M1 Abrams: Is It Cost Effective?

[FO Seaman]

Power to Weight Ratio: 25 HP/Ton

Top Speed: (Governed) 45 mph, (w/o governers) 60 mph

Cross County: 30 mph

Speed - 10% Slope: 20 mph

Speed - 60% Slope: 5 mph

Acceleration: 0 MPH -20 MPH 7seconds

4 Speed Forward
2 Speed Reverse

Fuel Capacity: 505 gal

Cruising Range: 275 miles

Cost: $4,300,000 each unit

 

[AlexKall]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

 

[FO Seaman]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

I don't know, but that would be my guess.

 

[AlexKall]

Interesting quetion I think

 

[Jacob]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

The M1 Abrams speed is governed so it dose not brake under the stress of high speeds. That damned thing can go allot faster than most people think and without the speed governed it's more liable to brake.

 

[Missileer]

I've seen too many other types of tank burning and the Abrams driving away. My life is worth more than a chunk of mobile metal.

 

[AlexKall]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

The M1 Abrams speed is governed so it dose not brake under the stress of high speeds. That damned thing can go allot faster than most people think and without the speed governed it's more liable to brake.

So it is governed because it will shake apart if its not? :shock:

 

[FO Seaman]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

The M1 Abrams speed is governed so it dose not brake under the stress of high speeds. That damned thing can go allot faster than most people think and without the speed governed it's more liable to brake.

So it is governed because it will shake apart if its not? :shock:

I knew the M1 could hit 60 mph without governers and I've been told she hit 90 mph on the Detroit test track (without a turret).

:cen: thats scary, so fast she'll shake apart.

 

[jedi078]

I knew the M1 could hit 60 mph without governers and I've been told she hit 90 mph on the Detroit test track (without a turret).

:cen: thats scary, so fast she'll shake apart.

Intresting, but isn't kinda useless to have a 90 mph tank without weapons?

 

[AlexKall]

Hehe yeah, would be light too!

 

[FO Seaman]

I knew the M1 could hit 60 mph without governers and I've been told she hit 90 mph on the Detroit test track (without a turret).

:cen: thats scary, so fast she'll shake apart.

Intresting, but isn't kinda useless to have a 90 mph tank without weapons?

I guess. The Brits used Sherman chassis to transport troops and stuff. But I'm just stating without is five one turret the M1 hits 90.

 

[AlexKall]

Wonder what the Leopard 2 A5 would do without the turret. I expect the difference to be less then the M1 without it as a turbine can run at alot higher RPMs then a Diesel can, which would only be sorted with a higher gear on the diesel engine, but on the other hand, don't see any benefit of running without so I'm not sure what it would benefit. Unless you put a test up for those guys on Top Gear, wouldn't want those in a tank with a turret full of ammo and a big gun, I guess in that situation the driver of the M1 would benefit from it getting a higher top speed :lol:

 

[FO Seaman]

Wonder what the Leopard 2 A5 would do without the turret. I expect the difference to be less then the M1 without it as a turbine can run at alot higher RPMs then a Diesel can, which would only be sorted with a higher gear on the diesel engine, but on the other hand, don't see any benefit of running without so I'm not sure what it would benefit. Unless you put a test up for those guys on Top Gear, wouldn't want those in a tank with a turret full of ammo and a big gun, I guess in that situation the driver of the M1 would benefit from it getting a higher top speed :lol:

Well the M1 has a higher power to wieght ratio giving it pretty good speed going cross country.

 

[DblGonzo]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

My understanding is the gas turbine runs at a constant rpm. So it burns the same amount of fuel no matter how fast it is going.

 

[FO Seaman]

Is there any reason to why its governed? Save fuel?

My understanding is the gas turbine runs at a constant rpm. So it burns the same amount of fuel no matter how fast it is going.

When stationary the M1 burns 50 gallons an hour. It's burns 5 gallons when starting.

 

[Limeyfellow]

The Abrams has always been a gas guzzler. It can run on gasoline however is needed, assuming you can find enough of a supply. The problem is that they were designed to fight a totally different type of war against columns of Soviet armour at high speed. We don't see this happening anymore.

They could replace the gas turbine with a diesel engine and make it three times more fuel efficient and cut down on that massive heat exhaust (1000 degrees) that makes it a nice target for IR guided weapons. The exhaust also makes it impossible for troops to follow behind the Abrams, use it for cover, or even ride on it. Nor can it tow anything. The gas turbine is also very expensive and takes alot more maintance and spends most the budget on repair on it alone. This has been rather the problem in Iraq where parts are hard to come by.

They should just pull the damn gas turbine out of a couple of thousand and upgrade to a new diesel engine for urban combat and support operations and that still would leave 6000 Abrams left, make them less costly to run and maintain, with minimal power loss and a far better support platform than what we have which is unfortantly designed on a battle plan that is not likely to ever occur.

 

[FO Seaman]

The Abrams has always been a gas guzzler. It can run on gasoline however is needed, assuming you can find enough of a supply. The problem is that they were designed to fight a totally different type of war against columns of Soviet armour at high speed. We don't see this happening anymore.

They could replace the gas turbine with a diesel engine and make it three times more fuel efficient and cut down on that massive heat exhaust (1000 degrees) that makes it a nice target for IR guided weapons. The exhaust also makes it impossible for troops to follow behind the Abrams, use it for cover, or even ride on it. Nor can it tow anything. The gas turbine is also very expensive and takes alot more maintance and spends most the budget on repair on it alone. This has been rather the problem in Iraq where parts are hard to come by.


They should just pull the damn gas turbine out of a couple of thousand and upgrade to a new diesel engine for urban combat and support operations and that still would leave 6000 Abrams left, make them less costly to run and maintain, with minimal power loss and a far better support platform than what we have which is unfortantly designed on a battle plan that is not likely to ever occur.

Currently the US Army is investigating a newer fuel efficent, lighter Honeywell-Lycoming turbine. While the turbine is a gas guzzler, on the up side a turbine is easier to maintain, can be fixed quite easily and can be change out faster than a diesel. In all actuality the Army has spend most of it's budget on the Stryker program and updatin older M1IP's to M1A2 SEP's.


The Army's biggest mistake was not keeping in the M60A3 TTS in it's inventory.

 

[AlexKall]

"on the up side a turbine is easier to maintain, can be fixed quite easily and can be change out faster than a diesel."

How long does it take to change a turbine in the M1A2SEP?

 

[AlexKall]

Wonder what the Leopard 2 A5 would do without the turret. I expect the difference to be less then the M1 without it as a turbine can run at alot higher RPMs then a Diesel can, which would only be sorted with a higher gear on the diesel engine, but on the other hand, don't see any benefit of running without so I'm not sure what it would benefit. Unless you put a test up for those guys on Top Gear, wouldn't want those in a tank with a turret full of ammo and a big gun, I guess in that situation the driver of the M1 would benefit from it getting a higher top speed :lol:

Well the M1 has a higher power to wieght ratio giving it pretty good speed going cross country.

Yep theres an 8 kph difference between M1A2 and Leopard 2 A5, not alot.

 

[FO Seaman]

"on the up side a turbine is easier to maintain, can be fixed quite easily and can be change out faster than a diesel."

How long does it take to change a turbine in the M1A2SEP?

40 minutes