$300 dollar round takes out M1A2

This may have been posted already - I haven't read the whole therad sorry - report on M1 ops in 2003 - it includes soem cases of M1's being KO'ed and that the side and rear armour was defeatable - 1 M1 was KO'ed by 25mm AP shots into its engine.

Since then, IIRC there is a "well known" case of a M1 being KO'ed by a RPG-29 that struck the side in a small gap in the armour that has since been "rectified" - it left a hole in the tank but didn't hit anything important, including the crew. One such occasions was reported in the NYT as occuring during the assault on Sadr city in 2008 - page 2 of this article - I dont' know if this is hte one in the video or not.

the OP video fits the bill in terms of the strike area and the weapon, and since it cuts out right after the hit there's no way of knowing jsut what damage was done - a big explosion outside the tank doesn't really mean anything.

A Challenger 2 was also penetrated by a RPG-29 as reported inThe Telegraph - it was apaprently penetrated through the lower front armour, which traditionally is weaker than the glacis plate as it is sometimes covered by ground in between the tank and its attacker, so doesn't get hit as often. But in a short range urban fight folds and small irregualrities in the ground are much less likely to hide bits of the tank.

The OP calling every other poster or so retarded shoots himself in the foot. I cannot believe anything this "college" educated person says anymore.

reply to post by AuWolf


I did not call every other person retard when they made themselves look like it. You can choose to believe what you want. You can see my other threads in the weaponry forums.

And where were you "educated."

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by byteshertz

 

The tank is rendered usless. Its turrent is literally blown off. I did not say anything happend to the crew. The tank is now mission incapable and will have to be shipped back to the US for repairs. Also we do not know if the crew survived or not. Would you want to sit in that tank and take a hit like that? Tell us how it goes.

If a tank is being shipped back for repairs, how is it protecting ground infantry = mission fail = tank taken out of the mission.

edit on 25-3-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

All I saw was re-active armor detonating which blasted off the thick plate designed exactly to counter RPG's.

reply to post by mazzroth


1 - There is no reactive armor on that section of the tank
2 - There are only side bins full of personal affects which were destroyed
3 - An RPG-29 is a dual tandem warhead which is designed to defeat reactive armor by first exploding its first section taking out the reactive armor and then the main charge destroys the main armor.

Nice try

Got up to page 11 but the mass amount of dick wagging put me off reading further so if this has already been posted I apologize.

Abrams Tank aftermath of IED1/5/07 - Abrams M1A1 Tank hit with an IED in Fallujah.

and the only other rpg-29 v M1A2 I could find (More could be in the wild but I don't know where to look)

www.4shared.com...

As for the ops vid is almost like those two guys on the left are covering the shooter from the view of the other tank as for the multiply cameramen would you rather jump out of cover and record the impact or be already standing in the open recording the tank and the shooter or would you rather have multiple cameramen who can get the required shots?

EDIT - Which direction would you say the turret on the first tank you see is facing and why do you think the guy filming the shooter is in a car?

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Where I was educated has nothing to do with anything I said, but since you "asked" sans question mark, I took a few college courses while I was in the Navy.

FAKE two videos edited togethjer

The thing is, why would you waste $5mil on a single test? It seems to me that an equivilant test, say, piercing a side panel of a tank, would give you measurable results at a fraction of the cost!
LG

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Look Mr. Professional, if the warhead indeed penetrated the turret the first thing it would do is blow off the ammo panels because that is where it hit. Since the video shows no ammo cooking off or even the turret flying off like a kitchen pan that you see on T-72s during Gulf War we can say in conclusion that the tank it intact and the crew is safe. Damaged yes but not destroyed.

reply to post by deltaboy


Ammo does not need to be cooked of in every penetration. It probably did not penetrate, but it is damaged, it is not 100% mission capable.

I was exaggerating about the turret.

The T72's in Iraq weren't the high quality T72 that the Russians had; they were downgraded and didnt even have night optics etc.

There has been many times when IEDs ripped apart an M1 and the turret has been blown of a 5 million dollar piece of American armor using off the shelf WalMart tools.

I don't think the $300 RPG round will penetrate the armor of an M1A1.

Blow off a track - maybe. Antenna - yes. Scratch the paint - highly likely.

Just as a side note.

I have a $0.40 bullet that will take out the shooter of the $300 RPG, and then take it.

Originally posted by FarArcher
I don't think the $300 RPG round will penetrate the armor of an M1A1.

think again.

It won't penetrate the front armour, but there's a lot of places on the tank that are quite thin enough to be penetrated - eg in the link I gave above 1 M1 was KO'ed by 25mm kinetic energy rounds into its engine compartment.

I have a $0.40 bullet that will take out the shooter of the $300 RPG, and then take it.

Only if you've got a gun to fire it, which cost you how much?

However a rock or a stick can do the job too......

Originally posted by FarArcher
I don't think the $300 RPG round will penetrate the armor of an M1A1.

Blow off a track - maybe. Antenna - yes. Scratch the paint - highly likely.

Just as a side note.

I have a $0.40 bullet that will take out the shooter of the $300 RPG, and then take it.

It did penetrate the armor, blew the side bins, and much more.

There is no evidence in the video of a $0.40 bullet killing anyone in the video. The evidence has been in this thread if you read it.

Just as a side note the Juba sniper is owning all the marines who think they are hot shiz.

Plus as a side note I just used a free spoon to beat you senseless and left you for the hounds.

Originally posted by AuWolf
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

 

Where I was educated has nothing to do with anything I said, but since you "asked" sans question mark, I took a few college courses while I was in the Navy.

Everyone else seems to think where I was educated in this thread was important, so everyone who should speak should prove their credentials.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Where did you get that free spoon?

And I'm not a Marine.

The first rule of tankers is to never enter an area where a close ambush is possible. You can use a quarter's worth of gasoline and bar soap and take out a tank.

Not as good as a free spoon, of course.

reply to post by FarArcher


Well as a basic rule American tankers are stupid, so these ones certainly lived up to the rule by invading a foreign country on false pretenses, so they deserved all the ambush they needed. So yes I agree with you.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by FarArcher
I don't think the $300 RPG round will penetrate the armor of an M1A1.

Blow off a track - maybe. Antenna - yes. Scratch the paint - highly likely.

Just as a side note.

I have a $0.40 bullet that will take out the shooter of the $300 RPG, and then take it.

It did penetrate the armor, blew the side bins, and much more.

There is no evidence in the video of a $0.40 bullet killing anyone in the video. The evidence has been in this thread if you read it.

Just as a side note the Juba sniper is owning all the marines who think they are hot shiz.

Plus as a side note I just used a free spoon to beat you senseless and left you for the hounds.

edit on 3-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-4-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

Ummm, I think we can all agree that we saw no bullet killing anyone. The point he was trying to make was clear if you reread it, don't understand how you fumbled that one.

Armored vehicles can get fuc**d up by an RPG29 and other weapon systems.
Just leave it at that, and remember the OPSEC !

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by FarArcher

 

Well as a basic rule American tankers are stupid, so these ones certainly lived up to the rule by invading a foreign country on false pretenses, so they deserved all the ambush they needed. So yes I agree with you.

LOL it was about time your true colors came out. You've been dancing around the issues since you started this thread. It's become obvious as your assertions were ripped apart and proved wrong time and time again, that the only reason you started this thread was to somehow try and belittle America.

The tank wasn't penetrated and if you think scratching the paint and some lost clothing makes it somehow combat inneffective then myabe you're as stupid as you claim American tankers to be.

Everyone else seems to think where I was educated in this thread was important, so everyone who should speak should prove their credentials

You're the one claiming things about your education, the onus is on you to provide information to back it up. It seems clear though that you are not what you claim to be. You just don't come across as being university educated, sorry.