And not hearing someone say “hit like and subscribe”

That is entirely KZfaq‘s fault. Supposedly they raised the video time limit to 10 minutes before you get certain benefits from ads. So now people waste your time for eight minutes before showing what you wanted to see

@@dpt300 The 10 minute requirement has existed for over a decade. Only recently did they bump it down to 8 minutes because everyone was putting filler in their videos to hit 10 minutes. Now though, it appears that youtube has taken on full control and just puts ads on videos however they want, giving creators no choice.

If I start a video, and it has a length of something like 10:01 I hit the X in the corner immediately. AI computer generated voice? Bail. Idiot shouting something at the video beginning like "WHATS UP GUYS" - Bail. Also, adblock.

Yea this video was created before people realized you had to game the Algorithm for attention/profit 😂

Retired Canadian Tank CC here. It is still used for 2 reasons 1 coms die 2 Bellowing out your drills ensures an automatic response to a familiar command under stress. It freaks out some international exchanges. Particularly how we used IC {intercom} for everything else in the vehicle calmly and with clarity, up until the gunner or CC spots a target. It can be a bit jarring, and most of us are half deaf so I guess 3 reasons.

DishwashermannedandreadySAH! DishwashersecuredSAH!

Iì

It's called a 'drill' for reason! You practice and practice until you get it 100% right. That moment when the commander gives a fire order? The whole crew act as one. Everything works as per training because it's 'drilled into you' you don't actually think... you react. After that initial call...SABOT TANK ON! you literally have seconds before the enemy shoots back. I could load 10 rounds of 120mm split ammo with my eyes shut because we practiced so much and the orders were screamed to motivate you above the noise of everything else. Driver full reverse! Sabot tank on. fuck me! Gunner see it? ON! right range? 1200m , driver left stick! fucking hell! When it all happens that crew work as a perfect honed instrument. They work in unison as a perfect unit. If you'd ever been a crewman you'd understand.

@@davepritchard283 Nowadays I bet the tanks could be made unmanned and 100% automatic. They take care of each others at the war field without any human lives lost. Or someone remote controls them just from home with HOTAS joystick.

LMAO, I was listening to Tool while this was running and only became aware of the soft, left ear narration after the song was over. Very polite of them not to ruin my listening experience while showing some cool shit

Ah yea the comfy gunners seat!

ok now this is odd, im on phone, and when i full screened it, it was basically muted with my bottom speaker and extremely muffled out of my top speaker

Tell em twin tell em🗣️

🤣🤣🤣

That was a layer of cobham armour under the surface layer of conventional steel there was no hole to fill no penertration

Allegedly composites of some type. The latest Dorchester armour is allegedly superior still....

It's not puss?

​@@Brian-om2hhAT rounds keep improving too

It is a composite made up of several layers of pizza sandwiched between heat treated steel.

No actual explosive filler in the projectile of the APDS round. Just a big sharp hunk of metal going really fast.

@@MockinGlobes Yep, but still, that impact was very underwhelming. I made soft objects hit porcelan with a more impressive impact sound.

They filmed Superman on Chobham clump back in the late 70's. Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran, all in very thin outfits worn in very cold conditions. I was there the day were filimg the "town" getting blown up. They had to do a few retakes due to horseriding in the distance (they rode past some buildings in the distance, and that made them look like 20-30 foot giants! Amazing how they made it look like a summers day in the movie! (It was brass monkey weather!)

You're saying you wouldn't keep this classified doc between your toilet and shower in your bathroom like at Mara Lago?

@@burtvhulberthyhbn7583 I'm sorry, what? Could you please rephrase.

​@@Wabbit_Huntayou seriously don't want to know what we do to make it look overcast on a bright sunny day. Greta would be very unhappy!

@@justandy333 ? were you even there? It was a cold October day when I was there watching the destroy the set. So much so that the film crew were all wrapped up, as were my brother and there was no sun at all on the day we were there. So tell me how heavy clouds and overcast weather that had drizzle in the air be made to look like a summers day then?

It's very naughty of you to reveal the composition of this armour ...now we're going to have to change it for armour made from wagon wheels ....

Dont leak it on the warthunder forums

Well the earliest variants of the armor package seem to have been at least partially declassified. Which is not surprising considering any foreign intelligence agency that can’t source the details of a 60+ year old armor package doesn’t deserve to be called an intelligence agency.

Can u give me the blue print for educational use🙄and iam playing warthunder btw

The original M1 Abrams armor could probably be declassified without posing any risk. Alot has changed in 45 years in Ceramic engineering, and material science as a whole. Idk tho, ask the DOD nicely enough, and maybe they will..

below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2017/01/early-m1-abrams-composite-armor.html

They don’t want people to see the actual armour and so fill it in then reveal the damage.

Still could've had fans to blow the smoke away from the camera. Guess the British state media propaganda just wasnt that smart.

@@Somerandofurrythat’s not filled in it’s part of the armor

@@Somerandofurry its to actually hide the fact from the stupid people into believing any of this crap

The V-Joke

"My dog has no nose..."

apds in warthunder is pain, as a british main i wonder if playing britain is worth it if im just gonna get "shell shattered" at the worst times.

@@Dammy_ytuk in war thunder is very bad as gaijin hates it Russians always hate the uk

@@Dammy_yt British shells in warthunder are trash, as are the tanks, planes and ships. Not because they are historically and factually represented by the game but because the game is all about propagandising Russian gear, the well known "Russian Bias" in the game. Which naturally those with less skill deny as they get many kills in their Russian tanks, ships, planes but then suck balls when in British tanks, ships and planes. And yet somehow it is a country mile better than world of tanks, world of warships. Which granted is not saying much but still. If they could just get past their Russian jingoism it would be a much better game for all.

@@TheWarforgedyou say all this without realising how OP the challenger 2 and 3 is. The Chally 3 in war thunder can actually penetrate ANY glacis with its stock shells. Including it’s own, but nothing can pen it. It can pen the abrams, T-90. Doesn’t matter it’ll go through at any angle. They’re horrible to fight against in top tier to the point people actually avoid fighting it.

you watch too much Michael bay shit

Well, monty python never had the option to use CG. They used real explosives, and more often than not real explosives aren't nearly as cinematic as hollywood would have you believe

‼WHAT⁉ 🪖🙃

They should measure the decibels right behind the plate. That would be interesting to know.

It probably varies projectile to projectile and whether it penetrates or not, but I've heard that tanks hit with shots that ricochet end up making the tank sound like a gigantic bell.

@@I_Stole_A_BTR-80 I'm a blacksmith , mis-strikes and glancing blows are often worse than a direct hammer strike on the anvil.

You do know tank crew wear headsets that block loud sounds?

He was probably thinking it !

"You never penetrate anymore!"

At 1450m/second it’s virtually impossible to miss with Apds The apfsds is 1540m/second Hesh is 850m/second if my memory serves me right How do I know Well It’s not from watching KZfaq put it that way. The chemical energy rounds ie Hesh , smoke etc are usually kept for bunkers and other mbt targets They are very useful Especially shake and bake ie smoke, kinetic ie apfsds will just go straight through a line of t64 types and continue out the back No tank made will survive apfsds and given the muzzle velocity it’s effectively a 120mm sniper rifle. The round itself is inert. A DU dart At 1540 m/second Bye bye target

1) That’s just their training 2) They want to make sure they hit it in a certain place like not on the edge or test stand

yes to both, why change what works

Aye, Laddie.

1st one probably

It is a chemical semi-fluid that absorbs fragments when hit at kinetic speeds. It fails under real-world conditions.

Hide. We don't want secrets getting out.

Probably triggering the shaped charge warheads which were used as well as the tank rounds?

Top secret and editing skills

the shape charges were placed not fired

I wondered whether it was part of the armour, or expanding foam to obscure the layers. It seemed too smooth and not charred at all.

It's to hide the structure of the plate steel

Custard

You are closer than you think

I believe its to stop you seeing what's inside.

Pus.

@@ColinWatters So they added that afterwards.... Ah. 😸

Mozarella

It's ballistic goo.

We do

@@Ccaraaa But the one in warthunder looks nothing like the real one, junk model.

@@Ccaraaa we don't have that one that one has add-on side armour and the in game one doesn't i'm pretty sure this is the Chieftain mk 11 and in game we have the mk 10

If it's on your right then your audio is swapped.

ah thats why the challenger 1 was so light!

Remember, it blew right through the original plate. To stop HEAT, you might need double the thickness of RHA they used to protect from that HEAT, so the weight savings of composites do end up being significant. It's hard to tell the thickness of that plate, but it looks to be around 300-400mm.

the whole point is that composite armors are more weight efficient than steel. drivetrain and suspension components (and roads and bridges) can only carry so much weight.

You didn't watch the first minute of the video? or maybe you did, but just didn't listen.

@@ruzziasht349 There is more that goes into weight of armour than simply protection/kg for a test piece, he's right in that things like armour thickness/volume (and how the vehicle is armoured) absolutely have other effects on vehicle weight. Consider conventional MBT of the 60s like Chieftain, T-62, Leopard or Patton, whether it's cast or welded or a combination of the 2, the armour forms the structure of the tank, they're essentially monocoques made of relatively thin and well agled steel. Tanks, at least western tanks, protected by composites have their armour in removable packs which attach onto the outside of a hull. The armour itself isn't structural, so you pay a weight penalty for the hull plus armour packs. Incidentally, this is another reason why Soviet tanks are a lot lighter than western tanks, their composites are built into the hull, it makes the tank lighter but harder to repair or upgrade. The other thing about these thick, externally mounted composite packs is they require a lot of overlap to be effective as they don't like being hit on the side of the packs. You need to overlap steel armour too, but if the composites are 4x thicker you will require 4x the overlap that again, adds more weight. Soviet laminate hull armours do tend to be a bit thinner, requiring less overlap, but they require being heavily angled which creates volumetric problems for the tank, on top of them already being cramped machines. The more advanced composites like Chobham don't require such extreme angling but they also don't lend themselves to being made into structural components of the hull. Overall, you can make a better protected vehicle for the same weight, using composites, but the advantage isn't quite as much as a simple test panel on a range, as it is when you actually have to make a practical vehicle with a protected 3D volume inside.

Utter bollox I did it for six years Stick to made up computer games

No they used underpowered, under weight "Demonstration" projectiles. It was a "Sales Pitch" Video.😮

Have you ever actually served on a tank crew? I think not

@@jameslynch7826 😆 Have you ever served in US Postal Service? If not then you know nothing about addresses and packages 🤣😂Why on earth did you post your zero comment? People understand basics of physics even without "serving in tank corps". Next time consider before hitting the Enter.

All British tanks have since the cold war. Even the Challenger 2. Its called 2 peice ammo and prevents cooks offs if theres a fire since the bag charge is placed in a wet stowage bin surrounded by water.

@@bootlegpete7984 Aha nice!

The bag disintegrates when fired and so actually improves the tanks rate of fire. The 105mm gun it replaced had a huge brass case that would be ejected into the turret. The 105mm gun could be loaded just as fast but eventually they'd have to stop shooting to clear the casings away from the gun. Usually this is after about 5 shots. The casings would either be placed back into the ammo racks or thrown overboard. On the Centurion and Leopard 1 tanks you can see a hatch on the left side of the turret, that's for the loader to toss spent shells out of. Because the bag in the 120mm gun disintegrates on firing, the loader doesn't have to clean up after shooting and so they can continue to fire full speed until there's nothing left to shoot at.

@@fyrep0w3r Interesting. I'm familiar somewhat with that system for the Iowa Class American battleships with the 16 inch guns. Same system, bags of powder charges and separate projectiles. I didn't expect that system could be useful on a smaller scale for a tank or fighting vehicle.

been like that from day one @@Jazzman-bj9fq

Charlie

It's actually not that loud when you're in the turret.

WHAT?

Mate there’s no use saying that to these computer games idiots who have never even spent a month on tanks They get their inaccurate opinions from pc games.

I have never loaded with any type of eardefenders The noise inside the turret is fine And hatches open for compression reasons Loading is a fast workout so you strip down And gloves are definitely not permitted They prevent you feeling the bag charge And or clearing stoppages

The only tanks to use this armor are the British Challengers and American Abrams. That being said, the armor on the bottom and top of the tanks are thin so they're still vulnerable to AT mines and drone attacks. This technology was great in desert storm. The T72's 125 apds rounds would simply disintegrate on impact with Abrams tanks. But yeah, the concept of the MBT being used as a break through weapon is something of the past.

Because its better to be safe then sorry, if you put a brand new pristine barrel on a tank it has to be remotely fired. Its just a precaution

@@joshhanklonbut there was nothing new or on trial with the tank firing the shot, they were just testing the armor down range. Seems like inside the tank is likely the safest place to be for at least a kilometer or so around the site.

@@wills.5762 eh i don’t know. Im honestly just guessing. It could be a rule that when a tank is involved in a test it has to be fired remotely. Idk

Because they had a catastrophic explosion in a turret while testing a development round at glen luce in late 60s early 70s..

@@doonhamer252 That's fair enough, but this is not a test of a round, this is a test of the armor, you would shoot a safe, proven round. I get safety, but to me, this case of "safety first" is just silly.

The men in the tank??? No....they're in a tank

@@Kelly-ju1kw- But the tank could be in ept... 😁

It's a secret material still kept as such today

Steel plates and rubber interlayer.

@@razorcola9833 Likely contains more than just 'slteel and rubber interlayer' lol.

@@aarongreen1654 exactly 😂😂😂 It's a full composite material all stacked in armour

We don’t know