Pros and Cons to the M1 Abram's Honeywell AGT 1500 Multifuel Engine

The Honeywell AGT 1500 engine is a multifuel gas turbine developed for use in the UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter.  After losing that contract, Honeywell entered the AGT 1500 into the contest for the SH-60 and AH-64, but lost those two also.  Finally, the engine snagged a victory in the contest for the Abrams, whose designers decided that its acceleration was key to fulfilling the role the Abrams would be given.  For logistical reasons, the Abrams generally runs on JP-8 fuel, and it is the AGT 1500:JP-8 combination that this post will discuss to determine whether or not keeping the AGT 1500 in the Abrams is a good idea.

Pros:

• Fuel tankers don't need to carry diesel engine specifically for the Abrams
• Can siphon fuel off of most damaged/disabled Army and Air Force vehicles without contaminating its fuel supply
• Unmatched top speed and acceleration
• Very good for the Cold War scenario of a war most likely in Germany

• JP-8 does not wax over in cold weather
• Lighter and smaller than a diesel engine
• More room for fuel and ammo

Cons

• ~1,000°F (535°C) engine exhaust
• Massive IR signature, allowing for detection and tracking at much longer ranges via infrared sensors
• Requires a lot of cooling to prevent a heat buildup
• JP-8's auto-ignition point is roughly 248°F (~120°C), meaning that any failure with the cooling units or engine heat shield could easily result in an engine fire
• Infantry cannot operate close to the tank, disrupting old tank-infantry operations and complicating transport
• Very bad for operations in urban environments where the infantry otherwise would be near the tank to reduce its vulnerability to point-blank attacks
• Gets 3 gallons per mile (~7 liters per kilometer) off road at half-load
• Requires a larger gas tank, negating the small engine bonus
• Performance with diesel not much better, as the engine is not optimized for diesel
• Range (not combat radius) of ~120 miles (~190km) off-road at full load and ~250 miles (~402 km) in optimal conditions with a full load
• Tanks need to wait for tankers to catch up, negating the top speed and acceleration bonuses
• Downtime allowed a portion of the Iraqi Republican Guard to retreat during the First Persian Gulf War
• Smokers, which create a smokescreen to obscure the tank's visual and IR signatures, removed to prevent engine flameout due to the heat they generate and the low auto-ignition temperature of JP-8
• Smoke grenades used instead, but at a lowered effect and amount
• Very expensive to maintain
• ~25% of the US Army's maintenance budget goes towards the AGT 1500's.  Another 25% goes towards the rest of the tank
• Unclear how much of the maintenance cost of the rest of the tank is due to exhaust heat
• Engine not optimized for any fuel, resulting in a lower efficiency when compared to other engines

Conclusion

In short, the AGT 1500:JP-8 combo has some advantages, namely in situations where the war would take place largely near the bases of the Abrams' operator, but it does not fit the current needs of the US military.  I cannot offer up another engine to possibly replace it, but a new engine should definitely be considered for the Abrams if, for no other reason, to increase its range.  Currently, the Abram's need for constant refueling makes it more difficult to deploy in Afghanistan, and, should we find ourselves in Iran, the Abrams would have the same problem it had in the First Persian Gulf War where it would run out of fuel prior to accomplishing its objective.

The US Army should also consider using a fuel better suited for ground operations, even if the logistics behind the switch would be very difficult.  Engines should be optimized for diesel or other fuels more suited for ground ops, but still accepting of fuels such as JP-8 for cold weather operations.

Millennium Challenge 2002: Events, results, and analysis

I originally posted this elsewhere 11 months ago under a different title.  I've edited some parts of it since its original posting to make it more accurate.

Background

In mid-2002, the US military held a multi-branch 14-day wargame exercise known as Millennium Challenge, in which General Peter Pace led "Blue" force, a US amphibious and naval fleet, in an attack on General Paul K. Van Riper's "Red" force, which simulated a Middle Eastern military in the Persian Gulf.  The games were designed to test modern, net-centric warfare strategies.  Amongst other assets, the Blue force had a carrier and six amphibious assault ships at their disposal.

Unscripted Freeplay

Blue sends an ultimatum requiring a response within 24 hours.  Red uses a fleet of mostly civilian boats and planes to patrol the Persian Gulf inconspicuously.  A day later, Red's fleet determines the location of and surrounds Blue's armada.  Riper decides to get the first strike in and, coordinating with WWII light signals to launch planes, radio messages disguised as calls to prayer from mosques, and motorcycle messengers; launches an all-out attack with Silkworm anti-ship missiles fired from land and sea, as well as suicide attacks from planes and boats laden with explosives.  The attack overwhelmed Blue's defenses, sinking 10 cruisers, the aircraft carrier, and 5 amphibious assault ships.  US airfields and other facilities around the Gulf were also damaged, predominately by suicide attacks.  As could be expected, Blue's fleet was "refloated" as to prevent a waste of $250,000,000.

Not-So Unscripted Freeplay

What came as a surprise to Riper wasn't the refloating of Blue's forces; it was the blatant scripting of his forces.  For round two, he planned to use a lot of the same basic techniques he had used to stay off the grid (minimal radio signals, no cellphone/satellite phone usage, motorcycle messengers, minimal radar use, etc.).  Instead of that, he found a list of orders from Joint Central command, the game's referees.  Amongst the orders were for him to turn on all of his anti-aircraft radar so that Blue could determine the location of all his anti-air assets and destroy it.  Aside from that, he was to ignore the transport aircraft that would be landing US troops and that he should move his forces away from beaches where Marines would be landing.  After these and other orders, Riper quit the games in disgust at their false pretexts of being a freeplay testing ground.  As can be expected, Blue annihilated Red, freeing it from the evil dictator that Riper had led throughout much of the games.

What the Results Mean

• US Military is too reliant on its electronic and technological advantages.
•  US Military strategy is vulnerable to asymmetrical techniques that, while unacceptable in the West, could very well be considered and used by Middle Eastern or other foreign strategists
• Lessons not learned from Vietnam; US military is not invincible, regardless of technological advantage
• Massed cruise missile strikes can still penetrate US defenses with ease, even if the missiles in question are first-generation missiles.
• Net-centric strategies need to be able to account for the unexpected

Attack Helicopters Losing Their Touch

http://www.defenceaviation.com/2011/09/attack-helicopters-losing-their-touch.html

1)  Yes, I'm that crazy author who thinks that fixed-wing CAS can replace attack helicopters.

2) No, I don't think that fixed-wing CAS can replace attack helicopters, I was over exaggerating to raise the point that we overuse attack helicopters in situations where fixed-wing CAS, or possibly attack helos with standoff weaponry, would function better.

Attack helicopters are great for applying and keeping pressure on a small force of foot soldiers to force them on the defensive, not for attacking large infantry regiments.  Unlike fixed-wing CAS, they can shoot at a target they're not flying in the general direction of (granted that fixed-wing CAS could use a guided munition to accomplish this, but fixed-wing CAS is incapable of sustaining such an attack), allowing them to give covering fire to an infantry division while maneuvering to get into a better position.  So, in short, they're useful for joint-operations in situations minimal anti-aircraft and for attacking small forces of infantry.  They're also good for attacking vehicular divisions, granted that a SEAD operation has already been conducted, but, then again, so is just about any other ground-attack aircraft.

Hello

I tried blogging before on a few sites but much never really came of it.  In any case, I'm going to try to update this semi-often, and I'm going to start by reposting stuff I've posted elsewhere.