Mystery behind Aug. 28 incident puzzles Army officials (what felled an M1A1)?

Navy Times ^ | 10-27-2003 | John Roos

[bonesmccoy]

Shortly before dawn on Aug. 28, an M1A1 Abrams tank on routine patrol in Baghdad

[Pro-Bush]

entertaining=Intertaining

Whew..getting late indeed!

[Radix]

No. Not unless Allah really is on their side.

Get off of my Internet!

You are very funny! LOL!

[Sapper26]

As time goes by, I'm beginning to lean toward the 'golden RPG' theory. The main (o.k. only) reason being it hasn't happened again. If it were a new weapon, it would seem logical that there would be more tanks hit.

[Kozak]

Quantum Black Hole.

[dasboot]

There's some component of an RPG round that is that dense, that small, and that fast? Do RPG's detonate on contact with armor and drive a projectile like that? There doesn't seem to be a lot of space around the sweet spot, and little or no evidence of impact by a larger 'mother ship'. It looks like the tiny bullet was free-floating when it struck.

To accelerate a [depleted uranium?] projectile to a speed sufficient to do what it did, wouldn't it take a rather long tube and a cumbersome gaggle of assisting technology...like that which might fit in the back of a large truck? And that it might mean that the thing it not so nimble or stealthy.....a weapon of infrequent opportunity? Or too secret to risk repeated use which would lead to discovery?

I am mostly ignorant of projectile science. Pardon me if I annoy. But I am curious.

[JasonC]

"Projectile" is being used far too loosely in this post.

It is obviously HEAT. Tiny pencil sized holes have been characteristic marks of HEAT penetration since WW II. Panzerfausts and bazookas did this kind of thing, it is silly to present it as new fangled and mysterious.

That means the actual projectile disintegrated outside the body of the tank, leaving only an explosive jet pushing into the armor. The rest of the path is where most of the plug of armor from the tank body itself was "shot" by that explosive jet. A few fragments broke off, that is the shrapnel that wounded the 2 crewmen.

What HEAT round? Obviously it hit an area with quite limited armor in the way, so it does not need to be anything high powered to account for the result. Moreover, the limits on the damage suggest it probably wasn't. I mean, if it had been a TOW (one of ours, MBT killer) or something similar the crew would not be so unscathed.

A LAW could do this. The RPG-22 is basically just a Russian LAW. An AT-4 could do this - indeed, would probably do more. I don't see a reason to quibble with the statement that it probably wasn't an RPG-7 - or for that matter an RPG-2 - but that leaves plenty of Warsaw pact HEAT it might have been.

[JasonC]

See the burn mark on the skirt? That was the blast, the diffuse portion. The focused portion goes straight at the armor. It punches a plug out of the metal like a holepunch, and shoots the resulting hot ingot into the body of the tank. Bits break off when it comes free on the other side - that was the shrapnel that wounded the crew.

[Sapper26]

My knowledge of RPG's specifically is limited. I'm guessing that it uses a shaped-charge for a warhead. Shaped-charges don't have a 'projectile' per se. The explosive energy is focused into a small area and burns through the armor.

Like I said, the main reason I don't think that it's a new weapon is there hasn't been more tank's hit.

[JasonC]

Look at the 3rd photo. See the metal gouged a bit there, just outside the hole? That is the actual impact, probably a low velocity rocket round - didn't get anywhere. Then it exploded, and the shaped charge did the rest.

[JasonC]

See the damage to the "safety guard"? Multiple pieces, not one lump, did that.

[185JHP]

Sandia Labs fired a 1 gram projetile @ 52,800 fps. F=MV2. This may be technology stolen from us.

[SLB]

JasonC - Your analysis is more than likely right on the money. It was a HEAT round. All of the conspiracy threads here are smoking something. The Iraqis do not have the technology or the capability to do anything more to what we have in country. I laugh at the "death rays" and "particle beams" that appear here. It was a lucky hit by an RPG of some type, more than likely an RPG-7 variant.

Archy - As I have said in previous posts, we need to pray for the Stryker crews, they will not fair nearly as well in any encounters with an RPG, no matter the claims to the opposite by General Dynamics and others.

[R. Scott]

One hell of a good shot.
As to the reference to the Stryker, remember that no piece of equipment is invulnerable, no matter what the PR people may say. War is about killing people and destroying things - for them as well as us.

[FreedomPoster]

Bump for that!

[SLB]

they will not fair

Fair = fare.

[R. Scott]

Try this link
It’s not particle beams, but good conventional weapons.

[blanknoone]

I agree that particle beams are probably a little far fetched, but your HEAT analysis was also rather limited. Yes, the exterior penetration smacks of HEAT. The problem is that the interior smacks of a penetrator. A HEAT round burns its way through the metal...the problem is that no Stream of molten metal would maintain coherence, blast through the interior components and bury itself 2 inches into the far armor.

My theory would be some combination of HEAT and penetrator...which by the way the US has not successfully done. In the battle between swords and armor, the armor took this step 20 years ago with layered armor...different layers effectively stop different types of round. Here we have a round that may effectively penetrate the different layers. HEAT to burn through dense things like DU and Kevlar mesh (designed to stop pentrators) and a penetrator to shatter things like heat transferring ceramics designed to stop HEAT rounds.

[RadioAstronomer]

I am WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY out of my element here so I am asking a question from ignorance.

Could a hyper-velocity rail-gun initiated depleted uranium round cause this kind of damage?

[Poohbah]

If it was a particle-beam weapon, the power draw was probably equivalent to the total generating capacity in Iraq right now.

Try again.

[snopercod]

HEAT = High Explosive Anti-Tank

M830A1 High Explosive Anti-Tank-Multi Purpose - Tracer (HEAT-MP-T)

The 120mm M830 High Explosive Anti-Tank-Multi Purpose - Tracer (HEAT-MP-T) is a chemical energy, multi-purpose projectile with an anti-personnel capability. It is largely a technology transfer from the ballistically identical German model DM12A1 except for the M764 fuze, double safety, and propellant containment bag. The round consists of a fin stabilized steel body which is loaded with Composition A3 Type II explosive. The fins are canted and impart spin to the projectile. A copper shaped charge liner and wave shaper are contained within the warhead. The projectile has a steel spike with a nose cap switch and a shoulder switch for full frontal area functioning. An electrically initiated base detonated fuze is located in the rear of the body. The propellant system employs single perforated stick propellant. The approximate cartridge weight is 53.4 pounds. The major components of the M830 Cartridge are:

• M830 Projectile
• Combustible Cartridge Case w/Case Base & Seal Assembly
• M123A1 Primer
• Propellant (DIGL-RP)
• M764 Fuze

The M830 was replaced by the M830A1 and is no longer in production.

The M830A1 HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) round, recently fielded for the M1A1 and M1A2 Main Battle Tank, is a major advancement over its predecessor, the M830, which has been in the US inventory since the early '80s. HEAT rounds have multi-purpose warheads which are used to defeat armored vehicles, helicopters and soft targets such as bunkers. The M830A1 adds higher velocity launch, increased armor penetration capability and selectable fuzing which allows for the engagement of a variety of targets. The M830A1 is unique in that it features a three-piece discarding aluminum sabot, a feature normally associated with kinetic energy projectiles. The sabot allows a lighter flight projectile which can be flown to greater ranges than could the M830. The M830A1 also mounts a proximity switch on the flight projectile nose. Manually set upon gun loading, this allows the M1A1/M1A2 tank to self-defend against attacking helicopters with the 120mm main gun, a capability never before possessed by a Main Battle Tank. The multi-purpose cartridge is also extremely effective against buildings, bunkers, and light armored vehicles. The M830A1 was fielded in 1994 and is currently still in production.