Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
Right, I get that. I guess what I meant to ask is whether DU has been combat tested.
There have been quite a few instances of manufacturers gaming the system and fudging test results. The proof is in the pudding. It's one thing to claim that DU armor can defeat X,Y,Z based on calculations and testing; combat is a truer indicator of a weapon's efficacy.
|
No Abrams in U.S. service has ever been lost due to an enemy penetration of its frontal armour.
Even in the First Gulf War when some Abrams had not been retrofitted with DU armour all tank losses were due to friendly fire or the deliberate destruction of disabled tanks to deny the Iraqi's from using the tanks as war trophies. There is one disputed tank loss that may have been destroyed by an Iraqi T-72, but it wasn't destroyed from the front and even in this case the damage assessment done by the DoD found the remains of a US air launched Hellfire missile nearby.
In the Second Gulf War there were many Abrams tanks damaged due to the invasion of Iraq and the nature of the urban warfare that was fought there, but the vast majority were not knocked out and many were simply abandoned due to being made immobile and later recovered. Nearly all tank losses were due to friendly fire incidents, the deliberate destruction of abandoned tanks by U.S. forces, or being rendered write offs due to heavy damage from powerful IED roadside mines. There are a few cases where it is has been claimed that Abrams were destroyed by Iraqi forces using ambush tactics and destroying them with multi anti-tank missiles and even anti-aircraft guns. But battle damage to the Abrams tanks was clearly found to be in the rear and top of the tank, and was not found in the frontal or barely even in the side armour of the Abrams. Certainly no Abrams were lost due to Iraqi tanks.
Regarding a more sophisticated enemy like the Russian Army, I will honestly say that I haven't researched what the Russians currently have in enough detail to claim that the Russian do not currently process anti-tank missiles or sabot shells that can penetrate the frontal or side armour of an Abram's. But I do know how powerful these missiles and sabot shells would have to be do be able to do that. Russian tank and infantry forces are far more capable than the Iraqi's were, but if they have munitions with the ability to penetrate the frontal armour of an Abrams I would say they are not widely distributed. Also for every Abrams the Russians could destroy the U.S. Abrams could probably destroy five or more of their tanks.