General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Gman on June 20, 2016, 05:41:39 PM
Title: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Gman on June 20, 2016, 05:41:39 PM
At 3:10 in the video, there is a fantastic shot of the M1 and Leo tanks intermixed, it'd be a great screen saver as a still picture. Very pretty country in the winter.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Jag34 on June 21, 2016, 08:07:38 AM
NICE video's. Thank you. It brings backs many memory's.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: DaveBB on June 21, 2016, 03:47:50 PM
If a round hits the front hull of the M-1,it looks like it would just bounce into the underside of the turret. Or at least damage the turret ring. Has this happened in combat before? I known some tank have chains hanging down from the turret to prevent ricochets from the hull into the turret.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Gman on June 22, 2016, 12:09:40 AM
That's a good question - maybe Maverick or other x tankers will answer, I'm sure it's not something they just "forgot" about in the design, but I too would like to know the precise explanation behind how that area is protected from frontal shots like that.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Brooke on June 22, 2016, 02:14:44 PM
Obsey (one of our Il-2 pilots in the Dnieper scenario) drove tanks.
<S> to tankers!
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: GScholz on June 22, 2016, 02:31:26 PM
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: DaveBB on June 22, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
Here's a Merkava with chain armor for the turret:
(http://i.imgur.com/dgwo6xs.jpg)
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: EskimoJoe on June 22, 2016, 11:18:38 PM
Chains, to my limited knowledge, act in a similar role as the 'RPG cages' found on MRAPs and if I recall, some LAVs had them too. They're not so much armor for ricochets, but armor against shaped-charges such as those similar to the RPG. The idea is to initiate the charge in the round at a distance that provides a safe standoff for the jet of molten metal from the shape charge to not offer a reasonable amount of penetration, if my wording makes any sense.
So, in theory, the jet of molten metal wont be forced into the vehicle like squeezing a banana in your hand and having it ooze through the gaps in your fingers (at hundreds of feet per second), but instead will lose a lot of its energy and bounce off the vehicle like a banana being thrown at your tile kitchen floor.
Whether or not the chains actually accomplish that, I can't say for certain. There were instances of them on tanks during WWII, but modern examples to my knowledge are very limited.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Jag34 on June 23, 2016, 08:27:34 AM
Quote
Chains, to my limited knowledge, act in a similar role as the 'RPG cages' found on MRAPs and if I recall, some LAVs had them too. They're not so much armor for ricochets, but armor against shaped-charges such as those similar to the RPG. The idea is to initiate the charge in the round at a distance that provides a safe standoff for the jet of molten metal from the shape charge to not offer a reasonable amount of penetration, if my wording makes any sense.
So, in theory, the jet of molten metal wont be forced into the vehicle like squeezing a banana in your hand and having it ooze through the gaps in your fingers (at hundreds of feet per second), but instead will lose a lot of its energy and bounce off the vehicle like a banana being thrown at your tile kitchen floor.
Whether or not the chains actually accomplish that, I can't say for certain. There were instances of them on tanks during WWII, but modern examples to my knowledge are very limited.
I have a little knowledge on armor, I just retired from the Army and was a Tanker for 33 years. Eskimo Joe is right on about the chains. They are for shaped-charge war heads, ie HE, HEAT, HEP and RPG rounds. They will not affect or stop the main anti-armor round, the Kinetic energy penetrator. The SABOT round. (https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M3d2a7a56ee2bf71cb55713a920542506o0&w=299&h=173&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0) At the turret ring is an armor ring that will stop a shaped-charge war head. (http://i.imgur.com/AghSZRn.png)
As far as the armored ring stopping a Kinetic energy penetrator, we were told it would. But have never seen first hand if it would.
My 2 cents worth.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: EskimoJoe on June 23, 2016, 11:03:37 PM
I have a little knowledge on armor, I just retired from the Army and was a Tanker for 33 years. Eskimo Joe is right on about the chains. They are for shaped-charge war heads, ie HE, HEAT, HEP and RPG rounds. They will not affect or stop the main anti-armor round, the Kinetic energy penetrator. The SABOT round. (https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M3d2a7a56ee2bf71cb55713a920542506o0&w=299&h=173&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0) At the turret ring is an armor ring that will stop a shaped-charge war head. (http://i.imgur.com/AghSZRn.png)
As far as the armored ring stopping a Kinetic energy penetrator, we were told it would. But have never seen first hand if it would.
My 2 cents worth.
Thanks for the two pennies, Jag! All the armor we get here are a few inches of MRAP with either a cage or a net :cheers:
I am wondering, since the chains appear to be only affixed by one end and seem to swing around, how do they prevent a shaped-charge from doing what they do? I imagine due to the shape of the chains, they just 'spatter' the jet instead of allowing it to stream through. Similar to bar armor, but different because of the amount of standoff.
For those that aren't too sure what we're talking about, but curious : A model on how shaped-charges work. Notice the cone on the inside, and how it "inverts" and shoots out as a jet. Science is a crazy thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqMoFx0uwpo
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: USCH on June 24, 2016, 05:42:57 PM
ya, no doubt... winter suck ANYPLACE that has snow. pretty my arse.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: save on June 26, 2016, 04:26:38 AM
The chains are probably good enough against early HEAT wepaons.
The more sophisticated wepaons use double charged HEAT, one to blow up/away explosives and other "obstacles" and the second to penetrate the main armor.
Even (before they where rebuilt) M1's where penetrated by Russian HEAT weapons during US middle east wars.
Late HEAT weapons hit the vulnerable top.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Zimme83 on June 26, 2016, 04:45:05 AM
Saudis have lost a bunch of M1A2:s in Yemen, the Kornet ATGM seems fully capable of penetrating the Abrams even in the Turret front. But more modern missiles hit the top of the tank that are easily penetrated.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: GScholz on June 26, 2016, 10:04:49 AM
Kornet vs. Abrams. Doesn't look good.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: DaveBB on June 28, 2016, 04:34:43 AM
It looks like the first tank either didn't have it's ammo doors closed, or the missile pierced the doors. The second tank worked as advertised.
I worked with an M1 Abrams commander for several years. In the first Gulf War, his unit lost an Abrams, but in a very strange way. As they came across lots of abandoned Iraqi vehicles, they began shooting them with coaxial and M2 machine gun fire. Well they shot up a truck at close range that was just loaded to the brim with anti-tank guided missiles. All the burning debris landed on and went inside one of the Abrams. American tanks don't fight buttoned up. The crew had to abandon the tank as the rocket debris and warheads burned the inside of the tank to a crisp.
In another strange twist, this Abrams commander was telling me about a large scale battle he was in. I was starting to think all this was a war story until he brought in the newspaper clippings and his awards and citation. A column of T-72s (mixed in with T-55s and other vehicles) attacked their position two days after the cease-fire in Iraq. The Iraqis were absolutely decimated. But why they attacked two days after the cease-fire is unknown.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Mister Fork on June 28, 2016, 01:35:54 PM
DaveBB - There in an inherent difference between the active tracking and firing systems of allied tanks against antiquated T-72's and T-55's and a stationary Abrams against the Russian made 9M133 Kornet ATGM system.
Abram's against a T-55/72 it's shooting ducks in a barrel (I'm a Gulf War vet). Saw the AA reports. Saw the barrel cam videos the next day. Ducks. Barrel. Boom. Poor tank command and control by the Iraqi forces. Poor training of the tank crews. And we gained excellent intel on the crappy design of the T-72 in it's ability to engage modern Allied tanks. They cook easier than a 30 gallon smoker with pork ribs.
The Kornet is a MOEFOE of a weapon for ANY tank crew. And if you're using older Abrams without AMD systems, no different than the video we just we saw an older Apache get shot down by a new Russian MANPAD, technology in weapon systems can creep-up on any army if you're not careful.
The Korent can and will destroy any tank. Abrams. Leopard II. Merkava. All toast if you don't have modern ATMD systems.
In the video, both Abram's cooked out BTW. One managed to escape in the second video.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: Zimme83 on June 28, 2016, 01:49:12 PM
Iraqi T-72:s were afaik mostly equipped with downgraded sabot rounds made of steel. Making them useless against Abrams.
Title: Re: USMC M1/Lavs ex in Norway with Leopards vid
Post by: save on June 28, 2016, 05:33:33 PM
But why they attacked two days after the cease-fire is unknown.
It was a one-sided cease-fire, made by the coalition.
What they could have done was to hide the tanks in the towns inside and adjacent to buildings together with antitank teams and regular troops, and make close quarter shootouts.
At point bland range all tanks are vulnerable to flanks.
It would force the coalition to bomb the whole town to rubble, Iraq leadership never cared for their own civilians and also knowing the other side did.