thedrifter
05-02-06, 12:08 PM
May 08, 2006
Making M1A1 more lethal
Better optics, electronics set for Abrams
By John Hoellwarth
Times staff writer
The Marine Corps’ Abrams tank is getting Iraqified.
Officials at Marine Corps Systems Command are making the M1A1 main battle tank more lethal through a series of upgrades set for all of the Corps’ 403 tanks by next summer.
The upgrades have already been added to the 34 tanks in Iraq and are slated to appear at stateside tank units by next May.
Advanced optics are on the way that allow a gunner to see more clearly, night or day, at five times the distance previously possible — far enough to acquire and identify a target that’s still too far away to shoot.
Enhanced electronics will compute and display grid coordinates automatically, allowing forward observers and forward air controllers serving with tank units to call for indirect fire against targets the tank can’t touch, and on radios that have been moved from the outside of the tank to the inside crew compartment, where there is protection from enemy fire.
Staff Sgt. David Burnson, a tank commander with 1st Tank Battalion at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms, Calif., said having the FO/FAC radios on the inside of the tank is a good idea, but he hasn’t made peace with the location of the antennas they require.
“The antenna mounts stick out a bit and limit your field of vision to the rear from the tank commander’s seat,” he said.
Because the Corps’ fleet of tanks is small compared to the Army’s, the Corps is able to field upgrades much more quickly. The Corps keeps tabs on the Army’s intended tank upgrades and often manages to get the Army’s good ideas to its Marines well before soldiers can expect the same, said Lt. Col. John Swift, tank systems program manager at SysCom.
Swift said many of the additions to the Corps’ tanks have come from direct feedback from Marines deployed to combat zones.
Additions such as thermal sights for the tank’s .50-caliber machine gun come from tankers in Iraq who say their tank’s go-to weapon becomes useless at night without the sight.
When Marines crossed into Iraq in 2003, they headed to Baghdad “with a more capable tank than the Army had” because of self-cleaning air filters and “drivers’ vision enhancer” upgrades that the Army is just now fielding, Swift said.
The last time a brand-new U.S. tank rolled off the production line was in 1991, and there are no indications that this will change in the foreseeable future, Swift said.
Since then, keeping the Abrams up-to-date has meant replacing aging components with newer, smaller electronic gizmos that will eventually make the once-analog tanks all digital, he said.
Lance Cpl. Randy Hinton, a gunner with 1st Tanks, said, “it looks complicated and overwhelming [inside the tank], but once you get used to it, it’s not too bad.”
The only downside for tankers is the electronic encroachment on what little space they have inside the turret. The combat power added to the tank with each new panel of knobs, dials, buttons and blinking lights belies the added danger inside, where increasingly cramped quarters raise the risk of losing a carelessly placed arm or leg to the breach of the tank’s main gun.
It’s in essence a rotating room that pivots from floor to ceiling with enough force to squash anything above or below it.
“When that thing shuts, it shuts. It’s going to take your fingers clean off,” Hinton said.
SysCom is adding a beefier latch to the ammunition door to further protect crews if the tank is struck in its magazine. But tankers say this might be a waste of money because the ammo door is already strong enough to have earned their complete confidence.
“I can tell you with certainty that no matter what cooks off in the ammo compartment, it is not going to penetrate the door. I can tell you that from personal experience,” said Staff Sgt. Mark Miller, training staff noncommissioned officer for 1st Tanks. “I had a tank completely destroyed by a [roadside bomb] in Iraq. We had to evacuate a burning tank.”
Miller’s experiences in Iraq have led to his endorsement of another low-tech innovation set to hit tanks by next year: mounting brackets inside the tank that give the four Marines inside a place to put their M4 carbine rifles, miniature versions of the M16 that have been handed out one to a tank until now.
Tankers carry a 9mm pistol, but Miller said a rifle is preferable when crew members have to leave the tank behind and fight on foot.
“The M4s are a good idea. I really do believe that’s where we’re going as a community, toward the M4. That’s a capability we should have,” he said. “It doesn’t matter if they’re on the inside or outside as long as they can be retrieved as we’re evacuating the tank.”
Ellie
Making M1A1 more lethal
Better optics, electronics set for Abrams
By John Hoellwarth
Times staff writer
The Marine Corps’ Abrams tank is getting Iraqified.
Officials at Marine Corps Systems Command are making the M1A1 main battle tank more lethal through a series of upgrades set for all of the Corps’ 403 tanks by next summer.
The upgrades have already been added to the 34 tanks in Iraq and are slated to appear at stateside tank units by next May.
Advanced optics are on the way that allow a gunner to see more clearly, night or day, at five times the distance previously possible — far enough to acquire and identify a target that’s still too far away to shoot.
Enhanced electronics will compute and display grid coordinates automatically, allowing forward observers and forward air controllers serving with tank units to call for indirect fire against targets the tank can’t touch, and on radios that have been moved from the outside of the tank to the inside crew compartment, where there is protection from enemy fire.
Staff Sgt. David Burnson, a tank commander with 1st Tank Battalion at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms, Calif., said having the FO/FAC radios on the inside of the tank is a good idea, but he hasn’t made peace with the location of the antennas they require.
“The antenna mounts stick out a bit and limit your field of vision to the rear from the tank commander’s seat,” he said.
Because the Corps’ fleet of tanks is small compared to the Army’s, the Corps is able to field upgrades much more quickly. The Corps keeps tabs on the Army’s intended tank upgrades and often manages to get the Army’s good ideas to its Marines well before soldiers can expect the same, said Lt. Col. John Swift, tank systems program manager at SysCom.
Swift said many of the additions to the Corps’ tanks have come from direct feedback from Marines deployed to combat zones.
Additions such as thermal sights for the tank’s .50-caliber machine gun come from tankers in Iraq who say their tank’s go-to weapon becomes useless at night without the sight.
When Marines crossed into Iraq in 2003, they headed to Baghdad “with a more capable tank than the Army had” because of self-cleaning air filters and “drivers’ vision enhancer” upgrades that the Army is just now fielding, Swift said.
The last time a brand-new U.S. tank rolled off the production line was in 1991, and there are no indications that this will change in the foreseeable future, Swift said.
Since then, keeping the Abrams up-to-date has meant replacing aging components with newer, smaller electronic gizmos that will eventually make the once-analog tanks all digital, he said.
Lance Cpl. Randy Hinton, a gunner with 1st Tanks, said, “it looks complicated and overwhelming [inside the tank], but once you get used to it, it’s not too bad.”
The only downside for tankers is the electronic encroachment on what little space they have inside the turret. The combat power added to the tank with each new panel of knobs, dials, buttons and blinking lights belies the added danger inside, where increasingly cramped quarters raise the risk of losing a carelessly placed arm or leg to the breach of the tank’s main gun.
It’s in essence a rotating room that pivots from floor to ceiling with enough force to squash anything above or below it.
“When that thing shuts, it shuts. It’s going to take your fingers clean off,” Hinton said.
SysCom is adding a beefier latch to the ammunition door to further protect crews if the tank is struck in its magazine. But tankers say this might be a waste of money because the ammo door is already strong enough to have earned their complete confidence.
“I can tell you with certainty that no matter what cooks off in the ammo compartment, it is not going to penetrate the door. I can tell you that from personal experience,” said Staff Sgt. Mark Miller, training staff noncommissioned officer for 1st Tanks. “I had a tank completely destroyed by a [roadside bomb] in Iraq. We had to evacuate a burning tank.”
Miller’s experiences in Iraq have led to his endorsement of another low-tech innovation set to hit tanks by next year: mounting brackets inside the tank that give the four Marines inside a place to put their M4 carbine rifles, miniature versions of the M16 that have been handed out one to a tank until now.
Tankers carry a 9mm pistol, but Miller said a rifle is preferable when crew members have to leave the tank behind and fight on foot.
“The M4s are a good idea. I really do believe that’s where we’re going as a community, toward the M4. That’s a capability we should have,” he said. “It doesn’t matter if they’re on the inside or outside as long as they can be retrieved as we’re evacuating the tank.”
Ellie