HOME | DD

BlacktailFA — M1 Debacle, Ch5: Engineering 1

Published: 2010-11-11 11:27:15 +0000 UTC; Views: 961; Favourites: 7; Downloads: 13
Redirect to original
Description The REAL M1 Abrams! Chapter 6: Combat Engineering Issues (Part 1 of 3)

One of the most important tasks required of a Main Battle Tank is Combat Engineering --- there are times and places where you MUST get through, NOW, and the only way it's possible is by sending Tracked Armor forward to clear the way. Regular Engineering Vehicles can clear obstacles when the enemy isn't around, but Tanks are the ONLY means to do so if the obstacles are protected by fire.

The M1 Abrams however, is VERY lacking in this essential capability, and EVERY US military operation on the ground is in danger as a direct result.

To fully grasp the limitations of the M1 Abrams in Combat Engineering, and why it's a VERY serious problem, one must first know 3 things;
1- The history of Tanks in Combat Engineering.
2- Why Combat Engineering in modern war requires Tanks.
3- The most quintessential tools required for Tanks to perform Combat Engineering tasks.

Only then, one can clearly see why a Main Battle Tank MUST be able to perform said tasks, and how poorly the M1 fares in this task. To that end, this Chapter is divided into three sections, in order to provide the most methodical coverage of the issue.

Here, in Part 1, you'll learn some of the history of Tanks in Combat Engineering through the two World Wars, and from the early Cold War onward from an American perspective. You will also learn of the two most useful tools for a Tank to have in any Combat Engineering task; a type of munition, and an attachment.

Only starting with this history can you appreciate why Tanks must ALWAYS be capable of said tasks.


Note: To play this animated GIF movie in full-scree, click "Download" (you may also save a copy on your computer, if you please).
Related content
Comments: 17

Codename-Quincy [2012-05-22 01:22:17 +0000 UTC]

the history of the tank isn't really pertinent in modern warfare. the battlefield has changed significantly since the introduction of the tank. (trench warfare was a bad idea even back then) many military analysts see the tank going away soon. any lo-tech with an EFP or 2 can disable any modern MBT if he has a clue as to what he's doin. yes, tanks are scary against dismounted infantry, but there are sooo many options for taking them down. that's why the pentagon theory crafters are exploring tank-free military ideas

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DireWolf505 [2011-12-29 07:43:15 +0000 UTC]

The AVRE was a BAMF, I think.

The 728s were/are awesome.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to DireWolf505 [2011-12-29 12:55:30 +0000 UTC]

You can't go wrong with a tank gun that;
1- Fires a 64lb projectile.
2- Fires a HESH round with a 40lb fill.
3- Has no gun overhang.
4- Can slew it's gun over it's side in close quarters.
5- Has a muzzle report that's less of a "bang" than a "chug".

LoL

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DireWolf505 In reply to BlacktailFA [2012-06-17 07:44:58 +0000 UTC]

Oooh, yeah.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Strike-Wolf [2011-11-01 15:16:28 +0000 UTC]

Uhm... just to say, I'm not a big expert on tanks, but the Abrams is an advancement... You're looking at what it can't do? Look at the Sherman. It was great, except when you saw what it looked like after it was hit by a Panzer battalion. You're looking at the negative side. Nothing is ever 100% safe, anyone who believes that is a fool. No offense.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to Strike-Wolf [2011-11-01 20:53:13 +0000 UTC]

What sort of advancement? How, exactly, is the M1 better than any of it's contemporaries OR immediate predecessors?

As for the notion that nothing is perfect, that's a Red Herring Fallacy, because it's completely irrelevant to my premise. These presentations are exposes of the numerous and massive flaws in the M1, not an argument that the M1 is imperfect.

Or to put it another way, which of my claims in the above presentation do you dispute?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

zeraful [2010-12-23 13:52:07 +0000 UTC]

WHY THE HELL THAT US ARMY THROWN THE M728s OUT



Oh wait, (Br)asshats again

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to zeraful [2010-12-24 12:31:40 +0000 UTC]

The main reason the M728 CEVs were retired in the 1990s was because the US Army somehow expected an M1-based CEV would be developed to replace it.

But as you've seen in Part 3 of this chapter, the M1 couldn't push a Dozer Blade --- that's half the M728's signature capabilities out the window.

No demolition gun was developed for or adapted for an M1 CEV either, because the ATK firm duped the Army into throwing it's support behind the M908 HE-OR round instead.

So, no M1 CEV... and no more M728 CEVs either.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zeraful In reply to BlacktailFA [2010-12-24 12:38:49 +0000 UTC]

Well, since Vietnam is in good term with the US now, did you think there's any chance we could buys those tanks like M60s, M726s and other with cheaper price? Since 1995, PAVN's are working on to bought some spare part for their M113s, M41s and M48s was left to dust in hangar, so i guess they're not gonna let go of this xD

Good stuff can't just go to waste, ya know xD

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to zeraful [2010-12-24 13:30:18 +0000 UTC]

I'm pretty sure the US government won't sell M728s to Vietnam, but there are 4 other countries that still have them --- they might be willing to part with a few, for a price.

It's an excellent weapon for "Jungle-Busting", which actual M728s did a lot of during the Vietnam War.

An alternative would be the Centurion AVRE 165, which has the same equipment, main gun, and capabilities.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zeraful In reply to BlacktailFA [2010-12-24 14:11:24 +0000 UTC]

What a shame, but AVRE could be a fine choice too xD

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChapterAquila92 [2010-11-11 23:10:08 +0000 UTC]

Interesting overview so far. It's also interesting to note that the majority of troops deployed outside the wire nowadays tend to be engineers, rather than straight-up infantry.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to ChapterAquila92 [2010-11-12 01:09:03 +0000 UTC]

That's another reason Combat Engineering is so important --- troops need it everywhere they go in Mobile Warfare.

And in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, with so little existing infrastructure to work with, it's THAT much more important.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

zeraful In reply to BlacktailFA [2011-01-07 12:53:12 +0000 UTC]

I wonder what would happen if some (Br)asshats have a big idea to go to Vietnam again xD

[link] That's in HCM city (Saigon)

[link] and this is in the Middle

And finally,North(take Hanoi for an example):[link]

Have fun "mobilizing" M1s in those areas, (Br)asshatsz xD

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChapterAquila92 In reply to BlacktailFA [2010-11-12 01:24:45 +0000 UTC]

Indeed.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

VickersIndependent [2010-11-11 17:21:30 +0000 UTC]

Are you planning on covering th ABV and the Grizzley?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlacktailFA In reply to VickersIndependent [2010-11-12 01:06:10 +0000 UTC]

I'm going to cover those two in a future chapter on M1 Abrams Vaporware, since they didn't exactly turn out as planned.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0