this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
103 points (99.0% liked)
Ukraine
8567 readers
397 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
πΊπ¦ Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
π»π€’No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
π₯Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
π·Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human involved must be flagged NSFW
β Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
π³π₯ Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
π³βοΈβοΈ Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
πͺ π«‘ Volunteer with the International Legionnaires
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Something hit the ammo storage (Wilshire says a Stugna-P ATGM) which then blew up the tank. It's one of the big weakness of the Russian T-series tanks, they don't have blowout panels; so when the ammo storage is hit the entire crew cabin explodes. Tanks like the Abrams separates the crew cabin and the ammo storage and directs any ammo detonations out the back of the tank via said blowout panels. While the tank is still totaled, the crew has a good chance of surviving.
Two different philosophies of design that are informed by politics. In a country where you have to manufacture consent for a war, you have to design your military gear with some consideration for the people that will be using it. You're designing gear that you have to market to the soldiers.
In a more overtly totalitarian regime, you can just chuck people into the meat grinder because they can't really say no.
I remember learning about Soviet vs US long range bombers, and how the US designs made arrangements for things like toilets, but the Soviet ones often didnt.