on killing tanks

[ZigZagZeke]

A great deal of fear is generated about provoking Putin by attacking his ground forces, his tanks, etc. and his possible retaliation with nukes.

So here is why I can guarantee you that Putin will not be the first to use nuclear weapons, no matter what…

"The video below from U.S. Defense News shows Ohio-class nuclear-powered submarines in action. It claims that just one of these ballistic submarines, sometimes called "boomers" or "undersea beasts" by Navy personnel, "could destroy Russia and China in minutes.
Although the Ohio-class vessels, which consist of four cruise missile submarines and 14 ballistic missile submarines, are only the third-largest submarines ever built, the video claims they are "the most destructive weapons systems created by humankind."
They can reach "targets up to 7,000 miles away, depending on the load." Each carries 24 Trident II missiles. "As a Trident II re-enters the atmosphere at speeds of up to Mach 24, it splits into up to eight independent re-entry vehicles, each with a 100 or 400 kiloton nuclear warhead."

"In short, a complete salvo from an Ohio-class submarine, which can be launched in one minute, could unleash up to 192 nuclear warheads to wipe 24 cities off the map."

And no, nobody including the US knows precisely where these 7 boats that are on patrol 24/7/365 are at any given time, and no, they do NOT need to surface in order to launch. I know these things first hand because I was once a weapons tech on these boats."

Russia Beware, This US Submarine Can Level a Country Within Minutes of Surfacing

Russia's submarines are bigger than ours, but they probably can't "reshape a continent" in under a minute.

www.westernjournal.com

 

[CamoDeafie]

Lets see... in the most recent Iraq war, we lost several M1A1s to IEDs, some to attacks to roof and rear, and engine compartments.. at least 1 to a RPG-29... these losses were why we developed the TUSK stuff.. and back in 1991? The M1 Abrams trounced the T-72s of Iraq, and then again in the more recent Iraq war.. so yeah... the T-72s are a full generation behind the M1 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2A5..

 

[rjmt]

A great deal of fear is generated about provoking Putin by attacking his ground forces, his tanks, etc. and his possible retaliation with nukes.

So here is why I can guarantee you that Putin will not be the first to use nuclear weapons, no matter what…

"The video below from U.S. Defense News shows Ohio-class nuclear-powered submarines in action. It claims that just one of these ballistic submarines, sometimes called "boomers" or "undersea beasts" by Navy personnel, "could destroy Russia and China in minutes.
Although the Ohio-class vessels, which consist of four cruise missile submarines and 14 ballistic missile submarines, are only the third-largest submarines ever built, the video claims they are "the most destructive weapons systems created by humankind."
They can reach "targets up to 7,000 miles away, depending on the load." Each carries 24 Trident II missiles. "As a Trident II re-enters the atmosphere at speeds of up to Mach 24, it splits into up to eight independent re-entry vehicles, each with a 100 or 400 kiloton nuclear warhead."

"In short, a complete salvo from an Ohio-class submarine, which can be launched in one minute, could unleash up to 192 nuclear warheads to wipe 24 cities off the map."

And no, nobody including the US knows precisely where these 7 boats that on patrol 24/7/365 are at any given time, and no, they do NOT need to surface in order to launch. I know these things first hand because I was once a weapons tech on these boats.

https://www.westernjournal.com/russias-submarines-bigger-launch-doors-open-immediately-clear-size-doesnt-matter/?fbclid=IwAR2CXzBHFZtYVciz5Na70j1QlD3KAKmghqgXKFMpE1CN8L4jIqV0TMtN-us#ixzz7PHDkWccQ"

the first house I bought was in Vallejo in '78, spent many a weekend at the Horse and Cow drinking with Nuc boat crews
those are some serious people!!

 

[wired]

Lets see... in the most recent Iraq war, we lost several M1A1s to IEDs, some to attacks to roof and rear, and engine compartments.. at least 1 to a RPG-29... these losses were why we developed the TUSK stuff.. and back in 1991? The M1 Abrams trounced the T-72s of Iraq, and then again in the more recent Iraq war.. so yeah... the T-72s are a full generation behind the M1 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2A5..

We didnt have incoming javelines . They do . Other good anti tank gear too . I dont think an M1A1 would live with modern anti tank missiles either. Good theater missiles will revolutionize warfare.

 

[rjmt]

We didnt have incoming javelines . They do . Other good anti tank gear too . I dont think an M1A1 would live with modern anti tank missiles either. Good theater missiles will revolutionize warfare.

these documents were released by Ukraine
understand, this is just a sample

 

[BrentN]

We didnt have incoming javelines

And why was that?

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

Haha. A T-14 costs $3.7 mil.

$3.7 MIL rubles =$36k usd lol

 

[DirectDrive]

And why was that?

The Iraqis didn't know the right people ?

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

one of the reasons the Russian tanks are maneuvering down narrow roads is it's Spring time in Ukraine - their spring mud stopped the Germans in WW2, the same with the Russians today
I live on property in the NW, once sank an F250 Diesel 4WD to the belly pan in our mud, the same with the Russian tanks in Ukraine
how did the Russians forget this from WW2?
the Mud stopped Napoleon on his way to Moscow
the Mud stopped Hitler on his way to Moscow
How did Putin forget this?

His mudder was a mudder !

 

[CamoDeafie]

We didnt have incoming javelines . They do . Other good anti tank gear too . I dont think an M1A1 would live with modern anti tank missiles either. Good theater missiles will revolutionize warfare.

We didn't allow the Iraqis to buy RPG-29s which defeated both Challenger 2 and supposedly M1 Abrams. The RPG-30 and RPG-32 are the most current anti-tank "rocket grenades" available as far as I know. Not sure if the ERA (explosive reactive armor) blocks defeat the tandem warheads of the RPG-29 to 32 series.

Edit. As far as I know, the T-72 is basically a peer of the M60A3 series. So whatever can defeat M60, can also defeat T-72. The Israelis proved that with their 105mm Merkava cannons, as well as using the TOW mounted on jeeps in the 1982 Lebanon war.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Weren't the earliest drones GSD's with mines strapped to their backs?

 

[TTSX]

The only thing you really need is a blue turtle shell

 

[rjmt]

We didn't allow the Iraqis to buy RPG-29s which defeated both Challenger 2 and supposedly M1 Abrams. The RPG-30 and RPG-32 are the most current anti-tank "rocket grenades" available as far as I know. Not sure if the ERA (explosive reactive armor) blocks defeat the tandem warheads of the RPG-29 to 32 series.

Edit. As far as I know, the T-72 is basically a peer of the M60A3 series. So whatever can defeat M60, can also defeat T-72. The Israelis proved that with their 105mm Merkava cannons, as well as using the TOW mounted on jeeps in the 1982 Lebanon war.

there are over 40 variants of T 72
some are superior to the T 90
which one are discussing?

FrankenTank: Poland Considered NATO 120mm Guns on T-72 Tanks

With the purchases of PAC-3 Patriots and F-35s coming in the near future, the Polish defense budget is likely to have little room for extensive T-72 modernizations.

nationalinterest.org

 

[Provincial]

RE : Are tanks obsolete?
One view

Aloha, Mark

I viewed this video earlier when it was posted in another thread. It is interesting, but one must remember that this is a professional soldier and his comments are those of a professional soldier who lives by General Patton's famous line:

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his."

Now, break down his criticism of the attack on the Russian armored column. He disparages someone shooting an inexpensive, but relatively ineffective antitank weapon (probably an older RPG, but possibly something like a Carl Gustav) at the lead tank, only to be engaged by two lighter armored vehicles with smaller caliber auto cannons. A professional would never take this shot.

Now consider that the shooter was probably not a professional soldier, and was fighting to defend his/her own home and people. He (or she) was willing to die to slow down, and hopefully kill, the tank and its crew. The commentator admits that the tank eventually stopped off-screen, while he believes (but has no proof) that the shooter was killed by the return fire.

What I saw was that someone took a shot at the back of the lead tank, causing minor damage which eventually caused it to stop. This action disrupted the mission of the armored column, and given the top-down command & control of the Russian Army, caused this column to be (at best, from the Russian perspective) delayed, thereby disrupting the other elements of that offensive thrust by exposing the flanks of the two adjacent elements. At worst, from the Russian perspective, it caused the column to fail to take its assigned objective. Somewhere between the two, it degraded the morale of the Russian soldiers, making them more cautious and unwilling to take risks in the future.

One person using a relatively inexpensive weapon(perhaps not even a soldier) disrupted a Russian advance at the cost (likely, but not certainly) of his/her life. This is Asymmetric Warfare in practice.

I hope the shooter had prepared a bolt-hole in which to take cover after the shot, and that bolt-hole was chosen to protect against the flak-type air bursts of the autocannons. It is unlikely that the column would disembark foot soldiers to search for the shooter, as that would cause them to delay their progress in their assigned task. More likely, they would shoot up the area from which the shot came, then move on after "suppressing" their opposition, as they likely said in the after-action report.

 

[Oro]

Marines giving up on tanks? Lol.

Are you nuts? They are gone. Like two years ago.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Something to consider here :

In combat , much like self defense , the object can be to get the threat to stop.
Which may or may not mean killing them.

If the threat is stopped or even delayed , made to go a different direction / forced to turn around or go in the direction you want them to go...
Then that could be considered success , depending on the nature of your mission.

In my experiences combat was far more than just killing the enemy.
Andy

 

[NeoBlackdog]

Im going to have my son buy me a T-72.

Cheaper than a new GMC 3500HD!

 

[Provincial]

Cheaper than a new GMC 3500HD!

And better gas mileage!

 

[CamoDeafie]

there are over 40 variants of T 72
some are superior to the T 90
which one are discussing?

FrankenTank: Poland Considered NATO 120mm Guns on T-72 Tanks

With the purchases of PAC-3 Patriots and F-35s coming in the near future, the Polish defense budget is likely to have little room for extensive T-72 modernizations.

nationalinterest.org

There are also variants of the M60 that's almost on par with the Merkava and the 1st gen Challenger (Sabra, M60-2000 prototype, and maybe a couple others) at the baseline ; the T-72 is still a generation behind M1 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2. The T-80 and T-90s are the replacements but these are also called 3rd gen tanks vs the 4th Gen M1/Challenger 2/Leopard 2 tanks. The T-14 Armata is supposed to bring Russian tank tech up to date but.... its still not in full production as far as I know.

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

The poor new guys that came to the Cav used to be given a rubber hammer and chalk. They would be tasked with finding soft spots on the tanks and wouldn't you know there would be tanks in the motor pool with little white x's all over lol !