How exactly can you call it a "T-72's projectile", when it was designed 10 years before the T-72? IMO "The first 125mm APFSDS" would be a much better title, no hate, just saying.
It was used on first t72 tanks and almost all export models used 3bm9 since it was cheap. Also having t72 in title would obviously be much better for algorithm compared to naming it t64s first apfsds or first 125mm apfsds.
Although personally I prefer to know what the two components are in the projectiles/armour... (because there's composite armour that can have steel, glass and rubber... And APFSDS, APDS and APCR can have tungsten or depleted uranium, even the APCBC could have both plastic and steel in front of projectile...)
Want a challenge? ZSU-23-4 Shilka against 40 mm of RHA @ 50°. Wikipedia says the API penetrates 15 mm RHA @ 30°. 1 second burst @ 4000 rpm (67 rounds) hitting a 30 cm² plate at random locations. (or a long enough burst to get a penetration)
Is there a way for you to simulate a HEAT shell making contact with a surface and triggering it but the jet sort of "ricochets" off the surface instead of going through? I'm curious how large of an angle you'd need to block a HEAT projectile if it reflects at all.
I will make similar test with 3bm42 mango and 3bm46 svinets1. Those are newest projectiles i can get diagram on (and also that Chinese one that got leaked few months ago)
@@mihailo674 m60A1 would be really hard to penetrate since it had 110mm at 65° but others would be easy. Even Leo 1 from late 1960s would be easily penetrated. 1960s were also era of heat rounds and most Soviet heat were able to pen anything including m60A1.
Who can explain, the speed of round more-more lower then speed of sound in material of the round. Why the speed of the round didn't change until the end?
@@Slavkovic_Predrag no, just by eyes, the round didn't change its speed after start of penetration, until in the end stay only small part of the round, only at that time it lower it's speed.
@@КоргиКорги-с7п The 0:20 view has the color scale mapped to velocity. You can see the color changing continuously after impact, meaning that the speed is continuously changing.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag and what you think about 3BM3 or 3BM4 test? And 3BM15 or 3BM22 vs NERA? I heard that 70s soviet monolithic apfsds with low penetration at 60 angle work badly againt western NERA comparing to 3BM42 Mango or even 3BM46 Svinets or Lekalo.
@@rinaldoman3331 That is true Nera would cause them to break up and tungsten carbide in the front wouldn't help much with penetration. I will do those tests eventually as I find more data on Nera hardness of steels used and stuff like that.
How exactly can you call it a "T-72's projectile", when it was designed 10 years before the T-72? IMO "The first 125mm APFSDS" would be a much better title, no hate, just saying.
It was used on first t72 tanks and almost all export models used 3bm9 since it was cheap. Also having t72 in title would obviously be much better for algorithm compared to naming it t64s first apfsds or first 125mm apfsds.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag it was mainly an export round, but yeah, the algorithm part makes sense. Keep up the good work!
@@mihailo674 Thanks
@@Slavkovic_Predrag sounds like false advertising to me... (click bait) cool video btw very interesting...
Although personally I prefer to know what the two components are in the projectiles/armour... (because there's composite armour that can have steel, glass and rubber... And APFSDS, APDS and APCR can have tungsten or depleted uranium, even the APCBC could have both plastic and steel in front of projectile...)
Want a challenge?
ZSU-23-4 Shilka against 40 mm of RHA @ 50°. Wikipedia says the API penetrates 15 mm RHA @ 30°.
1 second burst @ 4000 rpm (67 rounds) hitting a 30 cm² plate at random locations. (or a long enough burst to get a penetration)
Might try that in future.
Please do the bradley’s TOW missile vs t-72 turret side
Can you simulate this projectile vs upper plate of Maus or E-100?
It wouldn’t be able to penetrate as both plates have an effective thickness of close to 400mm. 370-380mm for Maus and 400~mm for E-100.
Can you try this with 3BM15? It's a bit longer and has a tungsten core, but is still mostly maraging steel.
Is there a way for you to simulate a HEAT shell making contact with a surface and triggering it but the jet sort of "ricochets" off the surface instead of going through? I'm curious how large of an angle you'd need to block a HEAT projectile if it reflects at all.
I doubt that 89° would help there. Heat has extremely high velocity like 7-15km/s and will probably always go in a straight line and won't bounce.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag Cool, just curious. Could be a cool video idea, though
Why apfsds make less job then short ordinary rounds at the same speed??🤔🤔🤔
Can you simulate 57 mm ZIS-2 vs front top of BMP-3 ?
I will do it eventually.
Can you please make a comparison between this apfsds and the newest as possible?
I will make similar test with 3bm42 mango and 3bm46 svinets1. Those are newest projectiles i can get diagram on (and also that Chinese one that got leaked few months ago)
Cool
Was this APFSDS so weak in real life?
It had roughly 240mm of penetration. It performed similarly in this simulation.
Still enough against any NATO tank in 1962 though
@@mihailo674 m60A1 would be really hard to penetrate since it had 110mm at 65° but others would be easy. Even Leo 1 from late 1960s would be easily penetrated. 1960s were also era of heat rounds and most Soviet heat were able to pen anything including m60A1.
where is the material going?
Some of it is pushed to side and other parts are molten.
Who can explain, the speed of round more-more lower then speed of sound in material of the round. Why the speed of the round didn't change until the end?
You are talking about 0:27 view ? That's not speed that's temperature.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag no, just by eyes, the round didn't change its speed after start of penetration, until in the end stay only small part of the round, only at that time it lower it's speed.
@@КоргиКорги-с7п it did a little bit in the start too but unfortunately colors don't show that little contrast.
@@КоргиКорги-с7п The 0:20 view has the color scale mapped to velocity. You can see the color changing continuously after impact, meaning that the speed is continuously changing.
So actually 3BM4 115mm shell is even better than 3BM9?
Its 115mm not 155mm and its basically the same but 3bm9 has higher muzzle velocity.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag yes my mistake of course 115 mm I know.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag and what you think about 3BM3 or 3BM4 test? And 3BM15 or 3BM22 vs NERA? I heard that 70s soviet monolithic apfsds with low penetration at 60 angle work badly againt western NERA comparing to 3BM42 Mango or even 3BM46 Svinets or Lekalo.
@@rinaldoman3331 That is true Nera would cause them to break up and tungsten carbide in the front wouldn't help much with penetration. I will do those tests eventually as I find more data on Nera hardness of steels used and stuff like that.
Projectile made of maraging steel
3BM9 wasn't made of maraging steel but heat-treated construction steel. Russians call this type of steel 'shaft construction steel'
Cool😎
Sad
нет ни правда так камулятив не работает
This isn't a heat projectile it's apfsds.