Depleted Uranium Tank Ammunition | DEADLY DARTS 💀☄️ 

💥 💣 Check out our partnership clothing brand! Attire For Effect💣 💥 www.attireforeffect.com 📸 Also follow them on Instagram: #attire_for_effect

Back in 1994, when I first became an Armor Officer in the WIARNG, this was all classified info. Imagine what we will learn in 25 more years.

I love Heavy Metal. Uranium, Tungsten, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, all of it.

Finally, a non-clickbait and non-robot voiced RU-vidr talking about military stuff. Subbed

These Shells: Exist* War Thunder: *_R I C O C H E T_*

If they could only harness the destructive power of being in a long term marriage.

1:30 "[..]Uranium. The heaviest, naturally occuring element on earth" Nope. Tungsten is heavier by a little more than 1% (Naturally occuring Uranium is lighter). Gold, platinum, indium and osmium are even heavier, but Gold is the cheapest one of these four. You would bankrupt your entire army by ordering a few rounds of those. It's not that DU is cheap, it's actually that it is rather useless. Tungsten has a wide applicability in machine tools, so it has some intrinsic value. That makes DU the perfect alternative for when you have cheap dead weight that does not accupy much space, like aircraft ballast and trim weights. Natural uranium has a 0.77% of fissionable uranium. Reactor designs vary, but you have to crank that percentage up to turn it into fuel rods, the most being 3% Uranium 235. You have to extract that 0.77 from more uranium, depleting it of it in the process. In the end, for every kg of reactor fuel (3% enrichment), you end with about 4kg of DU. For weapons grade uranium, every 1 kg of 80% pure uranium leaves you with about 104Kg of DU. The Little Boy bomb design built in Hiroshima had 64kg of Uranium enriched to an average of 80%. The US built 26 of them. And that was only the very first design they "mass produced". The way they do it is through Isotopic Separation. The uranium enriching process involves turning natural Uranium into Uranium fluoride (UF4), a fine yellow powder known as "yellowcake". You take that powder and throw it into a centrifuge. Much like Plasma separating from blood cells in medical centrifuges, uranium centrifuges make the heaviest elements go to the outer casing of the centrifuge drum whereas the lightes ones stay in the center. But there's so little of the slightly lighter U235 compound they have to scrape off the outer layer of the thing and repeat the process over and over and over again until you end up with the desired concentration. Industrial scale uranium refining involves scraping off most of the powder from the inside of the centrifuge and sequentially throwing it into the next, each step containing more and more U235. For reactor grade uranium, dozens of centrifuges are used. For weapons grade (80% and up), the number of centrifuges running, each scraping off that little bit more of U235, numbers in the thousands. As stated above, Depleted Uranium is indeed rather useless. There have been some developments in it's use as fuel in the MOX and Breeder cycle, but their use involves plutonium, and you know, no proliferation and stuff. The alternative is developing the Thorium Fuel cycle that turns U238 in U232 withouth going through Plutonium, but I don't know how close to a practical reactor we are (India is investing heavily in it, though). Using it in ammunition or armor was only natural. Because it's heavy weight favors it as a cheaper alternative to Tungsten. It was then when the "self sharpening" property was discovered and the use proliferated through nuclear capable countries. Some countries, like Germany itself, insist in using Tungsten penetrators still. The Dart KEP round is not good because of the Uranium. It is a good design by itself. Projectiles have a measurement taken into consideration when you want to design them for penetration, not only through armor, but through flesh and air as well. It is the Ballistic Coefficient, which is basically a relationship of the length and the diameter of the projectile. You can see it as a bunch of mass trying to get through the same hole. It's easy to picture that a dart will have a much easier time getting through a flat piece of steel than a ball, right? That's, in simple therms, because there's a lot more mass carrying momentum behind the tip of the dart rather than spreading it out like the ball. That stream of thought is what made them design a "dart" as a kinetic energy penetrator for tank guns, known as a Long Rod Penetrator. The concept has been applied since the T-62. And finally, a topic I think you broached briefly. Depleted Uranium is, by itself, pretty much harmless. You can handle them all day and carry some in your pocket withouth deviating from the mean chance of Cancer in the general population. DU still has some leftover U235 in it, but overall it's pretty inert. It's half life is like 4.5 billion years (that's almost the age of the Earth itself...), meaning it is still radioactive, but releases it's energy sooooo slowly it's pretty much harmless. In fact you'll be exposed to more radiation in an 8h flight than by sitting all day in a DU ammunition storage shack. DU is actually used as radiation shielding, and it's better than Lead at it. The health concern with it is not the practically nonexistent radiation, but rather because it is still a heavy metal, very much like lead in that regard. The controversy about DU rounds it's because their impacts pulverize the projectile and creates a fine heavy metal dust that can be inhaled. And one final note, about the monocristalinic thing people get wrong all the time. Even prof. Martyn Poliakoff (from Periodic Videos) got that wrong, and I too was taught that wrong until I studied Engineering an actual expert in the matter taught me otherwise. You said in 8:08, It is not the monocristalinic nature of a material that makes it strong. Get that out of your head. It's the other way around *The finer the grains in a metal, the stronger it is*. This is due to the way the crystals are arranged. They form an homogenous, orderly crystal, so if you have "large metalic crystal" *that's the weakest it can possibly be*. Materials do not break by severing the atomic bonds with eachoter, but rather by atoms sliding off one another. This is the Sliding Planes theory, and if you look deeper into material science, you'll see this orderly structure crystals arrange themselves in has a ton of sliding planes. When a piece is made out of a mess of tiny little crystals, that means that there's a tangled mess of these sliding planes a crack has to go through. As the atoms on a crystal slide off one another, rather than going into a single direction as they would in a monocristalinic piece, they have to change directions as the orientation of the cristaline structure (the sliding planes) of the next crystal is totally different. *This is why the finer (and the more there are) "chaotic mess of tiny crystals" is much stronger than a monocrystaline piece!* I would recomend R. C. Hiebbler's Mechanics of Materials if you want to learn more. That's a staple engineering book and the best one about it around. You may have reached that erroneous conclusion because jet engine parts are made of monocrystalinic pieces. And that's true. They have to be monocrystalinic because they have to be strong, right? Wrong. Turbine parts work at very high temperatures. And high temperatures tend to erase any work you try to do to refine the grain structure of a material, turning it into a single crystal. So to get that out of your head *turbines are monocrystalinic because they have to be designed at their weakest due to high working temperatures". There has been a lot of research done in this regard to alloying and how they affect the crystaline structure of a metal, which are especially important for high temperature applications. There's also vacancies, substitutive elements and other stuff that break the sliding plane thing and help make a material stronger, but this comment is already too damn long. I would only recommend you read some of Hiebbeler's book again if you want to learn about them.

Deadliest game of darts ever known.

It’s not only used as a munition, it’s also in the armor. ( former 2146 main battle tank mechanic for the USMC )

Well done Sir! I was the Chief of Armor Force DS/S Lessons Learned for the U.S. Army & you absolutely nailed all of the key points about the round & the Abrams.

Just stumbled upon your channel and I am blown away by the content and in-depth information with each video. My roommate is a Gulf war veteran with severe PTSD and after watching a couple hours of your videos I haven't seen him as engaged and happy with anything as your videos in such a long time. It may not seen like much, however, many people don't understand the suffering, mental breakdowns and the plethora of other debilitating health issues they go through. You don't know how grateful I am for you and your work and wanted to pass along the amazing difference you made in a Marine veterans life. Thank you greatly and be well.

Former tank crew here. I do have a distinct preference for depleted uranium because its pyrophoricity means that APFSDS shells using depleted uranium end up detonating behind the armour that they have penetrated despite theoretically being kinetic warheads, which is quite the spectacle. That said tungsten carbide isn't exactly a pushover either given that it can still cripple tanks by damaging critical subsystems like propulsion and fire control

Dang it. I will never unsee APFSDS rounds as over glorified Lawn darts

For those wondering, DU shells are NOT RADIOACTIVE. The real danger is that it is a heavy metal (like lead and osmium) and is rather toxic to the human body as a result.

Another health risk is an enemy tank surviving long enough to take you out.

Well, at least the debate about that ammo is healthy!

The depleted uranium dart used in tank rounds has been proven effective, and while there have been arguments about the “health or environmental impacts” we have to remember these darts are used only in a real war. In a real combat situation, a tank commander wants to know his or her tank is fully capable of engaging and beating an enemy. All war is brutal and harsh, and trying to tease out what is more humane or environmental when we talk of weapons of war seems to be idealistic. When this round was used in the first Gulf War, the results were stunning. In almost every engagement, the Iraqi tanks were blown apart or pierced. The very high velocity, high density and flat trajectory of this depleted uranium dart are huge advantages. Yes, it is harsh and the results would stun us, but this is why deterrence and diplomacy are always the best approaches.

But Are they as deadly as lawn darts?

As a retired nuclear engineer who spent a significant part of my career working with U, I suggest you re-think your comment about the toxicity of U. I'll leave it to you to look up the LD50 does of the various heavy metals. U isn't at the top. If it were, I'd have been dead a long time ago. So would a large numbers of infantrymen who went poking around in killed enemy tanks in the middle east and afghanistan. The two main reasons to use DU are a) We have a huge stockpile of the stuff and not much of anything to do with it. and b) unlike Tungsten and the other very heavy metals, U is easy to machine. The machining must be done in an argon inert atmosphere because the stuff is so flammable. The government and contractors machine it in large glove-boxes. A private entity who has only a small amount of machining to do can simply wrap the machine tool in plastic sheeting and feed in the argon. U is spoken of as pyrophoric but not really. Pyrophorocity is the property of a substance to spontaneously ignite and burn in air. Potassium or white phosphorous for example. Uranium, along with aluminum and magnesium, would do so except that as any of these metals sit in air, an oxide shield forms. Aluminum's oxide is so tough and tenacious that it isn't considered flammable. Magnesium forms a less tenacious oxide layer so that it CAN be ignited in air. Once lit, it burns to completion and not much short of a Class D fire extinguisher will extinguish the fire. U also forms a tenacious oxide layer but as it grows, the oxide layer separates into thin, very sharp (ask me how I know!) oxide plains that provide just enough protection to prevent spontaneous combustion. Try to do anything with it and the situation is much different. Chuck a chunk up in a lathe and start making a cut. The swarf comes off as strings of burning metal. Get the workpiece too hot and it too will catch fire. U will react to nitrogen to form uranium nitride. It'll strip the oxygen out of water molecules. It'll strip the oxygen out of the carbonate charge used in dry chemical extinguisher. It'll do the same thing to sand. Only a Class D extinguisher which consists of very finely powdered copper can do the job on a small fire. Bigger fires are allowed to simply burn out.

Those du rounds could conceivably punch through a Iowa class battleships main armor belt. Now that is incredible.

5:30 I'm surprised more people haven't commented about this; all ballistic projectiles are affected by windage and gravity - no matter how fast and/or brief the flight, they all fall, from the moment they leave the barrel.

Do a bob semple tank overview!

Pfft, nokia's are far superior ammunition. Its indestructible so it can go through anything. Science.

At 5:40 there is mention made that the round incurs NO ballistic drop out to 3000 meters. This is not possible. If the barrel were completely horizontal the round would begin dropping at with an acceleration of G as soon as it leaves the barrel. Any round from any weapon system will encounter ballistic drop, unless it is powered (like a rocket). It's just physics.

My dad did work on the depleted uranium round. The shape is the trick. At high speed it makes a jet of melted metal at super sonic speed inside the tank hit. The thing turns into liquid and melts the target metal impacted, everything inside is shredded. The ammunition also is hit by high speed melted splash and helps to keep the suffering inside the tank on the short side. 😁

10:26 that soldier looks so proud of that patreon round xD

NATO be like : Sorry for droping 10 tons of uranium on ur land

Interestingly, the Germans with the same gun do not use DU. They use a tungsten mono-block penetrator. Given the possibility that Germans would be fighting on their own territory, they didn't want DU dust/shavings littering their countryside. What they lose of course is the dramatic incendiary behind armour effect (DU burns like a mad bastard when it gets super compressed). But there's no indication that German rounds are ineffective against the threat (Russian tanks).

Ahhh nothing makes me harder than a good ole Abrams. God bless you matsimus you're one of the few supplying us military addicts* without the shitty robot voices

I actually worked on tests of du tank rounds during their development in the late 80's. We stepped them up to over 7500 fps and shot many tank turrets. I like to think our tests are why the Gulf War went the way it did!! We also tested Russian ammo for the same reasons!! We knew exactly their capabilities going in!!

Interesting video. Thanks for the effort to make it. A few physics corrections: 1. Naturally occurring Uranium starts out at 0.72% U235, 0.01%U234, and 99.27% U238. Your graphic states that depleted uranium is 89% U238. I think you derive this because Uranium is enhanced to 11% U235 for use in fission reactors. DU projectiles are alloyed with other metals. Depleted Uranium has to be 99.27% U238 minimum before being alloyed. 2. Stating that a projectile has no drop over 2 miles would be disputed by Sir Isaac Newton’s laws of motion. Gravity cannot be erased from any moving (or static)body on the earth’s surface. The drop may be small, but it can never be zero.

Finally!; a video that delivers. Ethical considerations aside, that was fascinating. To the point, well researched, plain language, not overloaded with technical wank. Spoke of past present and future to give a context of The Now. It caused me to Google 'smoothbore' before continuing and that was most interesting also. On the basis of that I then Googled 'Rheinmetall Rh-120'. The pretty pictures contained within the vid caused me to pause the vid and study the pics and the reasons for DU. Those pictures graphically (literally and figuritively) illustrated the fin stabilized smoothbore DU projectile. The ballistic drop info was outstanding. Before this vid I had little interest in war army tanks with huge death cocks, and I still feel that way, but this vid caused me to come away satisfied, educated, informed. Really a top notch vid this. If only all the vids on YT were this good. I will indeed view the link you posted below - mostly just because you recommended it.

Awesome as always Matt! Great explanation of this fantastic munition and it’s capabilities. And thank you Matt, for finally giving RU-vid, a video that does not go off on the mandatory tangent, detailing the possible harm of DU.

When I was a kid I used to think depleted uranium rounds meant tank ammo that detonated a nuclear blast and that's why they were controversial. What a moron I was. lol

Matsimus: Uranium, the heaviest naturally occurring material on earth Iridium: Am I a joke to you? Osmium: Hold my beer.

You can't focus on the risk to life, using this munition can pose, but the number of lives the use of this munition has saved.

When it comes to deadly darts, it's important to keep them out of the black and into the red... nothing in this game for two in a bed... Can't beat a bit of Bully... 😁😁😁

Ugh I love your videos so much mat. True quality military content. So interesting and somehow quenching my big bullet curiosities

What I learned from this video: All tanks are considered beautiful. I feel I must agree. :-)

Privet Western Partners/Counterparts! "...at least 90% KILL rate aimed for..."! Wow! Let's not disable the Killing Machine (Tank), but those operating it! Imagine opening top hatch, and look at the daddy of 2 kids (even western counterparts) minced up with body parts found even behind in storage bays and engines! The A-10 also use DU and we as well, but we normally target engines, hoping tank operators drop down out of Turret, because next target is blowing Gun turret off from tank's superstructure (only if "enemy" tank can still fire after engines are destroyed). You know Matt, you said something which I can also relate to, that is where you said she's just a *beauty...,* I look in awe at our SU-30, 35, 57, and top-class MiGs, and the way pilots dance and play with their "Ladies" are *beautifully crafted machines* (even F-22, B-2 Spirit, our white Swans etc), but then I'm reminded that those Ladies are what my pilot friends call their Mermaids...for they are extremely sexy machines to behold...until their fangs come out and they can kill thousands with *one* strike (depending on the munitions)! so, at the Airshows one can truly say: What a "View to a Kill"! С уважением Commander Mikhail Rimsky-Korsakov (FSB: Research, Information & Internet (Social Media)) ФЕДЕРАЛЬНАЯ СЛУЖБА БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ

The US unloaded several hundred tons of DU ammunition in Iraq alone for mostly no good reason (on not armored targets) with horrible consequences for the people there...

Once again great informal video! Learned a lot more about this kind of round and what DU is all about. It’s insane how powerful it is.

I wonder what it would have been like to be at the meeting where someone said for the first time, "Hey, we just came up with a way to make the most powerful tank armor penetrating rounds out of garbage."

In soviet russia we use satlinimiun more denser then a neutron star and its not toxic also used ib armor du rounds when shot at a russian tank just miss beacuse they dont want to get near stalinimium

That uranium is called depleted because it had had the fisionable isotope removed from it. In reality each one of those rounds, used in a Molten Salt Breeder Reactor could fuel the energy a FAMILY uses in their LIFETIME. The breeder develops regular isotope into fuel isotope with neutron bombardment and then burns the resulting fusionable (a mix of uranium and plutonium) to make more neutrons and more fuel.

For what it's worth I appreciate that you didn't completely gloss over the ethical implications of such 'dirty' weaponry. Yea we came here to learn the science but that aspect, even if only the debate surrounding it, deserves mention. Respect

Now let's getting into a pissing contest between DM63A1, M829A4, and Vacuum-1. xD

I have mixed feelings with "DU" rounds, I see the tactical benefit of it, hell I seen it with my own eyes but on the other hand, I also dont like the complications with "DU" killed wrecks and how toxic they are. After the was have been won allot more people have to go near and live with these wrecks.

So glad I found this channel, love your work. Thanks Mat.

It would be a bad idea to fully phase it out. The best thing to do is to give the crews options. Giving them some DU ammo and whatever next-gen ammo they come up with would allow the tank crew to have the OPTION of attacking with overwhelming force from the front or with lesser force when it is called for.

DU is also used for a variety of commercial and military applications. Most notably, DU is used in some air to ground munitions. It's believed that this DU is responsible for a variety of birth defects and other serious medical issues in areas where the US military operates.

hi mastimus! could you please make video on rocket assisted projectiles and hypersonic projectiles?

The big advantage depleted uranium shells have over anti-tank rocket systems, is it is pretty much impossible to intercept and fully stop a DU dart as it is such a highly concentrated mass moving at ridiculous speeds. Basic physics are at play here. It needs an equal force to stop it, and active protective systems relying on explosive shrapnel shells/rockets simply don't provide enough kinetic energy to stop the DU dart. The same idea is why Pk 1 & 2 Patriot missile defense systems suck at intercepting higher density (than air craft) ballistic missiles, as the the anti-air shrapnel missiles struggle against the higher density of missiles vs aircraft. Future Patriot systems moved on to direct intercepting missiles to fix this. Contrast that to man portable anti-tank rockets. Their slower, fatter explosive warheads are more vulnerable to active protective systems that rely on shrapnel explosive devices. Not to mention their electronics are vulnerable to electronic warfare systems.

Answered most of my questions about this munition. Thanks.

Fun fact: the scientific basis on why long, dense and slender rounds work so well was actually predicted by Sir Isaac Newton. Newton surmised that impact depth - once you reach high enough speeds - depend only on the following things: the density of the target (higher = less penetration), the density of the projectile (higher = deeper penetration), and the length of the projectile (longer = deeper penetration). Speed does not matter, once you go over a certain velocity, and neither does width/diameter. So you might as well sacrifice width - i.e. total weight - in order to get a higher velocity.

Back in the late 1970s I had a job at a university that was testing weapons amongst other things. And we tested deplete uranium shells, and man, that stuff melts two inch thick armor plating like soft butter. Deadly to shoot that stuff out of a canon.

absolute insanity anymore, this push to the envelope of who can punch through my big ass armor. Everything being fielded anymore, army, air force, navy, space its all 95-100% accurate, 100% lethal. I fear the future in 20 years.

Hi there. Sorry to be nitpicky, but Uranium is not the densest naturally occurring element. That honor goes to Osmium. Uranium has density 19.1 g/cm3 while Osmium has 22.59 g/cm3. That being said, Osmium round would be very expensive, while depleted uranium is basically waste.

The environmental problem with DU ammo isnt DU ammo, but the A10 30mm 4500rpm gun and it being used with DU ammo all over the place when the DU capabilities were more or less only warranted during the Iraqi invasion. MBT/IFV engagements impact are minimal (few areas, fewer rounds) and very localized to given areas, but A10 DU impact on the other hand is all over the place when DU is used for simplistic tasks like taking out a infantry foxhole or similar. Thereby having a unnecessary spread of DU.

One of the most impressive displays of tanks firing I ever saw as a tank gunner was at night in summer 1968. It was the last firing session with Centurions. A whole squadron of Centurions firing sabot at night together at the same time ! Fantastic !

The dangers of DU rounds is highly exaggerated. It does not fill the air with toxic dust, and the particles are so heavy they quickly settle. Stay out of battles with the A-10 and you'll be fine.

*JOHNNY LOAD THE THUMB TACK!*

I liked thinking about this stuff before the internet existed. Now everybody knows.

A small conical object made with one of the densest materials known to man with a very aerodynamic shape with a very pointy nose moving at mach 5 can kill just about anything

... all very interesting but you seem to have totally overlooked the British contribution ... from the early 70s the British have used 120 rifled tank guns firing kinetic shot, in contrast to the HEAT ammunition favoured by the US ... as a serving soldier I took delivery of the first shipments of DU APFSDS ammunition to the British Army in 1984 ... ... further more on the Chieftain Mk3/2 with the extended graticule 9 dot site the direct fire range of APDS went from 1790m out to 3000 metres with tungsten cores, one if which I have had turned into the most amazing set of darts

Collected via the epa website Studies indicate that an elevated pH in soil may increase the solubility of tungsten by decreasing its sorption coefficient, which may cause it to leach more readily into the groundwater table (ATSDR 2005; ASTSWMO 2011). Tungsten has been shown to accumulate in plants in substantial amounts. The extent of accumulation appears to be related to the tungsten content in soil and varies widely, depending on the plant genotype (Koutsospyros and others 2006) Studies on female rats have shown that oral exposure to tungsten caused post-implantation deaths and developmental abnormalities in the musculoskeletal system. Studies on rats also found that tungsten primarily accumulated in bones and in the spleen after oral exposure (NIEHS 2003). The EPA’s Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Interagency Testing Committee has included tungsten compounds in the Priority Testing List, which is a list of chemicals regulated by TSCA for which there are suspicions of toxicity or exposure and for which there are few, if any, ecological effects, environmental fate or health effects testing data (EPA 2006). The American Council of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has established a threshold limit value of 5 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3 ) as the time-weighted average (TWA) over an 8- hour work exposure and 10 mg/m3 as the 15- minute short-term exposure limit (STEL) for airborne exposure to tungsten metal and for insoluble tungsten compounds (ACGIH 2008). The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) recommends a permissible exposure limit of 5 mg/m3 for insoluble compounds of tungsten and a PEL of 1 mg/m3 limit for soluble compounds in the construction and shipyard industries as a TWA over an 8-hour work exposure. OSHA also established a PEL of 10 mg/m3 as the 15-minute STEL for airborne exposure to insoluble compounds of tungsten and 3 mg/m3 as the 15-minute STEL for airborne exposure to soluble tungsten compounds (OSHA 2013) Collected via academic.oup.com/milmed/article/172/9/1002/4283401 Studies in experimental animals and cell culture indicate that pellets based on heavy metal tungsten alloy possess carcinogenic potential previously unseen for depleted uranium and/or lead. Other metals in the tungsten alloy such as nickel or cobalt may contribute to such a risk. Accordingly, the long-term tungsten-related health risk is reason for concern. This article reviews toxicological and clinical literature and provides new perspectives on tungsten and tungsten-based alloys.

Is there a Stalker edition for these?

The toxicity of DU comes from its chemical composition, not its radioactivity.

I worked for a contractor that made these but in a 30mm round,I worked as a inspector in the DU room..WICKED STUFF !

Matsimus, come on man... Active protection systems or APS like Armata or trophy are useless against the kinetic warheads like a depleted uranium sabot round. APS is designed to knock out relatively slow moving ATGMs.

I understand your point on atgms but it is honestly a toss up. With APS atgms are almost certainly not going to be able to hit veichals from any angle. At least the du shells have a better chance of surviving it.

I was always wondering about this, thanks!

A tank round will drop when fired at exactly the same rate as a stone. If you have an upward initial trajectory, the round will exhibit precisely the same vertical movement as the same round thrown upward with the same vertical velocity by a strong man. At 1500 m/s with a flat shot, you will have a drop of right on 20m over 3 kilometers and will have a vertical velocity of 20m/s. Note that this is remarkably flat for a trajectory, but it's not a straight line and the tank's ballistic computer has to compensate for it. (Note that the actual drop will be a bit higher at any given range, because the round will slow down horizontally because of air resistance, but at the vertical velocities, air resistance will have little effect on the rate of drop.)

I was so impressed with depleted uranium ammunition that I bought it for my kids for Christmas.

the first clip is the tank range for camp burhering in kuwait. been there and wont go back again.

Early Boeing 747s used depleted uranium counterweights. If the aircraft crashed there was as risk of radioactive contamination to the persons, wreckage, the crash-site. This first became widely known after a 747 crash in Amsterdam in 1992 when crash investigators noticed high radioactivity on the crash debris. . (In those days airliner crashes were more frequent than now. )

Great presentation, thanks for the clear description of these types of munitions.

Ballistic drop is a function of gravity which, when I last checked, was still a valid law of physics. At 3000+ ft/sec. this may appear to be "flat", but it cannot be. The drop due to Earth's curvature over 2 miles is 2.67 feet, which may cause it to LOOK flat, but it ain't. In simplified terms, at 3,000 ft/sec., the projectile will take 3.52 sec. to reach the target. In that time it will, thank you, Mr. Newton, drop about 12.4 feet due to gravity, leaving an elevation compensation of about 9.3 feet. Given that it's a smooth bore, the Magnus effect doesn't enter into it.

This was developed to pierce the armour of tanks that are getting destroyed by javelins

Now this is what I call silver bullets, they even set the inside of vehicles on fire!

High Explosive Anti Tank

RU-vid "Depleted Uranium Firings West Cumbria" test footage on reducing DU discharge.

Interesting trivia - Tungsten carbide does not mushroom, it shatters / snaps instead of deforming. (ask any machinist who's ever broken a tungsten carbide bit)

Tngsten is harder and more dense tha Uranium, however uranium penetrators are more effective. Unlike tungsten, uranium is pyrophoric. It also has a lower melting point than tungsten. As a DU penetrator strikes a target, its surface temperature increases dramatically. This causes localized softening in what are known as "adiabatic shear bands" and a sloughing off of portions of the projectile's surface. This keeps the tip sharp and prevents the mushrooming effect that occurs with tungsten.

I will now put a RAILGUN on my tank in the future😂😂

When the tankers use DU the enemies DI

Please make a video about MRK-3 unmanned combat vehicle or T-15 heavy infantry fighting vehicle.

I Know nothing on this topic, but I do know this video was complex, extremely well made and your knowledge astonishing! My step dad was a supper big buff on battle guns, tanks and more and would custom model them to the finest detail, his work was like art. I remember sitting in the kitchen with him watching TV on Dessert Storm back in the day. Great video!

A lot of people liked the idea that tungsten is the heaviest element. Obviously, there is a confusion . When we talk about the heaviest element, we are referring the the mass of the element . There are other classifications based on density, but the idea is pretty basic and is taught in the seventh grade ,elementary school :) . The same quantity (number of atoms) from one element are compared to the same quantity from other element to determine which is the heaviest . Usually this quantity is a mol and has a number of atoms equal with Avogadro's number . The bigger the atomic mass, the heaviest is the element . Uranium has an atomic weight of 238.0289 , tungsten of 183.84 making uranium heavier than tungsten *as element* . I think that plutonium is the heaviest naturally occurring element since it has an atomic mass of 244 . I am not sure if it occurs naturally as a result of nuclear testing :)) .

"I went to a couple of those wars."

2:04 you’re making it sound like the m60 has all 62rounds in the turret.

I wonder how a DU round does against the modern explosive armor or reactive armor? A lot of countries are using some form of reactive armor these days.

Strykers are by far my favourite toys of deployment. 7 continuous years of battlefield experience here.

I am a retired munitions engineer on these 120mm and 105mm munitions. and others I enjoy your spectacular videos.

Hi Matsimus can you do video about Georgian APC Didgori

Maximus I wanted to hear the ethical side of using du. Because the military it's not a huge problem but for civilians it is there are thousands of cases of people living in a former warzone geting cancer or birth defects

Lucky Us (Us being Americans), the Europeans and Australians (Maybe the Brits to an extent?) avoid DU like the Plague. I’d much rather sit in a tank that had freaking Uranium for armor than just steel-based composites.

When you wanna play lawn darts....... Across the country.

Loudest thing i ever heard was the Sabot round from my old M1A1-i should have won a Tank Navigator status or award but i had a drill sergeant like Hitler that didn't want me to succeed as a soldier!

I have a feeling we'll soon be looking back into kinetic missiles once again. Because I think it was back in the 70's we experimented with kinetic missiles and the results were, they killed everything. Like no armored vehicle had a chance against them. But they were less usable then normal missiles since the launch platform was like an entire humvee outfitted with a launch system, also needed room to build up speed. Anyways I suspect we'll be looking back into such things with current gen armor being the fucking monster is it, but mostly because of the active protection systems. Since such things wont really be able to redirect what pretty much is a baby ballistic missile moving at over 1km/s. And even if the missile fails to pen, the shear concussive force will most likely disable the vehicle.