Prior to a Rock Drill with the Division Commander I was walking some younger troops through it. Talking them through the maneuvers I said "the tank will go to this position and the tank will go bang!, then move to this position and the tank will go bang! I didn't know the Division Commander was walking behind me when he tapped me on the shoulder and told me I had it all wrong. He said, "Sergeant the tank will move to this position and the tank will go BOOM!" Two lessons learned that day. Tanks go BOOM not bang and when your troops seem unusually attentive check your six.
@@therogueadmiral only the sheman would roar, the M1 howls and post Vietnam war IFVs like the Bradley are generally far quieter than they have any right to be for their size... especially from the front! (Personal experience of beeing chased down by CV9040s and a CV90 ARV on several occations.... on foot. ) You feel them through the ground long before you hear them, and you can't ident the direction they come from by the feeling alone...
@@brianreddeman951 It is very unprofessional if the presentation is followed with models or pictures pointed with a finger. BTW. Polish/Czech APC was called SKOT. While "S" stands for "Sredni" - a medium sized, it was one of the biggest if not the biggest APC of its time. OT-64 was a Czech name for it but both were in use in two countries. SKOT was was a very modern vehicle in the middle of '70s. Almost all (weak armor, weakly armed)of today's designing standards SKOT filled 50 years ago. Apart from the crew of 2 or 3 men, SKOT was able to take 10 soldiers onboard.
That bit about the compensation for the fin stabilized rounds was really interesting. I never really thought about it, so I would have answered wrong. After hearing you explain it, it makes all the sense in the world. That was super cool, thank you. I really enjoyed that, along with everything else.
A similar thing happens with an RPG, specifically with the PG-7V rocket, in that it ends up turning _into_ the wind. I think the mechanism is a little different, since there aren't really any substantial fins on the rocket I think it might have something to do with a lift force being produced when the air moves sideways across the round body. It tends to make an already inaccurate weapon even worse.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug rpg rounds do have fins which extend once the rocket leaves the barrel, they run a substantial length of the narrow rocket part, thus very highly affected by wind.
It really doesn't make sense though, because there is no forward acceleration on the round once it leaves the gun tube. The round is not a rocket. Therefore, any yaw of the round should not have an effect of the direction of the velocity of the round, all forward force has already been applied. This phenomenon only makes sense when the projectile still has forward acceleration after being affected by the wind, such as an RPG rocket. I wonder if there is more to this explanation.
@@hjalmar4565 Maybe think about the physics before just saying I'm wrong. Ignoring air resistance, rotating an object while its traveling with 0 acceleration will not result in a change in the direction that object is traveling. So there has to be some other force acting on these shells other than what the Chieftain stated, or perhaps he got it wrong. No one is 100% right 100% of the time.
One thing to keep in mind about muzzle brakes is that they are somewhat dependent on the mass of gas relative to the mass of the bullet. Putting a brake on a .38 Special (relatively small powder charge, low pressure, big bullet, especially in the original 200grain loading) would make little difference in recoil. Putting a brake on a 5.56x45 with the 55grain loading makes a much bigger difference because there's much more mass of gas (at higher pressure) to operate against the brake.
Only to receive concussions from the main gun being fired. Other than canister, the Abrams doesn't have a low pressure round. I think I heard something about the new multi fuse round being less terrible. You'd think after nearly a decade of insurgent warfare, we'd make some minor changes to actually make tanks useful.
Can you give us a watered down, wont get in trouble with the Army version of how armored operations work? How you go about going outside to do tank stuff, how doing tank stuff works, maintenance, resupply, going back for the next guys to go out and do tank stuff, etc. Aircraft get a mission, sortie, and then come home, but ships are out for months at a time doing things. I imagine tank stuff is somewhere in between the two?
"Aircraft get a mission, sortie, and then come home, but ships are out for months at a time doing things." At one point the Air Force wanted nuclear-powered bombers that would orbit the North Atlantic for weeks on end. I imagine serving on one of those would be like a submarine crew, except with windows, but all you see is clouds and the ocean surface.
Drivers have it best far as where to sleep ( now days that is) in a Bradley you just pull a lever and the back rest drops . Use whatever to get it at the angle you want and sleep. To drive all you do is sit up, pull up the backrest , done. Good vid.
Grandpa remembers saving French soldiers with OT-64 who were stuck in some fire engagement in Kosovo (KFOR mission). There was a narrow, muddy road. Driver had to back up several hundred metres, because the risk getting stuck/fired at when turning around was high. They came in, loaded Frenchies and got away.
That is obviously larger than a 20mm. Looks like a 30mm. A 20mm isnt that much bigger than a .50, and usually has a larger length/width ratio. That and the standard 20mm case in the west is 20x110mm which has a much longer case relative to the round. That thing is way too short and thick, and it has almost no neck.
That's a nice and educational way to show off your models :) thanks for another great vid. I agree - building scale models is a fun way to get more familiar with the different parts of a tank. I highly appreciate companies like Tamiya who take the time to label the parts in the construction manual. It's also a good excuse for me to look up both technical drawings and photos of the tank to make sure that all the details are there, and do a bit of research on the history of the vehicle and the experience of its crew. I always make it a point t learn something about the tank and its crews whenever I finish a model.
M1 bustle = Female cod-piece, Best line ever! That was hysterically brilliant. ~_^ As a retired SFC senior service school instructor I taught M1 Turret/Fire Control repair DS/GS at Vilseck, Germany 7th Army Training Command and USAOC&S APG Maryland. It never gets easier trying to explain the basics, great video.
Thank you very much. I found that genuinely fascinating. The bit about thermal shielding on the gun and how a bore evacuator works I found particularly interesting.
Love the old school knowledge drop just using the models for illustrative purposes. Definitely worth the watch for the tip that the wind pushes the finned sabot round up wind. Very cool!
I think that we need at least one video showing off The Chieftain's new house, or at least his office. It could be called "Inside the Chieftain's lair". We also need an Inside the Chieftain's Hatch video of your desk at your NG job. It's rare that people actually get to see the inner workings of an actual tactical military desk. :D
Probably the most common question I get asked about tanks is how do you get power from the hull to the turret since the turret spins. I know they use a variation of a slip ring but explaing about powered rails and brushes tends to make peoples eyes cross. Maybe you could do a video and explain it better.
The Tank museum at Bovinton recent series "the Matilda Diaries" shows a teardown of the turret rotary joint with combined electrical & hydraulic layers, in the turret electrical systems video with clear explainer and excellent video work. A good, simple 1938 design example that's easily comprehensible. Probably better than nick could, due to pro editing team and their resources on hand. His commentary on the video with David Fletcher would be great tho, especially if linked to his own Matilda review some time ago.🙂
Chieftain - many thanks for addressing that question I put to you about the front / rear location of the drive sprocket over Christmas. I kept seeing vehicles with front sprockets during your quick museum tours and it was driving me nuts why they would do that from an engineering standpoint!
there are various reasons, but originally it was mostly because the transmission needs to be where the drive wheels are, and so do the steering brakes and/or differential. It is difficult to run clutch and shift and brake linkages all the way from the front to the back (part of why T-34 has terrible shifting and clutch feel). This is still a problem in cars with rear transaxles, and it is rare for these cars to have shift and clutch feel as good as conventional cars. The benefits outweigh this. When tanks went to automatic transmissions, hyrdaulic systems improved, and control diffs took over a lot of duties from the brakes, so it became much easier to put the drive system in the rear, so most tanks and AFVs do now.
Good stuff, thank you. "Bore evacuator" definitely sounds more technical than what I've always called it: "that weird tumor thing in the middle of the barrel"
I was on first-gen Bradleys which were supposedly amphibious (we never tried), so they had a huge trimvane on the glacis. When it was fully extended as it would be to install the 25mm barrel or PMCS the powerpack it made a nice place to sleep, almost like a Lazy Boy recliner. Not quite as nice as the various spots on a 113, but good enough.
Not a a"bullet" it is a cannon round. There is no bullet in that object he is holding. A bullet is a solid projectile fired by small arms. It is the part of a cartridge that actually leaves the gun to fly to the target. A cartridge or 'round' is a bullet and propellant case and primer assembled in a unit (what ignorant people and the media call a "bullet"). That is a 30mm cannon cartridge, with a shell instead of a bullet, casing and primer. No bullets involved.
24:30 also having the engine at the front means that anything that does make it thru the Armour at the front still has to get thru an engine block before it hurts you not great for the engine tho... :P
I understood it immediately because model rockets behave identically, they always turn into the wind when you launch them, and then drift with the wind when the high-drag recovery device deploys (that's the parachute, streamer ribbon, helicopter blades, or whatever else makes the rocket not come down at high speed)
As a note, the hot trend in 1:35 military vehicles is 1000+ piece kits with FULL interior. That is, crew compartment, drive, engine, ammo, everything. So far I've seen Panther, JagdPanther, Tiger, T34, T60, M3 Lee/Grant, SU-122, SU-85, and probably others. Not for the faint of heart.
I can deal with that. It's the 500-piece track links which I find are over the top. Sorry, but I don't need to have each individual end connector and center guide modelled. If I wanted it, I'd buy aftermarket.
I vaguely remember bore sighting the M109 back in my Army Guard days. Later I learned to color inside the lines, went active duty Air Force and flushed most of that artillery stuff out of my noggin'.
Awesome thank you for great video. I wish you would elaborate a little more on advantages vs disadvantages of FWD("Front Wheel Drive" rear engine aka Renault 17 configuration) tanks vs RWD pluses and minuses. As for the future video there is a lots of debates of having turret basket vs not, as well as when "Gunner TC override" feature happen(I would think end of WWII) an inside on those subjects would be great. BTW, love that "Black Knight" on the shelf! And thank you, once again.
Muzzle reference sensor is not the only radioactive part of the tank....the depleted uranium plates they added to the Chobham armor are also radioactive (mildly).
@Mathieu Morin Depleted just means that almost all the fissionable U-235 has been processed out. However, it still emits alpha radiation; which can be blocked by a sheet of A4 letter paper.
Enjoyable, for sight/gun alignment would you consider similarly detailing say Sherman and Pershing. Just read 740 tank battalions with mixed 76mm and 75mm Sherman after action report 1945, very sobering. “9th April 1945 At G178708 Lt. Loopey (3rd Plat) destroyed two 70-ton Jadtiger tanks w/128mm guns. At ,elschen Ennest the Pl4,t set up road blocks and remained for the night”. In February 1945 they claimed a Tiger 1 confirmed by the infantry support. Worth a read it does appear they alone destroyed 3 tiger vehicles.
It is indeed the OT-64, more precisely the OT-64 SKOT with SKOT being either Střední Kolový Obrněný Transportér or Średni Kołowy Opancerzony Transporter, which means medium wheeled armoured transporter.
Chieftain, I really enjoyed this. My fascination with enclosed tracked vehicles, not just tanks, is vision and the drive train (suspension, steering, and engine cooling mainly). I have encountered the term "panoramic periscope" but I do not really understand what the term means. I am fascinated by the different steering technologies used, the various suspension systems used at different times by different countries, and just what constitutes "weak" vs "strong" track. I hope future lectures might get into some of these details?
Thanks love your work. Be really good to hear you speak about basic TTPs, e.g. commanders appreciation, fire orders, wine glassing/jockeying ( not sure about the US nomenclature for this stuff but guessing you’ll get what I mean) and the like I.e. the basic low level, stuff the crew does to get the tank into favourable fre positions and steel on target.
My father was a Gvozdika driver. According to him in the winter they would shut off as much as they could, keep the radiator on and snuggle up like worms in their positions and laugh at the infantry outside. Similar story with the BMP-23 just that you could lie down and sleep in the relatively spacious "passenger" compartment.
@John Fulghieri-- DU is a lot less radioactive than NU, but U235 accounts for only a very small fraction of the radioactivity of natural uranium. The rest comes about equally from the U238 and its decay product, U234. The latter gets swept out during the enrichment process, along with the U235.
Donald Palmrose is correct. Also found in an M1 Abrams is : Thorium oxide in combustor liner in the turbine engine. DU (Depleted Uranium) ammo M829 series DU APFSDS-T. DU in the armor of M1A1 "Heavies" and M1A2 , identified with a U at the end of the serial number. A thermal imaging window "may" contain thorium- not sure if this is specific to an Abrams though. Self-luminescent sights, dials gauges probably contain radioactive material. Source: Radiological Sources of Potential Exposure and/or Contamination TG-238 U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine 10 December, 1999
I had a friend in the motor pool - did Humvees over in Iraq. If they had an oil leak, they'd take one of the engine/drivetrain crates from the stack to the ceiling and replace the whole thing. Which was faster than fooling around with changing a valve cover gasket.
It’s interesting to think how long it took to get some design rules down like: put the engine in its own compartment, put ammo in its own compartment, evacuate the smoke from gun after firing, thermally balance the gun, etc etc.
remember that many of these issues only got solved when they became a problem. before ww2 most tank guns were small and did not produce a lot of propellent smoke and that even in ww2 most tank engagements were at short ranges.
Did I just hear a Ballistic Meteorology class in the middle of the video? I did! And I just thought the Red Legs was only ones who knew that. I guess tankers learned it too! Man I miss Field Artillery.
Heh! I did my compulsory service training as a radio specialist in a 120mm mortar platoon of a mechanised batallion, and if there is one unit especially dependant on accurate meterology, it's the batallion level heavy mortars...
'Glacis' is from military engineering and pronounced 'gla-see'. Pronounced thus being a French word. BTW sabot is French for shoe (made of wood) and is pronounced 'sabb-oh' not 'say-boh'. Thus you get 'sabotage' from cross French workers protesting by throwing their wooden shoes into their machinery. Infantry don't like muzzle brakes or blast deflectors on 'friendly' tanks as the blast gets directed to do unpleasant things to the PBI either directly with blast or by bouncing the local scenery off them. There are few pecetime character building moments to match approaching a stationary 70 ton mobile thing which can instantly begin moving at you backwards and does not know you are there until you have actually opened and licked up the exterior telephone and got the warm dry sleepy/busy inhabitants to acknowledge they have friendly human almost touching their tracks.
5:53 There's also like hyropenumatic (challenger MBT), hydrospring (Merkava), and like beville-washer type suspension (E-50, and the Swiss Panzer 58 [maybe the Panzer 61 too?] )
There's a misunderstanding of "muzzle break" and "muzzle brake" and they're two different things. For example the D30 soviet has come with both, the earlier towed version had a "brake" which used a series of flutes to spray the muzzle flash back and to the sides and the export version had a brake version that directed a large proportion of the gasses simply TO the sides to reduce the length of the plume. In the case of artillery you want as little as possible of the BRIGHT FLAMING GASES shooting high into the air with each shot, a device that peels these gasses off is a *break* and will have as broad an opening on each side as possible with as small a final path hole as can be gotten away with. Muzzle brakes on the other hand are designed to keep the high velocity flow of gasses but turn and deflect them backwards, as seen on guns like the M230 30mm chain gun. The confusion is fun and simple. Same sound different words and different purposes. So people use the term "flash hider" instead for muzzle breaks. They don't actually hide the flash very well on small arms but they DO keep it from being a big long spew from a ball of light. Since the two purposes are often needed on larger caliber weapons we result with a great deal of confusion. But the true flash hiders are the cones on weapons like a Bofors 40mm or a DP28.
Is the aim off to compensate for weather cocking intended to adjust the where the round strikes or to adjust the angle at which the round strikes the target? I don't expect anything but a hurricane is going to move the impact point much at the velocities and flight times these things have but I think maybe a slight off angle may affect penetration.
Yeah those sensors on the Panzerhaubitze are measuring the velocity of the rounds, a way of knowing if the rounds will hit short or far. That measurement is called "v0" in swedish, no idea if its the same in english or not. // Soldier in the Swedish artillery.
Chieftain! I love your videos and really enjoyed meeting you a few years ago at a wargaming event. Is there any chance you will be doing a short (or even long!) video on the Italian tank designs of interest and WWII?
