ATGMs?

Djuice · Post by **Djuice** » 2005-09-12 05:45

There are alot of ways to disable a tank, anything that penetrate its armour and damages the internal workings of the tank is considered a mission kill. Anything that affects is mobility, is also a kill.

Doedel · Post by **Doedel** » 2005-09-12 08:33

Then in that respect, a TOW or even an Eryx should be able to "knock out" pretty much any tank save for perhaps a very unlocky shot against extremely heavy armour or a glancing shot. RPG-7 or similar un-guided weapon should also be able to do the same with a shot to the tracks.. but you'd have to get close enough.

PLEASE tell me this is what you're planning! And PLEASE tell me you are going to include the Carl Gustav RR!

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-12 08:44

I suggest the margin of critical damage be increased even as much as twice the amount of the tanks' HP. One hit would disable the tank, but it would take a couple more to completely destroy it.

Doedel · Post by **Doedel** » 2005-09-12 19:00

I agree 100%.

Djuice · Post by **Djuice** » 2005-09-12 20:41

Least not forgot the angle of impact of those type of weapons, the higher the angle the less penetration. eg, PG-7V round impacting at 60 degrees only penetrate 180mm compared to it impacting aat 0 degree which is 330mm.

TerribleOne · Post by **TerribleOne** » 2005-09-12 21:47

80 Abram tanks have been sent back to the us to be rebuilt. another 40 have been 'written off' since the iraq invasion.
Only 18 were lost in the whole of the cold war. The abram was designed for frontal impact and is being destroyed/killing the interal crew with 1. One RPG from a side impact to the turret or a rear impact to the engine or turret.
The Tusk kit was aimed to give these tanks extra protection against such attacks however militants generally use mines or IED's to try and blow of the tracks rendering the tank immobile. Insurgents follow behind the tank with RPG and mortar.
Allthough the tank loss is high bear in mind tanks will be #1 Target in such a place.
The Challenger tank also deployed in IRAQ fairs much much better as t appears has far greater protection from a 360 perspecitive. I dont know the figures from damages to challeners but im about to look it up.
I Cant seem to find any reports that any challenger 2 tanks have been lost as stated by this website. Also the source of raquiems pretty banner

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2891059.stm

The abram TUSK upgrade kit fitted:

http://img365.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... 5223kx.jpg

Some Info on the Upgrade kit for the Challenger 2:

'Challenger 2E has a new integrated weapon control and battlefield management system, which includes a gyrostabilised panoramic SAGEM MVS 580 day/thermal sight for the commander and SAGEM SAVAN 15 gyrostabilised day/thermal sight for the gunner, both with eyesafe laser rangefinder. This allows hunter/killer operations with a common engagement sequence. An optional servo-controlled overhead weapons platform can be slaved to the commander's sight to allow operation independent from the turret.

The powerpack has been replaced with a new 1500 hp Europack with transversely mounted MTU 883 diesel engine coupled to Renk HSWL 295TM automatic transmission. The smaller but more powerful engine allows more space for fuel storage, increasing the vehicleâ$™s range to 550km.'