Welcome to Steelbeasts.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

daskal

M1A2 SEP V3

49 posts in this topic

In before the politics and Abrams/US haters come along...

 

I was really hoping to see this at the Maneuver Conference this year, but didn't get a chance - just saw a bunch of unmanned vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, daskal said:

First prototypes to be shipped shortly:

 

http://scout.com/military/warrior/Article/Army-to-Receive-First-New-Prototype-M1A2-SEP-v3-Abrams-Main-Batt-107426939

 

are they exchanging the engine on this one - no more jet engine sound?

 

M1A2SEPv3 will keep AGT1500, altough perhaps modified, this is uncertain, tough informations I have says, despite being much heavier than it's predecessors, M1A2SEPv3 weights 73 metric tons, it's much more reliable vehicle.

 

Engine replacement might come with ECP2 upgrade program sometime in future. M1A2SEPv3 = ECP1A, M1A2SEPv4 = ECP1B. With ECP2 designation might finally be changed to M1A3, as much more modifications are considered and planned, like new gun, autoloader etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the V3's there is a new modification to the AGT1500 which is the Amperage Alternator.

Edited by Assassin 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

The Alternator will help with the PTO Shaft breakage and fire hazards. Design for 1000 amps but limited to 850 amps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

17 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

In before the politics and Abrams/US haters come along...

Huh?.....where does that come from? ....In the decade or so i have frequented this site, i cant recall ever having come  across anybody "hating" on the Abrams. Quite the contrary in fact, The M1 is often highlighted as the best modern tank design, and used as the gold standard against which all other tanks is measured. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Assassin 7 said:

On the V3's there is a new modification to the AGT1500 which is the Amperage Alternator.

I wondered tough if they played a bit with engine power to compensate for greater weight, but perhaps this is not really needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Damian90 said:

I wondered tough if they played a bit with engine power to compensate for greater weight, but perhaps this is not really needed.

Yeah, it is not needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

43 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said:

Yeah, it is not needed.

 

Any news on the possibility of engine replacement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Damian90 said:

 

Any news on the possibility of engine replacement?

No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

On 9/25/2017 at 2:44 PM, Damian90 said:

 

M1A2SEPv3 will keep AGT1500, altough perhaps modified, this is uncertain, tough informations I have says, despite being much heavier than it's predecessors, M1A2SEPv3 weights 73 metric tons, it's much more reliable vehicle.

 

Engine replacement might come with ECP2 upgrade program sometime in future. M1A2SEPv3 = ECP1A, M1A2SEPv4 = ECP1B. With ECP2 designation might finally be changed to M1A3, as much more modifications are considered and planned, like new gun, autoloader etc.

 

Trying to understand how a new V3, that is just about to enter service, could be more reliable without a history in a maintenance world.

 

It seems to me, and others I'm sure, that any "more reliable" statement would be made after some time to prove/record such data.

 

Maybe the V3 is not subject to such criteria. I will did deeper.

 

But good on the US army for upgrading their MBT's :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

On 27.09.2017 at 8:45 PM, 12Alfa said:

 

Trying to understand how a new V3, that is just about to enter service, could be more reliable without a history in a maintenance world.

 

It seems to me, and others I'm sure, that any "more reliable" statement would be made after some time to prove/record such data.

 

Maybe the V3 is not subject to such criteria. I will did deeper.

 

But good on the US army for upgrading their MBT's :)

 

Because M1A2SEPv3 was tested by both GDLS and US Army? Like any kind of new equipment and was compared to currently used ones. Remeber that there was a lot of improvements added to the vehicle, it's entire electronics architecture replaced for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Damian90 said:

 

Because M1A2SEPv3 was tested by both GDLS and US Army? Like any kind of new equipment and was compared to currently used ones. Remember that there was a lot of improvements added to the vehicle, it's entire electronics architecture replaced for example.

Well if you base your criteria on testing (5 years?)vs past history, of what 20 some years, and decide it is more reliable and the army accepts this method -super.  I would not, to me it sounds like a car salesman tell a customer that this new model is more reliable,  because like always it went through our testing, I don't buy it. But we are entitled to our opinions in this regard.

Time will be the deciding judge in the long run (no pun intended) :)

 

Hope it works out for the operators.

Edited by 12Alfa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

29 minutes ago, dejawolf said:

could be it has less parts which usually = more reliability. 

Less parts I would Think suggest less weight, apparently not in this case. I'm not buying it, further data is required.

Also Meh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

On 29.9.2017 at 8:19 PM, dejawolf said:

could be it has less parts which usually = more reliability. 

 

...unless the fewer parts have a higher likelihood of failue than the many parts combined that they may be replacing ;)

 

p(fail) = 1-((1-p1(fail)) x (1-p2(fail)) x (1-p3(fail)) x ... x (1-pn(fail)))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 29.09.2017 at 8:51 PM, 12Alfa said:

Less parts I would Think suggest less weight, apparently not in this case. I'm not buying it, further data is required.

Also Meh!

 

The weight increase in majority of % comes from new armor package that replaces the currently used one. In fact M1A2SEPv3 by pure armor mass is the heaviest MBT curently in the world.

 

In case of other components, it actually should be lighter, for example new electronics are more compact, lighter and energy efficent. We can safely assume that in case of M1A2SEPv3, the primary reason why it weights 73 metric tons and not less than current 63.5 metric tons of M1A2SEPv2, is because of new armor.

 

Heck even new CROWS-LP RWS is around 50% smaller than M153 CROWS-2 RWS, which also means less weight for this component.

Edited by Damian90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I read all of that, I'm still not buying it, maybe more sugar coating is required :)

 

safely assume :(

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

It is hard to not buy a facts... but I guess it's the same like with a people that do not buy that earth is not flat or a center of universe? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

...unless the fewer parts have a higher likelihood of failue than the many parts combined that they may be replacing ;)

 

p(fail) = 1-((1-p1(fail)) x (1-p2(fail)) x (1-p3(fail)) x ... x (1-pn(fail)))

 

less parts means less parts that can break, which means less parts that needs to be kept in stock by maintenance personell, which means increased strategic reliability, because the parts are more likely to be kept in stock even if they break more often. 

less parts also means lower cost per part to manufacture, which means the army can buy more spare parts, which again means that the parts are more likely to be available when they break. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

3 hours ago, Damian90 said:

It is hard to not buy a facts... but I guess it's the same like with a people that do not buy that earth is not flat or a center of universe? ;)

The only

"fact" I'm not buying is reliability , this needs time to prove, I don't see this in testing, rather in years of operational use.

Also, would like some comments by the users on how the CROWS placement hinders their tactical viewing, good,bad, no change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

4 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

The only

"fact" I'm not buying is reliability , this needs time to prove, I don't see this in testing, rather in years of operational use.

Also, would like some comments by the users on how the CROWS placement hinders their tactical viewing, good,bad, no change?

 

New CROWS-LP is around 50% smaller improving visibility, also there were some other positive feedback I seen, like it's being more accurate due to lower height, and easier to use in manual mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

 

New CROWS-LP is around 50% smaller improving visibility, also there were some other positive feedback I seen, like it's being more accurate due to lower height, and easier to use in manual mode.

 Sry, was looking from operational commander who have used it in RL,  and not from published sources. Some of our USA players here, no offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now