Dunno if this has been posted here before (or better posted at the Soldier's Stories forum), but here it is...

An investigation on what killed an M1A1 Abrams in Iraq: http://www.marinetimes.com/channel.php?GQID=292236 (includes a slideshow)

Also a discussion on that one which you might be interested in following: http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002371.html

It really seems that the Abrams should have its skirts up-armored soon.

It looks like whatever it was, it was an unbelievably lucky shot. No injuries to crew still upholds the M-1 as one superior tank.. It won't take the boys at FK to figure out what and where on the round.

From what I read it was a lucky shot. Still I think it was the first hull penetration of an Abrams. Also their was a BIG dose of luck that prevented any of the crew being injured. If I remember the story right, the Gunner's body armor was grazed by the round. Life was a matter of inches for that guy!

looks like round as on steroids or something any guess's to what it is?

For such a small diameter round,I wonder more about the quality of the armor in that area?
Is the turret the only component that is DU enhanced? and is the hull merely plain armor steel?

Hi. Nothing is infallible or indestructable. The old race between armor and projectile, which started when the first time man picked up a stone and threw it at another man, continues.

With all the major world-wide corporations now in each other pockets and designing rooms, and who knows where else for that matter, it's really hard to tell where this particlar round first saw the light of day, or more importantly, who paid for it's development in the first place.

Still believe tha Abrams to be one of the best fighting AFV so far designed and built but still, like any other AFV, it can be taken out one way or another given the right set of circumstances and tools to do it with.

Take care, sgirty.

Well from what I read it looks like it was a really really luck shot with an RPG, from where it hit and all

It wasn't an RPG, there wasn't a scratch on the Abrams around where it hit. If it had been an RPG then it would at least have blasted the track away, but it passed between the a very small gap in the side skirt, over the track and into the turret well. The Abrams has very thick frontal armor in both the turret and hull, amounting to about two feet, not counting the slope. The sides of the hull are also a little thicker back to the turret well, but where the turret starts it becomes thinner due to the needs of the turret width. It was right at the very front of this thinner armor that the round hit. This is not to say that there is no protection, the thinnest the armor ever gets is 1.25" of RHA (Rolled Homogenous Armor, a layered type of sheet armor) which will still take a beating, but as has already been pointed out. nothing is indestructable, and there is always the Golden BB. The other Abrams lost yesterday was destroyed by a buried explosive charge, resulting in the deah of two of its crew members.

considering the amount of material pierced, it must be quite a powerfull round. also considered the diameter of the round. hardly any fragmentation . clean cuts! what cán it be?

The article and slide show make for very interesting reading and viewing. The experts current guess seem to point to a much newer generation hollow charge weapon than the old style RPG round. Remember though that the RPG is really only a launch unit, and is a somewhat "generic" phrase at that. Which RPG munition is the question.

From the article it does sound like this was a fairly lucky shot, right to one of the weaker areas of the armor. The real luck was on the side of the crew however since none of them were hurt.

Indeed interesting reading... No bad injuries and that's even better reading!
Thumbs up for the GI's (tankers) over there!

I would also point out that the vehicle wasn't killed, it was just taken back to the repair yard for analysis. It was supposed to be back in operation soon.

I saw this story thursday morning before reporting for week-end duty . I took a good look at the M1A1 that I was on , I have to agree with BroAbrams and others just a pure luck shot . The small diameter of the hole has me thinking that it could be a 25mm or maybe a bmp 2 ? As a M1A1 tank commander this hits a bit to close for comfort . Well the tank and crew will live to fight another day , so this shows the top of the line tank that the M1A1 is .
P.S. found this pic. take a look at the M-919 round small diameter sabot round (just a guess)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/25.htm

Here's an explanation from a reliable source as to what hit the Abrams...

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/default.asp?target=HTARM.HTM

They are not claiming to have the 100% ironclad answer, but they have a good track record for getting good info.

I must say I am ignorant to this news. I did not know this had taken place. where was this topic in the news, I never heard of it on TV or my military site army.mil,military.com, or army knowledge on line. go figure.
Even so I will go to the battlefield any day in an M1 Abrams, still the battle tank king for the US ARMOR tanker.

Agreed, 'twas a lucky shot... but one that could've been TOTALLY prevented though by having the skirts uparmored like what the Brits and Germans do to their Challenger I/IIs and Leo2s respectively, IMO. IIRC, the Leo2A5/A6 have better armor coverage on their skirts now as opposed to the M1. The Brits almost always have their Challenger I/IIs' skirts up-armored (instead of using the "light" skirts) when going to combat, so one can argue that with regard to side shots, the Challenger I/II and Leo2A5/A6 and even the Leclerc have better protection as opposed to the M1.

Agreed 100% about going to battle in an Abrams!! Its' hard to imagine a more successful weapons system! I remember when Congress and the media were decrying it and the Bradley as being overpriced, unnecessary and so on...Ask they men who crew 'em!

Uparmored side skirts sounds like a good plan. What are the weight and width issues to be traded off? But with the type of combat we are facing around the world today, with the large amount of RPG type weapons on the world market, it seems to make sense.

Still- no matter what measures are taken there is no 100% solution- the lucky shot will always be out there!

A salute to the crews out on the line, the engineers who put the package together, the planners who saw the need, and TO ALL THE TROOPS!!

I am going to agree and disagree, here. First of all, this being the "golden BB" shot that scooted in between the cracks and exploited the tiniest hole in the side skirt, the same thing would have happened to thicker, bulkier side skirts. Secondly, heavier side skirts would raise the weight enormousley for this bulging 70 ton monster. Admittedly, they would provide better protection to the more vulnerable suspension. Those are the disagreement. The agreement is that only seven men have died in combat operations in an Abrams, and only two of those as a result to enemy fire (the result of a massive explosive charge buried under a road and remotely detonated just a week ago). This is proving the safest place to be on the battlefield is in an Abrams. None of the other current generations of tanks have seen the combat the Abrams has and proved as reliable and safe. The Merkava III comes in a close 2nd with 3 deaths, while the Chally two follows on its heels with four. Obviously, they are all good tanks and I am sure each nation is quite proud of it's achievements, but I am extra proud of our Abrams.

Rob

well, I would have to say the Merkava series have the longest battle record, and most of it in population centers, something the M1 series was not designed for.

I think current events show it is still hard, but not impossible, to drill a hole in a large piece of steel.

Now, what this makes me wonder is, how good are US ATGM's vs armor? Sooner or later we are going to either a. fight a real war, with a real army, with real tanks or B. run into real ATGM's. Hard to believe that Iraq could stand up to anything considering what they have been shown to have...RPG's...sheesh.

and was it a Stinger that shot down our Blackhawk? Will we have to face our own weapons inthe future? Makes all those "stinger loans" to afghanistan look kinda dumb now...

Reminds me of that CNN footage where an Army or Marine squad with a Humvee fired off a TOW at a parked and abandoned T55...... AND MISSED! :-) Then you'll hear the two men cursing about not calibrating the guidance or sights. They I think fired off a second TOW or went up there, placed a charge, and detonated it from a safe distance. :-)

On the skirts, they could perhaps make it in such a way as being "spaced" armor so as to reduce weight as well as enhance protection, IMO at least. Besides, in MOUT and where there aren't too many bridges to cross, weight isn't much of an issue IMO. But still, yes, a lucky shot that one would be much rarer in the future with further "enhanced protection packages."

Well, to me this sounds interesting, and I'm not going to debate the armor of the Abrams over any other tank. The fact of the matter is that some kind of "bullet sized" projectile was able to get through the armor. This could mean many things. It could mean that someone has developed a small, but powerful weapon that can take down an Abrams tank (David vs. Goliath). It might also mean that this is just a regular bullet, but maybe the armor for that Abrams tank was defective somehow. Then again, maybe it was just a golden BB and everything was normal, it's just that somehow a bullet happened to get lucky and enter at the right spot. If it is a new weapon we're dealing with then what will be done to stop it? Could it be instead of spending money producing weapons of mass destruction and building up more tanks and planes, the former Iraqi government spent their time developing a bullet that would penetrate Abrams armor and buying up Guerilla type weapons? Given the fact that armor played a key roll in the first Gulf War and since they already have weapons that can shoot down airplanes and destroy other armor, all they really have left to find a way of defeating is the Abrams tank. Sure they could invest in mines, but anything could hit a mine. This maybe stretching it a bit, but it is something to look at.

Agreed. Lucky shot or not, it is still something to be investigated so that similar incidents in the future won't happen.

EDIT:

Apparently, another Abrams - this one being an A2SEP - was hit by an IED - a BIG IED, killing two or three crewmembers (only the driver survived). The turret was popped up.

Interesting links: http://www.activevr.com/afv/cgi_bin/web-bbs/webbbs_config.pl/read/44229#44229 http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002375.html