Russia has found the critical vulnerability in Nato’s American tanks

The Telegraph ^ | Fri, April 26, 2024 at 7:23 AM CDT | Hamish de Bretton-Gordon

[airdalecheif]

The arrival of the US M1A1 Abrams tanks in Ukraine was hailed as a turning point in the war. Coming in at roughly $10 million a unit, the Nato stalwart was supposed to provide the armoured fist that would punch through the Russian lines. But tactics evolve quickly in warfare, and Russia’s use of surveillance and hunter-killer drones has led to heavy casualties for Ukraine’s tank fleets. This is alarming for NATO. If Russia has found critical vulnerabilities in our armour, our borders are beginning to look very vulnerable.

[airdalecheif]

Two months after entering service, the Abrams tanks are now being withdrawn from the frontline. Five of the 31 tanks delivered last year have already been destroyed.

To begin with, it’s worth noting that the Ukrainians are not using the latest and best model of the M1A1. Some of the features that make the tank more durable and hard hitting have been removed to avoid them falling into Russian hands. (More good reading at the link}

[JJBookman]

...all tanks are vulnerable on the thinly armored top.

[marktwain]

Tanks and manned aircraft are beginning to look like the battleships of WWII. Obsolete and vulnerable. I expect artillery to meet the same fate, once enough drones on either side, of enough range, are placed into battle. Simple artillery is too big, too slow, too easily detected. It seems it is the artillery ammo dumps which are targeted the most, at present. When you have to move hundreds of thousands of artillery rounds, they are hard to hide.

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

That this article appears in the UK press is an interesting side to the “news.” Cheer-leading for a side — any side — only works for a while. Then the press has little choice but to set aside “narrative” for actual news. The comments posted under the article are interesting as well.

[microgood]

I think you need air superiority to make these tanks viable.

[abigkahuna]

as aircraft carriers replaced battleships in WW2, it seems as though drones will replace a whole slew of weapons in the next war

[freeandfreezing]

That is true. Both NATO and Russian tanks are readily destroyed by highly accurate FPV drones carrying even small EFP warheads.

[PGR88]

our borders are beginning to look very vulnerable.

LOL. Did they mean America's borders?

Because I have news for ya.....

[Thunder 6]

A pretty good article. Two points: 1. The Abrams was designed to fight a defense in depth in West Germany, not punch through Soviet lines. 2. All tanks are most vulnerable on top, and tank commanders are trained to mitigate that weakness by moving as part of a combined arms unit.

[ClearCase_guy]

This whole situation feel like the Spanish Civil War in the mid-1930s. The Nazis and the Soviets fought a war in a country that nobody much cared about. Hitler fine-tuned his blitzkrieg and combined arms approach. By the time WWII started, Hitler had a system that worked very well.

[whistleduck]

Usually. Or at least a platform that can deliver napalm with quick in and out service like Vietnam.

[Responsibility2nd]

All it takes is one routine drone strike to take out a 10 million dollar tank.

The Ukes have figured that out and have removed tanks from their battle plans.

[McGruff]

Ukraine pulls US-provided Abrams tanks from the front lines over Russian drone threats

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-pulls-us-provided-abrams-232304130.html

[Responsibility2nd]

Related Reading Regarding Tanks...

link

[Right_Wing_Madman]

Simple artillery is too big, too slow, too easily detected.

This war has shown that artillery is important as ever ("King of battle"). Drones can't efficiently mass enough fire at a single point in the battefield. And the 155mm and 152mm artillery shell has suddenly become one the most precious commodities on earth.

[microgood]

Not sure about the napalm in Vietnam but I posted that because I remember the movie Patton where he needed clear skies to attack the Germans with air power on his way to end the siege of Bastogne.

So did the tanks have a napalm defense?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

[Petrosius]

It’s not “American” tanks; it’s all tanks. Weapons and tactics are always changing. Nothing new or shocking.

[Revel]

Everyone is finding our weakness now so that if this country ever has to fight a war then we start right out severely disadvantaged.

[MinorityRepublican]

Tanks and manned aircraft are beginning to look like the battleships of WWII.

And aircraft carriers. You can't really deploy them close to a hostile country anymore.