Bradley vs T-72

[Joseph]

Just saw it on CNN. 5 Bradleys from the 7th Cav. took on 4 T-72 and destroyed them. The unit Capt. was interview. After the first encounter, the Capt. took 9 M-1s and 2 Bradleys and fought some 20 Iraqie units and destroyed 14 T-72s, 1 ZSU, 1 T-55 and some BMPS.

[Lonestar]

Hellfire-armed Bradleys = Dead T-72's.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Not Hellfires, TOW-2s.

The biggest problem (this is nothing new, but shows the Iraqis didn't learn the lessons of GW 1) is that the gunner's sight on the export T-72 and all T-55 and T-62 models uses stadiametric rangefinders of different types. The T-72 export version has horizontal lines etched in the site to calibrate to 1000 meter intervals based on the apparent vertical height of an M60 tank - the US standard when the T-72 came out.

Problem is that the Abrams is lower overall than the M60, and the Bradley even lower still, causing the Iraqis to misestimate range and overshoot. That combined with the slower than high-fiber diet **** flowing uphill autoloader on the T-72 main gun just dooms the poor bastards in the T-72.

About the only chance they have is with the heavy AAMG, but that can only penetrate the turret of the Bradley at fairly short ranges - if visibility is good, the TOW-2 gives the Bradley a huge standoff advantage.

[Dr Strangelove]

I take it that the Bradleys engaged the Iraqis at a range beyond the effective range of the T-72s gun, since the Bradleys have much less armor than the T-72s.

Maybe the Soviets sold the special third world - economy class version of the T-72 to the Iraqis.

[DinoDoc]

Hasn't the point already been made that ex-Soviet material is crap? Do we really need to add insult to injury?

[Lancer]

Speaking of crap, how about 10 M-60s vs 10 T-72?

Of course, in the '70s it was 10 vs 3 or something...

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Not Hellfires, TOW-2s.

The biggest problem (this is nothing new, but shows the Iraqis didn't learn the lessons of GW 1) is that the gunner's sight on the export T-72 and all T-55 and T-62 models uses stadiametric rangefinders of different types. The T-72 export version has horizontal lines etched in the site to calibrate to 1000 meter intervals based on the apparent vertical height of an M60 tank - the US standard when the T-72 came out.

I thought that the Soviets fitted the T-72s with laser range finders in the 1980s? Maybe they didn't do so on the export models? You'd think that Saddam might have put some effort into retro-fitting his tanks with decent ranging and night vision equipment after 1991.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I take it that the Bradleys engaged the Iraqis at a range beyond the effective range of the T-72s gun, since the Bradleys have much less armor than the T-72s.

Maybe the Soviets sold the special third world - economy class version of the T-72 to the Iraqis.

In GW 1, at 73 Easting the Bradleys held their own against T-72s at 1000 down to 500 meters range (since the Bradleys kept maneuvering). One Bradley had a non-fatal sabot penetratrion from a T-72, although one man was mortally wounded, and another had a penetrating hit of the turret from a 14.5 mm AAMG on another T-72, wounding the commander of that vehicle. Both of the Bradleys hit were still combat capable.

The problem isn't penetrating, it's the level of training for the Iraqi gunners to keep them from sighting the Bradley turret roof against the stadiametric etching in the gunner's sight. They have to manually compensate for the different vehicle height, but in the heat of combat, they don't do it - the result is once they dial in the range to the gun, it superelevates and they overshoot by 500-600 meters.

[Lancer]

Go 2d ACR!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


I thought that the Soviets fitted the T-72s with laser range finders in the 1980s? Maybe they didn't do so on the export models? You'd think that Saddam might have put some effort into retro-fitting his tanks with decent ranging and night vision equipment after 1991.

For Warsaw Pact and USSR use, yes, but the export versions had stadiametric sights. AFAIK, it's not something that's really upgradeable, you just essentially replace the entire gunner's station and gun controls, and that probably costs almost as much as the basic tank. The other big problem is getting crew training time under realistic conditions.

For the Abrams, the gunsight/thermal sight/gun computer and control suite costs in excess of $200,000 per copy. The Soviet T-72 and T-80 version doesn't have all those gewgaws like the barrel droop sensor and crosswind sensor, but still, the optics, laser and controls have to cost, not to mention the specialist labor.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


For Warsaw Pact and USSR use, yes, but the export versions had stadiametric sights. AFAIK, it's not something that's really upgradeable, you just essentially replace the entire gunner's station and gun controls, and that probably costs almost as much as the basic tank. The other big problem is getting crew training time under realistic conditions.

For the Abrams, the gunsight/thermal sight/gun computer and control suite costs in excess of $200,000 per copy. The Soviet T-72 and T-80 version doesn't have all those gewgaws like the barrel droop sensor and crosswind sensor, but still, the optics, laser and controls have to cost, not to mention the specialist labor.

Didn't the Israelis retrofit a bunch of their older US tanks? I'll betcha they know where you can get it done for a really nice price. Oh, wait, maybe not for you Mr Hussein.

[Carver]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Not Hellfires, TOW-2s.

Not missles, 25mm cannon.

I heard the interview on CNN; the soldier said 2 Bradleys destroyed 5 T-72s with their 25mm cannons. Now that's frightening.

[MichaeltheGreat]

That was a while ago, though - I think they were 90mm M48A2 Pattons upgunned to 105 mm NATO rifled standard.

They also did some Sherman 105 conversions, unlike our WW2 version of the Sherman 105, which was an armored howitzer used as an assault gun, they reworked the suspension and turret race, and fit a turret with a 105 mm AT gun.

IIRC, that was back in the 60's and 70's though.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Carver


Not missles, 25mm cannon.

I heard the interview on CNN; the soldier said 2 Bradleys destroyed 5 T-72s with their 25mm cannons. Now that's frightening.

They must have *******d them then, the 25mm gun can't take MBT frontal armor. If they got them from the flanks or rear, though, the rate of fire and accuracy of the 25mm makes it a very effective tank killer.

[Seeker]

It is pretty sad for the Iraqi's when their 'best' tanks can't take the US worst AFVs....in a 'normal' war something like that 25mm should be a weapon of last resort against enemy armour, but here it seems just as good.