Comments by "afcgeo" (@afcgeo882) on "🔴 Ukraine War - Single Ukrainian Tank Attacks Massive Russian BTR-82 Convoy In Close Ambush" video.

He hesitated quite a lot, given his position. He also missed every single shot. Literally got one kill off a rocochet.
6
And rightfully so. I watched it slowed down a little, about 5 times. The tank missed all its shots, by quite a lot. It lit up one BTR, purely by luck, as its shot ricocheted off the ground, way short of the target. Considering the dead on distance and slow speed of vehicles, and this tank being alone, it’s obvious that no one it it knew what they were doing. The arty volley that followed was unguided and hit absolutely nothing, as the BTRs continued down their path. We don’t know what happened to the tank. Perhaps it escaped. Its armor can withstand 30mm fire from the BTRs. It’s also possible that it’s still sitting there, with its turret a few meters away.
2
Like the fact that the tank and the artillery missed every round? The only hit we see is from a ricochet.
2
@adampustos1155 That’s false as there are no articles in the Russian language. There is no “the” or “a” or “an” in the language at all. Given the rules of the English language, it is NOT grammatically correct. That’s the point. People do use it, but people also use double negatives and made up words all the time.
2
@richardvonessling4442 BTRs aren’t IFVs. They’re barely even APCs. It’s “had” not “hat” and it’s just Ukraine, not “the Ukraine” just as it’s not “the Canada”, “the Germany” or “the Russia”. In the English language, proper names don’t get articles.
1
@craftpaint1644 Seriously though… look up why those get an article. There’s a very real answer. The Philippines (pl.): truncation of the Philippine Islands. Article required as there are many islands. An article is not used with a single proper noun. Example: Alabama (not THE ALABAMA). However, the Virgin Islands. The United States, but not “the Canada”. The Maldives, but not “the India”. The article “the” is used to denote a specific noun. When a singular proper noun is used, it already denotes itself as a specific noun.
1
@adampustos1155 The Gambia is a namesake of the river named The Gambia. “The article was originally used because the region was named for "the Gambia [River]." In 1964, shortly prior to the country's independence, then-Prime Minister Dawda Jawara wrote to the Permanent Committee on Geographical Names for British Official Use requesting that the name the Gambia retain the definite article, in part to reduce confusion with Zambia which had also recently become independent. At present,both Gambia and the Gambia are in common use.” - Africa News, 11 April 2021 The Gambian government purposefully requested an exemption from the standard English use. That’s for a good reason. The English-speaking Russian sources just repeat what they see in English media. They don’t factually know English use all that well. By the way, I’m Russian-American, with my maternal grandparents both from Ukraine, and have bachelor’s degrees in English Lit and Russian. And no, you using improper English isn’t insulting to Ukrainians. It’s insulting to your teachers and parents.
1
@Myemnhk Even if attacked from the rear, a 30mm cannot penetrate the triple layer armor of a T-62. All they can hope for is blowing up the tracks.
1
@richier8898 That’s not an AT launch. That’s an RPG fired by a soldier. You can see its smoke trajectory. He fired at the building because he thought someone was firing from there (and possibly someone was).
1
@dennyfpv1996 This is why the T-62 upgrade was so necessary. The targeting systems are horrific.
1
All shots really. The only kill was from a ricochet.
1
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 Sabots don’t go through vehicles. They also blow up inside, once penetrated. That’s how they destroy vehicles.
1
@korgothofbarbaria2841 Not expecting to engage at a certain distance doesn’t mean they can’t do it.
1
@pickleboy6059 There is ZERO chance a round will penetrate an engine and still come out the other side. ZERO. A sabot round is known to occasionally penetrate both armored sides if the internal space is hollow. Fuel tank? Maybe.
1
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 It does explode. It has no explosives in it, but the sabot part explodes into millions of hot, tiny, metal fragments, liquifying everything inside the vehicle, including the crew. I mean it literally turns everyone inside into a red mist. I’ve seen the aftermath in person. In a T-62 or T-72, which keeps its rounds in an unprotected auto-loader, it turns them into what we Americans call a “Jack-In-The-Box”. It cooks those rounds off, popping the turret from the explosive pressure like a champagne cork. In a BTR there are no rounds, so you just get a whole bunch of unidentifiable human parts, mostly tiny, and a whole lot of blood. The heat differential creates a high pressure inside, so the liquid remains spray out the holes made by the round. It’s gruesome to say the least. If the space where the sabot hits is empty inside, the front of the sabot cooks off and the remainder self-sharpens, penetrating the other side of the armor, all the way through. However, not in the engine. Then it’ll just get stuck there, melting it. If it hits a very think armored vehicle in an empty spot, then it can literally fly through and have no effect at all.
1
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 You should actually look it up instead of fantasizing on the internet. All that time commenting when you could have just looked it up.
1
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 I do mind. It’s the 21st century and everyone knows how to Google.
1
@harrybyaqussamprayuga1756 It’s possible, but unlikely. It’s also unlikely a sabot round would be used against BTRs. Ukrainians are far more likely to use HE rounds and save sabots for tanks. I also don’t see what you see in the video. It looks to me that the first BTR was lit up by a round that was very short, hit the ground and ricocheted into the top of it.
1