Military Review

Militants say that in the province of Aleppo with the help of TOW they shot down a T-90 tank. Video

163
A video appeared on YouTube on the militant channel of the Ahrar al-Sham group, the author of which claims that a successful shot was fired from the American anti-tank TOW missile system. tank T-90 in the area of ​​the village of Khan-Tuman (Aleppo province). It is noteworthy that the material is presented almost in the form of a film, and even shot using several video cameras, one of which is placed on the drone.


Until recently, the presence of UAVs at Ahrar al-Sham was not known. Although the presented video of the fact of such availability certainly does not prove. But video tapping allows you to doubt that the video taken from the air is really the T-90 tank. From the video taken from the ground, it’s not at all possible to give an unequivocal answer as to exactly where the missile fired from the American anti-tank complex went, and whether the T-90 rocket was released at all.

One option:


Another option (with sound):


Questions are caused by the configuration of buildings and vegetation on different frames of the presented videos. A tree "disappears" somewhere, which in the first frames of a rocket hit is located very close to the tank (a few meters behind it).

There are no official confirmations from the Syrian command about the loss of a tank (T-90) in the area of ​​the settlement of Khan-Tuman.
Photos used:
youtube.com
163 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. St Petrov
    St Petrov 10 May 2016 18: 39
    +20
    the main thing is that the crew was not ours

    And in general, the main thing is that the crew is safe - the iron is all replaceable

    And the fact that they knocked out is not surprising. Probability theory works.

    So many times they shoot at him with guided weapons, he’ll blow them into his forehead a couple of times, well, he’ll surely go sideways. There is no getting around here.

    And they can also cut videos of different ones, because now every degrod has a foulichdi

    1. poquello
      poquello 10 May 2016 18: 52
      +10
      Quote: s-t Petrov
      And the fact that they knocked out is not surprising. Probability theory works.

      twice did not believe, the third will
    2. naraevskij1957
      naraevskij1957 10 May 2016 19: 04
      +12
      Why did the BC not explode? I'm a tanker myself. 62,72, (which is very close to the T-90), 80. Probably the KDZ worked. Otherwise, it would simply "fly apart"
      1. just exp
        just exp 10 May 2016 19: 22
        +17
        there were a lot of cases of breaking through armor in Chechnya and the tank remained intact, there were even tanks that survived 5 crews each. so undermining the BC is not always there.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan 13 May 2016 10: 56
          0
          The record for 12 hits was per battle ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Ivan_ich
        Ivan_ich 10 May 2016 19: 35
        +27
        In a similar video, Abrams louder louder ... already the tower was demolished.
        1. Gogia
          Gogia 12 May 2016 14: 37
          0
          Is not the bassoon in the picture .....
        2. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 13 May 2016 11: 25
          +1
          Quote: Ivan_ich
          In a similar video, Abrams louder louder ... already the tower was demolished.

          Your video is not complete.
          Firstly, the tower was not demolished - with the detonation of the BK - it carried out the knock-out panels behind the tower where the BK at Abrams was laid. The continuation of this video - a tankman jumps out of the tower and runs away.
      4. Aleksey_K
        Aleksey_K 10 May 2016 20: 00
        +39
        Quote: naraevskij1957
        Why did the BC not explode? I'm a tanker myself. 62,72, (which is very close to the T-90), 80. Probably the KDZ worked. Otherwise, it would simply "fly apart"

        I agree with you, and also a tanker. It is very likely that the tankers again forgot to turn on active defense, as it was on the video some time ago. Dynamic protection worked. Therefore, the tank did not explode, but only smokes. If the TOU rocket penetrated the armor, then from the explosion of the ammunition we would see a column of flame, and not a slight smoke from dying outdoor equipment. The crew is most likely shell-shocked. Surprisingly, in the video, the tank without the cover of the Syrian soldiers, what did he do alone in the open? Nearby was a smashed and also smoking stone fence. So there was another shot from the TOU, didn’t it take a few seconds to call in for cover? Why is no one trying to save the crew? Are they specifically trying to discredit Russian equipment? It would be good if Russian specialists in Syria would understand in this case getting into the tank and punish those who were responsible for the irresponsible fighting of the Syrian soldiers.
        Therefore, it does not surprise me that, with full advantage in technology and soldiers, several Arab countries could not conquer Israel in the last century!
        1. K-50
          K-50 10 May 2016 20: 11
          +26
          Quote: Алексей_К
          Surprisingly, in the video, the tank without the cover of the Syrian soldiers, what did he do alone in the open?

          Maybe the production story was removed altogether in order to denigrate Russian weapons, and for this the drone flies over it. Moreover, it is impossible to unequivocally state that this T-90 in these frames. request
          1. dmi.pris
            dmi.pris 10 May 2016 20: 57
            +1
            Was there a crew there at all? They often drop equipment, useless warriors ..
            1. figwam
              figwam 10 May 2016 22: 13
              +11
              From the first video, from 39 seconds, in the upper right corner, in front of the fence, people walk quietly.
              On the second from 53 sec.
          2. cap
            cap 10 May 2016 20: 58
            +12
            Quote: K-50
            Quote: Алексей_К
            Surprisingly, in the video, the tank without the cover of the Syrian soldiers, what did he do alone in the open?

            Maybe the production story was removed altogether in order to denigrate Russian weapons, and for this the drone flies over it. Moreover, it is impossible to unequivocally state that this T-90 in these frames. request


            I watched I concluded, Hollywood and only.
            The goal is to discredit Russian tanks.
            I am 100% sure. The states have been ordered, the barmalei have removed. The price tag for 100 dollars premium will pull.
        2. ty60
          ty60 10 May 2016 20: 23
          +6
          And the time of prayer? Which Arab does not pray at this time having opened at least the upper hatch so that Allah sees?
        3. Igor39
          Igor39 10 May 2016 20: 55
          +12
          Alexey_K (3) RU October 26, 2013 20:11 p.m. ↑
          In the Mediterranean Sea in the Syrian region there was an incindet with the Americans. The submarine was underwater and the Americans were hunting for it. There was a forced ascent. And the frigate at this time went in full swing across the hull of the boat. Only an urgent dive saved the boat. The commander gave the order to torpedo the frigate. Like a cow tongue licked. They did not even have time to send a radiogram. So they remained missing for America.
          Reply Quote Report Abuse

          Alexey_K (3) RU October 26, 2013 20:04 p.m. ↑
          Really needed! Once in a hospital, a captain of the first rank told me about an incident with the Americans. Amerikosy got on their planes from one aircraft carrier to bomb our units on the territory of Syria. The commander of the air regiment, without agreement with the Ministry of Defense, raised the regiment by links and, flying over water, bombarded the deck of the aircraft carrier with missiles. All aircraft on deck and superstructures were demolished. But the aircraft carrier did not drown. There was a terrible scandal between America and the USSR. But the Americans also stopped bombing Russians and Syria. The regiment was summoned to Moscow, they thought they would shoot it, and they were awarded the Hero of the Soviet Union because the Americans had managed and stopped! And where to get planes in other regions? There are no bases!

          I remember your posts, you didn’t seem to be in the Navy? smile
          1. Aleksey_K
            Aleksey_K 10 May 2016 22: 15
            0
            Quote: Igor39
            I remember your posts, you didn’t seem to be in the Navy?

            No, I didn’t serve in the Navy, although I’ve been in voyages. And these cases were told to me when I was lying in the hospital, a submarine officer lying in the same hospital.
            1. Cappit
              Cappit 11 May 2016 03: 35
              +4
              Submariners - they are strong in poisoning bikes.
              1. iouris
                iouris 12 May 2016 22: 49
                0
                Have you read about the "loopback" made by a submarine?
          2. Serg65
            Serg65 11 May 2016 07: 29
            +10
            Quote: Igor39
            The commander gave the order to torpedo the frigate. Like a cow tongue licked. They did not even have time to send a radiogram. So they remained missing for America.

            Quote: Igor39
            Amerikosy got on their planes from one aircraft carrier to bomb our units on the territory of Syria. The commander of the air regiment, without agreement with the Ministry of Defense, raised the regiment by links and, flying over water, bombarded the deck of the aircraft carrier with missiles. All aircraft on deck and superstructures were demolished. But the aircraft carrier did not drown.

            Quote: Igor39
            A captain of the first rank told me once while in a hospital

            Igor, you’ll excuse me ... but this is an ordinary naval chatter! I won’t talk about nuclear submarines, but the fact that the Americans bombed from an aircraft carrier ..... in order to raise the deck carrier from an aircraft carrier in Sredizemka, the commander of the 6 fleet officially announced the departure of the commander of the Soviet 5 OpESk, otherwise the squadron declared combat alert and the departure of the Americans would be considered combat followed by adequate action. hi
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 11 May 2016 09: 49
              +4
              Can you imagine a bombed American aircraft carrier? me not. And how did the planes fly through the entire warrant?
        4. BULB TARAS
          BULB TARAS 10 May 2016 22: 53
          +1
          "children of the mountains" what to take from them ...
        5. Saburov
          Saburov 10 May 2016 23: 11
          +10
          Quote: Алексей_К
          I agree with you, and also a tanker. It is very likely that the tankers again forgot to turn on active defense


          You see the same tanker as the one you quote. Firstly, there is no active defense on the T-90, there are KOEP and DZ. Secondly, against the TOW-2 (which is controlled by wire), the Curtain is useless (it is designed to interfere with laser-guided missiles and ATGMs).

          Quote: Алексей_К
          Therefore, the tank did not explode, but only smokes.


          To immediately pulled the BC need a coincidence of very unlikely factors, which I described below. In 99% of cases, detonation of a detonator is a fire and this happens after a while, by heating the detonator and not always. More often from detonation of HE shell.

          Quote: Алексей_К
          The crew is most likely shell-shocked.


          Is the crew alive rather than dead or is the crew more dead than alive? What fortunetelling on coffee grounds?

          Quote: Алексей_К
          Surprisingly, in the video, the tank without the cover of the Syrian soldiers, what did he do alone in the open?


          What would the Syrian soldiers do? Would you become a human shield around a tank? What cover? Usually a soldier is covered by armor, and not vice versa, and even more so in open areas (at least life taught me this for all the companies and "rest" in Burdenko).

          Quote: Алексей_К
          So there was another shot from the TOU, didn’t it take a few seconds to call in for cover?


          If you ride a bicycle and hit your head with a brick, can you call in for cover? In my battalion, the drivers of the water received light concussion when undermining the TM-57 and were in a stupor for an hour. And with a heavy one, consider for life d.u.r.a.ch.o.k. with headaches.

          Quote: Алексей_К
          Are they specifically trying to discredit Russian equipment?


          They’re trying and I’ll tell you in secret, there is no perfect technique, no technique is fighting, and people and the success of combat use depends on a huge number of factors, whether the gunner slept well and the level of headaches of the command.

          PS In the future, have at least minimal knowledge on the topic about which you write, so as not to so openly scorch the nonsense that you wrote.
          1. Professor
            Professor 11 May 2016 06: 39
            +8
            Quote: Saburov
            You see the same tanker as the one you quote. Firstly, there is no active defense on the T-90, there are KOEP and DZ. Secondly, against the TOW-2 (which is controlled by wire), the Curtain is useless (it is designed to interfere with laser-guided missiles and ATGMs).

            Are you sure you are a tanker?
            1. The curtain is active protection. Not passive as armor, not reactive as DZ, but active belonging to the Soft Kill class. You can enable or disable this protection (assetdeactivate and deactivate).
            2. The curtain is also designed to counter such TOU complexes in the tail of which is a lamp (tracer) which is guided by the ATGM guidance system (sighting device with a coordinator) transmitting control signals by wire. The Curtain Spotlight shines brighter (more energy is heard) than the lamp in the tail of the rocket and the ATGM guidance system picks up the rocket.

            We learn materiel. wink

            The most common of these are anti-tank guided weapon systems, including a guided projectile (missile) with a tracer and an aiming device with a coordinator. The principle of operation of the specified guided weapons is as follows. The operator, observing in the sighting device, provides constant guidance of the sighting line (sighting mark) on the target. The coordinator automatically determines the deviation of the tracer, and hence the projectile from the aiming line, and sends correction commands to the projectile, for example, by wire or radio, ensuring the projectile travels strictly along the aiming line before it hits the target. For recognition by the project coordinator against the background of interference present on the battlefield, the projectile tracer emits a frequency-modulated light signal in the visible and near infrared range.

            From the side of the tank, without distracting the crew from their main combat work, an effective barrage can be created in a wide sector that protects the object from ATGM with infrared coordinators (types "Toy", "Milan", "Hot", "Dragon", etc. ), which are common types of anti-tank weapons.
            A searchlight installation is capable of providing both illumination of the battlefield and radiation with a modulation frequency and spectral range close to those characteristic for tracer shells (missiles) of anti-tank guided weapons with optical determinants of the position of a guided projectile (missile) along the tracer.
            1. Saburov
              Saburov 11 May 2016 14: 36
              +2
              Quote: Professor
              Are you sure you are a tanker?
              1. The curtain is active protection. Not passive as armor, not reactive as DZ, but active belonging to the Soft Kill class. You can enable or disable this protection (activate and deactivate).
              2. The curtain is also designed to counter such TOU complexes in the tail of which is a lamp (tracer) which is guided by the ATGM guidance system (sighting device with a coordinator) transmitting control signals by wire. The Curtain Spotlight shines brighter (more energy is heard) than the lamp in the tail of the rocket and the ATGM guidance system picks up the rocket.


              I’m sure you don’t go to a fortuneteller.
              1) This is all the Jews have for you that Soft Kill smokes, and when I met the complex in 1990, it was called (Optoelectronic Counteraction Complex - COEP), then it suddenly became a complex of electron-optical active protection. The teapot can also be activated and deactivated (deactivation, as you wrote Professor is one of the methods of disinfection), but the teapot will not become an active defense against this.
              2) For old TOWs, this is relevant (although a lot depends on some factors) and as you might guess in TOW-2, command guidance is semi-automatic, by wire. The principle of active guidance is based on direct control of the missile flight (by radio or wire) by the operator (machine gun) on the carrier. The advantages of this method are that the operator has full control over the missile guidance, it is practically impossible to hit the 'false' target, there is the possibility of retargeting. Setting up a smoke screen (the most common method of camouflaging armored vehicles) is not always effective against missiles. The operator only needs to see a fragment of the target (or the contours of the target) through the smoke screen to hit the target. Also, with a high probability, a completely invisible target is hit if its position is known (it was possible to detect it before the smoke screen was set) relative to visible landmarks. And besides, on TOW-2A, the problem with the IR emitter is solved and the Curtain is already useless against it. The purpose of the Curtain is to protect against ATGMs and laser-guided projectiles. And the operator can be interfered with only knowing the modulation frequencies and radiation ranges.

              PS So the Professor (you’re like an engineer of the Black Sea Fleet as far as I remember) is definitely not your topic and path in order to flash your mind.
              1. Professor
                Professor 11 May 2016 15: 14
                -1
                Quote: Saburov
                1) This is all the Jews have for you that Soft Kill smokes, and when I met the complex in 1990, it was called (Optoelectronic Counteraction Complex - COEP), then it suddenly became a complex of electron-optical active protection. The teapot can also be activated and deactivated (deactivation, as you wrote Professor is one of the methods of disinfection), but the teapot will not become an active defense against this.

                I’m dropping lunges about the Jews, but the Curtain is active protection. The materiel however. "Curtain" actively struggling. Not passive. Do you know the difference? wink


                Quote: Saburov
                For older TOWs, this is true.

                Wow. The opponent once again sat down in a puddle begins verbal diarrhea. Poke it again with your nose into the materiel:

                From the side of the tank, without distracting the crew from their main combat work, an effective barrage can be created in a wide sector that protects the object from ATGM with infrared coordinators (types "Toy", "Milan", "Hot", "Dragon", etc. ), which are common types of anti-tank weapons.
                A searchlight installation is capable of providing both illumination of the battlefield and radiation with a modulation frequency and spectral range close to those characteristic for tracer shells (missiles) of anti-tank guided weapons with optical determinants of the position of a guided projectile (missile) along the tracer.


                Quote: Saburov
                And besides, on TOW-2A, the problem with the infrared emitter is solved and the Curtain is already useless against it

                Yes? And before there was a problem with the tracer? Well, how is it solved?
                wink

                Quote: Saburov
                PS So the Professor (you’re like an engineer of the Black Sea Fleet as far as I remember) is definitely not your topic and path in order to flash your mind.

                Former I am an engineer of the Black Sea Fleet, former. And now, by all means, the most bourgeois engineer with a bourgeois diploma is able to understand the wind gradient and the ATGM guidance system of the TOU.

                PS
                Can you, as a "tanker", write us an article about TOU? So to speak, you will conduct an educational program. I promise not to laugh.
                1. Saburov
                  Saburov 11 May 2016 16: 03
                  +2
                  Quote: Professor
                  I omit attacks about the Jews, but the Blind is an active defense. The materiel however. "Blind" is actively fighting. Not passive. Do you know the difference?


                  Professor, is it difficult for you to go to any resource and read?
                  Optoelectronic Suppression System
                  The Russian system of optical-electronic suppression "Shtora-1" works well on the outdated complexes of Milan, HOT, TOW of the first modifications, "Baby", "Bassoon", "Phalanx", "Competition", etc. But on new systems (eg TOW -2A) in addition to the xenon lamp, an infrared emitter with its modulator is installed in the stern of the rocket, which is also perceived by the coordinator of the complex, so this system becomes ineffective. And on promising vehicles, for example, on modernized T-90СМ tanks, it is not installed. The injection of diesel into the exhaust system also puts a smokescreen.

                  Quote: Professor
                  Wow. The opponent once again sat down in a puddle begins verbal diarrhea. Poke it again with your nose into the materiel:


                  Your materiel begins and ends at the computer table, you can wipe your piquant place with this materiel, the life of the professor is varied and unpredictable, especially when you participated.
                  The principle of active guidance is based on direct control of the missile flight (by radio or wire) by the operator (machine gun) on the carrier. The advantages of this method are that the operator has full control over the missile guidance, it is practically impossible to hit the 'false' target, there is the possibility of retargeting. Setting up a smoke screen (the most common method of camouflaging armored vehicles) is not always effective against missiles. The operator only needs to see a fragment of the target (or the contours of the target) through the smoke screen to hit the target. Also, with a high probability, a completely invisible target is hit if its position is known (it was possible to detect it before the smoke screen was set) relative to visible landmarks.

                  Quote: Professor
                  Yes? And before there was a problem with the tracer? Well, how is it solved?


                  Complex of protection against high-precision weapons "Shtora-1"
                  Features
                  1) Protection against anti-tank guided missiles using laser target illumination
                  2) Protection against artillery weapons having a laser fire rangefinder fire control system
                  3) Protection against anti-tank guided missiles with a semi-automatic command guidance system (but this is where the random law that I described above enters)
                  4) It was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines.

                  Quote: Professor
                  Former I am an engineer of the Black Sea Fleet, former. And now, by all means, the most bourgeois engineer with a bourgeois diploma is able to understand the wind gradient and the ATGM guidance system of the TOU.


                  You are capable of only what you read about and no more. And you still have not decided whether you are a Soviet engineer or a bourgeois?
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 11 May 2016 16: 35
                    -1
                    Quote: Saburov
                    Russian optical-electronic suppression system "Shtora-1" works well on outdated complexes Milan, HOT, TOW first modifications

                    Quote: Saburov
                    Secondly against TOW-2 (which is controlled by wire) Curtain useless (It is designed to interfere with laser-guided missiles and ATGMs).

                    Did you write this both times? So against the second-generation TOW and ATGM "Shtora" or not? And where are the wires? wink

                    Quote: Saburov
                    Your materiel begins and ends at the computer table, you can wipe your piquant place with this materiel, the life of the professor is varied and unpredictable, especially when you participated.

                    We pass on to the person? I'm at the desk now reading the instructions for using the TOU. 500 pages. Have you seen them in your eyes? Maybe you saw the TOU itself or talked with people using the TOU? I saw and talked.

                    And before there was a problem with the tracer? Well, how is it solved?

                    Quote: Saburov
                    You are capable of only what you read about and no more.

                    Unfortunately, you probably do not know how to read. Learn the materiel. hi

                    PS
                    In addition to the xenon lamp, an infrared emitter with its own modulator is installed in the stern of the rocket, which is also perceived by the coordinator of the complex, so this system becomes inefficient

                    My personal opinion about Shtor as it was negative remained, but not thanks to the cleverness that you poured here. The curtain shines under its nose (and no more) with white noise that can clog both the modulation and the IR spectrum. The problem is that the probability that the Shtora will be in the right place at the right time in the right direction is approaching zero (which we have already witnessed), but the Shtora itself will unmask the tank for many kilometers. The tank with it glows like a Christmas tree.
                    1. Saburov
                      Saburov 11 May 2016 18: 20
                      +1
                      Quote: Professor
                      Did you write this both times? So against the second-generation TOW and ATGM "Shtora" or not? And where are the wires?


                      What a profane professor you are. TOW-2 has a semi-automatic command control system, by wire. As far as I know, TOW-2 and TOW-2А (in rare cases) were seen in Syria. Wireless TOW-2A may be present there, but I personally didn’t come across video from resources. Your article? http://topwar.ru/10626-ptrk-bgm-71-tow.html

                      Quote: Professor
                      We pass on to the person? I'm at the desk now reading the instructions for using the TOU. 500 pages. Have you seen them in your eyes? Maybe you saw the TOU itself or talked with people using the TOU? I saw and talked.


                      Imagine seen and even touched with his hands. Do you have instructions for the T-90 or the Curtain-1 on the table there?


                      Quote: Professor
                      Unfortunately, you probably do not know how to read. Learn the materiel.


                      Yes, he was born in the forest, prayed to the wheel, knew little and lived well.

                      Quote: Professor
                      My personal opinion about Shtor as it was negative remained, but not thanks to the cleverness that you poured here. The curtain shines under its nose (and no more) with white noise that can clog both the modulation and the IR spectrum. The problem is that the probability that the Shtora will be in the right place at the right time in the right direction is approaching zero (which we have already witnessed), but the Shtora itself will unmask the tank for many kilometers. The tank with it glows like a Christmas tree.


                      Well, your opinion does not play any role whatsoever. The curtain does its job well and works well against anti-tank missiles and laser-guided projectiles and targeting. Moreover, the battlefield is always sparkling and unmasking signs (lights, light rockets, flashes, etc.). And the tank, as you hope, is known to have been created as an attacking unit and a vehicle for breaking through enemy defenses. And even in modern conditions, it will be discovered already long before it turns on IR illuminators.

                      Quote: Professor
                      And before there was a problem with the tracer? Well, how is it solved?


                      With reading you do not care.
                      An additional infrared emitter with its own modulator installed in the stern of the rocket of the newer TOW-2A (in addition to the standard xenon lamp), the signal of which is also received by the ATGM coordinator.
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 11 May 2016 18: 50
                        -1
                        Quote: Saburov
                        TOW-2 has a semi-automatic command control system, by wire. As far as I know, TOW-2 and TOW-2A (in rare cases) were seen in Syria. Wireless TOW-2A may be present there, but I personally did not come across video from resources.

                        And someone and somewhere saw a wireless version of the TOU? wink

                        Quote: Saburov
                        Imagine seen and even touched with his hands. Do you have instructions for the T-90 or the Curtain-1 on the table there?

                        1. I do not believe.
                        2. Instructions for TOU.

                        Quote: Saburov
                        The curtain does its job well and works well against anti-tank missiles and laser-guided projectiles and targeting.

                        Does it work well against ATGMs and laser-guided projectiles? Where??????????????????????

                        Quote: Saburov
                        With reading you do not care.
                        An additional infrared emitter with its own modulator installed in the stern of the rocket of the newer TOW-2A (in addition to the standard xenon lamp), the signal of which is also received by the ATGM coordinator.

                        Quote: Saburov
                        And also on the TOW-2A problem The IR emitter is resolved and the Curtain is already useless against it.

                        Well? So what was the problem with the tracer? More specifically pliz. On Sunday I’ll tell my colleague who served an urgent and an employee in the reserve in Maglan. Let him know what his problems are with the materiel. crying
                      2. Saburov
                        Saburov 11 May 2016 20: 20
                        +1
                        Quote: Professor
                        1. I do not believe.
                        2. Instructions for TOU.


                        It is your right.
                        So write right away: give instructions for the Curtain-1.

                        Quote: Professor
                        Does it work well against ATGMs and laser-guided projectiles? Where??????????????????????




                        Quote: Professor
                        Well? So what was the problem with the tracer? More specifically pliz. On Sunday I’ll tell my colleague who served an urgent and an employee in the reserve in Maglan. Let him know what his problems are with the materiel.


                        Yes, at least tell your boatswain with the Black Sea Fleet. What is this business to me? Go Professor activate and deactivate your knowledge.
                      3. Professor
                        Professor 12 May 2016 06: 51
                        -1
                        Quote: Saburov
                        So write right away: give instructions for the Curtain-1.

                        What for? I have her TTX.

                        Quote: Saburov
                        Where??????????????????????

                        Does the commercial work well against anti-tank missiles and laser-guided projectiles? I knew it. wassat

                        Quote: Saburov
                        Yes, at least tell your boatswain with the Black Sea Fleet. What is this business to me? Go Professor activate and deactivate your knowledge.

                        Well? So what was the problem with the tracer? More specifically pliz.
      5. Sarmat149
        Sarmat149 11 May 2016 09: 34
        0
        Oh and Saburov, the political officer probably. For me, just one of your phrases about covering armored vehicles with infantry is enough. Nothing further to say.

        I catch cons)))
        1. Aroma77
          Aroma77 11 May 2016 11: 30
          +3
          Catch it. In this context, it was written that it was the armor that covers the soldiers, and not vice versa. Read carefully.
      6. Aleksey_K
        Aleksey_K 11 May 2016 14: 18
        -1
        Quote: Saburov
        So there was another shot from the TOU

        I don't even want to argue with you, because You like to misinterpret. I wrote: “Nearby there was a smashed and also smoking stone fence. So there was another shot from the TOU, was it really not a few seconds to drive behind the cover?”. You ripped out a piece of text and presented it as if it was hitting a tank. They began to paint me about the mechanics. What does the hit from the TOU into the fence have to do with the driver's concussion?
        Well, about active protection they have spun.
        1. Saburov
          Saburov 11 May 2016 18: 26
          +1
          Quote: Алексей_К
          I don't even want to argue with you, because You like to misinterpret. I wrote: “Nearby there was a smashed and also smoking stone fence. So there was another shot from the TOU, was it really not a few seconds to drive behind the cover?”.


          Are you trying to smooth your bloop? Your words?

          Quote: Алексей_К
          If the TOU rocket penetrated the armor, then from the explosion of the ammunition we would see a column of flame, and not a slight smoke from dying outdoor equipment.


          And what interesting outdoor equipment is burning out there?
      7. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 13 May 2016 11: 53
        +1
        Quote: Saburov
        To immediately pulled the BC need a coincidence of very unlikely factors, which I described below. In 99% of cases, detonation of a detonator is a fire and this happens after a while, by heating the detonator and not always. More often from detonation of HE shell.


        here is an example of the coincidence of factors - the detonation of the BC at the moment of breaking into the side (Hash Hash) is not as unlikely as it turns out ...
        https://youtu.be/inxALZbZdI0
    3. aziatt
      aziatt 10 May 2016 23: 12
      +6
      In the Arab-Israeli war, the Syrians lost the T-72 battalion and accused us of having bad tanks.
      They met on an oncoming march with an Israeli tank convoy, defeated it and began to dance and rejoice right at the battlefield, but the Israelis managed to call the aircraft and they bombed them. But they threw a complaint to me. These are the Arab fighters. This was told to us by the teacher when I studied at the tank engineering school, he then went there with our specialists, the tank will be sorted out, but the tank was new at that time and we sent them there for testing
    4. okunevich_rv
      okunevich_rv 11 May 2016 03: 53
      +1
      It’s absolutely right that you noticed, the video was shot specifically to discredit the Russian tank, hence all the consequences, such as shooting from an UAV. And then everywhere on the Internet, abrams fly apart, only fluff and feathers, and you can lose the market.
    5. Gogia
      Gogia 12 May 2016 14: 38
      0
      Give the Shaitans a good apparatus, they will either lose it in the field or drown in a swamp ...
    6. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 13 May 2016 11: 36
      +1
      Quote: Алексей_К
      If the TOU rocket penetrated the armor, then from the explosion of the ammunition we would see a column of flame, and not a slight smoke from dying outdoor equipment.


      1. The terrain is identical to that on the set from the side of the launcher, which is from the copter.
      2. Crew hatches are open (it can be assumed that at least the crew was evacuated or evacuated independently).
      3. Smoke comes out of the hatches - accordingly there is penetration of the armor, but the cumulative stream did not enter the ammunition tank and the fire extinguishing system worked out.

      And about the Arabs as a soldier - there are numerous videos where the Syrian tankmen act boldly and competently. And at the same time, they can roll out into the open, substitute the bot and stand for some time enough for the enemy to change position and throw Hashim or TOU from the RPG.
  2. Saburov
    Saburov 10 May 2016 21: 57
    +6
    Quote: naraevskij1957
    Why did the BC not explode? I'm a tanker myself. 62,72, (which is very close to the T-90), 80. Probably the KDZ worked. Otherwise, it would simply "fly apart"


    Something you are telling, dear fairy tales, for my entire service after the CTFTC for more than 25 years, I only saw 2 times how detonated a BC in the first BC more often burns out rather than detonates. In order for the ammunition to detonate, it is necessary: ​​when the armor is burned by a cumulative projectile strictly in the projection of the ammunition and if the gas stream hits the shell or the HE shell (which is extremely unlikely), the armor-piercing blank gets into the HE shell, and not the sleeve. the fuse is blown off the fuse, the fuse tripped when the detonator capsule was unbroken (from impact) and 99% of the causes of detonation of the detonator is a subsequent fire. For the BC to explode, it is necessary to match the above reasons, which is very rare in nature. So you either heard the army horror stories or you urgently served. And as for the video, it’s hard to say, but at first glance the fire extinguishing system worked, it was possible to break through the armor although it was clearly not visible (most likely under the shoulder strap), although the DZ (as far as I could see) seemed to be in place and left the carriage incomprehensibly ... more detailed video.
    1. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 10 May 2016 22: 53
      +4
      Quote: Saburov
      In order for the ammunition to detonate, it is necessary: ​​when the armor is burned by a cumulative projectile strictly in the projection of the ammunition and if the gas stream hits the shell or the HE shell (which is extremely unlikely), the armor-piercing blank gets into the HE shell, and not the sleeve. the fuse is blown off the fuse, the fuse tripped when the detonator capsule was unbroken (from impact) and 99% of the causes of detonation of the detonator is a subsequent fire. For the BC to explode, it is necessary to match the above reasons, which is very rare in nature.

      When a unitary cartridge used in tanks was used in tanks, the detonation or ignition of gunpowder in shells is really unlikely. Separate loading is used in the T-90 and the propellant charge has combustible cardboard walls, also impregnated with explosive composition, to completely burn cardboard in the barrel of the gun. The autoloader in the T-90 does not have a special fence that would prevent propellant charges from igniting when the armor is burned by a cumulative projectile. So now the ammunition light up very easily. And the fire extinguishing system, if the tank is damaged, can also fail. Forget about armor-piercing blanks in TOW-2 complexes, this is your personal invention. In general, you argue as if you were serving in the 60's on the T-54, T-55 and T-62 tanks and you would be fired from guns from the time of the 1941-1945.
      1. Saburov
        Saburov 11 May 2016 00: 50
        +7
        Quote: Алексей_К
        When a unitary cartridge used in tanks was used in tanks, the detonation or ignition of gunpowder in shells is really unlikely. Separate loading is used in the T-90 and the propellant charge has combustible cardboard walls, also impregnated with explosive composition, to completely burn cardboard in the barrel of the gun. The autoloader in the T-90 does not have a special fence that would prevent propellant charges from igniting when the armor is burned by a cumulative projectile.


        I am well aware of this, since I spent most of my service on the 72, which is why I wrote about the burnout of the ammunition, and not about explosions like you. And artillery gunpowder does not detonate, but burn during the chemical reaction of self-oxidation.

        Quote: Алексей_К
        So now the ammunition light up very easily.


        This, too, the grandmother said in two, looking where she gets. For this, I more intelligibly and explained. I can tell you a hundred cases when they came full of holes from the cumulative and whole and without ignition BC.

        Quote: Алексей_К
        Forget about armor-piercing blanks in TOW-2 complexes, this is your personal invention.


        Actually, I didn’t say this, where did you get this from? I know perfectly well what TOW-2 is and even imagine it as a trophy.

        Quote: Алексей_К
        You argue, as if you were serving in the 60's on the T-54, T-55 and T-62 tanks and you would be fired from guns from the time of the 1941-1945.


        Graduation year at 1986 PTCU. I reason so that everyone understands and is clear. Do not write to me about the explosions and round dances of Syrian sodates around the tank in the open.
        1. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 11 May 2016 14: 33
          0
          Quote: Saburov
          Forget about armor-piercing blanks in TOW-2 complexes, this is your personal invention.

          Actually, I didn’t say this, where did you get this from? I know perfectly well what TOW-2 is and even imagine it as a trophy.

          Why even mention armor-piercing blanks when the article deals with TOU. These are your words: "... the armor-piercing blank hits the HE shell ...". What for? So I answered you about these blanks. You also clutched at one word "explosion". But I did not write about the detonation of shells: "... then from the explosion of ammunition we would see a column of flame, and not a light smoke from a dying out external equipment ..." As you understand, detonation and just a column of flame are different phenomena. Upon detonation, the tower would have been torn off and thrown 10 meters away. How you love to misinterpret!
          1. Saburov
            Saburov 11 May 2016 18: 33
            +1
            Quote: Алексей_К
            Why even mention armor-piercing blanks when the article deals with TOU. These are your words: "... the armor-piercing blank hits the HE shell ...". What for? So I answered you about these blanks. You also clutched at one word "explosion". But I did not write about the detonation of shells: "... then from the explosion of ammunition we would see a column of flame, and not a light smoke from a dying out external equipment ..." As you understand, detonation and just a column of flame are different phenomena. Upon detonation, the tower would have been torn off and thrown 10 meters away. How you love to misinterpret!


            Because most people (who did not even serve in the army and know tanks only by games) cannot explain what a unitary ammunition is or separate and sabot loading. Therefore, I wrote to make it clearer.
      2. Saburov
        Saburov 11 May 2016 03: 14
        +5
        Quote: Алексей_К
        So now the ammunition light up very easily


        At VO there was such an article about the survivability of the 72s. http://topwar.ru/27952-t-72-vyzhivaemost-v-boyu.html

        Here is a good example for you, about the "light" burnout of the bookmaker. If necessary, I will add photos of leaked and unburned cars from my photo archive.
        1. Aleksandr12
          Aleksandr12 11 May 2016 08: 59
          0
          If it's not hard for you. It would be very interesting to see these photos, with relevant comments of course.
      3. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 11 May 2016 17: 21
        +1
        Quote: Алексей_К
        So now the ammunition light up very easily.

        Hello, Alexey.
        If the BK in the fighting compartment and the storage tank (T-72 (90)), then yes - the detonation of the BK is possible.
        But not always.
        Saburov is right that the charge does not explode but burns. To get into the HE shell is an accident.
        Knocking occurs most often from heating as a result of a fire.

        If the BC is only in the AZ conveyor, detonation from penetration by cumulative is practically unrealistic.
        Only after some time and again - due to the effects of fire.
        .............
        Most of all, in the Czech Republic, zhurnalyugi infuriated, they did not remove the tanks of the whole company, which ALL had hits, they only shot ONE tank company, collapsed into pieces.
        “Why do we have to shoot whole cars?” We need fried stuff ...
        .uki.
        .............

        Yes, guys, you be careful with "burning", children can read us.
        wink
    2. aziatt
      aziatt 10 May 2016 23: 22
      0
      Tou2 hits the projection and most likely doesn’t strike, it dies in the dynamics, and Tou2 m hits from above into the roof, it will definitely hit. I know, right now, you can tell a wise guy found, but only a tanker should know the principle of a cumulative projectile, because he doesn’t burn through but presses his armor, and the fire inside the car is an isobaric process from a jet with enormous pressure, which no one could measure, and these are words also a tanker, but a zampotech and not a commander. And a zampotech from the best KTTIU school for those years, all the same 5 years of training and not 4
      1. Saburov
        Saburov 11 May 2016 02: 58
        +2
        Quote: aziatt
        but the tanker only needs to know the principle of the cumulative projectile, because he doesn’t burn through but pushes through the armor, and the fire inside the car is already an isobaric process from a jet with enormous pressure, which no one could measure, and these are also tanker's words, but the deputy head commander. and Zampotech from the best school of those years at KVTIU, all the same 5 years of study and not 4


        So you will not please everyone and do not explain, you will need to read it yourself. You would write about the yield strength of metal or plastic deformation.
  • Lieutenant Izhe
    Lieutenant Izhe 10 May 2016 19: 54
    +5
    and what is MINUSE something?
    "War without losses DOES NOT HAPPEN!"
    I.Stalin
    1. jjj
      jjj 10 May 2016 20: 04
      +6
      And the rocket flies invisibly
      1. Alexei
        Alexei 11 May 2016 02: 15
        +1
        Quote: jjj
        And the rocket flies invisibly

        And I was more outraged by the fact that the trace in the air from a rocket (a white strip) somehow unnaturally changes the angle - mine says that this does not happen smile And the next frames will be given a head start on a mediocre video game schedule.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • ty60
    ty60 10 May 2016 20: 19
    +10
    Shnyaga. Explosion of something invisibly incomprehensible than. A burnt something resembling a tank in shape, starting from 62 ki. Brehnya.
  • Palladin
    Palladin 11 May 2016 09: 54
    0
    My friends, do not you think that someone was pampered with a video editor.
  • Gogia
    Gogia 12 May 2016 14: 31
    0
    BC did not explode, so they patch up. Nothing more surprising. It’s a pity there’s no shooting, as in Iraq from the DShK they were processed in the back of the Abramsa tower .... What would they say%))))
  • Dezinto
    Dezinto 10 May 2016 18: 41
    +25
    They knew right now that it was right now and it was this tank that would be hit and shot ...

    Odd somehow skepticism ...
    1. poquello
      poquello 10 May 2016 18: 53
      +19
      Quote: DEZINTO
      They knew right now that it was right now and it was this tank that would be hit and shot ...

      Odd somehow skepticism ...

      odd somehow strong skepticism
      1. cniza
        cniza 10 May 2016 19: 01
        +16
        It looks like the propaganda was shot and the director decided to save money.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 10 May 2016 19: 21
      +7
      Quote: DEZINTO
      They knew right now that it was right now and it was this tank that would be hit and shot ...

      Odd somehow skepticism ...

      What other skepticism? The eye sees bullshit, but the brain does not give out the analysis of the fact. Hence, I simply "do not believe".
      A man sits aiming, trying, but then "I don't believe it!" Pancake.
      No, the movie is cool, broads, I got ...
      But from a drone, here is a tank, here are the ruins, but when shooting from a distance, you see a difference in the height of the objects, and the distance between them is somewhat larger.
      Objects may be the same but twirling options. By the way, there are no fry tankers. These frames are lyamas. Bullshit technique Russ leads to death. And here, they aim, we see, somewhere fell, we see, and then it’s not interesting?
      From a drone shooting - a tank smolders, where are the corpses in the sand?
      I have the impression "it stood there for a long time."
      1. just exp
        just exp 10 May 2016 19: 24
        0
        corpses are likely inside the tank. the dead can’t get out of tanks.
        but in this case not a fact. since it’s not a fact that the tank is damaged, but not damaged. but it can also be knocked out. Won M60 Turkish also did not explode and has less damage, although he hit the cornet.
      2. donavi49
        donavi49 10 May 2016 19: 31
        +4
        They pay great attention to the shooting. There may not have been fried tankmen. Therefore, there is nothing to shoot. Most likely, the drone flew in half an hour or an hour after the end of the battle. But the tank cannot be pulled out until the Khan-Tuman itself is hooked, it’s by hatchet less than 2,5 km from Tuman, and the advanced TOU positions are even closer, that is, the tractor will stand next to it.

        Here's an example of shooting the assault by the Khan-Mist Babahs. Actually, in an attempt to advance and knock out the broads, the company went there on the T-90 with 4 divisions, elite Persians and army men.




        And here are the first launches of the TOU from the fog of 6-7 in May. With the usual comfort.
    3. Dryuya2
      Dryuya2 10 May 2016 20: 40
      +3
      Quote: DEZINTO
      Odd somehow skepticism ...

      someone will translate - many now give a link - they say left on their own what
      https://twitter.com/Ald_Aba/status/729788187573428225
    4. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 13 May 2016 12: 14
      +1
      they always shoot videos very often - to report back to the "sponsors"
  • Stabilization
    Stabilization 10 May 2016 18: 41
    +19
    I alone do not see the moment of getting into the tank? Actually, like the tank itself is not visible in the first part of the video, there is a shot into the distance and it’s not clear where to go ... and then the bang is standing, which tank is slightly smoking.
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 10 May 2016 22: 35
      0
      Not alone, I also see Hollywood. Shot-installation - some kind of "box" smokes.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 10 May 2016 18: 42
    +19
    Hollywood is resting. By order of the military-industrial complex Matrasia, a commercial was shot for the outdated Tou-2 ATGM, which destroys the T-90 (or maybe not the T-90, and in general, that is still a production). Well, if you do not have success, you have to loudly crow about them. It doesn't matter what happened in reality, what matters is what they say about it.
    1. just exp
      just exp 10 May 2016 19: 25
      -9
      and they rented a steaming tank from Assad for filming?
      and the tank judging by the tower is just the T-90.
      1. kenig1
        kenig1 10 May 2016 19: 59
        0
        "Smoking tank" and "judging by the tower". The tower is intact and smoking, it is interesting to see the further development of your thought.
        1. just exp
          just exp 11 May 2016 03: 57
          0
          Find a video of the wrecked tanks. in which the tower is also whole and smoking, and check out the development of your thoughts. start for example with a video from Grozny. otherwise I understand that you are one of those who are ready to throw soldiers and take Grozny to the airborne regiment than to admit that the enemy also knows how to do something and hasn’t done it with his finger.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 11 May 2016 09: 36
          0
          Those. do you think the bearded took the whole T-90 and threw a smoke bomb into the tower for shooting?
    2. BMP-2
      BMP-2 10 May 2016 19: 50
      +6
      They can edit movies. For some reason, I immediately remembered the film "The tail wags the dog" and the scene of the shooting of an Albanian girl running between explosions with a cat on her ruffs. what request laughing
  • salad
    salad 10 May 2016 18: 44
    +10
    Bullshit is some kind of one tank in the middle of the field, shooting from the air (moreover, high-quality) and finally you can see nothing and finally nothing is clear !!! in short, the mattress is trying to push further its Mr. extra-cannon.
    For me it’s a decree and nothing more am
  • Mengad
    Mengad 10 May 2016 18: 44
    +5
    The main crew would be whole ... and it’s easier to build equipment than to train and train a good crew.
    1. just exp
      just exp 10 May 2016 19: 26
      +1
      damaged tanks are mostly repaired and returned to service. not every penetration of armor leads to the destruction of the tank.
  • ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 10 May 2016 18: 45
    +8
    Propaganda production. The Germans shot similar videos with the destruction of the T-34. It seems that the bearded men are deserting.
  • Stabilization
    Stabilization 10 May 2016 18: 48
    +2
    In general, it seems and it is likely that the smoking tank, shot from above, is just the one that fell under the distribution earlier, the one that got into the tower.
  • Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 10 May 2016 18: 51
    +3
    Barmaley sits with all the amenities, there’s just not enough fan, for some reason some kind of crap.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 13 May 2016 12: 29
      +2
      From 3 km to detect very difficult. Could come at night, turn around and wait for a suitable target.
  • Cananecat
    Cananecat 10 May 2016 18: 51
    +2
    As it seems, the body kit does not look like the T-90. Specialists, where are you? We are waiting for comments.
  • Professor
    Professor 10 May 2016 18: 54
    +2
    Until recently, Ahrar al-Sham did not know about the presence of drones.

    Of course it’s known. They have long shot down fights with drones and spread them on the Internet.
  • Oml
    Oml 10 May 2016 18: 56
    +6
    Somehow suspiciously, leisurely, on a stool, not reacting that the shot was fired, nor any fire resistance. Like on the set of a movie.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 10 May 2016 19: 07
      +3
      Watch other TOU videos, always like that. It's just that this is the Arab army, even with the Persians ...
    2. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 10 May 2016 23: 23
      0
      Quote: OML
      Somehow suspiciously, leisurely, on a stool, not reacting that the shot was fired, nor any fire resistance. Like on the set of a movie.

      Find the TOW-2 launcher among the buildings at a distance of 2-3 km. very difficult, almost impossible. And the gunman after the shot sits and looks at the device, because he points the projectile at the target. After the shot, you probably noticed that there is almost no dusty cloud, the flash during the shot, almost silent, in brightly lit areas, is also difficult to detect. You will have to get used to the fact that everything happens so dramatically and it is very difficult to fight back without special spotters. Our tanks do not have a system that would detect enemy firing points and would automatically hit them when fired at a tank (a tank shell flies faster than a TOW shell). If such a system existed, then on the Internet there would not be these videos, there would be no one to upload them.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 11 May 2016 09: 01
        0
        Like breaking through the side of the tower?
        Therefore, the charges in the AZ did not detonate ...?
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 11 May 2016 09: 45
      0
      The start-up video could be shot separately
  • Baloo
    Baloo 10 May 2016 18: 57
    +4
    Not a specialist, a complete ignoramus and amateur in this matter, so I say one-for-one: I do not believe. A similar film was already, only from a different angle. Rather, this is a fragment of a report in front of the Macington monkeys.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 10 May 2016 19: 11
      +6
      This yesterday’s video was, and events in general 8-9 of May most likely occurred, from the Army men. There this tank fell into the frame, also knocked out, in a similar pose (tower).

      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 10 May 2016 22: 44
        +1
        It turns out that there are two T 90 knocked out - and even more precisely four.
  • LÄRZ
    LÄRZ 10 May 2016 18: 59
    +5
    I am not a specialist in tanks, so I would say this: "there is an object in the frame that looks like a tank." People! Enlighten, by what distinctive features is it classified as a T-90? request
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 10 May 2016 19: 13
      +13
      The curtain is the most distinctive feature on the tower.
      1. Professor
        Professor 10 May 2016 19: 18
        -6
        Quote: donavi49
        The curtain is the most distinctive feature on the tower.

        You are absolutely right. This is the T-90.
        1. Muvka
          Muvka 10 May 2016 20: 28
          +8
          Quote: Professor
          Quote: donavi49
          The curtain is the most distinctive feature on the tower.

          You are absolutely right. This is the T-90.

          The curtain and 72 is set ...
          1. Professor
            Professor 10 May 2016 20: 32
            +2
            Quote: Muvka
            The curtain and 72 is set ...

            If desired, you can put on the T-34, but in Syria, the T-72 and the Stora were not seen. request
            1. Victor-M
              Victor-M 10 May 2016 20: 35
              +8
              Quote: Professor
              If desired, you can put on the T-34, but in Syria, the T-72 and the Stora were not seen.

              Everyone sees what he wants.
              1. just exp
                just exp 11 May 2016 04: 06
                +2
                tell me, for you, like for many here, it’s fundamentally not to recognize losses and to find any even the most absurd excuse just not to recognize the truth, though unpleasant, but still?
                The T-90 is just a version of the T-72, the number 90 appeared on the orders of the Elkind (who is boruch and drunk), he is not invulnerable. it can also be knocked out like abrams and leclerks, there are no undetectable tanks. especially with the Arabs.
                so why is it surprising that sooner or later the T-90 was supposed to be knocked out?
                You were shown a video where the most likely is shown a wrecked (not destroyed, but wrecked. Wrecked tanks are to be restored) T-90. but you and a bunch of people like you are stupidly trying to find any probabilities, from the illusion of the matrix to 3D filming of insidious aliens that this is not the T-90.
                Well, if you need not the truth, but the excuse to cast aside thoughts of a possible loss of the T-90, then I’ll calm you down - this is not the T-90, it was an inflatable tank model that was doused with barbecue smoke to attract the attention of bearded primates, but for now they shoot at an indestructible inflatable mock-up; the real T-90 broke through the defenses of the Ishilovites and destroyed 600 fighters, and 11 Turkish tanks that helped the Ishilovites, and 2 F-22s. F-22 so, just in case, so that 3.14ndos would not relax. Glory to the T-90.
                it's all right ?
                and pluses to me, but more more. and that is what visitors do not like minus no matter what, even the truth and common sense.
                as recently minus for the positive posts about Monsieur Serdyukye. Now something has begun to reach and is already being evaluated positively.
                1. Baloo
                  Baloo 11 May 2016 07: 55
                  +1
                  and while they shoot at an indestructible inflatable mockup, the real T-90 broke through the defenses of the Ishilovites and destroyed 600 fighters, and 11 Turkish tanks that helped the Ishilovites, and 2 F-22s. F-22 so, just in case, so that 3.14ndos would not relax. Glory to the T-90.

                  Is this the scenario for the future cartoon quest? laughing
        2. user1212
          user1212 11 May 2016 05: 19
          +2
          Quote: Professor
          You are absolutely right. This is the T-90.

          T72
      2. LÄRZ
        LÄRZ 10 May 2016 19: 39
        +2
        Quote: donavi49
        The curtain, the most distinctive feature on the tower

        Thanks a lot! hi
  • donavi49
    donavi49 10 May 2016 18: 59
    +10
    Over the past 24 hours there were 11 video launches of ATGMs, 5 of them TOU, 3 on tanks, the rest on infantry and other equipment. Mostly on 2,5-3 km from Khan Tuman, which was recently captured by Nusra, Jude and Ahrar. Unlike the army men, who practically did not impede the advance of the broads to the assault positions, the broads as we see in 5 days were able to give a bunch of TOU, organize a solid defense and meet at distant approaches.

    Here's the tanks:




    Here are two additional tanks that are not included in the statistics (above).



    The shelling of the unit south of Khan-Tuman.




    The tank itself, it may have received slight damage, but judging by the binding, it is located on the TOU territory (already the contact line) and 100% T-90 - for the curtains.
    http://wikimapia.org/#lang=he&lat=36.091987&lon=37.057824&z=19&m=b

    And also, having grown rich at Schaer’s warehouses, they went to the T4 base. Now there are fights there ... Directly coordinate their actions with the Nusryats and others in Aleppo. The videoconferencing did not officially fly there (which is bad) - the Syrians barely cope, they lost the bird almost officially, most likely Gazelka.

    The planes of the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) in Syria on May 10 did not fly in the vicinity of the Taifur airfield in the province of Homs, a representative of the Russian air base Khmeimim curled.

    The Syrian military source of the agency, in turn, said that in Homs was fired from the ground by a Syrian military helicopter. The aircraft was able to land, the crew is alive.
    “A helicopter of the Syrian armed forces was fired from the ground, but was able to land. Everyone is alive, ”the source said. He specified that the helicopter is not Soviet or Russian-made.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 10 May 2016 20: 25
      +4
      Blind-1 - a complex of electro-optical active protection (complex electronic countermeasures - KOEP) from high-precision weapons.

      Adopted by the USSR Armed Forces in 1989. It is installed on armored vehicles: 2S31, BMP-3M, T-72 [1], T-80, T-90 (Russia); T-84 (Ukraine); M-84 (Serbia).

      Why exactly the T-90?
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 10 May 2016 22: 59
      -3
      At that rate, after a year, the Syrian army will not have any equipment left at all - 70 percent of what we supplied is probably already destroyed or destroyed.
  • semuil
    semuil 10 May 2016 19: 00
    +1
    In the video I saw only how the driver-mechanic pressed the gas. That's all.
  • Alex_36
    Alex_36 10 May 2016 19: 06
    +2
    Guys, it seems like the blocks are visible from above (or as they are correctly in a tankist way) "Shtora". On the sides of the cannon. Or are they not?
  • dvina71
    dvina71 10 May 2016 19: 07
    +13
    I looked .. I looked .. The quality is not very. The tower reminds of a 62ki bathhouse along the contour. And the most important thing. The t-90 delivered to Syria has side screens. There are none on this tank.
    PS .. Found. This is the T-72a from those that were exported to Arab countries.
    On Vidio 1.16c, ventilation holes are clearly visible in the rear of the case. Specific for this modification.
    On the T-90, like the T-72b3, these holes are covered with hatches.
    The t-62 has one such hole.
    1. activator
      activator 10 May 2016 19: 32
      +5
      So yes, there are no 90 holes.
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 10 May 2016 19: 37
        0
        And here is the T-90 with open plugs.

        There you have to look at the Curtain. She stands out characteristically.
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 10 May 2016 19: 57
          +6
          Is it a curtain? To the left of the barrel is a searchlight, to the right are blocks of dz. with such image quality .. Hatches in my opinion are more indicative. They are clearly visible and are not visible when viewed from the side of the screens, but the T-90 has them.
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 10 May 2016 20: 10
            +1
            Skirts do not live long. Here in the battles for Hader in November last year - the T-90 in the battles, already podoborovany.

            Plus, the explosion could rip off.
            1. activator
              activator 10 May 2016 20: 26
              +4
              But you must admit that behind the four holes are not typical for m 90.
        2. Muvka
          Muvka 10 May 2016 20: 27
          +2
          Quote: donavi49
          And here is the T-90 with open plugs.

          There you have to look at the Curtain. She stands out characteristically.

          Blind-1 - a complex of electro-optical active protection (complex electronic countermeasures - KOEP) from high-precision weapons.

          Adopted by the USSR Armed Forces in 1989. It is installed on armored vehicles: 2S31, BMP-3M, T-72 [1], T-80, T-90 (Russia); T-84 (Ukraine); M-84 (Serbia).
      2. activator
        activator 10 May 2016 19: 43
        +6
        But on this hole there is only what kind of modification I don’t know. There are four of them and they are shifted to the left as in the video. Again, there are no on-board screens.
        1. activator
          activator 10 May 2016 20: 00
          +4
          This campaign doesn’t mean 71 right, because it’s much harder to remake a tank’s ass than to fasten a curtain, and can’t you definitely tell the curtain? Chebureks were happy early on.
          1. activator
            activator 10 May 2016 20: 49
            +3
            I wonder what kind of minuser came running? Af ftar rolega or what? laughing
        2. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K 10 May 2016 23: 34
          +1
          Quote: activator
          But on this hole there is only what kind of modification I don’t know. There are four of them and they are shifted to the left as in the video. Again, there are no on-board screens.

          How not? And at the very top, on the left side of the tank, what does the dynamic defense hold on to, snot or what? 6 blocks of dynamic protection are very clearly visible to the left of the fighting compartment and poorly visible, but visible, are several blocks to the left of the mechanic on the side of the tank.
          1. activator
            activator 11 May 2016 07: 19
            0
            I’m not about a photo, I’m about a video.
  • marshes
    marshes 10 May 2016 19: 24
    +2
    Honestly, you won’t envy tankers, you won’t hide behind your armor. For the thanks, donavi49.
    Here infa about dry cargo with tanks.
    Interestingly, with "lattices" the damage can be minimized?
    1. DenZ
      DenZ 10 May 2016 20: 21
      +2
      Quote: marshes
      Here info about bulk cargo with tanks

      They seemed to agree that the barge was not with tanks but with two Raptor-type boats. Or was there another dry cargo ship ???
  • kolexxx
    kolexxx 10 May 2016 19: 26
    +5
    ... cutting about anything ....
    .... launch somewhere ...... something in the distance explodes with a bright flash and a column of smoke, as if a tank with a solarium were blown up, and for some reason it does not detonate the ammunition .....
    ..... and a standing, absolutely whole tank, a tower in place, with an incomprehensible blue haze from the hatch .... where the spectacularly scattered remains of the tank are super-duper TOW ???? ....... the crisis of the genre of the barmaleans , are forced to sculpt complete rotten meat for the report to the sponsors, because it seems that financing is complete, there are no results ..... no results, cut ...
    1. SSR
      SSR 11 May 2016 04: 57
      +1
      Quote: kolexxx
      ... cutting about anything ....
      .... launch somewhere ...... something in the distance explodes with a bright flash and a column of smoke, as if a tank with a solarium were blown up, and for some reason it does not detonate the ammunition .....
      ..... and a standing, absolutely whole tank, a tower in place, with an incomprehensible blue haze from the hatch .... where the spectacularly scattered remains of the tank are super-duper TOW ???? ....... the crisis of the genre of the barmaleans , are forced to sculpt complete rotten meat for the report to the sponsors, because it seems that financing is complete, there are no results ..... no results, cut ...

      Only now, despite the crisis, among the broads, drones appeared, capable of at least 3 km to fly back and forth. Looks like ours are catching the "bait" equipment of Western "partners" in order to then test our detection and suppression systems on them, and in case of revealing something conceptually new - developing methods of countering them.
  • cheap trick
    cheap trick 10 May 2016 19: 29
    +20
    To understand the phenomenon of hohlism, MSU students performed a social experiment. Several hundred bloggers who curse Russia and Putin, support the anti-terrorist operation, demand the return of Crimea and Nadia Savchenko, and so on, have randomly chosen the Ukrainian Internet segment. In short - several hundred of the most stubborn Ukrainians.

    A letter was sent to these bloggers offering office work in Russia with a salary of 50 thousand rubles.

    82% of hohloblogers immediately accepted this offer, another 10% thought a little. Only 8% of hohlobloggers did not give an answer to the proposal (I suppose - they just decided that it was the SBU that checks them that way).

    But the most interesting thing is that 73% of the number of hohloblogers from the number of those who received the proposal drastically changed rhetoric, reducing the intensity of criticism to her, or even stopped writing posts criticizing Russia. You see, they have not yet received any work in Russia, but just the realization of the fact that, in principle, in Russia you can work hard to make anti-rhetoric collapse, because "no matter what happens."

    At the second stage of the experiment, these same hohlobloggers were directly offered to write posts in support of Russia for money. 63% agreed right away, and another 15% agreed, but wanted to raise prices. Only 22% did not agree - mainly motivating this by the fact that their audience would not understand such a change in their position.

    What does this tell us? This tells us that the crest has no beliefs other than money. For money crest is ready to sell anything and anyone. All this “barked, on knives, that maskal does not skip” - it’s just social mimicry under the environment, “no matter what happens”, but not solid convictions. The same people in Ukraine were happy to give out the Gestapo to partisans and communists - and after a year they would just as well give out to the NKVD Bandera and their accomplices, and now nothing has changed - they will just as well serve anyone who comes to power and promises money or some other good.

    To understand the difference in mentality between yourself and Khokhl, just try on this experiment for yourself. If you were offered to write posts on the Internet against Russia and Putin, say, 100 rubles per post - would you agree? And 200 rubles per post?
  • dvina71
    dvina71 10 May 2016 19: 30
    +3
    THAT .. still found a video ..

    2.44 the T-90 looks like this from the top back.
    1. just exp
      just exp 11 May 2016 04: 25
      0
      it’s standing at my pause 2.44, the T-90AM shoots. where is the video above? here at 0.44 there is an angle from the side and from the top. but there you can see the tank as in the video and the Ishilovites.
  • vglazunov
    vglazunov 10 May 2016 19: 37
    0
    Another fake throw-in, the terrorists flee back to Europe, then there, inadequately, they cut everyone under drugs, the wave will reach America soon. What you sow, then you shake ...
  • dvina71
    dvina71 10 May 2016 19: 51
    +5
    And here is the T-72A

    5.47 it is clearly seen that these ventilation openings are not blocked by anything.
  • shultz21070
    shultz21070 10 May 2016 20: 05
    +3
    about landing on the moon, they also took off well
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner 10 May 2016 20: 10
    0
    Trying to rehabilitate your rockets with a movie? Although the old man ATGM, but the blow to the prestige was not weak. Surely manufacturers were very upset. So money for cartoons may not be spared.
  • serezhasoldatow
    serezhasoldatow 10 May 2016 20: 29
    +4
    The day before yesterday on "Zvezda" they showed all the equipment that went to the parade. In particular, there was an interview with the military representative about the T-90, allegedly knocked out (previously posted). So he said that the T-90 went to the parade because there was no detonation of the tank, the crew just forgot to turn on the active protection. The crew remained intact. Reliable technology must be shown to the whole world.
  • kolexxx
    kolexxx 10 May 2016 20: 30
    +12
    How to make such videos. Half of the monkeys set up the complex in the training camp for half a day, while the other half of the monkeys ran around the village in search of a chair or stool. A shot is obtained only from the third take, because in the first two the first two monkeys fly off somewhere, confusing the scope with a hole in the pipe. Then the monkeys run into the field and allegedly remove everything from the trench, twisting the depth of field as much as possible. Somewhere far in advance, the sent baboon was blown up by a makeshift bomb because he was not warned that the red cord should never be pulled. Another baboon is sitting in a tank, having bargained for two cigarettes from a warrior to sit in a tank for two minutes and is desperately inflating a dung-shaitan-cigarette imitating the smoke from an explosion. Nothing like an explosion like an atomic bomb, and a smoke like a wick of a kerosene. At this stage, the ts join in removing the tank from above, paying tank crews a hundred bucks for that. In the evening, all the baboons and ts gather somewhere in a concrete pit and we all squeal together in a bar! Yes, it’s nothing that the echo from the concrete walls is mainly that the video was finally removed.
  • sabakina
    sabakina 10 May 2016 20: 34
    +7
    Personally, I will wait for the conclusions of people who know how to parse such videos into frames. Then we'll make some noise.
    1. region58
      region58 11 May 2016 04: 03
      +1
      Quote: sabakina
      Personally, I will wait for the conclusions of people who know how to parse such videos into frames. Then we'll make some noise.

      On a gamble, guys also break their heads for what it would mean. Details at the link: http://glav.su/forum/5-military/2237/offset/57820/
  • Verdun
    Verdun 10 May 2016 20: 34
    +1
    Quote: K-50
    Moreover, it is impossible to unequivocally state that this T-90 in these frames.
    So I would like to note this. From this angle, even with relatively high video quality, it’s rather difficult to distinguish the T-90 from the T-72. It’s even impossible to say unequivocally that the tank is Syrian.
  • leigos
    leigos 10 May 2016 20: 47
    +2
    I do not understand ? what are they happy about? This is war, in war technology is lost, destroyed, tanks are consumables. No one said that our tanks are immortal
  • lopvlad
    lopvlad 10 May 2016 20: 50
    +8
    Some kind of three-part plot
    1) Action with TOW
    2) Something exploded well
    3) a tank with a whole tower and a slight haze.
  • Igor70
    Igor70 10 May 2016 20: 52
    +2
    Everything is just a shadow from an arrow behind a shadow from a tank on the other side are bad filmmakers
  • BOB044
    BOB044 10 May 2016 21: 05
    +2
    Some kind of crap.
  • Yak28
    Yak28 10 May 2016 21: 08
    +3
    In general, TOW is an anti-tank missile system, and even if the T-90 was knocked out of it, then what's so surprising? request For this, an anti-tank missile system is needed to destroy armored vehicles.
  • proud
    proud 10 May 2016 21: 34
    0
    Let them make a video from near then I will believe!
  • turishev
    turishev 10 May 2016 21: 37
    -17%
    T-90 - this is trash - especially in Syria - without protection
    1. 2я19
      2я19 10 May 2016 22: 11
      +5
      Create something better! I'll buy one or two.
  • JonnyT
    JonnyT 10 May 2016 21: 51
    +2
    we take a piece of plywood, a cylinder of polyurethane foam and vaul the old tank turns into t-90
  • HMR333
    HMR333 10 May 2016 22: 06
    +3
    the video itself raises questions for installation experts !? the drone shoots in high-definition resolution, but suddenly all the bad luck except for the left part begins to float in circles like a sunny hoax, but this is clearly not from the heat because I would have suspicion of installation on the whole picture and not very skillful!
  • HMR333
    HMR333 10 May 2016 22: 54
    +2
    a big tree ! distance to the fence 20 meters
  • HMR333
    HMR333 10 May 2016 22: 56
    0
    tree no bushes alone! distance to the fence meter 3 -3.5
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 11 May 2016 00: 57
      0
      Quote: HMR333
      distance to the fence meter 3 -3.5

      tank hull width ~ 4 meters

      Up to the fence almost two tank widths
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 11 May 2016 01: 51
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        tank hull width ~ 4 meters

        2m80cm .. width .. With a width of 4m you can forget about transportation both by air and railway platforms ..
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 May 2016 03: 33
          +2
          T-90 Tank

          Case width, mm - 3780

          We will argue with the source?
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 11 May 2016 11: 35
            -1
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN


            Draw. The size of the outer sections of the tracks is 3m37cm.
            2.9 is the track size.
            Your size is the maximum considering screens with remote sensing.
        2. HMR333
          HMR333 11 May 2016 12: 46
          0
          no matter in exact meters, the essence is that in the photo the distances vary, I wrote offhand I did not measure with a ruler)))
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 11 May 2016 08: 43
      0
      These garden trees are small. In two photos: side and top - a strict coincidence.
      One and the same place.
  • INF
    INF 10 May 2016 23: 10
    +1
    In general, this is a war and losses were and will be. Bzdets how many Americans made a racket.
  • mvnmln
    mvnmln 10 May 2016 23: 14
    0
    Pure water installation!
  • Buck
    Buck 11 May 2016 00: 39
    0
    Barmolei made a movie somewhere I have already seen before this shooter comfortably in a chair sitting.
  • Fayth
    Fayth 11 May 2016 01: 42
    +1
    Quote: just EXPL
    there were a lot of cases of breaking through armor in Chechnya and the tank remained intact, there were even tanks that survived 5 crews each. so undermining the BC is not always there.

    I personally knew 3rd crew 72 and it was somewhere in 98, this is a car, I swear we crossed ourselves when we found out where the guys are sitting .... they were the last crew.
  • Phosgene
    Phosgene 11 May 2016 04: 54
    0
    At one time I had to shoot at the `` resorts of the Caucasus. '' I don’t want to pretend to be a tough specialist, but it confuses me that this tank is alone, if it’s a tank at all, and not a dummy. Where are the escort forces? Where is the BMP, where is the infantry, where are the other tanks, why does the ATGM crew not change their position after the shot? In general, it looks like staged shooting, and illiterate. Usually, tanks cover BMP and ZSU, to fight enemy infantry and enemy firing points located on high-rise buildings.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 11 May 2016 08: 36
      +1
      This is the Syrian army.

      An example - there is a column attacking in Hama, they are received by TOU.
      The first shot, Allah bestows a column - the rocket explodes and no harm.


      What does the column do? He goes on, an explosion has been seen ...
      From the same position is the second TOU.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Red_Hamer
    Red_Hamer 11 May 2016 05: 09
    0
    Militants claim that in the province of Aleppo using TOW knocked out tank T-90. Video
    The question is not even what is hit (any tank can be hit, there is no invulnerable equipment), but why do they say so? Do not buy weapons from Russia, buy from the United States, that’s the whole message of this cheap video.
  • Taygerus
    Taygerus 11 May 2016 06: 37
    0
    low-budget staging, most likely minke whales ordered to at least somehow spoil us, since they managed in Syria
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 11 May 2016 09: 44
    +1
    Impenetrable tanks do not exist. If the TOU missile touched the T-90 armor, then it would penetrate it (with the exception of the forehead of the hull and turret with DZ). You can only defend yourself by shooting down missile targeting. The TOU shell is powerful, compare it in size and caliber with our ATGMs. Therefore, it is not surprising that the tank is down. Here it is also necessary to note the resistance of the tank to fire after being hit, to the explosion of ammunition. All this directly leads to the survival of the crew.