It's my favorite weapon. Can't wait until the upcoming counter failure gets to a "fever" pitch and massing occurs. Then we will see the crispy critters get going. I also like the thermite versions, that get the metal gone. Hope to get to see more such efficient usage soon. Graham, has yet to run out of the ladt Ukranian, but he's getting close. Slava zuchinni.
The interesting thing about the TOS-1 is that it was supposed to be operated by Soviet CBRN troops. The logic was that you can’t have contaminated ground from chemical weapons or biological agents if you vaporize it with thermobaric warheads.
Flame operations has always been the purview of chemical troops in most armies. It had zero to do with decontamination. As a US Army chemical dude one of my jobs was to make napalm and fill munitions and flame throwers.
As soon as you said that Ukraine captured some of them to use against Russia... my first question was "and how much ammo?" I'd doubt there was any significant use of these by the Ukrainians.
Ukraine had a lot of Soviet munitions production, which is a big part of how they've been able to keep so many captured tanks and artillery pieces firing. That said, I suspect these are more valuable as a source of tank parts than for redeployment.
highly doubt it, it's not so easy to reproduce something like that fast. Also there is ammo shortage in entire West at the moment - they will not even start something new to produce since there is not enough ammo for current howitzers and tanks. Also UA have no air support and using TOS short range artillery without air support is suicide.
We, the USAF, tested this airbomb on Loatian villages in the early 1970s. I had a patient (I'm a doc) who became an ordinance engineer but who had to go onto the ground to assess the effectiveness of this experiment. Everything was dead and exploded, men, women children, goats, beatles, chickens. He was sickened.
Are it's effects horrifying. Yes. Is it hideously effective against trenches and bunkers? Yes. But is it a war crime to use such a weapon? No. (Unless used against civilians).
The use of thermobaric weaponry was designated a war crime back in the 1980ies but because they are so effective nobody actually went as far as to outright ban them. The UNO expressed deep concern about it, as they usually do instead of actually doing something about the matter. And that's that for now
Bro being destroyed inside of a bunker is terrible for anybody soldier inside it if the bomb doesn't kill you then the collapsed concrete/steel will. Via crushed alive.
You are actually wrong. The Geniva convention since the 70s have banned all use near or at Cities or any sort of Human settlements due to how indiscriminate they are.
@@chill29394 they both use rockets to deliver their incendiary loads and this is their main characteristics. Obviously the scale is different, but not the core functionality.
@@chill29394 The TOS-1 does have plain incendiary rockets though, which confirms @zbyzanna's point. That the Americans for one reason or another choose to never develop a FAE-warhead to the M202 is hardly Kremlin's fault.
The range issue is less about precision than payload dimensions: This type of warhead is very heavy and takes up a lot of space. To make it longer range would either require an enormous rocket engine, a glide phase (which would make it easy to interdict), or a powered glide phase (massive increase to complexity for minimal gain) -- all of which would massively increase the size of each munition and limit the size of vlley per launcher. These tradeoffs are really hard to balance out, and it is clear which tradeoff the Russian design went with.
Oh no, there are thermobaric rockets for 300mm systems (smerch, tornado-s) same range as othr types. For other 220mm systems (uragan and tos-2) - more range than tos-1a. So there are plenty of thermobaric mlrs options in Russian arsenal, so tos-1a is a special tool, because thermobarics are only effective if there's precision and/or decent grouping. You have to hit quite close to target for any effect apart from intimidation and smoke.
You've mangled the "Solntsepek" even more spectacularly than one could expect :) Literally, the world means "sunblaze", which is more passing than Buratino for sure.
Seeing TOS impact grids filmed up close from Russian drone POV especially in the humid conditions being fought right now let's you see the shockwave front from each exploding warhead.... That really drives home how wicked strong these weapons must be. The stories of corpses being found with lungs ripped out from the overpressure seem likely :/
Hell they are waaaaay too close to enemy lines-just 6km range-with drones EVERYWHERE-who the hell would want to crew THAT The fuel part of this explosive-would be ignited by a tiny drone warhead-a grenade-not like normal HE which require significant explosive to detonate Yeah I would not want to crew THAT-imagine the fireball when all the rockets go off-on the crew- Drones everywhere 155 precision munitions available-not for me-too little range-they will find you
@@charlesoboyle4787 That is why they mounted it on a tank chassis. They literally designed their weapons to be used in a nuclear conflict with Nato because they where convinced, that one is inevitable. I expect that tank to be airtight. The operators of that system might actually survive while any soft targets outside are getting ripped to pieces. There is a reason for these things not being given to normal infantry - or PMCs...
Yep. Ukraine receiving 200B and getting beat on by budget weapons and taking (to some sources) 10:1 losses. This thing going on is stupid. Ukraine can't win this war and maybe if nato stayed minding their own business and if Minsk accords were followed the world would be a better place.
@@АлакПатрова lmao, 10:1? Russian army one of the weakest army in the world, and they even cant beat small country like Ukraine in the direct warfare. You are listen to much propaganda bro
The TOS1 is "identified as a flamethrower" because that's the translation from Russian to English. Flamethrower means something different in Russian than it does in English. It's kind of like their new mining system, it's called "agriculture." That doesn't mean they're planting daisies, the Russian word identifies a method of seeding mines over a large area.
Nah, funny names are just that, nothing to do with translation. And certainly agriculture has nothing to do with laying mines, just as flamethrower in russian mass culture is not a missile. For example most artillery systems are called after flowers species - pion, giacint, magnolia, droc, etc But some are not - msta (name of a river), acacia (tree), coalicia (coalition). Same goes for some police equipment - one baton is called "an argument", underwear - "tiger", teargas - "bird-cherry", handcuffs - "tenderness"
@@husa5777 вы сами не понимаете о чем говорите. Они пишут про flamethrower. А у нас она именно так и называется тяжелая огнеметная система. Вопрос к слову огнеметная. И в русском языке к этому есть вопросы.
I've seen Australian Air mounted Thermobaric weapons being demonstrated. Even from over a KM away, this thing going off is very powerful, and briefly feels like standing next to a gas radiator. I'd hate to be in the middle of an attack by one of these munitions.
"Oh, do you think so? I always told my men that the closer you are to the point of an explosion, the safer you are " Evelyn Waugh. Officers and Gentlemen
You could say beyond a certain point the chance of being KIA decreases the closer you are to the source of the explosion... ...because the chance of being completely vaporised by it and classed MIA increases
I loved how he showed the "Siege of Sevastopol" of 1854-1855 and talked about german nazy attacks. Yes, that poor city was sieged more than once or twice.
@Rex yes, I mean those ones, as these are the more dangerous ones for tanks and artillery. The other ones, like canon and mrap, they need reconnaissance drones to spot them.
@@galimbertino4939 Even though Israel hasn't yet given export licence for Spike-missiles to Ukraine, the newest variants of those have 25 km range. Even the ER II -version has 10 km range.
@@atklm1 I don't think Israel wants to get into this! 1. Even though the president of Ukraine is a Jew, but in Israel they know who this Jew supports, they don't have very nice patches on their shoulders, for Israel. 2. this is Israel's vulnerability, Russia clearly sticks to neutrality in the Middle East, balancing both Iran, Turkey and Israel, it will not be good if Russia is forced to take sides. 25% of Israel's population is Russian-speaking, many of course from Ukraine, but still most of them are from Russia. All the players in the Middle East are neutral, they stay out of the Ukrainian swamp - good for everyone.
Its definitely useful against dug in targets and in urban warfare against enemy strongholds. It substitutes air power in many scenarios and is insensitive to the presence of strong anti air defenses.
I never understood, like for Azovstal, why Russians didn't use tear gas. I don't see how it can be considered "chemical weapons" when used by police against unarmed people even in democratic countries. Or burning sulphur. They are very unpleasant at concentrations which are far bellow lethal.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et In order to avoid any grey zones, ALL use of gas is prohibited in war. Reason it's allowed by police (who also may use hollow-point ammunition) is that it is relatively unlikely that the police "accidentally" would mix in mustard- or nerve gas into their riot control gear and then claim "it's only tear gas".
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Tear gas isn't that voluminous and can't expand enough in a controlled manner to clear any long corridor or large space. It doesn't hang around that long either by design and dissipates. You need very specialized pumps and other equipment to even concentrate it in a tunnel as the USA found out in the Vietnam war. A simple office door with a rag under it can essentially block its passage. it's meant to discourage a crowd of protestors or smoke out a small car or a bedroom. Nothing more.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et There where civilians of their new provinces in the Azovstal bunker system. War is brutal enough as it is and they had encircled the area. So they decided to just besiege them until they surrender. No need to kill your own for a quick victory when time is on your side. Otherwise, thermobarics might have been used tehre too (although actual bunker systems like that in Azovstal might be immune because of being designed to protect against extreme pressure waves).
I love it that Cappy has to say 'non-firing' on the tiny GOAT guns to pass the RUclips censors. Excellent coverage of an rarely discussed weapon system.
Hello! I am native of Donetsk city and I want to make one point. On 8:42 it's not the explosion of TOS-1/1A/2. It is detonation of ammunition in the air - I know it, because I was in the house on the right side of the video at this moment (Yes, I live there and seeing this video again has triggered me). According to official Russian sources, it's an explosion of 155mm projectile (shell? idk how is it being written in English, sry) shot from Caesar french howtizer. Also, as far as I remeber, Russian army doesn't have shells which'll detonate in the air to cover larger area with shrapnel (for those, who'll say that Russian army is striking the cities under its control). It's not a propaganda or inciting national or political strife comment - only clarification of information from the video, please let's refrain from aggressive comments in any direction, regardless of political views. Thank you!
Russia has guided munitions for their mlrs systems and for the 6inch and 8inch howitzers The reason the TOS has such a short range is because it has far heavier warheads on a relatively small rocket, this allows big boom while being easily transportable and cheap. The fact that the launcher is a tank allows it to get very close to the target with relatively low danger. This is a very smart type of system and there are multiple advantages. The system is also very simple to operate and can very easily be converter to a robot, you set it the target, it automatically uses GPS to drive to the fire position, it fires and then it returns. These advantages mean other armies might want to invest in such a weapon system in the future. It can also work on a naval version, on a big drone boat designed to strike before a landing operation, limiting any risk to your own soldiers and at the same time delivering multiple times the payload of a long range system.
It really doesn't matter that it is a tank because the ammunition is heavily exposed. There is no real advantage, which is why most armies don't do this. Long-range, light mlrs is the best way to invest
There's tons of footage of the TOS-1 strafing treelines and trenches. Leaving behind burnt corpses. I saw one man literally blown out of the treeline. If this thing makes it to your position. You are done for.
A correction: the MOAB is not a thermobaric bomb. It's in the heaviest class of conventional bombs, hence the MO ("massive ordinance") designator. Thermobarics like the BLU-82 don't carry much explosive, just aerosolized fuel that needs to mix with air to become explosive.
.........SO,THERE WAS A MENTIONING MORE THAN A 10 YEARS AGO....ABOUT RUSSIANS MADE THEIR BLU-82 THAT WAS 4 TIMES MORE STRONGER THAN MOAB SO THEY CALLED IN "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS" ........ACTUALLY IT'S PRETTY MUCH ANXIOUS ABOUT MAYBE THEY'LL ALSO START TO DEPLOY THEM
Is it really capturing something if there's basically nothing left? That's like shooting someone in the head and calling it a kidnapping because you're still in possession of the body
@@1stCallipostle its about the Denazification/demilitarization of the Ukraine military. Just like you said 🤣 there is nothing left, no more Ukrainian Bandera boys there left to grind down in that city. Mission complete, to the next city..
The Russian way of war is such a unique way to envision warfare. The Book is also really good on how Russia has defeated every western army ever assembled against their nation. The Russians are truly one of the best militaries in the world and it is not based on spending, or tech, or fire power, just in the way the handle their weaknesses and make em their strengths the way they see things and events differently than us in the west. What they consider winning to what they consider losing. It is truly fascinating.
The secret is in the balance. Moderately harsh life, moderately comfortable. Moderately liberal policy, moderately conservative. To the extent of material values, to the extent of spiritual. Moderately rational development and moderately sensual development. Even the climate is moderate - both heat and cold happen.
@@Lercher-ph7ok Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria - were defeated. France, Great Britain, Japan, Serbia, the USA, Italy - emerged victorious from the war. Russia, which had done so much for the victory of the allies, was not among the victorious countries because of the revolution and Lenin's decree to withdraw from the war, when the fate of Germany was already determined.
That's funny, did you forget about that little conflict called World War 1. Then the Germans almost defeated Russia again in WW2, which would have happened if it weren't for Lend-Lease from the West. Then there was the Cold War. As far as losing to non-Western countries- Poland, Finland, Afghanistan..... Do I need to keep going here?
@@JudgeVandelay Harry Truman made this statement a few days after Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union, as published in The New York Times on June 24, 1941: "If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and thereby let them kill as many of each other as possible." You can also search for "Prescott Bush and Hitler" on Google. He is George Bush's grandfather. If American elites didn't nourish Nazi Germany like a mother breastfeeding, there wouldn't have been a World War II and tens of millions of corpses. There is a popular misconception in the US that America alone defeated Hitler. Well, to tell the truth, America did emerge with the greatest gain as a result of the destruction of Europe and the USSR.
The name of the latest variant of the TOS-1 "Solntsepiok" can be directly translated as Sun Burn, but the the more meaningful English translation should be something like Heat Waive.
I am certain that if a was in an entrenched position, and the enemy told me that they would use this weapon on me, I would retreat or surrender.......what a nightmare!
Current American FAE munitions include the following: BLU-73 FAE I BLU-95 500 lb (230 kg) (FAE-II) BLU-96 2,000 lb (910 kg) (FAE-II) CBU-72 FAE I AGM-114 Hellfire missile XM1060 grenade SMAW-NE round for rocket launcher
Works great, rockets are a serious problem. Currently per target limit is about 3-4 rockets. If its got ammo its definitely a number one target on the battlefield. Will collapse your lungs in the trench if you get caught no problem.
Saying that the oxygen sucking effect adds to the destructive power is like saying that sound of the gunshot adds to the destruction of the bullet. The only upside of using oxygen from the air is that the weapon does not need to carry its oxidizer, but that means the weapon has to make a close to stoichiometric mix with air for the explosion. This is not very ideal because only about 20% of the air is oxygen, so the rest of the air would consume energy to heat up. That means that these explosion are cooler, and less powerful compared to using high efficiency oxidizers. (this creates a non-trivial trade-off) The vacuum is created by the explosion over-expanding (nothing to do with oxygen). Anything which can create lots of hot gas and cool it quickly can create a vacuum effect. The cooling is caused by the very fast expansion of the explosion. This weapon tend to heat up very large amount of air instead of just creating hot gas like more conventional explosives. This largely enhances the vacuum effect.
This kid comparing gunshots and vacuum bombs effect. 😱😂 You cant breath in the area of vaccum you dumbo.. there is no air(oxygen) to gasp because all of them has been exploded. Idk if it can explode your lungs also.
Thanks for the generous dose of engineering mythbusting. The amount of illiteracy amongst the media and various military tech pseudo-experts is absolutely cringe. Worst part being that they proliferate such nonsensical BS, which their audiences proceed to take as gospel.
you wrong in many points but i will say this . matter does not get destroyed for all we know oxygen will remain in air wheather you cool it or get it hot
Few clarifications....When UKR, in breach of Geneva convention, uses buildings and settlements for cover and fire positions, TOS comes in handy. When mentioning 7000 civ casualties in Grozni, just remember 1.6 million of Iraqis of wich 300.000 were kids... or 4 million Vietnamese of wich million were kids.
.......I SLIGHTLY REMEMBER THAT AT END OF 2000'S RUSSIANS CREATED AND TESTED SO CALLED "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS" WHICH WAS THERMOBARIC EQUIVALENT OF 44 TONS OF TNT .....GOODNESS GRACIOUS THAT THEY DIDNT WENT COMPLETELY NUTS TO ALSO DEPLOY THEM
When a military attacks a city full of civilians, the civilians are not collateral damage. They are the target. That's just as true in Aleppo as in Hiroshima.
Hiroshima was packed full of military targets. If they hadn't built them in the city, it wouldn't have been targeted. Yeah, I know, learning history is just soooo hard.
@@nobodyspecial4702 Yup, when I read about that I was actually shocked about it!! At first I thought the US did it to flex their power, but after learning there was a high value target. Honestly if you built military object of any kind in coty...city.... expect your city being targeted for that reason.
A detail I do need to add is that the part about TOS-1As not being fitted with ERA is wrong. The vehicle is normally fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA. Oryxblog meanwhile lists 6 TOS-1As as having been confirmed destroyed damaged, or captured, of which Ukraine has captured 3. These have likely been stripped for parts to repair T-72s.
@@orderoftheyawgmoth Kane will be pleased with your answer, you have passed the initiation. Go forth Brother, spread the word. The rise of the brotherhood will happen once again. This time, the GDI forces will be dealt with once and for all. All hail Kane!
Even if the civilian casualty figures are correct, it's still less than civilian casualties in a couple of Japanese cities. So it is not the US to blame someone for possible civilian losses.
@@wesworld98 which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if the US stopped sticking their nose in other people's neighborhoods and sanctioning everyone in sight for not being gay enough
@@wesworld98 that is still not a good argument, like the afganistan war would be a whole lot quiker if the US bombed anything that moved but we at least try to avoid atrocities.
@@wesworld98 Is it though? I know that's the conventional wisdom we all believe because that's what we're told every time the subject comes up, but indiscriminately wiping out two entire cities tells me otherwise. Would nuking Baghdad have fewer overall civilian casualties? What about nuking Kiev?
The author was wrong only in one. Russia doesn't use Buratino (TOS-1), but Solntsepek (TOS-1a) In Russia, there were practically no Buratino systems left in the early 2000s. They are very different visually. At the frontline, 99% is Tos-1a Solntsepek.
Every weapon is horrifying if you are at receiving end. For me it was very horrifying when US used cluster bombs against civilians, but I guess that is one of benefits when a country has democracy.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Vietnam? US hasn't used cluster munitions (other than the AT "pucks") in a long, long time. We've gotten a lot of flak for the BLU-108's, unfairly, I think. They're precision anti-tank pucks.
During the 44-day war, I felt the effect of a vacuum bomb on me, it empties the contents of your lungs and plasters you to the ground, according to my commander, a phosphorus bomb is a more human impurity.
Nearly most nation fields a thermobaric weapon system. US Himars do have thermobaric warheads, also US used thermobaric bombs aganist talibans in the cave systems.
There is an important difference between fuel-air and thermobaric munitions. The first are two-stage (dispersion and initiation charge) whereas the second are one-stage and metallized. Thermobaric metalized are mostly solid-state (though not all) whereas fuel-air are liquid volatile explosive. It looks like Russian TOS-1 is fuel-air, not thermobaric.
TB warheads have to be triggered in a very specific way for the big boom. I doubt just hitting the launcher with a missile would cause the same effect as all of the warheads going off.
When you fight in open terrain, a soldier digs a foxhole to hide from shrapnel that comes from artillery, rockets, mortars, etc... Thermobaric weapons are meant to kill everything within a certain radius that can actually breathe, it will burn oxygen along with your lungs within milliseconds. Russian Tos launcher moves into positions, fires its entire salvo, and leaves in less than a min. It's hard to catch one and devastating to face it.
@@huntclanhunt9697 Weapons like that usually become controversial after intense use, that leads to bans. That's why we created rules of war, so men could actually return home
@@tomasgogashvily5350 no, they only become banned if they cause too much unnecessary suffering or if they contaminate the land. A thermobaric weapon kills much faster than traditional artillery rounds so they don't fall under that category.
That is "incorrect" if putting it mildly. Starting with the fact that Russia used "Solncepyok" practically from the start of the conflict. Saying it was engaged to specifically to capture Bahmut is pretty much a lie.
Those things would have one hell of a thermal profile, and they're big. Shouldn't be too hard to find them and document their use from thermal imaging.
I think he was implying that only losers of war get prosecuted, or even seriously accused in the media, of war crimes. Dresden, Tokyo and other fire bombings, Hiroshima/Nagasaki... any time prisoners were taken and the troops were given 5 minutes to take them back to base...
Haha it's gets a 2.5km range upgrade and you describe it "as a slightly longer range" and this is why you are a joke bro, It's a short range artillery by design and they almost doubled it's range. I'm just glad i don't support your work anymore man.
The TOS-1M has 30 launch tubes and the TOS-1A 24. I have yet to see the 1M version, so most have only 24 rockets. I doubt the 1M is still in use, due to the shorter range. The weapon system shown at 7:03 is a BM-21 btw, not a TOS ;-)
When it comes to larger militaries with ill intent, committing atrocities and using illegal weapons that are strictly mean to cause inhumane suffering... Once they get a taste of their own medicine (or a different type of equal or greater suffering and violence), they tend to throw their hands up and say "no fair" and then plead to add the weapon(s) to the list of naughty killimajigs.
Tos 1A is use in great effect in Southern Ukraine during the Great Ukraine Counter Offensive 2023..as per 16th day...btw M0.1.01.04M2 rocket was upgraded in March 2020/2022 to a heavier thermobaric warhead and better 10 -12 km range, to operate outside the range of modern ATGMs.
Well, in my opinion their existence in the world's conventional warfare arsenal means that most nations including ours really don't care about civilian causalities when it comes to maintaining power. It is the easiest way to break guerilla forces that rebel against their power.
As a resident of Donbass, let me explain to you why there are so many civilian casualties. 1. Kiev, no matter how much it shouts that it wants to evacuate people, it doesn't want them to leave-it benefits them. Your governments allocate huge sums of money, and as a result this money is simply stolen by your governments and Kiev. 2. The people of Donbass are not much loved in the rest of Ukraine because there has been propaganda against this part of the country at the state level. This was the trigger for the war, along with Ukraine's accession to NATO. Just so you understand, the people of Donbas were returning home and living within 5-30 kilometers of the front. People either go to Europe or to Russia, but not to western Ukraine, where they try to bend them over, and so it was with many people I knew. Any favor is a disgust of others, I have been watching the poisoning of people for more than 10 years, since Yushchenko came to power, whose wife was a CIA agent. Since 2004. No work, no help, given humanitarian aid in a box for a month if you are vulnerable. A lot settles in western Ukraine, because the Hub...They rent apartments, like on the open market without war, for a lot of money, which of course people deprived of work cannot afford. Men cannot leave, the borders are closed to them. Just lavishly in their own territory.
Why doesn't the author compare destruction of Aleppo, taken by Syrian forces with Russian AF support to Mosul taken by Iraq army with U.S. support. Could be a good example of difference between how U.S. cares about civilians and collateral damage during a war VS how Russians don't. Or... Maybe someone is just telling us BS and the U.S. is levelling cities to the ground with their guided ultra-smart weapons just as well?
My issue with a lot of NAFO people online is when they cry about the weapons Russia has like their landmines and thermobaric bombs, none of those weapons are bad or evil. The problem is them targeting civilians and the unjustified invasion.
Landmines last i checked it's strictly Anti personel mines. And guess who hasn't signed the ottowa convention on them.. The yanks, Russia and China. Meanwhile basically all of europe have.
If you think about that name, that classification, flamethrower, the rocket-sender is more a flame thrower than the thing I usual mean by flamethrower, the 'gun' hold, that projects a streaming lance of burning flame. The first one actually throws a fire on its target. The flame-gun is more a hose, that launches its jet from itself to the length of its range.
I've always thought TB weapons were very cool. Really kind of in a technical league of their own (not per say above other types of armament, but fairly unique all in all) Also, remember when the Ukrainians used a thermobaric RPG-7 warhead to assassinate the Russian leader Givi after the Donetsk airport invasion by hitting the building he was in with it?
I don't think it's a warcrime to have it. It's basically just like the Japanese Type 75 MLRS, just more heavier armored. That's a normal weapon. How you USE that weapon and where tells a different story
Jesus again, the USA literally bombed Raqqa with artillery and air bombs while citizens were in it. It was a livig city. They surrounded it with the Kurds and just bombed it until it was gone. Why doesn't this guy mention that?
He didn't, he mentioned the pre war number, the ones of destroyed and capture by Ukraine as well as Russia starting to produce more of these to sent to Ukraine and to supplement the ones they already have.
@@earthappel1232 everyone thinks t55s will be used as stationary artillery and so far we haven't seen them on the battlefield, so this theory might be true. And it makes sense since there's a lot of ammunition for them, why not use it
Если у США нет такого оружия, то его нужно запретить. А может расскажешь как велась операция в Мосуле, что вы делали во Вьетнаме. Вспомни про бомбардировки Хиросимы и Нагасаки. Ах, да, это другое. Это были правильные пацаны, на правильной стороне истории.
It's not in the Geneva Convention. Furthermore, Russia never signed any agreement to not use incendiaries. The US, similarly, does not consider white phosphorus an incendiary, hence why we've been using it in the current century.
Haven't heard of javelins since the first phase of the invasion. And even then, when ambushes were the main tactic, there was way more footage of other AT weapons. Only very rarely could the javelin be seen in action, the NLAW and such were much more frequently seen to destroy tanks. Guess it's not so magical after all. We barely hear anything from the Himars anymore either. The patriot systems seem to change nothing. The super duper Bradley's and western MBT's are getting destroyed. What's the next Wunderwaffe that will win this unwinnable war? Or maybe a Volkssturm will?
Haven't heard of javelins since the first phase of the invasion. And even then, when ambushes were the main tactic, there was way more footage of other AT weapons. Only very rarely could the javelin be seen in action, the NLAW and such were much more frequently seen to destroy tanks. Guess it's not so magical after all. We barely hear anything from the Himars anymore either. The patriot systems seem to change nothing. The super duper Bradley's and western MBT's are getting destroyed. What's the next Wunderwaffe that will win this unwinnable war? Or maybe a Volkssturm will?
@@Slavic_Goblin True, unless you can get within range of it (odds are very challenging to do). Me personally though… I could just pick it up and throw it, if I really tried.
We do, you forgot. We just classify them as incendiary, the thermobaric explosion is just an unintended side effect, so they aren't really war crime weapons. Fire has always been the best way to dig out entrenchments. It's not going to be banned ever.
If you just look at the energy stored in typical explosives and oil, oil has easily an order of magnitude higher specific energy, so it is not just the missing oxidizer.
A big thank you to GOAT for sponsoring today's animations and graphics. Get Your Own Mini GOAT Replica Today bit.ly/3OMHxan
We should also stop American war crimes. Both sides bad.
It's my favorite weapon. Can't wait until the upcoming counter failure gets to a "fever" pitch and massing occurs. Then we will see the crispy critters get going.
I also like the thermite versions, that get the metal gone.
Hope to get to see more such efficient usage soon.
Graham, has yet to run out of the ladt Ukranian, but he's getting close.
Slava zuchinni.
Go and stop it, big boy. 😉👍
Wow. For the longest time, I thought these could fire live rounds! Appreciate the clarification 🙄
YT regs can be dumb as hell
You are a Government agent 🤣🤣All you do is lie. V FOR RUSSIA CLOWN
The interesting thing about the TOS-1 is that it was supposed to be operated by Soviet CBRN troops. The logic was that you can’t have contaminated ground from chemical weapons or biological agents if you vaporize it with thermobaric warheads.
Soviet solution af. "Comrade, ahead we have heavily contaminated terrain"
"Burn it"
Flame operations has always been the purview of chemical troops in most armies. It had zero to do with decontamination. As a US Army chemical dude one of my jobs was to make napalm and fill munitions and flame throwers.
@@WillieBrownsWeiner Make napalm? You mean handle napalm.
@@MondoChow777 mixing napalm is a time honored tradition.
@mondochow4425 nope. Make it. With waste oil, mogas and M-4 thickener. Made in 55 gallon drums.
Anyone else thinks the TOS looks straight out of Command and Conqour?
Yes, it has a great look to it.
What a game that was, eh?
Probably were they got it from.
It looks like rocket launchers from Dune 2 intro.
Rise of The Reds mod has it
As soon as you said that Ukraine captured some of them to use against Russia... my first question was "and how much ammo?" I'd doubt there was any significant use of these by the Ukrainians.
Ukraine had a lot of Soviet munitions production, which is a big part of how they've been able to keep so many captured tanks and artillery pieces firing. That said, I suspect these are more valuable as a source of tank parts than for redeployment.
There was only one, not proven, report of use in 2022. There is no ammo for these systems made in Ukraine. Systems use post Soviet ammo.
@@raycearcher5794 This is not a Soviet system.
@@raycearcher5794lol , it literally entered service after the collapse of the USSR
highly doubt it, it's not so easy to reproduce something like that fast. Also there is ammo shortage in entire West at the moment - they will not even start something new to produce since there is not enough ammo for current howitzers and tanks. Also UA have no air support and using TOS short range artillery without air support is suicide.
We, the USAF, tested this airbomb on Loatian villages in the early 1970s. I had a patient (I'm a doc) who became an ordinance engineer but who had to go onto the ground to assess the effectiveness of this experiment. Everything was dead and exploded, men, women children, goats, beatles, chickens. He was sickened.
The west or US doing it so it's not a war crime (see the pattern here)
But Russia using them is a "war crime", huh?
That's awful, especially that it killed The Beatles.
@@EDKguy Only Ringo Starr
whut? no not really right
Are it's effects horrifying. Yes. Is it hideously effective against trenches and bunkers? Yes. But is it a war crime to use such a weapon? No. (Unless used against civilians).
Everything Russia uses is always against civilians!
Killing civilians is a war crime no matter the method.
@@indiasuperclean6969 why are Indians so weird on the internet and always think their country is the apex of humanity lol
The use of thermobaric weaponry was designated a war crime back in the 1980ies but because they are so effective nobody actually went as far as to outright ban them. The UNO expressed deep concern about it, as they usually do instead of actually doing something about the matter. And that's that for now
Bro being destroyed inside of a bunker is terrible for anybody soldier inside it if the bomb doesn't kill you then the collapsed concrete/steel will. Via crushed alive.
Got to say it looks beautiful with all the shock waves going outward. Pretty terrifying, but strangely beautiful
Use of flame weapons is not a war crime, however using them to suppress civilians is a war crime.
Prove it’s been used intentionally against civilians?? Not from Ukranians sources please
Do you think that the NATO or Russia care about it? Neither gives a damn about laws.
While i listen to the Serbian song my father is a war criminal by baja
You are actually wrong.
The Geniva convention since the 70s have banned all use near or at Cities or any sort of Human settlements due to how indiscriminate they are.
@@vladislavchekunov4530 Brainwashed
American made M202 FLASH is also categorized as flame thrower so the classification isn't that unique.
M202 FLASH is a flamethrower. It's not a thermobaric MLRS. Calling TOS1 a flamethrower is just calling a rifle a butter knife.
@@chill29394 they both use rockets to deliver their incendiary loads and this is their main characteristics. Obviously the scale is different, but not the core functionality.
@@zbyszanna absolutely not. Core functionality of TOS-1 is thermobaric effect. M202 doesn't even have that functionality.
@@chill29394 The TOS-1 does have plain incendiary rockets though, which confirms @zbyzanna's point.
That the Americans for one reason or another choose to never develop a FAE-warhead to the M202 is hardly Kremlin's fault.
It is different when the USA does it. Always. No exceptions from that exception.
The range issue is less about precision than payload dimensions: This type of warhead is very heavy and takes up a lot of space. To make it longer range would either require an enormous rocket engine, a glide phase (which would make it easy to interdict), or a powered glide phase (massive increase to complexity for minimal gain) -- all of which would massively increase the size of each munition and limit the size of vlley per launcher. These tradeoffs are really hard to balance out, and it is clear which tradeoff the Russian design went with.
Oh no, there are thermobaric rockets for 300mm systems (smerch, tornado-s) same range as othr types. For other 220mm systems (uragan and tos-2) - more range than tos-1a.
So there are plenty of thermobaric mlrs options in Russian arsenal, so tos-1a is a special tool, because thermobarics are only effective if there's precision and/or decent grouping. You have to hit quite close to target for any effect apart from intimidation and smoke.
You've mangled the "Solntsepek" even more spectacularly than one could expect :)
Literally, the world means "sunblaze", which is more passing than Buratino for sure.
It's a running joke on this channel that he mangles the names of everything
Go easy on the guy, @12:16 he can't even spell battalions properly. Betallions is not even close.
I am honestly impressed
@@clivedinosaur8407 As opposed to Sigmallion
SOLENVESKY! because if its russian its gotta end with a "sky" sound right?
that made me cringe pretty badly
Small portable thermobarics must do crit psych damage to enemy units. Seriously though, wouldn't want to be in the other side if that.
Seeing TOS impact grids filmed up close from Russian drone POV especially in the humid conditions being fought right now let's you see the shockwave front from each exploding warhead.... That really drives home how wicked strong these weapons must be. The stories of corpses being found with lungs ripped out from the overpressure seem likely :/
least indian shizo
I can dodge all of them missiles
Hell they are waaaaay too close to enemy lines-just 6km range-with drones EVERYWHERE-who the hell would want to crew THAT
The fuel part of this explosive-would be ignited by a tiny drone warhead-a grenade-not like normal HE which require significant explosive to detonate
Yeah I would not want to crew THAT-imagine the fireball when all the rockets go off-on the crew-
Drones everywhere 155 precision munitions available-not for me-too little range-they will find you
@@charlesoboyle4787 That is why they mounted it on a tank chassis. They literally designed their weapons to be used in a nuclear conflict with Nato because they where convinced, that one is inevitable. I expect that tank to be airtight. The operators of that system might actually survive while any soft targets outside are getting ripped to pieces.
There is a reason for these things not being given to normal infantry - or PMCs...
The TOS-1 and the Lancet are two incredible monsters.
Yep. Ukraine receiving 200B and getting beat on by budget weapons and taking (to some sources) 10:1 losses. This thing going on is stupid. Ukraine can't win this war and maybe if nato stayed minding their own business and if Minsk accords were followed the world would be a better place.
@@АлакПатрова everybody knows UA stands zero chances of winning anything here.
@@vickomen333 you'd be surprised. Americans, those on the left are easilly manipulated.
+ KA-52
@@АлакПатрова lmao, 10:1? Russian army one of the weakest army in the world, and they even cant beat small country like Ukraine in the direct warfare. You are listen to much propaganda bro
I can't believe they're using Term of services on Ukraine!!!
What's next? A dmca?? The ban?
Ah yes, the most feared type of soldier on the battlefield
Lawyers
Really is that why India has a small navy
@@indiasuperclean6969 we love india 🇺🇦🤝 🇮🇳
@@chilbiyitoperhaps someday.
The TOS1 is "identified as a flamethrower" because that's the translation from Russian to English. Flamethrower means something different in Russian than it does in English. It's kind of like their new mining system, it's called "agriculture." That doesn't mean they're planting daisies, the Russian word identifies a method of seeding mines over a large area.
Nah, funny names are just that, nothing to do with translation. And certainly agriculture has nothing to do with laying mines, just as flamethrower in russian mass culture is not a missile.
For example most artillery systems are called after flowers species - pion, giacint, magnolia, droc, etc But some are not - msta (name of a river), acacia (tree), coalicia (coalition).
Same goes for some police equipment - one baton is called "an argument", underwear - "tiger", teargas - "bird-cherry", handcuffs - "tenderness"
как русский скажу, что если переводить дословно на английский, то будет означать как примерно (very sunny summer day)
Я бы перевел так: heatness of sun in 12:00 on the beach😅
burning sunshine это наверное лучше)
@@husa5777 вы сами не понимаете о чем говорите. Они пишут про flamethrower. А у нас она именно так и называется тяжелая огнеметная система. Вопрос к слову огнеметная. И в русском языке к этому есть вопросы.
This happens when u upgrade shovel so much it becomes mini nuke.
I've seen Australian Air mounted Thermobaric weapons being demonstrated. Even from over a KM away, this thing going off is very powerful, and briefly feels like standing next to a gas radiator. I'd hate to be in the middle of an attack by one of these munitions.
"Oh, do you think so? I always told my men that the closer you are to the point of an explosion, the safer you are "
Evelyn Waugh.
Officers and Gentlemen
@@paulbeesley8283 That is satire for you... 🙂
You could say beyond a certain point the chance of being KIA decreases the closer you are to the source of the explosion...
...because the chance of being completely vaporised by it and classed MIA increases
That's an interesting anecdote. Cheers 🍻
I'd hate to be not close enough to be killed, but close enough to be left alive and maimed lol
So basically this is a Max level katyusha.
One they do maintenance on apparently. That's a radical new idea.
Can’t wait for them to be added to warthunder
History repeats itself Nazy get destroyed again by Russians
No, descendents of Katyusha are BM-21 Grad and BM-27 Uragan
I loved how he showed the "Siege of Sevastopol" of 1854-1855 and talked about german nazy attacks. Yes, that poor city was sieged more than once or twice.
Also the crimean war
@@Galaktionov hope not
@@Galaktionov what you mean
The Crimean Tatars during the war with Russia destroyed and drove into slavery about a third of the population of Russia.
They have increased their range from 4km to 10 km recently, which made the difference as they can not be targeted by rockets anymore.
Cannot be targeted by rockets? Even the old Soviet Grad-system rockets have over 50 km range. Or do you mean only shoulder-fired rockets?
@Rex yes, I mean those ones, as these are the more dangerous ones for tanks and artillery. The other ones, like canon and mrap, they need reconnaissance drones to spot them.
@@galimbertino4939 Even though Israel hasn't yet given export licence for Spike-missiles to Ukraine, the newest variants of those have 25 km range. Even the ER II -version has 10 km range.
@@atklm1 they will never give the export license as russia is in syria.
@@atklm1 I don't think Israel wants to get into this!
1. Even though the president of Ukraine is a Jew, but in Israel they know who this Jew supports, they don't have very nice patches on their shoulders, for Israel.
2. this is Israel's vulnerability, Russia clearly sticks to neutrality in the Middle East, balancing both Iran, Turkey and Israel, it will not be good if Russia is forced to take sides. 25% of Israel's population is Russian-speaking, many of course from Ukraine, but still most of them are from Russia. All the players in the Middle East are neutral, they stay out of the Ukrainian swamp - good for everyone.
Its definitely useful against dug in targets and in urban warfare against enemy strongholds. It substitutes air power in many scenarios and is insensitive to the presence of strong anti air defenses.
I never understood, like for Azovstal, why Russians didn't use tear gas. I don't see how it can be considered "chemical weapons" when used by police against unarmed people even in democratic countries. Or burning sulphur. They are very unpleasant at concentrations which are far bellow lethal.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et In order to avoid any grey zones, ALL use of gas is prohibited in war.
Reason it's allowed by police (who also may use hollow-point ammunition) is that it is relatively unlikely that the police "accidentally" would mix in mustard- or nerve gas into their riot control gear and then claim "it's only tear gas".
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Tear gas isn't that voluminous and can't expand enough in a controlled manner to clear any long corridor or large space. It doesn't hang around that long either by design and dissipates. You need very specialized pumps and other equipment to even concentrate it in a tunnel as the USA found out in the Vietnam war. A simple office door with a rag under it can essentially block its passage. it's meant to discourage a crowd of protestors or smoke out a small car or a bedroom. Nothing more.
@@BojanPeric-kq9et There where civilians of their new provinces in the Azovstal bunker system. War is brutal enough as it is and they had encircled the area. So they decided to just besiege them until they surrender. No need to kill your own for a quick victory when time is on your side. Otherwise, thermobarics might have been used tehre too (although actual bunker systems like that in Azovstal might be immune because of being designed to protect against extreme pressure waves).
@@johanmetreus1268
If it's banned in war it should be banned for police, including hollow points.
I love it that Cappy has to say 'non-firing' on the tiny GOAT guns to pass the RUclips censors. Excellent coverage of an rarely discussed weapon system.
Just remember, it's only a crime if you lose.
Losing is the only crime.
indeed.. US prove it.
Every time this weapon system is mentioned, I always imagine the Russian commander saying something like: "Igor, get Buratino."
Hello!
I am native of Donetsk city and I want to make one point. On 8:42 it's not the explosion of TOS-1/1A/2. It is detonation of ammunition in the air - I know it, because I was in the house on the right side of the video at this moment (Yes, I live there and seeing this video again has triggered me). According to official Russian sources, it's an explosion of 155mm projectile (shell? idk how is it being written in English, sry) shot from Caesar french howtizer. Also, as far as I remeber, Russian army doesn't have shells which'll detonate in the air to cover larger area with shrapnel (for those, who'll say that Russian army is striking the cities under its control).
It's not a propaganda or inciting national or political strife comment - only clarification of information from the video, please let's refrain from aggressive comments in any direction, regardless of political views. Thank you!
Russia has guided munitions for their mlrs systems and for the 6inch and 8inch howitzers
The reason the TOS has such a short range is because it has far heavier warheads on a relatively small rocket, this allows big boom while being easily transportable and cheap.
The fact that the launcher is a tank allows it to get very close to the target with relatively low danger.
This is a very smart type of system and there are multiple advantages.
The system is also very simple to operate and can very easily be converter to a robot, you set it the target, it automatically uses GPS to drive to the fire position, it fires and then it returns.
These advantages mean other armies might want to invest in such a weapon system in the future. It can also work on a naval version, on a big drone boat designed to strike before a landing operation, limiting any risk to your own soldiers and at the same time delivering multiple times the payload of a long range system.
Wow, so many armchair engineers today.
@@occamraiser They've got ideas going for them at least, you only have complaints.
That's just what we need, drone tanks with thermobaric weapons.
@@ladeao1552 we aren’t too far away from coordinated drone armies and swarms. Its the new space race
It really doesn't matter that it is a tank because the ammunition is heavily exposed. There is no real advantage, which is why most armies don't do this. Long-range, light mlrs is the best way to invest
There's tons of footage of the TOS-1 strafing treelines and trenches. Leaving behind burnt corpses. I saw one man literally blown out of the treeline. If this thing makes it to your position. You are done for.
Yep, no amount of digging in will save you from this.
@@bubbajones6907 digging your own grave indeed.
I also saw it last year in the spring, where a man flew into space. It was horrible...
@@spartanrating8210that is powerful weapon, but that not scary like when some quiet drone drop RPG-7 grenade on shoulder in night 😮
@@userAS456 Oh yeah I think I saw that one too.
SPLAATT
horrible
A correction: the MOAB is not a thermobaric bomb. It's in the heaviest class of conventional bombs, hence the MO ("massive ordinance") designator. Thermobarics like the BLU-82 don't carry much explosive, just aerosolized fuel that needs to mix with air to become explosive.
.........SO,THERE WAS A MENTIONING MORE THAN A 10 YEARS AGO....ABOUT RUSSIANS MADE THEIR BLU-82 THAT WAS 4 TIMES MORE STRONGER THAN MOAB SO THEY CALLED IN "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS"
........ACTUALLY IT'S PRETTY MUCH ANXIOUS ABOUT MAYBE THEY'LL ALSO START TO DEPLOY THEM
Center part of Bakhmut? Nah they captured ALL of Bakhmut
They are still coping with it.
Over 100 thousand dead orcs to take a ruin.
Ukraine just started probing attacks with countoffensive and already taken 1.4 kilometers in 1 day
Its called Artemovsk now 😅
Is it really capturing something if there's basically nothing left?
That's like shooting someone in the head and calling it a kidnapping because you're still in possession of the body
@@1stCallipostle its about the Denazification/demilitarization of the Ukraine military. Just like you said 🤣 there is nothing left, no more Ukrainian Bandera boys there left to grind down in that city. Mission complete, to the next city..
In an all out war, the rules go out the window if one side wants to win and doesn’t care, it’s as simple as that.
AMERICAN talking about destryoing CITYES and civilains it's fukin JOKE ....
"Flame thrower?"
And I guess Willy Pete's are just "portable heaters"
Shake'n'bake, baby!
The Russian way of war is such a unique way to envision warfare. The Book is also really good on how Russia has defeated every western army ever assembled against their nation. The Russians are truly one of the best militaries in the world and it is not based on spending, or tech, or fire power, just in the way the handle their weaknesses and make em their strengths the way they see things and events differently than us in the west. What they consider winning to what they consider losing. It is truly fascinating.
The secret is in the balance. Moderately harsh life, moderately comfortable. Moderately liberal policy, moderately conservative. To the extent of material values, to the extent of spiritual. Moderately rational development and moderately sensual development. Even the climate is moderate - both heat and cold happen.
@@Lercher-ph7ok Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria - were defeated. France, Great Britain, Japan, Serbia, the USA, Italy - emerged victorious from the war. Russia, which had done so much for the victory of the allies, was not among the victorious countries because of the revolution and Lenin's decree to withdraw from the war, when the fate of Germany was already determined.
That's funny, did you forget about that little conflict called World War 1. Then the Germans almost defeated Russia again in WW2, which would have happened if it weren't for Lend-Lease from the West. Then there was the Cold War. As far as losing to non-Western countries- Poland, Finland, Afghanistan..... Do I need to keep going here?
@@JudgeVandelay Harry Truman made this statement a few days after Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union, as published in The New York Times on June 24, 1941: "If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and thereby let them kill as many of each other as possible." You can also search for "Prescott Bush and Hitler" on Google. He is George Bush's grandfather. If American elites didn't nourish Nazi Germany like a mother breastfeeding, there wouldn't have been a World War II and tens of millions of corpses. There is a popular misconception in the US that America alone defeated Hitler. Well, to tell the truth, America did emerge with the greatest gain as a result of the destruction of Europe and the USSR.
they turned katyushas into flamethrower tanks, that's like something straight out of red alert
There is no Confinements if you are at war. You use what you have to win except for nuclear weapons.
The name of the latest variant of the TOS-1 "Solntsepiok" can be directly translated as Sun Burn, but the the more meaningful English translation should be something like Heat Waive.
I am certain that if a was in an entrenched position, and the enemy told me that they would use this weapon on me, I would retreat or surrender.......what a nightmare!
Current American FAE munitions include the following:
BLU-73 FAE I
BLU-95 500 lb (230 kg) (FAE-II)
BLU-96 2,000 lb (910 kg) (FAE-II)
CBU-72 FAE I
AGM-114 Hellfire missile
XM1060 grenade
SMAW-NE round for rocket launcher
Ruski bots hard at work tryna deflect to the US in a video having nothing to do with US lol.
Hypocrisy
Works great, rockets are a serious problem. Currently per target limit is about 3-4 rockets. If its got ammo its definitely a number one target on the battlefield. Will collapse your lungs in the trench if you get caught no problem.
Saying that the oxygen sucking effect adds to the destructive power is like saying that sound of the gunshot adds to the destruction of the bullet.
The only upside of using oxygen from the air is that the weapon does not need to carry its oxidizer, but that means the weapon has to make a close to stoichiometric mix with air for the explosion. This is not very ideal because only about 20% of the air is oxygen, so the rest of the air would consume energy to heat up. That means that these explosion are cooler, and less powerful compared to using high efficiency oxidizers. (this creates a non-trivial trade-off)
The vacuum is created by the explosion over-expanding (nothing to do with oxygen). Anything which can create lots of hot gas and cool it quickly can create a vacuum effect. The cooling is caused by the very fast expansion of the explosion. This weapon tend to heat up very large amount of air instead of just creating hot gas like more conventional explosives. This largely enhances the vacuum effect.
It's the vacuum it creates, and the ability to breathe. It is not remotely comparable to to a gunshot.
This kid comparing gunshots and vacuum bombs effect. 😱😂
You cant breath in the area of vaccum you dumbo.. there is no air(oxygen) to gasp because all of them has been exploded. Idk if it can explode your lungs also.
Thanks for the generous dose of engineering mythbusting. The amount of illiteracy amongst the media and various military tech pseudo-experts is absolutely cringe. Worst part being that they proliferate such nonsensical BS, which their audiences proceed to take as gospel.
you wrong in many points but i will say this . matter does not get destroyed for all we know oxygen will remain in air wheather you cool it or get it hot
@@macpj12j I literally cannot understand what you mean in your comment.
WE use thermobarics
Few clarifications....When UKR, in breach of Geneva convention, uses buildings and settlements for cover and fire positions, TOS comes in handy. When mentioning 7000 civ casualties in Grozni, just remember 1.6 million of Iraqis of wich 300.000 were kids... or 4 million Vietnamese of wich million were kids.
This is different. Anglo-Saxons can kill children because they are the superior race.
In WW2 the RAF used the 10 ton "Tallboy" bomb,against the Tirpitz and the Bielefeld viaduct,dropped by the Lancaster.
.......I SLIGHTLY REMEMBER THAT AT END OF 2000'S RUSSIANS CREATED AND TESTED SO CALLED "FATHER OF ALL BOMBS" WHICH WAS THERMOBARIC EQUIVALENT OF 44 TONS OF TNT
.....GOODNESS GRACIOUS THAT THEY DIDNT WENT COMPLETELY NUTS TO ALSO DEPLOY THEM
Looks like the CIA has influenced the influencer 😏
💯💯
No doubt
Like vietnam's napalm.
RUSSIA BAD AMERICA GOOD!!!
Doubt you were even around the last time the US used napalm. So why don't you just shut up junior.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance 😅🤣😂
Kudos to using the clip of Kurt Russell using a flamethrower, and from one of my favorite films!
A vacuum bomb is where my girlfriend gets angry if I don't do my half of the cleaning chores (vacuum bomb, laundry bomb, dishwashing bomb).
When a military attacks a city full of civilians, the civilians are not collateral damage. They are the target. That's just as true in Aleppo as in Hiroshima.
Can you imagine if Israel used these in Gaza? Where are the protests? The world is silent!
Hiroshima was packed full of military targets. If they hadn't built them in the city, it wouldn't have been targeted. Yeah, I know, learning history is just soooo hard.
@@nobodyspecial4702
Yup, when I read about that I was actually shocked about it!! At first I thought the US did it to flex their power, but after learning there was a high value target. Honestly if you built military object of any kind in coty...city.... expect your city being targeted for that reason.
@@nobodyspecial4702 Yup, a shame there were a lot more of civilian targets in the region, comes with the territory.
That is what every military does and why their opposition occupies those cities. They call it urban warfare.
A detail I do need to add is that the part about TOS-1As not being fitted with ERA is wrong. The vehicle is normally fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA. Oryxblog meanwhile lists 6 TOS-1As as having been confirmed destroyed damaged, or captured, of which Ukraine has captured 3. These have likely been stripped for parts to repair T-72s.
Oryx is a horrible source and is bought and paid for by Turkish intelligence
Yeah, I would not want to be on the receiving end of those Thermobaric warheads. Nice report as always CC & DA
The new generation of the Brotherhood's Flame Tank looks lethal
Which brotherhood would that be ?
@@XRioteerXBoyX Brotherhood of Nod
@@orderoftheyawgmoth Kane will be pleased with your answer, you have passed the initiation. Go forth Brother, spread the word. The rise of the brotherhood will happen once again. This time, the GDI forces will be dealt with once and for all. All hail Kane!
Thermobarbaric.
The most horrific weapons ever invented.
Even if the civilian casualty figures are correct, it's still less than civilian casualties in a couple of Japanese cities. So it is not the US to blame someone for possible civilian losses.
Which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if a ground invasion of Japan was done
@@wesworld98 which is still less than the number of civs that would have died if the US stopped sticking their nose in other people's neighborhoods and sanctioning everyone in sight for not being gay enough
@@wesworld98 that is still not a good argument, like the afganistan war would be a whole lot quiker if the US bombed anything that moved but we at least try to avoid atrocities.
@@wesworld98 Lao, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, Germany, Italy, Syria, Iraq, Palastine?
@@wesworld98 Is it though? I know that's the conventional wisdom we all believe because that's what we're told every time the subject comes up, but indiscriminately wiping out two entire cities tells me otherwise. Would nuking Baghdad have fewer overall civilian casualties? What about nuking Kiev?
The author was wrong only in one.
Russia doesn't use Buratino (TOS-1), but Solntsepek (TOS-1a)
In Russia, there were practically no Buratino systems left in the early 2000s. They are very different visually. At the frontline, 99% is Tos-1a Solntsepek.
Glad someone finally did a cursory on this system. It’s probably the most horrifying weapon in Ukraine right now
Every weapon is horrifying if you are at receiving end. For me it was very horrifying when US used cluster bombs against civilians, but I guess that is one of benefits when a country has democracy.
lmao, stop talk cringe
@@BojanPeric-kq9et Vietnam? US hasn't used cluster munitions (other than the AT "pucks") in a long, long time. We've gotten a lot of flak for the BLU-108's, unfairly, I think. They're precision anti-tank pucks.
All depends on how true the claims of chemical warfare are
@@chinadonttouchmyaccountmthf why dont you stop BEING cringe....
During the 44-day war, I felt the effect of a vacuum bomb on me, it empties the contents of your lungs and plasters you to the ground, according to my commander, a phosphorus bomb is a more human impurity.
Nearly most nation fields a thermobaric weapon system. US Himars do have thermobaric warheads, also US used thermobaric bombs aganist talibans in the cave systems.
USMC uses thermobaric rockets in the SMAW
There is an important difference between fuel-air and thermobaric munitions. The first are two-stage (dispersion and initiation charge) whereas the second are one-stage and metallized. Thermobaric metalized are mostly solid-state (though not all) whereas fuel-air are liquid volatile explosive. It looks like Russian TOS-1 is fuel-air, not thermobaric.
It would be a shame if a launch vehicle full of those were to get hit by a missile. 😏
Its work the other way around... 👀
TB warheads have to be triggered in a very specific way for the big boom. I doubt just hitting the launcher with a missile would cause the same effect as all of the warheads going off.
TOS 1 " Buratino" translates as "Pinocchio"
TOS 1A "Solnstepek" translates as "Sun burn".
Not "Sun burn" but rather "Sun blaze"
''Its only a crime when others do it''
I love the smell of thermobaric rockets in the morning. It's true game changer.
One badass weapon system
When you fight in open terrain, a soldier digs a foxhole to hide from shrapnel that comes from artillery, rockets, mortars, etc... Thermobaric weapons are meant to kill everything within a certain radius that can actually breathe, it will burn oxygen along with your lungs within milliseconds.
Russian Tos launcher moves into positions, fires its entire salvo, and leaves in less than a min. It's hard to catch one and devastating to face it.
So in other words, it's very clever?
@@huntclanhunt9697 nooo it's Russian it can't be *checks notes* good!!! 😤
@@huntclanhunt9697 Weapons like that usually become controversial after intense use, that leads to bans. That's why we created rules of war, so men could actually return home
@@tomasgogashvily5350 no, they only become banned if they cause too much unnecessary suffering or if they contaminate the land. A thermobaric weapon kills much faster than traditional artillery rounds so they don't fall under that category.
Whats an issue here? Soldier blown up in pieces by 155mm landing next to him vs dying in foxhole by pressure.
Is one way less humane
That is "incorrect" if putting it mildly. Starting with the fact that Russia used "Solncepyok" practically from the start of the conflict. Saying it was engaged to specifically to capture Bahmut is pretty much a lie.
Those things would have one hell of a thermal profile, and they're big. Shouldn't be too hard to find them and document their use from thermal imaging.
In the experience of the entire history of humanity, only losers of wars commit war crimes.
Um… hate to break it to you, but that’s not even remotely true. Winners commit war crimes all the time.
I think he was implying that only losers of war get prosecuted, or even seriously accused in the media, of war crimes. Dresden, Tokyo and other fire bombings, Hiroshima/Nagasaki... any time prisoners were taken and the troops were given 5 minutes to take them back to base...
Like Ukraine doing war crimes?
@@executivelifehacks6747 Yep, there is always someone that misses the joke and gets all serious about it.
Literally a 40k Whirlwind.
Haha it's gets a 2.5km range upgrade and you describe it "as a slightly longer range" and this is why you are a joke bro, It's a short range artillery by design and they almost doubled it's range. I'm just glad i don't support your work anymore man.
“That’s a great idea general.. a flame tank could be useful. Maybe we could get some gas for our tanks and some body armor?”
The TOS-1M has 30 launch tubes and the TOS-1A 24. I have yet to see the 1M version, so most have only 24 rockets. I doubt the 1M is still in use, due to the shorter range. The weapon system shown at 7:03 is a BM-21 btw, not a TOS ;-)
Unfortunately TOS-2 "Tosochka" wasn't ready for this conflict
When it comes to larger militaries with ill intent, committing atrocities and using illegal weapons that are strictly mean to cause inhumane suffering... Once they get a taste of their own medicine (or a different type of equal or greater suffering and violence), they tend to throw their hands up and say "no fair" and then plead to add the weapon(s) to the list of naughty killimajigs.
Napalm used in Vietnam was OK as it was Made in USA...
It was also last used in combat over 50 years ago, but sure let's go ahead ignore that because it makes you look smart. ...... Moron.
Tos 1A is use in great effect in Southern Ukraine during the Great Ukraine Counter Offensive 2023..as per 16th day...btw M0.1.01.04M2 rocket was upgraded in March 2020/2022 to a heavier thermobaric warhead and better 10 -12 km range, to operate outside the range of modern ATGMs.
Well, in my opinion their existence in the world's conventional warfare arsenal means that most nations including ours really don't care about civilian causalities when it comes to maintaining power. It is the easiest way to break guerilla forces that rebel against their power.
As a resident of Donbass, let me explain to you why there are so many civilian casualties.
1. Kiev, no matter how much it shouts that it wants to evacuate people, it doesn't want them to leave-it benefits them. Your governments allocate huge sums of money, and as a result this money is simply stolen by your governments and Kiev.
2. The people of Donbass are not much loved in the rest of Ukraine because there has been propaganda against this part of the country at the state level. This was the trigger for the war, along with Ukraine's accession to NATO. Just so you understand, the people of Donbas were returning home and living within 5-30 kilometers of the front.
People either go to Europe or to Russia, but not to western Ukraine, where they try to bend them over, and so it was with many people I knew. Any favor is a disgust of others, I have been watching the poisoning of people for more than 10 years, since Yushchenko came to power, whose wife was a CIA agent. Since 2004.
No work, no help, given humanitarian aid in a box for a month if you are vulnerable. A lot settles in western Ukraine, because the Hub...They rent apartments, like on the open market without war, for a lot of money, which of course people deprived of work cannot afford. Men cannot leave, the borders are closed to them. Just lavishly in their own territory.
13:46 "TOS-1A Solovepsky" - nailed it
Why doesn't the author compare destruction of Aleppo, taken by Syrian forces with Russian AF support to Mosul taken by Iraq army with U.S. support.
Could be a good example of difference between how U.S. cares about civilians and collateral damage during a war VS how Russians don't.
Or... Maybe someone is just telling us BS and the U.S. is levelling cities to the ground with their guided ultra-smart weapons just as well?
I thought that after Agent Orange there wasn't any moral limit of what a weapon can do
Japanese developments in biological weapons are scary too. Since US took those japanese scientists, I wonder what they developed
"My war, my rules...this is not complicated" ~ V. Putin
My issue with a lot of NAFO people online is when they cry about the weapons Russia has like their landmines and thermobaric bombs, none of those weapons are bad or evil. The problem is them targeting civilians and the unjustified invasion.
Landmines last i checked it's strictly Anti personel mines.
And guess who hasn't signed the ottowa convention on them..
The yanks, Russia and China. Meanwhile basically all of europe have.
I love the TOS-1A denazification device. Great development.
denazified 10,000 plus Chechen civilians. Then again, anyone who dares oppose Russia is apparently Nazi's
I was born and raised on Southeast Ukraine and me and majority of the people living there call them Russian liberators not occupiers
If you think about that name, that classification, flamethrower, the rocket-sender is more a flame thrower than the thing I usual mean by flamethrower, the 'gun' hold, that projects a streaming lance of burning flame.
The first one actually throws a fire on its target. The flame-gun is more a hose, that launches its jet from itself to the length of its range.
I've always thought TB weapons were very cool. Really kind of in a technical league of their own (not per say above other types of armament, but fairly unique all in all)
Also, remember when the Ukrainians used a thermobaric RPG-7 warhead to assassinate the Russian leader Givi after the Donetsk airport invasion by hitting the building he was in with it?
Btw Givi was born in Ilovaisk, Donbass
How could a local resident invade their own airport??
@@yastymanhe's just a victim of western prop
I don't think it's a warcrime to have it. It's basically just like the Japanese Type 75 MLRS, just more heavier armored. That's a normal weapon. How you USE that weapon and where tells a different story
ah yes, the Terms of Service-1
Jeez man, they're just thermobarics. This is more likely to get our armory further constrained than theirs, ya know?
Jeez man, if it's NBD lets drop one on your house.
@@huwhitecavebeast1972 Would prefer a MOAB but whatevs, _it isn't napalm_.
In Russia, T.O.S. violates you
'In spite of civilian casualties Russian military was happy with tos1.' ...grozniy
Jesus again, the USA literally bombed Raqqa with artillery and air bombs while citizens were in it. It was a livig city. They surrounded it with the Kurds and just bombed it until it was gone. Why doesn't this guy mention that?
liar
Ok... sets the air on fire, got it. Damn Terrifying ...
You forgot to mention that russia only has 45 of them and 10 have already been visualy destroyed (with 2 in the last 3 days).
He didn't, he mentioned the pre war number, the ones of destroyed and capture by Ukraine as well as Russia starting to produce more of these to sent to Ukraine and to supplement the ones they already have.
There is a low number of them, but not 45. They're easy to build since the base is already in disposal. All you need is a launcher
Those tanks are more simple than normal battle tanks, just the ammo is way more complex.. then why tf ppl think its only gonna be that much?
@@al1sa920 if the base t72 is so available why are they pulling t55 / t62 from deep storage?
@@earthappel1232 everyone thinks t55s will be used as stationary artillery and so far we haven't seen them on the battlefield, so this theory might be true. And it makes sense since there's a lot of ammunition for them, why not use it
Если у США нет такого оружия, то его нужно запретить. А может расскажешь как велась операция в Мосуле, что вы делали во Вьетнаме. Вспомни про бомбардировки Хиросимы и Нагасаки. Ах, да, это другое. Это были правильные пацаны, на правильной стороне истории.
It's not in the Geneva Convention. Furthermore, Russia never signed any agreement to not use incendiaries. The US, similarly, does not consider white phosphorus an incendiary, hence why we've been using it in the current century.
“Western militaries have no counterparts…” “No, but we’re good friends with St. Javelin!”
Haven't heard of javelins since the first phase of the invasion. And even then, when ambushes were the main tactic, there was way more footage of other AT weapons. Only very rarely could the javelin be seen in action, the NLAW and such were much more frequently seen to destroy tanks.
Guess it's not so magical after all.
We barely hear anything from the Himars anymore either.
The patriot systems seem to change nothing.
The super duper Bradley's and western MBT's are getting destroyed.
What's the next Wunderwaffe that will win this unwinnable war? Or maybe a Volkssturm will?
Haven't heard of javelins since the first phase of the invasion. And even then, when ambushes were the main tactic, there was way more footage of other AT weapons. Only very rarely could the javelin be seen in action, the NLAW and such were much more frequently seen to destroy tanks.
Guess it's not so magical after all.
We barely hear anything from the Himars anymore either.
The patriot systems seem to change nothing.
The super duper Bradley's and western MBT's are getting destroyed.
What's the next Wunderwaffe that will win this unwinnable war? Or maybe a Volkssturm will?
you re about a year and a half too late with that joke.
@@Slavic_Goblin True, unless you can get within range of it (odds are very challenging to do). Me personally though… I could just pick it up and throw it, if I really tried.
@@erileka5228 true, but at-least the joke is still true too
Why don't we have such a rocket for our M270 MRLS system? Or do we? And I forgot.
we don't need to because ours are more deadlier
@@jeremywolfe6929 Specify please...'our what is deadly'?
We do, you forgot. We just classify them as incendiary, the thermobaric explosion is just an unintended side effect, so they aren't really war crime weapons. Fire has always been the best way to dig out entrenchments. It's not going to be banned ever.
@@charlesmartin1121 the ones the usa uses have a 180,000 tungsten balls in them and can airburst
@@kameronjones7139 Which unfortunately will not takeout a reinforced bunker.
If you just look at the energy stored in typical explosives and oil, oil has easily an order of magnitude higher specific energy, so it is not just the missing oxidizer.