DOCSLIB.ORG

M1A1, M1A1 AIM and M1A2 SEP Tanks

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
M1A1, M1A1 AIM and M1A2 SEP Tanks GROUND COMBAT SYSTEMS The Program Executive Office Ground Combat Systems (PEO GCS) serves as the “system of systems integrator” of the ground combat systems for the armed forces and leads Army transformation ef- forts toward future systems while main- taining a current combat-ready force. GCS is a command partner in the Tank-automo- tive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Life Cycle Management Command. The M1A2 Abrams tank PEO encompasses a number of project management offices. For example, the Project Manager for the Heavy Brigade Combat Team (PM HBCT) serves as the life-cycle manager for the major combat vehicles in the Army’s heavy forces, including the Abrams, M88, Bradley, M113, M109 and Knight family of vehicles. Combined, these fleets total 32,682 platforms in various stages of their life cycles under PM HBCT’s management purview, and total program funding through fiscal year (FY) 2013 of approxi- The M1A2 has a digital command-and- handing full spectrum operations. mately $36.8 billion. PM HBCT’s responsi- control system that provides situational The Army must sustain the readiness bilities include the design, development, awareness updates to all the other tanks in and reduce the operations and support production, fielding and sustainment (re- a unit. Vetronics architecture ties all elec- costs of approximately 4,300 older M1A1 set, recap and upgrade) of safe, reliable tronic components in the tank together Abrams main battle tanks in its active and and lethal ground combat systems. Prod- and provides increased survivability and reserve component units. uct Manager Abrams manages approxi- supportability. The commander’s indepen- The Abrams Integrated Management mately 8,325 platforms within the Abrams dent thermal viewer (CITV) gives it a (AIM) Program is the recapitalization pro- family of vehicles, including M1A1, M1A1 hunter-killer capacity, allowing the M1A2 gram for the M1A1 tank. Under AIM, AIM and M1A2 SEP tanks, M88A1/A2 re- to engage one target while simultaneously M1A1 tanks are completely disassembled at covery vehicles and M104 Wolverine As- tracking another. The M1A2 also has im- Anniston Army Depot, Ala. The depot re- sault Bridge. proved onboard diagnostics that allow the furbishes many of the tank’s components. tank to self-diagnose faults without any The assemblies are then shipped to the M1A1, M1A1 AIM and M1A2 SEP additional special tools or equipment. Joint Systems Manufacturing Center (JSMC) Tanks Further M1A2 improvements, through in Ohio, where General Dynamics Land The M1 Series Abrams Tank provides the SEP, are under way. The M1A2 SEP is Systems reassembles the tanks to a zero the Army with mobile, protected fire- the backbone of the Army’s first digitized time/zero miles standard. power and will remain the cornerstone of division and the counterattack corps of the The AIM program has fielded tanks to the Army’s counterattack and containment Army’s current force. It is the only weapon units at Fort Hood, Texas, and in Germany. forces as the Army transforms to the Fu- system that can withstand the impact of Annual production now stands at 135 ture Force. The Abrams tank provides sol- high-energy warheads and remain lethal tanks per year and will continue until diers with the lethality, survivability and in full spectrum operations. It has inte- 2012. staying power to successfully close with grated combat command and control (IC3), In addition, AIM serves as the venue to and destroy enemy forces on the inte- which incorporates Force XXI Battle Com- apply modifications and upgrades to the grated battlefield. The 120 mm main gun mand Brigade and Below (FBCB2) to pro- tank, including embedded diagnostics. AIM on the M1A1 and M1A2, combined with vide real-time command and control and also serves as a means to combat electronic the powerful 1,500-hp turbine engine and situational awareness. obsolescence by introducing improved line- special armor, make the Abrams tank par- Its sights use the latest thermal-imaging replaceable units for those that face techni- ticularly suitable for attacking or defend- system (second-generation forward-look- cal obsolescence. The AIM process also ing against large concentrations of heavy ing infrared [FLIR]) for increased lethality incorporates redesigned hull and turret armor forces on a highly lethal battlefield and survivability. The M1A2 SEP tank network boxes. and for other roles that require shock effect takes advantage of computer/electronic The M88A2 Heavy Equipment Recov- and mobile direct firepower to support industry advances by including improved ery Combat Utility Lift and Evacuation Army mission requirements. electronics developed since the introduc- System (HERCULES) is a full-tracked, Two major programs maintain and re- tion of the M1A2. heavy armored vehicle developed to ac- capitalize the Abrams fleet: the M1A2 sys- The SEP package includes a new com- complish safe, effective and independent tems enhancement program (SEP) and the puterized mass-memory unit and color battlefield recovery operations. M1A1 Abrams integrated management maps and displays. A thermal manage- It implements swift and effective com- (AIM) program. ment system increases electronic reliability bat evacuations through the battlefield re- The M1A2 program provides the Abrams and decreases crew fatigue. covery operations of towing, winching with advanced improvements in lethality, Production deliveries of the M1A2 SEP and lifting. The Hercules uses the M88A1 survivability and fighting ability required to tank began in September 1999. These vehi- chassis modified to significantly improve defeat future threats. It is the Army’s first cles were used extensively during OIF, in towing, winching, lifting and braking digitized, direct-fire combat vehicle. which they were proven to be capable of characteristics. October 2010 I ARMY 343 Bradley M2A3 It is the primary recovery support for the 70-ton M1 Abrams tank, the Wolverine and other heavy combat vehicles. The M88A2 includes a 1,050-hp engine; a 35-ton boom; overlay armor; a 140,000- pound, single-line, constant-pull main winch; and a 3-ton auxiliary winch for de- ploying the main winch cable. When com- pared to the M88A1, these upgrades im- prove towing power by 25 percent, lifting capability by 40 percent and winching ability by 55 percent. The system is in full-rate production and deployment. Fielding began in July 1997, and it achieved first unit equipped in and to suppress and defeat enemy tanks, re- The Bradley Operation Desert Storm- July 1997. connaissance vehicles, infantry fighting ve- Situational Awareness (ODS-SA) M2/M3 The M104 Wolverine Heavy Assault hicles (IFVs), armored personnel carriers, A2 conversion implements a digital archi- Bridge (HAB) is an M1A2 Abrams SEP bunkers, dismounted infantry and attack tecture and will benefit the fleet by mitigat- variant and is operated by a two-man helicopters. The infantry version (M2) of the ing obsolescence and providing commonal- crew. The 26-meter bridge can span gaps A3 Bradley fighting vehicle is used most of- ity. The M2/M3 A2 ODS-SA system consists of up to 24 meters to support heavy ma- ten to close with the enemy by means of fire of a modified BFVS A2 ODS turret and chas- neuver operations at 16 kph. and maneuver. The primary tasks per- sis. The two-man turret consists of a The bridge is computer-controlled and formed by the cavalry version (M3) as part gun/turret stabilization system, a 25 mm automatically compensates for minor devi- of a troop and/or squadron are reconnais- gun, a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun, am- ations in launch-site elevation and terrain sance, security and flank guard missions. munition feed/storage systems, a dual-tube rack and cant. The crew can launch the The A3 is the consummate digitized TOW missile launcher with a launcher erec- bridge under armor in five minutes and re- platform, with a core electronics architec- tion mechanism/drive and a TOW launcher trieve it in less than 10 minutes. ture on a 1553 data bus and an improved elevation drive, gunner’s and commander’s The M104 Wolverine enables decisive target acquisition system that includes a stations, gunner’s and commander’s sight maneuver by allowing units to span tank full ballistic fire-control package with systems, and a turret processor with associ- ditches, road craters and partially dam- hunter-killer functionality via a comman- ated subsystems and sensors. The chassis aged bridge sections up to 24 meters wide der’s independent viewer (CIV). Optical contains the power train, suspension sys- at combat speeds. improvements also include two second- tem, the driver’s station and the squad com- generation FLIRs and day television cam- partment. The A2 ODS SA electronics archi- Product Manager Bradley eras, which can be displayed to the squad tecture is based on a dual redundant Product Manager Bradley manages ap- members in the back of the vehicle via the MIL-STD-1553B serial data bus. All major proximately 6,452 M2/3A2, M2/3A2 ODS rear-mounted squad leader’s display. This turret system units are linked through this and M2/3A3 Bradleys, approximately feature significantly improves the real- bus for signal and data transfer. Sight im- 13,943 M113 series platforms, as well as time situational awareness for the entire agery and graphics data are routed as RS- the M7/A3 Bradley fire-support team dismounted or mounted crew. 170 video signals to the operators. (BFIST) vehicles and the M707/M1200 The A3 integrated combat command- The A2 ODS SA system has the Improved Knight family of vehicles. and-control (IC3) package incorporates the Bradley Acquisition Subsystem (IBAS) for The Bradley M2A3 Infantry/M3A3 Army’s digital command-and-control suite the gunner that replaces the Bradley Eyesafe Cavalry Fighting Vehicle (IFV/CFV) facil- of automated messages, overlays and Laser Rangefinder (BELRF) integrated sight itates enhanced command-and-control ca- friend-or-foe graphics that meet the unit (ISU) in the A2 ODS.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army's Ground Combat Vehicles
    Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army’s Ground Combat Vehicles © MDart10/Shutterstock.com APRIL | 2021 At a Glance The Army operates a fleet of ground combat vehicles—vehicles intended to conduct combat opera- tions against enemy forces—and plans to continue to do so. Expanding on the Army’s stated plans, the Congressional Budget Office has projected the cost of acquiring such vehicles through 2050. Those projections include costs for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) and for procurement but not the costs of operating and maintaining the vehicles. CBO’s key findings are as follows: • Total acquisition costs for the Army’s ground combat vehicles are projected to average about $5 billion per year (in 2020 dollars) through 2050—$4.5 billion for procurement and $0.5 billion for RDT&E. • The projected procurement costs are greater (in constant dollars) than the average annual cost for such vehicles from 2010 to 2019 but approximately equal to the average annual cost from 2000 to 2019 (when spending was boosted because of operations in Iraq). • More than 40 percent of the projected acquisition costs of Army ground combat vehicles are for Abrams tanks. • Most of the projected acquisition costs are for remanufactured and upgraded versions of current vehicles, though the Army also plans to acquire an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, which will replace the Bradley armored personnel carrier; an Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, which will replace the M113 armored personnel carrier; and a new Mobile Protected Firepower tank, which will be lighter than an Abrams tank. • The Army is also considering developing an unmanned Decisive Lethality Platform that might eventually replace Abrams tanks.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaching the Siegfried Line
    ^ r ♦ 6 \o <• / / y f r ♦ r y ' *- 4 ■, .■ / s \. 4 REPORT 0 n •K BREACHING 4 of the SIEGFRIED LINE Prepared by Engineer Section, XVIII Corps (Airborne) * . 28 January 1945 V, ; & X . ‘i RESTRICTS D 4 REPORT ON BREACHING THE SIEGFRIED LINE : . ■^1 INDEX PAGE 1. Introduction 2. Description of line 4?.'' 1' 3. Methods of Breaching ^ . 3 a. V Corps 3 h. VII Corps 5 c* XIX Corps 8 d. 30th Inf Div 13 e. Engineer School. Study 15 4* Miscellaneous 20 5. Conclusions 20 ILLUSTRATIONS ■ ' : Plats: PAGE ' I.; ;Anti-Tan}c. Ditch la ■« :^2* Curved Rail Obstacle 2a . 3V' Dragons Teeth 2a ; - ' ^ :4. ' Dragons Teeth /;V ' .2a ' , Large 'Type Eiahrasures 2a MG. Embrasure ,' 2a 7• Fill-Boi Disguised as Electrical Substation 2a 8. Steel Observation and MG Turret 4a 9* Typical Pillbox; Installation in Forest 4a 10. Road Passage Thru Anti-Tank Obstacle 5a 11. Steel Obstacle ■, 5a 12. Large Type Steel Cupola with Periscope 8a 13. General View Pillboxes 8a 14. »» n 9a 15. ti . n fi 9a 16. n n .• n 12a 17. Typical Pillbox 12a 18. View of Disguised Pill Box 13a ■ •; RESTRICTED •! L A. \ rI K « i ' ■P t > i ' *• 1 I - ^ ' • 1. *= i-.* '■ r ' > \ SOURCE : Ml'lO WAR OFFICE PLATE 1. ANTI-TANK DITCH f f V ■■> i i V t •l I / la / f RESTRICTED HEADQUARTERS XVIII CORPS (AIRBORNE) Office of the Engineer A.P.0, 109, U, S, Army 2S January 1945 REPORT ON BREACHING OF THE SIEGFRIED LINE 1, INTRODUCTION: a. SOURCES: This pamphlet is a compilation of intelligence made available to this Headquarters by First Army, V Corps, VII Corps, XEC Corps and 30th Inf, Div.
    [Show full text]
  • The Army's Future Combat System (FCS)
    = -*=72>8= :9:7*=42'&9=>89*2= a= &(0,74:3)=&3)=88:*8=+47=43,7*88= 3)7*<= *.(0*79= 5*(.&1.89=.3= .1.9&7>=74:3)=47(*8= &>=,3`=,**3= 43,7*88.43&1= *8*&7(-=*7;.(*= 18/1**= <<<_(78_,4;= -,222= =*5479=+47=43,7*88 Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress -*=72>8= :9:7*=42'&9=>89*2= a=&(0,74:3)=&3)=88:*8=+47=43,7*88= = :22&7>= The Future Combat System (FCS) was a multiyear, multibillion dollar program at the heart of the Army’s transformation efforts. It is was to be the Army’s major research, development, and acquisition program consisting of 14 manned and unmanned systems tied together by an extensive communications and information network. FCS was intended to replace current systems such as the M-1 Abrams tank and the M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The FCS program has been characterized by the Army and others as a high-risk venture due to the advanced technologies involved and the challenge of networking all of the FCS subsystems together so that FCS-equipped units could function as intended. The FCS program exists in a dynamic national security environment which ultimately played a role in determining the program’s fate. Some questioned if FCS, envisioned and designed prior to September 11, 2001 to combat conventional land forces, was relevant in current and anticipated future conflicts where counterinsurgency and stabilization operations are expected to be the norm. The Army contended, however, that FCS was relevant throughout the “entire spectrum of conflict” and that a number of FCS technologies and systems were effectively used in counterinsurgency and stabilization campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • The Army's M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker: Background and Issues for Congress
    The Army’s M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker: Background and Issues for Congress (name redacted) Specialist in Military Ground Forces April 5, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R44229 The Army’s M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker Summary The M-1 Abrams Tank, the M-2/M-3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV), and the M-1126 Stryker Combat Vehicle are the centerpieces of the Army’s Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs) and Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCTs). In addition to the military effectiveness of these vehicles, Congress is also concerned with the economic aspect of Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker recapitalization and modernization. Due to force structure cuts and lack of Foreign Military Sales (FMS) opportunities, Congress has expressed a great deal of concern with the health of the domestic armored combat vehicle industrial base. ABCTs and SBCTs constitute the Army’s “heavy” ground forces; they provide varying degrees of armored protection and mobility that the Army’s light, airborne (parachute), and air assault (helicopter transported) infantry units that constitute Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (IBCTs) do not possess. These three combat vehicles have a long history of service in the Army. The first M-1 Abrams Tank entered service with the Army in 1980; the M-2/M-3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle in 1981; and the Stryker Combat Vehicle in 2001. Under current Army modernization plans, the Army envisions all three vehicles in service with Active and National Guard forces beyond FY2028. There are several different versions of these vehicles in service.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporation of the Royal Ordnance Factories
    NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Ministry of Defence: Incorporation of the Royal Ordnance Factories Ordered by the House of Commons to beprinted 23 April 1985 LONDON HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE E3.80net 343 This report is presented to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the National Audit Act, 1983. Gordon Downey Comptroller and Auditor General National Audit Office 22 April 1985 ,., Contents Ministry of Defence: Incorporation of the Royal Ordnance Factories Pages Summary and conclusions l-3 Report Part 1: Introduction 4 Part 2: Preparations for incorporation and final Trading Fund account 5-6 Part 3: Arrangementsforincorporation 7-9 Part 4: Postincorporationarrangements 10-11 Glossary of abbreviations 12 Glossary of terms 13 Appendix 14-16 Memorandum of Understanding between the Secretary of State for Defence and the Chairman of Royal Ordnance plc Ministry of Defence: Incorporation of the Royal Ordnance Factories Summary and conclusions 1. This Report records the results of a National Audit Office (NAO) examin- ation of the arrangements for incorporation of the Royal Ordnance Factories (ROFs) and in particular the financial aspects. The Report deals with the action taken and the costs incurred by ROFs and the Ministry of Defence (MOD) in preparation for incorporation; the proposals for valuation of the opening bal- ance sheet of the new company and the possible effects of this on the proposed later introduction of private capital; and the arrangements for control of the new company by the Secretary of State for Defence (Secretary of State) and account- ability to Parliament after incorporation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of the Royal Small Arms Factory (Enfield Lock) and Its Influence Upon Mass Production Technology and Product Design C1820-C1880
    Middlesex University Research Repository An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Lewis, James H. (1996) The development of the Royal Small Arms Factory (Enfield Lock) and its influence upon mass production technology and product design c1820-c1880. PhD thesis, Middlesex University. [Thesis] This version is available at: https://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/6706/ Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University’s research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners unless otherwise stated. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). They may not be sold or exploited commercially in any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s). Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author’s name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pag- ination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award. If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated.
    [Show full text]
  • Vincorion Gun Turret Drives. Exact and Quick Weapon Stabilization
    SOLUTIONS. TAILORED. VINCORION GUN TURRET DRIVES. EXACT AND QUICK WEAPON STABILIZATION. A wide range of applications: Gun Turret Drives come in: VINCORION delivers essen- The Gun Turret Drives product family. tial systems to battle tanks and fighting vehicles that are deployed in armed forces all over the world. These include There is nothing more critical than for modern combat the GTdrive® turret and weapon controls for extra-large, vehicles to be able to react quickly to surrounding con- large, medium and remotely operated weapon systems, ditions. So, the quickest target sighting, acquisition, which – founded on the most modern control technology tracing, and proper positioning of the main armament is and digitally configurable systems – form the basis for a vital for the foremost goal: a first-round hit. To achieve highly precise aiming and stabilization system, allowing this, the sights, targeting devices, and weapon systems alignment movements to be automatically stabilized or must be decoupled from the vehicle movements. In other manually controlled for absolute precision. words, they must be perfectly stabilized. That’s where our The GTdrive® product family of electrical systems for GTDRIVE® ELECTRIC DRIVES aiming, stabilization, and slaving of armaments has a wide range of applications for reconnaissance and combat – The elevation drive aligns the weapon in the vertical in light and heavy fighting vehicles. It covers a variety of direction drive systems – from spindle to spur gear – to meet the – The azimuth drive aligns the turret in the horizontal different mechanical interfaces. Its high reliability together direction with optimized life-cycle costs gives it the leading edge – According to the signal of the stabilization and power our customers truly value.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Vehicle Options Arising from the Barrel Type Piston Engine
    Journal of Power Technologies 101 (1) (2021) 22–33 Military vehicle options arising from the barrel type piston engine Pawe l Mazuro1 and Cezary Chmielewski1,B 1Warsaw University of Technology B [email protected] Abstract in terms of efficiency, meaning that piston engines can deliver enhanced range and endurance. This is benefi- The article reviews knowledge about requirements for engines in cial in missions requiring a stopover for refueling and state-of-the-art unmanned aerial vehicles and tanks. Analysis of particularly useful for unmanned supply, observation design and operational parameters was carried out on selected and maritime missions. turboshaft and piston engines generating power in the range of 500 - 1500 kW (0.5 - 1.5 MW). The data was compared In contrast, land combat vehicles have significantly with the performance of innovative, barrel type piston engines, different drive unit requirements. High mobility en- which are likely to become an alternative drive solution in the ables the vehicle to rapidly change location after de- target vehicle groups. tection. To this end, the torque curve as a function of the rotational speed of the shaft is of decisive im- portance. Keywords: military UAV, tanks, turboshaft engines, piston engines, barrel type piston engines The complexity of tank engines adds an additional layer of requirements, impacting the reliability and durability of the power unit, and they come with re- 1 Introduction lated manufacturing and operating costs. In military land vehicles, the engine should be as small This article consolidates knowledge on options and as possible; the space saved can be used for other capabilities arising from use of the barrel type piston purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks
    Tanks TANKS Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks Croatian Tanks Czech Tanks Egyptian Tanks French Tanks German Tanks Indian Tanks Iranian Tanks Iraqi Tanks Israeli Tanks Italian Tanks Japanese Tanks Jordanian Tanks North Korean Tanks Pakistani Tanks Polish Tanks Romanian Tanks Russian Tanks Slovakian Tanks South African Tanks South Korean Tanks Spanish Tanks Swedish Tanks Swiss Tanks Ukrainian Tanks US Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Tanks Yugoslavian Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Brazilian Tanks EE-T1 Osorio Notes: In 1982, Engesa began the development of the EE-T1 main battle tank, and by 1985, it was ready for the world marketplace. The Engesa EE-T1 Osorio was a surprising development for Brazil – a tank that, while not in the class of the latest tanks of the time, one that was far above the league of the typical third-world offerings. In design, it was similar to many tanks of the time; this was not surprising, since Engesa had a lot of help from West German, British and French armor experts. The EE-T1 was very promising – an excellent design that several countries were very interested in. The Saudis in particular went as far as to place a pre- order of 318 for the Osorio. That deal, however, was essentially killed when the Saudis saw the incredible performance of the M-1 Abrams and the British Challenger, and they literally cancelled the Osorio order at the last moment. This resulted in the cancellation of demonstrations to other countries, the demise of Engesa, and with it a promising medium tank.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare
    No. 109 JUNE 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare Michael B. Kim The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER No. 109, June 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim Major Michael B. Kim currently serves as the Squadron Executive Officer for the 8th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 2d Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2d Infantry Division. Prior to his current position, he graduated from the Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and completed the Art of War Scholars Program.
    [Show full text]
  • The Connection
    The Connection ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY 2 The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the contributors concerned and are not necessarily those held by the Royal Air Force Historical Society. Copyright 2011: Royal Air Force Historical Society First published in the UK in 2011 by the Royal Air Force Historical Society All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Publisher in writing. ISBN 978-0-,010120-2-1 Printed by 3indrush 4roup 3indrush House Avenue Two Station 5ane 3itney O72. 273 1 ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY President 8arshal of the Royal Air Force Sir 8ichael Beetham 4CB CBE DFC AFC Vice-President Air 8arshal Sir Frederick Sowrey KCB CBE AFC Committee Chairman Air Vice-8arshal N B Baldwin CB CBE FRAeS Vice-Chairman 4roup Captain J D Heron OBE Secretary 4roup Captain K J Dearman 8embership Secretary Dr Jack Dunham PhD CPsychol A8RAeS Treasurer J Boyes TD CA 8embers Air Commodore 4 R Pitchfork 8BE BA FRAes 3ing Commander C Cummings *J S Cox Esq BA 8A *AV8 P Dye OBE BSc(Eng) CEng AC4I 8RAeS *4roup Captain A J Byford 8A 8A RAF *3ing Commander C Hunter 88DS RAF Editor A Publications 3ing Commander C 4 Jefford 8BE BA 8anager *Ex Officio 2 CONTENTS THE BE4INNIN4 B THE 3HITE FA8I5C by Sir 4eorge 10 3hite BEFORE AND DURIN4 THE FIRST 3OR5D 3AR by Prof 1D Duncan 4reenman THE BRISTO5 F5CIN4 SCHOO5S by Bill 8organ 2, BRISTO5ES
    [Show full text]
  • Behind a Veil of Secrecy:Military Small Arms and Light Weapons
    16 Behind a Veil of Secrecy: Military Small Arms and Light Weapons Production in Western Europe By Reinhilde Weidacher An Occasional Paper of the Small Arms Survey Copyright The Small Arms Survey Published in Switzerland by the Small Arms Survey The Small Arms Survey is an independent research project located at the Grad­ © Small Arms Survey, Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva 2005 uate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland. It is also linked to the Graduate Institute’s Programme for Strategic and International Security First published in November 2005 Studies. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in Established in 1999, the project is supported by the Swiss Federal Depart­ a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the ment of Foreign Affairs, and by contributions from the Governments of Australia, prior permission in writing of the Small Arms Survey, or as expressly permit­ Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, ted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It collaborates with research insti­ organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above tutes and non­governmental organizations in many countries including Brazil, should be sent to the Publications Manager, Small Arms Survey, at the address Canada, Georgia, Germany, India, Israel, Jordan, Norway, the Russian Federation, below. South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Small Arms Survey The Small Arms Survey occasional paper series presents new and substan­ Graduate Institute of International Studies tial research findings by project staff and commissioned researchers on data, 47 Avenue Blanc, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland methodological, and conceptual issues related to small arms, or detailed Copy­edited by Alex Potter country and regional case studies.
    [Show full text]