History Of Us Army Afvs

[Damian]

https://timryan.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-tim-ryan-tours-joint-systems-manufacturing-center-lima-ohio?fbclid=IwAR3UX4US05vzIERXa9tzhg1M-zZh6z4haDs9BA6W3AdpXqMH4b5vbM7yLN4

 

Quote

The funding secured by Congressman Ryan will extend the service life of the tank and also integrate an unmanned turret. Additionally, it will help to develop the physical architecture and mechanical requirements needed to add an Autoloader and Automated Ammunition Handling System to the Abrams, evaluate current and emerging candidates for an Integrated Active Protection System, and develop new Abrams mobility and power architecture for conversion to a Hybrid Electric Drive propulsion and power generation system.

Hmmm, interesting, could this be the SEPv5 concept?

[Harkonnen]

 

Today we remember 100 years of Philip Wood Lett. Philip Wood Lett (May 4, 1922 – June 6, 2014) was an American armored fighting vehicle engineer that lead the Chrysler Defense design team in the XM1 tank.

A native of Newton, Alabama, graduated from Alabama Polytechnic Institute (Auburn) in 1944 with a B. S. degree in mechanical engineering. He served in the United States Army in the Corps of Engineers during World War II. After the war he received a master's degree in engineering from the University of Alabama in 1947. Lett completed his education in 1951 when he earned a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan. Dr. Lett is internationally recognized as the "father of the M-1 Tank." Lett began his civilian career as an engineer in 1950 when he went to work for the Chrysler Corporation.

He was "...a soft-spoken, skillful, and powerful driving force" who was "proud of the M1 and of the people who worked with him."

His thirty-two years with the Michigan-based company were marked by major accomplishments for both the Auburn graduate and Chrysler. He quickly climbed up the corporate ladder at Chrysler and held the positions of Vice President of Engineering, member of the Board of Directors of Chrysler Defense, Inc., as well as General Manager of the Chrysler Sterling Defense Division.

In 1982, General Dynamics Land Systems Division purchased Chrysler's defense business and Dr. Lett served as Vice President and Assistant to the General Manager at General Dynamics until his retirement in 1987. He then founded PWL, Inc., a defense-consulting firm.

In addition to leading the Chrysler design and development team that built the M-1 Tank for the United States Army, Dr. Lett has also been responsible for research and development of a variety of combat and tactical systems built for the United States military, including the T-51 Heavy Recovery Vehicle, the Heavy Equipment Transporter HET-70, and the Mobile Assault Bridge-Ferry Vehicle.

[Dark_Falcon]

A  new video on current US Army tank training:

 

[Walter_Sobchak]

On 5/4/2022 at 7:20 PM, Harkonnen said:

 

Today we remember 100 years of Philip Wood Lett. Philip Wood Lett (May 4, 1922 – June 6, 2014) was an American armored fighting vehicle engineer that lead the Chrysler Defense design team in the XM1 tank.

A native of Newton, Alabama, graduated from Alabama Polytechnic Institute (Auburn) in 1944 with a B. S. degree in mechanical engineering. He served in the United States Army in the Corps of Engineers during World War II. After the war he received a master's degree in engineering from the University of Alabama in 1947. Lett completed his education in 1951 when he earned a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan. Dr. Lett is internationally recognized as the "father of the M-1 Tank." Lett began his civilian career as an engineer in 1950 when he went to work for the Chrysler Corporation.

He was "...a soft-spoken, skillful, and powerful driving force" who was "proud of the M1 and of the people who worked with him."

His thirty-two years with the Michigan-based company were marked by major accomplishments for both the Auburn graduate and Chrysler. He quickly climbed up the corporate ladder at Chrysler and held the positions of Vice President of Engineering, member of the Board of Directors of Chrysler Defense, Inc., as well as General Manager of the Chrysler Sterling Defense Division.

In 1982, General Dynamics Land Systems Division purchased Chrysler's defense business and Dr. Lett served as Vice President and Assistant to the General Manager at General Dynamics until his retirement in 1987. He then founded PWL, Inc., a defense-consulting firm.

In addition to leading the Chrysler design and development team that built the M-1 Tank for the United States Army, Dr. Lett has also been responsible for research and development of a variety of combat and tactical systems built for the United States military, including the T-51 Heavy Recovery Vehicle, the Heavy Equipment Transporter HET-70, and the Mobile Assault Bridge-Ferry Vehicle.

My late father was a Program Manager for Teledyne Continental Motors.  From the stories he told me, he had a very low opinion of his counterparts at Chrysler Defense.  From what I can gather, more than once Chrysler Defense tried to throw Teledyne Continental under the bus when it came to issues the Army was having with the M60 tank, particularly concerning dust gutting of engines and production schedules.  Anyhow, I once asked him if he ever met Phil Lett.  He said that he did once, and that he was impressed with Dr.  Lett.  He described Dr. Lett as soft spoken man who yet also commanded everyone's respect due to his intelligence and demeaner.  This is in contrast to the Chrysler executives in charge of M60 production whom my father described as "bombastic a--holes."  Of course, my father could also be a stubborn SOB when he wanted to be.  I suppose some of the guys at Chrysler had some choice adjectives for him as well.  

[alejandro_]

Interview with  former US Army M60A3 tanker

http://alejandro-8en.blogspot.com/2022/05/interview-with-former-m60-tanker.html

[RETAC21]

3 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

Interview with  former US Army M60A3 tanker

http://alejandro-8en.blogspot.com/2022/05/interview-with-former-m60-tanker.html

Thanks Alejandro. I believe there's a typo here:

"With the DU round none of the tanks fielded by the Russians including the still to be fielded T80, could be easily penetrated and destroyed. The DU round paper specifications on range and penetration were always underestimated for the  public unclassified data on all USA and NATO papers."

I think it was meant to be all rather than none.

[DKTanker]

3 hours ago, alejandro_ said:

Interview with  former US Army M60A3 tanker

http://alejandro-8en.blogspot.com/2022/05/interview-with-former-m60-tanker.html

His unit fielding DU in May 1985 is indicative of being in 8th Infantry Division.

He makes mention of the M60A3 ballistic computer as being digital, and many others have as well.  It was not digital, it was electronic analog using positive and negative voltages to create a ballistic solution.  While this was a gigantic leap forward from the mechanical computers we used on the earlier M48s and M60s, being electronic analog meant they could never be as precise as their electronic digital counterparts such as with the M1.

Heaters were always a hot item in Germany, I find it interesting that he suggests that it was he that trained his subordinate NCOs how to repair their heaters and keep spare parts (ignitors, pre-ignitors and the such) in stock.

I don't know what to make of his opinion that the M85 fired better when dirty than when clean.  Maybe by clean he meant the moving parts weren't lubricated?

 

[alejandro_]

2 hours ago, DKTanker said:

I don't know what to make of his opinion that the M85 fired better when dirty than when clean.  Maybe by clean he meant the moving parts weren't lubricated?

 

I will check with him and also let him know about the ballistic computer. It is always nice when there is feedback/discussion from the interviews.
 

2 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

Thanks Alejandro. I believe there's a typo here:

"With the DU round none of the tanks fielded by the Russians including the still to be fielded T80, could be easily penetrated and destroyed. The DU round paper specifications on range and penetration were always underestimated for the  public unclassified data on all USA and NATO papers."

I think it was meant to be all rather than none.

Yes, that should be a typo.

By the way, I am going to interview a M60A2 tanker, perhaps any member has some question he would like to ask?

[RETAC21]

14 minutes ago, alejandro_ said:

By the way, I am going to interview a M60A2 tanker, perhaps any member has some question he would like to ask?

Why did you call it the Starship?

[Wiedzmin]

 

M60T

[DogDodger]

Reading through the history of the heavy tank M6 over the past couple of days, a dramatic little subplot emerged regarding the employment three French engineers...

[alejandro_]

Interview with a former M60A2 Starship tanker

https://alejandro-8en.blogspot.com/2022/07/interview-with-former-m60a2-starship.html

[sunday]

Remarkable the absence of complaints on reliability, and the long range accuracy of the main armament.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Renderings of 5 different OMFV models from different manufacturers. Enjoy.

 

[shep854]

On 5/13/2022 at 10:11 PM, Dark_Falcon said:

A  new video on current US Army tank training:

 

Where's the mud? 😛

 

[DogDodger]

Currently reading the second book of the three-books series Marine Corps Tanks and Ontos in the Vietnam War, and this report certainly caught my eye:

 

[shep854]

10 hours ago, DogDodger said:

Currently reading the second book of the three-books series Marine Corps Tanks and Ontos in the Vietnam War, and this report certainly caught my eye:

 

Where there's one...

 

[DogDodger]

13 hours ago, shep854 said:

Where there's one...

 

Absolutely, you never know: he could've been running back to his unit, bunker, or whatever else that may have been hiding in the treeline; the report also leaves out any details of recent contacts or if any enemy units were thought to be in the area, etc.

But OTOH...

[shep854]

1 hour ago, DogDodger said:

Absolutely, you never know: he could've been running back to his unit, bunker, or whatever else that may have been hiding in the treeline; the report also leaves out any details of recent contacts or if any enemy units were thought to be in the area, etc.

But OTOH...

Had to be a .45.

[bojan]

About average of what it takes.

[alejandro_]

Interview with former M1A1 AIM tanker. E. served in Iraq, and operated at 120°F, 48.9°C.

http://alejandro-8en.blogspot.com/2022/08/a-former-us-army-abrams-tanker-kindly.html

[EasyE]

I had an interesting talk with an American tanker recently.

I work on the engineering side of things, and he was a consultant, and he was retired US Army from the mid 1970s until the early 2000s. 

Served on M60A1/A3, M1, M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A2, and exposure to the M1A2SEP.

Interesting points.

M60A3 had the best thermal sights of any tank he crewed.  Said he could see if a soldier had a name tag from 3000m. Remarked how at first he didn't like the M1, and many other gunners didn't because the thermals were not great. 1200m was the most he or anyone else could ID a target at. 

Talked about how at first they spend lots of time hitting the armor of the M1 with a hammer when they first got them. Said he remembers clearly the lower front hull sounded hollow, wasn't so sure about the turret.  According to him, most of the tankers at the time figured that the Challenger 1 had the best armor of any Nato tank until the M1A1.

Talked about the M1A1 in the gulf war. Remarked on how he was friends with a tanker that took a hit to the lower front hull.  This resulted in a "dart" as he said being stuck in the front hull and being bent significantly while sticking out. We had a white board, and he actually drew what he saw.  That the tank crew went out of their way to avoid higher ups who would make them take it to the maintenance depo to have it removed. Their reason was that they liked using it as a step to get onto and off of the tank. Remarked that this story is well known among tankers from the gulf war.  Also of note was the worry that the poor-quality thermal view in smoke and dust would lead to lots of blue on blue. 

He had rather good knowledge about the turret armor of tanks of the USSR.  Talked about quartz filler until the Dolly Parton got "spaced plates".  

Very engaging convo, it was surprising to hear about how much affection tankers had for the M60A3 TTS, and the arrival of the 120mm on the M1A1. 

[DKTanker]

TTS was superior to the TIS, unquestionably.  While they used the same Dewar detector, Texas Instruments had the superior image processor.  That said, nobody was determining if a uniform had name tapes at 3000 meters.  I don't care what tank sight you use.  I much preferred the TTS and I know of no tanker that used both that didn't.

Hitting the M1, or my case the M1A1, with a hammer.  Sure enough.  Found the hollow spots along the turret sides and the front slope of the hull.  The ballistic skirts, solid sounding on the outside, sounded like a bass drum when struck on the inside.

I had no problem identifying BMPs, MTLBs, T-55s, and T-72s out to 2500 meters or so with the TIS during Desert Storm.  Mostly it was about target orientation and environmental conditions...and yes, the temperature difference between the vehicles and ambient conditions is the most important variable.  On the other hand many times I found it difficult to differentiate between a Bradley frontal and an M1 frontal until the Bradley got within 1000 meters.

Dart?  I don't recall ever hearing anybody refer to the penetrator as a dart, in my circle we called it a penetrator.  

[Stuart Galbraith]

12 hours ago, EasyE said:

I had an interesting talk with an American tanker recently.

I work on the engineering side of things, and he was a consultant, and he was retired US Army from the mid 1970s until the early 2000s. 

Served on M60A1/A3, M1, M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A2, and exposure to the M1A2SEP.

Interesting points.

M60A3 had the best thermal sights of any tank he crewed.  Said he could see if a soldier had a name tag from 3000m. Remarked how at first he didn't like the M1, and many other gunners didn't because the thermals were not great. 1200m was the most he or anyone else could ID a target at. 

Talked about how at first they spend lots of time hitting the armor of the M1 with a hammer when they first got them. Said he remembers clearly the lower front hull sounded hollow, wasn't so sure about the turret.  According to him, most of the tankers at the time figured that the Challenger 1 had the best armor of any Nato tank until the M1A1.

Talked about the M1A1 in the gulf war. Remarked on how he was friends with a tanker that took a hit to the lower front hull.  This resulted in a "dart" as he said being stuck in the front hull and being bent significantly while sticking out. We had a white board, and he actually drew what he saw.  That the tank crew went out of their way to avoid higher ups who would make them take it to the maintenance depo to have it removed. Their reason was that they liked using it as a step to get onto and off of the tank. Remarked that this story is well known among tankers from the gulf war.  Also of note was the worry that the poor-quality thermal view in smoke and dust would lead to lots of blue on blue. 

He had rather good knowledge about the turret armor of tanks of the USSR.  Talked about quartz filler until the Dolly Parton got "spaced plates".  

Very engaging convo, it was surprising to hear about how much affection tankers had for the M60A3 TTS, and the arrival of the 120mm on the M1A1. 

Looking at the size of the steel turret on a challenger one, and comparing it to the size of the Chobham boxes, I think thats a reasonable assumption. Certainly the M1A1 HA.

Thats hilarious about the step btw.

 

[Mighty_Zuk]

Elbit unveils UT50 turret for OMFV.

https://twitter.com/ElbitSystemsUS/status/1575138323093413893?s=20&t=CsLIkjSaPTA1rxZtxUj5gA