• lemonmelon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    2 months ago

    Non-credible. Purpose-built mine flails are on the borderline of credibility already. In this configuration, you’d need at least a class IV hitch to handle the tongue weight, probably a class V when you factor in the force imparted by the motion of the flail. That’s not even taking into account how much power is needed to properly swing the chains with enough impact to detonate a significant portion of the mines.

    And if there happens to be an AT mine or two in the mix, the whole ill-advised experiment becomes an unappealing art installation.

    • remotelove
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Good analysis, but you failed to point out that the truck will be towing the whole assembly. Pushing this contraption in reverse could be a hair problematic.

      If he is actually towing it, there is probably an 80% chance the actual truck would detonate the AT mine first, depending on how touchy the trigger was and if it’s ran over directly. (The rig would probably deflect more of the blast back through the truck.)

      • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        Mine flails typically reverse over minefields by design for that very reason, so I interpreted this one as doing the same. If not, then yes, driving across the field with the contraption behind the truck would be a short, joyless trip.