David Cenciotti is a journalist based in Rome, Italy. He is the Founder and Editor of “The Aviationist”, one of the world’s most famous and read military aviation blogs. Since 1996, he has written for major worldwide magazines, including Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, and many others, covering aviation, defense, war, industry, intelligence, crime and cyberwar. He has reported from the U.S., Europe, Australia and Syria, and flown several combat planes with different air forces. He is a former 2nd Lt. of the Italian Air Force, a private pilot and a graduate in Computer Engineering. He has written five books and contributed to many more ones.
Four U.S. Air Force A-10s have arrived in Romania. More to arrive in the next days. It looks like the USAF Warthog attack planes are rapidly moving across eastern Europe: after deploying to Germany, as […]
The three aircraft variants are highly resemblant of the Vietnam-era OV-10 Bronco. Icarus Aerospace, a relatively new Canadian company, recently unveiled a clean-sheet aircraft called TAV (Tactical Air Vehicle), which they advertise as an “highly […]
A better look at the images of the Iranian drone emerged so far highlighted something interesting. New screenshots coming from Syria give a better view of the Shahed 129 spotted over Damascus on Apr. 10. […]
Fin-Stabilised rounds are purposed for armored targets, so why expend this ammunition against an infantry target?
Because they can, that’s why.
Since the cameraman survived the hit (or at least his camera did) we can’t rule out the possibility he was next to an armored vehicle that was the actual target of the tank.
Could have mistaken the camera or something in the building as a rocket launcher or RPG, or he could have just not wanted to be filmed that day.
That might be the only ammo they have available, or perhaps the crew isn’t trained to know the difference. Or, as others have pointed out, they were shooting at an armoured target, or that was what was in the breach at that moment.
Possibly they were shooting at a building and thought that AP was the correct choice.
Syria’s probably not getting a lot of resupply, so perhaps the tanks are running low on shells and are firing whatever is available?
Can Syria manufacture 125mm rounds on their own?
The man firing the shell doesn’t need to answer that question to fire it, or even answer it correctly. “Bad mood”, however irrational it is, could be a sufficient reason for some.
I believe it’s very very hard to unload a round in the T-72’s autoloader system and even if it was simpler, most tankers shoot whatever is in their breech as it takes too much time to switch shells in a pinch.
Yeah, don’t think you need to be that accurate with a shell like that.
looks fake to me. the russian 9m119 has 4 fins. that looks like the US project for a mid range munition xm1111
i know i have seen that video of the shell before. i want to say on a show about Picatinny Arsenal.
I agree something seems fishy with the tank video. At the very least I think the camera was static and unmanned. It never moves. Most likely the guys saw the armor rolling in and pointed the camera at its expected firing area and took off as quick as possible. Then go back later and dig up the camera. I honestly don’t see how the camera wasn’t destroyed unless it was looking thru a sniper hole much farther away or something.
Syrian rebels have a bunch of unmanned cameras feeding footage via wire to operators. Let’s them know about Syrian Army movements.
It appears to be a 3BK14 HEAT round
Confirmed: It’s a fake.
I’d say the footage of the tank firing is the real deal, but that crisp shiny round was rendered.
He’s a ballistics expert, not a photography expert. Extreme telephoto flattens depth of field in just this way. Head-on, the projectile is barely moving in frame, and this is exactly what you would expect to see. You can even see some supersonic shockwave around the projectile. Not fake.
that is not APFSDS, that’s a HEAT round