Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NWU Army ROTC

Going to be a disaster. From what I have heard, when armed with a 105, the turret cannot traverse, otherwise it tips over. I have also heard that 12.7 can make mincemeat of the armor.

Plus, the 105 lacks the firepower to successfully engage a T-62 or anything better.

As many others on this thread said, the Army was better either modifying the M-113 or buying LAVs (a'la the Marines).

32 posted on 08/03/2003 9:35:11 PM PDT by Sparta (Send the Palestinians to their homeland, Jordan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Sparta
Plus, the 105 lacks the firepower to successfully engage a T-62 or anything better.

I had heard that the Israelis were punching holes through T-72s with the 105mm tank gun. But perhaps the 105 on the Stryker isn't quite the same as was mounted on the M60 series, the first versions of the Merkava, the M1, and a bunch of other tanks. (The M1A1 went to the 120mm, but the M1 still had the 105mm 'cause we couldn't get enough 120s at first).

Of course, I heard of one Israeli tank unit falling back to reload. The ammo point didn't have any "real" rounds left, but had some training rounds. In typical Israeli style, they uploaded training HEAT rounds and headed into battle. At the close ranges the battle had closed to, those "inert" chunks of metal took out T-62s nicely. But to head into combat with practice ammo - talk about . . ., uh, intestinal fortitude, yeah that's it, intestinal fortitude. :-)

33 posted on 08/03/2003 9:53:14 PM PDT by Conservative84 (Tracks, turrets, and real armor - NOW we're talking!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson