User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:22:50 PM EDT
[#1]
I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks.
I was just a non rate 0311...but still. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:24:35 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: An ATGM can’t replace a tank. Yes they can. Put in had to dig up relics to replace what javelins knocked out... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:24:39 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:28:51 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol. Some armies seem to be overly reliant on tanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:29:03 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:31:30 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes they can. Put in had to dig up relics to replace what javelins knocked out... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: An ATGM can’t replace a tank. Yes they can. Put in had to dig up relics to replace what javelins knocked out... A tank can suppress without being suppressed. An ATGM team is vulnerable to suppression in a more significant way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:36:00 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. I think the endstate was already decided and we worked backwards to justify that conclusion |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:49:45 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was about to say, is anyone over there using western APS? or just Russian stuff Just russian stuff, but honestly its not like there wont be CCM vs western systems if they turn out to be effective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:50:34 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can see his point with regards to Ukraine. I think we're in a different position than a lot of other countries though. Nothing wrong with having a bunch of Carl Gustaf though.  I mean CG's were designed to kill tanks/bunkers/whatever they have ton of warhead choices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:58:15 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the endstate was already decided and we worked backwards to justify that conclusion Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. I think the endstate was already decided and we worked backwards to justify that conclusion That was my conclusion. Task Force Smith here we come. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 7:59:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes they can. Put in had to dig up relics to replace what javelins knocked out... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: An ATGM can’t replace a tank. Yes they can. Put in had to dig up relics to replace what javelins knocked out... Let me know when an ATGM brings protected, cross-country mobile firepower with better-than-eyeball sensors and comms to the party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:14:46 PM EDT
[#12]
just sneak up an toss a grenade down the main gun barrel... :)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:29:27 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Has the US ever fielded an AT hand grenade? Apparently no. https://i.ibb.co/YPFLjj6/AE3-C355-A-0-A35-4-CDE-BCD0-8-AB18-E6-F528-E.webp https://i.ibb.co/47VHyBX/3652-A326-F41-F-411-E-82-CA-FF0-D6-D775567.webp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_grenade In the late 1970s, the U.S. Army was worried about the lack of emergency anti-tank weapons for issue to its rear area units, to counter isolated enemy armored vehicles infiltrating or being air dropped. When the US Army asked for ideas, engineers at U.S. Army laboratories suggested the reverse-engineered and additional safety improvements of the East German AZ-58-K-100 HEAT anti-tank grenade that had been clandestinely obtained. This concept was called "HAG" for "High-explosive Antiarmor Grenade". While the civilian engineers working for the US Army thought it was a great idea, it was rejected out of hand by almost all senior US Army officers with field experience, who thought it would be more dangerous to the troops who used them than the enemy. The idea was quietly shelved by 1985.[22] This decision left many rear-area U.S. units with no heavier "anti-tank weapon" than the M2 heavy machine gun. interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:32:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:38:47 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. Planners are using the proper buzz words so old think about combined arms is no longer of value You would think an offensive expeditionary force would want armor. I can't wrap my mind around it. Trick to get a more modern, smaller lighter vehicle imo. M1 is rather big and heavy for amphibious operations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:41:03 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: AT mines, attack helos, your own tanks, etc. Relying on just one system leaves you open to a tech breakthrough rendering you obsolete (e.g., relying only on tanks) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: As opposed to what? Letting tanks run over you? AT mines, attack helos, your own tanks, etc. Relying on just one system leaves you open to a tech breakthrough rendering you obsolete (e.g., relying only on tanks) Weird. I guess we don’t have any of those. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:44:03 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then...  ahh... I wasn't strictly being specific about the weapon, but looks pretty handy for guys behind the line to have around. now that you mention that I recall a friend of a buddy of mine back in the 90's who was in GW1... he was some kinda truck driver hauling supplies, I remember him saying he traded some of his shit for a rocket launcher he could keep in the cab just in case... also said they had to collect a buncha enemy stiffs, and how much that sucked.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:47:58 PM EDT
[#18]
Until the Russian tank population is depleted, no.
Once that happens, tanks will be nothing more than occupation machines. Air power, drones, missiles, etc., that is where its at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:47:59 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.army-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/1-Image-1-21.jpg ahh... I wasn't strictly being specific about the weapon, but looks pretty handy for guys behind the line to have around. now that you mention that I recall a friend of a buddy of mine back in the 90's who was in GW1... he was some kinda truck driver hauling supplies, I remember him saying he traded some of his shit for a rocket launcher he could keep in the cab just in case... also said they had to collect a buncha enemy stiffs, and how much that sucked.. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then... https://www.army-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/1-Image-1-21.jpg ahh... I wasn't strictly being specific about the weapon, but looks pretty handy for guys behind the line to have around. now that you mention that I recall a friend of a buddy of mine back in the 90's who was in GW1... he was some kinda truck driver hauling supplies, I remember him saying he traded some of his shit for a rocket launcher he could keep in the cab just in case... also said they had to collect a buncha enemy stiffs, and how much that sucked.. LOL I was in GW1...there was no "trading" for rocket launchers...not before we went through the breach anyway! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:48:25 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As opposed to what? Letting tanks run over you? FPNI. When you're faced with a huge fucking nail, a portable hammer that can be carried by a man is pretty damn nice to have. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:48:52 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: LoL, someone asked “as opposed to what?” and I listed some alternatives. There *are* other ways to stop tanks. Sure, they have drawbacks and some are hideously expensive. That wasn’t the question being asked in that post. The video, IMHO, is fucking stupid. His pointe are asinine. You know why the Javelin and N-Law and the Stugna are being so celebrated right now? Because they have a high pkill against armored vehicles…including moving ones…including ones that have active defense systems. You know why the RPG and similar systems are maligned? One, because they simply aren’t that effective. During the Russian invasion of Grozny it took around 17 RPG hits (usually shooting from a building down onto the tank) per kill against T-72s. Two, it’s not a long range weapon. It’s a close range weapon, one with a rather large launch signature that exposes the operator to return fire from the target or his buddies and so RPG operators tend to have a short operational life expectancy. Same problem with the LAW and the Carl Gustav. Fundamentally, they get more use against infantry strong points than they do tanks…because they can actually be useful in those roles. A Javelin actually gives infantry a leg portable stand-off against tanks. None of the other listed tank counters do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:50:36 PM EDT
[#22]
Tanks are a PITA without air support.
Using some modern anti tank weapons the tank is a fire pit you can drive then light it up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:51:26 PM EDT
[#23]
OP is part of Putin's PR team
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:51:56 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Portable high powered laser systems mounted on tanks will make ATGM’s weaker. That scenario is not exactly just around the corner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 8:57:24 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: LOL I was in GW1...there was no "trading" for rocket launchers...not before we went through the breach anyway! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then... https://www.army-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/1-Image-1-21.jpg ahh... I wasn't strictly being specific about the weapon, but looks pretty handy for guys behind the line to have around. now that you mention that I recall a friend of a buddy of mine back in the 90's who was in GW1... he was some kinda truck driver hauling supplies, I remember him saying he traded some of his shit for a rocket launcher he could keep in the cab just in case... also said they had to collect a buncha enemy stiffs, and how much that sucked.. LOL I was in GW1...there was no "trading" for rocket launchers...not before we went through the breach anyway! could be... I don't recall him coming off as mouthing off, more kinda serious... I got the impression it was sorta scary, somewhat shitty experience and he was glad to come out relatively unscathed.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 9:06:43 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: could be... I don't recall him coming off as mouthing off, more kinda serious... I got the impression it was sorta scary, somewhat shitty experience and he was glad to come out relatively unscathed.. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: interesting article.... didn't the rear area people have LAW's for such an occasion back in the day? I wouldn't want a LAW when T-72s and better are hunting my ass...we had AT-4s back in the day, and I know I'd much rather have a dedicated ATGM team around even then... https://www.army-technology.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/1-Image-1-21.jpg ahh... I wasn't strictly being specific about the weapon, but looks pretty handy for guys behind the line to have around. now that you mention that I recall a friend of a buddy of mine back in the 90's who was in GW1... he was some kinda truck driver hauling supplies, I remember him saying he traded some of his shit for a rocket launcher he could keep in the cab just in case... also said they had to collect a buncha enemy stiffs, and how much that sucked.. LOL I was in GW1...there was no "trading" for rocket launchers...not before we went through the breach anyway! could be... I don't recall him coming off as mouthing off, more kinda serious... I got the impression it was sorta scary, somewhat shitty experience and he was glad to come out relatively unscathed.. Sounds about right. It was short and intense, and I was happy to be alive and unscathed when it was over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 9:09:22 PM EDT
[#27]
I would be investing time, energy, and tech into anti drone capability from the looks of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2022 9:22:24 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Until the Russian tank population is depleted, no. Once that happens, tanks will be nothing more than occupation machines. Air power, drones, missiles, etc., that is where its at. This is incorrect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2022 1:16:18 AM EDT
[#29]
How ‘bout sticky bombs OP?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2022 4:28:47 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How ‘bout sticky bombs OP? What page is that in the manual? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2022 6:08:25 AM EDT
[#31]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2022 6:34:14 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2022 10:18:44 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Russians are getting rid of their tanks too. They just outsourced the work to the Ukrainians. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I still worry about the Marine Corps supposedly getting rid of their tanks. I was just a non rate 0311...but still. I'm very ok with this. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File