MBT's

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Here's what I found in the limited time I have right now before everything up to going to work. It seems the USMC M1A1HC FEP falls somewhere closer to being in between the USA SEP V1 and SEP V2. Also the "big push" to get the tanks closer to the SEP V3 started about 2015 - 2025 ten modernization program. Obviously this got somewhat delayed but, the APS will appear as the first step in that process.

Concerning the M1A1HC FEP it appears the ONLY improvements are to the NBC System and TI/GSR per REF. 1. That being said I recommend the following: 1) FOC mid 2014. 2) TI/GSR 50/STABILISER take the average of SEP V1 and SEP V2 apply to this tank. I don't even know if the M1A1HC FEP is in the game or what those values above are. I leave you to do that leg work.

No armor improvements as suggested in REF. 2 that I can find in the time I have today. That by REF. 1 will be in the final phase during SLEP.
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/...day%2Fusmc.ppt
https://www.quora.com/What-M1A1-Abra...about-the-same

I gotta get ready for work!!! Don if you see this please look two posts back #849 please.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

The M1A1HC FEP deserves more of my time. When I submitted the M1A2 SEP V2 I quoted from one of my Refs from the Col. in charge of the program basically this... "We now have a FCS that can see and identify a target almost as far as our ammo can kill it." it'd be easier to find it in the Fastboat Patch Thread then the MBT one if you're interested. But this was one of my "lynch pin" items I suggested to break the TI/GSR 40 barrier.

And now you the player have it but on more than one tank as Don and any of you that follow my work, I came to realize after going back and I believe I reviewed something like 20 different MBT's world wide and dug into their FCS's as much as I could, who assisted them in the research if it applied etc. etc. (It's all in the MBT Thread between 3 and 4 years back I think.) Many got to 50 some at 45 and some stayed where they were at and couple saw a slight reduction and all backed by the Refs. I had at the time.

This is where I would normally when I get in the mood to start my lecture on properly researching (Oh here he goes again !) etc. etc. etc. however, let's just do this for now...

As much as I would like to help the CORPS I can't pull things out of arse only from the web, so, concerning the M1A1HC FEP you get no armor upgrade, you should be able to keep the TI/GSR 50 and if Don agrees based on the following below and reading what the math is telling me as well, I feel more than comfortable in saying it should have the same FCS numbers as the SEP V2.

Before I start, it is important to remember that FEP is all about the FCS and associated support systems. Now I can start...

USMC/CHANGE/M1A1HC FEP VARIENTS/UNITS 467, 468 & 469/START 06/2012 vice 01/2008/TI/GSR 50 vice 45/FC 60 vice 55/UNIT 468 MRAP 7 vice SURVIBILITY 6/SAME MBT AS UNITS 467 & 469//I've backed off the start date from yesterday after reviewing the chart from Ref. 1 of the same post and some other data this morning. I really feel anything before 2010 is too early, I could be wrong however, based on what's out there, I don't see it UNLESS it can be found in the Annual USMC Chronological History. I used that on the LAV-AD if you remember. I don't see anything to warrant a STABLISER increase at this point, if you do based on the following quote from Ref. 1 below, I have no real problem with it as I'm "more on the fence about it than off of it" concerning it. I have a good understanding of "over the horizon" targeting so I was somewhat impressed by this next.

"FEP (Firepower Enhancement Package) – USMC
The FEP upgrade was awarded to DRS Techologies for the GEN II TIS destined to the US Marine Corps M1A1 tanks. This system comprises a 480 x 4 SADA (Standard Advanced Dewar Assembly) detector, an eyesafe laser rangefinder, a north-finding module and precision lightweight global positioning receiver. These enable the new Far Target Locate (FTL) targeting solution capability. This subsystem provides accurate targeting data to a range of 8,000 m with a 114 feets (35 m) Circular Error of Probability. This system extends the firing range into uncharted territories, a below-horizon capability with the earth curvature taken in account in what it is barely a “direct fire” anymore."

That is some of the most powerful wording I've seen for any FCS I've looked into to date. I'll leave it at that.

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/co.../M1_Abrams.php
(Above follows some of the very few that are out there.)
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land...fepsrdrev4.htm

Suhiir now stop bringing things to my attention if you would, just like a MARINE to try to improve their lot!?!

Well it was a long cold night out there checking "things" and I'm ready for the rack!

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

That was pretty much my understanding too.

The USMC acquired it's M1s/M1A1's between Nov 1989 (211 MBTs) and 2008 (44 MBTs used to increase the size of the two active duty tank battalions by one tank company each plus some for maintenance float). By FY 2009 the entire fleet of USMC M1A1s had received the FEP upgrades (US military Fiscal Years are the year prior to the date, thus FY 2009 is calendar year 2008).

The FEP was an improvement to the fire control and vision systems not armor, stabilization, or survivibility.

Starting around 2013 all USMC M1A1 FEPs began rotating thru the rebuild cycle at Anniston Army Depot, and an unknown (but fairly small) number were upgraded from M1A1 to M1A1 Heavy Common (thus more armor). Around 2015 M1A1s and LAVs started receiving improved thermal sights. Trophy mountings/electronics etc. were added around 2016. And AIDATS (improvements to the commanders .50cal) around 2018.

So a change from 2008 to 2009 for the FEP would seem reasonable. And FASTBOAT undoubtedly knows FAR more about vision and fire control systems then I do so his figures of TI/GSR 50 and FC 60 should be considered accurate.

But as with many units in WinSPMBT ... how many incremental upgrades are required before a new unit needs to be introduced? Does it make more sense to have a unit that starts before a specific upgrade is fielded incorporate that upgrade then wait several years before cumulative upgrades require the introduction of a new unit?

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a608067.pdf

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I found the UNLESS for the date change for the M1A1 FEP the good news is my MARINE friend was off on the original START date by a year or more. USMC FEP was completed by FY 09 or if you will OCT 2008 for ALL 403 M1A1 ABRAMS the CORPS had at that time.

There is however "fallout" from this program, it is absolutely important that ALL things ABRAMS come from the USA first. With the last in mind, the USA had also contracted DRS to do the same/similar upgrades for them around 2001-2003 timeframe. With the AMBRAMS that started with the M1A2 SEP and M3A3 BRADLEY plus HUMEVEE (Recon/ARTY OBS) I would think. Not worried about the last right now. Of the rest I've identified 2 ABRAMS SEP/SEP V1 and 3 M3A3 BRADLEY's

My thinking right now for the USA is a compromise in dates to make this work WITHOUT ADDING new units for the USA and doing what makes sense for the upgrade as well. I believe a simple shift of one year to 1.5yrs of the START for those units will accomplish what is needed. I've identified the particular units already however, I want to do another check to ensure I didn't miss anything and to think this through again I already foresee this affecting the BRADLEY BUSK units to a very minor degree as well.

My initial thoughts w/o date right now for USA is as follows: SEP/SEP V1 TI/GSR 50 and no others. M3A3 BRADLEY TI/GSR 45 & FC 22 and no others. BRADLEY BUSK FC 22 and nothing else.

I have to get ready for work NOW!

Will have this submitted in the next couple of days.

That's what I get for changing my search criteria!!

Regards,
Pat

[MarkSheppard]

The Royal Thai Army seems to have received a good enough quantity of NORINCO VT-4 MBTs to do this promo photo.

The VT-4 is basically a ZTZ-99 turret/gun mounted on a ZTZ-99A chassis and cooled down for export for sale as a "budget" tank to nations who want something better than a 1985 T-72; but not as expensive as a M1A2/T-90/LeClerc etc.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

1. About the VT-4 for Thailand UNIT 020...

From SIPRI (Slightly Modified Format)
Supplier/ No Year(s) Year No.
recipient (R) ordered ordered delivered Comments
China
R: Thailand 28 VT-4 Tank 2016 2017 28 THB4.9 b ($140 m) deal
34 Type-07P/VN-1 IFV 2017 THB2.3 b ($58 m) deal; delivery planned by 2020
10 VT-4 Tank 2017 THB2 b ($58 m) deal

We based date on late 2017 delivery a posted and for training. Also I believe they received those additional tanks in latter part of 2018. Should be posted in here.
https://www.janes.com/article/85735/...ks-from-china/
http://www.defenseworld.net/news/209...l#.XFas13dFzoo

UPDATE:
USMC M1A1 FEP: Looking more like JUN/OCT 2009. Sources showing FOC closer to end of production.

BRADLEY M3A3: Still holding at 3 UNITS. Holding at TI/GSR 45 reducing my initial call on FC to 22 vice 25.

BRADLEY M3A3 BUSK: 3 UNITS no change to current TI/GSR 50 FC 25 vice current 20. The BUSK besides the Armor got also a COMPLETLY new FCS. I believed these got submitted with the M1A2 SEP V2. I've found a VERY close relationship between the SEP tanks to the BRADLEY, especially in the area of electronics.

M1A2 SEP/MIA2 SEP V1: Of all the above, this was the worst PITA of them all. The information just kept overlapping, in fact the SEP V1 I only saw in a small number of references as compared to articles going from SEP to SEP V2. I've spent a lot more time on this issue than I cared to as the submission clock is winding down and my focus was elsewhere at the time. It's OK, CINCLANTHOME knows only to well when I get a "mission" in my head I'll do it until there's no more to do.
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m1a2_sep.htm
(Though the START DATE is 1999(?), that is correct for when the contract was awarded for 1 M1A2 SEP MBT.) I hope you see the point I'm trying to make here, this was the ONLY one where I ran into with this date that at least DID had a question mark.

That being said as far as I'm concerned at this moment, I believe you'll get a slot back in the USA OOB. I'll take a closer look at UNITS 316/317 and go from there. The start date is the issue to be resolved I'm thinking it'll fall somewhere between JUN 2004 - JAN 2008. End date will be DEC 2025 as I don't think they'll be updated to the SEP V3 before games end due to the push to get the M1A1 and the soon to be operational "new" M1A1 SA upgraded first. The contracts are being awarded if you will, oldest to newest and somewhere in there the USMC M1A1 FEP as well.

And I was just getting ready to fix some T-90S tanks that need fixing. That'll be easy compared to this.

John how about that JANE's!?! Maybe for CHRISTMAS?

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

First sorry the table didn't transfer over from SIPRI the way I set it up prior to hitting the "Submit Reply" concerning Thailand's VT-4 MBT's.

Now on to the other issues from this past week, consider this the source and view the previous as additional information.

I have to go with Fully Operational Capability (FOC) many people want to use (And have.) Initial Operating Capability (IOC) the difference between the two is huge. When in IOC the manufacturer is working whatever branch to work out the bugs. This process normally ends with the OPEVAL where the branch is putting the equipment through it's paces. This will normally lead to modifications at times. Once the OPEVAL is completed this is when that piece of equipment will normally go into Full Rate Production (FRP) and depending on the branch will transition to FOC once a magic number is reached or in to the case of the first to tanks below, when production is completed and many things can drive this decision such as minor equipment upgrades (Think software updates or issues concerning all F-35 types.) or replacement or maybe a different engine (ALTAY) etc. etc.
This is for context before I continue below.

Also note I have to use the M1A2 SEP V2 for balance against the next two tanks as well. I don't know what data was used for them, however, we had a lot of data to work from for the M1A2 SEP V2 when it was submitted and except for the date change I submitted for the M1A2 SEP V3 that tank looks good at present.

USMC/CHANGE/M1A1HC FEP VARIENTS/UNITS 467, 468 & 469/START 10/2009 vice 01/2008/TI/GSR 50 vice 45/STABILISER 7 vice 6/UNIT 468 MRAP 7 vice SURVIBILITY 6/SAME MBT AS UNITS 467 & 469// The FEP was a major upgrade to the M1A1 tanks the USMC operated. The contract was awarded on FEB 05, 2005 for the manufacture and installation of the of the subsystems making up the FEP package. The FOC was reached as submitted above. I cannot find any information to support any other date but, it should be noted however I found enough to change the date last submitted and after digging deeper, I will gladly in this instance "eat a little crow" concerning that last submission that "I didn't see it before 2010..." at least based on the data I had then.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a608067.pdf
(Pg. 6/Para B. Note they used JANE's 2013 ref.))
http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/index.php?item=156
(Para 4)
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...-(dec.-6).html
Paras 1 & 6)
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...1-tanks-01874/
(Covers both programs as of 2006.)
https://www.heritage.org/military-st...s-marine-corps
https://www.heritage.org/military-strength
(For context only. One of the very few "think tanks" that grade militaries and specifically are the only to do so for ours. The second will get you to the other branch's.)
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues...ets-new-sight/
(This last ties in the FEP and SEP programs. And as normal USA first.)

The DID Ref above lead me to this next UNIT(s) as they definitely fit the timeframe needed for the FEP upgrade.

USMC/CHANGE/LAV-25 A2 (CS)/UNIT 993/LAV-25A2/UNIT 061/TI/GSR 45 vice 40/FC 22 vice 25/Laser R/F 20 vice Range Finder 15 & 14 respectively/Of course ARTY & AT units wouldn't receive this upgrade// This is a "smaller package" as compared to the BRADLEY and size matters with this kind of equipment, that being said they're better then what they are now and it fits the FEP package well. I don't think I missed any other UNITS.

You'll forgive me I hope as the LAV updates and verification threw me off track and as I was up well into what is now, yesterday morning and as I've got to take care of a couple of other issues before I hit the rack, I'll just say Good Night or morning wherever you may be!!.

Hopefully I'll get to the ABRAMS & BRADLEY units later today or Tuesday evening as I have the "fight course" that morning/afternoon.

Don if you desire more on the FEP LAV let me know but, I believe a couple of the others mention it as well. The DID Ref confirms the money was allocated and funded.

As a reminder and as recently posted M1A2 SEP V3/M1A2C OPEVAL is at 2.5+ yrs. and still going on. The ARMATA if still on schedule and from Russian Ministry of Defense as posted will start it's OPEVAL around mid to late 2021. I might just be right on that one given the SEP V3 above.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well let's see if I can finish the rest of the "Project". I have come to the conclusion as already mentioned that the M1A2 SEP/M1A2 SEP V1 are the same tank. The ABRAMS of itself is nothing more then what Win10 is and that's a baseline "product" with continuous updated versions of itself. In looking into the SEP the following other AMBRAM's were either running parallel with or during it's development such as TUSK, AIM and SEP V2 AND I believe there was a fourth one as well. Again the M1A2 SEP V2 will be the driver for how far I can go without going there all the way. I wish to give you Some of what I've been dealing with trying to straighten what's turned into an ABRAMS "MESS" through the fault of NO ONE OUT HERE!! At the end of this I'll discuss what my next action will be once the submission clock runs out on me or before. Also...
The following is taken from DID it might help clear up some wording I use out here...In referring to the extensive work going on with the BRADLEY...
"Unlike RESET programs, designed to replace all defective or worn parts and restore/service a vehicle back to pre-combat condition, remanufacture is a complete rebuild designed to return it to full “zero miles” condition, and install upgrades."

Now the nightmare wraps up I hope!?! With...

Welcome to my world over the past week now from DID under M1A2 SEP: Additional Background section, by way of example...

"The M1A2 SEP is a formidable upgrade package, but it was missing a small but crucial item. Troops in Iraq and elsewhere are also clamoring for a phone on the outside of the tank that will let them talk to the vehicle crew. This was common as far back as World War 2, and its lack is hampering coordination on the modern battlefield – especially in urban areas. A General Dynamics representative noted that future M1A2 Abrams TUSK (Tank Urban Survivability Kit) vehicles will have this feature, but the SEP v1 tanks did not. And continues right into the next para with...

M1A2 SEP Version 2 configuration, which is just beginning to appear, fixes this." And continues...

Now correct me if I'm wrong, the above para was talking about M1A2 SEP and ended in the same para with the M1A2 SEPv1 right!?! Anyway...

USA/CHANGE/RESET/M1A2 SEP/UNITS 316 & 647/CHANGE/M1A2 SEP MCRS/UNITS 653 & 654/ALL/START OCT 2008/END DEC 2025/TI/GSR 50 vice 40/FC 55 vice 50/STEEL HF 70 vice 65/HS 18 vice 12/HR 10 vice 9/HEAT TF 150 vice 147/TS 50 vice 48// Unlike the M1A1 FEP, the M1A2 SEP received a 3rd GEN armor upgrade this includes a D/U pkg. as well. I threaded the needle for FOC based on the conflicting data. However it should be noted it's NOT out of line based on what I posted concerning the M1A2 SEP V3 almost being 3 yrs. into it's OPEVAL as we speak. Also the last order placed for the SEP was in mid/late 2005. That being said, I leaned a little more on the following from DID (Last Ref.) entries AUG 29/08 and JUN 20/05. Overall the SEP program to date must viewed as incremental improvements in all areas. And I really like the picture, things should be seen doing things.

USA/DELETE/M1A2 SEP V1/UNITS 318 & 640/SAVE THE PICTURE WE HAVE LATE MODEL ABRAMS "FLOATING IN THE SKY" THAT CAN USE IT/For the reasons stated above and below within the Refs. I have seen Refs to indicate the M1A1 AIM being tagged with V1 and V2 attached to the name. Also M1A1 AIM were all REMANUFACTED tanks for the record.

USA/CHANGE/M1A2 SEP V2/M1A2 SEP 2-T/UNITS 517 & 537 RESPECTIVLY/FC 55 vice 50/BASED ON M1A2 SEP V3 FC 60/NOTE I MISSED UNIT 537 WHEN I SUBMITTED REVISED START FOR UNIT 517 (06/2020 I BELIEVE FROM POST 845) SHOULD MATCH// Again we see the progression more clearly now between the variants.
http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eA...une1996web.pdf
(In 1996 the plan, pg. 11 and see Fig. 3 pg. 14.)
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...rmy/99m1a2.pdf
(In 2000 testing issues and failures experienced during and beyond 1999.)
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/...amsM1A2SEP.pdf
https://asc.army.mil/docs/pubs/alt/2...est_200101.pdf
(2001 Another overview and analysis.)
(In 2002 testing continues with minor issues, progress being made.)
https://www.forecastinternational.co...DACH_RECNO=534
(2003 Commanders CITV. Cap. & Production Plan.)
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/wsh/22.pdf
(2005 Conversion moves on it will be seen FOC not until Units in "PROGRAM STATUS" are fully equipped.)
https://www.gd.com/news/press-releas...oved-sep-reset
(2006 Last of M1 tanks to be upgraded to SEP expect 2009 final delivery to units for FOC.)
http://id3486.securedata.net/fprado/...ite/abrams.htm
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...updated-02834/
(After a 3rd/4th time or more, I've got a little more clarity on the date issue (Above 2 Refs in particular.) and I believe the M1A2 SEP V1 as noted under the M1A2 SEP V2 section. I'm starting to think what really happened here with most not reporting this version while a SMALL handful do is the program (M1A2 SEP V1) started and went straight into the M1A2 SEP V2 program. It is the only thing that makes sense here.)

I fear there is more work here however, Don unless you have issue with anything posted so far, I really would like to be done with the ABRAMS.

One of my Co-workers "KEN" was a Tank Commander of the M1A1 a year after they got fielded and fought in Iraq (Even had a picture of an Iraq soldier they captured.) he's retired Army and I had some questions for him. Anyway he told me when I once tried to get some info from Ft. Benning (Armor School) I went to the wrong base.
I will try to contact the "home" of Army Armor in Ft. Knox. As some have already seen, I've done this before successfully concerning armor w/Austria, Australia and Germany. France did let me down concerning the 105mm issue (And what fun that was for Don and I!?!) we had. Anyway this has been hanging on my PC for over two days now it's time to get it off of here, I don't remember what my screen saver looks like!?! and awe!

A final note did anyone notice a pattern with the Refs.? Just from what I posted was 12 yrs. for SEP to get into the field. Not bad when you consider ARJUN Mk I took over 30yrs. to get there! These things take time!

Good something to you all, it's been a long day and the "Red Man" is down again!

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

I fear there is more work here however, Don unless you have issue with anything posted so far, I really would like to be done with the ABRAMS.

Trust me.....I'm OK with it and as done with it as you are.......maybe more so

Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

CORRECTION!!!!

This was my moment early this morning.

See below for corrected version...

USA/DELETE/M1A2 SEP V1/UNITS 318 & 649/SAVE THE PICTURE (UNIT 318) WE HAVE LATE MODEL ABRAMS "FLOATING IN THE SKY" THAT CAN USE IT// As it was originally posted UNIT 640 is the M551(CS) - sorry.

One thing we like are pictures so...
USA/CHANGE PICTURE/M1A2/UNIT 637/REPLACE WITH UNIT 318 PICTURE//I personally enjoyed that when Don let me get all those USN SKYHAWK pictures replaced mostly in Australia and Israel, F-105 for the Swiss. Also helos for Australia, Switzerland and all the countries that used the French SAR/SPEC OP helo we just updated a year or two ago with the missing MG's. That's almost relaxing compared to the rest!

Don sorry for the "screwup" caught it while looking for the "floating tank" ABRAMS pictures.

Regards,
Pat