$300 dollar round takes out M1A2

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Not gonna tell personal private information. Not only that this is not my professional resume that I am applying for a job. Believe me I know how to write, I just don't care about it on this forum, nor should it matter to anyone. Also my profession doesn't care about grammar mistakes unless it is something official/big deal, which it isn't most of the time.

OK I see how it is, you claim to have this physics degree but can't use basic grammar or spell basic words (such as making the distinction between their, there and they're). If you write like this on here then you most certainly (despite your claims not to) write like this in real life, it is indicative of a person who has no real pride in what they do.
Revealing what University you went to or what type of physics degree you have is hardly removing your anonymity which leads me to believe that you don't have a degree as you claim. No offense but that is how it comes across.

It probably didn't penetrate that side, but if you hit the Abrams from more vulnerable spots and multiple at a time which is usually the case, it will penetrate.

I thought your whole basis of this thread was to show how the Abrams was "taken out" by an RPG-29. So now you're saying it wasn't taken out?

Even so, it is still about to enter production, testing has been cleared, and its been 3 years since then. This is already one step ahead of active protection systems.

See that is what you should have said rather than trying to bolster your statement that it is in production which it clearly isn't. As for being a step ahead I seriously doubt it, It wouldn't be hard to program the ADS system recognize such a threat, especially as the two projectiles are traveling on the exact same trajectory. The controlling program could just tell the system to attack the 2nd projectile. The time it takes for the projectiles to reach the target is an eternity for a computer and it could calculate the nature of the threat faster than a speeding bullet.

Originally posted by warbird03

It is most likely an RPG-29, could be a rpg-27
It could easily be the same RPG that is hitting the tank.

What lighting is different? Sometimes camera's have auto-level's that adjust when you pan past something and then pan back, it looks different. You can't say that a different RPG hit because of just lighting conditions. It is possible it was a different RPG, but most likely it was 2 different cameraman and they stitched the video together.

So your saying that someone added shaking to this video that was originally us test video? LOL. Really? There are so many faults with this statement its not even funny.

reply to post by mad scientist


Not only that, but that's only the equipment that we know about. They could have some special units using countermeasure systems that the public has no clue exist.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Originally posted by warbird03

It is most likely an RPG-29, could be a rpg-27
It could easily be the same RPG that is hitting the tank.

What lighting is different? Sometimes camera's have auto-level's that adjust when you pan past something and then pan back, it looks different. You can't say that a different RPG hit because of just lighting conditions. It is possible it was a different RPG, but most likely it was 2 different cameraman and they stitched the video together.

So your saying that someone added shaking to this video that was originally us test video? LOL. Really? There are so many faults with this statement its not even funny.

Or it could be something besides an RPG too.

What lighting is different? You don't notice the difference in the amount of light when they switch between the men and the tank? And actually, I can say it's a different RPG hit because of a change in lighting conditions. The whether doesn't change in just a split second. You, however, cannot say that it is the same RPG hitting the tank simply because they tell you it is because of the simple fact that we do not see the RPG hit the tank in the same clip. Why can't you understand that fact?

What faults are there with the possibility that a camera shake effect was added to footage of a US military test involving an explosive and an Abrams? Please, I would love to know what you come up with for that one. I could use a good laugh right now.

More and more, your'e sounding like somebody who knows they're wrong but will try to come up with anything they can to not admit it.

reply to post by mad scientist

is hardly removing your anonymity which leads me to believe that you don't have a degree as you claim. No offense but that is how it comes across.

There are too many weirdo's and I don't want any personal information out their. I will be happy to post pictures of my books from class that were required in physics when I get the chance, but I will not post any information relating to my personal things. You really want me to prove my physics degree lol? You really want me to post a photo collection of my physics books lol? Are you really that low that you can't take people's word for it? I wouldn't demand proof of your profession, I would give you the benefit.

it is indicative of a person who has no real pride in what they do.

Son, you have no idea how good I am at the job I do, or how much pride I have. You are basing that judgment based on what? My grammar? Haha, utter fail.

OK I see how it is, you claim to have this physics degree but can't use basic grammar or spell basic words

How bout you correct every one of my grammar mistakes and repost my quotes.

I thought your whole basis of this thread was to show how the Abrams was "taken out" by an RPG-29. So now you're saying it wasn't taken out?

It was taken out, they won't just be sitting their. It will be repaired. It is still not fully battle functional.

As for being a step ahead I seriously doubt it

On what basis? The RPG-30 is pretty much already in the field

The controlling program could just tell the system to attack the 2nd projectile.

That is exactly when it gets hit by a regular RPG, you mix up the combinations or throw a few rocks or shoot a few bullets at the ADS system and overwhelm it with mixed targets.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Any ADS system would easily be programmed to ignore something as slow as a thrown rock or as small and fast as a bullet. Give our military's R&D some credit, they do think ahead sometimes.

reply to post by warbird03

You don't notice the difference in the amount of light when they switch between the men and the tank?

Cameras have auto leveling. Lighting can look completely different based on what objects are in the scene (man vs tank)

As far as US tank footage being faked in this video. I have seen real US tank tests with real US military cameras. They are usually not done on busy streets, they are steady, they are mounted, they have high FPS, are of better quality, and usually don't have crew in the tank. The angles at which those tests are filmed at are usually good angles, usually perpendicular etc.

Originally posted by warbird03
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

 

Any ADS system would easily be programmed to ignore something as slow as a thrown rock or as small and fast as a bullet. Give our military's R&D some credit, they do think ahead sometimes.

Can you easily program it on the battlefield? So you are saying for it to always hit the second projectile? Their are so many mistakes that I can see with this theory that it would not be able to defend the tank.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Auto-adjust will not make the scene go from sunny to overcast.

I merely said that to give an example, they could have used footage from any number of things.

I didn't say anything about programming it on the battlefield, nor did I say anything about targeting which projectile. Please, if you're going to try to disprove something I say then address something I actually said.

reply to post by warbird03


It is sunny in both the before and after shots. I do not know what you are talking about.

You are giving fictitious credit to the ADS system when it hasn't even been put on a tank yet. The RPG-30 has been tested, and was set to enter in 2008. As far as production, I do not know.

The RPG-30 is entering service soon and the ADS is still in testing phase. The US denied the trophy system that is used in merkava tanks (I do not know for what reason).

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Their are too many weirdo's and I don't want any personal information out their. I will be happy to post pictures of my books from class that were required in physics when I get the chance, but I will not post any information relating to my personal things. You really wan't me to prove my physics degree lol? You really want me to post a photo collection of my physics books lol? Are you really that low that you can't take people's word for it? I wouldn't demand proof of your profession, I would give you the benefit.

I've seen too much BS on the internet to believe anyone who I don't know. I've never seen you talk about physics, so obviously I've never seen you demonstrate any knowledge of the subject. Telling me what type of physics degree you have is hardly going to give you away, you're one of literally hundreds of thousands, same goes for your University. Showing me pictures of books proves absolutely nothing.
You come across as kind of childish a lot of the times, I don't really see any intellect shining though in your posts. Sorry.

Son, you have no idea how good I am at the job I do, or how much pride I have. You are basing that judgment based on what? My grammar? Haha, utter fail.

I can make assumptions by the way you carry yourself in here, such as your latest childish comment, "Haha, utter fail." Or the fact that you're boasting about being good at some lame video game I can't even remember the name of. Hardly the indications of a person with intellect or a physics degree.

How bout you correct every one of my grammar mistakes and repost my quotes.

If you want to look foolish and lack credibility that's your business.

It was taken out, they won't just be sitting their. It will be repaired. It is still not fully battle functional.

Right so by your logic, if a bullet clipped off a communications antenna, it would have been taken out because it is not fully battle functional.

PS. Just as a heads up it's "there" not "their".

On what basis? The RPG-30 is pretty much already in the field

It isn't despite your fantasies that it is.

That is exactly when it gets hit by a regular RPG, you mix up the combinations or throw a few rocks or shoot a few bullets at the ADS system and overwhelm it with mixed targets.

Sure and by the time these choreographed attacks have been directed against one tank, supporting armor, infantry and air support have wiped out the attackers.
BTW millimetric wave radar can precisely determine object size and velocity in an instant. Throwing rocks and shooting small projectiles at would hardly spoof the system.

reply to post by mad scientist

I've never seen you talk about physics

That is because you haven't seen every thread of mine.
Look at this thread where I disprove the OP as a HOAX based on physics mistake he made:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Showing me pictures of books proves absolutely nothing.

I also have the required homework included. I will scan it for you. Take it to your local university and ask them to verify my work. You want the proof, you do it yourself. I will give you my physics work,you can take it to your university and verify that I do have a physics background.

You come across as kind of childish a lot of the times, I don't really see any intellect shining though in your posts. Sorry.

The same can be said about you when you criticize ones education and grammar and not the substance of the thread.

Hardly the indications of a person with intellect or a physics degree.

So just because someone plays a video game makes them not intelligent?

As for being a step ahead I seriously doubt it
On what basis? The RPG-30 is pretty much already in the field
It isn't despite your fantasies that it is.

And what is your basis for saying the RPG-30 is not a step ahead?

Sure and by the time these choreographed attacks have been directed against one tanks, supporting armor, infantry and air support have wiped out the attackers.

Same for the tank too. There was a story about a challenger which got hit by a lot of RPGs, and yes I know about millimeteric wave radar. Just because an object is being tracked doesn't mean that they can all be engaged. The radar may be seeing them, but can the system engage 5 RPGs at once? I highly doubt that

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


You must be delusional or something. It is definitely not sunny while the tank is shown.

Bottom line is until you have any kind of proof AT ALL that the clip of the men and the clip of the tank being hit are actually connected, you have nothing at all to go on besides faulty assumptions. Not only that, but we don't even have confirmation on what particular RPG they're using due to the quality of the video.

Sorry, this is an argument you cannot win due to lack of evidence.

reply to post by warbird03

You must be delusional or something. It is definitely not sunny while the tank is shown.

Tell me at which time on the video the tank is not under sunny conditions. Let me have a closer look at it and see if you are correct or not.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by warbird03

 

You must be delusional or something. It is definitely not sunny while the tank is shown.

Tell me at which time on the video the tank is not under sunny conditions. Let me have a closer look at it and see if you are correct or not.

My god, can you not tell the difference between overcast and sunny? Seriously, this is not something I should have to explain to you.

Stop ignoring the part about a complete lack of proof that the clips are connected. No part of your argument can stand until you can prove that.

reply to post by warbird03


Give me a time on the video that it is not sunny. I see sun throughout the entire video. It is not overcast. Just give me the time on the video that you claim it to be sunny and let me have a closer look. Otherwise all I see is when the RPG hits, it is still sunny as in the first segment of the film.

I said it was probably two different cameramen and/or two diff locations. So what if it was stitched, doesn't rule out the fact an rpg hit it.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


There's much less light any time the tank is shown.

You're using circular logic based on what an anonymous person on the internet has told you. Do you not see the problem with that? "The tank was hit by an explosive, so it must have been their RPG. They launched an RPG, so that must be what hit the tank." Quit passing off your opinion that it was an RPG as fact. It is not fact.

We cannot say that they didn't simply use 2 cameramen. You, however, cannot say that they didn't put together video from 2 completely separate sources. Your critical thinking skills are severely lacking for somebody intelligent enough to have a physics degree. Don't unquestioningly believe everything you're told, especially if it's from the internet.

reply to post by warbird03

They launched an RPG, so that must be what hit the tank

It is the most likely thing that hit the tank, based on the video overall.

We cannot say that they didn't simply use 2 cameramen

Why is that? It is more possible that they had a few cameramen and just got the best shots they could and put them together.

You, however, cannot say that they didn't put together video from 2 completely separate sources

The two sources being the cameramen. It looks like the same street in the beginning and at the end, and much less like an offical army video test.

Your critical thinking skills are severely lacking for somebody intelligent enough to have a physics degree

Not you too? Seriously are you questioning my critical thinking, you really wanna go down that road?

Once again. Just give me a time on the video, so I can analyze it more closely. I might be missing something, but you must give me the time on the video where it is clearly not sunny. An explanation for why it looks like less light anytime the tank is shown is because of auto leveling like I said.

reply to post by InTrueFiction


I wonder if those Farkin Bastages Defense Contractors are still selling those Rat Trap Tanks with the " Dip Gyro ' in them ........

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


1. Take the time to read what I said. We cannot say they didn't simply use 2 cameramen.

2. You apparently skipped over the part where I said "separate" sources. As in, the clips didn't come from the same location. "It looks like the same street" is nowhere near good enough.

3. I already told you, the extreme difference in lighting when the tank is visible.

Still waiting on that proof. The only thing you've proven so far is a severe lack of knowledge and that you have an extremely bad habit of exaggeration.