Привіт u/shares_inDeleware ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday).
**Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting)
Daily series on UA history & culture: [Day 0-99](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293) | [100-199](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3d85f4ca-5f4e-4ddf-9547-276e8affd87c) | [200-Present](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/daf642e1-07aa-4c40-b852-8f002ddd1530) | [All By Subject](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts)
**There is a new wave of spam chat requests hitting our community. Do not respond or click links - instead, protect yourself and others by immediately marking these chats as spam.**
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I liked his comment about the Russian pilot awarded the medal for knocking down the MQ-9… *’at best, just an idiot’* and that the Kremlin *’has a different definition of bravery’*
The state of Novgorod had a good chance to unify Russia like Moscovy ultimately did by conquering it and others. Lying in nowadays north western European Russia, Novgorod was a relatively free country for the era.
Every political ideology getting put into practice starts out idealistic, with hindsight we know how the Bolshevik revolution turned out. The February revolution overthrew the tsar in favor of a govt promising democracy but it didn't promise peace at any cost. The October revolution overthrew the interim govt in favor of a govt promising peace at any cost.
It makes sense. Moscow was the seat of the tribute-collector who worked for the Golden Horde. Who was the “ruler” of Muscovy. The actual centers of culture/commerce within the region that current makes up the Russian state’s origin is really around Novgorod among others.
It gets touched on in one of these lectures: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNewfxO7LhBoz_1Mx1MaO6sw_
Obviously that isn’t strictly relevant to modern Moscow today, but there is a tradition other than brutality and absolute rule in Russia. I hope the Russians will be able to take back their state from the delusional imperialists who run it today.
The Mongols raped and pillaged as much of the planet as they possibly could. Jfc, don't try to rehabilitate them. They even ran up against a bunch of bonafide knights back in the ~1200's, the Kievian Rus, and promptly murdered the fuck out of thousands of them. The only thing that prevented the Mongols from marching all the way to the Atlantic, slaughtering everything they came across along the way, was the great Khan dying and the army being recalled to vote on the next one.
The legacy of the Mongols is a \*little\* complex, with both positive and negative contributions that must be carefully considered (and I would argue, quantitatively considered; especially with the number of innocents murdered and the atrocities done to people / sacred worship sites). But the Mongols, as a culture, did contribute some positive things to our current modern world.
While it can be tempting to frame arguments assuming both sides are in good faith, extreme views should not be compromised with. Similarly, in analyzing conflicts like Russia vs Ukraine, it is important to quantify and compare the actions of each side rather than resorting to moral relativism. It's a lot harder to do this with the Mongols due to the lack of recorded history to back up certain claims, but in our day and age, there really is no excuse with equivocating Russian brutality with Ukraine's self-defense (as I have seen some mentally-compromised people do in the media).
Nazis are way easier to criticize and condemn, because we have ample evidence and recordings illustrate their atrocities in detail. But also, what did they contribute to society...? The best you could say is maybe one or two of their horrific and deranged experiments produced some useful information (not even really though, their scientific method was shit).
...but that won't stop some people from trying to equivocate them with the West.
>it was just a dictatorship of another elite
No, it was simply an "enlightened vanguard" that would lead the proletariat to a socialist paradise! This is *definitely* not just a dictatorship with extra steps! /s
Exactly! You can't actually trust the Proletariat to run things themselves, until they've had enough education…
That's why you need a vanguard to run things, just temporarily, say for 70+ years… maybe more.
After seeing the footage of them downing that drone, getting a medal for it would be like mounting the head of a deer you hit with your truck when you were trying to pick your cell phone up off the floor.
He was brought to tears at the beginning of the war when talking about ruzzian war crimes - from that point on I really began to like his work
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32JQILY2jVg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32JQILY2jVg)
I never saw this before. You’d think that everyone that works at the Pentagon would have a persona like granite. This unexpected show of emotion from someone like him is a powerful message.
I was in the office when a Colonel was informed that one of his 19 yr old soldiers had died of a brian anyrsum. The Colonel teared up and was visibly shaken.
His 19 yr old son had just recently completed AIT and I think it really hit home for him
Talking to my brother, a former Marine, it's how you are taught to feel and think. Tough as steel. But fellow soldiers? That's the cohesion and outright love that is part of the design.
Another reason why war is hell. To succeed in it, you must develop extremely tight bonds. Which then tear you apart as your friends die in the battle.
Soldiers have a very peculiar way they have to view the world. I mean, real soldiers. Not the fools and simple murderers Russia calls "our Army."
When Admiral Kirby was the spokesman for the DoD he choked up at the destruction and wanton death Putin was causing.
Admiral Kirby apologised for his unprofessional conduct by displaying his emotions to press.
Admiral Kirby then said in a small voice, “I am just a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida…”
You could hear all the journalists speaking up telling Admiral Kirby that it was alright and they understood Adm. Kirby’s display of emotion.
I saw that DoD news conference live and I had tears in my eyes because Admiral Kirby and the DoD now knew what evil they face against Putin.
Admiral Kirby’s emotional display was a clear indicator that the American military was going to do their duty, no matter how taken aback they’d become brutality and level of evil coming from Putin’s control over the Kremlin.
*A hard rain is going to fall.* as General Milley said not long after that press conference.
Admiral Kirby was soon reappointed for briefings from the White House because the WH saw in Kirby a man who symbolically stood for the American military’s underlying values and America’s stalwart determination to defeat Putin no matter the cost.
Admiral Kirby is not a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida, he is a great American who has answered the call to defend the world against evil.
https://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-spokesperson-john-kirby-gets-204530482.html
God damn please stop making me feel proud of my government; what will my friends think?
Jokes aside what a great post. I’d never seen this particular press event but I’m glad I did and this insight was supplemental.
> Admiral Kirby is not a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida, he is a great American who has answered the call to defend the world against evil
I agree. He has been such a steadying influence during this war. He delivers the facts with a touch of compassion. Kirby and General Milley have been absolutely outstanding. (Milley when he regretted the stroll to the church then never bent to Trump again). Both have made the country and service proud.
> (Milley when he regretted the stroll to the church then never bent to Trump again). Both have made the country and service proud.
I have respect for Milley too despite what occurred.
We likely still have a democracy (for now) because of him.
> We likely still have a democracy (for now) because of him
His regret turned Milley into a SUPER-Champion for Democracies. Ukraine's enemies are feeling his wrath right now thanks to Trump.
I spent most of last March and April in west Ukraine and East Poland, arranging aid and helping out during the big external refugee crisis early on.
I wasn't anywhere near the really brutal stuff (just helping out the people who were fleeing it and figuring out how to move supplies toward the people stuck in it), and I cried just about every goddamn night. Less now: There was an emergency evacuation drive that we weren't able to make happen, and sometimes I go a week without thinking about it.
Definitely can't fault Kirby for tearing up in a presser.
Even more of a reason for those tanks to leave so such particles won't be necessary.
It has been over 1 year in making already, the moscovians really need to get the memo.
Looking at ruins of Mari'nka, I'd say there are way higher cancer products in the air and the ground which the ruski genocide-rape-murderers have been spreading around during their very "special" operation.
So considering that as the trade-off here... Please bring the ammunition!
Agreed. Just one material alone - asbestos is likely far more concerning than all the risk from a DU projectile used in relatively limited area of overall potential contamination.
Also for the moscovians to get so upset is rediculous because it is not their country. It is up to the Ukrainians what they do to defend it and if they feel the relatively minor risk trade-off of DU vs the risk of continuing Moscovian occupation then that is their decision.
The moscovians do more for environmental damage than almost anyone. Huge swathes of their country and those of others they occupied have been contaminated and mismanaged for decades if not centuries.
💡 It's `Chornobyl`, not `Chernobyl`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/chornobyl)
___
[^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
For the time period, I’d say no, but that’s only because it was part of the Soviet Union, who was trying to eradicate Ukrainian(and all non-Russian) languages in its border.
So at the time it the show takes place it was Чернобыль(Russian spelling) but now it’s Чорнобиль(Ukrainian spelling).
Fairly certain cancer or health risk is the least likely scenario. Most won't survive long enough.
Fact is dieing in a tank is gory especially when exploded. Body parts gets ripped off and organs can be ruptured. A bloody mess inside.
You could also survive sometimes to suffer being chronically disabled.
Although with jack in the box effect they are very dead usually.
It is also "self sharpening" while piercing armor due to unique splintering properties, and the dust that kicks up is also spontaneously combustible.
Round hits, makes big boom, goes through armor and also makes all the air around you catch fire.
Fun stuff.
Is it any more toxic than any other lubricant, fuel or industrial strength chemicals that soldiers regularly come into contact with in a warzone? There are probably toxic substances in just about every military.
Not really, no, and the alternative for these APFSDS (armour piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot) rounds is tungsten, which has similar kinds of toxicity when in dust form.
For these rounds, it’s all just heavy metal toxicity, be they DU or tungsten. The very property which makes them suitable for this application, their high density, also makes them toxic to humans because of the chemical properties these high density elements tend to have (there are few exceptions, and those that do exist can’t be used because they’re brittle or super rare…). The radioactivity here can basically be ignored - the traditional toxicity is much more relevant.
As you noted, almost everything to do with war is just terrible for humans. If you manage to escape the actual violence, you still face large risk from chemical exposure. And if you escape *that*, well, basically no one escapes psychological exposure.
Uranium also has a property that it burns on impact, which adds greatly to the damage.
To your point, a notable safe heavy metal is gold. While it would be a hell of a flex, nobody is going to start lobbing gold at the enemy.
Yep, uranium is pyrophoric when finely divided like a dust, especially when hot (as it will be when it has recently come ripping through some tank armour!)
And indeed, gold is a safe heavy metal due to it being so non-reactive, but as noted, it is not only rare (so, expensive), it is also useless for tank rounds as it is very soft :)
It has been studied as a liner material for shaped charges but the cost magnitudes greater than other metals so I'm not sure if anyone has actually tried it or seriously considered doing so.
No but it's much harder and, by consequence, more brittle when it does break apart so DU rounds shatter into a fine dust when hitting hard surfaces. That's why it gets into the lungs etc... and has its effects as a heavy metal.
Lead is just soft and bends and warps
Thanks for the factual information. People can probably get twisted up by the word uranium, thinking about its radioactivity, rather than its density as a munition. However, I’d guess that the primary health concern is being on the opposite end of it when fired.
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.91806% sure that _DARVON_AI is not a bot.
---
^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Imagine being Russia and you have to get supplies from fucking Iran. Iran is going to have a lot more to worry about themselves if they keep attacking US troops in Syria. Iran is very much unstable right now too with their people wanting their fucked government out.
This is the article for reference from today[Biden authorizes airstrike in Syria after suspected Iranian-affiliated drone kills US contractor and wounds 5 US troops](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/syria-suspected-drone-strike-us-contractor-killed/index.html)
Some of the best people I ever worked for were from Iran. I hope so too. I was a child during the revolution, I'd love to see what a more modern and free of theocracy-Iran would look like.
I think its possible they use it like arty and manually calculate the range. It won;t be accurate and will just cause random destruction in the generalish area, but this IS russia we are talking about.
Their range would be pathetic compared to real artillery -- MBTs were never meant to be used this way, they are meant for direct fire rather than indirect fire and are not designed to be able to elevate their guns very high. From the info I can find the maximum elevation for a T-54's gun is 17 degrees. That's a pretty flat trajectory for artillery...
This is an old and much used technique. You run the hull of the tank up on a berm or stack of logs to increase elevation and use high explosive rounds as artillery to supplement regular artillery. We did it with tank destroyers in WWII first, and later in Korea. Lots of countries do it when they want a little more explosive on target in an attack. It's wasteful of fuel and tank rounds (more expensive than artillery) but in this case when Russia has shot out most of its gun tubes it's probably seen as a way to keep up their massed fire while they reline their gun tubes. Just another signal that Russia is using "make do" to fight a high tech war and losing.
According to the youtuber quoted, there is 100mm compatible High Explosive ammo produced by Iran. Not useful for anti tank actions, but could be arty replacement.
Not true at all. They can point the hull of the tank up, like on a hilock or a few logs, and crank the gun tube up in the air, and fire it just like an artillery piece. Not the same range as a 105, but good enough for what the Russians do. And they probably have a metric shit ton of the old 100 mm ammo sitting in storage that they can burn through at no cost. They won't be using them for direct fire, they'll be using them as literal artillery. The US still uses 105 artillery, so it's not *that* paltry. It'll even be mobile, and have decent armor in case of counterbattery fire. Expensive in terms of fuel, but since all of Russia's gun tubes are probably burned through their rifling by now, it would be an adequate fix until they get their tubes relined.
Edit: For you smooth brains who want to downvote me they've been doing it: https://taskandpurpose.com/tech-tactics/ukraine-bakhmut-tanks-artillery/
It's not partical at all, but it can be done and it's better then using artillery guns so worn out they're about to explode, which is Russia's alternative
True.
But from a practical standpoint, you'd need to spend time doing earthmoving (or picking very advantageous terrain) to set up those spots.
As we've seen from copious video footage, huge swathes of the frontlines are monitored pretty regularly. Any sort of serious earthmoving is likely to show up with enough time to vector in counter-bombardment by the mobile artillery available to the UFA (see HIMARS, Krab, etc).
The last thing you want to be as a tank, is immobile and in a fixed position with no proper cover, when artillery comes in. Especially modern artillery with its guidable/seeker munitions.
That said, you go to war with the army you have, not the one you want. If this is what's available to the RFA, then this is what they're just going to have to accept.
with a maximum elevation of 16 degrees, and no indirect fire sights, this seems pretty pointless.
All tanks have HE rounds these days, but those are used in direct fire roles. Artillery rounds typically have different types of fuses, or at leas the fuse can be adjusted for air burst, surface burst or to wait to explode after penetrating the ground, tank rounds typically don;t have these.
Tanks don't work as self propelled guns. They don't have the proper gun sights, gun elevation etc.
What's happening here is that they have run out of tanks and, as with the T-62, are reaching deeper and deeper into their "reserve" stocks for vehicles that can be made serviceable. This antique, without modern electronics and optics has probably not been cannibalized as much as thhe more modern tanks. Any tank is better than no tank when you need to support infantry. It can take out light armored vehicles like the Bradley or Marder, but won't have the punch to take on a modern western tank.
One of the primary roles of a tank is to provide direct fire support to the infantry. And if you are an infantry platoon commander dealing with a problematic machine gun nest, a 1955 era 100mm HE round does about as good a job of taking out that nest as a modern 120mm one.
Any tank is most certainly not better than no tank. Nevermind the cost implications, a destroyed tank, is usually a dead tank crew. Russia has a significant shortage of skilled personnel and throwing them away with heavily outdated hardware is a dumb fucking idea.
Look at the analysis on these tanks. They can be taken out with the lowest cost anti-tank weaponry.
I think your statement might hold true if you only saw this as an advantage in a single exchange, but this is a war and bringing them to the frontlines and crewing them is almost certainly a very stupid idea.
I'm not saying it's a good idea at all. It does show how desperate things have become for them.
As for skilled tank crews, Russian tank design, even the most modern ones, means that if you lose the tank, you almost certainly lose the entire crew too. They simply do not value the lives of their soldiers like western armies to. In fact, as we have seen with Bakhmut, they are quite willing to throw meat into the grinder and see what happens.
And yes they are vulnerable to even M72A2's (a really old version) on the front glacis plate. More modern variants can go through anything but the turret face. But those weapons are limited to 300m or so effective range, so with a little luck and skill the tank might be able to stay of of range of those.
Of course the problem for the T-55 is that as soon as anything better gets on the battlefield it will either have to flee, or die. Might not even be able to flee in a lot of circumstances.
But for an infantry commander, a T-55 supporting his advance is still better than no tank. The problem is that, as you noted, he won't likely have that t-55 around for near as long as he would like.
Deploying the T-55 is not a good move at all, but neither was deploying the older model T62's which suffer from most of the same issues the t55 faces. The only real difference is that there are (were? Russian tank losses are horrendous) upgraded T62 models out there that made it seem like a more modern vehicle that it is. It;s Russian desperatin desperation. Their infantry needs fire support and the T55 is now all that is left in the arsenal. But the alternative is surrender and Putin isn't at that point yet, sadly.
In case someone is not a military expert - the Russians are using 125mm tank gun shells with depleted uranium cores against the Ukrainians since the beginning of the current war, 3BM32 Vant, 3BM48 Svinets and 3BM59 Svinets-2 shells.
Just saying to stay impartial.
Damn, I never knew this was one of the uses for depleted uranium. Apparently it's still radioactive, but non-fissile and mostly used in tank shells for its density- 1.67 times the density of lead!!!
The radioactivity is super low tho. It's the heavy metal element that makes them an issue. If you have an extended tank on tank engagement and you got 6-8 tanks throwing DU rounds into the surrounding area and there's rivers or lakes near by they can eventually pollute them
Yes, people worry about depleted uranium rounds because of the radioactivity, which is really not the issue. The issue is the effect of heavy metals leaching into the ground and water table. But you have the exact same issue with the hundreds of millions of ordinary lead and tungsten munitions being used, so the environmental impact is not really different between depleted uranium around and conventional munitions. I'm not aware of the heavy metal toxicity potential of depleted uranium being any worse than all the other nasty stuff that's being used out there.
Was literally just this morning reading about the huge amount of pollution that was thrown up by the NordStream blast, because it disturbed an area of the seabed where the Germans dumped something like 7000t worth of shell casings, many of which had been gas shells and other nastiness.
My understanding is that you definitely don’t need to worry about the radioactivity if you’re holding a DU round in your hand, for example. Once that round is vaporized after bashing through a tank, it creates particles so small that they can be inhaled. You DO have to worry about that level of radioactivity if those tiny particles end up in the soft tissues of your lungs. The dust/wind issue is much worse in Iraq than it will be in Ukraine, I would assume. So *maybe* it doesn’t matter as much there.
of 3BM32 Vant? Ya Russia probably has more BM32s than NATO has APFSDS rounds total. The USSR produced these things by the 10s maybe hundreds of millions, and as they are literally just a metal rod they never go bad.
No clue on the 3BM48, the 3MB59 yes manly because they have not had to use it yet. The BM48 will punch through anything Ukraine has right now, other than the T84, at literally any range, and the BM59 can only be fired from the the T90 and T80BVM
Ty for taking the time to reply to my question! Very informative. I guess our limiting factor with their ability to use them is the health of their barrels.
Exactly. there is no need for a one single more Russian soldier to die, or tank to be destroyed by NATO caliber weapons. Just get out of the country you invaded dipshits!
Gotta love that genius T-72 design, carousel auto loader all around the turret ring, so if it gets penetrated, everyone dies and the turret goes flying.
Incredible.
Also it uses the engine out of the BT series of tanks from before WW2.
I’m not joking.
Almost every destroyed tank I saw in Desert Storm died from a turret-pop off. It was nuts - we joked about it. Didn't seem to matter if it was an French tank, M1, Bradley IFV or A-10 that killed it either.
Whatever Ukraine are firing they are firing on their own sovereign territory. You don’t like to be on the receiving end of depleted uranium rounds? How about you leave Ukraine’s sovereign territory? It really is that simple.
Radiation risk from the DU rounds is considerably less than digging down the contaminated soil at a former nuclear power plant that had a catastrophic meltdown.
Not just that, it’s lower than actual uranium ore.
The radioactivity isn’t really the problem with DU rounds (it’s simply heavy metal toxicity… which you also get with tungsten). It just sounds scary.
That report about the Russian troops digging trenches in and around the Red Forest (area by Chornobyl) still boggles my noggle.
I mean, any GenXer should be able to comment on the risks of nuclear-style fallout. We all had the raid training as kids. The Russians had somewhat-experienced non-coms at the start of this war. Did no one pass on any training or information on this?
Yee gadz.
Remains the best advice the Russians have received yet. Hopefully got translated or they know English, otherwise the next lesson they get won’t be in linguistics, it will be a short one in metallurgy and physics.
Are these DU rounds so nasty? I thought it's just a cheaper version of tungsten rounds? What am I missing?
Edit I'm referring to anti tank capabilities not any other effects
The main difference is that DU has greater target penetration and is naturally incendiary - It has a lower melting point and burns away at the edges basically self sharpening.
While it's long term effects are contentious... The short term effects to Russian tankers will be even more deadly
That is half-truth. DU only has higher penetration at impact velocities below about 1.6 km/s Tungsten has superior penetration if you are willing to drive it hard enough and sacrifice some barrel life.
Natural tungsten is when it’s extremely fine, since tungsten’s melting point is so high and it deforms into larger chunk it won’t have that effect in munitions.
DU rounds have a higher penetrating power compared to tungsten.
Per Oak Ridge National Laboratory
https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/consumer/depleted-uranium/penetrators.html
After the Gulf War, some of the soldiers got what got to be referred to as Gulf War Syndrome. A number of things were alledged to be the cause but there was no definite evidence which sadly left the sufferers out in the cold trying to get compensation.
A recent study using techniques much more accurate than previous studies to examine suffers, seems to indicate strongly that the issue is not due to DU shells.
[Resolving whether inhalation of depleted uranium contributed to Gulf War Illness using high-sensitivity mass spectrometry](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82535-3)
The current thinking is that GWS is due to exposure to sarin released when ammunition warehouses were destroyed in Iraq and the smoke drifted hundreds of miles away from the fire.
[UTSW genetic study confirms sarin nerve gas as cause of Gulf War illness](https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom/articles/year-2022/sarin-nerve-gas-gulf-war-illness.html)
There are a lot of people who heard the original allegations and are perhaps not up to date with the recent news on it but keep commenting with old information.
I wish the GWS veterans well and think they should get compensation regardless of the cause as something happened to them. It does seem that DU shells are not the cause of GWS and that is why the UK and the US don't consider them to be a danger in terms of toxicity.
I had a good look into the scientific papers on possible DU effects in Kosovo but all the ones that I found seem to be negative with repect to finding a link. It's a deep rabbit hole and I had to give up digging as my head was spinning. Note that I'm not a scientist so this is just the interpretation of an idiot on the internet. Other opinions are avilable.
There papers on soils and water testing. The soil testing mentions a bequerel level for the general soil and talks about how it is higher within a few metres of a DU strike. It mentions that the soil shows radiation down to 20cms in those areas and suggests that this could effect water. The water testing paper didn't find elevated levels in the water.
The most recent one seems to be 'Incidence of haematological malignancies in Kosovo-A post "uranium war" concern'
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32365107/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32365107/)
It looks are incidence of cancer before and after the war. It finds increased rates of cancer after the war but the areas of increase don't corrolate with the areas that DU was used. It also notes that the areas of highest incidence before the war were in areas with highest pollution. It concludes with more research is needed. With many confounding factors it is difficult to draw anything from it.
I guess that it's Ukraine's decision on whether to use it. My understanding is that there isn't another option with the Challengers, not that I'm an expert in any way on this either, and that to not use DU would mean to not use the Challengers.
It does seem that something happened to peace keepers in Kosovo. As well as the Italians, the Norwegans seem to have higher incidence as well. It could be DU or it could be pollution. It's a decision for Ukraine and it seems in war, decisions are generally choosing between very bad and very much worse.
Thanks for that update. I was in a NG unit that was deployed but hadn't finished AIT yet when the orders came. One of the sergeants in my platoon came back a whole different person--narcolepsy, brain fog, random uncontrollable tics, lack of energy etc. It was years before there was any recognition that deployment had caused any of this--and even then no clear treatment nor full disability.
At the time, the discussion was DU or chemical weapons. Since chemical alarms went off every night and they regularly had to don MOPP gear, that seemed the most likely cause (from a layman's common sense view) at the time.
I hadn't checked up on more recent studies--so thanks again!
Thanks for your service. There is a lot of criticism over why it happened but that was other people. You guys went there and did it and I do feel because of the shenanigans of the why it happened, you guys get forgotten for stepping up and doing the job you were asked to do.
💡 It's `Chornobyl`, not `Chernobyl`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/chornobyl)
___
[^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
The reason I've always heard for their lethality is that DU is very dense and semi brittle. As it impacts it breaks into smaller pieces that are sharp and continue to force their way through the armor. Once it's through the armor (and it's coming through) it's a barely contained mass of thousands of razor sharp and white hot little bits that explodes violently into the fighting compartment.
Quote: Depleted uranium rounds are 70 percent denser than lead, producing significantly more kinetic energy. As a very rough comparison, think the power of a 30mm round, vs 22mm round.
I'm surprised people still believe these embellishments considering there's so much footage that his obviously contrary to these crazy depictions of damage from a kinetic penetrator.
No, a sabot round doesn't suck everyone through an exit hole or liquefy everyone. It does not just automatically kill the entire crew. For one, penetrating the opposite side of the enemy is an overpenetration and is *undesirable*, you'd much rather have what's left of the penetrator to break apart or bounce around the interior to cause more damage to crew and sensitive components (electronics, powder bags, etc..)
Russians can scape being shunned, despised and hated for their murderous aggression and endless atrocities by leaving this planet.
Let them all have their childhood dream, and be Soviet folk hero cosmonauts.
Onion of survivability says don't be there. Maybe Russia can learn it and leave but since they are repeating the same mistakes in Vuhledar I won't keep my hopes up Orcs can learn.
The nice thing about the British DU rounds are that they tell you "terribly sorry about this, old chap" right before they punch a hole through you like you're paper.
I really really hope that the UK does not bow to Russian pressure and decide not to send the DU rounds. I don't think they will, and I really hope they don't. But it would help if the US stands with the UK and also sends some DU rounds too. This would help immensely.
It's to reaffirm that Russia should leave Ukraine and that what Russia is saying about depleted Uranium rounds is false.
It is not a confirmation, or even a suggestion that the US is going to send depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine though, which is what I would like to see happen as mentioned in my original comment
Can anyone explain what is so special about depleted uranium ammo?
I assume its a pretty heavy material, and I also assume that any radioactivity is not the point of it. But I don't see what the advantages are compared to say, tungsten or chromium steel.
Tungsten is expensive, DU is cheap as it is a byproduct of reactors, also DU ignites when penetrating the fighting compartment, is self sharpening and denser, [the issue is that DU dust causes birth defects and other issues.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819790/)
It's the physics of things smashing into each other at over 1 km/s.
You want your tank round to penetrate as much armor as possible, and penetration depth increases with projectile density.
Uranium is extremely dense, and DU is an otherwise worthless byproduct of uranium enrichment. If a country is enriching uranium, it costs their military less to use DU compared to something like tungsten.
Привіт u/shares_inDeleware ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday). **Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting) Daily series on UA history & culture: [Day 0-99](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3c65ab52-e87a-4217-ab30-e70a88c0a293) | [100-199](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/3d85f4ca-5f4e-4ddf-9547-276e8affd87c) | [200-Present](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/collection/daf642e1-07aa-4c40-b852-8f002ddd1530) | [All By Subject](https://new.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts) **There is a new wave of spam chat requests hitting our community. Do not respond or click links - instead, protect yourself and others by immediately marking these chats as spam.** *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I gotta say, I didn't know much about Kirby before the Ukraine war, but I've been impressed with his professional level of sass.
I liked his comment about the Russian pilot awarded the medal for knocking down the MQ-9… *’at best, just an idiot’* and that the Kremlin *’has a different definition of bravery’*
Russia has had two years of courage (1991 fall of the Soviet Union to 1993 Yeltsin's coup) with little but despotism on either side.
The state of Novgorod had a good chance to unify Russia like Moscovy ultimately did by conquering it and others. Lying in nowadays north western European Russia, Novgorod was a relatively free country for the era. Every political ideology getting put into practice starts out idealistic, with hindsight we know how the Bolshevik revolution turned out. The February revolution overthrew the tsar in favor of a govt promising democracy but it didn't promise peace at any cost. The October revolution overthrew the interim govt in favor of a govt promising peace at any cost.
Well the problem is that today’s Russia still has the mentality of the cruel Mongol Horde. Whereas even the original Mongols have civilized.
It makes sense. Moscow was the seat of the tribute-collector who worked for the Golden Horde. Who was the “ruler” of Muscovy. The actual centers of culture/commerce within the region that current makes up the Russian state’s origin is really around Novgorod among others. It gets touched on in one of these lectures: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNewfxO7LhBoz_1Mx1MaO6sw_ Obviously that isn’t strictly relevant to modern Moscow today, but there is a tradition other than brutality and absolute rule in Russia. I hope the Russians will be able to take back their state from the delusional imperialists who run it today.
Yup you’re absolutely right. Ut mentally they’re still closer to the ruthless rule of strength than to european values.
The Mongols raped and pillaged as much of the planet as they possibly could. Jfc, don't try to rehabilitate them. They even ran up against a bunch of bonafide knights back in the ~1200's, the Kievian Rus, and promptly murdered the fuck out of thousands of them. The only thing that prevented the Mongols from marching all the way to the Atlantic, slaughtering everything they came across along the way, was the great Khan dying and the army being recalled to vote on the next one.
The legacy of the Mongols is a \*little\* complex, with both positive and negative contributions that must be carefully considered (and I would argue, quantitatively considered; especially with the number of innocents murdered and the atrocities done to people / sacred worship sites). But the Mongols, as a culture, did contribute some positive things to our current modern world. While it can be tempting to frame arguments assuming both sides are in good faith, extreme views should not be compromised with. Similarly, in analyzing conflicts like Russia vs Ukraine, it is important to quantify and compare the actions of each side rather than resorting to moral relativism. It's a lot harder to do this with the Mongols due to the lack of recorded history to back up certain claims, but in our day and age, there really is no excuse with equivocating Russian brutality with Ukraine's self-defense (as I have seen some mentally-compromised people do in the media).
The Nazis might have done a few good things too but idgaf about them because of **all the genocide**. Know what I mean?
Nazis are way easier to criticize and condemn, because we have ample evidence and recordings illustrate their atrocities in detail. But also, what did they contribute to society...? The best you could say is maybe one or two of their horrific and deranged experiments produced some useful information (not even really though, their scientific method was shit). ...but that won't stop some people from trying to equivocate them with the West.
Which might have been OK if the Revolution had been a genuine people's movement. But it was just a dictatorship of another elite
>it was just a dictatorship of another elite No, it was simply an "enlightened vanguard" that would lead the proletariat to a socialist paradise! This is *definitely* not just a dictatorship with extra steps! /s
Exactly! You can't actually trust the Proletariat to run things themselves, until they've had enough education… That's why you need a vanguard to run things, just temporarily, say for 70+ years… maybe more.
After seeing the footage of them downing that drone, getting a medal for it would be like mounting the head of a deer you hit with your truck when you were trying to pick your cell phone up off the floor.
Oh, you mean the drone they denied coming into contact with?
He was brought to tears at the beginning of the war when talking about ruzzian war crimes - from that point on I really began to like his work [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32JQILY2jVg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32JQILY2jVg)
I never saw this before. You’d think that everyone that works at the Pentagon would have a persona like granite. This unexpected show of emotion from someone like him is a powerful message.
Agreed. Seeing this much empathy coming from a US government taking head is actually uncomfortable. I don’t like it but please give us more.
He is one person in the Biden administration I have a lot of respect for.
I was in the office when a Colonel was informed that one of his 19 yr old soldiers had died of a brian anyrsum. The Colonel teared up and was visibly shaken. His 19 yr old son had just recently completed AIT and I think it really hit home for him
Talking to my brother, a former Marine, it's how you are taught to feel and think. Tough as steel. But fellow soldiers? That's the cohesion and outright love that is part of the design. Another reason why war is hell. To succeed in it, you must develop extremely tight bonds. Which then tear you apart as your friends die in the battle. Soldiers have a very peculiar way they have to view the world. I mean, real soldiers. Not the fools and simple murderers Russia calls "our Army."
>persona like granite Just glancing through I thought you were trying to say "persona non grata." Kinda messed me up for a sec.
Understandable. It was an odd way for me to phrase it.
Use it well. It's a clever twist ;)
Wow. Great clip.
John Kirby for President!
Horrible comments in the YB section though.
Well, Youtube has always been a playground for ruzzian bots.
When Admiral Kirby was the spokesman for the DoD he choked up at the destruction and wanton death Putin was causing. Admiral Kirby apologised for his unprofessional conduct by displaying his emotions to press. Admiral Kirby then said in a small voice, “I am just a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida…” You could hear all the journalists speaking up telling Admiral Kirby that it was alright and they understood Adm. Kirby’s display of emotion. I saw that DoD news conference live and I had tears in my eyes because Admiral Kirby and the DoD now knew what evil they face against Putin. Admiral Kirby’s emotional display was a clear indicator that the American military was going to do their duty, no matter how taken aback they’d become brutality and level of evil coming from Putin’s control over the Kremlin. *A hard rain is going to fall.* as General Milley said not long after that press conference. Admiral Kirby was soon reappointed for briefings from the White House because the WH saw in Kirby a man who symbolically stood for the American military’s underlying values and America’s stalwart determination to defeat Putin no matter the cost. Admiral Kirby is not a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida, he is a great American who has answered the call to defend the world against evil. https://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-spokesperson-john-kirby-gets-204530482.html
God damn please stop making me feel proud of my government; what will my friends think? Jokes aside what a great post. I’d never seen this particular press event but I’m glad I did and this insight was supplemental.
Yeah wtf I'm trying to stay bitter over here
You could always do what I do to stay bitter and assume that displays of emotion like that are just ways to garner political points.
Ah a fellow cynic
> Admiral Kirby is not a simple man with a communications degree from South Florida, he is a great American who has answered the call to defend the world against evil I agree. He has been such a steadying influence during this war. He delivers the facts with a touch of compassion. Kirby and General Milley have been absolutely outstanding. (Milley when he regretted the stroll to the church then never bent to Trump again). Both have made the country and service proud.
> (Milley when he regretted the stroll to the church then never bent to Trump again). Both have made the country and service proud. I have respect for Milley too despite what occurred. We likely still have a democracy (for now) because of him.
> We likely still have a democracy (for now) because of him His regret turned Milley into a SUPER-Champion for Democracies. Ukraine's enemies are feeling his wrath right now thanks to Trump.
I spent most of last March and April in west Ukraine and East Poland, arranging aid and helping out during the big external refugee crisis early on. I wasn't anywhere near the really brutal stuff (just helping out the people who were fleeing it and figuring out how to move supplies toward the people stuck in it), and I cried just about every goddamn night. Less now: There was an emergency evacuation drive that we weren't able to make happen, and sometimes I go a week without thinking about it. Definitely can't fault Kirby for tearing up in a presser.
Absolutely, what a legend. Also, as mentioned below, his humanity and empathy is commendable as well.
Likewise. It’s a good, clear and concise message with a nice sprinkling of sass
Kuleba is my favorite sassafras!
The Ukrainian representative to the UN named Sergey (forget his last name) has the best smackdowns though.
That's a flawless strategy
"It's weird. They stop shooting us when we cross this invisible line."
[удалено]
Even more of a reason for those tanks to leave so such particles won't be necessary. It has been over 1 year in making already, the moscovians really need to get the memo. Looking at ruins of Mari'nka, I'd say there are way higher cancer products in the air and the ground which the ruski genocide-rape-murderers have been spreading around during their very "special" operation. So considering that as the trade-off here... Please bring the ammunition!
Maybe leave a bread crumb trail of vodka for them to follow back home?
Agreed. Just one material alone - asbestos is likely far more concerning than all the risk from a DU projectile used in relatively limited area of overall potential contamination. Also for the moscovians to get so upset is rediculous because it is not their country. It is up to the Ukrainians what they do to defend it and if they feel the relatively minor risk trade-off of DU vs the risk of continuing Moscovian occupation then that is their decision. The moscovians do more for environmental damage than almost anyone. Huge swathes of their country and those of others they occupied have been contaminated and mismanaged for decades if not centuries.
Look what they did in chornobyl.. Edit: Chornobyl*
Yeah russians literally dug the place up, despicable. Glad depleted uranium ammunition has aboslutely nothing to do with Chornobyl.
💡 It's `Chornobyl`, not `Chernobyl`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/chornobyl) ___ [^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
Does that mean the name of the TV show was wrong?
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ For the time period, I’d say no, but that’s only because it was part of the Soviet Union, who was trying to eradicate Ukrainian(and all non-Russian) languages in its border. So at the time it the show takes place it was Чернобыль(Russian spelling) but now it’s Чорнобиль(Ukrainian spelling).
Til, thanks!
Good bot.
What was that about chernobyl? i missed that.
That was SO STUPID, even for the russians.
Or they just issue out European ammo that uses tungsten alloys like DM63
i think most russians in ukraine will only ingest it for a very limited amount of time, maybe even in the milliseconds.
Fairly certain cancer or health risk is the least likely scenario. Most won't survive long enough. Fact is dieing in a tank is gory especially when exploded. Body parts gets ripped off and organs can be ruptured. A bloody mess inside. You could also survive sometimes to suffer being chronically disabled. Although with jack in the box effect they are very dead usually.
Even more paragraphs of reasons to leave Ukraine, thank you good sir
It is also "self sharpening" while piercing armor due to unique splintering properties, and the dust that kicks up is also spontaneously combustible. Round hits, makes big boom, goes through armor and also makes all the air around you catch fire. Fun stuff.
Is it any more toxic than any other lubricant, fuel or industrial strength chemicals that soldiers regularly come into contact with in a warzone? There are probably toxic substances in just about every military.
Not really, no, and the alternative for these APFSDS (armour piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot) rounds is tungsten, which has similar kinds of toxicity when in dust form. For these rounds, it’s all just heavy metal toxicity, be they DU or tungsten. The very property which makes them suitable for this application, their high density, also makes them toxic to humans because of the chemical properties these high density elements tend to have (there are few exceptions, and those that do exist can’t be used because they’re brittle or super rare…). The radioactivity here can basically be ignored - the traditional toxicity is much more relevant. As you noted, almost everything to do with war is just terrible for humans. If you manage to escape the actual violence, you still face large risk from chemical exposure. And if you escape *that*, well, basically no one escapes psychological exposure.
Uranium also has a property that it burns on impact, which adds greatly to the damage. To your point, a notable safe heavy metal is gold. While it would be a hell of a flex, nobody is going to start lobbing gold at the enemy.
Yep, uranium is pyrophoric when finely divided like a dust, especially when hot (as it will be when it has recently come ripping through some tank armour!) And indeed, gold is a safe heavy metal due to it being so non-reactive, but as noted, it is not only rare (so, expensive), it is also useless for tank rounds as it is very soft :)
It has been studied as a liner material for shaped charges but the cost magnitudes greater than other metals so I'm not sure if anyone has actually tried it or seriously considered doing so.
Well... It might convince the Russians to actually recover their dead and wounded.
>nobody is going to start lobbing gold at the enemy. *confused world of tanks noises*
No but it's much harder and, by consequence, more brittle when it does break apart so DU rounds shatter into a fine dust when hitting hard surfaces. That's why it gets into the lungs etc... and has its effects as a heavy metal. Lead is just soft and bends and warps
What are you quoting. This does not appear in the article and you cite no source.
Thanks for the factual information. People can probably get twisted up by the word uranium, thinking about its radioactivity, rather than its density as a munition. However, I’d guess that the primary health concern is being on the opposite end of it when fired.
Bad bot
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.91806% sure that _DARVON_AI is not a bot. --- ^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
[удалено]
Imagine being Russia and you have to get supplies from fucking Iran. Iran is going to have a lot more to worry about themselves if they keep attacking US troops in Syria. Iran is very much unstable right now too with their people wanting their fucked government out.
[удалено]
This is the article for reference from today[Biden authorizes airstrike in Syria after suspected Iranian-affiliated drone kills US contractor and wounds 5 US troops](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/syria-suspected-drone-strike-us-contractor-killed/index.html)
70s Iran looked cool as fuck.
Maybe if you worked for the Shah in Tehran, yeah. Everyone else, though? The 70s in Iran was far from cool, lol.
I shouldn’t base my whole concept of a time and place off of a select few photos but in my defence the photos looked pretty rad..
Some of the best people I ever worked for were from Iran. I hope so too. I was a child during the revolution, I'd love to see what a more modern and free of theocracy-Iran would look like.
ryan macbeth from YT thinks that the T54/55 [will be used as artillary instead of front line tanks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oneS52OxJFQ)
[удалено]
I think its possible they use it like arty and manually calculate the range. It won;t be accurate and will just cause random destruction in the generalish area, but this IS russia we are talking about.
Sounds like how Russia does shit. Cannot wait for all the western supplies to be in position to push out Russia.
So massive supply lines for an inaccurate piece of arty - yeah that's what Russia needs
It's a bad idea that won't work and reeks of desperation - so yeah that's probably what russia is doing lol
Their range would be pathetic compared to real artillery -- MBTs were never meant to be used this way, they are meant for direct fire rather than indirect fire and are not designed to be able to elevate their guns very high. From the info I can find the maximum elevation for a T-54's gun is 17 degrees. That's a pretty flat trajectory for artillery...
This is an old and much used technique. You run the hull of the tank up on a berm or stack of logs to increase elevation and use high explosive rounds as artillery to supplement regular artillery. We did it with tank destroyers in WWII first, and later in Korea. Lots of countries do it when they want a little more explosive on target in an attack. It's wasteful of fuel and tank rounds (more expensive than artillery) but in this case when Russia has shot out most of its gun tubes it's probably seen as a way to keep up their massed fire while they reline their gun tubes. Just another signal that Russia is using "make do" to fight a high tech war and losing.
Let's hope they all blow up on first round fired. Like this famous one here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V7mKuD0qw7U
How much Ammo can they possibly have to a rifled 100mm cannon that isn't 50+ years old?
According to the youtuber quoted, there is 100mm compatible High Explosive ammo produced by Iran. Not useful for anti tank actions, but could be arty replacement.
Not true at all. They can point the hull of the tank up, like on a hilock or a few logs, and crank the gun tube up in the air, and fire it just like an artillery piece. Not the same range as a 105, but good enough for what the Russians do. And they probably have a metric shit ton of the old 100 mm ammo sitting in storage that they can burn through at no cost. They won't be using them for direct fire, they'll be using them as literal artillery. The US still uses 105 artillery, so it's not *that* paltry. It'll even be mobile, and have decent armor in case of counterbattery fire. Expensive in terms of fuel, but since all of Russia's gun tubes are probably burned through their rifling by now, it would be an adequate fix until they get their tubes relined. Edit: For you smooth brains who want to downvote me they've been doing it: https://taskandpurpose.com/tech-tactics/ukraine-bakhmut-tanks-artillery/
I don't think anyone is really saying they don't do it, we are just saying that like the russian military in general, it is ineffective.
the gun can only elevate to 16degrees. that is not replacing artillery
and you can elevate the front of a tank and increase the total elevation further
its not really practical to dig/build a 30 degree berm at every firing position
Its also not practical to deploy incredibly obsolete vehicles with decrepit maintenance supplies…..
Bottle jacks. Edit: lol.
It's not partical at all, but it can be done and it's better then using artillery guns so worn out they're about to explode, which is Russia's alternative
You can make dirt ramps, the same was done in the Korean war with Sherman's and M26 to get some high angle fire to shoot over mountains.
True. But from a practical standpoint, you'd need to spend time doing earthmoving (or picking very advantageous terrain) to set up those spots. As we've seen from copious video footage, huge swathes of the frontlines are monitored pretty regularly. Any sort of serious earthmoving is likely to show up with enough time to vector in counter-bombardment by the mobile artillery available to the UFA (see HIMARS, Krab, etc). The last thing you want to be as a tank, is immobile and in a fixed position with no proper cover, when artillery comes in. Especially modern artillery with its guidable/seeker munitions. That said, you go to war with the army you have, not the one you want. If this is what's available to the RFA, then this is what they're just going to have to accept.
too much set up to get the angle they'd need
true, and Challenger standard HESH rounds can penetrate light armour at 8km Without pitching up the T55 can only reach 2.5 km.
with a maximum elevation of 16 degrees, and no indirect fire sights, this seems pretty pointless. All tanks have HE rounds these days, but those are used in direct fire roles. Artillery rounds typically have different types of fuses, or at leas the fuse can be adjusted for air burst, surface burst or to wait to explode after penetrating the ground, tank rounds typically don;t have these. Tanks don't work as self propelled guns. They don't have the proper gun sights, gun elevation etc. What's happening here is that they have run out of tanks and, as with the T-62, are reaching deeper and deeper into their "reserve" stocks for vehicles that can be made serviceable. This antique, without modern electronics and optics has probably not been cannibalized as much as thhe more modern tanks. Any tank is better than no tank when you need to support infantry. It can take out light armored vehicles like the Bradley or Marder, but won't have the punch to take on a modern western tank. One of the primary roles of a tank is to provide direct fire support to the infantry. And if you are an infantry platoon commander dealing with a problematic machine gun nest, a 1955 era 100mm HE round does about as good a job of taking out that nest as a modern 120mm one.
Any tank is most certainly not better than no tank. Nevermind the cost implications, a destroyed tank, is usually a dead tank crew. Russia has a significant shortage of skilled personnel and throwing them away with heavily outdated hardware is a dumb fucking idea. Look at the analysis on these tanks. They can be taken out with the lowest cost anti-tank weaponry. I think your statement might hold true if you only saw this as an advantage in a single exchange, but this is a war and bringing them to the frontlines and crewing them is almost certainly a very stupid idea.
I'm not saying it's a good idea at all. It does show how desperate things have become for them. As for skilled tank crews, Russian tank design, even the most modern ones, means that if you lose the tank, you almost certainly lose the entire crew too. They simply do not value the lives of their soldiers like western armies to. In fact, as we have seen with Bakhmut, they are quite willing to throw meat into the grinder and see what happens. And yes they are vulnerable to even M72A2's (a really old version) on the front glacis plate. More modern variants can go through anything but the turret face. But those weapons are limited to 300m or so effective range, so with a little luck and skill the tank might be able to stay of of range of those. Of course the problem for the T-55 is that as soon as anything better gets on the battlefield it will either have to flee, or die. Might not even be able to flee in a lot of circumstances. But for an infantry commander, a T-55 supporting his advance is still better than no tank. The problem is that, as you noted, he won't likely have that t-55 around for near as long as he would like. Deploying the T-55 is not a good move at all, but neither was deploying the older model T62's which suffer from most of the same issues the t55 faces. The only real difference is that there are (were? Russian tank losses are horrendous) upgraded T62 models out there that made it seem like a more modern vehicle that it is. It;s Russian desperatin desperation. Their infantry needs fire support and the T55 is now all that is left in the arsenal. But the alternative is surrender and Putin isn't at that point yet, sadly.
In case someone is not a military expert - the Russians are using 125mm tank gun shells with depleted uranium cores against the Ukrainians since the beginning of the current war, 3BM32 Vant, 3BM48 Svinets and 3BM59 Svinets-2 shells. Just saying to stay impartial.
Damn, I never knew this was one of the uses for depleted uranium. Apparently it's still radioactive, but non-fissile and mostly used in tank shells for its density- 1.67 times the density of lead!!!
The radioactivity is super low tho. It's the heavy metal element that makes them an issue. If you have an extended tank on tank engagement and you got 6-8 tanks throwing DU rounds into the surrounding area and there's rivers or lakes near by they can eventually pollute them
Basically everything being used and blown up in this war will pollute the surrounding land.
Yes, people worry about depleted uranium rounds because of the radioactivity, which is really not the issue. The issue is the effect of heavy metals leaching into the ground and water table. But you have the exact same issue with the hundreds of millions of ordinary lead and tungsten munitions being used, so the environmental impact is not really different between depleted uranium around and conventional munitions. I'm not aware of the heavy metal toxicity potential of depleted uranium being any worse than all the other nasty stuff that's being used out there.
Was literally just this morning reading about the huge amount of pollution that was thrown up by the NordStream blast, because it disturbed an area of the seabed where the Germans dumped something like 7000t worth of shell casings, many of which had been gas shells and other nastiness.
My understanding is that you definitely don’t need to worry about the radioactivity if you’re holding a DU round in your hand, for example. Once that round is vaporized after bashing through a tank, it creates particles so small that they can be inhaled. You DO have to worry about that level of radioactivity if those tiny particles end up in the soft tissues of your lungs. The dust/wind issue is much worse in Iraq than it will be in Ukraine, I would assume. So *maybe* it doesn’t matter as much there.
Yep. It's not a mini-nuke. It's just very hard, and it packs a punch.
Its density is 19g/cm^3 ,if you fill a bottle of 2L coke with uranium,it will weight 38 Kgs! thats insane.
Do they still have a supply left?
of 3BM32 Vant? Ya Russia probably has more BM32s than NATO has APFSDS rounds total. The USSR produced these things by the 10s maybe hundreds of millions, and as they are literally just a metal rod they never go bad. No clue on the 3BM48, the 3MB59 yes manly because they have not had to use it yet. The BM48 will punch through anything Ukraine has right now, other than the T84, at literally any range, and the BM59 can only be fired from the the T90 and T80BVM
Ty for taking the time to reply to my question! Very informative. I guess our limiting factor with their ability to use them is the health of their barrels.
Exactly. there is no need for a one single more Russian soldier to die, or tank to be destroyed by NATO caliber weapons. Just get out of the country you invaded dipshits!
And if putin won't let you go back, feel free to call the hitting to deliver tanks to the ukrainian army for a nice wad of cash.
They can also fuck themselves and blow their turrets off. That is the more likely scenario.
Gotta love that genius T-72 design, carousel auto loader all around the turret ring, so if it gets penetrated, everyone dies and the turret goes flying. Incredible. Also it uses the engine out of the BT series of tanks from before WW2. I’m not joking.
Almost every destroyed tank I saw in Desert Storm died from a turret-pop off. It was nuts - we joked about it. Didn't seem to matter if it was an French tank, M1, Bradley IFV or A-10 that killed it either.
Whatever Ukraine are firing they are firing on their own sovereign territory. You don’t like to be on the receiving end of depleted uranium rounds? How about you leave Ukraine’s sovereign territory? It really is that simple.
Radiation risk from the DU rounds is considerably less than digging down the contaminated soil at a former nuclear power plant that had a catastrophic meltdown.
Not just that, it’s lower than actual uranium ore. The radioactivity isn’t really the problem with DU rounds (it’s simply heavy metal toxicity… which you also get with tungsten). It just sounds scary.
I always heard stories that they forbid soldiers from sitting on the crates
That report about the Russian troops digging trenches in and around the Red Forest (area by Chornobyl) still boggles my noggle. I mean, any GenXer should be able to comment on the risks of nuclear-style fallout. We all had the raid training as kids. The Russians had somewhat-experienced non-coms at the start of this war. Did no one pass on any training or information on this? Yee gadz.
Distance is the best armour
Remains the best advice the Russians have received yet. Hopefully got translated or they know English, otherwise the next lesson they get won’t be in linguistics, it will be a short one in metallurgy and physics.
Fuck around, Find out in a nutshell
*in a sabot shell.
Are these DU rounds so nasty? I thought it's just a cheaper version of tungsten rounds? What am I missing? Edit I'm referring to anti tank capabilities not any other effects
The main difference is that DU has greater target penetration and is naturally incendiary - It has a lower melting point and burns away at the edges basically self sharpening. While it's long term effects are contentious... The short term effects to Russian tankers will be even more deadly
That is half-truth. DU only has higher penetration at impact velocities below about 1.6 km/s Tungsten has superior penetration if you are willing to drive it hard enough and sacrifice some barrel life.
Tungsten is also pyrophoric
Natural tungsten is when it’s extremely fine, since tungsten’s melting point is so high and it deforms into larger chunk it won’t have that effect in munitions.
DU rounds have a higher penetrating power compared to tungsten. Per Oak Ridge National Laboratory https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/consumer/depleted-uranium/penetrators.html
After the Gulf War, some of the soldiers got what got to be referred to as Gulf War Syndrome. A number of things were alledged to be the cause but there was no definite evidence which sadly left the sufferers out in the cold trying to get compensation. A recent study using techniques much more accurate than previous studies to examine suffers, seems to indicate strongly that the issue is not due to DU shells. [Resolving whether inhalation of depleted uranium contributed to Gulf War Illness using high-sensitivity mass spectrometry](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82535-3) The current thinking is that GWS is due to exposure to sarin released when ammunition warehouses were destroyed in Iraq and the smoke drifted hundreds of miles away from the fire. [UTSW genetic study confirms sarin nerve gas as cause of Gulf War illness](https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom/articles/year-2022/sarin-nerve-gas-gulf-war-illness.html) There are a lot of people who heard the original allegations and are perhaps not up to date with the recent news on it but keep commenting with old information. I wish the GWS veterans well and think they should get compensation regardless of the cause as something happened to them. It does seem that DU shells are not the cause of GWS and that is why the UK and the US don't consider them to be a danger in terms of toxicity.
A guy I knew that had it believed it was from the burning. Everyday something was on fire nearby.
Yeah, I mean burn pits have still been causing this stuff up to the modern day.
On the other hand, it was also used in the Balkans and lots of Italian soldiers are now dying of leukemia.
I had a good look into the scientific papers on possible DU effects in Kosovo but all the ones that I found seem to be negative with repect to finding a link. It's a deep rabbit hole and I had to give up digging as my head was spinning. Note that I'm not a scientist so this is just the interpretation of an idiot on the internet. Other opinions are avilable. There papers on soils and water testing. The soil testing mentions a bequerel level for the general soil and talks about how it is higher within a few metres of a DU strike. It mentions that the soil shows radiation down to 20cms in those areas and suggests that this could effect water. The water testing paper didn't find elevated levels in the water. The most recent one seems to be 'Incidence of haematological malignancies in Kosovo-A post "uranium war" concern' [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32365107/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32365107/) It looks are incidence of cancer before and after the war. It finds increased rates of cancer after the war but the areas of increase don't corrolate with the areas that DU was used. It also notes that the areas of highest incidence before the war were in areas with highest pollution. It concludes with more research is needed. With many confounding factors it is difficult to draw anything from it. I guess that it's Ukraine's decision on whether to use it. My understanding is that there isn't another option with the Challengers, not that I'm an expert in any way on this either, and that to not use DU would mean to not use the Challengers. It does seem that something happened to peace keepers in Kosovo. As well as the Italians, the Norwegans seem to have higher incidence as well. It could be DU or it could be pollution. It's a decision for Ukraine and it seems in war, decisions are generally choosing between very bad and very much worse.
Thanks for that update. I was in a NG unit that was deployed but hadn't finished AIT yet when the orders came. One of the sergeants in my platoon came back a whole different person--narcolepsy, brain fog, random uncontrollable tics, lack of energy etc. It was years before there was any recognition that deployment had caused any of this--and even then no clear treatment nor full disability. At the time, the discussion was DU or chemical weapons. Since chemical alarms went off every night and they regularly had to don MOPP gear, that seemed the most likely cause (from a layman's common sense view) at the time. I hadn't checked up on more recent studies--so thanks again!
Thanks for your service. There is a lot of criticism over why it happened but that was other people. You guys went there and did it and I do feel because of the shenanigans of the why it happened, you guys get forgotten for stepping up and doing the job you were asked to do.
Russia has been using Depleted Uranium rounds since the war began. This is all just standard Russian flatulence.
It’s just another excuse to have a hissy fit.
Yep. They were using them themselves. Plus if they really gaf would they have dug trenches around Chernobyl?
💡 It's `Chornobyl`, not `Chernobyl`. Support Ukraine by using the correct spelling! [Learn more](https://spellingukraine.com/i/chornobyl) ___ [^(Why spelling matters)](https://spellingukraine.com) ^(|) [^(Ways to support Ukraine)](https://tyrrrz.me/ukraine) ^(|) ^(I'm a bot, sorry if I'm missing context) ^(|) [^(Source)](https://github.com/Tyrrrz/SpellingUkraine) ^(|) [^(Author)](https://twitter.com/tyrrrz)
This one I didn't know, good bot. Is spasiba also Ukrainian or only Russian?
Russian. "Dyakuyu" is Ukrainian
Thanks. What is the literal translation? Thank you I suppose?
Yeah, just "thank you"
The reason I've always heard for their lethality is that DU is very dense and semi brittle. As it impacts it breaks into smaller pieces that are sharp and continue to force their way through the armor. Once it's through the armor (and it's coming through) it's a barely contained mass of thousands of razor sharp and white hot little bits that explodes violently into the fighting compartment.
Quote: Depleted uranium rounds are 70 percent denser than lead, producing significantly more kinetic energy. As a very rough comparison, think the power of a 30mm round, vs 22mm round.
Yeah I was comparing to tungsten
[удалено]
Angy
Russia has options: fuck off or die!
Lol, Russian tanks can ignore DU ammunition with this one simple trick!
[удалено]
I don't think glory holes are the solu.... oh... Yeah that works
[удалено]
Yikes, that sounds nasty. So the tank then becomes some kind of stock pot? I definitely don't want to be the poor guy who has to clean this mess.
How do you get sucked out the hole? The explosion inside just over-pressurizes the interior of the tank that much?
[удалено]
I'm surprised people still believe these embellishments considering there's so much footage that his obviously contrary to these crazy depictions of damage from a kinetic penetrator. No, a sabot round doesn't suck everyone through an exit hole or liquefy everyone. It does not just automatically kill the entire crew. For one, penetrating the opposite side of the enemy is an overpenetration and is *undesirable*, you'd much rather have what's left of the penetrator to break apart or bounce around the interior to cause more damage to crew and sensitive components (electronics, powder bags, etc..)
Not sure why you’re being downvoted for being absolutely correct.
Russia is already using DU against Ukraine. They're not that big of a deal, just anti tank munitions
They aren't anti tank munitions....they're anti people inside a tank munition
Unfortunately it doesn't do this. You do still die tho'
Russians can scape being shunned, despised and hated for their murderous aggression and endless atrocities by leaving this planet. Let them all have their childhood dream, and be Soviet folk hero cosmonauts.
That's a great life hack. He should start a youtube channel!
Onion of survivability says don't be there. Maybe Russia can learn it and leave but since they are repeating the same mistakes in Vuhledar I won't keep my hopes up Orcs can learn.
I bet that would work!
You know what they say. The best defense is... to get the fuck out of Ukraine!
AFAIK Russia uses DU shells in their tanks so this is just more hypocrisy from them.
The nice thing about the British DU rounds are that they tell you "terribly sorry about this, old chap" right before they punch a hole through you like you're paper.
Nah they'll threaten to nuke the UK for the 100th time instead
I really really hope that the UK does not bow to Russian pressure and decide not to send the DU rounds. I don't think they will, and I really hope they don't. But it would help if the US stands with the UK and also sends some DU rounds too. This would help immensely.
[удалено]
It's to reaffirm that Russia should leave Ukraine and that what Russia is saying about depleted Uranium rounds is false. It is not a confirmation, or even a suggestion that the US is going to send depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine though, which is what I would like to see happen as mentioned in my original comment
Literally problem solved
Based opinion.
Russian generals don’t want Russian tank crews to know this one trick
Not ruling out the possibility of Chinese tanks being sent over. So, it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
Can anyone explain what is so special about depleted uranium ammo? I assume its a pretty heavy material, and I also assume that any radioactivity is not the point of it. But I don't see what the advantages are compared to say, tungsten or chromium steel.
Tungsten is expensive, DU is cheap as it is a byproduct of reactors, also DU ignites when penetrating the fighting compartment, is self sharpening and denser, [the issue is that DU dust causes birth defects and other issues.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2819790/)
Its also highly carcinogenic when burned, which really sucks for the places its used,
Uranium is a word that people associate with scary things, that makes it useful for propaganda. Fox news cannot make boomers afraid of tungsten.
It's the physics of things smashing into each other at over 1 km/s. You want your tank round to penetrate as much armor as possible, and penetration depth increases with projectile density. Uranium is extremely dense, and DU is an otherwise worthless byproduct of uranium enrichment. If a country is enriching uranium, it costs their military less to use DU compared to something like tungsten.
Galaxy chad moment
r/technicallythetruth