To: armydawg505
I would think that if nothing else, the A-10s could detonate the tanks’ reactive armor, which would then allow a TOW or Hellfire missile to take it out. I know the nose cannon alone made hash out of Saddam’s pussies during Gulf II.
33 posted on
02/28/2016 1:55:55 PM PST by
IronJack
To: IronJack
Nothing like a little depleted uranium to start the day....
34 posted on
02/28/2016 1:58:13 PM PST by
nascarnation
(RIP Scalia. Godspeed)
To: IronJack
I would think that if nothing else, the A-10s could detonate the tanks reactive armor, which would then allow a TOW or Hellfire missile to take it out. I know the nose cannon alone made hash out of Saddams pussies during Gulf II. One of the reasons some tank designers are thinking about a coaxial 25mm or 30mm gun alongside the main gun as a replacement for the usual .30/7,62mm mg or coax .50.
That can leave the possibility of still having a .50 mounted coaxially fixed atop the main gun barrel, as the Israeli Magach nounts do. But interestingly, during WWII, Patton thought a tank needed two coax guns, not just one.
![](http://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2014-03/1394515287_f0205060_527469648ea06.jpg)
39 posted on
03/02/2016 8:45:45 AM PST by
archy
(Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Except bears, they'll kill you a little, and eat you.)
To: IronJack
I would think that if nothing else, the A-10s could detonate the tanks reactive armor, I expect putting a Hellfire into the turret top armor would pop off most of the ERA as well.
![](http://www.jodyharmon.com/militaryart/t72attack.jpg)
41 posted on
03/02/2016 8:56:19 AM PST by
archy
(Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Except bears, they'll kill you a little, and eat you.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson