>"One Challenger 2 operating near Basra survived being

File: _64534664_gary-tank-commander.jpg (61KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1024x576px

>""In one encounter within an urban area, a Challenger 2 came under attack from irregular forces with machine guns and rocket propelled grenades. The driver's sight was damaged and, while attempting to back away under the commander's directions, the other sights were damaged and the tank threw its tracks entering a ditch. It was hit directly by 14 rocket propelled grenades from close range and a MILAN anti-tank missile. The crew survived, remaining safe within the tank until it was recovered for repairs, the worst damage being to the sighting system. It was back in operation six hours later, after repairs had been done."

File: wew.png (22KB, 923x851px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 923x851px

>>32230312
>when saddam takes out the pg tips supply

>>32230312

Says fucking who, the British MoD?

Get fucked with your propaganda.

>>32230335
t. Mike One Abraham

File: 1456857835792.jpg (45KB, 554x439px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 554x439px

>>32230312
>thinks this actually happened

File: England.png (11KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 420x420px

>>32230374
>>32230335

>tfw you know these posters are just jealous because the Abrams isn't as good.

File: Challenger 2_destroyed_1.jpg (82KB, 1000x466px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1000x466px

>>32230312
>receives some fragments from a friendly fire inside its crew compartment
>brew up like a T-72

Since hadjis are dumb as sticks they probably tried to penetrate it from the front and from sides. No wonder nothing went through. I wouldn't be surprised if half of those RPG rounds were HEAT and anti-personnel rounds as well.

>>32230312
RPG-7s are old tech designed to destroy light armor, not heavy armor.

>>32230383
Proofs? Got a link?

>>32230387
>receives some fragments from a friendly fire inside its crew compartment
>Inside its crew compartment
>Inside
>Implying every tank wouldn't suffer the same ending from a case like that

File: 62f6a9cf1f7d28390d3dd8f0009d6f86.jpg (88KB, 944x745px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 944x745px

>>32230387
>literally 7 of the 22 Abram's destroyed were to friendly fire

>>32230390
This claims could be traced to couple BBC articles:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/2908679.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2905817.stm
Fake news? Fake news!

File: sweating pepe.jpg (32KB, 480x454px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x454px

>>32230412
>>32230398
SOMEONE GET Mi5 TO BACKTRACE THESE IP'S!

>>32230312
yeah I remember that story.
It did a 360 flip and curved 1 (one) hitting a mobile WMD factory, killing everyone and then bouncing off to into a terrorist camp a few miles away. Total enemy casaulties were like 4000 people.
Bles are troops.

File: 1479841718079.jpg (38KB, 650x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 650x480px

>>32230432

File: 1480969072283.png (1MB, 1440x888px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x888px

>>32230432

>>32230402
>MY SON GOT HURT! WHY DOES THE GOVERNMENT ALLOWS THIS?!??!


what the fuck did she expect when he got into the fucking army?

File: Challenger 2 DL2F armor configuration.jpg (125KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1024x768px

>>32230312
>I'M FUCKING INVINCIBLE

It's awlays easier when your tank is already fitted with several tons of add-on armor.

>>32230316

>RPG-7
>is a rocket propelled grenade

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

File: 127490376cb50235600b_zps0c898b91.jpg (423KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 1024x768px

>>32230316
I has ze pics.

File: 127492728cadcfa277bb_zps998643a8.jpg (488KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 1024x768px

>>32230780

File: 127492731a65fbd3f99b_zps114c8fff.jpg (603KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 1024x768px

>>32230790

File: 1274938295ea1b4ae23b_zps7b54a087.jpg (407KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 1024x768px

>>32230799

File: 12749038167232f555ab_zpsfcc40cce.jpg (540KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

540KB, 1024x768px

>>32230808

File: 1463605186209.jpg (46KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 604x453px

>>32230817

File: Ethiopian tank.jpg (202KB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1280x854px

>>32230312
What's the source for this story? Also, everyone post tanks.

>>32230402

>hit by RPG-29 tandem heat round
>an investigation was conducted to discover why the ERA failed

must have been a pretty short investigation

File: Tank main battle Swedish Stridsvagn 103.jpg (3MB, 2762x1870px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2762x1870px

>>32230402
What's the source of this article?

>literally every other post for a statement is WHERE IS PROOFS???
>didn't used to be like this
>people used to actually use google and find out for themselves

I want newfag cucks to leave

>>32230836
Is a woman driving this t54?

>>32230312
A challenger 2 would get one hit killed by a APDATS round from a L55 120mm.

>>32230312
>>32230316

Has there actually been any accounted incidents of a similar situation to have happened to an Abrams? Genuinely curious, not b8. All you ever hear about the Abrams tank is how they're always being destroyed\rendered inactive in combat.

>>32230407
The Abrams wouldn't. We have this magical space technology called blow out panels.

File: 1451811604495.jpg (101KB, 1024x764px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x764px

>>32230953
>muh blowout panels

>>32230933
I remember a story about an Abrams getting stuck in mud, taking fire from 3 t-72s, and killing all three. My memory may or may not be accurate.

File: 1419060603234.jpg (575KB, 2000x1312px) Image search: [Google]

575KB, 2000x1312px

>>32230933
a few accounts similar but maybe not quite as many, theres a doco somewhere on youtube about tankers rolling into (i want to say fallujah but thats probably wrong) where combatents would continuously pop out of alleyways and gates, fire rpg-7's 29's and whatnot and then run off before the tanks could react, in said video the crew talks about the sound of the projectiles hitting from inside the vehicle.

You mainly hear about them being destroyed because/ disabled because like 99% of the Coalition tanks entering the cities where US. and if they could not be recovered at the time they where demo'd.
Tanks struggle in an urban environment, just ask the slavs.

File: 1448229659752.gif (404KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 640x360px

>"The MoD are investing £53 million in the assessment phase. Each contractors receive £23 million, with an additional £7 million being set aside to cover additional, unspecified work. The Rheinmetall consortium includes BMT, Pearson Engineering, Supacat, and Thales UK and includes an option to retrofit Rheinmetall's 120 mm L55 smooth bore gun."
>"and includes an option to retrofit Rheinmetall's 120 mm L55 smooth bore gun."
>Challenger 2 might actually get a smoothbore gun

IT'S HAPPENING

File: Invisible Tank.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>32230982
>>32230953

>>32231040
Why did brits used rifled gun in chally chally chally 2 in the 1st place? Everybody from Russia to DC knew smoothbore was the new hot.

>>32231047
>>32230982
>10000 IT' WAS MONKEY MODEL!!!111!!! comments incoming

>>32231053
Brits love their HESH

>>32231065
Why would I say that? It looks like it worked as designed.

>>32231065
Now, that was the blowout panel, or rather the rack was hit, and the blowout panel worked. Hence why the guy was able to get the fuck out.

File: 1434120981164.jpg (257KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1280x853px

>>32231047
and not only did the turret not go orbital as a result of the ammo cooking off, the crew survived.

File: Abrams thrown a turret.jpg (475KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1600x1200px

>>32231087

File: 1366400506664.jpg (126KB, 600x576px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 600x576px

>>32230982
arguing with, even entertaining. someone who is obviously pretending to be retarded.

>>32231116
oopsie daisie... it must be a monkey model. Or, or that must be that new ruskie tank, totally not abrams turret because only ruskie tanks do that!

>>32231148
>2 rouble's have been deposited into your account

>>32231187
Why are americans so retarded? Your shit gets wrecked too.

>>32231198
>americans

>>32231116
Too bad the turret in that picture was pulled off by an ARV. But, then, you already knew that, didn't you?

>>32231148

Actually, it was an IED that physically knocked the turret off as the tanked flipped over.

3 AT mines stacked will do that.

>get hit with 70 anti infantry RPG

I'm invincible!

>get frontally pentrated by an RPG-29

Er, umm...

>>32231244
kek

why do americans also move the goalposts

>>32231244
Nah, the IED dented the lower hull, throwing the engine up into the turret, knocking it off. The gunner lived.

http://defense-update.com/20070407_efp-killer-basra.html?shared=email&msg=fail

Ammo didnt cook, zero secondarys.

>>32231254

This also happened. M1A2 SEP. Flipped the whole fucker over, turret came loose. But thats not the pic of that incident.

File: 1443379527197.png (544KB, 804x755px) Image search: [Google]

544KB, 804x755px

>>32231267
Hwat in the fug?

File: Challenger 2 Front.jpg (290KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 2048x1366px

>>32231264
>>get frontally pentrated by an RPG-29

It's funny how watered down information gets when thrown around like a meme.

>tank reverses down a slope\ditch
>lower frontal underbelly is exposed
>RPG-29 connects and goes through
>driver only losses a few toes
>drives back to base for repairs

That's not even to mention that portion was unprotected, and now has a literal slab of thick dorchester armor and ERA covering it now.

File: 1461524962004.jpg (59KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 1280x720px

>>32231267
>the gunner lived

Did... Did anyone else survive?

>>32231283
Yeah, the powerpack hit the rim of the turret, and pushed it straight up into the air like some kind of fucking cartoon, leaving the loader sitting there confused.

War is hell.

>>32231301
Nobody died in that incident.

in the OTHER one, (the rollover) only one lived.

>>32231304
How did "the loader sitting there confused" when he is placed in the turret as well?

>>32231328

The turret is a ring wtih a roof famalam. Technically they are sitting in a hull.

>>32231328
probably because it's a load of bullshit

>>32230475
>boxes filled with air and old socks
>armor

>>32231373
>>32230475
>grunts swap add on armor with metal boxes filled with their shit
>rpg hits side of the tank
>100000 tea bags fly in the air

>>32231460
>rpg-7 hits a chally
>tea kettle warmer is knocked out
>mission kill

>>32231498

DELETE THIS

File: Challenger 2 barrel.jpg (206KB, 2048x1361px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 2048x1361px

>>32231498
>ATGM strikes turret side of CH2
>boiler vessel knocked out
>crew goes berserk
>crew does the "British military go-to incase of a shit situation"
>fix fuck huge bayonet to the end of the barrel

>>32231301
the cheese sandwich

>>32231544
I'd love to see a bayonet affixed to a tank's gun barrel

>>32231544
I want a drawfag to make a comic about this

>>32230841
Turned out it was the ERA that caused it.
It basically hit between the ERA and non protected hull area.
First warhead hits ERA.
Second warhead hits different area and gets blown up into the tank.

>>32231040
Got blown out first time round.
The britsh rifled gun exerts more energy at the bore, but only marginally less than the smooth-bore, offering more or less the same penetration at 2km. Meaning at ranges closer than 1800m the challenger 2 actually penetrates thicker armour. whilst being more accurate.

TLDR:
> Rifled: more accurate, More powerful at close range.
> smoothbore: marginally more powerful at range, missiles.
>>32231053

File: 14563147677897.jpg (22KB, 512x246px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 512x246px

>>32233157
>> Rifled: more accurate, More powerful at close range.
>britbongs actually believe this

>missiles.
>he doesn't know that L7 and D-10T rifled tank guns can launch missiles.

>>32234288
>here's this graph with no context or source whatsoever
>this is 100% truthful and you should totally believe it guys because it supports my argument

Rifled guns are more accurate.

>>32230312
Cheerio old chap.

>>32230316
Goddamn, that is fucking metal

>>32230335
This

Abrams is best tank

File: 14563147677897.jpg (86KB, 619x881px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 619x881px

>>32234312
>Rifled guns are more accurate.
>bbc writes article on this
>it should be true
>*sips tea*

>>32231284
Nigger it went through the ERA placed there. It was on a flat exposed angle but it was hardly "unprotected". Stop trying to water it down. No tank is infallible, I don't know why /k/ thinks their specific brand of tank is infallible and is undeadable. Slavaboos think the T-90 ERA and APS in undeadable and will SACLOS ATGM your shit from 3km. Bongs think that their rifled barrel is sniper accurate compared to smoothbore snub nose revolvers and there's SUCH a YUUUGE difference and that Dorchester is undeadable and the only times Chally's have been penetrated was on the underside top next to the tinfoil viewport escape hatch at a perfect 90 degree angle from point blank with pinpoint accuracy and any degree off would have definatly just scratched the paint.
None of your metal brick isn't infallible you mongo's.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551418/MoD-kept-failure-of-best-tank-quiet.html

>>32234419
>actually thinks that rifled guns W/ munitions isn't more accurate than a smoothbore gun

Fucking lol. Here's your (you)

>>32230312
>being hit by 70 RPGs
According to British themselves. And it really depends. I bet they were shitty old grenades for RPG-7 and good crew situational awareness not allowing towelheads to hit the tank from the back or from the sides.

File: RPG-29_USGov.jpg (144KB, 1453x721px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1453x721px

I don't want to rain on the brits parade here, but western tanks are all but impervious to RPG-7s, all of them.

And as far as I'm aware the Challenger is the only tank that has been penetrated by an RPG of any kind

>>32234523
>he thinks for some unknown reason rifled guns are more accurate

>>32234477
> On one occasion, in August 2006, during the post-invasion stage of the Iraq War 2003 an RPG-29 was fired at a Challenger 2 that was climbing over a ramp, the front underside hull armour of the tank which was not augmented with an explosive reactive armour package was damaged, the tank subsequently returned to base under its own power and was quickly repaired and back on duty the following day.

Stupid nigger.

File: i'm a tank.gif (2MB, 296x142px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 296x142px

>>32234553
Forgot the gif.

>>32234571
>he thinks that smoothbore guns are more accurate than rifled

lol

File: cannon (1).jpg (37KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x300px

>>32234571

>British cannons

>>32230387
That's a chally 1 m8

Also
>tfw in the Army
>tfw genuinely know exactly how good the Challenger 2 is and how it compares with other tanks after a brief at MoD main building recently
>tfw can't share any of the incredible truths I learned about it because secret

Seriously guys. Wow.

>>32231047

I'm not a "abrams is undeadable" person but you realize that shows the blow out panels working perfectly right

>Crew is fine
>tank is still functioning and starts backing up

>>32234606
Tank guns are. You know they don't should balls anymore.

>>32234571
> unknown reason
Just think for a second:
> rifled barrel
> smooth barrel

Gee, it couldnt be the RIFLING, could it?

>>32230397
RPG-7s will ALWAYS be a viable anti-armor solution for the poor mans army.
It's the type of rocket that is used, and as long as countries make rockets that work in an RPG-7.
an RPG-7(with the shittiest HEAT rocket available) can disable an M1 from the rear and destroy one from a high angle(rooftop)

File: Abrams destroyed compilation 2003-10.jpg (2MB, 1962x1582px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1962x1582px

>>32234555
Oh, boy.

>Bumper B-66 TF 1-41, 2nd Armored Division(FWD)
hit by an Iraqi RPG-7 - Penetration in the hull,
below the turret. Ammunition blown-up.1 KIA, 3 WIAs

>Bumper C-12 TF 1-37, 1st Armored Division
hit by anti-tank missile, E round achieved a double penetration of the hull. The anti-tank missile set the storage area of the turret on fire

>Another Abrams was disabled near Karbala after an RPG warhead penetrated the rear engine compartment.
>Some Abrams were disabled by Iraqi infantrymen in ambushes employing short-range antitank rockets, such as the Russian RPG-7, during the 2003 invasion.

>>32234749

You say that yet it hasn't happened

>>32234763

Source?

>Ammunition blown-up.1 KIA, 3 WIAs

You're full of crap my dude

>>32231087
M1 turret only doesn't go orbital because it's too fat and heavy.

>>32234734
>fin stabilized rounds needs rifling

>>32234788
>Source?
Manning leak to Wikileaks?

>>32234734
>countries with rifled barrels on their MBT's: Britain, India

>Countries with smoothbore guns on their MBT's: Everyone else

Makes you think.

>>32234815

Surely you can link to the specific paragraph?

I never claimed the Abrams is undeadable, ATGMs will shit on most modern tanks unless you hit them on ERA and its not a tandem warhead.

as will IEDs

My dispute is with RPGs

File: 1464580507893.jpg (24KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 540x540px

>>32234788
>PROOFS?!?!???!?1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_M1_Abrams

> The first tank destroyed (B-66) initially was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG). Shortly after the RPG hit B-66, one or more US tanks fired on it. Four additional tanks rushing to B-66's aid subsequently were fired on and struck too.[362] We know this about the five Abrams tanks damaged in this action

>yfw americucks noticed that their abrams was penetrated by an Iraqi RPG so they decided to blue-blue them just so they can say their tank was knocked out by the 120mm DU round

>>32234833
>countries with longest tank kill: Britain - with rifled
>everyone else - smoothbore

Makes you think.

File: 03+Lehm+tells+Jonah+about+Wiley.jpg (92KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1280x720px

>>32234842

So it's your claim that the 3 depleted uranium rounds being fired into it from friendly tanks didn't kill the abrams, it was the rpg 7?

>>32234877
>mentally blocking out the other instances

lol

>>32234842
>Wikipedia

>>32234889

That's the only one that mentions an RPG-7 my dude

>>32234906
Did you even read the page?

>>32234603
ya that 2nd rocket never detonated. hadji probably forgot to pull the safety pin before he shot

>>32230407
>>Implying every tank wouldn't suffer the same ending from a case like that
Abrams wouldn't. Leo2 wouldn't as long as the hull magazine was empty. Armata T-14 wouldn't.

>>32234900
>the sources from wikipedia

>sources from wikipedia to counter your argument
>NU-UH YOU'RE WRONG THAT'S WIKIPEDIA
>using wikipedia to support your argument
>They're totally truthful, guys.

Moving the goalpost again, I see.

>>32234918

Did you even read my posts? I never claimed you can't penetrate an Abrams

File: Challenger 2 brew up.jpg (147KB, 1280x848px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1280x848px

>>32234312

http://www.panzer-war.com/page41.html

>>32234623
>That's a chally 1 m8

Nope, this is clearly a Challenger 2.

File: Abrams lost it's head.jpg (402KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1600x1200px

>>32234929

>>32234934
>>And as far as I'm aware the Challenger is the only tank that has been penetrated by an RPG of any kind

>>32234555
I've only gone and proven you wrong, anon. I'm not implying you said that the tank is impenetrable.

File: 1480102436071.jpg (58KB, 573x1024px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 573x1024px

>>32234932
What the fuck was the autism that just came out of you holy shit

>>32234961

Alright, so both the abrams and the challenger have been penetrated by an rpg

>>32234928
>that 2nd rocket never detonated
Wrong. Check the smoke escaping the turret ring after the second hit. Notice the much larger volume of smoke compared to the first hit. Notice how the smoke from the first hit just dissipates rapidly. Whereas the smoke after the second hit just keeps increasing. The second hit penetrated the hull roof at an angle somewhere around the driver, and ammunition is clearly burning.

File: 1469491006079.jpg (64KB, 431x592px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 431x592px

>>32234963
>being literally autistic enough to move the goalposts because you're losing an argument on an anonymous Japanese imageboard

>>32234970
The only tank, to have seen "combat", and to not have been penetrated by an RPG was the Leopard 2. And even then, in an instance, it had been penetrated by an IED. There are no recorded instances of that tank ever receiving RPG fire, let alone being hit by it.

>>32234976
(samefag)
Yep, I looked again, that's a serious brew-up happening there. Really makes the "suck my dick I'mma tank" caption stupid as hell.

>>32234765
it probably won't happen against western combined arms units unless extremely lucky/skilled enemy does it. As soon as he fired, the infantry would paste him...but that never bothers hadji.
An RPG guy has to get close to do it and (western trained) tanks don't sit still or move in urban areas without infantry support on their flanks

File: P-47 Strafing Tiger Tank.webm (822KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

822KB, 1280x720px

>shit smeared peasants bitching and pretending their metal coffin is still relevant in modern day combat

lol tanks were only relevant in ww1 and after that they were literally just a meme.

>>32234989
I have no idea where you're getting the idea I used wikipedia to support an argument I literally came to this thread to post
>Wikipedia

>>32234623

>>tfw genuinely know exactly how good the Challenger 2 is and how it compares with other tanks after a brief at MoD main building recently

This implys the MoD wouldn't lie to members of its own armed forces in order to instill confidence in its own teams, provided they delivered an outstandingly positive review.

It also implys the MoD has intimate knowledge of all the worlds tanks and crews.

>>32230871
we stug now

>>32234976
>Check the smoke
That clip was cut a little short and I can't see any fire after the 2nd hit.
Still that 2nd hit looks like the explosive(RDX?) vaporizing on impact instead of igniting inward into the tank(thus causing the copper to 'spear').

>>32235019
still relevant in Syria. still relevant if the enemy can't counter them.

>>32235079
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceSK3XAP3qc

It's all in the smoke. That warhead literally cannot make the large and increasing amount of this smoke - if ammo wasn't lit on fire the cloud would dissipate as fast as the first one did. The smoke even appears to be emanating from the hit location(read: the hole) as the tank rolls on.

>>32235088
Come on, that post was so ignorant that it's either a troll or some kid. Either way, not worth responding to.

>Survived 70 RPG hits

If it survived the first 35 hits, what made them think the next 35 would be any different?

>>32235157
>"the power of allah is with my rocket this time hakaam, h-honest"

>>32235157
They all fired them at the same time

>>32230780
>>32230790
>>32230799
>>32230808
>>32230817
>>32230828
And the source for this is? Because as far as I can see from reverse image search this is just "damaged Chally 2 images".

Not saying this whole thing didn't happen but the story isn't new and has been discussed on /k/ before. More than once. Never has anyone seen any images or a real source.

>>32235484
Just random images of damaged challys in iraq.

>>32231069
They had a lot left over after the cold war and couldn't afford to throw it all away. Same reason America still uses TOW missiles.

>>32230316
You just know that they count an RPG that landed 35 meters away and propelled some pieces of lint into the tank as a """"hit""""

>>32231047
Pretty sure they caught a high pressure fuel line. Only one guy got out, but nothing blew for 20 secs, and the turret stayed on.

>>32235669
>fuel line
>huge energetic jet of fire
>escaping vertically from the rear of an Abrams' turret, gee I wonder what's stored there, probably a >fuel line
Read a book, nigger

>>32230915
dont ya mean APDS-T or rather APFSDS-T?

>>32231498
it's called a kettle you idiot

and the water is heated using the engine heat

t. MoD contractor that designed the mighty engine kettle

what have you contributed to your country?

You fucking army guys are chickenshit. If your scared shitless behind a solid foot of tempered steel what the fuck are you going to do when charlie's all up in ya?

>>32230987
No it was Tigers and a Sherman.

>>32234961
>>32234555
A bunch of Israeli tanks were penetrated by ATGM's over the past decade. So its not just the challenger

>>32236777
In an armoured vehicle it is called a boiling vessel(BV)
t. someone that actually used the fucking thing.

File: bait.gif (327KB, 1000x773px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 1000x773px

>>32235019

>>32234948
That was caused by the tank being thrown in the air by an IED made of artillery shells, note the lack of secondary damage from fire.

>>32230312

source please?

>>32237760
Are we talking RPGs or RPGs or ATGMs or ATGMs? Because ATGMs aren't RPGs.

>>32234976
>and ammunition is clearly burning
I didn't know ammunition is stored in fuel tanks.
>>32235112
It's actually quite impressive how much a mad person can make up out of one gif.

>>32235010
Not that it's possible to day or anything anyway, but even if it were possible but there is never the opportunity to exploit the weakness, is it even still relavent?

>>32236638
No, I think he may be confusing video games with real life

>>32235050
Why wouldn't it have an intimate knowledge of other nations tanks and crews? It's a defence ministry that's 100% there job.

>>32230387
Basra, Iraq, 2003. After being mistaken for a flanking enemy, the open TC hatch is hit with a HESH shell, causing shrapnel to enter the crew compartment, 2 KIA, and loss of tank due to brew-up.
>>32230982
Battle of Norfolk, gulf war 1991. Presumably knocked out by flanking fire from enemy armor. Crew survived with burns.
>>32231087
Libyan T-72 knocked out by airstrike, 2015
>>32231116
Can't find anything quickly on this one

>>32234865
And the rifled gun is so great that they've been trying to get rid of it since the first CLIP proposals.
you idiot.

people with no concept of context say things like "tanks are invincible to RPGs" when the RPG-7 is capable of firing a myriad of different warheads

>>32241989
IIRC, last one was a number of daisychained 155mm shells used as a massive IED.

>>32235157
>aim for under the turret this time ahmed
>yes mohammed
>I SAID AIM FOR THE TURRET AHMED
>I DID AIM FOR THE FUCKING TURRET MOHAMMED I MISSED CAUSE THEY WERE SHOOTING AT ME
>alright alright load another rocket

>>32230402
Where did they get that rpg-29 zo sudenly?

>>32230390
>HEAT

You do realize that stands for High Explosive Anti Tank, don't you?

File: getin.jpg (336KB, 1646x1232px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1646x1232px

Reading up on what public information there is regarding Challenger 2 armor it gives the impression it isn't very good, it's basically just steel on the outer shell, with large sections of spaced armor featuring a few different materials followed by another steel layer. It works very well against heat but not AP.

Where did the challenger has strong armor meme come from? Purely on weight and shape it looks like perhaps the sides and rear are more protected against weak weapons than other MBTs.

>>32242155
there's no saving this sort of stupidity.

Challenger and Abrams use a composite armour derived from Chobham armour. Since it's development in the 70's it has been gradually improved and it's implementation refined.

1980 M1 Abrams - Chobham
1983 Challenger - Chobham
1992 M1A2 Abrams - Chobham combined with depleted uranium
1998 Challenger 2 - Chobham gen 2 (Dorchester). composition is classified but it is reasonable to assume that the improvements to British tank armour have followed the same path as American tank armour - by introducing DU.

>>32242155
>It works very well against heat but not AP.
>HEAT
That's a good thing since all RR, RPGs and ATGMs are HEAT rounds.
For every tank with decent enough AP to penetrate it, a tank crew will have come in contact with probably 100 enemy infantry.

File: 145834614413745.jpg (280KB, 1600x1063px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 1600x1063px

>rubber """"armor""""

>>32242155
>Where did the challenger has strong armor meme come from?

probably weight- it can bulk up from 62t to 75 ons ffs. that's almost Maus tier. IRL tough even the glacis isn't that good against HEAT

>In August 2006 south east of al-Amarah, southern Iraq, an RPG-29 capable of firing a tandem-charge penetrated the frontal lower underbelly armour of a Challenger 2 commanded by Captain Thomas Williams of The Queens's Royal Hussars. The tank, which had already been hit by 10-15 RPGs, small arms and sniper fire, was attempting to draw fire away from another callsign that had become stricken.[citation needed] Its driver, Trooper Sean Chance, lost part of his foot in the blast; two more of the crew were slightly injured. Chance was able to reverse the vehicle 1.5 mi (2.4 km) to the regimental aid post despite his injuries. The incident was not made public until May 2007; in response to accusations that crews had been told the tank was impervious to the insurgents weapons, the MoD said "We have never claimed that the Challenger 2 is impenetrable."[9][10] Since then, the explosive reactive armour has been replaced with a Dorchester block and the steel underbelly lined with armour as part of the 'Streetfighter' upgrade as a direct response to this incident.[citation needed]

File: Jejfo (2).jpg (127KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 720x480px

>>32242644
>>32242635
http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.co.at/2015/08/t-72b3-composite-armor-photo.html

>T-72 a shit!
>SHIT!
t. NATO

>>32242644
I think the main reason they keep western tank armor such a secret is because it's actually pretty crap and not much more than 1960s armor with some DU and composite plates.

But it's not an irrational choice, the benefit vs cost ratio for building new tanks out of the latest materials is probably much lower than other equipment the military can spend money on. Of course admitting that it was more cost effective just to lose the occasional tank than build a modern one is not good for morale or arms export.

Given the advancements in ceramics and carbon composites I can't imagine the steel + DU combo is anywhere near the strongest. The biggest advantage for spaced steel + DU is likely cost and ease of manufacturing.

>>32242874
>I think the main reason they keep western tank armor such a secret is because it's actually pretty crap and not much more than 1960s armor with some DU and composite plates.

Well you are certainly entitled to your uneducated opinon.

>>32242723
But the T-72 is undeniably shit.

>>32242919
>Well you are certainly entitled to your uneducated opinon.
You can see inside the armor in numerous m1 wreckage photos. It's just like those diagrams from the 1960s show.

>>32231065
>crew still alive
>tank still functional

I don't see a problem other than you're out of ammo.

>>32242194
Not quite accurate. The M1A1HA was the first to use DU in 87-88, not the M1A2.

US and UK armor seem to have diverged a bit after the introduction of the M1A2 where by today the US claims to be on a 3rd generation DU armor package utilizing carbon and graphite, whatever that means in reality.

File: M1A1 turret 1.jpg (459KB, 2456x1808px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 2456x1808px

>>32242952
t. uninformed burger #23623672734

>>32242701
>62t to 75
>Maus tier

uhh, no

Maus is 188 tons

>>32243015
I don't think you know what functional means anon :)

>>32242701
>frontal lower underbelly armour
That's the belly of the tank in bong talk.

>Since then, the explosive reactive armour has been replaced with a Dorchester block and the steel underbelly lined with armour as part of the 'Streetfighter' upgrade
So now it's x2 more protected.

>>32231544
If in doubt, fix bayonets

>>32234865
Not really. All these tanks can hit beyond that range if afforded the opportunity. Need I remind you CHARM 3 is one of the worst kinetic penetrators employed by a modern army. The longest kill meme is cute, when you can't even penetrate other countries first world armor.

>>32243025
Every new SEP model of the Abrams has Incorporated new or additional armor. The V2 introduced DU mesh into the front and sides, and the SEP v3 added more armor. 4 tons more to be exact. A lot of people (not directed at you) think the M1A2 (early 90s) was the last version of the Abrams, and got a couple electrical upgrades maybe, but the reality is the fleet has been entirely overhauled, several times with new tanks.

The tank plant doesn't produce new tanks anymore (commonly known) but the hulls and turrets are entirely stripped down and rebuilt with new components. (Kinda commonly known) end state: brand new 0 hr tank.

>>32234643
>tank is still functioning and starts backing up

Did you watch a different video?

>>32243058
What is this image supposed to imply in context of the T-72?

>>32244100
You clearly did.

>>32244137
it implies that the idea of composite armour has eenaround in the CCCP for much longer than in "the west". in Fact, the soviets pioneered it. Yet somehow Chobham, Dorchester etc. has been made into this big deal. That T-72 accident reveals basically what those british armours are made like.

yeah, 70 50-year-old RPGs that probably didn't detonate on impact. You can always count on the Brits to lie about how good their shitty toys are

Captcha: select all the pictures of tea

>>32244180
>the soviets pioneered it.

hmm

>>32230468

Bongs are actually that stupid.

>>32244180
The Abrams in that picture uses neither Chobham or Dorchester, so again I ask what it has to do with a T-72.

>>32244263
>The Abrams in that picture uses neither Chobham or Dorchester, so again I ask what it has to do with a T-72.

read the linked page >>32242723
and compare the visible parts. both armour's, the T-72's and the Abram's work on the same principle.

>>32244210
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination_K

>>32244303
Both the T-72B and M1A1HA are 80's vintage, so again what point are you trying to make?

File: orvydas-stridsvagn2.jpg (171KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 800x600px

>>32244388
the T is a gen older than the Abrams. if by now you don't get my point, I can't help you.

>>32243058
What does that have to do with the T-72's horrific track record?

>>32244433
>T-72's horrific track

The T has been in actual wars against actual AT weapons. The assad babils those Abramses killed were shooting underpowered steel and sometimes concrete training rounds back at them. Nominally the Abrams armour is better and covers more of the tank. The T has more mobility and a better gun + gun launches missiles. Comparing sandnigger operated monkey models on either sides is bullshit.

>>32244415
Both he T-72 and the Abrams are 3rd generation tanks.

The T-72B and M1A1HA entered service at nearly the same time.

>>32244483
>muh lion of babylons

Who cares?

>were shooting underpowered steel and sometimes concrete training rounds

Not even remotely true, but I love a good meme.

>muh monkey models

Wasn't even talking about them, but it's cute that you immediately go there.

There's a reason why the Soviets had what amounted to a Hi-Lo mix for armored formations and why breakthrough units going up against dug in places like NORTHAG were never given T-72s and instead transitioned from the 64 to the 80. The 72's performance in former Soviet countries speaks for itself. To claim that they've performed 'well' is historical revisionism at its finest.

>>32231283

The Abrams has stupid shot traps that practically guide munitions to the turret ring because the Abrams has a big booty.

>>32244546
>Both he T-72 and the Abrams are 3rd generation tanks.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72
>The T-72 is a Soviet second-generation main battle tank that entered production in 1971.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams
>The M1 Abrams is an American third-generation main battle tank....The M1 Abrams entered U.S. service in 1980

>>32231267
That's interesting.

So are turrets kinda just on the vehicle thanks to gravity, or are they actually sealed to the vehicle somehow (other than wiring and stuff naturally)?

>>32244483
Iraq used actual T-72A and T-72M1 tanks, Iraq never built any locally.

>The T has more mobility
>lower HP/ton with comperable ground pressure

>and a better gun + gun launches missiles.

Compared to the 105mm.

>>32244602
>wikipedia

>>32244650
>Compared to the 105mm.
also compared to the german 120mm gun they upgraded to.

>>32244666
is wikipedia russian propaganda now too?

>>32244554
>Not even remotely true, but I love a good meme.

It actually is, but they always leave out that it has a tungsten core and was pretty much standard Warsaw pack ammo, it is still widely used in the Ukraine conflict.

>>32244694
>It actually is, but they always leave out that it has a tungsten core and was pretty much standard Warsaw pack ammo, it is still widely used in the Ukraine conflict.

The Iraqi gun barrels were running on fumes, theywere in dire need of replacement barrels. Also, they had no access to quality soviet ammo.

>>32244683
Russia uses a different generation scale, by Western standards the T-72 is 3rd gen

And you are avoiding the fact that the two pictures are of tanks that entered service at the same time.

>>32244788
No one claimed that Iraq had access to Mango/Vant.

>>32234288
You can do the math.
the British rifled gun exerts more energy at the bore. but drops off over range because of pressure loss from rifle groves. So penetration is marginally less.

I've seen estimates that its only 20~mm at 2km. and DM53 out of the 55 smoothbore is stated to be able to penetrate 760mm RHA at 2km. I've heard that above 2km ranges SOP for brits is HESH only

I've heard that the new bag charges have kicked it up and that the all tungsten supplement for long range actually penetrates at 770mm at 2km

And the official reason that the 55 cal smoothbore was dropped was it was still less accurate than the rifled gun. But the brits liked the idea of Canister and missiles out of a tank.

Other problems included slower loading.
Loading not being as safe for KE rounds.

Lets be honest, whos going to still use 105 today?

>>32235050
I think the british helmets are only NIJ level 2, and were telling them they could stop AK rounds.

>>32242007
See above.
But was Mainly about cutting costs, and NATO comparability. UKs had enough of our standardization as they've been burnt by it twice with .280 and 4.85 which are the type of rounds people want today.

>>32242701
fat lady. i heard they're shedding 12T by simply adding newer equipment like cameras and computers and shit.

>>32243982
See above. CHARM has apparently been supplemented by going back to a longer tungsten rod for longer ranges.
The only downside is maintenance, As british tank "operators" (loaders) have to maintain the main gun, whereas in other tank crews its something a REMF would do.

File: Uncole sam.png (329KB, 750x362px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 750x362px

It is ok mister amerifat, pls do not be mad.

>>32244483
> were shooting underpowered steel and sometimes concrete training rounds

Sure, except the ones that fired APDS darts of some kind. I know one Abrams got three stuck into the turret.

>>32244629
Gravity.

File: 1480225513956.jpg (153KB, 565x659px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 565x659px

some sources on gun pen.
I assume the DM53 is fired from a 44 cal though.
>>32245020

>>32245154
those APFSDS LRPs were steel - like I said.

File: Kantanka-Armoured-Car.jpg (30KB, 448x299px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 448x299px

>>32245233
Apostle Dr. Kwadwo Safo laughs at all of your attempts to build tanks.

There is only one true manufacturer of XVIIth gen MBTs and that is Safo Industries.

>>32245020
I think the bigger issue with the rifled cannon is that the number of full charges it can handle is less than a 3rd of what the L44 series can take before the barrel needs replaced.

>>32245181
M774 is a bit low from everything else I've ever read. Most sources I've seen had it pegged between 390 and 420 (blaze it etc) mm of pen at 2km.

>>32245437
Addendum:

I didn't see the M833 there before. That's rated a touch high in that graph from what I've seen, generally 490 was considered it's max from what I had read at least. Still, neat chart.

>>32243102
I think he means that the 75 tons of more modern armor provides similar protection to 188 tons of what the Maus had way back when.

>>32231053
the real reason is we still had a shit tonne of HESH left over that would have had to be scrapped so we decide to keep the rifled gun for the sake of round compatibility.

>>32245154
>I know one Abrams got three stuck into the turret.
*yawn*
APFSDS rounds steel or not can't stuck in the armor. This is instant red flag of bullshit taken from the ass.

>>32234749
no one is going to give proper anti tank or anti air weapons to rebels or an african country.