Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

$300 dollar round takes out M1A2

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Guys I ran into this on a military forum:

www.liveleak.com...

This is the RPG-29, its cheap, each round costs 300 bucks. It just took out a 5 million dollar state of the art armored system. This is a guerrilla war and asymmetric warfare is ruling the battlefield.




posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I saw a rocket hit a tank but nothing close to taking it out. It is still there.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Sad. I wonder what the overall damage was? I also wonder if any of the crew survived?



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptSplatter
 


Are you serious?



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I have to agree with captain splatter - I see a tank still standing and IMO the armor done it's job.

Modern cars are designed to crumple in order to spread and absorb impact - I don't see why the same principles would not apply to modern armor.

You always hear old timers say "look how that car crumpled - they don't build em like they used to"
They are right - in the old car you would likely be dead, in the new one the car is a mess but you are not.
edit on 25-3-2011 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 


The tank is rendered usless. Its turrent is literally blown off. I did not say anything happend to the crew. The tank is now mission incapable and will have to be shipped back to the US for repairs. Also we do not know if the crew survived or not. Would you want to sit in that tank and take a hit like that? Tell us how it goes.

If a tank is being shipped back for repairs, how is it protecting ground infantry = mission fail = tank taken out of the mission.
edit on 25-3-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I don't know much about weapons and armaments but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the military industry would produce extremely sophisticated expensive tanks and weaponry, sell it to nations for billions of dollars and never mention that it can be easily destroyed by the cheap, old, decommissioned equipment they already sold them decades ago and convinced them to replace.

But like I said - I know nothing about this field.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Great. You just pissed off a tank.


But seriously, I wonder if the crew survived. Hard to tell if the armor was fully pierced from that video. If it did, they're likely goners. Just think of the shrapnel.

Edit: I don't see the turret being blown off...maybe a few pieces. The 50 cal coax is still intact. Still impressive to say the least.
edit on 3/25/2011 by goochball because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by byteshertz
 


The tank is rendered usless. Its turrent is literally blown off. I did not say anything happend to the crew. The tank is now mission incapable and will have to be shipped back to the US for repairs. Also we do not know if the crew survived or not. Would you want to sit in that tank and take a hit like that? Tell us how it goes.


You must be watching a different video than me - Im seeing a turret clearly still attached in the last frame.
It would'nt supprise me in the least if an old cheap weapon was found to bring down modern tanks. But what you are presenting me with is not evidence of that as far as I can tell.
And I would rather sit in a tank like that and take a hit from an RPG than an old school one.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 


So you are saying that this tank is fully capable of carrying on its mission that it was designed to do? The crew might now have to escape outside and will be vulnerable to sniper fire if they are around.

When I said turret blown off I meant that the turret is most likely useless.

We do not know if it penetrated or killed anyone. Fact remains that this tank is taken out of the equation and will not be able to provide and infantry support.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptSplatter
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I saw a rocket hit a tank but nothing close to taking it out. It is still there.


When you shoot someone in the head, they are still their, yet they wont be alive. This tank just got killed.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by byteshertz
 


So you are saying that this tank is fully capable of carrying on its mission that it was designed to do? The crew might now have to escape outside and will be vulnerable to sniper fire if they are around.

When I said turret blown off I meant that the turret is most likely useless.

We do not know if it penetrated or killed anyone. Fact remains that this tank is taken out of the equation and will not be able to provide and infantry support.


No Im saying what you have shown me is not evidence that it is unable to carry on it's job.
You are drawing a conclusion based on something we do not have not evidence to support or and expert analysis of.what evidence we do have.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure that turret is out of action now... if the crew are even alive from the shockwave, they are probably unable to fire back anymore.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by byteshertz

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by CaptSplatter
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I saw a rocket hit a tank but nothing close to taking it out. It is still there.


When you shoot someone in the head, they are still their, yet they wont be alive. This tank just got killed.


PROVE IT


Are you saying a 50 cal head shot wont kill someone and they will be able to walk around fine? Are you saying that this tank is perfectly capable of providing infantry support?


+3 more 
posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I don't know a ton about tanks or armor but I do know the US has been using this type of reactive armor for some time now. I understand it looks bad on the video but lets be honest the OP doesn't know the battle status of this tank after the rocket hit.




posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by byteshertz

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by CaptSplatter
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I saw a rocket hit a tank but nothing close to taking it out. It is still there.


When you shoot someone in the head, they are still their, yet they wont be alive. This tank just got killed.


PROVE IT


Are you saying a 50 cal head shot wont kill someone and they will be able to walk around fine? Are you saying that this tank is perfectly capable of providing infantry support?


Im going to ignore the first part because I am talking about the tank.

I am saying show me some proof that this tank is now incapable of:
A) Killing a target
B) Getting it's occupants to safety

Either of these to me would suggest the tank has done it's job - but you are saying the tank is dead and this RPG has won the battle - I am simply wondering how you can draw this conclusion without more evidence.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by byteshertz

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by CaptSplatter
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I saw a rocket hit a tank but nothing close to taking it out. It is still there.


When you shoot someone in the head, they are still their, yet they wont be alive. This tank just got killed.


PROVE IT


Are you saying a 50 cal head shot wont kill someone and they will be able to walk around fine? Are you saying that this tank is perfectly capable of providing infantry support?


I thought we were talking about a metal tank, not flesh and blood. In the case of a human being shot in the head in most cases and I said MOST, yes the person dies. But even then not everyone shot in the head dies....

Case in point just in case you need some proof of this....

edit on 25-3-2011 by CaptSplatter because: (no reason given)


edit on 25-3-2011 by CaptSplatter because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
The rebels preparing and launching the round and the tank exploding looks like 2 different video cut and spliced together to make it seems like the single round took out the tank. Probably a propaganda attempt.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptSplatter
 


Yes it may be reactive armor but the RPG-29 is is designed with a TANDEM warhead. What that means it explodes in two sections. First section destroys the reactive armor then the second warhead takes out the main armor.

If you look closely it hit the turret pretty hard and it is now useless. The only thing that may work on it is the 50 caliber. Other than that I see smoke coming out (fuel fire? etc..), the main turret is useless. This tank is out of commission for this mission.






top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join