Ah, yes. The classic "I'll just check out the first few minutes and watch the video later" that immediately turned into "oh, I watched the entire thing". Very educational!
The reason for the odd placement of the smoke grenade launcher controls and the options available lies in the type of smoke grenades used. They aren't meant to cover the tank thus they don't burst right in front of the tank but a couple hundred meters away where they cover a section of the battlefield, so they can be used either to cover an advance or deny the enemy's ability to fire from long range in a defensive position. At least that was the concept. I can't really comment on how effective it is. Cheers, a T72M1 tanker Edit: I haven't seen it at the time of writing, but as you can see it's even modelled correctly in game.
Awesome video, great to see someone finally give a good, honest assessment of the tank. The autoloader by itself is the subject of so many old wives' tales it's not funny, so people spend all their time and energy blabbering about those rather than discussing its actual advantages and disadvantages (one of the latter becoming very pertinent with improving modern armour - you're physically constrained in how long of a rod your sabot rounds can have, because you can't change the dimensions of the casette without redesigning the carousel, and you can't redesign the carousel without redesigning the whole tank).
The carousel, updated version, can fit a rod length comparable to most western rod. The problem is in the loading tray. The tray has a linear movement. Thus you cannot fit your projectile side ways into the breech like a human loader. If you look at some modernization effort of t90 (that they originally were thinking about, but not implement), quite a few of them is about moving the gun breech forward or change the lift tray design. Granted, the max potential is a shorter rod than other autoloader design, but it appears we haven't need that kind of rod length yet.
Talking storage I did see a clip somewhere of a Ukrainian tanker mention that they hadn't been able to carry an attack through in one go as they had only carried 22 rounds and needed to reload. That would make more sense now if they had decided not to stock the exposed rounds.
Could also be a question of not being able to load the loose rounds in a hurry even if you are carrying them. I'm guessing the SOP was to use them as reloads for the carousel, rather than lap-loading from random spots around the turret. (And even if that's something you train for, it's easy to imagine situations where disengaging to reload and re-engage at my advantage would be a better plan than pressing an attack with potentially limited ammo options or slow loading.)
These switchology videos are immensely relaxing. Thank you for another entry! Also, the super sensitive fuse setting makes me think about something I've always wondered: will tank rounds or say an RPG detonate if it hits a glass window? Is guess this specific round would definitely explode if it hit a window, of rain is enough to set it off.
When the Ivoirian rebels tried to kill Guillaume Soro they fired a RPG at his plane taxiing at Bouake airport, the round went straight through the plane and a French journalist and as far as I can tell didn't detonate. It may have been a dud, or it just didn't think there was anything hard enough to blow up.
You could've explained the weird Soviet turret azimuth display, where 00-00 is 6 o'clock and 30-00 is 12 o'clock. The whole 360 degrees of rotation is divided into 6000 "thousandths", which count clockwise from the rear and are read aloud two digits at a time. A commander on the "polygon" training grounds might call out "Armoured-piercing, twenty-one-fifteen, tank, 800" to tell the gunner to load sabot, look around 10 o'clock and engage a tank at 800 metres (ignoring the laser range-finders for the sake of example).
There's nothing wierd about that, they're just using bearing in mils, which is the SI unit for angles. 6283 (IIRC) to a circle but most of the time it's simplified to 6000 for Warsaw (6400 for NATO). Starting at the rear is a little odd, but I suppose it prevents confusion regarding missing numbers.
Yes, I meant the orientation of the numbers are strange. I have a Soviet "Instructional Manual for the Sergeant-Tankist" here from 1978 which explains that the circumference of a circle is 2PiR or 6.28R where R is the radius (which is the distance to the target being identified) and if the circumference were divided into 6000 equal parts, each part would be equal to 6.28R over 6000, which is a fraction of the radius equal to 1/955, which is rounded up to 1/1000. At no point does the manual use the word "radian" although it's kind of dancing around the topic. Then it lists several angle conversions to memorize and they're all round numbers, so 6000 is quite convenient once you get used to it. 1 degree is 0-17, 15 degrees is 2-50, 90 degrees is 15-00, 360 is of course 60-00. But when the turret is facing forward, it's 30-00 (180 degrees). The rest of the chapter is about how to use the "thousandths" (mils) marks in the gun sight to estimate distances between objects, once you know their distances from the tank and basically turn the gunner into a qualified land surveyor.
@@Bluehawk2008 That is indeed strange. Traditional mil marking starts from direct east, 90degree mark, and goeas counterclockwise, so north should be 15-70.
@@Bluehawk2008 The biggest reason why (I'm guessing) they would start the circle from 00-00 being directly behind is that is the orientation of the turret when the gun is in its travel lock (I'm making an educated guess; feel free to prove/disprove my statement if you can cite an actual source).
Well the original described Terrain Contour Matching correcting inertial navigation but i gess it works for the delta d mode too ^^ see ruclips.net/video/JfSy_6ihdgI/видео.html for explaination
If I don't remember incorrectly from my time in the Finnish Army in the 90's, the 12.7mm HMG could be rotated all the way around, the hatch would rotate at the same time and would always be on the backside of the one in the commander's cupola position.
That far my knowledge doesn't go :) All I have is the training I got on the T72M1 in the tank commander role. I could also be remembering things incorrectly, it's been a while since I last was stading in the commander's cupola.
@@RiccardoTheBeAst the carousel, because hand loading from the other places where you can stow ammo inside the tank was a pain in the behind. So much nicer when the autoloader does its thing.
@@CarolusR3x I would have no issue with it if it was one or two people. The problem is people becoming more extreme each day so much they cant even accept most basic facts about the enemy. That kınd of blind approach will certainly bring doom to all of us regardless.
I remember seeing interview footage from the Kharkiv offensive where the Ukrainian tankers mention that they only had 22 rounds before their ammo was depleted. Based on what you said, it appears that the Ukrainians are going into battle with just the autoloader filled
In a recent UKR video, UKR tank crews being interviewed stated they only ever went into action with 20 rounds at a time, your explanation about the carousel actually being the safer storage helps this all make sense! Thank you.
Thank you for explaining the ammo storage, especially the exposed charges. I have never heard that mentioned, and long wondered how the low-stowed munitions could be detonated so easily, given that storing ammo low in the hull is a primary technique for protecting the rounds and propellant.
In regard to the super quick fuse setting for the HE-FRAG rounds, I believe it is also intended for when engaging enemy infantry in deep snow. As always, an excellent video and very informative. May you continue making many more of them.
I love how the Chieftain is the only one on the net who pronounces “Cupola” the right way, which is Koò polah and not Koo pòlah. Italian word from Latin. :)
@@charlestaylor253 In Italian “cu” gives a sound like “koo”. If you want a sound similar to “kew” you need to write “chiu”, as in “chiuso” (kee oo zou”.
My first intro to a T-72 interior was asking the museum supervisor for the keys. I used to work for the Ft. Carson post museum right before I PCS'ed to Ft. Irwin. I'm a 5'6" 19K Abrams Tanker by profession, but I'll never forget how tight it was in the T-72. I'm also not claustrophobic, but the T-72 will change that lol.
Took one for a spin once and I agree, it is tiny in there. Your only friends are your radios and you’d think they are coming onto you with how close they are 😂
Love the switchology series, glad to see it back. I do love Steel-Beasts. A question if you please, did you get to go to the AUSA expo and view the AbramsX therein??
Soviet vehicle smoke is not for self protection. It is for blinding the enemy to enable own offensive movement. That is why it pop 100m away and are regular smoke grenades, not airburst fast smoke
[10/21/22] Knowing that any of the 6 unprotected rnds could become lethally ignited by spalling from a hit as you mentioned, it would behoove the wise crew to leave them out. The popular belief is that the autoloader causes the brew ups when hit, but it could very well be the unprotected rnds are the cause of most brew ups. As it is most of the videos we see online of T -72s that are hit result in some pretty spectacular brew ups. Some of the brew ups are ferocious.
On the one hand this has shown the inside of even early t-72s to be made up of modern, capable systems. However, I think this also shows just how bad the tank is for the armies that typically used it then or still use it now. So many of the systems seem to require a robust understanding of a variety of factors at the same time while this is all being placed on a soldier who very likely is only going to have a short time in service and may not have too many chances to undergo realistic exercises with the system. Now I could be wrong and maybe most armies, or at least most eastern european armies had plenty of chances to undergo in-depth training but surface level knowledge seems to argue against this. Curious if anyone has better info than I do. Thanks for the video chieftain!
Nice I'm truly glad they moved the spotlight for your quote @4:27 "so that the *Gunner* cannot stick his head up in front of the Coaxial Machinegun and get his head blown off" 🤣🤣🤣
24:00 The difference maybe in the different doctrinal employment of smoke. NATO tends to use it as a defensive aid (and hence giving the crew commander access to it makes sense). The Soviets (and I guess the Russians too) used it more offensively to obscure NATO defenders as the tks broke into a position (so the heroic grunt with the M-72, emerging from his hole after the preparatory fires, and the suppressive direct tank fire had one more thing to worry about as well as a limited view of the approaching tank). This in part is why NATO MBSGD smoke tends to land close to the firing vehicle, whereas "Soviet" smoke tends to land some 200 - 300m fwd of the firing vehicle. This would also tend to help explain the more choices / options as its probably a more deliberate act by the attacking vehicle as opposed to an defensive IA.
The delay in a nose-fuzed HE round is usually very short (0.01 sec or less) to allow the shell to move forward through the target after hitting its closest outer surface about 2-5 meters so that it can punch through a thick earth or masonry or concrete wall before exploding inside the target. Super-Quick is the usual delay time for an impact type of HE nose fuze and the delay is so fast that the shell will usually not move forward more than half of its length, if that, before detonating. The extra-sensitive setting for the HE shell would be Super-Quick too unless this setting is separate from the delay time setting..
smoke popping is a technique. the gunner chooses one bank, presses the button and spins the dial 0-4. this can be done in a second. he has 3 banks of 4 smoke grenades. he can launch individual ones too, but that requires thinking a bit more. Or he can launch whole 12 at the same time. it's actually very easy
Hello Mister Chieftain thanks for the video i really enjoy these switchology videos for the educational aspect of them and i am wondering if you could do a video on the leopard 2a4 as i believe it'd be intresting and if all goes to plan it'll be my tank soon... hopefully thanks in advance
i remember reading about Chechen wars how the Russians after the initial failure storming Grozny started only using "shells" in the autoloader, not carrying the spare ones and that supposedly improved their situation regarding the ammo cook offs.
IIRC the main problem in that war was their T-80s getting ambushed at close quarters by RPGs fired into the engine deck. In Ukraine the presence of advanced munitions has made life difficult for tanks at any range.
the chechens also apparently ambushed from basement windows, which meant an RPG round would pen the lower part of the tank, hitting the autoloader and the shells contained inside.
T-72 smoke controls were designed with a different smoke grenade application in mind. The West went with quick defensive smoke from the get go. The Soviets went the other way first, called Tucha smoke launchers. They yeet out smoke grenades a few hundred meters to the front of the turret, they land on the ground and start billowing thick Grey-black smoke. Hence, the gunner has to aim towards the direction he wants to lay down a smokescreen with the GPS (gunner primary sight). This system is designed for offensive smoke, and the switches are definitely suboptimal for self defensive smoke. Basically, Tucha allows you to screen your own forward movement towards enemy contact, reducing need to call for artillery smoke fire missions.
This video was super informative. From playing a bit of GHPC, the lack of good night fighting gear and thermals is a huge weakness of the T-72M. That and the fact that the poor East Germans don't get any rounds better than 3BM-15...
Just a little nitpick about the tkn-3's hunter-killer system. In real life if I recall correctly (Didn't really use the tkn-3 during my service in bmp-2 so I can remember wrong) you don't need to hold the stabilization button down when you designate a target, it stabilizes the sight automatically when you press and hold down the designate button.
So an improvised "safety" upgrade to Soviet style T-72/90 series and T-64/80 series tanks could be to keep 22/28 rounds in the autoloader and a further 3 projectiles and 15 spare propellant charges in the wet storage slots and then only carry inert APFSDS projectiles in open turret stowage and add heavily armored stowage bins on the rear of the turret with blow-off panels. These bins could contain further reserve HEAT and HE-Frag rounds and perhaps propellant charges. The tank crew could replenish the autoloader with 3 HEAT/HE-Frag and a number of APFSDS rounds whilst in combat but would have to withdraw to top up from the external stowage. However as others had already said the habit of only carrying rounds in the autoloader is a standard practice that goes back as far as the Battle of Grozny.
The rücksteuerung on the Leo2 is only active for 10 seconds after lasing, or for 100m of travel after lasing, whichever comes first. Then a fresh lase is required. Does the Delta-D system on the T-72 just stay active indefinitely (or at least as long as you have the stabilizer on)? I guess the reason the Leo2 system resets is that with time, "bad data" from track slippage and such will accumulate an mess up the calculations. I should add though that the Leo2 rücksteuerung will not only compensate for range, but also keep the turret stabilized and aimed at that point in a 3D space, with manual input from the gunner only needed to compensate for target movement. So it does a bit more work than the T-72's Delta-D. Nice to see some Steel Beasts here, looking forward to a future Leopard 2 video! We used SB Pro for simple Leo2 gunnery practice when I was in the Norwegian Army ~15 years ago. At the time it was the only Leo2 simulator we had access to, though the older Leo1 sims (the big ones with the full size turret you physically sat inside of) were still useful, as the gunnery systems were not too different.
It's worth noting that Soviet vehicle smoke serves a different function from NATO vehicle smoke. The Soviet smoke isn't for aiding a quick getaway. It's for creating a screen to maneuver behind. So the smoke is launched a bit over a hundred meters in front of the vehicle and is slower to build, but lasts longer. I think it still probably would have made more sense to put the smoke controls within easy reach of the commander, since he's still the one who would make the decision to pop smoke. But since the purpose of the smoke isn't defensive, the seconds lost in telling the gunner to pop smoke are less critical.
Question on this: Is stab for the sight on all the time? I watch videos of Sov tanks driving around with gun stab disabled (as you said, the motors can only stay on for an hour at a time). In this case, is the gunners sight stabilized or is he staring alternately into ground and sky? Also, I could do you Leopard 2 stuff if you want. I have about 2 years on 2A4/2A6.
The optic and the gun elevation is separate, this is because when reloading the gun elevates to a fixed position and the sight can stay on target, and the gun can move back to the position the sight is aiming at. also due to this the sight and gun are stabilized separately.
Is there any dangers associated with the automatic jettison of the spent casings? Like if there is a chemical threat outside the tank, does it break the seal?
On the smoke grenade issue. The smoke grenades on soviet tanks didn't plume as quickly and launched very far in front of the tank. They were supposed enable maneuvers by obsuring enemy vision and not neccesarilly enable evasive maneuvers. As soviets tanks only could effectively evade the enemy by turning their back to them.
Hello, my comment might be a little late but your statement at 7:55 regarding the T55s commander sight is wrong. Even early TKN1s found on T54Bs have the option to counterrotate and designate targets, although they are night only. Tankograd goes into great detail on this in his post about the T54/55.
@@TheChieftainsHatch Wow, I did not expect you to answer me. My only problem was your statement about the commander needing to fight the cupola when rotating because that's not true. Love your content though, thanks for this extensive insight.
@yourfriendlyneighborhoodf1802 I had another read of it and I don't interpret anything to mean that there is a counter rotation feature installed, no mention of motors or mechanical mechanisms. . Indeed, there are a couple of references to the effect of movements of the cupola relative to the target during the slewing both for the earlier and later systems.
The extra rounds outside the carousel may initiate the blast, but it is the rounds in the carousel going off that make the turret pop off. The ones in I saw in DS seemed to lose their turrets even without a penetration...as if concussion from a non-penetrating hit would set them off as well.
Very well said. People trash on the T-72 for turret launching but it little matters whether it launches or not, and other tanks do that too. You know who else launched their turrets? The famous leopard 2.
Chieftain In case you get change.. take look at what is elevation and depression angles in commanders periscope on T-72, PLEASE! In Steelbeast elevation of commanders sight is bugged to 0 degrees and it is known bug but no fix is happening as that is to my understanding because they haven't gotten right / reliable numbers. I wonder if you could provide such. Tankograd found some, but that was, to my understanding deemed dubious by developers. :(
Very strange that they would find a manual to be a dubious source but 0 degrees is acceptable, even though it was never the case for any TKN-3 installation in any tank
I have read an interview with t-80bvm tanker; he says that any experienced commander never loads his tank to the full. he was taking only 10-15 shells to combat (sabots and he, didn't bother with atgms though)
Could you do one on the B3, the kalina (best girl btw) FCS is awesome to use. Also does SB have working spotlights? i never saw them in any video being used
Question, why did it take so long for the US to integrate a hunter-killer capability into the M1? Was it a case of "wait for the CITV on the A2 for full shebang?"
It was money. After the gold plated failures of MBT-70 and XM803, M1 was designed to a cost so congress would agree to buy a new tank at last. M1 still overran that planned cost to the tune of about $60,000 in 1972 dollars, but a lot was omitted from the initial model so it would be even that close. No vehicle central CBRN defense system, no 120mm gun, no hunter-killer system. Army figured it was better to upgrade an imperfect tank later than miss out on getting any tank now.
During M1E1 period, the CITV was very expensive so as a result, the CITV was not incorporated on the M1E1, although a circular roof opening was added to the design so that a CITV could be easily added at some future point in time. The US installed a CITV in the early 90s on the M1A2, Germany also installed Thermal sight for commander on Leo 2A5 in the early 90s and the Challenger 2 didn't get it at all same goes for Leclerc. After the First Gulf War, the Abrams crews themselves mentioned the lack of Thermal sight for commander. M1 Block II was Abrams ,, adventure "into digital from analog, so devices like the CITV were a must have to enter full day/night hunter-killer capability.
I think it might not be that necessary to have since the TC can already control the turret before the hunter-killer system. All the TC had to do is to manually traverse the turret at the direction of the enemy, and the gunner will take care of the rest.
@@chrisblack6258 gunner and commander sharing the same TIS made the engagement sequence slower than it would've been with an independent channel. Commander had to stick his head out of the turret and use binoculars or NVGs if he wanted to scan a sector that the gunner wasn't scanning already. Big disadvantage, especially at night.
18:20 seems to be saying that you can solve the jack-in-the-box problem by just keeping all ammo in the carousel and nowhere else. Seems like if it were that easy they would have done that a long time ago. Right?
@@THESocialJusticeWarrior That depends on how you define the problem. Are you worried about if the turret remains on the vehicle, or are you worried about what happens to the crew when the ammo blows? If the ammo blows in an M60, I don't think the crew will be in a position to care what happens to the turret
I guess I'm the first person to go all Nigel Tunfel and complement the taste of the Soviets for having something that goes to eleven, when you need that little bit extra.😁😁😁
I had thought the issue with the carousel auto loader was that no good provision for blow out panels can be fitted. Admittedly contemporaries of the early T-72 also did not have this feature, later tanks such as M1, and Leopard 2 (as long as the front stowage is not used) do. Even today we see this issue in modern conflicts as although more modern T-72 variants exist, they are still suffering turret ejection when penetrated.
If you're tank gets penetrated I don't think haveing your turret still on makes a huge difference seeing as you still have all the super hot metal fragments of the shell and armor bouncing around in the turret .
Anecdotal evidence seems to show T series tanks kill turret crew, but the driver usually survives on penetration. Thats still one less person dead than when a western manually loaded tank gets penetrated. Amd have no illusion, noone is surviving a penetration of their fighting compartment, except by statistically irrelevant luck.
If a leopard 2 don’t use the hull storage, it will only have 16 rounds. I doubt a leo2 would go into action with so few rounds. Leclerc has roughly the same issue (22 rounds). So realistically, just drive an Abrams 😅😅😅 totally unbiased.
The T-72 generationally was a rather transitional design implementing more mature versions of older technologies. Vent panels simply were not a thing at the time and judging by the T-90M's design choices they can't be retrofitted to the carousel either.
I have seen folks ask it, so may as well ask it myself. Does SB pro have working IR spotlights?. Last time I looked (4 or 5 years ago as of note) they did not. But I wonder if they still don't given in SA: Blaze of War or Gunner Heat how big a deal spotlight on vs off is, I wonder why they have not added it yet?
It eliminates bad returns caused by obstacles between you and the target. If you know the target is at least 1.5km away, for example, and there are trees in between you and it, it means you won't get a direct hit on a tree
@@TheChieftainsHatch How does the super sensitive fuse on the HE shell not detonate upon firing the gun? Or the wind rushing past the shell in flight? But somehow detonate on something as light as a leaf or twigs?
That smoke launcher system might explain half of the reasons I haven't seen any Russian tanks pop smoke when under fire in Ukraine. The other half being that supposedly, many of them haven't been actually equipped with the smoke grenades to pop.
Ah, yes. The classic "I'll just check out the first few minutes and watch the video later" that immediately turned into "oh, I watched the entire thing". Very educational!
Dunno what you are talking about. ^^
There's a fun fact, the super sensitive setting on the T-10s 122mm could fuse on snow banks.
Finally, some sanity on the whole "hurdur autoloader makes tank go boom" stuff people have been parroting around. And another great switchology video.
The reason for the odd placement of the smoke grenade launcher controls and the options available lies in the type of smoke grenades used. They aren't meant to cover the tank thus they don't burst right in front of the tank but a couple hundred meters away where they cover a section of the battlefield, so they can be used either to cover an advance or deny the enemy's ability to fire from long range in a defensive position. At least that was the concept. I can't really comment on how effective it is.
Cheers, a T72M1 tanker
Edit: I haven't seen it at the time of writing, but as you can see it's even modelled correctly in game.
so it's more to cover the following mechanized infantry and other tanks? so there's going to be a poor bugger that has to do that in an advance?
@@nightshade4873 not really. All soviet armoured vehicles from this era were equipped with this type of smoke grenade launchers such as BTRs and BMPs.
Thanks for your info. That make sense 👍
Thanks for the info!
What was your opinion of it, as someone who had to operate one?
I figured this was to be used in formation.
Would be great if you did this same thing for the t72b3. Steel beasts is an amazing game so it’s great to see you cover it.
In a few months he might be able to do an Inside The Hatch instead, i hear theres a lot of supply of them going around :P
@@DarkestVampire92 Well Steel Beasts recently added the T72B3 2012 variant. But, yes it would be cool to see him check out a modern Russian tank.
Gunner, HEAT, PC! is a lot cheaper but still early days in its development but looks good so far.
@@the_bunse it will probably be some time before they add a T-72B3
B2 is more interesting though.
Awesome video, great to see someone finally give a good, honest assessment of the tank. The autoloader by itself is the subject of so many old wives' tales it's not funny, so people spend all their time and energy blabbering about those rather than discussing its actual advantages and disadvantages (one of the latter becoming very pertinent with improving modern armour - you're physically constrained in how long of a rod your sabot rounds can have, because you can't change the dimensions of the casette without redesigning the carousel, and you can't redesign the carousel without redesigning the whole tank).
The carousel, updated version, can fit a rod length comparable to most western rod.
The problem is in the loading tray.
The tray has a linear movement. Thus you cannot fit your projectile side ways into the breech like a human loader.
If you look at some modernization effort of t90 (that they originally were thinking about, but not implement), quite a few of them is about moving the gun breech forward or change the lift tray design.
Granted, the max potential is a shorter rod than other autoloader design, but it appears we haven't need that kind of rod length yet.
Talking storage I did see a clip somewhere of a Ukrainian tanker mention that they hadn't been able to carry an attack through in one go as they had only carried 22 rounds and needed to reload. That would make more sense now if they had decided not to stock the exposed rounds.
I saw that to. He seemed to be ok with it.
@@Darelumga better safe than sorry
Could also be a question of not being able to load the loose rounds in a hurry even if you are carrying them. I'm guessing the SOP was to use them as reloads for the carousel, rather than lap-loading from random spots around the turret. (And even if that's something you train for, it's easy to imagine situations where disengaging to reload and re-engage at my advantage would be a better plan than pressing an attack with potentially limited ammo options or slow loading.)
@@trioptimum9027 its purely for survival even the russian tankers do this
@@Vkat696
Clearly not, or else we wouldn't see turrets flying
These switchology videos are immensely relaxing. Thank you for another entry!
Also, the super sensitive fuse setting makes me think about something I've always wondered: will tank rounds or say an RPG detonate if it hits a glass window? Is guess this specific round would definitely explode if it hit a window, of rain is enough to set it off.
When the Ivoirian rebels tried to kill Guillaume Soro they fired a RPG at his plane taxiing at Bouake airport, the round went straight through the plane and a French journalist and as far as I can tell didn't detonate. It may have been a dud, or it just didn't think there was anything hard enough to blow up.
You could've explained the weird Soviet turret azimuth display, where 00-00 is 6 o'clock and 30-00 is 12 o'clock. The whole 360 degrees of rotation is divided into 6000 "thousandths", which count clockwise from the rear and are read aloud two digits at a time. A commander on the "polygon" training grounds might call out "Armoured-piercing, twenty-one-fifteen, tank, 800" to tell the gunner to load sabot, look around 10 o'clock and engage a tank at 800 metres (ignoring the laser range-finders for the sake of example).
There's nothing wierd about that, they're just using bearing in mils, which is the SI unit for angles. 6283 (IIRC) to a circle but most of the time it's simplified to 6000 for Warsaw (6400 for NATO).
Starting at the rear is a little odd, but I suppose it prevents confusion regarding missing numbers.
Are you sure it isnt divided into 6280 segments, and they just give the azimuth in miliradians?
Yes, I meant the orientation of the numbers are strange. I have a Soviet "Instructional Manual for the Sergeant-Tankist" here from 1978 which explains that the circumference of a circle is 2PiR or 6.28R where R is the radius (which is the distance to the target being identified) and if the circumference were divided into 6000 equal parts, each part would be equal to 6.28R over 6000, which is a fraction of the radius equal to 1/955, which is rounded up to 1/1000. At no point does the manual use the word "radian" although it's kind of dancing around the topic. Then it lists several angle conversions to memorize and they're all round numbers, so 6000 is quite convenient once you get used to it. 1 degree is 0-17, 15 degrees is 2-50, 90 degrees is 15-00, 360 is of course 60-00. But when the turret is facing forward, it's 30-00 (180 degrees). The rest of the chapter is about how to use the "thousandths" (mils) marks in the gun sight to estimate distances between objects, once you know their distances from the tank and basically turn the gunner into a qualified land surveyor.
@@Bluehawk2008 That is indeed strange. Traditional mil marking starts from direct east, 90degree mark, and goeas counterclockwise, so north should be 15-70.
@@Bluehawk2008 The biggest reason why (I'm guessing) they would start the circle from 00-00 being directly behind is that is the orientation of the turret when the gun is in its travel lock (I'm making an educated guess; feel free to prove/disprove my statement if you can cite an actual source).
"Inshallah school of gunnery" got an audible laugh from me.
Hey at least you have a valid excuse for missing build into doctrine. "I'm sorry commander, but god just didn't will it."
would make a great t-shirt.
Outstanding vid, Nick!
I fucking died!
I laughed too.
"...the ballistic computer knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't..."
Well the original described Terrain Contour Matching correcting inertial navigation but i gess it works for the delta d mode too ^^ see ruclips.net/video/JfSy_6ihdgI/видео.html for explaination
If I don't remember incorrectly from my time in the Finnish Army in the 90's, the 12.7mm HMG could be rotated all the way around, the hatch would rotate at the same time and would always be on the backside of the one in the commander's cupola position.
Finnish modification maybe?
You guys always did take the more sensible route to all things military. ;)
That far my knowledge doesn't go :) All I have is the training I got on the T72M1 in the tank commander role. I could also be remembering things incorrectly, it's been a while since I last was stading in the commander's cupola.
Did you run with full ammo or only in the carousel back in time?
@@RiccardoTheBeAst the carousel, because hand loading from the other places where you can stow ammo inside the tank was a pain in the behind. So much nicer when the autoloader does its thing.
your my favorite tanker ever, love your content, salute from italy
I'm drinking a gin and tonic and hearing chieftain say "yeeted" was the funniest shit I heard all day.
A lot of armchair tankers in r/combatfootage need to watch this
that sub is full off reactionaries
they will never sit down for 40 minutes and actually learn something.....easier to just repeat shit they heard like a parrot
You shouldn't take a redditors opinion seriously to begin with.
@@CarolusR3x I would have no issue with it if it was one or two people. The problem is people becoming more extreme each day so much they cant even accept most basic facts about the enemy. That kınd of blind approach will certainly bring doom to all of us regardless.
Not familiar with the sub, what are the armchair tankers up to that would make this eye opening to them|?
I remember seeing interview footage from the Kharkiv offensive where the Ukrainian tankers mention that they only had 22 rounds before their ammo was depleted. Based on what you said, it appears that the Ukrainians are going into battle with just the autoloader filled
Which may be another reason you don't see many Ukrainian tanks with catastrophic ammo detonations.
@@Vilamus Yup, they are a logic-using bunch. :)
An advantage of being on the strategic defensive, their log tail is likely shorter, so resupply is closer.
My guess is that Russians do it too, or at least i hope for them.
@@RiccardoTheBeAst Kill the tanks, let the crews survive to go home.
Lots to learn can't wait to see the t90 episode (when you get your hands on one) !
T-90 interiors are not modeled in that simulation unfortunately. Only T-72A, T-72B and T-72B3 mod. 2011. No T-64/80/90
Steel Beasts is a great simulator, glad it's good enough for you to use for this
Chief, your books are about to fall off the shelf.
In a recent UKR video, UKR tank crews being interviewed stated they only ever went into action with 20 rounds at a time, your explanation about the carousel actually being the safer storage helps this all make sense! Thank you.
I look forward to this inside the chieftain's hatch for the T-72M1
Thank you for explaining the ammo storage, especially the exposed charges. I have never heard that mentioned, and long wondered how the low-stowed munitions could be detonated so easily, given that storing ammo low in the hull is a primary technique for protecting the rounds and propellant.
The way the ∆D is calculated is very cool! Never knew the T-72 had such capability, let alone the way it is calculated.
In regard to the super quick fuse setting for the HE-FRAG rounds, I believe it is also intended for when engaging enemy infantry in deep snow.
As always, an excellent video and very informative. May you continue making many more of them.
I love how the Chieftain is the only one on the net who pronounces “Cupola” the right way, which is Koò polah and not Koo pòlah.
Italian word from Latin. :)
Actually, I had no idea the root and which was correct, but it's just the way I've always said it! But now I know
It's also pronounced as: Kew-polah...
@@charlestaylor253 In Italian “cu” gives a sound like “koo”. If you want a sound similar to “kew” you need to write “chiu”, as in “chiuso” (kee oo zou”.
My first intro to a T-72 interior was asking the museum supervisor for the keys. I used to work for the Ft. Carson post museum right before I PCS'ed to Ft. Irwin. I'm a 5'6" 19K Abrams Tanker by profession, but I'll never forget how tight it was in the T-72. I'm also not claustrophobic, but the T-72 will change that lol.
Took one for a spin once and I agree, it is tiny in there. Your only friends are your radios and you’d think they are coming onto you with how close they are 😂
Hi... I'm former T72M1 platoon leader.....and i'd like to thank you for very inforative video.... I'd like to make some notes about the tank... ☺️
Am i the only one noticing the Books in the background hanging on for dear life in that bookshelf?
Pretty sure that's been the case for years. Been debating starting a pool for how long until one of the books just decides the floor is better.
Love the switchology series, glad to see it back. I do love Steel-Beasts. A question if you please, did you get to go to the AUSA expo and view the AbramsX therein??
I did not. I went to Detroit instead to look at things the Army is actually buying
@@TheChieftainsHatch Oooooo, and what new goodies will Santa be sending our way??? ^~^
Soviet vehicle smoke is not for self protection. It is for blinding the enemy to enable own offensive movement.
That is why it pop 100m away and are regular smoke grenades, not airburst fast smoke
300-400 m
[10/21/22] Knowing that any of the 6 unprotected rnds could become lethally ignited by spalling from a hit as you mentioned, it would behoove the wise crew to leave them out. The popular belief is that the autoloader causes the brew ups when hit, but it could very well be the unprotected rnds are the cause of most brew ups. As it is most of the videos we see online of T -72s that are hit result in some pretty spectacular brew ups. Some of the brew ups are ferocious.
I was playing arma 2 with dlc this morning, ah memories, love these tanks
Thanks Chieftain. Great vid as ever.
On the one hand this has shown the inside of even early t-72s to be made up of modern, capable systems. However, I think this also shows just how bad the tank is for the armies that typically used it then or still use it now. So many of the systems seem to require a robust understanding of a variety of factors at the same time while this is all being placed on a soldier who very likely is only going to have a short time in service and may not have too many chances to undergo realistic exercises with the system.
Now I could be wrong and maybe most armies, or at least most eastern european armies had plenty of chances to undergo in-depth training but surface level knowledge seems to argue against this. Curious if anyone has better info than I do. Thanks for the video chieftain!
And that is another reason why tank crews in warsaw pact armies alway had at least seargent rank
Nice I'm truly glad they moved the spotlight for your quote @4:27 "so that the *Gunner* cannot stick his head up in front of the Coaxial Machinegun and get his head blown off" 🤣🤣🤣
24:00 The difference maybe in the different doctrinal employment of smoke. NATO tends to use it as a defensive aid (and hence giving the crew commander access to it makes sense). The Soviets (and I guess the Russians too) used it more offensively to obscure NATO defenders as the tks broke into a position (so the heroic grunt with the M-72, emerging from his hole after the preparatory fires, and the suppressive direct tank fire had one more thing to worry about as well as a limited view of the approaching tank). This in part is why NATO MBSGD smoke tends to land close to the firing vehicle, whereas "Soviet" smoke tends to land some 200 - 300m fwd of the firing vehicle. This would also tend to help explain the more choices / options as its probably a more deliberate act by the attacking vehicle as opposed to an defensive IA.
The delay in a nose-fuzed HE round is usually very short (0.01 sec or less) to allow the shell to move forward through the target after hitting its closest outer surface about 2-5 meters so that it can punch through a thick earth or masonry or concrete wall before exploding inside the target. Super-Quick is the usual delay time for an impact type of HE nose fuze and the delay is so fast that the shell will usually not move forward more than half of its length, if that, before detonating. The extra-sensitive setting for the HE shell would be Super-Quick too unless this setting is separate from the delay time setting..
I think the interior of a T-64, 72, 80, and 90 tanks is more interesting to look at than other thanks because of the autoloader machinery.
smoke popping is a technique. the gunner chooses one bank, presses the button and spins the dial 0-4. this can be done in a second. he has 3 banks of 4 smoke grenades. he can launch individual ones too, but that requires thinking a bit more. Or he can launch whole 12 at the same time. it's actually very easy
Hello Mister Chieftain thanks for the video i really enjoy these switchology videos for the educational aspect of them and i am wondering if you could do a video on the leopard 2a4 as i believe it'd be intresting and if all goes to plan it'll be my tank soon... hopefully
thanks in advance
Loved that, nice work sir
i remember reading about Chechen wars how the Russians after the initial failure storming Grozny started only using "shells" in the autoloader, not carrying the spare ones and that supposedly improved their situation regarding the ammo cook offs.
Wdym with "Shells"
@@isaacnickel he meant the ammo outside the autoloader...
IIRC the main problem in that war was their T-80s getting ambushed at close quarters by RPGs fired into the engine deck. In Ukraine the presence of advanced munitions has made life difficult for tanks at any range.
the chechens also apparently ambushed from basement windows, which meant an RPG round would pen the lower part of the tank, hitting the autoloader and the shells contained inside.
T-72 smoke controls were designed with a different smoke grenade application in mind.
The West went with quick defensive smoke from the get go. The Soviets went the other way first, called Tucha smoke launchers. They yeet out smoke grenades a few hundred meters to the front of the turret, they land on the ground and start billowing thick Grey-black smoke.
Hence, the gunner has to aim towards the direction he wants to lay down a smokescreen with the GPS (gunner primary sight).
This system is designed for offensive smoke, and the switches are definitely suboptimal for self defensive smoke.
Basically, Tucha allows you to screen your own forward movement towards enemy contact, reducing need to call for artillery smoke fire missions.
This video was super informative. From playing a bit of GHPC, the lack of good night fighting gear and thermals is a huge weakness of the T-72M. That and the fact that the poor East Germans don't get any rounds better than 3BM-15...
Just a little nitpick about the tkn-3's hunter-killer system. In real life if I recall correctly (Didn't really use the tkn-3 during my service in bmp-2 so I can remember wrong) you don't need to hold the stabilization button down when you designate a target, it stabilizes the sight automatically when you press and hold down the designate button.
So an improvised "safety" upgrade to Soviet style T-72/90 series and T-64/80 series tanks could be to keep 22/28 rounds in the autoloader and a further 3 projectiles and 15 spare propellant charges in the wet storage slots and then only carry inert APFSDS projectiles in open turret stowage and add heavily armored stowage bins on the rear of the turret with blow-off panels. These bins could contain further reserve HEAT and HE-Frag rounds and perhaps propellant charges.
The tank crew could replenish the autoloader with 3 HEAT/HE-Frag and a number of APFSDS rounds whilst in combat but would have to withdraw to top up from the external stowage. However as others had already said the habit of only carrying rounds in the autoloader is a standard practice that goes back as far as the Battle of Grozny.
will you do a vid detailing the barrel launched ATGMs that these tanks can use?
Hey sir just giving you a heads up your Excelsior on your shelf is knocked over
The rücksteuerung on the Leo2 is only active for 10 seconds after lasing, or for 100m of travel after lasing, whichever comes first. Then a fresh lase is required.
Does the Delta-D system on the T-72 just stay active indefinitely (or at least as long as you have the stabilizer on)?
I guess the reason the Leo2 system resets is that with time, "bad data" from track slippage and such will accumulate an mess up the calculations.
I should add though that the Leo2 rücksteuerung will not only compensate for range, but also keep the turret stabilized and aimed at that point in a 3D space, with manual input from the gunner only needed to compensate for target movement. So it does a bit more work than the T-72's Delta-D.
Nice to see some Steel Beasts here, looking forward to a future Leopard 2 video!
We used SB Pro for simple Leo2 gunnery practice when I was in the Norwegian Army ~15 years ago. At the time it was the only Leo2 simulator we had access to, though the older Leo1 sims (the big ones with the full size turret you physically sat inside of) were still useful, as the gunnery systems were not too different.
Great video and explanations!
Thanks, very informative.
would love to see the chieftain do a BMP
Outstanding video!
A Switchology on T-64 would be welcome, I heard it has a better FCS, though this depends on the modification.
It's worth noting that Soviet vehicle smoke serves a different function from NATO vehicle smoke. The Soviet smoke isn't for aiding a quick getaway. It's for creating a screen to maneuver behind. So the smoke is launched a bit over a hundred meters in front of the vehicle and is slower to build, but lasts longer. I think it still probably would have made more sense to put the smoke controls within easy reach of the commander, since he's still the one who would make the decision to pop smoke. But since the purpose of the smoke isn't defensive, the seconds lost in telling the gunner to pop smoke are less critical.
Quality video. Thanks
Oh my god he post Switchology video!!!!
there is VHÚ channel, has 1981 video of export 72. It shows NSVT rotation with the cover rotation opposite of it.
Amazing!! Thank you.
I missed the 2am premiere! 🇦🇺
Question on this: Is stab for the sight on all the time? I watch videos of Sov tanks driving around with gun stab disabled (as you said, the motors can only stay on for an hour at a time). In this case, is the gunners sight stabilized or is he staring alternately into ground and sky?
Also, I could do you Leopard 2 stuff if you want. I have about 2 years on 2A4/2A6.
They're separately stabilized
The optic and the gun elevation is separate, this is because when reloading the gun elevates to a fixed position and the sight can stay on target, and the gun can move back to the position the sight is aiming at. also due to this the sight and gun are stabilized separately.
the smoke launcher is interesting, also interesting that we haven't seen much footage of russians using the smoke in combat
I believe the primary change in the M and M1 series is improved NBC protection.
M1 also has better fire control and composite armour (to T72A standards). The T72M was a downgraded T72A.
IIRC the M was an early Ural-1 whereas M1 was T-72A '79
@@s.31.l50 they had the same FCS.
Is there any dangers associated with the automatic jettison of the spent casings? Like if there is a chemical threat outside the tank, does it break the seal?
On the smoke grenade issue. The smoke grenades on soviet tanks didn't plume as quickly and launched very far in front of the tank. They were supposed enable maneuvers by obsuring enemy vision and not neccesarilly enable evasive maneuvers. As soviets tanks only could effectively evade the enemy by turning their back to them.
what are western ones like then? i’m not familiar
Hello, my comment might be a little late but your statement at 7:55 regarding the T55s commander sight is wrong. Even early TKN1s found on T54Bs have the option to counterrotate and designate targets, although they are night only. Tankograd goes into great detail on this in his post about the T54/55.
The problem was that I misidentified the button on T55 as something other than a target designate feature, which is what I was correcting here.
@@TheChieftainsHatch Wow, I did not expect you to answer me. My only problem was your statement about the commander needing to fight the cupola when rotating because that's not true. Love your content though, thanks for this extensive insight.
@yourfriendlyneighborhoodf1802 I had another read of it and I don't interpret anything to mean that there is a counter rotation feature installed, no mention of motors or mechanical mechanisms. . Indeed, there are a couple of references to the effect of movements of the cupola relative to the target during the slewing both for the earlier and later systems.
@@TheChieftainsHatch I also re-read it and I am mistaken. You were correct all along, im sorry.
@@yourfriendlyneighborhoodf1802 No harm done. My mistakes (like in the original t55 video) tend to be a bit more public and embarrassing!
That's was cool!
Also, if you have hot fragmentation flying inside and it doesn't hit exposed charges, you probably still in quite a lot of trouble anyway.
That "inshaallah school of gunnery" gave me a good chuckle lol.
how is stub base gets yeeted? I never saw it gets yeeted from the inside. is there some kind of ram-rod mechanism to do so?
The breech yeet it to the circle holder.
The holder move to the turret top.
The door at the top open and yeeting it goes.
The extra rounds outside the carousel may initiate the blast, but it is the rounds in the carousel going off that make the turret pop off. The ones in I saw in DS seemed to lose their turrets even without a penetration...as if concussion from a non-penetrating hit would set them off as well.
If a tank round detonates pretty much on your lap, i doubt you would care if it sets off other rounds or not. You're dead either way.
Very well said. People trash on the T-72 for turret launching but it little matters whether it launches or not, and other tanks do that too. You know who else launched their turrets? The famous leopard 2.
pretty cool for 1980
Where do you find the user manuals that you usually refer to?
Are these not available to the public, or am I just dense?
G'day Nick, glad to see you're doing well and the 1 ARMD unit patch in the background. Did your man get any video of you driving the T72 at AusArmour?
Chieftain In case you get change.. take look at what is elevation and depression angles in commanders periscope on T-72, PLEASE! In Steelbeast elevation of commanders sight is bugged to 0 degrees and it is known bug but no fix is happening as that is to my understanding because they haven't gotten right / reliable numbers. I wonder if you could provide such. Tankograd found some, but that was, to my understanding deemed dubious by developers. :(
Very strange that they would find a manual to be a dubious source but 0 degrees is acceptable, even though it was never the case for any TKN-3 installation in any tank
Not a tank, but it would be interesting to see a video about armoured trains one day.
What is a tank really, but a train that lays its own track and then has the courtesy to pick them back up again when its finished?
@@emm4rmstrong What are missiles if not aerial torpedoes?
I have read an interview with t-80bvm tanker; he says that any experienced commander never loads his tank to the full. he was taking only 10-15 shells to combat (sabots and he, didn't bother with atgms though)
Have you done stuff on the M17A1/M17C FCS?
Awesome vid
Greetings from the Old Country, Nicholas ! How is the Master's Degree coming along ?
This is awesome, like DCS for tanks.
Could you do one on the B3, the kalina (best girl btw) FCS is awesome to use.
Also does SB have working spotlights? i never saw them in any video being used
Currently, no, but there will be movement on that front. Definitely be a few more years though.
No desktop ?
Seriously good vid, unexpected level of detailing, exept graphically...
Graphics aren’t really the point of the sim. they are good enough for the job, which is training soldiers.
@@TheChieftainsHatch yes, but the graphics are bad mostly because you are running it on a laptop right ?
@@attilavs2 The game is old...
@@attilavs2 No, a high end gaming machine. The customers are not asking for graphics any better than necessary, so this is what the sim provides
@@TheChieftainsHatch really ? But there was a whiny fan the whole time in the background. Sorry then
Question, why did it take so long for the US to integrate a hunter-killer capability into the M1? Was it a case of "wait for the CITV on the A2 for full shebang?"
It was money.
After the gold plated failures of MBT-70 and XM803, M1 was designed to a cost so congress would agree to buy a new tank at last. M1 still overran that planned cost to the tune of about $60,000 in 1972 dollars, but a lot was omitted from the initial model so it would be even that close. No vehicle central CBRN defense system, no 120mm gun, no hunter-killer system.
Army figured it was better to upgrade an imperfect tank later than miss out on getting any tank now.
During M1E1 period, the CITV was very expensive so as a result, the CITV was not incorporated on the M1E1, although a circular roof opening was added to the design so that a CITV could be easily added at some future point in time. The US installed a CITV in the early 90s on the M1A2, Germany also installed Thermal sight for commander on Leo 2A5 in the early 90s and the Challenger 2 didn't get it at all same goes for Leclerc. After the First Gulf War, the Abrams crews themselves mentioned the lack of Thermal sight for commander. M1 Block II was Abrams ,, adventure "into digital from analog, so devices like the CITV were a must have to enter full day/night hunter-killer capability.
@@Viktor-fl5mv roof opening wasn't added to M1A1 until M1 Block II production configuration was frozen in late 1988 or 1989.
I think it might not be that necessary to have since the TC can already control the turret before the hunter-killer system. All the TC had to do is to manually traverse the turret at the direction of the enemy, and the gunner will take care of the rest.
@@chrisblack6258 gunner and commander sharing the same TIS made the engagement sequence slower than it would've been with an independent channel. Commander had to stick his head out of the turret and use binoculars or NVGs if he wanted to scan a sector that the gunner wasn't scanning already. Big disadvantage, especially at night.
ah yes the yeet, just like that ball in the standing power throw. remember saying yeet during the event will add at least another 2 meters.
ow its crazy how bad this version of the t72 was at night
18:20 seems to be saying that you can solve the jack-in-the-box problem by just keeping all ammo in the carousel and nowhere else. Seems like if it were that easy they would have done that a long time ago. Right?
that was the case in chechnya
The most extreme example so far has been the M1 TTB which carried all 44 rounds in the under- turret carousel.
@@TheChieftainsHatch Yes, but does keeping all ammo in the carousel and nowhere else solve the jack-in-the-box problem? If so, why don't they do that?
@@THESocialJusticeWarrior That depends on how you define the problem. Are you worried about if the turret remains on the vehicle, or are you worried about what happens to the crew when the ammo blows? If the ammo blows in an M60, I don't think the crew will be in a position to care what happens to the turret
@@TheChieftainsHatch Crew. Comparing to tanks that have storage like the M1's.
Please do a video of T90 Switchology and Fire Control System.
Isn't the coax ballisticly matched to the main gun for use with the unity sight? Asking for a friend...
Very interesting, maybe more steel beasts but in a western tank next?
Wouldn’t the nighttime crosshairs still put the laser in line with the target?
Only at short ranges where the laser isn't needed anyway
Court Marshal coming for that gunner.
Can you review KV2
I guess I'm the first person to go all Nigel Tunfel and complement the taste of the Soviets for having something that goes to eleven, when you need that little bit extra.😁😁😁
I had thought the issue with the carousel auto loader was that no good provision for blow out panels can be fitted. Admittedly contemporaries of the early T-72 also did not have this feature, later tanks such as M1, and Leopard 2 (as long as the front stowage is not used) do. Even today we see this issue in modern conflicts as although more modern T-72 variants exist, they are still suffering turret ejection when penetrated.
If you're tank gets penetrated I don't think haveing your turret still on makes a huge difference seeing as you still have all the super hot metal fragments of the shell and armor bouncing around in the turret .
@@robingrewal8103 it can be the difference between one crewman dead and three crewmen dead.
Anecdotal evidence seems to show T series tanks kill turret crew, but the driver usually survives on penetration. Thats still one less person dead than when a western manually loaded tank gets penetrated.
Amd have no illusion, noone is surviving a penetration of their fighting compartment, except by statistically irrelevant luck.
If a leopard 2 don’t use the hull storage, it will only have 16 rounds. I doubt a leo2 would go into action with so few rounds.
Leclerc has roughly the same issue (22 rounds).
So realistically, just drive an Abrams 😅😅😅 totally unbiased.
The T-72 generationally was a rather transitional design implementing more mature versions of older technologies. Vent panels simply were not a thing at the time and judging by the T-90M's design choices they can't be retrofitted to the carousel either.
I have seen folks ask it, so may as well ask it myself. Does SB pro have working IR spotlights?. Last time I looked (4 or 5 years ago as of note) they did not.
But I wonder if they still don't given in SA: Blaze of War or Gunner Heat how big a deal spotlight on vs off is, I wonder why they have not added it yet?
Programming issues mostly (lotta old spaghetti code), but Ssnake has mentioned them for version 5.
What is the functional purpose of range finding gates?
It eliminates bad returns caused by obstacles between you and the target. If you know the target is at least 1.5km away, for example, and there are trees in between you and it, it means you won't get a direct hit on a tree
@@TheChieftainsHatch How does the super sensitive fuse on the HE shell not detonate upon firing the gun? Or the wind rushing past the shell in flight? But somehow detonate on something as light as a leaf or twigs?
@@ryanmanner2503 I would suspect arming distance for the first one, and I have to suppose correct tweaking of sensitivity for the second
What doesn’t constitute an EFC on a tank gun? A lower velocity round like HEAT? If so… is it .5 EFC?
It differ for each different type of munition.
AP is always 1 efc.
That smoke launcher system might explain half of the reasons I haven't seen any Russian tanks pop smoke when under fire in Ukraine.
The other half being that supposedly, many of them haven't been actually equipped with the smoke grenades to pop.