M1A2 SEP V2 doesnt have better LFP armour

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@ayeflyingcowboy

Name me the nations that received M1s with HAP-3 (or any DU armour package), I’ll wait.

Saudi Arabia (2014+), Australia (2006+), Kuwait (2007+), Poland (2022+), Morocco (2016+).

I don’t believe Poland received it in 2021, but either Q4 of last year or sometime this year with their Abrams deliveries.

@ayeflyingcowboy

Except it specifically does:

FMS Tanks
All Non-DU Armor Packages:

FMS Non-DU armor package:
Egypt
Kuwait
Saudi Arabia

Improved FMS Non-DU armor package:
Tested by Greece and Turkey

Again, this does not list the FMS classification of the countries, nor does it take place after the 1978 NPT of 22 USC 2778a was discontinued for Uranium 235 distribution… Hence the sent document.

The trials of Greece and Turkey took place in 1994, and funnily enough involved one of the largest Ukrainian trade scandals with Turkey. Still not applicable to the amendment of export arms, as it is an outdated reference.

@ayeflyingcowboy

There are multiple FMS armour variants, also 1999 is not outdated, the SEP with HAP-3 came out at that time.

Yes, they’re called EAP armor iterations. FMS is not an armor type, again, it is a catalogue of trade partners and their trustworthiness, used to rate the degree to which America will lease or sell arms to a country.
1999 isn’t oudated, though it is listing pre-1998 sales of the Abrams… Which again, isn’t applicable to this conversation.

@ayeflyingcowboy

I do, you apparently don’t, this gives a good overview:

Look at that! FMS details the countries eligible for any export arms… Wait for it… Based off of their trustworthiness!
Almost as if that’s exactly what I’ve been saying… And you’re here trying to pass it as if it’s an armor standard, when it’s simply the prerequisite to which nations receive which degree of american arms and technology.

@ayeflyingcowboy

I have already read 98-18674 , it has nothing to do with what you are talking about and never once talks about exporting DU. 98-18674 is talking about the environmental impact of DU, that’s it.

It has to do with the allowance of export of depleted uranium. Its express purpose is to challenge the NPT acts that restricted DU export on the basis of health concerns and underlying issues with possible losses of a prohibited Uranium isotope in combat.
That’s the entire purpose of 98-18674. It amends the prior trade limitations of DU armor, finding its use safe to crews and any oppositional forces, therefore allowing it to be exported.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Alright

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@CyrusJackson

Do you know the basis of debate? This is not up to us to prove something that doesn’t exist. It’s up to you to prove the US exported Abrams with DU armor package. You’re writing walls of incorrect text with 0 sources to back it up.

The basis of the current debate is whether M1A1SA or similar export variants include HAP pattern armor.
I don’t need to prove what isn’t substantiated. The best retort to it was an article from an Aussie tabloid paper with no sources or direct quotation at all.

I’ve provided a myriad of sources.

@CyrusJackson

Furthermore, as some have already said, your XMPP-2083 document has nothing to do with export(the word itself doesn’t appear once in it). It is about the impact of DU on the environment… Are you trolling? If not, make an effort.
(The doc in question:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1998-07-14/html/98-18674.htm

As I have told them, XMPP-2083 pertains specifically to the NPT acts that prohibited DU armor export in the first place. It is considered an amendment to that decree, which had prohibited the export of Uranium 235 armor components, and served to prove the health standards of the armor and its eligibility for export.
The entire basis of countries not receiving HAP armor was due to the NPT… The document I provided was a direct counter to the NPT and its claims that DU was not safe for export, and its passing is very relevant as it disbarred the sole limitation of DU export and opened other foreign countries to buying Abrams variants containing HAP armor.

[Victor_eu]

The armor offered to Greece and Turkey was described as 3rd generation ( Improved FMS ), but I don’t know if it corresponded to HAP-3, rather HAP-2. Maybe there is connection to what Hayward said or it’s a coincidence.

[Columbia6448]

What’s the name of the book?

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Soon™

[TheArcticFoxxo]

I would assume that since it took place from 1994-1995, it would have been EAP-2.
Export restrictions for DU were still in place, and to pitch the tank for foreign service its lower weight also gave it an edge over the Leopard 2s and T-84.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@Victor_eu

Coffee streak confirmed???

[Thug Shaker Actual]

Statistics are western propaganda apparently

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Statistics is german suffering

[Victor_eu]

[Stormwolf7]

Yeah… must have been due to inevitable tank losses and not GDLS telling Iraq that if they didn’t practically gifting Abrams tanks to Iran-backed militias, that GDLS would pull operational support.

(Russia has no such concerns as they don’t care who their tanks go to as long as someone buys them…)

[Victor_eu]

¯_(ツ)_/¯

[TheArcticFoxxo]

What is that from?

[Victor_eu]

Armored Cav: A Guided Tour of an Armored Cavalry Regiment by Tom Clancy, old book but still very good description of the M1A2 1993.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Ah, yes, Tom Clancy… I trust that more than most other sources, seeing his reputation for “common-sensing” classified information.

Especially with content like THFRO. Great book.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

Saudi Arabia (2014+), Australia (2006+), Kuwait (2007+), Poland (2022+), Morocco (2016+).

Instantly just showed you don’t know what you are talking about, none of these nations have DU armour, the fact you even have Australia in there proves you are incorrect:

FYI if your claim is that this is unsubstantiated, then here a report from the Australian government that states it has no DU armour:

They will not include any elements of depleted uranium armour but will be the best protected fighting vehicles in the world.

The trials of Greece and Turkey took place in 1994

You are trolling. The only trials that occurred around this time was the Swedish trial in 1993/4. The Greek trials were in 1999-2001 and the Turkish trials were in 2000. It would not have been possible for the Greek trials to have been in 1994 because the Challenger 2E participated in that trial, the Challenger 2E didn’t even exist in 1994…

If the trials with the M1A2 had occurred in 1994 why does this state otherwise i.e. GDLS had only signed an agreement with Turkey and Greece in 1999…

And you’re here trying to pass it as if it’s an armor standard, when it’s simply the prerequisite to which nations receive which degree of american arms and technology.

Like I said if you can figure out what the M1s BRL armour name stands for, you will understand an acronym can be used for more then one thing, as BRL was. The FMS armour package is the armour package that the FMS M1 deals come with, it does not only refer to what FMS is.

It has to do with the allowance of export of depleted uranium.

No it doesn’t nothing in there talks about it being for export, it was only in regards to new environmental and health considerations for DU as stated in the summary:

SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and Army Regulation (AR) 200-2, the proposed FONSI for the M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank Heavy Armor System is being published for comment. The U.S. Army Program Executive Office, Ground Combat & Support Systems (PEO-GCSS) has prepared a draft Environmental Assessment for the M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank (MBT) Heavy Armor System. The current use of the depleted uranium (DU) armor package on the Abrams MBT has been re-evaluated to determine whether the environmental impacts of its continued use remain insignificant, taking into consideration the current use of the tank and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) reduction in allowable radiation exposure from 500 mrem/year to 100 mrem/year for tank and maintenance crews (individual members of the public).

As in already-fielded weapon system, M1 MBTs have been in production and in the field since the early 1980s. During that time, many technical, environmental and health assessments have been completed. These documents have addressed and minimized environmental impacts. As part of the continuing analysis effort, this EA focuses specifically on the assembly, use, repair and disposal of the heavy armor package.

It has nothing to do with it being allowed for export.

[Victor_eu]

@TheArcticFoxxo

I don’t believe Poland received it in 2021, but either Q4 of last year or sometime this year with their Abrams deliveries.

None of the countries mentioned received armor with DU, Australia didn’t even want it xD. Poland M1A1 (FEP) has improved FMS armor package with turret serial number w/ suffix Ē, just like Kuwaiti M1A2K tank.

[Stormwolf7]

Thread was spicy enough with just the Non-Russian mains versus the mod actions in Issues community.

Now we’ve added Russiaboos with Kremlin levels of concern for Factuality & Accuracy.

I’m going to need more popcorn.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@ayeflyingcowboy

Instantly just showed you don’t know what you are talking about, none of these nations have DU armour, the fact you even have Australia in there proves you are incorrect:

Instantly replied with… Absolutely nothing.
Duncan Hayward didn’t know the Abrams had FLIR in 2005, I sure as hell hope he learned a bit before making more statements.
Let’s also ignore the fact that he’s a financial administrator for exports…

@ayeflyingcowboy

You are trolling. The only trials that occurred around this time was the Swedish trial in 1993/4. The Greek trials were in 1999-2001 and the Turkish trials were in 2000. It would not have been possible for the Greek trials to have been in 1994 because the Challenger 2E participated in that trial, the Challenger 2E didn’t even exist in 1994…

Agreed, I’m an idiot. Between managing 2 different comments I got dates mixed up.
Though I’m sure the 2 Abrams featuring the AGT-1500C and… MTU 883… Were also export standard.

@ayeflyingcowboy

Like I said if you can figure out what the M1s BRL armour name stands for, you will understand an acronym can be used for more then one thing, as BRL was. The FMS armour package is the armour package that the FMS M1 deals come with, it does not only refer to what FMS is.

There are 2 legitimate acronyms for BRL, being the Ballistic Research Laboratory, as well as the Burlington composite profile.
And sure, let’s indulge in this… If HAP is heavy armor package and EAP was export armor package, what may FMS be, since you’re so guided with acronyms?

@ayeflyingcowboy

No it doesn’t nothing in there talks about it being for export, it was only in regards to new environmental and health considerations for DU as stated in the summary:

Yes, as I said about 3 times now, it was made to reject the health limitations that excluded HAP from export. The entire purpose of it is to dispell any health concerns that had prohibited DU applications in foreign trade.

@ayeflyingcowboy

It has nothing to do with it being allowed for export.

Read mate.