| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| Libyan rebel T-55 in action, takes a hit [video] |
| 2011-12-29 |
Libyan rebel T-55 cruising around. Fast forward to 0:55 to see it start firing its main gun. There sure are a lot of guys standing around...I wouldn't be around a tank, it's the biggest target on the battlefield and is going to draw fire. At the end the tank takes a hit from somewhere. Kind of looks fake...a hit from an ATG wouldn't look like that, right? Looks like a detonation from inside the tank. The tank doesn't have an autoloader, which mean four men are operating the vehicle, so it gets crowded inside a tank with poorly trained personnel trying to operate relatively sophisticated equipment.. It could happen. Not to mention all the Insh'allan maintenance from the time the tank arrived on the quay in Tripoli all those years ago to the day of this video. |
| Posted by:gromky |
| #15 And it seemed to blow up about the time it should have been working with or firing another round. Probably ammo problems, in my uneducated opinion. |
| Posted by: gorb 2011-12-29 21:54 |
| #14 I didn't see or hear anything that sounded like a double-explosion or a hit-then-explosion. It just blew up. |
| Posted by: gorb 2011-12-29 21:53 |
| #13 Look at us! We got guns! We got TANKS!!!! Hey Achmed, be sure you get this on video. We can paste it on Facebook and show the world that we've got boom ..... |
| Posted by: lotp 2011-12-29 14:42 |
| #12 I give the "flyer" a 3.7: poor form, didn't stick the landing |
| Posted by: Frank G 2011-12-29 12:01 |
| #11 Static electricity and old ammunition are a bad combination. Also, as I remember it, the T-55 main gun ammo was a two piece round...first you load the shell and then you load the charge. IF the charge is old and deteriorated and more sensitive due to time, the static electricity that needs to be discharged with each round would have set the thing off. Of course, the Russkies were not above selling bad ammo with their old equipment. |
| Posted by: Bill Clinton 2011-12-29 11:52 |
| #10 mixed evidence. The tank was rolled up to a berm so only the turret and gun showed, implying at least someone in the crew had some experience. On the other hand, the position would have made it hard for an AT hit anywhere but the turret and there's no hint of that in the video. |
| Posted by: Mercutio 2011-12-29 11:29 |
| #9 Inverted foxhole. |
| Posted by: Matt 2011-12-29 10:41 |
| #8 RPGs must have the right shot to penetrate. A few degrees off 90 degrees and the shot could bounce, or hit and not penetrate. RPGs don't always penetrate the first time or even on the first hit. It has to be the right shot. If you watch closely the blast knocks the loader's machine gun out of its mount. The vector of the blast from the detonation in a turret is entirely upward. Were it a side hit most of the blast would be contained inside the turret since the vector would be redirected inside the tank until it is expended. The hull doesn't rock or sway from a side or rear hit, as you would expect it to. My point was since the tank did not have an autoloader, a dumbass loader possibly forgot to set the loader's safety switch, or the floor was completing a circuit and the loader dropped a shell shorting the circuit, or as JM pointed out, a misfired round was ejected from the breech, then detonated. |
| Posted by: badanov 2011-12-29 09:56 |
| #7 I wasn't going to comment, as it is hard to tell. Also a suspicious number of video cams going. But if a T-55 took a hit (say from an RPG-7) and it penetrated the crew area, anyone standing/sitting in the commander's hatch could be blown out and would look like a rag doll flying through the air. The body would be a bag of mush. The T-55 is simple, rugged, and hard on the crew. It is also likely a 'monkey'/export model, so simpler to maintain and more primitive than one used in the USSR. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2011-12-29 08:46 |
| #6 Given the lack of exterior damage, I am guessing a spark in the propellant of a round. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2011-12-29 08:43 |
| #5 The direct link for anyone who can't see the embedded video above. I don't know about insh'allah maintenance...if there's any equipment that can take it, it's Russian equipment. Especially a rock like the T-55. |
| Posted by: gromky 2011-12-29 04:34 |
| #4 Obviously, it blew up because there weren't enough Allahu Akhbars to please Allan. |
| Posted by: gorb 2011-12-29 04:20 |
| #3 I want a Toyota Hilux w/a 20mm in the back! If I saw that in a movie, I'd think "the guy" flying through the air looked awful faked... ...but, yeah, I think they blew up their own track, for reasons stated. |
| Posted by: Drang 2011-12-29 01:28 |
| #2 Video's been pulled. No access. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2011-12-29 01:21 |
| #1 Not to mention old tank shells. Agree, IMO it does look like an internal detonation, espec as indic by the poor guy flying up and away. Except that he isn't SUPERMAN. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-12-29 00:36 |