aero, I would say my unit had about the norm of the 1st cav while the 1st cav had much less than say the 2nd "tiger brig" that pushed up into Kuwait from the south. I was flying out on that left hook that drove through great expanses of desert before reaching an area just west of Basra.
Again I did not see what I would call a great deal of action. mostly taking shots at 2.5 to 3k and only was worried about being killed one time near that oil industrial area...cheers ute
Your insight is always appreciated, I guess some things just don’t change, armour engagement around built-up areas is inevitably more dangerous ever since WW2.
Fantastic post.
Things that we should remember.
America rules the air in Iraq therefore anything that is a large/noisy target
can be hit and destroyed
Israel in Lebanon was confronted by a group armed with very good manportable AT systems. I don't believe the Iraqi's have anything equivalent
Thanks, I guess one of the harsh realities of war is that you don’t get to choose your weapon when your opponent is at your door and ready to strike. I should also add that the successful use of air power is by no means universally applicable to all conflict. It is often claimed that air power won the Kosovo war for NATO, in a sense this was correct, as NATO alliance was able conclude the conflict on their term by using air power alone throughout the whole campaign, but the military lesson from this war was very different to Op Desert Storm, the Serbian leadership capitulated politically after realising that if they don’t back down, every factories, bridges, roads and government building in the country are going to be systematically destroyed, not because the military was taking a heavy blow like Iraq in 1991, but no sane political leaders and citizens would allow his country to be destroyed like that, Therefore, politically speaking, air power was very successful in Kosovo, but militarily speaking, it was not effective. How effective an air campaign can be is determined by various factors, any nation who is facing the prospect of being the target of a sustained air campaign has difficult dilemmas before him. Do you sit there in the open and hope the bomb won’t fall on your head like Iraq, or do you hide your asset yet lose all initiatives in a war like Serbia? In both cases, ultimately you lose. This should provide food for thought for many years to come.
talking about DU sabots, just what is its kill mechanism? One of my profs, who was in the Navy, said that second handed information he has states that the heat is the kill mechanism. I always thought the disintegration of the round itself is what's important.
My understanding is that by utilising Depleted Uranium in the manufacturing of projectile, it could raise the density of the metal above the usual figure of 19.3gm/cm3 found in tungsten, which is the most common material used, so DU round is harder and could perforate a thicker armour plate, but it still is a kinetic energy projectile, as opposed to HEAT and HESH which use chemical reaction involving high-velocity jet.