Man, They Are Still Flying MiG-21s???

[Pocus]

If u ever seen what a 5.56 can do to naked flesh. don't ever doubt it. I've seen what it can do to a pig.

 

Unless u're wearing heavy body armor like a turtle, a 5.56 will kill u just as good as a 7.62mm

 

I think a round, regardless the size, are fatal. It's the effectiveness and accuracy of the round that matters.

 

7.62 has a more powerful muzzle velocity but effective range is reduced due to the drag coefficient. 7.62 arms are also heavier.

5.56 has lesser drag with less stopping power and prone to ricochet and wind.

I read that they are developing a new standard NATO round that is suppose to be in between 5.56 and 7.62. It's said to be the the best balanced.

[Happily1986]

I think a round, regardless the size, are fatal. It's the effectiveness and accuracy of the round that matters.

 

7.62 has a more powerful muzzle velocity but effective range is reduced due to the drag coefficient. 7.62 arms are also heavier.

5.56 has lesser drag with less stopping power and prone to ricochet and wind.

I read that they are developing a new standard NATO round that is suppose to be in between 5.56 and 7.62. It's said to be the the best balanced.

 

I still believe they should maintain the 7.62 calibre to deal with soft targets. Not against infantry but you know soft skinned vehicles the likes.

[Pocus]

You will be surprised that the Americans nearly canned the F-15 when it was still designated as XF-15, experimental. Alot of goons from the cold war era fervently believed in the value of a long range strategic bomber with nuclear payload. No one gave a s--t to multi role fighters for many years. The emergence of the Foxbat saved the F-15 because the Yanks realised they had nothing to go up against the MIG-25.

 

That's cos they thought from the spy pics that the MIG-25 is going to be a Air superority fighter.....but in a end turns out to be a long range interceptor....

[Vulcann]

SAF's defence against RPG rounds...

 

 

Heard it's quite effective during Iraq right?

 

Rats, we have been drilled in our thick skulls since day 1 of BMT that this IS the best defence?

 

 

Source: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/military...ngapore-9471-2/

 

We've been had!!!!

 

[laugh]

 

But seriously the grills are more for protection against normal grenades then rocket-propelled ones.

 

Reactive armour will be the system more suitable for such RPG attacks if the armoured vehicle's armour is too thin. Tanks normally can sustain RPG rounds without much damage unless the tracks or rear engine are hit at the right spot.

[Happily1986]

That is why some question the existence of tanks in todays mordern warefare.

 

if you ask the Israelis to give up their Merkavas, they will think you are a whackjob. Remember the 2nd Gulf War? Prior to that, the US was intent on decomming the Abrams. They believe in a light armoured and fast strike ground force. They reversed their decision upon AAR. The destruction wreaked by IEDs will partly the reason. If the US patrols could patrol in Merkavas, it would have been excellent. The Merkavas bested the Abrams in that aspect. They were designed with urban fighting in mind.

[Happily1986]

That's cos they thought from the spy pics that the MIG-25 is going to be a Air superority fighter.....but in a end turns out to be a long range interceptor....

 

No seriously, the Americans canned about 3 or 4 XF designated multi role fighters prior to F-15. They really thought that fighters aren't important. It wasn't some decision that centred on the F-15 itself.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Happily1986

[Hephaestus]

if you ask the Israelis to give up their Merkavas, they will think you are a whackjob. Remember the 2nd Gulf War? Prior to that, the US was intent on decomming the Abrams. They believe in a light armoured and fast strike ground force. They reversed their decision upon AAR. The destruction wreaked by IEDs will partly the reason. If the US patrols could patrol in Merkavas, it would have been excellent. The Merkavas bested the Abrams in that aspect. They were designed with urban fighting in mind.

 

 

 

IDF M113 on patrol

Edited June 22, 2012 by Hephaestus

[Pocus]

.........But seriously the grills are more for protection against normal grenades then rocket-propelled ones.

 

Reactive armour will be the system more suitable for such RPG attacks if the armoured vehicle's armour is too thin. Tanks normally can sustain RPG rounds without much damage unless the tracks or rear engine are hit at the right spot.

 

 

Hence that's why it's in the rear of the tank mah...

But for those who dunno, the tank looks like a half-constructed job...

[Hephaestus]

 

RPG7 magnet

[I-LOVE-CARS]

IDF M113 on patrol

Wow it does not look like the m113 apart from its body

[Hephaestus]

Wow it does not look like the m113 apart from its body

 

the grills add on... with the viewing blocks cos kenna too many rpg7 fire

[Pocus]

IDF M113 on patrol

 

M113 can throw away lah...

Aluminium hull can still make it?

 

The front axle cannot protect against mines....if kena mine, the driver confirmed die.

 

BX and bronco are design is such a way the driver is still protected from mine blast. I think our bronco saved a UK driver like that during it's Afghan tour...

Edited June 22, 2012 by Pocus

[Happily1986]

IDF M113 on patrol

 

Ours look like sheet in comparison.

[Vulcann]

Hence that's why it's in the rear of the tank mah...

But for those who dunno, the tank looks like a half-constructed job...

 

The tracks is still the Achilles heel of any MBT. There is so much of the tank you can protect and the tracks touching the ground can only be protected to a certain extend.

 

The insurgents was euphoric when they disabled a M1 by aiming at its tracks in Bagdad IIRC during the Iraq War.

 

Could not remember it was by a RPG or IED though.

[Hephaestus]

M113 can throw away lah...

Aluminium hull can still make it?

 

The front axle cannot protect against mines....if kena mine, the driver confirmed die.

 

BX and bronco are design is such a way the driver is still protected from mine blast. I think our bronco saved a UK driver like that during it's Afghan tour...

 

 

Dutch M113

[Lala81]

I think a round, regardless the size, are fatal. It's the effectiveness and accuracy of the round that matters.

 

7.62 has a more powerful muzzle velocity but effective range is reduced due to the drag coefficient. 7.62 arms are also heavier.

5.56 has lesser drag with less stopping power and prone to ricochet and wind.

I read that they are developing a new standard NATO round that is suppose to be in between 5.56 and 7.62. It's said to be the the best balanced.

 

I think just combi of 5.56 + 7.62 can liao lah.

Just like how 1 section has SAR-21, M203 (still have right?) and SAW. Then GPMG at platoon level.

[Vega]

if you ask the Israelis to give up their Merkavas, they will think you are a whackjob. Remember the 2nd Gulf War? Prior to that, the US was intent on decomming the Abrams. They believe in a light armoured and fast strike ground force. They reversed their decision upon AAR. The destruction wreaked by IEDs will partly the reason. If the US patrols could patrol in Merkavas, it would have been excellent. The Merkavas bested the Abrams in that aspect. They were designed with urban fighting in mind.

 

That is the only place where tanks are useful........desert. in urban warefare, tanks are quite useless. that is why SAF develop the terrex.

if you look at gulf war 2 - yr 2003, many armored vehicles are destroyed within town with RPG.

 

And once the front and rear vehicles are destroyed, those in the middle are just sitting ducks.

[Hephaestus]

Korean M113