"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


Given the political sh*tfight that happened in the 2010s over the future Lima Army Tank Plant and it's economic and military-industrial importance, you'd think there would be some local political will to get more Abrams into Ukraine. Lima is working at under 50% capacity at the moment - there's headroom to produce an extra 15-20 tank upgrades per month without effecting existing refurbs/production.

There's about 650 M1A1 SAs in storage in the US. In addition to this, there's north of 1600 M1A1s of various stripes that are able to be upgraded to that standard. Plus another 1400 plus M1A2s in storage.

Theoretically, Ukraine could order 200+ M1A1 SAs straight out of US stores. The US Army could then replace them either like for like, or to the more modern M1A2 SEPv3 standard, within 12 months just by moving Lima from 1 to 2 shifts per day.
 
Last edited:
Tungsten armour? That's a new one for me. But, evidently, "Tungsten has the highest melting point of all metals and is alloyed with other metals to strengthen them. Tungsten and its alloys are used in many high-temperature applications, such as arc-welding electrodes and heating elements in high-temperature furnaces."

edit: evidently Tungsten is much more expensive than depleted uranium.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
The Panzergranate 40 (PzGr. 40) shell used in Germany's 75mm tank guns had a sub-calibre tungsten core. But as armour, that's new to me.
Click to expand...

Tungsten/tungsten alloys have been used as inserts in armour packages for in-service tanks for roughly 40 years (maybe longer, but armour package details are habitually classified and still hard to come by).

The Leopard 2A4, which was introduced in 1985, had a tungsten layer in the turret (I suspect tungsten carbine).
Early turret designs for what became the Challenger 2, tested in the early 1980s, tungsten carbide tile arrays as part of their second generation Chobham package. I believe that the UK actually led the world in the development of tungsten alloys for armour through the 1960s and into the 1980s.

It's less common outside of the West, but China's Type 99 and Type 96 reportedly use tungsten inserts as part of their turret armour package.

The US has been offering an 'export armour package' for the Abrams, which replaces the DU array with tungsten and other materials, since at least the early 2000s. Australia's M1A1s started arriving in 2004 and came without DU (mostly due to poltical considerations in both the US and Australia).

It's hard to tell how much impact losing the DU package actually has. Online estimates I've seen (so caveats for accuracy) project this means the turrent's protection is cut by about 2% to 5% when it comes to RHA equivalent armour thickness. Given an M1A1 turret has about 600-800mm LOS thickness of RHA equivalent, it maybe losing somewhere between 12mm and 40mm of total frontal protection.
 
Because of the nature of the mechanics of penetration by modern long-rod penetrators, high density and melting temperature of the armour plate has significantly more effect than the two values did vs the older AP/APDS/APCR/HVAP penetrators. Tungsten-carbide and DU-carbide both have very high relative densities and melting temperatures relative to conventional armour steels. Hardness has always had an advantage vs KE penetrators as long as the armour was also tough (ie not brittle and hence subject to gross failure by fracture).

High hardness, density, and melting temperature have always had advantages vs HEAT rounds - although the significantly higher hardness & toughness values of modern alloys (including conventional improved steel armours as well as tungsten-carbide and DU-carbide) result in much greater resistance to penetration than the best WWII and Cold War era FHA and RHA.
 
Any news on what Jordan is doing with its four hundred Challenger 1s?

There was talk online back in July, but nothing since. Either the deals not happening, or it's going on behind the curtain.

Britain is sending the Ukrainians the wrong tanks

Jordan has recently retired its fleet of around 400 British Challenger 1 tanks, enough to supply Ukraine with the entire fleet it needs
www.telegraph.co.uk
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Total: 2 (members: 1, guests: 1)

    Similar threads

    A
    The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy?
    2
    Replies
    37
    Views
    1K
    Sisu
    S
    M
    All V-22's Grounded
    Replies
    2
    Views
    1K
    GTX
    M
    All This For The Low, Low Price of .....
    Replies
    19
    Views
    2K
    MIflyer
    M
    M
    The Wrath of KAAN?
    Replies
    3
    Views
    834
    Snautzer01
    M
    The USAF V-22 Mishap of 2023
    Replies
    2
    Views
    491
    Thumpalumpacus
    Menu
    Log in
    Register