# TUSK Upgrades for the M1/M1A2



## tomahawk6 (11 May 2007)

Very interesting upgrade that will make the Abrams even more formidable in the battlefield.

http://www.armytimes.com/issues/stories/0-ARMYPAPER-2733068.php

TUSK kits to beef up tanks by summer
Upgrades give crews more protection, firepower
By Michelle Tan - mtan@militarytimes.com
Posted : May 14, 2007

FORT KNOX, Ky. — The Army will field its tank urban survivability kit in Iraq this summer, outfitting the M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams with additions such as reactive armor, belly armor, thermal sights for the loader and a second .50-caliber machine gun.

The package, known as TUSK, was on display at the 2007 Armor Warfighting Conference here April 29-May 3.

“The guys can’t wait,” said Capt. David Centeno, assistant product manager of the TUSK program. “They need this stuff. Every time I go [to Iraq] they ask, ‘When will we get it?’”

Centeno, fresh off his most recent trip to Iraq, will return to theater in July to coordinate the fielding of the kits, which will begin in earnest in September, he said. In all, 565 kits will be sent to Iraq over the span of a year.

“The goal is, by fall next year, all tanks will be fitted with TUSK,” Centeno said.

Each kit costs about $400,000 and includes:

•A .50-caliber machine gun mounted on the main gun, giving the crew the ability to provide countersniper fire without leaving the protection of the tank. The .50-caliber will slave off the main gun’s system, and because it’s mounted on the main gun, the .50-caliber will be able to shoot single shots more accurately.

A second .50-caliber on the Abrams isn’t new, Centeno said. About 130 systems have already been sent into theater, but packaging this additional capability in the TUSK will ensure every Abrams in theater has one, he said.

•Belly armor made from shaped aluminum to protect against improvised explosive device blasts. The belly armor weighs 3,000 pounds and can be installed in two hours.

•Reactive armor tiles to provide side protection. The tiles are already being used in theater on Bradley fighting vehicles.

•A tank infantry phone to allow dismounted troops to communicate with the tank crew. The phone will be on the back right side of the tank.

•Thermal weapon sights for the loader, giving him night-vision capability. The loader also will have a mounted display on his helmet, allowing him to use the system from anywhere in the tank.

•Gun shields made from armored glass and steel for the loader, providing him with protection without compromising his ability to see his target.

•A driver’s vision enhancer, or DVE, which will enhance the driver’s thermal night and all-weather vision.

•Remote thermal sights for the tank commander, allowing him to engage targets without opening his hatch. This addition is only for the M1A1.

•A power distribution box to provide power feeds with proper circuit protection to the different pieces of the TUSK package.

The kit can be added to a tank in 12 hours, Centeno said, minimizing the time tanks spend offline.

“You have to remember, when we do field this, we’re taking a tank off the battlefield,” he said.

Centeno said he plans to spend one day outfitting the tanks and another day training the crew on the new additions.

As the Army begins fielding TUSK, work continues on TUSK II, which will include a rear-view camera for the driver. Centeno said he hopes to field the cameras in May or June 2008. A similar camera is also in the works for the Bradley.

Also part of TUSK II are 360-degree barriers to protect the tank commander and the loader.

TUSK III is in the works and could include remote-operated weapons systems. Testing is underway to determine which system would work best for the Abrams, Centeno said.

“The tank was not designed to do what it’s doing now in Iraq,” Centeno said. “You take this massive tank and put it in the middle of a city, now you have to design something to enable it to survive and still do its mission in a city.”






Related article.

http://www.defense-update.com/products/t/tusk.htm


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (11 May 2007)

Considering the theatre they're now in, I would've thought they would've fast-tracked the RWS integration and made it part of this batch.


Matthew.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 May 2007)

Is this the first time that the M1 has had a tank telephone?


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (12 May 2007)

Ah, making and already formidable machine even more formidable.


----------



## ArmyRick (12 May 2007)

Damn! Insurgents look out!


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 May 2007)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Is this the first time that the M1 has had a tank telephone?



Yes it is.I think the reason it didnt have one is the heat of the exhaust, but then I am well close to swerving out of my lane here.


----------



## Avor (13 May 2007)

Co-axil weapon, direct phone, rear armor so you don't get raped, I though those things were suppose to be standard on tanks?  :-\


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (13 May 2007)

x


----------



## ghazise (13 May 2007)

Deleted


----------



## ghazise (13 May 2007)

I was wrong about the coax


----------



## 28402 engineers (16 May 2007)

Is there any way that we could McGyver the TUSK upgrade to be used with our new A6? I've seen the PSO upgrades, but TUSK seems to pack a bit more punch.


----------



## Avor (16 May 2007)

Command-Sense-Act 105 said:
			
		

> Avor...Rear armour - yes, should have been there better.  Looking at getting more stand off range in the back to detonate HEAT warheads further out so that the penetrator jet is spent before hitting anytihng vital.  Learn and adapt.



I know how it wokrs, I thought that upgrade was created sepreraly and was added on years ago.


----------



## KevinB (17 May 2007)

Rear Slat armor addition is relatively recent, it (duh) already was armored in the rear.
  The Slat is an upgrade to improve standoff from the RPG-27 and 29 series that are becoming more and more common here.


----------



## a_majoor (17 May 2007)

I think what is being talked about is a .50 mouonted on the gun barrel like Israeli tanks, so the .50 can be aimed and fired by the gunner and has the entire tank to absorb the recoil. Certainly useful for cleaning out targets holed up in buildings and complex terrain when you might not want to discharge the main gun. Alternatively, you could use this as a form of spotting rifle should the FCS be inoperative (Tex, when you see the splash on the bunker hit the main cannon!)


----------



## BestodaBest (23 May 2007)

Which israeli tanks employ that method? Merkeva?  regardless, when i first heard of it, i thought it was rather genious... not only can you use it to identify the target, but if the splash is on target, you know the tank round will land spot-on...


----------



## BestodaBest (24 May 2007)

Agreed.



			
				Command-Sense-Act 105 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, your "new idea" for spotting guns has been well-used in the past and overtaken by technology.



Although, i never did mention it being a new form of target acquisition... i do know it is a rather aged method, and is in no way comparable to modern methods or technology.


----------



## Staff Weenie (24 May 2007)

A simple question from somebody with no armour background - how much extra weight do all these upgrades add to a vehicle that's already quite heavy to start? 

Does this poes a threat to the tanks mobility? I would suspect that in an urban environment, the overall weight added and subsequent decrease of top speed isn't that great of a factor. 

But, does it limit the tank to only larger, and undamaged bridges, and paved or hard packed gravel roads? Is there a risk to the transmission as the Germans experienced with the initial Panthers? Can the recovery veh still recover it?

A final note - I love the phone on the back, I've actually used one on the old Leo's in Gagetown (improved our Sect attack greatly!) - but I'd hate to be the poor bugger back there if an ERA module goes off.......


----------



## vonGarvin (24 May 2007)

Staff Weenie said:
			
		

> A final note - I love the phone on the back, I've actually used one on the old Leo's in Gagetown (improved our Sect attack greatly!) - but I'd hate to be the poor bugger back there if an ERA module goes off.......


Would you rather be there when the secondary explosions from the ammo goes off when the round penetrates the turret?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQu9-lf3vtM


----------



## BestodaBest (24 May 2007)

i have no background whatsoever in Armour; i am looking forward to a component transfer into the trade, but all that i know are from books, articles, and television programs... im not here to argue, nor claim any of you to be incorrect; simply to gain as much knowledge as possible on the subject... my incorrect claims, and mistaking of terminology is simply that. I respect and thank you for your corrections, for first-hand experience is far more valuable (and correct) than anything you could possibly learn from simply reading... 

The only reason i posted this comment:

"i do know it is a rather aged method, and is in no way comparable to modern methods or technology."

Is because u assumed i was claiming it to be a "new" form of target designation, as said here:

Quote from: Command-Sense-Act 105 on Today at 09:07:40

Unfortunately, your *"new idea"* for spotting guns has been well-used in the past and overtaken by technology.




All in all, im not going to argue, but simply stop typing and start reading;

Regards.


----------



## aesop081 (24 May 2007)

BestodaBest said:
			
		

> All in all, im not going to argue, but simply stop typing and start reading;



Thats what you said yesterday in the TUA thread but a few minutes later you felt the need to come back and add another 2 cents....take your own advice this time or i can put you on *"listen only" * to help you along.


Your choice

army.ca staff


----------



## Staff Weenie (24 May 2007)

Capt S - point taken - either way, standing next to 60 tons of target is not recommended by your insurance agent, and may negate your coverage.....


----------



## KevinB (27 May 2007)

My guess (as a non armoured guy - and while I have stood on a M1A2 - thats the end of my experience... I wanted a pic ) is that the add ons are not that much weight in the great scheme of things.   As a side note the Bradleys in theatre here has ERA boxes on them -- but the M113' (static guard) and Strykers have slat armour.


BestodaBest - Dude join the Infantry, as you have already proved yourself very added to diging a hole for yourself...


----------

