# An M1A2 Abrams tank in World War 2 **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 20, 2012, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713 "2012-06-20T03:05:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/41 "2012-06-20T16:50:04Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Roughly quantifiable. > > The anti-tank specialist version of the 88 was the [Pak 43](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8.8_cm_Pak_43), although all models were used against tanks when available. > > Wikipedia lists Pak 43 armor penetration at 100m (effectively point-blank range) as 202mm. > > [M-1 Abrams](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams#Armor) frontal armor equivalence (very rough estimate) against kinetic penetration is given as 940–960mm, but that’s the old version. The M1A2s all have depleted uranium armor upgrades, described in the same article thusly: “The _added_ protection from the depleted uranium armor is believed to be equivalent to 24 inches (610 mm) of RHA.” [Rolled homogeneous armor plate] > > So you;re looking at a penetrator capable of cracking 202mm striking 1560mm equivalent armor. You’re talking about a single shot against the best-protected part of the tank. When the entire German army is shooting at it, it’s bound to be hit somewhere sensitive (hatch covers?) eventually. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/42 "2012-06-20T16:55:21Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I don’t think this is true. An Abrams is seriously heavy (around 140,000 pounds) but a Tiger II weighed more (around 154,000 pounds) and they were able to move around. As I recall, this was actually a problem in fielding the Tiger II. There were many bridges between Normandy and Berlin that simply couldn’t take its weight! ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/43 "2012-06-20T17:00:56Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] Throw in some Mark 16 torpedos (or some Japanese Type 93’s). The Mark 14’s were shit. [/QUOTE] Sure, along with some early model RPG’s and a 1950’s fire control system…plus a few other goodies. The point being, if you could go back in time you could take stuff that would actually be much more effective against the Germans and Japanese than a single or even a couple of Abrams tanks. It’s too advanced for the time. While a Sherman in, say, the mid-30’s would have been devastating on the battlefield (you could take a Chieftain that you could have in development and trot out along with your F-86 Saber in, say, 1942, just as German is poised to bring out it’s next generation Panzers and developing it’s ME-262, assuming they last that long). Sell the Brits and French a few hundred thousand AK-47’s and some Shermans (along with some decent advisers in strategy and tactics to use the things effectively), a few hundred P-47s and such and you’d have been giving them a huge technological early edge against the Germans, who’s tanks weren’t even better than the crap the French had at the start of the conflict…it was their tactics that ruled. Oh…and also take back a decent vehicle mount radio system from the 50’s as well, to be included in all our vehicles sold. All I ask for this munificence is a few juicy government contracts, to get me started (after that I’ll be betting on every world series and football championship, doing some heavy duty real estate speculation, and perhaps dabbling in the stock market ;)). Not so much to ask for saving the world from evil Fascists… -XT ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/44 "2012-06-20T17:22:02Z")
> [@XT](#): > > All I ask for this munificence is a few juicy government contracts, to get me started (after that I’ll be betting on every world series and football championship, doing some heavy duty real estate speculation, and perhaps dabbling in the stock market ;)). Not so much to ask for saving the world from evil Fascists… Television licenses - huge profits waiting there. Get licenses for as many major cities as you can grab and get in on the ground floor as the television boom hits in the fifties. The other thing would have been civil aviation - invest in airlines and airfields. But that boom might not have happened without the full war which you prevented. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/45 "2012-06-20T17:35:22Z")
Well, just in case that’s true I’ll be bringing a few, um, other things back with me as well. Just some patents, a few simple inventions and devices that I think folks might enjoy… (How do you like the ‘new’ xPod?? ;)) -XT ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/46 "2012-06-20T17:55:55Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > As it happens, I saw two Abrams tanks during Marine Week here in Cleveland. One of them had a UPS shipping tag on its left rear flank. Imagine the postage on one of those babies…! Let’s see it’s $0.45 for the first oz 0.20 for the next oz. Wow! ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/47 "2012-06-20T18:02:57Z")
BTW, what would you call this tank? The man it’s named after didn’t yet merit the honor in June '44. ---
**Author:** ![lazybratsche](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ba8739/32.png) [@lazybratsche](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lazybratsche)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/48 "2012-06-20T18:07:23Z")
I bet the most useful way to use that M1 would be as a scout and spotter. Between the thermal site and range finder, the crew could just sit back and call in artillery, or direct its supporting infantry around an ambush. Basically, use it as a “force multiplier”, rather than just a Supar Heavy Tank Sure, it could probably chew up a battalion or two without much trouble, but there’s a whole lot of German army between it and Berlin. (how good is the thermal site? Could you spot an anti-tank gun on the other side of a hedgerow? Can you keep the machine guns fed with WW2 ammunition?) ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/49 "2012-06-20T18:16:06Z")
> [@lazybratsche](#): > > I bet the most useful way to use that M1 would be as a scout and spotter. Between the thermal site and range finder, the crew could just sit back and call in artillery, or direct its supporting infantry around an ambush. Basically, use it as a “force multiplier”, rather than just a Supar Heavy Tank Sure, it could probably chew up a battalion or two without much trouble, but there’s a whole lot of German army between it and Berlin. > > (how good is the thermal site? Could you spot an anti-tank gun on the other side of a hedgerow? Can you keep the machine guns fed with WW2 ammunition?) The M2 machinegun would fit quite well into WWII since it was used then. But the REAL best use of the M1 Abrams would be to be sent to Detroit to be used for R&D. A lot of its technology would too advanced to copy right away. But a great deal of it could be used to upgrade existing vehicles and certainly could be a real boon in the postwar environment. ---
**Author:** ![Blakeyrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecd19e/32.png) [@Blakeyrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blakeyrat)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/50 "2012-06-20T19:32:45Z")
> [@lost4life](#): > > Do they know you’re coming to shoot Hilter’s balls? If not, how long would it take for them to realize they’re up against some futuristic super-weapon and mobilize against it? Of course they could take it out, but would they have enough time. And on that note, even if they are lacking in air superiority, they still have the resources to put together a flight of a few dive-bombers to take a whack at it. As soon as your tank was far away from the nominal front line. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/51 "2012-06-20T19:55:00Z")
> [@Mekhazzio](#): > > Tank maintenance is a never ending job, the tracks in particular need constant attention to reduce the chances of failure during critical moments. I recall hearing from one tanker in Iraq several years back that half of his company’s M1s were out of action at any given time, and that’s while sitting in base, not being used very heavily, with all the substantial logistics power of the modern US Army behind them. It takes a major effort to keep an armor force moving in day to day combat conditions. :dubious: I’m calling BS. My unit of M1IP and M1A1 Abrams maintained an OR Rate of 95%+ from Oct 90 through Jun 91, including an end-run around VII Corps after the Hail Mary. We were in near-constant movement for 3 days. Abrams maintenance isn’t that damned hard; just keep the engine topped up with turbine engine oil, keep the tranny topped with 30W, and keep the track tight, and that will suffice for most tactical movement. Re the OP: I doubt one Abrams alone, or with infantry support and air cover, could travel from Normandy to Berlin all by itself. Mobility kills from mines, artillery, or even German tanks would likely stop it, even if it didn’t kill the crew. And yes, a flamethrower can kill a tank by killing its crew; the fire/flames consumes the oxygen the crew needs to continue living. If you plucked me and my tank out of DS/DS and dropped us on Normandy Beach in 1944, and told me to head for Berlin all on my lonesome, I’d tell you to go fuck yourself. Sir. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/52 "2012-06-20T20:23:34Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > And yes, a flamethrower can kill a tank by killing its crew; the fire/flames consumes the oxygen the crew needs to continue living. Don’t all modern tanks include NBC protection suites? I would have thought somewhere in there they’d have provided breathing apparatus. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/53 "2012-06-20T20:33:50Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Don’t all modern tanks include NBC protection suites? I would have thought somewhere in there they’d have provided breathing apparatus. Nope. No on-board air-supply. At least not when I was in, and I haven’t heard of any SCBAs being added as crew equipment on any routine basis. The NBC system just takes bleed-air off of the turbine (post-combustion), filters and chills it to breathable temp, and rams it into the crew compartment at pressure. But if the tank is sufficiently engulfed in flames, even the turbine engine will crap out on you (it needs air at even a greater rate than the crew). The automatic fire detection/suppression system is designed to put out a fire inside the tank, and the one or two handheld extinguishers may not suffice to put the tank out if its on fire on the outside (not to mention exposing flammable crew members to more fire, both incendiary and lead-based). ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/54 "2012-06-20T20:40:00Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > Nope. No on-board air-supply. At least not when I was in, and I haven’t heard of any SCBAs being added as crew equipment on any routine basis. > > The NBC system just takes bleed-air off of the turbine (post-combustion), filters and chills it to breathable temp, and rams it into the crew compartment at pressure. > > But if the tank is sufficiently engulfed in flames, even the turbine engine will crap out on you (it needs air at even a greater rate than the crew). > > The automatic fire detection/suppression system is designed to put out a fire inside the tank, and the one or two handheld extinguishers may not suffice to put the tank out if its on fire on the outside (not to mention exposing flammable crew members to more fire, both incendiary and lead-based). And here I’d spent all this time thinking that being on fire was a fine and healthy thing. Ignorance fought! ---
**Author:** ![Capt\_Kirk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@Capt\_Kirk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt_Kirk)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/55 "2012-06-20T20:41:04Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > :dubious: (snip) > > If you plucked me and my tank out of DS/DS and dropped us on Normandy Beach in 1944, and told me to head for Berlin all on my lonesome, I’d tell you to go fuck yourself. Sir. Laughed so hard I almost fell out of my chair, thanks **ET** **CAPT** ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/56 "2012-06-20T20:41:21Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > :dubious: I’m calling BS. My unit of M1IP and M1A1 Abrams maintained an OR Rate of 95%+ from Oct 90 through Jun 91, including an end-run around VII Corps after the Hail Mary. We were in near-constant movement for 3 days. > > Abrams maintenance isn’t that damned hard; just keep the engine topped up with turbine engine oil, keep the tranny topped with 30W, and keep the track tight, and that will suffice for most tactical movement. I think you’ll agree that M1’s seem to break much more often when they are sitting than when they are in constant use. I found that the mechanical systems were much more reliable than the electronics. Basic track and engine maintenance allowed it to go pretty far without breaking. Things like the thermal sights (M60 TTS was much better) and the commo equipment were less reliable. I got out of the tank game before the M1A2 (though I have been inside them). They are much more complex electronically. But you really wouldn’t need any of that in 1944. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/57 "2012-06-20T20:41:59Z")
> [@SunSandSuffering](#): > > I heard he only had one ball 😉 Yes, I’ve heard that published reports were incorrect and he was not the “terrific dancer” he was said to be. He found that out at his first ball and didn’t have a second. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/58 "2012-06-20T20:44:11Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > And here I’d spent all this time thinking that being on fire was a fine and healthy thing. Ignorance fought! Get the inside of the tank hot enough and the heat sensor will set off the Halon system. Not good if you wish to keep breathing. Not healthy for the crew. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/59 "2012-06-20T21:04:51Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I think you’ll agree that M1’s seem to break much more often when they are sitting than when they are in constant use. Lord, Yes! It’s a strange contradiction that baffles me, but a tank in motion does tend to stay in motion. The worst maintenance FUBAR was my first field problem at Ft. Hood in Aug. of '88. Something like 7 or 8 of our tanks broke down less than 1/2 mile out of the motor pool. The Capt. was sweating bullets over that one, but neither our sister tank company or the two MI Co.'s fared any better, so that shit sandwich got passed around for everyone to get a bite. Our battalion had been sitting, parked, with no more drive time than driving forwards and backwards just enough to “walk the track” for the better part of a year. ---
**Author:** ![Fubaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@Fubaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fubaya)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2012, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713/60 "2012-06-20T21:53:14Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > Abrams maintenance isn’t that damned hard; just keep the engine topped up with turbine engine oil, keep the tranny topped with 30W, and keep the track tight, and that will suffice for most tactical movement. For how long? [This](http://www.centcom.mil/news/marine-tanks-prepare-for-their-first-missions-in-afghanistan) CO of a Marine tank company in Afghanistan said “They require a tremendous amount of maintenance,” Hughes said. “If you go on a four or five-hour patrol to support the men on the ground, you will have four or five hours of maintenance when you get back just to keep the tanks in the fight.” I’m sure a fresh tank with no support can last a while but is it going to last for the 10 months it took the allies to go from Normandy to Berlin? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-m1a2-abrams-tank-in-world-war-2/625713.md?page=4)