T-90 vs Abrams

[copeab]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

The West is going to active defenses that shoot down ATGMs. Look to see those on M1A2s in the near future.

I have doubts on these working all that well in an actual battlefield environment, with fire coming from all directions and smoke and fires all over teh place.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by copeab

I have doubts on these working all that well in an actual battlefield environment, with fire coming from all directions and smoke and fires all over teh place.

The Israeli's have started using it operationally and so far it has lived up to the hype by defeating RPG and AT15 fire.

[Gamer]

Both tanks can kill each other that's quite obvious and that's all that matters.
There are too many variables in combat to just say this tank is superior to that one especially if they have never faced one another in the field only a flag waving fool thinks otherwise.

Panthers and Tigers were deemed "superior" to the Sherman and it didn't do them much good.

Active protective systems are cute toys but seriously in a tank on tank firefight anyone here actually seriously believe the Abrams armor jockeys are actually going to be using HEAT rounds against a T-90?

No APS system in existence does anything but gives a pretty light show when used against a sabot round especially DU.

H.R. 4739 wasn't just between the Army and the Air Force, it also included the Marines.
The Marines were to get A-10s on a 1 to 1 with their OV-10s as well.

SEC. 1439 . REPLACEMENT OF OV-1 AND OV-10 AIRCRAFT WITH A-10 AIRCRAFT

(a) PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS- (1) Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Army for any fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1996, may not be used to operate or maintain OV-1 aircraft.

(2) Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Marine Corps after September 30, 1996, may not be used to operate or maintain OV-10 aircraft.

(b) RETIREMENT OF OV-1 and OV-10 AIRCRAFT- (1) Not later than September 30, 1991, the Secretary of the Army shall retire not less than 20 percent of the OV-1 aircraft in the inventory of the Army on October 1, 1990.

(2) The Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Navy shall take such action as necessary to retire, by not later than September 30, 1996, all OV-1 and OV-10 aircraft in the inventory of the Army and Marine Corps, respectively. The Secretary of the military department concerned shall notify the Secretary of the Air Force at the time each such aircraft is retired, and the Secretary of the Air Force shall, upon such notification, transfer one A-10 aircraft and all required support equipment to such military department.

(c) TRAINING AND SUPPORT- Chapter 901 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section :

`Sec. 9316. Training and support for A-10 aircraft

`The Secretary of the Air Force shall provide each military department with flight training, fleet support, and depot maintenance with respect to all A-10 aircraft assigned to each such department.'.

I haven't seen anything repealing this law but also not saying they haven't.
But it would be nice for that mean beast to be kept, it saved my butt more than once.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by copeab

I have doubts on these working all that well in an actual battlefield environment, with fire coming from all directions and smoke and fires all over teh place.

Israelis "Iron Fist" on the Merkava 4s has been defeating current generation Russian ATGMs fired from Gaza.

Meaning that ATGMs are going to have to be volley fired, and are getting to be to expensive for that.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Israelis "Iron Fist" on the Merkava 4s has been defeating current generation Russian ATGMs fired from Gaza.

Meaning that ATGMs are going to have to be volley fired, and are getting to be to expensive for that.

When did Iron Fist first see action? The Lebanon incursion in 2006 resulted in pretty heavy Merkava casualties and most of those tanks killed were taken out by Russian top-attack and/or tandem-warhead ATGMs. This came as quite a shock to the Israelis.

EDIT: Did my own research and it looks like the Israelis started deploying "Trophy" active defense systems in 2010.

Although it's interesting to discuss the effectiveness of such systems in today's world, from a T2K perspective, the matter is largely moot- such active protection systems (aside from "old-fashioned" reactive armor) would most likely not have been fielded in any significant numbers at any point during the WWIII of T2K.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Meaning that ATGMs are going to have to be volley fired, and are getting to be to expensive for that.

You get around that by volley firing (relatively) cheap unguided rockets, depleting the system's ammo, and keep the defense honest by including one or two ATGMs in the batch) so you just can't turn it off. to say ammo from a diversionary' attack.

[Gamer]

Originally Posted by Raellus

When did Iron Fist first see action? The Lebanon incursion in 2006 resulted in pretty heavy Merkava casualties and most of those tanks killed were taken out by Russian top-attack and/or tandem-warhead ATGMs. This came as quite a shock to the Israelis.

EDIT: Did my own research and it looks like the Israelis started deploying "Trophy" active defense systems in 2010.

Although it's interesting to discuss the effectiveness of such systems in today's world, from a T2K perspective, the matter is largely moot- such active protection systems (aside from "old-fashioned" reactive armor) would most likely not have been fielded in any significant numbers at any point during the WWIII of T2K.

The "trophy" system is the only such system on some of the MK4, "Iron fist" has not been fielded to date.
IMI and Rafael had been ordered to combine their two systems into one system for use on Israeli platforms as the defense ministry refuses to fund two seperate systems.
The only thing really keeping "Iron Fist" as an ongoing separate entity now is U.S and a couple others interest in the system.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Raellus

When did Iron Fist first see action? The Lebanon incursion in 2006 resulted in pretty heavy Merkava casualties and most of those tanks killed were taken out by Russian top-attack and/or tandem-warhead ATGMs. This came as quite a shock to the Israelis.

EDIT: Did my own research and it looks like the Israelis started deploying "Trophy" active defense systems in 2010.

Although it's interesting to discuss the effectiveness of such systems in today's world, from a T2K perspective, the matter is largely moot- such active protection systems (aside from "old-fashioned" reactive armor) would most likely not have been fielded in any significant numbers at any point during the WWIII of T2K.

Heavy losses? While a number of tanks was hit with at weapons (around 50), only 10 crew was killed: and of those 50, only 2 was total losses: the rest was repaired and returned to service.

[Grimace]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Heavy losses? While a number of tanks was hit with at weapons (around 50), only 10 crew was killed: and of those 50, only 2 was total losses: the rest was repaired and returned to service.

In terms of a war, what you described wouldn't be considered heavy losses. In terms of a battle, that is quite heavy losses as I'm sure every one of those tanks was removed from action for some time.

The fact that crews survived and vehicles were repaired speaks more to the tank design rather than their protection against ATGMs.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Heavy losses? While a number of tanks was hit with at weapons (around 50), only 10 crew was killed: and of those 50, only 2 was total losses: the rest was repaired and returned to service.

Considering that the IDF believed the Merkava IV to be pretty much invulnerable to modern ATGM systems, then yes. Considering that the IDF was engaging an unconventional force without access to its own MBTs, then yes also. Merkava losses in the 2006 Lebanon incursion came as quite a shock to the IDF. By all subjective measures, the IDF considered their MBT losses to be rather heavy. To the U.S. perhaps, 50 tanks temporarily disabled and 10 crew killed would be small peanuts but to a smaller nation like Israel, those numbers are significant, especially considered the time and money they've invested in both tank building and crew training.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Gamer

The "trophy" system is the only such system on some of the MK4, "Iron fist" has not been fielded to date.
IMI and Rafael had been ordered to combine their two systems into one system for use on Israeli platforms as the defense ministry refuses to fund two seperate systems.
The only thing really keeping "Iron Fist" as an ongoing separate entity now is U.S and a couple others interest in the system.

If the US military was smart and not just wanting to keep defense contractors happy and well-fed, they would have bought into Trophy from the Israelis, or traded Israel for some of the more interesting stuff they want more of, like JDAMs and Apaches. Have our defense contractors and DARPA work on Trophy with the Israelis -- with US R&D dollars, Trophy might have been fielded sooner and might be an even more effective system.