Ok this is for the M1 family of MBT’s. Any questions or thoughts?
What specifically are you looking for?
Just one: What exactly are you talking about?
Very vague post, my friend. [;)]
Oh, and welcome to FSM! [:D]
What is your question??
If you want them IDed, the left is the initial M1 presented to US Army, middle is an early M1A1(old M156 track), right is an M1A2.
???[B)]
By the way. There is no such version as the M1A1HA, Heavy Armor. This is a term only used by modeling companies. The correct nomenclature is M1A1HC, Heavy Common. This is due to it having the added armor which makes it Heavy, and is a Common tank for US Army and USMC.
Is there a website which outlines the differences between the various versions of the Abrams? I’d be very interested to know - currently I’ve no idea how exactly they differ in appearance or specification.
EDIT: Disregard the above question; I just found your excellent article on Armorama.com here -
http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=613
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm
Start there. Then let us know what your looking for. Remember to phrase your questions in the form of a question…
Mog
Able what are you asking ? Are you hosting an Abrams group build and these are possible badges or are you seeking info on a particular vehicle?
I think he’s just saying “tanks” for the memories.
RRRIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHT?[%-)][:P][:o)]
In his book “Desert Victory - The War for Kuwait”, author Norman Friedman writes that “The U.S. Army in Saudi Arabia probably had about 1,900 M1A1 tanks. Its ability to fire reliably when moving at speed over rough ground (because of the stabilized gun mount) gave it a capability that proved valuable in the Gulf. The Abrams tank also has… vision devices that proved effective not only at night, but also in the dust and smoke of Kuwaiti daytime. On average, an Abrams outranged an Iraqi tank by about 1,000 meters.” The actual numbers of Abrams M1 and M1A1 tanks deployed to the Gulf War (according to official DOD sources) are as follows: A total of 1,848 M1A1 and M1A1 “Heavy Armor” (or HA) tanks were deployed between the US Army and Marine Corp (who fielded 16 M1A1’s and 60 M1A1(HA) tanks).
Obtained at www.globalsecurity.org.
You are right about the first two, but the last is the M1A2 SEP, not baseline A2.
I know most of the M1’s history. (My father is a Master Gunner on the M1A1/A2 SEP armor platform). I made this thread to findout if there was any companies other than Rocco that made any of the above armor platforms and to inquire about camo and such of the 80’s, such as the MERDC four tone camo.
The author who wrote M1A1HA is still wrong. It is not actually called this. The actual nomenclature is still M1A1HC. The author probably never even saw one and was going off something he read as well. You have to take everything you read at non-officail website, and some official ones as well, with a grain of sale. Anyone can post anything on the web and claim it is gospel.
On the M1A2 SEP, without seeing the bastle rack and the left rear hull (to see the VCU and UAAPU) there is no way from that angle to tell a standard M1A2 and an M1A2 SEP apart.
If you wanted to know what M1 models are out there, that is what you should have asked. Here is your answer. These are all in 1/35 scale. I don’t know about any others since I only build 1/35.
Tamiya’s new M1A1/A2 OIF kit is the easiest to build and the newest tooled. Not necessarily the best. They all have their goods and bads.
Tamiya’s lacks the prominant anti-slip coating. It does come with a nice USMC MCD, APU, and some modern stowage and two descent figures.
Dragon’s is a close second to Tamiya. It is a little harder to build, but does have the anti-slip coating. All of Dragon’s M1A1/A2s also come with a partial interior. The newest Dragon USMC M1A1HC Baghdad kit also comes with a nice selection of gear, MRE boxes, and PE for the Bustle Rack Extension (BRE), however, the BRE is a US Army 3ID type, not USMC type. Dragon has also announced an all new tooled M1A1AIM to be out this fall. The M1A1 AIM will share most of its componenets with their recently released M1 Panther II mine clearing vehicle. Many improvements have been indicated over the Panther II as well. http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/dragon/dr3534.htm
Trumpeter is about on par with Dragon. It has the mud relief holes in the rear sprockets, one of only two kits to have these. It also comes with some extra ammo boxes and gear.
Academy’s is horrible. It has a sprue with some updated parts that are great for OIF, such as USMC Bustle Rack Extension, new style sprockets with mud relief holes, smoke grenades for launchers, USMC MCD, nice APU, etc. Other than the new items, it is the same old bad Academy kit with short M1 turret and old style T-156 tracks that haven’t been used since the early 1990s.
Italeris is an improved copy of the Trumpeter M1A1HC.
Here is a side-by-side review of most M1 Abrams kits out there.
http://vodnik2.republika.pl/pages/m1-comparison/m1comp1.htm
Review of new Tamiya M1A1/A2 OIF kit:
http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/tamiya/tam35269.htm
Review of new Academy M1A1 Iraq, 2003 kit:
http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/academy/acd13202.htm
Review of Dragon M1A1 USMC Bahgdad 2003 kit:
http://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/dragon/dr3533.htm
MERDC cammo was used on M1IPs and early M1A1s in the early 1980’s as well.
By the way, I have been in the US Army for 12 years and have been in and around armored vehicles my whole career. I do know what I am talking about. I also wrote an article on the M1 series of tanks. You can read it here to read up more on the different types: http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=613
Actually both the M1A1HC and HA are misnomers. The Army tracks them as M1A1, plain and simple. Most of the non-heavies have been rebuilt into updated variants, but some of the initial M1A1s are still kicking around (owned one up at Ft. Devens).
If that was the point then why did’nt the begining post say so? Not to sure what is happening I am scared.
Form my understanding HA where M1’s with added on armor for the Gulf War and had dozer blazes. HC and HA may mean the samething. I thought there also was an M1A1D.
I noticed that the Academy M1A1 is an M1A2, it has the CITV. (I didn’t mean to bash you, but my father is a Master Gunner (Master Sergent) on the M1A1/A2 SEP armor platform, has commanded the M48A5, M60A1, M60A3, and M1A1 armor platforms, he is currently working at Ft.Knox in CAPO, but is now in Iraq. He has served for 23 years.)
M1A1 Heavy had nothing to do with a blade, they only mount mine plows and rollers. Any version M1 can mount these, doesn’t matter which type it is. It is called this because of the the depleted uranium armor mesh added to the front slope of the turret. This armor made it 8 tons heavier, hence the Heavy name. Weight went from 60 tons to 68 tons. HA and HC do mean basically the same thing, just HA is not used by the military. HC is used by USMC and still some in US Army.
M1A1D is a rebuilt M1A1 with some of the Digital (D) gear added from the M1A2s. It is a cheap M1A2, but still has the M1A1 CWS (Commander’s Weapons Station) and no CITV. It gives the same C3 (command, control, and communications) capabilities as an M1A2. Check out my article and it explains it as well.
No, the Academy kit is a USMC M1A1HC. It does not have a CITV, it is the USMC MCD (Missile Countermeasure Device). It is used to redirect optically guided missiles away from the tank. Again, check out my article and it will explain all the intricacies of USMC M1A1HCs.
I respect your dad and God speed on his return, I was over there too, tough fight. Just because he is a Tank Master Gunner/ Master Sergeant doesn’t mean you know everything about tanks though.