Replies

We DO have tanks that protect the crew compartment very well from the best Russian-made, shoulder-fired ATMs (anti-tank missiles). The newer RPGs and ATMs CAN disable the chassis by knocking off treads, breaking road and drive wheels. Also a direct hit on the rear can disable the power plant.

So ... Aside from American Hellfire missiles, the crew is very safe, but the tank can be disabled.

In Gulf War 1, IIRC, only 18 MA-A1s were lost to battle damage -- 9 to friedly fire (all of which were total losses) and 9 more, mostly to mines.

In Gulf War 2 we have had more hull losses due to hostile fire and mines, but we've also had a LOT more hours of engagement at VERY close quarters.

There was one odd hull penetration event (featured on FR by the way) where an 'unknown' sabot round penetrated an M1-A1 where the turret meets the hull, passed through the spall liner, hit the loader/gunners (I forget which) chair and then exited the hull on the other side. The facts escape me, but it mighta been a freak friendly fire incident or a "golden BB" shot with a Kornett RPG/ATM. I'll try to search on FR to find the article and post a link.

Bottom line -- the safest place on the battlefield is IN an M1-A2.

There was that incident that appeared to be a Kornet hit on an Abrams in Iraq, but the Iraqi Army had no Kornets or other advanced anti-tank weapons, this was probably an odd lot smuggled in from Syria. So, we never faced an advanced ATGM threat in Iraq. My understanding is that a Kornet can do serious damage to an Abrams.

OTOH, it seems quite clear that Syria has given Hezbollah the most advanced Russian anti-tank weapons, including Kornets. That doesn't mean the Merkava isn't a terrific tank.

Olmert's kid-glove tactics neutralized the best defense against ATGM's - lightening armor strikes from unpredictable directions combined with very aggressive air and infantry attacks (we called it the Air-Land Battle, but the Army uses different buzzwords today).