FerretFangs 0 Posted April 25, 2005 It would protect against alpha and beta particles, although the absence of NBC-rated gas masks might be an issue if beta radiatinon was a significant threat. It's more likely that radiation is not the biggest risk factor for these guys, but rather the larger particles and dust associated with a DU penetrator impact. The resultant particles are toxic if breathed in, but are large enough to be adequately filtered with a paper face mask. If beta radiation was a real hazard they'd be wearing gas masks too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 25, 2005 well not realy in real NBC suits, but protective suits... and you guys light up like jocker are cheering you up you know it's at least protective suits, Chernobil liquidators sometimes haven't got enough protective suits so they used casual (don't know that english word) clothes in so huge radiation, till now area around Chernobyls closed nuclear power plant is still high radiactive(at least 100 times normal radiaton doze aceptable for human)... And i think it's not funny to laugh at somebody whoes gona dye 5-10 years later P.S. Tommorov, in 1986 04 26, for Chernobil disaster will be 19 years! man, that sucks! Â Â Â I feel sorry for liquidators and other people involved with it... HAHA!!! Now you can lough, what else you could do... freaken people... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 25, 2005 Um, who was laughing at Chernobil? As tragic as the consequences were, it's just as much a tragedy that the plant was allowed to reach the terrible state of disrepair that it was in. It's ridiculous that they got so used to warning sirens going off, they simply shut the alarms off, rather than listen to them, or try to fix the problems. It's totally absurd that they couldn't invest the needed funds into repairing and maintaining the plant, because they were trying to defend the USSR from an enemy that wasn't interested in invasion in the first place. Nope, nothing at all funny about it. Horrible and embarrasing maybe, but not at all funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 25, 2005 Seems that who was laughing from those "NBC" suits are silence when i mentioned Chernobil... well, to those who think that destroyed armor by DU is not harmful, come to it and sit on it for one day on that place where DU round hit armor, we will see who will lough last one... P.S. If you aren't so sure that i post correct info in this forum, so try to find something that will make a disucusion, but not lought from what you don't know about... Later i will post pictures from my childhood, to show that i'm know about biological, chemical and nuclear weapons from my childhood, in pictures i and my brother in soviet nbc suit... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 25, 2005 Gedis, I'm not sure what you're on about. Could you try to explain it better? I don't think anyone here was saying tank wrekage, ANY wreckage, is safe to play in. Nobody was really talking about Chernobil except you. I'm not sure who you're attacking, or why. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 26, 2005 oh... never mind... ignore me like everybody else... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ironsight 1 Posted April 26, 2005 well not realy in real NBC suits, but protective suits... They wear those suits because everything is burned (even burned paint is not very heathy). If the radiation would be that high that it could damage your health do you think they wouldn't wear NBC suits? And who says those tanks are hit by DU rounds? Those tanks are not totally destroyed. If the tank was hit by a DU round it would be way more messed up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 26, 2005 Due to the position of the tubes and turrets, as well as the open hatches, I'd say they were abandoned and destroyed in place by Coalition forces. They could have been hit with DU darts, and because they were left with open hatches, the explosive expansion that would typically occur in the turret was not as violent. Typically, it could blow the turret right off, if the tank is loaded with ammo, and the hatches are buttoned up. But if the explosion can vent thought the open hatchways, the visisble damage would be less obvious. It does look to me that they were fully consumed by fire, however. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 26, 2005 i have question for you Ironsight, i think you know much about abrams and DU rounds, but how can it come, that you don't know what happens to tank when it is hit by the DU round? Well... if tank woudn't explode from inside, it would burn out of hell... Out side, DU rounds just left little hole, but if tank are not in combat mode, than it's less chance that it will explode (combat mode, i mean hatches are open, amunition are not prepared for fight and etc.) more chance it will burn, but if tanks "ventilation holes" are completely closed, and tank is ready for fight, so when DU rounds comes inside, most of tank's crew dies of ricocheting small metal parts, secondly it causes fire and in some times it reaches ammunition storage(where shells and rounds are stored in tank) and then it exploded from inside(also depends on presure inside the tank), messing all the tank up and making it hard to undentifie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 26, 2005 Quote[/b] ]so when DU rounds comes inside, most of tank's crew dies of ricocheting small metal parts Actually what usually occurs, is the explosive increas of airpressure inside the crew compartment turns the crew into stew, and the resulting fire evaporates the remains. Quick, (relatively) painless, and clean (except for some ash and scorch marks). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 26, 2005 and for civilians not involved in war, which caused to appear Abrams, Bradleys, A-10 and other vehicles and aircraft in somebodys house "outside or teritory" causing health problems... bad is that, that Russia, U.K., Germany, now Jordania and other countryes follows bad U.S. steps, uses DU rounds on tanks and other military shit... Well i don't blame them, if U.S. have so many times boosted weapons, so effectively recomended it self in not one or two wars or conflicts, so what left for other countryes, create new better weapons or to follow much cheaper and unhealthyer way, they chose DU rounds... and it's bad... like i was against second gulf war or operation iraqi freedom and i am still against it, because nothing changed, terrorists kills soldiers and soldiers fight back by killing inocent civilians... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 26, 2005 I think you're mixing threads, Gedis. DU isn't going anywhere. You want to reduce the use of DU weapons? The best way is to not give the various nations useing it in weapons something to shoot at. Don't poke the bear with a stick, if you don't want the bear to wake up and eat the whole village. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 26, 2005 well, DU represents human kind... beasts kind... so i'm not mixing threads, yes, it would be GOOD if there were no DU, it would at least be normal balance of power, on the other hand russian has better weapons than DU rounds... but something better than DU armor? no but those better weapons better penetrates DU armor than russian rounds, well those weapons are ATGM missiles, like Kornet, Reflex and etc. at least better penetrates... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gollum1 0 Posted April 26, 2005 DU represents humankind? It's some ultraweapon that tips the strategical balance? Youre posts are making less and less sense, if that's possible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 27, 2005 well, little bit of my oppinion doesn't mean offtopic who wants to read about abrams du rounds(I this link well known for you, but as for you, it's at least in english) abrams DU rounds hm, this topic should be alive long... so lets keep it, please, post some interesting stuff about DU, there were no info about DU on Bradleys, A-10 in this topic... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 27, 2005 well, little bit of my oppinion doesn't mean offtopic who wants to read about abrams du rounds(I this link well known for you, but as for you, it's at least in english) abrams DU rounds hm, this topic should be alive long... so lets keep it, please, post some interesting stuff about DU, there were no info about DU on Bradleys, A-10 in this topic... Excellent site for info on the Abrams. Thank you Gedis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ironsight 1 Posted April 27, 2005 i have question for you Ironsight, i think you know much about abrams and DU rounds, but how can it come, that you don't know what happens to tank when it is hit by the DU round? Well... if tank woudn't explode from inside, it would burn out of hell... Out side, DU rounds just left little hole, but if tank are not in combat mode, than it's less chance that it will explode (combat mode, i mean hatches are open, amunition are not prepared for fight and etc.) more chance it will burn, but if tanks "ventilation holes" are completely closed, and tank is ready for fight, so when DU rounds comes inside, most of tank's crew dies of ricocheting small metal parts, secondly it causes fire and in some times it reaches ammunition storage(where shells and rounds are stored in tank) and then it exploded from inside(also depends on presure inside the tank), messing all the tank up and making it hard to undentifie I know what the effects of DU rounds are but don't you think the ammo in the turret will explode when it's hit by a DU round? Wouldn't the effects be way worse than showed on that picture you showed earlier? It's more likely the turret would be blown off then that it would only burn a bit from the inside Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 27, 2005 Well, these appeared to be abondoned. It's possible they weren't loaded with ammo, or even fuel. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 27, 2005 jup, if ammo will be in tank, explosion DEFENETELY will blow off turret, but if DU somehow could affect ammo storage... when tanks are abandoned i think people would steal ammo and sold it to somebody... about abrams link is good? hm... it already made me bored to read about "Powerful tank in the world", at least i know that this isn't true... there are plenty of sites... now i need to search again those links, well... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 27, 2005 man, it takes time to find what you read 2 days ago again, little collection of stuff. Â Don't think it's off topic, because abrams can't live without DU, their depends each on another ;) relatives... M1 Abrams (where i found this thumb is more thumbs of other tanks) more of abrams: info: easy info especialy good info site, because it's only about abrams stuff M1 Abrams (site translates to english, deutch and russian languages) M1A1 Abrams (site translates to english, deutch and russian languages) M1A2 Abrams (site translates to english, deutch and russian languages) info about abrams Low-Cost Titanium Armors for Combat Vehicles what has to say Globalsecurity.org about abrams what has to say Globalsecurity.org about DU what has to say Globalsecurity.org about what rounds can use abrams tanks FM 17-15 Tank Platoon.pdf FM 100-5 Operations.pdf Chief of Army - Abrams media briefing session.ppt General Dynamics' brochure.pdf learned lessons in Gulf War 2 (Operation Iraqi Freedom).pdf info (in russian language) pictures: just pictures M1A1 Abrams MBT in winter excersize picture 1(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in winter excersize picture 2(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in battle picture 1(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in battle picture 2(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in battle picture 3(medium-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in desert picture 1(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in desert picture 2(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in desert picture 3(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in Gulf War I(medium-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT in Gulf War I(high-res) M1A1 Abrams MBT with much DU armor plates(high-res) M1A1 Abrams in Gulf War II, haha, not upgraded (high-res) site in which i found this rare thing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 27, 2005 Tommorow i will post more corective info against General Dynamics' lessons learned in Gulf War 2, there is a lot been hidden from people: abrams were not destroyed by mines? no sideskirts damage were made? that's not true, tommorow will be the day when i will reveal real Abrams weakness... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FerretFangs 0 Posted April 27, 2005 Joy! I can hardly wait. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gedis 0 Posted April 28, 2005 General Dynamics' learned lessons of Gulf War 2 was mentioned that, no Abrams tanks were destroyed or damaged by ATGM (Kornet) missiles or mines. Hm, it's mentioned that there is no reported case of it and no Kornet missiles found in country, thats strange... Special Forces were send to find them? Well, from where Iraq get Kornet missiles? Syria gave it to them, because they wanted to test it against U.S. Abrams(bigger and bigger threat from U.S. side to Syria), because it's haven't been done yet(it says U.S. and Russia's officials), but for Iraq it looked like new super anti armor missiles (and it is) so they get it illegaly from the Syrian border... There are many destroyed Abrams mbts in Gulf War 2 and you think they all were destroyed from other weapons than Kornet missiles? no way... some of them were destroyed by sabotage explosives, others by heavy rpg fire, some of them by U.S. (not much been destroyed by friendlys) and etc. Well, pictures and movies speaks for them self... mysteryous missile(read all texts and cycle through all picture pages) mysteryous missile revelation (more questions than previous) conclusion, RPG-7V with new rocket or RPG-22 well, terrorists took their part destroying Abrams mbts: Video, blow completely off abrams You can even see terrorist with rgp-7(not rpg-7v) same abrams as previos blown off by the sabotage bomb oh, go for your self, to see more pictures of destroyed Abrams mbts in Gulf War 2 by Iraqi military and terrorists and by U.S. It is obvious that US and General Dynamics' are hiding true facts, numbers and abrams weaknesses, especialy General Dynamics' denyes everything, because they can loose contract with military(well in papers, in real they can't loose contract, because U.S. military at least operates 8000 abrams tanks and who will repair damaged doomed abrams) I wounder how could RPG-29 penetrate abrams armor, when it CAN penetrate T-90 front armor(anti tank missile system is turned off in T-90), RPG-29 straight flying rocket launcher used by single troop, most powerful in the world! P.S. i have realy hard headache, don't know why, i was 6 hours in the outside, with nature maybe i'm hungry? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Necromancer- 0 Posted April 29, 2005 The only way to improve tanks is to give them several layers of reactive armor.. At least.. that is what I think. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Przezdzieblo 0 Posted April 29, 2005 Gedis, mysteryous missile(read all texts and cycle through all picture pages) mysteryous missile revelation (more questions than previous)conclusion, RPG-7V with new rocket or RPG-22 AFAIR "the mystery projectile" could be even old PG-7V, which jet was able to remain thick after piercing through spaced armour. No AT weapon newer than RPG-7, even if round was from this new ones. There were many discussions around this accident and articles you linked are one of the oldest. Video, blow completely off abrams One sources said all crew was killed, other, that only driver. It is hard to tell was there any ammo explosion, but chance that tank gave crew enough protection that someone could survive this detonation of circa 250 pounds of explosives is not low. Probably better not to think how would behave ammunition if that IED blow under T90... You can even see terrorist with rgp-7(not rpg-7v) same abrams as previos This terrorist with RPG is photoshopped Someone added him - but probably this tank was disabled by RPG. blown off by the sabotage bomb Sorry, but you are completely wrong. This is Abrams Cojone Eh, disabled when riding through speedway near Bagdad when it was hit by RPG in engine room. Turbine cought fire and there was unsuccesful tries to tow this tank. It was destroyed by Americans, with nades dropped inside, one APFSDS in rear of turret which blow ammunition and, eventually, with two Mavericks missiles, which made two holes (one could be seen at photo). Cojone Eh is probably the most (in)famous Abrams in Iraq because of spread of it`s. photos. Few belov: http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....009.jpg http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....001.jpg http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....015.jpg http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....017.jpg http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....018.jpg http://www.aeronautics.ru/img....013.jpg It is obvious that US and General Dynamics' are hiding true facts, numbers and abrams weaknesses, especialy General Dynamics' denyes everything, because they can loose contract with military(well in papers, in real they can't loose contract, because U.S. military at least operates 8000 abrams tanks and who will repair damaged doomed abrams) Well, at first there is no evidence that when "Lesson Learned" appeared American knew that in close future at least two Abramses would be destroyed (not only disabled) by IEDs. They are using DU and playing unfair, but, still I suppose, cannot move in time. Mentioned before document was made after Second War in The Gulf, and before guerillas showed their new (new in Iraq, in Palestina rather comon) methods of dealing with hardware. Probably the best way to find all "fact travestations" of General Dynamics raport would be if you quote parts of "Lesson Learned" and show right places, with which you cannot agree. You showed some photos, good, but any comment (coz photos cannot speak for themselves, sorry, you must help :P)? AFAIR in "LL" there was info about disabled Abramses, GD did not said that there were no casualties in hardware. I wounder how could RPG-29 penetrate abrams armor, when it CAN penetrate T-90 front armor(anti tank missile system is turned off in T-90), RPG-29 straight flying rocket launcher used by single troop, most powerful in the world! RPG-29 probably would not have much problems with penetrating M1-M1A1 thick front armour, but probably would not deal with M1A1HA/HC/M1A2, which armour is better than in older vehicles. If you are talking about T90 front armour penetration you probably remind Russian trials from 20.10.1999. Information about "anti-missile system" turned off is unneccesary, because, if you mean Shtora, it is useless against RPGs, and if you mean Arena, it is expensive and very rare (anyone know how many Russian vehicles have it?). This were trials of 2 T80U (with ERA and without) and 2 T90 (with ERA and stripped). Shtora and Arena trials are different matter (btw see performance of Shtora against Kornet - and 9K135 is not the most modern ATGM today). Eat a sandwich  Here a good article about US Armour in Iraq, by Vasili Fofanov. As it`s Author said term "destroyed" from English translation in orginal Russian version is "take out of action" (vyviesti iz stroya, no Russian letters here, sorry for this not the best transliteration), which not neccessary mean destroyed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
