Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mishedlo who wrote (232236)	3/30/2003 1:43:23 PM
From: broadstbull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Their RPGs are bouncing of of our tanks doing little or no damage. Head to head we will crush them, their only hope is to drag it on and increase civilian body counts. I'm sure they'll give it a try.

To: mishedlo who wrote (232236)	3/30/2003 3:38:09 PM
From: Win-Lose-Draw	Respond to of 436258

from a distance, not really. up close, even an M1A1 is vulnerable to all sorts of unsophisticated attacks.

To: mishedlo who wrote (232236)	3/30/2003 7:06:42 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Mish, <<Do the Iraqis have hand held weapons that will easily take out our tanks?>> I do not know and am only repeating what I have read or saw on TV. I believe the Iraqis have a lot of RPGs hidden away, and I understand, perhaps wrongly, that RPGs launched at (a) tank tracks or (b) radiator at the rear of the tank will do the necessary damage to unnerve the crew; ... and same with very large pre-positioned remote detonated mines as in West Bank. Also, the armor on the top of the turret and engine compartment is not as thick as the front and sides. Urban warfare presumably involves folks shooting from building tops. Also, at 0.5 miles to the gallon of gas, and 3 crew per tank, the tanks are presumably vulnerable to supply (gas, water, rations, munition) disruption. Some media has reported that the military has said that war may extend for several months barring a lucky break (Saddam dying). With the onset of hot weather, the turning off of fuel consuming aircon and the taking off of heat trapping anti-CB gear would still be a non-starter. A taxi driver who used to drive a tank had said that a bucket of paint dropped from above on the tank optics may also create a sense of isolation, as in a submarine. Over all, HK investors feel that any delay is not good for a lot of reasons, but that the US can capture Bagdad is still a given. The timing of final resolution, as in return to peace and constitution of elected government, if these are the political objectives of the military campaign, would appear to depend a great deal on the Iraqi civilian attitudes. Chugs, Jay

To: mishedlo who wrote (232236)	3/30/2003 8:12:31 PM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

US Soldiers Ordered To Capture Anti-Tank Missile Missile That Can Destroy Abrams Scares Generals 3/28/03 12:50:48 PM Discuss this story in the forum Radio Free Europe Baghdad, Iraq -- US Surprised Iraq Using AT-14 Antitank Missile By Ron Synovitz Radio Free Europe 3-27-3 RFE/RL correspondent Ron Synovitz is embedded with a unit of the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division currently outside Najaf, a city in central Iraq now encircled by U.S. troops following 36 hours of heavy fighting. He reports that U.S. troops are encountering an unanticipated, and formidable, weapon in the Iraqi arsenal -- Russian-built Kornet antitank missiles. Najaf, Central Iraq (RFE/RL) -- U.S. military intelligence is warning American troops that Iraqi soldiers have begun to use a wire-guided missile system against American tanks that the U.S. military previously did not know they possessed... It is called the AT-14 Kornet surface-to-surface missile. It has a range of 3.5 kilometers, and it is emerging as the Iraqis' most effective direct-fire weapon against U.S. armor in the desert of southern Iraq. Iraqi commandos traveling in three-man teams dressed in black civilian robes and riding in Nissan pickup trucks have been moving against the flanks of columns of armor from the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division and launching broadside attacks from several kilometers away using the system. Those attacks have already disabled at least two Abrahms tanks and one Bradley armored troop carrier. U.S. military intelligence officials are extremely interested in capturing one of the missiles intact. They also are instructing American soldiers who destroy one of the Kornet launchers to save the remains of the system for close inspection. The Kornet is a Russian-built missile system developed by the KBP Instrument Design-Making Bureau in Tula. It is primarily designed to destroy tanks, but can also be used against fortifications, entrenched troops, and small-scale targets. It has been used by the Russian Army and has reportedly been sold to the Syrian Army. The appearance of the Kornet system in Iraq is of particular interest to U.S. officials because of a recent dispute with Moscow over its alleged weapons sales to Baghdad. The U.S. State Department has accused KBP of supplying Iraq with the Kornet missiles, something KBP and Moscow have vehemently denied. In a phone call on 24 March with U.S. President George W. Bush, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the American allegations of Russian sales of missiles, night-vision goggles, and radio-jamming equipment were "groundless." The AT-14 Kornet is a wire-guided missile system. In such a system, the missile literally pulls a thin wire along behind it as it moves toward its target. Those who fire the Kornet control it by keeping the sights of their launcher trained on the target. That way, the missile can be guided at moving targets like tanks and armored troop carriers. As a direct-fire weapon, the missile travels in a straight line, rather than in an arc, as it would with mortar or howitzer artillery. Direct fire is considered more effective than indirect-fire weapons like the mortar artillery because the person who is firing the weapon can see the target himself, rather than relying on forward troops to spot and provide information on where the target is. But the need to keep a Kornet launcher's sights locked on the target means that it must remain stationery after it has fired. After a Kornet missile has traveled 3.5 kilometers, the guidance wire has completely uncoiled and breaks. The missile then becomes erratic, no longer able to lock onto the target. Another disadvantage of wire-guided missiles is that they cannot be fired over trees, power lines, telephone lines, or water. That's because the wire will snag and break, or will malfunction, disabling the guidance system. That means the Kornet will lose its effectiveness against U.S. tanks once the U.S. forces advance near the canals and power lines around Baghdad. But for now, in the open desert, the Kornet's 3.5-kilometer range is helping Iraqi forces to equalize the advantage that U.S. weapons have had in earlier battles in this war because of their superior range. A U.S. Abrahms tank has an effective range of 3 kilometers and can destroy targets as far away as 4 kilometers: The range of depleted-uranium ammunition fired from the 25-millimeter chain gun of a Bradley troop carrier is classified information, but I have seen that weapon fired in battle here in Iraq and it rivals that of the Kornet. overthrow.com More On The Kornet "Our Tankers Are In Deep Shit" 3/29/03 1:29:40 PM Discuss this story in the forum LSN Reader Letter to LSN -- Bill, According to discussion on the Liberty Forum, the Kornet AT-14 is not a wire guided missile; the article got it wrong on that score. Apparently it is a laser guided antitank missile. In other words, no wire, rather the user paints the target with a laser beam and the missile homes in on that. A minor point, but an important one if true. And if true, that means our tankers are in deep shit if the Iraqis have large numbers of these missiles. Laser guided weapons have fewer drawbacks than wire guided weapons, as the wires can get caught and disabled by trees, telephone poles, etc., whereas as long as you can see the target, you can paint it with a laser. The only thing that stops a laser is bad weather or other things that disrupt light, but then, if that is the case, the user would also be unable to see the target anyway, due to dust, sand, smoke, fog, etc. [A recently discharged armored soldier.] overthrow.com