• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Is the M-1 Abrams outclassed now?

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
What really makes me wonder is how much of whatever Russia's equivalent is to DRRS-N reports and ROC/POE documents have been being gundecked since the end of the Soviet era, or at least since shortly after Putin took over. I mean, there's a reason the whole idea of a "Potemkin village" got its name from Catherine the Great's boo trying to impress her with what was ultimately fake bullshit. We have all of these supposed advances over the years, even going back further than T-14 tanks and Su-57s. How much of that was just window-dressing over the lion's share of the "modernization" budget getting embezzled by Putin's cronies and turned into some really baller luxury yachts?

I'm reminded of the ultimate result of the WMD fiasco in Iraq. We thought Iraq had WMD because Saddam thought he had WMD. And Saddam thought he had WMD because he basically told his scientists he'd kill them if they didn't get him some WMD. And no one in his inner circle was stupid enough to commit suicide by telling him that the Emperor was prancing around nekkid. Comrade Putin wanted to modernize his military . . . what's to say his people weren't also bullshitting him all along?
 

space_sailor

Well-Known Member
How much of that was just window-dressing over the lion's share of the "modernization" budget getting embezzled by Putin's cronies and turned into some really baller luxury yachts?

Comrade Putin wanted to modernize his military . . . what's to say his people weren't also bullshitting him all along?
Would recommend giving this video a watch on corruption in the Russian Military:

 

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
Possibly a new king of the armor mountain: Rheinmetall showcased a new 59 ton tank to replace the Leopard. Unknown if the German Army will go ahead with a purchase but the new KF-51 “Panther” mounts a massive 130mm Rheinmetall 130mm autoloading cannon, weighs 59 tons and has a dedicated top attack defense system.

1655512335289.jpeg


 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
Possibly a new king of the armor mountain: Rheinmetall showcased a new 59 ton tank to replace the Leopard. Unknown if the German Army will go ahead with a purchase but the new KF-51 “Panther” mounts a massive 130mm Rheinmetall 130mm autoloading cannon, weighs 59 tons and has a dedicated top attack defense system.

View attachment 35422


I don’t know. It seems like they (the Germans) are making the same error they made in WWII by investing in weight and simple firepower over maneuverability and sufficient fire power. All that said, this isn’t your grandfather’s Germany and the Nazis are gone, so this might be a great defensive weapon for a nation that primarily plans on defending itself.

But, it might be too big. I am still reading and researching, but there are some who say the age of the tank as we know it might be coming to an end.
 
Last edited:

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
I don’t know. It seems like they (the Germans) are making the same error they made in WWII by investing in weight and simple firepower over maneuverability and sufficient fire power. All that said, this isn’t your grandfather’s Germany and the Nazis are gone, so this might be a great defensive weapon for a nation that primarily plans on defending itself.

But, it might be too big. I am still reading and researching, but there are some who say the age of the tank as we know it might be coming to an end.
If I read it correctly, the new Panther is a svelte 59 tons - the Abrams is 70+.
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
If I read it correctly, the new Panther is a svelte 59 tons - the Abrams is 70+.
Head slap on my part…too much Scotch I guess but I had a far larger number in my head and clearly misread your numbers!
 

Hotdogs

I don’t care if I hurt your feelings
pilot
I am still reading and researching, but there are some who say the age of the tank as we know it might be coming to an end.

I would submit that I wouldn’t draw any conclusions about this war for armored and mechanized warfare yet. Much like we aren’t drawing any conclusions based off of the FW and RW employment of Ukrainian and Russian forces. They are doing things much (good and bad) differently at the tactical level than most western militaries. How and when you use a tool is just as important as the design of the tool itself.
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
I would submit that I wouldn’t draw any conclusions about this war for armored and mechanized warfare yet. Much like we aren’t drawing any conclusions based off of the FW and RW employment of Ukrainian and Russian forces. They are doing things much (good and bad) differently at the tactical level than most western militaries. How and when you use a tool is just as important as the design of the tool itself.
I agree entirely but there are lessons to be learned from any war. The trick is learning the right ones, as you note.
 

Random8145

Registered User
One cannot really judge the effectiveness of any tank by itself no matter how "bad-ass" it seems because there are a huge amount of factors that affect what makes for a good tank and tanks are not meant to fight by their lonesome, they are meant to fight as part of a combined arms military machine. So for example, judging the Abrams, the question would be, how good does the Abrams function in terms of doing its role in combination with U.S. infantry, artillery, air power, logistics, doctrine, etc...
I am still reading and researching, but there are some who say the age of the tank as we know it might be coming to an end.
The thing is, people have been claiming the tank was obsolete pretty much since the thing was invented. It just is incredibly handy to have a big armored vehicle with a Big Frickin' Gun on it.
 

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
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


1667306580045.jpeg

1667306619921.jpeg

1667306656375.jpeg
 

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
Hybrid powerplant?

No... until they go all-electric, California will not allow them into the Ft Irwin NTC.
Yes, it apparently runs off a mix of dirty diesel and unicorn blood.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
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
That WaPo article was positively painful to read. Did they give it to the intern or something?
 
Top