Somebody on another forum claims that this was a static T-62 target hit by a Challenger I at a lased range of 5,110 meters (that's well over 3 miles) during Operation Granby, Iraq/Kuwait, in 1991.

I probably should have googled but for the sake of discussion, is there any truth to this? Has anyone seen/heard of a longer shoot&kill by a tank?

5+ kilometers! FOr a ballistic projectile that goes along a curve and not a straight line and without the advanced FCS of those days (1991) how is that even possible?


Challenger MBT

It is more than possible and Israeli tank gunners fire to ranges of up to 4500 meters in rutine training, with much longer ranges claimed in war time.

Oh...And that is not the longest range tank kill in history. The longest range is over 11 killometers and the shots were made by Israeli M51 Shermans and Centurions firing HEAT and HESH rounds in indirect fire, with other tank crews on foot with very long range optics giving them corrections. This was 1966 I believe.

11 km? I think that is next to impossible; or perhaps a very very very lucky shot? Even specialized anti-tank missiles like the Hellfire have max ranges like 8-9 kilometers. How can a ballistic/dumb projectile with no mid-course correction hit its target at 11 kilometers unless it's sheer luck? And in 1966!

11 km? I think that is next to impossible; or perhaps a very very very lucky shot? Even specialized anti-tank missiles like the Hellfire have max ranges like 8-9 kilometers. How can a ballistic/dumb projectile with no mid-course correction hit its target at 11 kilometers unless it's sheer luck? And in 1966! 30 Minutes Ago 22:29

There are ballistic charts for those ranges. The tank crew is given corrections by a forward observer. Its basically using tanks as artillery. It takes alot of shots but eventually it hits.

I assume ballistic charts are probably basic triginometric curve-distance calculations at certain firing angles for certain types of ammo?

Those must be great to have, but I'm sure there are other factors that come into play; like wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, elevation of the firing tank, elevation of the enemy tank, etc. Feedback from on foot soldiers making optical observations should come in handy like it always does with artillery but after rounds of projectiles hit here and there around it for several minutes, I doubt the enemy tank would just sit there stationary waiting for the other guys to finally get lucky.

It dident take minutes. And the targets were mostly tractors and mechanical tools, not tanks.

I find no difficulty whatsoever in believing that ranges of 11km are "possible", but as indirect fire I find it incredible, as I would not have thought that the guns in tanks would not have had sights suitable for this type of gunnery.

I certainly don't say it's impossible, but to me who knows very little about tank weaponry it seems hard to believe. It would be a great credit to those involved and to the builders of the tanks.

Originally Posted by Lunatik

I assume ballistic charts are probably basic triginometric curve-distance calculations at certain firing angles for certain types of ammo?

Those must be great to have, but I'm sure there are other factors that come into play; like wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, elevation of the firing tank, elevation of the enemy tank, etc. Feedback from on foot soldiers making optical observations should come in handy like it always does with artillery but after rounds of projectiles hit here and there around it for several minutes, I doubt the enemy tank would just sit there stationary waiting for the other guys to finally get lucky.

A good portion of the data required is already known by the gunner and TC from the FCS.

I've heard stories where the M163 VADS had been used as an indirect fire weapon as well.

No, I think it's certainly possible.
Guns, though with a short effective range, they tend to have a very long maximum range. With a forward observer, I can see that it can be done. Tanks were used as makeshift howitzers in the Korean war as well, so it's not a concept that's too alien.

A world record for a tank shoot-and-kill has not been established.

It would call for neutral observers to go out and get exact measurements. Also rules for world records require things like who, what, where, and when to be established prior to the attempt. This allows the neutral personnel to be present to rule out unintentional records. Ruling out "lucky shots".

In war actions it has been hard to find the observers to go down range. Also, insurance has been hard to come by.