Article

2003-11-05 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-05 6:37:43 AM|| || Front Page|| [11134 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The mystery projectile has been revealed as a special developed Russian bullet useable with Kalasnikov riffles...

Suuuuuuuure, Murat! I hope the Jihadi's don't learn that walking up to and firing their AK "special bullets" right into the sides of M1s will make them all tank-killers. The results are simply too ~~funny~~ horrifying to contemplate. You gotta link to your Siberian Steel Superbullet theory?

P.S. A 16 mm armour-piercing capability was obsolete by 1939.

This post was also treated yesterday

...and the day before. It's still a mystery.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-11-5 6:54:00 AM|| 2003-11-5 6:54:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Hi Bulldog,

Well I am not the bullet specialist, US army weapon specialists revealed that, I guess some "jihadi's" between US army specialists if you like to put it that way.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-5 7:11:31 AM|| 2003-11-5 7:11:31 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Murat, why doesn't the story you linked to support your claims?

At this time, it appears most likely that an RPG-22 or some other improved variant of the Russian-designed weapon damaged the M1 tank, sources concluded.

No mention of a magic bullet, asshat.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-5 7:27:26 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-5 7:27:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Bulldog,

Armor penetrating bullets are nothing new, 10mm penetrating bullets are common known: armor penetration

The Russians developed one which can penetrate heavier armor, the mistery is how did the Iraqi's acquire these.

Posted by Murat 2003-11-5 8:09:09 AM|| 2003-11-5 8:09:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 So Murat...
You're telling me that some rabidly anti-American jihadi, armed with top secret, super-powerful, russian-made, armor-piercing rounds in his fully-automatic AK, ran up on a huge 68 ton M1A1 tank full of infidels... AND THEN ONLY PINCHED OFF ONE ROUND?

Posted by ---------<<<<-- 2003-11-5 8:35:22 AM|| 2003-11-5 8:35:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Uh, Murat, Bulldog wasn't disputing the existence of AP rounds. In fact, if you had bothered to read what he wrote, you'd have noticed that he called 16mm penetration "pre-WWII". In that light, a 10mm penetration is as exciting as Riyadh on a Friday night.

You still haven't bothered to source your claim.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-5 8:38:06 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-5 8:38:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Murat, when they refer to an armor penetration bullets they generally mean body armor, in the modern context, not Tank Armor. You really will believe anything won't you.

Posted by Yank 2003-11-5 8:57:11 AM|| 2003-11-5 8:57:11 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 16m is not tank armor!

Posted by Raptor 2003-11-5 9:10:05 AM|| 2003-11-5 9:10:05 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Bulldog, Armor penetrating bullets are nothing new...

Well, you don't say! Murat, what we're discussing here are anti-tank rifles or rifles with anti-tank capability. 16 mm is adequate to penetrate lightly armoured vehicles, e.g. the aluminium-bodied M113 APC, but totally incapable of penetrating the chobham armour of an M1A1.

Infantry anti-tank rifles themselves were considered out of date by the end of WWII, and there is simply no way that a puny little AK47, or even a sniper rifle, could have penetrated this M1A1.

Get. A. Clue.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-11-5 9:10:51 AM|| 2003-11-5 9:10:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 the mistery is how did the Iraqi's acquire these.

Why would that be a mystery? They are Russian.

Posted by Jack is Back! 2003-11-5 9:27:26 AM|| 2003-11-5 9:27:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Bulldog,

As said before I am not a bullet specialist, the bullet theory is from American weapon specialists who declare the 7N22 and 7N23 bullets are capable of penetrating 16mm armor shields like butter. I have also no idea about the armor thikness of the M1A1.

Who knows the hull thikness of the M1A1?

Posted by Murat 2003-11-5 9:36:43 AM|| 2003-11-5 9:36:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 Who knows the hull thikness of the M1A1?

Er, that's classified, Murat. Type of armour is more important than mere thickness nowadays, anyhow. But as a general idea of how clueless you are, even the relatively underprotected WWII era Sherman M4 had frontal armor of 85 mm.

Posted by Bulldog 2003-11-5 10:05:03 AM|| 2003-11-5 10:05:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 Maybe it was an African Swallow that shot the Armor Piercing Coconut

Posted by R.A. Myers 2003-11-5 10:08:26 AM|| 2003-11-5 10:08:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#14 the bullet theory is from American weapon specialists

Where does this claim come from, Murat? You have never cited a source for this. The story you linked to doesn't mention it.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-5 10:10:05 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-5 10:10:05 AM|| Front Page Top

#15 I have no internet links, but the bullet theory is from a report of Terry Hughes, the tank specialist who is investigating the mystery missile.

Some pictures of the M1A1 and the mystery hole of the African Swallow:

Posted by Murat 2003-11-5 10:29:01 AM|| 2003-11-5 10:29:01 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 OK, you've given a name. Now, where did you hear or read this?

God, it really shouldn't be this hard. You claim to be literate.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-11-5 10:47:53 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-11-5 10:47:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#17 Looks like...jihadi termites to me.

Posted by tu3031 2003-11-5 10:50:30 AM|| 2003-11-5 10:50:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#18 Here's a link to 1 explaination on StrategyPage.com I posted this a few days ago from the same site.

Posted by Yosemite Sam 2003-11-5 10:54:47 AM|| 2003-11-5 10:54:47 AM|| Front Page Top

#19 When the dust settles we'll probably find out an A-10 miles away pinched of a single round by accident and got a very lucky hit. Something innocent and improbably like that.

Posted by Yank 2003-11-5 11:01:16 AM|| 2003-11-5 11:01:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#20 One tank is disabled and all of a sudden tank-killers are on the loose? When several more are disabled in the same manner then the matter will probably warrant some sort of detailed investigation. Until then, there's going to be little change, other than probably being quite a bit more vigilant.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2003-11-5 11:14:40 AM|| 2003-11-5 11:14:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#21 Here is a link to information on the Abrams from Global Security. It might help the discussion.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-11-5 11:24:23 AM|| 2003-11-5 11:24:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#22 Murat-
I never had much experience with RPGs - and this is almost certainly what it is - but I have done work with the following:

*GAU-8 Cannon and associated ammunition, maintenance, inspection and testing (6 years)
*AGM-65 Maverick, all current models from 1984 to 1998, maintenance, inspection and testing
*TOW 2A and 2B, inspection, maintenance, testing (1995)
*Launch/firing experience with LAW, AT series, ex-Soviet RPG (1984-95)

I think I can reasonably say I've got some experience in dealing with armor-piercing weapons.

First of all, no - let me repeat that - NO 5.45 or 7.62 round is going to penetrate the composite armor (also known as Chobham armor)on an M1A1. No hand carried, shoulder fired rifle can ever muster the sheer muzzle velocity required, and even if it were possible, the round itself would never survive the impact. 'Armor piercing' yes, as in body armor or Kevlar or light steel armor. M1 level composite - no. Now, let's take a look at what it MIGHT be.
First of all, you're dealing with a fairly soft penetrator here, ('soft' being a purely relative term) because it doesn't look to have exited the crew compartment. It wasn't a DU penetrator - they burn on impact. In order to stay intact long enough to get into the crew compartment, it had to be about 8" long, which lets out anything fired from a gun smaller than a tank's main weapon - and there is no mention of any enemy tanks in the area. (A 30mm round from an A-10 is only about 4" long, but remember that it isn't that first round that kills you - it's the hundreth or so, the one that comes through the hole the first 99 have gouged out.)
A LARGE ATGW (TOW, any of the Soviet/CIS AT series, for example) is also probably out because of the cramped quarters the fighting was being done in - for best performance, you really need a couple hundred open yards minimum, and enough room for the fuzes to arm properly.
Now, one characteristic of an AP penetrator is that it causes 'spalling' - the creation of fragments from the wall of the crew compartment at the point where it enters. You can see some fairly mild spalling in the one picture, but compared to what you get from a large missile or tank-fired penetrator, it is close to non-existent. In addition, the larger missiles have either shaped charge warheads (which rely on the creation of an extremely hot jet of gas) or a penetrator (a BIG one - much larger in diameter and length than what hit this tank and causing FAR more damage), or a combination of the two. None of the signs of a large missile or tank fired penetrator round are visible here at all. All of the above leads me to believe that we are looking at a man-portable RPG of some kind.
Now, what did the Iraqis have access to? Well, the RPG-7,-18,-22, and -75 are candidates, as well as the Yugoslav RBR series and various Chinese mods of the above. Without having a chance to see where the engagement occurred, as well as the circumstances surrounding it, there's no way to tell for sure. But it seems most reasonable to me that somebody with a fairly modern and up-to-date AT weapon made a quick dash against a lone tank or the last tank in a column, got in close, fired, and did his thing. You'll notice that the tank appears to have made it home, and there's no mention of a mobility or systems kill.
Is there something to be concerned about? Yes. Is the M1 doomed? Nope. If somebody determines that there is a realistic threat from these things, we can have a fix in place right quickly - and that assumes the guys in the field don't think of one first.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2003-11-5 12:24:21 PM|| 2003-11-5 12:24:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Mike Kozlowski, wonderful post but you need to slow down on the abbreviations. I know RPG means Role Playing Game, AP is Associated Press, and DU is Democratic Underground but a few o fthe others lost me. ;^)

Posted by Yank 2003-11-5 12:59:22 PM|| 2003-11-5 12:59:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Yank,
My apologies - I kinda went into lecture mode on that one. Thanks for being understanding about it. :)

Best regards,
Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2003-11-5 2:09:34 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:09:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Murat you really should look at your sources before posting crap like that. The side armor on an M1 Abrams (not the later A2 which is modified even more) is about 10 CM sloped. Effectively this is equivalent to 20 cm when sloped at about 30 degrees. You're bullet would have buried itself probably in the skirt but no further.

Posted by Valentine 2003-11-5 2:32:02 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:32:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Oh as an aside, hull/armor thickness isn't classified on the earlier M1 tanks, it's the COMPOSITION of the armor thats classified ;)

Posted by Valentine 2003-11-5 2:34:26 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:34:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 There can't be another site on the internet where someone can post an article like this and have it explained the way MK just did. I'm impressed.

Posted by Matt 2003-11-5 2:34:28 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:34:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 Damn--nice post, Mike! Gotta love the varied backgrounds and insights of Rantburgers.

Posted by Dar 2003-11-5 2:39:13 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:39:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Mike, you just tore Murat to shreds. Nice work.

Posted by Charles 2003-11-5 2:52:45 PM|| 2003-11-5 2:52:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 I still say it was some sort of laser, Saddam's secret weapon, perhaps? disclaimer: I am not being serious

Posted by Rafael 2003-11-5 3:15:39 PM|| 2003-11-5 3:15:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 From StrategyPage:

November 5, 2003: The "Mystery Projectile" that caused the penetration of an M-1 tanks side armor was probably a Russian RPG-7V or similar type. This is an improved version with wave shaper in the HEAT warhead. The pictures (see here) of the penetration show classic HEAT warhead circular flash and light material splash (aluminum or similar from outer warhead casing) in a roughly circular area and at between 500 - 800 mm radius around the penetration hole. It also seems as if the entry hole on the skirt plate has a ragged and enlarged hole. This is consistent with wave shaped warheads that do not have optimal performance at point of impact as the jet is still being focused. In pictures 2-5 there is virtually no spalling around the inside exit hole and immediately adjacent interior equipment. Only items directly in penetration path has been punctured or splashed with molten copper (see gun guard picture). It appears as if the jet was disrupted and started deflagrating by interior components spaced effect and material compositions. The last picture shows residual heat discoloration on the switch box, which is typical of molten metal heat transfer and short-circuit effects as can be expected when you send conductive liquid or particles into an electrical box.

The damage done is similar in appearance to that done to other armored vehicles that have been penetrated by an RPG-7. In this case, the round hit one of the few areas on the side of the tank that was vulnerable to penetration by an RPG round.

If correct, it sounds like a lucky hit, but the procurement folks should be looking at those "few areas vunerable to penetration by an RPG"

Posted by Mercutio 2003-11-5 3:46:33 PM|| 2003-11-5 3:46:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 Great post Mike.
Would it be possible for 14mm anti-aircraft gun to inflict such damage?

Posted by Gasse Katze 2003-11-5 3:48:16 PM|| 2003-11-5 3:48:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 Looking at the pictures, you can see the splatter of molten metal. A hardened penetrator would have punched a hole in the outer hull, and then bounced around inside the tank. This was a shaped charge, a very focused narrow jet of hot metal.

Posted by Steve 2003-11-5 3:55:45 PM|| 2003-11-5 3:55:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 Guys, take a look at where the round hit again. Can anybody guarantee that where the turrent/body come together has all this special armor? I have noticed that Russian tanks use a smaller turrent that has a skirt that protects the joint. The Abrams has that huge turrent and it looks like about 2-3 inches of the joint are exposed. This round hit EXACTLY at that joint and I bet you there is no REACTIVE armor at that point. This is why it may not be out of the question this was a sniper round since it had to be so accuratly placed.

Posted by Patrick 2003-11-5 4:16:53 PM|| 2003-11-5 4:16:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 Found some more info on RPG-7V rounds at the manufacturer's website -- in particular, they talk about:

In 1988 the State Research and Production Enterprise "Bazalt" was the first in Russian and the world practice to solve the problem of creating antitank grenade launcher rounds capable of engaging combined (composite), screened and explosive reactive armor protection through the development of a radically new tandem warhead and a new PG-7VR round comprising this type of WH for firing from the RPG-7V grenade launcher. So far the PG-7VR does not have analogs in the world.

The warhead looks like it's got two charges -- one to defeat the armor, the second to do the dirty work.

Posted by snellenr 2003-11-5 5:35:46 PM|| 2003-11-5 5:35:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Guess the Russians decided to test-fire their new AntiTank Weapon (ATW) against an Abrams in Iraq. It also looks like Iraq only got a very FEW of these weapons, since no other attacks of this nature took place. It also looks pretty darned convincing that the weapons transfer took place AFTER the 1991 war and the subsequent arms embargo, OR it was a Russian military specialist that actually fired the round. Either way, Russia has some 'splaining to do. I'd have Vlad's shorts in the wringer PDQ if I were GWB (how's that for acronyms???).

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-11-5 6:19:27 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-11-5 6:19:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#37 Bet it was the Ghost Dancer Magic Bullet. The lucky jihadi was probably wearing a special white blouse and had stayed up all night.....

Posted by Shipman 2003-11-5 8:35:42 PM|| 2003-11-5 8:35:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 ..Thanks to all for your kind comments. Gasse Katze, I don't think an AA weapon could quite muster the oomph to get through steel armor, and definitely not the Chobham composite - again, even if it did, the round probably wouldn't survive.
Steve, I'm going to respectfully disagree and stick with my original call of a penetrator - though I will more than happily admit to error were it to come down to it. Some years ago, I had a chance to climb inside a T-72 that had been hit by a penetrator round fired from another tank (and you guys would never believe where this T-72 was when I saw it*S*) and the damage was very nearly identical. Also, the pic over at Strategy Page doesn't seem to show the scorching and deformation that I'd associate with a shaped charge hit. OTOH, the shaped charges I'm used to dealing with are pretty good sized - far larger than anything man-portable would be equipped with - so again, it's possible that there's something out there we haven't seen or aren't familiar with, or a variation on an old familiar - or an old favorite where the guy got a lucky shot.

Best regards,
Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2003-11-5 11:29:23 PM|| 2003-11-5 11:29:23 PM|| Front Page Top

12:32 alaskasoldier
08:34 Brian (MN)
07:53 B
04:42 Super Hose
04:08 Bulldog
04:01 Bulldog
00:12 NotMikeMoore
00:07 NotMikeMoore
23:56 NotMikeMoore
23:52 Uncle Joe
23:51 Alaska Paul
23:46 Grunter
23:46 NotMikeMoore
23:40 NotMikeMoore
23:36 Bomb-a-rama
23:34 NotMikeMoore
23:30 NotMikeMoore
23:29 Mike Kozlowski
23:22 Dev
23:19 marek
23:15 NotMikeMoore
23:04 NotMikeMoore
23:01 NotMikeMoore
22:55 NotMikeMoore