM-1R doesn't seem to go that far up in the air. Launching it at up to 200m would give the warhead a great search radius.
There's actually another video on this channel on the DM22 mine, which is basically a single-shot mortar that lobs a HEAT round at the target. These so-called "off-route mines" are actually pretty commonplace nowadays; no more are anti-tank mines restricted to the roll-over kind.
There is! Should be linked in the video cards. Thanks for watching guys. Glad you're finding this interesting.
@@yetanother9127 Good point about the DM22 lobbing a HEAT round but it's not really what I had in mind. Asside from this PTKM-1R, most (all ?) off-road mines rely on the operator pointing the mine in a very specific direction and then waiting on a target to cross that magic line. Having a mine that you can just place around the area of interest seems increadly usefull. I would probably not even bother too much about it being automaticaly activated. A manual trigger would do very well in many cases.
@@WBtimhawk take a look at the xm1100
Launching it that far in the air would greatly reduce it's penetration potential on the target
I've watched every video I can find on the BONUS round but this is by far the best view I've seen of an explosive penetrator firing and hitting the target. Being able to blast a jet of molten metal that far and accurately from a falling object still blows my mind.
its a very similar concept to the BONUS submunition. while not a mine it works in basically the same manner and is in current use as far as i know.
I'm real curious how long these things can operate once armed. If it's listening to data and crunching the numbers constantly, I could see that sucking down any batteries they might fit in the available space within a few days. And then it still needs power to tilt and slew once a target is identified.
10 days I believe. That's what the company states anyway. I forgot to me rikn that. Thanks for watching!
solar panels for the win
they'd probably have better luck with battery life if they put it in hibernation mode so to speak until a Certain Decibel is reached then it does it full numbers crunching identifying vehicles mode.
@@justnsaliga8518 yeah that makes a lot of sense and is probably how they're doing it.
This very much reminds me of an air-dropped cluster munition developed in the 1980s by the British for use against massed Soviet tank formations. The sub-munitions would fall like wobbly sycamore seeds to scan a large area. If a tank was detected the sub-munition would detonate and send an explosively formed projectile through the top of the tank. If no tank was detected and the sub-munition made it to the ground, it would act like a directional anti-tank mine.
CBU-197
The BL755
?
That was US made
According to Wikipedia, the CBU-97 is US made and does something similar, but the sub munitions are all supposed to self destruct before hitting the ground. I'd love a citation on anything that turns straight into a mine on landing.
CBU-100 ("Rockeye"). Use by the US in the Vietnam War. Way before the ".....1980's by the British" blah blah blah.
Rabotajte Bratja, rabotajte 🚀💥🔥
Sosi
Brutal. Usually people riding on tank tops think they're fairly protected from AT mines since the tank track will absorb it. This completely flips that.
I imagine this would be fairly easily countered with people walking in front looking for this. It's pretty big and has to be in a somewhat open area.
Doing that assumes good infantry/tank coordination, and I don't really think either side has shown particularly coordinated efforts.
But then you don't have the speed or armour a tank.
@@SuperFunkmachine if you don't coordinate your armor with infantry, you don't have any tanks because they're all destroyed!
@@ScottKenny1978 If your way to deal with anti tank mines is to get have the infantry get out an walk in front like its WW1 then your not using either right.
Anti tank mine are mixed with anti personnel ones and are covered by some form of observation.
@@SuperFunkmachine and how exactly do you suggest to search for off route mines that can be fired from up to 30m away from the vehicle in question?
maybe the reason why this mine hasn't been shown in action, is due to the fact that the ukranians and russians use a lot of the same equipment. (T-72's ect) so either its not in the autistic database or there's fears of friendly fire.
Interestingly, many years ago Norway was looking into maybe purchasing an acoustically triggered off-route mine that was said to differentiate between different vehicles based on sound profiles. I forget which one, maybe the German model. Anyway, they needed to test the manufacturer's claim so asked the Russians if they would please send one tank across the border for a dry fire test. The Russians obliged, of course they were just as eager to know whether the system worked or not. That's the only time a Russian armoured vehicle has taken part in a military exercise on Norwegian soil, I recall there was a fair bit of media attention at the time. Don't know if the mine worked or not, but I'm pretty sure we didn't buy any.
Acoustic you mean.
@@Twirlyhead no, seismic.
The explosions were registered on seismographs in Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
maybe the mine wasn't shown in action is because like many other things from Russia, it is vaporware.
the autistic database? 😂
that thing is awesome. reminds me of those smart cluster munitions that can actively seek out targets once deployed
That is some scifi shit right there 😯
I've started to have a healthy respect for explosively formed penetrators since I learned about Nuclear EFPs, a 1 kiloton nuke can throw a 20 tonne penetrator at 9 km/s IIRC.
Spacedocks did a video about it 😅
The EFP used by Iraqi insurgents were only the size of the large bean tins but could pen everything we had in coalition the Armour
@@ifv2089 People keep talking about Iraqi insurgents using EFP's when they cant make the difference between an EFP and a shaped charge. Go figure...
@@herrhaber9076 paired up with passive IR sensor rolled in the sand coverd in fresh expanding foam and a straw for the apature attached to a transmitter and turned on outside of the ecm bubble from kilometer away
There deadly
@@ifv2089 An EFP as the name implies uses explosive to form a projectile from a ductile material. The liner material in a shaped charge isnt really what defeats the armor, it only contributes.
Standoff distances are also extremely different since the solid slug from an EFP wont dissipate as fast as the jet from a shaped charge (you can see that in the video).
In reality they both use different effects. An EFP is closer to a Claymore mine than an RPG for example.
I could build a shaped charge in minute if necessary. Building an effective EFP would be a different story.
If it helps you picture things: using a compressor and an air gun on packed sand would be a shaped charge. Firing a bullet at the same sand would be an EFP.
I hope that last comparison didnt confuse you :)
@@herrhaber9076 the size of a bean tin and would smash clean through our chalenger two MBT imagine ! Was just a copper plate and some explosives with a detonator! the hardest part for the insurgents was not pulling out the detonator when covering it in expanded foam to look like a rock
Seems to be most advanced out of all automatic anti tank devices .
For the price of one you can have 30 normal mines and no battery change needed sometimes simple is better
Bro did you watch the video? the US made a system better than this one in the 1980s. Who do you think Russia got all this tech from?
@@Austin-cx2xeyes of course you did that’s why we have never seen them ever.
@@Austin-cx2xe ahhahahahahahaha cope like this never ends lol.
@@JohnJones-k9d Because anti-armor mines would have been so useful in the type of wars fought in the American wars fought since the 80s... /s
This mine is merely a simplified BONUS round fired by an acoustic/vibration triggered mortar. NATO allies already had all the required tech to build those already in 1990 if they wanted to. Hell, it doesn't even use a microwave radar for target-identification , only visual motion detection so it's much more easily fooled/obfuscated.
Interesting that the depicted target is an Abrams tank
well, what other tank could it have been?
@@phill2065 Hmmmmm 🤔 Tankette?
@@phill2065 t-64 or leopard 2
well its a russian mine.. of course its gonna be USA vs Russia duh
It will be really interesting to discover this mine's weaknesses and the counter measures used to defeat it.
I'm guessing that its biggest weakness is going to be in target detection and identification
Cope cage?
Rubber tracks and electric motors, stealth tanks in practise for that mine.
Just walk up to it and take it.
@@Emtra_ Electric tanks are probably one of the dumbest ideas, they are just too underpowered and need too much maintenance to be effective, let alone the cost of them.
i remember for the first time seeing a video of the full deployment of a POM-2 mine, and was already amazed at how that one works.
this one is even more insane
Very interesting video. Please keep this great content coming.
Imagine if we used all this hard work to feed, heal, and explore
War was always the reason for innovations in these fields. It's tragic as it is but true. Werner von Braun's rockets bombed England before his Mercury, Gemini and Apollo rockets explored space. Well and war pushes medical advancements.
Yeah the IMS stations have been around years, they do more or less the exact same thing. Fires out 2 different types of sublets. It can distinguish what a vehicle is, if its a target vehicle or friendly, it also works on acoustics and can work autonomously or with a soldier. One part goes out into the field and the other half stays at home. Fires out a projectile sublet upwards that spins rapidly over the target area with a infrared beam that spins outwards further and further in a circle searching as it spins for its intended target. Soon as it finds its mark it dets and sends a penetrator straight down into the target as you've just seen in this video.
what everyone seems to be forgetting is tht in a forest environment u dont need fancy mines like that, which can be seen visually and can only work for 10 days, a normal underground anti tank mine would work without batteries and wouldnt be detected by the enemy and the bottom portion of the tank is flat moslty and any shaped charges from below would utterly desteoy the tank
guys, guys everybody end everything you are doing. We got general keyboard over here who knows some shit. For your normal anti tank mine would work just fine, yeah because theres no way that they can check the route right? But tbh, this thing is easily planted by Russian ground drone or recon soldier and its supposed to be ambush mine far away enough from the tank to see it. Another thing is that Russians already doing behind enemy lines drone planting anti personel mines. Few videos can be seen on Rumble because RUclips doesnt allow it for some reason. They plant it on trenches during night or on tree lines.
I wonder if the Russians are having problems producing these now with sanctions effecting the import of integrated circuits?
they make there own chips for weapons its in russian law
No problem for Russians but west have problems on electronic parts.
for such things, cheap microcontrollers freely sold on aliexpress are enough
Russia has the most resources on this planet.
Why do you think NATO tries to pillage it over and over again...
@@miriamweller812 very true miriam
sounds like it would be very easy to mimic vibration and noise inputs on a decoy and just pop all these off
It's an improved copy of the hornet. My last unit that I was Armorer in, I had an M93 Hornet controller in my arms room and we were trained on how to use them. Amazing little piece of tech, but prohibitively expensive to deploy, which is why I'm certain Russia has very few of these in use. That's probably why no footage as of yet of them being used. The Volcano system referenced in the hornet video is a helicopter mounted mine discharger that can blanket areas with multiple mine types. I'm glad Ukraine is hard at work creating their own now thanks to Russia donating a few.
I NOGO'd the hornet :( I set the self destruct timer for 30 months instead of 30 days
For me it looks like a mine variant of the German SMART 155 Ammunition. Which exists since the early 90ties.
Ukraine creating... Its industry is in ruins, they cant produce an arty shell. Ukraine decommunizated itself pretty well long before russian invasion. Even world-renowned Antonov Aircraft is more dead than alive. They cannot create, constantly destroying what was given by others.
Footage of mine?! How?!
Russia is also actively studying NATO trophies
I wonder how long it can sense the surrounding environment until the battery dies? 🤔
These things can’t be “2021 new” as these exact same concept were in a game called “Combat Arms” since 2010. And yes, near identical model and in the game, the things would bounce up in the air as well.
That rapidly falling back part at the end sure has changed recently.
lol
lmao
Your comment aged like unpasturized milk
Is this are those russian anti-tank shovel that everyone is talking about?
Nice mine. Surprising that they aren't being fielded in numbers.
To expensive not enough chips and for the price of one you can have 30 normal mines that do the same job and you don’t have to change the battery
Reminds me of a face hugger in looks and the way it jumps at a tank
Tankhugger
Great video
Thank you for watching.
My question is is how long can these things sit before they run out of power, same wity the other types mentioned
Pretty impressive, I wonder what unit cost is
No source for cost sadly but definitely much more than a standard TM mine!
About 10% of the US equivalent...
@@Geekofarm how come its cheaper than the US equivalent ?
@@rrosski Because it's designed to be 90% as effective, deployed in larger volumes, and mass produced on demand by state arsenals.
but how effective against ERA? ATGM's use tandem warheads to detonate and defeat ERA, is a single warhead still effective these days?
The only nation roof mounting ERA is Russia.
so does this thing have a long battery life even with all those sensors and microphones running and processing?
seems to me like these things will go inert with months passing.
Yes the US ones are turned on and off as needed and the waiting lifetime is weeks or so and the operational lifetime is a few days depending on temperatures.
For something to be activated by vibrations I don't think the battery needs to be running. If it's activated by vibrations and then boots the mics and software I think it should be able to last a pretty long time considering how big it is.
Там таймер самоуничтожения она не будет ждать вас долго, ну максимум неделю
A couple of weeks apparently.
Clever idea, like a deadly Amazon Alexa.
Can def see why it would be much more effective to make these now vs the 80s (advanced in area acoustic sensors & miniaturization).
Would assume these are still pretty expensive to make/deploy esp with all the sanctions. Wonder what the cost is
Western Countries have supplied SMArt 155 and BONUS ammunition which uses MMW radar and infrared (SMART 155) and LIDAR ,Infrared (BONUS) to destroy tanks using EFP perpetrators.
These technology was perfected by the US by 1993 in the form of SADARM "Sense and Destroy ARMor". This is application of the technology to a land land mine (effectively a mortar) using acoustic and seismic sensors.
isnt this just a M93 Hornet mine copy?
A little more evolved by the look of it but similar concept.
I'm not buying it, there is no way they are only getting 70mm of penetration with an efp propelled by almost a kilo of HE or am I misunderstanding?
That's the penetration stated by the company, I wouldn't be surprised if it was more.
@@TheArmourersBench I mean, 70mm should probably be enough for roof armor but that statement surprised me, too. What an interesting device, id love to dick around with one
Looks like a top attacks like the swedish BONUS artillery shells.
This us old technology that goes back to the late 1960s. The USA had a secret pattern analysis and recognition sensor program that were used along the Ho Chi Min trail. Adding a munition package was the next logical step.
ruSSias most advanced anti tank mine with no doubt, full of western components it shouldn’t have been in possession of since 2014.
Of course, it was filled by many high tech western components, the reason it failed
So you just need a handcart with a loud music box, making vehicle noises to defuse the mine, letting it destroy a handcart. Cool!
Yes but maybe making noise in a war zone isn't the best idea
Have a drone with loud speakers fly in front of the tanks.
@@steur5693 they can either hear you from your counter measures or hear you when the mine goes off amd destroys your tank
@@chickenfishhybrid44 that's fair
А ты не думал что там комплект датчиков вибрации и ёмкости?
Using a ground thumper, or directional to the ground bass speaker, CAN set them off, while a distance away...Achilles Heel? Their acoustic sensor...
Anyone seen a slomo video of Russia’s 2K25 Krasnopol laser guided artillery at work? Bloody amazing seeing a artillery shell make an obvious detour to hit a tank.
I was wondering what the munition was that I would see detonating in the air and shooting at the ground in Ukraine footage. Thanks
That's brilliant. Now they stick them in a bush near a road and it doesn't have to be on a road. That makes minesweepers almost obsolete.
New slant on an old idea, delivering the mines from artillery to have them fall by parachute to be magnetically attracted and once locked on fires penetrator from above
3:01 not a mine, but the CBU-97 Sensor Fuzed Weapon is an area anti-armour top attack submunition type missile
That's from an M93 Hornet demo film so I don't think it's a CBU-97.
I wonder what the cost and weight impact is for the top attack feature and if this couldn’t be traded for increased power. Even front glacis can be penetrated with a strong enough duplex charge.
On a separate note, I don’t see “turtle tanks” doing well against remotly formed EFP devices. The steel bar mesh might act as grate armour against an inbound contact detonated device like RPG by cutting the shaped charge, but would have little benefit against remotly firmed EFP such as the weapon here. Anyone see otherwise?
BTW in one example I saw where a turtle tank was damaged, there was no ERA beneath the thin metal sheets and mess of rebar.
informative, great content
Could it differentiate a MBT from a wheeled vehicle, or even different kind of engines ?
if not, i suppose it has some anti manipulation measures to make sure the ennemy doesn't capture it and return it against your armor...
this info is so un-fucking-real, I just can't believe it, dawg! thanks for hosting!! 🤓🤓🤓
Thanks for watching !
Interesting and neat concept. I'd have some concerns about it though. It's very big and due to its' nature has to be in open area and cannot be obscured from above. Theoretically infantry would have to do look for it which isn't ideal, however if Ukrainians would encounter these in some large quantities, and if they would be facing difficulties with using infantry to find these, then it shouldn't be problem for them to use even cheap commercial drones flying low to look for these mines. They're big enough that you could spot them from the air even if you'd be relatively high.
US has had these Hornet mines for decades.
@@SoloRenegade Wasn't that just prototype? At any rate, if it was designed decades ago then my concern still applies. In the current battlefield conditions in Ukraine, it should be quite easy to spot them with drone.
@@fanta4897 no, it was not just a prototype. It was being taught o frontline soldiers decades after being a prototype. you don't give prototypes to trainees during peacetime to train on 1-2 decades after something was a prototype and still call it a prototype. The US army was capable of fielding it, but never did. the US doesn't use mines as they are defensive weapons and we've never fought a war in which such a mine was useful since its development. also, mines are widely frowned upon.
Yes, if you have a whole field covered in these that can start to stand out like a sore thumb as they are not buried and reasonably large. But one or two strategically placed can be effective. But they are defensive only. you place them when expecting an enemy advance on your position. but these mines are more expensive to, with lower probability of kill, as you have to be sure the enemy will approach it otherwise it's wasted.
Air power, artillery, drone strikes, AT missiles, etc. are more cost effective, and better for advancing. The US hornet mine has a few days to 2week self destruct to avoid littering lands with mines after a war. so if it never finds a target or is never retrieved, it is lost. Waste of money if it self destructs, and it's not cheap. Whereas something like a javelin, NLAW, etc can be used both offensively and defensively and has greater range from point of firing.
This is like the US M93 WAM mine.
Reminds me of the photos of dud Russian sensor fuzed munitions in Syria.
Just need to use a loud projectile deployed over the mined area to set of all these in a path.
Amazing what engineers can achieve. The US have a similar bomb that can cleanup whole tank columns
Такие вещи есть не только у США, это технологии 80х годов
I wonder if employing an acoustic cancelling device along with attaching hammers to the wheels could confuse/jam this mine.
Not really, it has vibration sensors so it won't even attack a car or infantry with a loud music from loudspeakers
Very interesting! Subbed!
I have to wonder if lack of evidence of operational use of this weapon means that, like it’s much earlier American predecessor, it doesn’t really work well.
More likely too expensive to just scatter around. If you want to mine a street there are cheaper options.
Where would such evidence come from? Drones have built in cameras so there's always video evidence of them hitting their targets. These mines are supposed to stay hidden for days or months and attack a passing tank without any warning, someone would have to record it by accident.
Interesting, never seen or known these before.
we were still training on teh US Hornet mine in 2004 and beyond, don't make teh mistake of thinking it was shelved. We have just had no use for it in our modern conflicts. the US largely has no need to deploy mines of any type. It is a defensive weapon, US is offensive.
That's pretty ingenious
How does mine know friend or foe ? Do they keep notes where they put the mines ?
They definitely should be keeping records on locations, whether they do or not is another matter sadly.
@@TheArmourersBench they are not using them in masses, thats for sure and iirc these mines can be destroyed by a signal from their device which can arm them or unarm them. Nearly all new mines have ability to being tracked tbh.
L9ve this interesting little channel good one mate
whats the batterie life after deployment?, what happens after the batterie runs out? Are they gooing to selfdestruct, or can someone pick them up, change the batterie, and redeploy them?
Supposed to be 10 days, no mention of self destruct from manufacturer sources.
sounds like something out of star wars for that supposedly 2nd army in the world, no doubt a general or two bought nice villas in Italy or Spain thanks to research that went into this
Idiot alert here but couldnt you fly a drone with speakers playing engine sounds and fly over these mines? Maybe the sound is enough to trigger them
I'd expect that it needs both acoustic and seismic triggers.
@@ScottKenny1978 but does all dirt lead seismic waves equally? Maybe one system is made to overide the other one
@@azkrouzreimertz9784 I doubt it. Probably used acoustics to "wake up" and seismic for range, though with 4x acoustic sensors it may be able to do range finding that way.
I doubt that either sensor alone would trigger the mine.
It was acoustic And seismic activated, meaning it requires both events to happen together
@3:28 I originall thought the flat fins were to provide a stable platform, but they clearly dont. Instead those flat fins orientate the device to be upright, after it was thrown on the ground, or landed on the ground, shown @3:06
The Russian mine isn't described as self righting in any available literature and is probably too delicate to be MLRS deployed. But who knows. Thanks for watching!
Thanks
the way that shaped chemical charge shot down in such a perfect stream. beautiful. but if it actually works and can accurately target and hit a tank, then this is a huge issue for nato.
Derivative of the US hornet mine.
Bouncing Boris?
Good potential nickname
just send an autonomous loud speaker into suspected mine area and set them off.
I would imagine it would run out of power after sitting for long periods.
wonder how long till the battery runs out
sci-fi looking stuff
Pretty effective piece of hardware but I wish they would stop using butterfly mines. Also vacuum bombs, not difficult to see they've been deployed more than once.
The wooden shipping crate tell a lot
and they have exactly 12 of them
Lucky they have enough other stuff to defend there people.
no... they made another one today so its 13... it was shown last year so what do you expect?
Scary piece of kit but Russia can afford about half a dozen of them. Conscripts with sticky bombs maybe.
They both use t72
Ok
Ukraine has mostly T64 BV
@@Artix902 T64 BV is from 1985. Since then, after the fall of the Soviet Union Ukraine continued to upgrade their T64.
They continued with the T64BM2, T64U (with T80 targeting)...
Latest is the T64 BM Bulat of which there are only 75 units.
About 12000 T64 were produced in total (all variants).
As of June 2022, among the 460 Ukrainian T64 around 133 BV, 4 B1M and 6 BM Bulat were either captured or destroyed.
For those who are asking how does this thing know who is friendly and who is enemy it is simple. Friendly vehicles will have an acoustic emitter with certain "key" frequency which the mine will recognise as friendly and disarm the mine.
So the mine has a data base of enemy vehicles, which, presumably, would not include the mostly Soviet vehicles that both sides are using?!?!
Saw some footage of it working, very brutal. Then again it may have been an air burst shell. 🤔
very interesting👏👏😯
When exactly would you use this mine? It's too big and heavy for special forces to deploy behind enemy lines. It doesn't look particularly air droppable as it looks a bit fragile. You can't use it to hold a position or protect your flanks for more than a few days due to battery life. It strikes me that the only obvious time that you would use this mine would be when you are retreating !! Mmm, that might make it a bit difficult to sell to the generals.
A selling point is likely, that it can cover quite an area. Or when you got terraint where it is hard to dig in mines, but easy to hide one of those.
Overall mines are quite a mess anyway and should be used rarely if at all...
>Ukraine places skeet shooters atop tanks
That looks a very complicated bit of hardware, labour intensive to build & each in it’s own wooden transport crate suggests it may not be very robust in transit.
Have you seen the Javelin packaging?
@@SmotritelMayaka29 Yes! And maybe that’s why they’re so expensive👍
nice video
So, Javelin also does 'top down' firing. Why don't tank builders make the top of tanks more armoured to stop 'top down' attacks?
Javelin has low penetration so ERA on top of tank protects perfectly against it. For tandem Javelin charges Russia now makes second layer of ERA on special platform 50 cm higher than first ERA layer
Nice, go get em!
Amazing
Really advanced shovels and washingmachines
it bounces too far in the air for the shaped charge to pierce any modern tank, besides maybe t62 without era on its roof.
so a speaker on an rc plate with a bit of steel on top ...done mines gone ...simple ...orks to easy to outsmart for sure
If santa was a giant the moose would be his rudolph.
The US has had weapons since the early 90s
The US have had weapons for a very long time, no? ;)
Last I checked, they have had them all the way to the late 1700’s
Never adopted the m93 hornet so it is not inventory but the new version is being proofed now
@@jeffreyprezalar220 I was trained to deploy the Hornet mine 20yrs ago
is it artillery deployable?
No, too delicate.
That's a lot of tech just for a at mine, why not blow off a track so the crew have to spend time fixing it.
depends, if the cost of making the mine outweighs the cost of building a new tank, then yeah.
A track can be repaired.
Traditional AT blast mines do that. But it takes several minutes to dig in each mine, and you have to lay several to achieve the necessary density or ‘stopping power’. The advantage of smart mines like this is that one mine can cover a large area so it’s comparatively quick to achieve the necessary coverage
@@bob_the_bomb4508 also, traditionally an advancing unit only had to clear the actual path or road of mines. Now, they may have to cover quite some distance out to either side, which multiplies the effort needed and significantly slows any advance through mined areas.
@@Kaboomf that’s certainly true…