Talk:Anti-personnel obstacle breaching system

Inspired by a British Invention?

I remember seeing a similar but maybe larger system in a book about the Centurion tank. It had a rocket attached to spool of flexible plastic pipe filled with plastic explosive. The text indicated it was tested c. 1954 if I remember correctly. It was on a trailer towed behind a Centurion. Does anyone know about this British system? If so could they make a page for it and at least put a see also on this one? Because as it stands it looks like the AOBS principle is an American invention. Comparing the dates this simply isn't true. 121.79.12.138 (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Source Please

What's the source of this page? The most original one I can find is this one. Mozzerati 20:54, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Advertisment

It seems written like an advertisement, but I don't see the POV compromised, so it doesn't warrant the tag but still needs to be written differently. Contralya 00:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Bangalore Comparision

I edited the article to clarify some cliams made versus the bangalore. Originally, this article described a bangalore torpedo as being a 320 pound monstrosity only employable by 12 men. That is absolutely ridiculous. A bangalore comes in sections of 15 pounds a piece. Frequently, for small protective wire obstacles, bangalore sections are employed two at time to blow apart a single fence of triple-standard concertina. Sappers will tie in their bangalores and place charges on any mines found in the lane. I have very rarely, if ever, seen 12 men on a breach site at one time.

The APOBS does present some good advantages, most notably that it does not require sappers to get right up on the obstacle to breach it. This addresses the most dangerous part of breaching: not getting shot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.245.17 (talk) 22:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anti-personnel obstacle breaching system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100812062251/http://www.pica.army.mil:80/PicatinnyPublic/products_services/products15.asp to http://www.pica.army.mil/PicatinnyPublic/products_services/products15.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121031111452/http://www.eba-d.com:80/products/anti-personnel-obstacle-breaching-system-apobs/ to http://www.eba-d.com/products/anti-personnel-obstacle-breaching-system-apobs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)