What Are Those Cages on Russian Tanks? | Koala Explains: "Cope Cages" (& Why They're Not Working)
Perhaps the most famous, or infamous, point of interest when it comes to the Russian equipment sent to Ukraine in 2022, is the presence of large rooftop cage armor pieces, nicknamed "Cope Cages". Initially reported as an anti-Javelin measure, after the Ukrainian army took delivery of shipments of the deadly top-attack missiles, their failure in this role has lead many to believe that some other motivation must have been behind their creation. But is that really true, or do Russian armor manufacturers just not know what they're doing...?
═════════════════════════════════
◄► Support the channel on Patreon!
/ armorcast
═════════════════════════════════
◄► Koala's Channel
/ thescottishkoala
◄► Twitter!
/ sc0ttishkoala
◄► Merch!
teespring.com/stores/thearmory
Emotional support armor
I agree
Yea basically
Tank Cuck cage
*Viktor where is my emotional support steel.* Vlad It won’t stop the Javalin. *Viktor I know I need my cope cage.*
Its ok Vs drone dropped munitions. I think if I had a choice as a tanker, I'd rather have cage armor on top rather than not. Even if it looks somewhat ridiculous.
everyone went quiet when they appeared on ukrainian challengers
And izrael's merkavas.
And China's Type 96s and 99s...
@@crafty_badger israel hasnt had to worry about dual warhead atgms. its literally the same thing as the side add-on armor for the stryker which was really popular after 2003. obviously they work somewhat, otherwise all the various governments wouldnt have funded it. let alone allow them to continue to be fielded due to its meter+ increase in the tanks height and therefore detectablity. it was funny to watch the internet go silent after seeing a cope cage on the challenger(which... omg... its so ugly. but... if it works right?)
A lot of cages seem to be made from whatever angle iron they had lying around/could loot and as such it's terrible. Some units have even removed their cages as apparently some are mounted too low and make it hard for some crew members to evacuate the tanks if they get hit but not turned into turret-poppers...
luckily that’s not too likely of an issue for them. the disabling shot I mean, not the turret-pop bbq.
Chicken coops... Probably
Imagine being stuck under that cage and being shot at that would suck
RedEffect does a good video. It's clear the slats were often field modifications by troops who don't understand how slat armour works (not one explained to them) so the bars are too close together and too thick.
I'm not strong in military technology but why didn't the author mention drones (quadrocopters). :)) Apparently he does not know how tanks are being blown up now.
"Back in my day, we put cages on top of the tank to prevent grenades for getting stuck on the top" ~ British Mark 1 Landship
I agree with the fact that a 'Cope Cage' merely doubles the profile of a Tank, I can add on to that point as well. T-Tanks all have a few good things going for them : Cost effective cheapness (when maintained), less of a logistic mess due to less crew, and above all a low profile. If we all remember the survivability Onion, not being detected is a large part. A 'Cope Cage' merely throws slight advantage away.
"less of a logistic mess due to less crew" until the crew need to fix a tank track while one man short.
@@brokeandtiredYou bring up a valid point, but I mean you're trading stuff like repairing to fight for not being seen. Hence the autoloader and everything, there's no real need to repair if you don't get seen to be hit. Though, I guess it really doesn't matter when mud exists, and the fact it's the Russian 'War Machine' you're fighting with. The advantages are useless for T-Tanks in this war lol
@@brokeandtired That's a moot point, cause you can still repair a track with one less guy. And unlike in the case of a manual reloading, you don't need a fresh loader in tip top shape to keep the reloading at a reasonable pace.
@@CookieCommandGaming "there's no real need to repair if you don't get seen to be hit. " Tracks break a lot just by being driven.
@@Slavic_Goblin No tank carries a spare loader...If your loader gets tired you are either out of ammo or already dead because you spent an hour missing the enemy. There are always lulls in fighting in which the loader can take a break....Also 1 less repair guy can double the time it takes to fix a track break.
SCHURZEN were developed against anti tank rifles to protect side armour panzer III and IV. Many US tanks applied additional armour as wood or sand bags. Gave the crews sense if safety.
Also concrete.
Yes... And Soviet troops tried welding all sorts of cages on their tanks in the Battle of Berlin in order to protect themselves from Panzerfaust with 0 effect...
@@ivanstepanovic1327 it's the thought that counts lol
As mentioned several times on the Tank Museum's KZhead channel,
@@whohashamburger855 It's not like anyone is going to complain.
The last bit on loitering munitions is IMO 100% the answer. In 2020, the Nagorno-Karabakh war between Armenia and Azerbaijan was, to me, the first major instance of the 'cope cage' like the Russians used, as opposed to traditional slat armor. And, in that particular conflict, the hasty additions of the cages over the turrets was noted as being an anti-LM measure.
You are so wrong, Russia used these cages in Syria where they performed well against the standard RPG.
@@fryertuck6496 Ukraine is using Polish loitering munition Warmate for 3 years and Ukraine even made Ukrainian warheads for them...
@@Bialy_1 Not sure why you replied to my comment. My point was that the cages were used in Syria and therefore had been in use long before 2020.
@@fryertuck6496 So the cope cages were designed to defeat RPG-7 type rounds fired from roof tops in urban combat?
@@williamzk9083 Indeed. Although sufficiently detailed plans were not shared when the order went out to use them so a number of improvised designs were made in the field. Tests had previously shown a design with wider spacing between the bars was better than a narrow design, but this wasn't passed down in detail and some units misinterpreted the instructions they received.
The slow mo shots of the javelin really bring it home. The engineering behind them is absurd, the whole system itself is practically out of sci-fi. Imagine going back to WW1, just over 100 years ago and showing them a javelin, or any other stupendously absurd hi-tech stuff we have. They’d be baffled beyond what I am even feeling. I mean, in some respects it is kinda beautiful, the javelin. Deadly, but.. kinda beautiful.
Someone paid you to wrie that comment? You know so the practically out of sci-fi price tag would not look so bad on it? Stugna-P have much longer range and its $20.000 per missile... The point of the system is to make it efficient, but with the price tag on javelin...
And let be honest here 30mm bushmaster with programable ammunition would be able to give much more sci-fi impresion and would be much more effective on a WW1 battlefield...
@@Bialy_1 someone’s a little salty… Look at Real Life Engineering n tell me the Javelin isn’t a marvel of the human mind. So is any modern weapon system. No need to get your panties in a wad, sweetie.
@@Bialy_1 my man you got a conspiracy oriented world view. Hommie can just be impressed by a system without someone cutting him a check 😂
You have to say about us humans… we cant cure the common cold, but if there was a real need, we could come up with a missile that waits at the bottom of a pond, launches, lands, drives the last 300meters, goes under tank, latches in the exact middle with an electro magnet, then detonates against the thin bottom of the tank, while dispersing anti personnel bomblets to discourage rescue attempts. Lol
From what I heard in various places around youtube, you're right. The specs were sent to commanders, and the commanders took the money provided for them, and then went to a local welder for "Something kinda like this, but cheaper you know Ivan? Case of Vodka in it for you if you can bring it in under half the money I was given".
...AND wiping the floor with army 3-times their own forces (650k UA, 200k RU) while defeating Western weapons and intelligence cope harder bro
@@jaroslavzaruba2765 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@jaroslavzaruba2765 HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA ... Russia has a Army worst than Syrian Army. Even little old Ukraine is kicking it's butt.
@@jaroslavzaruba2765 Ukraine has 200k professional/active army dipshit, and saying they're wiping the floor with Ukraine is a top tier cope.
@@jaroslavzaruba2765 lmao, you are coping right now.
2:11 I could be wrong but early German skirt armor wasn’t intended to defeat early heat ammo but instead reduce effectiveness of AP ammo by causing the round to tilt more before striking the main armour. It was later at some point recognised that this skirt amour would reduce the effect of heat ammo as well.
The full metal sheet skirts were designed to defend against Soviet 14.5mm AT rifles, but the wire skirts started appearing about six months after the Bazooka was first used in Tunisia, and its commonly thought that they switched to wire mesh because it’d be more effective against the shaped charge
@@ArmorCast seems like the logical conclusion. I’ve seen the wire mesh armour but never knew if it was a standardised thing so thanks for clearing that up.
@@ArmorCast From my understanding the first bazookas brought to the German Army's Kummsdorf testing and evaluation range were lend lease Bazookas captured from the Red Army. Of course the allies were not to know that. At that time the German Army was evaluating a replacement for the 28mm squeeze bore gun the 2.8 cm sPzB 41. This was a shaped charge breached rocket launcher called the 8.8 cm Raketenwerfer 43. When the Officers at the testing range saw the Bazooka and their own Rocket launchers (140kg) they realized their mistake and modified the rocket to fire from an open tube. This was the Panzerschrek. Panzerfaust was a completely seperate development. From my understanding the Schutzern had the effect of stripping the aluminum sorounds from tungsten ammunition and actually made the core more penetrative. Have you heard of that?
@@williamzk9083 stop. its cringe.
Morale booster for crewmen who don't know very much about HEAT weapons. A bit like the escape system on a submarine, it's there so you can tell your wife/girlfriend there is an escape system.
The original cope slope
They should have gone with the trampolines.
Interesting. No one questioned when the US put cages on their vehicles, but when Russia does it, well it's time to make jokes and say how they don't work. No Russian ever said cages were put on the top to stop Javelins. None. They are effective against other shoulder fired rockets as well as grenades dropped from drones.
@@specialnewb9821 Trampolines are expensive tho, Russia can't afford that
True, but a submarine's escape hatch doesn't double your vertical profile
Bumar Labdy does T-72 modifications in Poland and one of the things that is added is a rear turret basket, and the gear that was connected to the turret originally is then mounted to the rear of the basket.
Lmao Challenger 2 seen with one in the Zaporozyhe direction
Cool! Still doesn't mean they work...
@@ArmorCast He never said that. Just points out, how Russians were using cages and were mocked for doing this. However when Israelis and Ukrainians did the same, no comment. Smells like double standards, don't you think?
@@fevidala Not really. First of all, I saw a TONNE of comments in the OSI and military enthusiasm community laughing just as much at Ukrainian "cope cages" as they were at the Russians... I don't know where you were looking, but there was plenty of comment. And secondly, for everyone else it's just old news at this point
If you want consistent grill marks on your grilled meats you have to use well seasoned cast iron grates like these. Most professional chefs have these on their gas stoves, and they even sell a smaller version you can put on your gas grill for perfect char marks on your burgers and steaks.
Lol
Like a portable grill for the Russian infantry to use when they March past their burned out tanks and then they finally understand why they can't just get in a truck and also have a quick BBQ
Storage space is limited in inside Tanks, so they installed roof racks. They are great for drying clothes and particularly socks. It's also useful for carrying away "locally salvaged goods".
Locally salvaged. 😁 Good one
*Locally donated goods
1916: dropping grenades from biplane. 2022 : dropping grenades from quad copters.
1916: dropping grenades from biplane. 2022 : dropping grenades from quad copters.
Ah yes, the Strategic Transfer of Equipment to Alternate Locations
And so now IDF uses the same cages. So sad they didn"t watch this video((( Ukrainians used the same from 2022 btw
Ukraine have also experienced about the same level of success with them, which is to say... not much.
18:50 On the note of not putting them on BMPs and BTRs, I think they weren't installed to retain the amphibious capabilities of these vehicles. MBTs can't swim anyway so they extra weight isn't an issue plus they are juicier targets for small drone attacks. The inability to cross rivers is pretty debilitating for troop carriers especially when you're invading a country with lots of rivers with defenders ready to blow up bridges across said rivers. Dealing with this disadvantage vs being able to maybe survive a drone bomb is a worse trade off for a BMP or BTR than a slight bit of extra weight on an MBT.
If you look at the elevation of the gun on a BMP or BTR, it's quite high. The sights are on the turret roof, and have to look up, so a cage with a large area would block the gunners sights when engaging troops on the 6th floor of a building that is are down the street a ways. If the cage is sized to the turret, the turrets on a BMP or BTR are quite small, so the cage would cover a very small area of the vehicle.
Most of the BTR's and BMP's aren't swim worthy anymore anyways. Otherwise they wouldn't be so fixated on building bridges and losing so many resources when said bridges get hit by drone directed artillery fire. They'd have instead loaded everyone up in said IFVs, forded the river, cleared out far across the other side of the river, and then had engineering teams make their pontoon bridges for larger elements and resources to come through. Fording rivers with an amphibious IFV requires the IFV to be at the near perfect peak of maintenance and requires quite a bit of prepping and often, extra add-on equipment. Again, since they're focused entirely on building new bridges using their dwindling bridge laying equipment and not just floating all of their troops in their attached IFVs, it's easily assumed that most of their IFVs probably have lost that ability due to a lack of maintenance and lack of abundance of the add-on equipment to make it feasible. We aren't even seeing onsie-twosie occurrences of BTRs or BMPs trying to ford a river or doing it successfully. We DO have photos of abandoned BTRs and BMPs partially submerged in rivers where it looks like they tried and sunk instead.
@@Talishar Good point, it could also be the case where the banks of these rivers aren't suitable for amphibious vehicles, and they are likely to get stuck getting into or out of the water, assuming they actually did still float.
@@Talishar after conquering Swiatohirsk, he was at one point in the media reported that the Russians were already on the other side Donets, after which the topic died. Most likely, the river was successfully landed with light amphibious tanks supported, perhaps, by lightened BTRs and BMPs, but this landing was pushed back into the river by the Ukrainians. Buoyancy, unfortunately, means a reduction in immunity.
@@robertwisniewski2029 They weren't. The river crossings we're done by pontoon bridges setup by their engineering units. The Ukrainians have been good at finding them and hitting them while the Russians are less successful at it.
I love all the people that have zero tank design experience, zero ATGM design experience and zero connections to the Russian defense industry or the Russian military giving their take on whether a particular up-armoring strategy is effective or not and why it was added.
I love all the people with zero experience working at KZhead writing KZhead comments...... It's almost as if research is research no matter your connections of lack of to various armed forces...
My toddler has one of these. It’s called a “security blanket”. And it doesn’t protect her from Javelins either.
so how are those javelins working, huh? 😁
From what i've heard/read (take this with a grain of salt), World War II crews were "allowed" to add make-shift armor to the side of their tanks for additional protections (moral/confidence, the addition did nothing).
Yeah the only thing that makeshift armor did was put a lot of strain on the suspension and transmission and engine
Syrian tanks were fitting rebar cages on the sides of turrets, filled with cinder blocks and sandbags to defeat shaped charges. The drone defense angle seems especially likely if you can make it harder for a drone operator to get a clean shot, or obfuscate their view in any way to cause glancing blows and make sniping weak points difficult.
Drone dropped grenades is my guess
I was practically able to witness the transition from these being called Sunroof Armor to Cope Cages; first heard of these literally a few months before the war and now get to see them being repeatedly useless for anything other than equipment storage and still no Modern Working APS modules in sight...
Then why is Israel copying it?
The part about cage armour that actually works was fascinating, thanks ^^
I too found it counter intuitive. Always thought it was meant to make the shape charge explode and the reason for large gaps in bars was that the rockets were relatively larger. Makes me wonder how cage armour on car and truck windows work. Meant to disrupt bullets or take the hit?
I’m fairly certain bars installed in front of windows are less intended for bullets (which are statistically unlikely to interact with bars/slats wide enough to see well through) and more to protect against larger debris being hurled into the glass; things like uprooted trees during hurricanes or whatnot.
Coming from a western perspective. During the Maidan, the LPR/DPR would capture vehicles with slat armor and immediately remove it. Not only tanks but all captured vehicles. Made it harder for the infantry to dismount. The opposite would happen on the UAF side. Cage armor has it's place but is not always used. Seeing Russians with it, for me is odd.
On soft skinned trucks it stops bricks, logs, and debris from piecing in lieu of thick plexiglass or actual ballistic rated windows. You see it primarily on police riot vehicles and private security.
Great video. Can those "cope cages" be used for hanging out the laundry. Thanks Koala for all your efforts.
"The drone operators don't bother dropping them on tanks with the cages..." 19:51 (Cope Cage Tanker) 😌 "...instead, pointing a Javelin at them..." (Cope Cage Tanker) 😧
Materials List: Tanks: Stalinium Cages: Copium
I think someone pointed that well, cope cages were appeared in Syria first, almost two years ago. I think you are right about UAVs
Holy shit, it actually is Emotional Support Armor
Woke armour
Aged like milk lol
No?
@@rick7424 yes, ever since the Chinese, Israelis and Ukrainians started using these the world has been real quiet, this video is a joke : if they're ineffective then why are nations at war all spending money mounting them ?
Thank you for covering this
yesssss glad you covered cope cages
The javelin is a really remarkable system. Fired on in Afghanistan at a building, extremely easy to use and effective.
You forgot to mention each missile costs more than a house in a nice neighborhood. Yes, you are firing an entire house and the ground it's built on in a single shot.
@@ph11p3540 costs more than I made in three to four years
@@ph11p3540 Welcome to the world of military hardware. As with most products, you get what you pay for
I've read a few claims that they were hoping to catch grenades dropped by drones, like those used in Syria.
Pro-Russian outlets will claim anything to make Russia's failures look less extreme. Wearing chainmail to a gunfight and claiming you "only wore it to prevent knife attacks" after your opponent shot the crap out of you doesn't change the fact that your equipment didn't protect you.
It's funny how sloppy he did his research, there are other videos on the said cages that go in depth on the topic....this guy just hurriedly wrote up a video for the likes, he didn't even bother to see if the tanks were destroyed from a top attack or a side attack, it's just seeing a tank with cage disabled, and saying look the cage doesn't work. Such poor journalism.
@@JG-xm8jy not to mention seeing just a disabled tank means it could've done its job, save the crew and protect the tank enough it can be recovered and repaired
@@coconutshrimp707 Yes, that worked out great, since it lead to more tanks being recovered by the enemy.
Since they are working so well I guess that's why they are still using them. Since basically all of them have already been blown up I don't see how you are upset with him showing a picture and claiming that they didn't work. That was not an exaggeration either. Most that had them are gone. France has one of the most effective militaries out there and Russia has lost about 50% more tanks than they have while attacking it's nextdoor neighbor who is the poorest country in Europe. Even on paper that has degraded them badly. Iraq was far better armed and was the 4th largest military when the US hit it with an ocean in between. If we took the paper numbers for the same ratio the US would have lost all their tanks and a few carriers and a couple hundred thousand men. Ukraine might have it's propaganda down but it is hitting above it's weight at the same time that Putin tried to pull a stunt and has messed up but time. If the Russian military had full control of the planning they would have been far more effective. One of the things when you have corruption going on is that the people think that they will have time to work something out and there probably would have been far less of an impact. Even though Russia doesn't stick to a strick legal system they do have laws about how they use their troops and it does mess up their fighting mix. Russia lovers always try to nit pick but it's clear Russia has screwed up badly. It's not a good thing and people should be thinking about what this is going to lead to. What happens when they are broke with nothing but nukes.a simple look is that the sanctions aren't doing anything. A close look is that they have been brutal. It would probably take them 20 years to get their economy back on track from where it is now. We would have riots if the government ever clamped down on the monetary system that way. Even if they somehow win I am pretty sure that they will keep having strange fires and explosions for a very long time.
Koala, just found your channel and it’s awesome. I know you have a 60 second video on the Abrams, but are there any plans for one of your more detailed videos on the Abrams?
Definitely, but Abrams will be a big one to try and cover all in one video. We want to get a couple more preliminary videos out first, like the one we did on Combat ID panels last year
@@ArmorCast perfectly understandable! Can’t wait for more of your video! What I like best is that you’re not afraid to call out the various weaknesses and failings inherent to vehicles and their designs.
@@ArmorCast come back plzzz
Great Vid, Thanks for the intel
Agree with your logic. Covered this topic well.
Thank you very much for your videos I enjoy them. I hope you keep on doing them and I hope they will alow to continue. By adding the touch of humor is enjoyable particularly the Your Tank Sucks". So racing at the glass and a salute to you keep all that whiskey company makes my mother-in-law go to sleep real fast and therefore more human.
One of the best videos I've seen on the subject and I'm not saying that because you completely validated my opinions. 😁
Remember when the NBC field manual stated that putting on a raincoat would save you from a nuclear fallout?
This was fascinating, thanks for sharing with us man! God bless you :)
Interesting video, and I'd have to agree. They did only start appearing after the top-attack ATGMs started to appear. I don't think they'll be useful against drones, though. Many are tilted forward, or backward, ensuring that any shaped charge will either detonate on top, or roll onto the engine, or the driver's compartment. As for the warhead drones, well, they mostly come in at a shallower angle, more like an older ATGM. I'd say your first thought was correct: it's psychological. Russia's military is clearly under resourced, and the professional soldiers (the tankers) know it. Many of the conscripts, which makes up the bulk of the infantry force, have literally had 3 days training, then sent into die. They've been spoon fed propaganda, and are paid well (for Russia), so they are easier to get to the front. I suspect trying to get tankers to the front requires a lot more work, and the cope cages are a perfect tool.
I bet it would work nicely against the jury rigged DJI drones carrying an old soviet AT grenade.
Russia hasn’t sent conscripts in; their insistence that this is a “special military operation” has kept the lid on mobilization and conscripts going to Ukraine. They have been sourcing from other manpower pools; enticing conscripts to sign up on contracts with bonuses, getting manpower out of the breakaway statelets (which are technically not Russia and therefore don’t count in their counting as “conscripts”), pulling from Rosgvardia, etc. Russian armed forces (due to the mixed professional/conscript nature) tend to have the professionals specialize into more technical roles, leaving “dumb grunt” roles (like infantrymen!) to be filled predominantly by conscripts; leaving them behind has led to an acute shortage of boots on the ground which has affected their overall performance on the ground. The Kremlin *could* mobilize if they declare this an actual war, but that would be politically an admission of defeat…
@@zanaduz2018 they certainly have been using conscripts, just not Russians. They’ve conscripted hundreds of thousands from the DPR and LPR, given them outdated equipment and no training. Those poor guys are the ones doing most of the infantry slog
@@galacticupfan7386 Yep, the only conscripts right now getting any training are those from Chechnya, who get about 2 weeks special operations training. None of them are from western oblasts, all from the east, and occupied territories.
Spoon fed propaganda as the cnn guys tells us how russia is has been hurt by the sanction s that totaly work or how he tells how well ukrisen is doing while 200 of their soldiers die everyday
Soon you will have 100K subs. Preemptive congrats!
At my first look of the Cage armor on the top I thought it was there to try to minimize damage if the tank was hit on the top
Bruh one of the main advantages of the t series tanks is the low profit, this type of cage armor really hurts jt if not being used in strictly urban combat
With modern fire control systems that can reliably hit targets 2 or more miles away, it really doesn't matter much whether the targeted tank is a few inches shorter or not. Making tanks smaller is only useful because it means you have less surface area to armor and can make them either lighter, or make the armor thicker while keeping the same weight.
Aged like fine milk
I dont see much of those cages on recent footage anymore Wonder why
Hmm. One of the mostt experienced Army's (IDF - Israelis Defence Force) is also not knowing what they're doing? Saw a lot Merkavas with those cope cages in the last time. I'd bet that they aren't for recoil less rifles but for loitering munition and drones.
More likely, based on how they've been built and the theatre they're operating in, these ones on the Merkavas HAVE been built for defence against RPGs fired from high buildings. Keep in mind that the point of this video was never to say that cage armor itself does not work, just that the way these Russian cages atop tank turrets had been built, would not work against the threats they'd been designed to combat. The difference is that in Ukraine, the streets are relatively wide in the built up areas, meaning RPG teams in buildings can easily get an angle on Russian tanks anyway. In Gaza, the streets are much narrower, preventing those same RPG operators from hitting under the cage.
@@ArmorCast it makes sense to use them also against RPG's that are coming from above. We use similar cages on the sides of armored vehicles as well... But as more and more loitering munitions and drones are entering the scene it makes sense to use these cages for those as well.
They are drying racks for the crews uniforms after they wet themselves. Also useful for carrying looted washing machines, toilets, and food. Not useful for defence against modern anti-tank missiles, only against old obsolete russian ones, even then, not always...
🏆🏆🏆👍🇺🇲🙏 Excellent presentation. Great detail and concise Thank you for sharing
Nice analysis
Excellent video!
They are roof racks so you can loot a washing machine or heavily soiled toilet
And don’t forget throwing your surfboard up there on the way to the beach.
why brits dont use it then?
@@iMost067 Brits don't need bits of welded scrap to make them feel better, they have these fearless little Asian guy's with curved knives called gurkas.
@@bush_wookie_9606 yea, they put them in the museum to feel better
Sounds like the tried and true "I get the concept but have no idea how to effectively implement it". Why don't we just call them what they're actually good for? Luggage rack. 🙂
Here I assumed they were used to drag home more washing machines.
@@alexandermackie7621 like I said. Luggage rack. 😁
@@Rjsjrjsjrjsj ...fair.
Actually informative.
7:06 - what's the purpose of the additional yellow fin on that round?
I'm still a little confused on the effectiveness of slat armor in general. Some of those clips of RPGs hitting the armor seem to be affecting it very little, if at all. 6:10 This one, for instance. I must be missing something, because it looks to me like it just went straight through, didn't deviate much at all, and still hit the armor with the shaped charge. Maybe I'm still not entirely sure how shaped charges work, if that was the intended defensive effect. From my brief study of how tank rounds work (mostly due to playing and learning more about War Thunder, but not entirely), I always thought the intended effect of spaced armor of any kind was to detonate the round prematurely, so the penetrating "jet" doesn't actually hit the main armor.
It turns out the warheads prefer a bit more range than the container can provide? Especially for man carried one’s. I think that shot you mentioned hopes it pierced the liner, causing the jet to not form properly. If it actually pierced there should be more of an affect on the other side of the wall. I dunno if the HEAT ammo on tanks actually were designed with the right stand off distance in mind, and premature detonation would be beneficial.
What’s happened in that case is that the glancing hit with the bar has deformed the liner in the round (the bit that plasticises and forms the penetrator), so when the warhead actually detonated, pretty much as normal… the penetrator formed at a bad angle and couldn’t punch through the armor. So you still see the munition get through the bars, still get the big explosion…. But the armor is fine
@@ArmorCast Oh, I see! I didn't even consider how it affects the lining of the round, or the possibility of throwing off the penetrator after impact and detonation. I could see that it exploded without making it through the other side, but couldn't tell why or what the slats actually did. That makes a lot more sense, thank you!
HEAT rounds use an explosive lense. If you mess with the shape of the explosive itself it wont focus correctly. The warheads are probably going to be somewhat thin skinned and if you can just catch that can holding the charge you might stand a chance. Without that lensing affect the explosive itself is something that the tank should be able to handle even at the thinnest point. There is a channel showing making shaped charges from wine bottles. They got it to work but compared to precision made devices it wasn't that effective and I think it shows how just putting a good dent in the charge might give you a chance.
The slat armor doesn't work in 100% cases. But it does add some hefty 20-30% percentage of disturbing the heat jet
Koala - Brained guy: mUh CoPe cAgEs dOn't wOrK Then why every western nation have "slat armor"?
We have an auto loader so the profile of the tank can be lower with less crew and more compact ammo stowage. You know what would make this even better? Let’s negate the profile advantage by building grills 2 feet high above the turret!
With modern fire control systems that can reliably hit targets 2 or more miles away, it really doesn't matter much whether the targeted tank is a few inches shorter or not. Making tanks smaller is only useful because it means you have less surface area to armor and can make them either lighter, or make the armor thicker while keeping the same weight.
Cage armor was designed specifically against RPG style projectiles with piezo-electric fuzes. The bars of the cage crushed the thin skin of the projectile against the fuze and shorted it out, causing it to fail to detonate. You can find image of this online where an RPG would be buried inside the vehicle protected by cage armor but failed to detonate. They're totally useless against ATGMs which have a different fuzing mechanism. Against dropped RKG grenades it's highly questionable how effective they would be. If the grenade hits the bar and detonates, the jet will almost certainly penetrate the cage and the top. But the velocity of the grenades aren't enough to crush the skin and short out the fuzing mechanism, so if the grenade hits between the bars, it will probably just detonate anyways.
These Cages are there to successfully confine the Crew inside the Tank in Case of a direct enemy Hit. It’s to ensure that the Crews are able to enjoy a full flight together with their turret when it’s blown off for maximum score in the Flying Turret Competition.
Its for 40mm grenades dropped from drones
I think that it could be against frontally launched top attack guided missles, making them hit it and detonate while still above front turret armor and not above the roof where the crew is, might sound stupid in concept but i think it could work and to be fair if it does work it's probably worth the added weight on the tank Edit: Because most people are either too stupid to understand or didn't read the comment properly I'm talking about frontally fired top attack munitions like the TOW 2B missle.
Have you actually seen the video? He disproves your theory, it won't stop a Javelin.
Echoing Johnny English... Watch the whole video. And pay attention.
@@johnnyenglish583 I'm not talking about javelins at all, I'm talking about the bloody IFV or stationary ATGMs wich detonate above the tank roof Have you read my comment at all? This isn't something he mentioned at all
@@Rjsjrjsjrjsj do i have to specify I'm not talking about javelins again?
@@stralegaming2597 I'm literally watching the part where he talks about it. A Javelin IS an ATGM.
I know we use cages on some of our American vehicles. The are meant to disrupt shape charges like RPG rounds. Basically the plasma discharged has phases it goes through penetrate the hull, but the cages set it off early so the plasma is not hitting the hull optimally.
Did he ever say that in the entire video or has anyone said this in the comments? I really feel like thats literally the answer, but everyone keeps saying the Russians are using it for javelins. To my knowledge a lot of tanks were lost in the Chechnyan wars because of RPGs from buildings.
Red effect said that there is two types of cages the well made spaced out one that is supposed to trapp javelins and the cheap one that has its bars randomly spaced apart 0:31 good
0:14 cheap
Cage armor, even the well made stuff, won’t have any effect on a Javelin, it’s just too substantial a warhead to be affected in the same way a PG-7 rocket is. I’m aware of Redeffect’s video, but there’s a lot he gets wrong or misrepresents
@@ArmorCast I think the cage is trying to stop the javelin from exploding at all by the cage spaced out being the perfect width so that the javelin gets caught but I could be wrong
this video didn't age well
Russian authorities actively bragged about how the cages made the vaunted Javelin ineffective. The cages weren't planned against drone-dropped munitions either. Technologically, Russia has very good Electronic Warfare (EW) capabilities and that's how you counter drones. The Switchblade drones Koala mentions are actually pretty uselessness now due to jamming. In fact it turned out only the Polish-made WB drones are quite resistant to jamming. But early in the conflict, Russians didn't have good EW (due to organisational and command & control chaos, not due to lack of technology), which is why drones were much more effective then than now.
Almost all of the modern military drones have the ability to change frequency to counter jamming. The main issue with russian Electronic Warfare systems (and the majority of EW systems in general) is that they work in both directins jamming not only the enemy communication but their own as well. This is due to the only effective way to disrupt enemy communication being to cover a wide range of frequencies. This makes russians unable to use EW on the frontlines limiting it to areas with little to no actvie fighting like the occupied territories.
So the Russians have good EW, but not at the start of the conflict - when they started using the roof racks? Could you point me to the link where they were claiming the cages work against Javelins?
@@josedorsaith5261 as you know, they did lots of things very badly at the start of the conflict. C2 was non-existent. They actually used unsafe communications, including ordinary mobile phone networks, for military purposes. It was chaos. Now they got their act together, got rid of "new fangled inventions" like Blitzkrieg and manouvre, and got back to what they know and are good at: war of attrition by using a steamroll of artillery. They're using their EW really effectively now (rendering the Switchblade pretty useless) and their own drones, though crude, are effective at guiding artillery fire. I'm afraid I can't find those boasts in English: googling keywords like "cage armour", "javelin" etc. gives lots of results from after 24 Feb disproving cope cages' effectiveness, but there don't seem to be any settings in Google to only search for posts before 24 Feb. Try googling it in Russian, though, you might get better results. To the extent that I know Russia, there won't be too many new articles about the ineffectiveness of cope cages, so you will be able to hit the articles from 6-12 months ago that talked about it.
So they choose to suck at counter drones just to be the master of it now? Call me sceptic
Really? Every time I heard about javilins were from western media, not russian. Javelin isn't as good as you think, they're practically useless in or near urban centers, where most of the fighting is taking place. Just a guess, but NLAW and RPG28 is much more effective at countering russian armored advances
Ta, comprehensive description of what it's for & is going on.
so i was thinking maybe they are against nlaws over flying typ of attack how far abov target do they fly? also maybe against the drone morter drop good point also what about artillery and morter would the cage trigger them hmmmm or catch
Detonating a 155mm artillery or 220mm+ rocket arty an extra metre above the tank wouldn’t do a thing. Those rounds can kill you from half a football field away!
Remember when everyone thought Russia had a legit army? weren't we totally wrong, they're absolutely pathetic.
Where are you from
Something I said days after the conflict broke out - “You mean THIS is the nation we’ve been fearmongering about for the last 70 years..!?” 😂
@@ArmorCast yet scared of open conflict
This things are mage to defend from drones( maybe kamikadze drones) - russian journalists say. I saw such things in Syria war, while i s i s used hand made attack drones. When russian army came to the conclusion that Ukraine does not use such drones, roof bars have ceased to appear. To protect tanks from javelins, developments were underway to install false thermal targets (almost like on fighters). They just stuck a torch behind the engine bay.
Yes, these cages only work against drones attack but not against US javelin that has much powerful downward surge force that easily punched through the cages. Future russian tanks turrets will be automated with gap layered armor on top to stop javelin & other top down attack missiles high speed downward surge penetration force. Future MBT will add mini CIWS on top adding new role to MBT with ability to strafe at soldiers mounting anti-tank weapons on building roof top or upper floor. Zelensky forces and supporters love to make false claims like their drones could carry large payload air to ground missiles or something which doesn't exist.
@@jayjay53313 "future Russian tanks" when will it be - in 2030? and how many, 10? ;)
@@robertwisniewski2029 if Russians didn't improve their GDP much, then only in small hundreds assigned to home defense like Armata T-14/15 where just a handful being placed at strategic location to defend Moscow. Not enough to deploy to Ukraine. Same goes to their Su-34M only for home defense whereas older first variant Su-34 belonging to Russian navy being deployed for unguided rockets and bombs day only attack.
@@jayjay53313 problem with Armata is different - it has not yet entered mass production and it is very likely that it will never come into operation. All Russia has at its disposal are prototypes with serious design flaws, they may pretend to be a tank in a parade, but are not suitable for combat use.
@@robertwisniewski2029 money is the only main issue that brought development to halt. Imagine you're playing Red Alert 4, you have option to build Armata T-14 but it says insufficient funds.
That new ish type of air burst round for taking out drones and all aircraft and missiles is called a continuous rod expansive explosive charge, which is a cylindrically shaped explosive with steel or even titanium like 2 mm wide by 2 ft long bars packed tightly completely around the charge so when it explodes they all spray out in a perfect circle and kill everything in that circle there is literally no avoiding it...
🤣The Scottish Sense of Humor is so awesome!! You're so serious right up until you start dropping the jokes!
I've got a few points to counterpoints to.... points of contention I'd like to raise. The first point is that the quality of the information at our hands. We've got a bit, a lot of confirmation bias. We're seeing the kills, we're seeing the successful attacks and the information approved for release. We're the subjects of an information to propaganda war and we're supposed to reach the approved outcome. We're also seeing something of a kill bias too. We're seeing the kills, not the survivors on a whole. To be clear and to make it clear, if there are survivors of attacks. Which I don't know expressly exist or do not. I'm suggesting that we're seeing biased information and a very clouded image that. Speaking with any sort of certainty is a fool's game. I'd also point out that if I remember a post correctly, it was made the point that slat, statistical armour would be effective against larger munitions on a few conditions. Namely, if the slats were further apart. We do have an effective form of armour against the NLAW/Javelin, if it was spaced correctly. Which, speaking bluntly, it's not on a whole. In unreasonably and stupidly gameified RPG terms, it's.... like wearing chainmail because your opponents have swords and chainmail has a bonus against swords, cutting weapons. Only the swords your opponents have are special rapiers with bonuses against chainmail and they shoot special anti-chainmail bodkin points. I'd say the only point that I expressly disagree with Koala on this one is the nature of the expected threat. I would suggest, that the expected threat they were expected to cover were the Soviet era RPG warheads. They were built to engineered with that point of reference as their primary expected threat. They were then extrapolated/expected to work for other threats as a by-product. Only that.... wasn't so much the case. Both in the size of the NLAW and Javelin and in the yield, penetration of. If you made, shipped and distributed the RPG over fifty odd years to your neighbours and you've got the receipts.... Also, to be clear, I'm disputing their point of reference here. I'm thinking they were expected to face a lot more RPG fire than were attack profiles of the NLAW and Javelin. Complex subject is complex and I'm a dabbler in this particular field. So bear in mind, these are on a whole suggestions. I have some understanding of, some grounding in. I speak some of the language to understand the concepts. I have not done it professionally and some of the lingo still escapes me.
To be clear, would the Ukrainians have created Saint Javelin if they didn't work?
I'm sure there's an anti-survivor bias in what vids get spread around. If your target pops smoke and unasses from the area as your ATGM plows a field you don't bother posting the clip. I think the cope cages are from the institutional trauma the Grozny disaster inflicted on the Russian tank corps. There it was mainly old school RPGs fire from rooftops. As a rule, firing a RPG or ATGM from indoors is contraindicated, although some have a water jacket in the tube's rear cover to soak up the backblast.
@@archersfriend5900 Maybe. Or propaganda. It's a possibility. Even if there's a tonne of kills from Javelins, NLAW, that doesn't mean it's 100% effective. The moment you say never, you're setting yourself up for failure, being proven wrong.
@@tickticktickBOOOOM Without knowing the exact specifics of Grozny and the conditions in which RPG's were fired.... not going to argue, have a lot of questions and frankly, sounds about right. I seem to remember some form of AT4 was developed to specifically allow firing from enclosed environments.... couldn't tell you where. Pretty sure it was some form of water jacket behind the charge to eat up the back blast. As a side note, well, two, unasses? I thought it was de-assing. The more catastrophic the kill, the more it's shared. Wouldn't even try to argue that. The only other point I'd make is to the effect of fighting the last war. If they were expecting RPG's and the cope cages were engineered to RPG resistant, it makes more sense. To a degree. I'm not making any particular claims as to what, why, where or how. I'm just saying that if they were looking back on past experience and RPG's were the main line threat, one outcome is cope cages. Then being told 'da tovarich, other missile ineffective too!' also makes sense. Which reality has rather dramatically proven otherwise.
@@leonpeters-malone3054 The Russians sent a tank column into a city with highrises unsupported, and it got wiped out mostly by RPG-7s into the roof armor. That leaves an impression on an organization. Of course, any joy the Chechens had was short lived. The Russians leveled the city with artillery and airstrikes afterward. A few forays into Ukrainian cities early on reminded the Russians why that was a bad idea, and since then, they've mainly just surrounded urban areas and sent in Chechens and separatist militias. Nowadays, if you see a 'Russian' tank fighting in a city it's probably the guys who have been fighting in the Donbass since 2014. They know to keep behind the infantry and provide fire support from as far away as possible. Those People's Militias are the ones getting the T-62s the Russians pulled out of storage. As long as they're not going up against modern tanks, they're good enough. It's not like a Javelin will have any harder of a time killing the latest and greatest. Hell, the dazzlers on the T-90 are useless against the Javelin, which uses infrared and comes in above them anyway, and the NLAW, which isn't guided in the tradition sense.
There are rumours that those cages are meant to prevent deserting Russian tank crews from abandoning their vehicles while alive, as well as helping to locate casualties because the crews aren't blown out of the turrets when the ammo cooks off. 😁
On first look i'd only guess that its to protect the hatches from molotovs or grenades or whatever it is that people might throw out of windows when driving through a city
I assumed it was a grill, so at least you can have a bbq when your turret cooks off.
Cages proved to be effecive agaist drone munition, especialy if loaded with bags of gravel . Exactly this was tested in Sirya and those cages apeared years ago.
4:30 Что ты видео обрезал фраер? Там NLAW, которое не смогло пробить башню т72 ))) Люблю когда говорят про мораль и коррупцию, особенно такие больные люди как американцы. Вы давно на свою статистику больных ПТСД смотрели?) сейчас 2023 козырьки не уходят, а джавелины и нлоу либо закончились либо на хрен оказались никому не нужны. Сколько британия за последние 10 месяцев поставила или заказала nlaw хотя бы для своей армии? Ах да, 0. они не заказали. (не стоила игрушка того) Если изначально козырьки и хотели использовать для борьбы с джавелинами, в чем я с автором согласен, то по ходу конфликта оставили от дронов. На БМП их не ставят из-за веса в основном. Россия потеряла до 700 танков) По словам Орикса, который 1) не обновляет списки украинской техники и 2)Вот же диво дивно, закрывается)
This video is over a year old. After 15 months of fighting, confirmed Russian tank lost is over 2000.
@@naksachaisaejane1982 Подтвержденные кем? Орикс - не обновляет данные по украине, и что-то после публикации про патриот они резко объявили о закрытиии)
@@romanberkutov2592It has updated its info for Ukraine, Ukraine has confirmed to have lost 650 tanks, in total, 4481 pieces of equipment. Russia has 2324 tanks, and 12287 pieces of equipment
Even if these set off the first shaped charge this will blow a hole through the cage and still set off the reactive armor the primary charge will blow up as designed it looks as if you can reenforced penetrator to just break through before detonating
It could be also against nlaws. Since it's designed to detonate 1m above the tank and shoot the copper jet down vertically through the armor. Making the shooter aim higher or even intercepting the projectile bofore it reaches right on top may impact it's performance. But that's just guesswork. Haven't seen any kinds of tests about this. I just got trained on the nlaw enough to shoot it and know how it works basically
There's scant evidence of the cope cages actually not working, from what I've seen so far. Yes, there are quite a few pictures of destroyed Russian tanks with cope cages... but top attack ATGMs are not the only things hunting tanks in Ukraine. And that not every tank has them can be answered in the same way, it's not just Javelins and NLAWs hunting tanks. Artillery is a far greater threat and there the cage works against them due to higher profile.. Deflecting a shaped charge isn't the only function of the slat armour, mangling the warhead works just as well in greatly reducing the effectiveness of it as does premature detonation. A javelin has about 1 metre of penetration capability if the tandem warheads fire as intended. And while all over the place, as is the norm for most improvised solutions, many of those cages are mounted about that far away from the roof of a tank. Add to that many of the tanks with cope cages also have ERA blocks on their roofs... and suddenly the odds are looking better for that tank. Reliable data on it just doesn't seem to be there, from what I've seen so far. And that Ukrainan demonstration of a cope cage's ineffectiveness it's slightly pointless since the cage was mounted too snugly iirc.
Hmmm it reminds me of infantry helmets, its not really made for stopping bullets from assault rifles, like many initially assume, but to protect the infantry man from debris and shrapnel. Maybe this "cope cage" is similar.
@@Cloud43001 Entirely possible that they were designed for something else. But as stated in the video, their appearance on the battlefield does coincide with Javelins quite a bit. But to be sure, we'd have to ask the guys putting those cages on those tanks. I'm merely saying that the cages do affect modern ATGMs no matter why they were put there. Javelins and NLAWs and other such systems, while being excellent pieces of engineering, aren't magical.
1 metre of penetration against RHA is not the same as 1 metre of air. Having the missile fuse prematurely at the point of the cage would do very little to degrade its penetration
@@ArmorCast As far as I'm aware, the metal jet has a tendency to lose cohesion rather quickly. So the 1 metre distance very much does matter when it comes to whether it will or will not penetrate enough. Besides, the 1 metre was me rounding up. The actual stated penetration is 760mm. Shaped charges are not magic...
Cope cage lmao
Solid vid
At least they are good suncovers for turretcrew outside hatches.
My bet is the cages are there to convince conscripted Russian tank crews that they aren't completely fucked
Tanks arent manned by conscripts, lib
This comment section is filled with children 🤦🏾♂️
People want to find a way to laugh at atrocity… it’s the only other coping mechanism than sadness and anger, which doesn’t help anyone
@@ArmorCast true 👌
Standoff structures to cause the grenades dropped by drones to detonate off the surface of the thinner top armor of the tank turret. the damage from dropped shape charge munitions is also mitigated if they detonate beyond the optimal distance from the surface of the target.
They work, only for Single Charge Rockets, Some Launchers like Javelin and NLAW had Double Charge Rockets
Glory to Ukraine🇺🇦
Gay rights! 🇺🇦🏳️🌈
bornana
bornana
@@SnakeInAShoe bornana
@@xdarkfuturex7922 bornana
@@balagadoo bornana
@@pooddly9637 bornana
What I think is really need to help defend against drones is upwards firing smoke grenade discharger.
What tank is that at 10:19 looks like a BTR with a T-62 turret?
Probably, it’s just a test target, so they took a random hull and turret and pretty much just strapped them together
@@ArmorCast ah I though it might have been something intresting q.q
You’re heavily propagandized
Cope harder.
The theory behind the cage addons are decently solid Unlike their ability to actually trigger the tandem warhead on the Javelin in the top attack mode. And I think the theory here is to activate the first of the tandem charges and let ERA defeat the second like it's supposed to (IIRC ERA is the reason we made the javelin a tandem charge system) But yeh it's not your usual cage armor system to say the least.
The ERA mounted on top of Russian tanks won’t stop a Javelin, even IF the first charge were defeated by the cage. Keep in mind ERA doesn’t necessarily DEFEAT a shaped charge, just reduces its penetration. The roof armor of Russian tanks is so thin though that a Javelin will go right through the cage, and the ERA and most likely straight through the roof as well. Javelin’s are pretty terrifying!
@@ArmorCast personally, I'm aware of that.... Just using my slightly greater than average engineering ability to spitball why the tanks might have these to *try* to mitigate the awesome power of saint javelin.
Does not the anti armour version of the Switchblade use the same warhead as the Javelin anyway?
The m113a3 uses cage armor but they also had a 25 mm plate to back it up besides the m113a3 armor.
12:10 CSA FPAG
It’s the novorossiya flag used by pro Russian Ukrainian separatists in the Donbas not the confederate flags.!
These cage structures we're planned to better, easier and faster obfuscate the tank from the top. Branches and wood, as well as leaves from mother nature should be added later, to blend in the vehicle with the environment. Sadly the whole concept got misunderstood by the lower ranks and never got used for it's purpose...
I've heard theories that they are to protect against light drone missiles and such but I'm unsure of effective they would be against that.
It’s actually for RPGs because of their experience in the Chechen war
@@sharwama992 suicide drones where used extensively in syria to destroy tanks so it could be both there isnt just one reason there are a multitude
Wow, everyone is educating the youtuber after he "researched" the video on cage armour, and came to "educate" us about it, only to be the one to get educated in the comment section 😂😂
You talking about the cage armour on the Scimitar aren't quite correct mate, in Afghan 2006, a Scimitar with cage armour on its way to Musa Qala was ambushed and got hit by numerous RPG's and they didn't penetrate into the crew. They were also hit by small arms (never going to penetrate) and Dshka .50 rounds (will get through if they're AP rounds). They were either extremely fortunate that day or shopping trolley armour can stop RPG's.