Twilight 2020

[Legbreaker]

BTW, has any one checked Traveller, The New Era for any EMP rules

I've had a look and there doesn't appear to be.

[ChalkLine]

Neither does radiation half life of months instead of years and centuries.
It's a game. There were specific, deliberate changes to real world physics such as these to make it more playable and a much more interesting world to play in.

A new EMP section would be good though seeing how there's so much more electronics in the world now.

[Legbreaker]

A new EMP section would be good though seeing how there's so much more electronics in the world now.

Much more to get broken really. The high tech toys are nice and all, but in my opinion at least, they should be fairly rare and highly prized.

[Raellus]

Venezuelan Unrest

A potential flash point in the New World:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26174/russian-mercenaries-reportedly-descend-on-venezuela-to-help-protect-maduros-regime

-

[Legbreaker]

It's been "potential" for at least the last few years. With (allegedly) Russian backed mercenaries now protecting Maduro things just got a little more interesting, but I haven't actually seen any actual evidence the Russians have spent any coin whatsoever on this to date. Could be just smoke...
Fairly sure Maduro won't go quietly and there will be shooting at some point. Don't know if it's going to be just a single snipers bullet, full scale civil war, or something in between, but there will certainly be tears...
My guess is there are plans already being drawn up for an assassination with the blame put on one of his inner circle/security.

[Raellus]

It's been "potential" for at least the last few years. With (allegedly) Russian backed mercenaries now protecting Maduro things just got a little more interesting, but I haven't actually seen any actual evidence the Russians have spent any coin whatsoever on this to date. Could be just smoke...

Could be, but did you read the full article The Russian "PMC" is strongly linked with the Russian state security apparatus, and Russia recently deployed two TU-1600 strategic bombers to Venezuela (AFAIK, there still there), and they've been very vocal in condemning the U.S.A.'s support for the newly self-declared opposition "president". Coincidence I think not.

[Legbreaker]

But who linked them to the Russian government
The media
Not really seeing any solid evidence there just a LOT of conjecture, although it's possible....

[pmulcahy11b]

Good question and to be honest I don't know. I've been browsing around for a while and can't find an answer for you. Maybe the information is on some website but likely it is not as the composition of DU armor is highly classified defence material. However from what I've read and surmised the DU armor is fitted in layers with other extremely tough material such as Chobham or other ceramic materials, or is mixed with it when fitted to the Abrams tank making it less flammable. DU armor is concentrated on the frontal glacis of the Abrams and as far as I know it has never officially been penetrated by any type of tank round or missile ordinance. Only US Army and Marine Abrams tanks are fitted with DU armor and the US has not exported the tank fitted with DU armor to any country expect possibly Australia.

Just found out after doing some research into the new M1A2 updates. The M1's DU is encapsulated in graphite, which mostly stops potential pyrophoresis.

[RN7]

Just found out after doing some research into the new M1A2 updates. The M1's DU is encapsulated in graphite, which mostly stops potential pyrophoresis.

Good information Paul. Did you find any info about if the Aussie Abram's also have DU armor

[cawest]

the updated M1A2C would have DU and TUSK maybe TUSK II

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Good information Paul. Did you find any info about if the Aussie Abram's also have DU armor

Australian Abrams have never been equipped with DU armour. They may have had DU armour when they were in US use, before they were rebuilt for Australian use but they were specifically requested to be without DU armour. Future rebuilds/purchases will examine DU armour but the question of whether or not to equip them with DU armour remains as much a political consideration as it is military.


04/08/2004 MSPA 40804/04
Chief of Army Media Briefing Session
M1A1 Abrams integrated management (AIM) MAIN Battle tank
<snip>

BRIGADIER MICHAEL CLIFFORD
DIRECTOR GENERAL PREPAREDNESS AND PLANS, ARMY
ARMY HEADQUARTERS
<snip>

WE ARE BUYING 59 TANKS AS PART OF ONE OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST AND MOST PROVEN TANK FLEETS.

IMPORTANTLY HOWEVER THE ABRAMS IS PART OF A LONGER TERM STRATEGY ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE GOVERNMENT.

LAND 400 IS THE PROJECT WITH A YEAR OF DECISION OF 2011 THAT WILL MOVE US TOWARD A COMMON FLEET OF ARMOURED VEHICLES, TOWARD A SYSTEM OF COMBAT VEHICLES. THE ABRAMS IS JUST ONE STEP ON THIS JOURNEY.

THE ABRAMS ALSO PROVIDES US WITH ACCESS TO THE CUTTING EDGE OF NON DEPLETED URANIUM ARMOUR TECHNOLOGY.

<snip>

MEDIA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
BRIEFING ON THE M1A1 ABRAMS INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT (AIM) MAIN BATTLE TANK
LIEUTENANT GENERAL PETER LEAHY:
Ladies and gentlemen, do you have any questions
<snip>

QUESTION:
If we're not getting DU armour what sort of armour are we getting.

COLONEL HAYWARD: Armour technologies are sensitive in a classified area. The armour that we are getting is an advanced non-DU armour. We have had a look at destructive testing of this armour and we have sent across an Australian scientist to have a look at it, and it provides us an excellent level of protection.

QUESTION:
It's basically [indistinct] armour isn't it

COLONEL HAYWARD: It's an advanced non-DU armour that provides us an excellent level of protection.

<snip>

QUESTION:
Neil James from Defender. Nick just stole my first question, in fact. I've got two questions. The first one is, is the new improved armour as good as depleted uranium armour - yes/no

GENERAL LEAHY:
Duncan, you want to take that

COLONEL HAYWARD:
The armour that we're getting is very close to depleted uranium armour. In some aspects it is better against some types of threats. But I'm unable to discuss those in this forum.

QUESTION:
Okay, let's assume that the new armour is not as good as depleted uranium armour. Is the only reason we're not getting depleted uranium armour because of political concerns in Australia, and therefore are we running the risk of Australian soldiers being endangered in the future because political considerations prevent them having the best protection

GENERAL LEAHY:
Oh, I think Neil, you know me well enough that I wouldn't endanger our soldiers lives for a reason like that. We're getting very good armour. One that I have every confidence in, and one that I'd be happy for our soldiers to fight behind.

<snip>

Full transcript here: -

https://www.defencetalk.com/military/forums/t/australia-why-abrams-was-chosen-and-how-it-will-be-used.2160/

'The Age' newspaper
Australia picks US tanks to 'harden' force
By Mark Forbes
Defence Correspondent
Canberra
March 10, 2004


American-built M1 Abrams battle tanks valued at $550 million will spearhead a "hardened" Australian Army role in major overseas conflicts alongside the US.

Cabinet's national security committee last night agreed to buy 59 reconditioned, 68-tonne Abrams, ahead of British Challengers and German Leopards. The decision will be announced today.

Senior Defence sources said the war in Iraq had reaffirmed the belief that tanks were essential in modern conflicts to protect infantry troops.

Last November, The Age revealed that the military had settled on buying the Abrams, with Defence Minister Robert Hill, force chief Peter Cosgrove and army chief Peter Leahy backing the US tank over its rivals.

The Government's about-face on buying heavy armour is intended to strengthen the US alliance by boosting "interoperability" for future Iraq-style conflicts. Its 2000 Defence white paper argued against "the development of heavy armoured forces suitable for contributions to coalition forces in high-intensity conflicts".

In an indication of the strategic importance of the move, the US Administration will sell the tanks directly to Australia at a substantial discount.

The Australian Abrams, to be based in Darwin, would facilitate training between the two forces and access to ongoing development.

It could also allow Australian crews to fight in pre-positioned US tanks.

The Abrams will be modified for Australian requirements, including replacing its depleted uranium armour with ceramic plating.

Critics claim the Abrams are unsuitable for operations in the Pacific region and are too heavy to be airlifted. The tanks must be transported by sea.

Late last year General Leahy predicted that new tanks should be in service by July. He attacked critics of the planned tank purchase and said he had looked for a manoeuvrable, mid-weight, well-protected tank.

"Frankly, it's not there," General Leahy said. "So what we need to do is to respond to the current threat environment... where protection is, quite frankly, achieved by heavier armoured vehicles."

[cawest]

Your are dead on for the M1A1 AIM. but in 2016 it was announced that they were going to the M1A2C standard. I cut the below from the article. It does not say that it will have DU, but the M1A2sep3 does and tusk I and maybe tusk II. this was for Twilight 2020 so they could have DU.

It may include Australia aligning our baseline tank configuration with US Army tank development pathways (M1A2 Systems Enhancement Package Version 3).
The Land 907 Phase 2 upgrade will occur over the next 10 years with the intent to have a fully operational capability by 2025.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Your are dead on for the M1A1 AIM. but in 2016 it was announced that they were going to the M1A2C standard. I cut the below from the article. It does not say that it will have DU, but the M1A2sep3 does and tusk I and maybe tusk II. this was for Twilight 2020 so they could have DU.

It may include Australia aligning our baseline tank configuration with US Army tank development pathways (M1A2 Systems Enhancement Package Version 3).
The Land 907 Phase 2 upgrade will occur over the next 10 years with the intent to have a fully operational capability by 2025.

This is were it starts to get interesting from the Australian military point of view. The public & political situation here has been firmly anti-DU for decades but from what I'm seeing in defence circles at the moment, programmes for the future upgrading and/or expansion of the tank fleet are prepared to look at any available option (and select what's best suited to Australia's military and political needs).

That may very well mean we get a new generation of Abrams with DU armour but it could just as easily mean we get a newer generation of armour that supersedes DU. The critical factor is going to be political - no Defence Minister is going to order something that will mean political suicide for either the Minister or the Party. If the public says "No" to DU, there aren't many politicians here who would go against that for fear of being voted out at the next election.

[Legbreaker]

....at for fear of being voted out at the next election.

And the last couple of election results have been VERY difficult to predict, making the political risk extremely great.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And the last couple of election results have been VERY difficult to predict, making the political risk extremely great.

Yes indeed, I think this last one ended up being a surprise to people on every side of Australian politics.