There is some challenge because there are more experienced players who play 6.7. It isn’t sealclubbing if they have experience.
Iirc the abramsx was just a tech demonstrator, do you have any sources that show that the US army is interested in pursuing it?
That why i mention “composite armor”. which rely on different material to achieve protection they need.
heck even If there are new armor package we wouldn’t know the exact material they use anyway.
They did change turret armor package before when they rebuilt M1A1 into M1A1 AIM .
If they could design package armor that offer similar protection at a reduce weight. I don’t think they would have problem changing armor package on Abrams.
I know, but I don’t know if US army still wants it or go straight for the ABRAMS X, which seems more promising. M1A1 did use new composite armour, but minor redesign needed plus it did not cut weight.
I mean it does seem like the direction they will head towards in the future, lighter, unmanned turret, auto loader and larger calibre gun. They are already worried about the future of M1A2 just because of the shear weight. I don’t think this will be the exact tank they will make, but just that it will be the direction for them to move into.
Even “if” US army went forward with ABRAMS X or whatever its successor are. They would still have M1A2s in their inventory. and it would take sometime before they replace most of them. It only logical that they would have to come up with an upgrade/rebuild program. Just like they did with M60 patton or M1A1 .
M60 rebuild was totally seen as unnecessary by US army, so I really doubt they will take the trouble to do it for ABRAMS especially so much work is needed and it does not fundamentally improve the protection or reduce the weight to any significant degree.
wdym. The existing tank wouldn’t just disappear and you wouldn’t immediately get every tank replace at once. Just like how they used to have both M60 and M1 Abrams. In order to keep old one up to date. Army would have to upgrade them some way. At least APS kit are aready a things for Abrams.
Even then we do not know how much protection or weight would change in the future as it didn’t came out yet.
So How could you know about it ?
1 Like
Again going back to the document I’ve been reading, it’s pretty interesting that they’re already giving an idea of what they’re looking for in an M1A2 replacement:
They’re looking to switch to a autoloaded design for ‘‘In the aggregate it will reduce overall platform weight by reducing the required volume under armor.’’
They also seem to believe an intergrated APS is a must, their stance is that the current M1A2 SEP v3 is not sufficiently protected on the modern battlefield, and that any measures taken to improve protection are too costly from a weight perspective.
They’re also going pretty heavy on AI development for use in this next generation MBT.
They’re mentioning some pretty out there stuff:
- Gun-launched, rocket assisted KE(?)
- Rheinmetall 130mm as potential option.
- 157mm straight chamber cannon(?)
- Tube-launched ATGMs.
- Lowered radar cross section.
- Color-changing materials(?) (wut?)
- Counter-electronic warfare capability.
- Low probability of intercept communications.
It seems that they’re looking to intergrate heavier and more advanced ERA ontop of more advanced NERA base armour. Other systems such as LWR and potentially RADAR’s capable of detecting drones.
They note that heavy base armour is required as APS isn’t suited to protect the vehicle against autocannons.
They looking for a vehicle with all such features in the 50-ton range, certainly some sci-fi stuff being mentioned.
1 Like
and we dont call every crew member in a series T tank to be members of the russian space program for o reason either. :D
1 Like
So you are telling me US army are going to spend millions of dollars, to improve the ABRAMS which is already overweight? There is no way without sacrificing protection to loose weight.
As for APS, US will have to do their own or choose to do with the Trophy which has been proven to be extremely uneffective, as HJ8s and RPG7s have been able to breakthrough. Developing APS will once again be extremely expensive.
US is no longer willing to spend this much on its army, two points why they won’t update ABRAMS:
1.Abrams are not so far out of date, as to it is unable to compete with its counterparts like ZTZ99A and T90/T80s.
2.Effectiveness of such upgrades are at question, M60 upgrades are proven later to be foolish, as T72/T64 are way superior and they should have went straight for ABRAMS.
1 Like
That’s just doctrine difference, NATO went for standardization and USSR went for newer technologies for spearhead breakthroughs. They fielded T-55s and T-62s at the same time as T-64s and so on. And America did have a few projects to replace M60 during its life but they didnt get selected like MBT-70 or T95 program.
1 Like
And a source for this is?
2 Likes
Uh oh, German mains want it now :(
It would still depend on how they could design lighter armor package or not. which again we do not know.
Source to back up your claim ? As far as i have seen combat “export” Abrams in certain conflict they mostly rely on ERA not Hard kill APS.
1.“unable to compete” bruh are you one of those fanboy ? . If it is somethings like T-14 Amata i would at least agree that Abrams is at a disadvantage.
2.Again you don’t just suddenly ditch out your previous tanks when new one arrive to the field. That not how it work irl. It take some time to replace the old one. espically if they have a lot of them at hand.
Look at Soviet for example they still have a lot of T-55s/T-62s when they were fielding T-72/80/64
That why there are saying “Armies don’t fight with fancy weaponry but with what is available, affordable, and what works.” This still true to this day.
1 Like
Yeah sure, just ignore the existence of things like:
- Lighter gun tubes (see XM360)
- Swapping the hydraulic turret drive for a lighter electric one
- Aforementioned studies showing two tons would be saved by swapping to an all fiber-optic cable system from copper
- A bunch of titanium components that got prototyped but never implemented
6 Likes
Wasn’t the M1 TTB like 50 tons?
Going the route of an autoloader and having the turret be similar to the T-14/TTB could give more breathing room for…
All of that Sci-fi stuff while being in the 50-ton range.
If your willing, what are you reading?
1 Like
What a claim.
‘‘ARMY SCIENCE BOARD: An Independent Assessment of the Next Generation Armor/Anti-Armor Strategy’’
3 Likes
I think it’s a bit important to note that the M1E3 program’s a separate kettle of fish from the NGCV Program; which in regards to the Abrams would be referring to the Decisive Lethality Platform (the intended replacement to the Abrams as a whole).
and yeah the scifi stuff there’s pretty amusing, but I’m as a whole pretty skeptical on whether or not DLP will actually turn anything out with how quiet the Army’s been about it.