Tojours Pret and Suffa, I guess all that Graff dust we ate paid off. Thank god we replaced the M60 and M113. but there is no replacement for the best trained armor unit in the army. 3/2 ACR Killer Troop 19D K10 for those of you in the know.
we must recognize that American armoured-fighting tactics developed in order to fight against huge soviet cavalry charges were very good, as this battle was the first real battle against an enemy trained and equipped as well as Soviet/East German armoured units.
he was my dad's Squadron CO when he was at 1-4 Cav, 1ID. Last I heard, he pinned his first star but this was a few years ago. kinda odd seeing him with hair...haha. great guy, though.
@killerlarryusmc : Wow! What a small world. I wouldn't doubt that he made his star so easily since I had talked to those who served with him when I arrived to Ft. Carson in 06. I hear nothing but good stories about the man.
The iraqis were using inferior tank shells, which couldn't even make half the designated distance russian ammunition would make in the same tank, and they were surprised which gave the coalition forces initiative from beginning to end.
Yeah, because they totally had the ability to obtain the same kind of munitions and ordnance that the United States has ready access to. Go back to bed.
The entire premise of your argument is that 'it's not rocket science to create rockets.' That, in itself, shows a level of ignorance that I just don't even really know how to react to. Not to mention that you seem unable to grasp certain fundamentals of reality. Just because you comprehend something doesn't mean it pops into existence.
@gosciu555 Rocket science refers to rockets and science. If you believe space has got something to do with that then you probably mean: my personal memory of rockets is that of rockets going into space but i have no knowledge of this technology whatsoever. So i tend to think that rockets are space rockets. This is why you didn't feel like that conversation.
as far as i get, if the battle ended in morning, it took place at night. so US forces had all the adventages, including GPS, thermal-vision and night-vision. that was like killing sleepy chickens. no wonder that iraqys look so terrefied and lost. they were halpless.
Here's a quote from wikipedia for your interest " The majority of Iraqi armored forces still used old Chinese Type 59s and Type 69s, Soviet-made T-55s from the 1950s and 1960s, and some poor quality Asad Babil tanks (domestically assembled tank based on Polish T-72 hulls with other parts of mixed origin). These machines were not equipped with up-to-date equipment, such as thermal sights or laser rangefinders, and their effectiveness in modern combat was very limited." plus no airconditioning!
@thirdromeprivate True, the vid is a typical righteous American army bone head creation where as usual they portray themselves and brave hero's that engaged a highly dangerous enemy and through clever tactics and American courage stole a great victory against overwhelming odds or some load of bull like that which gets shown to other bone head american recuits to instil a false sense of security and supremacy. These tactics against a modern army with modern tech and air support would be minced.
@PangeaSpreads These were the same Iraqis that were at war with Iran for over 10 years versus a bunch of untested young rookies. There's no bragidosio. The results speak for themselves. Superior training won this battle. Nothing stupid like,"the water Americans drink makes us supermen, or because we are American means we are naturally stronger than others." Yes, we are FULL of pride. Especially our military, but as human beings, I don't think we are better than anybody else.
@jonesy97 Iraqis were the remnants of what was blitzed during the first war in Iraq with rookies in 1950's and 60's tanks hot as ovens, most made of dodgy parts constructed in all sorts of places thrown together with ineffective rounds against tanks with twice the range, a computer targeting system and satellite link .Tanks all look the same at a glance but this was by no means a glorious victory against the odds. The "gulf" between the two tanks was like m-16s with thermal imaging vs muskets
@jonesy97 By the way I'm not having a go at American people, not to be confused and I ain't pro any army, they're not formed to pick flowers but trained killers who do what they get told whatever that may be like good brainless drones and get fed righteous heroic bullshit vids like this with the usual "everyone who don't think like us are evil and wrong" undertone but in truth the soldier is expendable and acceptable losses are whatever wins it, left to beg on the streets if mutilated in battle
@PangeaSpreads No, no prob. No offence taken. I'm in agreement with you on the tank advantage. Yes, technologically, the coalition forces were decades ahead. And no, of course, the odds were not even, at all. The world versus Iraq. Odds like that were a military necessity to ensure victory. To absolutly overwhelm Iraqi ground forces. I think that we were pretty damn lucky our collective losses weren't higher, despite the edge in technology. I can speak some experience of this. I was there.
@stahlwerke Wow. Way to stay on the subject matter. Sorry. I'll never shut up as long as American-hating little trolls like you are out there, so go ahead and blame the USA on all your pathetic personal problems. I like to think I personally had a hand in your misery. Jonesy will always be here for you- making your life just a little closer to that delicious bread and butter. Bon appatite, asshole!
@jonesy97 I'm not an American hating troll at all. In fact most of my friends here in Germany are Americans. Spent most of my army days with American troops based here. Sorry to say there is no misery here in which you had a personal hand. We do discuss the Sad American a lot. The typical US braindead loner that gets all stirred up when his Government boss tells him that porky pie has hidden behind the bushes in some poor country and that he needs to defend the bald eagle once more. get real.
Too bad the Americans didn't face any modern armor. They faced tanks from the 70s...It like comparing a new mercedes to the Model T Ford of the 1920s. Of course it's gonna be a one sided battle.
Well considering the fact that they were using T-55s (Produced in 1955 before there were Fire Control Systems, Thermal Imaging, Improved Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot rounds, ERA, and all kinds of nifty features for tanks nowadays..The Abrams isnt exactly the best tank but it certainly made itself look good but taking a shit on tanks that should be in museums but hey Americans like to brag about destroying third world armies.)
@Kallosar, T-62(1961), T-72 and Asad Babil (1971), all have composite or alloyed armour, and laser rangefinders, and the Abrams still crushed them. And dont forget its the crew that makes the tank. Isralis in upgraded shermans destroyed T55s and T62s during the Six Day war and Yom Kippur war.
Wrong. The Asad Babil DOES NOT have composite or alloyed armor improvements...or Range Finders and even Night vision was not available to many Iraqi armor divisions. These were downgraded T-72s purchased from Poland I believe.
There was even a case that ONLY 5 Tanks out of the thousands...had ERA...Even then it was the most primitive ERA during the 03 Invasion.
there's nothing to brag about taking a shit on third world countries.
@Kallosar I'm not bragging, I'm not even American. But if the Abrams is as mediocre as you say, then it would not have had a victory as one sided as it did, maybe 100 abrams lost for the thousands of iraqi tanks destroyed, but certinly not the tiny handful it really lost. And while its true that the Asad Babil was a shoddy Iraqi made copy of the T72, but Iraq did not have the industrial capacity to build the entire fleet of T72s for the republican guard. Many were genuine models.
A Mediocre tank against a really shitty tank makes the mediocre tank look amazing. Take an RPG game for example: It's like a max level guy with crap gear vs a lvl 1...He's beating on the little guys because he gets wrecked if he goes against the guys his lvl but they have better shit.
It was so one sided because of the tech differences. The Iraqis had almost no training. Couldn't afford or didn't bother upgrading their T-72s (which were all basic versions).
@screenwriter44 - 4/7 CAV, we had your back, A/40th MLRS 'Deep Strike!' 3AD-DIVARTY, we weren't going to let anyone compare you guys to Custer if it killed every last one of us.... By the way, we rolled with 4/8 CAV leading 2nd BDE, till 3rd BDE passed through and we joined in with you guys to stay up front. Spearhead Steel!
I remember his recount of the attack on his vehicle... I heard it all on the radio... Remembering the commander known as "Dragoon 6" spelling may be wrong but I'll never forget it...Awesome victory though!
yea operation iraqi freedom was so different tank wise... the iraqies hid there tanks in towns and in dug in positions... they didnt dare face us head on... but in the end we still destroyed the enemy tanks ... idk... was sure an interesing fight... even in fallujah... prolly the hardest fight i've ever scene or been in through out my 9 years in the marine corp
"H" it's Dusty,you're old loader. Remember you took my CVC and banged it on the Ammo door because I was scaried Scittles? Want you to know you'd saved all of arses and we grew up to be custy old First Sargents and SGMs.I was a PFC during the Easting and risen (and sometimes fallen) to be a career man.
Also, want you you to know I've finished what we started @ OIF1.I was PLT Daddy as Recon. I saw myself in those boys and girls.You would've been proud.
Another thing this documentary omits is that VII Corps' M1 tanks and Bradley IFVs covered 170 miles in 89 hours.
That may sound impressive at first - until you divide 170 by 89. Then you get the pace at which they moved; less than 2mph.
That's less than half as fast as a Mk.I Tank (1917), and at the ravenous fuel consumption rate of an M1 at low speed, they can's go any FARTHER than a Mk.I either.
It took 8.4 Million+ gallons of fuel to move only 3000 vehicles just 170 miles.
I can't recall the title of the source --- I only copied a few paragraphs and pasted them in an RTF document, and I haven't been able to find it since.
I can paste a the most relevant sentences into this reply;
"The speed of the movement into the enemy rear was unparalleled. VII Corps attacked 170 miles in 89 hours — or about 45 miles a day."
"And this, while each armored division was consuming 500,000 - 750,000 gallons of fuel per day."
"This rate is comparable to the daily consumption of First and Third U.S. Armies in WWII of 850,000 for all 18 of their divisions combined. The corps as a whole consumed 6.2 million gallons of diesel fuel and 2.2 gallons of aviation fuel in 89 hours."
I can't comment on the fuel consumption but with regards to the rate of travel, the combat vehicles can only move as fast as their field trains which because of the large amount of vehicles can only move so fast.
Certainly, the M1's and Bradley IFV's can move at a fast clip but when you consider their field trains consisting of M35-A2's, HMMWV's, HEMMTS, M88's and 5-Tons have to keep within a reasonable distance to provide support, 170 miles in 89 hours is actually a good clip.
It takes hours to refuel and resupply a unit at a battalion level. If you include their FA support, which in the 2d ACR's case was the 210th FA and more specifically 3/17 FA which consisted of M-109's and FASV's...these vehicles must stay within a few miles and the M109 is a slow ass vehicle.
Blitzkrieg.....all you needed was the French to surrender, oh wait that DID happen
gopconservative78 1 week ago
Rest in peace McCoy "SUFFA"
wired2myguitar 2 weeks ago
Tojours Pret and Suffa, I guess all that Graff dust we ate paid off. Thank god we replaced the M60 and M113. but there is no replacement for the best trained armor unit in the army. 3/2 ACR Killer Troop 19D K10 for those of you in the know.
wired2myguitar 2 weeks ago
"Owned", would be an understatement.
Rob3rdacr 3 weeks ago
Then the French raced to Baghdad to surrender to Saddam's forces
gopconservative78 4 months ago
we must recognize that American armoured-fighting tactics developed in order to fight against huge soviet cavalry charges were very good, as this battle was the first real battle against an enemy trained and equipped as well as Soviet/East German armoured units.
anisocoro 8 months ago
Its like the British were not even there. lol
stalkingalizee 9 months ago
I would have preferred that the arabs fight their own battles.
rickcain2320 10 months ago
2-34 ARMOR!!!!
ozmorphus 11 months ago
@He101A Not just technology, but better training, working together as a single unit, rather than individual tanks.
TonyN737 11 months ago
12 years later we would be back at that desert, but we still didn't have to.
sardonicbynature 11 months ago
Last I heard, McMasters was the Regimental Commander for 3rd ACR during the Battle of Tal Alfar in 05.
vietscouty 1 year ago
@vietscouty
he was my dad's Squadron CO when he was at 1-4 Cav, 1ID. Last I heard, he pinned his first star but this was a few years ago. kinda odd seeing him with hair...haha. great guy, though.
killerlarryusmc 1 year ago
@killerlarryusmc : Wow! What a small world. I wouldn't doubt that he made his star so easily since I had talked to those who served with him when I arrived to Ft. Carson in 06. I hear nothing but good stories about the man.
vietscouty 7 months ago
Comment removed
cobrabase 1 year ago
@cobrabase Shut up about Kursk.
stahlwerke 10 months ago
The iraqis were using inferior tank shells, which couldn't even make half the designated distance russian ammunition would make in the same tank, and they were surprised which gave the coalition forces initiative from beginning to end.
Ortheos2006 1 year ago
I don't blame the Iraqi's for surrendering - who the fuck wants to die for Saddam?
AmericanWarrior1776 1 year ago
Iraqi's are idiots, get some scout planes and some anti-tank top attack submunition artillery and you have a chance.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555 hey don't give them any ideas
MegaBunky2 1 year ago
@MegaBunky2
You got to root for the underdog, don't you?
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555
Yeah, because they totally had the ability to obtain the same kind of munitions and ordnance that the United States has ready access to. Go back to bed.
revolrz22 1 year ago
@revolrz22
Lol, its not rocket science to make submunition MLRS from BM-21 or improvise something. Go back to school ;)
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555
The entire premise of your argument is that 'it's not rocket science to create rockets.' That, in itself, shows a level of ignorance that I just don't even really know how to react to. Not to mention that you seem unable to grasp certain fundamentals of reality. Just because you comprehend something doesn't mean it pops into existence.
revolrz22 1 year ago
@revolrz22
Usually the term "Rocket science" refers to rockets that go into space. W/E I really don't feel like having this conv. right now.
BM-21 rockets which they already had can be outfitted with submunition warheads. Its not hard. Omgz, over and out.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555 Rocket science refers to rockets and science. If you believe space has got something to do with that then you probably mean: my personal memory of rockets is that of rockets going into space but i have no knowledge of this technology whatsoever. So i tend to think that rockets are space rockets. This is why you didn't feel like that conversation.
stahlwerke 10 months ago
Anyone got anything from the 3rd?
KujoTV 1 year ago
the gulf war was badass U.S OF THE FUCKIN A!
ray69play 1 year ago
@ray69play
No, its not badass at all. It was pretty much a national tragedy for the Iraqi's but thats what happens when you allow incompetent leadership.
gosciu555 1 year ago
as far as i get, if the battle ended in morning, it took place at night. so US forces had all the adventages, including GPS, thermal-vision and night-vision. that was like killing sleepy chickens. no wonder that iraqys look so terrefied and lost. they were halpless.
thirdromeprivate 1 year ago
Cry Havoc! And let slip the dogs of war.
ogdocvato 1 year ago
Here's a quote from wikipedia for your interest " The majority of Iraqi armored forces still used old Chinese Type 59s and Type 69s, Soviet-made T-55s from the 1950s and 1960s, and some poor quality Asad Babil tanks (domestically assembled tank based on Polish T-72 hulls with other parts of mixed origin). These machines were not equipped with up-to-date equipment, such as thermal sights or laser rangefinders, and their effectiveness in modern combat was very limited." plus no airconditioning!
PangeaSpreads 1 year ago
@PangeaSpreads just brilliant post.
thirdromeprivate 1 year ago
@thirdromeprivate True, the vid is a typical righteous American army bone head creation where as usual they portray themselves and brave hero's that engaged a highly dangerous enemy and through clever tactics and American courage stole a great victory against overwhelming odds or some load of bull like that which gets shown to other bone head american recuits to instil a false sense of security and supremacy. These tactics against a modern army with modern tech and air support would be minced.
PangeaSpreads 1 year ago
@PangeaSpreads These were the same Iraqis that were at war with Iran for over 10 years versus a bunch of untested young rookies. There's no bragidosio. The results speak for themselves. Superior training won this battle. Nothing stupid like,"the water Americans drink makes us supermen, or because we are American means we are naturally stronger than others." Yes, we are FULL of pride. Especially our military, but as human beings, I don't think we are better than anybody else.
jonesy97 1 year ago
@jonesy97 Iraqis were the remnants of what was blitzed during the first war in Iraq with rookies in 1950's and 60's tanks hot as ovens, most made of dodgy parts constructed in all sorts of places thrown together with ineffective rounds against tanks with twice the range, a computer targeting system and satellite link .Tanks all look the same at a glance but this was by no means a glorious victory against the odds. The "gulf" between the two tanks was like m-16s with thermal imaging vs muskets
PangeaSpreads 1 year ago
@jonesy97 By the way I'm not having a go at American people, not to be confused and I ain't pro any army, they're not formed to pick flowers but trained killers who do what they get told whatever that may be like good brainless drones and get fed righteous heroic bullshit vids like this with the usual "everyone who don't think like us are evil and wrong" undertone but in truth the soldier is expendable and acceptable losses are whatever wins it, left to beg on the streets if mutilated in battle
PangeaSpreads 1 year ago
@PangeaSpreads No, no prob. No offence taken. I'm in agreement with you on the tank advantage. Yes, technologically, the coalition forces were decades ahead. And no, of course, the odds were not even, at all. The world versus Iraq. Odds like that were a military necessity to ensure victory. To absolutly overwhelm Iraqi ground forces. I think that we were pretty damn lucky our collective losses weren't higher, despite the edge in technology. I can speak some experience of this. I was there.
jonesy97 1 year ago
@jonesy97 Well in fact you guys slow the planet and it's peace down in about 53.000 ways.
Hyperinflation is now going to shut your tiny ass up.
Well done. Fuckin great job.
See you in line for bread and butter.
stahlwerke 10 months ago
@stahlwerke Wow. Way to stay on the subject matter. Sorry. I'll never shut up as long as American-hating little trolls like you are out there, so go ahead and blame the USA on all your pathetic personal problems. I like to think I personally had a hand in your misery. Jonesy will always be here for you- making your life just a little closer to that delicious bread and butter. Bon appatite, asshole!
jonesy97 10 months ago
@jonesy97 I'm not an American hating troll at all. In fact most of my friends here in Germany are Americans. Spent most of my army days with American troops based here. Sorry to say there is no misery here in which you had a personal hand. We do discuss the Sad American a lot. The typical US braindead loner that gets all stirred up when his Government boss tells him that porky pie has hidden behind the bushes in some poor country and that he needs to defend the bald eagle once more. get real.
stahlwerke 10 months ago
@stahlwerke You krauts have always had a knack for perversing the truth and reality.
ThunderAppeal 9 months ago
krauts haha omygod 1942.
Germany, Japan and China by the way; OWN you.
so maybe you got some kinky nicknames for the Japanese and Chinese too?
stahlwerke 9 months ago
@stahlwerke Wow.. I know you're not disrespecting America when all the fucked up, racist shit Germany has done.
AgrivatedKillah 9 months ago
Too bad the Americans didn't face any modern armor. They faced tanks from the 70s...It like comparing a new mercedes to the Model T Ford of the 1920s. Of course it's gonna be a one sided battle.
Kallosar 1 year ago
@Kallosar, tanks of the 60s and 70s vs tanks of the mid 80s, what a big difference.
thenoobfactor 1 year ago
@thenoobfactor
Well considering the fact that they were using T-55s (Produced in 1955 before there were Fire Control Systems, Thermal Imaging, Improved Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot rounds, ERA, and all kinds of nifty features for tanks nowadays..The Abrams isnt exactly the best tank but it certainly made itself look good but taking a shit on tanks that should be in museums but hey Americans like to brag about destroying third world armies.)
T-55 (1955) vs M1A1 (Upgraded 1991 Version)
Kallosar 1 year ago
@Kallosar, T-62(1961), T-72 and Asad Babil (1971), all have composite or alloyed armour, and laser rangefinders, and the Abrams still crushed them. And dont forget its the crew that makes the tank. Isralis in upgraded shermans destroyed T55s and T62s during the Six Day war and Yom Kippur war.
thenoobfactor 1 year ago
@thenoobfactor
Wrong. The Asad Babil DOES NOT have composite or alloyed armor improvements...or Range Finders and even Night vision was not available to many Iraqi armor divisions. These were downgraded T-72s purchased from Poland I believe.
There was even a case that ONLY 5 Tanks out of the thousands...had ERA...Even then it was the most primitive ERA during the 03 Invasion.
there's nothing to brag about taking a shit on third world countries.
The T-80U would of been a good tank for IRaq
Kallosar 1 year ago
@Kallosar I'm not bragging, I'm not even American. But if the Abrams is as mediocre as you say, then it would not have had a victory as one sided as it did, maybe 100 abrams lost for the thousands of iraqi tanks destroyed, but certinly not the tiny handful it really lost. And while its true that the Asad Babil was a shoddy Iraqi made copy of the T72, but Iraq did not have the industrial capacity to build the entire fleet of T72s for the republican guard. Many were genuine models.
thenoobfactor 1 year ago
@thenoobfactor
A Mediocre tank against a really shitty tank makes the mediocre tank look amazing. Take an RPG game for example: It's like a max level guy with crap gear vs a lvl 1...He's beating on the little guys because he gets wrecked if he goes against the guys his lvl but they have better shit.
It was so one sided because of the tech differences. The Iraqis had almost no training. Couldn't afford or didn't bother upgrading their T-72s (which were all basic versions).
Kallosar 1 year ago
@Kallosar ...
you just compared
possibly 15 years to over 50 years.. nice comparison.
AgrivatedKillah 9 months ago
Blitzkrieg at its finest! Hit them hard and hit them fast.....then CRUSH them
gopconservative78 1 year ago
4-7 CAV, 3AD - Garryowen - your left flank!
screenwriter44 1 year ago 2
@screenwriter44 - 4/7 CAV, we had your back, A/40th MLRS 'Deep Strike!' 3AD-DIVARTY, we weren't going to let anyone compare you guys to Custer if it killed every last one of us.... By the way, we rolled with 4/8 CAV leading 2nd BDE, till 3rd BDE passed through and we joined in with you guys to stay up front. Spearhead Steel!
deepstrike1991 7 months ago
2nd Squadron Headhunter Troop.Toujour Fucking Pret!!
pirate751 1 year ago
3/2ND ACR Lightning Troop!!!! Always Ready!!!!
hispdprsuit034 2 years ago 11
Comment removed
cbiwv 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2nd ACR was very good out there.
cbiwv 1 year ago
@hispdprsuit034 ai ee ya
deadmau5err 6 months ago
2nd ACR soldier, sitting on peace side yelling, "YEAH"!!!!!
US ARMY Black Beret. The unit was stationed in Amberg Germany before deployment. Wish I was there !!
ProfessorChaos821 2 years ago
I remember his recount of the attack on his vehicle... I heard it all on the radio... Remembering the commander known as "Dragoon 6" spelling may be wrong but I'll never forget it...Awesome victory though!
Waycooljr2270 2 years ago
yea operation iraqi freedom was so different tank wise... the iraqies hid there tanks in towns and in dug in positions... they didnt dare face us head on... but in the end we still destroyed the enemy tanks ... idk... was sure an interesing fight... even in fallujah... prolly the hardest fight i've ever scene or been in through out my 9 years in the marine corp
MrPlaystation3ftw 2 years ago
Boy does this bring back memories
fourdigger 2 years ago
"H" it's Dusty,you're old loader. Remember you took my CVC and banged it on the Ammo door because I was scaried Scittles? Want you to know you'd saved all of arses and we grew up to be custy old First Sargents and SGMs.I was a PFC during the Easting and risen (and sometimes fallen) to be a career man.
Also, want you you to know I've finished what we started @ OIF1.I was PLT Daddy as Recon. I saw myself in those boys and girls.You would've been proud.
"H" One more year and I'll be through!
dustyaries 2 years ago
does anyone have the link to the full documentary?
YAMASAKIZUKI 2 years ago
I was in this battle. I will never forget this experience.
cbiwv 2 years ago 2
very nice and interesting
TheCossak86 2 years ago
sgt jones kinda reminds me of kip from napoleon dynamite
nagyac0 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
AHHH, yes, great american battle against 30 years old downgraded export models tanks.
"Great" victory.
9K58 2 years ago
Another thing this documentary omits is that VII Corps' M1 tanks and Bradley IFVs covered 170 miles in 89 hours.
That may sound impressive at first - until you divide 170 by 89. Then you get the pace at which they moved; less than 2mph.
That's less than half as fast as a Mk.I Tank (1917), and at the ravenous fuel consumption rate of an M1 at low speed, they can's go any FARTHER than a Mk.I either.
It took 8.4 Million+ gallons of fuel to move only 3000 vehicles just 170 miles.
BlacktailFA 2 years ago
wow, nice information. Where did you get this kind of technical data?
calculated yourself?
9K58 2 years ago
I can't recall the title of the source --- I only copied a few paragraphs and pasted them in an RTF document, and I haven't been able to find it since.
I can paste a the most relevant sentences into this reply;
"The speed of the movement into the enemy rear was unparalleled. VII Corps attacked 170 miles in 89 hours — or about 45 miles a day."
"And this, while each armored division was consuming 500,000 - 750,000 gallons of fuel per day."
No room left --- I'll have to sent a 2nd reply.
BlacktailFA 2 years ago
One last reply, to finish what I started;
"This rate is comparable to the daily consumption of First and Third U.S. Armies in WWII of 850,000 for all 18 of their divisions combined. The corps as a whole consumed 6.2 million gallons of diesel fuel and 2.2 gallons of aviation fuel in 89 hours."
So much for the "efficient" gas turbine...
BlacktailFA 2 years ago
I can't comment on the fuel consumption but with regards to the rate of travel, the combat vehicles can only move as fast as their field trains which because of the large amount of vehicles can only move so fast.
NEPADad 2 years ago
Certainly, the M1's and Bradley IFV's can move at a fast clip but when you consider their field trains consisting of M35-A2's, HMMWV's, HEMMTS, M88's and 5-Tons have to keep within a reasonable distance to provide support, 170 miles in 89 hours is actually a good clip.
NEPADad 2 years ago 5
It takes hours to refuel and resupply a unit at a battalion level. If you include their FA support, which in the 2d ACR's case was the 210th FA and more specifically 3/17 FA which consisted of M-109's and FASV's...these vehicles must stay within a few miles and the M109 is a slow ass vehicle.
NEPADad 2 years ago
Comment removed
cobrabase 2 years ago 15
@cobrabase that is exactly right, but the Abrams is so powerful and advanced that it really doesnt need veterans of war ;)
SethP666 1 year ago
@cobrabase Yeah but we had idiot proof tech. And basically it was like if we had miniguns and the enemy had rocks.
andwhatelse 1 year ago
Comment removed
cobrabase 1 year ago
@cobrabase I am just tiered of hearing that the coalition forces were so brave and officers displayed great command in a tough situation.
andwhatelse 1 year ago
@cobrabase iraqis obviously were just a bunch of stoners sitting and watching themselves get blown up
Leopardipzg 1 year ago
@cobrabase
Practice at being stupid doesn't make you smart.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@cobrabase The biggest aromor battles since Kursk were those of 1973 Yom Kipur war dummy
kuronja985 1 year ago
@kuronja985
This was larger.
cobrabase 9 months ago
@cobrabase you compare 9 (nine) incomparable tanks to the battle of Kursk?
Has anyone ever slapped you?
Fool.
stahlwerke 10 months ago
Comment removed
cobrabase 9 months ago
@cobrabase
I'm 48 years old, I would never leave stupid comments here. I respect those who fough and risk their lives.
Dualismoassoluto 9 months ago
A Win is a Win
Wilmot1846 2 years ago
Freakin awesome!!!!!!
Shame they didn't have well developed MBT's though.
Aww man, that'd be awesome-er.
peepeevagi 2 years ago