The Truth About COPE CAGES
2022 ж. 26 Мам.
751 541 Рет қаралды
There has been a lot of speculation about the roof cages on the Russian tanks, more commonly known as the "Cope Cages".
Patreon: / redeffect
Sources:
gurkhan.blogspot.com/2021/07/b...
drive.google.com/file/d/1yMxv...
the V-shaped metal is called "angle Iron" in the US, it's a very common metal stock used for fabrication, welding and construction
Agreed. And described by dimensions such as: L2x2x1/4" (capital L to represent its shape)
or to me it looks like a vary vary long metal corner brackets prob bought from the russian equivalent of home depo
That's what I was going to say it is here in Scotland.
We just call it Angle Bars
@@sven9900 thats what angle iron is basically. Very common in 3rd world to just do whateve whenever. With stick welders of course. Dunno why home depot wouldn't sell the stuff
I wonder if the cope cages were installed to try and improve morale. After all sherman crews installed concrete armor (despite it not being too effective and stressing the automotive components)
Actually I could imagine it being abit more quiet inside a Sherman tank with concrete armor when it is being peppered with MG fire.. Imagine the noise inside when your tank is being peppered on from an MG-42..
@@Amir-ez2qh True, while concrete armor does Little to nothing to stop Tank rounds and such, it would probably be able to make the tank not clink every time it gets hit by 7.92 It was 7.92 not 62
Last tank coflict, Armenia, had hig number of desotroyed tank by drons from sky, in Syria and Libya many tanks lost by RPG7 fire from top of high bilding, i thnik it was thinked in this way then like people where saying against Javelin.
@@Frisher1 Per the Chieftan every tank that was 'illegally' covered in concrete had to be put back in thier original factory paint condition. Many sledge hammer were swung until they were allowed to switch to sledgehammers. POW labor for the job was disallowed. The big army was pissed so tank commanders were requried to put in as much work as the rest of the crews. Guess who love to have their own person tank in combat? Generals, Colonels, LTCs and the rest just pulled fine vehicles full of crap wasting soldiers and tanks. Eisenhower hate blowhards and took great pride in knocking them down a notch.
the british crews in WW2 were putting spare tracks as armor protection, they didn't really do much, but the commanders encouraged it if it meant that the tank crews would be more open to take an engagement
There was a captured Russian tanker who was part of a prisoner swap and just got back to Russia. He said said on social media that his unit removed the cages because it made escape difficult in case of fire and it also made the machine gun difficult to use. (He also said the ERA worked very well and they survived 9/10 hits but that the crew got concussions or something like that.)
True, but the same said it was Javelin hits, which i don't entirely believe.
Every missile is a javelin, every tank is a tiger. Some traditions just dont die.
Good information, thank you.
@@Orcawhale1 it's been said and partially documented that a lot of the javelins and nlaws are old stock that hadn't been properly refurbished, which lead to numerous failures from battery packs not holding charge to the main charge not detonating. There's that one famous video of the ukrainian soldier firing an NLAW at a T-72 from a building and the missile doing jack shit to it, because it was within minimum arming distance. It's a very hectic war. Fuck ups happen all the time.
I highly doubt they survived 9/10 hits just given the amount of absolutely obliterated Russian armor I have seen online since the start of the “special operation”.
“Long weird v-shaped metal” is the moment my inner welder died. Also they only tacked the angle on, didn’t even weld it. It would probably snap under that kinda pressure and cause more damage.
I may not be a welder, but as a frequent patron of hardware shops, I too had part of me died when I heard angle bars as weird.
It's not a problem if the welds fail. If they are hit with a mortar, rpg or bomb, then the cage would get messed up, how sturdy the cage is don't matter much in terms of protection as the point is to detonate the warhead away from the turret roof. If anything, having it tacked on saves on repair time as you don't have to do as much angle grinder work to stirp off the mangled bits and fit new bits on it.
@N Fels I know, I weld too. I'm saying that it doesn't need to be attached harder. Mortars are made so they would go off hitting soft soil, else they would be useless in fields and would leave behind tons of unexploded munitions. Just the weight of the angle and it's intrinsic inertia is enough to do the job and set of the round. It simply does not need to be welded on and it would just make refitting take longer. If we are talking about shaped charges, same thing applies, its job is to set of the charge prematurely. That little piece of mild steal is basically not going to put up any resistance, and even if it did, the inertia is way more important than the angle being fixed since the supersonic metal beam of a shaped charge moves at like 7km/s or something stupidly fast like that so it would have passed through the angle before it had time to move enough to rip the tack welds out.
@N Fels Also, as I eluded to in my previous post, stronger welds are not always better. Thus you can't say "you get much better results." There are many situations where tack welds are sufficient and it's simply a waste of time and welding supplies to weld more. In this case it could make refitting a lot harder since all the mangled angles would have to be removed with an angle grinder if you want to fit new ones that aren't mangled. Thus fixing a tack welded cage would be much less work than fixing a "proper" welded one. There is little argument for over welding it. Maybe it would make it stand up to a few mortar hits but lets be honest, if you take a tone of those, you are doing something wrong.
I felt like someone stuck a I beam into my heart
"Cope cages" were first implemented on Russian tanks in Syria, where drone dropped munitions first saw extensive use. The cages are not (were not originally) meant to protect against modern anti-tank systems like the Javelin, although I wouldn't be surprised if the Russians in Ukraine are installing them in the hopes they will. In Syria they were used to detonate drone dropped munitions, small mortars, and molotovs above the turret, to prevent damage to the sights and sensors mounted on top. If a commander cant see out of his sights and the sensors don't feed information to the computers a tanks fighting capacity is greatly reduced. Originally the cages were mounted slightly lower and with thinner gaps. It appears this Russian defense contractor saw the effectiveness of these cages in Syria and tried to modify them with some success to defeat anti-tank weapons. The "Cope Cage" is not an invention of the Ukrainian war, and its original purpose was not to defeat modern anti-tank weapons, despite the Russians hoping to use them as such now.
Agreed, but there are enough videos online of Ukraine using cheap drones to drop grenades that I think that is why they were put on. Also kamakazie cheap drones are being crashed into tanks from above. I personally believe it is to make the troops feel better about videos they see online of the drone drops. the commanders are simply saying "we beat this threat before don't worry"
I saw lots of slat armour on Syria , specially the cool one that is a T72 going "return to Panzer 4" But never saw roof armour, do you have a way to show it?
@@geroutathat Ukraine do use drones this way... but the cages is flawed because it sacrifices A LOT of other things to counter a single specific threat. Drone dropped EFP. As said by you and other people, the Javelin, NLAW, Panzerfuast-3, AT4, LAW, suicide drones, and MAM/UMTAS from Tb2 drones... All would bypass the cage with little to no difficulty.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 but its already proven to work against suicide drones and grenades dropped from drones in Syria. Isis had to start making smaller bombs in 3d printed plastic containers. Ukraine also has civilians who are dropping Molotov cocktails from drones. I personally don't see how a Soviet grenade can make it through this cage and take a tank out.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 The actual data on effectiveness of Cope Cages on top attack AT systems like Javelin isn't rather scarce. At leas as far as I'm aware. But we do know how shaped charges a Javelin, an NLAW, etc. work . And if there's one thing shaped charges don't handle well is extra distance the jet has to go through. Javelin for example, has the stated penetration value of about 1 metre. The cope cages though, some are a very snug fit and some are pretty high above the turret. In any case, add to that the odd ERA block and you just might have a chance in preventing a very dead tank. My opinion why they didn't catch on is that the main tank killer in the latest war isn't the Javelin, but rather artilery... And with arty, the added height and consequently higher detectability probably aren't worth it.
In 2021 I discussed them with tank crews during the expo. They said it was an order from the top, so it seems like field modification rather than manufactured one. Update: ow, southern district, that's exactly where the expo was
а сейчас смотря на это по другному воспринимаешь к чему все это было. тогда трудно было поверить, что будет спецоперация и казалось, что это просто исследования для того, чтоб результаты применить на танках республик.
Where the expo was? Vladikavkaz? I've been there too :)
Thanks for the info. I was curious about this
Russia started installing those cope cages EXACTLY during Azerbaijan-Armenian war. In that war was there a single Javelin used? Nope! Rather several dozen TB-2s destroyed hundreds of Armenian armored vehicles and who else has those TB-2s?? UKRAINE, what a ''coincidence''!! When Russia was installing those cope cages there weren't many Javelins in Ukraine nor Russia knew the west was going to send so many weapons to support Ukraine but somehow that only God knows how exactly those cope cages were installed against Javelins according to some vodka drunk ''experts''...
@@ukuskota4106 батя говорил что не стоит мне на это дело ходить и поддерживать эту кровавую вещь, ответил что это чисто для защиты внутри...как же он прав оказалась. Хотя бы я очень прав был на счёт заборов и что они против Javelin не помогут
I've heard a theory (educated guess by some of the military analysts here in Poland) that these cages were designed as a protection against loitering munitions, notably the Warmate - a Polish design used by Ukraine for some time even before the invasion. Its HEAT warhead can penetrate around 200 mm RHA and is single stage, so a "cope cage" like this would probably stop it.
it makes a great cage to set up a rain tarp, so a watchtower for the gunner, probably useful knowing russian optics
I read the V shape bars act as a high speed wing similar to Formula cars to help get extra hieght when the turret explodes off the tank chassis.
@@brian8410 That's a good one! And considering the Chinese recording of this... significant emotional event, as one tank expert says, it works very well in this role: kzhead.info/sun/hM2ykq5wjKd-i3k/bejne.html
For 110 days, there is not a single video confirming the successful use of Javelins.
@@TyphoonUSSR Probably all the weapons west sends don't work. You think that's why Putler throws a tantrum every 3rd day and threatens severe consequenses?
Yeah, well there's a difference between those two. One gets in direct contact with the projectile before it detonates. But ATGM's in top attack mode detonate at a certain distance from the target, not when they come in contact. And in that case, if you have thin rods and wide spacing you're basically not countering the ATGM at all
That was my observation, too. The Javelin, and other anti-tank weapons like the RBS 56 BILL, use explosively-formed penetrators that are detonated at a distance above the target vehicle, so conventional slat armor, which works by interfering with the formation of the shaped-charge jet, would be ineffective -- the warhead never strikes the slat armor, and the penetrating jet is already formed when it reaches the armor. To be effective, the penetrator would have to hit one of the slats, and narrow, widely-spaced slats are largely ineffective. Using closely-spaced angle-iron slats increases the chance that the penetrator would hit a slat, causing the penetrator to lose cohesion and break up rather than penetrating the tank's top armor.
Indeed. RedEffect doesn't seem to understand what he's talking about for a lot of the video.
As a former TOW platoon leader, I can tell you that when I saw the cages, I thought they made the tanks more vulnerable rather than less. They would show before the gun and sights crests a rise and the defenders would have a chance to get on target earlier. If the tank is stationary, it's easier to find and the cage can be targeted with a top attack round.
Isn't Ukraine very flat?
Yes, but there are always enough undulations to hide a tank. The effective range of a TOW missile and a T-80 tank are both 3-4km. A T-80 tank is about 2m tall, so let's say a 3m hill at 3000m is .999 flat land. The most successful attack the Russians have made in the last couple of weeks is near Popasna. It happens that they attacked down the length of the highest ground in miles. Terrain always matters.
@@invertedv12powerhouse77 Ukraine is not a salt flat. Plenty opportunities to fire from a hull-down position.
@@taekatanahu635 yeah you could hunker down I guess. But alot of the videos seem to see tanks getting blown off the roads. Disadvantage
Still smaller than an abrams. lol
That " long weird metal bent in a v shape " is just a 90° angle steel one of the most common types of steel bars. Also how are they supposed to be lower if the crew hatches are supposed to work while protecting from rpgs fire from buildings.
Ive seen that kind of steel rods used in BBQs. No pun intended
how are they supposed to be lower? Just make it into more pieces.
@@miguelpi8831 Yes it is basically used everywhere. Very simple, cheap and relatevely good against bending forces.
@@fronthole_guacamole ah ok! thanks in Germany we call it "Winkel Stahl" pretty much the exact translation. I didnt know how to call it correctly in English
@@fronthole_guacamole we call it angle iron in Ireland, I'd assume most English speaking countries follow suit
Brate, svaka ti čast gde izvlačiš sve ove informacije, grafikone, samo jako👊🏻👊🏻
The cage armor is designed to protect against anti-tank weapons like the RPG7. This is very different than the improvised canopy cage above
Looking at the study, the optimal width was 80mm against an RPG-7 rocket. Those rockets have a diameter of 93mm, which would give about 6mm of deflection per side (assuming a "direct" hit between two slats). If the slats are as narrow as possible, they will bend from the impact and dissipate kinetic energy to slow the HEAT projectile down, hopefully enough to catch it without detonating it. Using stiffer slats would, beyond increasing the chance of hitting the slat, cause a more violent deceleration that could detonate the warhead and cause a penetration. Now, if 80mm is a good length for a 93mm warhead, what would be a suitable slat distance for a Javelin which is 127mm? Well, using simple proportions, it would be 109mm. Problem of course is that these tanks aren't facing only Javelins and RPG-7s, but: Stugna-Ps 130mm NLAWs 115mm PzF-3s 110mm MATADORs 90mm AT-4s 84mm M72s 66mm Just to name a few of the anti-tank weapons they've been provided. A pretty wide gap of calibers to protect against, since an 80mm gap is quite unlikely to catch a 66mm rocket. And that M72 can still penetrate 200mm+ of RHA up to 450mm, depending on the model.
Now that could have been made clearer in the video, at least to me. Armour like this strikes me as very threat dependent. If you're up against projectiles too large or perhaps, detonate at stand off, distance from the target, that's a different configuration required over an assumed primary RPG-7 type of threat. Not to say the idea works, or doesn't work. Just to suggest that in this case the design as installed is not correct for the threat present.
@@leonpeters-malone3054 Thats why there was the proposition of those hard-object bags as layered protection. I mean when you look at tanks now ts layer upon layer upn layer of protections now. Cast-hull of steel for general protection. Composite armor shell over hull. ERA over fixed armor. ECM packages. Then its stand-off cages, then its bags over cages. At this rate, there is significant complexity to have a generally survivable tank, unlike WWII where it was thicker steel over a better hull design.
Two grids one to catch big fish and another below to catch small fish. cover 84mm to 120mm. Perhaps also add absorbers for IR, visible, radar? In these layers
@@agnelomascarenhas8990 that would likely be very effective. But it would be expensive to produce in a factory and difficult to produce in the field. Or at least that's what my intuition says.
Which version of M72 can penetrate 450mm?
Recently there was a post circulating on Telegram with an interview of a Russian tank crew member. He said the cages were removed as they are a nuisance. The machine gun on turret doesn't turn, it's harder to leave the tank, etc.
time for a bbq.
For 110 days, there is not a single video confirming the successful use of Javelins.
@@TyphoonUSSR You haven't been looking hard enough then.
@@TyphoonUSSR I mean I didn't even look that hard and found probably a dozen different clips of Javelins and NLAWs being used to great success
@@TyphoonUSSR I could you send you 20 plus 10 if you ask nicely.
One of your most interesting and informative videos, a genuine contribution to understanding. Thanks!
hey man I've been following your content for sometime you make really dope videos, besides what I really like is the amount of effort that is put into research. Keep up the good work
i personally believe that they installed these cages from the lessons learned in Syria\Iraq\ISIS. Where they used low cost drones to drop bombs directly on top of tanks where their armor is at the weakest and it would not take very much to destroy the tank this way.
I think these cages were seen first in Syria. I remember people mention it several years ago. It was in small numbers though. They probably see it work against small EFP dropped by commercial drones and used it in Ukraine expecting similar threats. Which to be fair Ukraine did use similar methods. problem is that it is a single specific threat that the cage works against. It is a detriment against literally everything else. Maybe they hope it would work against more capable munitions but logically speaking, that's unlikely. There may be some fluke cases but all the associated drawbacks just seems like its a bad idea.
@Работаем, брат! ayyy my man backing up all the research i had done on these since i heard the stupid phrase cope cages. i have seen the anti drone tech they are using now. it's high tech shit.
Germans tried it in WWIi, as did US armor in Vietnam.
@Работаем, брат! They were all designed for anti rocket protection. Some better than others.
Still they fight the same enemy as in Syria...
My assumption has always been that these cope cages were for drone dropped rounds, It would definitely never work vs Javelin charges. It makes the profile of the tank so much bigger, either way it seems like a insufficient cope to the new challenges tanks face
Even less for TOW and NLAW which will fly below the cage and explode...
Where did they all go? Besides some early videos of the conflict you don't see these cope cages anywhere in Russian forces anymore. Besides Javelins have proven pretty sucky. Seen APCs and BMPs eat 3-4 of them on video and still survive just from the anti-HEAT screens. Ukrainians are getting most of their kills from Arty, Russians much the same and air power.
@@anasevi9456 Russia realized the futility in using them.
@@donavonrobbins1908 that and the smart commanders realizing the west is basically funding Ukraine so the Ukrainian army doesn't need to do MacGyver shit with small drones, they are getting real military drones for free basically. I can see them in use in city battles where a civilian might drop a molotov cocktail or two but, most of the destroyed tanks are in open fields and not cities (which is weird because it is usually the opposite in battle theory).
@@anasevi9456 there are reports of tank crews removing them because it's more of a hindrance than anything
Cope cages tanks are the modern equivalent of bed springs fitted to soviet tanks in WW2. Did 🤬 all for protection and mostly likely meant to be a morale booster. If you are a tank going into a city, you are more likely to feel safer and not abandon so easy with the cage/bed springs installed. The lack of the cages since February shows they dropped that idea as it didn't help at all and probably hindered the crew and tanks performance.
Challenge 2 with cages.?
Merkava with cope cages
The better light and flat versions look like might work decent as a cargo rack, which in general a crew can always use more storage
except in a poor location making you easier to spot. Although more crew storage is always appreciated.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 it's a god damn tank, you hear its engine from kilometers
For essential vodka!
@@ImPedofinderGeneral yeah but imagine if you were trying to hide it behind a ridge or something from other tanks or observation from long range. the cage makes a relatively short T-72 taller than an Abrams. And if you're trying to move into a hull down firing position you'd see the cage coming up before the gun was able to fire, giving away that the tank is about to try to shoot.
@@Michael-uc2pn I saw one tank with lots of branches on this thing. Looked funny and like beaver nest. But you are right, it's probably worster for ambush
The cages don't *need* to work... they just need to get the tank's operators to *believe* that they're safer as a result of it.
Only helps when you aren't driving past killed tanks with the cafe
@@cgmason7568 Wrong. It got the tank crew to at least that point.
dont think the crewmen are dumb enough to not realized that.
@@pz_faust6866 A very large number of the Russian troops are conscripts, not regulars, and they didn't know where they were going or what they were going to be doing when they got there. A government which would lie like that will also lie about the effectiveness of the cages.
Exactly, it only exists for placebo effect , it need to to convince the soldier that he is safer , no need to be safer only convince
A very interesting and thoughtful presentation. Thank You
It’s called a cope cage to help the ghosts of the tankers to cope with their deaths
According to what I saw from Russian tank pages, they were mostly removed because they get in the way of crew evacuation
And we all know they need to be able to evacuate their tanks as fast as possible.....
Weird, Russian tank turrets seem to have a quite powerful ejection system, the turret flies with the crew 90ft in the air when impacted.
Steel angle, here in NZ, just as we use the term ‘aluminium angle’, prefixed/suffixed by the length of each side and the thickness of the metal. The product used in the ‘cope cages’ appears to the basic 50mm mild steel angle that is especially popular where the fabricated frame is intended to be put in one place and left there.
it's spelled "aluminum" in the u.s.
@@doctorboot7191 but he was specifically referring to NZ
@@doctorboot7191 The US spells it wrong
cage armor actually somewhat useful at stopping older rpg-7 warheads which with a shot to the turret from above or behind could score a mobility or mission kill. javelins and nlaws while numerous not the most likely threat these tanks are likely running into
I was trained and used the Javelin missile system while I was in the Marines. That cage armor is useless against modern antiarmor weapon systems.
The fact you were a marine doesnt makes you a expert on Tanks Not want to disrespect you, but on the slat armour, I not sure, they could work thx to lots of factors, but they def have tradeoffs related to how the tank operates, aka, cannot use your MG and exit easly, and kills the "advantage" russian tanks have of being small in height
I honestly just think this is a sequel to Sherman crews putting dumb shit on their tanks in ww2
just wait till the T62 get their upgrades hahahaha its gonna look like a scrap yard on tracks
@@Cheese_Boi1986 T 64?
@@pz_faust6866 Nah Russia is now sending T-62s to reserve units in Ukraine due to running low on armored vehicles
@@signs80 how do you know thats the reason?
@@pz_faust6866 Why the hell else would they send vehicles that were built 50 years ago to a modern warzone?
Good job! Interesting topic.
Very good article, well presearched. Thank you.
Well covered. Thanks - worth the subscription!
Great video. Thanks for all the information backing up what you show. So much speculation a d knee-jerk takes going on these days...
Exactly my dear Russians. Now it doesn't really matter that you have designed your tanks so tiny and uncomfortable if you put a skyskraper on your tanks.
Yea the cage ironically sacrifices one of the key advantage to their tank designs for a very minimal gain against a single very specific threat... and is a detriment to everything else
Well, Russians are still winning, despite trying their hardest to make their tanks easier targets to hit.
Perhaps next they will try "ablative tanks". Attach another main battle tank on top of the tank they need protected. Seems about the most effective way they can hope to survive a javelin.
I like how all of you make fun of it. The javelin this, the javelin that. The super weapon. How many tanks the javelin actually killed we will never know. I bet Ukraine would flood the net with such videos if they had incredible successes with them. But from what I hear many of them had dead battery packs!!
The NLAWs detonate about 1 metre (3 ft) above the turret using concussion to do the job. Cope cage might stop an RPG but will not stop the shock wave from an NLAW or Javelin.
NLAW does not use "concussion". It has a downward facing HEAT warhead that shoots a jet through the top armor of the tank. That's why it's ineffective in a direct attack role against armor.
The angled part on the front does seem to be for javelin missile coming at a 45° angle rather than an AT grenade droped at 90° but there are many different designs for the cages
The video maker has a very poor understanding about how Statistical Armour works (because thats the real name for 'Cage armour'). It's main purpose is to destroy the function of the piezo electric fuse of Russian RPG-7 and other munitions. It won't do anything to a Javelin as its fuse is further back in the missile body...it will just power through the steel using its kinetic energy then its precursor warhead will detonate on contact with the roof of the tank, followed very quickly by the main chage. Same with Brimstone. NLAW's top attack uses a downwards firing EFP and would cut through the bars like it wasn't there...before doing the same to the turret. It might have some marginal utility against drone dropped munitions...
"20% of the time, works every time"
My biggest concern as you can see in the pictures is that these things obstruct the machine gun. It can be annoying for those manual controlled ones as you probably need to raise the gun to turn it if the armor's 'legs' are in the way, I guess if it is the RCWS model it can be a nightmare to operate if you have to constantly turn it. Also good luck trying to aim for the guy with a Panzerfaust 3 on the roof of an apartment block, or a drone dropping molotovs on your head.
Hi Red Effect, great content. Can you do a video about the effectiveness of ERA (Kontakt 1+5 and Relikt) against modern ATGMs like NLAW and Javelin? Kontakt-1 seems ineffective due to the precursor warhead. Is Kontakt-5 and Relikt more resitant? Thanks
I suspected they were for old rpg-42 grenades dropped from drones, I'm sure there's a stock of them somewhere I guess they weren't getting used though
Spookson actually covered this topic a month or two ago. The Cope cage is more more than likely to help protect the tank from small diameter bombs like the ones dropped by the TB-2 and possibly various RPG shots from high elevations. The war in Azerbaijan saw the use of the TB-2 and showed the effectiveness of its weapons against Soviet era armor. Supposedly they also could’ve stopped earlier versions of the javelin but not the current model so it’s unlikely they were intended to protect against them.
Problem is TB2 uses more than just MAM bombs
Sorry to say man, but Spookston has no idea what he’s talking about. All he does all day is jerk off to the hstvl and cry about how bad other tanks are.
cope cage is not for TB2 it for the cheaper drone system that ukrane actually uses. it just drops a AT greande
Exactly Russia started installing those cope cages during Azerbaijan-Armenian war. In that war was there a single Javelin used? Nope! Rather several dozen TB-2s destroyed hundreds of Armenian armored vehicles and who else has those TB-2s?? UKRAINE, what a ''coincidence''!! When Russia was installing those cope cages there weren't many Javelins in Ukraine nor Russia knew the west was going to send so many weapons to support Ukraine but somehow that only God knows how exactly those cope cages were installed against Javelins according to some vodka drunk ''experts''...
Really informative Post more please.
they are good for other reasons like keeping the sun off or out of the eyes, they seem to be useful for carrying supplies and could be useful against some small arms fire or brush added for some top down camaflauge prolly not what was hoped for tho by the crews
So you can make those at home with materials from a store and they don't even work because they are making them wrong.
Thanks! Very good video Реально, так в теме даже наши блогеры не разбираются, особенно такой аналитики у нас маловато
Советую hellfire Он наш и очень хорошо разбирается
@@Felix-pc9sm смотрел. Недостаточно выводов и логики. Тут всё по полочкам, кратко и сухо. Хорошо поставленная речь и текст. Больше нравится
What if ze rockets 🚀 hit you from unzergrounz?
@@BT-kf4kx what? Да что ты черт побери такое несёшь?)
Подскажи, кратко если можешь, что он сказал? Ерунда эти решетки или нужная вешь?
The roof cage is actually installed so Ukrainian farmers have alternative points to attach tow cables to abandoned tanks
@Ban this youtube Russia has been targeting them as terrorists so any try will die
3:30 V-shaped metal... Yes, we have that thing in East Europe. We call it L-profile and it's very useful for pretty much everything. This is why they used it
Those "cope cages" are clearly made from "angle bar" or "angle iron", which (angle iron) is a cheaper way of making long, rigid beams with little material by hot-rolling a steel billet into a ninety-degree shape along its length. Perhaps the effect of properly designed slat armour could have ben replicated if the bars were welded onto their frames with one flange flat and the other sticking up like a fin, so that it's effectively bars spaced as per the factory design to an incoming RPG warhead.
I have heard that some tank commander have removed them because of the down side to them
Yup, the problem is not if it stops ATGM, RPG or whatever, or not, is if its worth it to defend against that, biggest problem I would point would be worse sighting, being spotted easier is a problem, and being hatder to flee as well, but not as bad as that
@@gerfand Those are only issues to the dead, and soldiers have a tendency to ignore that part of the class. It's more likely that it was interfering with weapon systems, communications, and maintenance.
@@stanielb2005 I dont think so, because the first tests was during 2020 if not earlier So have plent of time to see those problems
@@gerfand I assure you, nobody in the Russian high command cares. If they think it'll make 5% of their tanks live longer, they'll order every tank to have them. Once those tanks get away from their senior officers, the useless shit comes off and the useful stuff doubles up.
@@stanielb2005 that is dumb take, if they dont care that they tank get destroyed then they also dont care about victory
Hi redeffect Quick question on the T80u. I am wondering what is the massive filter looking thing on the back of its turret? I find this unusual since most modern Russian mbt's have their foraging snorkels there or a stowage box.
Hey Red would you be able to do a video covering the T-62 tanks that are supposedly being sent to the frontlines ? As always we enjoy the awsome uploads :)
"russia all ways realises the hard way" -my dad
😂
the javelin is specifically designed to defeat this type of armor with it's tandem charge.
Tandem charges are to deal with ERA not slat armour
As Blue Mountain has said. Tandem charge designed to defeat ERA. BUT the welded angle iron cage offers no protection as the kinetic energy of the missile warhead would easily overcome the mild steel frame. The secondary shaped charge will still penetrate and blow up the tank.
Super informative video
And when Israel does it they call them “cage armor”
Cope
crew member said: Динамическая защита. Я всегда к ней скептически относился. И вот два попадания - я своими глазами видел: срабатывает, реально помогает. Обвесы (металлические решетки для защиты от противотанковых ракет) мы сначала все наварили на танки, а потом их все сняли. Во-первых, неудобно: пулемет не двигается, антенна когда замыкает об решетку - сгорает радиостанция, связь пропадает. И если будет какое-то возгорание, там просто нереально будет вылезти из танка. Потому что когда встаешь в полный рост - упираешься. Поэтому их все сняли и выкинули.
Reactive armor. I've always felt sceptical about it. And then, I saw the tank being hit two times - I saw it with my own eyes: works, really helps. We've welded metallic cages against anti-tank rockets, and then took them off. First, it is unconvinient: machine gun does not move, and sometimes short curcuit in antenna is caused by cage, and when it happens - radio breaks and communications are lost. And when there is a fire, it's impossible to get out, because when you get up - you rest against it. That's why we took them off and threw away. Sorry, my english is not ideal.
@@nothingness29 use yandex-translate)))
You’ve got to convince people to get into those death traps somehow.
THIS
lmao true
This is Nicholas’ Cage
The cumulative jet has a focus point for which it is designed. If you move the moment of detonation away from the surface of the armor, the penetration depth drops critically. In this case, there is no destruction. However, the inconvenience is far greater than the benefits.
The long metal is not "weird" is is well known throughout the whole world as angle section or angle iron in the US and UK. I noticed in one of one of your other videos that you had to make changes to appeal younger audiences, maybe that is the case here, also.
Great analysis! I've seen a lot of jokes about the cages but I have been interested in what the intended use of the cages were and how effective they actually were. I'm happy that you did the research so I don't have to😁
Excellent job.
I'm surprised we didn't see one with camo net all over it. It remarkably difficult to hit something you can't see if you had concealment all over the top of your tank that might make it easier and a little safer to look around with the hatch open.
The issue is that tanks are loud when driving. Especially loud when firing the canon.
It might not work , but assuming its made of steel and covered with sand bags and kept at some distance like about 1-2 meter above so it might absorb a few kilo Joule of energy of the impact.. Somthing is better than nothing.
I would argue that the reported study tells about the best strategy to destroy the HEAT charge without setting it off (their trigger doesn't get triggered). While the cope cages would almost certainly trigger HEAT charges, they would also act like spaced armor (decreasing the effectiveness of the HEAT jet). They would work even against modern missiles, like the Javelin or the NLAW (which might get destroyed entirely by impacting the cage). All in all, i don't think the cope cage is stupid.
The cope cages work, but they simply have more disadvantages than advantages
@@name-yn6vu they don't work against Javelins, only small munitions and explosives and old rusty RPG heat charges which the ERA already does for it, since the Javelin uses tandem charges it can cut through both ERA and the cope cage.
@@ryanweltz4076 no, the tandem charge detonated the ERA, and the secondary charge attacks the tank. If the cope cage detonates the tandem charge, then the secondary will only detonate the ERA, and the tank will be unscathed
@@name-yn6vu thing is it can slip through, do you know how powerful a Javelin is? And you see those huge gaps between the tank and cage? Yeah, sorta big, a Javelin can slip right through which has happened, And there are many images of tanks with cope cages destroyed because of these hand held ATGMs Just search it up and you'll find the same result, cope cages are useless against Javelins.
@@name-yn6vu hence the name COPE cage.
I call for you to start adding the cool intro with the gasmask and the music again!
The best channel with unbiased analytics
Russia Cope Cages is mocked by WEST. but Ukraine tank are now installed by Cope Cage 😂😂😂😂😂
now even jews installing them on their merkavas, lmao
You know, we don't care. Mock us in any way you want. As we say, the one who laughs last laughs well. With love from Russia.
@@shipovnik89 People who know a thing or two about warfare don't mock Russia. Western war propaganda mocks Russia + the low IQ people who believe it and jump on the bandwagon.
This was a complaint by the DPR in the early years, '15/'16. They would capture vehicles with slat armor and would have to spend time removing it before refurbishing the vehicle to send to the front. It was a metal cage that you had to get up and step over t to jump off the vehicle. Where without it, you can jump off the side. It is a different mindset.
Authors of those improvised cages only heard of Javelin missile, but failed to read all the details. As usual, of course. They heard it strikes upper armour. And they assumed it does that strictly vertical. But it does not. Javelin in upper flight profile strikes at around 40 to 45 degrees and misses those over-the-top cages completely. Those cages are also useless against nlaw missiles as they detonate about 1-1,5 meters above the tank forming a very narrow hypervelocity coper stream downwards that pierces tower. Some improvised field upgrades also featured false targets for heat seekers - some kind of a 2-meter long horizontally installed pipe extended to the right or to the left of the vehicle with a cup of burning oil at the end of it. That practice was abandones shortly after beginning as it proved to be unpractical and cumbersome to maintain.
.... they studied most recent Armenia - Azerbaijan war and effects of Baryaktar TB-2. That is exactly angle for that cages, not Javelin or NLAW. But, for western ego, acceptance that something else bother Russians more than western armament is not an option. And "cages" are abandoned not because they missed the point, but because TB-2s are circumvented en masse on other ways. During NATO attack at SR Yugoslavia, Serbs put cages with grass bushes at top of tanks and IFV-s, usually wet, but, not above cupolas but above engines - to lessen thermal signature.
7:30 what is the tank ejecting? first time i see that hatch opening and closing like that on a tank, is that for spend shells hull cases?
I had the thought they may have been useful if building debris falling onto tanks was a concern, and considering how many buildings are barely standing it could be a risk to tanks.
Expanded steel mesh worked for RPG7 protection for the hippie kombis the Rhodesians made into MRAP vehicles.
Correct statement. Rhodesia approves
@@TRPilot06YT no way rhodesia official youtube account?
@@someturkishguy8638 H*ck yeah 😎😎😎
You can use em for specific warheads with proper spacing, but no way in hell do the Russians have a chance considering the gigantic variety of anti tank weapons in use in Ukraine
@@signs80 Like I said the Rhodesians were able to prevent RPG7 missiles from penetrating their VW T2 kombi mraps. Look up the " Leopard" for details.
Top attack munitions rendered the russian armored doctrine useless. They need to change their tactics or start developing a cheap and reliable hard-kill aps and massproduce it.
Russian commanders rendered their doctrine useless. Top attack munitions, which aren't even particularly common and don't make up the majority of total losses, have existed for decades. They have very little experience with combined arms operations and never examined their doctrine in those environments. That's what's killing them.
Even most modern NATO tanks cant do shit against top attack munition, and from my observation Hard-Kill APS (Trophy System) is currently the only way to defend the vehicle against modern/smart anti tank weapons such as BILL/NLAW/FGM-148, and TOW-2B with top attack mode. And the only tank that equipped with Trophy System and battle proven (per May 28 2022) is Merkava Mk.4 Though NATO countries planned to equipped their tanks with Hard-Kill APS. I've seen some pictures of Abrams/Chally/Leo with Trophy APS (the one that is being used in Merkava Mk.4) but its only for testing and still not in service
1:50 is example as to WHY it seems weird to do it on top attack munitions... This clip is from a tests of a TOW variant that flies above the target, and even from 2 meters away it easily explodes the turret off that old T series tank. This is also true to NLAWs that by design fly about 1m above the target. Javelins do explode on impact, but their shaped charge is far behind guidance that in such fat rocket would detect hit anyway before it get's to deform the shaped charge that with 750mm RHA penetration it doesn't really care for spacing. The study quoted explains why RPG-7 and other simple HEAT rounds would get affected (Carl G; PzF 3; AT4), but placement, and rumours suggest that it was meant to stop the more advanced rockets, which is not gonna.
Some of those cope cages are not expecting to make direct contact with the incoming ordnance in order to disrupt it. They have to deflect the incoming supersonic molten copper stream. So it seems their theory is that the closer angled bars will directly deflect this stream... does not seem to work well in this scenario though. Of course as you mention they may work well on small drone dropped grenades and similar rounds that do not auto detonate above the tank.
They should of been named "Hope" Cages; install them and HOPE they work!! In most cases they don't.
I don’t know how you guys didn’t mention about drones 😂 they saw from nagorno karabakh when the Armenian t-72’s got smacked by Azeri drones . It really isn’t hard to realize
Well the top attack mode of the NLAW for example, uses proximity fuse and magnetic sensors, there is nothing to "trap" so the width of the bars are irrelevant
Yep, although NLAW is just one of the many AT threats out there. Regardless, the cage probably won't stop even half of them.
The"long wierd metal" is common mild steel angle iron it appears. The frame that holds up your bed is a slightly harder version
My dad was in the 14th armored 47th tank battalion in ww11 he ran into panzerfousts driving into Germany a German youth shot my father's driver with one killing him instantly but didn't hurt the tank after that they tied logs and sand bags on the tank my dad's tank had bars welded all over it the logs worked good at stopping the panzerfoust but didn't work at stopping the panzershrek.
Pretty sure Panzerfasut has bettee capacity in damage than a PanzerSchreck because of how they worked The main advantage of a PanzerSchreck is being reloadable but hey the US uses a AT4 not a "rpg7"
@@gerfand wasn't sure I thought the Shrek was worse .
@@Superbowfin60 its not that they are worse, its just that Panzerfasut have multiple variants that can pen more or less, but they deal more post pen damage, I forgot about the fact Panzerfasut came in all sort of ways. That was my mistake Overall tho If not wrong PanzerSchreck is better most timed because it has a bit more range and you can reload, but its also super heavy compared to the panzerfaust. Well they used both because they saw situations where one or the other was more usefull
Here on youtube there is a test conducted by the Ukrainians on such a rooftop cage equipped tank using a Javelin. The cage had no effect.
Then why not link to this footage that no one else has seen
(Use Google Translate if you do not know russian) From an interview with Russian tank commander, basically he admits that cages were a very bad idea and everyone removed them from their tanks. К вопросу наваривания металлических "козырьков" на башни танков. «Обвесы (металлические решетки для защиты от противотанковых ракет) мы сначала все наварили на танки, а потом их все сняли. Во-первых, неудобно: пулемет не двигается, антенна когда замыкает об решетку - сгорает радиостанция, связь пропадает. И если будет какое-то возгорание, там просто нереально будет вылезти из танка. Потому что когда встаешь в полный рост - упираешься. Поэтому их все сняли и выкинули». Из интервью танкиста капитана Алексея Ухачёва газете Московский Комсомолец.
AWESOME Did not have a clue. Never seen or heard of that protection before
It's more to do with crew confidence than anything else. They feel like they have at least done something to improve their chances of survival. During the Cold War when I did my military service. If WWIII had happened, the life expectancy of a tank on the Soviet front line was quoted as 4 hours. Anti Tank weaponry has improved considerably since then while Russian tanks development has stood still. T72, T80 and T90 are substandard. I'd like to see how T14 compares in the current conflict. It seems to me that Russian tank forces are suffering mostly from a lack of efficient infantry support and adequate air cover. Infantry support is vital, it requires intense training and much practice. Tank Commanders and infantry commanders must learn to think as one. After a while it becomes instinctive.
I agree but that’s only part of the equation. Russian military life is very tough and demanding so most fulfill their obligated service time and leave. So seasoned professional soldiers in their ranks are in short supply. Also their equipment isn’t well maintained due to lack of experienced techs/mechanics again due to reasons I just previously stated and corruption from the officer corps which often funnel money to line their pockets rather than sending funds towards new equipment and maintenance all while actually maintaining the illusion to Putin that his armed forces are a top notch 21st century force to be reckoned with
@@mattkennedy6115 It is incredible how both you and him above are so sure of what you say. Do you really have this info or are you just saying what almost everyone in the West keeps saying? When was the last time a NATO army even the US fought against a even relatively modern opponent and without the bonus of complete air superiority? Russia is fighting an army which was trained, organised, entrenched by NATO for 8 years.
@@mattkennedy6115 Yes Matt, between us we nailed it.
@@gvaik Matt will I'm sure speak for himself. My information comes first hand from former USSR veterans and a "few" Russian soldiers with very recent service. Who for obvious reasons will remain nameless. As a veteran myself, I would never insult the determination, bravery or commitment of a fellow professional soldier. Be they NATO, Russian or ChiComs it makes no difference. I will however criticise their levels of training and equipment when necessary because both are extremely important. I wish you well.
So at best, this might improve the chances of survival by a factor of two. It looks like the cages are there just to make the crew feel safer. Let's be honest, tanks were never designed to deal with shaped charges, or anything that attacks them from above.
If the cage method works against RPG-7 warheads, then it should, in theory, work against Javelin and NLAW warheads too since all three (RPG, NLAW, Javelin) use HEAT warheads as standard. I think where they might be failing is while the standard RPG-7 rocket (the PG-7VL) and NLAW use one HEAT warhead, the Javelin uses a tandem warhead. I'm not sure as the RPG also has a tandem HEAT rocket (the PG-7VR) and I don't know if they've been used in testing as well. I do have a problem with their nickname of "Cope Cages" though as while it is a funny term, soldiers have always tried random things to "cope" with enemy fire. Mounting concrete armor, using logs to pre-detonate shaped charges and prevent the manual attaching of such in a quick fashion, using steel from beach defenses to fashion frontal attachments to use to plow through hedgerows. To call them "Cope Cages" diminishes the fact that they are largely creations of scared people trying their best not to die while still fulfilling their duty, regardless of whether or not that duty is just. Whether they deserve to die is also irrelevant and completely subjective.
Nope, because it is not about warhead used, but its placement and fuse operation. RPG-7 warhead is directly damaged, moreover its fuse is piezoelectric and by impacting cage armor, short-circuit is caused thus disabling the warhead. Main warhead in Javelin is far rear, as long as fuses works, it more-or-less ignores cage armor on the top of the tank
@@mungo7136 also, tandem charge.
in alot of these photos we see under said "cope cages" material and other equipment that the crewmen put under it so maybe it could double as storage somewhat? as seen in another comment I also believe that it might help with troop morale.
I wonder why to my knowledge not a single russian tank is using modern APS systems. I mean they clearly developed a few different ones and said they would work more or less great. Are they just that expansive?
I think the Russian military is just so broke that they can’t afford to buy and equip the APS systems
They are not designed for these types, so equipping them will need time
It seems likely that some tanks do have them equiped, however it does seem they don't have nearly enough to equip all there tanks with them. Well I guess it's either that or their APS systems simply aren't effective enough at this stage in their development to justify their being used.
I like how these cope cages completely negate the low-silhouette advantage intended by having the original tank design use an autoloader. With the cope cages the tanks now are more visible than their western counterparts...
It really doesnt matter how small your tank is anymore,it just has to be below a certain size to reduce the effectiveness of artillery and stuff like that,the optics on a tank gun can track you,the missiles can change where they aim AFTER being fired,theres not much of a point to it,and since they already have enough space for everything,they could use the extra space to add more composites,they probably wont because of funding and all that talk
Any improvised armor that isn't an APS isn't going to stop NLAWs or Javelins from damaging or killing a tank. Warheads used on those munitions aren't susceptible to slat armor.
"long weird metal in the V shape" lol, it's angle iron, the most ubiquitous metal stock you can find.
The only thing that those cages proved to be effective at is blocking ability of tank pilots to escape the tank :)
not true
also, pilots? lmao. they have more then one hatch.
I could see these becoming an actual useful piece of equipment should Russia attempt to take Odessa where ukraine will most likely put up extremely significant resistance and would likely employ older anti armour systems to bulk up capabilities.
These aren't stopping any HEAT rounds from the last 70 years unless they happen to be the perfect spacing to disrupt the projectile copper liner, which would be only a very narrow range of missile calibers for a given spacing of the metal slats
i dont think an assault on odessa is likely anymore, that would be pushing russian capabilities beyond max
The RPG has a contact fuse located at the very tip of the projectile . Bar armour works by allowing the fuse to pass between the bars , with the sides of the projectile impacting the bars. This causes damage to the projectile, specifically to the cone metal liner/penetrator and the actual shaped charge itself . It basically breaks up the projectile before detonation occurs. Should the projectile (impact fuse) strike one of the bars , a low probability , detonation would occur as normal and the penetrator go about its business. Bar armour would have little effect on proximity fused munitions other than increasing the stand off distance of the detonation.
"Should the projectile (impact fuse) strike one of the bars , a low probability , detonation would occur as normal and the penetrator go about its business. " Not quite. Optimal penetration is achieved at a specific distance from the target; premature detonation will reduce performance somewhat, possibly enough to prevent penetration of the armour.
Nice theory Anthony. The angle iron bars won't have any significant effect on the shaped charge warhead. Kinetic energy of the anti tank armour missile will defeat mild steel angle iron nearly every time.
I also saw on some KZhead comment that they were made to disrupt the thermal signature of the engine when looking from an elevated position, but i'm unsure if that would work.
ERA on cage?
xDDD
I followed the top attack from high places idea at first but hearing this, the drone theory actually sounds the most reasonable. It doesn't protect the engine of the tank but it could protect the crew which is the important part
you can't easily protect the engine given any attachment need to give clearance for turret/gun barrel traversing 360. Well I guess you can make a giant umbrella on the turret. But the structural integrity is going to be poor and will make it impossible to hide the tank... Not that the cope cages are very stealthy to begin with.
@@neurofiedyamato8763 yeah thats my point, they prioritized the protection of the crew.
A Great Video!!! From a USN Veteran 20+ years!!! I always wondered about the effectiveness of these "COPE Cages" or 'Lemonade stands' I like to call them. A SUPERIOR graphic on ability of COPE Cages in diameter of rods / distance between rods / effective % of rod - distance between rods..... A Great Graphic I'm a model builder and was interested in building a T-72-type tank with a 'Cage' and have a description of what the cages will do.... If I may, I would like to use your video as a 'link' when and IF I build that type of tank..... Thanks for the post!!!!!
You're the first channel I saw on KZhead since the beginning of the operation to actually research the subject. Love your work. Congrats