The Dogs of War

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,12:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Notice the picture of a B-52! I really hope it's just a stupid media illustration.<span id='postcolor'>

I think it is a stupid media illustration, I hope!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> "The trick, if you have to do this, is to use the smallest weapon possible to get the maximum effect, so that you don't create unnecessary loss of civilian life or property," Moseley said as U.S. troops ringed Baghdad.

<span id='postcolor'> By this they probably mean cluster bomblets right? Just kidding, I hope!

[PFC_Mike 2]

So how many Iraqi causalties are there? Assuming that this is Mogadishu part two, as so many of you hope, there will not be many Iraqi men left if all 1500 US troops at the airport are killed.

200 corpses found in an Iraqi military barracks; probably the remains of hundreds of enemies of the Ba'athists.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....id=1478

[PFC_Mike 2]

Looks surprisingly like OFP...

Look at the rust texture and the vehicular warping. How come I can't find it in the editor as "BMP Wreck"?

[Potatoman 0]

Iraqi TV showing celebrations around what they claim is a US IFV. The turret was separated and there was no fire. I'm watching on streaming video so it was hard to see but it looked like a BMP to me  

Edit: US claims of Iraqi casualities reduced to a couple of hundred.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC_Mike @ April 05 2003,18:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So how many Iraqi causalties are there?<span id='postcolor'>

Airport? Lots I would say. It's relatively open terrain so they would not stand a chance.

Coalition casualties are another story. It depends if the Iraqis managed to get their artillery coordinated or not.

[tracy_t 0]

Kontakt-5 ERA cannot be penetrated by 120mm DU shells, you say? Well, that means the Challenger and M1A2 don't have a chance against the likes of a T90S (feel free to correct me)

Does Syria or Iran have any T90s? I mean, they are part of the Axis of Evil, aren't they?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ April 05 2003,18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Kontakt-5 ERA cannot be penetrated by 120mm DU shells, you say?<span id='postcolor'>

Already posted a couple of times before, but here it goes again:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Jane's International Defence Review 7/1997, pg. 15:

"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION

"Claims that the armour of Russian tanks is effectively impenetrable, made on the basis of test carried out in Germany (see IDR 7/1996, p.15), have been supported by comments made following tests in the US.

"Speaking at a conference on Future Armoured Warfare in London in May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US tests involved firing trials of Russian-built T-72 tanks fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour (ERA). In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles.

"When fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles.

"Richard M. Ogorkiewicz" <span id='postcolor'>

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Potatoman @ April 05 2003,09:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraqi TV showing celebrations around what they claim is a US IFV. The turret was separated and there was no fire. I'm watching on streaming video so it was hard to see but it looked like a BMP to me  

Edit: US claims of Iraqi casualities reduced to a couple of hundred.<span id='postcolor'>

This one?  Someone needs to teach the Iraqi's their own GOB.  Looks like it was a BMP 1 or 2.

Yahoo news picture

BMP-2

[ralphwiggum 6]

kinda makes you wonder if Iraqis ever played OFP....

it seems like Coalition forces might resort to what they are doing with Basra. make incursion if neccesarry, and slowly take over the city by destroying enemies's morale one by one.

[Guest]

0--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ April 05 2003,190)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This one?  Someone needs to teach the Iraqi's their own GOB.  Looks like it was a BMP 1 or 2.

Yahoo news picture<span id='postcolor'>

LOL, morons Regardless if they claim that that BMP was a US APC or not.

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,09:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ April 05 2003,18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Kontakt-5 ERA cannot be penetrated by 120mm DU shells, you say?<span id='postcolor'>

Already posted a couple of times before, but here it goes again:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Jane's International Defence Review 7/1997, pg. 15:

"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION

"Claims that the armour of Russian tanks is effectively impenetrable, made on the basis of test carried out in Germany (see IDR 7/1996, p.15), have been supported by comments made following tests in the US.

"Speaking at a conference on Future Armoured Warfare in London in May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US tests involved firing trials of Russian-built T-72 tanks fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour (ERA). In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles.

"When fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles.

"Richard M. Ogorkiewicz" <span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

I can't speak to the penetration capabilities of the shells, but I can say that a newer Hellfire Blast Frag will defeat it. The Hellfire M was designed with just this type of armor in mind. This came about after information about the Kontakt-5 ERA surfaced and entered testing within the last few years. Two of which I was there for.

It preempts the ERA with an initial explosion of its own, freeing the warhead to strike the armor of the threat. It will also work pretty good against both above and semi underground bunkers.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ April 05 2003,19:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It preempts the ERA with an initial explosion of its own, freeing the warhead to strike the armor of the threat.  It will also work pretty good against both above and semi underground bunkers.<span id='postcolor'>

It must be several layers of explosions, since Kontakt-EDZ ERA (second generation ERA 20+ years old) already dealt with tandem warheads

I don't doubt however that they've developed countermeasures to that and that the Russians have already developed countermeasures to that etc etc

[bn880 5]

Just some little update

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Russian military intel update: War in Iraq, April 4

Currently the coalition group of forces in the airport area number up to 4,000 troops, up to 80 tanks and about 50 artillery systems. It should be expected that several helicopter squadrons from the 101st Airborne Division will be deployed here in the next several hours

<span id='postcolor'>

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,10:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It must be several layers of explosions, since Kontakt-EDZ ERA (second generation ERA 20+ years old) already dealt with tandem warheads

I don't doubt however that they've developed countermeasures to that and that the Russians have already developed countermeasures to that etc etc <span id='postcolor'>

The way I described it was minimalist at best. Obviously I'm not going to go into more depth on here. Go to http://www.chinalake.navy.smil.mil/vx9/cobra on SIPRnet if you want to read more.

And you're right, I'm not saying it's the end all, just that it works against the newer generation of reactive armor. But as you pointed out, the Russians are probably already working on their follow on.

It seems in armor and anti armor development that it's a reactionary process, and not evolutionary.

[Necromancer- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,19:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ April 05 2003,19:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It preempts the ERA with an initial explosion of its own, freeing the warhead to strike the armor of the threat.  It will also work pretty good against both above and semi underground bunkers.<span id='postcolor'>

It must be several layers of explosions, since Kontakt-EDZ ERA (second generation ERA 20+ years old) already dealt with tandem warheads

I don't doubt however that they've developed countermeasures to that and that the Russians have already developed countermeasures to that etc etc <span id='postcolor'>

ANti-ERA5 Missile ERA

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile ERA

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile ERA missile ERA.

and so on, and so on...

[Othin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Necromancer- @ April 05 2003,10:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ANti-ERA5 Missile ERA

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile ERA

Anti-Anti-ERA5 ERA missile ERA missile ERA.

and so on, and so on... <span id='postcolor'>

Eventually they're just going to shoot tanks at each other

[ran 0]

and finally , ERA 35545's only way to be neutralised will be to spray warm beer on it and the Hellfires gen 5466 will be defeated by putting strawberry jam on the tank's armor

[Balschoiw 0]

why go complicated ?

Put some sugar into the fuel

I have seen some semi smart solutions against high tech weapons in the last years. Some of them actually worked. You all know this garden lights that turn on automatically when someone enters a certain radius. Well in Yugoslavia they used it as a remote trigger for explosives and fixed firearms. Quite nasty. In Africa they used regular metal pipes to build RL´s and mounted them on trucks. They had to aim with the truck itself but the result was quite impressive. They blew a nigerian APC to bits.

[Renagade 0]

pffft just fire a big glob of superglue at it the hit the windows and sensors with paintballs

BTW Isn`t having some infantry firing a few rpg-7s in quick sucession at the same spot and effective tactic against tank armour ??

[bn880 5]

Renegade, at the same spot it should be, but you know you have to be organized to pull this off. Big problem for RG.

[Maraudeur 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ April 05 2003,19:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,10:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It must be several layers of explosions, since Kontakt-EDZ ERA (second generation ERA 20+ years old) already dealt with tandem warheads

I don't doubt however that they've developed countermeasures to that and that the Russians have already developed countermeasures to that etc etc <span id='postcolor'>

The way I described it was minimalist at best.  Obviously I'm not going to go into more depth on here.  Go to http://www.chinalake.navy.smil.mil/vx9/cobra on SIPRnet if you want to read more.

And you're right, I'm not saying it's the end all, just that it works against the newer generation of reactive armor.  But as you pointed out, the Russians are probably already working on their follow on.

It seems in armor and anti armor development that it's a reactionary process, and not evolutionary.<span id='postcolor'>

Thanks for the link Othin.

The new generation of reactive armor is not Kontak5. This one is more than 10 years old in design, and so for its use.

The new one, is the Kaktus.

Russian tanks immune again ?

Well, nobody outside Russia could test it, so, and as long as westerner are just speaking about the K5 while it's already old story for russian armoured tech....

What's funny,for example, is that in west, we just realized last year that an early 80's T72s variant widely diffused in red army ( only red army ), had more than just cast steel front turret armour, else than a layer of DU inside, but a complete box of composite plates.

And that it was in early '80s, at that part of the armour, immune to NATO ammo available in early '90 only....

Same sort of storys goes for ATGMS tech, artillery and, very important, all sectors of electronic warfare including airborne, for wich westerners thought they were more advanced.

That's what we learned yesterday for the material 20 years old. Imagine about actual armour, the surprises some may have ...

Eastern culture, entire spirit is completely differnet from western side.

Thoughts and ways to go so.

Actually we already can consider differences beetween europeans, so imagine.

I can assure you that regarding this and some other subjects, processes are evolutionists and not reactionists.

[Potatoman 0]

Reuters raw video has footage of a burnt out M1 and what looks to be a bmp. I doubt more US armour was destroyed or Iraqi TV would surely be showing it.

[theavonlady 2]

Has anyone posted this news yet?

We just saw it on TV here and were sickened. It was very gory.  

edit: I should point out that the TV report (from overseas) claimed that these werre executed Iraqi soldiers. They also showed documentation found listing names and containing post-execution pics of them.

They showed the bullet ridden walls where they were shot and there were also reports of torture chamber(s) and equipment found.

[Guest]

On the news here they said that the corpses were several years old. Probably some unfortunate dissidents

In other news,BBC:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A bomb explodes in the centre of Baghdad, next to the Palestine Hotel where many journalists covering the war are based and where briefings by the Iraqi information ministry are held.

<span id='postcolor'>

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 05 2003,22:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A bomb explodes in the centre of Baghdad, next to the Palestine Hotel where many journalists covering the war are based and where briefings by the Iraqi information ministry are held.

<span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

If I were a reporter there, I think I would take that as a hint.