Skip to comments.
How the M-1 Became a Fuel Hog
Strategypage.com ^
| 12-18-03
| AJ Wagner
Posted on 12/18/2003 2:11:03 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
To: Cannoneer No. 4
Considering that 350 car engine only gets 10 mpg and that cars way 1/7 th of what a tank weighs 5 mpg is not that bad.
Considering that a 350 car engine only gets 10 mpg and that cars weigh 1/7 th of what a tank weighs 5 mpg is not that bad.
To: Cannoneer No. 4
I would like to be added as well (Former Armor Officer -- 3rd Armd. Div. Germany and Gulf WarI.)
To: AnalogReigns
What's the armament?
To: AnalogReigns
[ A hovering close to the ground fuel tank....for 15 minutes sounds like a lovely RPG target... ]
15 minutes to refuel ? I doubt that...
And a tanker truck in the same position is'nt vulnerable ?... When the tank gets close to empty driveing a coupla miles in retreat to refuel would work... or just waiting for the advance to proceed for a few minutes... the refueling copters would'nt be alone.. almost automated refueling of tanks would be faster and above all that "mobile" could a coupla copters get hit.. of course,,, war being what it is.. hovercraft tankers might work too... don't need tracks.. hard to imagine a more juicy target than an 18 wheeler hauling gas...
65
posted on
12/19/2003 1:35:44 PM PST
by
hosepipe
To: Cannoneer No. 4
At the time the tank was conceived, this poor fuel consumption wasn't considered an issue. I disagree with that statement. I worked at the Army's Soldier Support Center as the M1 and much of the new Army equipment was being developed and fed into the units. Much work went into making sure we had the right kind of fuel haulers to support the front line tanks because of the high fuel consumption.
Could you put me on your treadhead ping list? Thanks.
To: expatpat
>>>
I'm racking my poor brains right now over the physics involved <<< You got me thinking too. I think its got to do with the ability of the hot gasses to expand more effeciently at the lower air pressure at altitude - thereby exerting more thrust.
Wish I could remember more from Thermo 301 - but that was 45 years ago.
67
posted on
12/19/2003 1:44:57 PM PST
by
HardStarboard
(Dump Wesley Clark.....he worries me as much as Hillary!)
To: archy
The Germans always did know how to make good looking big rifles!
The '88 was a classic and this Haubitze doesn' look a bit "bitze"! Looks formidible as hell.
68
posted on
12/19/2003 1:50:07 PM PST
by
HardStarboard
(Dump Wesley Clark.....he worries me as much as Hillary!)
To: Orangedog
IMO, it has the turning radius of the Nimitz, but that's kinda what I was after. You have to be tallented to get yourself killed in a Volvo. You ever seen the Nimitz in a REALLY tight turn?
69
posted on
12/19/2003 2:12:07 PM PST
by
archy
(Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
To: archy
LOL! I can imagine the crew picking up loosely stowed gear for a while after that turn.
70
posted on
12/19/2003 2:28:52 PM PST
by
Orangedog
(Remain calm...all is well! [/sarcasm])
To: Lokibob
LOKIBOB! They will have to pry my Army Air Corps silk scarf from my muddy, runnung-away paws !
71
posted on
12/19/2003 2:46:46 PM PST
by
PoorMuttly
(KAKKATE KOI !)
To: Orangedog
LOL! I can imagine the crew picking up loosely stowed gear for a while after that turn. From the making of the film *The Final Countdown* I believe, where the Nimitz undergoes a hurricane-force storm that sends it through time to December, 1941...the day before Pearl Harbor. Aircraft and the storm's weather and high seas were added later by the SFX artists, I reckon.
Hey the Hollywood folks want to see what it'll do, give 'em a show!
-archy-/-
72
posted on
12/19/2003 2:59:12 PM PST
by
archy
(Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
To: John Lenin
Considering that a 350 car engine only gets 10 mpg and that cars weigh 1/7 th of what a tank weighs 5 mpg is not that bad. I think you misread that. It's NOT 5 Miles Per Gallon, it's 5 Gallons per Mile.
Aa for car mileage, my LT-1 (350) T/A get 17mpg city and 28 highway.
The 350 Vortec in my Z-71 truck gets about 17 highway though. Gearing mostly. The T/A only turns around 1700 rpm at 70 in 6th gear.
73
posted on
12/19/2003 3:18:10 PM PST
by
AFreeBird
(your mileage may vary)
To: archy
Wow, wouldn't just love to jump that wake in a Wave Runner or Cigarette.
74
posted on
12/19/2003 3:19:43 PM PST
by
AFreeBird
(your mileage may vary)
To: ArrogantBustard
By the time you issue launch orders to deliver your W-88s, the brigade will be somewhere else.
Sorta.
Well for sure, an armoured brigade could not defeat a Trident.
75
posted on
12/19/2003 7:49:04 PM PST
by
Blueflag
(Res ipsa loquitor)
To: John Lenin
5 gallons per mile = M1A1
76
posted on
12/19/2003 7:49:36 PM PST
by
Blueflag
(Res ipsa loquitor)
To: hosepipe
Helos deliver huge fuel bladders to forward positions, and kinda sorta 'drop' them and run.
Helos are fast-mover fuel trucks for tankers.
77
posted on
12/19/2003 7:51:16 PM PST
by
Blueflag
(Res ipsa loquitor)
To: archy
NOW theres a shot......................thanks..
78
posted on
12/20/2003 12:11:42 AM PST
by
hosepipe
To: Blueflag
{ Helos are fast-mover fuel trucks for tankers. ]
true. but guys havea get out and HANDLE IT... know what I mean... In a hot zone gettin out SHOULD be needless for that purpose.....
79
posted on
12/20/2003 12:17:08 AM PST
by
hosepipe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson