Posted on 03/05/2024 9:05:56 AM PST by House Atreides
It wasn’t that old - the M1A1 SA (Situational Awareness package) is still manufactured and sold for export. Also, it is not clear whether the ex-US Army ones sent over actually had their DU armor package removed. They certainly had additional upgrades from later marks fitted to them like the external ERA armor packs and such.
Sure, but anyone watching video from the Second Chechen War or Syria would know that things have changed a *lot*.
If you send out a tank without an Active Protection System in the modern battlespace against a near peer, that tank is dead. It will be killed by tandem warhead missiles or drones pretty damn fast.
Ukraine has lost 2 Abrams.
1 Abrams got stuck; crew abandoned.
1 Abrams blew a track (mine); crew abandoned; Ukraine tried to recover but failed.
- - -
Ukraine lost 2 Abrams M1150 Assault Breacher Vehicles that are also used as Abrams tank recovery vehicles; to mines; crews abandoned; Ukraine destroyed 1, tried to recover other.
- - -
1 Bradley hit by missile; crew abandoned; Ukraine recovered.
- - -
- Based upon videos that I have seen, produced by pro-Russia and pro-Ukraine
That’s an M1A chassis M1150 Assault Breacher Vehicle (ABV) of which I’ve seen other drone footage (or perhaps they lost another one).
There’s video/stills of another Abrams that got hit by a Russian Lancer drone. Per Abrams experts, it looks like the crew was probably fine, but the tank was a loss - might have been fixable but it would not have been economically sensible. The ammo in the bustle was cooking off and had blown out the panels designed for the purpose, and the powerpack was fully involved in fire.
That’s two, possibly three Abrams that have been lost for zero enemy kills. Not good; Ukranian T-series tanks have been doing better.
This war and the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict have demonstrated that in this era of modern technology armored land vehicles, naval surface combatants and helicopters over the battlefield are death traps against even a moderately sophisticated, well equipped opponent.
Thanks.
I’m still getting used to the difference between a fifth generation fighter (aircraft) and whatever comes before them.
Calvin Coolidge said it best: “Why can’t the Army buy just one airplane and let the aviators take turns flying it?” (or words to that effect)
Yes and no. Helicopters are still doing well - their losses have not really gone up as a percentage of missions much since Gulf I through to modern day Ukraine. Naval surface combatants that do NOT have CIWS-type systems with deep magazines are going to be in trouble and armored vehicles that do not have an active protection system are toast.
Our Navy is hastily refitting all those CIWS systems we removed or omitted from our recent warships... and the US Army is hastily retrofitting our Abrams force with Trophy APS rather than wait for the vaporware Raytheon QuicKill system any longer.
Not that they would be any more survivable against drones, but some of their advanced electronics were stripped off before they were given to the Ukes. Color me skeptical that those stripped off capabilities were drone jamming electronics.
There are 31 Abrams M1A... in Ukraine.
In a video produced about 2 days after Ukraine lost Avdiivka, an Abrams advanced from a location northwest from there, and the tank headed east toward Russian positions, about 1 hour after sunset, it seemed.
That Abrams hit 5 Russian positions and then retreated to the west.
IIRC, Russia did capture one of the Abrams Breachers.
The Bradley seems to be a success, except that there were maintenance problems in colder weather.
That’s an easy one. 5th gen are mainline fighters designed with stealth/low observability first and foremost, to a degree where they may compromise a bit in other areas of performance, but not always.
Considering that the US Army is only just now starting to mount drone jammers on the first few vehicles in the test program, I don’t think they were there to strip in the first place.
From what I’ve read, all the M1s over there are M1A1 SA spec at least, with many having upgrades beyond that.
The Bradley is probably more of a success because it lends itself well to the tactics used by former BMP and BTR commanders. They also seem to be employed in pairs in areas of elevated threat as opposed to just solo, as one Russian T-90 crew recently found out to their cost.
I agree with you and allendale - peer-to-peer warfare has moved on from the past.
Lots of advances in this conflict.
Wise use of equipment.
It’s a bit odd because the pairs seem to be operating as conjoined patrols instead of traditional Western bounding overwatch or the Soviet counterpart. Each Brad operates well away from each other so a single strike from anything but a long-strip cluster bomb dispenser can’t get both of them, but they swing in together to pincer any lone stronger threat like a tank. Interesting tactic.
To be fair, after 1940 they weren’t going to be building defenses against the Germans until 1946, so 1944 was hardly their fault. As much as I don’t want to give them a pass on it.
Lieutenant Lyle Bouck and his 394th I&R platoon [99th ID] didn't give the Germans a pass on it.
Peiper showed up personally - fortunately, the Fuhrer's little helpers [Pervitin] hadn't kicked in yet...
Nice use of the machine's capabilities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.