Stryker Casualty

[Spartan_04]

http://forum.china-defense.com/uploads/post-11-1072421738.jpg
Found this over at chinese-defence.com. anyone know what happened?

[George W. Bush]

Found a red X, congrats

[Uninen]

--

http://www.freepgs.com/uninen/Picutures/post-11-1072421738.jpg
Mighty Stryker, finished.

--

What happened? It got ****ed up, no big surprice..

[Ratamacue]

As I remember, it was destroyed by a landmine but the crew and passengers all made it out alive. The Stryker is a helluva vehicle.

[Uninen]

Ratamacue,

Its a wheeled APC / ARMORED CAR.. And your army plans to replace M1 MBT:s with it, and also there are better wheeled APC around.. just ask Poles..

Link! (http://www.patria.fi/modules/page/show_page.asp?id=C2814C7E3B8747BABE7CD96C4C120329&prt=CBD0FB31EEF5461E943353F4D3D5C7BA&frm=MENU_1&lid=231038B96A424223AEE9724F86627252)

A hint, this offers immunity to 30mm APDS, Styker for 14,5mm solid slug.. and did already beat the Stryker on tests.. :cantbeli:

[George W. Bush]

Stryker is doing its job just fine in Iraq.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

That pic was posted here some weeks ago.

ANY AFV can be destroyed, as evidenced by the two merkava's destroyed by hamas.

An armoured vehicle, wheeled or tracked, is always gonna be a trade off between mobility, fire-power and protection.
You can argue till the cows come home about which is the better 8x8 AFV, but the only sure way to judge any equipment is by it's record whilst on operations. I know the Piranha/LAV series has performed well enough.

How has the Patria performed on operations Uninen?.

[George W. Bush]

Yes. Any AFV can bite the bullet like this Russian BTR-70(?) here:

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto5.jpg

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto10.jpg

[Uninen]

Yes?

I DO KNOW VERY WELL, it is you Americans that get stupified when your AFV:s get hit / disabled / destroyed. Like your "Super Tanks" (M1s)..

Yeah.. M1s also have been destroyed in battle by the Iraqis, fair and square.. IE April 7 2003 at "Objective Curly"..

The M1 there was claimed by Pentagon to have been destroyed by friendly fire to avoid its capture (after the battle / raid).. but this isnt true, as i have video footage from there (of the fire fight) and it shows that the tanks is already the destroyed, DURING the fight.. in other words, Iraqis totalled it..

[REMOV]

http://www.imageshack.us/files1/__pic47727.jpg
The one version states it was a mine but "The Combat Report" (a magazine from Italy) states that it was an RPG hit under the screen.

[REMOV]

ANY AFV can be destroyed, as evidenced by the two merkava's destroyed by hamas.That's right. The MBT that cannot be destroyed by antitank mine, heavy IED, missile, HEAT or APFSDS round doesn't exists.
http://www.imageshack.us/files1/_Magach7IED.jpg
The Magach 7 MBT and IED


How has the Patria performed on operations Uninen?.I'll tell you when the first APCs of this kind goes to the Polish Army service, ok?

[cold0]

I DO KNOW VERY WELL, it is you Americans that get stupified when your AFV:s get hit / disabled / destroyed. Like your "Super Tanks" (M1s)..

Yeah.. M1s also have been destroyed in battle by the Iraqis, fair and square.. IE April 7 2003 at "Objective Curly"..

The M1 there was claimed by Pentagon to have been destroyed by friendly fire to avoid its capture (after the battle / raid).. but this isnt true, as i have video footage from there (of the fire fight) and it shows that the tanks is already the destroyed, DURING the fight.. in other words, Iraqis totalled it..

So, if one MTB is destroyed by enemy fire in a conflict (after hundreds of engagements) it hasn't a good protection, has it?


The one version states it was a mine but "The Combat Report" (a magazine from Italy) states that it was an RPG hit under the screen

Are you sure that "The Combat Report" is an italian magazine? I have never heard of it, and the italian military magazines are really few.

[Uninen]

cold0,

Its not just one that got destroyed that way.. :| Many.. tens.. and total of AFVs ~150 to ???..

[Sergei]

Yes. Any AFV can bite the bullet like this Russian BTR-70(?) here:

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto5.jpg

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto10.jpg

If you're posting pictures from kavkazcenter, could you at least change your nick to your real name, Osama?

[George W. Bush]

Why? You think the photo is doctored or something?

[Uninen]

Its from TERRORISTS, i think it counts for "SOMETHING".. :bash:

[REMOV]

Its from TERRORISTS, i think it counts for "SOMETHING"..Tell me what is difference between terrorist and freedom fighter? The actual political situation? You know Afghan rebels (1980-1988) were also called terrorist or bandits (baschmatchs literally means the same) by Russian forces there, during the second world war the Germans called also all underground fighters terrorists and bandits.

When someone attacks military or law enforcement targets (and BTR is a military target no doubt), that in my opinion is not a terrorist but someone else, a fighter maybe. Terrorist starts when the targets are civilian, and their main reason is to threaten everyone.

[Va_Dinger]

I don't know how you guys are even comparing the Stryker to main battle tanks. The Stryker is nothing more than a armoured car. The pentagon likes them becuase their far easier to air transport Its armoured protection is relatively week. Certianly not much, if any better protected than BTR's.

[Uninen]

Va_Dinger,

Doesnt Pentagon have plans to replace all MBTs with Stryker gun-carrier or some other similar light vehicle? maybe thats why..

[George W. Bush]

That sounds very hypocritical. Remember that we didn't annex Afghanistan or Iraq like your country did Chechnya. We hold the moral high-ground in both conflicts.

Russian Federation lost thousands of men invading a country that's 25 times smaller than Iraq. Do you see any American being a **** and exaggerating number of equipment lost, saying Russia's equipment sucks, etc.?

[Mark Sman]

Uninen I don't think I'm understanding what you are saying.


Its from TERRORISTS, i think it counts for "SOMETHING".

Clarification please. Are you talking about the pics of the Taliban BTR destroyed by US planes?


150 AFVs

Not a chance, none. At all.



I DO KNOW VERY WELL, it is you Americans that get stupified when your AFV:s get hit / disabled / destroyed. Like your "Super Tanks" (M1s)..

Whats this even supposed to mean? US forces have lost, will lose AFVs. Err yes, and your point is? "Stupefied," maybe you. Might want to watch those "you Americans" statements. It might make someone think that you are using generalizations rather than making a specific point.

M1 "super tank" LOL. Thats a thirty year old design man. Only reason we aren't fielding a new MBT is we don't know what form the military is going to take in the future. Best to wait until that sorts itself out a little clearer as to what level of threat its going to face in the world, and what new tech we will have to incorporate in the design.

If the US wanted to field a super tank we would put somethng out that would far excede the M-1. So could alot of countries. At the moment it doesn't make sense to do it though.

[REMOV]

Doesnt Pentagon have plans to replace all MBTs with Stryker gun-carrier or some other similar light vehicle? maybe thats why..You know it just a press stereotype, introduced by the people who doesn't know much about a military, nothing else.

Nobody wants to replace ALL MBT by some light vehicles, but to detach and introduce light components i.e. Strykers or FCSs. The MBTs still would be in line but in small numbers, because... the lack of heavy armored enemies.

[George W. Bush]

^- He's "talking" about the photo I posted of Chechen terrorists blowing up a Russian BTR-70(?)

Yes, I consider them terrorists also! Is there any reason you are so partial to Russia and anti-Western ideology?

[cold0]

Uninen, you are saying that US/UK forces have lost (completely?!) 150 AFVs in OIF?
Where have you found these datas?

Anyway there isn't any plan for the US ARMY to replace all his M-1s with crappy wheeled vehicles!!

The Stryker is a solution for have a new AFV, that can easy airlifted by USAF for quick reaction force. I know that Rummie has strange ideas for the future of american forces, but hoping to replace the heavy tanks with wheeled vehicles is an absolute madness!!

[Va_Dinger]

Va_Dinger,

Doesnt Pentagon have plans to replace all MBTs with Stryker gun-carrier or some other similar light vehicle? maybe thats why..

The Stryker is the Pentagons attempt to make the Army "lighter", meaning faster and easier to transport. Mr. Rumsfield is pushing for the "Stryker Brigades". Problem is that its just an armoured car with high tech comunications and target identification gear. Its really no better protected than any other modern armies armoured car. I personally don't see them totally replacing the M1 totally any time soon. At least not in the "heavy" armoured divisions.

[REMOV]

That sounds very hypocritical. Remember that we didn't annex Afghanistan or Iraq like your country did Chechnya. We hold the moral high-ground in both conflicts.The funny thing is that modern terrorists (like Osama ibn Laden) are American (with a little help of Pakistani Intelligence) product of Afghan war.

And the situation in Chechnya is more complicated. The problem is, that in modern world there are some nations still cannot gain (or regain) independence because they are inhabitants of other coutries which don't allow them - for example Kurds, Chechens, Basks and so.

Compare the situation in Chechnya to the also former Russian republic - Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. There were also conquered by Soviets, also colonized in some way (their own language was discriminate) and also were Russians miliatry actions in early 90s but finally Russia reconsile to their independece. But Russia cannot reconcile Chechnya. Yes, Russian naturally have their reasons but Chechens also. Who is right?

[hank]

Are we rally doing this again? I mean what vehicel can't get blown up by something? C'mon - stryker is what it is - an interim vehicle until the Army gets that future combat vehicle thing. let it be - this is old news. It is just sill y to think tha twe would buy a wheeled vehicle from Poland - that jsut won't happen. Plus nobody here is really saying or thinking that the Stryker is the end - it is just the beginning of the process to replace some - not even all - of our m1s.

I did appreciate the pictures though. I had wondered how strykers was doing and hadn't heard much since we got those earlier pictures.

hank

[Uninen]

Uninen, you are saying that US/UK forces have lost (completely?!) 150 AFVs in OIF?

Its more than that (by to date..), including vehicles disabled (or other wise seriously damaged..) by the enemy.. not just "total" (burned out hulks..) loses.

[Argyll]

Lets keep this civil ,and not go down this road "My AFV is Better than your AFV" please,it's an argument that's unwinnable,so don't try to make it!!

[REMOV]

Its more than that (by to date..), including vehicles disabled (or other wise seriously damaged..) by the enemy.. not just "total" (burned out hulks..) loses.The problem is that most of those "AFV" were... HMMWVs.

[Uninen]

It is just sill y to think tha twe would buy a wheeled vehicle from Poland - that jsut won't happen.

1. What i suggested is from Finland..
2. You already bought a licence to AMOS (you can also find that product from the link i gave ya..)

[cold0]

Uninen

If you have counted the HMMWVs as AFV, as REMOV says, the 150 "AFV" could be a plausible data. But if you say that the US ARMY and Marines have loss more than 150 M-1/Bradely and so on, well, it isn't credible.

[Sergei]

^- He's "talking" about the photo I posted of Chechen terrorists blowing up a Russian BTR-70(?)

Yes, I consider them terrorists also! Is there any reason you are so partial to Russia and anti-Western ideology?

First of all let me clarify myself, I'm pro-Russia and pro-USA as I think they are fighting a common enemy.
Now, our reverend GWB nickname teenager resorts to posting pictures from an obviously bogus site set up by Chechen terrorists with hosting server located in Washington DC. Which leads to believe that US quietly supports Chechen terrorists. So one's man freedom fighter is another man terrorist, eh?

P.S. I do believe those are authentic kills of BTRs, the terrorist shoot on camera all their evil deeds to get money for next operations and to show that they are effective.
But you gotta read that site, they claim that they destroyed the whole Russian army ten times over. :D

[George W. Bush]

^- He's "talking" about the photo I posted of Chechen terrorists blowing up a Russian BTR-70(?)

Yes, I consider them terrorists also! Is there any reason you are so partial to Russia and anti-Western ideology?

First of all let me clarify myself, I'm pro-Russia and pro-USA as I think they are fighting a common enemy.
Now, our reverend GWB nickname teenager resorts to posting pictures from an obviously bogus site set up by Chechen terrorists with hosting server located in Washington DC. Which leads to believe that US quietly supports Chechen terrorists. So one's man freedom fighter is another man terrorist, eh?

P.S. I do believe those are authentic kills of BTRs, the terrorist shoot on camera all their evil deeds to get money for next operations and to show that they are effective.
But you gotta read that site, they claim that they destroyed the whole Russian army ten times over. :D

It's an authentic video still and is pertinent to this thread. There are hundreds of these videos. It's always interesting to watch them as they are released every month.

[Uninen]

:roll: Not really, as this topic is about killed Strykers.. :bash:

[Argyll]

I can see where this is heading guys!!

[Resevoir Hogs]

Unien I'm going to shed some light on your false claim that the US Pentagon is planning on replacing its MBT with the Stryker Moile Gun System.

You are correct that the US military is planning on purchasing the Stryker Mobile Gun. However, there has been at no time any plan to use it in the role of MBT or take over the job the Abrams does exceedingly well.

In Canada however, their defence department has stated plans to replace their Leopard 1's/C2's with Stryker MGS. Their plan consists of 105 mm as well as one's with short and long range anti tank missiles to augment the 105s.

here's some indepth reading on what they plan to do with it.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1238

ps. The US military intends to use the MGS as a peacekeeping/quickly deployable fire platform. This means in situations like Haiti where anti armor threat is low the Stryker could be used. Or on an operation that requires our forces to take a landing strip the airborne would go in and secure the runway and Hercules would begin bringing Stryker APCs, MGS, Mortar vehicles, etc in to quickly take an enemy airbase from within.

And to my knowledge there have been two or three Strykers lost in Iraq and no casualties. However, there have been many more that have been fired upon and survived with superficial damage thanks to the cage.

[Uninen]

You can basicly find thousands of RPG:s or systems alike from any nation, so unless Stryker isnt purpose build for Haiti (Haiti in which there are less than 10 000 fire arms all in all..) its basicly useless.. as the demands of modern combat enviroment are towards more protection.. and not for less.. (which you get in Stryker..) :|

[Jack Mehoff]

What kind of brainless retards expect Stryker or any other kind of vehicle is invincible?

[Uninen]

Jack,

Dont know.. but that is the kind of image that Pentagon and CNN have been hard trying to paint of US vehicles.. they even are supposedly surpriced that "Hummers"are a vulnerable as they are to small arms and RPG fire.. :|

[Jack Mehoff]

Jack,

Dont know.. but that is the kind of image that Pentagon and CNN have been hard trying to paint of US vehicles.. they even are supposedly surpriced that "Hummers"are a vulnerable as they are to small arms and RPG fire.. :|

I never heard the Pentagon say something about Stryker is invincible, but I do know Stryker is a much better addition than hummers.

[Uninen]

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/pdf/stryker_reality_of_war.pdf

Stryker vs. reality of war. ;)

[Some Guy]

Jack,

Dont know.. but that is the kind of image that Pentagon and CNN have been hard trying to paint of US vehicles.. they even are supposedly surpriced that "Hummers"are a vulnerable as they are to small arms and RPG fire.. :|

Actually, the only people who take this message away from CNN and the pentagon are people with deep seated insecurities and a pathologic inferiority complex. A simple two step process:

1) You have so little going on in your own life that you glory in your nation rather than in your own achievements.
2)Your nation is revealed to be utterly impotent on the international stage.

At this point, jealousy/envy of more powerful entities (e.g. the US) becomes all consuming. When American aluminum behaves like Russian aluminum or it is revealed that American soldiers must obey the laws of physics and are mortal, this somehow becomes a triumph- a source of glee to be reveled in- Hence pictures like this Stryker.
To those who get angry when they see threads like "American Hummer vs. RPG Hah Hah!" or "Iraqi rebels conquer Imperialist tanker truck" or even "Serbs shoot down 12 stealth bombers", let me suggest that the people posting these pics deserve not your anger but rather your pity.

[Argyll]

Jack,

Dont know.. but that is the kind of image that Pentagon and CNN have been hard trying to paint of US vehicles.. they even are supposedly surpriced that "Hummers"are a vulnerable as they are to small arms and RPG fire.. :|

Actually, the only people who take this message away from CNN and the pentagon are people with deep seated insecurities and a pathologic inferiority complex. A simple two step process:

1) You have so little going on in your own life that you glory in your nation rather than in your own achievements.
2)Your nation is revealed to be utterly impotent on the international stage.

At this point, jealousy/envy of more powerful entities (e.g. the US) becomes all consuming. When American aluminum behaves like Russian aluminum or it is revealed that American soldiers must obey the laws of physics and are mortal, this somehow becomes a triumph- a source of glee to be reveled in- Hence pictures like this Stryker.
To those who get angry when they see threads like "American Hummer vs. RPG Hah Hah!" or "Iraqi rebels conquer Imperialist tanker truck" or even "Serbs shoot down 12 stealth bombers", let me suggest that the people posting these pics deserve not your anger but rather your pity.


woot

[Uninen]

Think what you like, the fact is that im just sorry for YOU about the whole Stryker business, as its you getting screwed with it, actually some unlucky American troopers are, and they will lose their lifes because they had Stryker as their vehicle and not M2 or M113 that has been uparmored Israeli Zelda style. :petting:

[AFG]

AFAIK, there have been no KIAs with stryker vehicles right?

[Argyll]

well Uninen,I wonder which genious decided to make the back doors of the BMP's fuel tanks?

I've also not seen too many BTR's with applique armour on them either.

ALL vehicles have flaws in them.......but you seem to miss this point entirely!

[George W. Bush]

Stryker can withstand RPG7 projectiles if they hit the skirt and Soviet 14.5mm rounds, right?

[George W. Bush]

That sounds good to me. It may be not what infantry wants but its not going to get them killed.

[Resevoir Hogs]

To Unien
Perhaps you do not acknowledge the fact that the slat cage armor has proved its effectiveness against RPGs. As of Feb. 3, 2004 there have been TWO attacks on Strykers in Iraq. One shown on the pictures in this topic destroyed it by hitting under the cage in the wheel welts. However, none of the crew were killed or injured. The second attack came on Paul Wolfowitz convoy on his visit to Iraq. This was the first time the cage was tested and it proved effective at defussing the RPG round as there were again NO CASSUALTIES and very minor damage to the Stryker that is still in working condition. Where's the logic in saying that the vehicle is useless when it has saved the lives of US infantry AND the dep Defence Secretary?

As for your very illogical interpretation of Haiti and the use of a Stryker there. I used that as an example of a peacekeeping operation where they could be used. The LAV-25's we have there now with the marines have encountered no problems and have performed very well so their newer counterpart would make a good adition for that role.

Also the Styker is an INTERIM vehicle and only an means to an end. Neither is it a mech inf brigade APC that job is for the M2. The army's plans to have more rapid medium weight brigades does not hinge on the Stryker. They are seperate from the many other systems that will be coming into service in years to come. The M8 Armored Gun System is more likely to fill the airborne operations requirement for a fire support vehicle. It boasts a 120 mm gun and can be air dropped or airlanded. It is only a prototype at this stage but with units like the 82nd airborne pushing for a vehicle of this type we could see this vehicle on deployments sooner than we think.

Here are some images of this vehicle in testing
http://www.combatreform.com/m8agssidefiring.jpg
http://www.combatreform.com/thunderboltfiring.jpg
http://www.combatreform.com/thunderbolt02.jpg
http://www.combatreform.com/m8agsscoutinteriorifhybridelectric.jpg
http://www.combatreform.com/m8agsthunderboltonmove.jpg

Go here if you wish to expand you very limited knowledge of this vehicle and US plans for it.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/iav.htm

Here's a quote from that page

The Army’s LAV is being produced in two major variants: the Infantry Carrier Vehicle and the Mobile Gun System. The Mobile Gun System will have a 105mm cannon, the same gun tube as the one on the original M-1 Abrams tank. This is not a tank replacement, but it gives a direct fire capability to support the infantry elements.

Unless you bring some factual information to support your argument your claims are extremely useless. Your claim US soldiers will suffer is void when you consider the facts that our troops have survived PRG hits in the Stryker and the vast majority of hits on Hummers have resulted in two or three deaths.

[Uninen]

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/pdf/stryker_reality_of_war.pdf

Stryker vs. reality of war. ;)

Theres plenty, READ.. as of now im still reading it at the moment.. but this document is full of accurate fact about "faults" of Stryker, and wheeled AFV:s in general.. when it comes to actual combat.. etc.

[EYE SPY]

A few thoughts,

The stryker lav, and wheeled lav vehicles are generally very suited for peacekeeping, policing and areas with maintained roads.

The stryker's MGS version is an engineering nightmare. If they fire that main gun when the canon is pointed at anything besides what is directly infront of the Stryker's headlights, its gonna tip over.

The ideal solution is to field the M8 AGS.

1) It is type classified.

2) No more need for R&D since it is already done, all you need to do is shift some funds and get the assembly line rolling.

3) it is light, but its composite armore can be upgraded easily in theater.


Whats fishy about the whole Stryker Brigade concept is that. If it is meant as a Rapid Reaction Force type unit, why is it that one or two (im not sure)
National Guard Brigades are converting to the Stryker Brigade.

Wouldnt it make more sense to have the Stryker Brigade concept exclusively in the Active Component.

[Resevoir Hogs]

I'd assume the national guard will use it for peacekeeping policing role while active units like elements of the 2nd Inf div use it in the interim rapid reaction role.

M8 looks like a far superior choice to the Stryker MGS. I can't believe our neighbours to the north are actually going to replace their MBT with the MGS.

[Undo]

Think what you like, the fact is that im just sorry for YOU about the whole Stryker business, as its you getting screwed with it, actually some unlucky American troopers are, and they will lose their lifes because they had Stryker as their vehicle and not M2 or M113 that has been uparmored Israeli Zelda style. :petting:

What? Having served as TC on an M113, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near one in a real fight or anywhere RPGs are flying around, Isreali armor or not. This thread turned out to be a real peice of crap.

[Uninen]

Undo,

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/armored_personnel_carriers/m-113/Zelda.html

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/armored_personnel_carriers/m-113/Zelda2.html

In real world, either of these two over Stryker, any time, any where and at any terrain.

And from what ive red, M113:s (even the basic ones) fared quite well against RPG:s in Nam..

[Undo]

Undo,

And from what ive red, M113:s (even the basic ones) fared quite well against RPG:s in Nam..[/color]

I don't know what works of fiction you have been reading about Vietnam, and I appreciate all the improvements the Isrealis have made (I am fully aware of the Zelda), but I am telling you that I would not want to be anywhere near one.

The crews of 113's in VN would weld extensions on the driving arms so that even the driver would ride on top. If it was hit by anything, including 12.7, crew survival was highly unlikely.

Even as scouts we would dismount to do our scouting and fighting. 113 was just to keep us ahead of the armor. We were quite happy to trade them in for Hummers when the time came.

Maybe you should focus your attention on Finnish armor. No offense, but some of your assertions about US vehicles and tactics are uninformed and are not very completely thought through.

[cut]

Unien can you change your sig, it keeps ****ing up the page when I scroll down.

[Uninen]

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/vietnam/armor/

--

While the initial response to the introduction of armour to the battlefield by the "Free World" forces from the NLF (National Liberation Front or Viet Cong) and VPA was to increase the quantity and types of infantry AT weapons available to their forces in the field this was only a temporary. Despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the communist commanders were only too well aware that it takes a very brave man indeed to hunt down a tank with an RPG in the middle of a battle. That, coupled with the relative ineffectiveness of the weapons at their disposal meant problems. Dunstan quotes from a US Army report that M113's sustained approximately,

one penetration for every seven RPG hits. Hits in themselves averaged about one in eight to ten rounds fired due to the inherent inaccuracy of the weapon.

--

And Undo,

feel free to correct me about the things that i have understood completely wrong.. cause i do want know the absolute truth and not something "in between".

[RomanS]

This is great

Finland is giving USA tips on armor improvments. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Argyl sorry buddy, but this is too FUNY.

[Uninen]

Roman,

You seem again ignorant of the facts..

Which are: Finnish SISU XA:s have roled over alkinds of mines and IED:S, one was even attacked by IDF/AF with 500lb LGB and to this date no KIA:s.

Also, the PATRIA AMV 8 x 8 is THE BEST wheeled AFV around, for now and in the future. IE compared to Stryker it can stand 30mm APDS when Stryker offers protection only against 14,5mm. And still AMV is as airportable in C-130 as is Stryker.

[csqnsas]

Hello again,

You CANNOT protect any vehicle against a BIG IED . You can try to provide as much protection and anti ambush skill to the crew/passengers.

Try to limit the damage.

See again the Rhodesian war, followed by the S. Africans , who I see are selling these vehicles with a 30 year
R and D in a mine/IED enviroment to the U.K and the U.S.A for use in Iraq.

For the Finnish folk out there - yes you were there in the 50ies.

On this forum I have seen scary pictures of ALL the deployed forces in Iraq and Afgan.

No sandbags on the floor?

No crew served weapon ?

No added armour - PCP/convayor belt.

The worst had to be the American MPEG of a Signal troop training for deployment to Iraq. Everybody returning fire from within their vehicles, and ONLY firing at the targets to their front. Lets all think about it. If you are in a vehicle in an ambush you are a FU*king bullet magnet!.

As for return fire , would YOU as a terrorist stand up and fire at a convoy.
Once only.

What I would do (Did) was set up a target point for the stupids to see and react too. Then from my position give them a rev and bug out.

If you are in a convoy or any ambush hit the place where "you" would be on setting it off.
It works you know. :D

[mustamato]

For the Finnish folk out there - yes you were there in the 50ies.

Finns were not anywhere in the 50´s. But today:

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/rauhanturvaajat/images/operaatiot_maailmankartta.gif

[cut]

For the Finnish folk out there - yes you were there in the 50ies.

Finns were not anywhere in the 50´s. But today:

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/rauhanturvaajat/images/operaatiot_maailmankartta.gif

in pakistan?

[Uninen]

Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, India, Pakistan, Kosovo, Cyprus, Liberia and "Middle East".. those are the current locations.

[Resevoir Hogs]

Undo said

This thread turned out to be a real peice of crap.

I second that motion

It's like arguing with a five year old over pokemon cards.

Unien you have A LOT to learn and it seems no will to learn anything.

[RomanS]

Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, India, Pakistan, Kosovo, Cyprus, Liberia and "Middle East".. those are the current locations.

doing what?

[mustamato]

Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, India, Pakistan, Kosovo, Cyprus, Liberia and "Middle East".. those are the current locations.

doing what?

What Finns do best --> :hug: (the only exception is made for Ruskies).

[RomanS]

Undo said

This thread turned out to be a real peice of crap.

I second that motion

It's like arguing with a five year old over pokemon cards.

Unien you have A LOT to learn and it seems no will to learn anything.

No its more like northern europe really REALLY REALLLLLLLLLLLY wants to be in the spot light, but the big dogs keep ignoring them.

[Uninen]

How mature.. as you guys cant make any sensible claims to counter mine (from technical point of view) you resort to personal insult to a man and nation you know nothing about.. :backhand:

Also Roman, didnt we already talk about you being ahole to me? I thought that we had that settled that im not your enemy.. but suit yourself..

[RomanS]

How mature.. as you guys cant make any sensible claims to counter mine (from technical point of view) you resort to personal insult to a man and nation you know nothing about.. :backhand:

Also Roman, didnt we already talk about you being ahole to me? I thought that we had that settled that im not your enemy.. but suit yourself..

There is a difference between a civil conversation, and rediculous childish BS Unien.

Unless Finish or Polish armour has superduper Magical armour, EVERYTHING that man builds is destructble.
Be it Zelda, Mario, Titanic or statue of Lenin.

I'm seriously getting sick of the mustomato type aproach from others. It is understandble, USA, Britain, Russia, Canada gets to participate in combat, and others ... well lets just leave it at this.

[Resevoir Hogs]

Hey I don't ignore Northern Europe I respect them and their militaries just as a do many other nation's.

But I don't like people making outlandish false claims and saying my nation's soldiers are going to suffer because we made a mistake by buying Strykers. Expecially when we know the bugs have been worked out and the vehicle has suceeded twice in protecting the lives of our soldiers in Iraq(not to mention out dep Defence Secretary). Real life trials are FAR more important at showing a vehicle's effectiveness than tests that were done prior to deployment MANY months ago.

Bottom line is the vulnerability issue to small arms fire has been worked out and the cage has worked out the vulnerability to RPG and our soldiers who survived those attacks are proof of that. I'm sure they were glad to be in a Stryker those days instead of a Humvee.

Also unien for future reference the DOD is American and DND is Canadian. Talk about ignorance, you couldn't even tell the difference between a Canadian military decision and an American one.

Its a wheeled APC / ARMORED CAR.. And your army plans to replace M1 MBT:s with it, and also there are better wheeled APC around.. just ask Poles..

[mustamato]

For the Finnish folk out there - yes you were there in the 50ies.

Oh and by the way, some Finnish armour in Iraq

http://www.nldetirak.nl/fotopagina/januari/040117G1053.jpg
Dutch Marines Patria XA-188

http://www.nldetirak.nl/fotopagina/januari/040115G1057.jpg

http://www.nldetirak.nl/fotopagina/januari/040103G1126.jpg

http://www.nldetirak.nl/fotopagina/januari/040103G1035.jpg

http://www.nldetirak.nl/fotopagina/januari/040103G1064.jpg

Destroyed: 0 (I do certainly not claim that it can´t be destroyed or whatever,
but it´s as good as any other, and the XA-188 is not even close to being the newest
**** in Finnish armour technology).

[Dalleer]

For the Finnish folk out there - yes you were there in the 50ies.

Finns were not anywhere in the 50´s. But today:

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/rauhanturvaajat/images/operaatiot_maailmankartta.gif

in pakistan?

Actually, yes

We have a "military observer" team (or a person) somewhere in that area. If my memory serves me correct the team (or person) acts there to observe the Jammu-Kashmir situation.

[Uninen]

Also unien for future reference the DOD is American and DND is Canadian. Talk about ignorance, you couldn't even tell the difference between a Canadian military decision and an American one.

I know this, and what i said about USA replacing MBTs with Stryker stands correct, IN TO BE Stryker Brigades. :cantbeli:

[Resevoir Hogs]

Very nice looking vehicle. Must be a lot of nations who've bought the
XA-188.

Do you have any tech stats on it?

My only quam is with those front viewports they look like awefully big targets for an RPG. Has there been any testing to find out how much punishment the viewports can take(without the drop down sheild)?

[Uninen]

Unless Finish or Polish armour has superduper Magical armour, EVERYTHING that man builds is destructble.
Be it Zelda, Mario, Titanic or statue of Lenin.

Uhm, and where did i say its that? I DID NOT. Also i didnt claim that its better than Bradley or Abrams.. as it isnt..

(but comes very close to M2, only losing in mobility.. otherwise quite equal, in some respects even supperior.. [80s Vs. 200x technology] and the IFV-version actually uses same 25mm weapon..[one of the tested options] )

[Resevoir Hogs]

What you said does not stand correct unien as I an others have pointed out.

The Stryker brigades are for peacekeeping and rebuilding operations and would not at any time be used in the same way as the heavy armor brigades of the US Army. M1A1s and M2s are the mainstay of any large scale invasion force as we saw in Op Iraqi Freedom and will see in any future operation of that type.

there are only 300 Strykers in Iraq that could hardly be called a replacement of the Abrams and Bradleys that are still over there.

The army's plan is to purchase 2112 Strykers and has NO PLAN to mothball the 3000+ M1A1s. These will form 6 Stryker Brigades and if you know anything at all about out military 6 Brigades is not the majority of our force. This will give our forces more tools to perform the growing uses for our military overseas. Instead of deploying a heavily mechinized unit with M2s and Abrams to perform a peacekeeping operation we will have the option of deploying the Stryker bdes as we have done in Iraq AFTER the major fighting of the invasion was over and the reconstruction and security work began.

They are a augmentation on our forces not a replacement for the MBT as you so flagrantly put it.


Let me again refer you to the DODs statement on the Stryker MGS


The Mobile Gun System will have a 105mm cannon, the same gun tube as the one on the original M-1 Abrams tank. This is not a tank replacement, but it gives a direct fire capability to support the infantry elements.

There is something to be said for facts Unien and if you are content to ignore them then it's your loss not ours.

[mustamato]

Very nice looking vehicle. Must be a lot of nations who've bought the
XA-188.

Do you have any tech stats on it?

My only quam is with those front viewports they look like awefully big targets for an RPG. Has there been any testing to find out how much punishment the viewports can take(without the drop down sheild)?

http://members.surfeu.fi/stefan.allen/XAseries.html

It is in service in a bunch of countries, it has been made since 1984 and is
a older generation of Finnish armour, the Patria AMV is the newer one. It was
developed to be a multi-purpose and more versatile version of the Russian
BTR´s.

The Finns use it for all kinds of things, APC, radar carrier, MedEvac, you name it,
but it´s definitively not a IFV. But I can imagine that the glass can take atleast
7.62. I like this version:

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/ilma2002/get2data.php3?id=60

http://tietokannat.mil.fi/ilma2002/get2data.php3?id=89

http://www.army-technology.com/contractor_images/patria_vehicles/Photo-3-Patria-XA-202-PML.jpg
The newest XA-series (203) in service in Finland has a remote conrolled HMG,
or a 40 mm AGL, the Swedes that also has the XA-203 (PaTgb 203) have a 20
mm cannon in a turret

[Resevoir Hogs]

mustamato is that an Air defence anti tank version? or just anti tank?

[Uninen]

Resevoir Hogs,

Its mobile SAM system, using Crotale NG with American (VT-1?) missiles.

Also, the basic protection is against 7,62 x 51 ball, shell splinters and mines but with add-on armor the options are to 12,7 and 14,5mm.

Xa-series Armoured Wheeled Vehicle Family (save as) (http://www.patria.fi/modules/upndown/download_upndownfile.asp?id=4AF5A4DCDCDC48FB958281D6F98F8127&itemtype=UPNDOWNFILE)

[mustamato]

mustamato is that an Air defence anti tank version? or just anti tank?

AA of course, Anti Tank boys usually have cabriolets instead:

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

[Resevoir Hogs]

Ahhh interesting we usually have Hummers in the anti tank roll and they're going to be upping their range with the LOSAT eventually.

Strykers also have that role.

[Dalleer]

Wow, I like that TOW-2 launcher, but is that you in the picture?

[Uninen]

they're going to be upping their range with the LOSAT eventually.

Isnt the range of LOSAT 4 to 5 km? So the range in fact remains unchanged from TOW-2, but the hitting power of LOSAT its awesome! woot

Check HERE (http://www.missilesandfirecontrol.com/our_products/antiarmor/LOSAT/product-LOSAT.html) for facts and videos for LOSAT. ;)

[Salty Dog]

How mature.. as you guys cant make any sensible claims to counter mine (from technical point of view) you resort to personal insult to a man and nation you know nothing about.. :backhand:

Also Roman, didnt we already talk about you being ahole to me? I thought that we had that settled that im not your enemy.. but suit yourself..

nobody wants to make any claims that counter yours because you're ****in ridiculous. it wouldn't even be worth it. get a life man.

[Ian H]

Those band tracks mentioned quite some time ago, does any in service vehicle use them? They seem like a good idea. (I'm more of a pro tracks guy, just because it seems they make the vehicle more versatile. I'm open to (polite) correction though).

[Resevoir Hogs]

actually the LOSAT is said to have a range just under 5 km and the TOW 2B has a max eff range of 3.75 km so it's a bit of an improvement but a HUGE imporvment in penetration capability.

[Uninen]

MarineDEP4 care to specify? :roll:

And if you thinking that the stupid ass gage will make it RPG proof, your dead wrong, as like with ERA, first projectile that hits (and if detonates) the protection will nulify it, the second that hits the same place where the first hit, theres no more any protection left, and it will detonate on the hull, and burn anything and everything inside.

GOOGLE "SHAPED CHARGE WARHEAD" (link) (http://www.google.fi/search?q=%22SHAPED+CHARGE+WARHEAD%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=fi&btnG=Google-haku)

Ian H,

Tracks are i feel the only real option to any military vehicle that might actually take a somekind of a part in a battle, what you lose in "on road" speed, you gain in double (or more) as your off road mobility, and lets face it.. war isnt a nice "road cruise" so its better that your vehicle can get you where ever you want to go.. so tracks it is! ;)

Resevoir Hogs,

Uhm.. seems your correct.. (i checked from one of my field manuals..) anyhow, i do recall seeing somewhere that TOW-2 actually has range of 4,5km.. guess that isnt correct.. (the 4500m range..) :P

[Russian Texan]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

[Undo]

MarineDEP4 care to specify? :roll:

[color=darkblue]Ian H,

Tracks are i feel the only real option to any military vehicle that might actually take a somekind of a part in a battle, what you lose in "on road" speed, you gain in double (or more) as your off road mobility, and lets face it.. war isnt a nice "road cruise" so its better that your vehicle can get you where ever you want to go.. so tracks it is! ;)



This is the sort of statement that I have trouble with. You are saying that tracks are the only viable option for a military vehicle, and you say it like everyone should just know that and agree.

Well, it is that kind of shortsighted statement that irks people, I think. Tracks are great for some conditions. Have you ever had to fix a thrown track? Don't you think there are some vehicles were mobility is vastly more important than armored protection? I don't know anything about finlands military, nor have I ever claimed to, nor have I ever made any assessment of its military prowess, but I am certain that its leaders would vehemently disagree with many of your statements just as ardently as many in this thread have. I can't (no time) explain US combined arms doctrine to you, but it is all out there. If you get familiar with it, you will see that the Joint Cheifs are not a bunch of monkeys just procuring vehicles like stalker because they think it "looks cool" or something. It is a vehicle that fills a role in our combat and peacekeeping doctrine.

The way you present your arguments makes you come off like you know what you are talking about and everyone else should listen to you. I don't think you know very much about what you are talking about (when it comes to this topic) and I think you might need to do some more research before you destroy any credibility you may have.

[Dalleer]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.


And what comes to the BDU's they are wearing (M/62) they've always been a bit "baggy" as I can see it. Keep in mind that they were designed in the 60's and are still in use so the obvious age starts to show on them quite literally.

The Finnish army has always looked like this, I'm afraid. But we get the job done, and let's remember that this is something that happens (possibly) during an exercise so I doubt that they'd be wearing brand new M/91's and Beret's to go with it...

And those boys have to be 18 years old minimum to be able to join so no 16 year olds, and so far I see nothing wrong with their facial expressions.

[RomanS]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.

sarcasm on-

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE ?

[Dalleer]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.

sarcasm on-

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE ?

It seems that the sarcasm that your friend used somehow escaped me...

[RomanS]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.

sarcasm on-

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE ?

It seems that the sarcasm that your friend used somehow escaped me...

yet you replied

[Uninen]

One of my close friends is actually a APC driver.. for a wheeled APC.. and he thinks they are great.. dunno about that.. of course like you said, there is with tracks that one draw back and that just is that if track gets blown or drops.. then you aint going nowhere and it is a pain in the ass to repair, especially in the field.. vs wheeled APC that has 8 wheels and one goes flat (or as many as 4..) it really doesnt matter that much (if your still left with 2 wheels on each side.. well matters some, but it wont STOP YOU!).

But generally speaking about track and wheels, its matter of taste / oppinion (and depate) even in the upper most HQ:s of any (organised) military.

Also note that of this whole "tracks and wheels thing" i said "i feel" cause it really ist my field.. just saying what i think, not trying to impose my (maybe misleaded) beliefs to anybody.. ;)

[Dalleer]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.

sarcasm on-

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE ?

It seems that the sarcasm that your friend used somehow escaped me...

yet you replied

Yet I replied because his use of Sarcasm was rather poor. It seemed that he was actually unable to distinguish a Finnish soldier from a Swedish one, but then again I suppose that "sarcasm" is a fine art that people unable to use it correctly should just leave alone.

Or maybe he should have used a couple of smileys to make his point, or something.

[RomanS]

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/tekapstohjus_iso2.jpg

Are those average swedish soldiers?
If they are, what happened to well funded, equiped, highly trained, motivated, etc. fearsome swedish military machine? :)

I mean they look like 16 year olds wearing uniform that is 2 sizes larger than they are, not to mention their facial expressions....

Too bad that they are not Swedish, my good man.

More or less they are Finnish.

sarcasm on-

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE ?

It seems that the sarcasm that your friend used somehow escaped me...

yet you replied

Yet I replied because his use of Sarcasm was rather poor. It seemed that he was actually unable to distinguish a Finnish soldier from a Swedish one, but then again I suppose that "sarcasm" is a fine art that people unable to use it correctly should just leave alone.

Or maybe he should have used a couple of smileys to make his point, or something.


Well to be honest, I can't tell the diference either, unless they put their flags on the arms.

I can however identify American, British, Izraeli troops. Well than again, because they are more important in the fight against terrorism than Swedish or Finish.

Was there ever a terrorist atack in Sweden or Finland?

[Uninen]

Oh and the punks with the TOW Tracked-Truck.. you can see how they are with the sun-glasses and how they wear their unifroms that these guys are some candy asses from Helsinki, and also that their Officers and NCO:s also are candy assed.. :cantbeli:

But the looks can decieve, just cause they look relaxed, doesnt mean that they dont know the tactics, or cant hit the targets.. :)

And the guys, they are 18.. (most likely as thats the "under limit")

[Mark Sman]

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto10.jpg

I remember when this pic first moved on the news wires. It was identified as being a Taliban BTR destroyed by US airpower in Afghanistan. I will check up on this.

[Uninen]

http://www.kavkazcenter.net/photo/operations/foto10.jpg

I remember when this pic first moved on the news wires. It was identified as being a Taliban BTR destroyed by US airpower in Afghanistan. I will check up on this.

Sorry, no.. thats IED what hits it.. also ive seen the video of this, with audio, after the explosion, starts the small arms fire.. and the very first time i saw it it was in national news and it said Chechens ambushing Russians.. :|

[Dalleer]

Well to be honest, I can't tell the diference either, unless they put their flags on the arms.

I can however identify American, British, Izraeli troops. Well than again, because they are more important in the fight against terrorism than Swedish or Finish.

Was there ever a terrorist atack in Sweden or Finland?

Well, if you cannot see the difference between a Finnish and a Swedish soldier then perhaps you are completely illiterate in the subject or then you are not really trying.

Then again, if your interests are targeted on US-allied and US troops themselves you shouldn't even start making these sorts of guesses
unless absolutely sure of the country you are referring to.

[RomanS]

Well to be honest, I can't tell the diference either, unless they put their flags on the arms.

I can however identify American, British, Izraeli troops. Well than again, because they are more important in the fight against terrorism than Swedish or Finish.

Was there ever a terrorist atack in Sweden or Finland?

Well, if you cannot see the difference between a Finnish and a Swedish soldier then perhaps you are completely illiterate in the subject or then you are not really trying.

Then again, if your interests are targeted on US-allied and US troops themselves you shouldn't even start making these sorts of guesses
unless absolutely sure of the country you are referring to.

ughh NO N O NOOOO

I just simply don't care about Finland or Sweden. This topic was about American Stryker, not Finland and Sweden.

Thats what pisses me off most of the time. Either me, or my American friends would start a great topic about their toys, specops or tools, and you monkeys gotta throw your childish input in to it everytime.

[Russian Texan]

To Dalleer

My mistake, I apologize. That post was a personal attack against mustamato who made numerous uneducated comments and insulting remarks regarding uniforms, age and training of russian conscripts.

I have always stood by the opinion that it is what is inside a soldier that makes a difference and not his uniform...

[Russian Texan]

To Dalleer

My mistake, I apologize. That post was a personal attack against mustamato who made numerous uneducated comments and insulting remarks regarding uniforms, age and training of russian conscripts.

I have always stood by the opinion that it is what is inside a soldier that makes a difference and not his uniform...

[Dalleer]

Well to be honest, I can't tell the diference either, unless they put their flags on the arms.

I can however identify American, British, Izraeli troops. Well than again, because they are more important in the fight against terrorism than Swedish or Finish.

Was there ever a terrorist atack in Sweden or Finland?

Well, if you cannot see the difference between a Finnish and a Swedish soldier then perhaps you are completely illiterate in the subject or then you are not really trying.

Then again, if your interests are targeted on US-allied and US troops themselves you shouldn't even start making these sorts of guesses
unless absolutely sure of the country you are referring to.

ughh NO N O NOOOO

I just simply don't care about Finland or Sweden. This topic was about American Stryker, not Finland and Sweden.

Thats what pisses me off most of the time. Either me, or my American friends would start a great topic about their toys, specops or tools, and you monkeys gotta throw your childish input in to it everytime.

Well, too bad that your friend carried this topic to a bit of an offtopic-way with his wrong guesses of the Finnish soldiers.

I corrected his statement, and still cannot see whether or not it was trying to be somehow "funny" like you described it.

I have done nothing to hijack this thread, I have simply corrected your friends inaccurate guesses and getting hyped up about it shows somewhat poor judgment on your part.

[Dalleer]

To Dalleer

My mistake, I apologize. That post was a personal attack against mustamato who made numerous uneducated comments and insulting remarks regarding uniforms, age and training of russian conscripts.

I have always stood by the opinion that it is what is inside a soldier that makes a difference and not his uniform...

Alright, apology accepted.

I'm sure that you do not want this to turn into another childish flame-war any more than I do. So we'll leave it at that.

Let's carry on

[Argyll]

Quit the country bashing and get this back on Topic or it'll be locked!!

[mustamato]

Was there ever a terrorist atack in Sweden or Finland?

No because we are part of the terrorists. Just look at the beard of
this Finnish 16 year old taliban. And look, no flag on uniform, so
maybe it´s not a Finn? Because there are no other ways to tell?

http://www.student.oulu.fi/~timpio/jussi03/Jussi%2003%20-%2005.jpg

@ Dalleer, no it´s not me, those are from the exercise Jussi 03, some nice
pics here:

http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/joukot/kaipr/kuvia.dsp

http://www.student.oulu.fi/~timpio/jussi03/jussi_01.htm

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/sotilas_iso.jpg
... This one from Jussi 03 is nice

[Dalleer]

@ Dalleer, no it´s not me, those are from the exercise Jussi 03, some nice
pics here:

http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/joukot/kaipr/kuvia.dsp

http://www.student.oulu.fi/~timpio/jussi03/jussi_01.htm

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/mustamato/sotilas_iso.jpg
... This one from Jussi 03 is nice


Damn, these are cool indeed

http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/joukot/kaipr/tulivoimaa_iso.jpg

http://www.mil.fi/maavoimat/joukot/kaipr/kopteri2_iso.jpg

[Red]

I normally dont participate in such "funky" conversations but i have this to say to Uninen.I want to ask you how many years you have served in the US army?When was the last time you embarked on a mission on a Stryker?when was the last time you personnaly destroyed a stryker?why would you even think that Amored Personelle Carriers can replace Main battle Tanks?why do you think you know more about American equipment than americans?i mean this is stupid,i hate it when folks think they know more about an oragnization that they have never been part off.You got your information from the internet,not highly accurate.I can see that lots of the American BTDT's have not responded to your thread because from everything you have posted,i dont think that you know that much about anything to do with American armor.Please if you have an opinion but are not really sure why dont you ask.Have you sereved in your country's armed forces before?Argyll i love the way you MOD i wish here can become a bit closer to the SOCNET style where people who post dumbass threads are made to eat humble pie and then kicked.Uninen this is just my opinion of your post.Have a nice day.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Nz army competition for a M-113 replacement came down to a choice between the LAV gen 3 and the patria.

Lav won.

Why.

Because its a better vehicle than the Patria in terms of firepower, protection and mobility.

And it's combat proven.

Finns didn't like that, complained to NZ government. What were they told?.

Blow your nose, wipe your eyes and go away.

Keep talking through your hole uninen, its amusing.

[mustamato]

Because its a better vehicle than the Patria in terms of firepower, protection and mobility.

I guess you mean that the AMV was more expensive.

[Dalleer]

Nz army competition for a M-113 replacement came down to a choice between the LAV gen 3 and the patria.

Lav won.

Why.

Because its a better vehicle than the Patria in terms of firepower, protection and mobility.

And it's combat proven.

Finns didn't like that, complained to NZ government. What were they told?.

Blow your nose, wipe your eyes and go away.

Keep talking through your hole uninen, its amusing.

Well, despite everything I must say that I'm sure that the best one won...

Perhaps Patria's vehicles were not indeed suitable to the New Zealanders, or as you said lacked firepower.

Each to his own and "paras voittakoon"

[Uninen]

Because its a better vehicle than the Patria in terms of firepower, protection and mobility.

I guess you mean that the AMV was more expensive.

I belive that it was XA-series that was offered to them, cause to this day Poland is the sole nation to which AMV has been offered, and they chose it, over all others. BECAUSE OF ITS SUPPERIOR FIRE POWER, PROTECTION AND MOBILITY, ALSO IT CAN SWIM.

Futhermore, i cant actually imagine that how it (LAV / Stryker) can have better fire power, as the IFV versions of these use same weapons, and actually AMV can also be delivered with 30mm Bushmater cannon (this is actual AMV standard), which i believe has better fire power than the 25mm Bushmaster cannon.. ;)

[wholagun]

AMV was chosen for Polish army over other big names like the Piranna III (simular to LAV 3) and the Pandur 11
We chose it cause it has modularity meaning we can add or take off armour for various roles, air lift capibility, huge capacity, various differnt roles it can play and you can custom fit them (command control, etc) and its very good offroad abilities.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

I guess you mean that the AMV was more expensive.

You guess wrong as usual.

[Uninen]

Know what..

--

http://www.freepgs.com/uninen/Picutures/post-11-1072421738.jpg
Stryker, rolled over AT-mine.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/img/img006/coalition_hardware_losses_iraq/web_gal/hardware/gallery/images/coalition_military_hardware_destroyed_iraq_00114.jpg
Bradley, rolled over AT-mine.

--
Say what ever makes you all feel good, BUT THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE, THE CONTRAST COULD NOT BE GREATER. :bash:

[AFG]

YET there were no casualties UNINEM...

[Uninen]

YET there were no casualties UNINEM...

Yeah, and that is very good thing (and i suspect that LUCK being a big part of that), HOWEVER: THE VEHICLE IS COMPLETE LOSE, and that Bradley isnt. :P

Its also a matter of economics.. :roll:

[Backis]

:bash:

Your problem must come from bashing yourself in the head to much...

In general, tracked vehicles are MORE, not LESS vulnerable to mines due to their suspension types (ie tracked vehicles have less stand off space between the hull and the explosion, less external structures capable of absorbing or diverting the blast)... This is one of the true advantages of wheeled vehicles, that they are easier to design mine-resistant.

Less PRETEND dude...

[Ratamacue]

YET there were no casualties UNINEM...

Yeah, and that is very good thing (and i suspect that LUCK being a big part of that), HOWEVER: THE VEHICLE IS COMPLETE LOSE, and that Bradley isnt. :P

Its also a matter of economics.. :roll:

You really don't know anything, do you? Are you so desperate to find something to bash that you need to ignore the facts completely? As Backis said, wheeled IFV's are less vulnerable to mines.

The Stryker has proven itself time and time again. THERE IS NOTHING INHERENTLY FLAWED IN THE VEHICLE. It may not be the perfect IFV but it's certainly doing it's job extraordinarily well.

[HELEX]

Throwing another vehicle in the Pot, mission Modules can be changed in less than an hour:

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/images/mrav11.jpg

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/mrav/images/mrav9.jpg

[Uninen]

Ratamacue,

Look at the god damn pictures, both were hit by same size and type AT-mine, Stryker became a total loss, Bradley did not. Its not me who has the problem of not seeing things, ITS YOU. :|

[Ratamacue]

Ratamacue,

Look at the god damn pictures, both were hit by same size and type AT-mine, Stryker became a total loss, Bradley did not. Its not me who has the problem of not seeing things, ITS YOU. :|

And how exactly do you know it's the same size AT mine? Got connections? ;)

[Uninen]

Ratamacue,

Simple logic: They both reportedly hit a AT-mine, not a IED:s.. and whats the point of having all the different sizes (buried) AT-Mines? (shaped charge AT-mines placed on the surface are another thing..) and anyhow, (Buried) AT-mines no matter where they came from tend to be of similar size, about 8-10kg explosives.

[Argyll]

What type of AT mine,size,charge type,fuse, magnetic,there are little AT mines,Big AT mines..........which size was all he asked you,you're taking this thread to the extremes Uninen

[Uninen]

Argyll,

http://www.mineaction.ch/customers/svm/svm-web.nsf/search/f9e4638569270b79c1256b74003f489d/$FILE/TM%2057%20Kabul.jpg

http://www.freepgs.com/uninen/Picutures/TM-57ATMINE.jpg

This.

[Backis]

Ratamacue,

Look at the god damn pictures, both were hit by same size and type AT-mine, Stryker became a total loss, Bradley did not. Its not me who has the problem of not seeing things, ITS YOU. :|

Ok, so you have facts about exactly wich type IED was used, type of explosive, mode of detonation? Care to share that with us?

Sources please.


Btw, the Stryker looks so bad because it caught fire, and most damage was probably caused by that. The Brad was lucky and the explosives detonated early instead of under the vehicle, and seems to have been tamped forward and away by the ground.

Why are you trying to pose as a know-it-all, it clearly isn't your field... :roll:

There are some pics of a Linebacker that got hit on this forum (on a HEMT), go and se how well that one kept together.

[Backis]

Ratamacue,

Simple logic: They both reportedly hit a AT-mine, not a IED:s.. and whats the point of having all the different sizes (buried) AT-Mines? (shaped charge AT-mines placed on the surface are another thing..) and anyhow, (Buried) AT-mines no matter where they came from tend to be of similar size, about 8-10kg explosives.

LOL, you can stack any number of those on each other, not to mention combine mines with all types of straight explosives. Never been instructed in mining have we? ;)

[Uninen]

LOL, you can stack any number of those on each other. Never been instructed in mining have we? ;)

:roll:

1. Yes i know.. but that wasnt the case in either one of these.. cause despite everything the actual damage to the chasises of both vehicles seem quite limited..

2. Uhm.. yes? Actually i know plenty of mines and many different ways to use them.. including "installing" factory made models or making my own IED:s.. ive actually teached others on the subject.. :D

[Backis]

1. Yes i know.. but that wasnt the case in either one of these.. cause despite everything the actual damage to the chasises of both vehicles seem quite limited..

2. Uhm.. yes? Actually i know plenty of mines and many different ways to use them.. including "installing" factory made models or making my own IED:s.. ive actually teached others on the subject.. :D

And still no sources...

Only hot air...

[Milkman]

Why can't we all just get along? The stryker went boom and the crew made it out alive. Why is that so hard for some people here to comprehend? IFV will always be vulnerable to mines, period the end. And this Bradley vs Stryker crap? Who really gives a f***? They are both fine IFVs.

[Argyll]

Argyll,

http://www.mineaction.ch/customers/svm/svm-web.nsf/search/f9e4638569270b79c1256b74003f489d/$FILE/TM%2057%20Kabul.jpg

http://www.freepgs.com/uninen/Picutures/TM-57ATMINE.jpg

This.



And you know for sure this was the same type of mine used in both incidents?

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Look at the god damn pictures, both were hit by same size and type AT-mine, Stryker became a total loss, Bradley did not. Its not me who has the problem of not seeing things, ITS YOU.

compared to,


Simple logic: They both reportedly hit a AT-mine, not a IED:s.. and whats the point of having all the different sizes (buried) AT-Mines? (shaped charge AT-mines placed on the surface are another thing..) and anyhow, (Buried) AT-mines no matter where they came from tend to be of similar size, about 8-10kg explosives.

You've seen so many AFV's destroyed by mine or IED that you can tell from just looking at a picture exactly what type caused the damage?. But you can't or won't tell us exactly what type of mine was used?.

Yeah whatever.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the Stryker/LAV III. It's not the perfect vehicle but then neither is your much vaunted AMV. The LAV III series is an improvement over the gen II series incorporating lessons learned IN COMBAT from users world wide. Every vehicle, in fact every weapon system introduced into military service has its detracters.

But debate is pointless unless its informed, and your arguments have little or no factual basis.


Futhermore, i cant actually imagine that how it (LAV / Stryker) can have better fire power, as the IFV versions of these use same weapons, and actually AMV can also be delivered with 30mm Bushmater cannon (this is actual AMV standard), which i believe has better fire power than the 25mm Bushmaster cannon..

Fire power isn't constituted solely by size of the main armament. The fact that the Bushmaster 25mm whilst mounted on the M-2 destroyed a number of T-72's and an M-1A1 attests to the effectiveness in combat of the weapon system and ammunition natures.

The main point of superiority you've been able to bring up between the Stryker and the AMV is the difference in protection across the frontal arc. The fact is any AFV of the Stryker/AMV class would be disabled and potentialy destroyed by an AT mine in the 8-10kg size range. And as has been pointed out ANY AFV can be destroyed, period.

Uninen, your in the same class as fantassin, mustamato, etc. Your arguments are driven by emotion and you are blind to any facts put before you.
But worst of all when asked a direct question, usually for evidence, you either go off on a tangent or ignore it completely.
Debating with you is as fruitless as argueing with a four year old child.

[Uninen]

Argyll,

99.99% of Iraqis AT-mines are of that type, and US Army it self said that these both vehicles were hit by single AT-Mine. So the changes are.. nevermind my other sources..

Ngati Tumatuenga,

See Milkmans post. I agree with him, also i didnt claim that any vehicle is indestructable, just stated the GOD DAMN FACT THAT BRADLEY FARED MUCH BETTER AGAINST THE SAME KIND OF TRAP. Also read the .PDF that i posted earlier, and you shall learn about the draw backs of wheeled vehicles vs. Tracked and especially about the issues of Stryker.

P.s.

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/Irak/M1_1.jpg

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/Irak/M1_2.jpg

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/Irak/M1_3.jpg

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/Irak/M1_4.jpg

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/inne/Irak/M1_5.jpg
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO M1A2 SEP WITH 3 MINES OF THE INTRODUCED TYPE ONE ON TOP OF ANOTHER, WHEN IT ROLLED OVER THEM.

(It was not 100kg IED that some falsely have claimed, but 3 AT-mines).

[REMOV]

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO M1A2 SEP WITH 3 MINES OF THE INTRODUCED TYPE ONE ON TOP OF ANOTHER, WHEN IT ROLLED OVER THEM. (It was not 100kg IED that some falsely have claimed, but 3 AT-mines).[/color]
First - stop screaming here, this place isn't an Arabic market, so take you figner off the Caps Lock. Calm down, Uninen...

Second - who told you something about 100 kg IED? And who told you about 3 AT mines? According to my sources it was an IED, a modified 155mm artillery round with additional explosives placed around it to serve as a booster. It was a tank from 3rd Battalion, 67th Armored Regiment, 4th Infantry Division.

Third - you mixed up two incidents (from 29 October 2003) in fact three mines exploded but... under the Ukrainian's BTR-80s not M1A2 SEP!


Source: http://www.command-post.org/2_archives/008752.html

SevenUkrainian peacekeepers were wounded when militants attacked their patrol in southern Iraq, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry said today.

Two armored personnel carriers with 17 Ukrainian peacekeepers were ambushed Tuesday night near As Suwayrah, northwest of their base at Kut in southern Iraq, said Ukrainian Defense Ministry spokesman Kostiantyn Khivrenko. Three mines exploded under the vehicles, and militants then opened fire.

Khivrenko said that the wounded soldiers' condition was stable. Five of them were hospitalized in Baghdad, and the two others suffered only slight injuries.

A Ukrainian peacekeeper died earlier this month when the vehicle he was riding in turned over.

Some 1,650 Ukrainian troops are serving in the Polish-led stabilization force patrolling southern Iraq.

[HELEX]

According to my sources it was an IED, a modified 155mm artillery round with additional explosives placed around it to serve as a booster.

Sounds not very likely, did the Iraqis ever use 155mm? Never heard of it :roll:

[Macs.]

That sounds very hypocritical. Remember that we didn't annex Afghanistan or Iraq like your country did Chechnya. We hold the moral high-ground in both conflicts.

Russian Federation lost thousands of men invading a country that's 25 times smaller than Iraq. Do you see any American being a **** and exaggerating number of equipment lost, saying Russia's equipment sucks, etc.?

Word.

Just look at homepages like kavakzcenter (or how ever it is called) and other websites, you get hundreds of hours from chechenya on tape. Russian Soldiers get beaten, tanks/apcs/jeeps get blown up etc.

[Uninen]

Remov,

1. Ok..
2. Americans did..
3. ->

"Two American soldiers from the 4th Infantry Division were killed and one was wounded late Tuesday when their Abrams main battle tank apparently hit a land mine near Balad, 45 miles north of Baghdad, said division spokeswoman Maj. Jossyln Aberle."

--

"In Iraq, a US 4th Infantry Division tank was destroyed (and two of the four man crew killed, another was wounded) when they rolled over three anti-tank mines, buried in the road, one on top of another. The incident occurred on October 28th, 40 kilometers northeast of Balad at about 7 PM."

--

"The tank was disabled when it was struck by a land mine or a roadside bomb Tuesday night during a patrol near Balad, 45 miles north of Baghdad, said Maj. Josslyn Aberle, a spokeswoman for the 4th Infantry Division. A third crewman was evacuated to a U.S. hospital in Germany, she said.

It was believed to be the first M1 Abrams main battle tank destroyed since the end of major combat May 1. During the active combat phase, several of the 68-ton vehicles ? the mainstay of the U.S. Army's armored forces ? were disabled in combat."

--

"American tank "abrams" was completely destroyed by the explosion of mine in 60- TI kilometers to the north of Baghdad 27- GO of October. Explosion broke through the bronirovanoye bottom of tank, killed two crew members and rejected tower on is somewhat it was meter from the housing."

(Translation from Russian.. by Babelfish..)

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=anti_tank_mine.htm
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/480-22.asp

:roll:

[REMOV]

Sounds not very likely, did the Iraqis ever use 155mm? Never heard of it
Source: http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/al_jaber_ii/al_jaber_ii_refs/n61en103/971030_061997QA_001.html

Question: How many 155mm arty pieces were in Iraq before the war? How many 155mm arty pieces were recovered by the Coalition from inside Kuwait?

Iraq's pre-war 155mm artillery consisted of the following:

76 GCT SP Howitzers (French origin)
18 M109 SP Howitzers (US systems captured from Iran)
3 Palmaria SP Howitzers (Italian origin)
Unknown # AMX F3

92 FH70 towed guns (German origin)
200 GHN45 towed guns (Austrian origin)
18 Type 1950 towed howitzers (French origin)
124 towed guns (South African origin)

The Kuwaitis had an estimated 37 US-origin M109A1 SP howitzers and some 24 French-origin AMX F3 SP howitzers. Iraq captured almost theentire stock of Kuwaiti 155mm artillery rounds as well as almost all of the Kuwaiti artillery pieces. nearly all of the equipment was immediately moved north into Iraq, where it was subsequently employed by Iraqi forces. Those rounds consisted of around 25832 HE M107, 3904 WP M110 series, 5824 HE M483A1, 9211 HE M549, 6040 Illumination M485 series rounds.

We do not have any information indicating how many of the 155mm artillery pieces captured by Coalition forces were recovered from inside Kuwait. Regular Army units deployed in northern and southern Kuwait were supported by 155mm artillery batteries.


Iraq was probably the biggest single customer and the GHN-45's dominated the battlefields of the Iran/Iraq war with their great range and the increased lethality of the ERFB projectiles
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rsa/images/g-5-line.gif

[REMOV]

"Two American soldiers from the 4th Infantry Division were killed and one was wounded late Tuesday when their Abrams main battle tank apparently hit a land mine near Balad, 45 miles north of Baghdad, said division spokeswoman Maj. Jossyln Aberle."

"The tank was disabled when it was struck by a land mine or a roadside bomb Tuesday night during a patrol near Balad, 45 miles north of Baghdad, said Maj. Josslyn Aberle, a spokeswoman for the 4th Infantry Division. A third crewman was evacuated to a U.S. hospital in Germany, she said.

It was believed to be the first M1 Abrams main battle tank destroyed since the end of major combat May 1. During the active combat phase, several of the 68-ton vehicles ? the mainstay of the U.S. Army's armored forces ? were disabled in combat."

"American tank "abrams" was completely destroyed by the explosion of mine in 60- TI kilometers to the north of Baghdad 27- GO of October. Explosion broke through the bronirovanoye bottom of tank, killed two crew members and rejected tower on is somewhat it was meter from the housing."Ekhm... Nothing about THREE mines in quoted fragments above. The second thing is that in English IED is in fact a land mine, this two words are synonyms. So... it isn't any proof.

"In Iraq, a US 4th Infantry Division tank was destroyed (and two of the four man crew killed, another was wounded) when they rolled over three anti-tank mines, buried in the road, one on top of another. The incident occurred on October 28th, 40 kilometers northeast of Balad at about 7 PM."
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=anti_tank_mine.htm
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/480-22.aspOK, there is some useful information, but also with some problem - that guys mixed up M1A1 with M1A2 SEP. So... I really don't know that this is a reliable source. I don't reject such theory but your quotations don't convinced me...

By the way - that information about three "mines" might additionally confirmed my own sources - it was an artillery round with extra explosive materials. It could also called "anti-tank mine", right?

[Operation Ivy]

Thank God for REMOV :hug:

[Argyll]

Argyll,

99.99% of Iraqis AT-mines are of that type, and US Army it self said that these both vehicles were hit by single AT-Mine. So the changes are.. nevermind my other sources..



I don't agree with you at all you're basically telling me that this is the ONLY AT mine that Iraq has?........total BS and you need to provide the source otherwise I simply do not belive you!
Have you been to Iraq and seen their AT mines to make such a claim?
I've seen pictures of different Mines scattered all over the beaches in Kuwait and in the deserts of Iraq,some are AP but most are AT,and they're not all the same



An HRW team tracked down a storage building at a military site outside Baghdad known as the Second Military College and wandered in. What they found would please anyone with a score to settle: 1,000 Katyusha rockets, stacks of Italian and Chinese-made anti-tank mines, anti-personnel mines, "Bouncing Betty" mines that leap up to decapitate their victims, dozens of rocket-propelled grenade launchers, submachine guns, crates of ammunition, all of it there for the taking. No one was guarding the site. The nearest US forces were 10 miles away.

[Argyll]

In 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division’s area of operations, elements discovered a large cache north of Khalidiyah. The cache contained 650 plastic Anti-Tank mines, 400 Anti-Personnel mines, and 280 Rocket Propelled Gernade (RPG) warheads, RPG fuel rods, and propellant as well as 10 Anti-Tank missiles, and various small arms and demolitions.

Iraq's AT mines consisted of the following types
UK=Bar Mine Anti tank
Czech=PT-MI-BA-III anti-tank
France= MI AC HPD F-2 anti-tank
Jordan =PRB-05 anti-tank
USSR= TM 46 anti-tank
=TM 57 anti-tank
=TM 62M anti-tank

As you can clearly see there are many different types contrary to your claims!

[Operation Ivy]

Man you americans are idiots! You guys are the ones who created the taliban and osama. We don't see any vietnamese terrorists, so don't even go there! You guys should've just let the great Red Army take over that hellhole of a country and stayed out of their way but no, you had to spread "freedom" throughout the world as always. So after you left them because they'ed went through their usefulness they felt betrayed they sadly retaliated (9/11) so if american policies conitnue as they had I feel there might be more of such attacks.

please dont talk

[memphiz]

Man you americans are idiots! You guys are the ones who created the taliban and osama. We don't see any vietnamese terrorists, so don't even go there! You guys should've just let the great Red Army take over that hellhole of a country and stayed out of their way but no, you had to spread "freedom" throughout the world as always. So after you left them because they'ed went through their usefulness they felt betrayed they sadly retaliated (9/11) so if american policies conitnue as they had I feel there might be more of such attacks.

please dont talk
yeh, Canadians are there to eh.

[Uninen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IED

Explosive devices, as used by terrorists or commando forces, are formally known as Improvised Explosive Devices or IEDs.

An IED is a device placed or fabricated in an improvised manner incorporating destructive, lethal, noxious, pyrotechnic, or incendiary chemicals and designed to destroy, incapacitate, harass, or distract. It may incorporate military stores, but is normally devised from nonmilitary components.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmine

A landmine is a type of mine: a device which is placed on the ground and explodes when triggered by a vehicle or person. Landmines are used to secure disputed borders and to restrict enemy movement in times of war. Because of this, and also because not all types are designed to be buried in the ground, and to avoid using the word landmine, they are sometimes called area denial munitions, serving a tactical purpose similar to barbed wire or concrete "dragon's teeth" vehicle barriers.

From a military perspective, land mines serve as force multipliers, allowing an organized force to overcome a larger enemy.

[Uninen]

"In Iraq, a US 4th Infantry Division tank was destroyed (and two of the four man crew killed, another was wounded) when they rolled over three anti-tank mines, buried in the road, one on top of another. The incident occurred on October 28th, 40 kilometers northeast of Balad at about 7 PM."

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=anti_tank_mine.htm
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/480-22.asp

:roll:

This was a thing that US Army had removed, so i think it was AND STILL IS, THE TRUTH. :P

--

"Classification: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Sir,
Please remove the photos of the M1 Abrams destroyed by mines. The photos are not cleared for public distribution.
Thank You,
LTC Chris Carnes"

--

Remov, MINES, JUST MINES.. no huge ass IED.. ;)

I think that the world of Lietunant Colonel can be trusted, right? :D

[Operation Ivy]

yey dead people :| :(

[Resevoir Hogs]

Uhhhh you mean like the Bosnian made AP mine made of wood, nails and explosives? That sure as hell wasn't made of so called "military componenets" but you ask any engineer he's gonna call it a landmine.

IS that an IED or a landmine? Really whether it's manufactured or made in some guys kitchen it's the same ****.

I came to this argument late but I'm just trying to point out not all landmines are top of the line plastic high tech devices.

Whether it is triggered by magnetism, tripwire or pressure from a vehicle or foot it's still considered a landmine.

[Uninen]

Resevoir Hogs,

AT-mines: Platic or Metal casing, lots of explosives, actually ones ive used dont even have a "casing", those babys were made out of solid "HE".. :P

http://www.dlc.fi/~j27maa77/kuvat/tellu.jpg
Telamiina aka Tellu, the body (part nro.5) made out of "HE" only, no casing.. out of some 9,5kg of TNT actually..

[Resevoir Hogs]

That's great any way to detonate them after they have served their purpose? Or at least do you keep a good record of them.

[MVSpartan117]

Man you americans are idiots! You guys are the ones who created the taliban and osama. We don't see any vietnamese terrorists, so don't even go there! You guys should've just let the great Red Army take over that hellhole of a country and stayed out of their way but no, you had to spread "freedom" throughout the world as always. So after you left them because they'ed went through their usefulness they felt betrayed they sadly retaliated (9/11) so if american policies conitnue as they had I feel there might be more of such attacks.

please dont talk

I really really really ****ing hate AK Lover.

[Argyll]

Thats why I deleted his post.......he's Out of order............again!!

and again Uninen...........you never responded to the types of AT Mines found in Iraq so far........is it because you know you're talking BS?

[REMOV]

This was a thing that US Army had removed, so i think it was AND STILL IS, THE TRUTH. :PAs I said before "mine" is an synonym of the "IED", you can called all "IEDs" just "mines" or "landmines" if you want. It isn't a mistake. You mixed up technical and normal language and judge of the basic of this name about explosive device itself. Any TECHNICAL definition that you found at the Wikipedia has completly no connetion with the people's manners of speaking. Sorry, but there are two different things.

I repeat again, I don't reject you theory, but you haven't any convinced evidences, sorry.

Remov, MINES, JUST MINES.. no huge ass IED.. Uninen, IEDs ARE mines. Regardless you agree with or not. And not every IED is as large as you imagine it. An IED can be made of hand grenade for example.

I think that the world of Lietunant Colonel can be trusted, right?Really? Read the text again, carefully - this guy refers to the words written at StrategyPage NOT presented his own opinion. So, again, you drow false conclusion. There wasn't single word from LTC Carnes of a kind of explosive device that destroyed that tank.

[Uninen]

Sir,
Please remove the photos of the M1 Abrams destroyed by mines. The photos are not cleared for public distribution.
Thank You,
LTC Chris Carnes


Anti-Tank Mines Destroy M1A1 in Iraq
Remov,

Huh???

"So, again, you drow false conclusion." from those things said, you cant really tell, now can you? To me this seems rather confirm it than deny..

(that there were 3 At-mines..)

Argyll,

Its the TM-57 that is MOST USUAL IN THERE of course not factually 99.99% but still, the most usual AT-mine.

But anyhow, people died in there, and all this lip service isnt actually respectful to them, so lets give it a rest shall we as this isnt leading anywhere..

[mustamato]

Sir,
Please remove the photos of the M1 Abrams destroyed by mines. The photos are not cleared for public distribution.
Thank You,
LTC Chris Carnes

rofl

Welcme to the real world dear LtC, when it´s out it´s out. "These photos
are not cleared for public distribution" :roll: He would probably love to
live in nazi-Germany back in the days.

[Argyll]

Its the TM-57 that is MOST USUAL IN THERE of course not factually 99.99% but still, the most usual AT-mine.

But anyhow, people died in there, and all this lip service isnt actually respectful to them, so lets give it a rest shall we as this isnt leading anywhere..


Then stop posting false information,it show's you're ignorant of others research,you claimed to know for fact the Iraqi's mines were 99.99% the same.......perhaps if you were not so close minded and did some research as I have done ,you could have gone back and corrected your mistakes!

There is a huge difference in stating that it's 99.99% that a specific type of AT Mine has been used in attacks in Iraq,which again you would have to be in a position to know this information,of which I believe you are not.....
to the statement that 99.99% of Iraqi landmines are of the same type!!It is false and misleading information .If you're not familiar with the subject matter then don't make up BS to make out you do!

[REMOV]

Huh???He REFERS ONLY and nearly literally to the information from StrategyPage, do you still don't understand? The StrategyPage publish pictures and an information of mines. Look at he all statements not only the fragment suits you and which is ONLY for you a proof for something. Uninen, don't play such games with me.

"So, again, you drow false conclusion." from those things said, you cant really tell, now can you? To me this seems rather confirm it than deny..Again (I slowly bored repeating the same thing), the LTC REFERS ONLY to the StrategyPage informations, and use the same title as they used, which is normal thing.

Example - it can helps you understand the point - If they wrote something about IED, he would REFERED to their words and answered in this way: "Please remove the photos of the M1 Abrams destroyed by IEDS...". He in fact wrote NOTHING about mines or IEDs, I repeat it to you over and over again. It isn't any proof, which you're looking for.

Now, do you understand or should I repeat it from beginning? It really simple Uninen, the basics of PR.

[Operation Ivy]

You cant go against REMOV,thx for the info REMOV :D

[Milkman]

Why can't we all just drop the subject??
The stryker was destroyed, and the crew made it out alive.

Whooopdie freakin' doooo!

[AFG]

Why can't we all just drop the subject??
The stryker was destroyed, and the crew made it out alive.

Whooopdie freakin' doooo!


AMEN close it