Quote:
Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer
What sickens me about the guy is that I've seen reposts on YT - by him - of Jihadi videos showing Abrams, Bradleys, Strykers, Humvees and other vehicles/tracks being destroyed by IED usually with some bullshit in the description of ANOTHER POINTLESS LOSS BECAUSE THE ARMY REFUSED TO USE THE PROPER VEHICLE HERE. He got particularly vile about some early losses of AAV-7s early in the Iraq invasion. A pair got hit by RPGs and were total losses (as were the crews and troops inside) and he leapt on it making some kind of connection about how that somehow wouldn't have happened to an M113...
|
Yep, that's him. There some /k/ommandos from 4chan that google "G####n" because this whale poo can't help himself and cites it like it was fact and not his fantasy. So they go and egg him a bit and he goes coo coo for cocoa puffs with a quickness.
I misplaced my photo of a M113 used as a gunnery target. The .50 cal rounds penetrate one side, yaw hard, and embed themselves in the other side. It would still be lethal to anyone inside.
M113s aluminum armor was terrible at spalling. Any HEAT round would go right through and with aluminum's lower melting point more hot spall was splashed about versus steel.
The M113 was also notoriously deadly to passengers inside if it struck a AT mine. Enough armor to contain the blast inside.
We are on the M113A3 now and following the Israelis mods.
Personally I think the future for the M113 remains as a specialist vehicle.
Would be cool to see one with a Ripsaw suspension. Oh yeah.