What is the top speed of a M1A2 Abrams tank?
In Top Speeds
The M1 and its variants have a top road speed of 67.7 kilometres per hour (42 mph), and an offroad top speed of 48.3 kilometres per hour (30 mph).
6 people found this useful
this answer is not ture for many reason one. the m1a1 is a out dated verison of the m1a2 and the most advanced tank in the world is the British Challenger 2
It's highly unlikely they'll ever meet each other in battle, so there probably will never be a definite means of determining this. Each has their advantages and disadvantages, such as: M1 Abrams advantages : . Lighter weight leaves it more suitable for transport by air. This is critical …for any expeditionary military -> This is completely irrelevant, the same number of Challanger2 tanks can be carried by any air transport as the M1. . Smoothbore gun is more accommodating of various types of projectiles -> and also less accommodating with other various types of ammunition. . Mobility - it's a much faster vehicle than the Challenger, and speed is critical in the modern battlefield -> The Challenger2 has a considerably more advanced suspension system than the M1 and will outperform over extreme terrain, it also means the Gyro-stabilizer doesn't have to work as hard to pull off an accurate shot while moving . Turbine motor uses less moving parts than a traditional diesel motor, making maintenance and repair easier -> The turbine motor is no where near as reliable as the Diesel, this is a no-brainer! M1 Abrams disadvantages: . Less armoured than the Challenger 2, although add-on armour can be installed . Turbine motor has a considerably higher rate of fuel consumption, thus reducing the combat range of the vehicle. This is the reason why the Germans rejected this for the Leopard 2, also is not as reliable as the Challenger2 diesel engine . Turbine motor produces high heat signature . Less manoeuvrable over extreme terrain . Smoothbore gun means less accuracy for HE and HEAT rounds, also means HESH rounds cannot be fired Challenger 2 advantages: . Diesel motor has a lower rate of fuel consumption . Diesel motor is also more reliable . Better armoured vehicle . More maneuverable over extreme terrain . Rifled gun means better accuracy and range with non FS rounds . Higher average 1st hit kill rate, this of course is dependant on the skill of the tank crew, but having slightly better HK and IR targeting systems does help Challenger 2 disadvantages: . Slower speed increases vulnerability -> The Challenger2 uses Hydropneumatic and as a result is actually faster and considerably more manoeuvrable over extreme terrain . 120mm rifled gun is proprietary, and not compatible with standard NATO munitions -> The British army does not use NATO standard rounds. The British army trialled a Challenger2 a few years back with a 120mm L55 smoothbore and decided to keep the rifled gun mainly because of the advantages in using HESH * In todays battlefield a tank will kill another tank using what is called an "APFSDS round", these rounds do NOT spin when in flight, they instead use a fin to stabilise the projectile much like an arrow does, this is more effective than a spinning round. An APFSDS round uses Kenetic Energy to defeat armour, NOT explosive used in HEAT, HE, HESH, etc, as a result the effectivness of the round relies on 2 things; accuracy and velocity. This means a rifled gun is pointless when used for this type of ammunition and creates a few problems: 1) The spin MUST me stopped on the APFSDR round - The challenger achieves this by adding ball bearings to the Sabot used on the APFSDS rounds the Chally uses. 2) What "pushes" the round out of the barrel of a gun, is the gas which builds up behind the projectile after the charge (explosive) is ignighted, a small ammount of this gas is lost through the grooves (rifling) when using a rifled gun. However 3rd generation APFSDS rounds are completely overkill and so the Challenger2 is still able to defeat any MBT armour in existance. 3) Overtime the rifling will wear down from excessive use, this means a rifled gun requires more maintanance than a smoothbore. 4) NATO standard ammunition is not compatble with a rifled gun, so whats the advantage of using NATO standard ammunition? - a lot of countries use it, this means it is cheaper (supply and demand). However, it does have the advantage of requiring other countries that make use of the main gun have to be supplied by the British manufacturers, as other tank round manufacturers are less likely to stock non-standard rounds. Just a quick run-through... time constraints prevent me from getting detailed. As you can see, each advantage the tanks have over the other comes at a trade-off. The only real way of determining which one is better would've required the Cold War scenario of a push at Fulda Gap to occur. But we could however look at the kill death ratio of the Challenger 1 and 2 and compare it to the M1 series. It should be noted that these tanks are designed according to different doctrine. Addendum: >1) The spin MUST me stopped on the APFSDR round - The challenger achieves this by adding ball bearings to the Sabot used on the APFSDS rounds the Chally uses. This part is incorrect (probably the author was thinking of HEAT rounds, and the French OBUS G ammunition). Challenger has no problem firing APFSDS round, nor is it necessary for them not to spin, although it is desirable. In the Challenger slip-rings are used to reduce the amount of spin imparted (but it still rotates at about 1200 rpm, which helps give a cleaner sabot separation). (MORE)
Abram was the original name of Abraham before God changed it in Genesis 17:5 " no longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you a father of many nations."
M1A2 Hands down, the T80 is okay on cross country but the Abramshas much more advanced fire control systems, armaments, suspensionsystem, armor, Superior off road performance, and the ability tofire on the move. (Correction: The T-80 has the ability to fire onthe move as well. And has more potent ar…mament. The 2A46 is 8% morepowerful being a 125mm vs the M256 120mm, definitely a smalldifference but it makes the answerer's claim incorrect. The T-80also has gun launched ATGMs which vastly out range 120mm roundsfrom the L/44 M256. Both T-80 and Abrams use Torsion barsuspension, however the Abrams weighs much more and has grownheavier over time, the suspension has not changed to reflect this.It should be considered at risk of becoming a weakness.) (MORE)
The name Tank top, recorded in English since 1968, derives from its resemblance to a tank suit, a style of one-piece women's swimsuit with shoulder straps, so called since the 1920s, because it was worn in a "swimming tank".
The criteria for the top ten tanks should always be based upon the views of combat experienced tank crewmen; not television ratings & armchair generals, that have never been in combat on a tank:. Television & Armchair Generals will almost always choose German, American, and British armor (because t…hey sponsor the television program); and the German Tiger and Panther will almost always make the top ten list. In reality, the Tiger and Panther gave teething troubles for the crewmen that manned them; they were new tanks. And they entered the conflict toward it's closing days.. The 10 top tanks should be the tanks that were RELIABLE, RUGGED, EASY TO MAINTAIN, HAD FIREPOWER, WERE MOBILE, and were EASILY MASSED PRODUCED. The purpose of all "War Machines" is to fight a battle for the nation that produced it; if the war machine (warship, warplane, battletank) has not served the nation that produced it upon the field of battle...it has not been blooded...and deserves no glory. It is simply a war machine that was built, fielded, then replaced.. WW2 Armor:. 1. US M4 Sherman. 2. USSR T34. Korean War Armor:. 1. US M26 Pershing. 2. US M46 Patton. 3. UK Centurion. Vietnam War:. 1. US M48 Patton. 2. US 551 Sheridan. 3. Australian Centurion (a close enough relative to the British). Although not used by the nations that built them; the USSR's PT-76 Ampibious Light Tanks and their T54/55 medium tanks were used by the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) to fight the most powerful military on earth; the US Military (and many, no doubt, disappeared under the impact of the Strategic Air Command's (SAC) B-52 bombers). Those two communist tanks, the PT76 & T54/55 were heavily massed produced and deserve some credit for taking a pounding from the US Armed Forces in Vietnam. (MORE)
of course not.. Improved by another uses, myself. . A bit more detail here. The M1 Abrams, weighs in at 60 tons, theM1A1 at 63, and the M1A2(the current model) tips the scales at69.54 tons. . While yes tornadoes have moved this much weight before, whenthey have they were much larger, spread out, …with alot more surfacearea. (MORE)
An anti-tank missile is accelerating from the moment the rocket motor is ignited. That means it is going faster and faster at each moment until it strikes its target or runs out of fuel. Most missile systems possess this characteristic, that is, they don't have a cited "top speed" because of the var…iability of the speed reached based on the distance to target. In the case of just one missile system, the Javelin (and not the surface-to-air one), the missile has a 2,500 metre range, and can get easily achieve mach numbers at longer ranges within its designed reach. (MORE)
The US Army establishes the criteria for US military "Armor" (Tanks). The US Marines, and in some cases special "leased or on loan" "Armor" is given to the other branches (Air Force or Navy, etc.). But, the Marines, and everyone else will use what the US Army adapts. The official US Army tanks AFTER… WW2 were the M46, M47, and M48 PATTON tanks. These were officially classified as 90mm Gun Tank Patton(s). Light Gun Tanks were the M41 Walker Bulldogs, which had 76mm Guns. The US Military's ONLY heavy tank was the 120mm Gun Tank M103 (which had no name). The US Army only fielded one battalion of those M103's. The US Marines wanted the heavies more than the Army, and retained them until about 1974.. Oficially, 76mm gun tanks were "Light Gun Tanks"; 90mm gun tanks were "Medium Gun Tanks"; and 120mm gun tanks were "Heavy Gun Tanks." Un-officially, people referred to them as Heavy, Medium, and Light tanks.. The 105mm Gun, Full Tracked, M-60 COMBAT Tank was the US Army's FIRST MBT (Main Battle Tank) and was fielded in 1960. The M60 Series (Main Battle Tank) was an improved descendent of the M-48 Patton; however the M60 NEVER RECIEVED AN OFFICIAL NAME. The US Army wanted to change to M60's nomenclature to MBT, but management had already established it as a COMBAT tank on paper; and didn't want to "change horse's in the middle of a stream" (they wanted to get to building it and getting it to the units in Europe, rather than bickering over the name of the tank).. The M-48 Patton, was the last Patton, and the last of the "medium gunned" US Army tanks; however, after the Vietnam War the M-48 was later up-gunned to meet the M-60 MBT's standards with a 105mm cannon...called the M-48A5. The M-48A5 was an "Artificial M-60", designed to make MORE NUMBERS, rather than build more M-60's. The M-48A5 105mm gunned Patton, was eventually replaced in the 1980's, as more M-1 Abrams MBT's came on line. Leaving only the M-60 Series (MBT) and the M-1 Abrams MBT in the Army's inventory. Bottom line: the M-1 Abrams (MBT-120mm Gun) replaced the M-60 Combat tank (MBT-105mm Gun). (MORE)
I would say about 5-20 i can count 5 invading Iraq (very good considering they killed like 400 Iraqi tanks) I heard a story of one tank taking about 30 RPG's ant after it burned out they win in and found the crew alive.
The name Tank top, recorded in English since 1968, is derived from its resemblance to a tank suit, a style of one-piece women's swimsuit with shoulder straps, so called since the 1920s, because it was worn in a "swimming tank," an obsolete term for what are now called "swimming pools."
Yes, no one marks a faster, stronger, and more powerful main battle tank. ---- "Strongest" is also very subjective. Both the German Leopard 2 and British Challenger 2 tanks are very comparable in all aspects. The effectiveness of a given tank is also highly dependent on the other qualities of …its combat support (infantry, C3I, etc.). (MORE)
\nThe Chrysler Corporation invented the M1 Abrams tank. They later sold the Chrysler Defense division to General Dynamics.
well the Abrams costs around 6.21 million dollars a piece and their are about 10,000 currently being used by the us military so we have used about 62 trillion dollars on m1a1's alone
Almost aways transported by flatbed trucks. - - - - - You use an M1070 Heavy Equipment Transporter, which consists of anM1070 Oshkosh tractor and an M1000 Heavy Equipment TransporterSemitrailer. It has, among other things, six seats so you cantransport the tank and its crew in the same vehicle.
Theoretically, one rpg hit directly into the treads of a tank could break loose a tread and render the tank immobile. However, this is very unlikely. The rpg would have to be at least an rpg-9 (rpg-7's being the more common model). And the small area of vulnerability, means that to have a chance of …knocking the track loose, a large number of rpg's would have to hit the tank before one got the lucky hit. A lucky hit to the GPS (Gunners Primary Sight), or other targeting sensors such as the laser range finder could disable the ballistic computer. This would make the main gun far less effective. (MORE)
It is among the most advanced in production, though it's not the only such tank in existence.
Well, this is hard. Let`s just take a brief analysis of both tanks. First: the T90 The T90 has an autoloader, wich means crew is reduced to 3 and the rate of fire is higher. The T90 is smaller, more compact wich makes it a harder target to hit. It weights only 46,5 tonnes while the Abrams weights …67. This means the T90 is much lighter, mainly thanks to its smaller turret. The Abrmas has an composite armor made of depleted uranium and is much thicker than the T90`s but the T90 has its build-in upgraded Kontack 5 Dynamic protection (ERA). It gives extra protection against everything. In total the T90 has 800-830 mm against APFSDS 1150-1350 mm against HEAT. The T90 also has active/passive protection systems (shtora and Arena) wich are designed to protect against rocket propelled grenates and anti-tank guided missiles. Like most Russian tanks the T90 can fire guided missiles from its maingun wich can be a decisive advantage in longer ranges 2-5 km. Unlike the T72s in the gulf war, the T90 does not lack thermal sights.. Now the M1. Its much heavier and this means extra armor. The big turret of the M1 has better ammo containment and this means the M1 is safer if any projectile manages to penetrate the armor. The M1 has a 1500 hp engine, wich is about 500hp more than the T90, but less fuel efficent. Finally I have to say that the M1 is combat proven. In a few words: The M1 is a great tank, but personally I would go for the Russian T90. (MORE)
The first US Army General to command US Forces in South Vietnam was a former staff officer who served under GEN George S. Patton in Europe during WWII; GEN Paul Harkins.. The second USA General to command forces in Vietnam was GEN William Westmoreland; a paratrooper (Airborne Officer), and also a c…ombat WWII veteran who fought in the ETO (European Theater of Operations).. The third USA General to command forces in Vietnam was a tank officer, GEN Creighton Abrams. Abrams also served under GEN George S. Patton in Europe during WWII. Under the direction of the "Armor" General in Vietnam, tanks and AFV's (Armored Fighting Vehicles) were used more often, and their numbers grew in country. Including the brand new M-551 Sheridan tank, armed with a 152mm gun (and officially designated as the "Armored Airborne Reconnaissance Assault Vehicle"), which went directly from Army acceptance onto the battlefields of South Vietnam in January 1969...under orders from GEN Abrams. Abrams died from cancer in 1974, and the new M1 Abrams MBT (Main Battle Tank) is dedicated to all tank crewmen, and named after GEN Abrams on behalf of the men that served under him in Vietnam. (MORE)
the maximum speed of a sherman tank was around 30MPH with a standard speed of around 25MPH
The Challenger. Although the Abrams is one of the three best in the world, the Challenger has greater accuracy, greater offroad speed, superior armour and improved firepower. American tank armour is made by a British company and acted for the Challenger's armour's prototype. Challenger armour has be…en improvd twice since then. (MORE)
The German leopard is far Superior to the Abram's, better gas mileage, lighter, faster, the only thing it lacks is the Abrams ridiculously think armor
The Leopard 1 isn't. The Leopard 2 may possibly have some strong points over the Abrams, but it remains an untested design, never having actually seen combat. Both tanks are offshoots of a cancelled joint development program between the US and Germany known as MBT70. . The modern Leopard A3 and A…4 have seen combat in Afghanistan as a part of several different armies. They have performed just as well as the Abrams in that conflict. However, the Leopards have yet to face any comparable tank opponent, though there is little reason to expect that they will perform significantly different than the Abrams or the UK's Challenger 2. (MORE)
Opinions tend to vary on the Abrams vs. the Leopard 2. Both are offshoots of the canceled MBT-70 joint development between the USA and West Germany. Some people swear by the Abrams, and some swear by the Leopard 2. However, it's very unlikely these two tanks will ever face off against each other, so… the ultimate determination of which of the two ranks better isn't likely ever to be seen. Additionally, the Leopard 2 has yet to see all-out combat service, with its only combat deployments being to Kosovo and Afghanistan, where enemy armour isn't going to be encountered. (MORE)
The M1A2 costs $6.21 million per, although there have since been upgrade programmes which have likely made the tank more expensive.
Olympic speed skaters skate 500m, which is considered an all out sprint, in about 35 seconds. This means they are traveling one Kilometer in 70 seconds, with top speeds of over 40 miles per hour.. Olympic speed skaters skate 500m, which is considered an all out sprint, in about 35 seconds. This mea…ns they are traveling one Kilometer in 70 seconds, with top speeds of over 40 miles per hour. 36.80 MPH (MORE)
"Actually the m1a1 Abrams is air tight to prevent leaks and fire damage so to keep the crew from suffocating the Abrams has air conditioning so despite the fact that its 125 degrees in Iraq our tank crews are siting in beautiful 62 degree weather" I can tell you were not a 19K Armor crewman. The ab…rams does not have air conditioning. Actually, during normal operations the inside of the tank will run a little hotter than the outside air temp. The previous answer was refering to the NBC (nuclear , biological, chemical) system. This system basicly cycles air through the engine to burn of particles, then cools that air and pumps it to the crew compartment via hoses at each station that the crew can attach to their gas mask. (MORE)
The development stems from a joint programme between the US and West Germany known as the MBT-70 programme. Eventually, the joint project was scrapped, and the US and West German programmes went their separate ways, applying what they'd gained from MBT-70 to new developments. In the case of West Ger…many, the result was the Leopard 2, while the American development was the M1 Abrams. The first prototype of the Abrams was received in 1976, and first production models were produced in 1979. (MORE)
(This answer has been updated and corrected with the intention toimprove the answer by providing unbiased corrections toinaccuracies. I urge the original answerer to please do moreextensive research in the future however.) Most comparisons about the best tank are between Abrams and Leopard2. Which …conclude that the Leopard 2 A6/A7 is the best tank for theprice. So you get the best tank for each Dollar or Euro your spend(The Leopard 2 is cheaper to buy and operate). However when lookingpurely at combat performance the Abrams is the best tank. TheChallenger 2 is never number 1 in such comparisons. The Abrams is the best protected tank. Like the Challenger 2 it hasa variant of Chobham/Burlington armor. But in the case of theAbrams it is improved with a layer of steel encased depleteduranium (DU). The radioactivity of DU is harmless. (Correction:This is contested by Australian evaluations, though the extent ofharm is believed to be limited.) It is a very dense material whichgives a lot of extra protection against kinetic energy (sabot)projectiles. The older M1A1 Abrams in Desert Storm could survive hits at thefront and side turret. Not just of obsolete T-72's but alsopointblank 120mm 'Silver bullet' rounds from other Abrams whichpass straight trough a T-72 or T-80. (Correction: Proper T-72s didnot engage Abram tanks in Desert storm Iraq did not use them. Theyused local models 'Sadda' 'Assad Babil' and diminished exportT-72s.) When Abrams tanks had to be abandoned and destroyed when stuck inmud or were disabled (blown track, engine failure) other Abramswere often unable to do so. With the versions after that (M1A1 HA,M1A1 HC, M1A2, M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEP TUSK) protection has become evenbetter. During Thunder Run (armored assaults into Baghdad) Abramses werehit to up to 15 anti-tank weapons and kept going. The only oneknocked out was a lucky shot which hit a drum of fuel at the rearturret. The fuel got into the engine and caused fire. The(uninjured) crew was unable to get it out and had to leave itbehind.(Correction: These anti-tank weapons consisted primarily ofSPG-9 recoilless rifles and RPG-7 rocket propelled grenadelaunchers. Later RPG-29s were found more effective against theAbrams even the front armor and accounted for many the losses theAbrams suffered during the war.) As other tanks can't penetrateAbrams the abandoned tank it was taken out with an air strike toprevent it falling into enemy hands. This required 2 Mavericks anda Hellfire (which are very heavy anti-tank missiles). So the Abramsperformed very well in an urban environment (which is usually a badplace for tanks) before it even had an urban warfare kit. The Abrams also has ammunition blow-out panels. When the ammunitionis hit (which is at the rear turret) these panels blow out forcingthe blast upwards instead of towards the crew compartment. Neither Challenger or Leopard 2 have ammunition blow-out panels soan ammunition hit will mean more damage and more injuries.(Correction: Challenger uses separately loaded ammunition,therefore Blowout panels are not needed. Furthermore Abram'sblowout panels are rated for 105mm ammunition and should not beconsidered protection from 120mm cook offs) The Challenger is also very well protected but not as much as theAbrams. Both have a chobham variant but the Chal has no DU in itsarmor. (Correction: Chobham armor is just another term forcomposite armor. The Dorchester Mk2 of the Challenger and the RHA +DU armor of the Abrams are not comparable. Dorchester Mk2 containsTungsten Carbide and a variety of other materials in a different(though also classified) sandwich. However combat experience hasshown that DU armor provides no greater protection.) There have been instances where they have been penetrated by otherChallengers (freindly fire). The ammo is seperated but there are noblow-out panels. The Challenger 2 can be regarded as the secondbest protected tank behind the Abrams. (Correction: In light of theoriginal authors misunderstandings about blowout protection, andarmor types their conclusion can be disregarded as well. PS Armorwas not penetrated HESH creates spalling of the armor but does notpenetrate. Furthermore the tank that suffered from the strike wasequipped with older armor thus should be considered in the categoryof the Abrams A1 which suffered many penetrations during the Iraqwars.) The Leopard 2 has advanced composite armor but no chobham variantor DU. It has been deployed to Afghanistan by Denmark and Canada. In a test with a Leopard 2 A5 which was shot by another it required7 hits. One could argue that more Abrams has been disabled then Challenger2. This is not a fair comparison as much more Abrams have beendeployed then Challengers. When there are more around there is abigger chance one is hit. (Correction: As per percentage of tankshit, Abrams have suffered greater causalities. Thus the mention oftheir losses is still relevant.) The only Abrams destroyed were hit by 500kg IED underneath whichwould have destroyed everything. In freindly fire between Abrams there were no casualties (evenpoint blank no penetrations at front and sides). In friendly firebetween Challengers 2's there was. (Correction: Not a penetration,and the L/44 M256 is not comparable to other MBT weapons and shouldnot be considered proof positive.) It most however be noted that there is a diffirence between theAmerican Abrams and the export Abrams. The export Abrams does nothave the DU armor package. So while the US Abrams has better armor for sure, it could verywell be that in armor protection the export Abrams is equal ormaybe even less then the Challenger 2. Protection: 1. Challenger 2 2. M1A2 SEP Abrams (Correction: I moved the Abrams down a slot tocorrect the original authors bias and misunderstandings in order tobetter reflect the actual protection.) 3. Leopard 2 A6 The Challenger is underpowered. It only has a 1200hp enginecompared to 1500hp on Abrams and Leopard 2. The Abrams has bettermobility and the Leopard 2 more mobility then Abrams. Winner on mobility. Dutch Leopard 2 reached 110km/h on Germantraining area. Abrams reaches 120km/h with speed limiter removed(but fuel consumption is drasticly increased). (Correction: TheChallenger is not underpowered, underpowered implies that itstruggles in mobility. It does not. However it does have a lesspowerful engine. It should be noted that the 1500hp Gas-Turbine isprone to fan sheering and is highly inefficient, future US armytanks will use diesel engines. Finally turning off the enginegovernor requires work at the motor pool and operating beyond thegoverned speed will cause damage to the tank. It is highlyrecommended against by the tanks manual.) Mobility: 1. Leopard 2 A6 2. M1A2 SEP Abrams 3. Challenger 2 Both Abrams and Leopard 2 A6 can destroy a T-90 or T-80U at 4kmwith a single shot. The Leopard 2 A6 has a better gun but theAbrams has comparable firepower because of DU ammo (just a bitless). (Correction: The difference between tungsten and depleteduranium penetrators is negligible. The difference in force behindthe round however from the shorter barrel is not. The challenger 2is capable of doing the same at 4-5km.) I have no information regarding the Challenger 2 but they want toreplace the rifled gun with the German L55 of the Leopard 2 A6which indicates the firepower is less then the Leo 2 A6. So the Leopard 2 wins with the Abrams following very very closebehind. (Correction: The British army evaluated the L55 for a shorttime, not due to performance requirements but due to ammunitionconsiderations. Ammunition for the L30 was no longer produced andthey evaluated adopting a gun with widely available ammunition. Dueto the size of the cased 120mm for the L55 however the tank fitless than 10 rounds, instead of the normal 40. The L55 evaluationhas since been cancelled and ammunition for the L30 is beingproduced again. It was never an adoption only an evaluation on asingle tank. Information on the L30 is widely available.) Firepower: 1. Leopard 2 A6 2. Challenger 2 (Correction: For the purposes of accuracy, theChallenger and Leopard A6 onward can be consisidered tied. The L30has much greater range, but the L55 has a greater variety ofammunition. Older leopards however can be considered inferiorbecause they use an L/44.) 3. M1A2 SEP Abrams (Correction: I moved the Abrams down because theabrams uses a 44 caliber gun, with less power Challenger does not win in any of these catagories. Overal I would rank protection as most important as it determinesthe survival of tank and crew. Abrams is clearly winner here. Second is firepower. Leopard 2 wins here but with a very smallmargin. In practice its compable. Leopard 2 wins on mobility. I would take any of these tanks to combat. But if I had to pick Iwould want to be in the Abrams rather then the other 2. So the Abrams is the best tank when judging combat performance.(Correction: See previous corrections. Best mobility focused tank:Leopard 2A4 & A5 [A6, A7 & E are much heavier and lessmobile] Best protection focused tank: Challenger 2 Best firepower focused tank: Tie between Challenger 2 and Leopard 2A6-E (MORE)
Most tornadoes would not be able to. But an extremely strong tornado, most likely an EF5 could likely lift one seeing as how they can pick up buildings.
You can find No Boundaries tank tops at Wal-Mart. You might be able to find them at other stores,but they will for sure be at Wal-Mart.
The M1 Abrams is listed as having a 289 mile (approx 466 kilometre) operational range and 500 US gallons (1900 litres) of fuel capacity, so it comes out to something like .57 miles per gallon. . As with everything, it depends on the version of the tank being used. The MPG of the Abrams has incre…ased significantly from the M1 to the M1A2 models, due to a array of small improvements. However, one of the biggest overlooked things with tanks is their fuel consumption while in two very common actions: (1) at idle, waiting for something to happen, and (2) at very low speeds, under 5mph, as when fighting with infantry (particularly in urban combat). Tanks spend a significant amount of their time at idle; most tanks take a short while to turn on their engine and warm it up enough to move - up to a minute or more between hitting the "Start" button and actually being able to move the tank. In combat situations, this is death, so virtually all tankers leave their engine idling when they are stopped anywhere near a possible combat zone. So, the fuel consumption of a tank while at idle is almost as important as its MPG while moving. Similarly, tanks in urban combat spend virtually their entire time at human walking (or trotting) speeds, generally under 5 mph, so that accompanying infantry can stay in contact (and support the tank). In urban combat, tanks without infantry can be quickly overwhelmed by opposing infantry, so you won't see a tank tearing around town at 30 mph or so. Like with idling, the fuel consumption of a tank at very low speeds is just as important as its fuel consumption at fast speeds. The original turbine in the M1 was hideously thirsty, and tended to consume large amounts even at idle, and required an astonishing 10 gallons of fuel just to start the turbine . The up side was that turbines start much faster than diesel engines (particularly in cold weather), and provided a much faster power gradient (i.e. much faster acceleration), with a higher power:weight ratio. Currently, the turbine in the M1 series burns about 1.6 gallons per mile ( 0.6 mph, or 392 L/100 km), and uses 10 gals/hour at idle. A replacement turbine is in the development stage, which will reduce fuel consumption by 33% (50% at idle), but will probably not be available until 2015 or so due to political considerations. In the mean time, an Auxiliary Power Unit (small rotary engine) has been shoehorned into the M1A2's engine compartment. This allows the M1A2 to shut down the turbine completely, and still run all internal electrical systems using under 1 gallon/hour. There are also considerations for allowing the APU to drive the M1 at very low speeds (1-2 mph). (MORE)
10 M-4 Sherman (US) 9 Merkava (Israel) 8 T-54/55 (USSR) 7 Challenger (UK) 6 Mk IV Panzer (Germany) 5 Centurion (UK) 4 WWI Tank (UK) 3 Tiger (Germany) 2 M-1 Abrams (US) 1 T-34 (USSR)
It depends on the variety and terrain the tank is in. The older models could do 42mph on road and 25mph off road. However, the newest versions could do about 60mph on road and 36mph off road.
The question is vague but the answer is yes, the armor along with the weapons system make it far Superior to anything on the battlefield today and for at least 20 years, the only aspect of the m1a1 and a2 are they're horrible mpg, it wont matter how great the armor is if you cant make it go
They were made at the Lima Army Tank Plant in Lima, Ohio and at the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant in Warren, Michigan. Current production is underway only at the Lima plant.
well first of all i have no idea what a combushion cannon is idk if its even a word. but as for the M1a1 and a2 variants the tank has a 120mm smoothbore gun which can fire 2 types of rounds the SABOT round which is like a huge depleated uranium arrow which will destroy heavy armor and the HEAT round… which stands for high explosive anti tank which is used against light armour and buildings (MORE)
How much fuel does a car use per hour? It depends on speed, operating conditions, and fuel type. The Abrams can run on several types of fuel, but typicaly uses a half gallon per mile (it can get one gallon per mile, depending on engine temp., environment, etc.). It can go 70mph top speed (with goven…or disabled) in which case the engine will likely overheat quickly. It typically travels at 40mph top speed, so one hour at 40 will use less than one fifth of its 504 gallon fuel tank. The max distance it can travel is about 250 miles on one tank, 8 gallons to start and little more than a half gallon per mile in desert operating conditions (heat and sand afflicting the engine). (MORE)
I am a tanker currently stationed in Korea, and I am a gunner on an M1A2. Tanks have a four man crew. Driver, Loader, Gunner, and Tank Commander.
To destroy the enemy and his objectives. The first M1 Abrams battle tanks were delivered to the US Army in 1980. 3,273 M1 tanks were produced for the US Army. 4,796 M1A1 tanks were built for the US Army, 221 for the US Marines and 880 co-produced with Egypt.
Opinions will always vary, and are dependent upon the test conditions provided. Over 10k Abrams have been built,and over 8k currently serve with the USMC and US Army. Only 450 Challenger 2 tanks are in service with the British Army. The M1 has the best combat record of any modern main battle ta…nk,in the World today.Thats a true story.M1s have been lost,but M1s have made scrap yards out of other nations tanks.Sure,this was against inferior tanks,but it still got the job done,and a M1 has never been destroyed by another tank.Insurgants and road sides bombs have destroyed M1s,though. (MORE)
There are four crew positions on the M-1 series Main Battle Tank. The Tank Commander(TC) is responsible for commanding and coordinating all actions of the crew. The Gunner(GNR) is responsible for acquiring and engaging targets with the main gun and coax machinegun. The Loader(LDR) is responsible for… loading the main gun and engaging targets with his machinegun. The Driver(DVR) is responsible for maneuvering the tank. All crew members are responsible for the maintenance of the tank and must be able to assume the duties of their fellow crewmen if necessary. (MORE)
In February 2001, GDLS were contracted to supply 240 M1A2 tanks with a system enhancement package (SEP) by 2004. The M1A2 SEP contains an embedded version of the US Army's Force XXI command and control architecture; new Raytheon commander's independent thermal viewer (CITV) with second-generation th…ermal imager; commander's display for digital colour terrain maps; DRS Techologies second-generation GEN II TIS thermal imaging gunner's sight with increased range; driver's integrated display and thermal management system. further details can be found at www.army-technology.com/projects/abrams (MORE)
a mini tank top is a shirt that may look like a tank top but has thick straps so it is not a tank top but a mini tank top and is a type of shirt
'Leopard 2' is not sufficient. The original Leopard 2 entered service in 1979. The M1A2 cameonline in the middle 90s. The SEP which is the main modernizationupgrade, around 2000. At the time of Leopard introduction, the M1P was the standard U.S.Abrams and was equipped with a 105mm M68 weapon which w…as notcapable of penetrating the T-72 with BDD armor at over about800-1,000m. Which is okay in a way because there were few places inour chunk of Germany where that would have mattered. The initial Leo2 production lot was little more than a preseriesdevelopment tank rushed into production for which most of theintended sighting package was not yet available. This effected thecapability of the 120mm cannon which -could- penetrate, out toabout 2,000m but did not always hit, especially at night or inweather (we had TI they had I2). The Leo2A2/A3 quickly remedied this and, together with thecommanders sight, proved to be an all round superior tank forextended range gunnery. However; then the M1A1 came along and by adopting the sameRheinmetall weapon, became the basis of a fair comparison with theLeopard 2A4. Where the Leo falls down a bit is in the lack of the Abramscomposite armor or dual-angle sloping (though the turret front wasnarrower and so the basic RHA steel was thicker) and it's chosensight location which holed the turret front which was generallyseen as a very bad move. It's frontal arc was also seen as poorlyprotected until thicker sideskirts were developed and the glacisreshaped. Where the mid-series Leopard really wins out is in the automotiveend where it is more reliable and less thirsty. The U.S. then fielded the 'M1A1HA' or Heavy Armor with the DUlattice facing and this again tipped the scales towards the Abramsas now both tanks could kill at range but the Abrams had a noteablefront sector overmatch advantage at the shorter LOS ranges of Fuldaand the Hopf. The Germans who are past masters of the movingambush, tend to take a lot of flank shots so this may not havemattered as much to them. On the North German Plain facing Hamburgand the like, they can and do kill from the horizon. The 1A2 added more armor and some automotive improvements as wellas the CITV which finally provided the Abrams with equalhunter-killer capabilities to the Leopard in a better protectedtank which weighed almost 15 tons more than the Leopard 2A4. If you want to compare the M1A2 and Leopard 2, evenly, you need tochose the SEP model Abrams and Leopard 2A5 or A6 as your baselineand there the game is about evenly matched. The chisel-nose turret of the 2A6 with the raised GPS box fixes thearmor issues, though it brings the Leopard fully into the 60 tonclass and so it is not a agile as it once was. While the (2A6mounted) long-barreled L55 gun provides a 1,750m/sec muzzlevelocity (roughly 5,800fps) which gives the LM53 LRP round as muchas 1,100mm of penetration in comparison with the M829A3 whichoffers perhaps 900-950mm. The latter is a superior round, beingdenser (DU vs. tungsten) but only comes out of the barrel at about1,500m/sec (or 5,000fps). This is because the Abrams retains the shorter barrel L44 versionof the Rheinmetall main tube and so could theoretically (it's avery long barrel and subject to heat droop as well as certainissues in close terrain) upgun for a match, ballistically, to theLeopard 2a6. But where the M1A2 was intended to go was towards over the horizonguided shots for which the XM1111 MRM and digital communicationslinks were vital in providing shared targeting and a smart topattack capability to go -beyond- the frontal arc protection of athreat. Both the 1A2SEP and the 2A6 are better protected for the urbanfight, though the TUSK II package has better layering. Neithervehicle has an active APS intercept capability at the moment,though the AMAP-ADS and Quick Kill options are available. Thesecould theoretically 'remission' 20 tons of dead weight in armor bythemselves. The 2A6 also has air conditioning and an APU which makes fightingin hot climates easier. If it comes to the open field tank fight, the Leo2A6 is probablythe better ranged killer with less dependence on fuel and airfilter cleanings (the Abrams gas turbine leaves it a roughly 2hrfighter in movement based actions). If it comes to a MOUT fight where the threat is at close rangeand/or you have multiple friendlies intermixed, you have to givethe nod to the Abrams which has the better passive protectionsuite, better close in weapons (RWS or turreted protection forgunner and TC) and superior networking to sort the sheep from thegoats. The Abrams really suffers in the tank vs. tank fight for want of anover-hill capability as guided rounds (MRM was cancelled) toexploit it's network shooter package however and if you look at the'next gen' Leo2A7, not yet fielded, with massive add on side-armorpackages, the decision probably flips back to the Leopard, even inurban fights. (MORE)
The term "tank top" has several different meanings. In the United States, it is a sleeveless shirt with small straps worn by men and women. In the United Kingdom, a tank top is a form of sweater vest. Yet, a tank top, according to mariners, is a part of the ship's hull.
Men's tank tops can be purchased from many different retailers and online stores. Some examples of stores that sell men's tank tops include Express, Urban Outfitters, and Macy's.
They made the DU plating so it blends in with the vehicle, so you really can't tell it's on there. But the Army has added the DU plates to all the M1A1s in the field, and M1A2s were built with it already installed.
The M1A2 SEP. if no other tank comes out that gets ahead of theM1A2 SEP until 2017 - then itll be the M1A3. Even when it uses a German gun thats not even used by Germany anymore, the US Army uses special modified Kinetic Energy ammunitionfor that L/44 120mm cannon. This round is able to penetrate a…nytank to date, but itself. Wile the US Marines use a different roundthat has less kinetic energy level then what the US Army uses. thisis due to that the US Marines arnt fighting against modern tanks inthe middle east. The M1A2 is also protected by some of the 'said' thinnest armor fora tank - this is do to the introduction of Depleted Uranium strikeplating and Depleted Uranium woven blankets. this material isheavier then lead but much much denser. looking at the tank beforeand after the introduction of DU plating, the tank only lost 3MPHof speed do to heavier armor introduction to the tank. The M1A2 also uses a backup mobility system that was introduced toall NEW M1A2s that come equipped with the TUSK II package. the backup mobility system is always on. this system is the use of 3 or 4of its bottom track guider wheels that move along with the cornerspokes that is the primary source to move the tracks that move thetank. the system is put in place encase the M1A2 looses its track,when this happens the tank is atleast able to limp out of crossfireto a safe area. the M1A3 is being developed with more track guiderbackup mobility system wheels to be used like this. The M1A2 is battle proven and there are no reports, documents, orsoldiers saying that a M1A2 has been lost due to enemy fire. theM1A1 on the other hand have reported to have loosing 3 or 4 do tovery large IEDs. -some M1A1s and M1A2s would be disabled by takingheavy hits to its back from penetrating explosives such as RPG-7sto the engine. this would disable the tank. or some M1A1s or M1A2swould be disabled that dont come with TUSK equipped would loose atrack, then the tank would be stuck some how and cant be rescued,so the crew or supporting infantry would have to plant Thermiteand/or other plastic explosives into the hull and cab of the turretof the tank then blow the tank up from the inside out. they must dothis with infantry, even when another tank is present because theround even the US Army uses cant penetrate the M1A2's armor, it isalso a sure way to destroy all its components so they cant bescavenged or salvaged then sold to other countries. The M1A2 came out with advanced fire control systems that requiremuch less to use then what some other tanks use these days. the FCSin the M1A2 is very simple. all you do is flip a switch to whatround type you want to use, then the commander finds the range ofthe target using the commander's observation device that comes witha built in rangefinder, that info is sent to the FCS calculatorafter the commander confirms the distance he wants by a press of abutton, then the FCS calculator finishes and tells you what youneed to do to hit that target. i.e. elevation of the gun (bulletsloping). -usually other FCS computers, you have to ether guess orfind the range using non-built in range finders, then calculatewind, then input the round type, then the FCS will give thecalculations you need to hit the target. even some other systemsdesire you to put in the charge for the round and the velocity ofthe round. -NOW because of the new SEP systems that are beinginstalled, the M1A2 is now able to use the Israel LHAT tank firedmissile. the M60 Patton all the way to the M1A2 have had greater barrelelevation and depression limits then most of the other tanks. the M1A1 and M1A2 use backup turret control systems and even ifboth those go out, there is still the manual crank control to turnthe turret. but even then. depends on the crew to make everything work to hisneeds. could have a crew that has poor skills in operating a tank.any tank can be penetrated and/or disabled from tanking a tankshell to the rear of the hull. a Leopard 2A7 or a Merkava couldeasily circle a M1A2 if the crew isnt too bright. there was 1 or 2M1A2 crews where there tank used TUSK and the backup mobilitysystem wasnt used - the crew would just let the tank sit thereafter loosing a track because they arnt thinking correctly.anything can happen. every tank has a week spot. but when it comesto a head first fight. The M1A2 is the tank to go with. (MORE)
The lifting capacity of a helicopter varies depending on the density of the air, however- a Chinook cannot lift an Abrams under ANY circumstances. The load capacity of a Chinook is around 11,5 tons. The M1A1 weighs 63 tons. Fail.