Ok This is not about how tough the tank is, but just about a story I heard about an incident that happend during Desert Storm. It goes like this..

Back during Desert Storm an Abrams tank had gotten disabled. Standard practice in the military during war is to leave equipment, but destroy it enough so it can't be used again by anyone. So thats what they decided to do. They fired a few shots at it with another tank, but it didnt do that much damage. So they decided to place a bunch of rounds in it to help with the destruction. They fired at it again and set the rounds of, but still wasn't destroyed enough. They had to eventually tow it back to base anyway.

Ok, the story got told to me by 2 people. One person had heard it 2nd hand and the other said he was in the unit that it happend to. (but he wasn't the most honest person) Now I really am not looking for reasons why you think it is a fake story or anything like that. I do believe the story to be real, but might not have been exacly as told to me. I just want to know if someone has more info on the incident. Like from someone who was there or can find some article about it. If the one source was really there, it would have been an armor division out of Germany I think.

[edit on 14-10-2004 by Ronan]

Anything can be destroyed, except the WILL of man.

Please read the full post and not just comment on the header...

Ok I changed the topic to reflect more what im looking for. I have no doubt something can destroy an Abrams, but I was looking for more info about a story I heard. It was already crippled and not working, but it needed to be destroyed beyond repair.

[edit on 14-10-2004 by Ronan]

And to think Abrams armour is inferior to the Challenger 2 and Leo 2... puts things in perspective

Hello!? Why didn't the crew just spend an hour or so filling the entire fuel tank with Iraqi sand - that would disable it for a long time.

i saw during the invasion of iraq pictures of severly damaged abrams, but not destroyed beyond repair...there were stories that they would take the tracks off the abrams and them set the inside on fire...without the computer controlled fire support system the abrams is pretty much useless.

Originally posted by ben91069
Hello!? Why didn't the crew just spend an hour or so filling the entire fuel tank with Iraqi sand - that would disable it for a long time.

You have to destroy all sensitive componenets both inside and out that could possibly be used again or analyzed.

I did see a video by a news crew (unembedded Australians I think) where an M1 was too heavy for the bridge it was crossing and ended up barrel down in the dry creekbed, arse up in the air. It was during the 1993 Invasion. The crew reportedly had an uncomfortable time of it with Iraqi Artillery until they were rescued by Bradleys. It was destroyed with some US Airborne ordnance (I think).

There is the issue of surviving bits of tech & codes being spirited away and sold off to.....China for instance, in return for money and/or weapons. Plausibly denied of course.

the other big issue is of secondary weapons (MGs) being salvaged for use against the coalition.

ditto ammo....not just small arms, but turning the explosives in 120mm rounds into booby traps or large mines, the hope of salvaging DU for dirty devices.

Items of personal kit. The more you can salvage the more bods you can dress up and cause mischief.

Question: DU Rounds. I know they are superior penetrators than Tungsten rounds (if more expensive), so they are the round of choice for M1s and other platforms when dealing with enemy armour. We dont use them in Oz by the way.

But the mainstream media has decribed them in widespread and continued use. I usually assume this is because they don't know thier arse from thier face and basically call an overworked researcher at thier NY paper to find out for them, while they are at the bar in the Baghdad Hilton.

I understood that for instance the M1 had a mixed loudout and used different non DU rounds for other tasks. Therefore seems logical that since the threat of enemy armour is gone, they do not load DUs in thier ammo lockers now.

Unless you ascribe to the theory they are used as a terror weapon?

Its why I did not feel terribly sorry for the Al Jeezer (sic) TV crew or celebrating faction supporters climbing over that disabled Bradley a few weeks back.

Still armed, not burning, but hundreds of Iraqis crawling over it and god knows who pulling gear and rounds out?

Would you risk your platoon to another ambush to clear them off?

Or leave them to spirit away whatever they wanted?


No. You'd blast it with a Hellfire from far away. And if you warned them to clear off and they gave you the bird, is it your fault they didn't?

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.

well im from bosnia and i saw how Abrams is really useless tank in country like Bosnia.

In Bosnia Abrams tanks have much problems just driving on roads (it is so wide and big that you have to shut down whole roads from traffic when u have Abrams rollin) and when it rains offroad moving is simply impposible for 70ton beast.

Russian made T-55 could move where Abrams couldnt ,not to mention M-84 .(ex-Yu version of T-72).

So i guess hills,mud,bridges and no roads are bigger problem for US tank then most advanced missiles.

Abram ways 62t i think

If you want to kill an Abrams:

Onc incendiary round on cannon breech.

One incendiary grenade on engine.

Take the machine guns.

Done. 70-ton paperweight.

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.

That sounds more like what happend. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity