That reason is more visible with this still from an earlier video @RALee85 posted.
The majority of the Russian truck's cargo bed is made of wood planks.
This truck was hit by a small mortar shell that blew apart the wood. twisted down & severed the steel frame holding them. 2/
The choice of a wooden truck bed was one made for cost reasons.
Wood is cheaper than steel.
Plus if your industrial quality tolerances are bad, it is easier to cut a wood plank to match than make another steel frame with the right fit. 3/
The US Army builds it trucks and trailers with sheet steel beds for durability, world wide deployability and long, usable, life-cycle reasons.
The US Army uses its trucks a lot in lieu of the Railways.
So it puts them to really hard use over a 20 year service life. 4/
This emphasis on durability at a higher costs per truck means things in combat, good things for the crew & US Army.
Wood shatters and becomes high velocity fragments when subjected to blast effects.
Steel doesn't. It bends. 5/
The trucks Russian uses generally operate at colder northern latitudes where wood is a good cost-design trade off.
America covers more north-south latitudes than Russia & the US Army has no clue where a President will send them next. So metal truck beds are the design choice 6/
Vehicle design is always a trade off of performance features for unit cost.
Vehicles appropriate for one nation's military won't be for another.
The problem for Russian conscripts in Ukraine is the cheaper Russian truck bed design choice is helping to kill them.
7/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The first was the UK's Operation Outward. It was noticed after a windstorm during 1940's Battle of Britain that barrage balloons dragging severed cables under them caused shorts on power lines, damaging the power grid in occupied Europe.
This would be the 2nd reported downing of a Tu-22M by an S-200. The earlier Tu-22M being in December 2023.
It looks like these Tu-22M are still using Soviet era EW suites which were not geared against the S-200 C-Band, 100 KW, 5N62 Square Pair FMCW tracker/illuminator. 2/
Between ~1996 and 2005, most FMTV trucks accepted by DCMA for the US Army had my signature on the truck property forms along with my DSN phone number.
I got three or four calls in Sealy Texas from NCO's in Iraq trying to score ballistic composite glass armor because they stopped these EFP attacks⬇️
1/
DCMA Sealy was getting photos from contractor relatives of bombed FMTV's with sheet metal armor and receiving IED damaged trucks to get rebuilt.
You could tell the blast damage from how the windows were missing and the roofs were bowed at the top.
2/
When you pulled out the stowage boxes in the cabs there were usually spent 5.56mm or 7.62mm brass casings...
Or SAM hunters can use a weather balloons with a set of commercial off the shelf ELINT and thermal imaging sensors - connected via a smartphone - hanging underneath to listen for radars and look for SAM missile launches 24/7.
The world has changed.
(I wonder if the Houthi are doing this balloon surveillance trick to the Western merchantmen?🤔)
The thing that has deeply bothered me about this RuAF Tsar-shed tank with jammer and the earlier "Pallet Jammer" tank is the complete lack in any public analysis of the mention of Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC).
You can't throw radio-electronic systems together and expect them to work properly.
EMC🧵
1/
I have spend too many hours on too many days outside an Anechoic RF chamber with EMC test procedures and fiddly oscilloscopes to miss the fact that the drone jamming systems the Russians have deployed on tanks in Ukraine are missing such testing.
Corrugated steel doesn't an effective R/F ground plane make.🙄
Ukrainian reports claim four FPV drones were stopped by the "Pallet Jammer" tank while the fifth managed to immobilize the tank for later capture and analysis.
There were some claims that this 5th drone was immune from jamming