Has anyone else heard about this new upgrade which might or might not be in the works?

According to reports I have read, the A3 variant will pack a new 140mm main gun, as well as newer, bigger machine guns with faster rates of fire. It is supposed to be up-armored as well with newer, lighter, yet stronger armor as well as incorporate new anti missile technologies, like the marines "dazzler," but with more kick.

Any of you heard about this, or am I just caving in to rumors?

Rob

I know that all the sub-component of the rumor have all been under discussion for years, but I have not heard of them all being incorperated into a new "mark" of the M1...all rumors I hear are for the "Stryker" brigades leading to the "tupperwear" tanks of the future. Small, light, fast....the new army motto?

I've been "in" on some of the projects and that is definitely the way the army is leaning. Small and lightweight and limited personnel per vehicle if any in some cases. I imagine the big boys will be around for some time yet to come, but a 140mm, haven't heard a word in that regard. Hell, it took forever to convince then that the old 105 rifled was getting obsolete. The 120 smoothie is still romping and stomping

The 140 mm - that round would be a loaders nite-mare . In my 8 years on the M1A1 I have yet to find a loader (including me ) that didnt have trouble with the HEAT round . It weighes in at 60+ pounds and is heavier and longer than the all time favorite SABOT . So a 140 mm wold result in slower loading times and loader fatigue resulting in less rounds on target . I for one as a tanker dont want that , nor do i want a auto-loader . Heck I still miss the 105mm . I'm shure this post will bring up a few good debates on the subject . I'm no expert on this just my 2 cents worth . Good post Rob .

AFAIK, no one has yet to deploy a 140mm gun - Bundeswehr, IDF, Russian Army, US Army, etc. Although, both Germany and Israel have their respective 140mm guns in "advanced development phases." Currently, no one needs a 140mm gun. Current 120mm guns - especially the L55 used in the Leo2A6 - are ok for the mean time. Unless a tank is developed that amounts up to 100 tons (rather than the current 70 tons of the M1A2SEP, Leo2A6/Strv122, Merk IV), current 120mm (especially the 2A6's 55-calibre gun) is sufficient. IIRC, the US Army is developing its own 140mm gun. Meanwhile, in Russia, the Black Eagle is rumoured to be armed with a 152mm gun (not like the stubby 152 used in the M60A2 or the M551), with the autoloader mounted in the bustle, but considering Russia's dire financial condition, I'd be surprised if field a new tank at all in the near future (and new by which not for export but for their army - most of the newer tanks are built for export).

However, the M1A2E1 is currently being built in my own factory (hehehehe - reference to the Twilight 2000 campaign).

Seriously, there was a discussion on 140mm guns back at TankNet (I'll try to look for the thread and link the URL here), including pix of the German 140mm gun, and having it mounted on a Leo2A4, and the 140mm APFDS. One word comes to mind: MASSIVE.

WIth 140mm, I reckon the tanks that'd be carrying this gun would be equipped with an autoloader - ammo will be just waaaaaaaay to large and heavy for the human loader.

As for the armor for the M1A3, I heard that there is a type of armor that will incorporate a sort of electric armor or something like that which creates an "electric shield" around the tank to defeat HEAT type ammo. However, such electro-armor will fail in the face of APFDS and other kinetic type ammunition. The electro-armor will act something like grill armor (think the Merkava's ball-and-chain armor, or the grill armor at the skirt covering the sprocket of the Merk IV) against HEAT by pre-detonating the HEAT thereby countering the jet that the HEAT projectile produces to pierce thru armor.

As for active defenses, not much about that except for the current dazzler used by the USMC.

With regard to the 105mm, I heard that the Swedes, Germans, or the Brits are developing a newer 105mm gun for light tanks. The newer gun with newer ammunition would be enough to penetrate many current tanks out there, except the heaviest such as the M1A2SEP, Challenger II, Leo2A5/A6/Strv122, Merkava IV.

Some big gun discussion threads from TankNet:

Data on 105mm guns:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002212.html

Rheinmetall's 120mm HE:
[urlhttp://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002055.html[/url]

L55 - 120mm 55-calibre long gun used in Leo2A6:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002121.html

T-95 Black Eagle:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002070.html

130mm gun data:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002032.html

Some talk on big guns and design concepts:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001805.html

Rear armor kits for the M1 as learned from Op. Iraqi Freedom:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001803.html

M60A4 discussion:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001838.html

M1A2SEP v Leo2A6 discussion:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001768.html

Some talk on active defenses:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001707.html

More talk on tank guns:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/001556.html

Some info on the Leo2A5:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000953.html

About the new 105mm gun (I think):
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000256.html

"Liquid Metal" Armor technology discussion:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000220.html

Rail gun technology (I think):
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000230.html

Technical discussion on armor technology:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000151.html

Ammunition performance discussion:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000242.html

Nice query answered on 105 v 120:
http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000171.html

Sadly, I couldn't find the exact thread that shows the pix of the German's 140mm gun and ammo. I'll try to do a much more refined search (TankNet's search feature was disabled many moons ago, so I have to do it manually hehehehe but IIRC it was just within this year that the discussion was made - I just have to look more closely )

Pretty good link about FCS (Future Combat Systems) over at Global Security, including the 140mm and its potential problems. An assualt gun version of the Abrams? Cool...

Shaun

Oh, do a google for "140mm tank gun." Bunch of links to PDF files. Alas, I can't get Acrobat Reader to open so I can't say whether they are worth looking at.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/fcs-t.htm

I've found 2 pictures of a leopard armed with a 140 mm gun.
You can find them in the middle of the page.
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/leo2.htm

I never read of a M1A3 variant. Currently, Army policy is that if anything is added to the M1A2, something has to come off to meet the 70-ton diet limit. So far, even active protection can't get incorporated into the turret bustle without removing something.

The only "semi-planned" upgrades are add-on kits such as the "Urban Abrams," which has the rear slat armor, plywood top armor, and dual remote M2HB MGs over the barrel just like the IDF tanks. This has been tested, haven't been approved for widescale production.

I read this article in Jane's IDR and they had a mock-up for MOUT training. Try surfing Jane's for a photo of the frontal shot.

The "Urban Abrams" concept seems simple: give more MGs to shoot back and give RPGs something to hit other than the hull. With dual MGs over the barrel, the Urban Abrams has a lot of MG ready-ammo (I forget the exact count) compared to the 100 rds on the TC M2HB. I have to read the article again since I forget if the dual MGs could elevate and swivel or if they're fixed to the barrel. All I know is that the dual MGs are remote-controlled just like the IDF ones.

Then the plywood over the roof acts as a cheap barrier to detonate RPGs (the plywood acted as a prop, actual material may be metal or light and cheap composite). And we've seen the vent metal slats covering the rear (Eduard PE) and tested before Op. Iraqi Freedom. In fact, the Urban Abrams mockup came from lessons learned from the Russians in Chechyna, meaning the mods to the Urban Abrams aren't from the minds of the U.S. Army. We copied the Russians and IDF. The Urban Abrams WILL come in add-on kit form IF the Army makes it and MAY be used in MOUT battles, meaning M1s won't have the mods added unless in MOUT.

Here's the discussionon the140mm gun with some pix:

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002020.html

Hi

Just three quick M1 Abrams questions for those in the know:

Is the rough price for a M1A1 ±$3 million?

Does the M1A2 upgrade cost ±$6 million?

What will the ballpark figure be for a M1A3 upgrade?

Not really sure how much an M1A1 costs, but roughly it's about within the figures you mentioned I reckon. IIRC, an M1A1/A2 probably costs around US$4 million.

Now, regarding the M1A3 upgrade, since there isn't yet an M1A3, it really depends on what upgrades we are talking about. Up-armored skirts like those used by the Challenger 1/2 in Sabre/Telic wouldn't cost much I think. The electronic components would be expensive. IIRC, the CITV and other electronic/software upgrades for the M1A2 and M1A2 SEP cost quite a sum - perhaps around US$2-3 million, not sure, just a guess - Sabot and Rtwsmp and others in the US Army would probably know better. Check out www.army-technology.com. They might have mentioned how much the price was.

First of all, I am not in the military, just know a few things about the abrams. Secondly, an M1A1 cost about $1.6 million US and an M1A2 cost about $2.8 million.

The A2 isn't really an upgrade so much as it was built an A2. Some were upgraded from A1's but the majority were built to A2 specs. This is my understanding, I could be wrong.

The A3 would probably run $3.5 million new or $1-1.5 million to upgrade, but that doesn't include the cost of the already purchased vehicle. I think buying new would be cheaper and the added benefit of having a little extra inventory would be nice.

Rob

IIRC, there are some new build M1A2s, new build M1A2 SEPs, and the rest of the A2 fleet being re-built M1A1HAs. Then there's the M1A1D which has some of the SEP technology, e.g. data link, and other software/electronic stuff, sans the CITV and ICWS.

Considering that the M1 is a modular design, upgrading existing M1 tanks would be cheaper IMO. IIRC, if there's a new armor technology, one can just bring an M1A1 to the plant, have the armor removed, then slapped with the new armor panels. This is cheaper and easier thanks to the modular construction.

RTWPSOM2: I was under the impression that you served in the US Army so I mentioned you at my previous post. That impression, plus the fact that you've researched a lot on the M1 series made me to cite you as a reference. And yes, my figures were too off-based. IIRC, there was an old Time Magazine issue on the USA being the largest arms-supplier nowadays (this was circa 20th Century, mid-90s after the ODS), and it showed an M1A2 with the amount of $1.2 million (or was it $2 million - long time ago) as the price tag. But I wonder, is this the M1A2 sold to SA and Kuwait which AFAIK doesn't have the DU armor? IIRC, M1A1s used by Egypt don't have DU armor, DU and Chobham armor still being a "secret recipe" so any exported M1s would have none of these lest the formula goes to the wrong hands.

OT, I recently saw a documentary on TV showing the A2's protection being tested. Mighty impressed I must add. They launched an RPG on the side, exploded a 155mm artillery shell a few inches - or feet - from the top, and other nasty explosives and it showed the crew compartment unmolested from the explosives tested. Impressive to say the least.

Maybe Sabot can clear this up, but I have heard from several sources, one from United Defense as well, that all "new" M1 series production stopped in 1995 and that ALL the uprated tanks are rebuilds on older chassis. nothing wrong with recycling, but I was of the understanding that all the M1A2SEP are only rebuilds, not actual new built vehicles.

As for prices, all references state that export M1's have several key component missing, like the DU armor and some of the lastest optics/electronics. Makes sense since we are selling the vehicles to people who may eventually become less happy with us in the future, and what a slap in the head to have to fight M1's with M1's...ugh.

Now I wonder how a top notch soviet force, trained for 6 months in the desert with T-90's or T-80U's would fare against the Saudi's or the Kuwaiti's...?

This is my understanding as well. M1A2SEPs are rebuilt M1IP and M1A1.

Aye, makes sense that these are rebuilds then. I was under the impression there were a few that were complete new build A2s / SEPs, and the rest being rebuilds.

Well I found this pic , http://www.jed.simonides.org/tanks/alpha/abrams_series/xm291/xm291-intro.html I guess the U. S. has played with the 140 mm idea a bit

Cool pic, Toad, thanks for finding that one.

Rob