Jump to content

History of US Tanks.


Damian90

Recommended Posts

On 9/21/2016 at 4:53 AM, Damian90 said:

And the same pattern will repeat itself with the 120mm smoothbore guns Rh120 and M256. Both guns are not interchangeable, you can't rearm Leopard 2 with M256 and M1A1/A2 with Rh120. The gun cradle, recoil system, gun breech and other components are different, however both guns can fire the same ammunition and have same or similiar ballistic properties, because both are based on the same technology.

 

What are the differences between the M256 and Rh 120 L/44, other than things like breech design and recoil system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 423
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

10 hours ago, Nate Lawrence said:

 

What are the differences between the M256 and Rh 120 L/44, other than things like breech design and recoil system?

 

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA476340

 

Apparently, the M256 was also engineered to have a tougher gun barrel compared to the Rh120/L44, less susceptible/likely to fracture. Some of the differences laid in the manufacturing process (the US purchased both the know-how and the manufacturing tools from the Germans, but Watervliet Arsenal still had to conduct tests and experiments), which included novel steps such as swage autofrettage and chrome electroplating for increased lifespan.

 

Edited by Renegade334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^-- They already intend to explore that option: http://www.defensenews.com/articles/army-to-demo-robotic-wingman-vehicles-in-2017

 

Quote

One of the efforts planned for the summer of 2017 at Fort Benning will assess whether it’s possible to give the weapons loader on an Abrams tank the responsibility to control unmanned air and ground vehicles by equipping the tank with an automatic loader, Lt. Gen. Michael Lundy, the commanding general at the Army’s Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, said during a teleconference with reporters this month.

 


Lundy noted an automatic loader, which is a proven capability not yet fielded, would be integrated into an Abrams in order to take the burden off the weapons loader and free that crew member for unmanned systems operations duty.

The plan takes what the Army has and, without introducing new force structure, should supplement the Abrams with increased situational awareness among other capabilities, Lundy said.

The demonstration would then lead to a decision on whether the Army should require a product improvement to add an automatic loader to the Abrams, he said. Then more operational decisions would be made such as what a manned-unmanned teaming arrangement with Abrams would look like.

 

 

IOW: we'll see first if it's feasible, then we'll see whether we should add it to the M1 development roadmap. An experiment.

Edited by Renegade334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
36 minutes ago, Damian90 said:

Small news, M1A2SEPv3 weight will increase over 80 short tons, or 72.5 metric tons. Armor upgrade is more significant than I was thinking, it will weight around 9-10+ metric tons more than M1A2SEPv1/v2.

Is that with TUSK I /II or just the stadard issue ?  72.5 metric tons is pretty hefty! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lavictoireestlavie said:

Is that with TUSK I /II or just the stadard issue ?  72.5 metric tons is pretty hefty! 

 

Standard without addon armor as I assume. Here is quote from the committee that discused this.

 

Quote

The committee encourages the Army to continue development and procurement of a heavy equipment trailer solution to be used as part of the Heavy Equipment Transport System (HETS) for current and future combat vehicles. The committee notes the current heavy equipment transport (HET) trailer is rated for 70 tons, but the most modernized M1A2 Abrams main battle tank configuration, the M1A2 SEPv3, will weigh in excess of 80 tons. The committee understands the current HET trailer will be unable to transport modernized M1A2 SEPv3 tanks, or future M1A2 SEPv4 configurations. The committee believes the Army will require a more capable means of transport organic to the service. The committee encourages the Army to begin to plan and resource the modification of all 192 existing HET trailers, as well as develop ways to accelerate the new Enhanced HETS developmental program. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a briefing to the House Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2017, on the Army's strategy for upgrading current HETS and HET trailers. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the fact that it concerns the weight of an Abrams sitting on a HET trailer, I believe it implies no add-on (TUSK belly armor or ERA layers), no ammunition, no crew and the fuel tanks filled at a bare minimum for maneuvering.

Edited by Renegade334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Renegade334 said:

Considering the fact that it concerns the weight of an Abrams sitting on a HET trailer, I believe it implies no add-on (TUSK belly armor or ERA layers), no ammunition, no crew and the fuel tanks filled at a bare minimum for maneuvering.

Well our trailers are there to transport combat ready tanks sans crew /ammo. I guess the US HET should fit the same slot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

SNENVZI.jpg

 

Meanwhile, M1 TTB is being slowly restored to it's original condition by the National Armor and Cavalry Museum personell. It's great to see it finally in better shape than it was few years ago. All vehicles in NACM collection will be eventually restored and preserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2017 at 0:44 PM, Damian90 said:

SNENVZI.jpg

 

Meanwhile, M1 TTB is being slowly restored to it's original condition by the National Armor and Cavalry Museum personell. It's great to see it finally in better shape than it was few years ago. All vehicles in NACM collection will be eventually restored and preserved.

 

That is great to hear! Some of the vehicles at the NACM were looking a little rough when I visited it last year. Still, there is nothing quite like seeing an MBT 70 prototype in person.

IMAG0797.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Some more informations about M1A2SEPv3/M1A2SEPv4 upgrades.

 

o9zryza.jpg

wvGVMFN.jpg

I can only say wow, this will be one hell of an upgrade. And these are only some basics from ECP1A and ECP1B phases, there is a separate program to install hard kill active protection system + survivability upgrades here + new armor.

But FCS upgrades are also impressive, I mean, even current M1A2SEPv1/v2 is amazing machine in this regard, but here, well US Army do not fuck around these days. I guess this time they want to squeeze maximum from M1 upgradability before replacement will be avaiable.

 

Edited by Damian90
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

"General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, Michigan, has been awarded a $59,223,559 firm-fixed-price contract for new improved fire control electronics units (IFCEU); repaired and upgraded IFCEUs; and repaired and upgraded improved commanders display unit to support the M1-A2 System Enhanced Package Version 2 Field Modification program. One bid was solicited with one bid received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 28, 2022. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Warren, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-17-D-0098)."

 

This is good to see, thanks for the information Damian 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, so there is FCS upgrade for M1A2SEPv2's, Trophy APS integration for single ABCT for brigade level test and evaluation and also it seems they will modernize M1's transmission, probably the same modification is used on M1A2SEPv3 to compensate for a greater weight of vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...