How to Use Your AT-4 Rocket Launcher
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 июн 2024
- AT4 84mm rocket launcher is the key anti-armor weapon for any modern on the go infantry squad. I think the biggest question about this piece of equipment today is probably simply why are we even using it anymore? It's been around since the late 1980s and since then we’ve developed weapons like the Javelin and upgraded Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle which have way better anti-armor capabilities. Truth be told the AT4 isn’t really even rated to go head to head with a main battle tank.
Written by: Chris Cappy
Edited Co Produced by: Rebecca Rosen
Follow the Host: linktr.ee/cappyarmy
Inquiries: Capelluto@taskandpurpose.com
Join our Discord Channel! / discord
To get stuck on all of that would be to forget all of the positives about the AT4. For one, the back blast with the AT4-Confined Space version, isn’t nearly as serious. No I’m not saying don’t make sure no one is behind you but there is definitely less of a chance of turning the whole squad into a piece of toast.
The AT4 can be fired from the prone which might not sound like a big deal until your squad leader pulls you to the side and says “hey can you go crouch over there and shoot a rocket at that tank” the MAAWS on the other hand can injure out to 75 meters behind you when fired. That’s basically firing a weapon in both directions and hoping the other side takes more of the explosion than your own team.
The new version AT4-CS uses a saltwater countermass packed into the launcher tube that’s meant to eat up and absorb the back blast while also slowing down the dangerous pressure wave. It's 3 feet long and weighs 15 lbs. Max range 300 meters. Wow. Amazing. What a coincidence? That is EXACTLY 20 miles and 300 meters closer to enemy armor than I would ever want to be. It has a 500 meter range if you’re aiming at an area target but that sounds terrifying because it means you would be aiming at it like a platoon of tanks 500 meters away.
Which brings us to the next point: yes the AT4 is not meant to go head to head with a main battle tank like the T-90 because its armor is too thick. It can, however, knock the tracks off a tank and is very effective against other lesser armored vehicles like the BMP. The launcher can also be used against fortified enemy forces that are in a building or hiding behind cover on a mountain.
#AT4 #MILITARY #ROCKETLAUNCHER
Want more fun military content and news? Follow Task & Purpose!
Facebook: / taskandpurpose
Instagram: / taskandpurpose
Twitter: / taskandpurpose
taskandpurpose.com/ 
Развлечения
Are you telling me using the AT4 as a home defense weapon is a bad idea because i can burn my wife with it?
I don't believe you
anything up to and including a nuke is good to go for home defense!
I keep two of them under the bed.
m2 flamethrower is better than an at4 for home defense 🔥
HEAT rounds works wonders against fleshy targets....
I'm more a Gustav cannon guy myself
"It's a bit slower, but still effective"
Just like Cappy?
hoooOOOooooOOaaaAAAhhh
Yes officer, I would like to report a homicide...
@Kariza Key word: had.
@@kobidavis1752 By an anime PFP too.
My Captain said during training; "You don't fire this on a tank, the tank will just get angry with you and fire back". We were trained to use this against the supply-trucks. It is much more effective.
I'm wondering what kind of weapon would be more effective against a tank than against a supply truck...
@@An0niem4 you don't get our captains point. If you don't fight the tanks, but sneak around and hit the supply-lines the tanks will soon be out of action since they don't have any fuel.
@@MaskinJunior I get the point, but I'm wondering at what level of operations this is useful advice. Your average MBT has a range of over 400km. The grunt carrying the AT-4 can hardly decide for himself to leave the area in search of a fuel truck that is hardly likely to be right around the corner.
So while it's good strategy, it is quite a useless pointer on small arms tactics.
@@An0niem4 it is a game of hide and seek. And a MTB is blind as a bat and noisy like nothing else. But then the terrain of Sweden is mostly forrest. So there is a lot of places to hide foot soldier's, and the fuel truck need to go on roads so there will be good opportunity for ambushes.
@@MaskinJunior This is absolutely true if you're fighting a defensive war and if you don't have fixed objectives to defend. You cannot only have tactics that only apply to that specific strategic situation, right?
I'm swedish, and as you may know, Sweden is the mastermind behind this weapon and our government will send 5000 of these to Ukraine. While they aren't the best option against tanks, they will get the job done on light armoured vehicles, such as the MT-LB, BTR-60/70/80 and BMP-1/2s, which will allow the Ukrainians to spend all the expensive NLAWS and Javelins on actual tanks.
And older soviet tanks from the side and rear. Remember a tank that cant complete its mission is a mission kill
Japp!
Yes, the capabilities and proper use of the AT-4 have been demonstrated in Ukraine.
But, they armed their Saint with a Javelin ;)
That said, the US has added a load of AT-4 in the most recent package, somebody on the battle field must be asking for them
@@garysmcdermott Sweden just gave another 5000 AT-4 to Ukraine.
@@rudolfabelin383 Yes, and yesterday US added another 6000 AT-4
Take it from an EOD guy: The AT-4 is a recoilless rifle and not a rocket. It is classified as anti-tank because it uses a shaped charge and is thus armor-defeating, aka High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT); although they have several different cartridges. Results may vary depending on target, but still very effective weight to punch ratio.
Yeah.... I thought a rocket is self propelled, coming from the rocket, while a projectile is just propelled from a blast?
@@jthomas7904 You are correct. Anyone who says otherwise has either no experience or does not understand ordnance. The platform name has nothing to do with it's type by function.
Well.... shit. I stand corrected. It's not a rocket. I'm guessing a memory made 30 years ago is not as reliable as I thought. EOD_Dan - you da man.
@@UtahDelaCruz Apologies for being aggressive with my response. It's nothing personal, just that I have lost too many friends and had a few close calls myself. Sometimes people joke about "do you have all of your fingers and toes" and they do not understand what it means to me. Appreciate you acknowledging the facts. Best of luck Manny.
@@jthomas7904 Yes, but another thing why the AT-4 is better than RPG-7 is because you get much better accuracy since it's not rocket propelled. A rocket will fly all over the place, but a bullet will not do that.
"New fancy anti-armor options like... Carl-Gustaf recoilless rifle."
Yeah, like, THE Carl-Gustaf developed in 1948. New. Fancy. Whatever.
I prefer my *concealed carry* Schwerer Gustav anyway
new and fancy to the us military.
they just introduced it in the last few years.
while other nations started to phase out the carl gustaf for frontline combat roles in the 70´s and 80´s and only used it for battlefield illumination after that.....
BAD COMPANY 2
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 Special forces have been using it since the 80's
@@Cowboycomando54 for example the German armed forces retired their Carl Gustaf in the early 70s. The replacement is the Panzerfaust 3. A rpg with one use tube in the tiameter of the at4 and external warhead of larger diameter. The firecontrol group is reusable and the newest version incorporates a small fire control computer, optics and laser rangefinder. And it's penetration is around 800mm with tandem heat
As someone who used the real thing. Its funny how 75% of the b roll is of people completely dumping the shot into the ground because they aren't holding it properly.
weapon training exists for a reason right?
@@williamlindsay3484 we trained for days with first a 9mm training at4 then 20mm blanks then when we had to pass a test before getting the real one to shoot. You really need to hold it tight and support the front of it. The rocket weight is some where like 1.4kg. Imagine catching a quart of Milk without flinching or follow-through.
I’m glad someone said it
@@jackjederstrombergman4987 thank u sir 🙏! Now I'll b able to properly deactivate my neighbors car that's loud as F
@@williamlindsay3484 yup. Any moron can pick up a rocket launcher, but to actually hit something with it takes practice.
The Carl Gustav *can* actually be fired from the prone. This is standard swedish procedure, where the (usually two man) team lays on the ground by it like with the AT-4. In this configuration they can continuosly fire it from a prone position (although it's probably not very comfortable for the loader). You can see this in Swedish Army training footage.
The same in Denmark. Have fired plenty of live rounds this way during training. Both as gunner and helper.
Yes that is why it has a bipod.
You can fire more than 1 shot now?
@@Eduardo_Espinoza No, one shot only.
@@NYlocked thank you
Also dont forget, you dont always need to destroy the tank to take it out of action.
You can take it out by destroying the cannon, tracks engine ect, temp. disabling it. Repairing a tank does take time and resources u maybe dont have.
Yes sir stopping their movement is the game
The $78,000 price tag is why the Brits codename for the Javelin is "Porsche",
I enjoyed playing the NovaLogic game - Joint Operations: Escalation and found the Javelin quite engaging. Luckily I didn't have the price of each shot coming out of my military 'pay'.
That’s an insane price tag. It’s the equivalent of a BMW M3 every time you pull the trigger
How much is a dead tank worth to the guy fighting a live tank?
Priceless.
@@smithcas86 Yeah, but this is the US Military here.
Screw the AT launchers, just call in the A-10s. Cant fight back if its so dead that its descendants will feel it.
@@imapopo2924 If the enemy can afford tanks, they can afford AA, and the A-10 isn't faster than an S-300. I'd rather hump a Javelin then take on an MBT without air cover, backpain be damned.
You think the AT4 is old. The LAW is still in US service. Oh, yeah, and the Carl Gustov. The AT4 is a youngin'
The LAW is still awesome and has a place, 2 less effective explosions or 1 chance at a big at4? And yes the Carl G is the best of course, but only if a vehicle is carrying the launcher and several 3 or 6 packs around beside you 😄
Even though the Carl gustav is older it is still incredibly effective to the constant upgrades to the launcher and rounds itself
The newest LAW is smaller and lighter but have the same penetration as the AT4. The danish army have changed back to the LAW.
The LAW was brought back into service with the US military in Afghanistan because we could carry 2 LAWs for the weight of a single AT-4. While we weren’t seeing armor the LAW and AT-4 were useful for bunker emplacements and dug in positions.
@@gadget19k76 I think that was how the LAW was mostly used in Viet Nam.
The term for internal frag effects is "Spalling", a very intentional design back when they couldnt penetrate the armor, they would use HE to slap hard enough to break off stuff inside or concuss, like the HESH and HEP rounds.
a gustav with high penetration heads
Well, an AT4 just recently took out a much-praised Russian T-90 tank!
With High penetration (HP) - Extra high penetration ability, up to 42-60 centimeters (17-24 in) of RHA.
It also costs a tiny fraction of a Javelin (about 1.500 $) and the tube can just be thrown if one doesn't want /can carry it back.
lol i want to believe this... but this could easily be commie propaganda trying to convince soldiers to expose themselves by trying to kill an mbt with an ineffective weapon.
A molten slug of copper will puncture any military vehicle. I've seen them tear through modern MRAPs personally.
It was designed to attack the rear of tanks. Doctrine of the time was to establish defensive lines against mass soviet tank push. One of the tactics was to dig a foxhole in the middle of a road, cover and camo, the. Get in and wait for a tank to drive over so you could pop out and shoot him in the ass. They showed us videos of it in basic. Training at the time was more guerrillaesque than it currently is. The manuals of the time are very defensive, and defensive in depth, in nature.
And then you notice the rest of the convoy
@@cpt-cheese3489 yikes
Still, much preferable to the “rock, anti-tank, mkI” 😄
Less Guerrilla warfare and more suicide tactics. All my buddies who were in the Army were told over and over again they would die in any kind of war. Some within seconds and some would last up to 3 days.
@@danmorgan3685 And in command people were using statistical models to predict the losses and order up replacement cannon fodder. I worked there and at first it was pretty horrible just seeing the numbers projected and how troops were being staged to be used to plug the holes even before the enemy was even spotted.
Luckily for me I never had to see it all through a hot engagement, but even so it felt quite awful hearing how occasionally orders were issued that meant that statistically over 40% of the troops involve wouldn't survive. But then war is ugly and horrible and should be avoided is possible. But now and then someone manages to convince enough people that war is necessary or even desirable and then decisions like that may have to be made. Even though they may seem horrible it's possible the alternative is even worse.
The company I belonged to had a projected survival of less than three days, possibly hours depending on luck. But that was OK, strategically, as there were a backup company listening in on every communication but never giving a single peep until we were taken out, and then they would be fully up to date and ready to take over. For some reason it didn't really feel OK to me though.
Yall remember how they had an AT4 in battlefield 3 just for that one scene where you blew up that building, but you couldn't use it for anything else
Sad gamer noises
Why do games always give you a cool explosive weapon for one event and never let you have it again
@@Aaron-gc2oc BF4 had it as a special pick up on some maps
@@BaconEatingRAIDBoss oh thats cool
@@BaconEatingRAIDBoss Any reason why? Was it somehow impossible to balance?
I love how it's called the AT-4 and it's 84mm calibre. The only time I can think of that the US military has named something well. Nice 👍
As one who actually fired one I thought the same thing.
Btw the max range is misleading. Anything it is capable at killing at 200 or 300 meters it can also kill at 400 or 500 meters, it's just damn hard to hit something that far away bc the sights and such aren't calibrated and manufactured with sufficient precision along with other inherent factors.
Our range targets were roughly 450 meters away, some hits, lots of misses by a group of high caliber elite leaders.
Best range to apply imo is just beyond the reach of hand grenades, and the tank should be hit on the flank anyway.
Actually, AT-4 is the marketing name. The formal name in the US Army is "Lightweight Multipurpose Weapon M136".
@@CBDuRietz Marines don't care much about conforming to doggy nomenclature, but thanks for sharing.
btw it's also worth noting that a well equipped Marine Corps small unit is one located in close proximity to not-so-well guarded US Army supply stockpiles.
Maybe now we know one of the tricks.
Marines - What's that you say you've got missing? We've never heard of those. Our AT rocket munitions are called AT-4s. We wish you well recovering your stuff 🙂.
@@paulrevere2379 Best range to engage in is just beyond the reach of hand grenades? You can either yeet a nade a LONG ways or I want to be nowhere near you when you try to engage ANYTHING with that range. I think you are confusing max range with max EFFECTIVE range. Yes, you can reach out and kill at target at much further with almost any weapon system but like you said, you can effectively engage only much closer. 200 is probably good enough to engage or start thinking about calling in an airstrike.
@@dennisaston3551 You missed my point it seems, but you I think you can understand it. The point is that you don't ever want to have a preconceived plan that you're going to go out with a bunch of AT-4s and kill tanks. You don't want to ever let them get close enough for you to kill one even at max possible range where you would need to fire a dozen to be likely to score a hit.
Missile weapons (guided) or your own tanks are the way to take out enemy tanks effectively.
If tanks are rolling in on me and all I have is distant artillery support then I will first be calling for smoke (daytime) while simultaneously considering evac routes.
It's important to note that at least with the Marine Corps where my experience comes from, there are dedicated AT crews organic to every rifle company. The SMAW has been their principle weapon. While it's max range itself is somewhat short, it is vastly superior to the AT-4 and its employment by men who are professionally dedicated in knowing how to kill tanks is at least as important as the weapon itself.
A situation where US infantry are reduced to nothing more lethal against tanks than a few AT-4s is in a serious tight spot if they are faced with modern enemy tanks. It would be a foolish waste imo to use those last ditch shots at ranges where the odds seriously favor the tank and yes even 200 meters would be too far in an environment which isn't a nice ideal static training range. The better choice would be to evade detection as long as possible. This is where tankers have the disadvantage against infantry lacking effective longe range AT weapons. It also maximizes the opportunity to hit a tank where it will matter bc at long range the defending grunt is only presented frontal armor shots which would be like shooting a grizzly with a common pistol round.
I've never heard anybody say that the at4 rocket launcher is for battle tanks. I was taught in the Marine Corps that this weapon is used for light armored vehicles such as Scouts and armored personnel carriers.
We were told if you had to use it against a tank, volley fire was required to get an immobilized kill on a tank. But yeah, one AT-4 won't do much vs a main tank
@@qewfsdsd65445 Especially if they aren't protected by ERA or composite side armor, it'll be an easy kill. It's definitely possible, but other weapons are of course more effective. The AT4 would be devastating to something like a BMP though.
@@qewfsdsd65445 Depending on where it hits, what type of ammo is used and how the tank is built, it can destroy anything.
They work well on mud huts, bunkers, walls, buildings etc.
One day, when cappy finally sells his old camry, he might even be able to afford to wash his t-shirt before filming
I noticed the spot of "tooth paste" after I shot the video. I went to change shirts but those were even dirtier sooooo
@J F don't judge him; the Ancient Greeks said prostitutes were better than teachers.
It's not about the cost, it's about learning to operate a washing machine.
What's a "washing machine" ?
@@Taskandpurpose I rather grab a RPG 30 or 29, or even the panzerfaust 3 than this garbage.
After using for it's intended purpose you can either use it as:
-baseball bat
-A replacement pipe
-A flute
- 1x monoscope
Flute lmao
my favorite instrument is the at4
@@dakotadawn5789 army orchestra
Also can be haar to consumer large amounts of alcohol
A replacement pipe would be a good idea tbh
The AT-4 was used by my squad to mostly hinder the crew. not to punch through the armor or anything, but to give the guys inside a really bad concussion from the explosive force, which can then be used to get closer to said vehicles to properly disable it if it hasn't been already disabled from the actual rocket. The AT-4 is an amazing anti-vehicles weapons, if aimed at the right spots
At the beginning of my career I was an 11BC2. If you know what that is you can roughly figure out how long I have been in. The M136 Rocket Launcher aka AT-4 was a line grunts anti-tank weapon. Last ditch effort. Pretty sure the range at Fort Benning is no longer used that trained 11 Bravos on the tactic of letting the armor drive over your position to then pop up and engage the rear of the vehicle. It was round "race track" type road with two spider holes on the 3 and 9 o'clock position. A Bradley fighting vehicle and its crew would be tasked to drive around all day as trainees would be given an expended AT-4 trainer. A trainee would enter the hole, the Bradley would drive over the Soldier would pop up and surprise butt sex on a "tank" would be carried out and then get out replace with new trainee and they would cycle through the whole unit. Remember most of the Soviet tanks have there fuel tanks on the back of a tank. The troop carrier called the Meatball or MTLB, its rear troop hatches were the fuel tanks. Weakness of the T series tanks was the Halon Fire Supression system. If you got a fire going on the engine area of the tank, it would set off the halon then the troops need to get out. The weekest part of a MBT is its crew.
Not sure if they still do, but they did in 94. That was really fun, one of the highlights of basic training for me
a key factor is getting bad-guy tanks to have to drive into areas that provide cover and concealment for us grunts..Mainly done in terrain with natural terrain features , like even rolling hills, that can be modified with command detonated charges, and even minefields(which I hate) channelizing traffic into kill zones. Ukraine doesnt seem to offer good ambush zones, except in the towns or at river crossings. it does seem the grunts are killing tanks, however. probably indicating badly trained or unmotivated personnel
Goddamn planned obsolencence, i bought an at-4 without knowing it was single use, worst purchase of my life...
@safari mang Idk man I also thought that a Panzerfaust could be reloaded, that was the second worst purchase of my life...
@@yanislahtal6253 I mean, the Panzerfaust 3 can be reloaded I think.
If your on a budget get a recoiless rifle
@@ln7929 you could also do what france did, if you have a scooter. They slapped a recoilless rifle onto a scooter and said “fuck it, it’s done”
@@yanislahtal6253 just build one from good materials.
"Disable any troops inside the vehicle" Oh ya, they're disabled alright.
That's a euphemism if I ever heard one.
@@Brett_S_420 what’s a euphemism
But yes, the troops will be disabled
i like my women like my enemy tanks. Disabled and penetrated.
@LOAN NGUYEN I think knocked up is the more offensive term. Anyway, men don't get women pregnant. Women get women pregnant because they have to accept it. its like saying a bartender gets someone drunk. Unless the bartender is forcing them to imbibe, the person choosing to imbibe the liquid and render changes to their body is the one making the choice.
When I was serving in the Singapore Army pre-millennium, we used the Carl Gustav 84mm Recoilless Rifle. I have a lot of respect for that weapon. Although it was a bit heavy to lug around, it could fire a wide range of munitions. And it's as tough as hell... If you want a solid, no-nonsense launcher to blast practically anything except the thickest armour, the Carl Gustav was (and still is) the way to go. Besides, carrying five AT-4s or one CG with five missiles is a simple decision - the CG wins every time.
There are new versions of the "CG" now with titanium barrels and the rest in carbon fiber. Much lighter, I know the pain of marching 10+ kilometers fully geared with that 16kg steel tube xD
Hi SG, In sweden the CG team of 2 men has the launcher as their main job. The AT4's are carry by normal infantry soldier. Can have 2 AT4 strapped to your backpack ! So different roles and every platoon has one CG group and maybee 10-15 AT4 when in combat.
"Swedish armour penetrating shots like AT-4 are unexpectedly effective"
The Swedish armour shots AT-4 and other armour-piercing weapons have been unexpectedly effective in the war in Ukraine.
- This catastrophic effect of being shot at with backpack single-use AT-4 portable anti-tank weapons has at least surprised me, says Lieutenant Colonel Joakim Paasikivi to Norwegian NRK. Sweden has decided to send a total of 10,000 hand-held anti-tank weapons of the armour shot type AT-4, also called p-shots.
They are intended for use against lightly armoured vehicles, but not heavy tanks. Despite this, it appears that the hand-held weapons are destroying heavily armoured Russian track vehicles in Ukraine.
- Several tanks are fought with weapons that we in some cases did not seem able to fatally knock out a tank, says Lieutenant Colonel Joakim Paasikivi, who is a teacher of military strategy at the Swedish National Defence College, to NRK.
Hit the tower! The effectiveness may be due in part to the fact that Ukrainian soldiers are exceptionally good at using the Swedish weapons, and get into good positions to fire them. In part, it may be because Russian tanks are poorly constructed, according to him.
- The ammunition is stored in the cannon tower. Hit near the cannon tower causes an ammunition fire. The ammunition explodes, the tower flies off and the crew dies, Paasikivi tells NRK.
The Norwegian Armed Forces states that they have doubled their commitment and sent 4,000 anti-tank weapons of the M72 type, which are also hand-held but which are described as weaker than the Swedish AT-4 disposable p-shot.
A Volunteers lightly trained Home Guard has a future! According to Lieutenant Colonel Paasikivi, the war in Ukraine has shown that small swift and agile groups on foot - often behind enemy lines - can effectively knock out heavy armour and other enemy vehicles.
He sees a future for light infantry and homeland security groups in the Nordic countries, and that they should also be equipped with drones like the US made "Switchblade" for reconnaissance and attack.
"The Finnish territorial defence and the Swedish and Norwegian Home Guard are exceptionally good candidates for carrying out this type of weapons successfully into battle," he told NRK.
The Carl Gustav can certainly be fired from the prone position.
I was about to say Im pretty sure the Carl Gustav could easily be fired from prone hehe
Its not in the manual, so its impossible. Sorry to anyone that's actually done it, because you are now an illogical fallacy, and have deleted your existence... all hail the manual!
@@berryreading4809 I wonder its because of a chance the fins on the rocket might expand and catch the ground or grass? But yeah - because manual Haha 👍
@@berryreading4809 Dammit, now I don't even exist anymore.....
Oh wait, it's in the Swedish manual so Im OK guys
Relatively sure it was originally developed with a bipod
“It can be easily carried as a secondary weapon”
*Looks at Battlefield 3 and 4*
In my experience I mean you do if you have to but secondary weapons this size suck if you have to go through any forests. Humped a 60mm mortar, M16 and a couple rounds for the mortar. Not enough hands to keep everything from getting tangled in branches each time I passed a tree. To those that say its "only another 15lb so it's easy" I say ok lets take turns carrying it then.
@@ilongfordarkness I remember one day having to lug an AT4 because some idiot couldn't move fast enough, I lugged it and a SAW a couple hundred meters during a field excercise to "knock out" an enemy stryker. Wasn't fucking fun.
Ex Canadian army here. The Carl G can certainly be fired from prone; in fact are version had a small rotatable bipod on the shoulder plate. BTW the AT4 is a recoilless rocket. It does not have a rifled barrel or a rocket motor. It uses a propellant charge like artillery, but vents gas to the rear to counter the recoil of the charge
Western FPS quote : "RPG!"
Arabic FPS quote : "AT4!"
"New fancy anti-armor options"
Carl Gustaf laughs in "entered services in 48"
j/k
I should have specified the new version of the Carl Gustaf which fires cray cray fancy laser guided munitions haha
@@Taskandpurpose OK, a minor detail for the video as a whole.
@@Taskandpurpose so a new round not a new launcher
@@ianmills9266 I mean it's not like the physics of a pipe with two holes in it has particularly changed; the ammunition is all that really matters here.
@@pxatm well the modern carl is made of different, lighter materials than the orginal carl, which is infact a change in the physics of the pipe...
Someone in my unit must have hated me when I was a BOOT, because they let me shoot the AT-4 from the prone in training... oh man did that hurt...
Thank your recruiter and drill seargeant
I'd refuse that! Tell em where to put that AT4
The M72 was a lightweight system weighing between 5-8lbs depending on the model. Nice and disposable and in plentiful supply. During the Cold War in the 1980's it was believed that the military would be passing them out like candy bars at Halloween to try stop any Soviet thrust into Germany. You could give one to each member of a rifle squad if you needed to since the weight was negligible.
And every member of the squad would need one... to take out a single tank... maybe. Prolly not. You're dead anyway. No point in crying about it.
This aged well
Welcome to 2022
When I was in the Swedish army my training captain said: This is the only weapon that every person in the armed forces need know how to operate.
Most units were equipped with AK5 (FNC) and some units had the AK4 (G3), but everyone had the M86 (AT4). This was the weapon that was going to be used against the BMPs that would invade us.
I don't know where you got your information on the Carl Gustaf not being usable while in prone when the Swedish army very much does so. You position yourself the same way you would with a AT-4.
You even get a little detachable "bipod" that is included for that very reason.
Dang
Yeah, he got that one wrong.
Norway also trains with the carl gustav in prone position
Vikings train as they fight! ;) Always use the lowest position possible for concealment and weapon support as it increaseas personal protection and accuracy.
The US field manuals do not have any instruction to use it from the prone position, therefore you do not do so. Because rules and stuff.
So basically speaking, the AT-4 is essentially a bigger "noob tube" weapon
*flashbacks to original mws*
yes. nothing new about that.
i wonder why there needs to be a video about that.
everyone knows it can't compete with the big boys like ATGMs or modern RPGs and is pretty useless in most cases against MBTs except you hit a weak spot.
@@Blei1986 RPG-7 sucks against MBT.
@@karlhans6678
1st - i said *modern* RPGs (you know there exist more than just RPG7)
2nd - there are even modern (tandem, for example) warheads avaible for the old RPG7 which CAN be a serious threat to MBTs
@@Blei1986 "2nd - there are even modern (tandem, for example) warheads avaible for the old RPG7 which CAN be a serious threat to MBTs" this is what i was referring too-- sounds like another russian wishful thinking.
"Stop using the AT-4 against tanks"
Is this advice for my everyday life?
Never got to shoot a live one but I LOVED the sub-caliber insert equipped ones used in training, which shoots a single 9MM round. We used tracers which we were told simulate very well the flight of the live projectile itself. At 8:25, that's one being fired to the left, as well as at 9:23
I fired those many times when i was in the swedish army. Also those blue things you put in the back of modified variants. Made one hell of a bang.
And the sound is like: “FLUMP!”
It can be manipulated to explode inside of the room?
"- You're tearing me apart, HEDP!"
Program the warhead and it blows a hole in the wall, then explodes when its inside the room.
@@robertbobbypelletreaujr2173 "explode inside of *The Room* " joke.
1:40 gave me an idea, put your pop tarts back there to get them freshly toasted
my favorite is poptarts and avacado
@@Taskandpurpose eww, unsubscribed!!! XD
@@Taskandpurpose that's worse than beans on weatabix
@@Taskandpurpose I almost threw up on my computer from that...
@@Taskandpurpose Sour cream & onion poptarts are the best ones, change my mind.
Love this relaxing music in combination with your calming way of talking about deathtools
Let me tell you that the L14A1 Carl Gustav can certainly be fired prone, its a standard position for employment, and the bipod is used to make firing prone easier.
I have fired it prone many times.
Correct.
Agreed
Was about to say the same thing
HEDP usually means that the warhead has a shaped charge with a fragmentation ring around it. if it hits a hardened target, it the shaped charge can burn a hole into it. if it hits near an infantry position, it will frag the area, hitting any exposed infantry.
In light of the onset of conflict in Eastern Europe, and the staggering effectiveness of Man Portable weapons against Russian Armor, it might be worth re-evauating the effectiveness of the AT-4. While the Ukrainians do have an awful lot of Javelins. I think they are still sporting quite a few of these.
Not sure if they have that AT-4 itself, but they do have the updated version - NLAW.
Sweden just sent 5000 AT4s (or Pansarskott 86) to Ukraine, so we're way ahead of you. 🙂
@@MawrtiniTheGreat US sent another 6000 AT4s on March 23
They have fewer Javelins than other launchers. They're receiving more from the US, but are still getting a lot more AT4s than Javelins
@@ENCHANTMEN_ They had a butt load of Javelins from the Trump admin, but the Ukrainian military put most of it at the Donetsk and Crimean fronts and they all got captured by Russians on the first day. There is a lot of videos of Russians unpacking the Javelins. But yeah, the AT4 are way cheaper and are a lot easier to use. They are just sending civilians out to die without any overarching strategy or maneuvering, so it's not like it matters that they don't have missiles. Javelins are also not something you can just hand to someone, you need some training to properly set the parameters for targeting.
Inexpensive, light, and handy for a lot of "Make that thing over there go boom" tasks. What's not to like?
I hope they are shipping thousands of them to Ukraine, along with everything else.
@@rtqii Sweden shipped 5000 of them and they are already in Ukraine.
@@Slake2 Then Putin's army is already dead. Ukraine has ten times this number waiting to pull the trigger on them.
U.S. Army Infantry Officer (Ret). I fired 95 AT-4s in my time in the Army. We were taught from min-1 day-1 that these are NOT to be fired at tanks unless you get a perfect rear shot on the engine deck. The AT-4 is superb for killing APCs like the BMP-1, 2 and 3, a BRDM, any form of GAZ (eastern bloc equivalent to a jeep or Humvee). We also practice destroying fortified positions such as sandbag emplacements that the enemy is foolish enough to layer in wire (such as chicken wire to prevent hand grenades from landing in the machine gun position, this is common in Bosnia), the AT-4 will clip on the wire and blow up at eye-level inside the sandbags wiping out the gun and everyone within 15 feet of the position with a 90% kill probability. But yes...DO NOT FIRE at T-72s...you'll just piss it off.
For those of you who never shot one before, they have a unique flight profile that more than 99% accurate with a 9mm pistol round fired from a 19 inch barrel with a 7-1 twist. To practice on the AT-4 without wasting live rounds, we have AT-4Ps that have that 9mm 19inch barrel inside them, you open the rear, load in a pistol tracer round, then aim and fire like the real thing. The flight profile is so perfectly similar that if you score 5 of 5 hits at 250 meters with 9mm rounds, you WILL score a kill with the live weapon vs a BMP.
Also, the UXO (unexploded ordinance) specialists did testing with AT-4 tubes left behind. They were able to mount low-pressure rockets in them and fire them accurately again out to 200 meters with moderate accuracy. However, if the sights are broken off the tube their accuracy fell to "less than 10 hits in 100 shots", so it is standard practice that when you fire an AT-4, you turn it upside down and kick the sights off it before throwing the tube. The sights are polymer and shatter when broken this way.
If im not totally wrong, the 9 mil used for training is one with reduced powder charge. Is has those black lines painted on the back of the casing.
@@KristofferEngstrom We used a special 9mm tracer round when we practiced with this during my military service in Sweden, i believe it had a white band around the projectile. Not sure about the black band at the bottom it was 27 years ago =9
@@OjsMatte 9 mm sk ptr m/67 SlPrj.
"Live round m/67 is used for 9mm practice weapon 4 for GRG m/48B, m/48C and for Pskott m/86. It is used for a distance up to 200 meters. The ammunition is weaker loaded than a standard round, and is forbidden to be used in submachine guns or pistols. If fired in a pistol the weak load will make the gun to not cycle"
From the horses mouth. Great stuff
Many countries still use older tanks like the T72, and the AT4 is still perfectly effectice against probably 95% of armored personnel carriers, anti-aircraft platforms like the ZSU 23-4 and 2S6, or self propelled artillery like the M109, 2S19, 2s1, etc.
Well, down here where I live the most possible tanks I would have to fight would be T-55s, SK-105, and TAMs, so I'm pretty sure the AT4 round wouldn't even realize it hit something
My point exactly and against modern tanks you'd still get a mobility kill .
Now in ukraine rpg26s are being used to disable t72 b3 (2016) by shooting at the rear engine, and theres no reason they wouldnt work on t80s or t90s. The AT4 would be able to do the exact same thing. The crews abandon the tanks right after, so thats practically a kill right there.
Nope, I bounced one off a T 72 in Bosnia, the crew were quite stunned and evacuated. I'm pretty sure the crew has inner ear damage to this day
@@nicolaihilckmann4677 , then it accomplished its mission since the crew bailed . I have bee following the russian invasion of the Ukrain and I watched a video of what looked like ( you have to take everything coming out with a grain of sail because of the proppoganda) either a AT 4 OR that bunker buster rocket we gave to the Ukrainians. There was 2 soldiers sitting on top of the tank ( that's how I know it's not staged) and it looks like it hit on the turret ring . It did a number on that tank and definitely either killed the 2 soldiers or seriusly wounded them . Point being if all you've got is a law use it because your going to do some damage or kill enemies around the tank .
It's great to hear you speak Chris. As a 46q, guys like you made my job a whole lot easier. Thanks
He even masters Swedish (4.54) :-)
Unionited Manufacturing Works.
AT-4 against almost everything, and NLAW or Javelin against a tank.
AT-4 is a Swedish weapon
Carl Gustav is a Swedish weapon
Just so you know :D
Gotta
Buy anti tank weapon from swedish
Ah, those peaceful, neutral Swedes.
Between their weapons, their furniture kits, the meatballs and the women, they should rule the world.
But no. Neutral...
Sweden is not a country anymore just an economic zone with economic units(slaves) a natural resource currently being stripmined to death....
@@insiainutorrt259 So, your party did not win enough seats in the Riksdag?
@@MonkeyJedi99
For over 100 years...
All partys are exactly the same outside of the show and games they pretend infront of peoples as distraction...
And strangely all the real action is exactly the same as in all the other former countries now turned economic zones....
Like the show has no real power at all and
its all decided elsewhere
If you could only have ONE out on patrol would you rather the AT-4 or JAVELIN?
I haven’t even watched the video yet, and I’m going with the AT-4, it served me too well in MW2 for me to give up on the thing
At4 more versatile and smaller than the javelin
Javelin, weighs more yet... idk
javelin
That would depend on the environment. However, if the environment has a lot of unknowns.... Javelin, no question about it!
I am actually impressed by how wrong the pronunciation is at 4:50, you nailed it. Love the video as always!
"Fire and forget" usually refers to automaic tracking after you fire. Not that it's a one shot disposable weapon.
AT5: ❌
AT4 EXTENDED RANGE: ✔
Its easier to sell and upgraded weapon, even if completly new, rather than change the weapon name,..... just look the Air force with the F18 vs F18 Super Hornet, overall a new plane, but why name it f19? New training, new contract, new cost.... but F18 Hornet, shure, we say its the same thing to taxpayers no more cost in R&D, and they will sign the bill..... its more "easy"
The name "AT4" is actually a pun; the weapon's caliber is 84 mm (84/AT4). So AT5 wouldn't make any sense.
Isn't it an unguided projectile? So you can shoot at things further away than you can possibly hit?
@@boddjpllf4861 AT5 is easier to say than AT4 EXTENDED RANGE. AT4A1 would also work.
@@svenyboyyt2304 so the AT4 E8?
Actually, the biggest AT4 fails are when you're about to shoot a tank, and then some noob steps right in front of you and it blows up in his back, and since you can't damage your own teammates he takes no damage, but you take the blast damage and it kills you. And the worst part is, he's just a worthless sniper who refuses to play the objective.
WTH are you talking about...
PROMOTEEEEEED
Squad 2
@@perseusrex614 video games
I just had flashbacks from your comment. That video game ptsd.
I knew a guy in Tikrit Iraq who fired one of these from a building and took out a RPG team and some rifleman with it . Needless to say it worked and yes you can fire an AT 4 out of a window during MOUT combat as long as there is a open door and windows for the back blast . The guy was a SSG and ranger tabbed his plt leader got pissed off but he took out the threat .
I've seen the KG fired from the 'prone' position on many occasions. It's all about position. 'Prone' just means 'laying down,' but it's more intricate than that. Burning your leg to a crisp is not inevitable when firing KG, prone.
I was taught in IET back in 07 that, "Remember, AT-4s make bunker busting a no brainer."
Great information! Remember, the weakest point on any tank, however big or modern, are its tracks!
British Marines found out during the Falklands War (1982) that they could do little damage to entrenched Argentinian troops on hilltops. However, then they improvised and started firing their anti tank launchers at those positions and found out they worked a treat.
One thing though: Fire and Forget indicates a missile does not need further guidance by the weapon's operator. So once you fire it, first having achieved a target lock, the missile will chase and hopefully destroy the target on its own, leaving the pilot to deal with other threats.
Delete Marines insert Paras. The marines were in gay fire fights compared to the paras and even the Scots Guards did the more difficult scrapping...
AT-4 is unguided, just a single shot recoilless round (projectile, not a rocket). Look for the Javelin videos instead.
@@peterstubbs5934 Didn't the marines on South Georgia badly damage an Argentinian corvette with a round from a Carl Gustav ? This was well before Paras arrived on the Falklands.
Fire and forget doesn't necessarily mean that it's guided. Fire and forget can apply also apply to (technically speaking) to unguided munitions like the AT-4 because even t though it's unguided you can just fire and forget about it, it will either hit its intended target or not. Anything that doesn't require you to continuously paint your target like you have to with TOWs and Sparrow missiles, is fire and forget.
@@maconescotland8996 Corvettes are made from Fiberglass...so not much there...lol
I fired the M72 Law during training at Fort Jackson in 1968 at a tank, a prop only, but still a real tank. I was amazed to hit the thing dead center from about 300 yards or a little more. Hard to tell how much damage if any it did. I suppose it wouldn't have done much harm to a working enemy tank, but a lot better than nothing. This was from a standing position. You had to be careful of what or who might be standing in the area behind because the back blast was really fierce.
The first time I ever fired a live AT4 and felt that shockwave in my chest it was also the first time I decided joining the infantry wasn’t such a terrible idea
The Carl Gustav can be fired from prone, its how its taught in Norwegian training.
If Norweigan army teaches that the am CERTAIN both US Army Infantry & elite USMC Infantry teach that & more as well. Cheers
The javelin uses two warheds which allow it to punch thru ERA and slat cages. You should cover the warheads and how they work against armor a bit more.
Not to mention how expensive the Rockets are.. I'm fairly sure it's $80,000
@@vigilantewpgrlsv9449 the tanks and ifvs it destroys are more than ten times as expensive.
considering he's mainly covering the AT4 it's not entirely necessary. Plus the Javelin is a top-down attack in particular, giving it a greater effect on top of the tandem charge and has tracking. The AT4 is a single charge warhead while as being dumbfire and direct attack and is just as effective against light armored targets(which still costs more than the 1400 needed to make an AT4).
The AT4 and CG and all modern AT weapons have dual charge warheads too.
@@vigilantewpgrlsv9449 The Javelin is THE weapon you want to have against armored targets and very cost efficient when it comes to destroying those toys.
I trained with the LAW in 1982.... The AT was an enormous upgrade. Still even then it was never an "anti tank" weapon; however, it could then and still defeat any armored vehicle short of an MBT. Long story short, Its purpose is and was an anti armor antifortification ROCKET LAUNCHER to have at hand when other squad direct fire weapons were inadequate. In effect, a western, "cadillac", single shot RPG. It is as useful and effective as it has ever been.
Rocket launcher? No.
Recoilless rifle? No.
Toob? Yes!
I'm ashamed of myself for not buying a legal RPG-2 at a local gun show for $300
All rpgs are legal but not the grenade
There is "training grenades" that fire 7.62 single shot.
Yes this is something I would kill for lmso
You should be
Between AT-4 and Javellin i choose....
RPG
I choose Davy Crockett
I cannot choose anything! I'm stuck with my L86 LSW and AT4
Rpg7v?
Rpg 29?
M o l o t o v
@@TomahawkDemon now that’s just cheating
US Army Infantry vet here. I have used this weapon. It can blow the tracks and wheels off tanks and disable them, but the tanks can shoot back. Not a good idea. If that's all you have, it's best to fire on their supply trucks or shallow heavy-defended positions. If you have many, take out the tracks and leave them sitting ducks for artillery and more effective anti-tank weapons.
I remember, when I was in the Marines, that we were trained to keep the launch tube after firing, because the enemy could make improvised mortar launchers, booby traps, etc. So, even though the launch tube is trash, you have to bring it back with you so that it can be destroyed before disposal.
That is the line you were fed so you would comply with turning the tube back in to account for it. A God Fist is a big enough deal to rate that level of accountability.
@@slthbob
Nah. That's what was happening to the soldiers and Marines during the Vietnam War with the M-72 LAAW. Those are fire and toss weapons, just like the AT-4.
The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army were rigging the expended M-72 tubes into booby traps.
So, that's one of the lessons that the U.S. military learned about leaving expended launch tubes in the field without destroying them, first.
@@direbearcoat7551 My god man... a pipe... any pipe... now must be destroyed on the battlefield... eye roll for the.pronounced effect... when do we start bombing scrap metal piles for the same reason? Pretend harder... you are talking to the real deal dude. The mushroom squads operate better when kept in darkness and fed bullshit... there is no shame in being treated like one while you were one... IF you ever were.
Wait hold up, did you just call the carl gustaf new and fancy?
the new version of the Carl Gustaf I should say
@@Taskandpurpose haha it's nice to see them update such classic technology
Never fix something that isn't broke.
Fun fact. A little while ago, down in Chile (a country with fairly strict firearm laws), a man was busted by their FBI equivalent for having an AT4 casually hanging in his living room as a wall decoration.
The funny bit is, though, those guys were investigating a murder, and had to walk into that guy's house, so they politely asked, only to find that marvelous ornament hanging there.
Dude allegedly bought it for some $50 at a local farmer's market.
Was it an at4 tube empty or was it loaded and ready to fire?
Yeah, almost all of the "AT4"s turned in to gun buybacks are empty tubes.. which are basically props. Of course, you could probably hand in airsoft at most of those buybacks and they'd crow about getting a "full auto assault rifle" or something so..
good intel t&p! Cappy is funnier than usual in this one. yall have urselves a good'n
We have the Carl Gustave M3 now. I was at the class a couple of weeks ago at Fort Indiantown Gap. You can fire them in the prone, it even has a bipod.
The only reason I know the cost of a javelin by heart is because of Call of Duty Modern Warfare death screen quotes.
Lol
When the cost of shooting a javelin round costs more then you have made in the last 3 years. Just makes me wanna shoot it more
Thsts OK.as its well worth the price. Speaking of price,they. need to find way. To make it significantly cheaper & do so ASAP
Then, you had better make it count. If you miss, any and all witnesses will never forgive you, or let you forget. Plus, they will spread the word. I've seen it. You'll be made famous, and you won't like it one bit.
Thanks for the vid. One thing, the AT-4 is ( or was at last untill 2001) regulary fired from the prone althow you need to assume an angled fieringpossition.
Why anyone would think a weapon called the "Anti-tank 4" is an anti-tank weapon is beyond me.
Armor and infantry recon here, 19D10-3 1988-1992.
I have used the AT4 extensively, and it did not have penetration even back then. It was very iffy to get through even the side armor of a tank, especially after the introduction of reactive armor. That does not mean it is useless against a tank. I have crept up on tanks, especially in laager, to the point where I could drop CS grenades into the open hatches (they eventually made us stop doing that because of fire risk). Tanks without infantry support are vulnerable if you can get close.
In an infantry battle like Stalingrad or in MOUT or heavy terrain, tanks can be taken out with an AT4. It used to be top or rear armor kills, but if you take out the tracks the tank is a mobility kill. That can block road access and stop columns making them vulnerable to further attack. A mobility kill is a kill, especially if they have to have support to fix. A tank with a busted track wheel or thrown track is just a bunker or obstacle.
As you mention though, against vehicles like Bradley's, BMP's, BRDM's and other light armor the AT4 is devastating. Overkill really if there is such a think on the battlefield. For vehicles like that an even lighter rocket launcher would do just fine and we could carry more. This is a strength of the RPG, multiple warheads at a lighter weight. Fantastic weapon the RPG, loved our training on it as well as the Dragunov when Russia was the USSR and facing us across the Fulda Gap. We had to train with enemy weapons because we often found ourselves way behind enemy lines. Bottom line, in an infantry battle like Stalingrad, I would be very very happy to have an AT4 if my only other choice was to try to face a tank with a rifle.
Actually the law rocket came back into service a while ago. It was found it did a good job of blowing up bunkers & you can carry 2 laws for the same weight as 1 at4
I hope he'll do a video on the law.
Also the LAW will go off almost every time, I spent about half my time in the military as EOD, I only know of one team that ever found a unexploded LAW, but in one week on one range my company found almost 2000 unexploded AT-4's. Every time the range was used, we had to have a team on stand by as they would have one that did not go boom and if they were not done we had to go deal with it before they could get back to training.
The law would do a good job against BMP,s
Denmark started using it again a year ago... but now just send 2700 of them to Ukraine.
Not every target on the battlefield is a T 90 tank .
"
Stop using the AT-4 Rocket Launcher against tanks"
Nice try, Ivan
When he quoted the officer who said, "Can you go over there and expose yourself?" if shocked me at first, then I realized what he meant.
Girls Video Title: "Stop saying plus-sized women are fat"
Boys video title:
Stop calling _x_ its correct name. It's hurtful!
I remember talking to a demo guy back in college after he was out. He explained the after armor effect basically blast all the soft squishy targets inside back out the very small hole it entered through. I don't think we were meant to be able to pass through a hole just a few inches in diameter.
I hope you're joking, you're joking right?
Not after the first time, we're not!
@@MonkeyJedi99 What?
@@NarutoMagicCyclops The first time you pass through a hole only a few inches across is birth.
Well, for the majority of us anyway.
@@MonkeyJedi99 Considering that hole stretches as we are pushed out, I wouldn't quite say it's the same, however this guy is thinking that an implosion is happening which is physically impossible, what is happening is that there is concussive forces strong enough to kill people in armored vehicles, that and shrapnel flying around.
Carl Gustav is a must have for every army, with it's quick shot when carried loaded and multi purpose rounds that can handle most situations op to 1.5 km. Some Javelins is of course a good complement for missions exceeding the CG anti armour capabilities.
I am actually from the M 72 era, I only got the fire training round in basic, as I was an 02 tango. Very cool to catch up on the history. True correspondence course they mentioned something called a dragon, and I don’t know what that is, because you just explain that some day, the history and following tools.
*"Granola chewing hippie gives rationale on not using anti tank rockets against tanks"*
sir, I exclusively chew on soy products.
@@Taskandpurpose we know
wait, did this get a heart in just five minutes? Dang, this is the second time!
Anti light armor, not anti tank
4:50 as a Swede I saw this and pretty much it translates to: United Factories
Sort of the original bazooka round - it *was* a rocket, but the rocket burnt out before the round emerged from the launcher.
As an Aussie infantry vet we were carrying the m72 Law in 2000🤣🤦♂️, and we still carry an improved modernized version aswell as the Carl gustav and Javilin
I will definitely keep this advice in mind the next time I go to the range with my at4
the at4 just took out a t90m tank in ukraine
I’ve never used or seen an AT4, let alone need to know how to use one properly, but I instantly clicked this video love this content well done sir.
OK, this may not be all that significant in the grand scheme of things, but being an long time avid wargamer and playing games like Combat Mission Black Sea that watching this video should help me play game like that much better now that I have a better understanding of how it works and how it is best employed in that though I know a bit about WWII weapons I am not that knowable about more modern ones... though it seems there is always more to learn about all of them, past and present.
Great video!
Training on this by shooting 9mm tracer rounds through it, was high up on the list of the most fun I had in the Army.
For the record, we were instructed to aim at the top center of the tracks. For whatever that's worth.
You carry a Javelin on patrol vs an at4, if the tank won’t kill me the heat is exhaustion will
What's more destructive? At-4 or AT&T?
answer: AT&T
AT-4 destroys armor and buildings
AT&T destroyed Superman's home, DC Comics.
4:51 Förenade Försvarsfabriken that was epic. Absolutely zero chance of anyone even guessing what’s being said. HE for Hilarious Effort :)
Well i can't read all 2300+ comments to see if this been mentioned earlier.. For starters the AT-4 entered service in 1987 while the Carl-Gustaf was developed in the late 1940's so the AT-4 is definately more modern. They may both be called recoilless but thats not really true. I've fired several live rounds of both and sure they have low recoil considering the amount of mass they throw downrange, but not close to recoilless and the same goes for any weapon of this type including RPG-7.
When i did my swedish military swevice in the mid 90's we had a practice weapon for the AT-4 that fired a tracer 9mm round from a short barrel, that was pretty much recoilless.
During my service time they changed that to a 20mm round (still short barrel to get the same ballistics) to get it closer to the real thing and well.. not recoilless, thats for sure.
7:21
That soldier shooting the AT-4 is wearing Tri-Color which means the original video is probably over ten years old, and yet the video quality isn’t complete shit.
That’s rare footage right there.
I have only one thing to say about this....
BACKBLAST AREA CLEAR!!
Here commenting after an AT4 was used to destroy a T90M, the most modern operational Russian rank 😎