What Oil does the U.S. Army use in their Tanks & Hummers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does the military still perform quarterly oil samples and use the results to change oil and replace engines?

I was a motor officer of two different motor pools in the Army. My soldiers hated oil sampleing day, and I never understood why. My mechanics would have to go out on the line and help the operators perform the sample, that is, if we wanted it done correctly.
 
Oh yeah, we do. In fact, IIRC, what used to be the "NOAP" (Naval Oil Analysis Program) lab in Pensacola has grown into the JOAP (or "joint", reflecting the new we-all-work-together reality that's presently in vogue). Back in my active duty flying days, our mechs sampled the jets often. When I got out to go to law school and joined a reserve Motor-T unit, I was surprised to see that the truck mechs did the same thing (different techniques, of course...).
 
We did those JOAP samples back in the 80's, stopped because the crew chiefs were sticking the straws in the oil tanks and sucking the stuff from the bottom, and it was showing up as contaminated. So we were changing engines ( C-130) left and right until they figured out what was going on. It is no longer done.
 
my brother was a Nuke (nuclear engineer) on a sub and he told me they used Royal Purple on the subs. Im not sure if Nuclear subs used that oil or if he was referring to the older diesel subs.
 
The agency that procures the oils and other lubricants for DOD is located in Richmond VA. They purchase engine oil primarily by military performance specification and typically buy by brand name only. They advertise by announcing solicitations which prospective vendors will respond to. The lowest bidder typically will be awarded the contract but now they have factored in such things as responding to delivery schedules, quality control, etc., and these may at times negate the lowest bidder from getting the contract.

Now about what oils are used in HMMWVs, other wheeled vehicles, combat vehicles, etc., all diesel engine powered vehicles/equipment with the exception of the Abrams M1 series and some turbine powered generators use oils described by MIL-PRF-2104 (for use other than the arctic), MIL-PRF-46167 (arctic use), or MIL-PRF-21260 (standby storage/preservation). The turbine powered tanks and equipment use either MIL-PRF-23699 or MIL-PRF-7808 (for colder climates).

Several years ago, there were some SAE standards developed that are starting to be used. They aer SAE J2359, SAE J2361, SAE J2362 and SAE J2363.
 
What happened to the old "MIL-L-23699/7808" nomenclature? Incidentally 23699 and 7808 are the exact same two oils speced for the J-52 turbojets (yes, straight turbojets, not turbofans) in the jet I flew back in my early years (the EA-6B).
 
Am curious as to what you mean by nomenclature. Do you mean the content of the specification, intended use, etc.? In 1994-95, the Secretary of Defense came up with the bright idea to expand use of commercial products and wanted to do away with all military specifications. What transpired was that all military specifications were either changed to Performance specifications, Detail specifications, or Commercial Item descriptions. Essentially, the large bulk of the military specifications were just changed to Performance specifications. That was the case of the two that you mentioned. MIL-PRF_7808L is titled Lubricating OIl, Aircraft Turbine Engine, Synthetic Base and it now has two grades. MIL_PRF-23699F is titled Lubricating Oil, Aircraft Turbine Engine, Synthetic Base, NATO COde Number O-156 and it has three grades.
 
Interesting. Back in 94-95, I was a drilling reservist, and very much at the user level, so I guess I missed the change.

Also intrigued by the grades within the specs. When I was in flight training, we were just taught the two specs, without much detail. The only time it would matter for a cockpit aviator would be on the road if you had a problem, since the ground crews at home base would pretty much take care of all the lube minutae. For us, it was 23699 unless in arctic conditions (-40, IIRC), so really, it was just make sure you got 23699 if you needed oil. You don't see arctic conditions in NC or FL very often. . . BTW, I trained in the early 1980s.
 
quote:
Originally posted by ekpolk:

quote:
Originally posted by Tim H.:
We did those JOAP samples back in the 80's...
Click to expand...
Perhaps it's no longer done in that fashion. We are still doing it (at least we were when I served as a wing Safety Officer for a stretch back in 2004). It's in apps like this where UOA really makes sense. As everyone's surely aware, the cost of aviation engines makes car engines look like CrackerJack box toys. Also, especially in helo (helicopter) applications, failures, especially transmission failures, often kill people. It would insane to fail to monitor lube condition in one of these units.

In any case, for those who'd like to go to the horse's mouth, here's a link to the JOAP program website: Joint Oil Analysis Program Website.
Click to expand...
JOAP is still going on, it is just not used on C-130s anymore. In 6 years of working on them we never sampled oil.
 
The milspec number for turbine engines is 23699. It's synthetic and I know Shell was making lots of it but anyone who can show it meets milspec synthetic turbine oil specs can sell it to the Military. It's also used in aviation gear boxes and transmissions. Don't quote me but I thought the Abrams tank engine was a Lycoming T-53. The same engine as used in the UH-1's and Cobra's Lycoming was sold out and they stopped producing the T-53 which I believe was one of the reason the UH-1 and Cobra was phased out. However, 23699 is still the milspec oil used in army aircraft. I have a small bottle of it I use on my guns. It seems to work. kwg
 
SS, yes, that's the way the Army did it when I was in. Small bottle, similar to what Blackstone sends me now. The analysis reports came back to the motor officer in plain english terms, i.e. "operate as normal", change oil, resample new quarter", "replace engine."
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tim H.:
We did those JOAP samples back in the 80's, stopped because the crew chiefs were sticking the straws in the oil tanks and sucking the stuff from the bottom, and it was showing up as contaminated. So we were changing engines ( C-130) left and right until they figured out what was going on. It is no longer done.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it's no longer done in that fashion. We are still doing it (at least we were when I served as a wing Safety Officer for a stretch back in 2004). It's in apps like this where UOA really makes sense. As everyone's surely aware, the cost of aviation engines makes car engines look like CrackerJack box toys. Also, especially in helo (helicopter) applications, failures, especially transmission failures, often kill people. It would insane to fail to monitor lube condition in one of these units.

In any case, for those who'd like to go to the horse's mouth, here's a link to the JOAP program website: Joint Oil Analysis Program Website.
 
quote:
Originally posted by Al:
Mobil 1 used to advertise that the M1 Tanks used Mobil 1.
Click to expand...
True.

The Air Force also uses Mobil synthetic oil in their aircraft and helicopter engines. I worked on AC130s, MC130s, MH53s and MH60s and I remember seeing drums of Mobil synthetic oil being pumped into their oil tanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
What is the real difference between these two tanks?
Replies
7
Views
555
tnt_motorsports
1
Do you short-shift your manual transmission vehicle?
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
3K
wolverine86
The Critic
Trico Force Wiper Blades - Design Change?
Replies
5
Views
841
Triple_Se7en
S
How much gas used in an hour?
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
mitsuman47
T
Ford GAA 1100 Cubic Inch WW2 Tank Engine
Replies
11
Views
2K
OVERKILL
Back
Top