Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 28, 2021 at 10:39 comment added Graham @KeithMorrison On paper it can - but it depends what you consider "running". In a previous job I worked on car engine controllers, and I asked a colleague (a proper qualified engine expert) about this. He said that at best, on the wrong fuel it would turn the engine over and kind of run well enough to move, but that was about it. And you could expect to need an engine rebuild afterwards. The idea that you can put just any fuel into it and run it normally is basically fiction, apparently.
Feb 26, 2021 at 22:08 comment added user_1818839 @A.bakker There is a precedent for aero engine technology (albeit not jet) in tanks : the Rolls Royce Meteor was mostly Merlin parts (without the supercharger) - it could use rejected parts like pistons, and field repairs were possible using scavenged aero engines.
Feb 26, 2021 at 18:29 comment added user_1818839 As long as it's got the range to get you to the Winchester until it all blows over.
Feb 26, 2021 at 7:23 comment added A.bakker @KeithMorrison also in a basic zombie apocalypse the military (Semi) collapses and require new civilian recruits, a car mechanic would be more able to maintain a carlike vehicle like a Humvee then a tank. same goes for basic operating of a tank compared to a armored personal carrier of any kind.
Feb 26, 2021 at 7:21 comment added A.bakker @KeithMorrisonyou are missing my point on how easily replaced. i am not talking about the actual process but on how easily it would be to acquire more of those engines. And concerning the others that can use basic fuels...you get the issue that they are not fuel efficient compared to acceptable alternatives like armored vehicles. During a basic zombie apocalypse you need to do long term planning...if you throw out all your fuel in the first weeks by fueling all your tanks you will be doomed later on.
Feb 25, 2021 at 18:19 comment added A.bakker @KeithMorrison what percentage of tanks in the world are outfitted with an engine like that? and if said engine would break down how easily would it be replaced ?
Feb 25, 2021 at 18:11 comment added Keith Morrison @A.bakker, the gas turbine on the Abrams (Honeywell AGT1500) can use jet fuel, gasoline, diesel, or marine diesel.
Feb 25, 2021 at 18:05 comment added stix @A.bakker That's precisely when you would need tanks the most. The beginning is when the zombie horde will be at its largest, densest, and most dangerous. Expend your biggest and most perishable weapons in the beginning. Save the smaller stuff for long term survival.
Feb 25, 2021 at 17:42 comment added A.bakker @stix tanks would be great for the beginning, but in the long run they would be highly inferior to any form of armored personal carriers.
Feb 25, 2021 at 17:39 comment added A.bakker @stix yea and which would be easier to get a steady supply of, regular gasoline or jet fuel? And you will need to be able to store 20 times as much fuel for a tank to cross the same distance as a HMMV Also in what way would a zombie be able to penetrate the armor of a HMMV? Also you should consider the added benefit of of speed, maintenance and movability.
Feb 25, 2021 at 17:33 comment added stix Zombies might be able to penetrate a HMMV though. An armored tank that can be equipped with a cow catcher to just mow zombies away has its obvious benefits. Tanks and HMMVs don't use the same fuel either. An Abrams uses jet fuel, a HMMV uses regular gasoline.
Feb 25, 2021 at 16:32 comment added abestrange A line of tanks could form a fairly effective barricade, especially considering that they could be employed to disable any hordes that congregate on the other side of the barricade. I can imagine a city block being reclaimed by a line of tanks rolling through.
Feb 25, 2021 at 15:23 history answered A.bakker CC BY-SA 4.0