• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat What Destroyed This Abrams Tank?

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
What Destroyed This Abrams Tank?

Possibly a Chinese-made missile
m1_destroyed_iraq-602x350.png


October 25, 2017 Robert Beckhusen


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 andIraq’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.

Knocking out a U.S.-made Iraqi tank with a German anti-tank missile destined for the war with ISIS comes with political sensitivities. The Peshmerga denied using MILANs in the clash, and the German Defense Ministry would not confirm nor deny use of the missiles against the Iraqi tank.


Germany has a contingent of military advisers in the region training the Peshmerga, a mission which Berlin briefly paused given the row with Baghdad.

Iraqi forces and the Popular Mobilization Forces — pro-Baghdad paramilitary units — swept into the oil-rich Kirkuk region in October 2017 following Kurdistan’s Sept. 25 independence referendum. Outmatched by the larger Iraqi army, the Peshmerga retreated, but not without punctuating its collapse in Kirkuk with exchanges of fire.


While the Iraqi government and the Peshmerga are at odds over the alleged use of MILAN missiles, both sides acknowledged the clash, which took place in Altun Kupri — also known as Prde — between the Kurdish capital of Erbil and Kirkuk city.

We don’t know how the Peshmerga took out the Abrams, but the Kurdish army has tank-busting weapons other than the MILAN. One possibility is that the Peshmerga used a Chinese-made HJ-8 “Red Arrow” anti-tank missile. HJ-8s have appeared with the Peshmerga since at least 2014, although it’s not clear from whom Iraqi Kurdistan received the weapons.

Sudan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan are among the 19 countries which possess HJ-8s.

An HJ-8 equipped to a Kurdish Humvee. Photo via Kurdish social media
Along with HJ-8s, the Peshmerga have been sighted with Chinese-made anti-materiel rifles and grenade launchers.

Qatar is strongly suspected to have supplied Syrian rebel groups with these weapons after first buying them from Sudan, and the hardware could have eventually worked its way to the Peshmerga via captured Islamic State stockpiles, according to one theory from the weapons monitoring group Armament Research Services.


Social media channels aligned with the Kurdish separatist cause posted photos and videos showing tube-launched HJ-8s attached to Peshmerga Humvees. Interestingly, one recent video depicts Kurdish troops launching what looks like a vehicle-mounted HJ-8 during the clash at Altun Kupri.

We don’t see the target. We do see the Erbil-Kirkuk checkpoint at Altun Kupri in the background.

These same channels claimed an HJ-8 is what indeed took out the Abrams.


If so, it would be a rare example of a Chinese-made missile destroying an American-made tank, indicating a vulnerability with the Abrams, as the M-1s supplied to Iraq lack the high-tech active-protection systems which are becoming increasingly common on modern tanks. The U.S. military’s Abrams are only now starting to receive those defenses.

The wire-guided HJ-8 is an older missile first produced in China in the 1970s. It is roughly equivalent to the U.S.-made TOW missile.

If the Kurdish missile was an HJ-8E — a more current version seen in Syria — then it would have featured a 54-pound tandem-charge warhead capable of traveling 4,000 meters, assisted by a thermal imaging system included on the launcher. A tandem charge is a two-stage warhead that can punch through a tank’s add-on explosive reactive armor tiles, although Iraq’s M-1 Abrams tanks also appear to lack this additional defensive capability.

Regardless, it’s unclear what exactly caused the loss of the Iraqi Abrams at Altun Kupri. On Oct. 25, Rudaw — a news agency aligned with the Kurdistan Democratic Party — relayed an accusation from a Peshmerga commander that the Iraqi government removed the destroyed tank to “hide the truth that they have used [an] Abrams tank against the Peshmerga.”

Helpfully and for posterity, the article included an aerial photo of the burned-out armored beast credited to the Kurdistan Region Security Council. Take a look for yourself.

 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Lucky the Turds are only armed with the MILAN, and not with the SAF's Matador tank-buster, a deadlier tank-killer.

5237_178.jpg


 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
ROTFFLMFAO!



Early Red Arrow missiles (1980) had a range of three kilometers and their 120-millimeter shaped charges had a penetration equivalent to eight hundred millimeters of Rolled Homogenous Armor (RHA). However, HJ-8 has seen a lot of upgrades over the years. The HJ-8C and D versions introduced a tandem charge designed to defeat the Explosive Reactive Armor common on Soviet and Russian tanks, a feature retained in later models.

China now uses HJ12 and HJ11.

Matador is a toy with range of 500m and at best will scratch the tank.
Trust Sinkapore generals to want this toy.
Trust you to clap your stupid hands at this.
 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
Lucky the Turds are only armed with the MILAN, and not with the SAF's Matador tank-buster, a deadlier tank-killer.

5237_178.jpg



Carl Gustav is a fucking good weapon system in use during my time and with a very long reach.
C G was very much in use in Afghan by USA and other forces which shows how good they are.

The Army Is Bringing Back a 70-Year-Old Gun for New Fights

What the fuck was that replaced by the Matador? A kuching kurad idiotic rpg with very short reach of 300M?

I smell $$$$$$ going going gone and some people laffing on way to their banks and lives of Sinkies lost in future because they got to use Matador instead of Carl Gustav

JohnTan.

You going to bring this up to those you claim to rub shoulders and carry balls with ?
Why Carl Gustav was kicked out for the fucking Matador?

why why why?
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
JohnTan.

You going to bring this up to those you claim to rub shoulders and carry balls with ?
Why Carl Gustav was kicked out for the fucking Matador?

why why why?

Carl Gustav was an extremely heavy weapon. And technically, they are not the same type of weapon. Both are anti tank weapons, but the CG is actually a recoilless rifle and Matador is more an RPG. The CG was over 19lbs plus the stand, which is almost 2lbs, making it over 20lbs empty weight. The US is switching over to CG because That is the newer models of the CG. The older models which the SAF had were in the weight range of closer to 30-40lbs. I know because I was one of those assigned to carry it. The new CG has a range of 1000m and is made of newer and lighter materials not available in the 80s and 70s when the SAF operated it. The Matador by contrast only has a range of 500m. A 2 man CG crew can carry a total of 5-6 rounds between them. A 2 man team carrying only Matador will only be able to carry 2 each due to bulk and weight. Plus the newer rounds developed for the CG are better then the older ones. All in, a very good reason to switch back to CG.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
M1 Abrams sold to the iraqis is not the same standard as that operated by the USA. Looks like this Iraqi M1 was hit in the rear, which is a known soft spot for the earlier models.
 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
Carl Gustav was an extremely heavy weapon. And technically, they are not the same type of weapon. Both are anti tank weapons, but the CG is actually a recoilless rifle and Matador is more an RPG. The CG was over 19lbs plus the stand, which is almost 2lbs, making it over 20lbs empty weight. The US is switching over to CG because That is the newer models of the CG. The older models which the SAF had were in the weight range of closer to 30-40lbs. I know because I was one of those assigned to carry it. The new CG has a range of 1000m and is made of newer and lighter materials not available in the 80s and 70s when the SAF operated it. The Matador by contrast only has a range of 500m. A 2 man CG crew can carry a total of 5-6 rounds between them. A 2 man team carrying only Matador will only be able to carry 2 each due to bulk and weight. Plus the newer rounds developed for the CG are better then the older ones. All in, a very good reason to switch back to CG.


Do tell me about weight.
I was one of those in the original Arty in late 60s and got to manpack the fucking 120mm mortar
 

nkfnkfnkf

Alfrescian
Loyal





But the real new and effective Tank Killer is HJ-12, it kill EVERY TANK in the world, and hardly miss, it is fire and forget, can be fired from tiny space, it is Intelligent to kill tank by flying up and dive on the weak top commander hatch, it has own machine vision:


 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
JohnTan.

You going to bring this up to those you claim to rub shoulders and carry balls with ?
Why Carl Gustav was kicked out for the fucking Matador?

why why why?

I do know a couple of generals who volunteer alongside me in grassroots activities, including Meet-the-People's session.

The Matador is both an anti-tank and anti-wall weapon. It's good for destroying practically any tank our neighbours have and it can also blast apart holes in walls during close combat urban ops. The matador is a pretty nimble weapon to carry when on the move on foot.

We also don't have to worry too much about backblast. Surely you don't want some ITE moron handling that bazooka to kill his promising A-level lieutenant just because he forgot to check that his rear was clear before firing.

And the matador is accurate. We don't have to worry about someone's fart causing the rocket from the matador to go sideways and miss the target.
 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
I do know a couple of generals who volunteer alongside me in grassroots activities, including Meet-the-People's session.

The Matador is both an anti-tank and anti-wall weapon. It's good for destroying practically any tank our neighbours have and it can also blast apart holes in walls during close combat urban ops. The matador is a pretty nimble weapon to carry when on the move on foot.

We also don't have to worry too much about backblast. Surely you don't want some ITE moron handling that bazooka to kill his promising A-level lieutenant just because he forgot to check that his rear was clear before firing.

And the matador is accurate. We don't have to worry about someone's fart causing the rocket from the matador to go sideways and miss the target.

That fucking lieutenant should have the cowsense not to stand in backblast area.
If not, he can get Darwin Award by himself.

Trust Sinkapore to ask pengkia to bring knife to a fucking gun fight.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Our SAF used to have this 106 recoilless gun in our arsenal. It was pretty good in killing tanks, enemy infantry and oppies. Maybe we should sell it to the Turds and see them use it to kill some Iraqi Arabs.

 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal





But the real new and effective Tank Killer is HJ-12, it kill EVERY TANK in the world, and hardly miss, it is fire and forget, can be fired from tiny space, it is Intelligent to kill tank by flying up and dive on the weak top commander hatch, it has own machine vision:




Very nicely educational to those that think AMDK.
And maybe those that clap clap clap hands at Matador can sit on their fucking hands.

:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
 

eatshitndie

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Our SAF used to have this 106 recoilless gun in our arsenal. It was pretty good in killing tanks, enemy infantry and oppies. Maybe we should sell it to the Turds and see them use it to kill some Iraqi Arabs.

the m40 is actually 105mm caliber based on the less successful m27. it is designated 106mm to prevent confusion in the ammo dump with older 105mm shells for the m27.
 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal
Our SAF used to have this 106 recoilless gun in our arsenal. It was pretty good in killing tanks, enemy infantry and oppies. Maybe we should sell it to the Turds and see them use it to kill some Iraqi Arabs.



Key word is USED to have.

I seen that around during my time, long long time ago.

Fuck off! This not history channel.

Grandfather story will not save our pengkia when they are send with knife to a fucking gunfight.
You can tell your fucking generals that.
 

pakchewcheng

Alfrescian
Loyal


Iraqi army retrieves destroyed Abrams tank to 'hide evidence' of its use

By Rudaw 25/10/2017
337722Image1.jpg

American M1 Abrams tank destroyed by Peshmerga forces on October 20 / Photo: Aerial footage from KRSC
ERBIL, Kurdistan Region--A Peshmerga commander said on Wednesday that the Iraqi army has now removed an Abrams tank that was destroyed by Peshmerga forces on October 20, 2017 at the town of Pirde when Iraqi forces and the Shiite militia advanced out of Kirkuk towards the Kurdistan Region.
“By doing this, Iraq wants to hide the truth that they have used Abrams tank against the Peshmerga. But we still retain its pictures,” the commander said.
Kamal Kirkuki, a Peshmerga commander, told Rudaw that the Hashd al-Shaabi forces have removed the tank in order to hide it somewhere.
“We tried hard to bring it to the territory controlled by the Peshmerga, but couldn’t do it. Fortunately, we managed to take photos of it and the Peshmerga are retaining the pictures as evidence. That is why removing and taking it somewhere else doesn’t change the fact that this tank was used against the Peshmerga,” Kirkuki said.
On Friday, October 20, 2017, the Hashd al-Shaabi attacked the town of Prde on several fronts and tried to capture it. But Peshmerga forces confronted them and defeated seven consecutive attacks. In this attack, the Hashd al-Shaabi and Iraqi army used America’s Abrams tanks against the Peshmerga who destroyed one of them.
In the fight, nearly 20 Hashd al-Shaabi’s tanks and military vehicles were destroyed, and nearly 150 from their fighters were killed and injured. Seven Peshmerga fighters were also killed and a number injured in the attack.



Video footage filmed by a Pehmerga soldier circulating on social media shows the destroyed American M1 Abrams tank.









 
Top