New Designs Suit Tanks For Asymmetric War

AviationWeek.com ^ | Apr 22, 2011 | David Eshel, Bill Sweetman

[donmeaker]

It is important to note that WWII US tactics were to use tank destroyers against enemy guns. M-10s, M-18s and M-36s were all effective, and served as artillery between enemy armor assaults.

[donmeaker]

About 7 Tanks were lost in Desert Storm, and a few more in Iraqi Freedom, but so far, only two tankers have been killed. An Iranian Kornet missile shot through the side skirts about 2 years ago. That is about the time the reactive/active armor side skirts were added.

[PA Engineer]

I believe the Merkava tank is one of the best and comparable, but very limited by range compared to the Abrams.

[Hardraade]

From what I understand the Abrams has been scheduled for de-activation over the next 10-20 years

Well, you can always by some more from Egypt. You've given them production facilities. Of course, you'll have to buy them from Al Quaida, but wth.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks sukhoi-30mki.

The missile's accuracy is 0.7 meters circular error probable, and at an attack angle of more than 30 deg. penetrates 800 mm (31 in.) of steel armor.

There's not enough armor in or on anything to match the amount of exposive available. An IED triggered by a cell phone, with a kid as lookout giving the signal, is cheaper than this tank-mounted missile, and will take out a tank. In tank-on-tank warfare, the fight is over quickly nowadays, based on capabilities. In the Gulf War -- which is the most recent large scale tank-on-tank warfare in the world, I believe -- it came down to US tanks' better night vision and ineffective and inappropriate tactics by the Iraqis.

The previous large-scale tank-on-tank warfare was probably the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and much of that was asymmetrical, with Egyptian tank-killer teams using nice cheap (and numerous) recoilless anti-tank missiles to attack and destroy Israeli tanks under cover of the SAM umbrella from west of the Canal. The tank-on-tank battles also took place in the Sinai, but the anti-tank infantry was more significant IMO. The Syrians used 1300 or so tanks to try to overwhelm Israel's skeleton force along the frontier, and couldn't quite close the deal against the IDF and IAF.

[snippy_about_it]

Free Republic Treadhead Ping



Freedom Poster;Don W;Delta 21;mostly cajun ;archy; Gringo1; Matthew James; Fred Mertz; Squantos; colorado tanker; The Shrew; SLB; Darksheare; BCR #226; IDontLikeToPayTaxes; Imacatfish; Tailback; DCBryan1; Eaker; Archangelsk; gatorbait; Lee'sGhost; Dionysius; BlueLancer; Frohickey; GregB; leadpenny; skepsel; Proud Legions; King Prout; Professional Engineer; alfa6; bluelancer; Cannoneer No.4; An Old Man; hookman; DMZFrank; in the Arena; Bethbg79; neverdem; NWU Army ROTC; ma bell; MoJo2001; The Sailor; dcwusmc; dts32041; spectr17; Rockpile; Theophilus;humblegunner;Spktyr;onedoug;snippy about it;samwolf


************Snippy, I bequeath to you the FR TH PL.

148 posted on 08/24/2004 11:39:45 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)

ON THE WAY!!!!. :-)

[DCBryan1]

Gunner. Target. HEAT. BMP. 4200m. Fire! On the way!

[Hardraade]

Talking about cheap AT warfare, here's a little something that was spread from Iran some time before the EFP's started killing people in Afghanistan. It is basically an EFP designed to be throwable. The instruction film (very detailed) was spread by Iran as early as 2005.

[blueunicorn6]

Geez. The Israelis discovered the Shillelagh missile. The old tank/antitank argument. I used to train my Infantry Soldiers to wear body armor in the assault. My little Ranger Lieutenants told me that body armor was worthless. It just slowed them down and made them hot. They thought the Kevlar helmet was worthless, too. They could just wear a patrol cap. But, when the shooting starts..everyone wants armor.

[wku man]

Yep...I remember hearing horror stories about the Sheridan, such as it was so light, if you fired the main gun over the side at 3:00 or 9:00, the recoil could flip the whole tank over on its side. I also heard that firing a main gun round, at any angle, could knock the gunnery computer out of calibration. Don't know if any of those are true, but I never met anyone who was a big fan of the Sheridan.

Was the M8 AGS also known as the Stingray? I remember the Stingray was basically a Sheridan hull with a redesigned turret mounting a 105mm main gun (not the Brit L7). It disappeared from the Army's radar screen in the early 90s, but the Thai Army bought it. I remember thinking it wouldn't be a bad vehicle for us Scouts, to work as a team with our Brads.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[Joe 6-pack]

The M8 was going to be known as the "Buford". Never heard of it referred to as the "Stingray", and it was a new design from the ground up, not Sheridan based.

It had the same 105mm main gun as the M60 and M1 Slick, but was equipped with an autoloader which left it with a 3-man crew. Like the Sheridan it was designed to be transportable in a C-130. One of the neat features I thought would make it especially for an assymetric/OOTW type operation is that it had three bolt on armor "suites" which allowed the level of armor protection to be upgraded in theater according to the conditions on the ground.

[wku man]

Thanks for the kind thoughts, Pastor. I sure felt pretty dadgummed lowly in Klinton's army, as opposed to feeling 10-feet tall and bulletproof like I did during the Reagan years, and at least appreciated while Bush was CinC...until the drawdown, that is. My hat's off to the folks serving in today's military...I couldn't deal with what they have to put up with.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[PapaBear3625]

The M1A2 Abrams with the TUSK upgrade (“Tank Urban Survival Kit”):

Besides armor upgrades and armor for the loader's 7.62 machine gun, the commander's .50 cal machinegun is now operable from inside the vehicle. There's also thermal imaging sights.

[wku man]

Must be a different platform, then. Here's a link to the Stingray page...as you can see, it's definitely a Sheridan hull.

Stingray Light Tank

As light as it is (20 tons), it's probably well suited to the jungles of Thailand.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[unkus]

Thanks very much. That’s awesome!

[wally_bert]

I always had a soft spot for the Sheridan and when I played NG for a while, there was a Sheridan TC in the same outfit. He was one wild dude but a good guy.

This one was sitting at an aviation museum in Charlotte. I think it is just a sealed up body.

http://tysonneil.smugmug.com/Military/M551-Sheridan-Tank/12993910_Xo3fx#940273551_TeUKK

I have right click/save and linking disabled, hence the full page URL.

[SJSAMPLE]

Well, it doesn’t take a tank to kill a tank.
It was harder before, when tank armor was advancing but anti-tank weaponry was not. TOW to Hellfire to Javelin. Our infantry is more capable against tanks than ever, especially in the cities, where the “asymetric” part really comes into play.

And, as a matter of logistics, it is increasingly difficult to get large tanks into the theaters where such warfare is likely.

Sure, keep a good supply of excellent tanks handy, but don’t count on those tanks to be there every time you need them. We learned thatas recently as 1993.

[SJSAMPLE]

I guess we’re assuming that there’s no ADA or SAM coverage in the area?

[az_gila]

I guess we’re assuming that there’s no ADA or SAM coverage in the area?

---

Not really... we are assuming that the coverage has been taken care of earlier by other means - usually with airborne delivery...:^)

[Reeses]

Where are the robot tanks to go along with all the robot aircraft? There is no need for humans onboard so the need for heavy armour is much less. Robot tanks can be smaller, faster, and absolutely fearless. In Libya right now the tank drivers are too afraid to drive their tanks but smaller faster robot tanks would be in use.