Wow.. I had no idea the MGS probe was missing. I'd certainly call it a MAJOR success even if it is lost at this point. Did I read correctly it was there for ten years already? That's a lot! Any chance of getting MSNBC message boards back?

...as for the world's worst weapons I nominated the F-22 raptor is a dinosaur indeed. Well, at least it's an aircraft least likely to do what it was supposed to. I guess the Sherman tank was a death trap compared to the German Tigers and Panthers... The sherman was good compared to those at the start of the war but were painfully obsolete by the end. It is actually quite interesting to look at tank design in the first half of the last century. The original concept was British but the concept was never adopted. The US has some monsterous tanks in testing late in the war and the Germans had two monster prototypes called the T-1000 I think. They were the size of an M-1 if not quite a bit larger.

Yes, Chris, I understand they're doing some fixes for the message board system and it should be back in order once the fixes pass their tests. Here's more info on Mars Global Surveyor: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15832979/

I suspect most tanks are death traps. There used to be a great place to go to see a lot of different kinds of tanks - the Patton Museum, in Ft Knox, KY. (My dad was a DI there and I graduated from FKHS.) Unfortunately, they only have a very small number of outside exhibits now. I really loved those exhibits when I was a kid, though.

Maybe 15 years ago I had the pleasure of interviewing a number of test subjects who were tankers. They assure me that tanks are very dangerous things to be around, even in peacetime. People get their fingers cut off and get banged and bruised a lot in those beasties (these guys were M1 commanders). I talked to my dad about this (as he had been a tank repairman earlier in his career). He said that the older tanks were even more dangerous and told me about a guy who accidently cut himself in half.

The good news is that the M1, while expensive to build and operate, is safer than most. The fire control system (FCS) allows you to fire at a moving target while your vehicle is also moving. What's more, you don't have to lead the target. (Hunters will know what I mean by that.) Instead you keep the bead directly on the target - and use the LRF (laser range finder) just before you shoot. The FCS then uses the slew rate and range to automatically do the lead when you fire.

The tank has a pretty low profile for its weight, making it a harder target to hit - and probably most people are already aware that it has explosive-reactive armor. This is the stuff that explodes outwards when the vehicle gets hit, pushing the blast away from the vehicle. Combine all this with a night vision system that enables troops to see even in sandstorms - and through sand dunes, as well as a blue force tracker system and you've got a pretty formidable threat.

Unfortunately, the blue force tracker is not near as good as it needs to be. There's still a bad problem with fratricide. This has always been a problem in wars, but it wasn't well-publicized until the last few wars. I don't have any statistics or inside knowledge, but I wouldn't even be a little surprised if in Gulf I we didn't kill more of our own tanks than the republican guard did.

Another thing to keep in mind - our tanks don't autoload. M1s require a four man team: commander, gunner, driver, and loader. The loading takes maybe 3 -5 seconds. And the guy loading is in a cramped position. After he's done, he's got to squeeze back out of the way before he yells, "UP!" The commander designates a target and gunner fires. A very small fraction of a second later, the breach of that huge gun is where the loader was just standing while tranfering that 40 pound (I don't recall the exact weight, but I think it's at least 40 pounds) round from the ammo rack to the breach. If he doesn't get out of the way real quick, he's gonna lose a leg.

Finally, there's a mounting problem with the sabot rounds, as you may have heard in the news. They use depleted uranium, because it has the proper characteristics to send it clear through enemy tanks - in one side and out the other.

In peace or war, I don't think tanks are ever going to be extremely safe.

Thanks Thefalliblefiend!  The M-1 also has two other safety features that are hard to beat.  The Ammo compartment is sealed behind sliding bulkheads.  If it is hit, the main compartment where the people are should be fine as the explosion is vented up out the top of the turret!  They also have some sort of rapid-fire suppression system that detects a fire/explosion in the compartment and within milliseconds, puts it out.  Fire, from what I know, was one of the main causes of fatalities in WWII tanks.

Although I have always liked the M-1's look, most countries now have an M-1 equivalent.  Everyone from Italy, Germany, South Korea, England and so on, all have tanks with the gun stabilization system (which can shoot on the fly that you spoke of) and Chubbum armor which incorporates shuttle-like ceramics to absorb the heat of most anti tank rounds.  I thought they used tungstin Sabbots, not depleted uranium...?

The Best tank in the world (in my opinion) is the French Leclerc!  It's main gun is a meter longer (imparting more power), it has a 50 cal co-axel which is a better secondary armament, it has an impressive command system that relays not only the location of other tanks in the company but also the amount of fuel and ammo it has (etc). It has modular armor that can be upgraded.  It has a thermal night sight for the commander, not just the gunner, it is smaller which makes it harder to hit.  It has an auto loader, which saves on manpower.  And it has something I also thought was smart: a very small turbine engine that allows the tank's main engine to shut down yet allows all the heaters and electronics to remain active!!  German Leopard II tanks seem to sell the best throughout the world.  Sweden has one of the best IFVs...  Many European weapons are better than our own...  Soveit tanks were simple because there doctrine called for the extensive use of tactical nuclear weapons in ANY type of warfare in Europe.  Thus, an expensive tank was a waste.  It isn't that they couldn't have made an M-1, for what they needed, it just wasn't necessary...............

Good to know the Message boards are coming back! It was fun to participate. Activists have to believe they can make a difference otherwise why even bother trying at all.  I recieved a good number of complements over time (5-10 that I saw) and only a few threats.  Surprizingly - no one bashed on me for my communal living posts...  New Ed. of EP in the works! Includes a lot of what I took the time to write for the message boards! :)

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):