EricW Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 For whatever reason, I've been watching a bunch of combat footage of Iraq lately. I'm really getting sick of hearing/seeing "and the insurgents (Islamic a-holes) slithered out from under their rock and ambushed the convoy with RPG's." Humvee's seem particularly vulnerable. Even our armored cars and tanks are vulnerable to the stupid things. Apparently an M1 was taken out with an RPG. I didn't think that was even possible. I thought even a T-72 couldn't touch an M1 Abrams. When is somebody going to do something about this crap? Either let's harden the vehicles or build a system that puts some serious hurt on the a-holes launching that junk. All the technology needed to squelch an RPG in-flight exists and is available. All someone has to do is put the thing together. If someone was really smart, they'd build a system that backtracked the trajectory and totally obliterated the likely launch site. I'm sick and tired of seeing our service people get killed with five bucks worth of 50 year-old Soviet/Chinese surplus. Give me ten or twenty million bucks for R&D. I guarantee you after I get done that Al Qaeda will look at an RPG as an immediate death sentence. I have a plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Eric, All well and good except that they pop up fire and move. You better have a damn fast system and response to get the bastards. So far the best protection has come from snipers knocking them on their ass when the pop up to shoot. The part that pisses me off is these assholes shooting from the mosques and then ducking inside. Sorry it just became a parking lot not a house of worship! Good news is it looks like they have finally let the Devil dogs off the chain to do what they do best! Allah should be busy meeting assholes for a few days! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texasag93 Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Eric, I saw something just yesterday about a system they are looking at that will protect light armored vehicles from RPG's. It looked like a grill guard that went all the way around the vehicle. It keeps the impact off the vehicle surface which reduces the damage and casualties greatly. Hope they implement it soon and it works. TXAG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JD45 Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Twenty million is a joke for our government to spend. I think they should pay you to start tommorow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 I'm sorry, but if the news cameras can see the RPG toting combatants (sp?), why can't one of our snipers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 28, 2004 Author Share Posted April 28, 2004 I'm sorry, but if the news cameras can see the RPG toting combatants (sp?), why can't one of our snipers? The snipers aren't collaborators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 mmmm...yeah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 good point ericw, i was thinking the same thing. lynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 The new stryker vehicules are equipped with devices that should defeat RPGs. It's a kind of metallic cage all around the vehicle. It's designed to stop or detonate the rocket 1 meter outside of the armor. The vehicle should only get hit by small shrapnels without big damages. US troops should kick the medias out of town and do the job as the Israelis did in Lebanon. When one sniper or an RPG was detected in a building, just simply destroy all the building ! They used evereything they got on hand, from Vulcan Minigun to 105mm tanks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Julien, guess you're talking about explosive reactive armour. I saw it fitted to abrahms first, thus I thought it had been brought to Iraq. More info on this kind of tank and vehicles protection against missiles and RPGs here and here. Basically, it's a set of explosive tiles, laid onto the tank/vehicle skin, that wil sense the impact of an incoming HE projectile and will detonate before the projectile actually hits the tank (usually some 1/1.2 m from tank), thus greatly diminishing (if not ruining) the projectile potential threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Nope sir, It's not about reactive armour. It looks like this : It adds lots of weight to the vehicle but it seems to add lots of protection for the crew. As Eric said, I was surprised too to see Abrams burning, I always thought it was tough enough to not suffer from hits from "small weapons". As for Humvees, I think they are made of plastic and won't stand the bullet. They don't provide enough protection for troops. Armored hummers would be a good solution. Such as those used by French Army, the drawback, which might also be an advantage in urban operation is that it's smaller than the Humvees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Acknowledged. Anyway, I guess ERAs will offer a better protection in a lighter package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Boit Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 If my memory is good, the "cage" adds around 2 tons to the total weight of the Stryker. But I bet the cost would be higher to totally protect the vehicle with ERA. Money, always the money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Weeeeell, uhm.... ...not that much... ...just $ 9.64! [/thread hijack] Now, seriously, according to this link each ERA module will weigh about 2.8Kg. While according to this link the total weight of ERA fitted to a battle tank is about 1.5 tons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDH Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Humvee's seem particularly vulnerable. Even our armored cars and tanks are vulnerable to the stupid things. Apparently an M1 was taken out with an RPG. I didn't think that was even possible. I thought even a T-72 couldn't touch an M1 Abrams. I am reading an excellent book that talks about this titled Thunder Run. It is about the armored runs up into Baghdad (first, through town to the airport, and then into downtown where they stayed). Anyway, I am about half way through the book and am just blown away by not only the technology we have, but the bravory of the troops and despite these runs looking 'relatively easy' on the news..... just how tough these runs were. One thing they talk about, is just how many rounds of small arms, and RPG fire that the Abrahms, and the Bradleys took. According to the book, while both vehicles would be scarred, it really had little impact on them. The only exception was that the insurgents figured out that there was one soft spot on the Abrahms, and that was the rear grill. If they could get a lucky shot from either an RPG or a recoiless rifle into the rear grill, they could stop the tank. I fully agree that it is chicken shit jumping up, firing off a round and then running into a mosque, but if you pick up a copy of Thunder Run you will find out all kinds of little nasty surprises they used (and continue to use). I don't know what the answer is, but do know that all of us will probably be living with this crap for the rest of our lives...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogmaDog Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 When I was on active duty, the Marines were working on "Urban Warrior"--an experiment to develop urban warfare tactics and equipment. One of the things they had was a hummer with microphones mounted at each corner. The mics could triangulate the source of a gunshot, and then automatically aim the .50 caliber machinegun mounted on a top turret at the source, and fire in something like 1.2 seconds. I guess it had some problems with echoes and whatnot...the Marines never fielded the system. DD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3quartertime Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 If we put it up to a national vote I choose Eric to design a new anti-Americans getting killed weapon system. ( Sorry Euro members but American soldiers are getting whacked every F@#king day!!! ) I fixed airplanes on a carrier during my active duty so I didn't get to see all the cool toys the military has or had. I did get to see the phalynx system thou. We called it R2D2 with a hard on!!! It was quite impressive. With my admited shallow knowledge of current military hardware I've often wondered why we couldn't just mount one of those on top of a humvee and just pour the death out till the ammo is gone. I know we've lost far less than the Iraqi's, but the ratio is still wrong. Surgical strike is a catch phrase now, it is the result of wanting to not harm the innocent. I say we have lost more than enough soldiers to completely abandon that and go to excessive force. One word comes to mind... Example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongHair1957 Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 I'm sorry, but if the news cameras can see the RPG toting combatants (sp?), why can't one of our snipers? I say that we just disguise the sniper crews (or some SOG group) as news crews. Find the bastards with the RPG's etc. and wipe them out......Then go find some more.... I know, I know, then the insurrectionest (sp?) will think all the media are bad guy's and start shootijng them...... Maybe a win win situation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongHair1957 Posted April 28, 2004 Share Posted April 28, 2004 Or maybe we just pull back and perform the "Shock and aww" that we never really did......Let tham all run into the streets yelling "Praise Allah..the American dogs are running away"......Then they would hear this faint whistling sound... then nothing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted April 29, 2004 Share Posted April 29, 2004 When is somebody going to do something about this crap? Either let's harden the vehicles or build a system that puts some serious hurt on the a-holes launching that junk. Well, Eric..... it's kind of ironic because some of the people hammered for not "supporting the troops" way back when were the ones trying to force the defense contractors to build better systems or else face the axe. Jimmy carter was one. He tried to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (now called the M-2 tank) because it's cost spiraled out of sight and it failed so many performance tests.... like when the thing got so heavy it would barely run and would sink like a tool box when driven into water. The solution? Lighten it.... by removing most of it's steel armor and replacing it with aluminum (seriously). Those dogs were built right here in town at FMC and they stand as amonument to what happens when nobody polices the contractors. This all happened under Reagan's watch where the message went out that there was an administration in town who would pay anything, accept anything, and just wanted new toys. So, when you see an M1-A1 Abrahams getting taken out by an RPG or a Bradley that does the same... just remember a whole bunch of people signed off on those dogs before they left the kennel. And the Humvee is probably the biggest boondoggle of all: it has no armor and the people who have to drive around in them are lining the insides with sand bags and spare kevlar vests to try to protect their "family jewels". It's a disgrace that defense contractors continue to get away with this garbage by paying off the appropriate palms, but it's been that way for a long time. And whenever anybody tries to hold them accountable, they get raked for "denying our troops the weapons that they need". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted April 29, 2004 Share Posted April 29, 2004 I did get to see the phalynx system thou. We called it R2D2 with a hard on!!! It was quite impressive. Example. And it failed miserably in a combat mission where US sailors died. Back when one of our misile destroyers had two Exocet missiles "accidentally" launched on it during the Iraq-Iran war, both missiles struck the ship. One missile was a dud, and the other went off. The Phalanx system failed to intercept either one even though they were fired some seconds apart. There was a big stink raised about it at the time and some sailors had to be scapegoated to protect the image of that weapons system. A similar ploy was used During desert storm wher the Patriot missiles were creditied with "destroying" something like 98% of the SCUDS they engaged. In fact, no kills were actually verified. Nearly all missed entirely and the few hits that occurred, the patriot simply struck the scud's motor section and the warhead came down intact over the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Snyder Posted April 29, 2004 Share Posted April 29, 2004 the cage or good ole chain link fencing from VN days deforms the metal casing on the PG7 warhead so that when detonated a focused "shaped charge" gas jet is not formed...hopefully... still goes boom, but without a focused armor penetrating jet... of course there are a lot more warheads available than the typically seen RPG7 or ChiCom variant....regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Hayden Posted April 29, 2004 Share Posted April 29, 2004 He tried to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle (now called the M-2 tank) because it's cost spiraled out of sight and it failed so many performance tests.... like when the thing got so heavy it would barely run and would sink like a tool box when driven into water. The solution? Lighten it.... by removing most of it's steel armor and replacing it with aluminum (seriously). The Bradley, is an APC, and no one should think it's going to have enough armor to stop everything. It replaced the M113 (same company built those), that had aluminum hulls only and no armor (unlike the Bradley). They're meant to stop shrapnel, and small arms. And I think the armor is being improved all the time - I'll never stop a main 120MM Sabot, but hopefully it'l stop more of the smaller crap. The M113 only had a 50 mounted up top, (at least the M113A2's I was in), the only way to shoot was unbutton, and be outside the vehicle, and 7.62's (.308's) would go right through the side if fired at 90 degrees (I don't know where the angle of deflection is). The Bradley was a great improvement given the choice. Can it stop a heat round (or more)? No, but it can stop all (most?) rifle and automatic weapons rounds. And they can fire while buttoned up. The defense dept comes up with the max weight for the vehicles so they can be air transported, etc. My .02, I agree they need more work, but they're better than what we had before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Snyder Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 BerKim... did you notice 113's with all the antennas that were being used as command and control vehicles.... regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.Hayden Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 I saw some 577's (command tracks - I think they keep those because they can stand up), but I also saw a 113 flaming in Iraq after a hit on the news. My heart really sank when I saw that. The spal (spelling?) is deadly in those things. I know groups still have them, like using UH-1s and Cobras rather than Blackhwaks and Apaches, but there's far less than there used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts