Politics: Eryx instead of RPG-7?

[penguino]

You can barley stear those rounds anyways... i think and RFPG would be better because of its anti-personel capibilities!

[-{DFA}-Brak710]

Nah, because anything that looked like an AK would be removed too.

You have to remember that this is a war from the "near future", so the RPG-7 may be obsoleat considering how advanced the MEC seems.

[Wicz]

yea, but thats very rare. Again only 2 m1s ever destroyed in operation iraqi freedom.

It speaks volumes about the weapons effectiveness if a good hit is achieved....although the poor accuracy of the RPG series makes 'good hits' a rarity as you say

[Wicz]

An RPG-7 cant take out a tank no matter what war head it has. It can damage it but not take it out.

Also RPG-7's are anti personell. + they arent wire guided.

I suggest you do some more research.

Also if the inside of a tank ( the crew compartment ) is burned and the 'control equipment' is damaged, the tank, while still appearing intact from the outside is in fact useless and effectively 'taken out'.

I dont care what tank you might be in......if one or two tandem's get good contact you will wish you weren't.

Also if, as you say RPG-7's are anti personnel what is wrong with this picture?



Here are some facts for you....

Warheads

The HE (grenade) warhead is designed for use against exposed troops, light armor (including APCs), bunkers and other 'soft' targets of opportunity. In Afghanistan and Somalia it was effective against helicopters. The HE warhead is impact fused, and detonates with a large explosion in the direction of travel. The case and charge generate moderate amounts of shrapnel and blast.

The HEAT (anti-tank) round is a standard shaped charge penetrator, similar in concept to those used in Main battle tanks. In this sort of warhead, the shape of the explosive material within the grenade focuses the explosive energy on a copper (or other similar metal) lining. This melts the metal and propels it forward at a high speed. This speed, along with the high temperatures and pressures involved, converts the metal into a narrow, solid jet. The jet's high speed and narrow impact zone allows it to punch through Rolled Homogenous Armour (RHA) used in armoured vehicles including some types of main battle tanks.

Specialty grenades are available for illumination, smoke, CN (tear gas), and white phosphorus. Russia, many former Warsaw Pact nations, and China have developed a fuel-air explosive warhead. Another recent development is a tandem HEAT warhead capable of penetrating composite armor, as well as RPG screens and reactive armor

Some pics

Accuracy limits the standard RPG-7 to a practical range of 50 m, although it can reach 150 or even 300 m in skilled hands. It has an indirect fire (bombardment) range to 920 m, limited by the 4.5 second self-destruct timer.

There are persistent rumours of laser-guided Israeli RPG-7s accurate to the self-destruct radius.

[Eddy01741]

I suggest you do some more research.

Also if the inside of a tank ( the crew compartment ) is burned and the 'control equipment' is damaged, the tank, while still appearing intact from the outside is in fact useless and effectively 'taken out'.

I dont care what tank you might be in......if one or two tandem's get good contact you will wish you weren't.

Also if, as you say RPG-7's are anti personnel what is wrong with this picture?



Here are some facts for you....

Do some research yourself, i doubt a tendem warhead RPG could penetrate a M1A2SEP. It has the most advanced Compostie armor that stops all kinds of heat warheads. Why odn't tanks use HEAT rounds anymore, because of the frickin composite armor and the ERA on russian tanks. Maybe a RPG-29 could take out an abrams, but only a RPG-7 could penetrate the abrams if it 1: hit a weak spot (the bottom, or between the turret and hull/chassis) 2: Hit the fire control or engine, there for disabling the tank aand then an rpg could hit the weak spot of the tank 3: Because the crew was stupid and decided to be on the out side of the tank the whole time, so it would kill almost all of the crew, except the gunner, the driver, commander, and loader (i think) have hatches to look out of. So that would be a tragedy, the guys would come in AKs and shoot the gunner to death. And if there were only 4 M1s lost in the gulf war, and 2 lost in Operation Iraqi Freedom, then that's only 6 tanks lost to enemy tanks, RPGs, terrorists, mines etc. So i think that Saddam hussain whould have some tendem warhead RPGs and those did not penetrate very effectively, a large AT mine would have worked better. And the predator can penetrate because it is top-attack in real life, and it is still in testing stage, although it can take out any modern tank (even the M1). An RPG-7 could take out a T72 with ERA because of the tendem warhead and the T72s lack of compostie armor, it still had steel armor, although very thick, any modern tank round should penetrate it. Plus, i believe Russia does not even use the RPG-7 anymore, no reason for them to, because it can't penetrate modern tanks effectively enough, while newer AT missiles like the Predator, can take out any modern tank today.

[MedicManiac]

Plus if this game was un-balanced even more and exactly like real-life, the USMC would kinda' own the MEC and China. USMC wouldnt even use troops, for the MEC they would come in low and fast with B1-Lancers and carpet bomb them off the map. For China, B-2 carpet bombing and F/A-22 air superiority missions. I dont want to come off sounding like some ass here, but thats sorta' the truth and probably how it would be handled. The troops would just come in and wipe out the straglers and hold the objectives.

[Eddy01741]

Plus if this game was un-balanced even more and exactly like real-life, the USMC would kinda' own the MEC and China. USMC wouldnt even use troops, for the MEC they would come in low and fast with B1-Lancers and carpet bomb them off the map. For China, B-2 carpet bombing and F/A-22 air superiority missions. I dont want to come off sounding like some ass here, but thats sorta' the truth and probably how it would be handled. The troops would just come in and wipe out the straglers and hold the objectives.

Yeah, it is unfair, but quite true. If US and all it's allies agree that it can use nuclear weapons, then they'll just send up quite a bit of ICBMS, and after a week, let's see what the MEC and china will say, especially because in the near future we'll have ABMs, so the Chinese missiles arn't going to be very effective, plus, i don't htink China has many ICBms if many, ICBMS are the only missiles that would reach US. And if they don't use nukes, then, they will just carpet bomb them, or just moab them to death, the moab is the Massive Ordanance Air Burst, also known as the Mother of All Bombs, that of course is non nuclear, so they wouldn't stand a chance, For all we know US has enough nukes to destroy mankind, but we would rather use precision bombs because they stike the intended target and they don't kill many civilians. And since the US did not agree to the Geneva Convention about flame weapons, we could just use napalm bombs and just do what we did to Japan before the nukes came, so we would just destroy cities by using the flame weapons with B-1s. That would cause pressure on the Chinese president and make him surrender because of how many innocent people were dying because of the war.

[Lt.Phillips]

us should have got an at4 and mec should have got an rpg

[Eddy01741]

us should have got an at4 and mec should have got an rpg

I agree that it would be fair and more realistic for past times, but that's like in the 70s-80s. So right now i'm fine with the ATrockets, as long as they work, they're good enough.

[Wranger4400]

It's possible, or ea just forgot.

[imported_Chubz]

I agree. They wouldn't have left out a weapon simply because it has killed many allied forces. If that were the case the AK-47 would have never made it into the game....

Very good point. :)

I agree... I'd say it was because it would not be able to be guided, therefore making it quite pathetic compared to the China and USMC wire-guided rocket launchers.

[Wicz]

Do some research yourself, i doubt a tendem warhead RPG could penetrate a M1A2SEP. It has the most advanced Compostie armor that stops all kinds of heat warheads. Why odn't tanks use HEAT rounds anymore, because of the frickin composite armor and the ERA on russian tanks. Maybe a RPG-29 could take out an abrams, but only a RPG-7 could penetrate the abrams if it 1: hit a weak spot (the bottom, or between the turret and hull/chassis) 2: Hit the fire control or engine, there for disabling the tank aand then an rpg could hit the weak spot of the tank 3: Because the crew was stupid and decided to be on the out side of the tank the whole time, so it would kill almost all of the crew, except the gunner, the driver, commander, and loader (i think) have hatches to look out of. So that would be a tragedy, the guys would come in AKs and shoot the gunner to death. And if there were only 4 M1s lost in the gulf war, and 2 lost in Operation Iraqi Freedom, then that's only 6 tanks lost to enemy tanks, RPGs, terrorists, mines etc. So i think that Saddam hussain whould have some tendem warhead RPGs and those did not penetrate very effectively, a large AT mine would have worked better. And the predator can penetrate because it is top-attack in real life, and it is still in testing stage, although it can take out any modern tank (even the M1). An RPG-7 could take out a T72 with ERA because of the tendem warhead and the T72s lack of compostie armor, it still had steel armor, although very thick, any modern tank round should penetrate it. Plus, i believe Russia does not even use the RPG-7 anymore, no reason for them to, because it can't penetrate modern tanks effectively enough, while newer AT missiles like the Predator, can take out any modern tank today.

Another recent development is a tandem HEAT warhead capable of penetrating composite armor, as well as RPG screens and reactive armor.

The tandem is designed to defeat composite armour. You might not like the idea that it does but that doesn't make it any less of a fact.

The difference between my post and yours is simple....mine contains facts and yours contains your opinion.

You stick to your opinion and i will stick to the facts.

[Eddy01741]

The tandem is designed to defeat composite armour. You might not like the idea that it does but that doesn't make it any less of a fact.

The difference between my post and yours is simple....mine contains facts and yours contains your opinion.

You stick to your opinion and i will stick to the facts.

Look, i really don't want to start a flame war (i had a major flame war in the post "machineguns must be patched") but if you do look at the facts, there have only been 6 M1s destroyed in battle at Iraq, a M1 is morelikely to be killed by another M1 by accident than be killed by RPGs, i mean, terrorists (actually insurgents) fired like 6 rpg rounds at an m1 (not at the same place) but it didn't become destroyed, i don't even want to know how many RPGs were used trying to destroy the M1, lets see, the attepted kill using RPG-7: the M1s destroyed is kinda pathetic for the RPG, but the thing was used agianst our tanks in the Vietnam war, so that is kinda old. But the RPG-7 is a very good alll around weapon for terrorists as it is cheap, the ammo is cheap, and there's so many types of ammo, Heat rounds, Tendem HEAT rounds, Fragmentation Anti-Infantary rounds, and Thermobaric (aka Fuel Air Explosives) rounds. So it is a very versatile weapon, but it's use against modern tanks is not much nowadays, but other uses like heli killing, replacement of mortars, and anti-infantary are really effective against US troops as the insurgents just hide, shoot, and retreat mainly.

And by the way, composite armor was made to counter Heat rounds as well as KE rounds, but new hyper-velocity APFSDS is good enough that it can penetrate Composite armor, if the RPG-7 had some hypervelocity APFSDS round, than it might stand a chance against the Abrams.

PLEASE do not start a flame war, i really don't like them.

[Wicz]

Look, i really don't want to start a flame war (i had a major flame war in the post "machineguns must be patched") but if you do look at the facts, there have only been 6 M1s destroyed in battle at Iraq, a M1 is morelikely to be killed by another M1 by accident than be killed by RPGs, i mean, terrorists (actually insurgents) fired like 6 rpg rounds at an m1 (not at the same place) but it didn't become destroyed, i don't even want to know how many RPGs were used trying to destroy the M1, lets see, the attepted kill using RPG-7: the M1s destroyed is kinda pathetic for the RPG, but the thing was used agianst our tanks in the Vietnam war, so that is kinda old. But the RPG-7 is a very good alll around weapon for terrorists as it is cheap, the ammo is cheap, and there's so many types of ammo, Heat rounds, Tendem HEAT rounds, Fragmentation Anti-Infantary rounds, and Thermobaric (aka Fuel Air Explosives) rounds. So it is a very versatile weapon, but it's use against modern tanks is not much nowadays, but other uses like heli killing, replacement of mortars, and anti-infantary are really effective against US troops as the insurgents just hide, shoot, and retreat mainly.

And by the way, composite armor was made to counter Heat rounds as well as KE rounds, but new hyper-velocity APFSDS is good enough that it can penetrate Composite armor, if the RPG-7 had some hypervelocity APFSDS round, than it might stand a chance against the Abrams.

PLEASE do not start a flame war, i really don't like them.

I have no intention of starting a flame war but i do not accept that the newly developed RPG-7 tandem warheads cannot penetrate composite armour....because that is one of the reasons they were designed.

If you agree with that then we have nothing to argue about. If you dont agree i cant be bothered arguing with you anyway so its all good.

[Eddy01741]

I have no intention of starting a flame war but i do not accept that the newly developed RPG-7 tandem warheads cannot penetrate composite armour....because that is one of the reasons they were designed.

If you agree with that then we have nothing to argue about. If you dont agree i cant be bothered arguing with you anyway so its all good.

Ok, i accept your deal, no more posting or flaming about Real life weapons, if you want that,then another forum that is quite good is strategypage.com, go to military discussions,and then there's all kind of things on Armor,Armies of the world, and weapons of the world as well as a ton more.


Cheers