The REAL M1 Abrams! Chapter 8: Vaporware (Part 2 of 4)

[BitnikGr]

BlacktailDefense, what about Enhanced T158 tracks (interchangeable and non-interchangeable)? They were in development since 2006 as far as I know and they were promising 3000 and 5000miles respectively.

Are they in production and how many were built?

[BlacktailDefense]

@BitnikGr I haven't heard of these, but they would only be struggling to catch-up to the performance that the Diehl 530 P track has demonstrated for quite some time now. An M1A1 in the Australian outback managed to cover 4500 miles on a single pair of 530 Ps, which tells us 2 things;

1- A track that's been operationally used since the *1970s* outperforms the US tracks that it pre-dates.

2- The Diehl 530 P is compatible with the M1, so there's no excuse for the T156/158 to even exist.

[BitnikGr]

@BlacktailDefense The fact that Diehl 530 P is compatible with M1 is good for us (Greece). We have significant force of Leopards and as it seems we'll get 400 M1A1 from US Army for free.

[corporacionmonstruo]

@BitnikGr for free? why?

[BlacktailDefense]

@corporacionmonstruo Probably because there's no way the Greek government would spend money to on buying a heap like the M1. Not that they won't go bankrupt because of them --- the Logistics Chapter shows how expensive they are.

[BitnikGr]

@corporacionmonstruo For different reasons.

The main reason is to keep parity in Aegean region. Last years Turkey have developed its own military industry to quite high level and US was always a regulator in this case. Greece has a need to scrap old M48s and M60s, which are not adequate for todays means and they are too expensive in maintenance.

2) The best scenario would be to buy second-hand Leo 2A4 and 2A6 available in Europe. But there are 2 problems with that... First..

[BitnikGr]

@corporacionmonstruo ... is that there are no 400 second-hand Leopards available for purchase at any given time and second is of course that Greece hasn't money for such purchase.

3) Third reason to give 400 M1A1 to Greece for free is of course to brake a German monopoly in this market and then get money from Greece for infrastructure, repair-parts, simulators, rounds, training personnel etc. And that's not cheap. Judging by Egyptian contracts all this can cost more than...

[beltar2]

@BitnikGr

Buy T-90. :)

[BitnikGr]

@beltar2 Export price of new T-90S is 3-4 times more expensive than second-hand Leopard 2A4 and 2 times more expensive than 2 second-hand Leopard 2A6.

Greece is NATO member. We can't have Russian MBT. However, Cyprus bought 82 T-80U and they are fine with them.

Anyway... Greece can't buy anything right now. So, we can only take those 400 for free, even if they can become more expensive in future than obtaining second-hand Leo 2A4 ready for service.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

They not for free! You WILL spend at least a BILLION $ a year to keep them running.

Better solution will be fine USA for them as for nuclear waste disposal.

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov You are full of exaggerations as always :)))

400 M1A1 for Greece are built prior 1987 and they don't have either DU armor, either DU rounds. Actually we don't want DU.

Do you know how much costs maintenance of 700 old M48 and M60?

However, acknowledging that maintenance of second-hand gas-turbine tanks won't be cheap matter, there are some voices here in Greece that we should get more of those M1A1, if it was possible, for spare parts to keep those 400 running.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

"Do you know how much costs maintenance of 700 old M48 and M60?"

Orders of magnitude LESS than that of 400 old rusty M1s

"voices here in Greece that we should get more of those M1A1, if it was possible"

Definetly they have nice kick backs from US MIC

[beltar2]

@BitnikGr

Looks like USA just want to clear stores from old junk and then have money from maintenance.

I wonder how much operational T-72B built in later 80s Russia has...

[beltar2]

@BitnikGr

You wanted to buy 1000 BMP-3s before the crisis. NATO isn't a problem because it's possible to make modification for NATO's standard.

New tanks are not cheep but you can buy them using Russian credit like Venezuela does. The question is if Russia would agree.

[BitnikGr]

@beltar2 Russia will be glad to sell anything to NATO member. However, IFVs and AA systems are considered as secondary. MBTs and Air Force are among primary weapon systems. As long Greece is part of EU and NATO it won't be allowed to have Russian MBT or fighter plane.

BMP-3 was also a pure political agreement together with gas-pipiline. Greek Army wanted CV-90 with 30mm cannon. Pipeline is cancelled and so BMP-3s for Greece.

Cyprus has BMP-3 and feels happy with them.

[BitnikGr]

@corporacionmonstruo ... $1mln per vehicle, which is more expensive than second-hand Leo 2A4 in service condition.

These are the reasons.

[corporacionmonstruo]

@BitnikGr mmm,sounds like the word "free" is not adequate,Yanks always want something ;-)

[BitnikGr]

@corporacionmonstruo Not only Yanks... There is a saying "free cheese is only in mousetrap".

However, it is a very good opportunity for US to brake a traditional German monopoly in Europe with their Leopards. Maintenance of 400 M1A1 will distract at least 40% of funds for maintenance of Armored Forces and these 40% will go to US.

...

[BitnikGr]

@corporacionmonstruo ...

From the other hand it is a very good opportunity for Greece as well, to scrap most of 2nd gen tanks and have less tank fleet in numbers, but with more 3rd generation tanks with 120mm caliber guns.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

For 1 mln$ per vehicle you can turn Pattons in a modern tank which will be better than M1 AND it will not require half of greek military spendings to mantain them

[BlacktailDefense]

@MarshallJukov Not to mention that Greece still has a fair number of M60s. There are still about 650 of them.

[BitnikGr]

@BlacktailDefense No way we can have 650 M60s. Maybe 650 M48s and M60s all together. Saying the truth I was also surprised when I learn that M60A3 is under way for scrapping and not Leopards 1A5.

But as it goes our M60A3 are not TTS, while Leo 1A5 FCS is upgraded to modern standards. Without M48 and M60s all 105mm-gun tanks will go to islands, while 120mm-gun MBTs will stay on mainland.

350 M60s were donated to Iraq. Together with all BMP-1s we had.

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov No, you can't. Many tried, including US. Protection level of Leopards1 and M60s can't be upgraded and it is the most frustrating point. Otherwise German's wouldn't built Leo2 and US wouldn't build M1. Simple as that.

Whatever upgrades you do to 50-60 years old tanks they are still a nightmare of maintenance.

Money spent on maintenance of 700+ obsolete and difficult tanks will go for maintenance of 400 M1A1.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Protection isn`t the major trait modern tank should have (and protection of M1 definetly overall WORSE than that of M60 ). FAR not major.

Patton is nightmare of maintenance? LOL you never messed with M1`s maintenance then))

50 yo tanks CAN be upgraded to have modern`s tank efficiency very well.

watch?v=hUaZ_pNZz6M

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "Protection isn`t the major trait modern tank should have"

Everything matters! Modern trends are for increase of all-around protection of MBT and Western 2nd gen tanks suck on that. They can't be modernized to allow to have protection levels of Western 3rd gen tanks.

M60 doesn't even have composite armor. How can you possibly upgrade that? Throw out entire armor and build new one? :)

Any FCS, engine and ERA upgrades won't make M60 or T-55AGM a MBT of 3rd gen.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

"They can't be modernized to allow to have protection levels of Western 3rd gen tanks."

Protection of the MBT isn`t only its armor thickness. Modernized M60 AND T-55 CAN have MORE protection than some old M1

"M60 doesn't even have composite armor."

They can have applique AND ERA

"Any FCS, engine and ERA upgrades won't make M60 or T-55AGM a MBT of 3rd gen."

Actually, they DO

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov ...

"Actually, they DO"

In terms of mobility and for CTO maybe yes. In terms of firepower and protection no.

400mm at front and 100mm at sides don't suit modern standards.

Homogenous armor can't be replaced by composites. And composite armor can be upgraded with applique and ERA for further upgrade.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Whats different in between firepower of 125mm gun at upgraded T-55 and, say, T-90? Seriously nothing.

Just 105mm of M60 performed MUCH better than M256 aspecialy against soft targets.

Actualy T-55 even with 100mm has greater firepower than M1 in all except APFSDS

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "Whats different in between firepower of 125mm gun at upgraded T-55 and, say, T-90? Seriously nothing."

Really? Like any 125mm guns are the same? Like 2A46-1 of T-64 is the same with 2A46M-5 on T-90? Do we know what 125mm gun is placed on T-55AGM by Ukrainians?

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

KBM1 is 125mm gun which used in T-55AGM. It can use any 125mm tank munitions including ATGM and Ainet smart rounds. It has 18 rounds autoloader and L48 tube.

T-55AGM can be also used with NATO 120mm L50 gun.

T-55 also has RWS with 12,7 NSV

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "KBM1"

Effective fire range 2400-2500. And you say it is the same with 125mm gun of T-90A with range of 2800-3000m?

"18 rounds" - cool *sarcasm*! It suits our islands defendes, not Greek mainland.

How many T-55AGM are available in Ukraine and how much does it cost? If it cost more than 1.000.000$ we are not interesting.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Effective range is for unknown APFSDS. And in fact no any other tank gun in the world has greater range with APFSDS either.

18 rounds in autoloader and 30 total.

That is for T-55. M60 has much more room.

T-55AGM upgrade unit cost is 0,8mln $

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Aplique add-ons on legacy armored vehicles are widely present in the world. They make RHA all-steel armor on, say T-55 a COMPOSITE armor. ERA can be added to litetraly EVERY tank. Rember which tank got first ERA in history in the first place.

In the other hand drivetrain of M1 is already overloaded and this tank CAN NOT be uprgaded even with notable ERA system

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "In the other hand drivetrain of M1 is already overloaded and this tank CAN NOT be uprgaded even with notable ERA system"

M1A2 TUSK and SEP versions with ARAT ERA and additional weight of DU armor weights 8ton more than M1A1 we gonna get. So, there is a lot of room for slat armor and ERA upgrades. And we don't know how much of this room M60 drivetrain has.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Sure, and look up how it affected their drivetrain reliability.

M60 drivetrain is by default more reliable. As for room for upgrades... Magach

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

P.S. Each M1 takes at least 5 mln$ a year to mantain them even at peace time and up to ***51 million*** during wartime operation.

Overhaul cost of AGT-1500 will cost ***329000$*** each 1400 hours of operation!

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov Where did you get those numbers? Sources?

We know that engine's maintenance and overhaul will be the biggest headache. However, calculated on regular training base per year, 400 hours of operation are enough for 5 years... at least.

Anyhow, there are no better alternatives today.

Germany was VERY against this deal, but at the same time they didn't offer any alternative solution for months. So, we go for M1A1.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

"Where did you get those numbers? Sources?"

You should watch Blacktail`s videos more carefully. And overhaul cost of 1000 AGT-1500 had cost of 329 000 000$ do the math.

"400 hours of operation are enough for 5 years... at least."

20 seconds a day? You must be joking?

"didn't offer any alternative solution for months"

There is tonnes of solutions and not only from Germany. Aspecialy for M60 modernization

[franknbeans4761]

@MarshallJukov "You should watch Blacktail`s videos more carefully."

Hold on, I am laughing too hard to respond yet.

[MarshallJukov]

@franknbeans4761

Смех без причины, признак дурачины.

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "20 seconds a day? You must be joking?"

No. 800 miles per year with 50% idling time.

"Aspecialy for M60 modernization"

We don't need modernization of 300 2nd generation 60yo tank with 105mm gun. It costs more than second-hand Leo 2A4.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

"No. 800 miles per year with 50% idling time."

That is not as much as you think. Also i seriously doubt that those 400 M1 have their AGT-1500 not weared down. I bet all of them need this 329K $ overhaul initialy

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov 800miles per year per each tank is an average distance for a quite tense training and 2-3 war games per year in peace time.

400 M1A1 are selected one by one from US Army pool of more than 1100 M1A1 by Greek committee. These tanks were not used in Iraq and they are in quite good shape. We suppose that in average their engines have resource of 300-500 hours before overhaul.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Tanks are not for intense training, they are for intense WAR. And pathetic resourse of M1`s drivetrain makes if worst post-WW2 tank in history on that matter.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

T-55AGM cost is 0,8 mln$

I doubt M60 upgrade will cost more.

And this cost is ORDER OF MAGNITUDE lower than cost of those M1 and their further mauintenance

Its better to have good 2nd gen tank than worst 3rd gen.

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov If we had 0.8mln$ per tank to buy, we would go for stock of European Leo 2A4 and 2A5.

Nothing can serve and be upgraded infinitely. Those old M48s and M60s are real nightmare in maintenance. Technologically speaking maintenance of 25yo M1A1 is simpler than maintenance of 60yo M48 and it probably costs same money per year! At least M1A1 is more effective and can receive Leo's engine, tracks, gun and rounds in future.

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Greece got credit 1,2 bln $ to BUY those M1`s and spareparts they are NOT for free.

M1 is NOT simplier in maintenance than M48 or M60. M1 is WORST TANK in terms of maintenance in history of mankind!

Just 350 M1 tanks in Iraq take.....18 BILLION dollars a year to operate them, and average MTBM of M1 is less than 300 miles!

Please before saying this shit watch the entire Blacktail`s series on M1 for god`s sake!

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "Its better to have good 2nd gen tank than worst 3rd gen."

It is like saying that it is better to have a platform, which reached possibilities of its modernization, than a new platform, which is only in beginning of its life.

Like saying that it is better to keep MiG-23MLD than take F-16A... for free!

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

M60 and T-55 modernization limit WAAAAY beyond capabilities of M1A1 Abrams Greece was offered with.

And yes, its better to have MiG21-93 than F-16A

MiG-23 is in different class than both mentioned

[BitnikGr]

@MarshallJukov "You should watch Blacktail`s videos more carefully."

Saying the truth I do watch all of them. But also saying the truth, I am able to recognize when "wishful" is tried to be presented as "real". Several "bad things" about Abrams are simply overstretched to the extend to fit in here :) ""Притянуты за уши". "Натянуть сову на глобус" - in Russian :)))

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Which fact on M1 maintenance nightmare presented by Blacktail is wishful thinking?

[MarshallJukov]

@BitnikGr

Почитай про Т-55АГМ

vooryjenie. ru/17/971-varianty-modernizaci­i-tanka-t5. html

И сравни с тем говном что сплавляют Греции

[Zukonabe]

Strangely, but only Russians implement drop-tanks on their tanks, sorry for tautology.

BlacktailDefense

Do you happen to know why so? I mean, if it was a foolish idea, russians wouldnt use it for all these years, if it is a brilliant solution, why no west-block tank use it?

[BlacktailDefense]

@Zukonabe Most Russian tanks use those to extend their range mostly for offensives and road marches. As the Russian tank designs heavily emphasize defense and combat at close ranges (compared to NATO's doctrine). Maximum range on internal fuel has seldom been very long as a result, so they usually add the extra fuel to quickly move tank formations from the rear to the front (otherwise, they have to refuel more often).

[BitnikGr]

@Zukonabe French and Indians have drop-tanks on their tanks too. (Leclerc and Arjun).

How brilliant is this solution depends on implementation of it. Such system must have safety measures in order to be able to shut off external drop-tanks from main fuel system. In such case even if those tanks are hit and catch fire, they will simply burn out without any damage to the tank.

...

[BitnikGr]

@Zukonabe ...

If there is no possibility to drop them off or to shut them off, then fire will spread to entire tank's fuel system and engine and will burn the entire tank completely.

[VickersIndependent]

You know I almost forgot how silly some people are when they argue for !140mm! tank guns. Nice video by the way.XD

[superwout]

If I get a snack and beverage I'll probably choke on them , this stuff is not good for my bloodpressure anyway ...

[noponat666]

This mind-numbing stuff is just the tip of the iceberg of wasted money foisted on taxpayers and existing as career ladders for Army "imagineers" -- this should be featured on weekly TV and plastered on billboards. We would probably be better off jusy buying Leopard IIs and getting out of the failed supertank business. (I worked on the AGM-65 and wouldn't get into a tank for a million bucks!)

[BlacktailDefense]

@noponat666 It's funny you should mention the Leopard 2, because it was one of the competitors in the XM1 "Competition". I can't say for sure how well the competing Leopard 2 AV would have fared though, because the manufacturer got caught cheating --- I'll elaborate more upon this in a later chapter.

[BlacktailDefense]

@noponat666 I've read about the Maverick in Col. James G. Burton's "The Pentagon Wars: Reformers Challenge the Old Guard", but then THAT pales in comparison to two other show-stoppers.

First is the AGM-124 WASP anti-tank missile, which was promised to count the number of tanks in a column, and only attack a specific vehicle. Instead, it couldn't count past 4 without suddenly swerving off-course to attack a heat source somewhere else --- like the cars on the freeway near Elgin AFB.

[BlacktailDefense]

@noponat666 The second is the CBU-97 SFW (Sensor-Fuzed Weapon).

It was supposed to glide to the ground on a parachute and home-in on the heat from an AFV's engine in order to destroy it, but the seeker head proved weaker than the manufacturer had promised. Rather than spending the money to fix it, the interested parties rigged the "tests" by heating the target vehicles until they could fry an egg 30 feet away.

When the SecDef found out, he FORCED the manufacturer to fix it.

[franknbeans4761]

@BlacktailDefense What's your opinion on the Sensor-Fuzed Weapon?

[BlacktailDefense]

@franknbeans4761 It's an interesting idea, but I have reason to doubt that it works.

For one thing, it's first combat deployment wasn't until Kosovo, and none were used there.

For another, the only war I know for sure that it was used in was the Invasion of Iraq, and even then only a few-dozen were delivered.

Also, the USAF changed the name to "Wind-Corrected Munition Dispenser" at some point, and name-changing is often a symptom of a military project in serious trouble.

[franknbeans4761]

@BlacktailDefense "Also, the USAF changed the name to "Wind-Corrected Munition Dispenser" at some point"

The WCMD is a tail kit that fits to other cluster bombs.

en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Wind_Corrected_Muniti­ons_Dispenser

It isn't that. I am just not sure how accurate the bomb is. From videos I have seen it really only targets specific areas and only destroyed a few tanks, but destroyed the area too.

The US ordered 6,500 of them and if they are cheap, it seems good.

[mac163]

Sharoni & Bacon? is that a real company or is it something you had for lunch Blacktail? ; )

[BlacktailDefense]

@mac163 Asher Sharoni and Larry Bacon are real people, and they worked (and shilled) for Western Design Howden (WD, for short).

WD has created MANY worthless contraptions over the years, including several more devices that you'll see in the rest of this chapter, and an entire vehicle that you'll see in a future episode of Failed Tanks.

Also, they designed the autoloader that was used in the Stryker MGS.