M1A3 Abrams Upgrade?

[Waylander]

Just like the older APAMs from IMI it should provide an excellent multi-purpose round for the IDF. The flexibility which comes with the quick/delayed/airburst-fuze is IMO a huge improvements over older, more simple HE and HEAT rounds.

Just like the new DM11 from Rheinmetall such a modern multipurpose HE should be introduced into every modern tank forces.

Do you remember the video of the reporter? A Merk tank crew thought he and his camera are an AT-guy and fired an APAM over him. Sadly it shredded him but it shows how effective it is against small tank hunter units.
It is much harder to take out an AT-team at range when you use a GPMG/HMG or HEAT round.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

A .50cal as a coax is interesting. The Leclerc went that way and I am not sure if such a solution is good or not.
Increased penetration against lightly armored vehicles, trucks, troops behind light cover etc. is defenitely an advantage but a coax also does some amount of spraying in order to pin down enemy dismounts, especially in the attack. With a .50 cal one is going to carry alot less ammo than with a 7.62mm GPMG.

But the anti pers suppression role can be carried out by a 7.62 Minigun RCWS because unlike the traditional roof guns it has a dedicated operator and is an under armour weapon. The RCWS can even be slaved to the main gun sight and for all purposes fire as a coax weapon.

Having the .50cal as the coax is also denying it the ability to engage enemies which are higher up, for example in urban and mountain warfare.

Well the 7.62 Minigun in RCWS can engage these targets. The difference between the two is only going to be noticed against hard targets at long range and high elevation. These targets are almost non existent because high angle targets that the main gun can’t service are inherently close range.

Sorry to say no M2 for the coax position, it is way too large along with ammuntion supply limitations, we will end up or keep leaning towards it being RCWS configured.

There are other 12.7mm options than M2HB (Mini Bushmaster and the OCSW 12.7mm) and with the new main gun (XM360 120mm) and new, reconfigured radios you could fit in a 12.7mm coax and 500-1,000 rounds on the left side of the main gun. If the whole turret is being reequipped (getting rid of the hydraulic drive and old FCS) just about anything is possible.

 

[Waylander]

I thought the Abrams got rid of the hydraulic turret drive and got an electrical one from A2 onwards?

Can a 7.62mm minigun reliably penetrate urban structures? I have more faith in a 12.7mm weapon being able to do this.
What is it that really warants the ability to put 3000 leadballs per minute into the air in ground warfare? I can't think of many situations were this is needed.

And 500-1000 rounds for a coax seems like a small amount to me. Even with a modern CIWS on top the gunner still has to engage alot of targets. That's were I also have problems with the Leclerc as it also only carries 1100 rounds for the coax.

 

[IronsightSniper]

I thought the Abrams got rid of the hydraulic turret drive and got an electrical one from A2 onwards?

Can a 7.62mm minigun reliably penetrate urban structures? I have more faith in a 12.7mm weapon being able to do this.
What is it that really warants the ability to put 3000 leadballs per minute into the air in ground warfare? I can't think of many situations were this is needed.

And 500-1000 rounds for a coax seems like a small amount to me. Even with a modern CIWS on top the gunner still has to engage alot of targets. That's were I also have problems with the Leclerc as it also only carries 1100 rounds for the coax.

It depends on what you're looking for I guess.

If they replaced the Commander's .50 caliber with a 7.62 mm minigun, than I'd agree, as the Commander's gun being independently traversal able from the turret, it's more suited for the AP role (say, a mass of Soldiers flank the rear side of the turret and the turret is not able to slew towards the threat fast enough). For light structure purposes, the Coax will do fine.

 

[My2Cents]

Can a 7.62mm minigun reliably penetrate urban structures? I have more faith in a 12.7mm weapon being able to do this.
What is it that really warants the ability to put 3000 leadballs per minute into the air in ground warfare? I can't think of many situations were this is needed.

The problem with the .50cal is that it penetrates urban structures too well. Reports from Iraq were that 120mm HEAT rounds were preferred to .50cal in order to minimize collateral damage. The 120mm would kill everyone in the room targeted and cause casualties in all the adjoining rooms, but it stopped there. The .50cal rounds would rip though 6 to 12 rooms before stopping, and you usually need to fire a lot of them to kill a single target.

But a minigun seems inappropriate. Sure, it can be intimidating as hell, but is it really that much more effective, or would it be better to go with a standard machinegun and a larger ammo supply?

Lastly, I hope they put a couple of additional pre-wired mounting points for remote weapons on the turret. If there is one thing history shows us, it is when troops are in combat their vehicles quickly acquire additional weapons beyond those allocated by peacetime the bean counters. Might as well plan for it, instead of dealing with it later on an ad hock basis. Personally, I would want to have both a .30cal machinegun and an AGL with air burst grenades in RWS mounts on a tank going into urban combat. The capabilities of the 2 weapons complement each other.

 

[Waylander]

Jup, the overpenetration of the .50cal is a problem but as you said a minigun wouldn't really solve that. Get into a neighbourhood with decently build houses and a 7.62mm minigun needs to use alot of ammo to saw through a wall.

An apartment building in Sadre City might see a 12.7mm round travel through the whole building but the wall in a compound in Helmand might very well suck the round in without a single penetration.

You said it yourself and I said it before. Modern 120mm rounds are the solution to this. Programmable HEs are lovely and the Danes made some really good experiences with the new PELE rounds as well.
PELE is a brittle KE penetrator which upon penetrating a wall breaks into many little fragments killing everything in the targeted room. Due to it using no explosives it is very safe when it comes to collaterall damage. The shrapnels usually only have enough energy to clear 1-2 rooms in a building (1 in a well build Afghani compound).

In these assymetric scenarios ammo quantity isn't that much of a problem and tanks can carry the usefully rounds only (HE, canister, HEAT, PELE) as there is no need for KEs.
And as harsh as it might sound but in an all out war collateral damage is much less of a problem.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

An apartment building in Sadre City might see a 12.7mm round travel through the whole building but the wall in a compound in Helmand might very well suck the round in without a single penetration.

So? With my fitout the 12.7 is still on the tank (in coax) and the 7.62 Minigun in in the off axis high angle weapon. You don't need a high angle weapon to engage Helmand Compounds. They aren't high rises in narrow streets. A coax mount will be fine.

Any weapons fitout is going to be limited in some way. Its a matter of finding the right priority. Unless we put 2-3 RCWS on top of each turret. Which since they cost in the multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars is probably not going to happen.

Roof mounted 12.7s are a hangover from WWII AA and not such a good idea against stand off missile firing aircraft. They were fine for crop dusters dropping naplam on top of you but useless against anything >500m away.

 

[Waylander]

Sure a compound in A-stan usually doesn't require high angle fire.
But halfway quality buildings in a city might very well soak up alot of the 7.62mm a minigun spits out.

I never said that a .50cal is required because of some obscure air threat. That's what main guns and autocannons are for.

I stand by my opinion that a mixture of .50cals and AGLs in the platoon offers the best capabilities.

 

[sgtgunn]

One advantage of a 7.62mm minigun RWS would be the psychological impact, which I don't think should be underestimated. My uncle was a mechanized infantry platoon leader in Vietnam in 1968 and he was able to "acquire" an M134 7.62mm minigun from an aviation unit. With the aid of the the Battalion welder he relocated the M2 .50 cal on his M113 ACAV to the right wing gun position, and mounted the minigun in the TC position. After some tinkering (and allegedly with parts from Radio Shack mailed from home), the minigun was wired into the vehicle through the dome light. He and his crew removed the bench seats inside the track and literally lined the floor with 200rd 7.62mm ammo cans. A couple of the large 2400 round helo ammo cans stored the "ready ammo". He said that the minigun scared the hell out of the NVA soldiers, especially at night, and often all it took was a few bursts to brink a quick end to a fire fight as the NVA decided there were better, more healthy places to be. He said one of the first times he fired the minigun in anger was a night attack on his company's assembly area - his platoon was on the enemy's initial main access of attack, and between the minigun and a 90mm RR firing canister, they broke the back of the attack, and in the morning, they found nearly a dozen enemy KIA in front of the position (the fire had been too intense for the NVA soldiers to attempt to recover the bodies).

I know that USASOC forces sometimes mount M134s on HMMWVs, as well as larger GAU-19/A .50cal miniguns.

Maybe not ideal for every tactical scenario, but I sure the hell wouldn't want to have anyone shooting at me with a minigun! (especially not a .50cal one!!! :shudder )

Adrian

 

[sgtgunn]

I wonder if a GAU-19/A can fire M903 SLAP or Mk 211 Mod 0 HEIAP rounds....?

2000rpm .50cal SLAP @ 500m vs. a BMP-2......

Adrian

 

[IronsightSniper]

Won't 12.7 mm SLAP just create another issue of overpenetration?

 

[Waylander]

A GAU-19...what a firework that would be.

The psychological impact might really be a backbreaker.
Not that running into a burst from an AGL sounds like fun to me...

 

[My2Cents]

One advantage of a 7.62mm minigun RWS would be the psychological impact, which I don't think should be underestimated. My uncle was a mechanized infantry platoon leader in Vietnam in 1968 and he was able to "acquire" an M134 7.62mm minigun from an aviation unit. With the aid of the the Battalion welder he relocated the M2 .50 cal on his M113 ACAV to the right wing gun position, and mounted the minigun in the TC position. After some tinkering (and allegedly with parts from Radio Shack mailed from home), the minigun was wired into the vehicle through the dome light. He and his crew removed the bench seats inside the track and literally lined the floor with 200rd 7.62mm ammo cans. A couple of the large 2400 round helo ammo cans stored the "ready ammo". He said that the minigun scared the hell out of the NVA soldiers, especially at night, and often all it took was a few bursts to brink a quick end to a fire fight as the NVA decided there were better, more healthy places to be. He said one of the first times he fired the minigun in anger was a night attack on his company's assembly area - his platoon was on the enemy's initial main access of attack, and between the minigun and a 90mm RR firing canister, they broke the back of the attack, and in the morning, they found nearly a dozen enemy KIA in front of the position (the fire had been too intense for the NVA soldiers to attempt to recover the bodies).

The advantages of a minigun are mainly psychological (No, that is not a minor advantage).

The disadvantage is keeping the beast fed, which from the description your uncle clearly addressed by filled all the space they could create inside the track with ammo cans. He probably had more volume used for ammo storage in that track than an Abrams tank does for all its weapons combined.

Which is why I think that a minigun is not the best choice. A tank is already intimidating, adding a minigun in the RWS does not bring enough value to be cost effective. Put the minigun in a dedicated vehicle instead, like a Styker, that can devote the space to carry enough ammo to exploit the advantages.

 

[Volkodav]

The advantages of a minigun are mainly psychological (No, that is not a minor advantage).

The disadvantage is keeping the beast fed, which from the description your uncle clearly addressed by filled all the space they could create inside the track with ammo cans. He probably had more volume used for ammo storage in that track than an Abrams tank does for all its weapons combined.

Which is why I think that a minigun is not the best choice. A tank is already intimidating, adding a minigun in the RWS does not bring enough value to be cost effective. Put the minigun in a dedicated vehicle instead, like a Styker, that can devote the space to carry enough ammo to exploit the advantages.

How about an AGL with programable ammunition?
When you need you cn get a lot of metal down range very quickly and when something more presice is required you could lob single grenades through windows or set them to detonate over cover.

Infact why not go for an RCWS that can accomodate a variety of ordinance and select what you think you will need for each mission.

 

[Waylander]

There are already several CIWS available which are able to accomodate a number of different weapons.
That's not the problem.
The question is more, what kind of mix is most usefull in a number of different situations as one will seldomely have the opportunity to switch weapons as soon as one faces a new situation.

 

[My2Cents]

How about an AGL with programable ammunition?
When you need you cn get a lot of metal down range very quickly and when something more presice is required you could lob single grenades through windows or set them to detonate over cover.

Infact why not go for an RCWS that can accomodate a variety of ordinance and select what you think you will need for each mission.

An AGL with programmable ammunition is good on a second RCS mount, but because it cannot be used at short ranges (the fuse will not have armed yet) or in close proximity to you own troops (6m-10m burst radiaus) , the primary RCS should therefore still be a machine gun.

The AGL with programmable ammunition brings significant new capabilities to the fight, because of its ability to attack infantry under cover. This capability is good to nice to have in open terrain, very useful in mountainous terrain, and vital in urban combat where it is a better choice than the main gun to clear infantry out of upper story rooms (lower collateral damage in adjacent rooms), and its unique ability to clear infantry hiding over the edge of rooftops.

 

[Bonza]

One advantage of a 7.62mm minigun RWS would be the psychological impact, which I don't think should be underestimated. My uncle was a mechanized infantry platoon leader in Vietnam in 1968 and he was able to "acquire" an M134 7.62mm minigun from an aviation unit. With the aid of the the Battalion welder he relocated the M2 .50 cal on his M113 ACAV to the right wing gun position, and mounted the minigun in the TC position. After some tinkering (and allegedly with parts from Radio Shack mailed from home), the minigun was wired into the vehicle through the dome light. He and his crew removed the bench seats inside the track and literally lined the floor with 200rd 7.62mm ammo cans. A couple of the large 2400 round helo ammo cans stored the "ready ammo". He said that the minigun scared the hell out of the NVA soldiers, especially at night, and often all it took was a few bursts to brink a quick end to a fire fight as the NVA decided there were better, more healthy places to be. He said one of the first times he fired the minigun in anger was a night attack on his company's assembly area - his platoon was on the enemy's initial main access of attack, and between the minigun and a 90mm RR firing canister, they broke the back of the attack, and in the morning, they found nearly a dozen enemy KIA in front of the position (the fire had been too intense for the NVA soldiers to attempt to recover the bodies).

I know that USASOC forces sometimes mount M134s on HMMWVs, as well as larger GAU-19/A .50cal miniguns.

Maybe not ideal for every tactical scenario, but I sure the hell wouldn't want to have anyone shooting at me with a minigun! (especially not a .50cal one!!! :shudder )

Adrian

That's a really interesting story, thanks for sharing.

I've heard some murmurs about the M163 VADS (for those that don't know, a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun consisting of a 20mm Vulcan cannon mounted on a modified M113 chassis) seeing more service as an anti-emplacement and ground support weapon than it did in the anti-air role, sounds sort of like an upscaled version of what you're describing. Obvious limitations aside, it must have been a bloody intimidating presence to anyone who ended up in front of it...

I'd be interested to see emerging ammunition technology (for example, the telescoping-case and/or caseless rounds being developed by AAI as part of the LSAT program) applied to a minigun-type weapon. If the new technology works as advertised it could significantly reduce the weight/volume necessary for supporting practical quantities of ammunition, the benefits of which are self-evident, particularly (I think) in a weapon naturally able to produce a high volume of fire. No idea how the LSAT ammunition in its current form would react to being put through a minigun though.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I know that USASOC forces sometimes mount M134s on HMMWVs, as well as larger GAU-19/A .50cal miniguns.

there are a number of vehicles that mount dillons. US Treasury also have them in some fliptops

 

[sgtgunn]

I just read some interesting lessons learned about US armor in urban areas in Iraq:

120mm Main Gun HEAT/MPAT/HE-OR rounds were considered highly effective in attacking insurgents in buidings. A 120mm round into a window would kill all the insurgents in the room, but suprsingly do very little collateral damage to the rest of the building. It was also very effective against groups of insurgents in the open, and appeared to have great psychological effect as well. It was reported that while firing down narrow streets and alleys, the overpressure from the muzzle blast of the main gun often killed insurgents who were never touched by the projectile or blast from the round detonating.

The co-axial M240 MG was the prefered weapon on the tank for urban warfare being both deveastatingly accurate (coupled with the TIS and Gunner's Primary Sight) and also the least likely weapon to cause unwanted collateral damage.

The TCs M2 .50cal was considered effective, especially firing API rounds, but was problematic in the rounds consistantly overpenetrated. It is claimed that .50 API would in some cases travel through the walls of 4-5!!! buildings. The .50cal and loader's M240 were useful in engaging close targets in upper stories of buildings that the main gun and co-ax could not elevate to engage. There is a reported case of a TC enagaging an insurgent hiding behinda a re-enforced concrete Alaska barrier (T-Wall) with .50 API - 50 rounds blasted a hole lean through the barrier and killed the insurgent.

TC's frequently engaged close targets with thier M-4 Carbines, and the loader's M240 was usefull in supressing alley ways as the tank moved past.

IMHO One lesson learned here for a future MBT/M1A3 is the need to for increased elevation on the co-ax/main gun for fighting in urban or mountainous areas. Also a high elevation RWS would also be very useful. A very large number of engagments were fought very close to the tank, which makes me wonder if a 40mm AGL is the best choice - not sure how effective that would be against targets >50m.

Limited visiblity was cited as an issue (as always) - I think the US should look at the all around camera set ups & hardening of optics on the Isreali Merkava.

Adrian

 

[meatshield]

I just read some interesting lessons learned about US armor in urban areas in Iraq:

120mm Main Gun HEAT/MPAT/HE-OR rounds were considered highly effective in attacking insurgents in buidings. A 120mm round into a window would kill all the insurgents in the room, but suprsingly do very little collateral damage to the rest of the building. It was also very effective against groups of insurgents in the open, and appeared to have great psychological effect as well. It was reported that while firing down narrow streets and alleys, the overpressure from the muzzle blast of the main gun often killed insurgents who were never touched by the projectile or blast from the round detonating.

The co-axial M240 MG was the prefered weapon on the tank for urban warfare being both deveastatingly accurate (coupled with the TIS and Gunner's Primary Sight) and also the least likely weapon to cause unwanted collateral damage.

The TCs M2 .50cal was considered effective, especially firing API rounds, but was problematic in the rounds consistantly overpenetrated. It is claimed that .50 API would in some cases travel through the walls of 4-5!!! buildings. The .50cal and loader's M240 were useful in engaging close targets in upper stories of buildings that the main gun and co-ax could not elevate to engage. There is a reported case of a TC enagaging an insurgent hiding behinda a re-enforced concrete Alaska barrier (T-Wall) with .50 API - 50 rounds blasted a hole lean through the barrier and killed the insurgent.

TC's frequently engaged close targets with thier M-4 Carbines, and the loader's M240 was usefull in supressing alley ways as the tank moved past.

IMHO One lesson learned here for a future MBT/M1A3 is the need to for increased elevation on the co-ax/main gun for fighting in urban or mountainous areas. Also a high elevation RWS would also be very useful. A very large number of engagments were fought very close to the tank, which makes me wonder if a 40mm AGL is the best choice - not sure how effective that would be against targets >50m.

Limited visiblity was cited as an issue (as always) - I think the US should look at the all around camera set ups & hardening of optics on the Isreali Merkava.

Adrian

Very interesting read thanks