Since my last article/video on Russia’s ‘turtle tanks’ the adapted vehicles have continued to be used on several fronts but on Monday, 17 June Ukrainian forces captured their first turtle tank intact.
Known by numerous names by both sides including ‘Blyatmobiles’ (Блятьмобиль) and ‘assault garages’ (штурмовые гаражи), ‘Tsar Mangals’ (Царь мангал) or simply ‘sheds’ (сарай) the tanks are characterised by them being equipped with large counter-FPV shells made from readily available sheet metal (and other non-standard materials) and are sometimes equipped with electronic warfare jammers to provide additional protection against drones and sometimes with mine clearing devices such a mine rollers or ploughs. They appear to have been developed to provide improvised breaching vehicles capable of penetrating Ukrainian minefields, withstand drone attacks and in some cases deliver troops to an objective.
Front of the Turtle Tank captured in the field (via ArmyInform)
From posts on Ukrainian social media the tank was reportedly captured by troops from the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade but the vehicle was first encountered near Klishchiivka by soldiers of the 244th battalion of the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade that had been seconded to the 5th Assault Brigade.
The turtle tank allegedly became lost in the Klishchiivka area and saw an M113 APC belonging to the 2nd Battalion of the 5th Assault Brigade and began following it. When the M113 crew spotted the enemy tank it attempted to hide. The tank, however, continued to follow and on reaching the M113 a member of the turtle tank’s crew said to be the driver got out to ask for directions. He was captured by medics of the 244th Battalion. From the footage available it appears that the following morning troops of the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade approached the tank and captured an undisclosed number of Russian troops who were travelling in the rear of the turtle tank’s counter-FPV shell. Despite numerous sources and accounts the timeline of the tank’s capture remains somewhat unclear.
The immobilised Turtle Tank captured in the field (via 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade)
Subsequently released footage from a 22nd Mechanised Brigade drone appears to show the Turtle Tank being damaged by a drone dropped munition before it was captured. The post with the video claimed that the turtle tank’s crew became disorientated after the drone attack and mistakenly drove towards Ukrainian lines. Lt. Colonel Serhiy Misyura, of ArmyInform, also noted that the vehicle was struck by an FPV. Lt.Col. Misyura claims that the drone dropped munition detonated next to one of the tank’s road wheels and immobilised it. After it was captured Ukrainian troops were able to get the tank moving again and drive it to the rear.
Drone footage then shows the capture of the tank’s crew and the vehicle moving off towards the Ukrainian rear. Teoyaomiquu shared a short clip filmed by a member of the 93rd Mechanized Brigade which showed the captured tank passing by, the 22nd Mechanised Brigade’s flag can be seen flying from the top of the tank. In a photograph of the tank and some of the men who captured it the same flag can be seen. Another piece of footage showing the tank close up also appeared online on the 18th June. The video shows the front, rear and left side of the tank’s counter-FPV shell.
Right side of the captured Turtle Tank (via ArmyInform)
On the 19th June, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade shared a short video showing the confused captured tank driver sat in the rear of an M113. On the 20th June, ArmyInform, the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ news outlet published a video on their YouTube channel giving us an up close look at the captured tank in detail during which Lt. Colonel Misyura describes it as a ‘marvel of modern Russian engineering’.
The Ukrainian Army were quick to capitalise on the propaganda value of finally capturing one of the Tsar Mangal (Tsar’s Barbaque) / assault sheds in tact, at the time of publication the video has over 650,000 views on YouTube alone.
Examining The Turtle
Since late April we have seen many variations on the ‘turtle tank’ theme, this example is certainly one of the least refined. Firstly, the tank does not appear to have been equipped with mine clearing kit as some of the other tanks have. However, it has been outfitted with what appear to be some sort of EW jammer to counter drones. Additionally, we can clearly see several UDSh smoke generators, held in a pair of brackets on either side of the shell. These have sometimes been misidentified as standard TM-62 anti-tank mines but the UDSh is a smoke generator which mimics the mine’s shape for training purposes. In this case they have been repurposed to enable the tank to create a mobile smoke screen. According to CAT-UXO the UDSh can be initiated electronically or manually and once ignited discharges smoke for 8-10 minutes. In the ArmyInform video it is also noted that the Kontakt ERA blocks seen on the tank’s glacis are empty.
Ukrainian troops pose in fron of the captured Turtle Tank (via social media)
The tank itself is a T-62M and according to Ukrainian sources the turret is fixed in place and the tank carried no ammunition for its main gun, making it largely defenceless in isolation from supporting elements. The counter-FPV shell is crudely assembled made up of a mish-mash of materials including metal sheeting which ranges from rusted bare metal to various worn paint colours, wire fencing and metal caging. There also appears to be rubber matting attached front and rear to help keep dust down. The top of the shell over the tank’s engine deck appears incomplete and may have been damaged. In the ArmyInform video which shows the area in-detail it is clear that the counter-FPV shell’s support struts were welded directly to the top of the hull and a number of large and small shrapnel holes in the shell are visible.
Top of the captured Turtle Tank (via ArmyInform)
It appears that between when the vehicle was captured and when the ArmyInform video was filmed the Ukrainian have removed the assemblies, which may have been EW jammers, on the front of the tank. Its unclear how long the adapted tank has been in service but their is evidence of past repairs and there are numerous spray painted slogans on its panels including ‘god is with us’, ‘Hero-Z’ and ‘154 RUS’ (a possible joke reference to Russian vehicle registration plates). If this is the case it might hint at the origins of the Russian crew. ‘154’ is a registration code for the Novosibirsk Oblast which is the home of the 41st Combined Arms Army. In one clip of the tank it also has what appears to be a stolen ‘1941’ sign (possibly from a Great Patriotic War memorial) attached to the rear of its shell.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
There are a number of different RPG-7 pattern rocket launchers in use in Ukraine including the American PSLR-1s, the Czech LGL-7s and the Bulgarian ATGL-L and WRPG-7 to name a few. One of the most interesting to appear is the Chinese Type 69.
The Type 69s were potentially supplied by one of the Baltic states, Latvia, Lithuania or Estonia, which held them in inventory during the 1990s and 2000s. The Type 69 was in service it the Estonian armed forces as the M-69, and remained in inventory into the early 2010s. Another possible origin is that they were part of a seized shipment of small arms and light weapons supplied to the Houthis in Yemen by Iran, which was intercepted en route. Though no Type 69s have been seen in the released imagery of seized shipments.
Training with Type 69 (via 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade)
The Type 69 is a clone of the Russian RPG-7, manufactured by China’s state arsenals it has been successfully sold around the would by NORINCO and Xinshidai. It entered service with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army in the 1972, replacing the earlier Type 56, and served into the late 1990s.
The Chinese RPG’s distinguishing features include the absence of a rear pistol grip, an orangey-brown fluted heat-shield around the tube, a forward bipod, and a folding carrying handle fitted to the top of the launcher. There is also a fold‐down shoulder support which is removeable. The Type 69-1, introduced in the 1980s, is slightly shorter than the original Type 69 and has slightly different sights, with the rear sight assembly more centrally positioned on the tube. The Chinese RPGs seen in theatre so far appear to be Type 69-1s.
Two Type 69s in a Ukrainian armoury (via social media)
The earliest evidence of Type 69s in Ukraine I’ve come across is a video posted by the Ukrainian YouTube channel Tacti Coach on 29 November 2023 which discusses RPG-7s in general but features a Type 69. Subsequently, on 19 January 2024, the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade shared several photos of troops training with Type 69s.
Another undated photograph shows the interior of a Ukrainian armoury, with crates of ammunition and transit chests with a Barrett M107 and two Type 69s.
Training with Type 69 (via 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade)
On 21 January, a Ukrainian combatant believed to be associated to Ukraine’s special operations forces shared a photograph holding a Type 69 by its carry handle. On the 18 February, the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade again shared an album of photos showing troops training with the Type 69 giving us the best look at the Chinese RPG in Ukraine so far.
In future articles/videos we’ll look at other RPG-7 variants in use in Ukraine. We have previously examined a number of RPG-7 related topics, mostly focused on improvised warheads.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
Drones have come to define the war in Ukraine with both sides making prolific use of the them for observation and ordnance delivery. Both sides have struggled to find adequate countermeasures for the drone threat with everything from fishing nets to anti-drone guns and from cope cages to complex electronic warfare jammers to disrupt UAV frequencies over larger areas.
The threat to individual soldiers has become increasingly serious with many units resorting to pressing sporting shotguns into service. However, not every combatant can carry a shotgun and a number of companies, engineers and fabricators have turned their attention to providing soldiers with a cheap, mass manufacturable, and effective weapon which can be issued to individual soldiers en masse.
Loading the adapter into a GP-25 (via Ingra)
In this article/video we’ll look at one of these efforts from a Russian company Ingra (ИНГРА). Ingra have developed an adaptor that converts a GP-25, 40mm under barrel grenade launcher, into a single-shot 12ga shotgun. On 13 April, Ingra announced [machine translated]:
“Friends, the INGRA company has created a new, unparalleled device ROSYANKA [Sundew] for the destruction of quadrocopters. The testing stage has been completed. ROSYANKA changes the caliber of the underbarrel grenade launcher to fire a 12-gauge hunting cartridge with an effective range of 15-30 meters. The tests carried out showed the reliability, safety and efficiency of the device. We have reached the next stage, which is the production of a pre-production batch for testing by the troops. Our task is to fill the troops with the ROSYANKA product in a short time.“
Later the same day they shared their first videos demonstrating the adaptor in action. In the first video the adaptor is shown being loaded with a 12ga cartridge and then inserted into a GP-25, just as a grenade would be. A second short video shows the adapter being used to shoot down a commercial quadcopter drone.
A Rosyanka 12ga adapter and pouch (via Ingra)
On their telegram channel the company posted a pair of photographs showing targets shot with an adapter at 30 metres. They claim 5mm of penetration but do not mention the length of the adapter’s barrel. From one of the photographs Ingra shared it appears that the ROSYANKA was developed in three barrel lengths, estimated to range between 2 and 5 inches in length.
On around the 5 May, the company released a slicker video demonstrating the adapter. The design appears simple, it has interfaces that allow it to be loaded and held in the GP-25s barrel which align the cartridge, which is loaded into the adaptor’s breech, with the GP-25’s firing pin. To unload the adaptor it has to be released from the launcher by depressing the grenade release catch, then the spent case needs to be extracted from the adaptor and a new cartridge loaded. The video also shows that a rear sight adapter is fitted to aid aiming the weapon.
On the 10 May I spoke to one of the company’s representatives, before the adaptor had been launched on company’s website, he explained that would be available soon and that it would cost around 12,000 rubles ($130). On the 14 May, the adaptor was launched on Ingra’s website at a lower than expected cost of 9,300 Rubles or US$102. The adapter is currently listed as unavailable on Ingra’s website but posts on the company’s social media urge interested parties to contact them directly to order.
Firing on a commercial quadcopter drone during a range demonstration (via Ingra)
In a video, shared on the 13 May, Ingra demonstrated the operation of the adaptor and also noted that it is compatible with GP-25, GP-30 and GP-34 pattern grenade launchers. Ingra’s website provides some specifications and confirms that the adapter is only available in one barrel length, of the three previously shown. The adapter is 250mm/9.8in long and weighs in at 340g/12oz. The manufacturer states is has an effective range of between 15 and 35 metres (50-115 feet) against a target with a 500mm/19.6in cross section. The adaptor can be used with 2 3/4 and 3in loads and has a warranty for up to 100 rounds of the Siberia 32g No.3 12ga which is Ingra;s recommend load. The adaptor comes with instructions, a rear sight adapter and a small pouch.
On the 16 May, Ingra shared another range video featuring a Russian combatant trying out the Rosyanka adaptor against floating balloons. The adaptor is being used in a GP-25 mounted on an AKMS with a PBS-1 suppressor. The combatant testing the adaptor notes [his comments were machine translated] the importance of seating the cartridge fully in the breech and keeping your hands clear of the muzzle in case of accidental discharge. He suggests having the GP-25 on safe to avoid an accidental discharge, hinting that one may have occurred earlier. He also demonstrates using a rod to push the spent cartridge case out of the adaptor’s breech.
Now that the adaptors are available it remains to be seen if we and when we’ll see them in use in the field with Russian troops. The system is clearly well thought out, simple to manufacture and potentially fairly effective at under 40 metres. It adapts a readily available infantry weapon to a pressing new role and may also have some close quarter anti-personnel applications.
It undoubtedly provides the operator with a means of engaging a drone but it also has drawbacks. The reloading process is comparatively slow meaning that the user is likely to only have one chance to engage a drone if it is one of the faster FPV drones and is unlikely to otherwise match a conventional shotgun in terms of reload times when engaging drones engaged in munitions dropping or observation. It also means the grenadier has to choose what to have loaded ready in his GP-25 in various situations. The limited availability of underbarrel grenade launchers also means that, depending on the unit, only one soldier per squad will have the ability to use the adaptor.
Update – 20/06/24:
A Russian telegram channel posted several photos of a damaged adaptor, stating [machine translated]:
“The first test was not successful; during the first shot, the skirt of the cartridge was torn off (it remained in the GP25, the barrel itself jumped out of the GP and flew away 30 meters.”
It may be that the user loaded the adapter with a cartridge not recommended by the manufacturer.
Update – 11/7/24: Photographs of a production ROSYANKA disassembled showing the threads which allows the barrel piece to screw into the wider breech section.
Update – 27/4/25:
Here we have a GP25 in a DIY standalone stock loaded with a BRT shotgun insert which was developed to engage drones.
— Matthew Moss | The Armourer's Bench (@historicfirearm) April 27, 2025
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
In a recent article/video we looked at the proliferation of Russia’s unusual ‘Turtle Tanks’ which are protected by ad hoc, locally fabricated counter-FPV shells. Since then we’ve gotten a good look at several more Turtle Tanks and our first look at the driver’s point of view.
Footage, filmed on 27 April, of another Russian armoured assault into Krasnohorivka shows a column of four infantry fighting vehicles with what appear t o be counter-FPV shelters following a tank with a ‘cope cage’
On the 29 April, a Ukrainian Telegram channel posted a short video of a ‘Turtle Tank’ attack in the Bakhmut direction, noting that [machine translated]: “the equipment is stupidly scalded with metal, from 5 units it was possible to destroy a tank and an armored personnel carrier. A lot of FPV was spent on one tank. Everyone laughs at their construction of barns, but in fact they work like hell.” The tank appears to have a box like shelter with a sloped forward roof over its gun and glacis. As seen in earlier videos the tank is leading a column of armoured vehicles during the assault, clearing a path for them. It appears to detonate a mine with its mine plough and retreats.
At the start of May a pair of T-62s with hybrid counter-FPV shelters were seen in photos taken by a UAV, location unconfirmed. These images illustrate the blurring of the lines between ‘cope cage’ equipped tanks and the ‘turtle tanks’. Like the earlier turtle tanks they’re fitted with EW sets & KMT-6 mine ploughs but do not have shells made entirely from sheet metal. Instead, they appear to have used chainlink and gratings, one piece of which appears to have Kontakt (explosive reactive armour (ERA) mounted. One of the vehicles appears to have been used to transport supplies. One T-62 has broken tracks, the other top damage.
A hybrid combining elements of the Turtle Tank with that of earlier ‘cope cages’ (via social media)
Around the same time the Ukrainian 79th Air Assault Brigade shared video of Russian attacks near Novomykhailivka, in Donetsk, the footage included a brief clip of a ‘turtle tank’ with a small forward opening, camouflage over its shell frame and no sign of a mine plough or roller fitted. On 2 May, the 33rd Mechanized Brigade shared footage from thermal camera-equipped FPV drones showed a Russian tank being used to transport troops, the profile of the counter-FPV shelter is visible but the low definition of the thermal footage makes it difficult to analyse its construction. The vehicle, however, appears to be equipped with a mine plough and possibly an EW module.
Also on 2 May, Ukrainian drone fundraiser Teoyaomiquushared a video of a Russian assault near Ivanivske which shows a pair of Russian armoured vehicles with counter-FPV shells, one of which deploys a smoke screen. The 1st Assault Battalion of the 5th Separate Assault Brigade also shared footage from the Russian assault showing the shell-equipped vehicles.
On the 5 May a short video was posted by a Russian combatant which showed an entirely enclosed MT-LB with steel plates surrounding the top of the vehicle and its wheels. It also has an additional mesh roof cover to add additional top protection. Two cutouts in the side and one in the front for the driver also have mesh covers to give some visibility. On the same day video of a destroyed BTR-MDM which had been encased in a counter-FPV shelter was shared, showing the rear of the vehicle enclosed.
An evolved Turtle Tank with added cages on its superstructure (via social media)
Perhaps the most striking evolution of the ‘Turtle Tank’ appeared on 5 May, a tank completely enclosed except for a small gap at the front. Protective grills made from cages completely cover the outer metal sheets of the counter-FPV shell. One Russian telegram channel likened it to a rolling ‘poultry farm’. The vehicle also has a KMT-7 mine roller. Additional video of the porcupine-like tank gives us the first look at what it is like driving one of these ‘turtle tanks’, with his hatch open the driver has an almost clear view ahead (apart from the solid awning above him and the partial grill cage protection to his front) but no view to the left or right front quarters of the tank.
A Turtle Tank driver using a camera feed to steer (via social media)
Several days later footage from inside what appears to be the same tank shows the driver steering by video monitor. The readout on the monitor suggests the video’s resolution is 4K H.265 but the field of view appears limited, with the camera seemingly positioned on the shell’s awning looking down between the KMT-7’s two rollers. The system used is from Russian automotive accessory company Eplutus and appears to be one of their rear view camera monitors.
Another piece of UAV footage shows another ‘turtle tank’ with a much boxier shell. It again has all of the major features seen in earlier examples: a sheet metal shell which encloses most of the top part of tank, a set of mine rollers and a EW jammer module on the roof. Some sources suggest the footage was filmed near Bilohorivka, in Luhansk. It’s unclear when the footage was filmed but the vehicle appears stationary with access grates to the tank’s rear deck left open.
The 7 May saw evidence of the proliferation of t he ‘turtle tank’ concept with Russian social media sharing photographs of a ‘Turtle Tank’ fabricated by the Russian 40th Naval Infantry Brigade, these indicate that the concept is continuing to proliferated, perhaps without any central influence. The tank is encased in a counter-FPV shelter made up of three large metal sheets, a poorly fabricated angled roof which slopes at the rear with a flat top and a wire mesh slopping front piece. Additionally on the floor there appears to be a chair curtain similar to those seen on other ‘turtle tanks’. The rear has an extended deck and appears to be enclosed. A skirt of Kontakt-1 ERA has been roughly added around the skirt. As with other Turtle Tanks the ‘V Turtle’ is equipped with what appears to be an RP-377 electronic warfare jammer. It also has a KMT-6 mine plough fitted. A large white V has been painted on the sides of the shell and Russian flag rings added to the barrel.
A Turtle Tank built by the 40th Naval Infantry Brigade (via social media)
On 10 May, footage of an FPV drone attacking an immobilised ‘turtle tank’ emerged. The tank is again enclosed by a counter-FPV shell and has a mine plough. The feed from the drone also suffers from some interference as it approaches the vehicle suggesting that an EW module may be present nearby, perhaps aboard the tank. However, it appears that a mine has damaged the tank’s tracks and the vehicle has been abandoned allowing an FPV to attack via an open rear hatch. The footage was reportedly filmed during the first day of the new Russian offensive towards Kharkiv. This again shows that not only is the concept proliferating but also that the ‘turtle tanks’ are still vulnerable to conventional anti-tank weapons like mines.
Also on the 10 May, the Russian military channel, Large Caliber Trouble, shared a photo of the porcupine turtle tank which had been damaged by FPV strikes showing the cage bars bent and some holes in the counter-FPV shell. The post claims that the tank was “attacked by 40 kamikazes, [but] thanks to electronic warfare, most of them fell and only 8 FPVs were able to cause damage.” The condition of the vehicle after the engagement is unknown. The suggestion that a large number of FPVs attacked the tank supports the earlier Ukrainian comments about ‘a lot of FPV [being] spent on one tank.’
A ‘turtle tank’, possibly a T-80, seen on the eastern front on the first day of the Russian Kharkiv offensive (via social media)
A key question is how can the Turtle Tanks be defeated? Basically just like any other tank can be: anti-tank guided missiles with tandem warheads, dense mines belts, direct hits by artillery, use of multiple FPV drones to damage and breach the shell with additional drones to exploit gaps made.
We will probably see further proliferation of the ‘turtle tanks’ in coming weeks but with time the Ukrainians will probably find ways to engage these protected tanks more effectively, as is so common in war there will probably be a continued evolution of measure and counter-measure.
Update – 13/5/24:
On the 8 May photos of a Russian T-72B3 being fitted with a counter-FPV shell were posted. OSINT account Naalsionoted that while the tank had tactical markings denoting the 68th Guards Tank Regiment, 150th Motorised Rifle Division, 8th Guards Combined Arms Army, Southern Military District, the original Telegram post said that the work was carried out by the 104th Separate Tank Battalion of the 7th Guards Airborne Assault Division. In the photos we can see the assembly of a frame projecting from the tank’s sides with slightly angled sheet metal being welded to the sides.
Ukraine’s Presidential Brigade shared some FPV footage of what may be another ‘Turtle Tank’ near Vuhledar. The resolution of the footage is low but the vehicle appears to have an EW module on top of its counter-FPV shell. Its unclear if the shell is solid sheet metal or if its is a mesh screen which covers the top part of the vehicle and has been shrouded in camouflage netting.
On 13 May, photographs of a T-80U with shell were shared with at least some of the work seemingly being completed in the field with a welder hooked up to a generator. The outer framework of the shell is visible and the sheet metal used seems to be well rusted. Markings visible may suggest the tank belongs to the 3rd Motor Rifle Division’s 752nd Motor Rifle Regiment.
Also on the 13 May, the 3rd Assault Brigade claimed that the 3rd along with the 66th Mechanized, and 77th Airmobile Brigades had engaged Russian forces on the Kharkiv front and struck a ‘turtle tank’ with FPVs.
Footage of what may be the ‘turtle tank’ which was immobilised during the initial assaults on the Kharkiv front shows the shell badly damaged and its left-side track lost its KMT-6 mine plough is still present however.
The clearest imagery of of a knocked out ‘turtle tank’ which has appeared so far also emerged on 13 May. Three images taken by an observation drone show a T-62 which shares a numerous construction characteristics with the earlier ‘porcupine turtle’ seen on 5 May. It has similar protective grills made from cages completely cover the outer metal sheets of the counter-FPV shell. However, its rear is not enclosed by sheet metal but a combination of sheets and grating.
The tank doesn’t have any visible electronic warfare equipment but is fitted with what appears to be a BTU-55 dozer blade mounting point (H/T – Ross) which is no longer present and not visible in the available imagery (although what appears to be a KMT-6 mine plough can be seen on the ground behind the tank). The tank is clearly has signs of fire damage along its side and rear and the front portion of its shell as been blown inwards and warped, cause unclear though it may have been an artillery strike, ATGM hit or an FPV. Intriguingly, inside the shell appears to be an earlier pre-existing ‘cope cage’ shelter on the turret which does not not a part of the outer shell structure.
Update – 14/5/24:
Further examples of tanks equipped with counter-FPV shells, which both sides increasingly refer to as ‘сарай’ or sheds. Drone footage of a Russian T-72B3 equipped with a ‘shed’ was shared early on 14 May showing the vehicle on fire, with smoke billowing from its roof, and under attack by FPVs. The footage has reportedly been geo-located to Novovodyanoe, in the Luhansk region. Again the shell is made up of sheet metal with a rear hatch and an additional mesh roof screen. The tank has a broken track and one shot from the footage appears to show the vehicle surrounded by TM-62 anti-tank mines suggesting the vehicle entered a mine field. The vehicle does not appear to be fitted with a mine plough or roller.
Additionally imagery of another T-62-based ‘turtle tank’ were also shared, date and location unknown, but the now standard construction of a rough internal framework made from box metal and then sheet metal welded onto the frame. From the photos it appears it may be fitted with a mine plough. Only one side of the shell has been completed but there is also a small ladder welded onto the frame at the rear for access to the engine deck. Intriguingly, we can also see that the frame itself has been welded to the tank’s turret with two angled struts meaning that the tanks turret cannot be traversed at all.
Update – 15/5/24:
On the 14 May, footage of another knocked out ‘turtle tank’ emerged showing a burning tank near Andriivka in Donestsk. The tank appears to have been part of an armoured assault which may have been halted by artillery fire. The tank appears to be a T-62 fitted with KMT-6 mine plough. The vehicle is on fire with a significant portion of its shell blown off on its right side. The video also shows an FPV drone striking the tank from the rear.
On the evening of 14 May, the 79th Air Assault Brigade shared video of another Russian attack in Novomykhailivka, in Donetsk. This showed several intriguing vehicles including a hybrid-turtle which had a layer of tyres under some cage armour and a camouflage net. [Additional footage here] Another brief shot showed a tank, with no visible main gun, moving across open ground. It is equipped with a KMT-7 mine roller and a counter-FPV shell/shed which is open fronted with no additional protection such as a chain curtain or wire cages. It appears the assault was met with both artillery and FPVs.
On the 15th observation drone footage was shared of a badly damaged, burning ‘turtle tank’ which was destroyed by the Ukrainian 72nd brigade during a Russian attack in the Vuhledar sector. The date of the engagement is unconfirmed but the video shows the vehicle being destroyed in a spectacular explosion, likely due to a cook-off of ammunition.
On the 15 May another image of a converted T-72 in Donetsk emerged. Visible in the photo is a sheet metal counter-FPV shelter equipped with a layer of outer wire cages. A KMT-6 mine plough is fitted and a chain curtain protects the turret while providing decent visibility for the tank’s frontal arc. Additionally a commercial surveillence camera has been attatched to the roof of the shell. An АЕК-902 smoke discharger is attached to the top of the shell and ERA blocks have been attached to the skirt and then enclosed partially by a wire screen.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
Ukrainian social media describes the vehicles as ‘turtle tanks’ (танку черепашці) or the ‘Blyatmobile’ while on Russian telegram channels the tanks are often referred to as ‘Tsar Mangal’ (Царь мангал) or Tsar’s BBQ/grill or some refer to them as ‘assault garages’ (штурмовых гаражей). To give it a more academic name it could be described as a counter-FPV shelter or shell. Generally speaking at the moment Ukraine is short on anti-tank guided missiles and artillery which would traditionally be used to combat armoured vehicles, over the past year Ukraine has held the advantage in FPV drone production and has come to rely on them when targeting Russian armour. It appears that these shelters have been fabricated in an effort to mitigate Ukraine’s use of FPVs offering an additional layer of physical protection, often alongside electronic warfare systems.
A day or so after I shared my initial video on the Turtle Tank more imagery of what was either another Turtle Tank or the first one rebuilt appeared online. The vehicle’s shell had a slightly different profile and notably mounted on top was an electronic warfare device to counter drones. Here’s a still from a UAV feed showing the vehicle:
A still from a UAV feed showing the ‘Mk2’ on the move (via social media)
Subsequently, on the 17 April, we got a better look at the Mk2 Turtle Tank. Unlike the first vehicle it appears to be constructed from corrugated sheet metal and is fully enclosed, preventing any traverse of the tank’s turret. It has been speculated that Russian engineers took a damaged tank which could not move its turret and built a breacher vehicle which could be used to lead assault columns. Like the first Turtle Tank, this iteration also has a KMT-6 mine plough fitted.
With a fully enclosed shell it is unclear if the Mk2 is being used for transporting troops or if its enclosed to protect its electronic warfare (EW) kit or perhaps both. What is clear is that it is being used as a mine clearance vehicle ahead of armoured assault columns. The shell would in theory give all around protection against drone attack. The footage of the vehicle, said to have been filmed on around 15 April, shows the vehicle on the move, it survives several near misses from artillery and it also shows the vehicle making a wrong turn probably due to is severely restricted visibility.
A side profile shot of the initial Turtle Tank (via social media)
On the 19 April, a Russian telegram channel shared a video showing several photographs of the construction of the initial Turtle Tank showing its inner framework. A week later on 25 April, Russian news outlet Izvestiashared footage of one of the tanks, again fitted with a mine plough, in action leading a column of vehicles in the Krasnohorivka sector. [The first footage of the operation appeared on Telegram on 24 April.] The vehicle is immobilised by what appears to be a mine blast with Russian sources suggesting it became stuck. Another video filmed by another drone shows the rear angle of the columns advance.
Izvestia’s report suggests that the tank was locally known as ‘Ferdinand’. Further footage shows the salvaging of ‘Ferdinand’ with another tank successfully towing it away. Here is another video showing another overwatch angle of salvage operation. Closer drone footage of the stricken tank shows that the red corrugated sheet metal shell has been covered in a camouflage net and there is also what appears to be an electronic warfare device mounted on the roof. The sides of the vehicle’s shell are less sloped and the front of the shell appears less enclosed than the second iteration of the tank.
In additional footage a new iteration of the improvised counter-FPV shelters appears with a ‘Turtle BMP’ [or BMP-Mangals / ‘Царь-Мангал’] seen in operation inside Krasnohorivka. What appears to be earlier footage shows both ‘Ferdinand’ and the ‘Turtle BMP’ moving by road in the Petrovs’kyi district. The Turtle BMP appears to be fitted with a mine plough.
A still from footage of a Turtle BMP on the move on the outskirts of Donetsk (via social media)
Also on the 25 April, two photographs of fabrication of another Turtle Tank were shared these show a frame of six supporting arches onto which steel plates have been welded, on top of this a mash screen has been attached adding another layer of spaced protection.
A short video of yet another variant shows a sheet metal shell with an enclosed rear that has a door and steps perhaps to allow passengers to debus. The front of the shell is much more open and there is no sign of any electronic warfare devices mounted on the shell. It’s unclear when or where the footage was filmed.
Another example of a Turtle Tank, no mine plough fitted (via social media)
Intriguingly, the concept of a counter-FPV shelter made from sheet metal appears to be proliferating with several images of another vehicle reportedly originating from the Chasiv Yar area to the north of Krasnohorivka where the first vehicles were seen. The shell appears to be made from corrugated metal sheets and unlike some of the earlier examples has been painted with a camouflage pattern. Unlike some of the other Turtle tanks this one does not appear to have a mine plough fitted and it has a curtain of chains to protect openings at the front and rear of the shell.
A Turtle Tank reportedly operating near Chasiv Yar (via social media)
From the available imagery it appears that the majority of the vehicles outfitted with a counter-FPV shell are also equipped with mine ploughs, further supporting the theory that they are being used a breacher vehicles. Some, however, appear to be optimised for transporting infantry.
It’s unclear if all of the Turtle Tanks are operated by the 5th Motorized Rifle Brigade but [as of 25 April] there may be early signs that the counter-FPV shelter concept may be proliferating to other sectors, and other units. While the vehicles may appear ridiculous they are proving at least somewhat effective in mitigating the threat of Ukrainian FPV drones though their shells offer little protection against anything else.
Update – 29/4/24:
Footage, filmed on 27 April, of another Russian armoured assault into Krasnohorivka shows a column of 4 infantry fighting vehicles with what appear to be counter-FPV shelters following a tank with a ‘cope cage’
A Ukrainian Telegram channel posted a short video of a ‘Turtle Tank’ attack in the “Bakhmut direction” noting that [machine translated] “the equipment is stupidly scalded with metal, from 5 units it was possible to destroy a tank and an armored personnel carrier. A lot of FPV was spent on one tank. Everyone laughs at their construction of barns, but in fact they work like hell.”
The tank appears to have a box like shelter with a sloped forward roof over its gun and glacis.
Update – 1/5/24:
Not quite ‘turtle tanks’: a pair of T-62s with hybrid counter-FPV shelters were seen in photos taken by a UAV, location unconfirmed. Like previous turtle tanks they’re fitted with EW sets & KMT-6 mine ploughs. But do not have shells made from corrugated sheet metal. Instead they have used chainlink and gratings (one piece of which appears to have Kontakt ERA mounted). One of the vehicles appears to have been used to transport supplies. One T-62 has broken tracks, the other top damage.
T-62s with hybrid counter-FPV shelters. Like other turtle tanks they're fitted with EW sets & KMT-6 mine ploughs. 1 appears to be being used to transport supplies. 1 has broken tracks. Not corrugated sheets but chainlink and grating (also with Kontakt ERA mounted on some). https://t.co/0Ds6kmdoZB
— Matthew Moss | Historical Firearms (@historicfirearm) May 1, 2024
Update – 7/5/24: A ‘Turtle Tank’ fabricated by the Russian 40th Marine Brigade shows that the concept is continuing to proliferated, perhaps without any central influence.
I am pleased to inform you that they are at it again.
This beauty was apparently assembled by the 40th Guards Marine Brigade.
— Matthew Moss | Historical Firearms (@historicfirearm) May 8, 2024
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
In this series looking at weapons used in Ukraine we’ve looked at a number of different grenade launchers including GP-25s adapted for standalone use, FN FN40GLs, discharger cups for hand grenades and perhaps the rarest grenade launcher seen in Ukraine so far; the standalone Colt M203. Another interesting and fairly rarely seen grenade launcher that began to appear in Ukraine last winter is LMT’s standalone 40mm M203.
LMT offers a series of M203-derived launchers and two standalone stock attachment methods. The Iowa-based company introduced its 40mm grenade launchers in 2003. The launchers seen in Ukraine appear to be the rail mounted version with a 9 inch long barrel.
An LMT M203 in the field (via Rogue Team)
The first sighting of an LMT M203 in Ukraine came in November 2023, when Georgian volunteer O.d.i.n.s.o.n., part of the GUR/HUR (Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence)’s Omega Team, posted a photo of one side by side with a standalone GP25. The launchers likely arrived in country a little earlier, speaking to TAB at the time he noted that “the aiming module is a little weird. It has like an M4 forward sight and GL [grenade launcher] distance adjustable rear sight but it’s on top of the weapon. So it doesn’t force you to arc the barrel Like a GP25 does.”
The next appearance of one of the launchers came in late February 2024, when Scorpion Protection Group, another SOF group, shared a photo of a combatant training with one. A third GUR unit, Rogue Team, have also posted images featuring an LMT M203. The first image was shared by a team member on 17 March. This was followed by an image shared on the team’s Instagram page on the 5 April.
LMT M203 rail mounted version with 9in barrel – right side (LMT)
On the 14 April, a photo posted by one of the Kraken Regiment’s (also under the GUR) teams also appears to include a standalone LMT M203. Most recently on 16 April, a Spanish member of Omega Team, shared a photo of an LMT M203 with its action open with a round ready to load. On the same day TAB spoke again to Omega Team member O.d.d.i.n.s.o.n. at length about the launchers.
O.d.i.n.s.o.n. explained that the unit switched from rotary 40mm grenade launchers to standalone GP25s and LMT M203 as they are lighter and less bulky than the rotary launchers. He reiterated the difference in the LMT sight from quadrant sights found on other launchers and noted that “instead of a switch or a selector it has a little hook that you pull back and it prevents your finger from going on the trigger.” This is a carry over from the original M203 on which LMT’s launcher is based.
When comparing the GP25 and M203 O.d.i.n.s.o.n. noted that the M203 is light, effective and has a ‘really nice stock’ but he dislikes that the M203’s action has to be opened to reload, unlike the GP25 which when fired “leaves nothing inside the tube and is faster on the reload.” When asked if he’d seen many other units using LMT launchers he explained that “most [International Legion] Special Task Units [affiliated with the GUR] have a couple.”
An LMT M203 with its action open (Courtesy of Delta Knights)
We also spoke with Delta Knights, another GUR Specal Task Unit made up of international volunteers, who confirmed they also use LMT M203s and said that they ‘really love it’ but one thing they do wish they had more of is 40mm smoke grenades, adding that the launcher is most often employed with High Explosive (HE) grenades. Delta Knights were kind enough to provide some photos and videos of the M203 in operation at the range.
While the imagery and information available confirms combat use of the LMT M203s in Ukraine it doesn’t give us a solid picture of just how many are in-theatre and other units who may be using them. As always the imagery shared online represents a fraction of what is going on and can only be considered a limited sample. In terms of the origins of the launchers one potential source for the LMT M203s is Estonia which adopted the LMT MARS-L as the R-20 in 2020. Some of the Estonian R-20s have been seen with LMT M203s and given Estonia’s considerable past support for Ukraine it is possible that they may have provided a number of the launchers.
Special thanks to O.D.I.N.S.O.N and Delta Knights for their time and insights and to the guys at Cloooud for additional assistance.
Update – 1/5/24: A recently shared International Legion recruitment social media post included an LMT M203.
Update – 10/9/24: The ‘Expeditionaries’ Instagram page, seemingly affiliated with an international volunteer team shared a photo of an LMT M203 being jokingly loaded with a deodorant roll-on rather than a 40mm grenade.
Update – 10/01/25: Two additional archival sightings of LMT M203s. The first on the left dates from September 2024. The second, from DC Tactical was shared on 29 October 2024.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
The so-called ‘cope cage’ has been a thing since before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. With the proliferation of top attack munitions, drone dropped munitions and subsequently first person view (FPV) kamikaze munitions ways of protecting valuable armoured fighting vehicles were sought. This evolved as cages over the top of tanks’ turrets and later with some vehicles being near-fully enclosed by wire cages, sometimes with hanging chains.
A still from a Ukrainian overwatch drone feed showing the tank (via social media)
In early April Russian ‘engineers’ took the ‘cope cage’ to its next level, completely enclosing an entire tank in sheet metal. While this might look ridiculous the practice is a time-honoured one with the concept of spaced armour developing as early as the First World War, when the French augmented the Schneider CA1 with some forward armour panels. Spaced armour is intended to reduce the penetrating power of kinetic and explosive penetrators.
Damage to the outer, spaced, armour plates of a French CA1 tank (source)
At least one Russian tank, a T-72, has been seen near totally enclosed by sheet metal rather than a cage. Various imagery shows a tank encased in a trapezoidal steel structure, giving the vehicle the look of a shed on tracks. Ukrainian social media has seen the tank described as the ‘turtle tank’ (танку черепашці) or the ‘Blyatmobile’ while on Russian telegram channels the tanks is often referred to as ‘Tsar Mangal’ (Царь мангал) or Tsar’s BBQ/grill. The odd vehicle was first spotted during a recent attack on Ukrainian positions around Krasnohorivka, in Donetsk. It was seen in video posted on 8 April, from a Ukrainian overwatch drone, leading an attacking column of Russian armoured fighting vehicles delivering troops forward. It has been hypothesised that the sheet metal structure was built to protect troops riding on the tank’s hull. Notably the tank is also fitted with a KMT-6 mine plough.
A still from a video of the tank posted on a Russian telegram channel (via dobryi_russkyi)
While the turtle tank survived the operation during which it was first seen several days later it appears to have been destroyed by a Ukrainian artillery strike. Ukrainian overwatch and reconnaissance drones tracked the tank back to its base and the location was reportedly cross-referenced by a Ukrainian OSINT and geo-location team Cyber Boroshno, against open source video of it inside a warehouse posted by Russian sources.
In the video we can better see the construction of the tank’s shell. It appears there are 4 corner support columns holding up a frame work onto which the shell as been welded. At the front of the shell there is a white painted piece of shaped metal that looks it could be from the roof of a commercial panel van adds some aerodynamic finesse. It appears there may be an internal box with sheet metal of the sides of the shell providing a second layer at the rear on the tank’s engine deck. Perhaps a space for infantry dismounts.
The drone footage shared on 9 April showed the aftermath of the strike on the Russian armoured unit’s base with the battle damage assessment footage appearing to show the turtle tank in the wreckage of the building.
Ukrainian ISR UAV footage claimed to be of the turtle tank after an artillery strike (via CyberBoroshno)
The armour shell constructed by Russian engineers likely offered some protection against FPV drones but at the cost of the crew’s ability to observe its surroundings, the ability to traverse its gun and likely its mobility.
The turtle tank may look ridiculous but it is a prime example of in-field adaptation and evolution of concepts around how to protect vehicles. The cope cage, which first emerged in Syria, have become more and more mainstream with both Russia and Ukraine employing them, who knows perhaps the armour shell of the turtle tank may indicate a future direction of development which might eventually become less ad-hoc and ludicrous looking.
Update 16/04/24:
Russian ‘engineers’ in the Krasnohorivka area appear to have either rebuilt or built another ‘turtle tank’ with a slightly different profile and an electronic warfare device mounted on top to counter drones. Stills from a UAV feed:
Update 17/04/24: A better look at the Turtle Tank Mk2. It appears to be constructed from corrugated sheet metal and is fully enclosed, preventing any traverse of the tank’s turret. It has been speculated that Russian engineers took a damaged tank which could not move its turret and built a breacher vehicle. This later was iteration of the Turtle Tank also has a mine plough like the first.
It’s unclear if the Mk2 is a construction on another tank or the shell rebuilt on the same vehicle following damage. With a fully enclosed shell it seems unlikely that the vehicle is being used for transporting troops instead it appears to be enclosed to protect its EW kit and act as a mine clearance vehicle ahead of armoured columns. The shell would in theory give all around protection against drone attack. The footage of the vehicle, said to have been filmed on around 15 April, shows the vehicle on the move, it survive several near misses from artillery it also shows the vehicle making a wrong turn probably due to is severely restricted visibility.
A better look at the Turtle Tank Mk2. It is full enclosed, no turret movement. Electronic warfare set mounted on roof. Shell is made from standard corrugated metal. It's also mounted with a mine plough, & may be the same tank with shell rebuilt. Role seems to be as a breacher. pic.twitter.com/CjszFkecPM
— Matthew Moss | Historical Firearms (@historicfirearm) April 17, 2024
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
The U.S. government announced, on 9 April, the transfer of enough small arms to equip a brigade to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The weapons originate from the arms shipments that the US Navy and allies have seized in recent years thousands of weapons and millions of rounds of ammunition which have been seized in recent years from Iranian shipments to the Houthis in Yemen.
Thousands of illicit weapons interdicted by USS Monterey, May 2021 (U.S. Navy)
In a statement U.S. Central Command noted that the arms and munitions had been “originally seized by U.S. Central Command and partner naval forces from four separate transiting stateless vessels between 22 May 2021 to 15 Feb 2023.” The transfer to Ukraine includes 5,000 AK-pattern rifles, RPG-7 rocket launchers, sniper rifles and machine guns. This is not the first transfer of seized small arms to Ukraine with a previous transfer occurring in October 2023, when 1.1 million rounds of an unspecified 7.62mm calibre ammunition were transferred. That transfer was made up of ammunition seized from a single dhow on 9 December, 2022.
On Jan. 7. U.S. Navy seized 2,116 AK-pattern rifles including AKS20U & Type 56-1s from a fishing vessel en route from Iran to Yemen. (U.S. Navy)
On 6 July 2023, the U.S. Justice Department filed a forfeiture action for: “over 9,000 rifles, 284 machine guns, approximately 194 rocket launchers, over 70 anti-tank guided missiles and over 700,000 rounds of ammunition” these were reported to have originated from two dhows in 2021 and two from 2023. This suggests a discrepancy in the number of seized weapons detailed by the forfeiture action and the number subsequently handed over to Ukraine. This perhaps suggests that either a further transfer will follow with the remainder or a substantial portion of the arms and ammunition were not suitable for transfer for some unknown reason.
In terms of the types of small arms being transferred we can get a pretty good idea from examining the previously released images of the arms seized over the last couple of years. These include:
Chinese Type 56-1 7.62x39mm AKs
Russian VEPR AKS20U [VPO-158N-06] in 5.45x39mm (these will likely be useful for support troops and vehicle crews)
PK-pattern general purpose machine guns or Iranian and Chinese origin
Russian Kornet and Iranian Dehlaviyeh anti-tank guided missiles
Chinese Type 69 and Iranian RPG-7 clones
Iranian AM-50 12.7x99mm anti-materiel rifles
Chinese SVD clones
Imagery of seized ammunition suggests 7.62x54mmR, 7.62x39mm, and 12.7x99mm
US Central Command noted that:
“The munitions were being transferred from the IRGC to the Houthis in Yemen in violation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2216. U.S. CENTCOM is committed to working with our allies and partners to counter the flow of Iranian lethal aid in the region by all lawful means including U.S. and U.N. sanctions and through interdictions.”
The U.S. Justice Department confirmed in a statement that the transfer took place on 4 April, also explaining that the transfer required a civil forfeiture ruling against seized arms and ammunition which enabled the hand over. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said: “The Justice Department will continue to use our legal authorities, including forfeiture, to support the Ukrainian people in their fight.”
French naval forces interdicted more than 3,000 rifles and 578,000 rounds of ammunition, Jan. 2023 (US CENTCOM)
Most recently, in February 2023, the U.S. Navy reported that “more than 5,000 weapons and 1.6 million rounds of ammunition” had been seized since the beginning of the year. In 2021 alone, approximately 9,000 weapons were intercepted on their way to the Houthis. This suggests that if the weapons have not already been disposed of then there a further stocks of seized weapons to draw on for transfers to Ukraine. It remains to be seen if and when further transfers of seized weapons will be made and when the transferred weapons will begin to be spotted in the field.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
With the war in Ukraine’s current trench-bound stalemate often resembling the First World War it isn’t too surprising to see an early 20th century innovation making a comeback. Several variations on the concept of a periscope rifle have been seen in Ukraine since the summer of 2023.
A still from Heroes of Gallipoli (1915) showing a periscope rifle (via IWM)
The concept actually pre-dates the First World War, with sights like William Youlten’s Hyposcope dating to 1900, but really emerged during the war with many nations developing similar periscope-based systems that allowed service rifles to be mounted in frames and fired over the parapet removing the need for soldiers to expose themselves when sniping.
The first design featured in an article by Jeff Farrell in June 2023, Farrell interviewed a Czech veteran of the International Legion, Marian Simunek, who was wounded and has since developed a periscope which a rifle can be mounted in. In a pair of videos Simunek demonstrated fitting the rifle into the periscope mount and how it would be fired. Simunek manages to mount an AK-74 in the periscope mount within 30 seconds. The stock folds down from the body of the periscope and is secured with the pistol grip and trigger assembly being lined up, the stock of the rifle is secured by two straps and then the trigger cable is attached to the rifle’s trigger.
A second periscope design emerged in late January 2024, when a short video showing a tall tripod-mounted periscope was shared. The video shows the testing of a prototype gun mount which can be raised up to above parapet height and allows the gun to be aimed using the periscope the gun is show being tested in both semi-automatic and fully automatic. The trigger is attached to a command cable which runs down to a front grip with an exposed trigger in front of it. The tall monopod isn’t the most stable platform but the user demonstrating it supports the assembly using the integrated stock and pistol grip assembly and holds the stand with his off hand. While the ability to quickly raise and lower the rifle mounted on the stand is useful, especially for reloading, but it may lack stability in the field.
The third variation on the periscope rifle concept was shared on 18 March, with a short 22 second clip showing an AK-pattern rifle with its stock removed, mounted on a well fabricated pole with a periscope, an off hand support grip, a stock shaped like an AKS-74 folding stock and a pistol grip and trigger assembly which uses what appears to be a brake cable. In another video of the mount in the same position an individual demonstrates the articulation of the mount (albeit without a weapon installed). The mount has a wide tripod base and appears to be well made. The gun is set up in an urban environment behind a wall, likely for demonstration proposes. The this periscope rifle may be a more developed version of the previous design but I’ve been unable to find the original source for the video.
Interestingly, another video of as similar periscope rifle set up was shared, the design is clearly the same as that seen in the previous video. The shape of the stock has changed and the position and design of the stabilising forward hand grip differs.
While trench periscopes have been in use since the early weeks of the war, a more modern approach is the use of digital camera aimed remote weapons. These include the Shablya (sabre) remote weapon station developed by Roboneer, which has been in development since 2015 and has been tested with numerous different types of machine guns including PKs and M2 Brownings. Another similar system is the Tarantul, developed by engineers of the 118th Territorial Defence Brigade. This is a concept that Russian forces have also been experimenting with with a number of systems seen in test videos.
— Matthew Moss | Historical Firearms (@historicfirearm) April 24, 2023
The available imagery of periscope rifle systems originating from the war in Ukraine is relatively small so its difficult to gauge their utility fully, I’ve yet to see any evidence of their front line use. They are a specialist piece of kit which depending on the design is suited to some environments more than others. If you’ve seen other examples of periscope rifle systems or evidence of their use in combat please do let me know!
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
A few of weeks ago I published an article/video detailing the appearance of Swedish Carl Gustaf m/45 9x19mm submachine guns in Ukraine. One notable feature of the guns was that their configuration appeared to sit somewhere between the m/45A and the m/45B.
In the absence of clearer information I referred to these as m/45Bs, the most common variant and one which has the defining fixed magazine housing rather than the earlier removable magazine well seen on the m/45A. The fixed magazine well is an upgrade which was made before the later m/45B refit. It seems that there was some fluidity to how the upgrades were carried out which has led to guns with a mix of features.
An upgraded m/45A with the 41st Mechanized Brigade (Daily Mail)
From Swedish sourcesI’ve spoken to many of the m/45s seen in the imagery from Ukraine are early spec guns (m/45As) which may have been in storage and were not refit to the m/45B pattern. The m/45B refit was partially necessitated by the need to add an additional retention method to hold the receiver end-cap in place. Some sources suggest this was due to a type of training ammunition then in use, others point to it being simply extra security.
An m/45B (top) and an m/45A (bottom) with the fixed-magazine well upgrade (Henrik Jansson)
Working theories explaining the configuration of the guns seen in Ukraine include: that they are m/45A configuration guns which had been in storage and were retrofitted after the training ammunition left service and the additional end cap retention was no longer needed, so this change to the guns was omitted. As mentioned earlier, another reason may be that these are m/45As which had the magazine well upgrade but were placed in store or transferred before the broader m/45B upgrade was carried out.
As discussed in the initial video, it is thought that Estonia is a likely source for these guns as they received some of these guns in the 1990s and these m/45s have then subsequently been sent to Ukraine. Regardless of origin country the result is guns which do not have the additional end cap retention catch nor the green finish of the Swedish Army’s m/45B. They all feature the fixed magazine housing but there is also a mix of larger and smaller perforations in the barrel shrouds. [Note: Thanks to Jonathan Ferguson who noted that there is some variation in the size of shroud perforations within examples of both A & B model guns.]
A combatant in Ukraine with an m/45 c.early 2024 (via social media)
Since the last video a couple of other sources showing the m/45 in Ukraine were shared with me. Including this image of a Ukrainian combatant with a Swedish K which has the smaller barrel shroud holes. On 10 February a Daily Mailreport, featured Thunder Company, an element with the 41st Mechanised Brigade. Members of the company show journalist Richard Pendlebury an m/45 that is in their inventory. The company’s deputy commander describes it as a ‘museum piece’. Both guns appear to be of the same configuration generally seen in Ukraine. On 4 March, another short video of a Ukrainian combatant firing an m/45 at what appears to be a range was shared. It’s unclear when or where the video was filmed.
My very special thanks to Henrik Jansson for his time, insights and imagery and to numerous others for their knowledgeable input. Thank you to Weapons_Illustrated for their help sourcing imagery, check them out on twitter.
Update – 24/5/24:
On 11 April, a soldier of the 2nd Battery of the 2nd Self-Propelled Artillery Battalion of the Field Artillery Regiment of the 3rd Assault Brigade shared a photograph holding an m/45. [h/t Cloud for sharing].
Update – 18/6/24:
Some nice range footage of a Carl Gustaf m/45 in Ukrainian service. For more on these in Ukraine check out my video/article here:https://t.co/Hb9PcN8SR8
— Matthew Moss | Historical Firearms (@historicfirearm) June 19, 2024
Update 4/9/24: A new image of the Swedish m/45 submachine gun recently surfaced. (H/T AbraxasSpa)
Update 3/10/24: A photograph of what may be a member of the Ukrainian 129th Territorial Defence Brigade or potentially a member of the International Legion. He’s equipped with an m/45, note the three magazines in his chest rig and Ukrainian digicam pattern sling.
Support Us: If you enjoyed this video and article please consider supporting our work here. We have some great perks available for Patreon Supporters – including early access to custom stickers and early access to videos! Thank you for your support!
The Armourers Bench 