Jump to content

mocdra

Members
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by mocdra

  1.  I have noticed that orders will not executed properly is equal tound bases or real time

    Units get orders  an then  stod still a long time..   the staus shows Spotting allthe time

    I habe played the first part an had not such issues in the last game

    Is there a way to force to execute orders?  A kinf of connsole commands?

     its  a pitywhen there the units standing and standing and do nothing

  2. Generally the East built 115 or 125 mm Sabots are less effective as West Guns. Less Accuracy,Range and Armor Penetration Values.

    The Rheinmetall 120 mm Gun of the Leopard 2 and the M1 has a Muzzle Vel. of 1600 m/s and a effective Range of 3500 m.

    Some Hits of m1a1 penetrates 2!T72 staying side by side behind a Sand Wall at once

    In my Opinion East AP Shells (APFSDS Rounds an HEAT Rounds) are not able to penetrate the Frontal Turret Armor of the most Western Tanks

    The Front Armor of the M1a2 is very massive.

    900mm sightable thickness. In the frontal Armor is included a heavy DU Plate then 2 Layers of Chobham Armor and a kind of Bulkhead Armor( Like the Triangular Sections on the Leo2a6). All that is mantlet by heavy reinforced armor.

    In the Inside is in the Crew Compartement a Spall Liner.

    The Frontal Armor is able to withstand several Hits of the older Russian AP Rounds (up to t80 guns).

    The inverted T below the Abrams main gun and in the vicinity of the driver's hatch should be vulnerable to a well placed APFSDS. At least the Russians say this is vulnerable. Is the inverted T modeled in the game?

    The inverted T below the Abrams main gun and in the vicinity of the driver's hatch should be vulnerable to a well placed APFSDS. At least the Russians say this is vulnerable. Is the inverted T modeled in the game?
    I believe that it is modeled, but the most Shells hits the Front Turret Frames and not the Hull .

    Somtimes a Hit gets in the Gun Mantlet causing a Gun Jam but not more. Some Front Arc Hits downhull causing Immobilitys due Track Hits.

    Driver Hatch Hits or Upper Hull Hits are not occured in my Missions or not implementet in the Armor Model i think.

    Greetings

    Moc

    [ August 14, 2007, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: mocdra ]

  3. Is the M1 series invulnerable? No. There are spots on the tank that are weaker than others.

    Can a T72 destroy an M1? Yes.

    Is it tough to kill an M1 from the front? Absolutely

    No one has sayed invulnerable. The weak Spots are the Turret and Hull Roofs. The Hull Sides, then the Turret Rear and aft Turret Section ( Ammo Bunker)

    Then the Shot Trap between upper Hull and lower Turret.

    a T72 can abolutely destroy a M1 but only from the Rearsides or at the Hull Flanks(not Turret Flanks)or a lucky Hit between Turret and Hull or on the Gun Mantlet.

    Its very difficult from the Distance to Kill a M1 from the Front .. !! At close Range (under 200 m ) is this easier because the vulnerable Spots are get easily targetet

    The Best way to destroy a such Tank is to use a large Air to Ground Missile as the AGM65 series. Then the M1 is a big Puzzle with its Pieces sprayed over a large Area.. !

    Greetings

    Moc

  4. I do believe that M1's should be more vulnerable to damage from multiple 125mm or ATGM hits on the front aspect
    Do you mean the Damaging of the whole Armor Structure from the several Hits?

    It is Realistic?

    In wwII many Tiger Tanks took multiple Hits ( from 6 to 32) at the Frontal Turret and Hull Armor from t34 Tanks wothout any Penetration or Damage. The Same was this with the Front Armor of the King Tiger and Hunting Tiger. Somtimes the Rounds simply deflectet completely by the front Plate at distances of 150 m.

    Ther are have in all Kind no Armor Structure Damage occured !.

    There are videos of M1 armor tests floating around out there showing a clean penetration by a 100mm AT gun (fired point blank) into the crew compartment at a 90 degree angle to the turret side. It was a full-diameter hole with lots of daylight coming in (from the in-turret camera).
    This seems to be West Propaganda andd a nearly Fake, to let known a potential Enemy that the M1 is weaker as in Reality !

    The possibility of 'critical' hits is not incosiderable, there is a big shot trap between turret and top front hull, a large and vulnerable drivers hatch, etc. Every frontal shot should have at least a few percent chance of taking the M1 out completely

    The Big Shot Trap is me well known.. This is One of the Achilles Points of the M1.

    I believe the M1 would fare far worse if hit with a large volume of ATG/ATGM fire on the front than is currently modeled in the game. We have to assume that experienced or well-trained enemy gunners will target the obviously vulnerable areas if they are close enough
    Sounds true... Enemy gunners will uses TOP ATTACK ATGMs or taregting the Hull Sides and upper sides, or optics and hatches.

    Rhen about the Informnations over Modern Armor ..

    Overall in the Armies ans Armoer Builders was cooked with water but not more.

    Greetings

    moc

  5. A T72 can easily knock out(penetrate) an M1 from the sides or the rear even the front that is at the lower hull of the front

    The Rear is true but it is on every Tank right..

    The Turret and Hull Rear of the M1 is one of the Achilles Points next to the Hull Flanks,the Turret Roof and the Notch beetween Hull and Turret.

    and

    A side/rear turret hit by a T72 will certainly kill the M1. .

    M1 with DU armor is excellent at withstanding hits from the frontal side(front turret, upper hull) only

    Upper Hull.. Not right Lower Hull Yes there is it true... The Armor Plate where the Driver has its Hatch is relatively thin .Thinner as at the Challenger 2 and Leopard 2, but the Target area at the M1 have a small hitable Arc from the Front

    Then i repeat it now again.. Side Turret Armor is Chobhamn of the newest Gen and 35- 45 cm thick ( 20 cm or less by the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2).

    The Turret Side Armor is at the back Section ( where the Ammunition is stowed) thin. Here it has 2 Inch or less.. The Ammu Bunker must broke when a Ammunition Explusion occures.

    The Crew room has much more Side Armor !.

    In the Iraq War some T72 hits M1 from the Turret Sides witout Penetration at 200 m Distance !

    The Rounds gets deflectet or struck trough the Half of the Turret Side Armor( 20 cm) !

    I search the Report and post it then here.

    and

    There was a case with a Challenger 2 (British most armored tank) in Iraq which was penetrated by an RPG from the front(RPG-29 hit the lower hull of the front side). The driver lost his leg and his comrades were wounded. Mind you that not only it is the most armored tank fielded by the British(most likely it is one of the most armored tank in the world) but it was protected by the newest type of Chobham(RHA armor-US) armor(as every Challenger 2 participating in Iraq does
    The Challenger 2 is worse armored (specally at the Turret Sides )as the M1. That is Fact. Shot woth a RGP 7 at the Turret Side and the Crew get a new Airhole!. This Tank has better Protection at the upper Front Hull but not more.

    The Challenger in Use in Urban warfare is the Hell for the Owner of these Tanks, because there are much more Tank Losses possible as by Use of an m1 or Merkava Tank.

    [ August 09, 2007, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: mocdra ]

  6. I have earlier noticed that goes anything wrong with the Armor of the M1

    Please note my Facts about the Armor of the m1 in the Game...

    Im am sure that a t72 never take out a M1 with a Hit at the Turret Flanks!.eventually at close in Range of 100m but not more

    In the first Campaign Mission i have took m1 knockouts coming from defending T55 at 250m from 60 Degrees at the Left Side. The Shells hit the Turret Side Armor..

    That is really NOT realistic.

    The Gun of the t55 has as much lower Muzzle Velocity and older Ammunition than a modern faster Smooth Bore Gun.

    here the link to the Topic in this Forum about the armor discuss.

    http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=002204

    Greetings

    Moc

    [ August 08, 2007, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: mocdra ]

  7. Now i have the full German Version of these Game now

    In the German Version of the Game is a Big Bug.

    In the Quick Battle Menu at the Settings Screen, i set Battle Size Middle.

    Then US Force against Repuplican Guard

    ba the Forces on the Us Side i set mixed and then to the next i set Armor.

    Now hit the bext Button and change my Side game type etc..

    Then the Game loads. Often comes here a CTD at 67% of Loading .

    When no CTD occures then Blue have no units on the Map ?!! but the Game runs normally as there are Units on the Map for the Blue. The Game Engine did not notized, that are no Units on the opposing Blue Side.

    Red have Units on every try.

    When i select Heavy Infantry then there are Units on the Map but only Bradleys and Infantry.

    How i get Battletanks without the Unit not Existing on Map Prob or CDTs

    Whats is wrong?

    Greetings

    Moc

  8. The turret configuration of Western tanks is such that from a frontal 30° angle the turret side armor is as thick as the turret front armor
    Yes that is the Main Design for the Western Tanks but some Tanks have thicker Turret Side Armor.

    There are the Leclerc the Merkava the korean Type-88 and the M1

    Leopard 2(All series),Ariete, Challenger 1 and 2 have the typical smaller Turret Side Armor.

    The last Tanks have a Problem in Combat whan the Turret Pos is nearly 90 degrees to the Move Direction.

    A opposing Tank Plattoon or Force , that do attack from the front shots first at the Tanks thier facing Turretflanks in the Enemy direction .

    In a Stabdard Tank Formation One Tank hat the Turret forward One Turret to the Left One to the Right and one afterly.

    At a First Detection and First Shotfrom the Enemy these Tanks with the thiner Turret Side Armor gou earlier a Prob as other Tanks.

    In my opinion.. the M1 was designed for such Events to prevent a Knockout due Turret Side Hits.

    Greetings

    Moc

  9. The turret configuration of Western tanks is such that from a frontal 30° angle the turret side armor is as thick as the turret front armor
    Yes that is the Main Design for the Western Tanks but some Tanks have thicker Turret Side Armor.

    There are the Leclerc the Merkava the korean Type-88 and the M1

    Leopard 2(All series),Ariete, Challenger 1 and 2 have the typical smaller Turret Side Armor.

    The last Tanks have a Problem in Combat whan the Turret Pos is nearly 90 degrees to the Move Direction.

    A opposing Tank Plattoon or Force , that do attack from the front shots first at the Tanks thier facing Turretflanks in the Enemy direction .

    In a Stabdard Tank Formation One Tank hat the Turret forward One Turret to the Left One to the Right and one afterly.

    At a First Detection and First Shotfrom the Enemy these Tanks with the thiner Turret Side Armor gou earlier a Prob as other Tanks.

    In my opinion.. the M1 was designed for such Events to prevent a Knockout due Turret Side Hits.

    Greetings

    Moc

  10. The turret configuration of Western tanks is such that from a frontal 30° angle the turret side armor is as thick as the turret front armor
    Yes that is the Main Design for the Western Tanks but some Tanks have thicker Turret Side Armor.

    There are the Leclerc the Merkava the korean Type-88 and the M1

    Leopard 2(All series),Ariete, Challenger 1 and 2 have the typical smaller Turret Side Armor.

    The last Tanks have a Problem in Combat whan the Turret Pos is nearly 90 degrees to the Move Direction.

    A opposing Tank Plattoon or Force , that do attack from the front shots first at the Tanks thier facing Turretflanks in the Enemy direction .

    In a Stabdard Tank Formation One Tank hat the Turret forward One Turret to the Left One to the Right and one afterly.

    At a First Detection and First Shotfrom the Enemy these Tanks with the thiner Turret Side Armor gou earlier a Prob as other Tanks.

    In my opinion.. the M1 was designed for such Events to prevent a Knockout due Turret Side Hits.

    Greetings

    Moc

  11. and the front armor looks to be an incredible 30" inches thick...of course there might be styrofoam peanuts in there for all I know. The side turret however is only about 6-8 inches thick. As others have noted thickness is hardly the sole indicator of protection. The top is incredibly vulnerable, only 1" steel
    The Thickness of the Side Armor is not correct... the Thickness is over one Feet (33 cm) thats are 12 Inch or more. The Frontal Thickness sounds true and matching my analysis.

    Heres a Link to a Atop Photo from a m1a2

    http://www.arcent.army.mil/cflcc_today/2005/july/images/jul03_08/08_05.jpg

    Note the Distance between the Commanders mirror Ring and the Turret Flank. Thats the Armor Thickness !

    Thats more than 8 Inches !. The Feet of the sitting Soldier has up to 33 cm. The Foot is shorter than the Distance between Ring and Hull !

    By the German Leopard. There are the 8 Inches or less true at the Turret

    Do you need more Photos and Draawings of that?

    It is true that the Thickness is not the Factor for the Protction but is important after the Armortechnologie and Layout.

    What brings the Chobham Armor when it is only 4 inches thick??!

    To the Game:

    Yesterday i played the Demo a second one.

    One Abrams stands with ther Frontal Side against 2 T72 at 150 m Distance. The M1 have withstand 12 or more Direct Turret Hits!. Only the Left Track was damaged by a low Shot.

    2 other 300 m distanced M1 moving in 90 ° tio the Enemy where knocked out by the first Hit.

    I dont know where the Hits going in.. Hull or Turret. a Side Hull Shot , that is logical then the Tank is knocked out.. by a Turret Hit ?? i am not sure and i believe no every Shot penetrates the Turret Side in Reality..

    Greetings

    Moc

  12. and the front armor looks to be an incredible 30" inches thick...of course there might be styrofoam peanuts in there for all I know. The side turret however is only about 6-8 inches thick. As others have noted thickness is hardly the sole indicator of protection. The top is incredibly vulnerable, only 1" steel
    The Thickness of the Side Armor is not correct... the Thickness is over one Feet (33 cm) thats are 12 Inch or more. The Frontal Thickness sounds true and matching my analysis.

    Heres a Link to a Atop Photo from a m1a2

    http://www.arcent.army.mil/cflcc_today/2005/july/images/jul03_08/08_05.jpg

    Note the Distance between the Commanders mirror Ring and the Turret Flank. Thats the Armor Thickness !

    Thats more than 8 Inches !. The Feet of the sitting Soldier has up to 33 cm. The Foot is shorter than the Distance between Ring and Hull !

    By the German Leopard. There are the 8 Inches or less true at the Turret

    Do you need more Photos and Draawings of that?

    It is true that the Thickness is not the Factor for the Protction but is important after the Armortechnologie and Layout.

    What brings the Chobham Armor when it is only 4 inches thick??!

    To the Game:

    Yesterday i played the Demo a second one.

    One Abrams stands with ther Frontal Side against 2 T72 at 150 m Distance. The M1 have withstand 12 or more Direct Turret Hits!. Only the Left Track was damaged by a low Shot.

    2 other 300 m distanced M1 moving in 90 ° tio the Enemy where knocked out by the first Hit.

    I dont know where the Hits going in.. Hull or Turret. a Side Hull Shot , that is logical then the Tank is knocked out.. by a Turret Hit ?? i am not sure and i believe no every Shot penetrates the Turret Side in Reality..

    Greetings

    Moc

  13. and the front armor looks to be an incredible 30" inches thick...of course there might be styrofoam peanuts in there for all I know. The side turret however is only about 6-8 inches thick. As others have noted thickness is hardly the sole indicator of protection. The top is incredibly vulnerable, only 1" steel
    The Thickness of the Side Armor is not correct... the Thickness is over one Feet (33 cm) thats are 12 Inch or more. The Frontal Thickness sounds true and matching my analysis.

    Heres a Link to a Atop Photo from a m1a2

    http://www.arcent.army.mil/cflcc_today/2005/july/images/jul03_08/08_05.jpg

    Note the Distance between the Commanders mirror Ring and the Turret Flank. Thats the Armor Thickness !

    Thats more than 8 Inches !. The Feet of the sitting Soldier has up to 33 cm. The Foot is shorter than the Distance between Ring and Hull !

    By the German Leopard. There are the 8 Inches or less true at the Turret

    Do you need more Photos and Draawings of that?

    It is true that the Thickness is not the Factor for the Protction but is important after the Armortechnologie and Layout.

    What brings the Chobham Armor when it is only 4 inches thick??!

    To the Game:

    Yesterday i played the Demo a second one.

    One Abrams stands with ther Frontal Side against 2 T72 at 150 m Distance. The M1 have withstand 12 or more Direct Turret Hits!. Only the Left Track was damaged by a low Shot.

    2 other 300 m distanced M1 moving in 90 ° tio the Enemy where knocked out by the first Hit.

    I dont know where the Hits going in.. Hull or Turret. a Side Hull Shot , that is logical then the Tank is knocked out.. by a Turret Hit ?? i am not sure and i believe no every Shot penetrates the Turret Side in Reality..

    Greetings

    Moc

  14. So everything I said about armour thickness goes out the window because the armour has a completly different rating against HEAT weapons
    Thats right.

    A homogenous thick Steel Plate of 700 or 900mm is very useless aginst a Heat Rounds of any Kind.

    Only the Composition of different Armor Materials that destroys an divert the Heat Jet or diffuse it, bevore the Jet can affect the Main Armor Plate ( Slat Armor, Reactive Armor, Multiple Layer Armor, Spaced Armor etc) is effective against these Munitions.

    The Leopard 2a6 has Spaced and Multiple Layer Armor in additional triangular Modules at the Chobham armred Turret Front that protects from Shaped Charge or Heat Warheads.

    The Russians have somtimes very heavy Combinations

    f Reactive Armor, Spaced and Muliple Layer Armor and Composite Armor at one Turret Front !.

    No Nato Tank has a similar massive comosition og Armor Technics at once

    First the Armor Modukes with ERA m Sopaced and Muktiple Laysr Armor.. then the Main Composite Turret Armor !.

    Link to this impressive Thing...

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/armor.htm

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/1/armor_world/armor_world2.htm

    then a next interesting Thing is there.

    The Russians habe found a ballistic Hole in the Abrams Frontal Zone..

    The Gun Mounting and the upper Hull Plate where the Drivers Hatch is located.

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/t-90vsabrams.htm

    The Same for the Leopard

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/bars_leopard/80u_vs_leo2.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  15. So everything I said about armour thickness goes out the window because the armour has a completly different rating against HEAT weapons
    Thats right.

    A homogenous thick Steel Plate of 700 or 900mm is very useless aginst a Heat Rounds of any Kind.

    Only the Composition of different Armor Materials that destroys an divert the Heat Jet or diffuse it, bevore the Jet can affect the Main Armor Plate ( Slat Armor, Reactive Armor, Multiple Layer Armor, Spaced Armor etc) is effective against these Munitions.

    The Leopard 2a6 has Spaced and Multiple Layer Armor in additional triangular Modules at the Chobham armred Turret Front that protects from Shaped Charge or Heat Warheads.

    The Russians have somtimes very heavy Combinations

    f Reactive Armor, Spaced and Muliple Layer Armor and Composite Armor at one Turret Front !.

    No Nato Tank has a similar massive comosition og Armor Technics at once

    First the Armor Modukes with ERA m Sopaced and Muktiple Laysr Armor.. then the Main Composite Turret Armor !.

    Link to this impressive Thing...

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/armor.htm

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/1/armor_world/armor_world2.htm

    then a next interesting Thing is there.

    The Russians habe found a ballistic Hole in the Abrams Frontal Zone..

    The Gun Mounting and the upper Hull Plate where the Drivers Hatch is located.

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/t-90vsabrams.htm

    The Same for the Leopard

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/bars_leopard/80u_vs_leo2.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  16. So everything I said about armour thickness goes out the window because the armour has a completly different rating against HEAT weapons
    Thats right.

    A homogenous thick Steel Plate of 700 or 900mm is very useless aginst a Heat Rounds of any Kind.

    Only the Composition of different Armor Materials that destroys an divert the Heat Jet or diffuse it, bevore the Jet can affect the Main Armor Plate ( Slat Armor, Reactive Armor, Multiple Layer Armor, Spaced Armor etc) is effective against these Munitions.

    The Leopard 2a6 has Spaced and Multiple Layer Armor in additional triangular Modules at the Chobham armred Turret Front that protects from Shaped Charge or Heat Warheads.

    The Russians have somtimes very heavy Combinations

    f Reactive Armor, Spaced and Muliple Layer Armor and Composite Armor at one Turret Front !.

    No Nato Tank has a similar massive comosition og Armor Technics at once

    First the Armor Modukes with ERA m Sopaced and Muktiple Laysr Armor.. then the Main Composite Turret Armor !.

    Link to this impressive Thing...

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/armor.htm

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/1/armor_world/armor_world2.htm

    then a next interesting Thing is there.

    The Russians habe found a ballistic Hole in the Abrams Frontal Zone..

    The Gun Mounting and the upper Hull Plate where the Drivers Hatch is located.

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/t-90vsabrams.htm

    The Same for the Leopard

    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/4/bars_leopard/80u_vs_leo2.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  17. Unless I've been out of the loop for too long, there has only been a single case of a clear RPG penetration of the sides of the M1. And that was only slightly hurting one crewmember and the crew disembarked because there was enough protection and no enemy fire around after the RPG hit. If there had been a bigger fight, this vehicle had been able to fight on with no problems.
    the RPGs took more Damage in some Attacks

    A few Abrams knocket out by RPG 7 Turret Rear Hits. The Tanks burning out after that.

    Pic Links to that...

    http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/3c/300px-B-23-1991.jpg

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=69838.

    Links to the Pic with the 12,7 mm Bullet Damagethat penetrates the Side Hull Armor

    http://www2.beareyes.com.cn/jpic/1/2005/05/20050507_134450_1.jpg

    http://static.htka.hu/mp/cikkek/modern_pancelosok/rpg.gif

    Or Shots from above at the Turret Roof are deadly for the Crew and somtimes the Tanks burning out.

    Then the American Army was not ready for City Fights against single armed Groups and Guerellia Warfware. They drove there Tanks, equipped and designed for open Field Battle in the Streets of Bagdhad ot other Cities an Towns without awareness and the possibility for even asymetrical Guerellia Warfware and Morale taking Needle attacks against their Armored and Mobile Forces.

    The wrong Tactics ans Equiptment was first noticed after the first heavy losses of Personal and Vehicles.

    They uparmored thier Vehicles with ad on Armor and Sang Bags. After a vew Time a Tank Urban Survival Kit "TUSK" was developed on the Emergency of the assymetrical City Warfware.

    Link to the TUSK for the Abrams.

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/tusk.htm

    http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/uploads/large/OCPA-2005-03-09-165522.jpg

    Note the Armor Upgrades mainly for the lower Hull!.That shows where the mainly Weakness is.

    The German Tank Designers have developed a similar better Thing for Urban Areas for the Leopoard 2 bevore the Iraq War happened

    Called Leopard 2 PSO

    http://fprado.com/armorsite/Leo2_Pics/Leo2pso-02.jpg

    http://www.basier.de/leo.html

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/l/Leopard-PSO.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  18. Unless I've been out of the loop for too long, there has only been a single case of a clear RPG penetration of the sides of the M1. And that was only slightly hurting one crewmember and the crew disembarked because there was enough protection and no enemy fire around after the RPG hit. If there had been a bigger fight, this vehicle had been able to fight on with no problems.
    the RPGs took more Damage in some Attacks

    A few Abrams knocket out by RPG 7 Turret Rear Hits. The Tanks burning out after that.

    Pic Links to that...

    http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/3c/300px-B-23-1991.jpg

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=69838.

    Links to the Pic with the 12,7 mm Bullet Damagethat penetrates the Side Hull Armor

    http://www2.beareyes.com.cn/jpic/1/2005/05/20050507_134450_1.jpg

    http://static.htka.hu/mp/cikkek/modern_pancelosok/rpg.gif

    Or Shots from above at the Turret Roof are deadly for the Crew and somtimes the Tanks burning out.

    Then the American Army was not ready for City Fights against single armed Groups and Guerellia Warfware. They drove there Tanks, equipped and designed for open Field Battle in the Streets of Bagdhad ot other Cities an Towns without awareness and the possibility for even asymetrical Guerellia Warfware and Morale taking Needle attacks against their Armored and Mobile Forces.

    The wrong Tactics ans Equiptment was first noticed after the first heavy losses of Personal and Vehicles.

    They uparmored thier Vehicles with ad on Armor and Sang Bags. After a vew Time a Tank Urban Survival Kit "TUSK" was developed on the Emergency of the assymetrical City Warfware.

    Link to the TUSK for the Abrams.

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/tusk.htm

    http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/uploads/large/OCPA-2005-03-09-165522.jpg

    Note the Armor Upgrades mainly for the lower Hull!.That shows where the mainly Weakness is.

    The German Tank Designers have developed a similar better Thing for Urban Areas for the Leopoard 2 bevore the Iraq War happened

    Called Leopard 2 PSO

    http://fprado.com/armorsite/Leo2_Pics/Leo2pso-02.jpg

    http://www.basier.de/leo.html

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/l/Leopard-PSO.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  19. Unless I've been out of the loop for too long, there has only been a single case of a clear RPG penetration of the sides of the M1. And that was only slightly hurting one crewmember and the crew disembarked because there was enough protection and no enemy fire around after the RPG hit. If there had been a bigger fight, this vehicle had been able to fight on with no problems.
    the RPGs took more Damage in some Attacks

    A few Abrams knocket out by RPG 7 Turret Rear Hits. The Tanks burning out after that.

    Pic Links to that...

    http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/3c/300px-B-23-1991.jpg

    http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=69838.

    Links to the Pic with the 12,7 mm Bullet Damagethat penetrates the Side Hull Armor

    http://www2.beareyes.com.cn/jpic/1/2005/05/20050507_134450_1.jpg

    http://static.htka.hu/mp/cikkek/modern_pancelosok/rpg.gif

    Or Shots from above at the Turret Roof are deadly for the Crew and somtimes the Tanks burning out.

    Then the American Army was not ready for City Fights against single armed Groups and Guerellia Warfware. They drove there Tanks, equipped and designed for open Field Battle in the Streets of Bagdhad ot other Cities an Towns without awareness and the possibility for even asymetrical Guerellia Warfware and Morale taking Needle attacks against their Armored and Mobile Forces.

    The wrong Tactics ans Equiptment was first noticed after the first heavy losses of Personal and Vehicles.

    They uparmored thier Vehicles with ad on Armor and Sang Bags. After a vew Time a Tank Urban Survival Kit "TUSK" was developed on the Emergency of the assymetrical City Warfware.

    Link to the TUSK for the Abrams.

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/tusk.htm

    http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/uploads/large/OCPA-2005-03-09-165522.jpg

    Note the Armor Upgrades mainly for the lower Hull!.That shows where the mainly Weakness is.

    The German Tank Designers have developed a similar better Thing for Urban Areas for the Leopoard 2 bevore the Iraq War happened

    Called Leopard 2 PSO

    http://fprado.com/armorsite/Leo2_Pics/Leo2pso-02.jpg

    http://www.basier.de/leo.html

    http://www.defense-update.com/products/l/Leopard-PSO.htm

    Greetings

    Moc

  20. Side hull armour on a M1A2 is only about 1/5 as thick as the front hull armour
    That is really true. Many M1 knocked out in Iraq by Side Hull Hits with RPG 7. The Sideskirts and 80mmm Steel Plate with inlaying thin Ceramic Plate are easiliy penetrated by the single Heat Warhead.

    This is one of numerous vulnerable Achilles Points at this Tank (The Turret Rearside and Ammunition Bunker Side Armor and Turret Roof as Example)

    The side turret armour is only about 1/3 as thick
    That is not true. Please study some Photographs from the Inside (here specially the Commanders Pos) then Photos from the Turret. Then you see , the Armor is 2/3 of the Frontal Turret Armor.

    At the first M1 series( the Model with the 105 mm Gun)has had the Frontal and Side Armor the same Thickness!

    The m1a1 ans a2 Models have upgraded thickjer Armor. Noticeable is that with the Lenght of the whole Turret etc. the frontal Zone. These differs noticeable from the m1 to the m1a2

    Other Tanks since the german leopard 2 series or the Challenger hase the 1/3 Rule at the Turret Armor.The France Leclerc has thicker Turret Side Armor and the Merkava too

    The Advantage of the M1a2 Tank is the strong Frontal Turret and Side Turret Armor but not more... ! it was concipatet for Battletank to Battletank Encounters

    One Hit in the Hullside,then the Tank is badly damaged, inop or destroyed.

    Due the strong Turret Armorr the Tank has a high Level Weight Point that makes it vulnerable to IED Attacks. The Tank flaps earlier over than other ones and lands upsidedown or sidewards on the Road.

  21. Side hull armour on a M1A2 is only about 1/5 as thick as the front hull armour
    That is really true. Many M1 knocked out in Iraq by Side Hull Hits with RPG 7. The Sideskirts and 80mmm Steel Plate with inlaying thin Ceramic Plate are easiliy penetrated by the single Heat Warhead.

    This is one of numerous vulnerable Achilles Points at this Tank (The Turret Rearside and Ammunition Bunker Side Armor and Turret Roof as Example)

    The side turret armour is only about 1/3 as thick
    That is not true. Please study some Photographs from the Inside (here specially the Commanders Pos) then Photos from the Turret. Then you see , the Armor is 2/3 of the Frontal Turret Armor.

    At the first M1 series( the Model with the 105 mm Gun)has had the Frontal and Side Armor the same Thickness!

    The m1a1 ans a2 Models have upgraded thickjer Armor. Noticeable is that with the Lenght of the whole Turret etc. the frontal Zone. These differs noticeable from the m1 to the m1a2

    Other Tanks since the german leopard 2 series or the Challenger hase the 1/3 Rule at the Turret Armor.The France Leclerc has thicker Turret Side Armor and the Merkava too

    The Advantage of the M1a2 Tank is the strong Frontal Turret and Side Turret Armor but not more... ! it was concipatet for Battletank to Battletank Encounters

    One Hit in the Hullside,then the Tank is badly damaged, inop or destroyed.

    Due the strong Turret Armorr the Tank has a high Level Weight Point that makes it vulnerable to IED Attacks. The Tank flaps earlier over than other ones and lands upsidedown or sidewards on the Road.

  22. Side hull armour on a M1A2 is only about 1/5 as thick as the front hull armour
    That is really true. Many M1 knocked out in Iraq by Side Hull Hits with RPG 7. The Sideskirts and 80mmm Steel Plate with inlaying thin Ceramic Plate are easiliy penetrated by the single Heat Warhead.

    This is one of numerous vulnerable Achilles Points at this Tank (The Turret Rearside and Ammunition Bunker Side Armor and Turret Roof as Example)

    The side turret armour is only about 1/3 as thick
    That is not true. Please study some Photographs from the Inside (here specially the Commanders Pos) then Photos from the Turret. Then you see , the Armor is 2/3 of the Frontal Turret Armor.

    At the first M1 series( the Model with the 105 mm Gun)has had the Frontal and Side Armor the same Thickness!

    The m1a1 ans a2 Models have upgraded thickjer Armor. Noticeable is that with the Lenght of the whole Turret etc. the frontal Zone. These differs noticeable from the m1 to the m1a2

    Other Tanks since the german leopard 2 series or the Challenger hase the 1/3 Rule at the Turret Armor.The France Leclerc has thicker Turret Side Armor and the Merkava too

    The Advantage of the M1a2 Tank is the strong Frontal Turret and Side Turret Armor but not more... ! it was concipatet for Battletank to Battletank Encounters

    One Hit in the Hullside,then the Tank is badly damaged, inop or destroyed.

    Due the strong Turret Armorr the Tank has a high Level Weight Point that makes it vulnerable to IED Attacks. The Tank flaps earlier over than other ones and lands upsidedown or sidewards on the Road.

  23. Of course it does, and in more detail than before. Which makes it impossible to display in a sensible way (and helps avoid a lot of grog wars, heh ).
    Is there a Way to show the right detailed Armor Model ? ...

    The actual Display in the Game is too simple.

    I did not like to play an other Kind of Panzers, Sudden Strike or Blitzkrieg!.

    Greetings

    Moc

  24. Of course it does, and in more detail than before. Which makes it impossible to display in a sensible way (and helps avoid a lot of grog wars, heh ).
    Is there a Way to show the right detailed Armor Model ? ...

    The actual Display in the Game is too simple.

    I did not like to play an other Kind of Panzers, Sudden Strike or Blitzkrieg!.

    Greetings

    Moc

  25. Of course it does, and in more detail than before. Which makes it impossible to display in a sensible way (and helps avoid a lot of grog wars, heh ).
    Is there a Way to show the right detailed Armor Model ? ...

    The actual Display in the Game is too simple.

    I did not like to play an other Kind of Panzers, Sudden Strike or Blitzkrieg!.

    Greetings

    Moc

×
×
  • Create New...