I've heard tales of the armor on the M1-A4 Abrams Main Battle Tank being self-healing (from an aquaintence that was formerly in the marine corps), but I haven't really been able to find any information regarding this. I was wondering if anyone on here might have some information about that. Call it curiosity, more than anything else.

If there's already another thread regarding this topic, I apoligize, but I wasn't able to find it through the search on the site. I'd appreciate if someone could give me a link.

I don't think there is an M1A4 variant planned at all, there isn't even a M1A3 planned, it will all be oovered by the FCS, the M1A2 SEP will be the premium US MBT in the next coming years till FCS, it's possible it might have some minor updates...

But the self-healing armor is plausible, considdering they already are working on nano-armor for infantry that would heal them just after they get hit, FCS has armor that is extremely resistant to modern small arms fire...

I also heard about nano-armor for aircraft...

One of the self healing armors I heard of was part in the metal and part in the paint.

The metal uses some memory metal properties so that once damaged it will bend back to about where it was. Its not perfect, and much weaker then before, but its better than a large gaping hole.

The second part is in the paint. The base/color coat would contain within it plastic bubbles (easiest way to describe it) filled with epoxy or other glues. When that section gets damaged the bubbles rupture filling in any cracks/holes nearby.

In case anyone doesnt realize how strong epoxy is. It is considered adequate to replace concrete in foundations and all other areas of building.

Its only used for patching and filling holes though because its otherwise difficult to handle and extremely expensive for construction grade epoxy.

sorry no nanos for a very long time yet. that is all stuff of science fiction for sure (for a whole lot of reasons). a nice "what if" but not in any immendiate future and "M1" with nano bot self healing armour is probably going to be model "ZZZ" (versus B now)

I had heard of the M1A4 as a top secret tank, ahead of what the public knows (much like we'll have planes in use for years before the publics knows they exist). The source I heard it from (and I'm honestly not sure how reliable he is, so take all of this with a grain of salt) said that he actually worked on these tanks. He's always been fairly good with a wrench, so at the time, not knowing all that much about military hardware, it seemed plausible. Although, at the same time, this is a guy that was thrown out of the military for "non-conformity" as he phrased it.

It's quite possible that I'm speaking total bunk here. If that's the case, I'd like to know. Either way, I had heard about the self-healing armor, be it on the M1A2 or a publicly unknown M1A4. I was curious.

Xerrog, thank you for the best explaination I've gotten so far.

sorry no nanos for a very long time yet. that is all stuff of science fiction for sure (for a whole lot of reasons). a nice "what if" but not in any immendiate future and "M1" with nano bot self healing armour is probably going to be model "ZZZ" (versus B now)

in 2000 I heard that Nano-Technology will be mature enough to be used on a massive scale in 15 years, that's 10 years now, Nano-Technology is widely funded and researched, and with the new war there is a lot of demand for it...

The M1A4 "Campbell" is a third party unit for the game "Total Annihilation", check if he plays that game with 3rd party add-ons.

I have heard RUMORS about research in the M1A3 but they favored spending their budget on the FCS instead...so that's the end of that...

He's more than likely bunk, but the Nano-Armor is true...It's being researched, right now just for infantry...Memory Alloy is well underway as well.

They can "research" it all they want- nano bots still remain a thing of sci-fi. just for starters there are many things that have to go together just so so to have a single successful nano bot. motors, controllers, and power supplies to name a few

sure they have gotten individual motors down to pretty darn small but those microscopic motors are having all kinds of issues. Like extreme super high speed- very short life expectancy - 99% of them eteched have fatal flaws- almost zero torque- because torque on electric motors = higher amps and that burns up the microscopic wires. sure motors etched one atom at a time can be smaller than a human hair- lot of good if it doesn't work or the "power" cannot be harnessed. anyone want to talk microscopic gear boxes?? there have been some made but they contiue to have signifcant issues.

and sure computer processors are getting smaller all the time- but no where near small enough to fit on a nano bot- "wire" size is the number one issue. more processor speed is assosciated with higher voltage which tends to burn up the wiring. Even super basic nano-bots are going to require pretty sophisticated controllers for the various motors necessary for whatever its function(s).

Power supplies- well then this remains a HUGE issue (literally). Power supplies for nano bots - i.e. batteries remain Gargantuan compared to what is necessary for even the simpliest bots.

then we get to function: exactly what is proposed for a function of the nano bot going to repair said armour? Are many hundred going to run over to the hole with little pieces of metal and weld it back into place?- or just run to the hole and turn themselves molten and fuse thousands of very expensive nano bots together to close the hole? that's fine but how will they know how thick the metal is (nano bot size x-rays?? i see them going to shoe box sized +++) or will they just keep going until it overwelms the crew of said tank- or will they stop once the hole is closed and leave aluminum foil thick armour- all but useless. where is the power for that sort of function going to come from? Nano bots are going to be 99% silicon just from the circuits anyway.

i am a degree carrying mechanical engineer (i currently work in a Space related field) and did a lot of work on these in college, which wasn't all that long ago (99), and while i have only been cursorially following the issue since then (because i thought the idea was fantastic) i have seen zip, nanda, zero to make me think nano bots in the true sense are anything less than decades (perhaps many, many) away.

and for those folks always asking for the links, please, please, THINK before you ask for something stupid! - i cannot PROVE something is not- sure it would be easy to find an article saying that these are problems but it could be 5 years old on the internet. if it has been solved there will be something out there. So, you prove to me that these problems have been conquered. Burdon of proof saying something is possible is YOURS. show me someone- anyone has come up with solutions.

Nanotech: Fact, Fancy And Context

When the SR-71 first flew, the conventional wisdom at the time was that such an aircraft was either "science fiction" or "impossible".

For a grad student working on his Ph.D. in the microlab at some university somewhere, nanotech may very well be "several years out" or "not here yet". A lot of that depends on who's shelling out the dough for his work.

Give that same student a 9-figure budget, a well-established base of technological and experimental data, hundreds of fellow researchers, a beyond-state-of-the-art facility, a massive black world support infrastructure and make it a felony for him to talk about it to anyone outside his program, and perhaps his timetable might start looking different.

It would be absurd to assume that public knowledge of the state of nanotechnology is current.

At the same time, speculation about its existence is almost as absurd, because anyone who can speak authoritatively on the subject cannot do so legally.

But it would be the ultimate in folly to presume that simply because you don't know about something it cannot exist.

For my part, I don't know one way or the other, but I'm comfortable with that. I can accept the possibility of near-term nanotech deployment without the need to consider my own ignorance of it to be either proof or disproof of that possibililty.

With this, as with all things, time will tell.

Originally posted by Majic
Nanotech: Fact, Fancy And Context


For a grad student working on his Ph.D. in the microlab at some university somewhere, nanotech may very well be "several years out" or "not here yet". A lot of that depends on who's shelling out the dough for his work.

Give that same student a 9-figure budget, a well-established base of technological and experimental data, hundreds of fellow researchers, a beyond-state-of-the-art facility, a massive black world support infrastructure and make it a felony for him to talk about it to anyone outside his program, and perhaps his timetable might start looking different.

throw money at it all you want- some things money doesn't help all that much. and believe me those folks doing the microscopic motors and gearboxes, or micro controlers don't have a shortage of funds- just working models.

It would be absurd to assume that public knowledge of the state of nanotechnology is current.

At the same time, speculation about its existence is almost as absurd, because anyone who can speak authoritatively on the subject cannot do so legally.

so you saying that it is pointless to have any discussion? Ok so what was the point of you joining in? Being an engineer myself and based on what is known in any of the much smaller fields related, i disagree. Much can be put together from unclassified sources on the bits and pieces that make up the whole - i think the military refers to stuff like this as "critical information" stuff that cannot be totally covered up but when pieced together it gives you a very accurate picture of what is going on. every secret program of such complexity has many such areas if people only know where to look. as i mentioned earlier i was one of those students and the problems they had then pretty much continue to be the same problems now even if they have come up with new ways to etch and what not unless they have come up with very dramatic changes in material science- and we would be sure to see that show up somewhere else.

For my part, I don't know one way or the other, but I'm comfortable with that. I can accept the possibility of near-term nanotech deployment without the need to consider my own ignorance of it to be either proof or disproof of that possibililty.

again, why is it you joined in???? just trying to raise your ats score? if you really don't care one way or the other----- i just don't get it.

i really don't think self healing armour (via nano bots) is coming anytime soon. can i prove it isn't? heck no. i can't disprove anything! how does one prove something does not exist- by eliminating infiti possibilities. I just don't think it is likely. Pretty easy to prove something exists on the other hand, though sometimes it can be quite convoluted- hence the conversation.