SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post

Stealhead · 06-15-12, 02:51 PM

Perhaps not so much anymore we are not in Iraq anymore and as I understand NATO has no or very few MBTs in Afghanistan IEDs are a weapon of insurgency so the the West will probably start focusing more on traditional threats again and forget the past in Vietnam they did not have ERA but they did have lots of chain link fence which it turns out is pretty good at defeating an RPG before it hits armor.

I think all Abrams lost where just overwhelmed by RPG spamming and the crew and systems to contain damage got overwhelmed it is also hard to judge because the insurgents more than likely sat and watched the the tank get prepped for destruction by the crew and engineers then let it burn for an hour or so and then posed for the photo not showing the many dead that it took to disable the M1 to the point that due to enemy activities the tank had to be destroyed because it could not be salvaged.If 200 6 years old attack you you will go down but not in same manner as you would if Mike Tyson punched you in the face..

Also much of this data would be classified as well in fact I think many an Abrams crewman is more than happy to allow you to think that you can hurt him when you really cant or not as badly one might think.The ERA is supposed to defeat any anti armor warhead more than an IED though I think it would not do much to an explosive under the hull but most IED are not made of a tank killing warhead unless it is simply a massive amount of explosives but I am betting that any one planting an IED would rather make 200 smaller IED that will kill or seriously wound troops in something softer skinned than to try and take out a tank but not the crew inside with any degree of certainty.

I think you will start seeing active threat warhead killing systems on AFVs soon like the laser system that you mentioned then you will have the hull armor the ERA and the ACM(active counter measure) meaning that an attacking warhead would have to defeat 3 different systems. Requiring the attacker to try and get multiple warheads onto the same spot it will become a smaller scale MIRV counter MIRV.

06-15-12, 02:51 PM	#11
Stealhead Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kentucky Posts: 5,421 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Perhaps not so much anymore we are not in Iraq anymore and as I understand NATO has no or very few MBTs in Afghanistan IEDs are a weapon of insurgency so the the West will probably start focusing more on traditional threats again and forget the past in Vietnam they did not have ERA but they did have lots of chain link fence which it turns out is pretty good at defeating an RPG before it hits armor. I think all Abrams lost where just overwhelmed by RPG spamming and the crew and systems to contain damage got overwhelmed it is also hard to judge because the insurgents more than likely sat and watched the the tank get prepped for destruction by the crew and engineers then let it burn for an hour or so and then posed for the photo not showing the many dead that it took to disable the M1 to the point that due to enemy activities the tank had to be destroyed because it could not be salvaged.If 200 6 years old attack you you will go down but not in same manner as you would if Mike Tyson punched you in the face.. Also much of this data would be classified as well in fact I think many an Abrams crewman is more than happy to allow you to think that you can hurt him when you really cant or not as badly one might think.The ERA is supposed to defeat any anti armor warhead more than an IED though I think it would not do much to an explosive under the hull but most IED are not made of a tank killing warhead unless it is simply a massive amount of explosives but I am betting that any one planting an IED would rather make 200 smaller IED that will kill or seriously wound troops in something softer skinned than to try and take out a tank but not the crew inside with any degree of certainty. I think you will start seeing active threat warhead killing systems on AFVs soon like the laser system that you mentioned then you will have the hull armor the ERA and the ACM(active counter measure) meaning that an attacking warhead would have to defeat 3 different systems. Requiring the attacker to try and get multiple warheads onto the same spot it will become a smaller scale MIRV counter MIRV. Last edited by Stealhead; 06-15-12 at 03:13 PM.