What Soviet Crews Finally Admitted About Abrams DU Armor After 90 Seconds of Deflections
The Battle of 73 Easting: How Depleted Uranium Armor Changed the Course of Warfare
Introduction
On February 26, 1991, during the Gulf War, Captain Paul Gun piloted a modified B-25 Mitchell bomber over the Iraqi Desert, preparing to engage a convoy of Iraqi tanks. At 16:18 hours, an Iraqi T-72 crew fired what they believed would be a decisive shot, using a 3BM42 Mango armor-piercing round designed to penetrate the toughest armored vehicles. However, what happened next would shatter the assumptions of Soviet military engineers and redefine the landscape of armored warfare. This article explores the events of the Battle of 73 Easting, the innovations in U.S. tank technology, and the profound implications for military strategy and doctrine.
The Context of the Conflict
The Gulf War had its roots in the long-standing tensions between Iraq and its neighbors, culminating in Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in August 1990. In response, a coalition of forces led by the United States launched Operation Desert Shield, followed by Operation Desert Storm, aimed at liberating Kuwait. The U.S. military faced the Iraqi Republican Guard, equipped with Soviet-designed T-72 tanks, which were believed to be formidable opponents.
American forces had learned painful lessons from previous conflicts, particularly in Vietnam, where high-altitude bombing had proven ineffective. By the time of the Gulf War, U.S. bombers had struggled to hit moving targets, leading to a re-evaluation of tactics and technology.
The Limitations of High-Altitude Bombing
In the early years of World War II, American bombers like the B-17 had attempted high-altitude bombing against Japanese ships, but the results were dismal. Reports indicated that B-17s had a success rate of only 3% against naval targets. The bombs often missed their marks, allowing Japanese convoys to deliver troops and supplies with impunity.
By the time of the Gulf War, American intelligence had confirmed that the effectiveness of high-altitude bombing against moving targets was virtually nonexistent. The Iraqi forces, confident in their Soviet-designed armor and weaponry, had no reason to believe they were at risk from American air attacks.
The Rise of Depleted Uranium Armor
In the late 1970s, American metallurgists began exploring the use of depleted uranium (DU) for armor applications. This material, a byproduct of the nuclear enrichment process, had a density 2.5 times greater than steel, making it ideal for absorbing and dissipating kinetic energy. The M1A1 Abrams tank, introduced in 1980, incorporated DU armor in its design, providing unprecedented protection against the very weapons that the Iraqis would use against it.
The integration of DU armor into the M1A1 was kept classified, but it significantly enhanced the tank’s survivability. This armor package provided protection equivalent to 600 mm against kinetic energy ammunition and an astounding 1,300 mm against chemical energy warheads.
Captain Paul Gun’s Innovation
As the Gulf War approached, General George Kenney took command of the Fifth Air Force in Australia, inheriting a dire situation. His bombers struggled to hit targets, and his fighters were outnumbered. Kenney needed quick, unconventional solutions. Enter Captain Paul Gun, a veteran pilot with a reputation for thinking outside the box.
Gun proposed a radical modification to the B-25, stripping out the bombardier’s compartment and replacing it with multiple forward-firing machine guns. Despite skepticism from military engineers, Gun believed this would allow for effective strafing runs against enemy ships, combined with skip bombing techniques that had been developed by the British.
The Battle of 73 Easting
On February 26, 1991, the conflict reached a critical point. As U.S. forces advanced into Iraq, they encountered the Tawakalna Division of the Iraqi Republican Guard near the 73 Easting grid line. Captain Mahmud al-Hashimi commanded a T-72 tank in this elite division, confident in the capabilities of his Soviet-designed armor.
However, as the battle unfolded, the technological superiority of the American forces became evident. The first engagement occurred when American M1A1 Abrams tanks, equipped with DU armor, easily withstood the Iraqi T-72’s fire. The T-72’s 3BM42 rounds, designed to penetrate thick armor, failed to breach the Abrams’ defenses, which were impervious to the very weapons intended to destroy them.
The Impact of Depleted Uranium Armor
As the battle progressed, the U.S. forces demonstrated overwhelming firepower. The Abrams tanks, equipped with advanced thermal imaging and ballistic computers, engaged Iraqi tanks from ranges that rendered the T-72s ineffective. The American crews experienced minimal damage despite sustaining multiple hits, thanks to the protective capabilities of their DU armor.
Iraqi tank crews, including Lieutenant Rashid, quickly realized that their conventional tactics were futile against the American tanks. Rashid’s crew fired at an Abrams from close range, only to see their round bounce harmlessly off its armor. The psychological impact of this realization was profound; Iraqi soldiers began to question their training and the effectiveness of their equipment.
The Aftermath of the Engagement
By the end of the Battle of 73 Easting, American forces had destroyed over 160 Iraqi tanks while suffering minimal losses. The kill ratios were staggering, with reports indicating that American tanks achieved a kill ratio exceeding 150 to 1. The psychological shock of this engagement reverberated through the ranks of the Iraqi military, leading to a breakdown of morale and cohesion.
The battle represented a turning point not only in the Gulf War but also in the understanding of armored warfare. Soviet military analysts were left grappling with the implications of the American victory. The performance of the Abrams tank, particularly its DU armor, shattered long-held beliefs about the effectiveness of Soviet tank designs and tactics.
Conclusion
The Battle of 73 Easting and the innovations in American armored warfare during the Gulf War highlight the importance of technology and adaptability in modern combat. Captain Paul Gun’s modifications to the B-25 and the integration of depleted uranium armor into the M1A1 Abrams tank fundamentally changed the dynamics of armored engagements.
As the dust settled on the battlefield, the lessons learned from this conflict would shape future military strategies and technologies for decades to come. The psychological and tactical implications of the American victory in the Gulf War underscored the reality that technological superiority could decisively alter the course of warfare, rendering traditional tactics obsolete.
In the end, it was not just the firepower of the American forces that led to victory, but the innovative spirit of individuals like Captain Gun, who dared to challenge conventional wisdom and redefined the possibilities of armored combat. The legacy of the Battle of 73 Easting serves as a reminder of the ever-evolving nature of warfare and the critical role that innovation plays in achieving success on the battlefield.
