"What Destroyed This Abrams Tank?" Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile ArticleFor the time being, the last in our series of articles on the gates of Old Jerusalem.
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 18 Nov 2017 9:55 p.m. PST |
"On Oct. 20, 2017, the Kurdish Peshmerga claimed to have destroyed an Iraqi M-1A1 Abrams tank during fighting in Kirkuk province and took grainy video footage to prove it. It was an especially noteworthy clash given that Western allies supplied many of Iraqi Kurdistan's anti-tank missiles and Iraq's Abrams tanks. The Iraqi military's Joint Operations Command accused the Peshmerga of targeting the tank with a wire-guided MILAN anti-tank missile launcher, which Germany supplied by the dozens to the Peshmerga for use against Islamic State's up-armored suicide bomb vehicles. Iraq's Kurdish region possesses few tanks of its own — older T-55s captured after the collapse of the Saddam regime in 2003, and no match for M-1s…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
Lion in the Stars | 18 Nov 2017 11:25 p.m. PST |
Well, the Iraqi Abrams don't have all the heavy armor that the US-spec M1A1s have. No DU mesh. So it's much less protected than the US tanks, which are about 5 upgrades past what we sold the Iraqis. Fairly impressive that the Kurds got the front of the tank to burn, I wasn't aware that the Abrams had much of anything flammable in the crew compartment. |
bsrlee | 19 Nov 2017 12:17 a.m. PST |
Looks like it was one of the early units with the Auxiliary Power Unit hanging off the back of the turret – the source of several US M1 losses, since corrected at least for the US. Just about anything hitting the APU could set the fuel alight which then ran into the engine bay eventually overwhelming the fire suppressants in the bay and leading to complete loss. |
soledad | 19 Nov 2017 5:27 a.m. PST |
Well, it seems like no-one actually knows what knocked out the tank. It could have been abandoned and then burned by the someone. In the end every vehicle can be knocked out by something. No vehicle is invincible. So yes, someone somehow stopped this tank and somehow it was destroyed. In a way no big deal. In war people die and vehicles are destroyed, we just have to accept that. |
Caedite Eos | 19 Nov 2017 6:54 a.m. PST |
Yes, but if less developed fighters are knocking out versions of our MBT…. It becomes vitl to know how they're doing it. If as you say they really did it at all. Aren't the Russki's funding the Kurds these days? |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 19 Nov 2017 11:41 a.m. PST |
"Accused" seems an odd choice of word. It suggests something improper about firing an anti-tank missile at a tank. Isn't that what anti-tank missiles are for? |
emckinney | 19 Nov 2017 2:45 p.m. PST |
If the Germans supplied this missiles with the implicit or explicit condition that they would be used against IS, and not to wage a war for independence, they might have a point. It may be that they're playing to the Germans, trying to get them to stop supplying the Kurds. In that case, "accused" seems like the right word. |
Lion in the Stars | 19 Nov 2017 4:28 p.m. PST |
Germany: "Hey, we gave you those missiles to kill ISIS! Not fight Iraq for independence!" Kurds: "The soldiers on the ground thought it was one of the tanks that ISIS captured from the Iraqis. Oops." |
PMC317 | 20 Nov 2017 3:01 a.m. PST |
I thought they'd used a Chinese system. At least I seem to remember some discussion about it being something of the sort rather than MILAN. |
|