M1 and M60 snorkle operation or any other tank

[kicker]

What is involved in waterproofing a tank for fording a river or embarking from a LST? How reliable is the equipment, and do crews tolerate it or hate it? Is it all a pipe dream that will never be used in combat? With the high operating tempertures of the M1 gas turbine what effect does being submereged have on engine components? I know the army abrams does not utilize a snorkle but the marines do.

[kruser79]

You're right. Since the Marines have the beachhead mission, they have to go through the pain and heartache of prepping a tank for deep fording. We don't have the equipment (ie. snorkel, exhaust duct extension), for deep fording, but the BII for sealing the old M1 for NBC ops would do about the same thing, just not as deep. You seal up every hatch, hole, and crevice on the thing. From RTV'ing the access plates underneath, to plugging the heater exhaust, to sealing the breechblock, it all has to have some sort of sealant. Even if it's only a matter of some grease on the close tolerance mating surfaces like breechblock to breechring....you get my drift? It's a real pain in the keister.
Now I've seen footage of the snorkel kit for the Marine M1A1s, it doesn't look very user-friendly. And since they have the LCAC in service, I don't think they really keep it in mind operationally now.
The temps inside the engine get pretty dang hot. Combustion chamber in the neighborhood of 1200 deg. F, and exhaust in excess of 900 deg. F, makes for something that isn't too conducive to rapid, extreme changes in temp. It doesn't mind getting a little wet, like in a rainstorm (ahhhhh, nothing like the steam rising off of a convoy at a rest halt, on a cold rainy day in Deutschland...), but to have a running engine submerged in seawater? I'm not too sure, but I can't see the ol' AGT 1500 liking it too much.
Oh, I heard something really silly on another BB (no, it was part of a search, I wasn't being a traitor, lol). They were arguing about a quick way to disable an M1 without using a weapon. Here's the beef. If any of you heard a discussion involving throwing sandbags on top of the intake, or any other attempt at cutting off the M1's voracious appetite for air, DON'T BELIEVE IT!
Stupid people shouldn't allow their stupid kids to play on the Internet. Almost every broke tank I climbed up on had allllll kinds of gear stowed in that little air-maze area, some were even so bold as to stow V-pack cleaning wands, hoses, rail-loading equipment and the like right on top of the precleaner! I'd jump up and down, rant and rave, threaten statements of charges, tell them they'd be the last ones I'd come to fix when their engine wouldn't start, the whole nine yards. But let's face it, the crews were constantly having things added to their packing lists. Room was quickly becoming a precious commodity. My beef was purely preventative, don't block the air coming to the intake. But even the tanks that looked like a bomb had been dropped in the precleaner area never had engine problems. Now that may have been because of a number of things like the fact that we used Turbine Engine Cleaner every other service, or that our company was very maintenance minded, or maybe it was just pure dumb luck (maybe the engine was running a little labored, just not badly enough to call us).
But even with all that crap inside there, these tanks would road march all around Graf, Hohenfels, wherever. So some kid builds an M1 model and suddenly he's an expert?


Ahhhhhhhhhh, I feel so much better, lol.......

[kicker]

Have you ever heard the saying "winning a argument on the internet is like winning the special olympics-- even if you win your still retarded" Thanks for the info. I never thought about the closeness between getting ready for NBC and fording. I thought that the M1 operated with a over pressure system to provide so called shirt sleve enviroment?

i could not imagin being on a russian t72 totally submerged with no escape hatch, especialy with no faith in russian equipment. No wonder theres all those stories of crews refusing to do it, and thats in Mother Russia where you do WHAT UR TOLD you never say NYET comrad. I dont know drown in a t72 or go to siberia? Hmm

[Hoop Snake]

Now here is a pet hate of mine. I hate deep fording. Luckily, we don't do it any more as I think someone realized that the amount of training, preperation and time required for something that I can think of no practical use for, far outweighed any benefit. By the time you get the tanks ready, the Engineers could have built a 2 lane 100m long bridge for you.

[kruser79]

Originally Posted by kicker

I thought that the M1 operated with a over pressure system to provide so called shirt sleve enviroment?

i could not imagin being on a russian t72 totally submerged with no escape hatch, especialy with no faith in russian equipment. No wonder theres all those stories of crews refusing to do it, and thats in Mother Russia where you do WHAT UR TOLD you never say NYET comrad. I dont know drown in a t72 or go to siberia? Hmm

The overpressurization system didn't come along until the M1A1. The original M1 had a sponson box on both sides of the turret ring, instead of the NBC system on one side, sponson on the other ala M1A1.
Some colleagues and I were discussing the Soviet fording problem. One of these guys is a retired Arty CSM, the other an ex Major with time in Pershing and Arty units. One thing they both said was that the Soviets killed hordes every time they did deep fording training. The biggest cause was panic. The driver is absolutely blind under there, even in the clearest water, vision blocks don't let in enough light and the tank stirs up clouds of muck. If they didn't get the tank to remain directly on the smoothed path, the rocks and debris made them sitting (or is it drowning?) ducks. They also said the scenario Arty prayed for was to catch them in the middle of fording. Let them get almost all the way across, and pound the living daylights outta them with delay fuzes. Kind of depth charge them, leaving a maze of tanks at the bottom that no one would be able to get through. Kinda morbid, but I can't think of a better deterrant than making every crew following say,"I ain't goin' in there, YOU go in there!"

[The_Federalist]

Originally Posted by Chrisjsmith

Now here is a pet hate of mine. I hate deep fording. Luckily, we don't do it any more as I think someone realized that the amount of training, preperation and time required for something that I can think of no practical use for, far outweighed any benefit. By the time you get the tanks ready, the Engineers could have built a 2 lane 100m long bridge for you.

The origin of deep fording was so that the large formations of Soviet Unions shock armies could cross the many rivers in Germany without having to wait for bridges. The Soviets always knew our plan was to blow the bridges and hold them in the Fulda Gap for as long as possible.

The whole concept of the AirLand Doctrine was to attack both "near" and "deep" against the Soviets well scripted mass movements. By wreaking havoc deep within their lines, we could slow their advance and prevent them from over-running western Europe.

The Soviets knew that they needed a quick and decisive war to win, as they didn't have the resources (indigenous oil!) for a protracted campaign in the West.

With a hundred or so divisions in Eastern Europe, the Soviets didn't care about their armies losing a couple tanks during the fording; they had another 50,000 more on the way. The hope was that the shock and speed of their advancing formations would outweigh any material loss.

[The_Federalist]

Hey Kruser I saw the M88A2 on some show about "extreme machines" on either TLC or Discovery.

Not a bad little tow truck!