 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Models / July 2009M1 Abrams questions
Was watching Military Channel and they were doing a bit on the Lima Arsenal and M1s. They commented that M1s never die they just get rebuilt. Has any Abrans actually been a total writeoff on combat? A complete kill, no salvage possible or desired? Seems to me if the hull and turret are separate items something can always be salvaged. Is there a hard figure on the number of kills by Abrams? Mainly tanks, but other vehicles, APCs, etc also? Frank >Was watching Military Channel and they were doing a bit on the Lima Arsenal >and M1s. They commented that M1s never die they just get rebuilt. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Frank i heard 4 in golf 1. no stats from rereun ver. 2. of course you can totally destroy one. no armor is perfect and i hope our guys never have to face the shark or any other hotshit aircraft. there was one that got the sh.t knocked out of the front. they thought the driver was dead after th boom and fire, but when it cooled a couple of hours later, they pulled the driver out who wondered what took so long. they are bmf tanks, but anything can be destroyed. A few. Most of the time tanks are written off it is due to a catastrophic event (e.g. the ammo detonates) or fire. Fire changes the molecular composition of the steel and other materials used in the armor weakening its integrity. All told we have probably written off 20 or so, most of them during OIF due to IEDs or fires. Cookie Sewell AMPSOne@aol.com wrote in news:abaae73b-e707-4b85-95b7- 041dded0c05e@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: > A few. Most of the time tanks are written off it is due to a > catastrophic event (e.g. the ammo detonates) or fire. Fire changes the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Cookie Sewell Anything in tank vs tank? I guess I'm trying to divine the kill ratio, x number of Abrams vs x * 100 of bad guy tanks. Still 20 is pretty remarkable.  SignatureAlways remember: Bull Connor was a Democrat! > AMPSOne@aol.com wrote in news:abaae73b-e707-4b85-95b7- > 041dded0c05e@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Still 20 is pretty remarkable. This article states that the first Abrams destroyed by enemy fire occured during OIF, and that all Abrams damaged during DS were returned to service. These particular Abrams were believed to have been taken out by a truck mounted AT gun. http://www.militarycity.com/iraq/1704995.html This article claims that no Abrams has been lost to fire from an enemy tank, either in DS or OIF. http://www.tankopoly.com/M1A1_Abrams_Tank.htm They're internet articles and are thus subject to being truthful, not entirely correct, exaggeration, falsehood, lies, outright fantasy, practical joke run amok, Microsoft upgrade... you get the point. WmB > > AMPS...@aol.com wrote in news:abaae73b-e707-4b85-95b7- > > 041dded0c...@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > - Show quoted text - According to the tankers I know NO Abrams has ever been lost to enemy tank fire -- there are a lot of claims from Iraqis and fellow traveler pro-Soviet writers like Sergey Suvorov but no actual losses, period. One tank was lost during Desert Storm when it smoked a T-72 and then pulled up next to the burning tank looking for more Iraqis. The T-72 detonated and showered it with burning fuel which the crew could not extinguish so they bailed out and the tank was a loss. That's about as close as it comes. Some were lost to ATGM and RPG fire in OIF, all rear shots. Cookie Sewell on 6/20/2009 1:51 PM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following: > AMPSOne@aol.com wrote in news:abaae73b-e707-4b85-95b7- > 041dded0c05e@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I don't have numbers of Abrams vs Iraqi tanks, but it was said on a Military channel program that the Bradley IFV smoked more Iraqi tanks than the Abrams. SignatureBill In Hamptonburgh, NY In the original Orange County. Est. 1683 To email, remove the double zeroes after @ > on 6/20/2009 1:51 PM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following: > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Somehow I doubt that -- for example, B Company 4th Tanks USMC took out 34 out of 35 T-72s in less than 14 minutes in one engagement, and the Battles of 73 Easting and Medina Ridge were won mostly by Abrams gunfire at 2000-3000 meters in limited visibility conditions. Cookie Sewell on 6/22/2009 8:23 PM (ET) AMPSOne@aol.com wrote the following: > >> on 6/20/2009 1:51 PM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > Cookie Sewell > Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, which is probably what I heard on TV. From: http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=5 "The Bradley saw extensive action in the Persian Gulf War of 1991, accounting for more enemy tanks destroyed than that of the M1 and M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank systems. On the flip side, of the twenty Bradley's lost in the conflict, a whopping 17 were due to friendly fire accidents. As such, identification measures were put into place to curtail these incidents in future engagements". I'm looking for a more official site, but a number of unofficial sites report this. Speaking of Bradleys, have you seen this? Ooops. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umhv1_n-MtE SignatureBill In Hamptonburgh, NY In the original Orange County. Est. 1683 To email, remove the double zeroes after @ : Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, which is : probably what I heard on TV. : From: http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=5 Not exactly a reliable source you provide there. Not to mention that the History Channel is one of the most reliable sources there is. Of SNAFU's. Now, I have seen a somewhat different quote, and that quote makes a whole lot more sense: "During the Gulf War, the Bradleys destroyed more Iraqi ARMOR than the M1 Abrams." Still, I would be a lot happier to see actual numbers. Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes >> Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, >> which is probably what I heard on TV. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Still, I would be a lot happier to see actual numbers. I've yet to hear a TV commentator who could tell the difference between a "tank" and an APC, especially since the latter starting sporting turrets. (kim) >>> Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, >>> which is probably what I heard on TV. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > (kim) Well then - you'll be pleased to know that French "battleships" have the Sea of Japan and the Horn of Africa covered. Heard that bit of precision reporting last month. Battleship sightings by the press are nothing new of course. In fact, the yearly increase in sightings appears to be in direct relation to the yearly increase in public school funding. WmB >>>> Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, >>>> which is probably what I heard on TV. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >WmB the number of lgm's sighted here go up as the budget and iq's go down. the tweekers can see flocks of them invading mc dumbells. : Well then - you'll be pleased to know that French "battleships" have the Sea : of Japan and the Horn of Africa covered. : Heard that bit of precision reporting last month. I am actually not so annoyed by that bit of usage, as I can easily see battleship being used to indicate a generic warship. Since anything with tracks must be a "tank", so must any warship be a "battleship". Now, why are the Frogs covering the Sea of Japan? Bruce Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX. - Thuganlitha The Power and the Prophet Robert Don Hughes > : Well then - you'll be pleased to know that French "battleships" have the > Sea [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Bruce Probably trying to get under the DPRK missile arc. WmB brucegb@realtime.net (Bruce Burden) wrote in news:Z4X%l.4123$Uq5.2125 @newsfe23.iad: >: Here's a quote, although it was for the first Gulf war in 1991, which is >: probably what I heard on TV. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Bruce OK, so basically we have no Abrams KIA by action of an adversary AFV. How many adversary AFVs is it estimated that Abrams has put down? Mostly Iraqi I'm guessing. Mostly T-55s and T-72s with a smattering of T-62s for variety. I particularly like the Iraqi tanks when the turrets fly off. I call them pop tops, my boy gets a giggle out of it. Frank On Jun 30, 9:56 pm, grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com (Gray Ghost) wrote: > bruc...@realtime.net (Bruce Burden) wrote in news:Z4X%l.4123$Uq5.2125 > @newsfe23.iad: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > - Show quoted text - On another note, the Army announced the plans to develop the M1A3 by 2014 and field the M1A3 by 2017 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.