Posted on 04/25/2024 6:23:12 PM PDT by McGruff
He was denying that the Russians had captured M1’s.
And, IIRC, the Russians managed to set up an ambush from which they struck an Abrams M1A1 tank from a distance, using a combination of Kornet anti-tank missile and FPV drone.
The Kornet missile strike occured first, followed shortly after by the FPV drone (might have been 2 drones in quick succession).
The Russians than re-edited the video in order to make a fake story of also hitting a second tank. But other images in this second, fake video, matched with the first video.
Net: 1 confirmed Abrams M1A1 lost, but also IIRC, the crew survived.
Whatever...
M1s are getting knocked out, Leo’s are getting knocked out the Chally 2 is getting knocked out.
It’s just a clump of steel with an engine and gun. No magical mystery machine with UFO alien tech. It doesn’t hover, use a laser cannon, nor is it powered by a flux-capacitor.
***IMHO, it’s very important for a military to keep up the morale by creating this myth of invincibility (you want boys to go fight).
But the M1 can get blown up from below pretty easily, it can get penetrated from above super easy. You can mobility kill it fairly easily. Only the turret front is exceptionally well armored and even the turret sides can get penetrated by MOST modern ATGMs and RPGs... That’s why you have ARAT 1 and 2.
It’s an old tank that should have been replaced no later than 2012 or so based on the proliferation of various threat systems.
This is another Obama and Biden failure, killing the FCS and replacement of our current fleet of armored vehicles.
I’m not saying FCS was perfect, but we would have modified and upgraded that system also as it would have been tested, fielded... Even the F-15 and M1 in their initial fielding were far from perfect.
https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2009/06/23/its-official-fcs-cancelled
No Russians in that video
there is no official account of an Abrams being captured
Not true. 2 destroyed & 2 damaged and abandoned
That video is originally from a Russian site, with Russian watermarks, with Russian tracked recovery vehicles (BREM), in Ukraine, pulling an M1A1 SA they captured.
Now you’re just being goofy.
Officially we’re still talking about Ukraine launching counter offensives in a year and Ukraine taking back the Crimea. Hahaha
Yes, Russia has M1’s they captured. Yes, people have died in M1’s. Yes, the armor on the M1 has been penetrated on many occasions... No, the M1 is not some invincible tank. It’s a good tank compared to the other outdated tanks today, and it once was king in 1986 and for many years after it’s A1 variant was fielded, but today it’s actually pretty vulnerable and has a huge signature in a world where everyone has thermal sights.
This will take an M1 out (standard Russian issue): https://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/strelkovoe-oruzhie/grenade-launchers/pg-7vr/
This will take an M1 out: https://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/missile-systems-multiple-rocket-launchers-mrl-atgm-systems-and-field-artillery-guns/kornet-em/
Man carried configuration (mass fielded and proliferated around the world): https://roe.ru/eng/catalog/land-forces/missile-systems-multiple-rocket-launchers-mrl-atgm-systems-and-field-artillery-guns/kornet-e/
Look at the list of nations that have this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M133_Kornet#/media/File%3A9M133_operators.png. It’s not something rare that poses little threat.
The M1’s useful life (for us) is long over.
Today we attempt to keep the M1 alive in a high threat environment with ARAT 1 and ARAT 2, but these are only partial solutions that give you a probability of survival, with a limited area covered, and only against a HEAT warhead.
It’s time to replace that chariot.
Time for a bandcamp story.
In 2003 we already encountered the Kornet in Iraq and it blew holes into the M1. We first said yes, then said no to them having been used there. Now we officially say yes they were used there.
https://www.rferl.org/a/1102697.html
IMHO, it’s very important that the war fighter is confident in the capabilities of his equipment.
But there comes a point where this becomes a false or over confidence, and that gets folks hurt and tanks pulled from the front lines when they don’t perform as awesome as everyone was sure they would.
The M1 in all reality has been around for 44 years. It has a legacy that is hard to rival. You would have to go back to WWII in order to find a tank as successful as the M1. But like a boxer that doesn’t know when to call it quits and keeps trying to stay on top even after his time has passed, this legacy will turn into an ugly mess eventually. Knowing when to exit the stage is an important concept to understand.
This tank should have been replaced starting 12 years ago. There are still some combat roles where it can serve well, but against an enemy like the Russians and the equipment they have, using it to achieve a penetration of front lines, it will not fair well.
That video is originally from a Russian site, with Russian watermarks, with Russian tracked recovery vehicles (BREM), in Ukraine, pulling an M1A1 SA they captured.
—
You will, of course, note that watermarks are easy to impose and fake, that Russian is spoken throughout UKR, and that UKR uses Russian vehicles.
So your argument falls flat it seems. The troops are actually UKR recovering the tank.
and?
The other Abrams M1A1 that FUNKER530 also discussed:
March 3, 2024
https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1764371009262522691
I saw that, but again we have no direct proof that the people are Russians. They make a lot of fake videos. I’ll stick with ORYX for verified counts, not some random mblogger.
It’s a super tank, got it.
Now to reality, already in 2003 M1’s were getting blown up and penetrated.
BUT, weapons like the Kornet and advanced RPGs like the 7vr, 28, 30, etc had not proliferated. They were a rare occurrence and in those areas where this threat existed, we equipped the M1 with ARAT 1 or 2.
Most the stuff we found on the battlefield was older and the M1 provided adequate protection even on its turret sides albeit the driver and hull below the turret on the sides were not that well protected even back then, i.e. the need for ARAT on the skirts.
However, today that is different. The more advanced warheads for the RPG are everywhere, Kornet is everywhere...
RPG 29: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-29#/media/File%3ARPG-29_operators.png
RPG 27: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-27#/media/File%3ARPG-27_operators.png
RPG 7, I list it because the VR warhead is becoming more common, and no, an M1 turret side is NOT protecting you against something that can punch through 750mm RHA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-7#/media/File%3ARPG-7_Users.png
Kornet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M133_Kornet#/media/File%3A9M133_operators.png (primary ground based ATGM treat today)
Metis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K115-2_Metis-M#/media/File%3A9K115-2_operators.png
Konkurs (newer versions): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M113_Konkurs
Simply put, the proliferation of high penetration RPGs and ATGMs have made our legacy MBTs an obsolete concept. You cannot realistically armor a tank from all sides against such threats, and today the MBT basically only provides excellent protection on the turret front. Where the M1 once provided protection against RPGs (turret sides) it no longer does, and operations in urban areas make it vulnerable to being hit on the roof where you have a mere inch of steel, that’s it. Operations on hostile ground and soft soil make it extremely vulnerable to large IEDs which have taken out several M1’s. The M1 is in concept designed to operate on friendly terrain, i.e. W. Germany where we were not worried about such a threat, hence the tank sits low 18 inches ground clearance, is flat bottomed, and only has about an inch of steel there too.
All other areas besides the turret front require add on armor in order to meet the threat and these ERAs are temperature dependent, sometimes flammable, can have sympathetic discharges, only have a probability of working, cover a HEAT threat only, are easily damaged (bump into things), add considerable width/weight to the vehicle, can be defeated with a tandem warhead or tandem warhead with a precursor rocket as with the RPG 30. ERA is not a reliable and comprehensive solution, it only gives you a probability of being protected against a very specific threat.
We have failed (did not preemptively/anticipatory make required changes) and if we don’t get off our @ss and do something about it soon, bad $hit will happen. Our current fleet of armored vehicles are a hodge podge dating back to Eisenhower M113. You have different tracks, power packs, sprockets, controls, for the M113, M109, M1, and M2. That is a logistical nightmare. These vehicles are not really matched up, meaning the M1 will leave the M109 behind (speed on and off road, terrain capabilities vary greatly). Some of these machines are so old that their original manufacturers for major parts no longer exist, in some cases as with the AGT 1500 you have to remanufacture things. These machines were designed in a Cold War, to fight in Europe, a defense, on friendly ground. When these machines were designed, concepts like active defense, digitization, and signature reduction didn’t exist. When these machines were designed, there was no drone threat, the enemy didn’t have RPGs and ATGMs with high penetration warheads, thermal sights didn’t exist or were only limited to a handful of nations that were allies... EVERYTHING is different today: the threat weapon systems, and sensors, where we fight, and how we fight.
America today is hemorrhaging 61 billion in one security assistance package to Ukraine, while in reality our own Army is riding into war on (((ANTIQUES))) that belong in a museum.
We (public) seldom have proof because our DOD generally does not admit or advertise when these things happen. But they do.
We had guys get blown up in Iraq multiple times by big IEDs (KIAs) in the M1, we had numerous tanks penetrated and people hit in the legs...
The M1 is history. It’s long past it’s prime (1980s - late 1990s). By early 2000s it was already in a world where there are many threat systems (albeit not proliferated) that could knock him out.
Today, these systems have proliferated.
The situation is critical. This platform can no longer achieve its battlefield effects against many of the threat nations we may face off with. That is not an insult for the M1 specifically, since the German Leo, British Challenger are all in the same boat.
We need a new platform for mechanized / armored warfare.
The German Puma: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_(German_infantry_fighting_vehicle)
Or Korean K2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther
Puma and K2 incorporate “some” of the newer ideas and concepts needed but do not go far enough.
We need a new system that is a common platform (ARTY, MBT, IFV) and incorporates newer materials (aluminum and ceramics), digital and network architecture, signature reduction, a modular armor design, new sensor types, and active defense systems as well as ERA (needs included in design to maximize area coverage and staying within reasonable dimensions).
The simple steel beast isn’t going to survive on a battlefield where threat systems can punch through as much as 1,300mm RHA.
I hope for us, that this isn’t like so often is the case, where after a huge failure and loss of life, necessity forces us to change.
Want the video of where the Russians are trucking ANOTHER M1A1 SA on a lowboy to Moscow to become part of the display of war trophies? I can post the video if you wish.
This one is already on display: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci8yqy4xc_8&t=01s
Of course there is nothing “confirmed” by the US DoD. Hahaha
I suggest you read something other than the always factual, comprehensive, non-propagandist, Western media (doesn’t matter left or right, Euro or North American).
Not saying they have a bias, censor, and are essentially owned by the same people which wanted this war (Western oligarchs), but reading something other than Western news may provide different views or new insights.
There are almost always two sides to every story. When you only hear one side, that should actually make a thinking man question what he’s hearing.
You will find the only 4 have been either destroyed or abandoned and presumably captured. So what? Its war - things get broken and destroyed. Now bug off.
Good thing they pulled them from the line. That saves face. Can’t lose / fail if they are being used in the line.
It’s just a clump of steel. No different than the Leo or chally.
These machines have been conceptually obsolete for years (at least 12 years or so). They have been technologically passed up by threat systems which have also proliferated: RPGs, ATGMs and drones.
Great machines “in their time” and still capable today in a lower threat environment.
In a high threat environment and against a capable enemy, they will get chewed up no differently than the ATGMs chewed up the Russian armor at the beginning of this war.
The real question is if the military brass gets the message? The old MBT is dead.
Should say: Are not being used on the line.
Need to build US Turtle Tanks, massive layered armored with a big gun.
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.
