These “mobile coffins” suffer from a catastrophic design flaw—the “jack-in-the-box” effect—where ammunition carousels ignite, launching turrets stories into the air.

...

The flaws aren’t limited to older T-72 tanks; the newer T-80 and T-90 series also have a similar autoloading system in which ammunition is stored inside the turret. While the armor surrounding the tanks has been improved, this flaw persists, and Western analysts point to the Russian military’s refusal to learn from the hard lessons of the Gulf War.

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] m3t00@piefed.world 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

lolipop

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 6 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Is this.. By design?

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Sort of. They use an auto loader system for their tanks so they need less crew. For this to work, there is carousel with ammo just below the turret, instead of having the ammo deeper down. Quick loaded and firing, lower profile, but also one good hit that sets of the ammo in the carousel, and pop goes the turret.

[–] Gathorall@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It also wasn't a major problem of course before drones and their cheap air capability, it's a hard target ground to ground, and naturally proper infantry support could mitigate it quite well even now.

One of Russia's failures is that the Cold War skirmishes trained them to ignore the realities of large scale ground warfare against and organized opponent, while their western neighbours have given it as much thought as an existential threat deserves.

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

it's eating ants, totally normal

[–] Dhs92@piefed.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

Ejector seat for the crew. Totally by design. /s

[–] BarrelRollNebula@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 weeks ago

"It's not a bug, it's a feature"

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 19 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Good thing they are so stupid.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 weeks ago

Thank you for the proper quote.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 weeks ago

Why is Russia using T-62s?

That's easy. It's what they have left. They're not making enough new thanks, so they're using the last dregs of the Soviet Union

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well when you're infantry any tank is better than no tank.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Until that particular model of tank is obsolete in a given theater of war and the enemy has access to effective anti-tank weapons.

You have to understand, when an explosion is triggered in these tanks because russia was stupid enough to actually put ammunition into a T-62 and send it into combat, it turns the tank into a pressure cooker.

It is much much much much worse to be inside a tank undergoing an internal pressurized detonation than in the general vicinity of an explosive munition detonating, as bad as an alternative as it is to have no armor at all at least you aren't trapped in an enclosed space with an immense shock of heat/kinetic energy enveloping your body like you would be if you are inside a tank/armored vehicle that has just had its armor penetrated by an anti-tank weapon.

I am not saying tanks are obsolete, what I am saying is T-62s are obsolete, they are worse than nothing and the fact that they are so heavy to boot means that they take up an immense amount of the logistical supply chain for moving equipment and supplies to the front that could be used for much more valuable equipment and supplies.