WTF...Our tanks suck?

[SarcasticDwarf]

Regarding the recent news articles about our tanks being taken out of action. What the hell is the point of using tanks in that situation when I couple of Iraquis with a RPG can take the multi-million dollar unit out with one hit? The tank listed in the above was an M1 Abrams. Do we even have anything that can withstand a low tech RPG?


Note that I didn't post this in P&N as I am talking about the technological aspect of things, not the political.

 

[Heisenberg]

An RPG wouldn't even scratch the paint on an M1A1. There's got to be more to that story.

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

I don't think we have anything that can easily take an RPG. I guess those are the joys of using cold war "plains of europe" weaponry in an urban environment.

Edit: I have heard there are only two ways an RPG could even dent an M1A2. 1) if it's a depleted uranium core or 2) you hit it in the engine intake. Otherwise those things are pretty solid.

 

[Vonkhan]

The RPG probably hit a light-skinned part of the tank (underbelly or rear) or was fired from very close range.

edit: The palestinians destroyed an israeli M1 by donating a simple IED mine capped with a mortar round ... the mortar round pierced the underbelly and exploded in the crew compartment

 

[radioactiveballpoint]

They have some new lightly armored APC/tank that is going to be used to replace the M1 tank in a lot of situations... i forget what it is called though. Could they maybe they are moving towards lighter armor because it is pointless to try to build a behemoth to withstand these RPGS?

 

[bradruth]

Originally posted by: Heisenberg
An RPG wouldn't even scratch the paint on an M1A1. There's got to be more to that story.

Does the Abrams have a "soft spot" where the armor isn't at thick? I know some foreign tanks are like that (on top), hence the flightpath of the Hellfire missle.

 

[TheBDB]

Are you assuming that our tanks suck because 1 has been damaged??

 

[Pocatello]

A low-tech RPG can take out a M1A1 tank, if you're lucky and very brave.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

I can see how a tank is useful in high-speed maneuvers and getting over terrain, but inside a city where the primary cannon can't even be used in fear of civilian casualties, how is it any better than an APC (which I would assume had a faster rate of acceleration and enhanced maneuverability)?

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: TheBoyBlunder
I don't think we have anything that can easily take an RPG. I guess those are the joys of using cold war "plains of europe" weaponry in an urban environment.

Edit: I have heard there are only two ways an RPG could even dent an M1A2. 1) if it's a depleted uranium core or 2) you hit it in the engine intake. Otherwise those things are pretty solid.

A grenade containing depleted uranium would be counter-productive. You use grenades as explosives, and DU is used as a penetrator. In a grenade it would only be dead weight (density is almost 20g/cc IIRC, anyway).

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: TheBDB
Are you assuming that our tanks suck because 1 has been damaged??

No, hence the question mark in the title

 

[AvesPKS]

When the US went into space, we spent millions of dollars to develop a pen that would write in space.

The Russians just used a pencil.

 

[Vonkhan]

Originally posted by: TheBDB
Are you assuming that our tanks suck because 1 has been damaged??

This isn't the first MI to be damaged/destroyed in the war

 

[bradruth]

Originally posted by: AvesPKS
When the US went into space, we spent millions of dollars to develop a pen that would write in space.

The Russians just used a pencil.

"In America you have 'In God We Trust' on your money. In Soviet Russia, we have no money!"

 

[Heisenberg]

Originally posted by: AvesPKS
When the US went into space, we spent millions of dollars to develop a pen that would write in space.

The Russians just used a pencil.

Nope

 

[So]

Originally posted by: AvesPKS
When the US went into space, we spent millions of dollars to develop a pen that would write in space.

The Russians just used a pencil.

False!

Edit: Beaten to it by Heisenberg. He was just too fast. Good thing I don't know where he is.

:beer:

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

Originally posted by: AvesPKS
When the US went into space, we spent millions of dollars to develop a pen that would write in space.

The Russians just used a pencil.

Ahem...

 

[glenn1]

An RPG wouldn't even scratch the paint on an M1A1. There's got to be more to that story.

Not necessarily, although it is a bit of a stretch. Tanks aren't indestructible, just durable. RPGs can take out tracks, and if the tank's hatches were open it could have caused casualties that way. The reporter could have also been confused and meant to say another weapon system other than an RPG.

It may have been a heavier, crew-served weapon system and not an RPG that hit the tank. Heavier weapon systems can wound or kill tank crew members even if the round doesn't penetrate, just from the kinetic energy transfer. Take a TOW missile and shoot it at a tank, even if it doesn't penetrate, the concussion of a 50 lb. warhead travelling 3,000 MPH slamming into the side of a tank would probably shatter every bone in the entire tank crews' bodies.

For those reasons (among others), tanks are normally not employed absent infantry support.

 

[etech]

Kornet

"The Kornet-E is an "export" version of an anti-tank missile developed specifically by the former Soviet army to counter the threat of modern battle tanks such as the Abrams, America's previously-uncontested "queen of the battlefield."
...."

It really depends on what you mean by RPG and if the Iraqis insurgents really do have the Kornet-E.

 

[Pocatello]

When the Russians invaded Chechnya, the guerillas used RPG to destroy quite a large number of T-80 and T-72 tanks (the M1A1 has better protection though), tanks are very vulnerable on the top and from behind.

 

[Wuffsunie]

Conventional RPGs will do dick to an Abrams. The reactive armor will keep them from penetrating.
What's being used is likely this one missile the Russians developed for this exact purpose during the cold war. I can't recall what they're called. They work by being consisting of two specially shaped charges. The first blows through the reactive armor, the second blows through the lighter stuff below and then into the inside, likely taking out the tank. They look very similar to conventional RPGs.

Edit: etech got the name.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Conventional RPGs will do dick to an Abrams. The reactive armor will keep them from penetrating.
What's being used is likely this one missile the Russians developed for this exact purpose during the cold war. I can't recall what they're called. They work by being consisting of two specially shaped charges. The first blows through the reactive armor, the second blows through the lighter stuff below and then into the inside, likely taking out the tank. They look very similar to conventional RPGs.

Yes, the Kornet-E mentioned above.

I hadn't heard of this before though...wow

 

[Pocatello]

Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Conventional RPGs will do dick to an Abrams. The reactive armor will keep them from penetrating.
What's being used is likely this one missile the Russians developed for this exact purpose during the cold war. I can't recall what they're called. They work by being consisting of two specially shaped charges. The first blows through the reactive armor, the second blows through the lighter stuff below and then into the inside, likely taking out the tank. They look very similar to conventional RPGs.

The M1A1 doesn't have any reactive armor. Supposedly the designers thought that the Abrams tanks don't need it. Most modern main battle tanks don't have reactive armor, just the older tanks such as the M-60 and the T-72 and armored fighting vehicles such as the Bradleys.

 

[Vonkhan]

The Kornet-E

Saw them in use with the Indian Army (to kill a pre-wrecked "Vijayanta" tank) but didn't know that the Syrians had them as well ...

 

[Descartes]

It takes at least four shots to the rear of an M1A1 in BF1942 Desert Combat.