$300 dollar round takes out M1A2

the rpg 29 seen here world.guns.ru... and has not repeat not the capability to pen the armor of an M1A2. the armor of the M1A2 can be seen here, it is one of them you can not copy from. So you have to read ti i hope you do, deny ignorance www.fprado.com...

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)

O.P. uh... no "reactive armor")
you just made a tragic error and pissed off a tank crew expect return fire.

you guys crack me up...

IF this round is able to defeat an Abrams tank, it's only a matter of time - probably a short time - before a countermeasure is devised and issued. May have already been done. That's how these things go - back and forth.

Anyway, probably nothing to "crow" about.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Sky watcher
You sir are a moron and need to stop posting this Terrorist propaganda as its against the T&C on ATS. [/quote

Well i reported you to admins and it's a great relief to know that i can leave ATS for 18 months and still find the same people comitting the same offenses..... It's like watching a soapie on TV; not watching for months rarely results in you missing anything substansial!

Just for the record how is his admittedly strange interest in the potential destruction of this or that piece of American hardware make him a terrorist propagandist? The going on 5000 dead American personal suggest that Americans are not bulletproof and that their equipment is not infallible or invulnerable.... What exactly motivates your accusation?

The RPG did nothing to that tank and the Armor did its job. This dumb terrorist did not even hit the right area of the tank to stop it from moving. Im sure this idiot who shot at the tank died from a anti-personal round. 1000 buck shot fired from a tank round would catch him lol.

www.haaretz.com...

If Merkava crewmen can die so can Abrams crewmen and it's simply fascinating to watch people on this thread go about the business of denying this very obvious fact. Admittedly there aren't too many modern RPG's getting into the hand of the Iraqi resistance ( unlike the Israeli experience with hezbollah) but if they were it can promise you that the results would be similar to the Israeli experience.

Either way no matter your nationality or how modern your RPG is it takes very real courage ( or in the case of 'insurgents' 'fanatacism', since we wont ascribe them reasonable human motivations and emotions) to engage tanks with them. Glad i'm not being put in the situation where i felt it my duty to do that sort of thing down the street from my house.

Stellar

reply to post by 46ACE


I don't see any return fire. I see an RPG disabling a tank. The tank crew made the tragic error of using a tank not equipped with TUSK or Trophy round defeating system. So still fail.

Yes I know what ERA is. This round is specifically made to DEFEAT ERA. what don't you guys understand. You guys throw out terms like reactive armor not knowing that their are systems designed to circumvent it.

You guys crack me up.

Reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

You don't see an RPG disabling a tank, you see one hitting a tank. They cut the video short of actually being able to see the damage, most likely because the tank was still fully operational but they want you to belive otherwise. As I said before, these kind of people would most likely want to show off an M1 kill as much as possible so they wouldn't cut it off if it was actually knocked out.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I agree with Analyze76 the tank survived and the crew might have
overpressure disorientation (Shock). My MOS was 19k10 in the
first gulf war and a M1A1 a few meters away from our tank got
hit with friendly fire from a hellfire missle in the engine compartment.
needless to say it lifted 72 ton (the back of the tank) about 4 feet
in the air and blew up the engine pack. Enemy republican gaurds
saw the tank get hit and fired a T72 sabot round at the same tank
which did penetrate the turret but got stuck. The result was the crew
got sprayed with liquid metal. They all survived.

Our tanks went through an artillary barrage, took hits from high
powered machine guns (50 cal?) and we had burn spots from
what could have be RPG's. All of our equipment (Ruck sacks
and duffel bags) were burned/blown of the tanks so that some of
the straps were still hanging on the bussel racks however we still
went on and fought 100 hours straight without sleeping (Total) until a
cease fire was declared. Our tanks survived all that so no, I don't think
an RPG round can take out a tank.


Post scriptum: For the record the tanks that got hit with hellfire missles
4 total and the one that was additionaly hit by a T72 sabot round were
battle losses and the tanks were not able to continue fighting.

reply to post by warbird03


It may not be fully disabled but it is less than fully operational and battle ready. RPG-29 is designed specifically to defeat ERA. Some people (not you) just skip over my comments without reading what I said earlier when someone mentioned ERA.

Reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

It may be "less than battle," but we just don't know. The video is inconclusive at best. If he'd have hit the side of the tank straight on then I'd think there's a very good there was crippling damage. Instead he hit the sloped armor on the turret. With the launchers angle (shooting upwards at the turrent) there was a pretty good angle between the RPG and the armor that most of the blast was likely deflected off.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by 46ACE

 

I don't see any return fire. I see an RPG disabling a tank. The tank crew made the tragic error of using a tank not equipped with TUSK or Trophy round defeating system. So still fail.
.

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

To be fair, and in this case I consider myself fairly neutral, you don't see an RPG disabling a tank.
You see something hit a tank.
The video has been edited to quickly cut away immediately after the hit, and again to be fair, you cannot definitively state that the RPG seen being handled at the start of the video is the weapon that hits the tank.
The camera angle is such that you cannot see the round incoming, nor due to editing can you see the resultant damage to the tank with any clarity.

reply to post by warbird03


Actually the tank is most armored in the front. A straight on hit would do less damage as the M1A2 was designed for tank vs tank battle facing each other.

A more vulnerable hit would be in the engine compartment or the treads.

If this had ERA, from the looks of it, it would not matter a whole lot as the RPG-29 is a dual warhead. Meaning it destroys the ERA first, then proceeds to cut through the armor with its HEAT round.

But I do agree with you in that the hit wasn't completely perpendicular and some energy may have dissipated off.

Reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Wasn't the tank facing to the left in the video and he had a clear shot at the side? I thought that's what I remembered but its been a couple hours since I watched it and I can't get to it at the moment.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by warbird03


Yes it was facing left, and he shot the left side of the body.

The copper cone inside an RPG is not designed to destroy armor. It is designed to shoot a molten hot stream of copper INSIDE the tank. Killing or maming the tank crew inside. Once again, RPG's don't destroy armor, they blow right through it. So yes, that tank and it's crew are disabled. This isn't a video game. Tanks don't blow up from RPG's.

well i didn't see return fire, but if you see the red circle if this creww didn't fire then shame on them.
and what kind of dumb ass fires a weapon out in the open like that, had to be blind not to see that tank across the street.




as soon as i get the video to capture right, i'll show you the turret was no damaged and could still fuction.

Reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Yeah, so the thick armor at the front doesn't matter. The turret is often the second most armored part of a tank, although the information is classified for the Abrams. He most likely could have at least immobilized it if he'd have hit it square in the side with a good chance of penetrating all the way. Instead he makes a shot at an angle on the thick turret armor. He could have even tried to damage the turret to stop it from turning if he'd have the base of it but didn't. It could be due to an inaccurate weapon (no idea about this particular RPG) or just general lack of knowledge about tanks. Either way, he had the chance to do some real damage but didn't.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I find it deliciously ironic how the OP has chosen the sobriquet of "The professional" when every thread he posts highlights his utter and total lack of understanding on a myriad of subjects...

What you call the "Turret being blown off" is in fact the GEAR stowed in the external BUSTLE racks on the outside of the turret being shredded and blown away.

Congratulations insurgency you can now paint the silhouette of a BACKPACK on the side of your rpg! Because that is what they just killed LOL

As a further note they actually put the gear on those racks to serve as a way to break up the gas jet that anti tank warheads use to puncture armor with their standoff detonating shaped charge warheads. (that is why it's on the two sides and rear of the turret side where the actual chobham underneath is of less thickness) In all likelihood the only thing SERIOUSLY damaged on the tank is the armor under the bustle rack. Physics and a working knowledge of the actual mechanisms by which modern anti armor weapons are designed to work tell me this.

TO sum this up: This video DOES NOT show a tank being knocked out by an RPG 29... What it does show is a few things:

1: This is why we put bustle racks for gear stowage around the back 3 sides of the turret. It's much cheaper to replace someone's duffel and playstation than it is to scrape PFC bob out of the inside of the turret!
2. Said backpacks and the general construction of the tank make it unlikely that ANY of the crew were injured or serious damage was done to the tank
3. Yes the tank may have been sent stateside for Depot level maintenance. This has more to do with how the ARMY runs it's logistics than the severity of damage. The abrams tank is an extremely sophisticated piece of equipment and whether or not you have actual penetration of the armor that damage would need to be fixed so it could not be exploited later. That being said turret repairs are handled stateside due to the classified and highly specialized equipment used to refit abrams turrets which are extraordinarily advanced and have about 3 places IN THE WORLD where you can do a total workup and recertify the turret for combat.
4. If you are going to criticize the military or anything else it's ALWAYS important to do your homework and get your facts straight to avoid looking like a scaremonger or just plain moron.

Thanks

Didn't look to be damaged at all.I have been hit my ied's in iraq some of them knocking out our warrior armored vehicle but never took any damage from rpg's because of our bar Armour.Main battle tanks on the other hand can withstand alot more and i have seen challenger 2 tanks drive over massive efp ied's the only thing happened was the back end lifted up a couple feet and slammed back down,the commander shrugging after popping up from the turret. Rpg's are pretty much useless against abrahams and challengers tho.