On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 08:47:23 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:

On 17 Jun 2004 07:31:01 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

http://216.239.37.104/translate_c?hl...UTF-8%26sa%3DG

M-1A2 is dogmeat. Leo 2 has:

Sounds like a sore loser if I ever heard one.




- anti-top attack missile protection- M1A2 doesn't


Such as?



- modular, spaced, and laminate armor plus reinforced inner turrret
and Kevlar liners for crew protection- M1A2 doesn't

According to that report you've been siting so much the M1A2's is
better still. But hey, the Leopard II is good enough for forth place.




- a 1,550 hp turbodiesel which gets better gas milage, consumes less
fuel and air, and has a reduced heat signatire- M1A2 doesn't

And can be heard for how many miles?
the agt1500 engine in the abrams has been out of production since like
1992, and is 1960's technology. and the reliability and cost problems
relate to this. its like fixing the engine of a B-52. Even though the
crusader is cancelled their is talk ofalso putting its engine into the
abrams.
here is a little info on the engine.
http://www.geae.com/engines/military...objective.html

and dont forget that unlike diesel, you can use almost anything as
fuel in the M1
info on the agt1500 turbine engine.
http://www.honeywellaerospace.com/pd...500Turbine.pdf



- DM 53 ammo plus L55 main gun- just as lethal as M1A2 with L44 copy
and DU round

Because you say so? Doubtful the thing is even as effective as an L44
with the M829A2 let alone the M829E3.



- been adopted by most of Europe- M1A2 rejected in every Euro-trial

Most likely because they go into hysterics every time they think about
DU armor.



Rob