can Red Arrow 9A penatrade M1 tank? - Page 2




 
--
Boots
 
January 21st, 2005  
bushpig1998
 
 
Questions is, how close to the turret are the rubines? The turbines are mounted in the main body, correct? Wel, since this is a ' heat seeking weapon, wouldn't it go for the source of the heat, in which case - if the turbine are close enough to the turret, the missile "may" hit on or close to the ring between the turret and main body - always a weak point on tanks. RPG's damage M1's? Yeah, I guess it can knock the tracks off. I can't see an RPG taking out an M1 with a hit to the turret or chassis. Then again, opinions are like...
I may be wrong.
January 21st, 2005  
SHERMAN
 
 
Im preetey sure it can. But i'd rather be the guy in the M1 than the guy with the Red Arrow. I can assure you that the 120mm penetrates the poor guy with the ATGM 10 times out of ten...
January 21st, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Quote:
can Red Arrow 9A penatrade M1 tank?
The question is problematic. If you have a really good anti-tank weapon, it stands a reasonably good chance of scoring a kill on a modern MBT. You're not ever going to be 100% effective. So what you really want to know is the % kill rating of the Red Arrow vs the M1. Also, there are many versions of the M1. The older ones are sold abroad, the latest generally are not.
--
Boots
January 21st, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marksman
well i think that simples RPG can do a decent demage to M1,which was probably a case in Iraq,and i most certanly think that this can penetrate
I would like to mitigate your claim. I know specifically of one instance durring operation Iraqi Freedom near Basra in which a Brittish Challanger 2 tank, using almost identical armor to an M1, was cut off from their squadron. He was hit in the tracks by an RPG, then both his sensors where destroyed by precise RPG hits. They where then attacked with impunity with gunfire and the crew counted eight successive RPG hits and most disturbingly an anti-tank rocket. The crew was able to be rescued without harm and the tank retrieved in an all night battle when the Squadron caught up with them.
January 21st, 2005  
AlexKall
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadet Airman Adam Seaman
Sort of looks like the MILAN, no it can't peirce the armor on the M1A1 or M1A2, but maybe an IPM1. The M1's hull and turret armor are made of anti-tank misslie resistant composite aromr. Designed for survivability includes internal armor bulkheads with sliding armor doors isolating the crew from the main armarment stowage. Blow-off panels and designed to channel blast outwards, while an auto Halon fire-exstingishing system is designed to takle internal fire insatantneously. The armor is made of special steel with an inner layer of DU so that the outer layer maybe peirced but the DU layer stops the round becasue it is super hard.


I'm qouting Globalsecurity.org:

"Its most impressive feature was its special armor, a composite “sandwich” of steel and other materials capable of defeating HEAT rounds in addition to kinetic energy penetrators. "

http://globalsecurity.org/military/s.../ground/m1.htm
Do you have a source that conferms that this weapon can not penetrate the hull of an M1? Its inpossible to say either if it has never been prowen and I think it should be cept as "speculations" until proved by hard facts, rather then facts of off the M1 tanks protection, or the ability of that missile. What you quoted has has to do with rounds, not missiles. A missile is different from a round. Especially if it is a heatseaking missile.
January 21st, 2005  
FO Seaman
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexKall
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadet Airman Adam Seaman
Sort of looks like the MILAN, no it can't peirce the armor on the M1A1 or M1A2, but maybe an IPM1. The M1's hull and turret armor are made of anti-tank misslie resistant composite aromr. Designed for survivability includes internal armor bulkheads with sliding armor doors isolating the crew from the main armarment stowage. Blow-off panels and designed to channel blast outwards, while an auto Halon fire-exstingishing system is designed to takle internal fire insatantneously. The armor is made of special steel with an inner layer of DU so that the outer layer maybe peirced but the DU layer stops the round becasue it is super hard.


I'm qouting Globalsecurity.org:

"Its most impressive feature was its special armor, a composite “sandwich” of steel and other materials capable of defeating HEAT rounds in addition to kinetic energy penetrators. "

http://globalsecurity.org/military/s.../ground/m1.htm
Do you have a source that conferms that this weapon can not penetrate the hull of an M1? Its inpossible to say either if it has never been prowen and I think it should be cept as "speculations" until proved by hard facts, rather then facts of off the M1 tanks protection, or the ability of that missile. What you quoted has has to do with rounds, not missiles. A missile is different from a round. Especially if it is a heatseaking missile.
If you would read my post :"The M1's hull and turret armor are made of anti-tank misslie resistant composite armor".

The armor can't be piereced by a HEAT or SABOT rounds or missles, the turret neck in between the turret and chaisis is the most vonerable. The XM1 or IPM1 maybe disable. Only one round has ever penertrated the M1A1 and M1A2 and M1A2 SEP, it is a Russian made round made to drill through armor and it can only peirce turret neck armor. An RPG can disable the turbine but not peirce, when an RPG hits the armor it riochets off. The armor is as said can defeat HEAT rounds and missles "Its most impressive feature was its special armor, a composite “sandwich” of steel and other materials capable of defeating HEAT rounds in addition to kinetic energy penetrators."

It is recorded that in the Gulf War that some Abrams where hit and disable but the crew wan not harmed anfd the tank itself was intact and could be refitted and rebuilt.


Quoting Globalsecurity.org:
Quote:
The Abrams has been using Depleted Uranium (DU) armor since 1988. In 1996, a design change to the armor package was made by the Army and cut-in to production by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) via Change Request XMPP-2083 in Oct 96 and effective with Job #1 M1A2 Phase II AUT. The use of DU armor is a primary feature that distinguishes the Abrams tank from numerous other commonly accepted equipment employed by the military and industry. The current use of the depleted uranium (DU) armor package on the M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank (MBT) Heavy Armor System has been re-evaluated to determine whether the environmental impacts of its continued use remain insignificant, taking into consideration the current use of the tank and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) reduction in allowable radiation exposure from 500 mrem/year to 100 mrem/year for tank and maintenance crews (individual members of the public). As in already-fielded weapon system, M1 MBTs have been in production and in the field since the early 1980s. During that time, many technical, environmental and health assessments have been completed. These documents have addressed and minimized environmental impacts.

The stowage for the main armament ammunition is in armored ammunition boxes behind sliding armor doors. Armor bulkheads separate the crew compartment from the fuel tanks. The tank is equipped with an automatic Halon fire extinguishing system. This system automatically activates within 2 milliseconds of either a flash or a fire within the various compartments of the vehicle. The top panels of the tank are designed to blow outwards in the event of penetration by a HEAT projectile.
January 21st, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
man, u got to read about Red Arrow 9a first..it is a bit different from other crappy RPGs..

according to global security web site
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/hj-9.htm

called one of the world advanced and powerful anti-tank weaponry. The HJ-9 is a vehicle-based long-range anti-tank missile of high precision. It is capable of effectively destroying various new-type tanks produced around the year 2000 and other armored objects found. HJ-9 is reportedly most sophisticated in searching and striking objects, tracking and loading, with a combat capability at all time and under all weather and a precision of hits over 90 percent under the guide of an around-the-clock observation system.
January 21st, 2005  
FO Seaman
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
man, u got to read about Red Arrow 9a first..it is a bit different from other crappy RPGs..

according to global security web site
http://globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/hj-9.htm

called one of the world advanced and powerful anti-tank weaponry. The HJ-9 is a vehicle-based long-range anti-tank missile of high precision. It is capable of effectively destroying various new-type tanks produced around the year 2000 and other armored objects found. HJ-9 is reportedly most sophisticated in searching and striking objects, tracking and loading, with a combat capability at all time and under all weather and a precision of hits over 90 percent under the guide of an around-the-clock observation system.
It is capable of effectively destroying various new-type tanks produced around the year 2000 and other armored objects found.

M1A1 was built in 1985. DU used since 1988. According to Globalsecurity.org.
January 21st, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
en...actually that sentence means it can penetrade any tank produced before 2000...

i thought u r american...
January 21st, 2005  
FO Seaman
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
en...actually that sentence means it can penetrade any tank produced before 2000...

i thought u r american...

How would you know thats what the sentence means its says around 2000, 1985 M1A1 and 1979 IPM1, 16 years isn't close to around 2000 its almost 20 years, 1979 is more than 20 years. An it says new tanks the Abrams is an old tank. But still the top of it game.

Yes I'm American.