Some links with pics;
https://defence-blog.com/army/usa-begin-mass-producing-latest-variant-of-abrams-tanks.html
http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?s=f39be09ff82dae0dcf1ff97ed038b70f&showtopic=40443&page=4
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
M1A2 SEP V3 full rate production
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 05:22 AM UTC
HooFlungDung
Joined: November 14, 2005
KitMaker: 23 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 05:37 AM UTC
The bottom link gives me a scary Google warning that this is a compromised website and to proceed at your own risk.
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 06:00 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The bottom link gives me a scary Google warning that this is a compromised website and to proceed at your own risk.
Strange, I’ve been bookmarked there for years, never had any issues
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 10:47 AM UTC
Quoted Text
The bottom link gives me a scary Google warning that this is a compromised website and to proceed at your own risk.
I went there and I got transported to "Never-Never Land"
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 10:56 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Some links with pics;
https://defence-blog.com/army/usa-begin-mass-producing-latest-variant-of-abrams-tanks.html
http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?s=f39be09ff82dae0dcf1ff97ed038b70f&showtopic=40443&page=4
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 02:04 PM UTC
The M1A2 SEPv3 is mainly upgraded internally w/new computer systems and a new (back to the old) Under Armor APU (UAAPU) in the left rear of the hull. The only real external difference over an M1A2 SEPv2 is the exhaust for the UAAPU on the left rear (which was on the original M1A2 SEP w/UAAPU). If you have any of the SEP kits that have both the UUAPU and the Hawker battery system options for the left rear, and a CROWS 2, you have the parts for an M1A2 SEPv3 already.
Hercules1983
Joined: July 24, 2013
KitMaker: 43 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 04:30 PM UTC
Hi Gino,these new V3s use CROWS LP, and the front&rear lifting rings seem to be enhanced.
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 05:09 PM UTC
All the mounting lugs for TUSK around the turret also
HeavyArty
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 21, 2019 - 11:43 PM UTC
Like I said, the only real external difference from the M1A2 SEP V2 (already has CROWS 2/LP) is the UUAPU and its external fittings. The other minor fittings are also there, but I consider these cosmetic.
system
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 363 posts
Posted: Friday, March 29, 2019 - 08:33 AM UTC
Interesting post on the Gur Khan blog.
https://translate.google.com/translate?um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=tw-ob&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fgurkhan.blogspot.com%2F2019%2F03%2Fblog-post_32.html
It seems the turret shape has changed.
https://translate.google.com/translate?um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=tw-ob&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fgurkhan.blogspot.com%2F2019%2F03%2Fblog-post_32.html
It seems the turret shape has changed.
BunkerBuster
Joined: March 29, 2017
KitMaker: 157 posts
Armorama: 122 posts
Posted: Friday, March 29, 2019 - 09:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Interesting post on the Gur Khan blog.
https://translate.google.com/translate?um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=tw-ob&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fgurkhan.blogspot.com%2F2019%2F03%2Fblog-post_32.html
It seems the turret shape has changed.
Yup, thicker frontal armor. Reference the TUSK mounts on the two shots, noting the additional length of the turret sides.
JavierDeLuelmo
Joined: February 29, 2016
KitMaker: 189 posts
Armorama: 186 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 02:47 AM UTC
Both turret and hull frontal armour are now thicker.
system
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 363 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 04:05 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Both turret and hull frontal armour are now thicker.
Yes, and although it's not obvious, I think there's some kind of chamfer or break in angle in the turret front plates parallel to the mantlet. You can see a difference in shape on the far side of the mantlet in this pic
panamadan
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 06:29 AM UTC
Why not just just call it a M1A3?
Dan
Dan
HermannB
Joined: October 14, 2008
KitMaker: 4,099 posts
Armorama: 4,067 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 06:33 AM UTC
Will the designation not be M1A2C?
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 07:27 AM UTC
Quoted Text
[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
BunkerBuster
Joined: March 29, 2017
KitMaker: 157 posts
Armorama: 122 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 08:14 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
Yeah, I hear they finally fixed the issue with RPGs being able to penetrate the frontal hull armor.
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 09:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
Yeah, I hear they finally fixed the issue with RPGs being able to penetrate the frontal hull armor.
Seem to remember you've lost more Abrams than we've lost Challengers in combat, probably more if we hadn't given you the secrets of Chobham armour
knewton
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2019 - 11:35 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
And with the Rheinmetall turret as part of the Upgrades to the Challenger, it looks like a new tank altogether.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2019 - 12:28 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted TextQuoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
Yeah, I hear they finally fixed the issue with RPGs being able to penetrate the frontal hull armor.
Seem to remember you've lost more Abrams than we've lost Challengers in combat, probably more if we hadn't given you the secrets of Chobham armour
"You guys" didn't give "us" ANYTHING, without getting SOMETHING in return... I'm not going to get into a P*SSING-CONTEST with you...
Logic dictates that when one fields MORE equipment in battle, one will LOSE more of it, proportionately speaking... It also depends on WHERE this equipment is deployed, and HOW MUCH "exposure" to enemy forces said equipment encounters. Understand what I'm saying..?
Majekm
Joined: April 06, 2008
KitMaker: 39 posts
Armorama: 38 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2019 - 04:22 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Both turret and hull frontal armour are now thicker.
Wow, so the first changes to the actual, external shapes of the tank in years.
Do you guys think we'll get an updated release from Academy/Meng/Dragon or RFM? Or a resin upgrade?
If not, how difficult would it be to modify/lengthen the current kits, then recreating the welds, so that they match the original ones on the original kit parts?
Kenaicop
#384
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2019 - 05:49 AM UTC
Let me throw this one out there, is there any possibility the turret grew out on the sides also?
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2019 - 06:32 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted TextQuoted TextQuoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
Yeah, I hear they finally fixed the issue with RPGs being able to penetrate the frontal hull armor.
Seem to remember you've lost more Abrams than we've lost Challengers in combat, probably more if we hadn't given you the secrets of Chobham armour
"You guys" didn't give "us" ANYTHING, without getting SOMETHING in return... I'm not going to get into a P*SSING-CONTEST with you...
Logic dictates that when one fields MORE equipment in battle, one will LOSE more of it, proportionately speaking... It also depends on WHERE this equipment is deployed, and HOW MUCH "exposure" to enemy forces said equipment encounters. Understand what I'm saying..?
I understand you like to get on this site and pontificate as long as nobody challenges your opinion or point of view. But like anybody who pushes their opinion, in any discussion by shouting (as in using CAPS all the time).
You seemed to have missed the fact you started this "p*ssing contest" as you call it by writing quote " Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD," with once again the stupid use of caps, invites a response from those who feel differently.
It is after all as you said before, when getting your pants all screwed up, an open forum for different opinions.
Understand what I'm saying, and without the senseless use of caps - get over yourself Dennis.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2019 - 06:51 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted TextQuoted TextQuoted TextQuoted Text[
Seriously... I think this is good. Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD, it has GOT TO BE GOOD...
I didn't know they were improving the Challenger...
Yeah, I hear they finally fixed the issue with RPGs being able to penetrate the frontal hull armor.
Seem to remember you've lost more Abrams than we've lost Challengers in combat, probably more if we hadn't given you the secrets of Chobham armour
"You guys" didn't give "us" ANYTHING, without getting SOMETHING in return... I'm not going to get into a P*SSING-CONTEST with you...
Logic dictates that when one fields MORE equipment in battle, one will LOSE more of it, proportionately speaking... It also depends on WHERE this equipment is deployed, and HOW MUCH "exposure" to enemy forces said equipment encounters. Understand what I'm saying..?
I understand you like to get on this site and pontificate as long as nobody challenges your opinion or point of view. But like anybody who pushes their opinion, in any discussion by shouting (as in using CAPS all the time) you seemed to have missed the fact you started this "p*ssing contest" as you call it.
By writing quote " Anytime that we can improve the BEST TANK IN THE WORLD," with once again the stupid use of caps, invites a response from those who feel differently. It is after all as you said before when getting you pants all screwed up, an open forum for different opinions.
Understand what I'm saying, and without the senseless use of caps - get over yourself Dennis.
Not biting-
BTW- Old "Half-Blue Face" in your "photo I.D" just happens to be an American actor...
PS- It seems to be YOU that is "pontificating", not I...
Removed by original poster on 03/31/19 - 19:11:30 (GMT).
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.