Category Archives: Technology

Technology

Maintaining Satan’s Chariot

Video

U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sergeant Cecilio Ricardo, 09APR2007.

What does it take to keep what the Afghan’s call Satan’s Chariot in the air?

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Angelita Lawrence, 02OCT2009.

Video from September 2009, live fire prep, 12.7mm chin-gun and 57mm rockets:

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Angelita Lawrence, 02OCT2009.

Video from September 2009, the awesome sight and sounds of live fire training:

Loading the 12.7mm four barreled gatling chin-gun, May 2010.

Don’t forget the 57mm rockets.

These pics were taken at Kabul International Airport during a 100 hours inspection of a Mil 35 (Mi-24V, NATO Hind-E), in October 2011.

Video from June 2015, maintaining the Hind Legs of the Hind-E (and the front leg as well):

Before we go, live fire training 12.7mm chin-gun and 23mm under-wing gun-pods, from 2014:

Zombie ‘Copter:

Afghan Mi-24 Hind-D.

HOW THE HIND RETURNED TO AFGHANISTAN (with the help of the U.S./NATO), AND WHY IT WON’T DIE

Vehicle I-D:

NATO photo, 15MAR2018.

MIL 24 HIND ‘SATAN’S CHARIOTS’, in use by almost everybody including NATO

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO MAINTAIN A FLYING MILITARY FIRETRUCK?

Technology

NATO: Poland Sukhoi 22

Video

The Sukhoi 22M4 is the export version of the Sukhoi 17M4.  The NATO reporting name for both is Fitter-K.  Poland began using Su-22s in August 1984, when it was a member of the Cold War era Warsaw Pact.  Poland joined NATO in 1997.  Polish officials want to phase-out the Su-22 by 2026.

U.S. Marine Corps photo by Staff Sergeant Dengrier M. Baez, 07JUN2018.

Note the shark mouth painted external fuel tanks on this Polish Su-22M4, NATO Baltic Operations (BaltOps), June 2018.

U.S. Army video, by Sergeant Jacob Holmes, Su-22s over the Gora Hetmanska Range in Drawsko Pomorskie, 15FEB2017:

A Polish Su-22 now a museum piece. U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Lauren Harrah, 13AUG2016.

Swedwin, Poland, 08JUN2016. USA photo by Private First Class Antonio Lewis.

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

Polish Su-22M4s in Estonia, taking part in NATO’s Spring Storm wargames, June 2016.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Matthew Plew, 05JUN2016.

Tight formation break-away during Spring Storm 2016.  For kit builders, note the new larger blade antenna behind the cockpit.

Video showing Su-22M4s along with F-15s and SAM batteries:

USAF photo by Airman First Class Kyle Gese, 13JUN2014.

Polish Su-22M4s take-off from Lask Air Base during NATO’s Eagle Talon, June 2014.  Note the smaller original blade antenna behind the cockpit.

USAF photo by Airman First Class Kyle Gese, 13JUN2014

Video, Polish Su-22 during NATO Exercise Anakonda 2014:

Apparently there are only a handful of countries using the Su-22, with Poland being the only NATO member flying the Fitter-K.  Peru has less than a dozen Su-22s in reserve status.  In 2012 Peru signed a ‘codification’ agreement with NATO but is not considered a member, or partner, of NATO.

NATO MiG-21

Vehicle I-D: Sukhoi 24

Technology

Zombie ‘Copter: How the Hind returned to Afghanistan, and why it won’t die

Video

The first time the Afghan military used the NATO-reporting-name Hind was during the Soviet occupation (1979-1989).  It was during that occupation that Mujaheddin on the receiving end of the Mi-24D nicknamed it Satan’s Chariot.  After the Soviets left, Afghanistan managed to operate a few Mi-24s (NATO reporting-name Hind-D), some sources say right up until the 2001 U.S. invasion.

Apparently the Mil 35 is the export version of the Mil 24V (NATO reporting-name Hind-E), and apparently there’s wasn’t much difference between the Soviet version and the export version.   However, don’t confuse a Mi-35 with the newer Mi-35M (prototype Mi-24VM).  Along with many internal upgrades the basic visual differences between Mi-24/25 (another ‘export’ designation)/35 and a true Mi-35M are the landing gear, wings and chin-gun.  The Mi-35M has fixed landing gear (apparently in an effort to reduce weight and keep production costs down), shorter span wings and a twin barreled 23mm chin-gun.

Kabul International Airport/Air Base. U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sergeant Cecilio Ricardo, 02APR2007.

In December 2008, Czech Republic started deliveries of at least six refurbished Mi-24Vs (NATO Mi-35 Hind-E), along with several Mi-17s, to help build Afghanistan’s air power.

The push to build Afghan government controlled air power was seen as a way of reducing reliance on U.S./NATO forces, a way of avoiding getting stuck in a ‘Tar Baby’ the way the Soviets did in the 1980s.

U.S. Air Force photo by Technical Sergeant Edward Gyokeres, 27MAY2009.

Live fire at East River Range Complex near Bagram Air Base, May 2009.

June 2009 video of Czech technicians training Afghans for live fire exercise:

According to the exalted Wikipedia, it states the Czech Hinds were “purchased” by Afghanistan and training was done by technicians from India. Wrong!  Here’s an official NATO report from July 2009:

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Thomas Dow, 09SEP2009.

2009, U.S. Air Force video report explaining what the plan is for the Afghan Hinds:

USAF photo by Airman Brian Ybarbo, 15DEC2009.

USAF photo by Staff Sergeant Manuel J. Martinez, 11MAY2010.

USAF photo by Technical Sergeant Oshawn Jefferson, 15MAY2010.

Quick live fire video from June 2010:

USAF photo, 26JAN2011.

Photo by Vladimir Potapenko, 05MAR2011.

USA photo by Staff Sergeant Elvis Umanzor, 18SEP2013.

In 2014, it was revealed that the United States supplied Afghanistan with 30 Russian built new model Mi-17B-5 helicopters. But the affair with Russia ended over the shenanigans in Ukraine and Crimea.  U.S. officials instead pushed for U.S. made helicopters to be given to Afghanistan.

In a 2015 New York Times article an Afghan colonel criticized the U.S. for forcing Afghanistan to accept MD 530F scout helicopters (at U.S. taxpayer expense).  The colonel pointed out the MD 530Fs were easily shot down saying “This plane is a total mess”, and expressed a desire to get more Hinds.

In 2019, the arrogant U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) stated the Czech gifted “…Mi-35s were removed from the authorized fleet in 2015, but the Afghans continue to attempt to sustain them. DoD has advised them against doing so….”, and seemed perplexed at Afghan military leaders wanting a more reliable and survivable gunship like the Mi-24.

Sensing an opportunity to make points with the Afghan government, India gifted four refurbished Hinds (originally purchased from Belarus) between 2015 and the end of 2019.  The Indian Hinds were denoted as Mi-25s and Mi-24Vs by the Indian news media and even Jane’s Defence Weekly, U.S. news sources refer to the Indian gifted Hinds as Mi-35s.

Moral of the story is; if you want to make Afghans happy just give them more Satan’s Chariots!

Update, 11AUG2021, Taliban capture Mil 24V (Mil 35):

VEHICLE I-D: ZOMBIE TANK T-55, THEY’RE EVERYWHERE!

Technology

Soviet era Armor used by NATO: Poland

Video

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Lauren Harrah, 19JUL2016.

Polish modified ZSU-23-4, known as ZSU-23-4MP Biała, July 2016.

Very quick video of Polish ZSU-23-4MP, a mine throwing TRI-Kroton (aka Opal, modified MTLB) and some 2S1 SP guns, in Romania for NATO wargames in 2017:

USA photo by Sergeant Justin Geiger, 18JUN2017.

Cold War era Warsaw Pact Czechoslovak designed/built 152mm Samohybná Kanónová Húfnica vzor 77 (ShKH vz. 77, or self-propelled cannon howitzer model 77), June 2017.  It’s also known as DANA (Dělo Automobilní Nabíjené Automaticky, or gun vehicle loaded automatically).

Video, 2S1 Gvodzika Self Propelled artillery guns, March 2017:

Polish designed MTLB engineer vehicle known as Opal or TRI, June 2017.

Quick video of TRI:

A PT-91(improved T-72) based WZT-3M recovery vehicle on public display in 2016 (note the Christian priest wearing the tanker helmet).

WZT-3M, June 2017.

Video of WZT-3M towing BMP-1, followed by BMP-1s, June 2017:

BMP-1 (known as BWP-1 in Poland), June 2016, NATO Exercise Anakonda.

Video from 2014, BMP-1 used to defend beach against wargame invasion:

Video, Poland BMP-1s invade Romania for NATO’s Noble Jump 2017:

The PT-91 is Poland’s version of a modernized T-72, this pic was taken in June 2018 during NATO’s Puma 2 Exercise-Saber Strike.

Here’s some PT-91 videos from 2017:

Video from 2016, 2K12 Kub (NATO code-name SA-6 Gainful) SAM launching, the 2K12 Kub is mounted on a highly modified MTLB chassis:

Video from 2014, S125 Neva SAM (Surface to Air Missile) mounted on T-55 chassis, with launch at the end of the video:

Soviet era Tanks used by NATO: BULGARIAN T-72

Vehicle I-D: UKRAINIAN ARMOR

Technology

Vehicle I-D: Ukraine’s BTR-4E +

Video

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau’s BTR-4 is a private venture that can be configured in many ways.  The BTR-4 in this article is armed with a gun system similar to the BTR-3DA (30mm gun, 7.62mm gun, anti-tank missiles).   

Yavoriv, Ukraine, a BTR-4E fires its 30mm gun. New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

BroneTransporteR=Armored Transporter

New York Army National Guard photo by Sergeant Alexander Rector, 01DEC2017.

Canadian Armed Forces photo by Corporal Andrew Kelly, 30NOV2017.

Video, Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau rep explains the BTR-4E features:

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Kyle Larsen, 26SEP2019.

USA photo by Private Joanna Gaona Gomez, 26SEP2019.

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau of some BTR-4 variants:

https://youtu.be/jltu95B9fRE

BTR-4KSH mobile command post.

BTR-4 Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV).

BTR-4 Recon/NBC.

BSEM-4K ambulance.

BTR-4MB1 heavy armor version.

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau BTR-4MB1 promo video:

https://youtu.be/77TM8UR_jog

To make nomenclature identification more difficult, every country that has purchased the BTR-4 applies their own designation.

  In 2009 Iraq purchased 420 BTR-4s, but in 2014 sent back dozens of vehicles due to break downs and high levels of corrosion.  As of 2018 Iraq had received 280 BTR-4s of differing configurations.

SOVIET ERA TANKS NOW IN USE BY NATO: SLOVENIAN M84

NATO MIG-21

CH-47 CHINOOK COLLECTS MIL 8 ‘HIP’ BONES

Technology

Vehicle I-D: F-8 Super-Critical-Crusader, father of modern airliner wing design

Video

“This thing is so different from anything that we’ve ever done before that nobody’s going to touch it with a ten foot pole without somebody going out and flying it.”-Larry Loftin, NASA’s Langley Research Center

NASA photo, 1971.

F-8A Bureau Number 141353/NASA tail number 810 with SuperCritical Wing (SCW) flies in its original paint-job in 1971.  On its first flight, on 09MAR1971 the SCW marking on the fin was made from tape.  Also notice the F-8 SCW lacks the bulges on the sides of the forward fuselage, as seen on the later pretty paint-job.

The F-8A Crusader was built by Vought (which has been known by several other names before and since, such as LTV), the SCW was built by North American Aviation (which became Rockwell International).  The wing itself cost U.S. taxpayers $1.8-million.

Richard Whitcomb with a F-8 wind tunnel model equipped with the Supercritical Wing. NASA photo, 19JAN1970.

The SuperCritical Wing creates higher lift-to-drag ratios, NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) boasted that it could save a silly-vilian (civilian) airline company with 280 airliners $78-million (1974 dollars) in fuel per year.   Look closely at airliners developed since the mid-1970s, you’ll see some SuperCritical Wing in them.  Thank the designer of the SCW, Richard Whitcomb.

NASA photo, 1973.

The SCW flying with the DFBW, over the San Bernardino Mountains in California, 1973.  F-8A SCW’s last flight was 23MAY1973.

NASA photo, 1973

VEHICLE I-D: F-8 DFBW, OR ANOTHER REASON WHY TODAY’S TECHIE GENERATION OWES THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!

NASA photo, 1995.

On 27MAY(the day I was born, not the year)1992, both SCW and DFBW were put on ‘gate guard duty’ at NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards Air Force Base, California.

Build your own:

By 1980, the SuperCritical Wing became know as the Aeroelastic Research Wing. NASA photo, 12JUN1980.

Can you recognize the SuperCritical Wing (renamed Aeroelastic Research Wing) on this BQM-34 Firebee II drone?

Technology

NASA’s Russian Tupolev 144 SST, more money spent on the U.S. airliner industry

Video

Before conversion to NASA’s ‘LL’ configuration. NASA photo, 1995.

17MAR1996 rollout of Tu-144LL at Zhukovsky Air Development Center near Moscow, Russia.  A joint project between Russian Aeronautics Establishment, NASA, Boeing, McDonnell-Douglas, Rockwell, and others.

NASA photo, 17MAR1996.

LL stands for Letayuschaya Laboratoriya, which means Flying Laboratory.  The intent was to develop a practical SST (Super Sonic Transport) for the 21st Century, to be built in the United States.  The NASA led program was paid for by U.S. taxpayers and corporations. It was hoped that a market for SST aircraft would reveal itself in the 2020s.

NASA photo, July 1997, Zhukovsky Air Development Center near Moscow, Russia.

NASA photo, July 1997, Zhukovsky Air Development Center near Moscow, Russia.

Zhukovsky Air Development Center near Moscow, Russia. NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

Test flights began in June 1996 and ended in April 1999.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

Tu-144LL had Kuznetsov NK-321 turbofan engines (same as those used on the Tu-160 strategic bombers) rated at more than 55,000 pounds of thrust in full afterburner.

NASA photo, 1996.

NASA photo, 1996.

NASA’s computer room for data collection from Tu-144LL.  The effects of flight on the real Tu-144LL was compared to data collected from models used in wind tunnels.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

This photo was taken in 1998, note that some of the names of the sponsoring companies have been removed from the fuselage.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

In 1998 two NASA pilots conducted three flights to test handling of the SST at subsonic and supersonic speeds.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

NASA photo by Jim Ross, September 1998.

A 2014 NASA statement, updated in 2017, simply says the data collected will be used to build a future SST that can meet specific goals; strict noise and air-pollution standards, carry 300 passengers at least 5,000 miles at a cost per passenger of no more than 20% above subsonic airliners flying the same routes.  However, a 2009 NASA report, also updated in 2017, states that “…an economically viable SST could not be envisioned near enough to further justify U.S. industry commitment.” 

As far as what happened to the Tu-144LL, it was last seen rotting away at the Zhukovsky International Airport.

1:1 SCALE WIND TUNNEL MODELS?

VEHICLE I-D: NASA CANBERRAS, B-57B ‘HUSH KIT’ & WB-57F RIVET CHIP/SLICE

BARE METAL: NASA’S MD-11 EXPERIMENTAL

IDAHO, KANSAS, UTAH HOME BASES FOR NASA’S DC-8 FIREX-AQ!

NASA ‘CLIMATE SPY PLANE’ PROVES CALIFORNIA’S STRICT ANTI-POLLUTION LAWS ARE A JOKE!

SUPER GUPPY BE OLD, BUT NASA STILL USES IT!

VEHICLE I-D: ‘NEW’ F-16 VISTA

VEHICLE I-D: F-8 DFBW, OR ANOTHER REASON WHY TODAY’S TECHIE GENERATION OWES THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!

SALVAGING F4U CORSAIRS

Kit Bashing, Technology

1:1 scale Wind Tunnel models?

Image

National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA)’s first wind tunnel, at Langley Field, Virginia, was an open-circuit wind tunnel completed in 1920. It was not ‘full scale’ and was a copy of a wind tunnel used in the United Kingdom.  It was considered a failure because it could not replicate ‘scaled down wind’ due to not being airtight, and due to not being able to compress the air to match the scales of the model aircraft being used.

Approval was given to build a Full Scale Wind Tunnel, also at Langley Field.

“The tunnel is of the double-return flow type with a 30 by 60 foot open jet at the test section…..  ….The tunnel is equipped with a 6-component balance for obtaining the forces in 3 directions and the moments about the 3 axes of an airplane. All seven dial scales of the balance system are of the recording type, which permits simultaneous records to be made of all forces.”-Smith DeFrance, NACA TR #459 page 291

However a reduced scale model of the Full Scale Wind Tunnel was also built: “The excellent energy ratio obtained in the new wind tunnel of the California Institute of Technology suggests that before proceeding with our full scale tunnel design, we ought to investigate the effect on energy ratio of such factors as: 1. Small included angle for the exit cone; 2. Carefully designed return passages of circular section as far as possible, without sudden changes in cross sections; 3. Tightness of walls. It is believed that much useful information can be obtained by building a model of about 1/16 scale, that is, having a closed throat of 2 ft. by 4 ft. The outside dimensions would be about 12 ft. by 25 ft. in plan and the height 4 ft. Two propellers will be required about 28 in. in diameter, each to be driven by direct current motor at a maximum speed of 4500 R.P.M. Provision can be made for altering the length of certain portions, particularly the exit cone, and possibly for the application of boundary layer control in order to effect satisfactory air flow. This model can be constructed in a comparatively short time, using 2 by 4 framing with matched sheathing inside, and where circular sections are desired they can be obtained by nailing sheet metal to wooden ribs, which can be cut on the band saw. It is estimated that three months will be required for the construction and testing of such a model and that the cost will be approximately three thousand dollars, one thousand dollars of which will be for the motors. No suitable location appears to exist in any of our present buildings, and it may be necessary to build it outside and cover it with a roof.”-Elton W. Miller, 26JUN1929

The wind generators for the model of the Full Scale Wind Tunnel.

Construction jig for the cowlings that will fit around the wind tunnel’s giant diesel motors.

“The propellers are located side by side and 48 feet aft of the throat of the exit-cone bell. The propellers are 35 feet 5 inches in diameter and each consists of four cast aluminum alloy blades screwed into a cast steel hub…..   …..The most commonly used power plant for operating a wind tunnel is a direct-current motor and motor-generator set with Ward Leonard control system. For the FST it was found that alternating current slip-ring induction motors, together with satisfactory control equipment, could be purchased for approximately 30 percent less than the direct-current equipment. Two 4,000-horsepower slip-ring induction motors with 24 steps of speed between 75 and 300 r.p.m. were therefore installed. In order to obtain the range of speed one pole change was provided and the other variations are obtained by the introduction of resistance in the rotor circuit. This control permits a variation in air speed from 25 to 118 miles per hour. The two motors are connected through an automatic switchboard to one drum-type controller located in the test chamber. All the control equipment is interlocked and connected through time-limit relays, so that regardless of how fast the controller handle is moved the motors will increase in speed at regular intervals.”-Smith DeFrance, NACA TR #459 pages 294-295

The above photo shows the twin tunnel funnel with diesel motors before the giant propellers were mounted.  This ‘cone’ sucked the air out.

Entrance cone, where the air came into the wind tunnel room.

Even though the wind was generated by diesel powered props, the Full Scale Wind Tunnel still required electricity from “Two 4000-horsepower slip-ring induction motors with 24 steps of speed between 75 and 300 r.p.m….” 

The completed building housing the Full Scale Wind Tunnel, also known as the 30×60 Tunnel: “The entire equipment is housed in a structure, the outside walls of which serve as the outer walls of the return passages. The over-all length of the tunnel is 434 feet 6 inches, the width 222 feet, and the maximum height 97 feet. The framework is of structural steel….”-NACA TR #459 pages 292-293

Testing nacelles for the U.S. Navy.

Vought SU-2 Corsair/O3U-4 in Langley’s Full Scale Wind Tunnel in 1934. The cowling around the engine is the less aerodynamic Townend cowling.

Testing of the lowly Brewster Buffalo was so successful in discovering aerodynamic inefficiencies that the U.S. Army and Navy sent most of their World War Two prototype and production aircraft to the Full Scale Wind Tunnel for similar examination.

Vought F4U-1 Corsair: This production F4U-1 underwent wind tunnel trials in an effort to find potential aerodynamic refinements.

MX-334 flying wing glider, 1943.

Bell XP-77 1:1 scale model, 1943.

The 30×60/Full Scale Wind Tunnel has undergone numerous upgrades since World War Two.

Mercury space capsule, January 1959.

Testing the proposed parawing landing system for space capsules.

Testing one of the proposed Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) models.

The scale model built to test the swept-wings of the Super Sonic Transport (SST) was so big the Full Scale Wind Tunnel had to be used.

In 1999, NASA (National Aeronautics Space Administration) decided to test a 1:1 scale model of the Wright Flyer, for aerodynamic data. However, the full-scale Wright Flyer was built stronger than the original for fear it wouldn’t hold up in the wind tunnel (it was tested at only 30mph/48kmh).

Despite being declared a National Historic Landmark, demolition of the 30×60 Full Scale Wind Tunnel began in 2010, officially declared dead and buried in 2014.

VEHICLE I-D: NASA CANBERRAS, B-57B ‘HUSH KIT’ & WB-57F RIVET CHIP/SLICE

BARE METAL: NASA’S MD-11 EXPERIMENTAL

IDAHO, KANSAS, UTAH HOME BASES FOR NASA’S DC-8 FIREX-AQ!

NASA ‘CLIMATE SPY PLANE’ PROVES CALIFORNIA’S STRICT ANTI-POLLUTION LAWS ARE A JOKE!

SUPER GUPPY BE OLD, BUT NASA STILL USES IT!

VEHICLE I-D: ‘NEW’ F-16 VISTA

VEHICLE I-D: F-8 DFBW, OR ANOTHER REASON WHY TODAY’S TECHIE GENERATION OWES THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX!

SALVAGING F4U CORSAIRS

Technology

Vehicle I-D: BTR-3DA

Video

BroneTransporteR=Armored Transporter

Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau’s BTR-3DA, upgraded BTR-3, entering service with Ukraine National Guard in 2017.

Ukraine, September 2017

One 30mm ZTM-1 cannon, a 7.62mm machine gun, fully automated anti-personnel grenade launcher and smoke grenade launchers, two anti-tank missiles.

Carries a commander, a gunner, a driver, and six infantry troops.

Quick video:

 

Deutz BF6M 1015CP water cooled V-6 diesel engine, coupled to a 3200SP Allison transmission.

Ukraine, August 2017

Maximum speed of 104kmh (64mph), cruising range of 600km (373 miles).

The little covered rails on the driver’s right side of the turret are the mounts for the anti-tank missiles.

Video, river crossing assault:

VEHICLE I-D: GEORGIAN T-72 & BMP

VEHICLE I-D: IRAQI ARMOR, AFTER THE INVASION

Technology

Vehicle I-D: Iraqi Armor, after the invasion

Video

On 13JUN2019, the Iraqi army unveiled a new tank; the al-Kafeel-1.  Note that it uses an M2 .50 caliber machine gun in a remote controlled mount.  Russian news sources say the tank is based on Iraq’s experience fighting Islamic extremists, and Iraq’s use of the M1A1M.   It is strange that most ‘western’ news sources didn’t report about the Iraqi developed tank until more than a year after its unveiling.  Speculative reports say it was developed with help from China.

Inside of BTR-80.  9th Iraqi Army Division Warrant Officer explains to U.S. troops how it works.
U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Mary S. Katzenberger, 27SEP2010.

 

Ukrainian made BTR-94, 2018.

Ukrainian made BTR-94 blocks 14th of July bridge in Baghdad, 15AUG2004. U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Jacob N. Bailey.

Ukrainian made BTR-4, reports say Iraq was not happy with the BTR-4, claiming they were not ‘new builds’ and had corroded bodies (Ukrainian investigation links the defective BTR-4s to the now infamous corruption scandal plaguing the Office of the U.S. President).

BTR-4 variants, the BSEM-4K ambulance and BTR-4 armored personnel carriers with 30mm gun turrets.

‎U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Kalie Jones Frantz, 06FEB2016.

A mystery modified M113 seen at Camp Taji, February 2016.  It’s not a ACV or YPR765.  A homegrown modification?

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Kalie Jones Frantz, 06FEB2016.

U.S. Army photo by Specialist William Lockwood, 11FEB2016.

Camp Taji, February 2016.

M113 ACAV, U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Kalie Jones Frantz, 07FEB2016.

M113, U.S. Army photo by Sergeant David Strayer, 28APR2011.

M113, Kirkush Military Training Base, April 2011.

Notice the use of wide ‘snow’ tracks. Texas Army National Guard photo by Specialist Maria Mengrone, 12MAY2005.

MTLB, May 2005.

Texas Army National Guard photo by Specialist Maria Mengrone, 06MAY2005.

This one has the standard width tracks. Texas Army National Guard photo by Specialist Maria Mengrone, 06MAY2005.

U.S. Army photo by Specialist Sean Hanson.

March 2007.  This tank is a Chinese Type 69 (Iraqi designation for Chinese Type 69 is T-55B), as denoted by the headlights on both fenders and the camera/laser sighting system on the mantlet.

Texas Army National Guard photo by Specialist Maria Mengrone, 12MAY2005.

May 2005, Type 69/T-55B.

Notice the U.S. antenna. Texas Army National Guard photo by Specialist Maria Mengrone, 12MAY2005.

BMP-1, October 2005:

Rebuilt BMP-1s on Camp Taji, 07OCT2005.

BMP-1, January 2007:

BMP-1, Camp Taji. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sergeant Jon Cupp, 17JAN2007.

Video Camp Taji boneyard, T-72 turret lift, 2009:

T-62, March 2010:

T-62s in the ‘Bone Yard’. Tennessee Army National Guard photo by First Lieutenant Desiree Pavlick, 17MAR2010.

Graveyard of T-62 and T-72, October 2005:

Camp Taji ‘boneyard’, 10JUL2005.

T-72, Camp Butler/Butler Gunnery Range, February 2006:

U.S. Army photo by Staff Sergeant Brent Hunt, 16FEB2006.

Low quality video from February 2006, supposedly it was the first time Iraqis were able to fire their T-72s since the U.S. invasion:

T-72, Forward Operating Base Hammer, October 2008:

U.S. Army photo by Private First Class Evan Loyd, 31OCT2008.

U.S. Army photo by Private First Class Evan Loyd, 31OCT2008.

2008 Besmaya Range gunnery video (by U.S. Army Specialist Neil A. Stanfield):

T-72, Besmaya Range Complex, April 2010:

U.S. Army photo by Private First Class Jared Eastman, 14APR2010.

Checking out a ‘newer’ T-72, apparently donated by NATO-Czech Republic, April 2016:

U.S. Army photo by Sergeant Paul Sale, 05APR2016.

Iraqis began training on U.S. M1A1 Abrams in 2008-09:

Besmaya Range Complex, 31MAR2009. U.S. Army photo by Captain Thomas Avilucea.

According to a U.S. Defense Department news release, between August 2010 and the end of 2011, 140 M1A1M Abrams tanks were delivered to Iraq as part of a 2008 military sales agreement.

According to the the U.S. Army, these were the last of the 140 Abrams delivered to Iraq:

U.S. Army photo by Staff Sergeant Edward Daileg, 29AUG2011.

In 2016, BMP-1s were positioned for the Mosul Offensive against so-called Islamic State:

U.S. Army photo, 18OCT2016.

In February 2018, it was revealed that an Iraqi militia unit funded by Iran acquired nine of the M1A1Ms.

Blurry image showing Iranian funded Iraqi militia hauling an M1A1.

In June 2018, Iraq announced it was trading the M1A1M for the Russian T-90S.

The first T-90S and T-90SK were delivered by November 2019.

M109A1, Firebase Saham, December 2018.

U.S. Army photo by Captain Jason Welch, 03DEC2018.

For some strange reason the official U.S. Army information that accompanied the pic states this is a “M109 Paladin”, but it is clearly not an M109A6 Paladin (which is a radical upgrade of the M109 series), it is a M109A1.

In 2008, U.S. Army officials decided to allow Iraq to refurbish several M109A1s abandoned in the ‘boneyard’ of Camp Taji: “Last fall, our brigade commander was given guidance by the 9th IA commander to pull out of the Taji boneyard roughly a battalion’s worth of M109A1 howitzers.”-Major Matthew DeLoia, Military Transition Team-Pennsylvania National Guard’s 109th Field Artillery Regiment, July 2009

VEHICLE I-D: UKRAINIAN ARMOR

VEHICLE I-D: GEORGIAN T-72 & BMP