I was reading this article:
"The majority of vehicles in Resta's brigade, as throughout much of Iraq, were poorly armored. Most were protected by only half-inch sheets of plywood."
Plywood!? Surely that can't be right, can it?
I guess it would keep out a haistly thrown rock & maybe some sand, but not much else- especially not a bullet
If you built a plywood box and filled it with sandbags you would have something. Maybe the news geeks didn't understand what they were looking at.
BTW have you ever looked at WWII pictures of Sherman tanks? You notice the sandpags piled on them and all the extra track stuck all around the sides? That is hillbilly armor. (the Sherman had inferior armor too) Iraq is not the first time guys have made up for bad congressional appropriations decisions with things they have lating around.
Pretty common. The US troops went into Iraq expecting small-arms fire and instead received RPGs. These have a shaped charge warhed which explodes _outside_ the armour and sprays a hot jet of molten metal forwards, cutting a hole through the armour. The jet is only effective for a few inches, so if you can make it hit something _above_ the armour, you trigger the warhead too early and it just scorches the surface of the real armour. This spaced armour appeared in mid-WW2 and has been made out of anything from chicken wire to corrugated iron chickenhouses.
Surely you know better than to ask ... or is that you just wanted to give this ridiculous sob story a little more coverage?
This guy didn't join up to serve for his country, he joined up to enrich himself with tuition benefits and got a rude surprise when he actually had to do something besides go along for the easy ride ... poor baby. As the former CO of a combat unit, I recognize the attitude all too well ... it was often responsible for getting other's killed. I can guarantee you that those who had to pull his reluctant ass along are glad to see him go.
Horseshit, Andy ...RPG's have been around for a long time and to state they were not "expected" is either spin or ignorance, but ludicrous in either case.
We actually used chain link fencing in Vietnam to set them off before they hit our sandbags.
Won't comment on this.
That may be true for RPGs but other shaped charges can't be dismissed so easily. TOW missiles use shaped-charge warheads. We (Hughes Aircraft) learned and/or predicted that it was actually better to start the plasma earlier, not later, and thus the later versions have an extendable probe that moves the crush switch further in front of the missile.
I was told that this was discovered by accident, although I have my doubts. The story was that there was a spec requirement that the missile needed to penetrate some thickness of plywood without detonation and detonate going through some greater thickness. (True) This was to simulate a ground pounder having to shoot through light brush. Tests were performed at Redstone
See:
So why are the Americans taking so many casualties from them ?
Given the choice between a Humvee and a CAMAC-armoured Landie, I know which one I'd rather be in. Amazingly enough, the Brits know a thing or two about CQB and dealing with a well-armed population with a dislike for squaddies. The US troops seem to have taken all their advice from the LAPD - Compton is a tough neighbourhood, but not as well armed as the Bogside.
Expense. A proper armored personel carrier like the Strycker is much more expensive than a Humvee plus a half dozen body bags.
It's a war, Andy ... and if you were really paying attention you would know that it is NOT the RPG so much as the IED that is the cause of the flurry to jury rig armor on utility vehicles that were never intended to be used solely for troop transport. They are designed as military "utility" vehicles, not "armored" vehicles.
Blame Congress and previous administrations that designed, budgeted and built them, not the current battle planners and those executing the plan.
Ground troops ... their mission is to pound the ground, not ride into batlle, therefore these vehicles were not designed solely for troop transport. Give a foot soldier the choice or riding in an unarmored vehicle, or walking, and he'll take the ride any day regardless of the danger ... IOW, he'd take a bicycle rather than walk.
Your guys are doing a excellent job, and they undoubtably have more experience in dealing with close quarter insurgency, but they're also getting shot at with RPG's too, statistcially just not as frequently.
All but the most naive amongst you know that this "armored vehicle" thing is being used as a rabbit trail ... and just like foolish, unaware coon dog, many of you are being fooled by it.
... anybody who would believe that is one sick puppy.
Depends on the thickness of the target. The optimum is some classified number (about 2.1, AFAIK) times the max armour thickness. TOW is a heavy missile intended for heavy armour. RPGs are a much lighter thing
- there's no point in giving them a long standoff, they'd just lose the jet's cohesion.
The point of the spaced armour though is not to provide a "long" standoff, so much as a "different" standoff from the one designed for.
It's not - it's the on-going occupation of an unruly civil population. The biggest single lesson of NI was the disaster of Bloody Sunday, that kicked so much of it off. The Paras are great as soldiers for fighting wars, but they're lousy policemen. This is _not_ a war - you can tell this, because you're not allowed to get the big toys out. A civil situation like this needs a different approach and it's not one that infantry are trained for.
Sure, but we're talking about plywood. Plywood _does_ have uses against RPGs, odd though this might appear at first.
I'd extend it to the military planners. They're supposed to be the experts, not Congress itself.
Your distinction is theorectical, impractical and spoken like a civilian. A rose by any other name ... when the bullets are flying, it's a _war_ to those having to duck..
No argument, as I said, we used chain link fence ... but not as "armor".
Congress appropriates the funding and approves, cuts, or increase budgets for the military planners/designers based on administration. IIRC, The previous administration did a lot of cutting in that area.
Nonetheless, all these current equipment design decisions were made years ago. The military commander has to fight with the tools available, and improvise from there, which is what is being done, and has been done in every war. The equipment lag time, often based on "lessons learned", is never in favor of those who have to fight now, never has been, and never will be.
The distinction isn't about whether someone is shooting at you, it's about whether you're allowed to shoot back.
Total, absolute, nonsense ... it would really help if you would stick to what you know. Although ROE's may change according to the situation, our soldiers, and your's, operate under specific Rules of Engagment that allow them to use deadly force in self-defense and in defending others from death or serious bodily injury.
Use your head, Larry. "Every" person? Patently ridiculous and you know it. How about just the radical Islamic fundamentalist, who would kill Larry Jacques anywhere they can find Larry Jacques, including Larry Jacques' own street, in case your memory is that short.
On 25 Jan 2005 11:26:36 GMT, Ed Clarke vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email
OK. You tell me......
.... and anybody who doesn't is in denial.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.