To: 11th_VA
T-55s?! The poor slobs. They might as well have rode into battle on mopeds.
17 posted on
03/25/2003 9:44:03 AM PST by
Redcloak
(All work and no FReep makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no FReep make s Jack a dul boy. Allwork an)
To: Redcloak
That's not right. You mean mopeds with bb guns. Now that's a more apt analogy.
19 posted on
03/25/2003 9:46:03 AM PST by
Rammer
To: Redcloak
Well, they already rode into battle on SUV's with mounted .50's against M-1 Abrams...
25 posted on
03/25/2003 9:54:02 AM PST by
Darksheare
(Nox aeternus en pax.)
To: Redcloak
You're right. This is embarassing.
But not embarassing enough. I'd just as soon see them in old pre-WWII Italian M 13/40s. Slow, and no armor.
26 posted on
03/25/2003 9:54:58 AM PST by
AnAmericanMother
(. . . there is nothing new under the sun.)
To: Redcloak
T-55s?! The poor slobs. They might as well have rode into battle on mopeds.Self propelled coffins
To: Redcloak
Poor slobs, maybe, but that 100mm main gun and 14.7mm topside will do a number on APCs and light wheeled vehicles.
Remember the Russian tankers motto: First it's a tank, then it's a pillbox and then a coffin. A lot can happen between stage one and three. If the crew wants to fight it out, they can make life really interesting for anyone within 1500 meters.
Tank on tank the T55 is pretty much a target for our M1s and Challengers, but it is still a tank and a dangerous opponent for our light troops in the right hands.
And a been there, done that note:
"Air cover is nice, when you have it, but you will not always have it when you REALLY need it!"
94 posted on
03/25/2003 2:26:28 PM PST by
cavtrooper21
("..he's not heavy, sir. He's my brother...")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson