Motors Obama's "Beast"

How big a gun would you need to get through that armour? Out of interest?

The alloys could be much cooler.

 

8" armour? An anti-tank shaped charge really. Even then there's no guarantee it'll work on that either, as I'm sure it has all manner of anti-piercing/burning plating in there. Composite armour is incredibly clever stuff.

After a bit of Wiki'ing, it seems the finest battle armour is the British-made Chobham armour. So it's probably 8" of that.

Interestingly, a Challenger 2 is only £4.4m. For a state-of-the-art MBT, that doesn't seem like a lot.

 

Anti-Tank equipment. You'd need something big. The main flaw of this car is that it doesn't have reactive armour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armor). You'd need something with the ability to burn through not just make a dent. If it uses Chobham like Krik thinks then it won't be easy. But I've seen Abrams with holes in them from Anti-Tank weapons and they use Chobham.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/smaw.htm

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/at4.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M829_(munition)

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/tow.htm

 

Depends if you look at Challenger 2 like you say and the Chobam armour used on that, theres some pretty interesting history about it namely, that only one challanger has ever been destroyed and that was in a friendly fire incident from another challanger which shot a shell into an open hatch. But the british use a more advanced version of Chobam armour called Dorchester than the americans since its british technology.

Apart from that the armours very effective with one challanger being hit with 70 RPG's and no damage and another being hit as close range with anti tank missles and RPGs which only affected the sighting systems and after it was recovered it was repaired in 6 hours.

There was 2 incidents where an RPG richoched off a road and took off 3 toes of a driver and another where and IED took off a drivers leg but since there extra armours been applied to the underside.

So I'd say it would be pretty effective as a presidents vehicle, oh plus it has a longest range confirmed kill of any tank. But at the same time the German Leopard 2 and Abrams M1A2 would also be effective but have different strengths and weaknesses.

 

BAE are tops, basically. That said, the M1 is only ~4.35m USD, so only a touch more than half the cost of a Challenger, which is ~7-8m USD.

I expect it's because the American military is more.. In the worlds eye, than the British military. We're not likely to be as targeted as you chaps are. On top of which, the design of the Abrams is what, 20 years old? I expect that, even with the armour upgrades that've been made over the years, the design isn't as up to date as it could be. Admittedly the Challenger is ~10 years old (Only 5 years actual service, though).

On top of which, we can establish what would be needed to penetrate the armour on both tanks - And we're not intending to do so, someone with the intention of blowing one open probably has access to a lot more information than we do.

 

I love that film.

In all fairness, if you're going to kill the president you wouldn't be overt about it. It's suicide. And you certainly wouldn't attack him in his vehicle. You'd wait for a exterior conference in a smaller town, or a regional visit on foot, preferably a venue with raised ground 500-800m away, then you'd hire professional gear that can do the distance - a barret m82 or similar. Crowds would get in the way, so a handshake-line would be ideal. Personal protection only scope the immediate vicinity and obvious buildings, so in a rural area shooting the president from long-range would be easy (comparitively speaking).

Also, if you were going to attack the president's car, you wouldn't hire 4 goons and swing out of the windows with submachine guns like Batman villains (Which seems to be what the president's security expect.) You'd use high explosives - planted on a road if possible, but that'd be really difficult. More likely in the side of a car driven adjacent to his convoy. News flash for the SUV thugs: miniguns can't disarm semtex. Nor can bullet-resistant glass or short shotguns

I'm just saying, once you're president safety really is an illusion. Bottom line is, if people with enough money and half a brain want to kill Obama, they will - all this hyper-security stuff is just a big ineffectual "go on - do your worst!" flag.

 

Or just drop a nuke on the car XD

 

They kind of check for those things. They don't just turn up to an event with no forward planning you know and think, hey lets just drive there, the SUVs with the miniguns would be enough. The secret service aren't retards.

If someone with enough money and half a brain wants to try and kill Obama they can, but that doesn't mean they'll succeed. A presidential motorcade will have more than an armoured limo and a couple of SUVs with miniguns.

 

This is the most pointless car in the world. Obama's frequently hanging out in public spaces so anybody could assassinate him easily. It's like wearing an invincible shield that only cover's your crotch.

 

I imagine there's a lot more security then anyone can imagine that goes into place at any public speakings. The stuff behind the scenes that we will never know about.

Until the president becomes a "lame duck". Then he's fair game.

The shoe attack against president Bush anyone? Where was the secret service jumping in front of the president to take the shoe? Exactly.

 

Interesting car, it is diesel and has a petrol tank £300,000 seems quite cheap though.
I wonder what happens when it breaks down, you have the president as a sitting duck and a massive great lump to recover!

 

It's better than not having an invincible shield to cover your crotch, when you're the president of one of the most hated countries in the world, something like this is not in any way pointless.

 

Before the President visits a location, the Secret Service arrive ahead of time, often days in advance. They scout for potential threat areas and plan accordingly. On the day of the visit, the President doesn't just line up a convoy and go cruising through town. Every route is planned in advance, and each road is selected for a reason.

Ahead of the convoy is generally a scout vehicle or two. Before the scout vehicle is the helicopter. The President's convoy is given a full police escort, so it would be extremely difficult to just drive up next to his car and set off a few explosives.

Rest assured if you've thought of it, the Secret Service has probably already protected against it.

For practical purposes, the point of this car is not to sit there and withstand an attack. There are other vehicles and personnel in the convoy for that. This car is designed to get the President to a secure location at the first sign of trouble. For that reason, the Secret Service are trained to drive the car to peak performance. Every member of the Secret Service Presidential Detail is trained to drive the car, and I'd wager they can out-drive just about anyone here, even in that beast of a car at 60mph.

-monkey

 

8" of armor sure..
week points still the windows..
even if they are 8" thick.

 

For all intents and purposes, that glass is bullet-proof:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_glass#Recent_advances_in_bullet-resistant_glass_composition

8 inches means even a .50 like the rifle I suggested would struggle to get through it. And you'd only get one shot, with all the security described above - if that.

I think supermonkey makes a good case: military tactics are futile, espionage would be better. Use vast sums of money and intelligence to buy out enough of his staff/security over a couple of years, or get your own people into his staff/security, Benjamin Linus style, and plant the bomb on the car.

Incidentally, I wonder how that car would hold up to an explosion? I mean...it's basically tank armour, it's plausible he'd actually survive.
For something that's road licensed, that's quite incredible.

 

I can't find one on youtube - but I've seen the BMW armoured 7-series being bombed from underneath, and although it wouldn't be pleasant, there was no interior damage at all. Most of the car was destroyed, but the people would be fine. And that's a cheaper, probably less well-armoured vehicle too.

 

So if there is a bomb inside the car, would you see any damage from the outside?

 

We'll find out in a couple of days. I hear Obama is da bomb-diggidy.

-monkey

 

Call me a conspiracy theorist, whatever, but i don't belive that the only armament in that car is a couple of shotguns
There has got to be some seriously high tech stuff in there! I'm taking about retractable or hidden lasers, tasers, smoke screen, etc, you know, at least a couple of those things you see in movies!!!
If you were the president, and you had that car and that military, wouldn't you put some serious stuff in there?

 

How did that picture of President Camacho travel 492 years back in time?