How to destroy T-14 Armata
2021 ж. 29 Қаз.
496 108 Рет қаралды
With the T-14 Armata state trials said to be near completion, for the 5th time now, I thought it might be a good idea to show you how to destroy this tank, since it might actually see service soon.
Short answer would be that you probably cant. If you are an infantryman armed with a rocket launcher, better luck next time, even Javelin will not help you with T-14. However, there is a way, but first we need to look at T-14s layers of protection in order to understand how to beat them. In this video, we are going to assume that you are an infantryman, since that is much more likely scenario.
Who knows, maybe it comes to War Thunder, so this video becomes even more useful...
Patreon: / redeffect
You cannot possibly destroy T-14. It is invisible. You cannot find it anywhere
Purple is sneaky (c)
Yeah until an Abrams find it
Abrams would be destroyed
You cannot destroy it if it doesn't exsist
@@mabinuqi03 Yup. The T-14 has got to be expensive. The GDP of just the state of Florida is $1.2b. The GDP of all of Russia is $1.3b. Not really worried about it. Think about it: Florida decides to develop a next generation tank? Could they do the r&d and still have money to actually test, refine, construct, train crews, and actually field it in any significant number?. On top of a conscripted force that are in and out in, what, two, three years?
Just wait until T-14 gets added to Warthunder, then its just a matter of time until someone leaks the classified specs
Killing this tank seems too hard. I demand real life nerf, now!
They don’t even need real specs to consider, they’ll take any rumoured speculations and implement it regardless if it’s true or not. The difference is that they won’t do this with other nation vehicles.
I dont think Gaijin will make it total Bias cuz it is a Russian Company
@@tsuaririndoku Russian companies always OP foreign vehicles and underpower Soviet/Russian ones
WT dont got official documents for the Abrams ,challenger and leclere armor and they still made it decently if u asked me
but can it defeat a John Deere tractor, that's the real question.
😂😂
You mean can it be towed by a John Deere?
The real question is, if it can defeat one that's one thing, but usually those apex predators hunt in at least pairs, so can it defeat two ?
@@Dive-Bar-Casanova 0 0
T-14 Armata vs. KILLDOZER! Now that's a matchup I'd like to see on WOT!
Question??? doesn't Russia have to build the T-14 before you can destroy the T-14.
Well, yeah. That's why NO army in the world has the means to destroy a T-14. Russia stronk!
BAHAHAHAHA! YES!
@@EndriuC Their 20 pieces of T-14 are very worrying :D Proving in Ukraine very well. The state with HDP of Spain is not able to finance development and production weapons of 5th generation. Another point is very high rate of coruption :D
@@frixtr the T14 is not in Ukraine at all.
@@EndriuC they had no real reason until now to mass produce it, there is no threat in any country around russia where the T72B3 or T80BVM could not combat it, they wiped out the ukrainian T64s and T80s in force on force, most of the tank losses have been to Javelin ATGMs, NLAWs and mines. All they have to do is to upgrade those older tanks with active kill systems and some of the automatic countermeasure systems the T14 has and i think they learned that from this conflict. If the neighbouring countries don't recieve a significant amount of Abrams S3 or Leopard 2A6, i doubt the T14 will ever go in full production, at least until the sanctions wear off and/or china lends some serious dough and resources.
The tried-and-true method to destroy equipment like this is through shoddy maintenance.
German Army is very good at this...
@@venator4838 my great grandfather was credited with the most downed German planes in WWII. Also got called the worst mechanic in the Luftwaffe.
The Russians are great at that with a lot of their vehicles. Many are filled with fluids and are dirty in ways I cant explain lol.
And budget cuts.
Airdrop crates of vodkas on Russian motor pool.
"Shoot the engine compartment or top of the tank" That's literally how you destroy any tank
Yeah but is it combat tested
@@slycer876 yes? This is true for every tank, the engine compartment is always the least protected as there is no crew there, and all tanks have relatively weak top armor (hence top down attack missiles are a thing)
Just shot turret is easy to destroy!
@@slycer876 uh the Armada is not combat tested....sorry buddy.
after exploding armor exploded
It's hard to destroy something that apparently doesn't exist
Is it?
There is like 25 of em
@@wrpg9955 once more of them come out, more weakness would be discovered. Though the main weakness is that it apparently requires way too many western made components to produce and Russia decided to go into war before managing to mass produce any of them. Someone forgot to explain Putin supply chains of modern tech.
@@wrpg9955 yeah and putins claims was over 250😂😂😂 so we shouldn’t be worried besides these tanks are going to be used as a last offense as it’s his most expensive piece of equiptment yet
@@wrpg9955 How many are plastic though?
The easiest way to destroy a T14 Armata is to place it in the hands of the russian troops. They either abandon it, get stuck in the mud or park in the open, waiting for the Saint Javelin.
how tank get stuck in the mud XD
@@hainamnguyen6919 idk man ask the russian tank crews in ukraine rn..Somehow..they get it done
@@savagespud8038 How to get a Russian tank stuck in the mud. Ask a Russian tanker. How to get a Russian, sorry a now Ukrainian, tank out of the mud. Ask a Ukrainian farmer.
I saw a picture of Russians collecting javelins and saying tanks to mi16
@@christiankalinkina239 Russians steal everything. Wouldn’t be a bit surprised that some javelins would make it that way too. But who can blame them with that equipment they field 😅 Check out their combat moon boots if you want a good laugh!
You should try interviewing a Russian tank commander
Yeah it would be amazing
Shrek the ogre
they will be restricted on what they can say
Like Boris
Is that the answer for: "How to destroy T-14 Armata?"
I give the Russians huge amounts of credit for almost overprotecting the crew. If youre in that thing you wont get killed and thats the most important thing. The rest is just metal and plastics.
i dont think you can "overprotect" the crew, mans life is always more worth than a machine
And stalinium
yeah. It might take few days to build a single unit of any AFV but it takes years to produce well trained and experienced soldiers.
It must also be a huge morale booster too
it is the biggest ever shift in their tank design
A round doesn't have to destroy the tank to take it out. The turret, gun, track could be damaged. The crew on the inside could suffer severe injuries from the impact of a round that doesn't penetrate the vehicle. Having seen what the T-90s are doing in Ukriane; it's hard to believe ANYTHING about this tank.
Western tanks would burn even worse there, because both Russia and Ukraine have similar technologies. Ai on the caterpillars also need to get in, and do not forget that the armata has an armored capsule.
@@user-xh5lq6ou9h no or should I say "нет"!!!! The west would have finished this off already with minimal loss of life and equipment. The russians were bluffing the entire time; their army is garbage!
@@user-xh5lq6ou9h It's pretty hard to set an modern Leo on fire. Good fire suppresion system and the ammuntion is VERY difficult to set off.
@@TheShowdown16 That's the thing.
nothing like that is news buddy, we've all know this. also apperantly you haven't even watched the video.
Your thermal defence would only work against the Javelin if the tank is moving, if it's stationary, Javelin will hit the last known location.
The missile has to be very precise to damage the tank, if it loses guidance during the final stage it would probably miss the target.
Hard kill system should disable a couple javelins.
@@randomthot125 Javelin is fire and forget, and they rarely miss.
@@lazerlazerlazer7823 the Russian anti missile defense systems overall leaves a lot to be desired.
@@TheMrReee just like any other infrared missile
NATO generals be like: "Hmm interesting video indeed"
probably from ukraine would say that
Most people would like to know how to destroy the chinese tanks, since theyre most secretive
NATO doesn't care, they have the K2 Black Panther on their side.
@@Pepe-dq2ib who cares
@@badgermcbadger1968 its the best tank in the word, just ask any Korean or Turk.
How to destroy Armata? Make it more expensive for buyer/goverment
Lmao
Us sanctions are doing that
In den man ihn in Polen warten lässt.
@Leplivo the problem is who bites the buck with sanactions. China sancations their biggest buyer their economy crumbles and 15 other buyers are contracted within two weeks. Vietnam, Taiwan, Phillpines, india all would love to get contracts. China doesn't hold the cards, it holds the bill. Russia, would crumble if the eu stopped buying gas. Their gdp is laughable at best comparable to italy despite being how much larger in population and resource density. It's childish reasoning to think otherwise, Russia and china are preparing to ensure their existance, that's why they focus on millitary strength over everything. They need something to even be considered as a contender because they are exploited.
It's not necessary to destroy it. It'll run out of gas, get bogged down or traded by the crew to the nearest farmer for a crate of vodkas and a hot meal.
Javelin won't defeat a T14? I wonder how many T14 crews would be happy to test that theory. As for them "invading a country near you" considering that they haven't gone into production yet and the way the Russian economy is now toast I somehow doubt it.
I know! The stupid tank is going to be somewhere in the cloud of smoke, moving in the same direction as before. The best you can do apply the smoke screen, then jam the controls (automatically) in one direction so the last indicated position is no long your position and the missile misses. Lol, otherwise if the tank is stationary, the could won't make much of a difference since the missile has an accurate location.
They took a few of them to Syria and were then shit scared to commit them to the fight..
@@peterstubbs5934 That shit always happens. Russia sends one of its 6 working [GREAT NEW THING]s to a conflict for PR, and then immediately withdraws them when there's any chance of engagement. S-400s got pulled out of Syria the second F-35s started hitting it. PAK FA gone too.
Russia is so poor they can't afford to pay attention.
@@jdgoodwin3136 HaHa
For all those dressed up as a T-14 Armata this Halloween ... beware! Some one dressed up as a Spike-LR operator can knock you out!
just imagine 2 dudes dressed up like that beating each other up in the middle of the road
@@shaun9014 if they miss ... rip to those 2 dudes 50/50 chance there ...
Putting the crews lives first says quite a bit about their policies regarding tank warfare with this new design. Very smart move indeed. The people driving these tanks will be happy about this and more confident about their use of it.
I also did not expect russians to be the first to use unmanned turret, I thought its gonna be israelis or at least NATO
I like the way the Russian outlook on defense has changed. They're still practical people, but they're practical people who respect the lives of their men now.
@@lamalien2276 Very true.
@@lamalien2276 Let's not get too romantic: Russia has the third highest suicide rate in the world. If Russia really wanted what's best for its people they'd stop playing with tanks and focus on having a GDP larger than Italy, a healthcare system that didn't . The T-14 is impressive but be under no illusions as to where that money is coming from. Russia has egregiously high military spending (even versus the likes of near peers in the west) and that comes at a huge cost to its people. Not sure that a separate crew compartment in their latest bit of steel really signals a change in overall thinking when it comes to the well being of their military personnel. Of course there's also the fact that the T-14 will not be produced in very high numbers (during peacetime at least). Most Russian tankers will be in nothing better than a T-90 for a decade.
Except this doesn't really protect the crew, against modern anti tank weapons the damage will be high enough to easily go through the turret AND into the hull. The unmanned turret only increases complexity and price not to mention that they made it unmanned but made it fucking huge for some reason when it should be smaller to reduce the profile
Have been an M1A2 tank commander for about 16 years and being familiar with most other tanks and their set ups, I have already seen how to make the T-14 Armata a useless moving target with the first shot. I'm surprised that no one has picked up on it yet. To me it is so obvious. But I will not disclose it, I don't want them to fix it. With that said, it would not destroy the tank, but it would take away its ability to fire making it useless in battle.
shoot the gun or gun mantlet?
@@t90mshaweenee55 though that shot has a very small chance of success it is not what I am referring to. Most mantle hits will not damage the gun or the gun carriage. A hit on the cannon itself certainly will put it out of commission but them shots are lucky hits. There is a much larger and easier to hit target if you look.
@@JohnMiller-wf6cmif the t-14 hit you first? Un think it would be like an tiger vs an m4 Sherman? 😂
You don’t need to destroy the tank to completely cripple it, the turret (which houses all the weapons) is only shielded to up to 20mm, so even a single use rocket could cripple the tank.
Depends what rocket you are using, the way T-14's Turret looks like is because there is a cover over T-14's actual turret semi protecting the second layer of the tank. You could blind it or swarm it that will be a bit hard. I am saying this because T-14 is a Descendent of Obj.195. If you put the covering that T-14 has over Obj.195's turret, they will nearly look Identical. Obj.195's hull is nearly the same as T-14's or you can even say Identical. We don't know much about the Tank so we can't really say anything about it and doubt it before seeing it in action.
What's disappointing about these videos is that they don't discuss all the other ways to take out an MBT other than "killing" it. .. disabling its sensors/optics, destroying its tracks etc.
Whenever people show an Abrams getting killed, literally cooking off, every single comment is "look see the crew survived!!!!!! No destruction, American things are literally perfect in every conceivable way and absolutely invincible because freedom or something". But when its a Russian tank in question, everyone is quick to point out that killing a tank has almost literally nothing to do with killing the crew, and everything to do with removing the tank from the battle.
@@WordBearer48 I didn't even talk of the US or Russia in particular but about "these videos". So what are you talking about, what's triggering/hurting you?
True this. I think the balance had shifted decisively against Tanks for the foreseeable future. With all the modern equipment you can give to basic infantry nowadays, it wont take much to turn these 60 Ton beasts into blind Tractors.
@@yanmak2363 EXACTLY 👍 .. though those means existed in earlier times already. Back in the day infantry would successfully fight tanks with Molotov cocktails, anti-tank rifles or just dig ditches wide enough. ..or simply have them cut off from our destroyed their support, if they weren't careful. A tank without ⛽ is basically dead. Basically my point is: This tank talk isn't overly rational. Tanks are COMPLEX machines with more than one weakness, which can be neutralized in much more than one way.
And with modern tanks which rely on a ton of electronics... EMP
Best bet would be to mission/mobility kill it, at that point the crew would have to bail out anyways. At long range its an absolute menace, but at close range I dont think it stands a better chance than any other tank
Yeah that's why tanks aren't meant to be used like that, if you're using a tank in urban environments you've already lost. They have the terminator for that anyway
@@antimatter4733 not necessarily in urban environments, also forests, rocky/hilly terrains, passes and more! Also sometimes you cant really decide where to fight, and if the tank cant partake because of environmental factors you kind of already defeated it
@@matteocesa9017 if you're in an environment where you can be flanked like a Forrest or hills you need to have infantry push up alongside the tank and use it for fire support
A mission/mobility kills still require you to hit the tank. And as it is shown in the video that is extremely difficult due to the active and passive protection systems. Your safest bet to achieve a mobility kill would probably be a mine. Or you need to be very lucky in both timing and position to be able to catch the tank when the turret is turned 180 degrees away from you. So yeah, even a mobility kill would be extremly difficult to pull off.
@@antimatter4733 yes of course, I just assumed for the sake of this thought experiment that for whatever circumstance you are able to take a shot at the tank; if you arent it could be a t55, it wouldnt matter anyways. I understand that no piece of military hardware is used by itself, its still fun to have these discussions :)
"shoot the engine" isn't that how you destroy vehicles in general?
It's a powerpack
Javelin has an inertial guidance component and isn't going to simply go home if you fart at it. It doesn't panic at loud noises or sudden motion and it also doesn't actually optically guide in the last half second before detonation. While it probably won't ever kill the crew on a T-14, it will definitely damage the turret system enough to set off all the soft and hard kill components on it. The biggest problem you face in the Armata is that even with the fire suppression systems if the turret chamber cooks off you're still dead because there's no way you're getting out of the front compartment after a cook-off anyway. The crew that just destroyed your turret is gonna see the fire truck and blow it up too. People seem to forget that the Javelin isn't an image homing system, it is a image monitoring system that plots a solution based on target motion. If you drive out of your smoke you're dead, if you stay in your smoke you're dead. This has all been accounted for.
You do realize that's not how that "fart" worked right? The javelin is programmed to hit center of mass and that "fart" will completely all the heat signature of the tank ,so yeah good luck to even manage to hit part of the tank. And before you're saying im just spreading Russian propaganda i just wanna to mention "you do realize the Abrams have this kind of things right?" Does javelin automatically have 100% accuracy if it's a russian tank or something?
Best counter to the armata is obviously an Arjun
Lol, very funny 😂
Agreed. Put an Arjun in a transport aircraft, drop it out the back at height, and try to drop it on top of the T-14. Repeat as many times as needed to get a kill.
kzhead.info/sun/rbCKhciCfaOhhoE/bejne.html Provocations Over
I think a Bob Semple would do a better job than an Arjun against a T-14 Armata!!
Arjun will be able to easily go through the Armata's armor with the Penetration Cum Blast round ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
How to destroy a T-14 Armata? High packet loss.
Cameras connected by multiple redundant wires
@@r.p5380 Nah Russian equipment is built simple, tough and rough.
$4M tank , $2 internet
@@sannidhyabalkote9536 EZ clap
@@destroyerarmor2846 so tough that their tops fly off!
the ONLY real informative tank channel. ty
How do you shoot an imaginary tank. It’s not even made
With the proliforation of portable launched rockets and missiles, you concentrate and saturate a tank with multiple weapons within a few secs apart, overwhelming its defenses.
I wonder what will a molotov or a few do to its sensors and rocket defense systems. Haha
Shoot it with small arms to damage sensors and the thing is out of action. Then kill it with fire or any AT rocket.
if you are able to get that close to a tank with multiple such weapons you already win because enemy tactics sucks
Defenses? What defenses? Do you mean the NON-WORKING "Arena" active protection system? ONE Javelin will saturate its non-existent active protection system.
Surely knocking out the turret counts as a kill, rendering the vehicle useless or dead makes no difference.
No it’s the same as knocking out the ammo of an Abrams. Yeah it won’t be fighting back again but it could drive away or call for backup. Something that would be a disaster for an enemy because a T14 or an Abrams are very important to the army so they will send backup very fast. The idea of killing a tank these days is also about destroying the resources of the enemy. If they can just drive it back then the enemy retains the resources
If a tank cannot use its gun, it is just a 60 ton telephone.
it will engage 90kmph reverse and come back a day or 2 later...but still cant hit it with infantry weapons
it wouldnt be a kill because the operator could drive back the tank for repair, and if you hit the engine the crew would stay inside the capsule untill reinforcement arrive with recovery vehicles, and in a month the tank would be repaired back to businesses again
@@AbdulRasyidPangrango-qr9dt Yes, it is called a "casualty"
This didnt age well.
yeaaaa
The new Javelins have advanced targeting where you can aim the missile off the target and the missile will find it on its own.
The T-14's turret constantly rotating in the promotional videos must also be an excellent defensive measure. Nothing says "undefeatable" like a tank's turret constantly rotating. That's almost as impressive as tanks shooting their main gun while in the air...because... Kung Fu!
Isn't it obvious? The T-14 is a master in baseball. SABOT round coming at you at supersonic speeds? Bat that fucker away and get a home run!
Future iterations will have a helicopter variant that uses the turret as the rotar.
Nothing says defeatable like a A-10's 30mm cannon. 🤣😂
Well it does show off the ability for aps to get around to rear shots
I was surprised they released these videos because the stabilization is actually not that good
if the javelin, upon losing the target, kept going to the last place it was targeting, I think that even if the driver reversed, it would take out the tank’s reactive armor
Real world tanks are not a game object with hitbox and HP pool. Hit with a round/rocket/missile doesn't garantie even a mission kill. Top atack weapons are not exception. They try to avoid the need to overpower the armor by attacking from other direction but they still need to hit something vital, and vital zones are way smaller that tank itself
I want the T14 successfully detect the Javelin first. It doesn't have a huge uv or ir signature.
@@tsorevitch2409 as we are clearly seing now, a javelin will not give 2 cares and would probably blow the t-14 if it hit...
would the conter mesures work combined thats the real question if counter mesur are still being triggered on time if in a hot cloud and missile just pop throught as not physicaly armed to explode first charge ...
@@megarafjogos But do not forget about the mobility of the Armata. When the armata releases the veil, it will quickly leave, and the javelin will fall into the void, and by the way all these javelins of the armata can be bred without it.
Where Is this super tank?? Javelin wants to say hello 😂
The fact you lit up the t14 makes me happy as I saw your Abram video only yesterday.
Just call in the bob semple tank, it eats it for breakfast
The mighty Bob semple trundles over all in a haze of victory and burning engine oil
lmao t-14 stands literally not chance against the bob semple tank in all ways, its basically 60 years behind the bob semple tank
@@shaun9014 I saw an article somewhere comparing the active missile defense of the t14 to the sheer aura of corrugated awesome that surrounds the Bob semple.long story short the semple won
@@cartmanrlsusall any day same result bob semple tank coming on top 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
Don't compare it to the mighty Bob Semple tank, it's existence deter the Japanese from even planning to invade NZ.
bait t14 with javelin, make it use all of its smoke, or make it use smoke so it can't see trough smoke too. call arty with cluster munition and saturate that area... STONKS.
yeah and now you just wasted all of those resources and time to take out a single enemy vehicle, either way cluster munitions wouldn't do shit against it
If you have to do all that to destroy an enemy tank, it means that it's a damn good tank. Now I'm not saying you shouldn't call in fire support just because "it's a single tank" , I'm just saying that any tank which cannot be destroyed with the organic weapons of a well equiped, modern infantry battalion is a very capable and well protected tank.
That's really expensive bait.
The t14 has a warning system that will alert the crew of incoming projectiles, deploy counter measures and alert them of exactly where the attack came from. I dont think spamming javelins is a good idea
@@ShaDOWDoG667 Well the t-14 if moving would have to stop so the javelin could trigger the ir smoke, unless the US made a fake missile with no warhead, and use an infantry m252 mortar with special anti tank cluster ammo. Well the US invented a nuclear howitzer, they could simply shell an area with blu 108 cluster
Survival time on battlefield? the amount of time it takes the gunner in a Challenger 3 to press the button.
Fascinating.Thank you.
Wow, hit the engine. That applies universally huh Edit: in an automatic loader, it's entirely possible that each round will be held in a shielded and vented cell. Pretty much, every holder has a moderate blast plate between them and a one way pressure release plate on the back. Any explosion would essentially go out the back rather than forward or sideways into the adjacent cells. Considering the thickness of the walls on the gun, including plates thick enough to hold a blast is easy enough when there no need for human accomodations. The easiest way to take out a tank these days is a good sniper. I don't know why all the important sensors are behind thin, polished composites and paper thin cowls but they are bigger than a head and a tank can't work without them. Anti tank sniper pops one and tada, your tank has issues aiming, Target recognition, range finding, something vital is gonna go.
"The easiest way to take out a tank these days is a good sniper" or a suicide squad with paintball guns...
anti tank sniper? BS mostly anti tank purposed rifles accuracy fall too much troops are forced to aim at range bettwen 300 to 100 meters for get enought accuracy thought as been proved is a lot expensive and had to make anti mater and accurated sniper rifles at the point normal common RPG and shoulder mounted missile launcher are the most viable way agaist tanks
@@the_bane_of_all_anti_furry anti tank snipers have made hits at very long ranges, far past 300m, before the rifles became largely ineffective. The reason for short ranges was the terrain. Tanks were largely employed in urban/developed areas at the time . Open field battles were generally tank v tank. If you read my comment, you'd have realized that I wasn't speaking of penetrating the main hull, so RPGs, Tows and other ATGMs are not necessary. They're heavy, give off your position on the first shot and one can only carry limited ammo. The rifle is meant to attack the turret mounted sensors which have piss armor protection.
that would only work if tank does not move and does not move turret... maybe...
War does change and anti tank rifles are no longer a threat to armored vehicles. There is a reason why we no longer use them against tanks or ifvs, only armored transports. They just won't penetrate.
During WW2 M4 Sherman crews knew they could not defeat the front armour of German Panthers and Tigers. If they encountered them, a favourite tactic was to fire a WP round at the front of the panzer, spraying burning white phosphrous across the front of the German tank, blinding the panzers gunner and commanders optics with white hot smoke, which allowed the M4 to move closer and go for a flank shot or disengage. Those panzers at least had turret hatches and periscopes so the commander could eyeball the enemy in emergencies. Seems like a similar tactic would work on Armata. Smash a WP round into its turret or front glacis and it's camera's and self-protection sensors would be blind , with no back up option. Even if active protection shot at the incoming WP round it would still detonate less than 30 metres in front of the T-14 and spray burning chunks of WP across the front of the tank. Other tactics could include a 'double tap'. A Bradley could hose the front of the Armata with 25mm automatic cannon fire to the destroy optics and countermeasures systems while a Abrams follows up with an APFSDS round. Alternatively a pair of M1's could fire an MPAT round in airburst mode set to detonate 20-30 metres in front of the T-14, so it saturates it's defensive sensors with hundreds of fragments and a thermal bloom, while the second M1 fires an APFSDS or a second MPAT a second or two later. Not sure a relatively lightly armoured turret was a good idea. Without its turret an Armata is just a heavily armoured Uber.
Nah man I’m sure the T-14 Armata is just Ivan’s armoured lada mounted with some self defense, but since they ran out of budget their self defense turret has to have little armor
@@ChillyMcChill lada? You mean an imported car?
Because of it's better optics and AESA radar and automatic battle management system, the T-14 Armata tank will detect your tank earlier and destroy it with one shot anyways. On the other hand you would need a very precise shot to damage the T-14's sensors.
@@alfredwhite7773 yeah, until Adversary A, B, and C develop a tank with just as good or comparable AESA, battle management system and optics. For example, T14 invented approx. 2015...M1 abrams was invented in 1970's. Whatever replaces the abrams will 100% have approximately as good or better of those systems, and then cycle repeats...so wait 5-7 years
Interesting, maybe some paint bullets would be helpfull :)
I’m watching this as I’m seeing the javelin literally destroying these trash cans
You can't, it was not mass produced, it won't be seen on any battlefield.
You forgot about finns with logs, molotov coctails and satchel charges.
Hey I watched the entire video and thought you would mention the RPG-30 but you didn't, if it doesn't work I would appreciate it if you would elaborate in a future video or even make an entire video for the RPG-30.
I somehow think that a Javelin won’t be fooled by a bit of smoke, and even if it is, by the time the smoke has been launched the missile would likely be on target anyway.
I think (proud armchair expert here) that the countermeasures would NOT evade a javelin top attack very often.
Prepare some fireworks with the UV signature to match a missile. Fire randomly upwards from a safe location. Prepare ATGM teams when smoke no longer covers the tank after a firework is launched.
My guess we will have a new version of the Javelin with secondary magnetic homing.
Easier just to add millimetric wave radar, like the Brimstone missle.
Ya all do realise that chaff was invented and dispensed from dispensers before flares? Only smoke is older.
what about TV Guided bombs
@@5000mahmud Operator is slow to correct compared to software, and not much better at hitting the smoke compared to software. They still can't see. TV and an operator solves a lot of problems but not all.
@@JebacPresretac101 it wont set off smoke because no UV emitted
All you need is a drone with a laser designator. Keep painting it until the tank spaffs all it's thermal shells, then hit it hard.
when you have tutorials about how to destroy a tank that doesnt exist lmfao
Well. The way the Javelin works is still passive-active. It will go to the last location of its locked target. And now TOW-IIB top down, airburst munitions are fired at the vehicle, but to fly over it, not directly at it. Unless APS is going to start wasting munitions on actually missed targets, i dont see how APS can counter it at all. The US is close to releasing a new top down range detonated tank munition as well.
the APS will counter it before it burst into pieces decreasing the damage that could be done, just like AA defense missiles that could intercept nuclear missiles before it reach desired range
@@destroyertashkent5713 unfortunately t14 aps does not defend top attack missiles :(
You forgot that there is literally ERA on top of the tank which were specifically made to counter TOW2B
@@A_Nice_Guy. Assuming the era completely absorbs it and doesn't miss any uncovered areas, sure, but doesn't the Jav have like 1100mm of pen. Looking at pictures it looks like the breach is half covered and the ammo elevator is uncovered by ERA.
@@denonbarton8791 Javelin have like 750mm pen at best, it can't have more due to the design constraint of being top attack, the T-14 top ERA cover all the vital parts the only place it doesn't cover are optics placement, and beside for Javelins specifically T-14 has its softkill APS, and beside I was talking about TOW2B which actually has an abysmal penetration since the warhead is so small.
Say what you want, we can't deny this tank is extremely impressive coming from Russia.
It's also the newest one at the moment, give NATO time and motivation and then we'll see
@@emails8621 Russia can afford it, but in times of peace they can rely on the T90… who would attack a nuclear armed country like Russia anyway
@@r.p5380 yeah who would risk the entire world
@@billhanna2148 you mean the US. they do all the heavy lifting.
@@r.p5380 finally, someone with a brain. Well said man.
A10 Can put enough 30mm rounds on target in a single pass. To screwup most of the defensive systems to leave it vulnerable.
M O R T A R
You dont have to destroy the tank disable it and it becomes useless. Once you disable it your ground forces can either recover it or use c4, semtex and blow up the insides of the tank. Then it can never be used against you ever.
You'd probably only destroy because im pretty sure Russians would rather destroy it than let anyone get their hands on their equipment
and i doubt that you'll be able to even put a C4 before the tank was reacting and making a quick retreat
If you can get close enough, simple RPG strikes from multiple angles would likely still cause some damage, even more with more advanced ones. Dropping a building or a couple of trees onto it could inhibit its defences enough to get a proper attack in. Also good old mines still would work.
On modern tanks it would have to be a bloody powerful mine to do much more than blow the tracks off.
Also as he said it’s not just hard and soft kill protection. It’s armor for the most part is RPG safe from most angles
@@verstappen9937 What point would it be to repeat what he already spoke about in the video? Everyone knows this. Also it is the "from most angles" that you would have to count on if you don`t have proper heavy weapons available. But really, mobility is one of the most important abilities of a tank, taking that, it becomes merely an overly expensive bunker. This would be a useful starting point if you want to take it out.
Not simple RPG like 7 to 16 and it's suicide to get close. Most tank have Active Defensive System that'll destroy any incoming rockets or missiles and quite deadly to any personnel within close proximity. So it's best like what he said fire on top of a building if the tank is stupid enough to go into highly urban area without support and using newer RPG 29 to 32
@@verstappen9937 just bury a bomb
how to destroy t14 armata? give its crew tacobell rations...
Really helpful right now.
Step 1, Wait for it to run out of fuel. Step 2, Get your tracktor. Step 3 , Profit!
You can’t tow it away tho
@@rogue__agent5884 just add more tractors
Put crate of vodka next to road. Crew goes out the tank to get vodka. You sneak in the tank while they're outside the tank Win-win. Lol.
@Leplivo more vodka is always better :D
well a leopard 2a7v with it's advanced fcs and very high penetration apfsds would be a good contender
Nope cant pen frontal plate its around 900mm with out ERA And top Dm63 only penns around 800 or 700 mm at close range so first hit wont do jack shit and after you lase t14 he knows where you at
@@rayotoxi1509 with the new higher pressure gun and dm73 apfsds the 2a7v should be able to pen 900+mm of steel Red effect has even mentioned this in his 2a7v video
@@tobilikebacon what new gun its still the same l55 and we dont even know anything about the dm73 its probly either the same length or a bit longer then the dm63 so same or abit better pen And german goverment wont put Depleted uranium in with DU it probly would reach 900mm becuse american m829a3 nearly reaches 900mm with same lenght as dm63 and its uranium and fired from l44 cannon
@@rayotoxi1509 alright first off uranium does a difference but not in the 100s of mm Second the dm 73 has the same length as dm 63 but has higher energy (velocity) than the 63 giving it 8% higher penetration Third the gun has an increased performance by 20% Do the math from the old penetration rates and you get 900+ mm making it the most powerful gun in nato mbts
@Enclave Patrol If its the Same length as the L55 It wont make the Penetration anybetter Same for the M1A2 abrams is the L44 copy build so same length as the L44 44 times The size of the bore so 44x120=5.280 or 5 Meters L55 is 6.600 6m length
What would happen if you launched multiple rockets or missiles at it at the same time from different directions? Since the turret can only be in one place at any given time wouldn’t one get the kill shot?
All 14 of them. Easy wait for the T-14 to breakdown and tow it away.
what about artillery? if you have artillery it’s the most ideal thing to use against a tank when defending
But it is not worth it taking and using all that ammo on one tank. Its like a the Germans from 1941 when they encounter a KV. They threw everything at it that they had on the ground but nearly nothing worked, if they encountered a KV then they would have to bring in a Heavy Anti tank gun or the Luftwaffe. But in this case in tank battles it would mostly be like the Tiger Vs Sherman Thing from ww2 but it would still depend on the crew training and what situation it is.
@@MrTungy They didn't have GPS guided artillery rounds in 1940. Stop comparing WW2 with modern times, it was a totally different era and the technology changed completely since then. Today a modern artillery with precision guided round can easilly destroy any tank at very long range.
wha about a nuke tho? bro, wtf are you asking?
Why do I need to learn to how to destroy this beauty when it is fighting terrorists in my country comrade ??! 😂😂😂😂 But really , that's an awesome intro you did my friend , wish the best for you and you channel .......
this video was made as a meme but now it can actually be useful to someone
All I heard was you need 2 maybe 3 squads with javelins have one shoot at the tank to get it to release its self-defense system and then have another squad somewhere else attack from the back or other side with another missile, a pincer attack if you will. Also, these tanks look expensive so there wont be that many of them (probably) meaning the javelin squads are still a more efficient way to fight than a tank with all the toys. Yes this requires a bit more tactics to fight but ultimately tanks are proving to be more and more outdated tools of the trade because mobile troops with systems like the javelin or NLAW are proving as efficient if not more because of the utility being superior, because a human has better fuel efficiency than any tank.
How about dropping a switchblade 600 suicide drone on the T-14 Armata Heavy Tank T-15 Armata IFV. *Switchblade 600 is the drone version of FGM-148 Javelin*
Javelins are in short supply. They are not easily built.
@@shootingbricks8554 I still think its easier and cheaper than making a tank work.
This argument makes no sense. Troops are easily defeated with bullets, explosives, knives, bad weather , low food supplies, low morale, etc. it does not make them outdated. A tool being defeatable does not make it outdated, unless the tool’s purpose is to be undefeatable, there is no tool IRL whose purpose is to be undefeatable. A tool is outdated when it’s purpose can be done better by another one. Tanks are cavalry, troops with ATGM are pikemen. The existence of pikemen never made cavalry obsolete, because pikemen can’t do what cavalry can do. What made cavalry obsolete is that tanks are better than horses at the same job.
@@brain_tonic Yo my guy, re-read your last sentence of your first paragraph and you will see that you just contradicted yourself and reiterated my point! Also just curious, how old are you because based on your comment I'm thinking that you are either a kid who is uninformed or inexperienced in life or an adult with the same problem or worse. And you would have a point if the "calvary" you were talking about were not so easily destroyed by drones, planes, RPG's, Javelins and NLAWS, or just basic lack of maintenance and fuel. The game has changed, tanks can't keep up anymore and the costs associated with them don't make them a viable tool anymore for modern warfare, which we are currently fighting. so, what sounds better to you, 2 soldiers who can destroy a 40 million dollars' worth of tank and crew and munition with just a single shoulder missile from 2 to 3 miles away for just 178 thousand dollars or facing a 40-million-dollar tank with another 40-million-dollar tank and see who wins. I know my choice!
So imagine Pereh Missile Carriers encountering T-14 Armata(s). Each Pereh(s) will keep spamming its array of Spike-NLOS(s) at an Armata till those overwhelms the APS, then the DPS and finally disables the Armata's key components rendering it non-operational.
You would lose the war of attrition if all you can do is waste 10s of missiles for every tank. And you would also have to worry about a counter attack once your position is exposed
@@mike_hock Spike Nlos costs $210k. 10 would cost $2.1M a T14 costs 3.7M and you can very possibly kill the crew. This would always be a good deal for the Pereh. Even if it took 20 Spike this is a good deal if even one of the crew is killed.
@@ZbjetisGod it would be better and cheaper to just take it out with airpower, positioning 10 atgm's specifically to take on a single armata would be a pretty big waste of time even if they were all on one vehicle as you can't fire it all at once, you would need several crew members to guide each missile and have to deal with many other variables. In the end it would depend who sees who first and Armata's sensors are quite good at that.
@@ZbjetisGod if you shot the missiles once the tank will spot you so you are dead by the time you are going to shoot the second one
I'm pretty sure untrained rebels will find a way to crack it soon enough. If you want to destroy the armata as an infantry, you need a coordinated attack though the likelihood of this being successful is pretty slim since everyone know well to provide a tank with proper cover. I wonder how will it fair against simultaneous attack from different angle though.
You can still use heavy artillery or an A-10 or two simultaneous Javelins from different directions
Yet another wonder-weapon that will turn out to be a cardboard dummy if it ever sees combat.
It's been four months since my first comment and guess what, still no Armata anywhere other than KZhead. I guess we don't need to know how to destroy one.
I think this video glosses over the fact that light infantry work in teams so its never gonna just be 1 guy with a launcher. It would be several javelins setting up a kill zone. The IR smoke is a doubled edge sword while it does degrade the performance of the seeker (not entirely spoof it) it also blinds the tank from engaging the enemy so its only option is to retreat thus breaking their resolve and scoring a win for the infantry.
You are also forgeting that a tank also does not work alone.
@@josephstalin9387 even in the event that a platoon of tanks is encountered the result would still be the same. Because they would quickly realize they are ambushed and would retreat to a more favorable position. Tanks aren't going jeopardize the integrity of their platoon just to kill a squad sized element.
@@nemisous83 Then from that favorable position they are going to bonk you. If a missile is launched at one tank the others are going to return fire while they are moving to cover and as the have thermals they will spot the enemy fairly easily and fire their main and secondary guns at the infentry rendering them combat ineffective . The infentry will probably fire 2 to 3 rockets and not all of the troops will have AT so if the tank crew are smart they will focous down the AT troopers.
@@josephstalin9387 I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding what I mean. If the tank is retreating its vulnerable because its reversing keeping its front towards the enemy also the T-14 is limited on how much smoke it carries in each launcher to get adequate smoke coverage it would have to launch almost all its smoke since they are smaller diameter smoke grenades so after the initial volley the tanks are incredibly vulnerable to another attack but also most light infantry squads have a dedicated FISTER with them to call in long range fires and a platoon of brand new shiny T-14's is definitely on the commanders high pay off target list.
@@josephstalin9387 also I think you are drastically over exaggerating the effectiveness of thermals. it very much depends on the distance also troops aren't going to be firing their javelin in the open they are going to use proper cover and concealment and move as soon as they launched their first volley. Also the fire and forget nature makes this task much easier reducing the chance of retaliation. Also max firing range of the 2A82 125mm is only 3km for convention ammo and 5km for it ATGM where as javelin has a max firing range of 4km and doesnt require a constant laser lock from the host like the Reflekts does. If the tank has to pop smoke it's going to lose laser lock.
i know it wouldnt be very practical in a lot of scenarios but couldnt you bury a bunch of 155mm artillery shells under the road then set ithem off when it drives over?
Nah G IEDs are practical in all situations
Or even better, shoot the tank with the 155mm artillery gun :D
Insurgents did that in Iraq and took out even Abram tanks
what about explosive charges since some of the ammo is located at the back of the turret. an explosion could destroy the defense that the T-14 has since it is also in/on the turret. the charge would be placed on the engine when the tank looks forward
Go for the gunners telescope with a machine gun. It's pretty big on the T-14, and they don't have a spare.
Curious, does Javelin not just home in on the targets last known position? I suppose it can't know the target has obscured itself with thermal smoke so where on the smoke cloud would the missile aim for?
If it attacks the last location than that means it is not homing anymore and the tank can move thus avoiding the projectile.
Use a unguided rocket, when u fire it the countermeassures will deploy but the rocket will continue flying in the same direction since it has no guidance. The minus is that you would have to be close to the tank.
"Even javelin will not help you" whew, this did not age well.
They are not using T14s in Ukraine
@@hefic it's almost like some idiot YOLO'd across the border.
@@hefic lmao true.
@@hefic 3 of them destroyed xd cope harder
@@jajuny1627 where did you get this information from?
Ukrainian: „write that down WRITE THAT DOWN!!!“
@Чёрный Волк yeah this is true..
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the entire vehicle resistant to light auto-cannon fire only, outside the crew ‘capsule’?
The video you just watched clearly stated otherwise after going into great detail. You have problems of comprehension?
Just hit it with a British NLAW :D from top attack easy.
My money is on the Javelin. If not the first then definately the second Javelin.
I have reason to believe the Jav can work on the T14. We thought the T14 would be the tank of the gods but turns out our tried and true anti tank missiles are still true and we know because we tried.
With the current situation i would say that it would be safe to assume that 50% of those features would be non-functional, removed or replaced via cutting corners to make it cheaper. Also its nice to see that cutout schematics. Glad to know that even in XXIst century, russian designs still have hit indicators of "Turret goes pop" when hit due to centrally located ammo magazine. You have to give A+ for effort to stick with the tradition ;).
It's going to get disabled no matter what. With their poor logistics I doubt they would be able to recover the crew, they are doomed outside the tank.
Step 1: take a plane Step 2: take a bomb Step 3: make tanks obsolete
step 1 take a plane step 2 get shot down by anti air missiles... wait
@@CheekiBreeki-mq2my spam flares)))))))))))))
@@davidecarucci1073 flares dont stop radar
The rpg and javelin failures are gold
A huge amount of explosives hidden under the road that detonate when the tank drives over it always works....I saw the pics of an M1 Abrams taken out in this way (tracks and engine was fucked....massive mechanical damage...several crew badly injured)....crude but effective method
Idk Abrams are bipolar with massive explosions depending on their model. Literally saw one detonate a huge ass VBIED and literally didn’t even scratch the abram. And it literally rolled over the thing giving itself a direct underblast
Yup. Daisychain 155mm artillery rounds will mess up an Abrams tank. Insurgents did it in Iraq.
I would love to see 10 $ ER eBay lasers to mess up counder measure's
Coming across a T-14 in a combat zone is a little like finding a winning PowerBall lottery ticket in a truck stop bathroom.
what do you think of an x-band laser? it could blind optical systems, and also damage radars and other components on the turret. I also don't think the sensors could detect lasers in this band and alert the crew. then, fire at will to the pig.
What was happen if you shot an AT4 at the front to distract it and then another AT4 a second later from the back to kill it so that way the chart would be distracted from the first one go to kill it but then the second one will come up and hit in the engine ideally but this would require a good coordination
Yep. The US military calls it "Salvo fire". Already been used since at least as far back as WWII bazookas to simultaneously engage a tank with multiple shooters from multiple directions. And I suspect it was a tactic used by antitank guns before then.
An AT-4 at best will immobilize a modern battle tank but not destroy it. You will have to be doing vollefire (at least 3-4) AT-4 rounds to have a shot to immobilize a tank.
If russia was fighting a technological peer like the US, the destruction of their tanks will mostly be from the air. The f35 DAS 360degree cameras can identify any tank, artillery, missile systems, even man portable systems from hundreds of kms away, and do so passively. THe recognition and cueing is automatic. There are videos on the DAS system. The data can be instantly sent to any forces, land, sea or air, even incoming cruise sea or land skimming cruise missiles. These videos are always fantastic, i'm pretty sure a depleted uranium round can take any tank out of action.
The confidence in this tank is what makes it invincible apart from all the modern APFSD stopping tech.
Lol at "invincible" anything in wartime. What were you, born yesterday?
So know nothing about tanks and tank warfare but I have a question....wouldn't taking out the tracks be the best and easiest option. They are absolutely crucial to the tanks operation but also seem the softest target on the the tank ,the least defended. I see the counter defense of the tank, but two RPG one fired at the front and one fired at the rear of the track, one or the other is bound to make it through. If it's stuck in the middle of a field with a track off wouldn't it make an easier kill with heaver weapons .
use bait. a crate of vodka should lure the operators out of the armata.
After February 28 in 2022 we know that it will be proably towed away by a ukranian tractor on some random field.
Yep and that video you saw how a tractor towed one BMP away was is Poland
@@animationenusw What bmp? I saw videos of the Tor system (which only Russia has) and two T80.
@@Peacekeeper-118 but not towed by a tractor. Pls don't watch videos like these since the Ukrainian citizens, at least at the east, are thankful for the help of the Russians, while those ukrainian Nazi still are trying to kill people in Donetsk with rockets, for example yesterday a rocket from the Ukrainian side hit the center of makijiwka, right next to Donetsk and luckily nobody died. Such attacks were more often done by the Nazis from the *Ukrainian* side.
@@animationenusw oh, so you spread Russian propaganda
@@animationenusw also... is that why it was geo-located in... oh, Ukraine
The Weapon specification is like food supplements or vitamins tablets that labeled almost every element on it but actually, those contain basic one the remaining for the satisfaction of the taker
It’s pretty unlikely that the anti-Javelin system will be as effective as you described. There’s so many factors that could throw off the system. I’m not saying it wouldn’t work but to say that it would make it immune to thermal missiles would be wrong.
You know, so many Russians and others have died because of crap equipment, I am actually glad to see that the crews have survivability. I am a Marine, so it is not rooting for my enemy specifically..... it is just that those operators are just soldiers doing a job that they probably don't want, and it always made me feel bad that those guys usually died screaming. There is no honor in that. At least give the crew a chance. Our guys have enjoyed that for decades now.