Ten Fingers, 6 Strings: Help

August 03, 2005

Help

I'm probably pissing into the wind, as no one really reads this blog, but can anyone substantiate this statement made by Reuters:

Roadside bombs, concealed in everything from soda cans to dead animals, are the single biggest killers of U.S. forces in Iraq, penetrating even the heavy armor of tanks.
Many improvised explosive devices, as the troops call them, are spotted and defused. But dozens go off every day.

U.S. generals have voiced concern in recent months that insurgents have been making deadlier bombs, including, they say, "shaped charges" -- explosives which direct the force of their blast in a concentrated direction to penetrate armor.

On several occasions this year, entire crews of armored vehicles have been killed by makeshift bombs on the road.

Thanks.

Posted by 10 fingers 6 strings at August 3, 2005 05:37 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Hey there! You've put some good stuff up the last couple of days... :-)

As far as the "armor-penetrating" stuff, I read your post a couple of days ago and sat there going, "geez, I don't have a clue" but today I was reading Michael Yon's blog/online mag and the post titled "Devil's Foyer" has some information regarding that type of thing. It's in context, but maybe it will help with sorting out whether or not Reuters has a pole up their...well, you know.

Here's the link: http://michaelyon.blogspot.com/2005/07/devils-foyer.html

I'm not smart enough to know how to put hyperlinks in comments. :-)

Anyway, hope that's useful!

Posted by: Jayne at August 4, 2005 12:54 PM

Reuters is giving a false impression. It's possible that a roadside bomb could disable a tank, but usually it's not done through penetrating the tank's armor. Tanks carry the vast majority of their armor on the front and sides of the tank. They carry a lesser amount on the bottom, top and rear. It takes a tremendous amount of kinetic energy to punch through the frontal -- or even the side -- armor of a tank.

The thing that the insurgents/terorrists do have that can kill a tank are old Soviet anti-tank mines. They work by blowing up underneath the tank as it passes over, command-detonated by wire; by the vehicle hitting a stalk that triggers it; or, nowadays, by radio. But mines blow up the tank by avoiding the armor, not by defeating it.

(Semantics, perhaps, to the occupants).

A roadside bomb could damage the roadwheels/treads of the tank, immobilizing it, while not penetrating the tank's main armor. This is known in the business as a "mobility kill".

Reuters is playing a little fast and loose with their terminology. A Bradley, a Stryker, or a Marine LAV are not tanks, and are nowhere near as heavily armored as an Abrams. They are personnel carriers, designed to carry infantry into battle while protecting them from small arms fire and shell fragments. They are only "armored vehicles" in the sense that they have some armor. They are not designed to take a direct hit from a tank's main gun and keep running, like an Abrams. Could their side armor be defeated by a roadside bomb? Sure, if the bomb is powerful enough. A shaped charge would facilitate that process by focusing the blast on a narrower section of the armor.

So, if it's taken out by a roadside bomb, it's most likely we are talking about Strykers, LAVs, Bradleys, HMMWVs, and the like. Not a tank. If a tank is taken out, it is most likely through an in-the-road antitank mine, or a mobility kill from a roadside bomb that has disabled the tracks.

Hope that helps.

Posted by: The Colossus at August 10, 2005 01:25 PM