Okay but why doesn't this comment have a single reply after 11k likes and 6 whole years

Tank was the codename for the project (i.e. like a water tank). I think they were developing "landships"

Zeek Kasai a flame trooper kit has been located in your area.as well

Zeek Kasai A Tank-Hunter kit is available near your location.

Zeek Kasai anti-vehicle

Zeek Kasai bf1 brought me here to

does bf1 really tells you this?

Or do, if you want to keep your shoulder.

Did not know that, thanks.

believe the answer is a shorter tripod and crouch behind it rather then stand, or put something VERY heavy on the base of the legs to hold it down

munkSWE88 evn a M2 tripod?

Ma dude, Answered my comment before I even made it.

Multi function weapon is always handy!

End them rightly, eh?

I don't think you can unscrew the pommel from this mighty weapon.

+Skallagrim can a T-Gewehr end him rightly?

I brought the Skallagrim fanbase to light here, and I'm not ashamed of it. But let's be real, we were already here, and we already knew the answer to this question.

Yes.

Forgotten Weapons 🔥

Robert Yadegari Nay, Forgotten Ammunitions ^_^

ironheadfm bullets dont age

XenoNova Gaming lol Bullets aren't indestructible. They can age and sure as hell they can deteriorate.

Very much so. In addition, the .50 BMG cartridge was developed form the 13.2mm TuF, using a bunch of captured T-Gewehrs.

Chris Gaming Hate to be this guy (not really, I love it), but it's anti materiel. Material and materiel are different.

Forgotten Weapons actually the 50 BMG was already in development and planning at this stage of the war but like the Thompson SMG was to late to enter service. However, the US did look at using the 13 tuf as the caliber but ruled it unsuitable for MG use so they stayed with the 12.7 round

John Browning Developed the .50BMG round as an Enlarged Version of the 30-06 for use in his M2 Browning Machine gun. but i cannot Argue that the design is based off the 13mm TUF round.

Locked Firing proof it with some links

even a bit of plywood would be sufficent.

my thought too. thinking water mellon or something similar.

Bloody thirsty buggers

yes

And make a sturdier frame so the armor doesn't flop down and foul the test result by changing its angle as it's hit.

it's bigger than the tank!

zum that's not what your mother said last night.

zum hahah yeeee, can never go wrong with a classic like that.

A weapon to surpass metalgear

That is what women when they see my dick.

The Stoned Videogame Nerd WW2??

i just dont understand why they had that extremely tall bipod, its like they wanted the gun to hit the dirt. Better it, then them i guess. haha. think i would have done it prone though.

well thats a good point. i see why they didnt want that, it just loos so awkward. wikipedia says its designed to be fired either prone or from the trench. im guessing the design specification dont matter a lot there anyways, most would probably choose a dislocated shoulder over fist fighting a tank, hehe.

The Stoned Videogame Nerd Nowhere near like getting hit by a sledge That shit will break your shoulder bones and then some Sure it hurts, but it was primarly meant as a trench weapon to prevent tanks from steaming through barbed wire it's easily worth the pain, as tanks were a bloody nightmare, as it could relatively safely cross no man's land...and in it's path it opens up a rather nasty gsp the enemy can use to slaughter you The round waa loaded with being shot in both formats in mind, so it was far less dangerous than orginally designed to be, but also not constantly putting the soldier firing out of comission for abit With some.proper spacing it was not a difficult task to fire multiple rounds before having to switch it to the other member of your team If both got wore out? Chances are you're dead, as infantry against tanks was never a winnimg proposition, and if you got through that kany rounds..there are.too many for you to fight and likely live

that rifle was made to be shot from the ground.

Not to mention spalling and rivets coming lose. those were the real killer.

and machine guns firing 500 rounds a minute would caused a lot of spalling on the inside of the tanks

Mryamaha R603 keep in mind, most of the power and velocity (the think that kills armor) is a result of the length of the barrel and the bullet picking up speed, not the round itself. Sure a heavy projectile hits hard, but velocity is what kills armor. Essentially, even though that round was origionaly designed for a machine gun, a machine gun wouldn't have the same raw performance (or as much as you could achieve with a large bore rifle) than what the rifle would do, not to mention the kick would be horrendous

Dwayne the 'Rock-Hard' Johnson The way I've heard that explained is that bullets are effective because of high kinetic energy, while wrecking balls are effective because of high momentum.

To help clarify, both a bullet and a construction wrecking ball do what they do because of kinetic energy. The energy they transfer to what they hit is based on their velocity and the mass of the object (the famous e=mc^2) , and how much energy is transferred is based on properties of the struck surface. A bullet generally has low mass and thus needs to be moving very fast to have enough energy to have much effect. Whereas a 1,000 kg weight would need far less movement to transfer the same amount of energy. Properties of the struck surface aside, it is indeed possible to have a bullet strike with the same force as a wrecking ball, the light weight bullet would just need to be moving incredibly fast. Dwayne is correct in the need for a correctly lengthed barrel to make full use of the powder charge behind the round. Firing the same form a gun with too short of a barrel would lead to loss of velocity because the expanding gasses in the barrel would be vented off to quickly. Keep in mind though, that a machine gun with a similarly lengthed barrel would have pretty similar performance to the rifle. It being a single shot weapon does not grant some additional bonus to the ballistics of the round.

It was the ricocheting fragments that destroyed the stand and allowed the plate to fall, not the initial impact.

Forgotten Weapons thanks for the reply and clarification!

Momentum is conserved in collisions but not energy: momentum is mv and energy is 1/2 mvv (Nonrelativistic approximation). Anyway - if we assume the bullet is about 0.1kg at 1000m/s, and the plate is 10kg (nice numbers for a ballpark guess), then the final velocity you would expect from the plate if all the momentum of the bullet was transferred to it would be 10m/s. The initial energy of the bullet would be 50,000J and the final energy of the plate would be 500J. That means that the energy loss in knocking the plate down would be only 1%. Okay so I know that plate was probably more like 25kg and the muzzle energy was probably more like 16,000J but the kind of scale will remain. This test will have involved about 99% of the energy that would've been imparted had the plate been attached to an actual tank. That 1% loss is probably equivalent to moving a couple feet further from the target. Also that's if you have all momentum imparted - any oblique ricochet or total penetration will leave some of the momentum in the bullet and result in even less energy being lost in the movement of the plate. Good question though.

12 years old and playing minecraft?

Germ .Fish Mate are you fucking serious? Like, no, genuinely how far up your arse is your head sitting? Jesus

It was the tripod. The weapon was never meant to fire from a standing position. The force simply knocked over the flimsy tripod. Notice how both of them were able to hold the rear of the weapon.

KFC´s Gravy oh look some other idiot grabbed it and charged to their immediate death

Khanbalyk it's the same idiot who gets himself killed as a takner and behemoth driver

KFC´s Gravy *Tankhunter Kit

Sebeki 2 stupid announcer says anti vehicle kit

KFC´s Gravy It's tank hunter kit pal

Why? It proved the rifle wouldn''t go through the tank lol.

At 45° it doesn't but otherwise it did. If you take a look at an Mark IV you'll see that it has plenty of space where it gets pened.

aka drivers port :D

?

Too soon :(

Trevor Leach Well it did, after firing too many rounds it's known to have broken collarbones, especcially when prone.

The Two Shot Gun. One for each shoulder.

Because it is big? It is just a single-shot Mauser albeit scaled up for a specific purpose.

Hey, it's unlikely that somebody will be this fucking crazy to do so, but this is CA, can you imagine shooting bullet-proof glass with this thing? Armored cars, bank deposits, shit, you can probably mess somebody up in the safety of their home within a safe range. I don't agree with the ban, but my argument would certainly not be rare ammunition and pistol grip.

Blyatiful Cyka it can peierce a TANK, imagine criminals using it against cop cars , its a wonder its banned lol

Yeah maybe not the number one choice for gang warfare...

Just imagine a gangster trying to hold this thing sideways...

Yeah Cali, there are plenty of legitimate uses for Anti-Tank rifles in civilian life. I don't care that this could potentially penetrate armoured police vehicles, what about all those heavily armoured deer that I need to hunt?

Piotr Sulej 60° doubles effective armor thicknes, 45° is only multiple of 1.414.

ah true, but still 1/2 the force.

the initial impact force at the angle deflects bullet even more, so effective angle is even sharper than 45 degrees

it doesnt double thinkness though, its increases it by a factor of 1.41 (square root of 2)

ah root, not roof, stupid me :P

Yet it still worked.

Yes.

This particular AT rifle was not really expected to be used directly flat on the ground but rather perched on the edge of a trench or foxhole or crater. The shooter would thus be crouching or standing behind the gun, rather than in-line with it. The tripod thus better reflects how the weapon would have normally been wielded. AT rifles shooting flat on the ground regularly was more of 1920s thing. Shooting this gun flat on the ground is possible but only at great risk of injury, especially when you are expected to have to put 20 rounds into a tank before it quits.

And they were to lazy to dig a trench for testing purposes ;)

Its a typical rifle to be fired from the hip - semiautomatic.....^^

Collarbones feel better when they're not fractured

Douglas Bader You shouldnt be, France is still digging up a few thousand unexploded artillery shells a year in their woods.

You could replicate it with the right information, but having original ammo is amazing given it wasn't that common.

MWAHAHA FUCK YOUUUUU *BOOM* holy shit

gg bird

Spartan Pillow you would see nothing but a pile of feathers falling. Not even a corpse. Just 100 small pieces of meat

There wouldn't be bird left

in soviet russia, birds shoot with these

Nick Craik ya lol

Nick Craik that how they shot it back then

lol clarkson

And apparently, it's completely silent as well.

lol

Hello future how is your day?

Go play BF1.

That's not what this weapon was designed for.

Dudio What are you talking about?

Dudio And what the f*** is a "shrapnel cloud"?

BILLZ 1981 true...

h0lly shiz, and i thought it was an extra gun perk? i used it on an infantry at close range head on in the Chest. .. now i see its an anti tank rifle... this whole time.... i wasted my time..

Greedy Baron no they had it coming to them 😂😂😂

but i feel awful for the misery i caused to the widows i created. all they got back is a coffin filled with mince and their national flag at the ceremony. my sins are non-redeemable, i will uninstall Battlefield 1 in this case.

Nice one here

Sjambok1 He came to protect our sacred right to arm bears!

Sjambok1 and Satan

In that case the tank would have stopped a nuke since it's britsh.

Mors Letum how you work that one out then

Coitus Ergo Sum While Ian and Karl actually demonstrate the effects of a T Gewehr on armor in 7 minutes, lindy would have still been giving his intro telling us about his childhood of making model british tanks, then proceed to ramble on for another half hour. (I just watched a 20 minute video of lindybeige explaining what a muzzle break does lol) Still a fan, dont kill me

His salt was that people were saying Brit soldiers called the MG34 Spandau, not the MG42. Because the 34 was manufactured in the Spandau plant and the 42 was made all over the country and whatnot. Like you can differentiate between both when they're slinging lead at you. Americans called them both "Buzzsaw". In the end of the first video, he reiterates the question: "Was the Bren better than the Spandau? NO *Outro plays*"

In what way was he proven wrong?

You cant kill tanks.

MAsterOplayer no but you can kill the crew inside that was the whole point of that rifle

Aser15€ The actual tank they're talking about in this video, the Landship its called in BF, theres a variant of it that has T Ghewehr's in the front and back instead of a cannon. You can snipe tanks with a tank haha

Can kill tanks, hit the engine, or a fuel pipe.

thank you gun jesus

hello darkness my old friend ....... I've come to talk with you again......

aah the legendary spef

spef Dat profile picture tho

ahahaha fucking picture lol

Talk about fans

You know Ian has reached the big leagues when he has his own stalker, lol!

because when using a bipod your laying down and all the energy is going straight into your shoulder with no ability to bend to the recoil. in other words shooting from a bipod hurts like a bitch for something that big (shoot a bois AT rifle or a 50bmg while laying down and you will know what i mean) and finding a bipod to work for such an old gun is really difficult. would have been better if he used a tall wooden panel as a fourth support to stop him from dropping the gun.

No... if you are being hurt by recoil YOU are a bitch. The original comment was correct, he should have used a bipod. Looked like idiots dropping it twice... And whoever lent you that rifle will think twice about letting you borrow another after that.

Considering the fact that they were designed to be shot prone, it will make a massive bruise.

Alpha Adhito lelelelelellellelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelel

Alpha Adhito Well the reason because of that is if he were to be proning his shoulder would just rip

zont?

"Let 'er rip!" "It sure does."

The owner was the first guy shooting the rifle.

Oh! Ok! Why you guys didn't use a more stable thing? Anyway, nice video!

We didn't anticipate that it would collapse like that, and once we were there it was too late to change anything.

Forgotten Weapons I don't think the owner will shoot that rifle again in a veeeery long time! LOL! Question... Value of that rifle?

CreepingDeath $6500

Didn't want to abuse my shoulder.

winstin win He would break or badly bruise his shoulders

They fixed it. Someone in comments said it happened because video was listed as educational. 3 weeks ago it was all little kid stuff, a bit creepy

I've got a lot of Forgotten weapons, some Vickers tactical, and then random military/tank videos in the clickbait fashion "this is what China are scared of"... yeah unlikely. Oh and a single World of Tanks "funny moments" to top it all off. I almost watched it, then saw the video creator was "JustForLolzFYI". With a name like that I expect nothing more than cancer. Still, the suggestion that China are scared of some random gun mid way through development wins the cancer award. China, a country not at war with USA and with a military approximately equal in power to that of Spain. If they were scared of anything regarding the American military I'd imagine they'd be scared of the fact that USA has about the same power as the next 5 most powerful nations in the world combined (including UK, France, Russia, and Israel combined) rather than some half developed demonstrator gun in the age of missiles and drones. But once again, China aren't at war with USA so the entire argument is moot anyway. And yes they have a lot of soldiers, but even in WW2 the pure infantry count meant absolutely nothing as Russia can testify. Wars are won and lost by the Air Force these days.

I did NOT expect you to look the way you do having just read all that. I'm sure I'm not alone, that's a compliment btw.

Jerwmy Julian yeah when he was 20

Remenber: the Difference between science, and messing around is writing it down.

The vegan version

Jerwmy Julian ha ha

It fell over because the splash after impact ripped the wooden supports apart, Ian already explained this in another comment.

CRQ5508 Supported or unsupported makes no difference. The energy transfer happens so quickly. If you take a heavy door, like on a bank vault, and push it closed, the more energy you push it with, the harder it will slam shut. If you punch it, however, you're going to apply more energy but the door will move very little, if at all. In the case of the armour plate, if the projectile cannot penetrate, only then will it use all its energy in more of a push. It all happens in milliseconds though and the end result is the same. There's a couple videos I've seen floating around KZfaq that have done supported vs unsupported penetration tests, and the result is always that they're the same.

+AusiKifaru27 very interesting, thanks! I was wondering the same thing and this answers that question.