nice read abt RPG-7
-
woo. thanks
-
Disagree with this guy man.. The way he said it, the tank is almost useless in urban combat. But American experience in Somalia (1993) and Israeli experience in Palestinian territories, show that armour is critically important in urban battles, especially if the insurgents are relatively under-armed as the Palestinians are. On the whole, if you ain't gonna use a tank, what the hell are you gonna use when you got snipers all over the place? Armoured bulldozers as tried by the Israelis??
-
If tanks are alone, yes they are in deep shit. But if they are working with infantry, that is another story. A cannon can sure provide some mean fire support, while the infrantry soldiers can sure make sure no one get too near a tank to do serious damages. All down to tactics of deployment.Originally posted by Langley:Disagree with this guy man.. The way he said it, the tank is almost useless in urban combat. But American experience in Somalia (1993) and Israeli experience in Palestinian territories, show that armour is critically important in urban battles, especially if the insurgents are relatively under-armed as the Palestinians are. On the whole, if you ain't gonna use a tank, what the hell are you gonna use when you got snipers all over the place? Armoured bulldozers as tried by the Israelis?? -
he has made a valid observation in both Grozny and Iraq... the insurgents in these places are not "under-armed" ... and driving a tank through a narrow urban street surrounded by tall buildings really isn't smart... especially since it has now become clear that there are a lotta RPGs around.Originally posted by Langley:Disagree with this guy man.. The way he said it, the tank is almost useless in urban combat. But American experience in Somalia (1993) and Israeli experience in Palestinian territories, show that armour is critically important in urban battles, especially if the insurgents are relatively under-armed as the Palestinians are. On the whole, if you ain't gonna use a tank, what the hell are you gonna use when you got snipers all over the place? Armoured bulldozers as tried by the Israelis??
as long as pple are only taking pot-shots at u with small arms, tanks and APCs provide u with enough protection... but with RPGs? i would hate to be in the vehicle... -
Some advance RPG-7 warhead is currently in use in iraq that can take on reactive armour. Cheap and yet devastating,I wonder what is the future of armour?
-
i wonder why SAF dont use RPG. Cheap and good. Somemore got new types of warhead.
-
Buildings hard to clear leh. Time and effort consuming process which can be very dangerous too as the Israelis discovered when they raided Jenin refugee camp a few years ago. Full of bobby traps. That's why now they juz use their armoured bulldozers to mow down the buildings. If we cannot use tanks what can we use? Use ST Fantails to spot snipers/RPG gunners then call in Predators with Hellfires??Originally posted by storywolf:If tanks are alone, yes they are in deep shit. But if they are working with infantry, that is another story. A cannon can sure provide some mean fire support, while the infrantry soldiers can sure make sure no one get too near a tank to do serious damages. All down to tactics of deployment. -
Always the answers is in machines and more machines only - manned and unmanned.
Why not genetic engineer high tech Singa sniper eating war dogs?
Dogs that will only have peace when they eat non tag human flesh with gunpowder toppings or they die........ -
considering that the iron curtain only fell 14 years ago, how were we supposed to buy RPGs to arm the SAF with?Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:i wonder why SAF dont use RPG. Cheap and good. Somemore got new types of warhead.
a fairer comparison would be between RPG-7 and the 84mm, not the LAW.
the russian equivalent of the LAW is the RPG-18, which is a foldable, disposable light anti-tank weapon.
all things considered, they really should "modernise" the 84mm since the older ones are really heavy and unwieldly...