ground vehicles Improved Performance Abrams M1IP

[CK_16 791]

Improved Performance M1 Abrams

 

 

The Improved Performance M1 (often referred to as IPM1 or M1IP) was a stop gap to take some of the revisions to the vehicle (BLOCK I improvement) being implemented on the M1E1 where it was found that some could be placed onto a slightly modified Abarms while some of the other features were undergoing further testing, mainly involving the Rheinmetall 120mm cannon & new NBC system. 894 of these M1IP’s were produced between 1984 to 1986. The model feature the new turret based on what was going to be the M1A1’s, sometimes referred to as the “long turret” which offered greater protection and a rear turret bustle rack for better stowage of the crew’s personal gear. There was also some improvements to the suspension & powerpack to accommodate the heavier turret and the rear side skirts adjusted from field feedback.

 

 

 

Armor Changes:

The armor of the M1IP turret was one of the main upgrades to the Abrams while not that noticeable at a glance compared to the original M1. Analysis of increasing Soviet munition lethality  lead to one requirement of the M1A1 project to increase the protection of the vehicle to withstand the new Soviet weapons. This resulted in upgrading the Chobham/Burlington armor and the frontal portions of the turret being increased from 650mm to 880mm ~ estimated, this added about 1 extra ton from the base M1, this reduced the speed of the M1IP to 41.5 MPH (66.8 Km/H) .

(Top M1 & Bottom M1IP)

 

Armor chart, CIA estimates.

Spoiler

Mantles diagram's below

Spoiler

(Diagram of M1 vs M1IP mantlet differences.)

 

Quality of Life improvements:

The first generation side skirts on the Abrams covered roughly half the rear drive sprocket, this was allowing mud to build in the area and cause thrown tracks. Several modifications were done to alleviate the issue from cutting a portion of the rear skirt in the field away to just out right removing the rear skirt segment. The final solution was what we see on modern Abrams today with the familiar smooth blended cut out around most of the drive sprocket. The original M1 Abrams had issues with crew gear stowage, with limited space inside and the unpopular rear turret storage straps, this lead to in the M1E1 project adding a rear turret bustle rack, this as well translated to the M1IP and probably was one of the most recognizable feature to the tank.

Side Skirt changes

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ammunition

“In 1979, the first depleted uranium (DU) penetrator round was introduced, the M774. This round had superior long range performance compared to the M735 and cause more damage on impact due to the pyrophoric reaction of uranium and steel. In 1983, the US Army began acquiring a significantly improved round, the M833, which used a longer and heavier DU penetrator. This round could reportedly penetrade 420mm of steel armour inclined at 60° at 2000 metres…”- Zaloga pg. 9

 

 

In addition the ammo stowage was same as the original M1, with 55 rounds rounds dispensed between the turret bustle(44), hull rack(8), and turret basket floor(3) in a spall protected case. With general combat rounds consisting of M833 APFDS, M456A2 HEATFS, & M393A2 HEP-T. Along with smoke grenades & the standard ammunition of 12.5mm .50 cal & 7.62mm NATO for secondary weapons.

 

For game play sake, the M833 could (and should) be the upgrade round while the M774 being the stock APFDS around.

 

M1IP Stats Sheet:

(Page From Hunnicutt)

 

 

M1 Abrams Stats sheet below

Spoiler

(Page From Hunnicutt)

 

 

Deployment:

The M1IP was deployed to various US force around the globe from its introduction to service in 1985, primarily at first in the Continental United States and West Germany. Early production IP’s were used by the 4/8th Cavalry during the Canadian Army Trophy (CAT) shoot in 1987. They would go on to be the first American team to place first and bring home the silver Centurion in the competition, beating the German 124th Panzerbataillon platoon in the final round of the competition. The M1IP would see deployment with the US led coalition to Saudi Arabia and Desert Shield in 1990, Although concerns that the Iraqis had modern Soviet ammunition for their T-72’s, many units had their M1IP’s replaced with M1A1HA’s right before Desert Storm was launched. The M1IP would continue to see use in front line units throughout the 1990’s, most notable in South Korea as their last major deployment abroad. They would continue in US army reserves use until the mid to late 2000’s.

(M1IP's of the 4/8 Cav, CAT Shoot 1987)

 

(M1IP of the 24th Infantry Division, Desert Shield / Storm)

 

(M1IP California Nation Guard)

 

(M1IP at the NTC)

 

 

 

Various images

M1IP's in General

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M1IP's at CAT87 4/8 Cav

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M1IP's at NTC

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M1IP's in Desert Shield/Storm

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I will keep this a WIP, adding as I can !!

 

Thanks! 

 

 

Sources:

 

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/US/M1_Abrams.php

 

M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank 1982-1992 - Steve Zaloga & Peter Sarson

 

M1 Abrams in action By Jim Mesko - Squadron/Signal publications

 

Abrams - a History of the American Main Battle Tank R.P Hunnicutt

 

Edited April 11, 2018 by CK_16

[Radom 4,245]

Open for discussion 

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

M1, M1IP, M1A1, M1A2 gunnery manual:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293130713861980162/418544895276613642/M1_M1A1_M1A2_Abram_Gunnery_Manual.pdf
it used the M900 as well

 

also +1
this needs to be introduced befor the M1A1

Edited April 4, 2018 by dotEXCEL

[WulfPack 1,693]

+1 as the US counter to the T-80B

[Nell_Lucifer 927]

Sure +1 

[twoand900 593]

More Abrams = Better game +1

Edited April 4, 2018 by twoand900

[TempestRiser 525]

I think i would go for M1A1 instead... but maybe the M1IP could come as a upgrade ? 

[Koty1996 457]

2 hours ago, dotEXCEL said:

M1, M1IP, M1A1, M1A2 gunnery manual:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/293130713861980162/418544895276613642/M1_M1A1_M1A2_Abram_Gunnery_Manual.pdf
it used the M900 as well

 

also +1
this needs to be introduced befor the M1A1

 Although it is important to note that M900 came well after the tanks currently featured.

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

13 minutes ago, Koty1996 said:

 Although it is important to note that M900 came well after the tanks currently featured.

sure

[RogueStarflyer 1,242]

+1

 

Would be a great step between the current M1 and the M1A1.

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,154]

I support the M1IP with the M900.

[Ultor128 251]

Hell YES!!

[MaterialWharf3 454]

9.7 is too low for this thing, if/when it comes to WT. at least 10.0 or above

[SANDOKAN_624 29]

There is a few things I'd like to say about this suggestion. 

 

Firstly, I think this variant of the M1 should be added before the M1A1 or any newer variants. My reason for this is that it wouldn't require Br so much higher than the M1 which the M1A1 would. Other than that, it could come as a sort of transitional vehicle so there wouldn't be such a gap (in performance at least) between the M1 and the A1. This would ideally result in lower BR vehicles being actually competitive against new top tier tanks.

 

Secondly, I think it should be using the M833 not the M900 for obvious reasons. 

 

Thirdly, Gaijin should also focus more on filling rank so that we don't have any more M60A1 AOS vs T-64B situations. 

 

But yeah, I'd like to see this tank very much indeed.

+1

[CK_16 791]

I agree, the M900 on the IP is a similar situation to the M833 on the M1 currently. It's totally overkill for the current max BR. 

 

That said once assuming they add in tanks like the T-80U & T-72BU ext pretty much late 80's to early 90's vehicles, then the M900 becomes needed for the IP and the 833 to the M1 currently is same once they add the T-64BV/T-80BV imo when the BR jumps again.

[Z3r0_ 4,128]

I think I'm going to have to say "not now", for the moment at least.  Before any more advanced hardware is added to the nations that already possess top end rank 6 tanks, we need to add proper equivalents to what's already in-game to the other tech trees, namely Japan, France, and Italy - hell, Italy still doesn't have a ground forces tree at all.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Z3r0_

[_EQUAI_ 356]

This isn't the even the abrams final form! I'd support it for 10.0

[sniperNZSAS 1,116]

+1

[Querulous1 3,276]

Yes.   As long as all tank nations balance at the top

[Admiral_Aruon 2,264]

i'm for it at 9.7 or 10.0. +1

 

some personal issues: right now the M1 and M1IP don't even need the M833 let alone the M900 as both are just overkill. if the M833 was added then this would have to be 10.0 or 10.3 what with the improved turret making the M1IP practically impenetrable outside of the turret ring and LFP, and future-proofed vs T-72s and T-80s.

[kev2go 5,112]

sure This thing would be easier to Balance than the M1A1, which has stock ammo that even makes the already powerfull M833 look like a pea shooter pellet.

 

Although If japan is really getting a Type 90, along with production leos ( possibly 2a4)  then i really do think M1A1 is an inevitable addition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kev2go 5,112]

18 minutes ago, Admiral_Aruon said:

i'm for it at 9.7 or 10.0. +1

 

some personal issues: right now the M1 and M1IP don't even need the M833 let alone the M900 as both are just overkill. if the M833 was added then this would have to be 10.0 or 10.3 what with the improved turret making the M1IP practically impenetrable outside of the turret ring and LFP, and future-proofed vs T-72s and T-80s.

 

It all depends on the ammo the future Russian tanks get. Proof agiaing 3bm15 And 3bm22 that the T64B already has , as well as the 3bm26 and  3nm2929  but 3bm32 may give the M1IP trouble at War thunders typical ranges ( 0-1000M) 

 

540mm at point blank range, 500mm @ 2000m

 

 250mm penetration @ 2000m @ 60 degrees.

 

Estimates of the M1IP's turret  ive seen range from 450mm - 600mm vs KE typically. 

 

SO it quite varies. Id imaging gajin wouldn't give it the most optimistic Value. ( 800mm vs KE i Highty doubt at 800M + vs Ke would seem more what M1 with DU inserts would give)/ While i would't nessarily expect 3bm32 for the T64B 1984 ( maybe they boost it with ammo it had during its introduction 3bm26 and 3bm29) , I Certainly would on a T-72B mod 85 or on a T-80BV.

Edited April 6, 2018 by kev2go

[CK_16 791]

Well courtesy of a fella on the Leo2A4 thread I have seen this.

 

Edited April 8, 2018 by CK_16

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

We don’t yet need this tank, it would be overkill.

 

+1 for the future when it has actual competition to fight seriously.

[Laviduce 1,779]

1 hour ago, MH4UAstragon said:

We don’t yet need this tank, it would be overkill.

 

+1 for the future when it has actual competition to fight seriously.

For tanks like the M1IP,M1A1, Leopard 2A4, Leclerc Serie 1, Type 90,etc. a tier 7 should really be implemented.