quinn whitsitt
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 23 February 2024
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 13
and besides that was very mean i can talk and type English dude i am from america.
I can just about read necessarily in 'nesscairly´, I have difficulty understanding 'garyes place´.uuh that not nesscairly true garyes place /wiki leaks
Please give a link to that website? garyes place?that is the name of the website i am not kidding
I do not intend to be mean.and besides that was very mean i can talk and type English dude i am from america.
A2 version has better front and side armour.
They just fly the drones under the cage and there's usually more than one anyway.I think it doesn’t matter too much against suicide drones which are top attack. Cope cage has its place in today’s wars.
I have seen abrambs be destroyed over 20 times by ieds 1 time by a rpg 29 and a few times by dronesMBTs aren't wonder weapons and losses are to be expected over there regardless of common internet behavior saying how country X's tank is the best and country Y's tank is trash.
I can't log into my telegram account where I am so I can't see the videos, but it looks like the two M1A1s weren't catastrophic losses. Or at least they were not such when first disabled by a hit. Meaning surviving crew members had a chance to bail out before the Russians would start hitting the tank with whatever available to ensure it becomes a wreck beyond realistic recovery.
The M1150 is probably the worst lost since such vehicles are relatively rare and must be in high demand in a country now as littered with landmines as it now is. Hopefully Lima tank plant can pull some old M1 hulls from storage and convert more. I do wonder if there will be a need soon to start building entirely new vehicles. As far as I know the standard practice for the last two decades or so has been to take old models leftover from the Cold War days of a larger Army and rebuilding them to A1SA or A2 SEP standard.
Evidence?I have seen abrambs be destroyed over 20 times by ieds 1 time by a rpg 29 and a few times by drones
Agreed. The following article provides some possible insight into the situation here:MBTs aren't wonder weapons and losses are to be expected over there regardless of common internet behavior saying how country X's tank is the best and country Y's tank is trash.
You don’t have to discuss current events to understand that tanks aren’t suitable surrogates for tube artillery. Something like a M1A1 105mm offers 20 degrees elevation which limits it to line of sight. Not all that useful compared to a howitzer and probably worse in range than a modern heavy mortar.Agreed. The following article provides some possible insight into the situation here:
Counterattacking Without Artillery, The Ukrainians’ M-1 Abrams Tanks Are Exposed—And Taking Losses
The Ukrainian 47th Mechanized Brigade’s artillery-shortage is forcing it to fight close instead of far—and risk its U.S.-made M-1s, M-2s and Assault Breachers.www.forbes.com
Now having posted that, let’s try to not turn this into an Ukraine War thread.
I wouldn’t jump to that conclusionUkraine-Russia war live: 100-mile US glide bombs fail in Ukraine
Much-vaunted US-supplied glide bombs given to Ukraine “didn’t work” due to a combination of mud and Russian signal jamming, the Pentagon has admitted.www.telegraph.co.uk
One rather suspects that they have lost a fair number more than just five tanks to warrant such a drastic move.
What are you referring to?yep there are always miss fires and jams every now and then but 100 at a time is very bad
Turret still intact. Only Abrams I've seen with its turret blown off was due to hitting giant IEDs.Proper Abrams captured too (properly mangled as well). Speculation is whether it might be dragged to Moscow for the 9th May parade on time, joining many other western armoured vehicles captured and displayed there already.
View: https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1784585897993810037
You don’t have to discuss current events to understand that tanks aren’t suitable surrogates for tube artillery. Something like a M1A1 105mm offers 20 degrees elevation which limits it to line of sight. Not all that useful compared to a howitzer and probably worse in range than a modern heavy mortar.
I’d argue that a 105mm L7 could be very useful as a surrogate for artillery, albeit with 40-45 degrees of elevation and the right ammunition. The Belgians are offering a turret with 42 degrees of elevation and a claimed 10km range.
Wow. Abrams against the world. All the tank lost by russia, the 5 abrams lost, no mention about the other tanks lost by ukraine. What does it mean?
That ratio isn't great either.Wow. Abrams against the world. All the tank lost by russia, the 5 abrams lost, no mention about the other tanks lost by ukraine. What does it mean?
Ok, ok, and what does the comparison between total losses and those of a single tank mean?That ratio isn't great either.
You do know that Oryx is not even an American website, right? (IIRC, they're Dutch)never trust the dod the have lied several times same thing with genral dynamics its a propagnda
US TDs did the same in WW2, predominantly in Italy.Centurions in Korea were driven up slight inclines where possible to improve elevation for fire support missions. 20 punder was the active ingredient.