Prev: Re: [ds] Modern Tanks. Next: Re: [ds] Modern Tanks.

RE: [ds] Modern Tanks.

From: "Glover, Owen" <oglover@m...>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 17:00:57 +1000
Subject: RE: [ds] Modern Tanks.

Ease up a little John or please take the rants off-line. When people
the use of profanity to support the argument I think your argument is

Up until the personal attacks I have been amused at the defence and
on the M1 in teh Gulf War but a little civility isn't too much to ask??

-----Original Message-----
From: John M. Atkinson []
Sent: Sunday, 15 November 1998 6:38
Subject: Re: [ds] Modern Tanks.

Kenneth Winland wrote:

>	  The US Army's VII Corp had 9 M1s destroyed and 4 M1s damaged. 
> the entire Desert Storm, 9 M1s were destroyed and 9 were damaged.  No
> were destroyed by enemy fire, it was all fratricide and mines.  At
least 7

Source?  Considering I just posted details of four M1A1(HA)s being
knocked out by enemy action, I'd say whereever you got your info is a
little unreliable.  Or maybe using an interesting definition of knocked

> M1s took direct hits from 125mm rounds from T-72s.  None penetrated
> none were disabled.  In one instance, an M1 was hit by two 125mm

Again, bullshit.  Already posted source.  You do the same.  Cite source,
or retract.

> projectiles from 500m away; one hit the hull front and the other the
> turret front.  The result was no injury to the crew and no
> injury to the tank.

Frontal arc.  
>	  In one instance, an M1 was hit by 1 T-72.  The M1 returned
> and destroyed the T-72 before it's autoloader could cycle another

Frontal arc.

John M. Atkinson

Prev: Re: [ds] Modern Tanks. Next: Re: [ds] Modern Tanks.