The M1A3 Abrams Tank Thread (proposals for modernizing our aging fleet of M1 and M1A1 tanks)

Multiple Sources ^ | 8/20/2004 | Multiple

[exnavy]

Engineering, R & D, your suggesting changeing a proven system on a vehicle NOT designed for this purpose. That requires R&D, I do not suggest sending troops into battle in slip shod make do reconfigurations unproven to be survivable.

What is needed is the right tool for the job. The Stryker program has some things in the works, and other programs are in R&D that would better serve the needs addressed.

The M1 abrams is a tank killer, primary mission, to attempt to change horses in midstream with it would be to invite problems that could cost lives. I wouldn't want that on my head.

[hchutch]

Applique armor would probably be needed. Or, one could just drop the M163 turret onto the Stryker, which has shrugged off RPGs in the past.

Then again, I think that the Army should have not bothered developing Stryker. The LAV-25 (used by the Marines) and the M8 Buford could have been purchased and fielded sooner, with no need to spend money developing a whole new vehicle.

[Southack]

"The M1 abrams is a tank killer, primary mission, to attempt to change horses in midstream with it would be to invite problems that could cost lives. I wouldn't want that on my head."

The M1 is mothballed. The M1 (not the M1A1 or the M1A2) is not in use. We've got about two thousand of them sitting around at places like Anniston, Alabama collecting dust.

In the meantime, we've identified a new need for an infantry support platform; something that we could use in Najaf and Fallujah, for instance. Something that could give us the firepower of the A-10 attack fighter, but on the ground, always with our troops.

So what's the downside to upgrading those mothballed old M1's to have the A-10's proven firepower? Get them over into Iraq rather than sitting around here in Alabama. Make the mullahs next door in Iran nervous, too.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[colorado tanker]

Thanks for the ping, cannon-cocker. I'd love to see 120mm beehive. That would have come in real handy on the thunder runs in Baghdad.

And bring back the cupola, which every NCO I knew called the cupalow, God bless 'em. I never liked working buttoned up, but the Abrams leaves you awfully exposed up there.

[jriemer]

Check out the XM307 25mm airbursting weapon system under review. There's a video off the main page

XM307

[Cannoneer No. 4]

PGU-13 HEI 13
High Explosive Incendiary

---

Team: 30mm GAU-8
Height (max): 11.41 in.
Weight: 378g
Number Produced: 15M
Birth Date: 1976
Muzzle Velocity (nominal): 1020 m/s
Chamber Pressure (typical): 360 MPa
Dispersion (typical): 0.6 x 0.6 mr
Projectile Weight: 378g
Fuze: M505

This round's primary role is defeat of light materiel targets. As an added advantage, it incorporates extended-range incendiary capability against fuel targets.

Cannon
30mm, 7-barrel Gatling
4200 or 2100 rounds/minute
Normal burst: 100-2500 rounds
Ammo capacity: 1350 rounds
Loaded weight: 4000 lb
Length: Over 20 ft

 

This is not something you'd want to get shot at with, but it is not primarily an anti-personnel round. The round is designed to blow things up and set them on fire. Collateral damage in built up areas would be prohibitive. There are cheaper ways to blow the hell out of a town.

Suddenly surrounded by 600 enemy combatants

600 dismounts in the open or 600 dismounts in buildings and under other structures? If the later, we've already had that happen and dealt with it.

Surrounded by 600 screaming Hadjis, 7.62mm coax and loader's gun plus TC's .50 cal will disperse that crowd.

an existing M1 crew could fire 1 beehive round,

We don't have any 120mm BEEHIVE. We have 120mm canister.

For an infantry support role in such a situation, the GAU-8 is clearly the preferred choice over the 105mm or 120mm beehive round.

Clear to you maybe. Highly questionable to many others, including me.

Heck, move their old 105mm main battle cannons onto Strykers or Bradleys if you want

You would mount the M68 on to a 20-ton hull? Such a proposal betrays total ignorance of Newton's Third Law of Motion.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

COOP-a-lo

Is there another pronunciation?

[colorado tanker]

LOL! Nope.

[Darksheare]

It'd be funny, in a weirdo tech tinkerer way, to mount the gun pods from an AV-8B harrier on the sides of the turret of the M1 Abrams.
And stick a high rate of fire weapon (preferably explosive rounds) on a cupola and make it swing 360.
I know, pipe dream and impractical..

[Cannoneer No. 4]

I'd like to replace the 165mm gun on the CEV with a Vulcan and send them to Najaf.

[Darksheare]

Any chance I can get one of those and use it on the woodchucks around my area?

[jriemer]

If you offer General Dynamics enough money, they might part with one or two. Plus they should be really effective on squirrels too.

[Darksheare]

Squirrels too.. hmm.
Very tempting.

[buwaya]

4 half tracks requires a total redesign of the powertrain. You will have 2x the driven axles. Plus much modification of the hull, controls, etc.

This is not a simple modification of existing chassis. You might as well design a new vehicle.

[drachenfels]

Speaking as an old 16Sierra (stinger gunner) who was in a ADA Battery back in the day... that looks AWFULLY familiar! M163 Vulcan AntiAircraft system.

Heck, it even looks a lot like our old motorpool.. but we were 8th ID, not 3d Armored Div.

IMHO, the Vulcan was a fine system; the reason for it's obsolescence was the inability of the turret to slew fast enough on low flying targets. I thought that was bull; the gun-bunnies solved that one by having a platoon cover chunks of a quadrant. Each system covered a small chunk of a quadrant (w/ 4 guns, each covered roughly 11 degrees). Lots o' bullets results in good chances on "golden BBs".

Against ground targets, IT ROCKED. Then again, there's damn little protection against RPGs, but all the same...it'd be one hell of a convoy gun truck. ;-)

[Southack]

"This is not something you'd want to get shot at with, but it is not primarily an anti-personnel round. The round is designed to blow things up and set them on fire. Collateral damage in built up areas would be prohibitive. There are cheaper ways to blow the hell out of a town."

OK, I like the GAU-8 but I'm not married to it. If you must, using the GAU-4 or GAU-12 would suffice instead.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[Southack]

"4 half tracks requires a total redesign of the powertrain. You will have 2x the driven axles. Plus much modification of the hull, controls, etc. This is not a simple modification of existing chassis. You might as well design a new vehicle."

Yes and no. The reason to *not* design a new vehicle from scratch is that we've got some 2,000 M1's sitting around collecting dust. That armor and engine is expensive in both time and money to melt down and reproduce in a new vehicle.

Yes, power has to be transfered to the new forward half-tracks if we go with a 4 half-tracked approach rather than stick with the original two track design...but there are *multiple* ways to transfer power to the forward tracks, all of which would be worth exploring (hull modification for new drive shafts as you mentioned, external drive shafts, chains, electrical power transfer to two near-freight-train-sized electric motors, etc.).

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[Springman]

Bump for later read.

[ableChair]

Check out the XM307 25mm airbursting weapon system under review. There's a video off the main page

Nice. But honestly, it looks like an intermediate technology. They've lightened it up some, but apparently it's cyclic rate is lower than the MK-19s and it's effective range is slightly less. (2200m - MK-19 and 2000m M307). What's really needed is a VERY high cyclic and sustained rate of fire. Do you know what the SUSTAINED rate of fire for the M307 is? The MK-19s is only about 40 rounds/min. Anyway, we need a sustained rate of something like 600 rounds/min. A rate of fire like that would allow what's been called 'fragmentation saturation' which would dramatically tip the scales in combat; especially in urban combat. A single such mount could hold off hordes of crazed, ill-trained lunatics with AKs and RPGs.

[jriemer]

Do you know what the SUSTAINED rate of fire for the M307 is?

From GD website: Rate of Fire - 250 Shots per Minute, Automatic

Now can maintain that rate of fire all day long - who knows.