Jump to content

Armor of Ukraine


Harkonnen

Recommended Posts

The early M1s had an aluminum skirt (#7 IIRC) that covered the sprocket.  It was very nicely angled and looked sharp but managed to cover most of the center of the sprocket which meant that as mud accumulated in the sprocket it had no where to go, eventually bending or tearing off the skirt.  Most units started taking them off before going to the field because they were constantly replacing them.  Eventually a field modification came down from on high with a template for cutting the skirt to allow mud to be thrown out.  The person who submitted the modification to the Army suggestion program made a nice chunk of change since adopted suggestions paid out a percentage of the money saved by the change. Eventually the modified skirt became the standard production skirt, but you could still occasionally receive one of the original ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

When did the Army stop mounting those big flanges outboard of the sprockets? Their purpose was to avoid the sprocket throwing out the track, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2024 at 6:40 PM, Harold Jones said:

The early M1s had an aluminum skirt (#7 IIRC) that covered the sprocket.  

Chieftain also received aluminium skirts instead of steel ones to save weight. Challenger had aluminium skirts from the beginning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/13/2024 at 8:20 PM, QOHC32 said:

Any thoughts what happened here? Surely not apfsds...

 

GDvVfP3WoAAyUz5.jpg

Same vehicle shows up in this German TV segment. There they say it was an FPV drone, the hit did not penetrate.

Video should start at the correct timestamp. Subtitles work well enough. 11:15 till 13:50 is about Leopard 2.

21st Brigade. It shows one tank with two road wheels missing (AT mine), and then the vehicle above. Of 21 tanks only 5 are still combat ready. The crews express satisfaction with the protection. They complain about a lack of ammunition. We see the turret bunker is filled entirely with DM53A1 rounds. Crews complain that what they really need is HE ammunition, of which they have none left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, blowout panels gone, hatches open but no smoke from the fighting compartment, crew probably got out okay.

So much for the "UK/US told Ukraine not to use their tanks on the frontline to avoid images of losses" nonsense, BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BansheeOne said:

no smoke from the fighting compartment

Not what I'm seeing.

That doesn't mean that there has been a fire inside the crew compartment (may be fumes from the fire suppression system), and if there was/is a fire on that picture, at least there are no open flames coming from the crew hatches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That M1A1SA is good enough for recovery. Isolated ammunition magazines with blow off panels worked as intended.

However I see a different problem. And it's not in quality of weapon systems. Ukraine have problems with quantity of said weapons systems, and also problems with training, tactics, lack of VSHORAD and SHORAD with C-UAS capabilities.

And also what I observed, tanks, other armored vehicles or infantry are often working alone, not in proper formations.

In reality same happens on the Russian side.

Some more observations. Do both sides have proper ARV's to recover vehicles weighting over 60 metric tons?

Also both Russians and Ukrainians often drive their vehicles with stabilization systems turned off and turrets lock. They do not seek targets actively, unless in direct combat.

In general, both sides seems to waste vehicles.

Edited by Damian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2024 at 3:24 PM, sunday said:

When did the Army stop mounting those big flanges outboard of the sprockets? Their purpose was to avoid the sprocket throwing out the track, I think.

Officially, many years ago.

In practice... this photo was taken of a line of M1A2 Sep V2s about two years ago.
Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retaining rings, yeah. IIRC, they were still present on the M1IP, but were removed from the M1A1 and onwards. That's more or less the same time they stopped fitting Abramses with those trapezoidal skirt sections and replaced them with the ones that had round cuts that left the sprockets exposed.

Edited by Renegade334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Damian said:

 

And also what I observed, tanks, other armored vehicles or infantry are often working alone, not in proper formations.

Thats why I wrote above that the Abrams will not fare better than other tanks.

28 minutes ago, Damian said:

 

Some more observations. Do both sides have proper ARV's to recover vehicles weighting over 60 metric tons?

Depends on ground conditions. If it is too muddy (which is often in ukraine), no, not the slightest hope. You need something like a Cat D9 or Komatsu D375 or above. If it is not that bad, then you would be surprised, basically any tank would be enough. Even a T-55. Not ideal, but it would tow it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, old_goat said:

Thats why I wrote above that the Abrams will not fare better than other tanks.

Depends on ground conditions. If it is too muddy (which is often in ukraine), no, not the slightest hope. You need something like a Cat D9 or Komatsu D375 or above. If it is not that bad, then you would be surprised, basically any tank would be enough. Even a T-55. Not ideal, but it would tow it.  

Wow, now that would be a sight to see!  A T-55 towing an Abrams...

RedEffect has uploaded a video on the Abrams tank being knocked out which consists of a few short videos (rather poor quality for most) and some pictures.  

I dare say we shouldn't be waiting too long to get more details on this as to the how's and why's of the vehicle ending up in its current state.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manic Moran said:

Officially, many years ago.

In practice... this photo was taken of a line of M1A2 Sep V2s about two years ago.
Image

Thanks, Nick! Now I wonder the why.

I see John Denver has tanker fans. also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a tank platoon on level concrete, we could manually push a Leo 2A4. Still required the full strength of fifteen soldiers, but it was possible (with decoupled final drives, obviously). The recovery trouble starts when it's not level, not a hard surface, and all the other complications that will arise from battle damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, old_goat said:

First ukrainian Abrams knocked out. I dont think they will fare better than Leopards or any other tank.

 

739772.jpg

Looks worse than it is IMHO. Most of what you see burning appears to be the kit in the bustle rack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does not matter, this one is out of action and if the fascists can recover it is questionable giving the fire power superiority of pro-Russian forces. And to repair it will take a long time, if possible at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, new turret and send the old one back to uncle sam. Bish bash bosh.

The difficult bit is going to be recovering it. The Ukrainians dont seem to be as good at recovering their own tanks, as they are Russian ones. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read that they are doing a pretty good job recovering and repairing their tanks.  
 

In the summer of 2022, Ukrainian tanks that had been destroyed on the battlefield, but recovered, were being repaired in Poland at a rate of 20 to 30 per month,” analyst Nick Reynolds wrote in a new study for the Royal United Services Institute in London. If that rate held for all 10 months of the war last year, the Ukrainians may have fixed up nearly 300 tanks—nearly every tank they “lost” that wasn’t captured by the Russians.

https://rusi.org/news-and-comment/in-the-news/tanks-get-hit-repaired-hit-again-and-repaired-again-ukraines-armor-renewable-resource

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...