User Panel
|
|
Diesel power packs also come out with the transmission and engine together FWIW.
|
|
Quoted: oh i know. there is a reason they never made the jet car into production. each engine was near $100,000 in todays money. they are extremely expensive. A Abrams is like what? 10 million? would not be surprised if 3 million of that is just of the engine itself. sure back in the 70s conventional engines could not do the power output required but now? fuck we can make a v12 have 2000 hp easy, maybe even multi fuel just put a fucking normal engine in it already for half the cost. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Hey, now - That turbine shares the same lineage as the mighty Mopar you're driving! oh i know. there is a reason they never made the jet car into production. each engine was near $100,000 in todays money. they are extremely expensive. A Abrams is like what? 10 million? would not be surprised if 3 million of that is just of the engine itself. sure back in the 70s conventional engines could not do the power output required but now? fuck we can make a v12 have 2000 hp easy, maybe even multi fuel just put a fucking normal engine in it already for half the cost. A Abrams is not 10 million dollars. When I was a supply SGT my whole property book was only 64 million dollars. 14 SEP V2 tanks, 2 HMMWV, a M113 a, LMTV and a water trailer was the only big items. Everything else was cheap shit like chem detectors, radios and pistols and rifles. Tanks are pretty fucking cheap actually. |
|
The value listed in the book isn’t necessarily what was spent on it, nor does it include the lifetime of spares, support and training that are often procured in a capital expenditure. Polands V3s we’re something like $20m each all up.
|
|
if cornpop and AOC get their way, it'll be a solar-powered EV.
|
|
You can only add so much steel. I wonder if some new wonder armor will be on it.
Could it be lighter? |
|
Quoted: You can only add so much steel. I wonder if some new wonder armor will be on it. Could it be lighter? View Quote See the weird shape around the gun? They lowered the turret roof in the front but kept the gun up to not lose elevation and depression. They wanted to lose weight. The army has said before that if they really wanted it, the Abrams could shed 20% of its weight. I bet they’ve taken a good chunk out. |
|
|
|
|
Quoted: A Abrams is not 10 million dollars. When I was a supply SGT my whole property book was only 64 million dollars. 14 SEP V2 tanks, 2 HMMWV, a M113 a, LMTV and a water trailer was the only big items. Everything else was cheap shit like chem detectors, radios and pistols and rifles. Tanks are pretty fucking cheap actually. View Quote |
|
|
Quoted: I was at ft hood when they got rolled out. That's what we were told. They locked them down fairly quick. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: That is the best part. I was stationed with a guy who claimed ungoverned that it would go over 80 mph. I was at ft hood when they got rolled out. That's what we were told. They locked them down fairly quick. No doubt right after some PFC took one off some really sweet jumps wide open. |
|
In fairness the hull and powerpack probably only represent together less than a third of the price of the vehicle. The turrets are replaced in some of the major upgrades.
|
|
I remember hearing once that the Abrams has thousands of pounds of copper wiring in it that could be shaved off by switching to fiber optic. Did they ever do that?
|
|
|
It must have its own drone swarm. It would be epic to tell the gunner...Gunner...enemy troops on the reverse slope of that ridgeline...switch to drone swarm and launch them...
|
|
Quoted: Yeah, what's wrong with the turbine? The only real weakness I know of is that it consumes a lot of fuel - but being a very multi-fuel capable engine in a time where they were expecting to be retreating with supply lines that would have been getting shorter (and the ability to scrounge fuel from wherever they happened to find it), the turbine made sense. Low coolant requirements and a small size helped too. It's too bad they didn't follow through with the re-engening that got canceled with the Crusader. Same power with a lot less fuel consumption and a seamless drop-in swap. View Quote The engine management improvements have reduced fuel consumption substantially. The idle fuel consumption is still crap but making APUs standard also fixed that. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, what's wrong with the turbine? The only real weakness I know of is that it consumes a lot of fuel - but being a very multi-fuel capable engine in a time where they were expecting to be retreating with supply lines that would have been getting shorter (and the ability to scrounge fuel from wherever they happened to find it), the turbine made sense. Low coolant requirements and a small size helped too. It's too bad they didn't follow through with the re-engening that got canceled with the Crusader. Same power with a lot less fuel consumption and a seamless drop-in swap. View Quote High fuel consumption. They require a tremendous amount of air when operating and this poses problems longer term in desert/arid conditions. The fine sand particulate is sucked up and through the V-Packs and into the turbine, thus causing damage. In the case of my M1A1 in Desert Storm, total turbine destruction. |
|
Quoted: High fuel consumption. They require a tremendous amount of air when operating and this poses problems longer term in desert/arid conditions. The fine sand particulate is sucked up and through the V-Packs and into the turbine, thus causing damage. In the case of my M1A1 in Desert Storm, total turbine destruction. View Quote I’m told they’ve got much better filters now. Apparently every time they rebuild the turbines they last a little less time than the last time. And the AGT-1500 is about twice as big and thirsty as it has to be, it was designed in the 1960s. |
|
Quoted: I remember hearing once that the Abrams has thousands of pounds of copper wiring in it that could be shaved off by switching to fiber optic. Did they ever do that? View Quote I believe not, but I would expect that they did in this one, to move to all digital everything. Be curious to see if they use an autoloader or semi-autoloader. |
|
Quoted: And all this time I thought it was Taco Tuesday farts. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: I thought the silent killer was alzheimers And all this time I thought it was Taco Tuesday farts. Well if you have taco Tuesday farts and Alzheimer's, you can shit your pants and forget about it |
|
|
Quoted: I believe not, but I would expect that they did in this one, to move to all digital everything. Be curious to see if they use an autoloader or semi-autoloader. View Quote Would they be able to make an autoloader work with the separated, armored ammo storage. IIRC the Russians have had a bit of a problem with their autoloaders, since it resulted in filling the crew compartment with exposed cartridges just waiting to get hit by some Ukrainian rocket and become an ARFCOM GIF... |
|
Quoted: Would they be able to make an autoloader work with the separated, armored ammo storage. IIRC the Russians have had a bit of a problem with their autoloaders, since it resulted in filling the crew compartment with exposed cartridges just waiting to get hit by some Ukrainian rocket and become an ARFCOM GIF... View Quote There are at least two designed from Meggit, one for a full autoloader for the existing Abrams turret, one is a semi autoloader that presents a shell of the requested type at a small hole with a miniature blast door. That promises to be lighter, faster and more safe than the existing arrangement, and you can keep your loader. |
|
Quoted: It is an all of the crews will be LBGTQ whatever the fuck they're called View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Dear god don't be an EV. It is an all of the crews will be LBGTQ whatever the fuck they're called What happens in the turret STAYS in the turret. |
|
Quoted: What happens in the turret STAYS in the turret. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Quoted: I have no idea if this is what they did, but there was a proposal years ago to go with a diesel generator and electric drive train. Saved fuel, weight and maint costs. Gave you more acceleration and range. View Quote I have an Army dual axle truck with just that. Was listed as a standard Eaton Fuller manual transmission in the auction. Nope. It's still sitting in the same spot it was parked because I'm not screwing around with that shit. |
|
|
|
Quoted: I have an Army dual axle truck with just that. Was listed as a standard Eaton Fuller manual transmission in the auction. Nope. It's still sitting in the same spot it was parked because I'm not screwing around with that shit. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: I have no idea if this is what they did, but there was a proposal years ago to go with a diesel generator and electric drive train. Saved fuel, weight and maint costs. Gave you more acceleration and range. I have an Army dual axle truck with just that. Was listed as a standard Eaton Fuller manual transmission in the auction. Nope. It's still sitting in the same spot it was parked because I'm not screwing around with that shit. |
|
|
|
Looks like they chopped a foot off of the height of the turret, like the Korean K2. How much will that reduce internal space for the crew?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted: See the weird shape around the gun? They lowered the turret roof in the front but kept the gun up to not lose elevation and depression. They wanted to lose weight. The army has said before that if they really wanted it, the Abrams could shed 20% of its weight. I bet they’ve taken a good chunk out. View Quote https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/next-generation-m1-abrams-tank-teased-by-general-dynamics The main gun may be a variant of the XM360 developed for the FCS and significantly lighter than the M256. |
|
Quoted: They're quiet, powerful, easy to swap, and reliable. They can swap a power pack out of an Abrams in an hour. The major drawback is specific consumption but with the addition of the APU the consumption while not actually moving is greatly reduced. Still thirsty but better than it was. View Quote |
|
I bet it is the same chassis with upgraded powerplant, sensors and control systems. Apparently we have a ton of Abrams chassis being constantly rebuilt just to keep the factory open.
What is on everyone's wish list for abrams upgrades after watching Russian tanks blow up left and right? Here is my list: - Improved fuel economy - Faster turret and improved targeting and tracking - Missile detection and jamming. - Automatic missile/artillery defense lasers. - Targeting laser jamming chaff dispensers. - Infantry sensors that actually work in an suburban or urban environment. - Recon drones. - IED detection and jammer. - 2x Mine clearing charges. #shorter than dedicated mine clearing charges for IEDs or short and lazy mine deployment like in ukraine. - AC and satelite dish - Beer fridge. |
|
|
|
Quoted: The most awesome part of that turbine engine is proving that horsepower is the number to look at when you need to evaluate an engine's ability to do work. 73.6 tons is moved quite nicely by an engine that makes 395 ft-lbs of torque at peak which drops to 277 ft-lbs at the 30,000 rpm speed where 1500 hp is produced. View Quote Horsepower is literally a measure of work per unit time. What else would you look at? Torque is what engines actually produce that we can measure directly. But HP has always been the measure of work done. |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.