M1A2 TUSK upgrade

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#1
why slats at the rear but reactive armour on the side?



from http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/street-fighters-m1-abrams-tusk-tank-conversions-updated-02546/

TUSK stands for “Tank Urban Survival Kit,” and represents the American approach to the problem of employing tanks in urban situations where weapons elevation, protection placement, and other design elements aren’t designed to cope with key threats. The Leopard 2 PSO (Peace Support Operations) is another example of this kind of adaptation, albeit with a different combat engineering slant and camouflage improvements. France has its AZUR program for the LeClerc, and other vehicles as well. Israel’s Merkava tanks are seeing their own modifications, including a rear sniper porthole to go with its traditional under-armor mortar and space for infantry; now dedicated APC versions are also in the mix. What is certain is that combat in urban terrain is the way of the future, as demonstrated by trends over the last 15 years of major military engagements.

This is DID’s FOCUS Article for this important new tank variant. Recent additions include a minor contract for TUSK equipment…

American M1 Abrams TUSK upgrades include a RWS machine gun operated from inside the vehicle, a loader’s armor gun shield, a tank-infantry phone, Abrams reactive armor tiles, a remote thermal sight, and a power distribution box, as well as other key modifications that take many of the M1A1-SA “situational awareness” modifications and add a number of extra offensive and defensive systems designed to help the tank survive and fight on urban battlefields. See this article’s graphic for more.

Note that TUSK does not automatically upgrade a tank, which retains its earlier version – so they’re properly referred to as M1A1 TUSK, M1A2 TUSK, etc
 
#2
I'd suspect because they don't want to block the grills at the rear of the engine deck that allow some cooler air in and very hot air out.....Overheating engines tend to burst into flames, which tends to put tankies off......can't think why..;-)
 
#3
Chally 2 also has bar armour at the rear, in preference to other types (image from TankNet). I would suggest that prudent OPSEC should preclude any discussions as to the reasons why.

 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#5
I know why slat armour is used at the rear, thats obvious – its to vent the engine.

My question is why stick reactive armour on the side instead of slat? I was very much under the impression that slat performed as well if not better than Reactive vs RPG’s. In the C2 pic, you can see the slat armour running up the side.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
The only thing I'm confused about is why the anti-incoming weapon system has not been added, like it has on the Merkava.
 
#8
Ok, why isn't this in RAC?

As for the armour, I guess the americans have more faith in ERA, also the were reports of 30mm punching through the side on M1s in Iraq, I guess ERA protects against all threats not just RPG.
 
#9
Active anti incoming systems like ARENA tend to make it hard for accompanying troops - they get hit by the stuff that is intended to hit the tank... Given that TUSK is an Urban upgrade, the kit needs to work in concert with close support infantry.

I would imagine thats why no reactive armour at the back... Even given the hot exhaust from the turbine, the troops would likely be behind the tank, so no reactive armour there...?
 
#10
Biped said:
The only thing I'm confused about is why the anti-incoming weapon system has not been added, like it has on the Merkava.
Systems like Russia's ARENA and the Isreali's Trophy are currently operational to varying degrees. The reason why the US haven't yet got a system is due to the age-old issue of politics and defence contractors getting cosy contracts.

The US are making their own system, known as Quick-Kill. It's made by Raytheon and due in service in 2011. Even though Trophy was offered to them as a more mature technology, cheaper and arguably performs better than Quick-Kill does at the minute.

Still pretty impressive to see though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgWywHPVzMg
 
#11
Where the ERA is, the skirts are already a couple of feet from the armoured hull. The advatanges of standoff from slat armour is not really required, and the tank is already 12 feet wide. ERA will provide a lot more protection for the cost of only another foot or so in width.

NTM
 
#13
Gun_Nut said:
Chally 2 also has bar armour at the rear, in preference to other types (image from TankNet). I would suggest that prudent OPSEC should preclude any discussions as to the reasons why.


Hello Gun_Nut,

I'm not sure it is a good idea to post a picture showing our top secret mine "sweeping" equipment.


tangosix.
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#14
WhiteHorse said:
Ok, why isn't this in RAC?
1. Cos the QM´s is about kit
2. The RAC forum is about the RAC
3. Tanks are kit.

If only tanks were posted in the RAC forum, then rifles could only be posted about in the Infanteers forum, Radio´s in the sigs and McDonalds vs Burger King in the RLC.

Besides, this is the M1Ax, so perhaps it should just be posted in the Intl forum?

Which is a bit of a slap response I know but its early and the kids were awake and Daddy is still without his cup of tea.

Another response, post tea, might be: "That given that this is about the US TUSK and of general interest to most if not all troops in theatre of likely to be, I chose not to hide it away in the RAC forum where it might be missed but chose the very public multi-trade QM´s forum".
 
#15
Tangosix, those pictures have been in the public domain for a while now.

How do we know about the secret mine clearing equipment? You told us.
 
#16
tangosix said:
Gun_Nut said:
Chally 2 also has bar armour at the rear, in preference to other types (image from TankNet). I would suggest that prudent OPSEC should preclude any discussions as to the reasons why.

Hello Gun_Nut,

I'm not sure it is a good idea to post a picture showing our top secret mine "sweeping" equipment.


tangosix.
Tsk, tsk, don't be so naive. Pictures in the public domain are two a penny. This one has clearly been taken from the public observation lay by down at the Bovington test track. You see the spotters with their cameras there all the time. They just wait for the ATDU reference vehicles to trundle by and a few hours later a picture is up on MilitaryPhotos.net or TankNet.

Pictures are one thing, but people in the know commenting on what they see on a public forum is quite another. Discussions that sail close to the wind on OPSEC should be avoided.
 
#17
I think folks are missing tangosix's joke here;
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
PE4rocks RAC 5

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top