Soviet T-55 tank burns after an armor-piercing shot through the glacis during US trials in 1976

The projectile type is not specified however it is possibly an early M735 APFSDS round. Of interest is the tremendous amount of incandescent material generated by the impact that causes an almost immediate flash of flame inside the tank that blows the turret hatch open and also emerges from the bottom of the hull as well as the hole in the armor. Within 30 seconds of this initial ignition, flames from burning fuel and propellant start to engulf the tank.
If you would like to support the channel consider visiting www.buymeacoff...

[@Niewiem0]

"Driver turns yellow"

[@evgenpetrov4403]

One of the fuel tanks is located next to the driver's seat. During the Vietnam War, one such tank burned down when fired upon by an M41. Diesel fuel gases ignited and exploded because the tank was one third full.

[@mr.samurai901]

Was the Duster firing 40mm AP ammunition ? I didn't know that was commonly made or issued. I do not doubt your story, it's even more fascinating if the 40mm guns took out the T-55 with HE ammo. The M41 was by all accounts a fearsome weapon in Vietnam, I've read countless stories of it being used to wipe out NVA ambushes and attacks. 😂Edited to say, I got the wrong vehicle. M41 Walker Bulldog. The M42 was the Duster. Makes a bit more sense lol.

[@Mthammere2010]

The M-41 walker bulldog had a 76 or 90mm gun if memory serves.​@@mr.samurai901 the duster was the air defense vehicle

[@mr.samurai901]

@@Mthammere2010 Yes, I made the mistake of thinking that is what it was referring to. I got the M-41 and M-42 mixed up.

[@kyezun]

@@Mthammere2010 yes, 76mm to be precise

[@evgenpetrov4403]

@@mr.samurai901 you are absolutely right. it was a Walker Bulldog with a 76 mm gun. According to the conditions of the battle, two M41s were on a hill and repelled the attack of several T-54\55s.

[@kiloalphasierra]

Room temp to 2,000 degrees inside in less than a tenth of a second. 😳

[@showdown66]

Movies and games show the hole as a glowing red ring but looks like that’s not the case IRL

[@vashbain3136]

yes it is lol theres literally footage of a tank duel in germany during ww2 where you can see the hole glowing

[@metropoliceguy1090]

@@vashbain3136 there's a diffrence between AP shells and APFSDS shells.

[@vashbain3136]

@@metropoliceguy1090 So what? A hole is a hole lol if there is fire on the inside it will glow

[@Squee7e]

​@@vashbain3136the glow comes from the heat that is created by the friction of the shell. It literally presses itself through thick steel. A lot of energy is being released and heats up the surrounding air and the tank itself

[@blueduck8431]

​@vashbain3136 I was going to comment on the same footage...you beat me to it. 😅

[@Oligodendrocyte139]

Looks like it blew out the driver's escape hatch.

[@hw97karbine]

The turret hatch was blown open too, must have caught a bag of propellant with the initial impact.

[@Andernol]

"technically, the driver did make it out his escape hatch..."

[@Batmack]

​@@Andernol "Most of what was left of him, anyways"

[@Oligodendrocyte139]

@@Andernol Well, they were trials and hopefully they hadn't asked for volunteers 😀

[@alesha_piterskiy]

Скорее всего люки просто прикрыли, никто не хотел получить оторваной башней по голове

[@SolidWorksCAD3D]

@01:34 it shows the hit in real time (how it would look in reality to a person watching it with the eyes)? I ask because most AP hit footage is slow-mo and I would like to know how it looks in real time... Thanks!

[@NguyenLyubyuStrana]

Blud got slightly uptiered

[@Green-ader]

Blud isn’t funny

[@mirroredvoid8394]

@@Green-ader Blud telling the truth

[@SMGJohn]

Common sight with a lot of tanks in WW2, brutal

[@tackytrooper]

It astounds me how many men had, and have balls big enough to drive these tanks into battle, knowing this can happen to them at any time...

[@louiefence6579]

Lol why do you think of their testicles it has nothing to do with bravery xD

[@dr.ryttmastarecctm6595]

_"Oh bugger, the tank's on fire!"_ The Chieftain Moran!

[@duartesimoes508]

His _first_ videos were truly great. Soon, all they think about is to extend them as much as possible in order to earn as much as possible and the videos quickly become endless and really dull. Drachinifel and Ward Carrol's videos are more bad examples of this trend.

[@DecidedlyNinja]

I don't think anyone would be left to worry about escaping after that first explosion.

[@JohnKobaRuddy]

One of the worst presenters with an extremely bizarre accent. That's part British, part American and part Irish.

[@SpaceCoffee700]

​@@JohnKobaRuddynah his channel is great accent is cool too

[@pennycarvalho1223]

@@duartesimoes508sounds like a you problem, drach and chieftain actually try to use all their time to add extra information and even going over smaller details that most shorter channels would completely ignore. You just don’t appreciate good stuff

[@julianmuller6541]

in some cases when they test ammunition they fill the fuel tanks/ammo with sand to examine post pen what would have happened if u want a show u put real ammo and fuel in the tank

[@godofhate4167]

War thunder be like "hit" fuel tank and ammo rack "disappeared"

[@dave.of.the.forrest]

oof, my glacis is killing me

[@stephenhumphrey7935]

I'm having trouble seeing. Has anybody seen my glacis? 😅😅

[@JackRobertson-op3ib]

The T-55 was made in 1947.

[@anakinskywalker1982]

D'où les 5 secondes pour l'équipage pour quitter le char une fois touché. Ou l'autre option se tirer une balle pour pas brûler vif

[@Kesin_Kai]

А если бы в баках находилась боеукладка то т55 оторвало башню , ибо в баке который расположен рядом с механиком водителем еще и расположены снаряды, и при взрыве баков произошел бы взрыв снарядов

[@user-pq4tj8vr8q]

Переиграл в вар тандер? Дизельные баки не взрываются, и, более того, не горят. Да и бензиновые не взрываются, но хорошо горят. А то, которые башню или нет, зависит в первую очередь от того, сколько фугасных снарядов. Если их достаточно много, то все равно, где располагаются, танк по-любому разорвёт

[@Kesin_Kai]

@@user-pq4tj8vr8q на счёт фугасов я в курсе а на счёт баков ладно тут просчёт согласен

[@stephenhumphrey7935]

Did you know the T55 is much less likely to lose its turret than the T62/72/80. That's because it has much less propellant than the 115/125mm gun tanks.

[@hughezzell10000]

that armor piercing shell must have been a sabot with the outer casing we see blasting off in front of the tank at impact and being the tiny sparkles in the slo mo

[@GrundleStiltSkin]

looks like the "big bang"

[@miloszruczynski1230]

Do You guys think some of the crew could survive the initial blast and escape before the secondary fire engulfed the tank?

[@BlackMasterRoshi]

❌

[@that207guy7]

Absolutely 100% no.

[@captain0080]

There's a video from the Syrian civil was where the commander is blasted into the air and falls next to the tank after he opens the hatch to escape, next he stands up with his burnt pants up to his face and runs into a building while a hail of bullets falls around him, wether he lived after that it's unknown.

[@brennanleadbetter9708]

Highly doubt it

[@billyponsonby]

No chance

[@Better_Clean_Than_Green]

Poor tank😢

[@Lepo234]

😢

[@technojailson_6264]

Sirry captain we lost the D point

[@Dan-yk6sy]

Maybe the d point was in our hearts all along

[@jesusmoya4807]

Que calibre era el arma con la que impactó el proyectil?

[@Cormano980]

9mm

[@SSN515]

@@Cormano980 Hypersonic depleted uranium 9mm?

[@Cormano980]

@SSN515 yes, the one that blows your lung out

[@JohnKobaRuddy]

Read the frigging description instead of fishing for partial human interaction.

[@paulrallyfan417]

6.5 Creedmoor

[@MyLateralThawts]

This was no doubt an export model to the Middle East (captured Syrian or Egyptian T-55), with the Soviets keeping the best for themselves. Interestingly, I was told that the East Germans took delivery of their Soviet equipment, stripped it down, improved what they could improve, and put it back together again. So it could be argued that their final product was better than your typical Russian model.

[@fanda789]

Západ teď dodává Ukrajině vyřazenou a značně starou techniku,kterou by musel draze likvidovat a takto na ni ještě vydělá spoustu peněz.

[@georgeouroussoff3830]

That is t-54

[@telesniper2]

everything old is new again

[@Putnamsmif]

Every generation of Russian tank since this can be currently seen emulating this in Ukraine...

[@damsky2]

as well as Western military equipment

[@alm5992]

@@damsky2 More Russian than Western, but I understand you have to try and feel a "victory" on KZbin, at the very least since the Russian military can't win anything.

[@ReckerFidelWOLF]

Guess we'll pretend the Patton series of tanks also dont have cook offs or turret tosses either.

[@Layd36]

Yet western tanks are getting obliterated by Russian drones so good try acting like the west is winning the war 🤡🦅🇺🇲

[@tackytrooper]

In reality very few tanks besides Abrams have blowout panels, and even those only work part of the time. NATO tanks do have less sensitive propellants though, which is actually a bigger deal than the design itself.

[@andrewjack5755]

It’s a t54 there’s no barrel evacuator

[@Uncle_kelbean]

Where's the best part about the turret going in the air?

[@DeltaEchoGolf]

The T-54/55 series was the last Soviet tank that was loaded manually. The ammunition was placed all around the inside of the tank. Unlike later tanks with the auto-loader ammo carousel right underneath the turret.

[@5co756]

​@@DeltaEchoGolfThe problem is the huge amount of HE shells in that tanks , not the autoloader .

[@obsidianjane4413]

@@5co756 No. Its very much the concentration of propellent in the carousel. HE shells have to be hit directly to have a chance to detonate and toss the turret (on pretty much any tank). But just the propellant alone is enough on a T-72. HE detonation is what disassembles the tank into pieces.

[@5co756]

@@obsidianjane4413 No , the propellant burns way slower than high explosives . Hitting the propellant results in a ammo cook off , hatches got blown open and fire comes out as you see on this T 55 . Hitting HE ammo directly let this tanks explode , not every T series tank explodes like that . If you pack the ammo storage in an Abrams or Leopard 2 full of HE , this tank will also explode . This blow out pannels are only for propellant cook off . If the propellant would explode like that , your breech would kill the crew after the first shot . Or every weapon in general , pistols , rifles ect.

[@obsidianjane4413]

@@5co756 There was no HE detonation in this video. Propellant, esp. when confined within a small space burns much faster and energetically than you seem to appreciate.

[@park1776]

WHY

[@Mthammere2010]

From what caliber gun? And what range?

[@kyezun]

based on the description, if it's M735, it's a early 105mm APFSDS round, though range isn't known

[@IMP-vi6je]

Outdated by that time T64 replaced it

[@williambrasky3891]

Russia is literally using T-55s today, as we speak.

[@10.huynhphathuy8]

@@williambrasky3891as direct artillery support vehicles for Donbass militias not frontline tanks and still kicking ukro daily lol. Plus ukro also using T-55

[@IMP-vi6je]

@@williambrasky3891 i meant for the soviet union but ok i never seen any evidence of the russian military using t55 but i've seen the Ukrainians using m55s which is a modified t55

[@G-Mastah-Fash]

And the T64 was even less survivable because of the autoloader.

[@jorgenguyen7641]

@@G-Mastah-Fash Not really. A lot gets made about the autoloaders, but a T-64 would be a lot better protected than a T-55. A tank with a carousel-style autoloader isn't necessarily less survivable than a tank with a human loader, it just means that a hit to the ammunition hits *all* the ammunition since it's centralized in the carousel, whereas a tank with a loader usually has the ammunition stored in a few different spots, and an ammo hit might only detonate part of the stored ammo. Conversely, the advantage of the autoloader in that sense is that at least all of the ammunition is stored in one spot, so a hit in any other spot might not detonate any ammunition, while having the ammo spread out makes it more likely that at least some ammunition would be detonated.

[@peterhald9744]

It looks very pyrophoric. I would rather think that it is depleted uranium than a tungsten cored M735.

[@nigelsmith7366]

Wrong

[@foenikxsfirebird3067]

Aua .... der ist fertig....😢

[@johnathandavis3693]

I thought this was a live shot from Ukraine...

[@mariahlofer]

No russian bias was harmed here...

[@brennanleadbetter9708]

I expected the turret to get sent to space.

[@lewcrowley3710]

That would need a high explosive round to explode. The fire appears to be from ammunition. And it 'blows itself out', but it doesn't appear to have a sympathetic detonation. Probably using older cartridge ammunition instead of the two part ammunition they use now.

[@brennanleadbetter9708]

@lewcrowley3710 Its a joke

[@TheStormtrooper00]

Soviet bbq inside.

[@billyponsonby]

Astonishing

[@Oliepolie]

War thunder:

[@TheRobbiUno]

Was that a DU round?

[@DeltaEchoGolf]

Depleted Uranium.

[@obsidianjane4413]

In '76 probably not. Probably just an APDS like M392, or an early APFSDS either using tungsten carbide.

[@quan-uo5ws]

nope, tungsten core round.

[@wolverinesdreams9293]

Tank crew nightmare!

[@user-cm3ly5yl6j]

Жутко...

[@ihorkorotchenko9732]

Бамц !

[@papaschlumpf2149]

something went wrong, turret is still in place 🤣

[@foenikxsfirebird3067]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@jett_phil]

Didn't have a full ammo load

[@that207guy7]

No autoloader, that's why.

[@jett_phil]

@that207guy7 The autoloader is not actually the cause of a turret throw. It has to do with the unarmored ammo stowage being hit which either burns or detonates, which then detonates the ammo in the autoloader carosel. Tanks have been throwing turrets since they've had them.

[@that207guy7]

@@jett_phil the chances of that turret being thrown upwards with an autoloader goes up a lot. Mostly just because of all of the ammo sitting right below the turret. But yes, if the ammo detonates just right all at once then the turret will pop on any tank (with ammo stored in the hull of course)

[@anthonychappell9409]

HEAT round?

[@Ghostmaxi1337]

No, there you would see a more violent outside detonation, as the name indicates. The sparks are propably from a light alloy carrier, if it was a APCR/HVAP round.

[@Wayoutthere]

Ah, a Significant Emotional Event'.

[@alexvisser5913]

Kaputt

[@user-ev8fv9lv1v]

Т 54

[@iansmith5174]

The T-55 wasn't the Soviet's top-of-the-line tank at the time. What's the point of the test?

[@festungkurland9804]

lmao

[@utzius8003]

To test the penetration of your tank rounds against the single most abundant tank of the entire cold war.

[@kempodle4665]

Top of the line? No. Most common, especially among Warsaw pact nations? Yes.

[@warlordjohn8927]

it still made up a large chunk of the Soviet tank force, why not test it, and study what you can, rather than letting it rust in some warehouses?

[@12LoLproductions]

Iirc soviet composite armored tanks didn’t get exported till 1991. So this would’ve been useful up until then

[@StevieSantosia]

Today's new 2.5 million Dollar Russian T-90 tanks are being turned into fire tanks with propeller turrets by cheap 500 Dollar Ukrainian drones

[@user-nb5uf3zn1t]

сегодняшние леопарды и прочие жестянки горят точно также ))))))) а абрамс потерял лицо и тихонько плачет )))

[@kulio1214]

Same thing is happening to leopards 2's by cheap Russian drones

[@kaensiba4668]

H o h o l m o m e n t. H o h o l v s t o i l o

[@damsky2]

​@@user-nb5uf3zn1t абрамс на Украине показал себя хуже т64: среднее время жизни в бою 20 минут, отсутствие осколочных боеприпасов, что не дают снести дом с вражеской пехотой. Настолько убогий танк, что бредли на его фоне выглядит более полезным и живучим

[@SpaceCoffee700]

​​@@damsky2same issue with Iraq They are export models Issue is it IS a tin can and still just a measley 60 ton cost effective tank export or not It's not gonna stand up against a LANCET lol Either way a true modern tank isn't a tank anymore it would need to be around 5000 tons therefore becoming a armored mobile platform A bitch like that would need a small nuke or space kinetic penetrators to take it out completely basically Modern ratte but better and can factually go 75mph forward and reverse The only reason the NASA crawler is slow is because it carried giant rockets But slap some real horses onto it and it can easily be as fast if not faster than any MBT shit wish the USA would do it just to do it.

[@luxbeci2]

Tiger destroyed Soviet tank

[@antoniostamndley8272]

Just proves inexpensive contermeasures, have made tanks obsolete, even when a barn is fitted ,

[@DecidedlyNinja]

It's kind of silly to post that on a video about a weapon that could only be wielded by a tank.

[@bensmith7536]

Ukraine.... the more things change, the more they stay the same.

[@OffendingTheOffendable]

What Russia is using in Ukraine right now

[@kulio1214]

Not even remotely true

[@DeltaEchoGolf]

"Officially", they are intended only for fire-support. I think one of the reasons the deal struck with North Korea was done was because they still have a stockpile of T-55 100mm ammunition. T-55 tanks have also been used as remote-controlled bombs targeting Ukrainian trench lines.

[@tackytrooper]

When literally every single tank either side deploys can be nearly instantly dispatched by drones the second it reaches the front, the side with the numerical superiority of tanks has the advantage.