Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: edat!brian@uunet.UU.NET (brian douglass personal account)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Effects inside tank
Message-ID: <1991Feb28.045907.6390@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 28 Feb 91 04:59:07 GMT
References: <1991Feb27.015359.18692@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: Electronic Data Technologies, Inc., Las Vegas, NV
Lines: 30
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: edat!brian@uunet.UU.NET (brian douglass personal account)

In article <1991Feb27.015359.18692@cbnews.att.com> ccplumb@rose.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Plumb) writes:
>
>A few years back, I saw a TV documentary on an Israeli-developed tank.
>It was designed for survivability, with non-flammable libricants,
>kevlar anti-spalling interior, low profile, etc.

Isn't this the Israeli Merkava (?) tank?  I think the documentary
was a 60 Minutes article on the difference between U.S. procurement
practices and that of the Israelis, focusing on the Merkava and the
M1.  They also showed some great footage of the Merkava in action
against Syrian T-72s and the like.  They emphasized how the
Israelis kept all the old Syrian hulks and studied them to
determine what actions killed the tanks and what killed the crews.
It seems like not long after this M1A1s got rolling.

We all should know by now the differences between the M1 and M1A1,
but could someone please elaborate on where the inputs came from for
the enhancements?  Were they the result of Israeli information
gleened from the Lebanon Invasion?

Thanks

Brian Douglass			Voice: 702-361-1510 X311
Electronic Data Technologies	FAX #: 702-361-2545
1085 Palms Airport Drive	brian@edat.uucp
Las Vegas, NV 89119-3715