Military Review

Tank M1 Abrams is no longer the best

75

The American tank M1 Abrams is one of the most common in the world. But conflicts in the Middle East showed: this combat vehicle is not free from numerous problems and quite easily becomes a target for the enemy.


Abrams is no longer the best


Today, the presence of certain shortcomings in the "Abrams" forced to admit even in the US military command. So, not so long ago, General John Murray was forced to admit that the "Abrams" can no longer be called the best main fighting in the world a tank.

The United States does not like to admit the shortcomings of its weapons, but there is no escape from the truth. It is enough to see what happened to the Abrams in the numerous wars of recent years, not only in those in which the American armed forces participated, but also in the states led by the US allies.

Thirty years ago, during the Persian Gulf War, the M1A2 Abrams performed well in battles against the Iraqi army. The troops of Saddam Hussein were mainly armed with Soviet T-72 tanks. But even not so much the technical features of the tanks as the low level of crew training led to the fact that Iraqi tankers were defeated by the Americans at the Abrams.

The success in Iraq inspired the United States: the American military command decided that since the army has the best main battle tank in the world, then you can not pay attention to its modernization. Disappointment came decades later. But already during the second war in Iraq, myths about the invincibility of American tanks began to rapidly disperse. Iraqi soldiers without any problems hit the Abrams from the Soviet-made RPGs. Sometimes one hit from the side of a grenade launcher was enough to incapacitate a car. In addition, it turned out that there was much more fuel needed for the tanks than originally thought, and the radio stations were constantly failing.

How the Hussites destroy the Saudi Abrams


Tank M1 Abrams USA actively supplied to its many allies, including Saudi Arabia. Riyadh has invested and is investing tremendous amounts of money in arming and equipping its army, but the civil war unleashed not without Saudi participation in Yemen has shown: money injections alone, as well as American patronage, are not enough to defeat a serious and ideologically motivated enemy. The Saudi army, together with allies from the UAE and other Arab countries, was never able to defeat the Yemeni Hussite rebels. American tanks did not help either. Moreover, it was Yemen that revealed the existence of serious problems for the Abrams.


It must be understood here that the Hussite Yemeni rebels are much worse armed than the Saudis. Nobody ever really spoiled them weaponsnor money. So, if we talk about anti-tank weapons, the Hussites have the Soviet anti-tank missile systems "Fagot", "Competition", "Baby" and the Iranian complexes Towsan-1, which are almost an exact copy of the "Competition". However, the tactics of counteracting a tank attack by the Hussites worked out flawlessly and the Soviet anti-tank systems turned into a formidable weapon even against the vaunted American Abrams.

Spring 2015 In the footage of the video, we see how the Hussites hit two Saudi M1A2S Abrams tanks from portable anti-tank missile systems. One hit in the tank is enough to catch fire. And where is the superior American armor? But there are still such consequences of hits as detonation of the ammunition, as a result of which the tower simply tore off the tower.

As it turned out, American tanks do not have reliable protection against such missiles. Despite all the improvements of the Abrams armor, it is not able to provide protection at 360 degrees. This is what the Yemeni rebels take advantage of. Towsan-1 can hit tanks at a distance of up to 3,5 km.


Mostly Husites ambush the enemy tank columns and attack unexpectedly. The surprise effect, combined with the high accuracy of the Yemeni shooters, leads to fatal consequences for Saudi tanks. But there is one more problem: the Saudi servicemen are poorly trained, not ideologically motivated, they do not want to die for money in the sand of Yemen. True, American analyst Blake Stillwell writes that American tankers would have suffered the same fate if they had tried to confront the Hussites on the Abrams.
Author:
75 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nikolay Ivanov_5
    Nikolay Ivanov_5 10 June 2020 11: 56 New
    -2
    Old American junk.
    1. Civil
      Civil 10 June 2020 12: 04 New
      +8
      Give the Arabs a blaster and a death star, everything will not help.
      1. Nikolay Ivanov_5
        Nikolay Ivanov_5 10 June 2020 12: 06 New
        -2
        Junk in any hands will remain junk.
        1. Insurgent
          Insurgent 10 June 2020 12: 24 New
          0
          «Abrams "is no longer the best

          Today, the presence of certain shortcomings in the "Abrams" forced to admit even in the US military command. So, not so long ago, General John Murray was forced to admit that the Abrams can no longer be called the best main battle tank in the world. ”


          No, but what belay ? They did everything right yes .

          Weathered theatrical pause in several decades, and admitted that "Abrash is not rightРт"

          Although, the fact that "Ambrams" was originally "not ice" has been known for a long time ...

          But on the other hand, for some time they got used to the "most-most" ...
          1. Nikolay Ivanov_5
            Nikolay Ivanov_5 10 June 2020 12: 27 New
            -2
            I support. Ambrams was originally a junk.
            1. Insurgent
              Insurgent 10 June 2020 12: 29 New
              +3
              Quote: Nikolay Ivanov_5
              I support. Ambrams was originally a junk.

              BUT - PROMOTIONAL JAM yes
            2. evgenii67
              evgenii67 16 June 2020 13: 13 New
              0
              Quote: Nikolay Ivanov_5
              I support. Ambrams was originally a junk.

              Well, nothing is perfect, only nature itself and Mother Earth.
              Regarding Abrams, well, you can't call junk straight, tell me other tanks that can withstand an RPG shot on board ?! And especially with Abrams, you can't book a bus equally well. Perhaps now there are tanks with new DZ screens that can withstand getting the old Soviet RPGs on board, but there will not be so many of them, most likely Abrams will be among them in the latest versions and there will probably not be a single Russian tank.
      2. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 10 June 2020 12: 34 New
        +5
        Quote: Civil
        Give the Arabs a blaster and a death star, everything will not help.

        Sorry, but who are the Hussites? From another planet landed? Soviet military training did not offer, thousands of Iraqis studied in Moscow.
        1. Insurgent
          Insurgent 10 June 2020 12: 41 New
          15
          Quote: Mikhail3
          Soviet military training did not offer, thousands of Iraqis studied in Moscow.

          Actually in Iraq, an army devoted to its military and political leadership was defeated.
          Here, where you don’t study, everything is not at the cash register ...
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 10 June 2020 15: 11 New
            -11
            Maybe I don’t have enough information. How did leadership paralyze their army? Do you have any idea? It would be interesting to know.
            1. Insurgent
              Insurgent 10 June 2020 15: 27 New
              +5
              Quote: Mikhail3
              Maybe I don’t have enough information. How did leadership paralyze their army?

              It's simple - the United States through the CIA outbid the top politicians, officials and the generals of Iraq.

              The army was left without a "head"

              Didn't you know that?
              1. Mikhail3
                Mikhail3 10 June 2020 15: 35 New
                -4
                This chatter I naturally heard. How was it done (if done) technically? Did someone just order the Americans not to interfere? But the Iraqi military was actually burned and shot, as I understand it. In such conditions, the order will not be enough. Or was there something else?
                In 41, our tank units drove back and forth in continuous marches, and since the tank engine had an overhaul interval of 30-40 hours, the tanks simply got up a stake, without even coming into contact with the enemy. And what was in Iraq?
                1. Insurgent
                  Insurgent 10 June 2020 15: 40 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Mikhail3
                  In 41, our tank units drove back and forth in continuous marches, and since the tank engine had an overhaul interval of 30-40 hours, the tanks simply got up a stake, without even coming into contact with the enemy.


                  Quote: Mikhail3
                  And what was in Iraq?


                  If applied to "Ambrams", then they also became a stake from the imperfection of the GTE filters.


                  Quote: Mikhail3
                  This talk I naturally heard. How was this performed (if performed) technically?


                  Look for information on your own, I'm not a tutor.

                  Start with "Wiki", since the knowledge base is so poor ...
                  1. Mikhail3
                    Mikhail3 10 June 2020 15: 49 New
                    -2
                    That is, you do not know anything, for "knowledge" you pass off a propaganda cliche. You read that "the CIA bought the Iraqi commanders" and that's it. This is not knowledge. This is nothing. In addition to this stereotyped thing, I did not find anything on the network, and even more so they did not say anything on TV.
                    This is how it works) You think you know something. But in fact, you just fell for an advertising construct. I advise you to check yourself, how much do you really know? Or can you come to some kind of conclusions with the help of logical constructions and separate, known facts? Otherwise, most of your "knowledge" would not turn out to be of such low quality ...
                2. blackice
                  blackice 11 June 2020 06: 56 New
                  -2
                  Again these tales are in the style of "Fury", where one abrasha beat down the invincible army of the Husseinites.
                  Immerse yourself in the story. The news clips of that time were simply teeming with reports from that war, where they shouted excitedly about how American hawks fired Iraqi tanks under cover of night without any losses. How then the proud Yankees paraded through the desert, not meeting any resistance.
                  And only then, when propaganda videos were required, did Hollywood enter the scene and Captain America appeared on the abrash, striking 3-5 Husseinit tanks with one shot.
        2. Speedy
          Speedy 10 June 2020 13: 04 New
          +1
          Well, they have experience and cat.
      3. Revolver
        Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 32 New
        0
        Quote: Civil
        Give the Arabs a blaster and a death star, everything will not help.

        They will either break, or lose, or resell.
        lol
    2. Federal1
      Federal1 10 June 2020 22: 12 New
      +5
      Yes, exactly that! Abrams of the Arabs, after all, M1A2 (1992) without KAZ and DZ, this is the T-72 level with Contact -1, the maximum which will forgive everything on board, only the nuance is that, unlike the Soviet one-time junk, the crew usually survives there and more often remain in place and so yes junk .. let's drown further
      1. Grading
        Grading 11 June 2020 05: 05 New
        -3
        Quote: Federal1
        Yes, exactly that! Abrams of the Arabs, after all, M1A2 (1992) without KAZ and DZ, this is the T-72 level with Contact -1, the maximum which will forgive everything on board, only the nuance is that, unlike the Soviet one-time junk, the crew usually survives there and more often remain in place and so yes junk .. let's drown further

  2. Octopus
    Octopus 10 June 2020 11: 57 New
    22
    Does Mr. Polonsky have any kind of timeline for empty drafts? That on F-35 is marked for no reason, then abram ATGM amazed aboard, some news. Like a dog on a walk, walk through all the trees.
    1. Grading
      Grading 10 June 2020 12: 22 New
      +6
      The author continues to pounce on the fan in the hope of a bonus and that people pick up!
    2. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 10 June 2020 15: 13 New
      +7
      I’m even afraid to ask the author which tank (according to his analysis on the basis of military clashes) is the best ?!
      ALL tanks are on fire!
      And often, even an experienced crew will not help. There are too many armored vehicles.
  3. Ravil_Asnafovich
    Ravil_Asnafovich 10 June 2020 11: 57 New
    +8
    During the Second World War, a Red Army cook with an ordinary ax incapacitated a German tank, and the crew was captured.
    1. Free wind
      Free wind 10 June 2020 12: 20 New
      -9
      The newspapers wrote about this, but do you believe in it?
      1. Federal1
        Federal1 10 June 2020 22: 16 New
        -5
        man still writes out the truth of the 40s, believes bully bully
    2. tagil
      tagil 10 June 2020 12: 22 New
      17
      The Red Armyman was a cook, and the tank was just a tankette armed with MG-34. He simply bent the barrel with a machine gun with an ax. Although his feat does not detract from this.
      1. Alf
        Alf 10 June 2020 19: 43 New
        +1
        Quote: Tagil
        He simply bent the barrel with a machine gun with an ax.

        And what was the tank crew doing at this time?
      2. Revolver
        Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 35 New
        -1
        Quote: Tagil
        the tank is just a tank sole armed MG-34

        Even Galimov PZ I had these MG-34 2 pieces.
    3. Glaaki
      Glaaki 10 June 2020 13: 56 New
      +1
      And how is this related to abrash?
  4. V.I.P.
    V.I.P. 10 June 2020 12: 07 New
    16
    And which tanks are holding the ATGM strike on board? .... Armored tanks for the USA in the frontal projection contain depleted uranium, the BOPS core is also from uranium, and everything goes without uranium for sale)) ....
    According to the results, the defeat of the tanks, they are modernizing SEP V 3. / V4 Install additional armor blocks on the sides. We have passed the tests and are in the process of purchasing, and installing KAZ Trophy on the American abrams. (the same new AMP shell accepted)

    The Germans also buy KAZ Trophy for Leo A6 / 7 .. The Englishmen are testing and integrating the same Trophy on the Challenger .. If they manage to build it, they will also buy it.
    So that they can all shoot down ATGMs ...
    1. Dr khorne
      Dr khorne 10 June 2020 12: 26 New
      +7
      Why, in the English-language Wiki, they write that the M1A2S that are in service with Saudi Arabia are the same M1A2 SEP - Abrams whose armor contains uranium. Lying?)
      1. carstorm 11
        carstorm 11 10 June 2020 12: 39 New
        0
        states never delivered tanks with uranium armor. even if they were selling from storage, then it was all dismantled.
    2. dvina71
      dvina71 10 June 2020 12: 35 New
      +2
      Quote: V.I.P.
      .Armor tanks for the USA in the frontal projection contains depleted uranium.

      Only a tower and not over the entire projection .. it can save at a great distance, but Abrams has a lot of holes in the armor protection ... In the same frontal projection there is a scrap receiver under the tower .. Yes, and a large landmine that got there .. will do it .. Thickness body armor there is not great
    3. Revolver
      Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 37 New
      0
      Quote: V.I.P.
      And which tanks hold the ATGM strike on board?

      It seems that Merkava is holding Trophy, and not only RPG, but also some serious.
  5. Maks1995
    Maks1995 10 June 2020 12: 27 New
    +4
    Ah, the article simply described what is already understandable.
    A massive obsolete tank cannot be the best.
    Yes, and the Arabs do not deliver all the best, and even they fight like a dash. Rollers full.
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 10 June 2020 12: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: Max1995
      Yes, and the Arabs do not deliver all the best, and even they fight like a dash. Rollers full.

      Who exactly, whose crew was on the video, of course the fig knows him, but the tank is definitely from the Saudis, and they buy "the most sophisticated" ...
  6. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 10 June 2020 12: 28 New
    12
    In the year 1962 or 1963 I read in the Pionerskaya Pravda newspaper a very impressive story about how sailors used sea mines against tanks. 300 kg of explosives. Not a single tank could withstand this then, and will not survive today.
    Conclusion: the best tanks are those that did not leave the courtyard of the manufacturer and when they did not participate in any military operations.
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 10 June 2020 12: 28 New
    0
    Tank M1 Abrams is no longer the best

    The best, the best is that which wins or contributes with its advantages to achieving victory!
    About the quality of the gasket between the seat - the steering wheel \ steering wheel \ levers all in the know ....
  8. Free wind
    Free wind 10 June 2020 12: 50 New
    0
    Abrams was never the best. Good but not the best. The Americans are also talking about this. They are trying to make it better with us, advertising the T-90. Our tank is better than the best abrams tank ..
  9. maiman61
    maiman61 10 June 2020 12: 54 New
    0
    A caterpillar is shot down on the right side of the tank, the engine works fine, the crew escaped. The tank did not receive any defeat.
    1. edmed
      edmed 10 June 2020 14: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: maiman61
      maiman61 (Yuri) Today, 12:54 NEW
      +1
      A caterpillar is shot down on the right side of the tank, the engine works fine, the crew escaped.

      Video # 1 "Oh, something loudly bumknolo into the tower! Well, let's get it down! The Houthis will then burn it with a cardboard box" Video # 2-Not clear, but it seems like a repeat of video # 1
  10. mvg
    mvg 10 June 2020 12: 58 New
    +4
    Ilyukha, drugan. Have you started writing again? You're nuts ? Besides the word, it’s hard for me to pick up.
  11. Gust
    Gust 10 June 2020 13: 25 New
    +5
    No tank can hold ATGM on board without KAZ. You can only reduce the likelihood of hanging grills and screens. This does not mean that the abrash is bad as a tank.
    Of the real stocks - the absence of remote sensing, ever-clogging filters, a horse price tag, an African American instead of AZ, and so on. And PR, where without it, as "having no analogues";)))
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 43 New
      0
      Quote: Rafale
      African American instead of AZ

      But if the caterpillar is knocked down, this African American will wave a sledgehammer, and even beat it in the right place, if it is commanded correctly. And how will AZ help in the repair? lol
  12. Carnifexx
    Carnifexx 10 June 2020 13: 28 New
    +5
    What did i just read?
    As it turned out, American tanks do not have reliable protection against such missiles. Despite all the improvements to the Abrams armor, provide protection 360 degrees she is not able. This is what the Yemeni rebels take advantage of. Towsan-1 can hit tanks at a distance of up to 3,5 km.
    ALL tanks have no all-round anti-tank missile defense. I do not understand whether this is postironia or trolling.

    I agree "Sometimes it took one hit to the side of the grenade launcher to disable the car", but there are other tanks in the world and everything is learned by comparison. How other tanks behave when hit board? That's right, they fail. And the T-72 woodworkers die with the crew, almost always. By the way, in the video where the Hussites burn Abrams, struck with modern anti-tank systems, with two shots on board, 2 crew members were killed. What happens when one hit ATGM in the T-72B3 is well known - they throw towers.
    Abrams is not an invincible machine, but still possessing truly amazing survivability in comparison with most tanks in the world, and it’s good that there are people in Russia who understand that crew survival should be put in the forefront, at least that was at the head of the development of the T -14. The issue of readiness and export potential of the latter is separate.
    1. CSKA
      CSKA 10 June 2020 14: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: Carnifexx
      what happens when one ATGM hits the T-72B3 is well known - they throw towers.

      And where did you see the ATGM hit in the T-72B3? I've seen a lot of videos from Syria, the notes were T-72. And not always, I will say that the tower flew off.
      1. mvg
        mvg 15 June 2020 16: 36 New
        +1
        I've seen a lot of videos from Syria, the notes were T-72. And not always, I will say that the tower flew off

        But Chechnya-1 and Chechnya-2 then saw it. And how much did the Syrians hang on their export tanks of additional metal? In Grozny, the tank withstood 8 hits, but it happened the other way around.
        1. CSKA
          CSKA 15 June 2020 17: 18 New
          -1
          Quote: mvg
          But Chechnya-1 and Chechnya-2 then saw it.

          Have you seen what? How does a T-72 ATGM get? So I saw, but a friend from the top writes about the T-72B3.
          Quote: mvg
          And how many Syrians hung on their export tanks of additional metal

          And when did the ATS start exporting tanks?
          Quote: mvg
          In Grozny, the tank withstood 8 hits, but it happened the other way around.

          8 hits ATGM? With RPG I still believe, but not ATGM.
    2. edmed
      edmed 10 June 2020 15: 21 New
      +6
      Quote: Carnifexx
      Abrams is not an invincible machine, but still possessing truly amazing survivability in comparison with most tanks in the world,

      Abrases also began to throw a tower when they began to load OF, before this scrap and sleeve, gave an advantage.
      1. Grading
        Grading 10 June 2020 22: 08 New
        -1
        Does it make it difficult to provide a photo?
    3. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft 12 June 2020 01: 36 New
      -3
      Carnifexx (Andrey) What happens when one ATGM hits the T-72B3 is well known - they throw towers.

      Clumsy "working" "Andrei", you (as well as other adherents of everything empirical) are simply not familiar with the basics of physics ... fool so don’t come to the cashier on Monday ...
      If an armor-piercing or cumulative projectile manages to break through the vehicle’s armored hull, there’s a great chance to hit the combat unit with fragments or a cumulative stream. This, in turn, leads to detonation of ammunition and premature detonation of shells. At this point, excess pressure arises in the tank, which will seek a way out along the path of least resistance. And in modern machines, well protected and airtight, this place remains in pursuit of the tower. Indeed, unlike a homogeneous building, a tower is the second part. And the blast wave successfully tears off this detail.
      No tank is fully protected from this effect - but you can reduce the likelihood of a "flying tower". For example, if the affected tank was with open hatches. Then the lazy blast wave will not have to undermine the tower - it will exit through the hatch. The second way - kick panels. Many modern tanks (T-90M, M1 Abrams, Leclerc) are equipped with special compartments for ammunition, in which the outer wall is made weaker than the internal. When detonating, it carries it out, thereby the blast wave is redirected outward, reducing risks for the crew. But this is not a panacea. Isolated warheads contain only a fraction of the shells. And with the detonation of the rest of the shells, the M1 Abrams will throw the tower as high as the T-90M.Therefore, the statement about the "Soviet turret launchers" is not entirely correct.
      fellow
      https://zen.yandex.ru/media/kitchenmag/pochemu-u-tanka-otryvaet-bashniu-5c8d2934d4eea800b2747f3b
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 50 New
        0
        Quote: Lara Croft
        when detonating the rest of the shells, the M1 Abrams will throw the tower as high as the T-90M
        The turret’s throwing height depends on the quantity and quality of detonated ammunition, the weight of the turret itself, and several other factors. However, the crew is already purple.
        ... and volleys of turret guns
        The last journey takes us ...
  13. Kostya Lavinyukov
    Kostya Lavinyukov 10 June 2020 15: 35 New
    -2
    Interesting. Is there a public access to TTT for this miracle. It was always interesting what the designers and the military proceeded from, creating it.
    1. Alf
      Alf 10 June 2020 19: 47 New
      +5
      Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
      Is there a public access to TTT for this miracle.

      Dear colleague! TTT for this overseas miracle except that Pravda Muhoranska did not print.
      1. Kostya Lavinyukov
        Kostya Lavinyukov 10 June 2020 20: 02 New
        0
        Perhaps you are talking about tactical and technical characteristics, they really are where there are a lot. But it’s Tacto’s technical requirements that interest me. They could not be found so quickly.
        1. Alf
          Alf 10 June 2020 20: 04 New
          +2
          Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
          Perhaps you are talking about tactical and technical characteristics, they really are where there are a lot. But it’s Tacto’s technical requirements that interest me. They could not be found so quickly.

          At least two books were published precisely on Abrams, where, among other things, the history of creation is given. Yes, and Abrams legs grew from MVT-70.
    2. Suhoy
      Suhoy 11 June 2020 11: 37 New
      -2
      In short, the Americans made an anti-tank self-propelled gun with a rotating turret and called it a tank. And very wrong with the choice of engine.
  14. Ravil_Asnafovich
    Ravil_Asnafovich 10 June 2020 18: 42 New
    -1
    Well, I’ll add, you can even break a fool,
  15. Berg berg
    Berg berg 10 June 2020 21: 22 New
    -2
    It’s more honest to write not already, but not the best for a long time! The presence of an air conditioner in technology is not a fact of its greatness, but simply its small addition, as a place of a cup holder for Coca-Cola!
  16. bubasa
    bubasa 10 June 2020 21: 32 New
    -3
    and when was he the best? is this coffin on wheels?
    1. bubasa
      bubasa 10 June 2020 21: 38 New
      +1
      "Saddam Hussein's troops were mainly armed with Soviet T-72 tanks."
      the truth of direct collisions could be counted on the fingers of one hand and the T-72s were destroyed mostly by aircraft, and the Abrams crews had clear instructions not to engage in battle with the T-72s, and this is considering that the T-72s were of the earliest versions, while the coalition (!) was armed with tanks of the latest modifications and even considering that after aviation in second place on the destroyed Iraqi tanks, and the bulk are not T-72, but even earlier T-54/55/62, there are English Challengers, and the Abrams during the Desert Storm were marked mainly by an episode when they fell into a helicopter ambush of Iraqis and the entire advancing convoy was destroyed
  17. Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 10 June 2020 22: 00 New
    +2
    The success in Iraq inspired the United States: the American military command decided that since the army has the best main battle tank in the world, then you can not pay attention to its modernization.

    That awkward moment when Abrams was actively cultivating.

    Moreover, it was Yemen that revealed the presence of serious problems with the Abrams.

    What are these "problems"? High crew survivability? Indeed, the problem is ...

    Spring 2015 In the footage of the video, we see how the Hussites hit two Saudi M1A2S Abrams tanks from portable anti-tank missile systems. One hit in the tank is enough to catch fire
    .
    Author, indicate where did Abrams catch fire in these videos?
    However, they really caught fire, more precisely, the burning of the BC took place. With closed armored doors - the crew is safe.

    But there are still such consequences of hits as detonation of the ammunition, as a result of which the tower simply tore off the tower.

    There was no such thing.

    Despite all the improvements of the Abrams armor, it is not able to provide protection at 360 degrees.

    Name at least one tank. which provides all-round protection against MBT from ATGM / RPG without KAZ? Ahh, there is no such MBT.

    True, American analyst Blake Stillwell writes that American tankers would have suffered the same fate if they had tried to confront the Hussites on the Abrams.

    There are great doubts about this.
  18. dog of war
    dog of war 10 June 2020 22: 14 New
    +4
    Everyone who is interested in military subjects knows that the side armor of modern tanks does not hold the blow even of anti-tank weapons of the Second World War! The author of the article simply wants to collect likes at the expense of a big name.
  19. exo
    exo 11 June 2020 11: 44 New
    +2
    "But not so much the technical features of the tanks, as the low level of training of the crews led to the fact that the Iraqi tankers were defeated by the Americans on the Abrams." (C)
    Air superiority is the key to victory for the coalition forces. And no tank would have resisted under such circumstances. And Abrams, in fact, "cleaned out" what was left after the work of aviation.
  20. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 11 June 2020 20: 00 New
    -1
    I wonder what it ended up with where they tried to burn abrams with a newspaper, burned or not?
  21. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 11 June 2020 20: 03 New
    0
    Towsan-1 can hit tanks at a distance of up to 3,5 km.
    Towsan-1 is our "Competition-M" if that
  22. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 11 June 2020 22: 07 New
    +1
    Tank Abrams is good as an anti-tank weapon, our T-90/80/72 have little chance against it, the armor penetration of Abrams is 850 mm from 2 km, which will allow him to sew our tanks in the forehead, and ours from the same distance only 450- 550 mm, while in the frontal armor of Abrams under 900 mm is the equivalent of homogeneous armor.

    But how support for the Abrams infantry is worse than the T-90/80/72 tank for the reason that it does not have high-explosive fragmentation munitions. But OFS does not have Abrams for the reason that then an ammunition depot with kick panels will not help.
    1. merkava-2bet
      merkava-2bet 12 June 2020 10: 52 New
      +3
      The armor of the tank is heterogeneous, and it has in the BC OFS, learn the materiel.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 12 June 2020 12: 09 New
        0
        The armor of the tank is heterogeneous, and it has in the BC OFS, learn the materiel.


        Seriously? ))) Here's the news ?! ))) And I was thinking straight 900 mm cast armor at Abrasm in front))).

        And now seriously - as a material for testing in Russia and NATO countries adopted a homogeneous rolled armor. The armor penetration of BOPS and cumulative shells and the armor resistance of the tank projections are described in this equivalent.

        About the OFS for Abrams and other NATO tanks can be more?
        1. The comment was deleted.
  23. Revolver
    Revolver 12 June 2020 04: 29 New
    0
    Arabs are so Arabs. For them, the dumber the weapon, the better. RPG is the most. With ATGM, too, in principle, no special mind is needed, caught in sight, pressed "start", and then the missiles themselves will do their job. But in order for the Houthis to hit the tanks in the side, someone had to substitute these sides for them. And the Saudis are still considered almost the most intelligent and educated among the Arabs.
  24. Maki maki
    Maki maki 13 June 2020 15: 43 New
    +6
    There are no invulnerable tanks. The laws of physics can’t get around!
  25. Shiden
    Shiden 13 June 2020 18: 56 New
    +4
    Yes, about reading comments and such an impression that the majority of the Furians here come in for the pluses and ranks. The site has long turned from a reputable source to apologize for expressing a yellow edition. Where analytics, opinions, reviews of military equipment with pluses and minuses. It is not there, but urapatriotizma, having no analogs, the western bad bulges like mushrooms after rain.
  26. DeKo
    DeKo 13 June 2020 21: 00 New
    +1
    I read on one of the English-language sites that this Abrash was abandoned by the crew long before the battle
  27. COLDAT_666
    COLDAT_666 14 June 2020 13: 29 New
    -1
    they should have already made a new tank
  28. COLDAT_666
    COLDAT_666 14 June 2020 13: 31 New
    -1
    Why is my shoulder strap not displayed?