Assassin 7 Posted May 22, 2019 Share Posted May 22, 2019 https://www.army.mil/article/222100/2_8_cav_tests_abrams_upgrades_demonstrates_increased_lethality 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted May 22, 2019 Author Share Posted May 22, 2019 (edited) @dejawolf Ok I have now solid confirmation that M1A2C front hull armor is thicker than in previous versions. This is M1A1M, it have same hull and turret dimensions as all M1A1's and M1A2's previous to M1A2C, notice where front lights and their bushguards are placed, just next to the edge where upper front hull plate joins with lower front plate. And now M1A2C, it's clearly visible that the edge where upper front plate and lower front plate are welded togheter, is much further to the front compared to lights and their bushguards. Edited May 22, 2019 by Damian90 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 https://taskandpurpose.com/army-m1a2c-abrams-brigade-summer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted July 2, 2019 Author Share Posted July 2, 2019 I have interesting observation. The US Army M1A1SA and some M1A2SEPv1/v2 tanks, have serial numbers ending with letter M on their turrets. What does that mean? It means that the M suffix is a code for the NGAP or Next Generation Armor Package, as the same M suffix can be seen on the newest M1A2SEPv3 tanks. Ok, so what is the difference? Well, the M1A2SEPv3 have turret and hull front armor thicker than previous generations. My theory is that NGAP armor have two generations. 1st gen. NGAP was an upgrade for M1A1SA (possibly also M1A1FEP) and M1A2SEPv1/v2. Pic. M1A2SEPv2 and M1A2SEPv3 While 2nd. gen. NGAP armor is an improved variant for M1A2SEPv3/v4, that is designed not only to protect against current modern threats but also possible future threats, by not only using improved armor composition, but also making it significantly thicker and heavier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted July 21, 2019 Author Share Posted July 21, 2019 So US Army officialy admitted that under guise of M109A7 modernization they developed a completely new 155mm SPH. There won't be M109A8, now it will be designated as M1299 (XM1299 during R&D phase). https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2019/armament/Musgrave.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3Star Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 (edited) It means that the M suffix is a code for the NGAP or Next Generation Armor Package, as the same M suffix can be seen on the newest M1A2SEPv3 tanks. The "M" was the suffix of the serial number on the non-SA AIMS tank I received in 2007. I don't know what it's doing on the SEPv3, but at the time, we were told it was for the new management system the tank had. Edited August 12, 2019 by 3Star 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 55 minutes ago, 3Star said: The "M" was the suffix of the serial number on the non-SA AIMS tank I received in 2007. I don't know what it's doing on the SEPv3, but at the time, we were told it was for the new management system the tank had. When is the last time you read a 9-2350-200-BD Manual? it will tell you the truth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted August 26, 2019 Share Posted August 26, 2019 (edited) “U.S. Army awards Raytheon with $534M contract for Commander’s Independent Thermal Viewer” https://defence-blog.com/army/u-s-army-awards-raytheon-with-534m-contract-for-commanders-independent-thermal-viewer.html/amp Edited August 26, 2019 by Assassin 7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted September 17, 2019 Share Posted September 17, 2019 Pictures off of Reddit: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted September 17, 2019 Members Share Posted September 17, 2019 It's beginning to look a bit silly. Not that I doubt that it's an improvement, but further elongation doesn't appear feasible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted November 28, 2019 Author Share Posted November 28, 2019 Fresh M1A2SEPv3's from factory. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted February 12, 2020 Author Share Posted February 12, 2020 It seems we can see first M1A2SEPv2 tanks upgraded with series production, Trophy HV active protection system, heading for Defender Europe 2020. We can see armored boxes on turret roof, that probably contains electronics for Trophy HV. Also notice additional plates, which are most likely counterweights to better balance the turret, when Trophy HV is mounted. These plates might also serve as additional armor, M1A2SEPv3 does not need these additional counterweight/armor plates on turret front, cause it have already, thicker, reinforced front turret armor. These vehicles are in long range transport, so this is why modules containing Trophy radars, launchers and spare interceptor magazines with autoloaders are not seen, these are transported separately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted April 24, 2020 Author Share Posted April 24, 2020 (edited) Recently Secretary of the US Army published photos from his visit at GDLS HQ. These photos presents GDLS prototypes for MPF (Mobile Protected Firepower) (light tank) program and OMFV (Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle) (new IFV) program. MPF prototype: OMFV prototype: Edited April 24, 2020 by Damian90 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormrider_sp Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Damian90 said: Recently Secretary of the US Army published photos from his visit at GDLS HQ. These photos presents GDLS prototypes for MPF (Mobile Protected Firepower) (light tank) program and OMFV (Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle) (new IFV) program. MPF prototype: OMFV prototype: Now that's a nice bus man! Edited April 24, 2020 by stormrider_sp 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 Just IMHO: "optionally manned" is one of the dumbest design decission you can make for an AFV. It combined the downsides of a highly-automatized vehicle with the downsides of having to provide crew protection 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted April 24, 2020 Author Share Posted April 24, 2020 18 minutes ago, Grenny said: Just IMHO: "optionally manned" is one of the dumbest design decission you can make for an AFV. It combined the downsides of a highly-automatized vehicle with the downsides of having to provide crew protection I think this is a bit misleading terminology. To better understand the idea is to name it, optionally unmanned. Which means that normally vehicle operates manned, with crew inside. However if it is necessary, crew can get out of vehicle, and control it via terminal they take with themselfs. This gives more flexibility to vehicle and used tactics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormrider_sp Posted April 24, 2020 Share Posted April 24, 2020 2 hours ago, Damian90 said: I think this is a bit misleading terminology. To better understand the idea is to name it, optionally unmanned. Which means that normally vehicle operates manned, with crew inside. However if it is necessary, crew can get out of vehicle, and control it via terminal they take with themselfs. This gives more flexibility to vehicle and used tactics. Wouldnt it be better to just field a cheaper UGV, perhaps even a swarm of them for just a fraction the weight? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted April 24, 2020 Author Share Posted April 24, 2020 1 hour ago, stormrider_sp said: Wouldnt it be better to just field a cheaper UGV, perhaps even a swarm of them for just a fraction the weight? And again US Army plans are misunderstood. Yes OMFV will be optionally (un)manned for greater flexibility, however besides manned vehicles, also a family of robotic combat vehicles (RCV) will be fielded, including RCV-L (Light), RCV-M (Medium) and RCV-H (Heavy). The manned vehicles will be: 1. OMFV (Optionall (un)Manned Fighting Vehicle) the new IFV that will replace the Bradley. 2. OMT (Otionally (un)Manned Tank) the new MBT that will replace the Abrams. 3. AMPV (Armored Multi Purpose Vehicle) a replacement for M113 family of vehicles. 4. MPF (Mobile Protected Firepower) a new light tank. And these manned vehicles will be supported by RCV's. PS. And here are some designs I found, and I assume these are some initial notional designs for the new OMT tank. So crew (2 or 3) in hull, hull have super thick front armor + unmanned turret. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted July 24, 2020 Author Share Posted July 24, 2020 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division received their newest M1A2SEPv3's. Meanwhile from Army Prepositioned Stock in Germany and Netherlands, US Army sends 30 additional M1A2SEPv2's reffited with Trophy HV active protection system to Poland. We have confirmed that that least 8 tanks will have Trophy HV radar and interceptor modules installed, while all tanks have electronics for the system already mounted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 Army investigating how M1 Abrams accidentally fired on another tank at Fort Bliss, injuring a soldier https://www.armytimes.com/2020/07/24/army-investigating-how-m1-abrams-accidentally-fired-on-another-tank-at-fort-bliss-injuring-a-soldier/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted July 28, 2020 Author Share Posted July 28, 2020 M1002 practice round hit in to CITV and loader machine gun mount. If it would hit directly in to armor, damages would be smaller and most likely loader would not be wounded. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 The poor guy had a hand severed and a collapsed lung from what I read. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 ere we can see addon armor and ballast plates thickness, these are welded to turret front of M1A2SEPv2's equipped with Trophy HV active protection system. It also shows how much armor was factory standard thickened in M1A2SEPv3. We estimated with my friend these addon plates are ~160-180mm thick and M1A2SEPv3 front turret armor is turret more or less thicker by such value compared to previous M1A1 and M1A2 variants. Obviouslu this is only estimation, but the plate even seen by naked eye, is obviously thicker than 100mm. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damian90 Posted November 16, 2020 Author Share Posted November 16, 2020 This just shown up on various forums. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.