![]() ![]() ![]() Russia Today subsequently ran a segment ostensibly interviewing the crew of the tank, who claimed they were now operating another vehicle. There is some media supporting the notion that this particular tank was at least minorly damaged. This top-attack mode was redundant, however, given the favorable vantage of the Ukrainian gunner in Mariupol. That design in part reflects some confidence that even protected by ERA, a tank’s top armor may be too thin to adequately degrade an attack from this angle. a main battle tank) from their frontal aspect, an NLAW can be programmed to projects its warhead downward for a top attack, rather than striking directly forward into the rugged frontal armor. Ordinarily, when engaging a more heavily armored vehicle (ie. A few of these ERA bricks are visible atop the turret. One possibility is that the second-generation Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor (ERA) on the turret of this model 1989g T-72B may have blasted a metal plate outwards, deflecting or warping the missile’s shaped-charge warhead, preventing it from exploding into the turret at the ideal angle and distance. What went wrong with this seemingly perfect kill shot? But the tank does not “brew up” in flames as it rolls onwards beyond sight of the camera.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |