It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Tanks take a beating in Iraq

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 04:46 PM
If you are in urban warfare, "a friendly" tank is your best friend. Nothing will give you more cover and support. No one weapon system is a cure-all, and the tank is no different. That said, the MBT will have a role in urban warfare for a long time to come.

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 05:06 PM

[edit on 5-4-2005 by WeBDeviL]

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 05:45 PM
It is very hard to destroy an Abrams, the problem comes if you disable it in some way.

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Broadsword20068]

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 11:04 PM

as posted by seekerof
I have a picture of a conceptional urban warfare upgrade package on my home computer....its conceptional, but if looks could kill, it would OwNz!
Post it when I get home from campus.

OK, here it is:

This is a conceptual [not being considered] urban upgrade package for upgrading mothballed M1A1 MBT's. And yes, the 105mm M1 cannon has been replaced by the installation of 30mm GAU-8 or could be a 20mm GAU-4.

Btw, here are those Israeli urban outfitted MBTs:



posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 11:27 PM
Honestly I am surprised at the number, 80 Abrams ?!? I know tanks aren't invulnerable (especially rear and top) and we have already known from WW I it’s not wise to use tanks in urban warfare.

But last year, whole threads were made when one Abram was knocked out - it was big news back then. People were looking for an explanation, and that ranged from high caliber sniper rifles to the newest Soviet/Chinese anti-tank weapons, even to plasma technology and sound beams.

I am not being cynical, but I am so much surprised because perhaps I too am conditioned (by the media) on the invincibility of the US armed forces and her equipment.


[edit on 5-4-2005 by Blobber]

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Blobber]

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 11:50 PM
80 tanks down is a huge number but that's out of more than 1,000 and some of them were probably damaged by accidents like driving into canals and ditches like in the photo below.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by AceOfBase]

posted on Apr, 5 2005 @ 11:56 PM

Originally posted by AceOfBase
80 tanks down is a hugh number but that's out of more than 1,000 and some of them were probably damaged by accidents like driving into canals and ditches like in the photo below.

Aye. According to the link 1100 were used in Iraq, still that gives a rate of more than 7%. I don't think though that a lot of tanks had to be shipped back because of accidents (e.g. ditches) as I assume that they then can be repaired over there.


[edit on 5-4-2005 by Blobber]

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 01:20 AM
IT is universal problam with tank.
they made to fight in open not in urban jungle where there monverablity is limited >

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 01:33 AM
The link said 80 were damaged but it did not say 80 were completely destroyed most of the 80 tanks in question are probably repairable.

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 08:07 AM
That 4 tracks design seems pretty nice addon alone, if roadside bomb blows one of the tracks your not render immobile, at least the chances get smaller. There just wasnt any side picture of real tank. I dont like the turret they add above, it should be automated instead controlled from inside monitors. At least on other tread it was shown as manned turret.

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 08:44 AM

Originally posted by Kozzy
The story you are speaking of happened in the 1st Gulf war, in the 24th Infantry Division

An Abrams was rolling through the desert where it got stuck in the mud. The commanders did not want to attack to be slowed for a single stuck tank, so the company left it behind to wait for a maintenence section. Sitting alone in the desert immobilized it was ambushed by 3 T-72s. The first T-72 fired a HEAT round, no damage, Abrams killed it. 2nd T-72 fired another HEAT round, no damage, Abrams killed it. 3rd T-72 fired a APFSDS round, slight dink in armor, it drove behind a sand berm for cover. Through the Abrams' thermal sights they saw the T-72's exhaust and fired a M289A1 through the sand berm and into the T-72, killing it.

Now when the maintenence section showed up to get it out of the mud. They couldn't, it was really stuck. So they decided to destroy it to prevent the enemy from reaching it. An Abrams fired a HEAT round straight into it's rear, cooking off the ammo with the blast doors open. The resulting explosion and fire were put out by the tank's fire supression system. The tank was completely servicable and went back into action the war.

I read this in Tom Clancy's Armored Cav, had it verified by an Army Master Gunner and numerous other internet contacts.

being damaged and distoyed are 2 seporate things

Things learned about the abrams

[edit on 6-4-2005 by shadarlocoth]

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 09:19 AM
here is the upgrade planned for urban fighting M1's

Tusk M1 urban combat upgrade

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 12:12 PM
So there have been a total of 770 tanks have been attacked. 80 of them have been taken out of action, that's a loss rate of 10.4%. There have been 15 crew deaths, that's a loss rate of .5%. If you take into account that the tanks are being used in urban enviroments where tanks have always been at a disadvantage and that there has been a complete breakdown of the logistics system in Iraq, it isn't bad. This is over the past 2 years as well. I don't think any other tank could do any better.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by Kozzy]

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 12:18 PM
I ment a tank not with more amour but more spread out.

posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 01:15 PM
They are definatly using a "lessons learned" approach to the urban fighting in Iraq guys. Couldn’t find the great post here on the M1 upgrade, but I was able to find some data on it here:

I forget who, but somebody here made a post with a great write up/chart going over some mods that will happen to the M1 to upgrade it against urban fighting. Some real impressive stuff and I am certain its survivability will increase exponentially.

If anybody has a link to that post id love to see it again.

Also: ALL TANKS are vulnerable to the same attacks that are mildly effective against the M1 in Iraq. I think under the circumstances the M1 is doing very well. After the upgrades I think it will nearly seal itself as about the best MBT out there.

[edit on 6-4-2005 by skippytjc]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in