The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - January 8, 2009

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Strategic Nuclear Weapons Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: M1A1 nuclear?
GhostShadow    10/5/2005 6:27:25 PM
I have heared rumors about the M1A1 Abram Tank going nuclear. I guess i want to know if 1) do you think it can happen? and 2) When do you think it will happen.
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2
jlb    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   10/9/2005 2:24:30 PM
What do you mean by "nuclear"? a nuclear power plant instead of the turbine? that's not likely to happen anytime soon. shells with nuclear warheads? what for?
 
Quote    Reply

Lanton    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   10/12/2005 10:10:15 AM
Lol, nuclear propulsion for a tank...what's gonna happen when an M1 gets hit and there's radioactive contamination?!
 
Quote    Reply

Basilisk Station    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   10/12/2005 4:29:25 PM
He might be refering to the impact of one of the Depleted Uranium shells. I believe when one hits a brief burst of radiation is caused or something to that effect.
 
Quote    Reply

Weasel    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   10/14/2005 11:30:10 AM
How bizzare, The only instance I could imagine an M1A1 becoming radioactive, is if it where exposed to high energy neutrons. The DU in the armor would, in essense, become fissile material exposing the crew to a flash of X-Ray type radiation.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   11/15/2005 5:38:52 PM
He is probably referring to nuke shells. But if you take out one of these "special delivery" tanks the nuke shells would be worth the tank's weight in gold. I don't know if it's worth the technological risk to loose one of these warheads in a place like Iran so the nuke shell can end up in China.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   11/16/2005 10:09:50 AM
I've never heard of anyone ever making nuclear shells for tank guns. My opinion is it is undoubtedly a variation on the pacifist/ecofanatic/rabidantiadministration/tinfoilhat crap concerning our use of DU in the APFSDS projectiles and in the armor. Displacedjim
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/11/2005 7:57:05 AM
At first I thought he meant, going nuclear powered, but now I've re read it he's seems to be asking whether it can go nuclear, as in explode like a nuclear bomb. The answer would be no. Depleted uranium has less than 0.7% U-235, which is the fissile isotope of uranium. That is less U-235 than natural uranium. If the M1 could go nuclear the Northern Territory in Australia, where they mine bucket loads of uranium, would be having regular nuclear explosions occuring when they blast the ore.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/12/2005 12:57:33 AM
I thought the question was about arming the M1 with a-bomb shells.
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/12/2005 10:15:21 AM
It's a badly posed question thats for sure.
 
Quote    Reply

bobfall    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/24/2005 11:02:47 AM
The DU armor would not be fissionable material, If the tank got expose to a neutron level high enough to start fissionable reactions, it has been turned into plasma. All of it, crew included. DU armor, is not normally fissionable. The smallest, recorded, US nuclear weapon was just over 50 lbs. That was developed over 50 years ago. Nuclear rnds can be made small enough to to fire from the 120mm cannon. But, why Bob
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/24/2005 7:54:58 PM
"The smallest, recorded, US nuclear weapon was just over 50 lbs. That was developed over 50 years ago. Nuclear rnds can be made small enough to to fire from the 120mm cannon. But, why Bob" Clear out a "human wave" charge?
 
Quote    Reply

Jungle-Man    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/24/2005 8:11:26 PM
What about the Davie Crockett recoilless rifle? Its round would have been lighter than 50 pounds, so probably you can make nuclear shells, but again the question is why bother.
 
Quote    Reply

bobfall    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/25/2005 11:06:48 AM
"What about the Davie Crockett recoilless rifle? Its round would have been lighter than 50 pounds," That was the rnd I was talking about, and no it warhead was 51 lbs. That is ,offically, the smallest US nuclear warhead. As to human wave attacks, the M1a1, could kick it out a bit. But, again I do not see them deploying a nuclear weapon, on a tank. You would be pretty close,when it went off. And they are up-tight about who gets nukes. Things, in the world, would need to change a lot. Not saying never, but I can say, unlikely. Bob
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/25/2005 9:47:28 PM
A nuke round would head off any silly debates about armor penetration. : )
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:M1A1 nuclear?   12/26/2005 11:55:24 PM
>>Clear out a "human wave" charge? << Sounds like tactics straight out of the 1950s "Atomic Hand Grenade Users Manual" and such. Political, tactical, etc., nonsense that Korea aptly demonstrated was a complete non-starter. Besides, 1000 10mm tungsten ball bearings will address the human wave issue more effectively than an a-bomb from an individual tank's perspective.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy