M1 Abrams Developments and News

Forest Green

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
11 June 2019
Messages
4,965
Reaction score
6,339

The Trophy APS is a situational awareness and Active Protection Hard Kill (HK) System that is available in three main configurations: HV (Heavy armored Vehicle), MV (Medium and Light Armored Vehicle) and LV (Light Armored Vehicle). Both configurations dramatically boost the force’s survivability and provide a vital add-on capability for the maneuvering combat teams.

Trophy-HV protects heavy (>30 ton) and medium weight (>15 ton) armored vehicles from a wide variety of threats ranging from rockets, ATGMs (Anti-Tank Guided Missiles) and platform-fired High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) rounds. Trophy-HV offers 360° protection in azimuth, as well as extensive elevation coverage, while maintaining a pre-defined safety zone for friendly troops on the ground. The neutralization process is initiated only if the threat is about to hit the vehicle.



Army Recognition Global Defense and Security news

Rafael Trophy APS active protection system fitted on an M1A2 Abrams main battle tank (Picture source: Rafael)
 
where is the FASTDRAW auto loader when you need it.
put a 50mm RWS to engage direct fire targets on one of the hatches and use main gun for 8km i(stated goal) but for indirect fire tgts.
 
You won't really see much given SEP v4 adds:
  • An upgraded Gunner's Primary Sight (GPS) with a third-generation forward-looking infrared (FLIR) sensor, improved laser range-finder, and full-color video camera.
  • An upgraded Commander's Primary Sight (CPS) with a third-generation FLIR and full-color video camera, as well as a laser pointer and range finder.
  • Lethality improvements including the addition of a digital data link that can communicate with the Army's new reprogrammable XM1147 Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP) round for the tank's 120mm main gun.
  • A new onboard meteorological sensor that can collect various types of data to improve accuracy.
  • Upgraded communications, data-sharing, and onboard diagnostics systems.
 
Has there been any word on what variant of M1A1 they are? Ideally they'd be upgraded to one of the newer standards like the M1A1SA.
 
Do you or anyone else have more information about that John Deere rotary diesel? The version I have seen is the RR diesel rotary, which has two separate rotor chambers, with the supercharger rotor being about 2x the size of the small one. Air flows into the supercharging rotor, feeding into the one where combustion happens, and that exhaust gets expanded again as it flows out the exhaust side of the supercharger rotor.


October 1998 - Integration of Arena APS onto the M1A2 and M60-2000 for Turkey!

View attachment 699866

Not surprised, Arena, when it's actually all there, is apparently a pretty competent system.

Competent enough that my FCS-like combat vehicle family uses something very like it for the short range APS (along with Iron Curtain for point blank APS and either Quick Kill or Trophy for long range)
 
This is a mistake. If you make this mistake, the Abrams brand will suffer the same reputational damage as the T-72 brand suffered in Iraq at the time. With all the commercial costs. At that time, we even had to rename the T-72БУ to the T-90. It would be much more reasonable to ride the uncomplaining Germans and their unfortunate Leopards.
Depends on which model of Abrams they're delivering. Article says M1A1s, which everyone knows are about 3 armor generations out of date compared to what the US is currently using (A2, SepV1, SepV2, and just introducing SepV3)
 
Assumption is the mother of all mistakes. If you want to get into a discussion about the rights and wrongs of the war in Ukraine, I urge you to try that somewhere else - there are plenty of sites for that.
No, I don't want to. I already understand everything. This war is a natural outcome of the circumstances. Moreover, in this conflict, since 2014, the United States has not yet made a single mistake.
They are redefining their requirements for what they are calling “M1E3” after the cancellation of the SEP4 upgrade. M-1X was an industry demonstration, not something government sponsored. However I suspect that any future tank would have most of the M-1X features…though it has basically nothing in common with the M-1.
As far as I could understand from the photo:
Абрамс-Х.jpg
the body, chassis, and possibly the power plant have moved almost unchanged from the M1. Naturally with a new body kit. The fuel tanks were removed in the control department and a separate capsule was made for the crew according to the type of T-14 tank. However, it is not very clear how comfortable it will be to be located there in a lying position. The T-14 crew capsule has a high ceiling, a toilet and cooking tiles.
Turret X is new and naturally uninhabited. It's clear here.
The gun is apparently new, but of the same caliber 120 mm.
I have always been interested in one question. In our tanks, the driver mechanic cannot open the hatch and get out of the turret at a certain position of the turret and cannon. To increase safety, the driver has a red button "AП" (Emergency Turn) of the turret. But still - the place of the driver-mechanic is considered a bad place (they die most often). I look at Abrams and think - if the gun falls on the driver's hatch, will he be able to get out? If the tower is turned back and the aft niche of the tower hangs over the mechanic's hatch - will he be able to get out? Is there an "AП" button there?
The hull side screens on the old Abrams were kind of thicker. According to our data, about 65mm of composite armor.
It is difficult to say more from the photo.
 
No, I don't want to. I already understand everything. This war is a natural outcome of the circumstances. Moreover, in this conflict, since 2014, the United States has not yet made a single mistake.

As far as I could understand from the photo:
View attachment 711662
the body, chassis, and possibly the power plant have moved almost unchanged from the M1. Naturally with a new body kit. The fuel tanks were removed in the control department and a separate capsule was made for the crew according to the type of T-14 tank. However, it is not very clear how comfortable it will be to be located there in a lying position. The T-14 crew capsule has a high ceiling, a toilet and cooking tiles.
Turret X is new and naturally uninhabited. It's clear here.
The gun is apparently new, but of the same caliber 120 mm.
I have always been interested in one question. In our tanks, the driver mechanic cannot open the hatch and get out of the turret at a certain position of the turret and cannon. To increase safety, the driver has a red button "AП" (Emergency Turn) of the turret. But still - the place of the driver-mechanic is considered a bad place (they die most often). I look at Abrams and think - if the gun falls on the driver's hatch, will he be able to get out? If the tower is turned back and the aft niche of the tower hangs over the mechanic's hatch - will he be able to get out? Is there an "AП" button there?
The hull side screens on the old Abrams were kind of thicker. According to our data, about 65mm of composite armor.
It is difficult to say more from the photo.

My understanding is that this vehicle reduces crew from 4 to 3 and moves them into the forward hull - see the three hatches on the front of the vehicle. I believe it also uses hybrid diesel/electric propulsion, not a turbine. The turret is heavily redesigned with no crew and autoloader, and a different 120mm gun than the current Abrams (see muzzle break). So I think this vehicle has only external similarities to the M1; engine, hull, turret are all radically different (and gun is similar but not the same). I think labeling it part of the M1 series is misleading, but presumably that is a marketing ploy.
 
And why the armored side screen have such an uneven shape with ledges? Does this make any sense or is it just a design element?
 
My understanding is that this vehicle reduces crew from 4 to 3 and moves them into the forward hull - see the three hatches on the front of the vehicle. I believe it also uses hybrid diesel/electric propulsion, not a turbine. The turret is heavily redesigned with no crew and autoloader, and a different 120mm gun than the current Abrams (see muzzle break). So I think this vehicle has only external similarities to the M1; engine, hull, turret are all radically different (and gun is similar but not the same). I think labeling it part of the M1 series is misleading, but presumably that is a marketing ploy.
It's about as much an Abrams as the old TTB. Hull is Abrams, internal arrangement is significantly different.
 
I believe it also uses hybrid diesel/electric propulsion, not a turbine.
I'm thinking how can a hybrid powerplant be adapted to a tank? It's not a car. Car in the city yes - acceleration / braking, acceleration /braking. Braking by recuperation charges the battery. But the tanks have a different mode of movement. The tank usually either stands still or moves slowly. And as soon as he removed his foot from the accelerator pedal, tank immediately stopped under itself weight. It is almost not necessary to turn on the brake. So the battery will not be charged. It is easier to make an energy accumulator from a cannon. So that the battery is charged with the energy of each shot.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom