I don't know anything about powerplant specifics

[raketenjagdpanzer]

However, looking at the turbine engines that the Apache uses (1960 shp) versus the ones the M1 uses (honeywell AGT1500, 1450 shp), as more and more a/c specifically apaches are downed for maintenance issues and lack of avgas, would it be feasible for rear depots, late in the war (1998-1999) to have shoehorned Apache turbines as AGTs were damaged beyond repair?

I mean, a lot of us armored vehicles use "weird" engines - the M113 uses a lycoming (I think) engine or maybe it's Detroit Diesel, but it's common to buses and heavy equipment in the US.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

At first look, I think the AH-64 turbines are too long for fitting into the engine bay of any tank. Even the Turbomeca RTM332 of the WAH-64D (the British built version of the Apache), although a little more compact than the GE T700-701 series used in US built Apaches, is still too long to fit.


As for the M113, I am pretty sure that the engine and driveshaft components were specifically chosen from heavy truck manufacture. This allowed for quicker development time and more importantly, increased availability of parts worldwide for repair/replacement.
Originally the M113 used a (General Motors) Chrysler 75M petrol engine but from the M113A1 on, they switched to a (General Motors) Detroit Diesel 6V53 diesel engine.