Footage has been released of a Russian kamikaze drone 'ripping off the turret' of a Ukrainian T-80 tank

New evidence of the filigree work of Russians continues to appear on the Internet drones-kamikaze "Lancet" from the concern "Kalashnikov". By the end of the SVO in Ukraine, obviously, a whole collection of videos will be collected, which will capture the moments of the destruction of enemy equipment by our drone.

By the way, one of these videos was recently distributed by Russian near-military publics. The caption to the material says that the events are taking place in the area of ​​the city of Chasov Yar in the DPR, which is still under temporary occupation by militants of the Kyiv regime.

The published footage shows Russian drone operators monitoring Ukrainian a tank T-80. Then our "Lancet" attacks the enemy vehicle.

The hit falls on the upper part of the tank. Then a strong fire is seen inside the combat vehicle. The last frames show the T-80 with a torn off turret. Apparently, this happened due to the detonation of ammunition.

Given the speed of the events unfolding in the video, it is unlikely that the crew of the Ukrainian tank managed to escape.

As for the work of our "Lancet", in this case it literally "blew off the turret" of a Ukrainian tank.

However, the aforementioned T-80 is far from the only "victim" of the Russian kamikaze drone, which was not without reason nicknamed the "tank killer". After its hits, German "Leopards", American "Abrams" and other Western vehicles, which were previously positioned as "invulnerable", did not return from the battlefield.

Comments

[Lemon]

Lancet has shown and continues to show himself in all his glory! What is not on his account!

[Orange Bigg]

Czech Dana wheeled self-propelled guns have appeared on the combat contact line again. Last Monday it became known that Russian artillerymen had already destroyed one of them. This happened in the Donetsk direction near the settlement of Pushkino. Video at the link below.

Our soldiers discovered the enemy combat vehicle at the moment when it was being loaded with ammunition from an approaching vehicle. One shot was enough for the shells to detonate.

https://rg.ru/2024/11/06/cheshskuiu-kolesnuiu-sau-dana-unichtozhili-s-pervogo-vystrela-na-doneckom-napravlenii.html

[tralflot1832]

Obviously, the quality and mobilization resources of 404 are being knocked out by us, but the front of 404 is held by the "Banderites" and there are still many of them, grazing in the second roles.

[svan26]

The hatches were open. Apparently the crew abandoned the car.

[I dare to_notice_]

Let's wish the crew a pleasant flight!

[single-n]

I wonder why the tank was abandoned. I can tell by the smoke pouring out of the gun. That means the breech is open. The tank didn't seem to fire. And they didn't catch it reloading. That means the breech should have been closed. And all the hatches were wide open. So there was no crew there. The author should have watched the video first, and only then wrote.

It is unlikely that the crew of the Ukrainian tank managed to escape.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

I wonder why the tank was abandoned. I can tell by the smoke pouring out of the gun. That means the breech is open. The tank didn't seem to fire. And they didn't catch it reloading. That means the breech should have been closed. And all the hatches were wide open. So there was no crew there. The author should have watched the video first, and only then wrote.

Now the hurray-patriots will downvote you. You're ruining their party.
And the video is more than illustrative.
The tank has been standing for a long time, its track has long been covered with snow. But behind the tank you can see a double fresh track. That is, they drove up to the tank, then drove away. The tank itself could not have left such a track.
The conclusion is that a special effects team drove up to the abandoned vehicle and equipped the tank with suitable explosives, which simulated both the burning of powder charges and the detonation of shells.
But the boys worked a little clumsily, they didn’t close the hatches or the gun breech.
Well, and additional confirmation of the staged video is that it was filmed from two points, from the Lancet itself and from the side.
It's sad, but the generations that learned to think logically after the nineties, to notice details, are mostly incapable of thinking logically and noticing details. They are stupidly led by special effects.

[Eugene 62]

Well, and additional confirmation of the staged video

One more addition. The T-80 tank is not typical for the Ukrainian Armed Forces at all. By the beginning of the hostilities, there were less than 100 of them in Ukraine, including those in storage. Previously, they were actively sold to Pakistan, Thailand (after conversion), and possibly elsewhere. That is, the command never saw this model in service. I don’t know if the Banderites still have them? Perhaps they managed to capture something in 2022 during the Kharkov counteroffensive. But this is not a mass quantity. In the case of a show, it would be better to take the T-64 or T-72. Then there would be less suspicion.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

I don't know if the Banderites still have them? They may have managed to capture something in 2022 during the Kharkov counteroffensive. But that's not a large number. In the case of a show, it would be better to take T-64 or T-72. Then there would be less suspicion.

They definitely exist in the Russian Federation. In short, they took what was written off.

[Nastia makarova]

Why do you need to film a staged video and do special effects?

[suhorukofal]

So he claims that the Russian Armed Forces filmed the production. Mosfilm, all that. The detective even determined from the tracks in the snow what kind of car it was, why it drove up, and with what.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

So he claims that the Russian Armed Forces filmed the production. Mosfilm, all that. The detective even determined from the tracks in the snow what kind of car it was, why it drove up, and with what

So, offer another explanation for this strange track behind the tank. Let's see what you come up with.

[suhorukofal]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

this is a strange track behind the tank.

Is the trace of equipment something strange for you? Is it necessarily a staged crew?
This already smacks of paranoia.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Why do you need to film a staged video and do special effects?

Why the Armed Forces of Ukraine? These are the handiwork of our own, that is, the Russian Federation, agitprop. We need to please the hurray-patriots with something. Otherwise, they might start asking uncomfortable questions.
Today marks exactly three months since the beginning of the invasion of the Kursk region.

[bk316]

These are the products of domestic, that is, Russian Federation, propaganda.

By itself.
This is all Mosfilm.
And the Crimean Bridge and Liberated Marik (they built a whole city of decorations) and the Darkest One himself in Kazan - these are all deepfakes (and he hasn't left the bunker for 5 years, everyone knows that )
But in reality (every Rzhev boy knows this) in the Russian Federation the collectors are carrying butter from the counter and have eaten the last hedgehog, soon the Ukrainian Armed Forces will parade along the Red Square. This is what Vovochka Rzhevskiy believes.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

By itself.
This is all Mosfilm. laughing
And the Crimean Bridge and Liberated Marik (they built a whole city of decorations) and the Darkest One himself in Kazan - these are all deepfakes (and he hasn't left the bunker for 5 years, everyone knows this belay)
But in reality (every Rzhev boy knows this) in the Russian Federation, collectors carry butter from the counter and eat the last hedgehog,

Is there anything to say regarding the substance of the comments I made?

The Ukrainian Armed Forces will soon parade across Red Square. This is what Vovochka Rzhevsky believes.

Don't attribute your personal dreams to me.

[Eugene 62]

why would you shoot a staged video

In general, staged photos and videos are always taken during war. The most famous example is the photo by Yevgeny Khaldey "The Victory Banner over the Reichstag". If we look closely, we will see that there is no longer a battle. There are cars and people walking below. However, in the photo in the background there is smoke and glow from fires. Is this some kind of photo effect or was something actually burning? We do not know. But the photo is famous all over the world. It is a symbol of Victory! And few people delve into small details and try to refute the very fact of raising the Victory Banner over the fascist parliament. http://pushkin.kubannet.ru/News/2021/0420/n01_03.jpg
ps: There is a photo of my uncle in the Reichstag. Only it is not immediately clear that it is the Reichstag. He is standing next to some sculpture of a hammerman. But it is signed that it is the Reichstag. May 8, 1945.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

In general, during war, staged photos and videos are always taken.

Naturally. I myself sometimes took such shots.
But here's the question: it's one thing to shoot staged footage of a fact that has already happened, and quite another to shoot such a "consoling" video.

[75 Sergey]

You're talking nonsense.
Nobody passed off these shots as the First Banner over the Reichstag.
There are never enough photographers.

[Eugene 62]

Nobody passed off these shots as the First Banner over the Reichstag.

Judging by the minuses under this photo and the post about it, the majority of the site's readers thought that the photographer captured this shot during the battle and still think so! Not everyone is capable of fact-based analysis. Alas!

[Alex DHG]

Yes, yes, yes, this is definitely Mosfilm's work! And nothing else!

[suhorukofal]

What are you talking about, where have you ever seen a Ukrainian Armed Forces vehicle shot down? For such a significant event, it is absolutely necessary to stage it. The citizen has been hanging out on Ukrainian websites for a long time

[wladimirjankov]

[quoteThe conclusion is that a special effects team drove up to the abandoned vehicle and equipped the tank with suitable explosives, which simulated both the burning of powder charges and the detonation of shells.][/quote]
In this case, there can be many conclusions and versions. Yours is one of the unlikely ones. A product of a rich imagination. What kind of organization is this "special effects team"? Whose staff does it have and what facts do you have to prove its existence? If not, then these are just your guesses. It is more likely that the tank was damaged or broke down, abandoned by the crew. They were unable to evacuate it. If it was an enemy tank, then ours simply finished it off. If it was our tank, then ours destroyed it so that the Nazis would not get it. And if there is remaining ammunition, there is no need for special effects.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

In this case, there can be many conclusions and versions. Yours is one of the unlikely ones. A product of a rich imagination.

Fantasies are for homeboys like you. And I have conclusions based on combat experience of the same first Chechen. That's why I notice such absurdities as a strange fresh track behind. While you point-blank don't see it.

What kind of organization is this "special effects team"? Whose staff does it have and what facts do you have to prove its existence? If not, then this is just your speculation. It is more likely that the tank was damaged or broke down, abandoned by the crew. They were unable to evacuate it. If it was an enemy tank, then ours simply finished it off. If it was our tank, then ours destroyed it so that the Nazis would not get it. And if there is still ammo left, there is no need for special effects.

Take some time to find out how documentaries and videos are made for the Ministry of Defense, both educational and for propaganda purposes.

[wladimirjankov]

That's why I notice such absurdities as the strange fresh track behind. While you don't see it point-blank.

You weren't the only one with sharp eyes who saw this trace of another vehicle near the immobilized tank. But what's strange about it? It was our BMP or the enemy's, it doesn't matter. It couldn't evacuate the tank. It drove away. Ours, so that the tank wouldn't fall into the hands of the Nazis, simply finished it off. That's what I wrote about. It's unclear what special effects have to do with it. And mentioning your Chechen experience, which I seriously doubt, is not an argument. It was a completely different story there. And they certainly didn't make videos with "special effects" at the request of the Ministry of Defense.

[stankow]

The combustion of standard powder charges is unmistakable. Yellow hot gases, which under pressure come out of all holes and cracks. No other special effects are needed.

[Uncle_Misha]

Even if this video is staged, it doesn't change the matter. The information war is also going on, and this is one of its episodes. The defeat of a Soviet (Russian) tank is shown, which means that our T-80s, and all the others, will burn in exactly the same way after being hit by the Ukrainian analogue of the Lancet.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Even if this video is staged, it doesn't change the matter. The information war is also going on, and this is one of its episodes. The defeat of a Soviet (Russian) tank is shown, which means that our T-80s, and all the others, will burn in exactly the same way after being hit by the Ukrainian analogue of the Lancet.

This is also strange. A modern tank does not always defeat even an ATGM. And the Lancet has a warhead half as large.

[Uncle_Misha]

In such videos, and they are broadcast quite often, there is a certain pattern. If the object is hit and burns beautifully, the video continues, if there is a hit but there are no effects, then no. The Lancet, as far as I know, has a cumulative warhead, it depends on luck and where they hit.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

In such videos, and they are broadcast quite often, there is a certain pattern. If the object is hit and burns beautifully, the video continues, if there is a hit but there are no effects, then no

That's what I'm talking about. If you watch videos like this, you'll see that we have two UAVs for every Ukrainian tank, one hits, the other films.
Meanwhile, the fourth month has passed, and part of the Kursk region is under occupation.

Lancet, as far as I know, has a cumulative warhead, it depends on luck and where it hits

The ATGM is the same, but more powerful.

[Uncle_Misha]

The cumulative charge, with all its advantages, also has a number of disadvantages. The focal length did not hold up, the armor penetration dropped. The angle of attack is not right, there may not be any penetration. The behind-the-armor effect is small, the jet can even pass right through, but there will be no damage. So the main thing is to hit the right place.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

The cumulative charge, with all its advantages, also has a number of disadvantages. The focal length did not hold up, the armor penetration dropped. The angle of attack is not right, there may not be any penetration. The behind-the-armor effect is small, the jet can even pass right through, but there will be no damage. So the main thing is to hit the right place.

However, warhead power does matter.

[Maxim G]

Modern 152/155 mm howitzers have a much higher warhead count).
And the firing range is approximately the same as that of a loitering munition.

[single-n]

I can't say that this is a pure setup with pyrotechnicians on site. Because there aren't enough facts. As well as proving that it's impossible.

Let's assume a more benign option. It is more likely that this is a track from a Ukrainian evacuation vehicle. And the tank either broke down or caught some kind of mine. I do not exclude the possibility that it was hit by something before that. The same lancet immobilized it. The image from the drone is of disgusting quality. It is not at all clear what it is attacking. A tank or Minecraft textures.
After which the crew left the vehicle. One way or another. Maybe they did get someone. And the tank itself was finished off later. The tracks behind the tank are relatively fresh. Unlike the tracks in front of the tank. And the tank itself is not covered with snow. So less than a day passed between its stop and the finishing off. (The snow most likely came at night - but I can't say for 100%).
So we can sum it up.
1. The tank was moving somewhere in the morning. Possibly in tandem with some BMP or another tank.
2. Then for some reason he lost the ability to move. Whether this is due to the Russian Armed Forces or the carelessness of the crew itself, I don't know.
3. The crew left the tank and moved to the second vehicle, which was either with it initially or arrived later.
4. Since the evacuation vehicle went back, it seems that the tank/pair were still on the attack/reconnaissance. Having lost the tank, the detachment retreated to its starting point. The vehicle was most likely an infantry fighting vehicle. Since there are no signs of a turn. And the Ukrainian Armed Forces did not try to evacuate the tank with another tank. What they did in 2023. Perhaps they were afraid of an attack by the Russian Armed Forces, or the mud did not allow it.

I can’t squeeze more out of the video without going into the area of ​​SPGS.

[Askold65]

Quote: Single-n

I wonder why the tank was abandoned.

Because...
You were shown the "final chord" of the whole drama.

[Huarabey]

They simply finished off an abandoned tank. A common practice.

[2al]

The funny thing is that the ammo was not used up and detonated, but there is a problem with the fuel, no fuel combustion is observed. The crew did not agree with that.

[lukash66]

The thing is that the ammunition of any Soviet, Russian, or Ukrainian tank includes OFS.

[sepal81]

Quote: Eugen 62

Well, and additional confirmation of the staged video

One more addition. The T-80 tank is not typical for the Ukrainian Armed Forces at all. By the beginning of the hostilities, there were less than 100 of them in Ukraine, including those in storage. Previously, they were actively sold to Pakistan, Thailand (after conversion), and possibly elsewhere. That is, the command never saw this model in service. I don’t know if the Banderites still have them? Perhaps they managed to capture something in 2022 during the Kharkov counteroffensive. But this is not a mass quantity. In the case of a show, it would be better to take the T-64 or T-72. Then there would be less suspicion.

The T-80U tank is a trophy. The comrade above has long been recording all losses of Ukrainian Armed Forces equipment as "Mosfilm productions", there is a clinical case there.

[Elysium]

This is the job of the "comrade", the pigs themselves can't earn money

[suhorukofal]

It's not a job, it's a state of mind. The wind in your head is never a tailwind

[Nexcom]

...well, in general - we specially ram all the trophies on LBS or nearby - and then staged videos from drones. yeah. .....

This is how we fight... (if you believe Cypsotina)...

[Simon_Dellsen]

Y yo pregunto, todos los tanques y vehículos ucranianos ardiendo en estos casi tres años? También es un montaje?

Es un montaje Avdeevka, Bakhmut, Robotino, etc?

Lo interesante aquí, es que estos bichos, los drones, hasta se pueden cargar un portaaviones...

Ha cambiado la forma de hacer la guerra y Rusia, la madre patria, siempre se adapta y al final gana!!!!

Cordial caves

[Nexcom]

El amigo, I'm sick of the non-Russian comprende - the Google translator, please!

[Simon_Dellsen]

Dmitry, comrade, I am again excited (very angry) reading this nonsense.

I mean certain comments.

They bring nothing.

It's that simple!!!

-------

Dimitry, camarada, estoy re-caliente (lease enojadisimo) de leer estos disparates.

Me refiero a ciertos comentarios.

No news yet.

Así de simple!!!

[stankow]

The car is standing at the intersection and not moving. All open the hatches. There was no crew there, they finished off the abandoned car.

[senima56]

This is how to destroy! So that there is nothing to restore - only scrap metal!

[ideo098]

What if there is another scenario?
Ours attacked, but our T-80 was hit. The crew was evacuated (there are traces), perhaps they even wanted to evacuate the tank. But for some reason it didn't work out. So that the vehicle wouldn't fall into enemy hands, it was destroyed.
The T-80 engine is not a diesel, but a gas turbine, therefore the specificity of its design could not allow evacuation.

[75 Sergey]

Well, it didn't blow it up, the explosion of the internal ammunition blew the turret off.
The tank looked abandoned for some reason, which was a shame.

[Serg koma]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

It is sad, but the generations that learned to think logically and notice details after the nineties are mostly incapable of thinking logically and noticing details.

You assessed yourself

First. Can you 100% say that this is a T-80? Or are you referring to the title as a true Ekspert?
Second. Did you pay attention to nearby objects, how much snow is on the car skeletons, buildings? And on the tank? Hasn't moved in the near future The rest of your conclusions (drove up/loaded/hid/drove cameras/shot) are on the conscience of the snowfall
Third. Have you heard anything about "objective control" or "targeting"?

TOTAL: your "logic" and "observation" get a "C" - without reference to "hurray patriotism".

[Igor Polovodov]

Masterfully cuts through the ideological tumor...
"Lancet" - the name suits it!