people are stealing your videos for tiktok without your permission, please use a watermark! i hate seeing your amazing work being stolen without credit. keep up the good work.
Thanks, someone mentioned this to me before. Unfortunately, even if I move the watermark out of the black bands people will find a way to block it out. And i don't want it ontop of everything as it will detract from the video. What is the name of the tiktok account(s) which are sharing them the most? (I found one called SY Simulations on tiktok which is NOT me) I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who came across my content (or any other stimulation channel) could add comments on the videos, sending people to the original creators, thanks!
@@SYsimulations maybe it would be an idea to put your Name on the Shell or the armor Plate in the simulation as long as it does not Influence the results?
@@jamesricker3997 In what idiotic american mind world did the Soviets consider their troops "Expendable" Jesus Christ your imbecility continues to astound me.
Congratulations on being able to explain in words what you saw in the video. I'm sure that helped all the people even more stupid than you that couldn't even manage the words. Thank you for your efforts to help those that miss the bloody obvious.
Germany never fielded a 128/88mm round, the long 88 is similar to the post-ww2 90mm American guns. Nothing special, just a long heavy cannon, outdated.
@@randominternetguy8735 No. Both the M77 and M82 have a penetration value below 200mm of RHA even at close distance. Meanwhile the long barreled 88 would roughly pen 220mm RHA point blank. You seem to have confused the old shorter 88 found on the Tiger 1 with the newer and longer 88 found on the Tiger 2.
@@randominternetguy8735this video is about the tiger 2 88 mm, not the tiger 1. That is all the specificity you need to be able to navigate these comments, yet you get confused
If you look at this from a different perspective, a 100mm potato launcher is still a 100mm potato launcher. It is better to have a 100mm potato launcher than have no 100mm potato launcher.
"Wild." Even wilder, the fact that the T-54 today is still fully relevant on any battlefield. As mentioned by previous poster, when they're no longer good enough as tanks, they're still plenty good enough as the modern equivalent of a StuG. Or in other words, mobile, heavily protected firepower.
Soviets used PaK43 as a template for a "scary anti-tank gun we might face in considerable numbers" at the time, they knew nobody would actually be using it after WW2. That said 20pdr introduced in 1948 turned out to be pretty poor against T-54 so they were spot on.
Probably when Personal Computers become powerful as quantum computers. Because AFAIK this single rendering takes multiple hours, now imagine in game constant calculation and rendering of each shot.
The thing is, in-game pen simulations don't even need to be *this* detailed, but Gaijin is incapable (or unwilling) of even making optics into weakspots instead of infinite armor.
@@bickboose9364 heck they could go easy mode and make a broken optic reduce the gunners aiming skill or put a bit of variability on the projectile so my jumbo stops getting machine gun port sniped by panthers from 500+ meters away when my shell hits the optics
Did you already test the M41 Walker Bulldog’s 76mm gun yet? Would be interesting to see how its APDS round would perform against a T-54/55 in a simulation
Would go through. The 76mm APDS is around the same or even more powerfull than the 88mm Pzgr. 40 APCR, which would fare at least equal to the 88mm Pzgr. 39 APCBC.
Could you do a simulation of PzGr 39/43 from King tiger's 88mm Kwk 43 Cannon hitting T29/T30/Heavy tank's gun mantlet at probably 900-1200 meters. That would be interesting to see, good video anyways!
I got BS’d by this on WT today. HEAT shell right in this exact spot, didn’t even damage the machine gun. 90mm HEAT shell with 305mm penetration got shrugged off like it it was a 50 cal.
You should make a video that explores the difference the angle of yaw of projectile makes: one with projectile hitting the highly angled plate while pointing a few dgr downwards and another with same setup but with projectiles nose pointing away from the plate. This factor can significantly alter the results when the velocity of projectile is right at the ballistic limit of the plate, changing a clean perforation into a harmless scoop.
Possibly from some distance, Schmalturm would've had little spots to be hit flat. If it doesn't hit the flat turret face but the angled sides its an instant bounce. It would be hard to hit such small areas from beyond 400-500 meters but it probably would destroy the tank if it did hit as the penetration power is good enough to tackle 100mms of flat armor.
@@ultravioletsus the question is if a hit from 800 meters would still cause enough spall to be a threat. Of course its hard to hit, but there is a mass of allied tanks firing at one panther.
@@Einheit101 I'd say it'd be enough to disable the Panther. As 76mm ballistics usually show around 90 to 100 mms of penetration at about 1 kilometer range, had the turret armor been angled even a little then the penetration power wouldn't be enough to create a decent spalling inside the tank.
@@czwarty7878 - Can the 128 penetrate the strongest point of the armor at further distance? This video had the 88 shell hit the weakest point of point turret armor.
It would be interesting to see a round that definitely can penetrate a given armor hitting it while tumbling, maybe hitting it either perfectly backwards or perpendicular.
if an enemy tank engages your tank at that range, your commander is a fool, an idiot, or both at the same time, most tank engagements are 1/2kms, at this range the T54 was nigh invulnerable from most NATO rounds for a while, not to mention its tiny size meant spotting one was no small feat.
And if it was the 40/43 round, it would have penetrated at around 1600m, while its 100mm wouldnt be able to penetrate the front hull at any distance, and the turrent front at probably 200m or under with regular ap rounds.
I wonder if the Soviets in the early versions of the T54 would have had still ergonomic and optics issues or hull down issues against the Tiger Ausf B ....
The armor was just barely adequate to stop the projectile, but it looks like there still would have been a lot of backspalling. It's a wonder it took so long for T-55s to be up-armored.
@@AKUJIVALDO Yeah, no kidding. I researched the armor penetration figures for the 90mm guns used on the M26, M46, M47, and M48, and they're less than you'd expect.
I remember hearing that the Soviets believed that the Western Allies would adopt the German 128mm gun as their new main armament of their tanks "moving forward" And so the design future Soviet tanks assumed this gun to be their primary threat.
Did they get a APDSFS shot into the vision port? Would have been one hell of a shot. There is nowhere the 25mm can penetrate into the fighting compartment. From what I gather, they smashed up all the sensors which likely glitches the turret and panicked the crew into crashing. The entire encounter was a super videogame move that is much easier to do for real. If another game is accurate, no not WT, a T54/55 can be killed by the 25mm in the back of the turret.
The T-90's drivers hatch is on the roof of the hull and can only be hit if the Bradley is on an elevated location. Even then it would hit at a very high angle
@@cheekibreeki4638 I believed all t62 has the same based armor construction. I'm specifically interested in t62 because the Yugoslavia determined t62 turret has better frontal protection, but not good enough to warrant an import. The real increase of thickness is only like 15mm. Is that enough to prevent large chunk of steel flying off at the same condition?
@SYsimulations projectile behavior appears wrong. 7,5 cm and 8,8 cm Pzgr of the latest generations remained whole at velocities at least up to 1100 m/s. With the 8,8 cm projectile beeing more robust. According Bericht 166 der Lilienthalgesellschaft Vorgänge beim Beschuß von Panzerplatten 1943. 7,5 cm Pzgr 39 vs 200 mm homogenous plate at 30° obliquity. Impact at 1020 m/s projectile rebounded Impact at 1070 m/s projectile stuck in plate whole. Head of projectile could be seen. Impact at 1090 m/s projectile through plate and remained whole. Absolutely no deformation visible to all three cases. Result was inline with late projectile penetration chart. Size of the (incomplete) hole was in every case calibersized.
Ваши формулы не работают! КПВТ 14.5 мм пробило лобовую броню Леопарда! Как ????? Лично вёл огонь с дистанции 550 метров ..очередью 10-12 выстрелов...из них 3-5 ушли в рикошет .
Тигр 2 имеет длинную 88, и как раз он может вплотную пробить т55 если попадёт в самую плоскую зону башни. На видео как раз таки это и изображено. Если бы дистанция была больше, и снаряд улетел бы не так точно, то пробития не было бы.
@@combinero.YT_deletes_comments. комментатор сказал, что пробитие стало возможно только при попадании в ослабленную зону вблизи амбразуры пулемета или прицела.
Then why don’t ANY western militaries use rounded armour? We stupid? Never understood why we didn’t just Kepler building supposedly superior German weaponry for ourselves. We had the factories and tools even wishers, no ‘licensing fees’. I read Montgomery’s book about he and Patton even secret (known jealous hating each other) meetings ordering investigations in such one thing they agreed on was continue to march onto Moscow even arranging interviews with likes of Manstein and Speer before Pattons car accident. That surprised me.
The Germans Gunners would have engaged and destroyed the T54/55 with a 88 / L71- APCR / APDS round which would have blasted through the front of the turret at 1500 metres range !!! If hypothetically speaking the War had lasted another 5 years!
Очередная ложь! Т-54 лёгкий танк по классификации немцев. Т II - тяжёлый танк по немецкой классификации. НО!!!! Т-54 убьёт T II на расстоянии 2000 метров.
Ах, как же так? Русских опять унижают в интернетах! Нельзя молчать! Т-54 пробьёт 3 абрамса с 3000 километров! Нужно срочно написать об этом, чтобы тупые европейцы узнали ПРАВДУ! Вперёд, товарищ!
Id be interested to see the bradleys bushmaster vs a T90m turret ring to give us a better idea of how that, now famous, clip from Ukraine actually played out!
That was an interesting scenario because normally if a round reached the turret ring it would just jam it, but it was spinning freely and uncontrollably. It could have been just that the crew panicked, in addition before the Bradley engaged, that T-90 was hit by a kamikaze drone which may have ruined the optics, or maybe that drone damaged the turret controls
@levilastun829 The drone impact happened after it was shot by the bradleys, it's what finally made the crew bail out, as far as I remember it was the bradleys that destroyed the optics
Nit as bad armor, but in modern standards it would fail but the tank was still good and against a US tank example the Pursuing would win, including against other tanks at the time, but the Tiger IIs gun would have to hit the armor at least 2-3 times to destroy the important part of the tank (engine, ammo rack, and sights)
"That one didn't go through".
Meanwhile the gunners face is gone.
easy, just use the medkit
@@salazar778 Nah, crew replenishment works, just wait a while.
this shot basically is shoot right in front of it, with less than 10 meters distance(943m/s)
@@vict9451 The muzzle velocity of the KwK 43 is ~900 m/s at 1000m, it loses about 10 m/s per 100m for the first 1000m. This is at 600m not 10m
"It seems we missed!"
people are stealing your videos for tiktok without your permission, please use a watermark! i hate seeing your amazing work being stolen without credit. keep up the good work.
He is?
@@Fiberglass_Insulationhis current watermark is really easy to crop out
Should be used watermark behind object he is testing or appearing in random areas
Thanks, someone mentioned this to me before. Unfortunately, even if I move the watermark out of the black bands people will find a way to block it out. And i don't want it ontop of everything as it will detract from the video. What is the name of the tiktok account(s) which are sharing them the most? (I found one called SY Simulations on tiktok which is NOT me)
I would greatly appreciate it if anyone who came across my content (or any other stimulation channel) could add comments on the videos, sending people to the original creators, thanks!
@@SYsimulations maybe it would be an idea to put your Name on the Shell or the armor Plate in the simulation as long as it does not Influence the results?
That would be create massive deadly spalling inside the Tank.
that's what it said at the end
Congratulations, you played world of tanks and now you know what spalling means
No problem a T-55 was cheaper and easier to manufacture than a Tiger II and the crew was considered expendable
@@jamesricker3997 In what idiotic american mind world did the Soviets consider their troops "Expendable"
Jesus Christ your imbecility continues to astound me.
Congratulations on being able to explain in words what you saw in the video. I'm sure that helped all the people even more stupid than you that couldn't even manage the words. Thank you for your efforts to help those that miss the bloody obvious.
This long 88 was one hell of a gun , imagine a APDS 88/50mm sub caliber as the 128/88mm . Did you ever test the 128/88mm APDS ?
He didn't, but I'like to see
I think he did videos on the 128 apds
Yes, he did (iirc)
On the E-100 vs IS-3. 31st December 2023
Germany never fielded a 128/88mm round, the long 88 is similar to the post-ww2 90mm American guns. Nothing special, just a long heavy cannon, outdated.
wow 88mm works good
Yep, more penetration than the 90mm gun on Patton tanks with full caliber AP rounds.
@@randominternetguy8735 No. Both the M77 and M82 have a penetration value below 200mm of RHA even at close distance. Meanwhile the long barreled 88 would roughly pen 220mm RHA point blank. You seem to have confused the old shorter 88 found on the Tiger 1 with the newer and longer 88 found on the Tiger 2.
@@randominternetguy8735 How can i be even more specific?
To be fair it achieved this by being super long
@@randominternetguy8735this video is about the tiger 2 88 mm, not the tiger 1. That is all the specificity you need to be able to navigate these comments, yet you get confused
Looks like someone's T-54 got penned by a Tiger II here in War Thunder 👀
nah, if this was warthunder the shell woulda gotten eaten by the gunners optic
@@Dasponz Right. In WT optics often give a vehicle better protection instead of making the armor worse. Super annoying.
Чушь. Броня т-54 гораздо лучше чем у тигра. Тигр пробьет ее только подойдя очень близко, а т-54 пробивает тигр как картон
@@user-eu4neserg in real life yes. in warthunder we have gaijin.
So there are T-54's still out there in active service in some capacity with a turret originally designed to counter Tiger II ammo? Wild.
If you look at this from a different perspective, a 100mm potato launcher is still a 100mm potato launcher.
It is better to have a 100mm potato launcher than have no 100mm potato launcher.
There are still a lot of 100 mm ammunition in warehouses. These tanks are used as self-propelled artillery
"Wild."
Even wilder, the fact that the T-54 today is still fully relevant on any battlefield.
As mentioned by previous poster, when they're no longer good enough as tanks, they're still plenty good enough as the modern equivalent of a StuG. Or in other words, mobile, heavily protected firepower.
If I have to storm a machine gun nest as an infantryman, I would prefer to have a T54 as a support gun than to have nothing
Soviets used PaK43 as a template for a "scary anti-tank gun we might face in considerable numbers" at the time, they knew nobody would actually be using it after WW2. That said 20pdr introduced in 1948 turned out to be pretty poor against T-54 so they were spot on.
The day this kind of damage model is integrated to War thunder type games, it's going to be a great leap for gaming
Probably when Personal Computers become powerful as quantum computers. Because AFAIK this single rendering takes multiple hours, now imagine in game constant calculation and rendering of each shot.
The thing is, in-game pen simulations don't even need to be *this* detailed, but Gaijin is incapable (or unwilling) of even making optics into weakspots instead of infinite armor.
@@bickboose9364 I would just appreciate if breaking the optics and viewports on a tank did something in WT
@@dominuslogik484 Yeah, anything instead of them acting as black hole singularity armor would be nice, I dare say. 👍
@@bickboose9364 heck they could go easy mode and make a broken optic reduce the gunners aiming skill or put a bit of variability on the projectile so my jumbo stops getting machine gun port sniped by panthers from 500+ meters away when my shell hits the optics
Did you already test the M41 Walker Bulldog’s 76mm gun yet? Would be interesting to see how its APDS round would perform against a T-54/55 in a simulation
Would go through. The 76mm APDS is around the same or even more powerfull than the 88mm Pzgr. 40 APCR, which would fare at least equal to the 88mm Pzgr. 39 APCBC.
@@kimjanek646Go through at under 500m sure but past that probably not.
никак
ARVN tankers would have no doubt scored some kills against PAVN T54 and T55s in later stages of the Vietnam War....
Could you do a simulation of PzGr 39/43 from King tiger's 88mm Kwk 43 Cannon hitting T29/T30/Heavy tank's gun mantlet at probably 900-1200 meters. That would be interesting to see, good video anyways!
Very interesting simulation. Thanks ❤❤❤
Thank you for adding the voice over!
I got BS’d by this on WT today.
HEAT shell right in this exact spot, didn’t even damage the machine gun.
90mm HEAT shell with 305mm penetration got shrugged off like it it was a 50 cal.
Do the same test but the British 20 pounder vs the T54 armor
You should make a video that explores the difference the angle of yaw of projectile makes: one with projectile hitting the highly angled plate while pointing a few dgr downwards and another with same setup but with projectiles nose pointing away from the plate.
This factor can significantly alter the results when the velocity of projectile is right at the ballistic limit of the plate, changing a clean perforation into a harmless scoop.
WarThunder Tiger II Player: Of course, it's a full Up Tier 😮
What about Soviet 85mm gun or US 76mm gun vs Panther 2 Schmalturm? Would the new turret offer enough protection against the most common 1945 threats?
Possibly from some distance, Schmalturm would've had little spots to be hit flat. If it doesn't hit the flat turret face but the angled sides its an instant bounce. It would be hard to hit such small areas from beyond 400-500 meters but it probably would destroy the tank if it did hit as the penetration power is good enough to tackle 100mms of flat armor.
@@ultravioletsus the question is if a hit from 800 meters would still cause enough spall to be a threat. Of course its hard to hit, but there is a mass of allied tanks firing at one panther.
@@Einheit101 I'd say it'd be enough to disable the Panther. As 76mm ballistics usually show around 90 to 100 mms of penetration at about 1 kilometer range, had the turret armor been angled even a little then the penetration power wouldn't be enough to create a decent spalling inside the tank.
Can you do the same
But with the first turret of the T54 ?
What about a JagdTiger with its 128mm gun? Can it withstand?
Well obviously if 88mm penetrates, 128mm will too. Jagdtiger's 128mm gun had up to 260mm of penetration, compared to max 230mm of 88mm L/71.
@@czwarty7878 It obviously depends on the distance, the area, and the angle of impact. But, yes 128mm should do the trick
@@czwarty7878 - Can the 128 penetrate the strongest point of the armor at further distance?
This video had the 88 shell hit the weakest point of point turret armor.
No background music that makes me vulnerable to any unwanted noises.
now try it with APCR
Could you please provide more details about the conflict in Yugoslavia? 88 Pak43/Kwk 44 guns fired at Soviet T-54s?
Видео наглядно показывает насколько мощное было 8,8 см орудие 1943 года.
И как эволюционировала броня через 10 лет, и смогла его удержать.
It would be interesting to see a round that definitely can penetrate a given armor hitting it while tumbling, maybe hitting it either perfectly backwards or perpendicular.
Obviously this wouldn’t be something like APFSDS round, more like a WW2/ Cold War era round.
600 m is still quite substantial.
It's specifically weak area. Main cheek won't budge.
Source?@@gargean1671
No,it isn’t . Normal tanks engagement range in late WW2 is around 1km and above, 600m and below is only happens during ambush or surprise engagement
if an enemy tank engages your tank at that range, your commander is a fool, an idiot, or both at the same time, most tank engagements are 1/2kms, at this range the T54 was nigh invulnerable from most NATO rounds for a while, not to mention its tiny size meant spotting one was no small feat.
600m is substantial, as in that it goes through, while it was designed against it. Keep ya white knight in ya pants.@@vunguyenxuanhoang7422
what about 88mm Pzgr.39/43 hitting IS-3M, T-10M or Object 268 at the similar position
Object 292 against M1 Abrams turret please
And if it was the 40/43 round, it would have penetrated at around 1600m, while its 100mm wouldnt be able to penetrate the front hull at any distance, and the turrent front at probably 200m or under with regular ap rounds.
Yo dude you should totally do sherman 76mm vs Tiger 1 upper plate angled
I'd be much more interested to see this with an actual Mod. 1946 turret, or one of the prototypes' turrets
This also isn't including blast effects from the shell's explosive.
I wonder if the bursting charge would have much of a difference in terms of propelling the spall through the tank?
Just because other parts would be breached doesn't mean the crew would not get banged up by the concussive force.
Doesn't the PzGr 40. APCR have better penetration capabilities? How would that round perform?
I wonder if the Soviets in the early versions of the T54 would have had still ergonomic and optics issues or hull down issues against the Tiger Ausf B ....
What is the sound-effect and shock-effect of getting hit from inside a vehicle?
Could you try the same test with the 128/88mm apds? That shell was a hair from going clean through.
The armor was just barely adequate to stop the projectile, but it looks like there still would have been a lot of backspalling. It's a wonder it took so long for T-55s to be up-armored.
Because they weren't against WW2 Germany with their awesome long 88... Only weakass 76mm, 17pounder, 20 pounder and 90mm.
@@AKUJIVALDO Yeah, no kidding. I researched the armor penetration figures for the 90mm guns used on the M26, M46, M47, and M48, and they're less than you'd expect.
Cant wait to see this be used by the 7383th warthunder tiktoker with CC partnership
I remember hearing that the Soviets believed that the Western Allies would adopt the German 128mm gun as their new main armament of their tanks "moving forward"
And so the design future Soviet tanks assumed this gun to be their primary threat.
Do T-90M’s driver’s harch vs a few bradley shell’s fired in the same spot like the real life event
Did they get a APDSFS shot into the vision port? Would have been one hell of a shot. There is nowhere the 25mm can penetrate into the fighting compartment. From what I gather, they smashed up all the sensors which likely glitches the turret and panicked the crew into crashing. The entire encounter was a super videogame move that is much easier to do for real.
If another game is accurate, no not WT, a T54/55 can be killed by the 25mm in the back of the turret.
The Bradley fuck the optical on the t90m it didn't penetrate the tank tho , FPV drone and arty later taken it out
The T-90's drivers hatch is on the roof of the hull and can only be hit if the Bradley is on an elevated location. Even then it would hit at a very high angle
How about t62 turret front "flat spot"?
Yes, let's test technology that's 20 years apart to see which is better.
Only about 10 year difference between the tank here, and the base model T-62 was incredibly similar armor wise.
@@999mi999
You put a shot into the side of t62 with m62 ap and it will goes up in flame. Your point?
@@cheekibreeki4638
I believed all t62 has the same based armor construction.
I'm specifically interested in t62 because the Yugoslavia determined t62 turret has better frontal protection, but not good enough to warrant an import.
The real increase of thickness is only like 15mm. Is that enough to prevent large chunk of steel flying off at the same condition?
Question: witch Simulation Software do you use for these numerical calculations? Best Regards
Sure looks like a pen to me - and this is before counting the explosive filler
Is it possible to simulate a 1.88 MN distributed load on top of an Hetzer casemate?
Can you compare it with a 100mm BR-412B? :)
>inb4 angry russian anons in the comment section trying to explain to you (in russian) that this video is western propaganda.
I can already hear them typing...
Why would they try prove if a tank that is produced like 80 years ago was good? I mean, it doesn't matter if it was good or not if it did the trick.
@@SYsimulations Why aren't you just banning them? Their behaviour counts as a hate speech at this point
we got a schizo here lol
The T54 T55 were smaller tanks than the Tiger Ausf B so it would be harder for the 88mm to be hit???
What kind of logic is that? The T34 was smaller than the T54, yet germans had no problem knocking them out from 2+km away lol
@skdKitsune really? Wasn't the T54 besides gun and turret not more or less same size as the 34/85
Can you do a 500 lb nose-fused JDAM?
oh god that spalling😊
308mm sturmtiger rocket vs m18 commanders cranium when?
308? I think you made a mistake there.
@SYsimulations projectile behavior appears wrong. 7,5 cm and 8,8 cm Pzgr of the latest generations remained whole at velocities at least up to 1100 m/s. With the 8,8 cm projectile beeing more robust.
According Bericht 166 der Lilienthalgesellschaft Vorgänge beim Beschuß von Panzerplatten 1943. 7,5 cm Pzgr 39 vs 200 mm homogenous plate at 30° obliquity.
Impact at 1020 m/s projectile rebounded
Impact at 1070 m/s projectile stuck in plate whole. Head of projectile could be seen.
Impact at 1090 m/s projectile through plate and remained whole.
Absolutely no deformation visible to all three cases.
Result was inline with late projectile penetration chart.
Size of the (incomplete) hole was in every case calibersized.
Similar to the IS-7 vs Maus video...
can you do fv4005 vs jagdtiger ?
Do the american t34 against the T-54s ufp
Most armor engagements in Europe happen under 500 meters anyway, so 88 is fine
88mm brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
The spelling from that shot would do some damage
What is this program? Please let me know
Como sería el impacto de un 75mm de un Panther
Pls, test Ob.292 APFSDS
Can you show the effect of an RPG shell pg7vr or al yassin 105 on a mekava 4 tank?
Bro if you think some 💩 old cheap rocket from CCCP is going to do anything against modern armour your wrong, Merkava armour is also classified
@@KASKAS-yo5dn It's a modern enough tandem warhead. I have a bridge to sell to you...
Put an APCR shot and show us results
You forgot to say "please"
what simulation software is this?
what software are you using?
Even if it didn't penetrate, I suspect that tank would need airing out.
Power washing, then airing out.
Unless you count a gunner's blood(and maybe even commander's) a wondrous decoration...
what does he make these on?
Ваши формулы не работают! КПВТ 14.5 мм пробило лобовую броню Леопарда! Как ????? Лично вёл огонь с дистанции 550 метров ..очередью 10-12 выстрелов...из них 3-5 ушли в рикошет .
Object 292 vs M1A2 Abrams
Это при условии, что броня у Т-54 из пластилина?)))
Тигр 2 имеет длинную 88, и как раз он может вплотную пробить т55 если попадёт в самую плоскую зону башни. На видео как раз таки это и изображено. Если бы дистанция была больше, и снаряд улетел бы не так точно, то пробития не было бы.
At high speeds, metal behaves like plasticine.
At very high speeds metal behaves like water.
Что не так?
@@combinero.YT_deletes_comments. комментатор сказал, что пробитие стало возможно только при попадании в ослабленную зону вблизи амбразуры пулемета или прицела.
"T-54: made of pure Stalinium, very stronk!"
nice
I dont think the gunner liked that very much
What they claim vs what actually happened on mass produced equipment definitely in the USSR is two very different things
Then why don’t ANY western militaries use rounded armour?
We stupid?
Never understood why we didn’t just Kepler building supposedly superior German weaponry for ourselves. We had the factories and tools even wishers, no ‘licensing fees’.
I read Montgomery’s book about he and Patton even secret (known jealous hating each other) meetings ordering investigations in such one thing they agreed on was continue to march onto Moscow even arranging interviews with likes of Manstein and Speer before Pattons car accident.
That surprised me.
Was this partially due to the optics ? Would the same spot on the other side of the turret fail as well?
He kind of mentioned this in the video....
The Germans Gunners would have engaged and destroyed the T54/55 with a 88 / L71- APCR / APDS round which would have blasted through the front of the turret at 1500 metres range !!!
If hypothetically speaking the War had lasted another 5 years!
Очередная ложь!
Т-54 лёгкий танк по классификации немцев.
Т II - тяжёлый танк по немецкой классификации.
НО!!!!
Т-54 убьёт T II на расстоянии 2000 метров.
Ах, как же так? Русских опять унижают в интернетах! Нельзя молчать! Т-54 пробьёт 3 абрамса с 3000 километров! Нужно срочно написать об этом, чтобы тупые европейцы узнали ПРАВДУ! Вперёд, товарищ!
Т-54 можно назвать первым основным боевым танком. По крайней мере в СССР.
Im more concerned about spalling in any russian tank.
Ja mam w aucie zainstalowanego Samsunga A 8👌
Jagd Tiger
War Thunder has taught me that Stalinium will always stop an 88mm
T54 by Tigra zničil prvním výstřelem.
да ага блять
что б он в тундре эту т54 хоть куда то в лоб пробивал
Can you do the LOSAT missile vs any Russian tank
Id be interested to see the bradleys bushmaster vs a T90m turret ring to give us a better idea of how that, now famous, clip from Ukraine actually played out!
That was an interesting scenario because normally if a round reached the turret ring it would just jam it, but it was spinning freely and uncontrollably.
It could have been just that the crew panicked, in addition before the Bradley engaged, that T-90 was hit by a kamikaze drone which may have ruined the optics, or maybe that drone damaged the turret controls
@levilastun829 The drone impact happened after it was shot by the bradleys, it's what finally made the crew bail out, as far as I remember it was the bradleys that destroyed the optics
Не реально
Tell that to the "War Thunder" dev team.... 🙄💩
голимый ыздеж
If it was german tank the comments would be whining and moaning because you shot the MG port 🤣
found the whining sipp
Nit as bad armor, but in modern standards it would fail but the tank was still good and against a US tank example the Pursuing would win, including against other tanks at the time, but the Tiger IIs gun would have to hit the armor at least 2-3 times to destroy the important part of the tank (engine, ammo rack, and sights)
The Pursuing tank could reach 110 mph to catch its prey
Bull sheet
soviet armor crap
What program is this? Ansys?