Is the M-1 Abrams outclassed now?

[nittany03]

The turbo-diesel hybrid powertrain is a big deal. Pretty impressive specs. The LTS-101 was a shitty fuel gobbling nightmare on the original M! and even worse on the BK-117 I flew

Get the turbine vs. diesel bit, but that article was written by someone who seems to be confusing debates over specs (turbine vs diesel vs hybrid) and other debates over doctrine or ROC/POE (when/how to employ armor after lessons learned in Ukraine, and how it effects said specs) with some juvenile idea that all this means that tanks are all obsolete and thus "wasteful military spending."

Which is the level of analysis I'd expect out of an undergrad intern, brand-new J-school grad, or a particularly dim Ensign/2ndLt.

 

[taxi1]

The turbo-diesel hybrid powertrain is a big deal. Pretty impressive specs.

The idea that it could slink around a little in silent mode...that would be a scary sound to hear from just around the corner.

 

[nittany03]

The idea that it could slink around a little in silent mode...that would be a scary sound to hear from just around the corner.

I wonder if you’d still have the tracks and wheels going squeaky-squeaky crunchy-crunchy.

 

[Flash]

I wonder if you’d still have the tracks and wheels going squeaky-squeaky crunchy-crunchy.

There's a fix for that:

 

[taxi1]

I wonder if you’d still have the tracks and wheels going squeaky-squeaky crunchy-crunchy.

Might just be the sounds of bones being crushed

 

[Griz882]

Might just be the sounds of bones being crushed

Around 17 seconds in…

Good remake by the way (this clip is, oddly, in English with Spanish subtitles).

 

[ChuckMK23]

Around 17 seconds in…

Good remake by the way (this clip is, oddly, in English with Spanish subtitles).

WWI sucked. Just sayin...

 

[Random8145]

General Dynamics has proposed the Abrams X as the successor to the current Abrams. Major changes include:
- 3 man crew (vs 4 man) all mounted lower in the hull
- 6 cylinder Cummins turbo diesel hybrid powertrain
- 30mm chain gun on top
- 10 tons lighter

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/10/12/abramsx-ai-hybrid-military-battle-tank/

AbramsX Next Generation Main Battle Tank Breaks Cover

This is the first time we have seen the AbramsX concept, which is representative of a future American main battle tank, outside of artwork.

www.thedrive.com

View attachment 36575

View attachment 36576

View attachment 36577

They need to keep the gas turbine because it sounds cooler. Joking aside, I do hope the 10 tons lighter is not at the sacrifice of armor protection. However I am sure armor has made great advancements since as well.

Might just be the sounds of bones being crushed

I've read that in WWII they called enemy soldiers they'd crush with the tank "crunchies."

 

[Randy Daytona]

Interesting interview with “The Chieftan” who discusses tanks much like Drachinfel discusses ships.

Below is the link to his youtube channel for those interested in tanks and other armored vehicles.

https://m.youtube.com/@TheChieftainsHatch

 

[Randy Daytona]

Looks like the M10 Booker was cancelled by the Army:

Too Heavy, No Mission: Why the US Army Killed the M10 Booker

The US Army has cancelled the M10 Booker program, ending years of debate over the vehicle's confused role—alternately described as a light tank, assault gun, or infantry support vehicle.

www.19fortyfive.com

 

[Lawman]

Looks like the M10 Booker was cancelled by the Army:

Too Heavy, No Mission: Why the US Army Killed the M10 Booker

The US Army has cancelled the M10 Booker program, ending years of debate over the vehicle's confused role—alternately described as a light tank, assault gun, or infantry support vehicle.

www.19fortyfive.com

Good reason too.

It’s not significantly advanced or logistically cheaper than an Abrams which due to fleet size is cheaper because of established infrastructure so the Booker can’t serve in a Cavalry role to the ABCTs.

Its providing mobile protected firepower to our light formations in a way that is too heavy to go with them in the forcible entry scenario (can’t be air dropped) so we can only use it in an airfield takedown scenario. That isn’t what our airborne units are for, and when it does get to the fight it absorbs fully half the class 3/5 of the unit it’s supporting because they weren’t mtoe’d for what was essentially an attached tank platoon worth of needs.

And in the meantime of it’s development delays we got to watch a couple current technology fights and test to inform the design of the Mobile Brigade Combat Team and the Booker doesn’t work for that.

 

[Hotdogs]

Good reason too.

It’s not significantly advanced or logistically cheaper than an Abrams which due to fleet size is cheaper because of established infrastructure so the Booker can’t serve in a Cavalry role to the ABCTs.

Its providing mobile protected firepower to our light formations in a way that is too heavy to go with them in the forcible entry scenario (can’t be air dropped) so we can only use it in an airfield takedown scenario. That isn’t what our airborne units are for, and when it does get to the fight it absorbs fully half the class 3/5 of the unit it’s supporting because they weren’t mtoe’d for what was essentially an attached tank platoon worth of needs.

And in the meantime of it’s development delays we got to watch a couple current technology fights and test to inform the design of the Mobile Brigade Combat Team and the Booker doesn’t work for that.

Better question in the age of tiltrotor aircraft and advanced air defenses is why we still have airborne formations at all.

 

[Lawman]

Better question in the age of tiltrotor aircraft and advanced air defenses is why we still have airborne formations at all.

the JFE scenario. There aren’t enough rotors of any kind to mass the kind of formation that once executed the C17s can disgorge into the airhead. And it gives us something to execute immediate security half a world away into a ground scenario while we draw out the prepo stocks.

It’s why we keep only 2 divisions active. If we execute the scenario it’s understood that unit will be attrited entirely and spend years to reconstitute, so 173rd will have the ring once we play out the 82nd.

Plus their infrastructure facilitates all the other base knowledge for the rest of the requirements throughout the joint force. We don’t have a special school for our required Airborne personnel in the 160th, they go to the regular army one, same as jump masters.

 

[Griz882]

the JFE scenario. There aren’t enough rotors of any kind to mass the kind of formation that once executed the C17s can disgorge into the airhead. And it gives us something to execute immediate security half a world away into a ground scenario while we draw out the prepo stocks.

It’s why we keep only 2 divisions active. If we execute the scenario it’s understood that unit will be attrited entirely and spend years to reconstitute, so 173rd will have the ring once we play out the 82nd.

Plus their infrastructure facilitates all the other base knowledge for the rest of the requirements throughout the joint force. We don’t have a special school for our required Airborne personnel in the 160th, they go to the regular army one, same as jump masters.

I get it, but I have to say that the even the guys from 10th SFG (they secured the DZ with the Pesh) who watched the 173rd drop in Northern Iraq thought the era of massed airborne assaults into defended areas is over. There, despite the fact there was zero resistance at the DZ, it took just under 1000 airborne troops almost 10 hours to gather at their rally points.

 

[Hotdogs]

the JFE scenario. There aren’t enough rotors of any kind to mass the kind of formation that once executed the C17s can disgorge into the airhead. And it gives us something to execute immediate security half a world away into a ground scenario while we draw out the prepo stocks.

It’s why we keep only 2 divisions active. If we execute the scenario it’s understood that unit will be attrited entirely and spend years to reconstitute, so 173rd will have the ring once we play out the 82nd.

Yeah, that’s never gonna happen in a major peer conflict. Way more likely to fly into theater and jump into school buses… or ride some variation of a floaty thing into a port nearby. Basically just like the Gulf War and OIF I.