- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Army soldiers to get powerful new Swedish-made tank-stopper
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:22 pm to Scream4LSU
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:22 pm to Scream4LSU
quote:
Took a sager missile to one of the panels and didn't even know it until way later when we got out and started looking around.
The Soviets thought those things were the be-all end-all.
The Songster was pretty intriguing - they intended to fire them from their MBTs - but as DV will tell you - why fire a freakin' ATGM when you have a main gun round to fire.
(But, the answer is - range - 4000m range if they ever proved that in combat, would have been a reason.)
Reactive armor was a pretty clever workaround for ATGMs - "Okay - so you cost me a few hundred bucks in repairs with your multiple thousand dollar missile. What else you got?"
3
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:41 pm to Ace Midnight
Won't be any new information for anyone in this thread, but the show "Greatest Tank Battles" did an episode on the gulf war. It was pretty cool seeing how the M1A1 and Bradley worked against the T-70's.
And wow, they never stood a chance.
And wow, they never stood a chance.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:46 pm to beejon
Spec Forces to my knowledge, have always had the freedom to procure and use whatever weapons they wanted, regular army issue or not.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:46 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Reactive armor was a pretty clever workaround for ATGMs - "Okay - so you cost me a few hundred bucks in repairs with your multiple thousand dollar missile. What else you got?"
Late model RPG rounds that can punch neat little holes in modern MBT's. Designed to defeat reactive/composite armor.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:51 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
sager missile
quote:
The Soviets thought those things were the be-all end-all.
When stationed in the Fulda Gap, I figured I'd be blown to kingdom come moments after the Soviet attack by one of these.
quote:
The Songster was pretty intriguing - they intended to fire them from their MBTs - but as DV will tell you - why fire a freakin' ATGM when you have a main gun round to fire.
SABOT > ATGM... any day of the week.
quote:
(But, the answer is - range - 4000m range if they ever proved that in combat, would have been a reason.)
The secret the Soviets never figured out though.... optics. Their optics sucked. The Iraqi tanks I blew to shite back in 91 for the most part didn't even get the chance to see me because I killed them before I was ever close enough for them to see me. The T-72 were better but still even there we held a huge advantage.
quote:
Reactive armor was a pretty clever workaround for ATGMs - "Okay - so you cost me a few hundred bucks in repairs with your multiple thousand dollar missile. What else you got?"
I still trust my chobham armor over all others.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:52 pm to beejon
Posted on 3/11/14 at 4:55 pm to Clames
quote:
Late model RPG rounds that can punch neat little holes in modern MBT's. Designed to defeat reactive/composite armor.
Some.. but not all. Here look at this picture...
See the raised box on top of the turret just to the right of that arrow? That's the gunner's main sight. Directly under that is in inside wall of the turret. Notice how far back that box is from the front of the turret? That's how far of layered armor a projectile will have to penetrate before getting inside that turret. In case you're wondering, it's like 3' from the front edge of the turret to the inside wall.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 5:04 pm to Darth_Vader
I'm very familiar with the Chobham armor the Abrams uses. I also know the those RPG rounds can cut through 2 feet of composite armor AFTER hitting the reactive layer. Abrams are very vulnerable to RPG-29's and later, armor technology historically doesn't keep up with anti-armor technology.
Posted on 3/11/14 at 7:06 pm to Clames
quote:
armor technology historically doesn't keep up with anti-armor technology.
Warhead has to constantly get ahead of armor - otherwise, warfare stops.
I think that's why we're moving away from heavy armor and to the whole flexible - "Identify, Nominate, Destroy" - model, using remote sensors and drones wherever possible.
Unfortunately, everybody else is moving towards this, as well.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:31 am to Clames
Are they still putting reactive armor on BFV's? Like you said the newer shaped charged RPG's with exotic molten materials etc. surpassed what we had at some point but has the concept of reactive armor been abandonded? I haven't been on a Bradley since 2001.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:07 am to beejon
^That guy's backblast is certainly not clear
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News