nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo) (11/27/90)
From: nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil (William M. Aldo) John Masly writes: > Acutally, CNN has the tank designators correct. There >are only three variants of the M1 Abrams Tank: IPM1 (Initial >Production M1), M1, and M1A1. There is no such model as the >M1A2......... > >105mm main gun was removed and replaced by the 120mm smoothbore >main gun (this gun is a German design, check out the German Main >Battle Tank, the Leopard III)...... ^^^^^^^^^^^ Overall, a good article....pretty much to the point; however, the Leopard III doesn't exist, yet (unless they're currently working on it). The Leopard II utilizes a 120-mm smoothbore gun manufactured in Germany by Rheinmettal (the same maingun used in the M1A1, which BTW the U.S. didn't want in their 'new' tanks, back when the MBT70 was on the drawing board....kind of ironic, eh ;-) Also, the Leopard II's main body/chassis is not that much different from the Leopard I. ***As a former tank commander of the 1st Armor Division, I spent two weeks training with our 'sister-unit' in the West (formerly;-) German Army (303rd Panzer Regiment; Hahnenkamm Kaserne; Heidenheim, Germany) back in Jan/Feb '74. At that time, they had just recieved the 'new' Leopard Ia3. (trivia, if nothing else) -- Mark Aldo UUCP: (osu-cis)!dsacg1!waldo INTERNET: waldo@dsac.dla.mil "...Hotel Quebec One Six...You are clear to begin your night run on Range Eight Zero....Good luck, good shooting...Tower, out" -- radio transmission from Control Tower - Range 80 at Grafenwoehr, Germany
welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) (11/29/90)
From: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty)
In article <1990Nov27.045911.4944@cbnews.att.com>, William M. Aldo writes:
* The Leopard II utilizes a 120-mm smoothbore gun manufactured
*in Germany by Rheinmettal (the same maingun used in the M1A1,
note that by and large, US tank guns are manufactured at the Watervliet
Arsenal here in upstate NY, regardless of the design origin. the US
would be unlikely to purchase guns of German manufacture for various
sound economic reasons, mostly having to do with the outrageous cost
of chrome plating in German cannon plants. since i know someone is
going to ask: the principal difference between the US approach and the
German approach is that in US production, they aim, as it were, for the
best price/performance rate, accepting a certain level of chrome plating
failures on proof firing and simply sending the failed tubes back for
replating. the Germans don't find the US `bang for the buck' approach
to be acceptable, and they set extremely high standards for the yield
of the plating process. this sends the price/tube through the roof,
as the process control needed to acheive what they consider acceptable
yield rates is incredibly tight. people that i know at the arsenal
consider the German yield rate amazing, but they laugh at how much
more it costs than is strictly necessary.
richard
--
richard welty 518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York
welty@lewis.crd.ge.com ...!crdgw1!lewis.crd.ge.com!welty
``We're in a road movie to Berlin, can't drive out the way we drove in''
-- They Might Be Giants