Тёмный

Strv 103 BAR ARMOUR SIMULATION | T-62 vs S-Tank | 115mm 3BM3 APFSDS Armour Piercing Simulation 

SY Simulations
Подписаться 96 тыс.
Просмотров 645 тыс.
50% 1

Some Swedish Strv 103's featured bar armour at the front of the hull to protect against shaped charge munitions as well as damaging or distorting kinetic projectiles. A potential threat to the Strv 103 was the Soviet T-62; the first tank to enter service with a smoothbore gun and fire Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilised Discarding-Sabot (APFSDS) ammunition.
The 115mm smoothbore gun provided the APFSDS with an exceptional muzzle velocity of over 1600m/s, giving it more penetration than most NATO tanks of the time. It's initial APFSDS round (3BM3) featured a maraging steel body (~650BHN), a tungsten carbide slug, a soft steel cap, and a steel windshield and fins. The slug provided high penetration against vertical armour but could be easily deflected by sloped (or bar) armour.
The simulation shows the 3BM3 impacting the Strv 103 at 1km range, at a lower portion of the upper plate. This area of the upper plate doesnt have the ribbed armour, but instead has spare track links on it. (This area was chosen to save computational time as to hit the ribbed armour the round would have to fly substantially further)
Info on the bars: fromtheswedisharchives.wordpr...
Amazing thumbnail model from: Degitt22 sketchfab.com/3d-models/strv-...

Наука

Опубликовано:

 

30 июн 2022

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 439   
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
I genuinely didnt expect this to go through, but I suspect a hit higher up wouldnt perforate the armour due to a larger air gap and the ribbed armour
@oim8254
@oim8254 2 года назад
Hi, a while ago I sent you an email offering OC armour design to test against APFSDS. Take a look at it if you're interested. 😊 Also dude, you definitely deserve Patreon page for your efforts on the channel.
@ericwilson5679
@ericwilson5679 2 года назад
Could you do T-62 vs Is7 please?
@hotlanta35
@hotlanta35 2 года назад
Extreme sloped armor is great but you have to make it thicker if you expect to survive against a MBT
@I_dunno_man_but
@I_dunno_man_but 2 года назад
@@hotlanta35 the thing is that this tank was designed in the 1950s while spicy needles were invented in the 60s. When this tank was designed, almost nothing could penetrate it from the front.
@_Astroh_
@_Astroh_ 2 года назад
Could you do one with the Centurion mk. 5 AVRE where you pen the bulldozer blade and then the tank
@TheAmazingCowpig
@TheAmazingCowpig 2 года назад
The dynamics of post-WWII sabot rounds and destabilizing them as a form of protection never stops being fascinating. While WWII was generally about "make armor thicker, and slope may make the impact less optimal", Cold War ammo vs armor is so interesting with "stopping a lot more while trying to do it with a lot less", and that's just wild.
@thehammurabichode7994
@thehammurabichode7994 Год назад
I thought WW1 was more about "Make it thicker"?
@oerlikon20mm29
@oerlikon20mm29 Год назад
@@thehammurabichode7994 lol WWI was just “make it move at a speed faster than I can walk”
@sol2544
@sol2544 Год назад
@@thehammurabichode7994 WW1 is just "Make it"
@tylersmith1468
@tylersmith1468 Месяц назад
Well, post ww2 rounds could go through like 300mm+ of RHA. So you'd start needing like a half metre thick metal box, which is kinda hard on the engine and transmission. So making the armor just thicker very quickly becomes impractical for anything that isn't a bunker.
@Prime_Sisyphus
@Prime_Sisyphus 24 дня назад
@@sol2544 interwar is just, slap as many guns as possible on it
@nicolasrouvreau8365
@nicolasrouvreau8365 2 года назад
For a plate of only 40 mm, it still very impressive
@Shmuzznik
@Shmuzznik 2 года назад
Slopege :D
@acog_is_good1650
@acog_is_good1650 2 года назад
they would still survive cuz it would hit the engine the crew compartment is more back
@ExcavationNation
@ExcavationNation 2 года назад
It's because it's sloped DUH
@albinskold8792
@albinskold8792 2 года назад
@@acog_is_good1650 thing would probably just slip right trough everything if it managed to pierce, idk tho i'm not a engineer and i dont design armored engines or heard of
@ZETH_27
@ZETH_27 2 года назад
and it wouldn't even kill the crew. the shrapnel would be stopped by the engine block and/or the internal armour shield. And since the vehicle has 2 engines, even if one is taken out of commission, the vehicle can still counter-fire or retreat.
@thefunfactman6098
@thefunfactman6098 2 года назад
And this is why my STRV 103 is still one of my favorite tanks. Such a unique design.
@henrik3291
@henrik3291 Год назад
Uniques: yes, totally worthless: yes
@Tjalle
@Tjalle Год назад
@@henrik3291 not wordless, for the porpoise it was build for
@anhaltboyzrule1704
@anhaltboyzrule1704 Год назад
@@henrik3291 This tank is not used for head on combat, as it's a defensive tank. you probably wouldn't even notice the tank as it was very small as it was only 40 tons. Now for head on combat, yes it is worthless. Defensive? No, and the tactic with the tank was to ambush and retreat.
@henrik3291
@henrik3291 Год назад
@@anhaltboyzrule1704 "Defensive tank" yeah that is the problem xD. Some Swedish officers thought it would better to redesignate as an assault gun or a tank destroyer.
@anhaltboyzrule1704
@anhaltboyzrule1704 Год назад
@@henrik3291 really? Didn’t know that. Interesting
@MrSuba47
@MrSuba47 2 года назад
It would be interesting to test full caliber 120mm M58 gun with AP shot, on different tanks like is3 and more modern tanks with composite armour designed to stop apfsds like leopard 2 turret.
@kajetus0688
@kajetus0688 2 года назад
or maybe battleship?
@MrSuba47
@MrSuba47 2 года назад
@@kajetus0688 "YAMATO" kudasai.
@Sean_but_Not_Heard
@Sean_but_Not_Heard 2 года назад
The additional explanations are what make your videos so awesome. I’m a complete nub when it comes to this stuff, but with the context you give I’m able to work out all the effects and figure out why you’re showing what you are.
@PrinzAquatic
@PrinzAquatic 2 года назад
Unlike normal round that ricochet when meeting extreme angle Dart round shattered when hitting extreme angle, shown beautifully here.
@a.e.richardson218
@a.e.richardson218 2 года назад
Tungsten darts also ricochet but they tend to deform more when doing so
@cursedcliff7562
@cursedcliff7562 2 года назад
@@a.e.richardson218 how can brittle tungsten deform more than steel?
@Artemonim
@Artemonim 2 года назад
Can you simulate a ricochet? It is interesting to see what condition the projectile is in after the ricochet.
@Artemonim
@Artemonim 2 года назад
@Ēriks A. I meant a ricochet without completely destroying the projectile.
@dankuspanku4650
@dankuspanku4650 2 года назад
@@Artemonim Projectiles will always be deformed/destroyed after a deflection.
@xtron1234
@xtron1234 2 года назад
@@Artemonim Considering the speeds and energy involved in these simulations, that’s not really possible unless it’s an extremely glancing hit.
@jimtrela7588
@jimtrela7588 2 года назад
There IS a simulation video on RU-vid that illustrates how a ricochet becomes the dominate result. The angle of obliquity is stepped up in multiple simulations, from around 81° to 83° in 1/4 degree increments.
@datadavis
@datadavis 2 года назад
Ribbed armor - for added survivability feel
@henryextreme9210
@henryextreme9210 2 года назад
War thunder seing this : looks like the shell completely penetrated so now it will go through the whole engine, kill the crew and explode the ammo Nice gaijin 👌
@orcashamudeluxeu567
@orcashamudeluxeu567 2 года назад
thats not even that bad tbh, however I Draw the line at HULL AIMGING AHAHHAHHAHAHAHHHHHHHHH WHY GAIJIN
@JaM-R2TR4
@JaM-R2TR4 2 года назад
while its quite easy to simulate this.. just compare achieved penetration vs effective armor.. and amount of overmatch should determine amount of shrapnels generated... so in this case, relatively small amount...
@romaboo6218
@romaboo6218 2 года назад
It wouldnt do jack shit in Warthunder only damage the engine or do nothing as the swedish angle god can only be killed whit flanking
@FlexyWrexy
@FlexyWrexy 2 года назад
​@@JaM-R2TR4 The problem is War Thunder doesn't have any kind of over-matching process currently. This is why big calibres and HE don't work properly on angled surfaces in WT. I would love to see a proper over-match feature in War Thunder, it would be a game change for the big-boi guns. I'd also love to see deteriorating armour, shooting the same spot twice would send the round straight through the weakened armour.
@junibug6790
@junibug6790 2 года назад
Balanced by War Thunder ALSO saying, "My gunner, driver and commander are all dead? No problem - I, the loader, shall drive, aim and reload the entire tank all by myself!"
@moosiemoose1337
@moosiemoose1337 2 года назад
Awesome video
@YuriKlbnv
@YuriKlbnv 2 года назад
That armor never stops surprising me
@MaxRavenclaw
@MaxRavenclaw 2 года назад
That looks like cage armour made to mess up with shaped charge warheads. EDIT: Yes, didn't see the title well, that's bar/cage/slat armour. Interesting that it can also mess with APFSDS, though it was probably not installed to do that as much as to short RPGs that would probably fuse on the tracks or something. Just my educated guess, I haven't researched the official reasoning.
@ZETH_27
@ZETH_27 2 года назад
it was installed against shaped charge warheads, yes, however it functions to destabilize APFSDS projectiles as well, which drastically reduces their penetrative power.
@MaxRavenclaw
@MaxRavenclaw 2 года назад
@@ZETH_27 Statistical armour through and through. Against APFSDS the projectile needs to hit the bars, and against RPGs it needs the warhead to go between them haha
@dposcuro
@dposcuro 2 года назад
It isn't specifically designed to defeat APFSDS, there's a lot of empty space the penetrator could slip through without hitting it. But if it does hit the bar, especially just to the side, it imparts an angular force into the projectile, which then causes it to change it's orientation, in relation to the directions of its force. If the penetrator is hitting off axis, then it is not able to support the leading edge, making it much more susceptible to fracturing and having the energy redirected.
@MaxRavenclaw
@MaxRavenclaw 2 года назад
@@dposcuro Yes, thought as much, and I'd guess it has a far higher chance to stop SC than KEP.
@hazardous458
@hazardous458 2 года назад
@@MaxRavenclaw it was designed for apds in mind not apfsds.
@flyingskyward2153
@flyingskyward2153 2 года назад
Is there any possibility of doing a test of plates at different angles including vertical with the same equivalent horizontal thickness against various rounds? I want to see how much benefit angled plates really are.
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
Will do at some point
@petter5721
@petter5721 Год назад
I believe the rib armour on top of the main armour is missing in this simulation. Even if it penetrates the crew is protected behind the engines and another armour wall.
@joeduv715
@joeduv715 2 года назад
I watch quite a few of your videos and am always curious what type of damage the crew might face. Even when there is no penetration, there seems to almost always be spalling and I’m interested to know how lethal it could be (depending on the place of the hit of course)
@Anon14_88
@Anon14_88 Год назад
~shotgun
@basedjorts
@basedjorts 2 года назад
Any chance of testing the 120mm M358 against the same target?
@fuahrahn
@fuahrahn Год назад
S-tank is amazing. Saw one in the museum few years ago and love it.
@MarcinP2
@MarcinP2 Год назад
You have the top of the bar cut short and constrained. I think the asymmetry caused by the bending would help.
@chelseagrey9166
@chelseagrey9166 Год назад
So impressive!!
@antonrudenham3259
@antonrudenham3259 2 года назад
Wouldn't the spare track links shear off and give way rather than redirect the slug down through the armour?
@benij2431
@benij2431 Год назад
Even though it penetrated it the crew would be fine seen as this is a diagram from the very front of the S tank proving its design was really remarkable
@johan-erikjohannesson2796
@johan-erikjohannesson2796 2 года назад
An engineer working for the Swedish defence material acquisition agency (FMV) wrote that Sweden testfired T-72s bought from former DDR in 1994 against Strv 103C. The apfsds of the T-72 went straight through with no problems.
@henrik3291
@henrik3291 Год назад
One of the worst military projects that Sweden has invested in
@m1a1abramstank49
@m1a1abramstank49 Год назад
@@henrik3291 The STRV 103 was designed during a time where there were no T-72s, and would be used when there wouldn’t be many in service during the time. It’s main opponents were AP and HEAT rounds which it can stop fine
@anhaltboyzrule1704
@anhaltboyzrule1704 Год назад
The Strv was a defensive tank, so i wonder if the t-72 would have noticed it by the time the strv had fired and retreated.
@henrik3291
@henrik3291 Год назад
@@anhaltboyzrule1704 Again, what you are describing is a tank destroyer
@mr.artist7247
@mr.artist7247 Год назад
@@henrik3291 Strv 103 is great for Sweden. Now shut up
@the1Blind
@the1Blind Год назад
Just as a thought, rerun this one without the track piece. It seems to me, like the track would create a backstop for the dart and add downward force, MAYBE helping in penetration. A kind of mini shot-trap.
@rohesilmnelohe
@rohesilmnelohe Год назад
it is welded on in this simulation aswell.. so yes.
@05Hogsrule
@05Hogsrule 2 года назад
how about a simulation that shows the round NOT hitting the rods first and going straight into the armor plate?
@BubupatianD
@BubupatianD 2 года назад
Amazing 👍👍
@robertb6768
@robertb6768 2 года назад
What software are you using to create these models/tests? FEA of some kind I assume?
@viperfishlover8767
@viperfishlover8767 2 года назад
hey sy what program do you use to make these simulations?
@betterlatethannever9590
@betterlatethannever9590 2 года назад
Стрв 103 произведение инженерного искусства и помимо этого симпатичная машина
@gkhobby7722
@gkhobby7722 2 года назад
can you do iphone 7 plus vs .22lr or 9mm ? at 90 degree and 60 degree will the battery fully charged act like ERA ? will the mainboard area contains with aluminium+ tin + textolite+ quartz core+ rubber+ air gap+steel + glass/rubber stops the .22 ?
@Tomartyr
@Tomartyr 2 года назад
0:32 The view down (up?) the barrel is probably the most interesting.
@igorbarbarossa
@igorbarbarossa 2 года назад
Can we see the same simulation but without the steel bars?
@jintsuubest9331
@jintsuubest9331 2 года назад
The bar does not appear to be doing anything interesting against the rod beyond standard erosion. Will we observe something complex if the rod scrap the bar sideways?
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
The HEAT-grid was never intended to do anything against AP rounds, so if it had any effect at all it would be a lottery win.
@Frisher1
@Frisher1 2 года назад
Can you do T62M1 vs T84? Not related to recent events definitely
@Mamiya645
@Mamiya645 2 года назад
I'm a fan of engine-front design for this. Dream car is a civilian CV90 (with free fuel).
@petter5721
@petter5721 Год назад
Did you know that the Merkava tank was heavily influenced by the S-tank design. The Israeli even consulted some Swedish engineers during the development.
@flyfish4fun
@flyfish4fun 2 года назад
Thanks for finally showing with fence bars on the Swedish S-tank, however the bars are also horizontal, just saying 😉👏
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
Thanks, but this is showing an impact between the horizontal bars so they don't need to be modelled
@adammckay852
@adammckay852 2 года назад
Please add witness plate for future simulations
@mbox314
@mbox314 2 года назад
How long does it take to run these simulations?
@stijnVDA1994
@stijnVDA1994 Год назад
Would the shape of the bar armor help in protecting the tank any further?
@johnnaill5028
@johnnaill5028 2 года назад
Could you do one with heatfs against fence armor on m46
@Akatsuki_Krew
@Akatsuki_Krew Год назад
That one bounce!
@shturm602
@shturm602 2 года назад
Can we have a test without the bar armor to have a baseline?
@Dramigbaklanges
@Dramigbaklanges 2 года назад
I always wonder why Sweden didn’t put ERA modules on the upper plate? Perhaps that would be an interesting simulation?
@ThorSuzuki1
@ThorSuzuki1 Год назад
They did test it on later models. :)
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
Because of the HEAT-grid, it wasn't deemed necessary.
@TheAdaoo7
@TheAdaoo7 5 месяцев назад
The strv is an absolute beast
@irirjhrhr4645
@irirjhrhr4645 5 месяцев назад
far from a beast. mediocre, 3bm3 entered service 5 years before the strv 103 (for 103c its like 20 years) and it perforated, disabled the engine and could have gone into the crew compartment. also somehow despite having only 40mm of armor it weights more than a t72 and the same as a t80B
@KREADOS2011
@KREADOS2011 2 года назад
would it be possible to simulate how slat or cage armor deforms a shaped charge so the penetrating jet of copper fails to form properly or at all?
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
I hope i can simulate that one day; my current pc isn't powerful enough
@TheCopperGrasshopper
@TheCopperGrasshopper 2 года назад
@@SYsimulations what software are you using for this? You may have the ability to outsource the "work" to cloud computing platform, like a "render farm". So you setup the sim and the processing part of it actually gets sent out and done on a server that's "rented" and you're returned the rendered product. Some programs have a link within them so you don't send the file over with instructions but it literally just processes on the communal server via net link rather than your PC's hardware. It's great for video editing and 3D model rendering, can still use your computer while waiting for the renders to complete because they don't use up any of your physical pc resources.
@Ownedyou
@Ownedyou 2 года назад
The top of the bar armor is a fixed constraint? Not the case in real life though... I wonder how much that would change the penetration picture.
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
Yes, just for simplicity. It wouldn't affect it as the bar has barely bent by the time the projectile has passed it, so the projectile wouldn't see the difference between fixed/realistic
@ovtiu97
@ovtiu97 2 года назад
Ух ты! Снаряд резино-пластиковый?
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
Вы когда-нибудь видели ствол Калашникова в замедленной съемке при стрельбе?
@IberianCraftsman
@IberianCraftsman 2 года назад
well, the best thing about that tank is the ability to dig itself into the ground so the ground itself is its armor as it has a bulldozer, but its a camper tank, on the move its just an easy target anyway
@DamplyDoo
@DamplyDoo 2 года назад
So those bars actually do a nice job of messing with the integrity of the projectiles cap?
@TheLadderman
@TheLadderman 2 года назад
It's not a warhead, just a projectile, or rod, or whatever you wanna call it. Regardless, it doesn't have any explosives so it isn't a warhead.
@richardmillhousenixon
@richardmillhousenixon 2 года назад
Not so much the cap, as it's a kinetic penetrator, but it definitely destabilized the round making it far harder for it to penetrate sloped armor
@gargean1671
@gargean1671 2 года назад
Would like to see 3BM4/6 too
@jerryjerry5321
@jerryjerry5321 2 года назад
how damaging would this be to the engine? do you think this would put it out of commission or just damage it?
@imagifyer
@imagifyer 2 года назад
I think it depends if it hits the drive train/transmission, the STRV has 2 engines so theoretically if one was knocked out they could rely on the other to stay mobile
@jerryjerry5321
@jerryjerry5321 2 года назад
@@imagifyer good to know.
@matspersson5382
@matspersson5382 2 года назад
"The simulation shows the 3BM3 impacting the Strv 103 at 1km range, at a lower portion of the upper plate." Difficult to say. This is where the front fuel tank and the brakes are located. A hit in this area wouldn't damage any of the two engines or the transmission but brakes or clutches.
@fgm1197
@fgm1197 Год назад
what kind of programm do you use?!?
@johnojeda3900
@johnojeda3900 Год назад
And the engine eat the shell. At least all 3 of them are still alive .
@tsuaririndoku
@tsuaririndoku Год назад
The screw still very safe and the engine is still in a working order. So I would call that the rounds fail to penetrate.
@sergiokv5711
@sergiokv5711 2 года назад
What happened to the little steps that the Strv has in his upper plate?
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
They're only present higher up, if you look at the image at the beginning of the video you can see where they start
@qc_ploum-zoum2
@qc_ploum-zoum2 2 года назад
I don’t know if thd spall shield would be enough to stop the debri. Still amazing that a tiny fence changed a full penetration to a almost bounce
@spyran5839
@spyran5839 2 года назад
@@axeavier And the entire engine compartment betwen the front and the crew.
@Mattebubben
@Mattebubben 2 года назад
As mentioned by others already between that penetration and the crew compartment you have the Gearbox, the Engines, and lastly a Spall shield separating the crew compartment from the engine compartment. So i don't think any of those fragments would penetrate the crew compartment.
@einar8019
@einar8019 2 года назад
@@Mattebubben the spall shield is 30mm(or 20 cant remember)
@1222dss
@1222dss 2 года назад
it doesn't matter tbh since the vehicle would be disabled anyway. Without engine it's just as useful as dead horse considering the fact this thing has no horizontal traverse whatsoever
@ZETH_27
@ZETH_27 2 года назад
@@einar8019 Yeah, WT (which few like to admit is their source), has the internal shield modelled wrong. IIRC it was 30mm yeah, but I'd have to look it up to be sure.
@TheFinanceHub_
@TheFinanceHub_ 2 года назад
Imagine they added a little bit of composite onto it
@Blei1986
@Blei1986 Год назад
OP AF
@Buugipopuu
@Buugipopuu 2 года назад
For these non-homogenous armour add-ons, what I always want to see is if they do better than their mass in basic steel plate.
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
Do you mean the bars or things on the plate? For the bars, 500bhn would be better than RHA for its weight but can only be achieved on thin plates. As for the tracks and other things, no, it is weaker than rha
@penclaw
@penclaw 2 года назад
what if the driver had pool flippers on?
@mehmettugrulakdeniz3840
@mehmettugrulakdeniz3840 2 года назад
What is this software or simulation could somebody tell me please
@warthunderworld9930
@warthunderworld9930 2 года назад
Funny from other scifi armor piercing simulations :D
@feynthefallen
@feynthefallen Год назад
Funny how the actual penetrating is done by the projectile's fins
@blackroseta2
@blackroseta2 2 года назад
fragmention inside of that is a sertain death.
@nukkinfuts6550
@nukkinfuts6550 Год назад
That front bar on Stridsvagn103 was classified as fuck back then and was originally intended to protect against HEAT ammunition not APFSDS etc
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
Correct, it was original equipment (and not added later) but only revealed and mounted in case of national mobilisation.
@Stripedbottom
@Stripedbottom 6 месяцев назад
Bar armour was not something that was fitted to only "some" tanks or some later models. It was secret equipment that would have been fitted to ALL Strv 103's in wartime.
@darrenbarry3628
@darrenbarry3628 2 года назад
my favoriate tank!
@Pro_yapper
@Pro_yapper Год назад
what app is this?
@erushi5503
@erushi5503 Год назад
That round will never reach the crew, since theres also the engine block and another 20-30mm plating before the nearest crew
@King.Leonidas
@King.Leonidas Год назад
Dead Soviet t62 column right there ;)
@KaihanDTuna
@KaihanDTuna 2 года назад
Swedish lowrider is really worked out
@jotabe1984
@jotabe1984 Год назад
fun (and bad) thing about extremely sloped armor is that despite how cool it is at a given distance, the effect is on the opposite when strikes come from an angle... so the tactical usage is in fact very restrained
@dsheshin
@dsheshin Год назад
A concept never tested in action in fact. The only planned purpose was ambushing other tanks being entrenched. Well a tank has zillions of others purposes besides that
@xendk
@xendk Год назад
@@dsheshin Test made in Sweden showed that it could respond and turn to engage a target as fast as a turret tank could only disadvantage was it could not move and fire but in 1956 that was not a problem
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
@@dsheshin "The only planned purpose was ambushing other tanks being entrenched" Completely wrong. It was intended to be used like any other tank, which in case of Sweden meant aggressive attacks against beachheads and air landings.
@acog_is_good1650
@acog_is_good1650 2 года назад
yesssss lets gooo
@a2b3c
@a2b3c Год назад
But if it doesnt hit one of the bars first (destabilizing), it will probably go right through..
@ksiaze997
@ksiaze997 2 года назад
Make the same symulation but with isu 152 HE
@bestamerica
@bestamerica Год назад
' how come this missile dont have a high powerful TNT then boom inside the tank
@raz4371
@raz4371 24 дня назад
US should adopt the design and improve on it and resurrect the tank destroyer this tank had so much potential
@topbanana.2627
@topbanana.2627 Год назад
so itll still render the tank destroyed, as it has no turret and relies on its engine for movement
@Frille512
@Frille512 Год назад
It has two engines, nevermind that the projectile has too little force left to damage one of them
@Harikuu
@Harikuu 2 года назад
Those links in comments are kinda weird I have to say. Don't click them
@XavierAway
@XavierAway Год назад
So basically if you’re the other side of that plate you’re dead in every case
@romaboo6218
@romaboo6218 2 года назад
You know the point is hitting the empty spots on the bars?
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
At 1000m its upto chance if it hits a bar or not
@_uncas_7485
@_uncas_7485 2 года назад
А фугасным снарядом?
@LyonPercival
@LyonPercival Год назад
MORE ANGLING due to the Strv cresting behind a hill 😉😉
@snb333
@snb333 2 года назад
what the programm?
@pavelsokol_off393
@pavelsokol_off393 Год назад
В картофельной игре это не пробил и рикошет от калибров ниже 120мм, но и выше порой тоже))
@Igzilee
@Igzilee Год назад
Imagine if this tank had just 10 more mm of armor at 50mm, it would probably stop almost every projectile it could face. It probably wouldn't be practical considering the added weight, but still...
@kirgan1000
@kirgan1000 Год назад
There was plane to make a next generaltion of the S-tank, Stv 2000, but it was to expensive so Sweden did buy Leopard 2 instead.
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
@@kirgan1000 Strv 2000 was a conventional (well, by Swedish standards) turreted layout, as it was well recognized that fully stabilized guns had made the strv 103 concept obsolete.
@kirgan1000
@kirgan1000 Год назад
@@BPo75 Yes you are right, think it was a very early starge of Strv 2000 that was a bigger and meaner Strv 103, and the late from of Strv 2000 did have a turret.
@mwxxl318
@mwxxl318 Год назад
Интересено, что показал бы натурный эксперимент....
@hungryhedgehog4201
@hungryhedgehog4201 2 года назад
that prob wouldn't even damage the engine
@Ramash440
@Ramash440 2 года назад
The eternal cheese wedge reigns supreme.
@Jothishayamantharaadawiya
@Jothishayamantharaadawiya 2 года назад
❤️👍👍👍
@user-en7qc9ef2s
@user-en7qc9ef2s 2 года назад
Ну молодцы авторы, а хули не пушечными ядрами?)) Чё то вы нас переоцениваете.
@shannon1267
@shannon1267 2 года назад
In warthunder, people in the 75mm Sherman when facing a tank they can’t pen, will aim for the turret hatch. The round hit the hatch and does a 90 degree turn downward and kills the crew. Can you simulate a 75mm AP round hitting a tiger turret hatch to simulate what would really happen
@dandas8726
@dandas8726 2 года назад
AP and APHE are two very different rounds.
@Andrey0I
@Andrey0I 2 года назад
Ну да, а если между прутиками зайдет? Тогда эффект будет фатальный уже для экипажа?
@VadimZ19
@VadimZ19 2 года назад
Эта решетка противокамулятивная. Для подкалибера эта решетка всё равно, что лист тетрадный против мечете. Подкалибер эту херню насквозь пройдёт. А если сзади будет стоять ещё одна такая шляпа, то и её прохерачит.
@BPo75
@BPo75 Год назад
«Веточки» предназначались только для защиты от кумулятивных зарядов орудий. Если броня пробита, то двигатели будут мешать перед 3-сантиметровой противоосколочной броней, отделяющей моторный отсек от экипажа.
@Andrey0I
@Andrey0I Год назад
@@BPo75 погугли толщину приведеной брони.
@cristsan4171
@cristsan4171 2 года назад
*N O P E N E T R A T I O N*
@patrykK1028
@patrykK1028 2 года назад
It's more likely to go between the bars than to hit them
@SYsimulations
@SYsimulations 2 года назад
Agreed
@TheCopperGrasshopper
@TheCopperGrasshopper 2 года назад
The point is to sheer off the trajectory of the explosive warhead so that the shape charge blast lens is off center (less/no penetration) or enough to malfunction detonation cap and entirely prevent the explosion. With these cages, the hope is for it to NOT hit directly, as that *would* give proper det and charge orientation (shape charge effective blast cone can be quite large, eg. "cope cages" vs Javelin top-down attack). The more you know ;) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fe-s9IiLPcM.html
@tsclly2377
@tsclly2377 2 года назад
a little 'rub' on the Swede S-tanky..
@patriotenfield3276
@patriotenfield3276 2 года назад
What if we add an ERA ? (or like The Swedes copied Soviet kontakt 1 ERA and made it better)
@DS-wl5pk
@DS-wl5pk 2 года назад
DO NOT CLICK THE SHADY LINKS IN THESE COMMENTS
@natte8470
@natte8470 2 года назад
even if it penetrated the enginen and transmition whould it it
@Sousleek
@Sousleek Год назад
I think the one of the engines would be damaged :(
@CMDRFandragon
@CMDRFandragon Год назад
and it still almost penetrated. Put anything even slightly more powerful and RIP.
@mmmyes9353
@mmmyes9353 2 года назад
Can i have the 3d model for both the apfsds and the armour?
Далее
A Tankers View of the Strv 103 | Swedish Armor
11:46
STRV 103 S Tank Documentary
7:08
Просмотров 876 тыс.
Inside the B-17 Ball Turret
18:59
Просмотров 1,8 млн
Did You Hull-Aim Today? (War  Thunder)
9:09
Просмотров 267 тыс.
M1A1 Abrams VS T-90M | Armour Piercing Simulation
1:31