https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/99/4b/e2994b49d0b60e35bad77813944a5f77.jpg

Does anyone know about this photo?
There is no debris around the tank so it was moved. The gun-tube is damaged/missing part of it. I assume the blowout panels worked but I can't see that section very well. I see the air gap between the inner and outer turret sides. I do not see an impact point on the turret sides so I was wondering what caused this type of damage that would peel the turret side? I am thinking that the turret may have been cut and peeled back intentionally after the fire. Notice the burned area on the side of the turret. The smoke /soot stain is not inside the peeled area therefore it was not exposed to the fire from the drivers compartment. the cut coincides with the rear of the crew compartment.

Here, rather typing a huge response on the armor of an Abrams I found this blog.

This is picture of a T-72, supposedly but it is Russian, showing the armor plates between the inner and outer skins of the turret. This also shows that the side of the Abrams turret is heavily armored by like the front of the turret.

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2017/01/early-m1-abrams-composite-armor.html

T-72 showing armor plates set in the "cheeks" on the front of the turret.

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nBPQCYqmyk4/VJmN1mf9OjI/AAAAAAAAA8Y/ktZKrH1l9hs/s1600/t-72b_bulgingplates.jpg

And a picture of a Merkava showing the same.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QEfu-3NuzF4/VubvvcVQy1I/AAAAAAAAAEc/fkLkM0DOz3oFn5gW2Mm0DJnyRFVUpo23w/s1600/merkavaChobham.png

I'm sure they recovered the classified parts of the tank including the armor when they recovered it.


As to the story behind the destroyed tank? It looks like IED damage. Where it happened? Somewhere with lots of sand.


Additional: Just found this picture on Pintrest and it claims it's a Marine Corp M1 destroyed in Iraq in '03. The veracity of the claim? Unknown.

Okay, how about a panzerfaust? Just kidding, don't want to start another argument,er, discussion!!!!!
Jesse

I saw the article. Unfortunately, the link to the page is not available anymore, I even tried Wayback Machine, but I did read it years ago and it did have citation and evaluation of the US Marines documents. The link is still referenced here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PG-7VR

The original link: https://www.strategypage.com/error.asp?aspxerrorpath=/military_photos/solved.aspx

So, it was also around 2003, that M1 Abrams was said to be part of a 2 tanks group during a night ops. Both of them was getting hit by many RPG rockets that their exterior equipment are all wore off. They tried to use the NV camera on the roof MGs to identify the object that disable the tank, but the MGs were gone. The crew was unharmed and the tank did stay functional in battle, only the tank's mobility was disabled.

Apparently, they found out that the insurgence possessed some PG-7VG tandem charge with 600mm penetration after ERA (that over 3 times the power of the LONG 88mm at point blank range!) could disable the Abrams at a very clean angle. Also considering that the common RPG-7 HEAT has 500mm and it doesn't seem to pose a thread, the new tanks are pretty well armored.

BTW, Some soviet tanks like the IS-4, T-10 heavy and other prototype were armored enough to be consider immune to the Long 88 from the front, and were phrased out because raw RHA can't be as good as composite armor...

Bottom line is that the Long 88mm has very limited killing power against newer tanks.

I seriously doubt that a German 88mm with a AT round can take out a modern MBT, but I’m pretty sure that a 88mm, within 1000 meters, can take out a T55/62, M48/60, Type62/74, AMX30 and Leopard 1 with a straight-on flank or rear shot. It might take two to three shot to completely destroy a MTB that’s using1950s/1960s armor technology.

These are not exactly “modern” tanks, but tanks that, even in today’s world, will be around for many more years.

IMHO the answer is yes. I was participated in a test gunnery back in 2008 to evaluate AP ammo and Anti-tank missiles against T-72 (in my definition a modern tank...). The result, a BTR-80A armed with a 30mm machine gun (2A72) easily penetrated multiple times the T-72 side armor (the road wheels and the armor plate beyond). It looked like a cheese slice after the testing. I think an 88 has four times the AP capacity than russian 30mm gun. However, I think an 88 has no chance against modern western MBTs. Hope this helps.

Depends on where the projectile hits.
A tank, old or modern doesn't matter, is not armoured to the same protection levels on all surfaces. The tank would become excessively heavy if all surfaces had the same armour.

Tiger II


M60

That's a great story idea!

can we fit the '88'with a modern warhead?

1130m/s is nothing to sneeze at, the RB 120mm 1580-1750m/s

Nope. First line of the O.P. "but can most feared anti-tank cannon of WW II"

That limits it to ammo available during WWII.

Wot?!
We have rules now!?!