Спасибо, теперь все военные заводы поднялись и стали менять "Реликт"... Только Малахит (ДЗ 4 поколения) будет максимально эффективно понижать угрозу от ОБПС.
@@romanyalovyi6079 Ты один из тех идиотов, которые считают, что в Rheinmetall работают волшебники создавшие ОБПС, летящий с гигантской скоростью и не влияющий на объекты попадающиеся на его пути? Ты хоть немного читал о ДЗ "Малахит"? Знаешь, что она снимает примерно 800 мм бронепробития? Ты знаешь, как она работает? Нет - не пиши чушь...
@@romanyalovyi6079малахит работает не от прямого воздействия, а с помощью электрического поля, дз сработает всё равно, да и не надо нести бред, что дз от новых ломов не сработает
@@mr_Saladman18 the explosive velocity of smokeless gunpowder nowadays 7km per second compared to 1300m/s of blackpowder. There are definitely slower explosions. Or maybe the explosive was triggered too quickly in relikt.
О, это вы великий конструктор бронетанковой техники? напишите в Уралвагонзавод со своей заявкой, по слухам "секретная информация от наших коллег из ФБР" там работают одни кретины которые совсем не справляются со своей работой и им никак не обойтись без ваших величайших конструкторских решений P.S. дубина ты сталеросовая физику прогуливала видимо в школе, ты вообще имеешь понятие, как ведёт себя материал на таких скоростях? Задача реликта как раз и состоит в том чтобы с максимальной скоростью выбросить бронеплиту в сторону снаряда чтобы за вот это микромгновение контакта с ним передать ему противоположный импульс, замедлив его а также изменив вектор скорости БОПСа, хотя да в вашей танковой доктрине до сих пор существует мнение что без заряжающего из банановой республики не обойтись и чем тяжелее танк, тем лучше, скоро видимо дойдете до того что у вас борта и крыша танка из фанеры крашеной будут (вы уже к этому близки), чтобы хоть как-то компенсировать толщину лба корпуса и башни которая себя оправдывает только в случае если бы в танк стреляли только прямо))))))))))
Every simulation shows the dart hitting the era block dead center where its most effective No one shows how effective it is if the dart hits a corner or anything
@@BlackZaporozhianDUPLET is twice as heavy tho id you want to use it on a tank you have to remove the first layer of composite to fit it due to weight increase but yeah it is more effective than RELIKT and K5
Why are T-90M steel plates segmented? That may have altered the results in some way. On the other hand, perhaps try delaying the detonation of ERA a little bit more? This feels very "sudden", the back flying plate had almost no interaction with the projectile.
The plates are segmented to reduce the number of nodes and control the size of the segment. This process has no effect after using fixed support and other techniques. Actually the second plate interacts with the penetrator, the detonation time was set to simulate the real Relikt mechanism.
@@romanyalovyi6079 actually DM53 penetrator is not segmented. M829A3 as we know from the patents has 1 segmented sacrificial section which is the tip of the projectile made of steel.
@@alanch90 DM53 has 3 segments. German patent DE 4023482A1 Zu einer Anhebung der Durchschlagsleistung von unterka-librigen Wuchtgeschossen 10 an Mehrstoff-Sonderzielen werden vor ainem Hauptkern 20 zwei Vorkerne 21,22 kleinerer Masse angeordnet und wird eine die Vorkerne 21, 22 und einen Teilbereich des Hauptkerns 20 umschliebende ballistische Haube 11 mit einer Spitze 12 aus Wolfram-Schwermetall versehen. Die Spitze 12 wird in die ballistische Haybe 11 einge-schraubt. Der erste Vorkern 21, der sich vorderseitig konisch verjungt, wird mittels einer Madenschraube 14 axial fixiert. Die Fixierung des zweiten zylindrischen Vorkerns 22 erfolgt beispielsweise uber einem am Hauptkern 20 vorgesehenen Gewindezapfen 26. Ziwischen den einzelnen Kernen 20,21,22 konnen Zwischenlagen 15,16 aus einem weicheren Material zur Stobdampfung vorgesehen sein. M829A3 is the same.
@@somerandomboibackup6086 du is inferior to tungsten btw, it fractures and cracks on impact, its only used because the west lacks tungsten and can't make better penetrators. Also the west is stuck in the 90s. Another side is du is a way for us to get rid of its nuclear waste to other countries. Also it cost nothing to make really. Ask the crews who are dying of cancer how good DU is in shells and armour 😂😂😂 or the other shit like asbestos.
There is not enough information available to run a simulation on this round, which was specifically designed to take down a T-90M. So, I would take this with a grain of salt.
@@chickenchicken8097did you not just watch it? Not only did it damage the head, the tip didn’t break away it warped the projectile in the front, which is the whole point of the breakaway tip.. to defeat deformation of the rod before it makes contact. This video while a good simulation of what it used, is missing key segments that would affect the outcome in big ways. Some people said the era exploded too fast, the tip didn’t break way and deformed the rod. These make big differences in the outcome.
It is unlikely that the Abrams will meet the T 90 in battle. I think it will be like with leopards and British tanks. they will become easy prey for ATGMs and lancets. Telegram has a recent video of the destruction of a repair vehicle based on an Abrams tank
@@MultiNike79 I already know. there are photos and videos. As far as I understand, it was destroyed by a commercial quadcopter. I’ll also note that at the same time the archer self-propelled gun (a very rare vehicle) was destroyed. There is also a video (I don’t know how recent it is) where a PzH 2000 was destroyed by counter-battery fire
Seeing from video, it barely had any armor left. If it was shot at closer distance like 200-300 meter then would probably penetrate it. Also if Abrams were at high ground than T-90M, then it would also penetrate since it would be more direct 90° shot and less thickness to go through. And of course the more modern M829A4 would definetly fully penetrate.
The Merkava doesn’t have much armor, it’s an infantry fighting vehicle. They have a lot of thin metal to protect against simple grenade launchers, and that's it. Any tank will shoot Merkava.
@@M4_Sherman587 No. The Merkava is designed to fight the poorly armed semi-civilian indigenous population of Palestine. Accordingly: huge dimensions and internal volume for landing, which is impossible for tanks. Thin spaced armor can combat the cumulative blast from simple grenades, but is useless against modern anti-tank missiles or APFSDS. Slow and heavy is normal for Israeli soil, but in Ukraine or Europe it would be an easy way for soldiers to pay off their mortgage.
@@MultiNike79 i dont think you know what an IFV is… the merkava by definition is quite literally an MBT. Also, i have no idea where you got your info about it being underarmored, some parts of the turret has almost 1000mm of protection against kinetic rounds. plus, it has the trophy APS system to protect it from missiles. it was literally the main reason the merkava was built, to have a tank that will absolutely protect the scarce number of qualified crew israel has. do not talk about something you have 0 idea about.
@@M4_Sherman587 _i dont think you know what an IFV is_ What other tank do you know that can transport troops internally? And the design of the tank was copied from a captured Soviet IFV, with its engine at the front and the driver at the side. _some parts_ The Merkava is a huge tank that cannot be properly armored. This is more even compared to Western pseudo-tanks like Abrams or Leopard. Simply, according to physics, the Merkava will be inferior to normal tanks in terms of armor. _the trophy APS system_ Please note that in real footage of the Merkava’s defeat, Trophy did not work. There is a reason why no one uses the APS system on the battlefield, rather than in punitive raids against civilians. The same Arena-M was developed a long time ago, but in real conditions these systems have too many problems. _a tank that will absolutely protect_ Please note that the results of the war in Grozny and similar scale operations in Lebanon - Merkava and T-series showed similar results in terms of tank losses and crew losses. Tanks of Russian crews are easier to protect in much MORE COMPLEX conditions than Merkavas, which can only shoot the weak with full cover. _have 0 ideas about._ Yeah, yeah.
Какая разница...история боев показала, что все эти танки просто мишень для дрона FPV....Великолепно шьются и Абрамсы и Леопарды и 90-ки. Все зависит от мастерства пилота дрона....Есть кадры после 8 дронов Т-80БВМ уходит на своих гуслях ...есть кадры где шьют с первого дрона Леапёрд 2-А6
yes , its pretty much PENETRATED the turret already with only a 25mm APFSDS a Abrams 120mm APFSDS is gonna penetrate even more. I bet this video gonna be deleted once Ukraine tests the Abrams with a captured damaged T-90M for testing.
@@Giganibba511 No, these are 2 S-200s. The video of the Russian missile launch is the shooting down of the first S-200 (it exploded a little earlier). We didn’t have time to shoot down the second one.
Someone made a good point, why did the tip not break off and immediately warped what would have been an intact rod, which is the point of the breakaway tip, no?
People complain about the Relikt not working, but ignore the fact that most ERA blocks on Russian tanks are NERA instead. If you want to cry about it and say it isn’t, well I won’t be able to change your mind. But I will try.
I would like to suggest a simulation of 50mm ap round vs m1a2 abrams side skirt (around 30mm ar550 steel) + side hull (around 80mm ar550 steel), as the armour and thickness are classified, this is a closer thickness specification and steel hardness.
I think the ERA should have done a bit more damage to the penetrator, it seems to me like the ERA plates are moving slightly too fast in comparison to the penetrator, at least based on other ERA simulations ive seen although i could be wrong.
It's ridiculously funny to see the simulations of this channel and compare it with the reality we know. Wherever it is at any time in the history of the world. Every time that Western equipment faced Russian equipment, the Russians were turned into scrap! Bradley troop transport cars destroyed T90s with 25mm cannons. DIDN'T EVEN NEED AN ABRHAM 🤣🤣🤣
You are not applying proper boundary conditions. Parts of tank armor are moving freely as if you were firing at a cutout IRL. The tank would shake itself apart if you built it like this. What is the deal with the upwards strike angle?
@@romanyalovyi6079No, it was made to defeat Kontakt-5, which is what the US army *had to test* after acquiring T-72A1 and T-72B1 tanks from the Germans in the 1990s. How could they design it to defeat Relikt if it replaced M829A2 in 2003, a full 3 years before Relikt was deployed in 2006? Stop lying in all your comments.
This is assuming the T90M actually has the stats as advertised...which is highly unlikely given what we have learned about Russian manufacturing quality!
Please add disclaimers to your videos. Alot of people actually think this is a realistic one-to-one simulation. Which its not, so its pretty misleading.
@@Wuwesare это прямая насмешка от автора на вращение башни танка, которая произошло с танком когда бредли повредил систему о предупреждении об обучении
@@bigsmoke4345 Абрамс от Модифкации М1А1 до M1A1SA не способны стрелять снарядами M829A3, это могут только модификации M1A2, M1A2C sep 1, sep 2, sep 3 , sep 4, но они используют более новый снаряд M829A4
@@SFERA9-rb6xw the guy who made the video says this "This simulation shows the impact of the 120mm M829A3 APFSDS-T with a Depleted Uranium penetrator being fired from a US M1A1 Abrams tank at a range of 0.8km, targeting the front hull of a Russian T-90M tank."
@@SFERA9-rb6xwYes they can, this isn’t war thunder where the M1a1 cant fire M829a2 or a3 if it was in the game. All M1 abrams variants with the 120mm gun can fire any 120mm ammunition. Just like how the M60a1 RISE could fire M833 and M900, it had the same gun as the 105 abrams so it could fire the same ammo as the abrams.
@@tbomb69 Нет, у них у M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A1SA базовая 120мм пушка М256, у M1A2, M1A2C sep 1, sep 2, sep 3, sep 4 это 120мм пушка M256A1.Что касается 105мм снарядов по типу М900 то ими может стрелять пушка M68A1E4, а не M60.
The US and German most powerful rounds are only capable of defeating Kontakt5. Now that Relikt may be available to them for testing, we might see something develop in the future thats more capable
@@Artig627 да уже весь мир, увидел, как наши держат по несколько6паподаний... А амеро дерьмо, казалось, обычной рекламой продаж.. Ваших меньше? Согласен, потому, что на этом рекламном дерьме, плохо воевать... Где ваши "Челенджеры".. Два, сожгли, на остальных, вундервафля, носа не суют. А Лепоперд, оказался, обычным куском железа!.. Российская техника-для войны, натовская, лишь для рекламы, игр,, и гонять аборигенов по Ближнему Востоку...
Bei deinen sinnlosen Simulationen vergisst du das jeder russische Panzer eine ca 50-70 Cm niedrigere Silhouette hat. Ergo. Der t90 sieht den a1 viel eher
It would be cool if this Ukrainian war was over so Americans could buy T-90 tanks! Without live tank shells course! Think about driving a T-90 around town! Those things are FAST!
Чушь. При пробитии первой плиты, даже если там такой бутерброд на самом деле, снаряд должен изогнутся внутрь под 90 градусов и проламывать броню уже напрямую, а не изгибаться обратно по прямой. Кто делает все эти симуляции? Они неадекватны.
@@мясорубка2232 советую посмотреть видео, как т-90 переживает удар джавелина в крышу изнутри танка. Концепция танков типа т-90 это более прочная защита по кругу, но слабее спереди. У танков НАТО по сути вся броня спереди. Разные концепции и подходы к использованию машин. Но в войне дронов лучше иметь лучшую круговую защиту.
You're comiaring anvearly 90's tank system to post 2000 system. T90M is dying to Bradley IRL, so the abrahms, well.... The problem with abrahms, its logistics chain. Its terrible for UKR.
In the other video you did you put up an m1 abrams from the cold war☠️ against a t90 and shot the weakest part of it from close range. In this video you shot a t90m from long range and at one of its strongest parts☠️ The Russian bias is strong with this one.
К сожалению или к счастью, на данном этапе бронепробиваемость кинетическими снарядами как и защита от них, потеряли актуальность. Танку нужна всеракурсная защита от кумулятивных снарядов, мощные средства маскировки и РЭБ, максимальная ситуативная осведомленность и встроенность в информационное поле. Процент применения танков против танков да ещё и кинетическими снарядами, с обеих сторон, ничтожен.
because the use the same gun? like the only change the did is addon armor and CROW system, they haven't change a lot of thing to the hun other than it able to use programable round
Nonsense. If reactive armor is effective, why isn't it used by most NATO countries? Moreover, many films from Ukraine question the effectiveness of reactive armor even when attacked by a shitty drone.
Ссылаться на ориксы и прочую поеботу - себя не уважать. За все время подтверждено уничтожение 3(!) т-90м! 3(!!!). Было около 5 поврежденных, которые потом в тыл эвакуировали. Свои сказки рассказывай дома на кухне у себя
They actually did back in the 80s when soviet designers realised that 105mm apfsds could barely penetrate t-72 ufp, so they added a 16mm armored plate and that stopped the round
@@somerandomboibackup6086 its just smoll. But itsnt about engine, 1HP per tonn loss is not catastrophic loss. Problem is in transmission, its pretty much at its limmit
I like comparing these computer simulations to reality. If the Russian 3BM44M 125mm APFSDS rounds can punch through the frontal armor of the T90M as we've seen in Ukraine, I don't think the M829A3 would have a problem cutting into it.
@@SimulationPlus The ATK patent for Steel tip comes well after the round was in full production and refers to an export round concept made of tungsten. The patent for the M829A3 penetrator # US6662726B1 was submitted in mid 1999, and the DOI for the M289A3 was 2003. (you can google it) "first portion of the body having a first mass of about at least 9% to 15% of a penetrator mass and consisting primarily of a single piece of a tungsten-based material" "The former is chosen to produce a relatively wide hole in the face plate of explosive reactive armor while the latter is chosen to best perforate basal armor. The connection between the two portions is configured to rupture under pre-determined conditions, namely at a threshold torque between the first and second sections. Such rupture reduces the tendency of interaction forces between the armor and the first portion from deflecting the second portion into an ineffective, highly oblique relation to the basal armor." There is no mention of a steel tip. The alloy of the M829A3 is also far better than the M829A1 at around 5% better performance against RHA at 0-deg, and far more resilient to deformation.
@@abas656thegodemperor9 I posted the US patent US6662726B1 which is for the M829A3 penetrator. Not sure why my comment was deleted. However, if you google it you can see that they designed it in 1999 with a tungsten penetrator to defeat ERA. This is not hard. Google it and read it.
@@Anonymous-is6xu The detonation speed is 10 times faster than the combustion of powder gases. Nothing surprising here. The difference is that the projectile will arrive in one piece, and the plate will turn into fragments.
God you are so naive. if you knew Russian, you would have watched the interview with the Bradley gunner who fired at the T90. According to him, he didn’t really see the tank; its shooting was corrected by a drone. and he was very scared that he could not penetrate the armor of the tank
@@jah886 Thank you for the information. and since I'm so naive because I don't know a certain language means you are also so naive since you can't speak or listen to more than 7000+ languages. and also demolishing/destroying and disabling are all practically the same thing in warfare, it gets taken out of action.
you took what he said from your @ss lmao, there is ones with subtitles and everybody knows it doesn't matter how strong a tank, if you ambush it in the right place, it will be destroyed.@@Vrooto
A drone took the tank out. The Bradley damaged various components but failed to penetrate the armor at all. Russian tank armour has held up quite well to the rare instances of tank, missile and cannon fire hitting its frontal arc. Vehicle on vehicle engagements are exceedingly rare in modern warfare now and most tanks destroyed in this war have been annihilated by indirect fire and hits on their flanks. Desert Storm was literally 30 years ago and a completely outdated metric to use to analyze 21st century drone dominated warfare.
The relict is exploding way too soon and far too fast. The back plate does not even contact the rod
Спасибо, теперь все военные заводы поднялись и стали менять "Реликт"...
Только Малахит (ДЗ 4 поколения) будет максимально эффективно понижать угрозу от ОБПС.
@@KasKusOKне будет, против него уже созданы М829А4 и DM73.
@@romanyalovyi6079 Ты один из тех идиотов, которые считают, что в Rheinmetall работают волшебники создавшие ОБПС, летящий с гигантской скоростью и не влияющий на объекты попадающиеся на его пути?
Ты хоть немного читал о ДЗ "Малахит"? Знаешь, что она снимает примерно 800 мм бронепробития? Ты знаешь, как она работает? Нет - не пиши чушь...
@@romanyalovyi6079малахит работает не от прямого воздействия, а с помощью электрического поля, дз сработает всё равно, да и не надо нести бред, что дз от новых ломов не сработает
@@romanyalovyi6079оба снаряда даже в серию ещё не пошли😅
Bro thinks he's an helicopter
on gng bro lil bro funna fly
Its reference to T-90M that got destroyed by 2 Bradley IFVs in Ukraine
@@lampredgo5440no, it is not destruyed, was ddestroyed visión system
Best attack helicopter in the world!
@@marianoprado5652 That is called a mission kill. The T90 could no longer fulfill its mission.
its very good that while animation is running , a commentary speak about what's going on in this video and history about it! good job
Why is the relikt exploding so quickly?
If it exploded slowly it would be more effective. This is the fastest i have seen on any simulation.
I never seen a "SLOW" explosion
@@mr_Saladman18relict typically has a slight delay so it can use both flyer plates to create a sheer effect on whatever is hitting it
Timestep is different.
@@mr_Saladman18 the explosive velocity of smokeless gunpowder nowadays 7km per second compared to 1300m/s of blackpowder.
There are definitely slower explosions.
Or maybe the explosive was triggered too quickly in relikt.
О, это вы великий конструктор бронетанковой техники? напишите в Уралвагонзавод со своей заявкой, по слухам "секретная информация от наших коллег из ФБР" там работают одни кретины которые совсем не справляются со своей работой и им никак не обойтись без ваших величайших конструкторских решений
P.S. дубина ты сталеросовая физику прогуливала видимо в школе, ты вообще имеешь понятие, как ведёт себя материал на таких скоростях? Задача реликта как раз и состоит в том чтобы с максимальной скоростью выбросить бронеплиту в сторону снаряда чтобы за вот это микромгновение контакта с ним передать ему противоположный импульс, замедлив его а также изменив вектор скорости БОПСа, хотя да в вашей танковой доктрине до сих пор существует мнение что без заряжающего из банановой республики не обойтись и чем тяжелее танк, тем лучше, скоро видимо дойдете до того что у вас борта и крыша танка из фанеры крашеной будут (вы уже к этому близки), чтобы хоть как-то компенсировать толщину лба корпуса и башни которая себя оправдывает только в случае если бы в танк стреляли только прямо))))))))))
some mf said ERA is useless against apfsds bruh
Every simulation shows the dart hitting the era block dead center where its most effective
No one shows how effective it is if the dart hits a corner or anything
Contact 1 (5mm against pen) useless, but Contact 5 (120mm against Apfsds) and Relict (250mm) , there is also a Duplet (250-300mm).
@@BlackZaporozhianDUPLET is twice as heavy tho id you want to use it on a tank you have to remove the first layer of composite to fit it due to weight increase but yeah it is more effective than RELIKT and K5
Once upon a time, that was true.
@@ozan1234561 ERA works as is should be when hit. When not hit it doenst work. Is that really a big surprise?
incorrect Relikt working!
Reilly is the best ERA by any European country
Prove it
@@Justbecausewhy_notТаковым, стоит называть ДЗ "Малахит". Он буквально ломает лучший, на данный момент, M829A4, сводя его пробитие к 50-80мм.
@@KasKusOKwe have no data on M829a4 how do you know what ERA does to it
@@an000n good point
Love how the projectile flies upwards to avoid the truck, then goes straight back to it’s original flight path.
Bros turrent engine stuck 💀
Someone hooked up the engines output to the turret ring
Turret spinning after an encounter with a Bradley
but did it pen tho
Why are T-90M steel plates segmented? That may have altered the results in some way.
On the other hand, perhaps try delaying the detonation of ERA a little bit more? This feels very "sudden", the back flying plate had almost no interaction with the projectile.
The plates are segmented to reduce the number of nodes and control the size of the segment. This process has no effect after using fixed support and other techniques. Actually the second plate interacts with the penetrator, the detonation time was set to simulate the real Relikt mechanism.
@@SimulationPluswhy penetrator has just one segment ? If even DM53 has 3.
@@romanyalovyi6079 actually DM53 penetrator is not segmented. M829A3 as we know from the patents has 1 segmented sacrificial section which is the tip of the projectile made of steel.
@@alanch90 DM53 has 3 segments.
German patent DE 4023482A1
Zu einer Anhebung der Durchschlagsleistung von unterka-librigen Wuchtgeschossen 10 an Mehrstoff-Sonderzielen werden vor ainem Hauptkern 20 zwei Vorkerne 21,22 kleinerer Masse angeordnet und wird eine die Vorkerne 21, 22 und einen Teilbereich des Hauptkerns 20 umschliebende ballistische Haube 11 mit einer Spitze 12 aus Wolfram-Schwermetall versehen. Die Spitze 12 wird in die ballistische Haybe 11 einge-schraubt. Der erste Vorkern 21, der sich vorderseitig konisch verjungt, wird mittels einer Madenschraube 14 axial fixiert. Die Fixierung des zweiten zylindrischen Vorkerns 22 erfolgt beispielsweise uber einem am Hauptkern 20 vorgesehenen Gewindezapfen 26. Ziwischen den einzelnen Kernen 20,21,22 konnen Zwischenlagen 15,16 aus einem weicheren Material zur Stobdampfung vorgesehen sein.
M829A3 is the same.
@@alanch90 DM53 has 3 segments.
German patent DE 4023482A1.
M829A3 is the same, but longer.
Wait why does the DU rod bend with the steel tip? While the tip itself never break off?
Because the front still got slapped by the plate. Not that hard to see
@@commitselfdeletus9070 ok? In the video the steel part got the same properties of the DU rod, which is not true lmao
@@somerandomboibackup6086 du is inferior to tungsten btw, it fractures and cracks on impact, its only used because the west lacks tungsten and can't make better penetrators. Also the west is stuck in the 90s. Another side is du is a way for us to get rid of its nuclear waste to other countries. Also it cost nothing to make really. Ask the crews who are dying of cancer how good DU is in shells and armour 😂😂😂 or the other shit like asbestos.
I think they're working with public knowledge.
because this simulation doesn't mean damned thing and we've already tested the UFP of a T90A with ERA and it doesnt work lol
There is not enough information available to run a simulation on this round, which was specifically designed to take down a T-90M. So, I would take this with a grain of salt.
T90M: spin me around
I don't know did the ERA do well or not
The APFSDS didn't penetrate the T-90M
it seems to have prevented proper penetration by destabilizing the projectile, so I'd say yes.
it didn't. The relikt exploded way too quickly, only damaging the head of the shell, not the body.
@@chickenchicken8097did you not just watch it? Not only did it damage the head, the tip didn’t break away it warped the projectile in the front, which is the whole point of the breakaway tip.. to defeat deformation of the rod before it makes contact. This video while a good simulation of what it used, is missing key segments that would affect the outcome in big ways. Some people said the era exploded too fast, the tip didn’t break way and deformed the rod. These make big differences in the outcome.
@@chickenchicken8097well the tip didn’t break away like it was supposed to either
t90m's fcs bing heat by Bradley and su.cide drone at the same time again 😭😭😭
We don’t know what the T-90M armor is made out or what components the M82 round has. This simulation is useless entirely.
It is unlikely that the Abrams will meet the T 90 in battle. I think it will be like with leopards and British tanks. they will become easy prey for ATGMs and lancets. Telegram has a recent video of the destruction of a repair vehicle based on an Abrams tank
Abrams himself has already been destroyed, for which I congratulate you.
@@MultiNike79 I already know. there are photos and videos. As far as I understand, it was destroyed by a commercial quadcopter. I’ll also note that at the same time the archer self-propelled gun (a very rare vehicle) was destroyed. There is also a video (I don’t know how recent it is) where a PzH 2000 was destroyed by counter-battery fire
I mean... The T-72 got its revenge by attacking the M1A1 Abrams using a T-72B3.
You are very good at discrediting yourself with such a simulation.
Demian XYZ Simulations did a proper simulation a month ago
So which type of ammo can destroy T-90M from front?
Well, a lot depend on angle of impact and distance.
M829A4
Seeing from video, it barely had any armor left. If it was shot at closer distance like 200-300 meter then would probably penetrate it. Also if Abrams were at high ground than T-90M, then it would also penetrate since it would be more direct 90° shot and less thickness to go through. And of course the more modern M829A4 would definetly fully penetrate.
Like the first guy said
But generally speaking not much the base composite is really good and add on the ERA and it becomes a tough nut to crack.
@@INeatFreak Well yeah, but the T-90m would have stood there and not shot at the enemy , yes yes... yes?
This is why America developed m829a4 it essentially ignores relikt m829a3 is designed to defeat kontakt 5
m829a2 was designed to beat K-5
plz make video about turret armor merkava 4m
The Merkava doesn’t have much armor, it’s an infantry fighting vehicle. They have a lot of thin metal to protect against simple grenade launchers, and that's it. Any tank will shoot Merkava.
@@MultiNike79this is a joke… right?
@@M4_Sherman587 No. The Merkava is designed to fight the poorly armed semi-civilian indigenous population of Palestine. Accordingly: huge dimensions and internal volume for landing, which is impossible for tanks. Thin spaced armor can combat the cumulative blast from simple grenades, but is useless against modern anti-tank missiles or APFSDS. Slow and heavy is normal for Israeli soil, but in Ukraine or Europe it would be an easy way for soldiers to pay off their mortgage.
@@MultiNike79 i dont think you know what an IFV is… the merkava by definition is quite literally an MBT. Also, i have no idea where you got your info about it being underarmored, some parts of the turret has almost 1000mm of protection against kinetic rounds. plus, it has the trophy APS system to protect it from missiles. it was literally the main reason the merkava was built, to have a tank that will absolutely protect the scarce number of qualified crew israel has. do not talk about something you have 0 idea about.
@@M4_Sherman587 _i dont think you know what an IFV is_
What other tank do you know that can transport troops internally? And the design of the tank was copied from a captured Soviet IFV, with its engine at the front and the driver at the side.
_some parts_
The Merkava is a huge tank that cannot be properly armored. This is more even compared to Western pseudo-tanks like Abrams or Leopard. Simply, according to physics, the Merkava will be inferior to normal tanks in terms of armor.
_the trophy APS system_
Please note that in real footage of the Merkava’s defeat, Trophy did not work. There is a reason why no one uses the APS system on the battlefield, rather than in punitive raids against civilians. The same Arena-M was developed a long time ago, but in real conditions these systems have too many problems.
_a tank that will absolutely protect_
Please note that the results of the war in Grozny and similar scale operations in Lebanon - Merkava and T-series showed similar results in terms of tank losses and crew losses.
Tanks of Russian crews are easier to protect in much MORE COMPLEX conditions than Merkavas, which can only shoot the weak with full cover.
_have 0 ideas about._
Yeah, yeah.
Какая разница...история боев показала, что все эти танки просто мишень для дрона FPV....Великолепно шьются и Абрамсы и Леопарды и 90-ки. Все зависит от мастерства пилота дрона....Есть кадры после 8 дронов Т-80БВМ уходит на своих гуслях ...есть кадры где шьют с первого дрона Леапёрд 2-А6
Красава, приплел
Еб лан
The rotating turret from T90 is nice detail 😂 ... Bradley 25 mm Bushmaster Like this ❤
yes , its pretty much PENETRATED the turret already with only a 25mm APFSDS
a Abrams 120mm APFSDS is gonna penetrate even more.
I bet this video gonna be deleted once Ukraine tests the Abrams with a captured damaged T-90M for testing.
@@stinopharan5528No the Bradley didn't penetrate T-90M, the gunner panicked and was rotating the turret because external sights were destroyed
@@stinopharan5528 nope, it didn't get pennetrated, you probably don't know how armor works
@@stinopharan5528 They only gave them apds and ap they don't have apdsfs
@@stinopharan5528
retarded angloid logic:
penetration of 20 tonne turret = perpetually spinning turret
M829A3 muzzle velocity is 1555 M/S
Oh MIM-104 PAC-2 Patriot Missile Penetrated 200 Kilometers on A-50 AWACS aircraft.
Nope it was friendly fire. lol
It was friendly fire , and Ukrainian messiles can't reach that range lol
It was a s200
@@Giganibba511 No, these are 2 S-200s. The video of the Russian missile launch is the shooting down of the first S-200 (it exploded a little earlier). We didn’t have time to shoot down the second one.
@@bittemeinrammstein"friendly"
ok the spinning t90 turret was so RELATABLE😂😂
Как там абрамс у Авдеевки?)
lancet loves abrams sooooo much))
@@NITN-q5cbro got made cuz Russian turrets are Sputnik space programs 🤣
The ERA should be house bricks like real life.
Someone made a good point, why did the tip not break off and immediately warped what would have been an intact rod, which is the point of the breakaway tip, no?
Потому, что на таких скоростях металл поведением становится похожим на жидкость.
Cuz this is Propaganda my man!😂
@@scottsauritch3216no it’s that at high speeds metal acts like liquid
People complain about the Relikt not working, but ignore the fact that most ERA blocks on Russian tanks are NERA instead. If you want to cry about it and say it isn’t, well I won’t be able to change your mind. But I will try.
I would like to suggest a simulation of 50mm ap round vs m1a2 abrams side skirt (around 30mm ar550 steel) + side hull (around 80mm ar550 steel), as the armour and thickness are classified, this is a closer thickness specification and steel hardness.
The brits developed chobham for the Abrams but kept an even better version of it for themselves only, id love to know how that grade does
Почему реликт сработал, когда снаряд даже не пробил его внешнюю плиту?
Он сработал корректно...
@@KasKusOK Ага🤣🤣🤣
@@dirkdiggler6730 what was it supposed to do? It clearly stopped the round didn’t it?
This is brilliant animation work, are you using Blender or Unreal, both?
SHA? What is that on the front plate?
I ask the same, i thought it was rolled homogeneous armor, but it's called RHA.
I think the ERA should have done a bit more damage to the penetrator, it seems to me like the ERA plates are moving slightly too fast in comparison to the penetrator, at least based on other ERA simulations ive seen although i could be wrong.
Hello !
How did you manage to make those text arrows at 0:17?
There’s no way this is accurate.
It's ridiculously funny to see the simulations of this channel and compare it with the reality we know. Wherever it is at any time in the history of the world. Every time that Western equipment faced Russian equipment, the Russians were turned into scrap! Bradley troop transport cars destroyed T90s with 25mm cannons. DIDN'T EVEN NEED AN ABRHAM 🤣🤣🤣
You are not applying proper boundary conditions. Parts of tank armor are moving freely as if you were firing at a cutout IRL. The tank would shake itself apart if you built it like this.
What is the deal with the upwards strike angle?
The tower wasn't even hit and it already wanted to fly away
Would the M829A4 pen it? It seem like this was a close one.
Yep, it was made to defeat relict
well that's the core design of it so yeah 90% likely
@@quan-uo5wsM829A3 was made to defeat Relikt.
@@romanyalovyi6079No, it was made to defeat Kontakt-5, which is what the US army *had to test* after acquiring T-72A1 and T-72B1 tanks from the Germans in the 1990s.
How could they design it to defeat Relikt if it replaced M829A2 in 2003, a full 3 years before Relikt was deployed in 2006?
Stop lying in all your comments.
@@toma3025 lying means purposely spreading misinformation, he is in fact just blindly believes into what he said which means he is just stipid
did he just say that rubber side Skirts are a Saftey feature???
This is assuming the T90M actually has the stats as advertised...which is highly unlikely given what we have learned about Russian manufacturing quality!
There's no way the turrent turn so fast
The turret didnt even turn that fast,wdym
That’s slow for an mbt
What program do you use?
T90M3 also has APS
no way that effect of the era is realistic
Bro, got an update for you. An abrams in Ukraine just got bonked by T-72B3 :D
And?
Too close. I think weaker base armor of T-80BVM would have been penetrated. T-90M just has better base armor.
So, this means M829A4's could easily go through the T90 UFP
probably why the A4 exists.
Please add disclaimers to your videos. Alot of people actually think this is a realistic one-to-one simulation. Which its not, so its pretty misleading.
T-90M: helicopter helicopter
What?
Very good simulation. I was doubtful that even with A3 shot it would go through UFP. Soviet UFPs are a different breed
Why M1 gets to fire but the t90M does't? Is it because M1 has more democracy built-in?
Is that impactus afea?
0:24 поставил дизлайк за то что автор смеется над Т-90М
Гений мысли, посчитать забавное вращение башни в анимации за насмешку над ОБТ Т90М
@@Wuwesare это прямая насмешка от автора на вращение башни танка, которая произошло с танком когда бредли повредил систему о предупреждении об обучении
@@firdavsking тогда пожалуй ты может быть и прав, но я не уверен можно ли это назвать проявлением неуважения к российским ОБТ
@@Wuwesare самый адекватный пользователь ютуб 🙂
поплачь обиженка
Вертолёт быстрее лома?
Ты о чем?
try the A4
M1a1 is from the 80s… t90m enters service like 5 years ago
M829A3 APFSDS-T Depleted Uranium is made in 2014. It's not about the tank, it's the ammo
@@bigsmoke4345 Абрамс от Модифкации М1А1 до M1A1SA не способны стрелять снарядами M829A3, это могут только модификации M1A2, M1A2C sep 1, sep 2, sep 3 , sep 4, но они используют более новый снаряд M829A4
@@SFERA9-rb6xw the guy who made the video says this "This simulation shows the impact of the 120mm M829A3 APFSDS-T with a Depleted Uranium penetrator being fired from a US M1A1 Abrams tank at a range of 0.8km, targeting the front hull of a Russian T-90M tank."
@@SFERA9-rb6xwYes they can, this isn’t war thunder where the M1a1 cant fire M829a2 or a3 if it was in the game. All M1 abrams variants with the 120mm gun can fire any 120mm ammunition. Just like how the M60a1 RISE could fire M833 and M900, it had the same gun as the 105 abrams so it could fire the same ammo as the abrams.
@@tbomb69 Нет, у них у M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A1SA базовая 120мм пушка М256, у M1A2, M1A2C sep 1, sep 2, sep 3, sep 4 это 120мм пушка M256A1.Что касается 105мм снарядов по типу М900 то ими может стрелять пушка M68A1E4, а не M60.
The relikt is innacurate… also use the m829a4
0:24 what happen with the tank :))
t90 vs bradley
Even T-72 sent Abrams flying in orbit in the first shot recently in Ukraine 😂😂😂
LOL! Keep dreaming pal!
Classic russian comment...
Entertain his self. 😂😂
"mass destruction weapons " nuclear bombs bro?
The US and German most powerful rounds are only capable of defeating Kontakt5. Now that Relikt may be available to them for testing, we might see something develop in the future thats more capable
damn relikt is real upgrade after k5
Увидел как горит абрамс, яркое зрелище
Сколько горящих Т-72 и Т-90 вы видели? Слишком много сейчас вспоминать, даже горящие МТ-ЛБ сейчас обычное явление...
@@Gundan223 даже горящие пуканы украинцев сейчас - обычное зрелище. Потому что их в интернете гораздо больше, чем абрамсов в зоне боевых действий
@@Gundan223Кто бы мог подумать что танк независимо от чьей нации будет гореть как спичка, вот это да!
@@Gundan223 because both sides using soviet equipment in mass number?
The sneaky reference to the spinning turret in Ukraine
СЕГОДНЯ,, СОЖГЛИ ВТОРОЙ АБРАМС!!!!! СЛАВА РУССКОЙ АЛЬТИЛЕРИИ!!! 👍✌️✌️✌️
А теперь посчитай сколько сожгли ваших танков
@@Artig627 да уже весь мир, увидел, как наши держат по несколько6паподаний... А амеро дерьмо, казалось, обычной рекламой продаж.. Ваших меньше? Согласен, потому, что на этом рекламном дерьме, плохо воевать... Где ваши "Челенджеры".. Два, сожгли, на остальных, вундервафля, носа не суют. А Лепоперд, оказался, обычным куском железа!.. Российская техника-для войны, натовская, лишь для рекламы, игр,, и гонять аборигенов по Ближнему Востоку...
Уничтожили 2 Абрамса но потеряли 5000 танков
@@yHu4ToJIluTeJIb Исконно РУССКАЯ логика👍
@@Artig627 🥶🥶🥶
make the abram tank on fire and disabled to get a lore accurate abram since you're going with "accuracy" with the t-90m
Bei deinen sinnlosen Simulationen vergisst du das jeder russische Panzer eine ca 50-70 Cm niedrigere Silhouette hat. Ergo. Der t90 sieht den a1 viel eher
Even in War Thunder if you shot at the front side of the T-90M you wont's kill the driver.#warthundet90m
It would be cool if this Ukrainian war was over so Americans could buy T-90 tanks! Without live tank shells course! Think about driving a T-90 around town! Those things are FAST!
Чушь. При пробитии первой плиты, даже если там такой бутерброд на самом деле, снаряд должен изогнутся внутрь под 90 градусов и проламывать броню уже напрямую, а не изгибаться обратно по прямой. Кто делает все эти симуляции? Они неадекватны.
Изогнуться внутрь под 90 градусов? Ты физику в школе учил? Да и первая "плита" это ДЗ, взрывная волна деформирует и отклоняет лом ОБПСа
I don't buy this. The M829A3 was designed to defeat the latest ERA.
Я думал пройдет. Так то лобовая броня т-90 средняя, но круговая хорошая.
Абрамс наоборот, спереди твердый, но по кругу мягонький.
Aren't all tanks are hard in front and soft all around? There are no tanks that can survive side shots, top attack or rear
@@мясорубка2232 советую посмотреть видео, как т-90 переживает удар джавелина в крышу изнутри танка.
Концепция танков типа т-90 это более прочная защита по кругу, но слабее спереди.
У танков НАТО по сути вся броня спереди.
Разные концепции и подходы к использованию машин. Но в войне дронов лучше иметь лучшую круговую защиту.
Nice simulations. However, seach RUclips for Russian tanks tower toss....
You're comiaring anvearly 90's tank system to post 2000 system.
T90M is dying to Bradley IRL, so the abrahms, well....
The problem with abrahms, its logistics chain. Its terrible for UKR.
In the other video you did you put up an m1 abrams from the cold war☠️ against a t90 and shot the weakest part of it from close range.
In this video you shot a t90m from long range and at one of its strongest parts☠️
The Russian bias is strong with this one.
800 метров много ?
🤦🏾 The round here was phased out in the early 90's . By 1991 Nato had updated rounds to deal the ERA.
Aint no way you said M829A3 was phased out in 90 when this round was developed recently
Funny how AUK posses over T90's...😂
К сожалению или к счастью, на данном этапе бронепробиваемость кинетическими снарядами как и защита от них, потеряли актуальность. Танку нужна всеракурсная защита от кумулятивных снарядов, мощные средства маскировки и РЭБ, максимальная ситуативная осведомленность и встроенность в информационное поле.
Процент применения танков против танков да ещё и кинетическими снарядами, с обеих сторон, ничтожен.
Blah blah blah, no pen. Gee, who could've guessed.
3 day Operation ? U mean War bud
Why are we using the m1a1 and not the m1a2 v2 or v3?
The fascists are afraid that the Nazis will lose them and Russia will become targets for research.
Russian drones, helicopters and artillery, as well as FABs, will not feel the difference. So why should Americans spend more new equipment?!
because the use the same gun? like the only change the did is addon armor and CROW system, they haven't change a lot of thing to the hun other than it able to use programable round
А где поподание в абрамс??
в твоем военкомате
why penetrator has just one segment ? If even DM53 has 3.
The new Abrams was hit by a Russian tank.
Nonsense. If reactive armor is effective, why isn't it used by most NATO countries? Moreover, many films from Ukraine question the effectiveness of reactive armor even when attacked by a shitty drone.
lost only 20? something like 60 already
More than 20, less than 60. By comparison around 65 leopards were already destroyed.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45 65? Yeah, 14 destroyed other damaged, total 35
@@nehalemxtv5331 Oryx stopped counting most ukrainian losses. Look at any tg and count yourself, you will see what i mean.
@@igormsh14bidevisualizacoes45just last week i saw around 5 burnt out leopards in telegram lmao
Ссылаться на ориксы и прочую поеботу - себя не уважать. За все время подтверждено уничтожение 3(!) т-90м! 3(!!!). Было около 5 поврежденных, которые потом в тыл эвакуировали. Свои сказки рассказывай дома на кухне у себя
A turret hit would be more likely...
This is not relikt.
So if this is the case why didnt they do simulations and than just do a good ol slapparoo of another 50mm of steel and be sure there will be no pen?
They actually did back in the 80s when soviet designers realised that 105mm apfsds could barely penetrate t-72 ufp, so they added a 16mm armored plate and that stopped the round
Trash engine, ERA is lighter but more effective
@@somerandomboibackup6086 its just smoll.
But itsnt about engine, 1HP per tonn loss is not catastrophic loss. Problem is in transmission, its pretty much at its limmit
I like comparing these computer simulations to reality. If the Russian 3BM44M 125mm APFSDS rounds can punch through the frontal armor of the T90M as we've seen in Ukraine, I don't think the M829A3 would have a problem cutting into it.
Так стоп, а где ты это видел?
"As we've seen"
I didn't. Can you give me the source? Because as far as I know, T-90Ms were lost only to mobility kills and drones
source? all the lost 20 T90M either From drones or artilery guided shells , this is BS
@@Янус_Ырт he left lmao
@@Giganibba511 I guess that's the only thing he could do
The M-829A3 tip isn't steel, its tungsten.
It is steel, It isn't like dm53 that is tungsten.
What is your source?
@@SimulationPlus
The ATK patent for Steel tip comes well after the round was in full production and refers to an export round concept made of tungsten.
The patent for the M829A3 penetrator # US6662726B1 was submitted in mid 1999, and the DOI for the M289A3 was 2003. (you can google it)
"first portion of the body having a first mass of about at least 9% to 15% of a penetrator mass and consisting primarily of a single piece of a tungsten-based material"
"The former is chosen to produce a relatively wide hole in the face plate of explosive reactive armor while the latter is chosen to best perforate basal armor. The connection between the two portions is configured to rupture under pre-determined conditions, namely at a threshold torque between the first and second sections. Such rupture reduces the tendency of interaction forces between the armor and the first portion from deflecting the second portion into an ineffective, highly oblique relation to the basal armor."
There is no mention of a steel tip.
The alloy of the M829A3 is also far better than the M829A1 at around 5% better performance against RHA at 0-deg, and far more resilient to deformation.
A3 was designed to counter ERA,which is why it has a steel tip
@@abas656thegodemperor9 I posted the US patent US6662726B1 which is for the M829A3 penetrator. Not sure why my comment was deleted. However, if you google it you can see that they designed it in 1999 with a tungsten penetrator to defeat ERA.
This is not hard. Google it and read it.
Your simulation would be a lot more accurate if you used cardboard.
Makes sense, M829A3 being insufficient against Relikt is why M829A4 is a thing.
У автора неприязнь к т-90
А у физики? :)
@@MultiNike79
Physics are rusophobic
@@MultiNike79when ERA plates fly faster than an APFSDS projectile traveling at 1600 meters per second. “Physics” you say? 🤡
Потому что Т 90 превосходит Абрамс, хотя бы потому, что у него нет заряжающего факинг нигга 😅
@@Anonymous-is6xu The detonation speed is 10 times faster than the combustion of powder gases. Nothing surprising here. The difference is that the projectile will arrive in one piece, and the plate will turn into fragments.
If a desert storm bradley can demolish a T90M then a abrams is equivalent to dropping a 12000 lbs bomb directly onto a t90m.
God you are so naive. if you knew Russian, you would have watched the interview with the Bradley gunner who fired at the T90. According to him, he didn’t really see the tank; its shooting was corrected by a drone. and he was very scared that he could not penetrate the armor of the tank
@@jah886 Thank you for the information. and since I'm so naive because I don't know a certain language means you are also so naive since you can't speak or listen to more than 7000+ languages. and also demolishing/destroying and disabling are all practically the same thing in warfare, it gets taken out of action.
you took what he said from your @ss lmao, there is ones with subtitles and everybody knows it doesn't matter how strong a tank, if you ambush it in the right place, it will be destroyed.@@Vrooto
A drone took the tank out.
The Bradley damaged various components but failed to penetrate the armor at all. Russian tank armour has held up quite well to the rare instances of tank, missile and cannon fire hitting its frontal arc. Vehicle on vehicle engagements are exceedingly rare in modern warfare now and most tanks destroyed in this war have been annihilated by indirect fire and hits on their flanks. Desert Storm was literally 30 years ago and a completely outdated metric to use to analyze 21st century drone dominated warfare.
@@neferpoyaz4037 so you have nothing better to do than extend an argument?
What happened at your face?