[sci.military] MTBF for M1 tank

bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman) (10/30/90)

From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)

In the _San_Francisco_Chronicle of 10/28/90 in a page 1 story headlined
"Analysts question suitablity of U.S. arms in a Gulf War" bylined
Keary Davidson:

	"'the M-1 tends to break down every 30 miles or so...' says
	Kosta Tsipis, director of MIT's Ptogram in Science and
	Technology for International Security. ' ... under
	... dusty and sandy conditions ... [the M1] may suffer more
	frequent breakdowns.'"

(The article goes on to express fears about reliablity of other weapons
systems.)

Can this figure be correct?  This means that at 45mph about half the tanks
would be inoperable after 40 minutes!
------------------------
	Brad Sherman(bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)

mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) (11/01/90)

From: mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)

In article <1990Oct30.052800.7512@cbnews.att.com> bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman) writes:
>In the _San_Francisco_Chronicle of 10/28/90 in a page 1 story ...
>"'the M-1 tends to break down every 30 miles or so...' says Kosta
>Tsipis, director of MIT's Ptogram in Science and Technology for
>International Security. ' ..."

Kosta Tsipis has a long track record for ... um, "exaggerating".  
For instance, his Scientific American article "proving" that SDI was
forever impossible, based on the energy from the hydrogen-fluorine
reaction.  Besides the facts that high-energy lasers aren't the only
way to do an SDI and hydrogen-fluroine gas dynamic lasers aren't
necessarily the best lasers to use for that purpose, he "mis-stated"
the energy of the H-F reaction by a factor of 100.

>Can this figure be correct?  This means that at 45mph about half the 
>tanks would be inoperable after 40 minutes!

It doesn't seem at all likely to me, even before I consider the source.
Everything I've heard from people who actually drive M1s is pretty
favorable, which wouldn't be the case if Tsipis were right this time.
-- 
Mike Van Pelt                     "I'm not a biologist, but I play one in 
Headland Technology/Video 7        front of Congressional hearings."
...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp                        -- Meryl Streep

bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman) (11/03/90)

From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
In article <1990Nov1.025149.12410@cbnews.att.com> mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) writes:
>From: mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
>In article <1990Oct30.052800.7512@cbnews.att.com> bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman) writes:
>>"'the M-1 tends to break down every 30 miles or so...' says Kosta Tsipis
>Kosta Tsipis has a long track record for ... um, "exaggerating".  

I am in no position to add anything of substance to this argument, but
ad hominem attacks on Tsipis seem beside the point.  Either the M1 tank
has an acceptable rate of failure or it doesn't.  We many find out soon.
Likewise, anecdotal evidence doesn't help much but for the sake of
completeness, I am forwarding this letter which I received in response
to my original posting.  The author suggested that I post it but asked
for anonymity.  I cannot attest to its veracity (except to say that
the e-mail source was apparently a miltary institution).

    Sir:
    I used to be a driver in an M1 before I came here to ----------,
    so I figure that I probably ought to know better than a person
    who reads his/her info out of a book and profess to be experts...
    Anyways, there are a multitude of factors that determine if a tank
    is deadlined or not.  The first is the tank crew itself.  Each
    individual in the tank has his responsibilities, ie the gunner
    ensures the weapons systems are operational, the loader ensures
    that the commo, breech, and ammo ready doors are operational,
    and the driver ensures that the tank is running, and is responsible
    for everything that moves a tank...from the road wheels to the track
    to the engine.  One of the main reasons that tanks abort their
    engines is due to clogged air filters.  If you have a driver that
    knows what the hell he is doing and does his job and cleans the air
    filters every chance he gets, your tank is probably not going to
    abort.  Also, if you have a sharp driver, he is going to ensure that
    there is the proper amount of tension in the track, and there is
    enough rubber on the road wheels, that there is enough lubricant in
    the road wheel hub, etc.  Let's put it this way...I think that I was
    in a pretty sharp battalion at ------------------, and we also had
    good mechanics to help us out.  With the right people dedicated to
    their jobs, a tank will not break down, unless it is a freak accident
    of nature.  I have no idea where MIT or whoever you quote got their
    figures from, but I know that they are wrong.  Let's put it this way
    ...during one FTX, we had our tank running the whole five days
    straight, without it ever being deadlined...and I'll tell you what,
    we didn't run it for less than 30 miles...I think we averaged
    something close to 100 miles per day!!!
        I hope that this answers some questions for you.

[ellipses as in original, dashes are mine -bks]
----------------------------
	Brad Sherman(bks@alfa.berkeley.edu)

FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU (jim bowers) (11/06/90)

From: jim bowers <FQV@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
In article <1990Nov2.203119.29539@cbnews.att.com>, bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad
Sherman) says:
>
>From: bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad Sherman)
>In article <1990Nov1.025149.12410@cbnews.att.com> mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van
>Pelt)
>writes:
>>From: mvp@hsv3.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt)
>>In article <1990Oct30.052800.7512@cbnews.att.com> bks@alfa.berkeley.edu (Brad
>Sherman) writes:
>>>"'the M-1 tends to break down every 30 miles or so...' says Kosta Tsipis
>>Kosta Tsipis has a long track record for ... um, "exaggerating".
>    Anyways, there are a multitude of factors that determine if a tank
>    is deadlined or not.

Exactly, and just because a vehicle is "deadlined" does not mean it is
out of commission - it is only out of commission on paper.
For instance, a vehicle can be deadlined for having a broken headlight
or rear view mirror - but you can still drive / fight in it.

The army definetly needs to come up with a different system or degree of
"deadlineness"  ie.
         level 1.  Not perfect but will still get you where you need
                   to go and preform it's job (sort of like a car
                   that won't pass inspection but still gets you
                   to work).

         level 2.  Can still perform most of it's job and in an emergency
                   situation it's better than nothing so you might as
                   well take it along with you (i.e. the brakes don't
                   work so well but you can still stop the thing by
                   running it into a tree).

         level 3.  Won't run at all or is more hazardous to the crew
                   than enemy fire (i.e. thick clouds of exhaust pouring
                   into cockpit).

     When I was in the 82nd (late 70's) there wasn't any real distinction
     between level 1 and 3 - if it was deadlined they wouldn't take it.