• Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Inside the US Army's Lethal New M1A2 SEP v.3 Abrams Main Battle Tank

Discussion in 'Land Warfare' started by Zarvan, Oct 8, 2016.

  1. Zarvan

    Zarvan ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    47,351
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Ratings:
    +84 / 48,780 / -13
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    [​IMG]
    Dave Majumdar
    June 2, 2016

    TweetShareShare
    [​IMG]
    General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) will start to deliver the first production M1A2 SEP v.3 Abrams to the U.S. Army starting in 2017. Out of a total of nine prototypes built, the company has delivered seven prototype tanks for field-testing at the Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona and the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.

    “Testing commenced in Jan. 2015 and ends in Mar. FY2020,” said Donald Kotchman, General Dynamics Land Systems’ vice president for tracked combat vehicles in a statement to The National Interest. “Prototypes are currently in reliability test and performing well.”

    According to Kotchman, the Army will start to field the new Abrams model starting in the third quarter of fiscal year 2020. However, unlike most Pentagon acquisitions programs, there is no such thing as entering into “low rate initial production” or entering into “full-rate production.” Instead, the Army is developing the SEP v.3 as an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP). “Instead of LRIP/FRP these are ECP vehicles and initial production deliveries commence in 2017,” Kotchman said. “Fielding is expected to begin in Q3 FY2020.”

    Right now, GDLS is on contract to build six initial upgraded tanks, but eventually the Army hopes to remanufacture its entire M1A2 SEP fleet into the new configuration. “We have a contract for six pilot vehicles and are working follow on orders. The Army currently plans to put the V3 capability into all of its M1A2SEP vehicles,” Kotchman said.

    Though the M1A2 SEP v.3 was developed as an ECP, the upgrade adds significant new capabilities to the Abrams. GDLS was originally awarded the contract for the Abrams ECP1a Program in Sept. 2012. At its core, the program was an engineering development program to improve the Abrams’ Size Weight and Power-Cooling (SWaP-C) capacity as the tank was running out of room to grow. “The ECP1a program is characterized as the ‘Power Package’ to include improvements to various systems to aid the soldier in future fights,” Kotchman said.

    According to General Dynamics, some of the major improvements within the ECP1a program include increased power generation and distribution capacity. “Soldiers have a requirement for additional electrical power in order to use advanced technologies and improved capability in the future,” Kotchman said.

    The new Abrams variant also includes improved connectivity—allowing for better communications with advanced network capabilities. Tank crews are also afforded vastly improved displays and man-machine interfaces that should enhance their situational awareness.

    The SEP v.3 also has improved survivability and lethality compared to older Abrams models. Kotchman said that the vehicle has advanced abilities to defeat improvised explosive devices and has an upgraded armor package. The addition of a new Ammunition Data Link supports use of advanced new ammunition types that are either already fielded or will be fielded in the near future.

    Meanwhile, life for maintenance crews gets easier with the addition of a new Vehicle Health Management System (VHMS) that supports off vehicle reporting of maintenance status. New Line Replaceable Modules (LRMs) help to improve on-vehicle diagnostics and repair, which should greatly improve vehicle availability due to decreased downtime. The addition of a new under-armor Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) helps to reduce fuel consumption and should lessen the wear and tear on the tank’s Honeywell AGT1500C 1500shp gas turbine engine.

    Kotchman deferred comment about whether the Army needs to develop new tank to defeat the new Russian T-14 Armata as the Germans intend to. Berlin is clearly concerned by the Armata and is hoping to develop an entirely new main battle tank to counter it. However, Kotchman did say that the M1A2 SEP v.3 is just one of the upgrades in the pipeline for the Abrams. However, he deferred comment to the U.S. Army about the nature of those potential additions. “The Army is considering additional engineering changes that would add capability to the Abrams tank,” Kotchman said.

    Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for The National Interest. You can follow him on Twitter: @davemajumdar.

    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...rmys-lethal-new-m1a2-sep-v3-abrams-main-16445
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  2. Beny Karachun

    Beny Karachun SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,264
    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Ratings:
    +2 / 901 / -34
    Country:
    Israel
    Location:
    Israel
    Change its design of the tank already, this design isn't effective
     
  3. Penguin

    Penguin PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    13,097
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Ratings:
    +56 / 11,415 / -0
    In-effective in wat way(s)? Says who? You?

    "Leopard, Merkava, Leclerc, K2, T90MS (T90A and such are shit) etc are much better."
    https://defence.pk/threads/why-the-...-king-of-the-battlefield.454280/#post-8784476

    Your vaunted Leo2, LeClerc, K2 follow the same general design. So, your sound-byte doesn't make much sense.
     
  4. Beny Karachun

    Beny Karachun SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,264
    Joined:
    May 30, 2016
    Ratings:
    +2 / 901 / -34
    Country:
    Israel
    Location:
    Israel
    Armor sloping, you know more than me, but I am pretty sure you know what I am talking about, the Armata for example, has a really good hull design, the Abrams has a worse design, when the enemy makes a totally new tank design, you shouldn't make a tank based on the same tank you were using for 30 years, agreed?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  5. Zabaniyah

    Zabaniyah ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    14,913
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Ratings:
    +7 / 12,367 / -0
    Country:
    Bangladesh
    Location:
    Bangladesh
    How old is the Merkava then?

    A design that lasts long is a good one.
     
  6. C130

    C130 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,095
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2014
    Ratings:
    +4 / 7,358 / -5
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States
    it really needs an APS badly IMO, but if we had to go for a radical new design,I think we should go for the K2 Black Panther and start upgrading that.

    so make a deal to aquire 1000 K2 Black Panthers, buy 250 straight from SK and build the other 750 in the U.S

    entire program shouldn't cost more than $10 billion dollars.
     
  7. flamer84

    flamer84 BANNED

    Messages:
    9,435
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2013
    Ratings:
    +5 / 11,541 / -17
    Country:
    Romania
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    ...................................

    I sometimes wonder about you...
     
  8. C130

    C130 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,095
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2014
    Ratings:
    +4 / 7,358 / -5
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States

    U.S would spend $10 billion designing a prototpye just to say it's too expensive to buy. might as well go for a new MBT that's already designed,tested, and being fielded.

    I actually question the effectiveness of the tank in modern warfare period. especially when warfare is becomming so asymmetric against non-state actors.

    unless you going to charge these guys with 10+ tanks bulldoze right over them, I just see them as a waste of resources and easy targets
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2016
  9. Penguin

    Penguin PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    13,097
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Ratings:
    +56 / 11,415 / -0
    The Merkava tank began development in 1973 and entered official service in 1978

    Congress canceled the MBT-70 in November and XM803 December 1971, and redistributed the funds to the new XM815, later renamed the XM1 Abrams. Prototypes were delivered in 1976 by Chrysler Defense and General Motors. The turbine-powered Chrysler Defense design was selected for development as the M1. A total of 3,273 M1 Abrams tanks were produced 1979–85 and first entered U.S. Army service in 1980. In March 1982, General Dynamics Land Systems Division (GDLS) purchased Chrysler Defense, after Chrysler built over 1,000 M1s.
     
  10. Penguin

    Penguin PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    13,097
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Ratings:
    +56 / 11,415 / -0
    Yeah well, you never know if/when Russian armor roll into Europe again. Or Chinese armor into someplace else.

    Besides, the US has plenty hulls in service AND in reserve, which could easily be rebuilt into new versions e.g. with the new German 130mm etc. Personally I could see how one would shoehorn a large caliber gatling or chaingun (25m-35mm) into the turret (deleting the main gun), to make a support vehicle for urban warfare.
     
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2016
  11. DayDreamerz

    DayDreamerz FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Messages:
    97
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 20 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    sirs g how to add a pic if i can if any1 can explain......please ..??? something to me important very ....too tell

    just visited a site full of concept hellicopters.jetshttps://www.google.com.pk/search?q=military+aircraft&sa=X&biw=1280&bih=699&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ved=0ahUKEwj8lt_gyMvPAhXIyRoKHRRRDcwQ7AkIQg#tbm=isch&q=future+military+body+armor&imgdii=MBXKssiEGv8p3M%3A%3BMBXKssiEGv8p3M%3A%3BJyasOWLP748HXM%3A&imgrc=MBXKssiEGv8p3M%3A,tanks,etc , maybe not new to APP LOG....

    sirs g agaar app logon kay pass google ki ID hai more easy ..please log in throug there login to ur google plus ID there search for ....Future military aircraft ,,,aviator comes from their too ...in first line you will find every thing ................choppers ..tanks ..body armmor etc etc ..........please add concept too with the search id ....
     
  12. Stannis Baratheon

    Stannis Baratheon FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,137
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2015
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,210 / -2
    Country:
    Bangladesh
    Location:
    Bangladesh
    Not happening at all. The private contractors in the U.S will not let anything of such pass the Congress.
     
  13. Penguin

    Penguin PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    13,097
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Ratings:
    +56 / 11,415 / -0
    And exacly what advantages would the K2 offer over the latest version of the Abrams?
     
  14. C130

    C130 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,095
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2014
    Ratings:
    +4 / 7,358 / -5
    Country:
    United States
    Location:
    United States

    besides being more modern you tell me.

     
  15. Penguin

    Penguin PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST

    Messages:
    13,097
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Ratings:
    +56 / 11,415 / -0
    Could you at least attempt to be specific, please? "More modern" means nothing. You mean 'newer'? If not, what do you mean? What does it offer that late model Abrams don't?