Talk:M1 Abrams

message: Can this tank be serviced and repaired in Europe and the rest of the world with metric tools and screws etc.? -- Espoo (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Given how common US bolts and parts are in the US, that seems doubtful to me. But note that Wikipedia is not meant to be a how to manual type of thing per WP:NOTGUIDE. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: My question is an indirect way of pointing out that this article is missing essential info, whether the tank is made with bolts and other parts in metric units or not. This then provides the essential information whether or not it makes sense for other countries to buy or temporarily use this tank or not. --Espoo (talk) 00:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If other countries are using Wikipedia as a guide to whether or not to purchase or use a certain, then the tank is probably a bad fit for those countries. They should stick with bows and arrows. As to readers, it's just WP:Trivia. BilCat (talk) 00:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be unaware of the importance and role of Wikipedia in keeping citizens informed and in being empowered to control and criticize political decisions, especially on issues that are  decided mostly in secret. Even most journalists first go to WP to check for specifically things like this issue of metric or not or inefficient mix.--Espoo (talk) 09:58, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

text: Metric vs. imperial was a major point of contention during the MBT-70 project. It rose to the level of SecDef and Defense Minister, who were still unable to resolve the question. I think it deserves a mention. We should probably have a production and maintenance section. I suspect the measurement issue is a major reason why the U.S. says the Abrams is not suited to Ukraine. Schierbecker (talk) 06:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: IIRC, most of not all of the U.S. military uses metric now, but I could be wrong. Or, like most of the US, they use a confusing mix of both. BilCat (talk) 08:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

text: User:Espoo. 
In August 1976 the USA and the Federal Republic of Germany signed an addendum to the 1974 MoU: ‘The Addendum will assure significant stan- dardisation of items that dominate the logistical support of our tank forces, including fuel, ammunition, guns, tracks, engines, transmissions and fire- control. The Addendum envisages both the comparative evaluation of Leopard 2 and XM1 tank designs and the initiation of joint activities neces- sary to introduce these standardisation elements into the respective national programs. It also provides for the possible participation by other NATO nations in these standardisation efforts.’[...]In accordance with the December 1974 MoU a comparative test and evaluation of the Leopard 2 American or Austere Version (AV), was con- ducted between September and December 1976, utilising the same criteria and constraints as used with the two American prototypes. Through the provision of a January 1977 addition to the Addendum to the December 1974 MoU the USA and West Germany agreed that the evaluation of the Leopard 2 (AV) MBT would be used only as a basis for furthering sub- system standardisation between the two tank systems. Among these con- figuration options were the diesel and turbine power packs, tracks and sprockets, metric fasteners, the gunner’s auxiliary telescope, and a turret capable of taking either a 105 mm rifled or a 120 mm smooth-bore tank [...] In the end standardisation between the two tanks, apart from the West German 120 mm tank gun was restricted to common fuel, fire-control modules and metric fasteners and tools at the crew maintenance level. West Germany declared that it could not agree to changes to the Leopard || which would have an impact on cost or production.
So, yes, I believe the Abrams uses metric fasteners. Schierbecker (talk) 06:23, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

text: As a former M1 tank crewman (I commanded a tank company in Iraq in 2006), I specifically recall SAE (not metric) wrenches in the tanks' toolkit.  I believe there is at best a mix of SAE and metric components, as found in many US-made products (see our automobile industry).  To the point of suitability for Ukraine, I think the real issues here are the weight of the tank, the complexity of its maintenance, and its fuel consumption. Vasky22 (talk) 17:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  metric or customary units? 

message: The page highlights reference to an article by David Axe in Forbes that the tanks going to Ukraine are former USMC tanks, specifically equipped with the USMC Firepower Enhancement Package (FEP).  I believe former USMC tanks had DU armor, and providing M1s with DU armor to a foreign country would be a significant deviatioin from former US policy.  Even the Australians got M1s without DU armor.  I've only found reference to this in the Forbes article, and have written David Axe for clarification on his source.
I do not know if the FEP could be added to older M1A1s in stock, without significant time and work.  I do know that the tanks pictured in some articles as the "M1A1s bound for Ukraine" have US Army-model smoke grenade launchers, but these are readily swapped.  The .50 cal mount does seem to look different from Army M1A1s, but I have seen US Army M1A1s equipped with what I believe were USMC variations on the M1A1 mount, complete with a camera for the tank commander.  This was at NTC (11th ACR/OPFOR) in the last 5 years or so. Vasky22 (talk) 18:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: David Axe replied and linked a different Forbes article that specifically notes that the M1 tanks going to Ukraine will not have DU armor.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/01/27/the-tungsten-m-1-how-ukraines-tanks-will-differ-from-americas/?sh=5fbcf13726b3  I think this should be noted that apparently these USMC M1s didn't have armor the equivalent of the US Army tanks, and that the Ukrainians are getting tanks that are roughly the equivalent of M1A1s sold to Australia and Iraq and Morocco. Vasky22 (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

text: * The US supplying the older M1A1 tanks is covered in the Operators section in the Ukraine entry already. -Fnlayson (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

text: *:first M1s seen in ukraine as of 2 days ago 91.247.180.57 (talk) 00:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

text: *::War Update: first Abrams tank seen in the Ukraine was reported lost within two days 2.27.2.54 (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ukraine to receive former USMC tanks 

message: The linked citations are either extremely outdated (1990) or does not have a price at all. Diator (talk) 00:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are they getting the price per unit? 

message: If it is officially confirmed that an M1 Abrams tank was knocked out in the Ukraine, might the article have a section to highlight such a lost? 2.27.2.54 (talk) 21:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:   Yet Another Abrams Tank Lost to Enemy Fire? 

message: Remove the Der Spiegel source because it cannot be verified. It is under the first sub heading history.
Remove it please. 64.189.18.25 (talk) 09:49, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The only use of a Der Spiegel source has a dead link but the archived web link works for me. So no reason to remove. -Fnlayson (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The first occurrence should be removed. There's a failed verification tag next to the cited content. Schierbecker (talk) 16:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Der Spiegel source 

message: Both history and design have content that is not cited and should be removed!or at least have sources for the content if it can be properly sourced. 64.189.18.25 (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Question: Do you have sources you'd like to add? User:CanonNi (talk|contribs) 01:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I have specifically noticed a typo in the 3rd to last paragraph of the armour section of the abrams gives it 16201 mm of armour. Sidewinderwetrust (talk) 14:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2024 

message: In history under previous development the first two paragraphs have sentences that require citations. 64.189.18.32 (talk) 18:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you saying you want a citation needed tag added or? Shadow311 (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Already done These sentences already have citation needed templates. If you have citations that verify these statement please reopen your request with the references. Jamedeus (talk) 19:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2024 

message: Congressional Report on the M1-E3 modernization program. 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12495/2#:~:text=The%20United%20States%20has%20sold,31%20M%2D1%20Abrams%20tanks. 47.198.232.143 (talk) 09:39, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  M-1E3 Abrams Tank Modernization Program