Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/17/2002 7:16:58 PM EDT
I just thought I'd pass this story along for your amusement and awe. I don't claim that the assertions in this story are true, but they were vouched for by the guy who told me the story. Draw your own conclusions if you wish. A very good friend of mine, who served in the Army until just a few years ago, recounted a story to me from one of his Army buddies. This guy claimed to have been driving down an access road at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds, and was driving on a parallel course with an M1 Abrams tank out on the proving ground. The tank was apparently going rather fast, so this guy steps on it and tries to keep up and see how fast the tank is moving. Apparently, this tank was running with no speed governor and may have been modified, but then again, maybe not. No way to know. This guy who's pacing the tank reported to my friend that the tank was doing about 120 miles per hour, according to his speedometer. [shock] A fifty ton tank moving at 120 MPH...gads! Anyone care to comment? CJ
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:22:10 PM EDT
Have no idea what to make of that, but I'd like to watch if he threw a track! [BD]
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:22:29 PM EDT
Answers to this post may not be in the interest of national security. Who in their right mind would reveal information about this?
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:24:19 PM EDT
Somehow remember hearing we had some deuce-and-a-half's in Germany that could make big numbers on the autobahn.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:25:56 PM EDT
What in the hell was he driving and know he was doing 120? I agree with the poster before me. I don't know, and I don't care, I just hope it is true. -elliott
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:29:37 PM EDT
Goatboy, I need a "BS" icon. Although I did hear in Desert Storm, speed governors were the first thing to be ripped out in tanks. Who cares about engine life when your butt is on the line?
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:40:10 PM EDT
Do you really believe that a tank that acutally weighs around 67 tons can go 120mph and nobody knows about it but your friend? About 40-45mph is tops....
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:48:35 PM EDT
Do you really believe that a tank that acutally weighs around 67 tons can go 120mph and nobody knows about it but your friend? About 40-45mph is tops
View Quote
Back at the height of the Cold War when the Warsaw Pact was still in existence the life expectancy of a Front Line US Tank Crew in Europe was 2 hours or less. The first thing that happens when an Abrams makes it to Europe is the Engine Governor IS REMOVED! On official Record is the fact that A US M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank was clocked (by a German Officer) on the AutoBhan at 70MPH. The Tanker was Ticketed for Driving the Vehicle on the AutoBahn at that speed. So as far as I know this is as fast as I have ever heard of one going that is on Record. Benjamin
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:50:05 PM EDT
I don't remember any roads on apg that you could get to 120 on unless your on a rice rocket. none that border the test range to get a pov in to pace tank. m1's are fast but not that fast.. [:\]FANTOM..........
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:54:49 PM EDT
We lost three Abrams in the Gulf War to tank to tank conflict. Three Abrams were shot from the side by T-72 they were not turret hits. HOWEVER, A T-72 Shot an M1 straight on and the 125mm Flachette Stuck in the Frontal Armor of the M1 like a dart. CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT CRAP? I have seen camera footage of an M1 take a POINT BLANK HIT TO THE FRONT FROM A 120MM Cannon and there was this huge explosion which totally covered the tank and the Fully FLATTENED Warhead slid down off the front of the Turret of the M1 and onto the ground. NO Damage to the Tank.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 7:56:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001:
Do you really believe that a tank that acutally weighs around 67 tons can go 120mph and nobody knows about it but your friend? About 40-45mph is tops
View Quote
Back at the height of the Cold War when the Warsaw Pact was still in existence the life expectancy of a Front Line US Tank Crew in Europe was 2 hours or less. The first thing that happens when an Abrams makes it to Europe is the Engine Governor IS REMOVED! On official Record is the fact that A US M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank was clocked (by a German Officer) on the AutoBhan at 70MPH. The Tanker was Ticketed for Driving the Vehicle on the AutoBahn at that speed. So as far as I know this is as fast as I have ever heard of one going that is on Record. Benjamin
View Quote
70mph is still believable without the governor as I took the top speed from the spec sheet, and should have stated as such, but there is still a missing 50mph. 50mph is an astronomical amount of speed from a small, land based 60 ton vehicle. It takes a lot of horsepower to move that 120,000lbs another 50mph and I don't thing the 1500hp Lycoming Textron gas turbine engine has it in it. Nor do I believe that there is room for enough engine to run it at 120mph. Sounds like another [size=5]TALL[/size=5] tale to me.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:00:28 PM EDT
There are no speed governors in M1A1's or M1A2's I dont [i]think[/i]. Early M1A1- which were the same as M1's except for the gun- might have stll had them. But the HA's and HC's and all A2's have the DU armor and gained 10 tons. They put in a gearbox with lower gear ratios to keep the acceleration from a stop and to help them get through sand and mud. It will run out of revs before then. 48 is the best they do on pavement. 120 is too much, unless the tank was stripped, and the guy was looking at the Kph instead of the MPH on his spedo.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:00:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: We lost three Abrams in the Gulf War to tank to tank conflict. Three Abrams were shot from the side by T-72 they were not turret hits. HOWEVER, A T-72 Shot an M1 straight on and the 125mm Flachette Stuck in the Frontal Armor of the M1 like a dart. CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT CRAP? I have seen camera footage of an M1 take a POINT BLANK HIT TO THE FRONT FROM A 120MM Cannon and there was this huge explosion which totally covered the tank and the Fully FLATTENED Warhead slid down off the front of the Turret of the M1 and onto the ground. NO Damage to the Tank.
View Quote
I think the best photos attesting the shear strenghth of the Abrams were of one M1A virtually parked on top of another one with almost no visible damage to either one! Apparently they had been following each other when the front tank stopped suddenly and the following tank not so suddenly.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:02:09 PM EDT
Pony Boy , I agree I don't believe the 120MPH speed either, But I do believe the 70MPH story. However, 70MPH is right around 120KPH, If my quick SWAG is near right. Ben
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:05:16 PM EDT
Maybe it was a 'special project' with a different powerplant? Like maybe a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW232? (doubtful) (F16 powerplant, BTW) Maybe it's just a tall tale, but just THINKING about it is adequately entertaining. Short of someone spilling the beans and saying 'Yes, they're real, and I work on them', it's no more harmful than admitting to seeing a 'donuts on a rope' contrail in the sky in the general area of Nevada, or other visual evidence of Area 51 style special projects. CJ
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:07:12 PM EDT
I love the Abrams tank, this comming from a country which has historically had bad tank designs since they were invented. I think the Three best tanks in production now are M1A3
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:09:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: Maybe it was a 'special project' with a different powerplant? Like maybe a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW232? (doubtful) (F16 powerplant, BTW) Maybe it's just a tall tale, but just THINKING about it is adequately entertaining. Short of someone spilling the beans and saying 'Yes, they're real, and I work on them', it's no more harmful than admitting to seeing a 'donuts on a rope' contrail in the sky in the general area of Nevada, or other visual evidence of Area 51 style special projects. CJ
View Quote
Then again, maybe it was a Chevy Camaro with a carbon fiber shell made to look like a tank speeding down the tank course? Naw, nevermind....it would have probably been broken down. It must have been a Mustang [:)]
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:13:21 PM EDT
I was suprised by the fact the Marines in Desert Storm still came with a good number of M60A3 Pattons. I remember thinking HUH...They still have those things??? I forget that sometimes the Marines don't get the best up front.. There has been something like 5000+ M1 Produced..
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:16:02 PM EDT
Alot of people are screaming We don't NEED Main Battle Tanks anymore??? I think they are wrong.. I guess those people are the same ones saying we don't need our Super Carriers.... I think they are wrong there as well... Hell I know they are wrong.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:16:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2002 8:19:38 PM EDT by OLY-M4gery]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: There are no speed governors in M1A1's or M1A2's I dont [i]think[/i]. Early M1A1- which were the same as M1's except for the gun- might have stll had them. But the HA's and HC's and all A2's have the DU armor and gained 10 tons. They put in a gearbox with lower gear ratios to keep the acceleration from a stop and to help them get through sand and mud. It will run out of revs before then. 48 is the best they do on pavement. 120 is too much, unless the tank was stripped, and the guy was looking at the Kph instead of the MPH on his spedo.
View Quote
M1's were geared for higher top end than later M1 versions. The different gearing in later M1's was to get more power to the ground,(for off road performance) not neccesarily for better acceleration. I believe M1's and M2/M3's have speed govenors, M1's govenors were EASILY removed, M1A1 and M1A2's are not supposed to be removed, and are not made to be "popped on-off" like the originals. When I was in 3ID they had M1's, they could get up to about 70 mph on roads, but they would "float" after 55-60 making them difficult to steer. I think later versions lost 8-10 mph of top end.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:24:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/17/2002 8:34:04 PM EDT by OLY-M4gery]
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: I was suprised by the fact the Marines in Desert Storm still came with a good number of M60A3 Pattons. I remember thinking HUH...They still have those things??? I forget that sometimes the Marines don't get the best up front.. There has been something like 5000+ M1 Produced..
View Quote
There are some people that say the gun stabilization system on the later versions of the M-60's are actually superior to the Abrams for shooting on the run. Also we "stole" a lot of the goodies on the Abrams from the Leopard-2A4. The Leopard has less horsepower but has greater drving range, and it uses a "dependable" diesel power plant. The Merkava, is like like a hybrid AFV/IFV there is nothing like it. It was designed to make sure it's crew lived even if the tank was toast, if at all possible. Oh yeah, name another Tank/IFV, besides the Merkava that has AC and a water cooler built into it.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:27:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:29:12 PM EDT
Benjiman, I had heard that we had NO M1's killed by Iraqi we had 4 knocked out by US, and 4 written off to mine damage. One of the 4 knocked out by friendlies was the one written about by Tom Clancy in his "Armored Cavalry" book that got stuck in the mud, then fought it out with 3 T72's after it had been left behind by its company to wait for the battalion train M88's After knocking out the three T72's the crew decided it was too dangerous a place to try and make a rescue, so the had other M1's try to destroy it. They succeded only in setting the ammo in the bustle off. Three days later, after the cease fire and the appearance of the sun, they went back and a mechanic drove the tank out of the now dried mud. It was returned to the states and a new turret was fitted at Lima. Those things are awsome. Its a shame though that they didnt think to put the engine in FRONT like the Merkava. The Merkava's cool because it can carry its own infantry escort. The Marines would LOVE someting like that.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 8:52:25 PM EDT
The M1's we got in '83 would do 70 MPH without much trouble. The only time we tried was on the A-Bahn and only for short runs (catching up when a gap formed in a convoy). Took a while to get there and the brakes got real touchy. I never tried to turn beyond what it took to stay in the lane. Maintaining greater than 65 would cause the rubber on the track blocks to heat up and de-laminate (fly off). That's why the governor is there. The General Dynamics guys who came out to look them over every year or so told us the engine and tranny could do 85 MPH with the wind at your back. 120 must have been KPH. That's 74.5 MPH. Not outside the realm of possibility for someone estimating from a distance. 120 MPH is not possible. The tracks would fly apart before you got to 100.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 9:08:44 PM EDT
I heard a story that a small number of M1's were hit by friendly fire in the form of DP 20 or 30mm slugs, which would not have done much damage (DP, or Depleted Plutonium, is also erroneously known as DU or Depleted Uranium), but the slugs were much 'hotter' than they're supposed to be so the tanks were severely contaminated with radiation. This story goes that they were far too 'hot' to ever be safe to use again, so they got dumped into the ocean in deep water. This should also be considered to be another rumor. I think it's GREAT that the M1 is so tough that even WE can't bust one with another M1. Cool. Not at all like those Iraqi tanks that pop like zits. Oh, by the way, the Israelis lost one of their fancy new Merkava tanks just a few days ago to a Palestinian land mine. Three dead out of a crew of four. The armor on the floor of the tank apparently wasn't quite up to the task. I can only imagine what kind of a noise the crew of a tank experiences when a large shell impacts on the tank, even if it doesn't penetrate the armor. I'd rather not get a demonstration. CJ
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 9:27:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: I think the Three best tanks in production now are M1A3
View Quote
I assume you mean the Leopard 2? [img]http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/leo2fv2.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 10:10:26 PM EDT
I agree with the KPH theory. 120 mph is unrealistic. The Merkerva is not new its been around for several years. The engine sits in the front to absorb any hits and the back has enough room for about 4 troopers. Any head to head match between a M1 and any tank is extremely one sided. I think the the only tank other MBT that has a chance is the newer Britsh challenger, but the Chobalm armor and weapons systems are very similar to the M1s. We wrote off several M1s in Desert Storm, all due to mechanical failure or damage from friendly fire. They lost one off-loading from a ship. The cables used to lift is off the transport ship broke and the M1 landed upside down. It was kinda funny to see the Iraqis abandon their tanks when they saw our A10s coming!
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 10:14:18 PM EDT
The coolest crossing sign is near FT. Lewis near Tacoma. In the back woods where they practice near the Indian reservations, there are tank crossing signs on the road side. An M1 on yellow sign. Talk about collision damage from a deer!
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 10:35:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ARDOC: The coolest crossing sign is near FT. Lewis near Tacoma. In the back woods where they practice near the Indian reservations, there are tank crossing signs on the road side. An M1 on yellow sign. Talk about collision damage from a deer!
View Quote
[img]http://www.janeandrichard.co.uk/blog/img/tank.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 10:42:42 PM EDT
Just checked with a relative who was an Abrams instructor at Fort Knox, and a commander in Germany. He says there is a governor on the Abrams. Without it, they will do an honest 70MPH, but it's HELL on the tracks and running gear. He also told me a story about riding as commander in an early M1 in Germany. They had "DO NOT FOLLOW CLOSELY" signs, in German and English, on the back plate. He ordered his driver to stop at a crossroad light, and a Mercedes pulled up behind him, VERY close to the rear. He waved the driver back, but Herr Dumbkoph didn't have time to listen to an Ami. He did get a little perturbed when he noticed the Abrams turbine exhaust was blistering the paint off the hood of his Mercedes. From all accounts the top secret Chobham composit armor is just about inpentrable to any known anti-tank round. Most people don't realize that the huge turret is really a box to hold the actual armor. The outer shell is small-to-medium arms proof, and the secret inner layered armor is what stops the killers. We do know it contains layers of ceramic, synthetic, and depleted uranium, among others. If the bad guys come up with something that penetrates, the top of the turret can be popped off and the mix of layers can be altered to compensate.
Link Posted: 2/17/2002 11:47:30 PM EDT
When I was stationed in Fort Hood, we had a deuce and a half that took the wrong road off one of the hills there. They were in blackout drive, and wound up on a tank trail. At an intersection, they were hit by an Abrams moving at a pretty good pace. The Abrams hit the front end of the deuce, and ran over it, crushing the cab and hood, killing the driver and the two other guys in the cab. Very minor damage to the Abrams(broken headlight or two), the deuce was a complete write off. No joke, this happened. The deuce belonged to the 57th Sig. Battalion, this happened in '96 or '97.
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 12:10:13 AM EDT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I heard a story that a small number of M1's were hit by friendly fire in the form of DP 20 or 30mm slugs, which would not have done much damage (DP, or Depleted Plutonium, is also erroneously known as DU or Depleted Uranium), ---------------------------------------------- Actually "DP" means "Duel-Purpose", like "HEDP" rounds are High Explosive Duel Purpose, for penetrating light armor or anti- personnel..
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 12:24:03 AM EDT
By brother is in the Sig Bat at Ft. Hood. I will warn him next time I hear of a wrong turn by him or his crew!!
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 5:43:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock: Somehow remember hearing we had some deuce-and-a-half's in Germany that could make big numbers on the autobahn.
View Quote
I can attest first hand! Broke two speedometer cables on two seperate occasions crusin to Graf down Autobahn 9! The gauge stops at 60, so who knows how fast we were going!
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 5:50:10 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 6:16:03 AM EDT
Do they have a way to make a burst mode (2 shot) 120MM Main Gun for the M1. That would be a good invention for the reactive armor the soviets have a tendacy to use. DOUBLE TAP AT 40MPH W/ 120MM; PinPoint Accuracy.
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 6:17:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer: there is only 1 main battle tank that WILL do over 100mph. I forget the name of it. But it is from FRANCE and will only do it in reverse. mike
View Quote
That would be the IGVUP-13
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 6:20:11 AM EDT
My Winnebago with M1 Garand main gun will do 105 mph coming down a mountain pass: [img]http://www.dimensional.com/~mwluse/winnebago.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 6:21:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: Do they have a way to make a burst mode (2 shot) 120MM Main Gun for the M1. That would be a good invention for the reactive armor the soviets have a tendacy to use. DOUBLE TAP AT 40MPH W/ 120MM; PinPoint Accuracy.
View Quote
That would be an impressive feat. The gun is manually loaded.
Link Posted: 2/18/2002 6:38:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/20/2002 2:56:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: Do they have a way to make a burst mode (2 shot) 120MM Main Gun for the M1. That would be a good invention for the reactive armor the soviets have a tendacy to use. DOUBLE TAP AT 40MPH W/ 120MM; PinPoint Accuracy.
View Quote
TOW2 and TOW3 both have standoff warheads, IIRC, for just that purpose. The standoff warhead detonates the reactive armor cell and the main warhead punches through the now-unprotected armor. But, since the Abrams' main anti-tank round is the APFSDS, reactive armor won't help a tank - it only works against HEAT rounds.
Link Posted: 2/20/2002 3:41:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/20/2002 4:07:42 PM EDT by m1tanker]
So there I was. Going East to west down the central corridor at the National Training Center in an M1A1C (Heavy Armor). I had 10 minutes to hook up with the scouts so we could set a screen line and kill enemy recon. I was about 10 kilometers away. So, with the cavalier attitude that only comes from being a dumbass 1LT, I told the driver to floor it. Now, we had about 5 k's to work up a head of steam, a flat semi-paved surface, (remnants of road that goes down the central corridor) no oncoming traffic and a 5% (or thereabout) downslope - perfect tank drag racing conditions. With all those factors, our whopping top speed according to the speedometer and my PLGR.... 70K/Hr. That's it folks, and as far as I'm concerned that's as fast as the big boys can go. I too have heard all the neat-o stories about 100 MPH tanks - but I have also heard stories about sheep getting sucked out the side of the turret during sabot round testing, and I have also heard that you can't shoot a .50 cal at enemy troops (you just shoot at thier equipment ell tee, you know, thier kevlar and LBE...)and a thousand other barracks legends. What do all these rumors and a good looking lesbian that wants to invite you over for a fun filled evening with her "roommate" have in common? Let me tell you, dear reader: They are complete USDA Prime, 100% - bullshit. My vote goes in the 70K per hour top speed (and whatever that converts to in MPH) and not a bit more. As a final note - 70K an hour feels about like the speed of sound in a 70 ton tank, which is to say it is scarier than two motherf**kers. Load Sabot - Tanker
Link Posted: 2/20/2002 4:40:38 PM EDT
I grew up in Aberdeen, and know the base quite well. Had they been running at that kind of speed, it would be a well kept secret. That means they would never have done it where anybody could see it that was not supposed to. Therefore, if it was witnessed, divulging that information would be a security breach on the GI story teller's part. Plus, an M1 just can't go that fast! Another M1 anecdote: One day I was in Churchville, Maryland at a gas station filling up my car. At the intersection in front of the gas station, an M1 had pulled up to the light, on its way back to APG from the Churchville test facility. Invariably, M1's making this drive have at least a couple of other vehicles in convoy, and this time the vehicle behind the tank was a Hummer. Problem was, the Hummer must have fallen behind a little bit since this lady in a little newer plastic laden car had gotten between the tank and the Hummer. When she pulled up to the light behind the tank, she stopped at a distance of less than 5 feet or so from the rear of the tank. Anyone who knows M1's will tell you that it's a BAD idea to be that close, especially after some highway speed driving. Needless to say, the plastic stuff started melting first, paint began to blister, and finally it caught fire!!! The Hummer crew had pulled up in time to get her out of the car, just before it ignited. The tank crew pulled away a bit and when the heat source went away, the fire became very easy to extinguish. I, of course, laughed my ass off!
Link Posted: 2/20/2002 10:30:41 PM EDT
[>:/]
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 4:38:11 AM EDT
I can tell you that the ~70mph figure is accurate, my father worked for Lycoming on developing the fuel control system for this series of tanks. He's passed on, so I unfortunately can't relay any questions... I could tell you stories about the mountains of paperwork involved to get the length of a screw changed though! [:D]
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 12:04:36 PM EDT
I only have one story, but it's true. In 1983 I was living on a ranch just outside of the Dugway Proving grounds in western Utah. One day we were driving from I-80 towards Dugway when we noticed a large dust cloud from the side of the highway. There was a wide very well maintained dirt road next to the highway. As we came closer to the dust cloud, we could see a tank driving fast down the road. As we pulled along side the TC looked over at us, smiled and gave an order to the driver. This tank then lowered it's back end and accelerated away. We were going 60mph when this happened and the ranch truck would not go any faster. I found out later that it was a test M1 sent to Dugway for a series of tests in the desert. Dugway was a great place to go to high school. Between guard gates, Eduard Schevardnezda visiting, sheep dying from nerve gas exposure, MiG-21's from Red Star testing airspace defenses, we got to observe retreat during football practices.
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 9:04:02 PM EDT
A book I read last year about the 1st Armd Div in the Gulf War described the loss to enemy fire of the 3 M1s. IIRC, the Iraqis had their tanks powered down. After our guys passed them, they hit the M1s in the rear.
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 9:22:46 PM EDT
Obviously, there are conflicting stories about M1 losses. I heard that we lost a few to radioactive contamination when they were hit with unusually 'hot' DU rounds in friendly fire accidents. The tanks weren't physically damaged, just contaminated beyond recovery, and are now at the bottom of the ocean, helping to breed new generations of three-eyed fish named Blinky. Or so I've heard. Rumor. To be taken with a ten pound salt lick. The mere fact that there are a couple of conflicting stories regarding M1 losses in the gulf suggests something. That we're not being told all the truth, maybe? CJ
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 9:31:40 PM EDT
Depleted Plutonium? Certainly not. There are two isotopes of Plutonium (Pu-239 and Pu-240). "Hot" DU? Not possible. Plutonium is fissionable in both isotopes, but Pu-240 ends up being a fast moderator in a chain reaction. Plutonium is an very reactive element.(Chemically pure Plutonium will spontaneously ignite in the presence of Oxygen.) There are two Isotopes of Uranium U-235 and U-238. Uranium is fairly stable chemically speaking, and only slightly radioactive in the U-238 (Most common Isotope). U-235 is the fissionable isotope, and occurs naturally in less than 0.3% of the Uranium ore mined. URANIUM DECAY CHAIN -- Main Branch Read from top to bottom. Arrows indicate decay. Uranium-238 ==> (half-life: 4.46 billion years) alpha decay Thorium-234 ==> (half-life: 24.1 days) beta decay Protactinium-234m ==> (half-life: 1.17 minutes) beta decay Uranium-234 ==> (half-life: 245,000 years) alpha decay Thorium-230 ==> (half-life: 75,400 years) alpha decay Radium-226 ==> (half-life: 1,600 years) alpha decay Radon-222 ==> (half-life: 3.82 days) alpha decay Polonium-218 ==> (half-life: 3.11 minutes) alpha decay Lead-214 ==> (half-life: 26.8 minutes) beta decay Bismuth-214 ==> (half-life: 19.9 minutes) beta decay Polonium-214 ==> (half-life: 163 microseconds) alpha decay Lead-210 ==> (half-life: 22.3 years) beta decay Bismuth-210 ==> (half-life: 5.01 days) beta decay Polonium-210 ==> (half-life: 138 days) alpha decay Lead-206 (stable) Alpha and Beta decays are easily stopped by a sheet of tinfoil. Uranium is mildly toxic...about as much as all metals are toxic to humans. Uranium, contrary to most beliefs, is not all that "hard". In cast form it has roughly the physical strength of 304/316 stainless steel, albiet at three times the mass. There are forgings and heat treating specifications for Uranium which approach tool-steel hardness and toughness. (Alpha Phase Wrought Uranium / 0.75% Titanium alloy w/ heat treating) Depleted Uranium (U-238) has been for many years used as a countermass material for control surfaces of jet aircraft, and as a ballast material for racing yachts. U-238 is also the basis for creating Plutonium-239 by packing it around a reactor and allowing t to absorb neutrons (A Breeder Reactor)...this only a rough approximation of what is actually done, but you get the idea...
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 11:10:17 PM EDT
Ok, if a M1 can do 70 Mph now at 68 tons, what could the XM-1's do that weighed 10 tons less?
Link Posted: 2/21/2002 11:14:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Kar98:
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: I think the Three best tanks in production now are M1A3
View Quote
I assume you mean the Leopard 2? [img]http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/leo2fv2.jpg[/img]
View Quote
Does that new armor on the turret front actually do something? Or is it just there for Political correctness, cause the original Leopard II's were a dead ringer for a TigerI
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top