Thanks for watching, check out the accompanying article for this video here: armourersbench.com/2022/08/21/ukraines-homemade-tank-destroyer/ Check out the full playlist of videos on Ukraine here: ruclips.net/p/PLt7Io-OQBYSpPwU2o06V67DBI_aKEfeNn
I'm pretty sure "Kraken" is a unit/ battalion name and have uploaded several videos of their combat including retaking of villages and towns. Very interesting video, thanks 👍
Looks like it has a pretty serious flaw though... can the crew even operate it from in the vehicle? It looks like the recoil would make that impossible, and if that the case, it can really only be used on static targets because theres no way to adjust fire on the fly.
Hydraulic spades is a part of stock mtlb. It is an evacuation vehicle, its winch (rotor with steel rope) requires a counter force to pull tank out of the dirt
I really like how this combo looks. It is elegant, looks like a properly designed weapon system rather than just sticking a cannon on a top of the vehicle, it is tracked, the cannon despite being 100mm has already destroyed a lot of russian non tank armour (actually it shoots 100x910mm rounds, so its a much higher velocity than 100x695mm used by tanks like T-54), MT-12 can be fitted with night vision, there is a version with a radar for low visibility firing (smoke screens) and even a version capable of firing laser guided rockets. The issues are obvious - can it actually be fired with the crew on it (can it fire at moving targets), and how much ammunition it can take (reliance on support vehicles). Still, it just looks so good.
It also has a high elevation..meaning it can double as a fast light artillery piece like a German 105mm Wespe from WW2. The should convert all their 100mm AT guns to this combo.
The original MT-12 gun crew was always behind the shield. They probably use the lanyard to protect their hearing and prevent bodily damage from the concussion of the gun firing.
how much critical thinking is lacking in the West. the ukrozergs put an old anti-tank gun on the old MTLB (which the Ukrainian army also has in abundance), made a couple of pretentious videos and all the Western lemings got wet like girls. the ukrozergs are able to shoot a video, but more than 100,000 corpses have already been scattered across the fields, and you think why there is still no offensive on Kherson. Do you think the Russians are fools that they don't put heavy weapons on MTLB? the answer is very simple, the mtlb case is not designed for shock loads. That's how it's not even an armored personnel carrier, but an armored transport. On its basis, you can make either special machines with radar and surveillance systems or light air defense and ATGM missile launchers, but not for guns.
i have not heard until today that exist any "field anti tank gun" to be able to "shot on the move", simply because is MANUFACTURED to shot on stationary position. Except that, they added hydraulic support on the rear side of vehicle to support & stabilize the vehicle when firing. Clearly on the move such thing can not be done. Are you requiring from simple fighters on battlefield, to produce an "piece of art" weapon with complex electronic stabilization computers, including precision gearboxes with electromotors to do the function automatically, how just how it works in modern tanks?! Are you sure that you are not some kind of psychopath?!
@@thepreserver83 I wrote "fire at moving targets", I did not wrote "shoot on the move" anywhere. Perhaps anger made you misunderstood what was written. Please wipe the foam off your mouth and don't call others "psychopaths" cause it is really rude.
I love homebrews like this. All business, no talk. It really gets down to the essentials, without the bells and whistles, of what is really needed - i.e. not a camel but a horse.
Ukraine is ahead of the curve. I suspect they are preparing for the reduced availability of Western ATGMs. These things are good for targeting everything except tanks. Perhaps it will allow them to save the ATGMs for tanks and employ these for any number of other targets including fixed positions. Doctrinally, these are defensive weapons which allow tanks to be consolidated into offensive formations.
@Babd it's a remark on a common saying. "A camel is a horse designed by committee". Meaning that when a bunch of desk sitters design something it ends up being bloated with features at the detriment of its intended purpose. In the clip we see what soldiers created because that's what they specifically needed, in its simplest form. Hope this clears it up :)
Historically Camels can be more effective than horses as military mounts in certain circumstances. In the history of the Middle East and North Africa Camels were often used as anti horse cavalry because horses found the smell of camels rather unnerving and obviously the camel is better adapted for desert than a horse. I'd argue there are more bells and whistles with a horse than a camel.
The British 57mm Six Pounder Anti Tank gun was a heck of a weapon. A real one-shot tank killer in a small package. Quick to deploy, low to the ground weapons firing very high velocity solid rounds. I wonder if smaller bore high velocity guns would do the job today. Easier logistics with three or four-man gun crews.
Suffice to say, anything that inst mobile have a tendency to attract artillery fire very quickly and since artillery seems to be on the order of the day in Ukraine this tank-destroyer seems like a logical conclusion.
Always refreshing to see the the creativeness of the Ukrainians during the thick of war. They are a special people who seem to use all available resources wisely.
I can understand an advantage of range over effective anti tank missiles like Javelin but I'm not sure how useful this development is on the battlefield. However I'm sure every little helps and equipment is always needed, even if it's helps secure quieter parts of the battle.
How efficent it is will depend on wha you use it on. It is likly not the best weapon against tanks that are advancing, but against stationary vehicle, tank or with lighter armour it can be a good idea. Even better it using it against field fortification. Wikipedia have the max range of the framentation shell at 8200m with indirect fire. If you like to use the gun for indirect fire putting it on the MT-LB to quickly move away to avoid counteratillery fire can be a good idea. The only shell we see they load into it is a HE or HEAT shell. Se do see some APFSDS but only used in training with the towed gun. If Ukraine has the guns and ther effectiveness or need in the anti tank roll is limited why not use it for indirect fire as long as you have ammunition? They do not have enough atillery or atlast enough ammunition to the old sovet guns but do have the anti-tank gun ad some stock of HE shell so why not use the? I suspect is was build as a test. It would not require a lot of manpower of equipment to convert it. So let the troops build one so the idea can be tested. If it works and it efficient then you might build more. It if do not wok you can remove the gun and put it on the original towd stand. The MT-LB can alos be restored. If feels like making one for testing is a good idea because if it works Ukrain can make some more light selfe propelled artillery pieces with stuff they already have.
Could be very effective in a concealed ambush position. Blast a Russian column from 3 km away then scoot back and shoot as artillery. MBTs act as front screen.
There is a possibility that the reason it was mounted on the tracked vehicle is the infamous mud and weather of Eastern Europe. Bad enough that it's bogged down any and all armys who have come through there. As for the gun, it's probably being used as a mechanized field gun for both artillery and anti-tank/personnel duties. I wouldn't be surprised if the reason that they mounted that one had more to do with an excess stockpile of ammo, and parts on hand than anything else.
It is suppose to be an anti-tank gun, not a howitzer, or a infantry support weapon. It isn't a very good anti-tank gun if the crew has to fire it from outside of the vehicle.
@@Ace1000ks A fair number of WW2 anti-tank guns were like this. Its not a new design. The idea was less frontline, and more ranged, almost to the point were it could be considered indirect, or a self-propelled gun, yet not.
All tank destroyers are born of the combination of spare big guns, older vehicles, the urgency of conflict and the lack of capacity to produce the proper number of modern tanks.
As far as field custom solutions go, this is outstanding. Some serious design and fabrication with went into this. The quality of the build work is far beyond the usually slapped together with a welding torch and a dream type creations you see in many armed forces.
I think this combination is a pretty competent adaptation which makes the use of the gun more effective. I like the way the gun has auto-ejection of the spent shell. This speeds the rounds per minute rate considerably.🤔
Looking at the firing I don't think it can be used in anti tank role. The recoil seems to be too great for the gun layer. It may be more likely a bunker buster or as an ordinary self propelled artillery gun. Love the recoil though it reminds me of the 17 pounder on the 25 pounder gun carriage!thanks for posting.
I can see this being used against all but an MBT, unless some of those reserve T-62s Russia is using are rolling around. They clearly can use it in a direct and an indirect fire mode as well. A good weapon to do ambush attacks against BMPs and BTRs.
I agree. Also, its no self-loader. It seems they must load every shot one by one... A tank would fire upon them with its machine gun, if nothing else... Even shooting from a couple kilometers away machine gun bullets would rain on them still causing wounds... So its essentially a self going cannon, a basic version of these they get from west. Im sure it works well enough.
I want people to know this can knock out the t-62m and t-64b that the separatist use from all angles, and the t-72 and t-80 of all variants form the side. Not to mention the btr and bmp would be very soft.
@@terrynewsome6698 It might not be as effective on the sides of tanks with Kontakt-5, as the projectile would shatter when it strikes the ERA. It might still pen, but it would be far less effective.
@@voidtempering8700 true, but it is still something to support the Ukrainian infantry in a ambush. And there is a limit to how many atgm equipped tank destroyers can supply to each platoon.
Is it though? I question it's accuracy. Also MTLB has little to none armor, so the way it is fitted... I doubt it can survive more than a 100 shots without falling apart.
A simple design, quick assembly, major mobility, and very good fire power. This is a classic good example of infield system adaptation. I tip my hat to them. You don't always need the best and latest tech to fight a battle.
Even if it is not suitable for destroying tanks or other vehicles, it is still a good option to increase the number of self-propelled artillery for working at short distances. For paratroopers and assault groups - a great option. From 6 to 14 shots per minute at a distance of 8 kilometers... If you have at least 2-3 such machines - the enemy infantry is fucked
It might be expected that this technology has been superseded by the more flexible, more accurate, portable anti tank missiles provided by the US and UK. The problem with an anti tank gun of the type shown, is it is likely to be forced to attack the tank armour at its strongest point, reducing the effective range. There is also the issue of accuracy, and the potential vulnerability of the vehicle. I suspect that its a poor match against a tank, due to its lack of ability to track and acquired a moving target. This seems more suited to attacking fixed positions. Its existence likely owes a lot to making maximum use of readily available resources.
@@RCorvinus There appears to be an issue with firing it with the crew aboard - the need for the long firing lanyard for example. That implies that it cannot be used against moving targets, even lightly armoured ones. Also, APC type vehicles can be taken out with smaller calibre weapons than 100mm guns. I suspect Mr Johnson might be right and this is more an assault gun (Stug) designed to give infantry mobile direct fire HE support against fixed positions and defences than a Panzerjager. After all, nothing makes a grunt happier than being able to send a large HE round straight into an enemy machine gun nest.
@@nigeljohnson9820 If it even hits the tank - remember this thing is not exactly "accurate" in current configuration (shakes a lot) and I bet it only has optical coincidental sights (like WWII tanks up to 1960s).
The spades weren't "added" - that started as an MT-LB "Blade" , the version with the rear mounted dozer blade, They just repurposed the mechanism to be 2 rear facing spades for recoil rather than 1 front facing dozer blade/plow
It has to answer some need. I love the ingenuity of soldiers. Give them a real lemon and they can make something no one expects. Soldiers have no respect for anyone's ego. So what if a vehicle follows them or a trailer is towed with more ammunition. At some point, a truck has to resupply them with fuel and ammunition.
MT-12 has a lot more then that. the problem is Ukrainian logistics have been devastated so good luck getting those huge shells around to where they are needed.
@@linusa2996 Well I never said it could, but now I will :) If you point at a point on a road and simply let them drive into your sights, BAM, you've just hit a moving target.
@@RubyFox_YT How would you know it's in your sights? you don't have one and the shooter is outside the vehicle pulling the rope connected to the firing mechanism. This isn't like a hetzer where the gunner is sitting next to the gun with looking through the sights
The advantage of this is definitely the ability to shoot and scoot. I'm not sure that this would be notably faster to set up for a shot, but it's definitely faster to leave after a shot.
Seeing a lot of people questioning its effectiveness as a tank destroyer, and I don't necessarily agree with those arguments. Mostly, even if it has drawbacks the normal towed version doesn't. Then this still isn't a case of it replacing the towed version, but aiding it. There are times where this would be incredibly useful against tanks, and if they have them in abundance, then why not make some. But additionally, I see this being used more simply as general artillery. Since Russia has more artillery, much of it with longer range, being able to fire off some rounds and then quickly relocate before opposing artillery fire has time to narrow in on their location could hold a lot of tactical value. But lastly, it looks amazing and I hope at least one survives the conflict and ends up in a museum somewhere.
The MT-LB is fairly spacious for a russian vehicle. I reckon the inside area above the fuel tanks as well as the crawlspace from the rear compartment to the front can be used as a ready rack for the projectiles.
@@TheArmourersBench It does 180mm penetration at 2000meters and 230mm at 500meters, its not at tank destroyer, just a general porpose gun for afvs, trucks or even fortifications
Probbaly it depends also on the ammunition waht can be destroyed, but mostly who spots who first. Those manpad type of weapons are more difficult to spot
When at War break out, arises the necessity for better, improved, and more mobile weapon systems and platforms, usually at the hand of the Front line infantry for their own needs where HQ cant provide. I always loving seeing self made improvised weapon platforms/systems
Edit: As I see now, some others pointed this out already. So let me just say, nice Video. Interesting vehicle. I hope they put it to good use and it serves them well. 01:35 those are not not soviet Soldiers with the MT-12, but east German Army (NVA) soldiers. The footage is from an east german propaganda movie named "panzerjäger Klietz" a 3 parter as far as I remember. It follows one MT-12 crew throughout their service in the NVA. You can also see it from the east german helmets and hear it form the beautiful sounds of comabt german beeing spoken :) I know all this because I used the footag (available hear on youtube) for my own video about soviet anti tank guns of the cold war a while back (in german). I like this vehicle because since that video I am indeed quite interested in soviet PaKs. Hopefully it survives the war and we can see it in person one day.
Even though all of these recent wars have brought suffering, they have also given us ways to keep the offending party at bay in creative ways! Seeing a towed AT gun mounted directly to a prime mover like this is one of those rare genius ideas that comes out of a war. When this is all over, I think we're going to see that improvisation was way more a factor in victory than most think!
Most of these Ad Hoc implements are done on volunteer units. They seem to have the kind of creative and innovative thinking (or rather are somehow deprived of ordinary weapons) but I also think that Ukraine is easing the weight on local innovations. They may have found out that free initiative may open new ways. In this case is nothing really new, but you change 2 rolling units into 1 which in Ukraine´s landscape is always gonna be a logistical advantage, besides elevation this sort of mounting also spares men, effectively doubling your manpower potential. If you add a guided round, you may even engage helicopters. Is quite an improvement
4:26 Those are not soviet gun crews, they are east German, trivially spotted by their uniform pattern, the helmet shape and the fact that they are speaking German.
@@TheArmourersBench Sure, but the way you write it, it means "soviet (gun crews)", not "(soviet gun) crews". Also, the majority of English speaking watchers will not understand "NVA" to mean "Nationale Volksarmee", but rather "North Vietnamese Army". Well, you can't change it now anyway. In any case, thanks for responding.
@@imjustthere9343 okay and? will this technique feel comfortable in the game? Its tower practically does not rotate or is completely welded to the body. the vertical aiming angles also seem to be 0
seen alot of talk about fixed guns being obsolete in modern war as well as many of the older "battle taxi" lightly armed troop transports so this seems like a good way to get more use out of both halves of the build.
God bless Ukraine for perseverance, indomitable spirit, sacrifice, and ingenuity. Kinda reminds me of the Germans turning the 88 AA gun into a tank killer. Seen some interesting weapons in Ukraine: like old German MG 42s, scars, m14s, etc. The list goes on. They are taking outdated systems and making them viable on the modern battlefield, while utilizing them in sync with new western arms. The commercial drone as a FO and weapon system has been ingenious. Glory to Ukraine from a Slav.
Think of it as a inexpensive solution in place of a MGS platform like the M1128 Stryker. I'd love to see what this does in a side or rear impact on an MBT.
Given that Ukraine has been given many 105mm howitzers, I was wondering if the MTLB chassis could be modified to make a gun carrier, for mobile artillery. It would seem to me turning the 105mm into a highly mobile artillery to support counter offensive operations, would provide many benefits.Then I came across this video.
That the entire cartridge package is self contained is off my head rare amount Ukrainian equipment, since even their tank shells have multiple pieces. I wonder how much that helps with things. Rate of fire, etc.
The ingenuity of the Ukrainians never ceases to amaze me. Their warrior spirit coupled with this level of improvisation is truly a force to be reckoned with.
Exemplary creativity and innovation by the Ukrainian Soldiers! Great going Ukraine! You guys have seen the A-10 drone version; what more do you need to know? If you don't try; the answer is, "no you cannot do it." anyway. Get your auto mechanics and welders and injured pilots involved!
This is literally the first truly 21st Century war. You have makers taking two almost obsolete weapons and making something completely new that confuses the enemy's tactics. That applies to other improvised systems we've already scene.
That reminds me the conversion the Greek army did on its Bmp1 vehicles by removing the turret and replacing it with twin Zu 23-2 AA cannons that has on ample supply, both given from the former East German army stocks.
I hope the Ukranians use the Gephard anti-aircraft units against infantry positions like the krauts did with their anti-aircraft machine guns in WW2 for big effect.
I love the weapons ingenuity shown during war...but it's a shame it has to be developed. That MT-LB is novel. It's usually the ZU-2 or the Strela-10 models seen. Will you be doing more videos on improvised war weapons? E.G. Hell Canon etc?
Is this really usefull against (moving) tanks/IFVs? Especially if the gun is fired from outside of the vehicle. How are they aiming at a potental moving target?
We don't know a lot about how they're hoping to employ it and I wonder if the filming was from a test. In action they might he manning the gun (I would imagine so).
@@TheArmourersBench This will likely be used against MG nests. I recall Soviet doctrine regarding PT 76, which were conceptually precursor to this contraption. Truth be told, It's only effective against tanks if people inside are carrying ATGMs. But against static targets it’s good.
Russian tanks are not racing around the countryside too much these days anyway. They can be used from an ambush, or when a drone has spotted one they can sneak closer to fire on it. Not perfect, but better then a towed one
I'm not sure I buy the idea of a 'tank destroyer' being fired with a lanyard after the crew all leave the vehicle. If you're firing at a moving tank, don't you have to track it through through the sights until the moment of firing? I suspect that in reality, this is being used as mobile field artillery, either in direct or indirect fire, to destroy fixed defensive positions. That's a perfectly sensible thing to do BTW, since the high velocity of an anti-tank gun will give it greater stand-off range in direct fire.
Against NATO tactics, this would be useless as their tanks would be moving while their optics would allow them to outrange it. Plus this gun would be useless against modern armor. But Russian tactics are to bombard and area with artillery, then send troops with a few tanks and BMPS forward to see if they killed or drove the enemy forces out. So the Ukrainians would pull back and hunker down until the artillery stopped then move forward with drones feeding them targeting information. Javelins and NLAWS would handle the tanks while these could deal with BMPS and troop concentrations!
@@JimCOsd55 It would have the same problem hitting a moving BMP as a moving tank. I think that, unless it can be fired with the gunner's eye to the scope, it's only going to be useful for static targets. Of course that could include a stationary/dug-in BMP etc...
@@MrHws5mp … Which is why they use Javelins and NLAWS to hit moving targets like tanks and BMPS while videos show static targets like parked BMPS and troops hiding in trenches being hit with artillery.
Given that it's only 100mm, I would not be surprised to find that they are significantly overcharging the weapon. So firing the thing via a long string is probably prudent.
"Only 100 mm" still offers quite a punch ;). And you don't have to overcharge it. Newer tanks might be frontally immune (yet still can get damaged - optics, tracks, equipment etc.). Newer generations from the side however, or as russians get more and more obsolete tanks from their inventory (there are T-64 mentioned to be deployed)? Not to mention any lighter AFV. Might be a nasty "only 100 mm" surprise :D
The WW2 German Flak 88 was smaller but still considered one of the best guns ever made. A relatively small projectile with big propellant charge got the job done. Ditto the British Six Pounder.
The gun is a modernized version of the bC-3 100mm antitank gun the Soviets used in WWII. With a barrel that long, you could just about literally "reach out and touch someone". Notice the "Silver bullets" sabotted penetrators?
It is a rather impressive conversion and given the complexity of the modifications, I'd be inclined to image the Ukrainians have produced a convenient conversion kit (if there are more than one of these mobile gun carriages in service).
I may be mistaken and of course can't find the source, but I believe a version of the mt-lb was supposed to have the capability to do something similar. It was an open top version that didn't just tow a gun but that the gun could be embarked pointing forward using ramps. The pictures were of using them for amphibious crossings and supposedly the gun could be fired in transit. It was a smaller gun, maybe an 85mm. If someone corrects me and finds what I'm thinking of , no problem.
This supports the argument that tank destroyers are STILL VIABLE in this modern age. Even more so the homemade style such as this configuration. Tank destroyers are still capable of doing their job in this day and age, even if most of that job is limited to indirect fire support. So, let’s remember this for the history books. Ingenuity will always be a thing to support the argument that there are still ways that antiquated ideas can still deal damage on the battlefield.
Thanks for watching, check out the accompanying article for this video here: armourersbench.com/2022/08/21/ukraines-homemade-tank-destroyer/
Check out the full playlist of videos on Ukraine here: ruclips.net/p/PLt7Io-OQBYSpPwU2o06V67DBI_aKEfeNn
Ukraine made their own Marder Jadgpanzer. Ukraine should put all their 100mm on MTLB...they also make decent light mobile short range field guns.
Going to be looking like vraks soon
I'm pretty sure "Kraken" is a unit/ battalion name and have uploaded several videos of their combat including retaking of villages and towns. Very interesting video, thanks 👍
PaK 40 7,5cm was from the Germans, it was mounted on the PZ I, PZIII & Czech PZ38.
Kraken is regiment's name.
They didn’t half-ass that assembly. The hydraulic recoil spades are a nice touch and took effort and skill to install. I’m impressed.
Looks like it has a pretty serious flaw though... can the crew even operate it from in the vehicle? It looks like the recoil would make that impossible, and if that the case, it can really only be used on static targets because theres no way to adjust fire on the fly.
@@ianmedford4855 It's a 70's artillery gun. What did you expect?
Combat Engineers can do anything
Hydraulic spades is a part of stock mtlb.
It is an evacuation vehicle, its winch (rotor with steel rope) requires a counter force to pull tank out of the dirt
@@ianmedford4855 to be fair the footage is almost guaranteed to be from a firing range.
This reminds me so much of the "Marder" Tank destroyers of WW2 where the germans fitted russian guns on pz2 chassis. Same Vibe.
reminds me more of the experimental stuff the Germans drew up like the Scorpion "H-SKA 81959 for the 12.8 cm Skorpion mit Panther Bauteilen"
Some of them did have soviet guns, but mostly they carried the german pak40 7.5cm anti tank gun
@@yoeriw7099 Man this stuff never got build because id needet Panther parts. Only the light Waffenträger was built.
@@Kullioking you might wanna read, I only said they drew it up.
Mum can we get a marder?
Mom: no we got marder at home.
The marder at home.
I really like how this combo looks. It is elegant, looks like a properly designed weapon system rather than just sticking a cannon on a top of the vehicle, it is tracked, the cannon despite being 100mm has already destroyed a lot of russian non tank armour (actually it shoots 100x910mm rounds, so its a much higher velocity than 100x695mm used by tanks like T-54), MT-12 can be fitted with night vision, there is a version with a radar for low visibility firing (smoke screens) and even a version capable of firing laser guided rockets. The issues are obvious - can it actually be fired with the crew on it (can it fire at moving targets), and how much ammunition it can take (reliance on support vehicles). Still, it just looks so good.
It also has a high elevation..meaning it can double as a fast light artillery piece like a German 105mm Wespe from WW2. The should convert all their 100mm AT guns to this combo.
The original MT-12 gun crew was always behind the shield. They probably use the lanyard to protect their hearing and prevent bodily damage from the concussion of the gun firing.
how much critical thinking is lacking in the West. the ukrozergs put an old anti-tank gun on the old MTLB (which the Ukrainian army also has in abundance), made a couple of pretentious videos and all the Western lemings got wet like girls. the ukrozergs are able to shoot a video, but more than 100,000 corpses have already been scattered across the fields, and you think why there is still no offensive on Kherson. Do you think the Russians are fools that they don't put heavy weapons on MTLB? the answer is very simple, the mtlb case is not designed for shock loads. That's how it's not even an armored personnel carrier, but an armored transport. On its basis, you can make either special machines with radar and surveillance systems or light air defense and ATGM missile launchers, but not for guns.
i have not heard until today that exist any "field anti tank gun" to be able to "shot on the move", simply because is MANUFACTURED to shot on stationary position.
Except that, they added hydraulic support on the rear side of vehicle to support & stabilize the vehicle when firing. Clearly on the move such thing can not be done.
Are you requiring from simple fighters on battlefield, to produce an "piece of art" weapon with complex electronic stabilization computers, including precision gearboxes with electromotors to do the function automatically, how just how it works in modern tanks?! Are you sure that you are not some kind of psychopath?!
@@thepreserver83 I wrote "fire at moving targets", I did not wrote "shoot on the move" anywhere. Perhaps anger made you misunderstood what was written. Please wipe the foam off your mouth and don't call others "psychopaths" cause it is really rude.
Kraken isn't the name of the vehicle, it's the name of a volunteer regiment formed by Azov veterans in February.
I'm familiar with the regiment, perhaps they're responsible for it? Thanks for watching!
Very adaptive unit.
Yes, Kraken is unit name and main target of both Russian / DPR / LPR / everyone else attacks.
@@tomk3732 well they're doing a great job from what I have seen of their actions on YT.
@@oz314 cope. Azov aryans slaughter the red army
I love homebrews like this. All business, no talk. It really gets down to the essentials, without the bells and whistles, of what is really needed - i.e. not a camel but a horse.
Can't beat s shed build❤️🙏🇺🇦👍😎
Ukraine is ahead of the curve. I suspect they are preparing for the reduced availability of Western ATGMs. These things are good for targeting everything except tanks. Perhaps it will allow them to save the ATGMs for tanks and employ these for any number of other targets including fixed positions. Doctrinally, these are defensive weapons which allow tanks to be consolidated into offensive formations.
@Babd it's a remark on a common saying. "A camel is a horse designed by committee". Meaning that when a bunch of desk sitters design something it ends up being bloated with features at the detriment of its intended purpose.
In the clip we see what soldiers created because that's what they specifically needed, in its simplest form.
Hope this clears it up :)
Historically Camels can be more effective than horses as military mounts in certain circumstances. In the history of the Middle East and North Africa Camels were often used as anti horse cavalry because horses found the smell of camels rather unnerving and obviously the camel is better adapted for desert than a horse. I'd argue there are more bells and whistles with a horse than a camel.
@@paulsnell534 I'd agree. Camels seems to be more purely utilitarian, whereas horses are more "glamorous".
Bit of an upgrade from a 6 pounder on the back of a truck in North Africa in WW2.
Big portee energy!
The British 57mm Six Pounder Anti Tank gun was a heck of a weapon. A real one-shot tank killer in a small package. Quick to deploy, low to the ground weapons firing very high velocity solid rounds. I wonder if
smaller bore high velocity guns would do the job today. Easier logistics with three or four-man gun crews.
@@Dave5843-d9m very true. Apparently ee even as they were upgrading to the 75mm they had introduced an APDS round for the 6 pounder
We've also seen a different 6 pounder (57 mm S-60) mounted on the back of Kraz or Ural to be used by the TDF unit. The more things change.
@@theleva7 so very true
Desperation is the mother of invention. Desperation plus cool toys is the god of cool inventions.
Suffice to say, anything that inst mobile have a tendency to attract artillery fire very quickly and since artillery seems to be on the order of the day in Ukraine this tank-destroyer seems like a logical conclusion.
if its bombed its bombed, the crew probably trenched around
Always refreshing to see the the creativeness of the Ukrainians during the thick of war. They are a special people who seem to use all available resources wisely.
Hecho con Chatarra Soviética y los 40 mil millones $ ?
unfortunately their government does not use them wisely and neither does nato.
I can understand an advantage of range over effective anti tank missiles like Javelin but I'm not sure how useful this development is on the battlefield. However I'm sure every little helps and equipment is always needed, even if it's helps secure quieter parts of the battle.
How efficent it is will depend on wha you use it on. It is likly not the best weapon against tanks that are advancing, but against stationary vehicle, tank or with lighter armour it can be a good idea. Even better it using it against field fortification. Wikipedia have the max range of the framentation shell at 8200m with indirect fire.
If you like to use the gun for indirect fire putting it on the MT-LB to quickly move away to avoid counteratillery fire can be a good idea. The only shell we see they load into it is a HE or HEAT shell. Se do see some APFSDS but only used in training with the towed gun.
If Ukraine has the guns and ther effectiveness or need in the anti tank roll is limited why not use it for indirect fire as long as you have ammunition? They do not have enough atillery or atlast enough ammunition to the old sovet guns but do have the anti-tank gun ad some stock of HE shell so why not use the?
I suspect is was build as a test. It would not require a lot of manpower of equipment to convert it. So let the troops build one so the idea can be tested. If it works and it efficient then you might build more. It if do not wok you can remove the gun and put it on the original towd stand. The MT-LB can alos be restored. If feels like making one for testing is a good idea because if it works Ukrain can make some more light selfe propelled artillery pieces with stuff they already have.
I've got a feeling they will be used mostly for indirect fire
Mobile artillery is better than immobile artillery.
Could be very effective in a concealed ambush position. Blast a Russian column from 3 km away then scoot back and shoot as artillery. MBTs act as front screen.
an anti tank missile is always very expensive and the availability limited..
There is a possibility that the reason it was mounted on the tracked vehicle is the infamous mud and weather of Eastern Europe. Bad enough that it's bogged down any and all armys who have come through there.
As for the gun, it's probably being used as a mechanized field gun for both artillery and anti-tank/personnel duties. I wouldn't be surprised if the reason that they mounted that one had more to do with an excess stockpile of ammo, and parts on hand than anything else.
It is suppose to be an anti-tank gun, not a howitzer, or a infantry support weapon. It isn't a very good anti-tank gun if the crew has to fire it from outside of the vehicle.
@@Ace1000ks A fair number of WW2 anti-tank guns were like this. Its not a new design. The idea was less frontline, and more ranged, almost to the point were it could be considered indirect, or a self-propelled gun, yet not.
All tank destroyers are born of the combination of spare big guns, older vehicles, the urgency of conflict and the lack of capacity to produce the proper number of modern tanks.
As far as field custom solutions go, this is outstanding. Some serious design and fabrication with went into this. The quality of the build work is far beyond the usually slapped together with a welding torch and a dream type creations you see in many armed forces.
Also improves its field of fire, and probably it's range significantly.
I think this combination is a pretty competent adaptation which makes the use of the gun more effective. I like the way the gun has auto-ejection of the spent shell. This speeds the rounds per minute rate considerably.🤔
Now that is some Alfred Becker shit* right there.
_*if you got that immediately, you have certified ww2 armor deep lore knowledge._
Looking at the firing I don't think it can be used in anti tank role. The recoil seems to be too great for the gun layer.
It may be more likely a bunker buster or as an ordinary self propelled artillery gun.
Love the recoil though it reminds me of the 17 pounder on the 25 pounder gun carriage!thanks for posting.
Quite possibly. MT-12s are very snappy. Must be a lot of reinforcement on the mount. I can't imagine them using the lanyard in action though.
@@TheArmourersBench When being shot at the definition of 'safety' becomes fluid
I can see this being used against all but an MBT, unless some of those reserve T-62s Russia is using are rolling around. They clearly can use it in a direct and an indirect fire mode as well. A good weapon to do ambush attacks against BMPs and BTRs.
@@CombatIneffective To some extent works against MBTs from certain angles...
I agree. Also, its no self-loader. It seems they must load every shot one by one... A tank would fire upon them with its machine gun, if nothing else... Even shooting from a couple kilometers away machine gun bullets would rain on them still causing wounds... So its essentially a self going cannon, a basic version of these they get from west. Im sure it works well enough.
I want people to know this can knock out the t-62m and t-64b that the separatist use from all angles, and the t-72 and t-80 of all variants form the side. Not to mention the btr and bmp would be very soft.
You must be crazy or stupid to go against any tank on that thing.
Yes, from 500 meters, not more or after dynamic protection was burnt off.
@@1Shapic1 given that most tank on tank engagements I have seen in this war are at four to five hundred meters ambushes, that seems to be just fine.
@@terrynewsome6698 It might not be as effective on the sides of tanks with Kontakt-5, as the projectile would shatter when it strikes the ERA. It might still pen, but it would be far less effective.
@@voidtempering8700 true, but it is still something to support the Ukrainian infantry in a ambush. And there is a limit to how many atgm equipped tank destroyers can supply to each platoon.
Impossible to use on moving targets. I wonder how useful this is.
But on the other hand: it's an improvement compared to the towed version.
Is it though? I question it's accuracy. Also MTLB has little to none armor, so the way it is fitted... I doubt it can survive more than a 100 shots without falling apart.
Maybe it could do a better job as self proppelled artyllery
Most likely this is primarily used as a fire support vehicle. Doesn't make much sense to use this thing against T-72s or T-80s.
A simple design, quick assembly, major mobility, and very good fire power. This is a classic good example of infield system adaptation. I tip my hat to them. You don't always need the best and latest tech to fight a battle.
Love the MT-LB glad it's being put to great use.
Even if it is not suitable for destroying tanks or other vehicles, it is still a good option to increase the number of self-propelled artillery for working at short distances. For paratroopers and assault groups - a great option. From 6 to 14 shots per minute at a distance of 8 kilometers... If you have at least 2-3 such machines - the enemy infantry is fucked
Oh this thing would destroy anything that ain’t a tank and many of the earlier tank models in use.
Dude pullin the string be like "Watch this!"
It might be expected that this technology has been superseded by the more flexible, more accurate, portable anti tank missiles provided by the US and UK.
The problem with an anti tank gun of the type shown, is it is likely to be forced to attack the tank armour at its strongest point, reducing the effective range. There is also the issue of accuracy, and the potential vulnerability of the vehicle. I suspect that its a poor match against a tank, due to its lack of ability to track and acquired a moving target. This seems more suited to attacking fixed positions. Its existence likely owes a lot to making maximum use of readily available resources.
I’d imagine it would be used to pick of APCs/IFVs saving ATGMs for the tanks.
@@RCorvinus There appears to be an issue with firing it with the crew aboard - the need for the long firing lanyard for example. That implies that it cannot be used against moving targets, even lightly armoured ones. Also, APC type vehicles can be taken out with smaller calibre weapons than 100mm guns.
I suspect Mr Johnson might be right and this is more an assault gun (Stug) designed to give infantry mobile direct fire HE support against fixed positions and defences than a Panzerjager. After all, nothing makes a grunt happier than being able to send a large HE round straight into an enemy machine gun nest.
Its not to be used vs. tanks but as mobile artillery. Ukraine is running very low on Soviet ammo - but not on 100mm rounds. Yet.
@@tomk3732 that makes sense, as I do not think it would last long, even against a Russian tank. It would get one shot at best, against a tank.
@@nigeljohnson9820 If it even hits the tank - remember this thing is not exactly "accurate" in current configuration (shakes a lot) and I bet it only has optical coincidental sights (like WWII tanks up to 1960s).
I sat with a big happy grin during the whole video - thanks!!
The spades weren't "added" - that started as an MT-LB "Blade" , the version with the rear mounted dozer blade, They just repurposed the mechanism to be 2 rear facing spades for recoil rather than 1 front facing dozer blade/plow
It has to answer some need. I love the ingenuity of soldiers. Give them a real lemon and they can make something no one expects. Soldiers have no respect for anyone's ego. So what if a vehicle follows them or a trailer is towed with more ammunition. At some point, a truck has to resupply them with fuel and ammunition.
Use for hitting buildings for offensive roles n ambush for defensive roles. Thats what they probably use it for
as a tank destroyer it might not be too useful, but with that gun elevation it might work as a decent SPA if needed, and the MT-12 has FRAG shells
MT-12 has a lot more then that. the problem is Ukrainian logistics have been devastated so good luck getting those huge shells around to where they are needed.
I'm surprised there is not a variant of MT-LB with this configuration already in existence.
Good point!
Reminds of the many ad hoc self-propelled anti-tank designs Germany fielded in World War II.
Ukraine really gets creative with their equipment :)
That is soooo cool looking. Bet it's somewhat effective too. Reminds me of the SU-100P.
No, i don't think it can hit a moving target.
@@linusa2996 Well I never said it could, but now I will :) If you point at a point on a road and simply let them drive into your sights, BAM, you've just hit a moving target.
@@RubyFox_YT How would you know it's in your sights? you don't have one and the shooter is outside the vehicle pulling the rope connected to the firing mechanism.
This isn't like a hetzer where the gunner is sitting next to the gun with looking through the sights
@@linusa2996 shooting a HE round have no need for gunner next to it. But look again at this footage and you'll see a gunner nearby . 1.40
The advantage of this is definitely the ability to shoot and scoot. I'm not sure that this would be notably faster to set up for a shot, but it's definitely faster to leave after a shot.
Just wait people?
This will be premium tank in War Thunder
Gives me serious Waffenträger vibes. How to describe a Waffenträger in the most simplified fashion? "I want a big gun .... that can drive."
Seeing a lot of people questioning its effectiveness as a tank destroyer, and I don't necessarily agree with those arguments. Mostly, even if it has drawbacks the normal towed version doesn't. Then this still isn't a case of it replacing the towed version, but aiding it. There are times where this would be incredibly useful against tanks, and if they have them in abundance, then why not make some. But additionally, I see this being used more simply as general artillery. Since Russia has more artillery, much of it with longer range, being able to fire off some rounds and then quickly relocate before opposing artillery fire has time to narrow in on their location could hold a lot of tactical value. But lastly, it looks amazing and I hope at least one survives the conflict and ends up in a museum somewhere.
Speaking of aiding the towed version, could this still tow a second gun for double the fire with only one engine to maintain and one crew?
A protective steel plate or something similar for the gun crew would be what I would add on this vehicle
Unless you mean seperately from the gun it has it
Solid video that was really informative without trying to be something super fancy 👍
Thanks, that’s always my aim! Thanks for watching, more to come.
The MT-LB is fairly spacious for a russian vehicle. I reckon the inside area above the fuel tanks as well as the crawlspace from the rear compartment to the front can be used as a ready rack for the projectiles.
MT-LB is not a russian vehicle. It is a Sovet desing vehicle. It was build by the Kharkiv Tractor Plant that is today in Ukraine
@@target844 Russian and soviet is the same fucking thing.
@@Mornomgir no...
@@yuhiki9060 Yes.
This looks like an actual vehicle, rather than a homebrew. It just makes sense
Nothing more dangerous than soldiers doing some tactical arts and crafts.
you are forgetting the height. it would be much easier to move in just below the crest of a hill or go hull down with the gun mounted on top.
Yes indeed!
"Necessity is litterally the mother of invention". Plato
Necessity is the father of invention. How do they aim the gun left and right quickly though?
This is the kid if brilliant innovative spirit that gains victory!
Is it really a tank destroyer though? It seems a bit clumsy in use for that, maybe more like a self propelled gun.
Definitely seems like more of a self-propelled gun, we don't yet know a lot about how they're hoping to employ it.
@@TheArmourersBench It does 180mm penetration at 2000meters and 230mm at 500meters, its not at tank destroyer, just a general porpose gun for afvs, trucks or even fortifications
Probbaly it depends also on the ammunition waht can be destroyed, but mostly who spots who first. Those manpad type of weapons are more difficult to spot
It's probably made for artillery support, same as Ukr tanks and helis that are being used almost exclusively for artillery role.
I would like to see a WW2 era Marder in comparision. They don't seem to have that much difference in their design.
When at War break out, arises the necessity for better, improved, and more mobile weapon systems and platforms, usually at the hand of the Front line infantry for their own needs where HQ cant provide. I always loving seeing self made improvised weapon platforms/systems
What they need is more and more.
Edit: As I see now, some others pointed this out already. So let me just say, nice Video. Interesting vehicle. I hope they put it to good use and it serves them well.
01:35 those are not not soviet Soldiers with the MT-12, but east German Army (NVA) soldiers. The footage is from an east german propaganda movie named "panzerjäger Klietz" a 3 parter as far as I remember. It follows one MT-12 crew throughout their service in the NVA.
You can also see it from the east german helmets and hear it form the beautiful sounds of comabt german beeing spoken :)
I know all this because I used the footag (available hear on youtube) for my own video about soviet anti tank guns of the cold war a while back (in german).
I like this vehicle because since that video I am indeed quite interested in soviet PaKs. Hopefully it survives the war and we can see it in person one day.
Even though all of these recent wars have brought suffering, they have also given us ways to keep the offending party at bay in creative ways! Seeing a towed AT gun mounted directly to a prime mover like this is one of those rare genius ideas that comes out of a war. When this is all over, I think we're going to see that improvisation was way more a factor in victory than most think!
Ukraine really just adopt "Improvise, adapt, overcome"
I will leave a like as for you using the right terminology here, well done
Thus vehicle reminds me of the Marder series of early world war 2 stop gap tank destroyers.
Most of these Ad Hoc implements are done on volunteer units. They seem to have the kind of creative and innovative thinking (or rather are somehow deprived of ordinary weapons) but I also think that Ukraine is easing the weight on local innovations. They may have found out that free initiative may open new ways. In this case is nothing really new, but you change 2 rolling units into 1 which in Ukraine´s landscape is always gonna be a logistical advantage, besides elevation this sort of mounting also spares men, effectively doubling your manpower potential. If you add a guided round, you may even engage helicopters. Is quite an improvement
That's one bad ass Tank Destroyer, kind of reminds me of the WW2 German Jagdtiger with its 152mm Anti-Tank Gun.
4:26 Those are not soviet gun crews, they are east German, trivially spotted by their uniform pattern, the helmet shape and the fact that they are speaking German.
True. Still, the cannons are surely sovjet produced, so the illustration stands OK.
@@barneydenstad2148 No. The illustrations say "Soviet gun crews". These are not soviet gun crews. End of story.
You see the NVA in brackets, a reference to them being Soviet but actually East German National Volksarmee. Thanks for watching!
@@TheArmourersBench Sure, but the way you write it, it means "soviet (gun crews)", not "(soviet gun) crews". Also, the majority of English speaking watchers will not understand "NVA" to mean "Nationale Volksarmee", but rather "North Vietnamese Army". Well, you can't change it now anyway. In any case, thanks for responding.
Only a matter of time when war thunder decides to add this tank
lol never
@@Shin-iu8vw it's made with cold war Era equipment
@@imjustthere9343 okay and? will this technique feel comfortable in the game? Its tower practically does not rotate or is completely welded to the body. the vertical aiming angles also seem to be 0
@@Shin-iu8vw stug 3 is hurt by your comment
@@imjustthere9343 at least this tank has armor
The spirit of the marder lives on along the modern Eastern front !
It looks so similar to the Sd. Kfz. 251 with the Pak 40.
seen alot of talk about fixed guns being obsolete in modern war as well as many of the older "battle taxi" lightly armed troop transports so this seems like a good way to get more use out of both halves of the build.
Maybe they could make a muzzle brake that will help with recoil.
I like it's kinda based of the SU-130p just lacking the ability to move the gun horizontally, heck it's literally a look like, just modern :3
God bless Ukraine for perseverance, indomitable spirit, sacrifice, and ingenuity. Kinda reminds me of the Germans turning the 88 AA gun into a tank killer. Seen some interesting weapons in Ukraine: like old German MG 42s, scars, m14s, etc. The list goes on. They are taking outdated systems and making them viable on the modern battlefield, while utilizing them in sync with new western arms. The commercial drone as a FO and weapon system has been ingenious. Glory to Ukraine from a Slav.
Think of it as a inexpensive solution in place of a MGS platform like the M1128 Stryker. I'd love to see what this does in a side or rear impact on an MBT.
Beautiful piece
It looks really cool, I really like the low profile
Haha what a pretty PAKWAGEN! Just like sdk251/22, armoured troop carrier refitted with AT gun and changed into tank hunter. Great!
Someone left the E4 mafia alone to long...
Given that Ukraine has been given many 105mm howitzers, I was wondering if the MTLB chassis could be modified to make a gun carrier, for mobile artillery. It would seem to me turning the 105mm into a highly mobile artillery to support counter offensive operations, would provide many benefits.Then I came across this video.
That the entire cartridge package is self contained is off my head rare amount Ukrainian equipment, since even their tank shells have multiple pieces. I wonder how much that helps with things. Rate of fire, etc.
Well, there's one of them. Definitely a nice conversion. Maybe we'll see more.
Its the idea what counts, free chassie and a free M12 gun creative work and ideas build up a commrade legend
The ingenuity of the Ukrainians never ceases to amaze me. Their warrior spirit coupled with this level of improvisation is truly a force to be reckoned with.
I am in love with MTLB. Amazing tractor.
Nice piece of tech, tribute to the adaptability, ingenuity and efficiency of the Ukrainians... Well done !
Looks highly effective for the flat terain long distance engagements in the South.
Exemplary creativity and innovation by the Ukrainian Soldiers! Great going Ukraine! You guys have seen the A-10 drone version; what more do you need to know? If you don't try; the answer is, "no you cannot do it." anyway. Get your auto mechanics and welders and injured pilots involved!
nothing insane here to be honest, it's something that was commonly done by germans and soviet during ww2, like the ZIS-30 or Sdkfz 251/22
Boris : "Ah Alexi, I play World of Tanks. Lets make a Borsig !"
Alexi : "Boris you are a genius !"
So not a "Mini Turret, Long Body" but "Mega Turret, Lopped Body"
awesome hack!!
I've heard the "hacker spirit" is strong in Ukraine, but this is next level!!
This is literally the first truly 21st Century war. You have makers taking two almost obsolete weapons and making something completely new that confuses the enemy's tactics. That applies to other improvised systems we've already scene.
That reminds me the conversion the Greek army did on its Bmp1 vehicles by removing the turret and replacing it with twin Zu 23-2 AA cannons that has on ample supply, both given from the former East German army stocks.
I hope the Ukranians use the Gephard anti-aircraft units against infantry positions like the krauts did with their anti-aircraft machine guns in WW2 for big effect.
Two sheets of r500 sheet steel with a base plate for a 60mm mortar would add some punch with indirect plunging fire
I love the weapons ingenuity shown during war...but it's a shame it has to be developed.
That MT-LB is novel. It's usually the ZU-2 or the Strela-10 models seen.
Will you be doing more videos on improvised war weapons? E.G. Hell Canon etc?
Yeah I find it an absolutely fascinating aspect of the war.
I might do!
@@TheArmourersBench
Mega mate👍🏻
I suspect there's alot of material to get your teeth into.
I wish I could make more than one video a week, I've got so much to cover. Thanks for watching!
We use it not like anti tank canon. This is very precise short range self propelled Canon
Necessity is the mother of invention
When industrial countries go to war
Is this really usefull against (moving) tanks/IFVs? Especially if the gun is fired from outside of the vehicle. How are they aiming at a potental moving target?
We don't know a lot about how they're hoping to employ it and I wonder if the filming was from a test. In action they might he manning the gun (I would imagine so).
@@TheArmourersBench This will likely be used against MG nests. I recall Soviet doctrine regarding PT 76, which were conceptually precursor to this contraption. Truth be told, It's only effective against tanks if people inside are carrying ATGMs. But against static targets it’s good.
Russian tanks are not racing around the countryside too much these days anyway. They can be used from an ambush, or when a drone has spotted one they can sneak closer to fire on it. Not perfect, but better then a towed one
Can't wait to see this in war thunder
I'm looking forward to the day Miniart or ICM brings this out in 1/35th scale.
I'm not sure I buy the idea of a 'tank destroyer' being fired with a lanyard after the crew all leave the vehicle. If you're firing at a moving tank, don't you have to track it through through the sights until the moment of firing? I suspect that in reality, this is being used as mobile field artillery, either in direct or indirect fire, to destroy fixed defensive positions. That's a perfectly sensible thing to do BTW, since the high velocity of an anti-tank gun will give it greater stand-off range in direct fire.
Against NATO tactics, this would be useless as their tanks would be moving while their optics would allow them to outrange it. Plus this gun would be useless against modern armor. But Russian tactics are to bombard and area with artillery, then send troops with a few tanks and BMPS forward to see if they killed or drove the enemy forces out. So the Ukrainians would pull back and hunker down until the artillery stopped then move forward with drones feeding them targeting information. Javelins and NLAWS would handle the tanks while these could deal with BMPS and troop concentrations!
@@JimCOsd55 It would have the same problem hitting a moving BMP as a moving tank. I think that, unless it can be fired with the gunner's eye to the scope, it's only going to be useful for static targets. Of course that could include a stationary/dug-in BMP etc...
@@MrHws5mp … Which is why they use Javelins and NLAWS to hit moving targets like tanks and BMPS while videos show static targets like parked BMPS and troops hiding in trenches being hit with artillery.
@@JimCOsd55 Exactly. So the MT-LB+MT-12 isn't really a 'tank destroyer' per se, it's an assault gun/direct fire-support gun.
@@MrHws5mp … The video presented it as a homemade tank destroyer but yes, it would better be described as an assault/artillery gun.
Given that it's only 100mm, I would not be surprised to find that they are significantly overcharging the weapon.
So firing the thing via a long string is probably prudent.
"Only 100 mm" still offers quite a punch ;). And you don't have to overcharge it. Newer tanks might be frontally immune (yet still can get damaged - optics, tracks, equipment etc.). Newer generations from the side however, or as russians get more and more obsolete tanks from their inventory (there are T-64 mentioned to be deployed)? Not to mention any lighter AFV. Might be a nasty "only 100 mm" surprise :D
The WW2 German Flak 88 was smaller but still considered one of the best guns ever made. A relatively small projectile with big propellant charge got the job done. Ditto the British Six Pounder.
@@Dave5843-d9m flak 88 also faced vehicles with waaaay weaker armour than more or less modern MBTs
The gun is a modernized version of the bC-3 100mm antitank gun the Soviets used in WWII. With a barrel that long, you could just about literally "reach out and touch someone". Notice the "Silver bullets" sabotted penetrators?
It is a rather impressive conversion and given the complexity of the modifications, I'd be inclined to image the Ukrainians have produced a convenient conversion kit (if there are more than one of these mobile gun carriages in service).
There is reportedly a couple of these now!
This conflict will go down in history as the practical application of the evolution of modern warfare.
As ANY war.
I may be mistaken and of course can't find the source, but I believe a version of the mt-lb was supposed to have the capability to do something similar. It was an open top version that didn't just tow a gun but that the gun could be embarked pointing forward using ramps. The pictures were of using them for amphibious crossings and supposedly the gun could be fired in transit. It was a smaller gun, maybe an 85mm.
If someone corrects me and finds what I'm thinking of , no problem.
Solved my own confusion. I was thinking of it's sibling the: BTR-50
This supports the argument that tank destroyers are STILL VIABLE in this modern age. Even more so the homemade style such as this configuration. Tank destroyers are still capable of doing their job in this day and age, even if most of that job is limited to indirect fire support. So, let’s remember this for the history books. Ingenuity will always be a thing to support the argument that there are still ways that antiquated ideas can still deal damage on the battlefield.
we did it boys, we got a modernised ZIS-30
Marder 1, Marder 2, Marder 3 and Steyr Waffenträger: Thats my boy
Didn't think technicals will make something like this