Dude just one gun would be the illest video. I would definitely contribute to a fundraiser to build or buy a single ww2 era style naval cannon. They're just so absolutely rediculously powerful.
22:31-22:49 Yes. The T-62 was able to penetrate both the Chieftain, and M60 Patton tanks. During combat in the Iran-Iraq war, it was found that the British Chieftain tanks were being penetrated by 115mm ammunition, at the front of the turret, and upper glacis plate (according to the data I have, apparently 70% of the Chieftains were knocked out, mostly by 115mm guns). What's even more surprising was the fact that something as "mundane" as steel-cored APDSFS from the T-62's gun, was able to achieve these frontal penetrations (against the Chieftains), with good reliability, and at around 1 km range (or more) This vulnerability of the Chieftains was also proven (at nearly the same distance, same gun, same ammunition, and same impacted points) during Soviet tests as well. I recall, that the Russians managed to capture (relatively) intact Chieftain (specifically Mk.5 versions. These British tanks were sold to the Iranians, which were then captured by the Iraqis. Which were then given/donated to the Soviets by the Iraqis), and M60 Patton tanks. With these captured vehicles, they were able to perform extensive tests on them. Because of these tests, the Soviet engineers concluded that Chieftain tanks were vulnerable to 115mm, and 125mm guns. The most notable thing, that I remember from the report is that, areas of 240mm LOS thickness (on the Chieftain, and M60 tanks) are fully exploitable by 115mm guns using finned ammunition (both steel, and tungsten cored ammunition) ** A) www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp82t00709r000102700002-6 (Just to make sure I am not bullshitting about Soviets testing captured Chieftain tanks given by the Iraqis. Here is a CIA intelligence report about the presence of British Chieftain tanks in Leningrad testing areas) B) btvt.info/3attackdefensemobility/432armor_eng.htm (Some details about Soviet tests on captured Chieftain tanks, and a study of the vulnerability of these British tanks) C) thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/t-62.html?m=1#ap (Some more information about the T-62's 115mm APDSFS ammunition. Courtesy of Tankograd. Yay, Tankograd!!!) D) www.flickr.com/photos/7682151@N07/40600023554/ (Some information about the resistance of Chieftain tanks to 115mm, and 125mm guns) If your a military history nerd like me, hopefully, you find this information useful 😊
It’s not so much that Wargaming is blatant about it as Ian and Nicholas are. WG isn’t known for its transparency, but those two are just there for the boom boom.
Don't praise WG, this is probably the closest the public will ever get to what they have in mind for a 'marketing ploy' bear in mind the irony of how they stopped updating the only T-62 variant in the actual game itself.
19k here. I was a loader on an Abrams during a gunnery, and all my 6' tall ass was worried about was getting the next round up, and not letting the breech block remove my knees. My TC said "after you load this next one, come up top". So I threw in a sabot, locked breech lever up and came up top and sat. "Up!" I remember the sun had already set, and there was just a hint of orange and purple along the horizon of the hills. My TC said to me "take a big breath and try not to blink" as he pointed at the end of the barrel. So I did. TC went ahead- "Fire!" "On the way!" A gigantic flash of light filled my entire field of vision, and all of the air was sucked out of my lungs, and replaced with this explosive smell. It was like everything that excites a child about fireworks, multiplied to the highest possible level. I couldn't tell you if it was loud.. there was just the concussion that stuns you, and by the time my vision came back to me, I could see a little orange ball flying away from us and impacting the hill far away. I let out an excited cheer that came out on its own, looked over at my TC and said "Fuck yeah!", who was staring back at me grinning and just said "there ain't nothing like it." It probably gave me 6 kinds of cancer and took 10% of my hearing, but that smell, that glow.. I'll never forget it.
I stuck my head out of the turret during gunnery (forget which table we were on) as a loader once. Yeah, I had a similar experience. Never did that again. lol
Big guns are like that! I was at knob creek and degroute (sp?) Tactical had a american arty piece setup on the line. From over 1000 yards away, inside the tent city gun show portion it was so loud me and my friend about shat ourselves! We put our ear pro on and made sure we were down at the line when he fired it the next time. It was epic, brilliant and beautiful all at the same time. Its too bad we can all just make these bad ass big guns and drive around blowing holes in the desert and then all go home and have a beer. Damn but they can they be works of explosive art at times!
Just for the more enthusiastic: "Sh" in "DShK" stands for "Shpagina", after Georgi Shpagin, the same person who designed the PPSh-41 submachine gun. He designed the feed system for the weapon.
@@hermanman8235 Because in English there is no one single letter that can denote the sound "ш" (Дегтярёва Шпагина Крупнокалиберный - literally means "Degtyarev's Shpagin's Large-caliber")
It also has IDF markings on it, probably a captured Egyptian or Syrian tank, although if that's the case I'm not sure why they would leave the arabic markings on it.
@@redlabel5241 Ah, so that would be the red spray paint? I only recognized the Arabic since it's my native language. This thing seems to have changed hands quite a few times till it arrived at the US!
@@Y.M... The writing inside the number rectangle is an acronym for "Base Work Shop". Right next to it outside the rectangle it says "Line". On the barrel, worryingly, it says something like "Disqualified" or "defective".
The markings I was referring to were not actually the red ones, the "license plate" numbers (white digits on black background) are clearly IDF and on the turret the same number is written in white with the hebrew letter for army (a serial number with the letter צ is very common for marking IDF property) next to it.
The MT-12 Rapira is an insanely accurate gun, artillery instructors used to hit a metal bucket from 2000 meters (6000+ ft) when they showed off the gun to their students
You should see his video where he talks about starting in the Irish Army -- their "tanks" were way, way, smaller than the M1's and stuff that he was commanding in the US Army.
@@Biden_is_demented Note how he's dissing all night vision technologies of the era and not specifically the model installed in this vehicle. Has roughly the same spiel in his series on the Strv 103C; paraphrased "when night vision tech is bad enough to require spotlights to see more than a couple hundred meters, lobbing a flare doesn't seem like such a bad idea."
When I reported for duty with the 3rd US Cavalry Regiment there were no M60 tanks in the motor pool. All of them had been shipped to Israel to replace losses there. A few months went by, and we got a Czech built T62 tank that the Israelis had captured on the Golan Heights. We used it in Warsaw pact vehicle familiarization training. What I remember is how ruggedly reliable that T-62 was. It got no maintenance at all but just kept on running and running. When it stopped smoking, we knew it was time to add engine oil!
For as many problems that wargaming has, i do appreciate everything that they've done to raise interest in tanks and history Also the "Sh" in DShK stands for Shpagin, the other designer
It was probably an awkward phrasing, I think maybe Ian wanted to point out that Shpagin designed the feeding system? Although I'm really not sure if it was Shpagin who designed the new, 1946 version of the feedblock.
@@nibs7252 Deh-sheh-kah (shah is the correct old-timey pronunciation when you're learning to spell, but when spelling acronyms it's "eh" not "ah"). And no stresses, it's an acronym.
I agree. I've tried WoT, Armored Warfare and WT. For me, War Thunder is the most fun and most satisfying to play. I've been playing it on and off for about 6 years now and have no intention of stopping. :)
I've gotta say though, World of Tanks is still a really good game. Its gameplay isn't as enjoyable as War Thunder's in my opinion but the game is high quality. It's also on mobile, something I don't thin War Thunder will ever achieve.
Do you know how much I appreciate the forthcoming nature of this intro? This is a marketing ploy, these only come out if you decide to play the game in the description. Do you know how much easier it is to take that, than listen to any other "content creator" do something remotely close? Because they always read from the cheesiest scripts and hype up some pay to win ad-fest of a game. But the first 2 minutes of this video were done correctly, thank you so much.
The question, though, is "did it work?". It's not exactly 'standard' for our office either, my reputation is a bit on the line. Only the metrics will tell.
@@TheChieftainsHatch It might still be a little soon to tell, but if I didn't skip the first 2 minutes, I don't think your more patient viewers will either. Good luck and I hope to see another one of these, with a similar intro.
@@TheChieftainsHatch I skip literally every ad ever. Didn’t skip this one. We the people appreciate not being fed bullshit. We know ads make the world go ‘round. Sly transitions and scripted marketing lines are insufferable. We know you have to run ads. That’s fine. When they amount to “we can do this again if you go play this game that is paying for us to do this”...people might actually go play the game in a show of support.
@@TheChieftainsHatch depends on how much player retention matters. I'll happily create an account and play the game for 2 days just to support you guys before college restarts. But will that 6-7 hours of gameplay even help or matter? I for sure am not going to sink time into this game long-term as i don't have the spare time in general. But hopefully others do and it works out.
Fantastic! Two World re-known experts of their respective fields combining to give us these brilliant videos; rammed with info, 'loaded' with humour and pace! Really top-guns. ThankS Ian, Nick.
For reference, I'm sure he was going on about the metal lump on the hull that whacks the unsecured track pins back into the track. It's covered on a T-34-85 in The Mighty Jingles' Top 5 Tanks video from Bovington Tank Museum if you want to see and hear it described.
@@mortarriding3913 to be honest otherwise you, I skip agaed on chieftain videos on the track tensioning pits He thinks its his differentiator, while his rea differentiator is the he's the chieftain: a veteran tank commander who is still in service and has unmatched access to documents whe asi being a consultant for the tank game that startd whe whole thing. Track tensioning be damned, I'm here for the interesting parts
I wouldn't surprise me if they did! A .50 cal BMG round is a 30-06 scaled up, and the V-2 rocket is a scaled up 8mm Mauser bullet! Whatever works, right?
For those of us who have a hard time "thinking in metric" 1700 meters per second is 5577 feet per second. For comparison a 5.56x45 round from a 20" barrel does about 3200 fps.
yuo see Ivan, when barrels is very lonk and many powder is burn for much longer than rifle, is of boolit go much more speed than the rifles. *science, Ivan. we of science tank now.*
Some half a year ago I watched a video, in which a T-62 tank gunner said that in Afghanistan he'd hit the target with the HE round; and the target was like 6.5 km ish from his position! And I believe him.
15:22 - Oddly enough, I have one of those reflecting sights that I took off of an Iraqi Type 69 in '91. The glass was pretty well cracked by a piece of shrapnel, but I also have a nearly identical one from an S-60 AA gun.
G'day Ian & Nick, Great to see you two 'gun experts' together again, having as much fun one can have with earplugs in, so to speak. You got to hand it to Nick, put him next to a tank and he'll start talking till he dehydrates; the sun goes down or until someone shouts, "Shoot!" Seriously, though, anyone who has sat through his lectures on tanks, tank warfare through the years or any of the talks he gives on military history will tell you he's a captivating speaker. Some years ago I started watching his channel and he got me hooked on all things tank. Pretty amazing because I'm an ex-RAAF type and back then we simply called tanks, "targets". Nick has taught me so much about tanks as you, Ian has taught me volumes on firearms that I've never seen or heard of before. Thank you, gentlemen. Great shooting, Ian and your 'mystery' Russian helper. Pardon me, I've got to go play WoT, see if I can buy myself a T-62... Da, da, da Cheers, BH
Great video. I LOVE the T-62. I also love smoothbore cannons and the T-62 was the first tank in the world that was equipped with a smoothbore gun. I am from Germany and i collect large deactivated ammunition and i have 2 115mm cartridges (OF-11 and OF-18). I think you fired a OF-18 in the video. They are actually extremely rare to find in Germany so i am really thankful to have these. Keep up the good work.
Really liked the good side view when the main gun was fired, the dust jumping off from everywhere on the tank... even out of the suspension wheels to the side was impressive.
Beautiful video. Definite props to whoever mixed the sound. Really felt the cannon’s punch through my speakers. So many videos just have the mic spas out when recording large guns.
Way, way back when, I played lots of hours on a Commodore 64 tank sim called 'Steel Thunder'. The silhouette of the actual T-62 is still hauntingly familiar.
FUN FACT-- The T-62 was originally supposed to have teh100mm rifled gun because at the time it was superior to the 115mm gun, BUT since we had 105mm guns on our M60's the russians put the 115mm gun on it for "i have a bigger gun" logic.
12:50 -Этот автомобиль меня оскорбляет, убери это! -Да! Translation is -This vehicle offends me, remove it! -Yes! Other words I've picked up were воздух (air), огонь (fire) and выстрел (shot)
i love gun nerd and tank nerd collabs, please do a shooting video of you shooting a fully equipped m2 with all the 50cals mounted, i want you to shoot all of em
I really like these collaboration videos between you two. The things and niche's to learn are doubled and the history also is just completely amazing. Thank you for another amazing video on the Guns of the T-62 with it's history too.
The 100mm Anti Tank Gun is being used to this day, especially since 2014/15 in Ukraine, the old Soviet stocks all over the country (incl the East, or any other former Warsaw Pact country before they sold it over the end of the 90 and to this day)! There are clips the Donbass Militia using the 100mm very effectively! Cannon (artillery)!
22:31-22:49 The fact that the T-62 could penetrate the Chieftain tanks, was one of the contributing reasons why "Stillbrew" armour upgrades were developed for the later Chieftain tank models (starting with the Mk. 10 version). Well, actually "Stillbrew" was developed, because the British were thinking about future proofing their tanks against Russian 125mm guns too. From what I've been able to find, the "Stillbrew" armour package was a form of early NERA composite armour *(although, I have run into a few morons, who think "Stillbrew" is not considered to be composite armour. And for pretty dumb reasons too. DESPITE all evidence suggesting otherwise).* It was developed for the Chieftain tanks during the 1980s. And it was very likely that "Stillbrew" was developed from previous British experiences with developing composite armour during the 1960s The "Stillbrew" armour package is composed of cast armour steel. Specifically of RARDE 823 cast steel (which had less ballistic protection than RHA steel. Typically cast steel has 15% less protection than RHA armour steel). I've heard some mention that "Stillbrew" would later use hardened cast steel which had the same protection as RHA steel, but this didn't pan out. Other details about its construction was that the "Stillbrew" applique armour was composed of 120-200mm thick (cast) steel plates, with 20-60mm rubber inserts behind these steel plates (the rubber was connected to the steel plates by way of armour fasteners. So basically things like screws, nuts, bolts, and bosses). Apparently, "Stillbrew" was good enough to stop kinetic penetrators with 500mm RHA (possibly even more) of penetrative power. Which was enough to provide protection against 115mm, and 125mm APDSFS projectiles. What's surprising is that it provides protection against not only 125mm tungsten cored ammunition, BUT ALSO depleted uranium shells too :/ ** A) below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2016/03/chobham-armor-facts-and-fiction-1.html?m=1 tankandafvnews.com/wo-194-1323-feasibility-study-on-burlington-chieftain/ (Previous British research into composite armour of the NERA type during the 1960s) B) www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/37096-chieftain-questions/page/27/ (Composition of "Stillbrew" armour. And also, what weapons were tested against them during British tests) C) www.flickr.com/photos/7682151@N07/40600023554/ www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/37096-chieftain-questions/page/40/ (Some idea of what the durability of the Chieftain tanks were like, when upgraded with "Stillbrew". The minimum amount of protection that "Stillbrew" could provide WAS AT LEAST 500mm of RHA effectiveness. Surprisingly, according to documents, it states that the turret armour is better protected than the Leopard 2 [probably the early versions] 😳 )
The reason for the smoothbore gun was to fire a longer discarding SABOT round with a diameter to length ratio of 12:1 or higher. The advantages of this are that you can have a round with the same weight but with a smaller diameter. The smaller diameter allows much larger penetration as it impacts a smaller area of the armour.
99% of my comments on Ian's videos except this one will be and have been positive. This time, I say: go to hell. I'm both Ukrainian and Russian, still waiting for this war to be over so I can fly back to Ukraine so I can spread my Ukrainian father's ashes. F*** you and your simplistic "Us vs. Them" methodology of perception, it is objectively stupid and anti-human.
@@GarioTheRock So you can spread your Fathers Ashes? Are you playing Far Cry or what. Do you think they will stop a war so you can spread your fathers ashes.
"...dowesn't it?" Nick's Irish accent really stood out to me there. A lot of people I show his videos to don't believe me when I say he's originally from Ireland. "Isn't he some kind of German or Scandinavian?" they say.
Really didn't expect to see T-62's used in combat by Russia, but they had to resort to them pretty quickly. Thought they'd be bringing in the T-54's first.
To clarify, the Russians added into service 80s modified T-62Ms that are on par with early T-72s but with newly added thermal imagers, considering tanks mostly fight against infantry, having cheap tanks with thermal imagers is not a bad idea.
honestly, i think the reason that this marketing ploy worked so well is because people respect this channel so much, that they are actually willing to sit through a sponsorship if it means supporting the channel
Ah yes, T-62, a "weird cousin" stuck between T-55 and T-64, almost forgotten by history compared to those, who still both serve all over the world. Too late to be in same tank generation with T-55, too "traditional" to enter the next one.
And even returned to service in Russia. Up to 2000 T-62M received the status from "written off" to "mobilization" in 2013, new shells and gun barrels were ordered... Not for the army, for the territorial defense militia. The last time the T-62M showed itself in 2008 in the "Olympic five-day war 080808". The T-62M is not as outdated as they think. At least he knocked out the new Israeli-Polish T-72SIM1 quite confidently.
@@creedencerat9032 careful there! You might summon M60 fanboys, who'd claim that it is "just as good" as Chieftain and T-64A, slightly better then T-72 and shouldn't be compared to "obsolete" T-62;)
@@elusive6119 2013... very specific year. Never mind, must be an accident:D Problem with modernizing T-62 that it's more effective to produce new T-72 at this point. Modernized T-62 are worth it only as "humanitarian aid" to some allies or supported nations. For example send them to Iran and India if Pakistan acts funny. Even chinese aren't afraid of T-62 no matter how modernized and they are the most realistic potential "problem"... IF they don't aggro on India first. And if Russia decides to leave India to its fate:(
Special mention to the fighter jets pilots who must have wondered if they got lost as they were observing a T-62 firing off all of its weapons at some rocky hill in the desert through their IR targeting pods or EOTS.
You should check a-10 pilot coloring book for t62 mentioning. At the time gau8 avenger can only penetrate t62 from the back. No pun intended. Frontal and side armor were invulnerable for 30mm rounds
One of the most enjoyable of your videos I've seen. Really fascinating and I've seen most of yours. You could let him ramble and have a directors edit that does include the tensioning system + others. You both looked like you were really enjoying this. More please! Brilliant! Already a WoT player.
Seeing the inside of tanks like this, and how cramped they can be, makes me wonder if military recruiters look at short people and think "Aha! A tanker!"
