I think he was referring to side armour, which in Iraqi T72 case wasn't more than 80mm in the hull - much less than that of turret sides for example -, in suspension area (and also well in range of carousel). Even in my wildest imagination I can't see how that small round could penetrate 400-500mm of RHA in addition to sand beams...

mr_rok, just make sure you'll not refer to that russian site with any of the SP:s political discussion forums, or you'll in good danger of being banned... funny, isn't it...

Why should I be banned for pointing to a couple of pictures?

This is not a public site where you're allowed to speak whatever you want, but as a private one the discussion is pretty effectively directed in a one direction. Any post and poster that is considered to be too "anti-american" will be deleted. Go trying and throw that link into a one political discussion board with few descriping paragraphs and see what happens. That's why I don't bother showing my differing opinions in political forums, even if my opinions and posts there are as objective as they are in here. Freedom of speech is as long as you speak what mainstream wants to hear. Sadly. One step further would be a point where one russian site in the past developed itself into. There every posts (a few mine included) that were controversal with russian webmasters point of view - even when backed with pure facts, or showed some critic, were without a question deleted from the boards...

O.K. You've made me read the terms of use once more and again I found nothing I violated. And I ain't anti-American. I pointed out to pictures showing largely destroyed American vehicles; I only meant to show EX98c the amount of damage on an abrams tank that in my opinion is futile to repair, answering on his post that there is no such thing as a destroyed tank only damaged. And I really believe in freedom of "intelligent" speech, not some stupid vulgarism. Anyway thanks for the tip.

RetiredCdn said: "Surely you're not trying to say that a 25mm penetrated 2-3 metres of compacted earth, as well as a frontal aspect T-72?" I had a hard time with that too, but didn't say much about it. I have shot a 120mm penetrator through a berm and the frontal armor of a T-72, but I seriously doubt that a 25mm round could penetrate the berm and then a T-72, whether front or side aspect. I did survey some T-72's, two to be precise, that were penetrated by the 25mm on the Bradley in 1991. Both were side aspect hull shots and neither caused a catastrophic kill. The turret burned but did not cook off. Neither tank was hull down. I don't believe the Bushmaster's 25mm has enough KE to penetrate a berm and the T-72. I would question whether the L44 could do that to a current generation T-80 on the frontal aspect. Although the case where one round from an L44 penetrated two T-72's in 1991 gives you pause to reflect.

While I can't give out details, I was privvy to a trial done on the 25mm, with different natures of ammunition, including the new Oerlikon ammo. Part of the trial was penetration tests done on a T-72M. I can say that no 25mm penetrated the frontal 45 degree aspect. I can also say that about 10-15% did penetrate the side armour, and close to 100% penetrated the rear. It is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that a 25mm could penetrate the frontal aspect of an Iraqi T-72, given that they did not have the "M" model, and given enough rounds fired. Now, during our trials, the range to the target was, shall we say, quite a bit less than 1000M. Based on this knowledge, I have a hard time grasping 25mm penetrating 2-3M of berm, and a T-72, either frontal or side aspect.

''Your photos made me do some digging. All of the A5/A6 and 122's that I have seen, and the photos for them, show the frontal armour going almost all the way to the fume extractor/bore evacuator. The armour in your photos seem to be much, much smaller than that.'' http://www.defensieforum.nl/index.php?board=50;action=display;threadid=3901;start=5;boardseen=1 Look at the link for more photo shots of leopard2A6 frontal armor

I agree with you that combat allows the best comparison but today's sophisticatd computer simulations do allow for comparison and I think the Leopard 2 comes out top.

I saw a BBC documentary a couple of weeks ago discussing the reasons for the Iraqi army's complete collapse last year. One of the reasons the show highlighted was because the best of the Iraqi army was never deployed. Many of Iraq's top generals (including republican guard) disappeared in the days leading up to the conflict. Their units never reached the field and as they were the best equiped, Iraq's best weapons never saw the light of battle. Many Americans interviewed confirmed this. I realise that the best way to compare armour is withe hindsight of battle outcomes but have US and British armour really been tested in battle? I don't think that the Iraqi conflict is really a good indicator. Until US, British, German or even Russian tanks are on the same battlefield (and lets hope we never see the day), I think the question raised has to be left unanswered.