LoooSeR Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 Is this M1A2C? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laviduce Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 4 hours ago, LoooSeR said: Is this M1A2C? No , this tank is not an M1A2C. The turret face is a little to thin (by 1-2 inches) and the hull towing connectors are of the old type. It seems to be an M1A2B. Ramlaen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Laviduce said: It seems to be an M1A2B. M1A2 SEP v1 and M1A2 SEP v2 were not renamed to M1A2A and M1A2B. shaun22sd 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laviduce Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 37 minutes ago, SH_MM said: M1A2 SEP v1 and M1A2 SEP v2 were not renamed to M1A2A and M1A2B. Thank you for the feedback ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 So this is a M1A2 SEP v2 with low profile CROWS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted November 4, 2019 Report Share Posted November 4, 2019 Quote On October 30, 2019, the U.S. Army issued General Dynamics Corporation (a division of General Dynamics Land Systems - GDLS) a contract worth $ 162.404 million for the supply of 624 small robotic wheeled transport platforms Multi-Utility Tactical Transport (MUTT) under the Small Multipurpose Equipment Transports (SMET) program. Deliveries should begin in the second quarter of fiscal year 2021 and be completed by October 29, 2024. Quote The ordered crewless transport platforms comply with the concept of the so-called "robotic mules" and are intended for the transport of goods and equipment as part of infantry units at the squad and platoon level. The selected MUTT platform developed by GDLS is an 8x8 wheeled vehicle with an electric hybrid drive. The US Army’s SMET requirements include optional human or remote control, autonomous mobility, transportation of up to 1,000 pounds (454 kg) of cargo (9-man unit property), 72 hours of operation, 60 miles range, 1 kW silent power generation in movement mode and 3 kW when stationary, the ability to recharge soldiers' equipment (radios, night vision goggles, tablets). With full-scale production, the cost of one platform should not exceed $ 100 thousand. The GDLS specifications of the MUTT platform in the 8x8 wheel configuration are maximum weight with a payload of 3,500 pounds (1,589 kg), payload mass of 1,200 pounds (545 kg), length 116 inches (2947 mm), width 60-70 inches (1524-1778 mm), 60 miles range (with 5 gallons of fuel), remote control is provided at a range of up to 200 m with a simple remote controller by one hand, it is possible to provide movement on water. GDLS also developed the lighter MUTT variants with 6x6 (900 pounds load) and 4x4 (last optionally tracked, 600 pounds load) wheel configurations. https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3826600.html Spoiler Ramlaen and Scolopax 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZloyKrolik Posted November 5, 2019 Report Share Posted November 5, 2019 So it is a remote control Mechanical Mule? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heretic88 Posted November 5, 2019 Report Share Posted November 5, 2019 19 hours ago, SH_MM said: M1A2 SEP v1 and M1A2 SEP v2 were not renamed to M1A2A and M1A2B. US army should really consider dropping their idiotic designation systems! Look at the air force. Those guys did it right. From the first letter, you immediately know the general type of aircraft. Then model number, and a letter for variant (A,B,C..etc), and finally sometimes sub-variant, for example F-16C Block 52... Also for army M1 means a tank, a truck, a rifle, a helmet, socks, pants, everything... crazy. No such thing at air force. DIADES 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted November 7, 2019 Report Share Posted November 7, 2019 97 early M1, presumably on their way to Yuma to be rebuilt as M1A2C. Scolopax 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Posted November 7, 2019 Report Share Posted November 7, 2019 Did the earlt M1 have fewer road wheels?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted November 7, 2019 Report Share Posted November 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Voodoo said: Did the earlt M1 have fewer road wheels?? Nope. There are some missing on some of those hulls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clan_Ghost_Bear Posted November 8, 2019 Report Share Posted November 8, 2019 https://novac.jutarnji.hr/aktualno/planiraju-otvoriti-srediste-za-odrzavanje-oklopnog-vozila-bradley-za-ovaj-dio-europe/9553307/ This article claims that BAE Systems is interested in expanding Bradley sales to Eastern/Southern Europe, with Greece, Macedonia, Romania, and Lithuania earmarked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted November 16, 2019 Report Share Posted November 16, 2019 Karamazov and Clan_Ghost_Bear 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted November 22, 2019 Report Share Posted November 22, 2019 Australian Abrams put on weight... Ramlaen and Clan_Ghost_Bear 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted November 23, 2019 Report Share Posted November 23, 2019 Because of TUSK. Laviduce 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted November 23, 2019 Report Share Posted November 23, 2019 ?? Laviduce, Beer, Karamazov and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted November 23, 2019 Report Share Posted November 23, 2019 9 hours ago, SH_MM said: Because of TUSK. Australia has had TUSK since 2011. Because TUSK is a theatre/operation-specific appliqué, the MLC isn’t updated unless it’s carried. Trials with the amphibious ships & the landing craft led to the tanks being weighed via weigh station. This activity led to a reclassification of their MLC. Future upgrades via Project Land 907-2 will likely result in armour upgrades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Posted November 23, 2019 Report Share Posted November 23, 2019 Are the values in metric tons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted November 23, 2019 Report Share Posted November 23, 2019 Short ton. Beer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted November 27, 2019 Report Share Posted November 27, 2019 M1A2C Clan_Ghost_Bear, Ramlaen, Laviduce and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted November 27, 2019 Report Share Posted November 27, 2019 More visual cues for identifying M1A2C Scolopax, Clan_Ghost_Bear and Laviduce 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VPZ Posted November 27, 2019 Report Share Posted November 27, 2019 Clan_Ghost_Bear 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted November 27, 2019 Report Share Posted November 27, 2019 The protective cover for the wire to a low profile antenna. (not installed) The easy differences to spot are; -larger turret face -pedestal for an antenna on the left rear of the turret -enlarged tow hooks -APU exhaust on the left of the hull rear -low profile antenna next to the drivers hatch -new mud flaps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted November 28, 2019 Report Share Posted November 28, 2019 Another M1A2C from Bob Latta's social media. Clan_Ghost_Bear and VPZ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanch90 Posted November 28, 2019 Report Share Posted November 28, 2019 Well i made a rough estimation of the LOS height and length increase/decrease of the M1A2C turret compared to M1A2. Firstly i had to make sure that the scaling was good, after all the two pictures were not taken from exactly the same angle and distance, and in addition the picture resolution is not the best for this kind of comparison. In short, whoever put the two pictures together made an excellent job, the scaling is pretty much on spot. Spoiler In terms of LOS length, M1A2C is about 87 pixels longer but in terms of LOS height, its about 11 pixels shorter. Now if anyone could tell me the exact measurement of one element present in the turret (for example, the height of the armored glasses on the commander's cupola) i could make a rough conversion of pixels to centimeters. Clan_Ghost_Bear 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.