Molotove cocktails

Possibly a stupid question but what if you got close enough to the tank to actually get fuel/ napalm int he barrel. Isn't that a fairly direct line to the. Crew compartment?

Bellet yet a Willie Pete?

Couldn't they close the breach or whatever it's called?

The breach is allways closed unless you are reloading.

The breech is air tight and the bore evacuator (knot) can flush smoke.

Out of curiosity, has any modern American tank (ex:Abrams) been damaged significantly, had its hull pierced, rendered immobile or inoperable?
>>Inb4: that one that was flipped!
That was a version without depleted armor sold to the Saudis.

Some Abrams left to the Iraqi army ran afoul of ISIS in the last few years, some of them ended up driving around flying black flags for a while and there are videos of Kornet/RPG-29/etc doing them significant harm.

A hit near the air intake will still immobilize most modern tanks. Turbines still need oxygen, fire consumes oxygen, no oxygen means the turbine stops. A tank with a stalled turbine on the battlefield is as good as dead.
u r retar

Please tell me how modern armies have been able to make engines run without oxygen.

Open breech to reload. A gallon of gasoline pours into crew compartment from mouth of breech.
Mfw vladamir is smoking cigarette
Blyat.

>How effective would a Molotov cocktail be against a modern tank?
Depends.. Did the commander leave the hatch open?

Attached: 67_.jpg (890x890, 327K)

yes, a few got penetrated by RPG-29 in Iraq and one got fucked up when it hit a massive IED
all were eventually repaired though

You'd need a lot of burning fuel to snuff out a turbine. 5gal bucket sized molotov at least.

Soviet tanks ran on gasoline during WWII. So did American tanks. Thats part of the reason molotovs were dangerous.

Modern tanks run on diesel so its less of a problem, plus if you're close enough to throw one the tank is close enough to turn you into hamburger.

How about fire in and around the crew air intake. I assume they have something to supply crew with air.

Modern tanks have positive pressure cbrn set ups to keep ichy stuff out right?

Idk of any country that has designed a soldier that doesn't run on oxygen either

Your best bet is to take out their optics with a paint bomb. They've been made tough, but not indestructible. Fire and blasts aren't going to get you very far. Thermite and a road flare down the main gun would likely disable it, but you'd have to force the crew out in order to neutralize the tank.

Are you just asking about the Abrams? I'm pretty sure some upgraded M60s got blown apart during their service with the Saudis.
As for the M1, I don't think there are any reports you ought to trust when it comes to the Iraqi and Syrian Civil War. Outside of that, I belive none got destroyed by enemy fire but some were destroyed due to friendly fire.

>blasts aren't going to get you very far
If kilos of high explosive land on your vehicles roof its good night sweet prince time

Attached: satchel_charge.jpg (380x292, 13K)

Unlikely to happen though. Gunner and Commander have different sights, you can protect the peri so that it does not get damaged. There is also the battle sight you can use in case of emergency.

I'm operating under the civil disobedience school of thought. I love guns as much as the next guy, but i'm a realist. Large quantities of high explosives aren't on my grocery list.

How massive is "massive"?

American tanks in general.
What were they hit with?

How about adding shit to the Molotov that would make the smoke "sticky" so that it could pack into air filters or compressor blades and degrade performance?

By sticky I mean I have personally watches smoke adhere to surfaces. Especially when the smoke is in an enclosed space. If you could get the engine to ingest enough of the stuff it could choke.

It's an unlikely victory, but could be done. You'd have to use your surroundings to your advantage. I feel confident that I could at least disable it.

Would tank traps be effective on a modern tank?
Or maybe a quicksand pit?

Idk man harrier jets used to "hot stall" from sucking it's own farts when in vtol.

I wonder exactly how hard it would be.

You are gonna need a hell of a big fire to suck up ALL the oxygen around a tank if you want to starve the engine of oxygen, see previously posted 500kg napalm tank against S-tank video.

>How about fire in and around the crew air intake.
Unless you are counting on the tank just sitting there in the fire long enough for the crew to use up all the oxygen in the crew compartment i wouldn't count on that working very well.

How in the fuck do you think that would work, the tank's just gonna sit there, while you run up to the barrel with your bucket of fuel and pour it inside? Whilst neither driver, gunner, (loader) or commander see you?

Are you braindamaged?

Maybe like this?

military.com/video/ammunition-and-explosives/liquid-explosives/bahrain-rebel-molotov-cocktail-attack/3038781121001

enough to get the tank airborne for a few feet

Diesel, burnt motor oil, broken down styrofoam, lots of sugar. It can be done to make a burning sludge, it's just you need it to reliably light and stay lit.

Any and all idiots trying to molotov tank A will get gunned down by tank B or by supporting infantry because tanks don't operate alone

now fucking /thread

Not braindamaged just really sneaky

>Are you braindamaged?
All these threads about improvised ways to disable tanks by people that have never seen a real tank always turn out the same way.
They never learn, i just can't tell if its the same idiot every time trolling or if there are just a lot of idiots out there.

A swarm of 128 quadcopters each fitted with a 1-ounce dump tank?

They could just close the breach. So it wouldn't be a knockout blow. But that would disable the use of their main gun for a short time.

You are gonna need a lot more then that against a tank.
Also you are going to have to count on the tank just sitting there and the crew doing nothing to stop you.
Like i said, see previously posted 500kg napalm bomb against S-tank video.
All that did was damage the air filters.

Depends. A thermite molotov will damage Western tanks. But not Chinese tanks, they have TNBC protection. Thermal Nuclear Biological, Chemistry. It is protected from those, it is said Chinese tanks don't even need air from outside it can do battle in a vacuum.

IIRC massive enough to throw it

23rd march 2027,

Chinese armored division meets little resistance from U.S space force infantry, poorly equiped to deal with Chinese quantum type 99 tanks

China declares the moon "Chinese territorial waters"

Attached: 180809-mike-pence-space-force-feature.jpg (618x410, 73K)

if the situation has devolved to the point where honest-to-god tanks are being deployed, it's no longer civil disobedience.

>>implying tanks never stop moving
>>implying people are never complacent
>>implying Syrians haven't snuck up on tanks and dropped a grenade down the barrel

>implying Syrians haven't snuck up on tanks and dropped a grenade down the barrel
If it´s the one in the video i think it is it was already abandoned.

>snuck up on abandoned tanks

>>Abandoned.
Sure it was.

so do people seriously not know how to make a simple home-made thermite pipe bomb that you can put some tacky adhesive clay on and have a handy easy to use and deploy device that can disable any armored vehicle in existence today?

Running up to the tank to stick your device on it is not "easy to deploy" that is suicide, possibly darwinism

Then please explain why the crew did nothing at all and there can be seen no movement of either the tank, it's turret or the commanders cupola in the video of it?
And they also just happened to leave the breach open.

No, this is day/k/are

Attached: K daycare.jpg (700x603, 51K)

China uses Lunar calendar. Of course the moon is rightful Chinese clay.

It's Syria.
US troops jack off and sleep in vehicles.
It's not hard to believe Syrian troops could be worse.
If there was been a crew in there, they wouldn't have had time to react to a grenade rolling down the barrel.

>US troops jack off and sleep in vehicles.
Not in a active combat zone without keeping some sort of watch.

who said anything about running up on a tank that has infantry and is properly deployed?
IF and I say a big IF, you're looking for a direct confrontation or a resistance against an advancing force, you would clearly be using some form of a small drone, many a racing drone that has a FPV camera that you can quickly guide into the driver/commander compartment or better off targeting mobility kill by aiming for engine or other critical areas of the vehicle.
I could say more ways of doing stuff but I low-key feel like these threads are agencies fishing to see what the general public knows about how to effectively utilize asymmetrical combat in urban settings

>t. Tienanmen square tank driver

Attached: cropped-cropped-13857327373243.png (512x512, 127K)

turn off the name

六四天安門事件

be gone with you

If the hatches aren't closed completely, you could burn the crew, similar effect if the seals for the hatches are damaged/worn.

If you can get close without getting MG'd by the tank, its probably better to shove a big enough satchel charge into the track and blow that up, damaging if not destroying the tracks and immobilising the tank.

>Out of curiosity, has any modern American tank (ex:Abrams) been damaged significantly, had its hull pierced, rendered immobile or inoperable?
They've been penetrated by RPG-29 (with PG-29VR) but only mission killed at best. They have been destroyed by friendly aircraft if immobilized in some scenarios. One got thrown in the air by an IED. I wouldn't be surprised if a "monkey model" M1 got destroyed by an ATGM in Syria or Iraq during the whole ISIS thing.

If you got that close without getting shot, why not just toss or shoot something that goes boom down the barrel?

I think we've established that a molotov won't do much, but I'm thinking that if you had either a home made flamethrower or a flamethrower from Lord. Elon of Musk you could come up along the side, spray fire over the front, thus covering optics and windows in soot, denying the crew the opportunity to shoot and keep track of you. Then wait for the tank to fire and once it does, start spraying fire down the barrel so that the inside of the tank is instantly engulfed in flame once the gunner opens the hatch to reload.

If you're lucky the gunner won't be able to control himself enough to close the hatch once his face starts melting.

Praise be to Lord Elon

Depends
>Breech closed
Not an awful lot. Probably damage the chamber and ruin some Armorer’s day when they have to change the barrel
>Breech is open
Goodby crew lol. Driver might be fine though

>flamethrower from Lord. Elon of Musk
That's not a flamethrower, it's just a fucking torch. There's no liquid/gel fuel to "spray" down the barrel or anywhere else.

>I wouldn't be surprised if a "monkey model" M1 got destroyed by an ATGM in Syria or Iraq
we've actually lost a bunch of those, but that's mostly because the Syrians and Iraqis can't get the concept of infantry support into their heads. None of em had DU though

I think you might be one of the most retarded posters i have seen on Jow Forums in a while.
And that is saying something.

Attached: derp.jpg (330x350, 23K)

if only there was a device capable of wiping things off the optics...

Attached: m1a1_details_137_of_435.jpg (2848x2144, 1.37M)

This

Don't armatas set themselves on fire?

There are many videos of isis doing this in Mosul.

jihadology.net/2016/12/13/new-video-message-from-the-islamic-state-hunters-of-the-shields-wilayat-ninawa/

Go to 20 minute marker

Thowing a blanket over the tank would be more effective.

It would suck in some of that carbon monoxide and possibly make them dizzy.

Attached: rusi vodka and asbestos.jpg (628x617, 119K)

Can't speak to tanks other than Leopard 1 and 2s but they have fire suppression systems, with automatic and manual activation.

The Leo2 has a few ways to put out fires. The discharge of CO2 into the engine compartment can be triggered manually or once the engine fire wire breaks. This is a two shot system. You can also switch the air intake from the normal vents on the engine deck to sucking air from the crew compartment. This feature is a byproduct of the deep fording ability of the tank. The engine compartment is pumped out of air by the radiator cooling fans that suck a plastic rubbery seal to the inside of the removable engine deck plate to make a water tight seal. This also puts out any fire because lack of air.

If you don't hit the engine deck but get the turret and even more unlikely inside a crew hatch a second fire suppression system for the crew compartment will discharge to put out the fire. They do also keep fire extinguishers in the crew area. If the hatches are sealed then the tank is getting air for the crew compartment from the NBC filter system which wouldn't keep fire out but would filter smoke.

All that said hitting a tank with a thrown projectile means something strange is going on. 1000m is close range for a tank, and tanks shouldn't operate alone.

So they would close the intake.
Jesus fuck you people are retarded.

Tangentially related: How does one best protect the air intake for static fortification?
Pic related is the air intake tower for a WW1 fort that I haven't been able to find any schematics for.

Attached: Boncelles_tour_1994.jpg (1747x1161, 410K)

About as effective as your dick in giving women orgasms

theres a video in the ukraine protests thing on netflix where the protesters appear to stop an armoured vehicle with molotovs