And do we need it ?
Yes, new electronics, updated armor, and maybe a new engine.
Yes we need it.
>>29378409
The new tracks and the LWR are more than enough to make it worthwhile.
Dem tracks man.
Take twice as long to wear out and provide better performance on all terrain types.
The new armor package and switch to the XM360 are great ideas though.
The M1A2 is an old piece of shit
Whats needed is an all new tank, not an upgrade
But I think the army can't decide on design criteria(largely because they want a 1 size fits all vehicle rather than just buying a number of variants on the same chassis), and they don't have funding for it.
>>29378556
Nah it has to do with how the FCS program was a disaster because of congress changing the criteria on the APC variant all the time, which fucked up all the others.
>>29378409
still
>4 man crew
>can't be operated by remote control
>turbine engine
>maximum fording depth 1.6m
>heavy as fug
>no APS
>no HE, no ATGM
>abrams using non American engine
>>29378409
>no more nigger loader
>more space for the gunner
why the fuck not? M1A2 Sep is 90s technology
>>29378581
FCS program was a disaster because they wanted to turn every ground vehicle into a fucking stryker
Thank god that piece of shit was cancelled.
mobility kills, fixed in a week
>>29378601
It will have an APS, the worlds only 360 degree APS.
>>29378601
>no HE,
worst meme 2012
>>29378630
That was not the goal of the FCS at all, where are you getting this?
>>29378896
The goal of the FCS was producing vehicles that could fit in a C-130
aka under 20 tons
>>29378827
Nigger Trophy already has 360 degree coverage.
>>29378409
>Do we know anything about the m1a3 ?
We don't know much about the M1A3 Abrams but that's because it's supposed to be a secret.
>And do we need it ?
While the recent variants of the M1 Abrams are among the best tanks, we always need to innovate.
>>29378409
so I just did a search on this and this A3 is supposed to be lighter than the A2 by 15 tons? But yet have better protection? How?
http://thebrigade.com/2011/01/16/is-this-the-new-m1a3-abrams-9-photos/
>>29379479
Materials science must have improved a lot since 1992...
>>29379479
the updated wiring system alone drops 2 tons and new material sciences
>>29379479
Those numbers don't sound accurate
let me take a wild guess
>60 tonns
no APS
no ATGMs
niggerloader
turbine fuel hog
cardboard side armor
maneuverability of a pregnant cow
>And do we need it ?
funds must flow. there is still so much financial potential in raping and mutilating 40+ year old designs
>>29378601
>>still
>>turbine engine
I thought they were going with the German MTU V-16 diesel?
>>29378630
The irony being FCS lives on, its tech is being retrofitted to existing vehicles.
>>29380672
The APU partially negates the only real advantage a diesel engine has.
>>29379479
>>29379809
An article from 2011 is meaningless as what is in the works changed.
There is no M1A3, the next Abrams is the M1A2 SEPv3.
>>29378409
Your picture is actually a 'Thumper', one of the 140mm test bed tanks.
>>29380874
SEPv3 is a variant of package
>>29382534
Work on your English some more please, you are not ready
>>29378409
>>29380874
What we know about the SEPv3;
-new armor package called NEA (Next Evolutionary Armor)
-ammunition data link for the M829A4 and XM1147 rounds
-third gen FLIR sights
-low profile configuration for the RWS
-IED protection in the form of the crew seats, belly armor and a CREW
-under armor APU
-improved electricity generation and distribution
-upgraded networking compatibility and memory
The US Army also wants a bolt on hard kill APS within 2 years.
The US needs all new ground vehicles
It's all 80's designs with bolted on 90's tech
>>29378601
>turbine engine
>no APS
>no HE, no ATGM
hahaha ok
>>29378409
we dont need it
>>29379479
Fiber optics, wiring and electrical changes, material sciences have gone crazy the last few years.
>>29378409
>And do we need it ?
It'll come in handy in an upcoming civil war.
>>29378601
GLATGMs are shit, and Abrams is getting an improved multi-purpose HE round with SEP V2.
>>29382935
By bolted on you mean taken apart to the last screw and put back together with the latest tech.
>>29378972
>Nigger Trophy already has 360 degree coverage.
against RPGs yeah. anything with a more substantial warhead or mass for a penetrator that is, is bound to still go through and fuck up anything not covered by thick armor.
>>29380792
>The APU partially negates the only real advantage a diesel engine has
It can double the mileage?
>>29382972
>we dont need it
This. Let's face it. US is not going to relive the days of the Fulda Gap anytime soon. Pretty much the best tank US forces would conceivable come up against is the export T-90S and while that is certainly a tough nut to crack, unless manned by Russians, American tanks would still come up consistently on top due to sheer amount of advantages it has over the enemy in terms of skills, tactics, and support.
>>29383574
>It can double the mileage?
The biggest difference in fuel consumption comes from idling.
>>29383688
Or when travelling at slow speeds, which is basically how it always travels
If they were building a new tank they would use diesel electric, not turbine.
>>29385032
If they were to actually re-engine the Abrams it would be diesel electric, not diesel.
>>29386005
Aren't they bigger? Don't think its quite that easy
The abrams is an old tank, it's madness to keep upgrading it.
>>29386200
>The abrams is an old tank, it's madness to keep upgrading it.
Because spending a large amount of money to develop, and then another large amount to procure, something that is functionally equivalent to a upgraded Abrams is a good idea?
The fact that the hulls are 20-30 years old does not mean much.
>aps
>atgms
>turbine
problems that aren't problems, jesus christ you guys are all fucking stupid lol
>>29386241
>you guys
>1-2 out of 24 posters
At least update your bingo chart Engie.
>>29386257
I think I will take the advice of someone who's actually a tanker, over some nerds, neckbeards, and slavaboos anyday of the week. A strong case for the Abrams being one of, if not the best MBT in the world has been made, and no one has yet to refute that.
>>29386257
It can be 1 poster out of 100 that agrees with the statement the Abrams is fine as an MBT, it doesn't make them wrong. And you're all wrong for disagreeing with it. I have yet to see a single person stand up for a tank that's "better" and actually win the argument. This thread is a rinse repeat of every /thg/ thread ever.
>>29386241
>Autoloaders are faster than humans
They are though. Humans are faster at loading for short periods but get beaten out easily in sustained fire because lol fatigue.
They absolutely curbstomp in arty too. 12RPM for autoloaders vs 4RPM for humans. Not even a contest.
>>29386393
>1 round per 15 seconds
Are you going to try to troll? Or are you going to continue to post on - weapons and say to yourself "gee, I should post on /k/ today and be a massive fucking tumor to the community"
cause that's literally what you're doing right now
>>29386393
I hope your target is at the same elevation you are, cause human loaders don't require the gun to return to 0 elevation for the gun to be loaded
Autoloaders being faster then humans is a myth, and its false
>>29386433
autoloaders don't require that either
>>29386438
yes they do
>>29386387
>>29386362
Is your reading comprehension that bad?
There are/were 24 posters in the thread, only 2 posts were ones saying Engie's greentext, yet he insisted it was everyone saying it.
>>29386393
4 RPM on artillery is during sustained fire to keep the barrel cool, it has nothing to do with loading methods.
What is the main problem with 140mm systems?
No actual combat requirement?
Too much air pressure inside cabin?
Too heavy for current chassis and engine?
Not enough room for ammo?
Fast barrel wear?
>>29386241
But anon the L55 is a better gun then the L44.
Why is that on the butthurt bingo?
>>29386492
America has better ammo
>>29386490
>No actual combat requirement?
I would have thought this is most likely.
Considering NATO has DU APFSDS rounds, it's highly unlikely a new gun is needed. In the Gulf war the Britbongs were given some dozen DU rounds in their Challengers should the Iraqi t-72s show up. They didn't.
Unless the T-14 is actually using the level of composite Armour that the Challenger and Abrams use, a new gun isn't really that needed.
>>29386492
M829A3+M256 > L55+DM53
>>29386490
The jump in muzzle energy was not needed after the Soviet Union fell.
Combined with halving your ammunition count because the rounds were fuckhuge.
>>29386518
>>29386503
>>29386492
Also the L55 is longer and heavier then the L44. Cannons aren't like rifle barrels. The tubes in question are subject to accuracy issues the longer and heavier they are when in use. The L44 may need a Muzzle Reference System update every 2-5 rounds while the L55 is sooner cause of the shittier weight distribution.
>>29378601
>4 man crew
CATTB ( The one you posted ) is 3 man crew, autoloaded 140mm
>can't be operated by remote control
Nigger what
>turbine engine
CATTB had a diesel, as well as improved all-round armor and radar/IR stealth aspects
>maximum fording depth 1.6m
Irrelevant
>heavy as fug
Not really, Challenger is heavier.
>no APS
Literally a bolt on attachment
>no HE
>HE
>THE CURRENT YEAR
>, no ATGM
XM1111
>>29386433
>cause human loaders don't require the gun to return to 0 elevation for the gun to be loaded
Not that that's an argument against auto-loaders: even some tanks with meat-loaders have their guns do the same so as to make the loader's job easier when the tank is on the move.
The loader has a shitty time in comparison, trying to load on the move on anything but smooth terrain in an Abrams, what with the gun leaping up and down.
>>29386608
By "can't be remote controlled" he's referring to how the armata can allegedly be remote controlled by another armata is close enough and if the controlled vehicle gives permission. That's what he means.
>>29386608
Also setting aside that the USMC procured DM11 rounds for Afghanistan.
>>29386660
Yeah, but thats the USMC. HE is obsolete.
For infantry you want frag or thermobarics, or some type of canister shot.
For structures HEAT works for penetrating deep into bunkers, and APHE works wonders at shattering the entire building.
>>29386751
Do you know what DM11 is beyond 'its some sort of HE round'?
>>29386751
HEAT is pretty shit tier for blast effects, the multi purpose / dual purpose types have added fragmentation.
>>29383574
>against RPGs yeah. anything with a more substantial warhead or mass for a penetrator that is, is bound to still go through and fuck up anything not covered by thick armor.
It successfuly intercepted Kornets and RPG-29's. Stop talking out of your ass.
>>29386800
>HEAT is pretty shit tier for blast effects,
That's why I specified for bunkers, they'll penetrate multiple times more concrete than their RHAe penetration ratings.
>>29378409
I think the DoD, right now, is choosing the path it's going for a reason.
Sure, give it a bigger budget after loosening up the cuts and who knows what we'll see, but for right now, for projected threats, they don't see their tanks as being a high priority thing to update. They, and other systems working together (war isn't system on system like so many people somehow seem to forget, there's "combined warfare" for a reason...) should suffice until they determine they want to upgrade.
Besides, how much "new" technology is there really to add? Sure, the Armata has put it together in a production vehicle, but it's not like the U.S. hasn't experimented with and developed autoloaders, unmanned turrets, crew capsules, advanced cannons, ammunition, and armor, hard and soft APS, remote control, IR and radar signature reducing methods, and so on. So it'd be trivial for them to put it into a production vehicle if need be, they just don't want to right now. Besides, the Abrams has great ability to have aforementioned things added no problem, so why throw out a perfectly good chassis that you have thousands of when they're perfectly fine to upgrade?
Tell me how different a TTB with APS and such would *really* be compared to an Armata. So, in my opinion, there's no real "need" to upgrade outside of the SEPv3 path we're going right now considering budgets and stuff. Of course it's best to overmatch your opponent and all that, but sometimes you have to prioritize and make hard decisions you may not like and all that...
>>29388311
Besides, consider the costs of what they're upgrading or buying now. They're really "big-ticket" items, scraping as much funding out for these really high-priority/high-tech/etc. items while it lasts, then saving the relatively cheaper items to upgrade later, not really having to worry that much about shrunken budgets, if that makes sense.
I'd have a hard time believing people on this board would *seriously* say that the DoD *doesn't* know what they're doing or whatnot. They're smart people, and regardless of their faults or failings or whatever, it'd be pretty narrow-minded of you to say they're all complete imbeciles and so on.
Think of how many more things they could update for the costs of the F-35, LCS, Ohio replacement, and Ford-class carriers for example. They're just getting the big stuff out of the way first.
>>29386751
>HE is obsolete.
>APHE works wonders at shattering the entire building
>APHE not being obsolete as fuck
>>29388360
>They're just getting the big stuff out of the way first.
Which might also explain the rocky development of said items. They might be feeling rushed or had to literally rush certain things etc.
Unnecessary and stupid politicking/bureaucracy also plays a part I imagine. Not to mention many programs in the past have had similar problems, and the internet, social media, and so on haven't really helped things...
For an example if ridiculous politics and dumb public opinion, look at the F-22 for example. It's in the so-called "death spiral" group, yet when it was first coming out it was meant to have all these crazy features that aren't in the current planes because of costs, then the production was stopped because of costs and "hurr durr, we don't NEED 1,000+ Raptors!!! China and Russia aren't really a threat! Their planes are behind schedule herpy durr!", whereas now you find so many, of the same people even! who will say "DURR!!! WHY DON'T WE HAVE MORE RAPTORS!?!? IT'S THE BEST FIGHTER EVAH!!!! WE SHOULD RESTART PRODUCTION HURR DURR!!! CHINA AND RUSSIA ARE PULLING AHEAD!!!!!".
Sensationalism aside, the people behind the procurement and development of the Raptor knew these things would happen, yet no-one believed them or took them as seriously as they perhaps should have. Now look at the defense scene. I bet those guys are collectively saying "I told you so." My point with that whole long rant is to show that the DoD isn't as stupid as some people seem to think, it's really the dumb politicians and uniformed or willfully biased (etc.) civilians/spectators/etc. that let our military down.
>>29388693
Also, I forgot to mention, you've gotta look at it in terms of industry terms and timeframes.
Sure, while I imagine we COULD start pumping out mega death rays of justice daily if we REALLY REALLY NEEDED to, most programs are planned out for specific timeframes, dates, and so on.
Five years or so may seem long to a lot of people, but that's next to nothing in regards to defense industry etc.
Look at all the planned replacements or introductions or D/IOTE, and such, which people forget about a lot (F-35), you'll see they're in the 2020's or 2030's for example.
Every country has their own timelines, trying to introduce things just as your enemy does is a good way to bankrupt yourself, among other things (USSR). I know that's very simplistic, but I think you get my point.
I don't know when the Armata is supposed to be fully in service, or in what numbers, or if they'll be fully "equipped" if that makes sense, but say they're fully in service by 2020 or 2030 or so, who's to say that's not when the US or Germany or whoever plans on introducing something to match or exceed it etc.?
(What I mean by "equipped" are things like systems and APS and whatnot... I heard the T-14 is supposed to be getting an update to it's APS or something, kind of like how the F-35's systems are coming in "Blocks" to indicate capabilities and such etc...)
>>29388762
It's getting UV sensors because the APS's radar has issues with ground clutter.
>>29388823
Ah, thanks for clearing that up for me senpai
>>29388762
>Sure, while I imagine we COULD start pumping out mega death rays of justice daily if we REALLY REALLY NEEDED to, most programs are planned out for specific timeframes, dates, and so on.
Which, I, again, forgot to add, goes along with my feeling that the DoD may be a little "rushed" with it's procurement right now etc...
>>29386789
>HE is obsolete
>What is AMP
http://www.army.mil/article/161228/Advanced_120mm_round_gives_tank_crews_more_versatility/
>inb4 it is not HE round with fancy name
>>29389329
HE will never be obsolete
>>29388693
Raptors were cut because they weren't really 5th gen, were old tech, had no practical enemy to fight, and were gonna cost a mint for maintenance.
>>29389385
>Raptors were cut because they weren't really 5th gen, were old tech, had no practical enemy to fight, and were gonna cost a mint for maintenance.
Anon, not to be rude, but I don't know how to say this any other way: You don't know what you're talking about in this case.
Perhaps you'd care to elaborate?
I'm particularly interested to hear what you mean by "they weren't really 5th gen" and "were old tech".
If you'd like, I can provide counter points to your post. I just figured it'd be easier to let you explain yourself first.
>>29386387
>This thread is a rinse repeat of every /thg/ thread ever.
What? /thg/ is renowned on /k/ for (generally) NOT being like that. It's every OTHER thread outside of it that gets like that.
>>29388916
Most of the tech being retrofitted to American equipment in the next 2 years was born from the FCS program, its not exactly rushed.
>>29389385
Raptor production was cut because Obama/Gates and the lack of credible adversaries for the next decade+.
>>29390192
I wasn't talking about retrofits. I was talking about other programs.
What you're talking about is more along the lines of the tech already researched/developed that I spoke of in this post:
>>29388311
>>29378409
This pic just reminded me of a gif.....
the one where a whole trainload of tanks (or was it bradleys) gets derailed and they just go one by one off the side of a hill and pile up and up.
anyone have that gif?
>>29382961
?
all of that is correct.
How many of you seriously think that the M1 has an APS that's actually worth a shit?
No, not the MCD (which is literally trash), a real, actual, genuine, existing APS that's actually put on the tank and used?
>>29390555
How long do you think it would take to bolt Trophy or Quick Kill to an Abrams?
How many vehicles in service actually have an APS worth a shit? I will give you a hint, its 2 and neither are Russian.
>>29390534
>still thinking the Abrams does not have HE available
>>29390555
>Says MCD is trash
>Nothing else to back up claim.
Wasted trips.
>>29390661
It is trash in the sense that both it and Shtora are only capable of dealing with cold war era missiles.
>>29390699
Are you familiar with their ages, how they work, and what countermeasures there are against them?
>>29390636
Well I'm genuinely perplexed. Because Arena and Trophy are the only hardkill countermeasures worth a damn.
>>29389329
We don't even know what they are doing with the AMP beside that it needs a data link.
A better question is will the AMP do something that could not be done with DM11, M329 or M339 rounds, or is it being made so the US has an 'in house' round.
>>29390749
Russia does not actually field Arena, so the answer would be the Merkava and Namer using Trophy.
>>29378601
>no ATGM
And nothing of value was lost.
>>29390743
Are you familiar with presenting information instead of unbiased claims followed by questioning of the person you're trying to educate?
Why do some people tout GLATGM's as being such a big thing? What are it's advantages to these people?
Also, aren't GLATGM's reserved for the platoon leader in Russian doctrine or something? Not everyone is getting them as far as I'm aware, so they can't be that damn amazing or "impactful" or whatnot...
>>29391001
Are you familiar with the concept of looking things up yourself using information already given as a basis?
>>29391033
Nationalism, it's an avenue to claim AMERICA BTFO!
>>29391092
>I'm going to make a claim that YOU have to back up!
Wew lad. Just... wew.
>>29391367
>MCD/Shtora developed in the (late) 80's
>post cold war missile upgrades like UV flares and signaled IR flares to counter IR dazzlers
>NO, I NEED MORE PROOFS
At least try.
>>29391431
>Missing the point
>Damage control
This could've been a lot easier on us both, familia.
>>29391463
>Missing the point
>demanding to be told things you should already know about 25+ year old soft kill APS systems
>>29391493
>Still trying
Just give up anon, we're past it.
>>29391512
>we are past it but just let me get in the last word
>>29391560
I'm assuming you're not past it?
