Something hit the ammo storage (Wilshire says a Stugna-P ATGM) which then blew up the tank. It’s one of the big weakness of the Russian T-series tanks, they don’t have blowout panels; so when the ammo storage is hit the entire crew cabin explodes. Tanks like the Abrams separates the crew cabin and the ammo storage and directs any ammo detonations out the back of the tank via said blowout panels. While the tank is still totaled, the crew has a good chance of surviving.
Two different philosophies of design that are informed by politics. In a country where you have to manufacture consent for a war, you have to design your military gear with some consideration for the people that will be using it. You’re designing gear that you have to market to the soldiers.
In a more overtly totalitarian regime, you can just chuck people into the meat grinder because they can’t really say no.
I remember learning about Soviet vs US long range bombers, and how the US designs made arrangements for things like toilets, but the Soviet ones often didnt.
Holy shit, was that hit by a nuke?
I wonder what hit them to cause this….
Could it be a javelin to the ammo storage?
Good riddance anyways. Get out of Ukraine if you don’t want to end up like this.
The explosion started on the side of the tank rather than the top so probably not a Javelin or NLAW.
I’m guessing it was dueling with a leapord or challenger and ate an AP round to the turrent.
Stugna-P according to sources
Something hit the ammo storage (Wilshire says a Stugna-P ATGM) which then blew up the tank. It’s one of the big weakness of the Russian T-series tanks, they don’t have blowout panels; so when the ammo storage is hit the entire crew cabin explodes. Tanks like the Abrams separates the crew cabin and the ammo storage and directs any ammo detonations out the back of the tank via said blowout panels. While the tank is still totaled, the crew has a good chance of surviving.
Two different philosophies of design that are informed by politics. In a country where you have to manufacture consent for a war, you have to design your military gear with some consideration for the people that will be using it. You’re designing gear that you have to market to the soldiers.
In a more overtly totalitarian regime, you can just chuck people into the meat grinder because they can’t really say no.
I remember learning about Soviet vs US long range bombers, and how the US designs made arrangements for things like toilets, but the Soviet ones often didnt.