The destruction of two Ukrainian tanks by Lancets west of Berkhovka was captured in the frame

The network published footage showing the destruction of the crew of loitering ammunition "Lancet" of the Southern group of the Russian army at once two tanks T-72 militants of the Kyiv regime.

The footage shows how the attack drone accurately hits a Ukrainian tank disguised in a forest plantation, as a result of which the combat vehicle catches fire. The camera of the reconnaissance UAV recorded how the crew of the Ukrainian Armed Forces tank in a panic scatter in all directions from the burning military equipment. It is reported that enemy military equipment was discovered and hit in the area of ​​​​the settlement of Bogdanovka, located to the west of Berkhovka at the time of replenishment of ammunition - in the immediate vicinity there was a truck with ammunition.

Earlier it was reported about the attempts of the Ukrainian army to counterattack in the area of ​​​​the settlement of Berkhovka on the northern flank of Artemivsk. According to the curator of the Russian PMC "Wagner" Yevgeny Prigozhin, the militants managed to occupy part of this settlement. There was no official confirmation from either side of the conflict. Military correspondents reported today that there are no enemy troops in Berkhovka.

In May, after a counterattack by the Ukrainian army on the flanks of Artemovsk, the RF Armed Forces retreated to the Berkhovsky reservoir located to the south of the settlement in order to increase the stability of defensive positions.

In order to prevent flank strikes, the Russian army, using artillery and UAVs, methodically destroys accumulations of enemy manpower and military equipment.

Comments

[Reindeer]

Well, in the video there is no destruction of two tanks at once - only the defeat of one. By the way, given the presence of a nearby truck with ammunition - maybe it would be more logical to bang it? He would definitely have been blown apart by atoms, you see - and he would have hooked the tanks 8)

[Argon]

It seemed to be said that the lancet was not hitting the tanks, but they were still hitting them. Unclear. Probably the khokhryaks are happy that they didn’t hit the truck with shells.

[Herman 4223]

And who said that there are shells ??? Can't the truck carry anything else?

[Reindeer]

Strictly speaking, the text of the note says "there was an ammunition truck in the immediate vicinity." - but something like that ... to read, and even more so to believe what is written, seems to be bad manners.

[Argon]

And let's guess what a truck can bring up so close to 2 tanks? Fuel? That's not a fuel truck .... Spare parts? Then the question is why two tanks were able to be so close and so convenient to call. PM? ... Continue the list...

[Sergei N 58912062]

Quote: Argon

It seemed to be said that the lancet was not hitting the tanks, but they were still hitting them. Unclear. Probably the khokhryaks are happy that they didn’t hit the truck with shells.

There is a Lancet with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead. And there is a Lancet with a cumulative warhead, which is designed to destroy armored vehicles.

[Repellent]

Quote from Reindeer

given the presence of a nearby truck with ammunition

This is TRM. Tank repair shop. There is no ammunition there.

[Reindeer]

And, clearly, it means that the article was mistaken. Then of course the operator did everything right :)

[Repellent]

Quote from Reindeer

And, clearly, it means that the article was mistaken. Then of course the operator did everything right :)

I believe my eyes more than the inscriptions on the fence. On the video - TRM, they do not carry ammunition. That is, you can, of course, try ... but it’s not enough - it’s a little crowded inside:

[smart ass]

How do you know there was ammunition in the truck? Weren't you driving?

[Nikolay Dyaglev]

And where are the 2 destroyed tanks? It can be seen that they hit a tree, the cumulative jet from the tree hit the tank, there is light smoke, the Ukrainians went to extinguish it. And they wrote that ... We see one, 2 in the mind?

[Bingo]

Exactly! In a tree, a cumulative jet set fire to the paint on the metal! Well, or a focal fire of an armor plate - they sometimes light up when a cumulative jet passes through a tree! Waiter! A bucket of chifir to this table - made me laugh ...

[karabas-barabas]

In fact, everyone has long known that the Lancet is weak to destroy a tank, which has been repeatedly recorded, including in this video "destroying 2 tanks".

[Sergei N 58912062]

Quote: karabas-barabas

In fact, everyone has long known that the Lancet is weak to destroy a tank, which has been repeatedly recorded, including in this video "destroying 2 tanks".

There is a Lancet with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead. And there is a Lancet with a cumulative warhead, which is designed to destroy armored vehicles.

[karabas-barabas]

Quote: Sergei N 58912062

And there is a Lancet with a cumulative warhead, which is designed to destroy armored vehicles.

True, but the cumulative warhead of the Lancet has a penetration of about 200mm, which is very small. For modern combined, spaced armor, it is not a problem to neutralize the weak warhead of the Lancet. I don’t think that OFs were used for BTT. I suspect that the design of the drone itself may interfere with the effectiveness of the cumulative warhead. For example, Krasnopol also experiences similar problems against tanks, although there is a larger charge there. What's the matter, in placing the warhead behind the GOS, or the Control Unit, that after hitting the kume, you first have to break through your own electronics until you get to the armor, which greatly reduces efficiency. As an example, the American analogue of Krasnopol (I forgot the name), it has a Control Unit behind the warhead and this projectile is effective.

[Thrifty]

If the crew of the tank had fought to save it, then it is possible that the tank would have been defended. By the way, in the video, the Lancet hit ONE tank!

[polpot]

Dear commentators, you will burn at least one tank in your life, then you will be able to express smart thoughts.

[Argon]

I understand that you are the operator of that same lancet ?! If so, questions for you! What is the penetration power of the lancet? Who is teaching you? And who allows you to manage them?

[Legate]

What is the penetration power of the lancet?

TTX KZ-6 look

[VPK-65]

Quote: Legate

TTX KZ-6 look

They write that the charge can be different. But if there really is KZ-6, then:
http://www.dogswar.ru/boepripasy/miny/8863-kymyliativnyi-zariad.html

Punch thickness and hole diameter:*
- armor 21,5 / 20
- reinforced concrete up to 55
- frozen ground 80/50

That for heavy armored vehicles (tanks) is like a pellet for an elephant.
I saw a lot of videos where, when hitting lightly armored vehicles, a secondary detonation occurs, but on heavy armor - only a little smoke. IMHO: either hang RPG-7 on it at least, or don’t hit tanks at all.

[Bingo]

Quote: VPK-65

armor 21,5

Quote: VPK-65

That for heavy armored vehicles (tanks) is like a pellet for an elephant.

Twenty-one centimeter of penetration - is it a pellet for an elephant?!!! Yes, the tank has no top, not just 20 cm, no one will ever put 10 there, because the hatch is so thick - you’ll open the hell already ...
And yes, a little smoke... Such a white one - it's at the tank that the powder charges are already burning, you have to run fast there. until the tank turret flew over the tanker’s turret))))

[Foul skeptic]

Such a white one - this is the tank’s powder charges already burning

[karabas-barabas]

Quote from Bingo

it’s the tank’s powder charges that are already burning, you have to run fast there

When gunpowder burns, the tank detonates and it's too late to run. Obviously, something is burning near the tank, but not gunpowder, otherwise they would not have been running around the tank.

Quote from Bingo

Twenty-one centimeter of penetration - is it a pellet for an elephant?!!!

This is 21cm of homogeneous steel, spaced armor can be thinner, but have the equivalent of 21cm of steel. This is very weak, the level of cumulative grenades is 50x. The same RPG is at least 300mm, and even then it often does not even pierce the side, or it pierces without consequences.

[storm]

You need to hit the Lancets only in the open hatch of the tanks, then defeat will be guaranteed ...

[Sergei N 58912062]

Quote: assault

You need to hit the Lancets only in the open hatch of the tanks, then defeat will be guaranteed ...

There is a Lancet with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead. And there is a Lancet with a cumulative warhead, which is designed to destroy armored vehicles.

[Legate]

Dear commentators, do not believe what you see

[Wolfskin1993]

It was business. "Centurion" burned. And the naked RPG-7. In district 4-5, the skating rink is on board. Angola

[Foul skeptic]

What good fellows, prudently slowed down the video so that it was clear that the operation was on the crown of the tree.

[Fan-fan]

It turns out that the Lancet caught on a tree?

[Argon]

The feeling that it worked from the branch to the touch. Looks like some kind of additional sensors, ultrasonic, IR or some other.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Another cartoon from Konashenkov and KO. Well, at least they changed the script a bit. Already what is the eleventh video and everything is as always, first supposedly video from the "lancet" camera, then necessarily the angle supposedly from another UAV.
Although what am I talking about, cheers-patriots are grabbing, if only the picture is more beautiful for them.

[Andrei Nikolaevich]

These would be Lancets, but according to the Maidan, in 2014! The bullish Ragouli would have fled in an instant.

[JD1979]

The bottom is bottom ... how much can you publish such garbage, where the name, text and video refute each other ... not a website, but a disgrace has become.

[Mazunga]

the truck had to hit the tank in my opinion, scratch from the lancet, although the pigs draped as much as their pushing hooves slipped

[Horon]

I see one miss (it caught on a branch and exploded before contact with the armor), shown twice with different speeds and different zooms!
Where is the destruction? Who started throwing fakes in the media? For the level of journalism "2"!

[_Ugene_]

Is there even one video of a tank being destroyed by the Lancet? a lot of hits, no sense
or the warhead should be larger or it should fall vertically in order to destroy the tank

[Sergei N 58912062]

Quote: _Ugene_

Is there even one video of a tank being destroyed by the Lancet? a lot of hits, no sense
or the warhead should be larger or it should fall vertically in order to destroy the tank

There is a Lancet with a high-explosive fragmentation warhead. And there is a Lancet with a cumulative warhead, which is designed to destroy armored vehicles.

[Dva parovoza]

The onboard remote sensing smokes after working out what flew after the detonation of the "lancet" against a tree. Where are the two destroyed tanks? By the way, there are three tanks. There may be more, but only three are visible from the picture. But "The destruction of two Ukrainian tanks by Lancets at once west of Berkhovka was captured" where? Where is the destruction of even one?

[senima56]

And where is the "destruction of two tanks at once"? The video clearly shows a hit in one tank. Moreover, "hit" and "destruction" are two big differences! Our journalists love to "crow"!

[Carlos Hall]

This Zala Lancet Unexpectedly Becomes Russia's Deadliest Weapon

[sdivt]

Quote: senima56

Moreover, "hit" and "destruction" are two big differences!

Such is the play on words. Formulation. For example: a tank (armored personnel carrier, some other technique is not the point) is struck. It would seem that everything, no tank? No matter how. There is another term - "destroyed". And "amazed" is just hit the target

[Esaul]

konashenkov wrote an article or something ... although he would have written that 52 tanks were destroyed

[vadimtt]

Well, here is the cumulative Lancet (you can clearly see it from the storyboard), everything is as you asked

[certero]

All this shows that the enemy's armored vehicles are calmly moving and accumulating for the offensive.
And no advantage of Russia in aviation prevents this.
Helicopters with guided missiles and rocket artillery with submunitions that have a shock core should work on tanks.
Or a more powerful lancet that will penetrate at least 50 mm of armor to reliably hit the engine compartment or the roof of the tower.
Well, and most importantly, why the heck is the Ministry of Defense releasing videos on which everyone can see that the content of the video does not match the title. As recently shown a video about the destruction of German leopards

[Victor Shershnev]

Yes, it looks like they were hiding fat from each other in the DZ.
Here it smoked!
There is a lot of smoke, which means there was a lot of fat.
Combat capability undermined! ))