Article

2003-04-01 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 BLoB 2003-04-01 10:49 am|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 These must the ATGM-14s sold to the Iraqi dirtbags by our Russian friends. You know they have been so helpful - the GPS jammers, the weaponized small pox and now ATGMs. It is nice to have comrades you kount on.

Posted by Doug De Bono 2003-04-01 11:07:10|| [www.douglasdebono.com] 2003-04-01 11:07:10|| Front Page Top

#2 That's the thanks we get for the hundreds of Chechen jihadis who were taken out of circulation in Afghanistan. I wonder if any of the Russians involved in these deals have sons fighting in Chechnya?

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2003-04-01 11:38:38|| [www.nuclearspace.com] 2003-04-01 11:38:38|| Front Page Top

#3 I checked out that site a few days ago and didn't go with their news summaries. The position they're taking is straight-up anti-U.S., which means we can do nothing right, and they seem to get a lot from the Iraqi official channels. So I'd look for corroboration before relying on them too much.

Posted by Fred 2003-04-01 12:08:19|| 2003-04-01 12:08:19|| Front Page Top

#4 Serious reservations about this story.

First, battle damage assessment would be highly restricted info. Little chance we would be advertising to the world how to take out our Abrams.

Second, other than stating that 3 tanks were hit by guided weapons, it has no breakdown by numbers, but does give percentages. Obviously, not a lot of hard data behind this.

Third, a professional assessment of this war shows that the the Iraqis are getting rolled off the battlefield with a wildy lop-sided kill ratio, so the caution against "excessive optimism" is an amusing touch.

Posted by Dreadnought 2003-04-01 12:15:54|| 2003-04-01 12:15:54|| Front Page Top

#5 Three Abrams knocked out (not necessarily destroyed) does not a statistical analysis make. You need a collection of more than 3 data points to make any sort of statistical analysis so I agree that this "assessment" should be taken with a heavy dose of salt.

There may have been more data points if the analysts take into account the Bradleys that may have been knocked out of action, but they refer to "tanks" and these analysts ought to know the difference between a Bradley and an Abrams (IFV vs MBT).

Posted by FOTSGreg 2003-04-01 12:47:18|| 2003-04-01 12:47:18|| Front Page Top

#6 There have been several reports about the AGTM-14 Kornet anti-tank missile on the Net over the last few days. Good summary here. Loads of good information about Iraqi military equipment, including the Kornet here.

Looks like Iraq didn't get any of these until 2003, which is a direct violation of the UN sanctions. There's also some indications that the Iraqis also got a couple of Russian Kormorant anti-ship missiles from the Russians, too, and they were captured at Al Faw.

The Russians are beginning to smell as bad as the French. As more information comes out about past dealings between Iraq and other nations, there may be an avalanche of incriminations tossed about.

From all I've read, two Abrams have been damaged, and a Bradley 'seriously damaged' by these Kornet missiles. Either they're not as potent as the Russians indicate, or the Iraqis are so inept at using them they haven't managed to make a kill. Either option is good news for us, and sucks for the Iraqis. Pity, pity.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-04-01 14:37:03|| 2003-04-01 14:37:03|| Front Page Top

#7 Could be Kornets: our russki allies sold 2-3000 to Iraq.

Also check out RPG-29. Dunno if they got these under Lend-Leaski program, but I hope Putin got his money up front...

Posted by Anonymous 2003-04-01 14:37:21|| 2003-04-01 14:37:21|| Front Page Top

#8 When this is over, what are the bets that all these Russian violations get swept under the rug? Even if we push it, what's the UN going to do to Putin? Whack his pee-pee?

Posted by tu3031 2003-04-01 15:27:59|| 2003-04-01 15:27:59|| Front Page Top

#9 I recall hearing (FOx probably) that the M1's were knocked out by rear-shots from wire guided ATGM. Since there were no casualties, that indicates a mobility kill on the engine that started a fire in the turrent, giving the crew time to bail. Not a tank in the world can stand those shots. So no Uber Weapons - just proper tactical employment by the Iraqi.

Problem for the Iraqis now is that the US unit that allowed them to get into their rear has learned that lesson, and will be much more thorough about securing their approaches and flanks as they drive thru an area now. More Bradleys on "Sagger Watch". Having a .50 Cal or 25mm gun chewing the terrain around you is enough to distract the aim by enough to cause a miss with a wireguided ATGM.

Combined Arms is what its all about.

Posted by OldSpook 2003-04-01 17:53:08|| 2003-04-01 17:53:08|| Front Page Top

#10 Kornet was specifically designed to defeat reactive armor:

It is optically guided. How that works when your world is Suddenly Violent Feces (SVF) is up to the operator.

The right hit might take out an Abrams.

With 2-3 lost (Bradleys are a different matter, ditto-but-less-so Crusaders) in only 250 miles and 13 days, I say we run up the white flag while there's still time. That last SCUD was nearly as close to San Diego as it was to Kuwait and I believe they have us bracketed.

Posted by markiv 2003-04-01 22:10:43|| 2003-04-01 22:10:43|| Front Page Top

09:39 raptor
07:13 Bulldog
00:52 Brew
23:37 RW
23:29 mojo
23:23 mojo
23:17 True German Ally
23:14 mojo
23:10 mojo
22:54 Former Russian Major
22:52 tu3031
22:46 H.D. Miller
22:32 tu3031
22:21 becky
22:21 Anonymous
22:20 anon1
22:17 Former Russian Major
22:11 Anonymous
22:10 markiv
22:10 Frank G
22:10 Former Russian Major
22:04 OldSpook
21:53 OldSpook
21:52 True German Ally