¯_(ツ)_/¯
What is that from?
Armored Cav: A Guided Tour of an Armored Cavalry Regiment by Tom Clancy, old book but still very good description of the M1A2 1993.
1 Like
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.
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.
3 Likes
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.
3 Likes
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.
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…
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.
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?
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.
Read mate.
3 Likes
EAP is a product.
FMS is a category which includes EAP.
You are welcome.
2 Likes
That still explains nothing of the acronyms used, nor how the supposed use of FMS as an armor designation differs from the FMS definition for export.
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.
Fine then, here is a report from the Australian government on it not having DU armour:
They will not include any elements of depleted uranium armour but will be the best protected fighting vehicles in the world.
There are 2 legitimate acronyms for BRL, being the Ballistic Research Laboratory
There you go, you figured it out, BRL = Ballistic Research Laboratory i.e. BRL-1 = Ballistic Research Laboratory generation 1 armour package, likewise improved FMS armour = Improved Foreign military sales armour package, a package that is separate and used specifically for FMS tanks and encompassed a few different armour packages i.e. the original, an improved and an advanced, as noted by what Viktor has shared with us.
Your idea was that FMS cannot be used in conjunction with armour package because it is a program for something else, BRL contradicts this notion.
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.
Nothing in either that document or the FONSI is talking about export, there is 0 evidence that this is the case, it is only for revaluating the environmental and health affects of DU because of the newly developed armour package which would have been HAP-3…
In 1996, a design change to the armor package was made by the Army and cut-in to production by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) via Change Request XMPP-2083 in Oct 96 and effective with Job #1 M1A2 Phase II AUT. The purpose of this revision to the Environmental Assessment (EA) is to assess the environmental impact of the change from the original DU armor design to this modified design.
Once again it has nothing to do with it being for export.
3 Likes
It’s being used interchangeably… (not a best practice.)
All EAP are FMS. Not all FMS are EAP.
Just like DU Armor and Heavy Armor have been used interchangeably. (By me as well once or twice, also not a best practice.)
All DU Armor is Heavy Armor. Not all Heavy Armor is DU Armor.
(To break it down Barney Style: All Main Battle Tanks are tracked vehicles. Not all Tracked Vehicles are Main Battle Tanks.)
5 Likes
Also the regular FMS and the improved FMS can most likely be identified by the letter in the serial number, the regular E is the regular FMS (Saudi Arabia M1A2 in the photo), and the better and newer varieties are the E with a dash. ( Polish M1A1FEP ). Americans, of course, have the letters U and M, and Australia - A. I wonder what the Ukrainian M1A1SA have.
3 Likes
interesting document about SEPv3, the armor weighs a lot, and the structure of the hull and armor is no less than the turret. ( data in short tones )
2 Likes
Interesting, shame I can’t find anything on the identification meanings, but yea I would assume E is just export variant and the E with the dash is the improved one.
In regards to the U and M for the US, I believe one of them indicated it was DU, but I could be wrong.
Cool photos that compares the SEPv2 (top) and SEPv3s turrets:
4 Likes
U - Heavy armor package
M - NEA/NGAP
interesting is that there are M1A2SEPv2 and M1A1SA that have U or M letter, it’s possible that the ones with M use newer armour technology that may have something to do with SEPv3
1 Like
Yea the M1A2 turrets are very heavy:
But yea I originally thought that the graph you shared proved the M1A2s didn’t get improved armour as the weight difference from the M1A2 to SEPs wasn’t that different, and then remembered they had the weight reduction program:
Which is interesting because from a new datamine the titanium was actually implemented for the turret top and commander viewport:
- M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEP V2 : Turret Top, Commander Viewport : RHA → Titanium Alloy
2 Likes
you can see it here, the chart earlier shows that the mass of the M1A2SEPv2 was increasing, it may have something to do with better armor.
2 Likes
91 tons!???
1 Like