Taitelupanssarivaunujen haavoittumattomuuden (ja tässä tapauksessa erityisesti Yhdysvaltalaisten Abramsien) myyti murtamiseksi heitän lukaistavaksi tällaisen löytämäni väitteen:
Iraqi resistance fighters, whose ranks were bolstered by scores of trained Iraqi soldiers, have clearly learned to exploit the vulnerabilities of the US systems. They managed to destroy up to 20 enemy tanks even with their antiquated light anti-tank weapons, mostly Soviet rocket-propelled grenades such as the RPG-7 or its Chinese and Egyptian variants, with rounds developed in the 1970s-early 1980s. The results of combat operations show that the side armor of the Abrams tank is completely inadequate to fire from light anti-tank weapons, including older generation weapons, making these tanks unsuitable for operations in built-up areas.
For example, in a widely-discussed incident, an M1 tank from the 2nd Battalion, 70th Armor Regiment, 1st Armor Division was hit and disabled during a routine patrol on 28 August 2003. The American press, deluded by its own reports of the “invulnerability” of the Abrams, claimed that some kind of “secret weapon” was responsible for the damage. In fact, published photographs clearly show that the offending weapon was none other than a simple RPG. The hollow-charged jet penetrated the side skirt and turret ring and continued into the crew compartment as it disintegrated before finally coming to rest after boring a cluster of craters 30-50 mm deep in the hull on the far side of the tank. The crew was lucky to have suffered only minor shrapnel wounds as the projectile passed through the gunner’s seatback and grazed his flak jacket. On April 2, 2003 an RPG attack from the side disabled another tank by penetrating the turret’s hydraulic drive.
The side protection of the M1 turret is also inadequate. On 7 April 2004 an anti-tank RPG penetrated the side of the turret resulting in serious wounds to two crew members. The top of the tank is equally vulnerable, and even the glacis was easily defeated by anti-tank weapons. For example, on April 10, 2004 a tank was hit on the right side of the glacis by an RPG fired from an overpass and destroyed. Additional measures designed to increase protection for the Abrams tank have showed mixed results. Halon firefighting gear has proven largely ineffective. Practically all secondary fires resulting from enemy fire, engine breakdown or overheating destroyed the tank completely. For example, the 7 April attack noted above ignited the tanker’s personal effects attached to the outside of the turret, and since the crew had abandoned the vehicle, the fire was left unchecked, while on 10 April, fuel leaked out of a damaged fuel tank and ignited. Externally stored items, including on one occasion an external auxiliary power unit (EAPU), caught fire on several occasions and led to catastrophic losses. - -
Tuo löytyi Tiede.fi:n foorumilta - mistä lie olivat sen löytäneet, lähdettä kun ei oltu mainittu.
Tiivistys:
Nykyaikaisen taistelupanssarivaunun panssaroinnin läpäisymahdollisuudet ja tuhoamistodennäköisyydet ovat jopa aivan yleisesti
erittäin rajusti aliarvioituja, arvatenkin tällaisten suurten nykyaikaisten panssariarmeijoita ylläpitävien (suur)valtioiden propagandakoneistojen toimesta - kuten nyt vaikkapa Yhdysvaltojen. Pidetään siis hyvin mielellään yllä tuollaista pelottavaa myyttiä täysin voittamattomista panssarijoukoista ja niiden lähes yliluonnollisen tason omaavista kalustoista, vaikka totuus olisikin aivan toisenlainen...
Myös Abrmaseja on sodissa tuhoutunut paljon ja niitä tuhoutuu jatkossakin taistelukentillä, mutta jostain syystä ainoat kuvat niistä palamassa roihuavina tulisoihtuina löytyvät vain mm. joltain Al Jazeeran tyylisiltä sivustoilta, eikä juuri sitä ensimmäistäkään vastaavaa kuvaa miltään länsimaalaiselta sivulta.
Tehokasta sotasensuuria ja propagandaa, on aivan pakko myöntää...
