From: Darrell Ramsell (daram@comcast.net)
Date: Thu Oct 21 2004 - 12:56:55 PDT
Jim
My information is correct. I watch the video where Col. Danny McKnight is
reading the actual e-mail. The IED was mounted underneath the bridge. It
blew through the reactive armor and 3 inches deep into the area above Kyle.
It clearly mentions the armor was 4 inches thick but doesn't specify where
or if all the top armor is that thick. There is also the possibility that
the Bradley had make-shift supplemental armor. I'll contact Kyle's Dad and
see if he's willing to forward the actual e-mail that he received from the
Army.
Darrell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Webster" <james.webster@iomartdsl.com>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: [MV] Stryker
> Darrell Ramsell wrote:
>
>> Actually Kyle was in a M-2 Bradley and not a Stryker. Kyle was saved
>> because the armor above him was 4 inches thick and the IED went 3 inches
>> deep. Unfortunately the blast blew through the top of the turret killing
>> the vehicle commander and gunner. As Aaron pointed out the blast
>> initially
>> stunned and blinded Kyle who was the driver. As soon as Kyle realized
>> what
>> happened he hit the gas and was able to clear the area before insurgents
>> could target the vehicle in an ambush.
>
> The frontal armour on a Bradley is 65mm thats about 2.5 inches. There is
> no way that the roof armour is thicker than that. Sounds like a case of
> the more the story is told the thicker the armour gets (or the longer the
> fish gets)
>
> TTFN
> Jim
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:36:52 PDT