M1A2?

RonUSMC,
That would be the one.

Grouch, you mean this top view of Carnivore?

http://rongeorge.com/modules/Gallery/abramsref/m1a1carnivore

Well, I got my DML M1A2 today!
Its pretty much as I expected. All of DML's fantastic detail coupled with all of DML's fantastic fit problems! The gap at the front of the turret around the mantlet was 1/16" wide!!!!! Sheet styrene all the way for filling. It cleaned up nicely, though and the weld line is still there. As for detail, its friggin beautiful! The non-skid upper surfaces are great. The upper hull was a little warped, but I fixed it no problem.

I haven't decided whether I like the DML or Tamiya gun barrel better. I'm leaning towards the Tamiya, but there is something about having an actual TUBE instead of a muzzle that stops a few millimeters in.... Then again, the alternative is $35 on an aluminum barrel. Just doesn't make sense when you're spending $20 on the kit...

Now on to markings..... I haven't decided whether to do a 3/67 Armor or a 1/10 Cav Tank. I've got a pic of one from each unit. They're both in Iraq right now, but probably have not seen much (if any) action. Anyone got any news on them?

Anyhow, enough of my rambling. I'm probably going to end up doing a representative tank from each battalion that participated in Iraqi Freedom. Moving right along!

CobraHistorian,
The website is www.tecom.usmc.mil/gtb/draft/its/151098b.pdf , it is an Indivdual Training Standards manual. Unfortunately there are no photos in it, and I can't figure out how to attach pictures on this forum. I have a good pic of a tank in theater named Carnivore I plan on modelling, If you have an E-mail I would be happy to send it to you.

Ok, whew...

Thought I was goin nuts there for a while! Grouch, do you have the link to the manual? I'd like to check it out. Any pics? I figure I'm probably going to have to scratch build the damn thing, so any visual reference is greatly appreciated. Now there's just the question of which kit to build as my USMC Abrams!

Mistake in terminology. The "dazzler" is actually known as the MCD or Missile Countermeasure Device. Reference to it can be found in MCO 1510.98B pages 6-A-200 and 6-A-201. It is available on the web in pdf format, but at over 600 pages its not much fun to sift through. Anyway, no joy on the workings of the thing, and all the tankers I know are off saving democracy, so for that we will still have to wait.

I'm afraid the "dazzler" in question is an ATGM countermeasure, as I mentioned earlier I don't know the mechanics of how it defeats said missiles, but I do know its origins. The Marine Corps did some research on future weapons systems and tactics called "Sea Dragon". Sort of a similar project to the Army's Force XXI project but not on as grand a scale. This device came out of the project. Back in garrison ar Lejune you only see the mounting rails on the manhole, but when deployed the unit is mounted on the rails. Any pictures of USMC tanks in transit will generally have a cover over it. When exposed you can see that it is rigid mounted, and has cooling fins on the back. In some respects it looks very similar to the AN/ALQ-157 mounted on the CH-46E helicopter as an IRCM, though I would hate to make the leap that its function is similar. the fact that the big green machine forgoes ATGM defense is no reason to doubt its existance. The Marine Corps has a much smaller fleet of tanks to equip, and though they are all "12th year common" M1A1s, they are different in many details from Army equipment. The Marine Corps has been known to innovate from time to time, Amphibious Assault and Close Air Support just being a couple of examples.

Tanker,

HELP!! Then what is that thing mounted over the manhole??? I'm a yearly visitor to FIG and haven't seen it on any of the Abrams' there. It seems to be strictly a USMC mod. Email me off the list and I can send you pics of it. I'm hoping to be an Abrams tanker within the next 2 years (gotta finish up school first) with the NY National Guard.

To whom it may concern,
There are NOT any DAZZLERS, or any other type of Defensive Aide Suites installed on any M1, M1IP, M1A1, or M1A2. There is nothing in that family of vehicles that warns the crew of a being on the receiving end of a laser rangefinder. There are not any countermeasures designed to confuse an incoming ATGM through the use of a Dazzler. I have been an M1IP, & M1A1 19k20 for the past 10 years in the PA National Guard. Even we would know of any of the above mentioned systems being installed on an M1. If the Marine Corps M1's have a countermeasure device mounting kit, then thats just what it is, a MOUNTING KIT. If you saw a device mounted on it, then it was a prototype. Why would the Marine Corps have this system installed & not the Army? If it works I certainly would want it on my Track. I have a friend at Aberdeen Proving Ground who is currently testing M1A2 & Stryker systems, I will ask him if there is such a system in the works. I do not claim to be an expert on the M1, but I know more about it than a helicopter pilot.

Grouch,

I'll certainly agree with you on that! The Marines usually are behind the Army, but lately that's been changing due to the changing nature of the use of the Marines. They've gotten the new Digi-cam uniforms and a great deal of the new personal equipment ahead of the Army. I assumed ( I know, I know) that they received M1s that were upgraded to M1A2 standard ahead of the Army because of this. Plus, that damn Dazzler and the 8-bank smoke mortars threw me off....

No. The Marines do not own M1A2 tanks. I can't think of many occasions where the Marine Corps got new equipment before the Army did! As for the SEP designation on the M1A2, it stands for System Enhancement Package.

Okay, so...do the Marines have A2s in country or not? and what does the SEP designation mean?

Guys,

Whoops! I goofed. You're right, that's the "dazzler", not the CITV. I'm a helicopter guy myself and have been interested in armor, but not studied modern stuff as intensely. I assumed that the gadget on the turret "manhole" was the CITV, just because I hadn't seen any M1A1s with any electronics mounted there. It is interesting seeing the other USMC modifications there as well. Does anyone have any sources for the Dazzler or the 8-bank smoke mortars in resin?

In Janes Armour and Artillery 2000-2001 p138 under M1A1 for the US Marine Corps there is a listing of USMC modifications. One of the items listed is "missile countermeasure device mounting kit". I have seen the "dazzler" installed on a Marine Corps M1A1 with my own eyes on the last LF6F deployment I made back in '96. It is a square box with a reflective face bolted to 2 rails on the manhole of the turret top. The CITV of the M1A2 is round, not as tall, and capable of rotation. A photo of the countermeasure device from the top is available in Tom Clancy's "Marine" p110. To find out how this thing works, I'm afraid we will have to hope some young Marine tanker will enlighten us as alas, I was a helicopter pilot!

You guys need to read some of the previous bits of info on this original question. The M1A2 has a CITV that stands for Commanders Independent Thermal Viewer. It is not a sensor. It allows the Commander to view, range to target, build a fire solution for the main gun. Once the gunner fires his current target the main gun will automatically lay on the target that the commander is viewing. There are no defensive aid suites built into or onto any member of the M1 family. No Dazzlers, no sensors. If the Marine Corps has M1A2 SEPs that would be a first that they would have them prior to any Active Duty Army Armor Company or Troop. As of info provided in Armor Magazine Nov-Dec 2002 these units have the M1A2, 1-12 Cav, 2-8 Cav, 1-8 Cav, 2-12 Cav, 3-8 Cav, 1,2, & 3-3 ACR, the M1A2 SEP is equipped in the 1-67 AR, & 3-67 AR.

Hi Guys,

There are currently about 88 M1A2 *SEP* tanks in the active inventory. They belong to 1-67AR and 3-67AR (4ID). The 1st CAV Div. is fully equipped with M1A2 (basic version). So you can probably figure 6 battalions or so at 56 (+/-) tanks per battalion.

The sensor was a cylinder, with a flat pane of gold colored glass in front. it looked like the CITV, but you were in service, so i'm leaning to trust you.

My cousin is attached to the 4th ID right now and they have the M1A2. He is in the 1st AD 1/13 Armor Regiment and they have the A2s.

Semper Fi
Bryce

I'm pretty sure that those USMC tanks were M1A1s. The shiny thing located where the manhole would be on the 'A1 or the CITV on the 'A2 is a type of missile countermeasure or dazzler. I retired from the Marine Corps at the end of 2001, and there was no plan at all at that time to get the M1A2.

Cader,

If you're talking about the sensor turret on the left-hand side of the turret, then those were Marine M1A2s in Baghdad. There's no interim model between the A1 and A2 variants. If its got the sensors, its an A2.

Of course, the news today knows minimal about the military, they could have identified them as Army. I about had a fit when they referred to the "marines" of the 101st Airborne Division a few weeks ago. If one more person on the news refers to a "fighter jet" I'm gonna 'splode. Its a JET FIGHTER..... But that's just me.

On CNN i saw several Abrams with the new thermal viewer mounted. are these true A2s or just interim models? the news said the tanks were in Baghdad.

most of us in the Bigred one haven't gone anywhere yet, or at all ( as a whole Div. anyway ).

Panzer,

There are a few differences, but the most prominent is the Commander's Independent Targeting system. The CIT allows the commander to actively look for targets, lock on to them and compute a firing solution independent of the gunner's sight, allowing the gunner to concentrate on one target while the commander looks for the next one. Once the gunner fires on the first, the gun automatically lays on the commander's next selected target. Its probably more complex than that, but as I haven't gone to Armor school yet, I'm just going on what I've been told. I'll get back to you in 2 years after I've completed my M1A2 training!

That's the major difference. You can tell visually by looking at the top left side of the turret ahead of the loader's hatch. There will be a sensor turret there on an M1A2, but just a flat circlular plate on an M1A1.

From what I've seen on the news and elsewhere, the Marines were the only ones to use the M1A2 in combat this time around. The pics I've seen have the old circular guard on the outside of the drive sprocket too, which makes me think they were originally M1s or IPM1s. The 4th ID's M1A2s weren't offloaded fast enough (thanks Turkey!) and missed out on the action. I'm not sure about the 64th Armor of the 1st ID up north. They may have M1A2s and may have seen some action. Very little has been reported on them.

There are subtler differences like the new smoke mortars (2 banks of 4 per side instead of the old inverted pyramid type with six rounds), and a change in the .50 caliber machine gun mounting. The commander used to be able to fire it from inside or outside the tank. Now its only fireable from the outside.

Hope I've covered everything. If anyone else can think of something I've forgotten, sound off!

Whats the different between an M1A1 and an M1A2?

It was Russian AT Weapons... similiar to our TOW.

Well in response to several points; The Fire Control System is strictly for that, Fire Control. That means shooting the main gun or coax. The Fire suppression system handles any crew compartment or engine fires. The Blast panels are located on top of the turret above the ammo storage. Inside the turret the crew is protected by 2 titanium doors. If the turret is hit in the ammo storage area the rounds cooking off will be vented through the blast panels on the turret roof by design. I believe that a Sabot round will penentrate the side turret armor of the M1 family. Tactics dictate that you keep the heaviest armor towards the enemy. That is the front of the turret & the front of the hull. Though the sides of both are covered in Chobham armor, it is not as thick is whats up front. If the pictures show a hole through the armor, with no other visible damage, I believe it to be the work of a Sabot round. Although a HEAT round uses chemical energy to burn a hole through the armor. I'd have to see the pictures. Lastly I do not believe that there is a M1A3. The latest & greatest is the M1A2 SEP (System Enhancement Program). Most existing M1's & M1A1's are being upgraded to M1A2, without a designation change from M1A2 to M1A3.

I can't think of anything the Iraqis may have had in the way of Anti-tank. Possible Freindly fire? What do we have that could punch through?

CRzRB

I'd heard that story too. I'm wondering what penetrated the turret armor of one of the knocked out M1A1s I saw. From everything I know about the M1A1, a kinetic energy round hitting the side of the turret should not penetrate, but this M1A1 which I saw on the news last week had a hole in the turret side armor and looked like it burned severely. Anyone else see this or am I imagining it? My guess was a T72 got a lucky point-blank shot at it. The other knocked out ones I'd seen seem to just have been disabled.

Jon

In tom Clancy's Armored Cav book he tells a great story about an M1 stuck in the mud in GWI when it is attacked by 3 T-72s each Iraqi tank gets a shot and hits the M1, the only damage is scratched paint from one shell. THe M1 dispatches all three and calls for support. They try to pull the M1 out but can't and decide to destroy it and move on. Another M1 tries but can't puch through the armor. Finally a shot detonates the ammo but the fire control system kicks in and vents the explosion to the outside. Finally they get some more m88 tow trucks and pull it out. The turret goes to the states for study and the tank gets a new one and is back in the fight.
The iraqis never had a chance.

CRzRB