Military Review

In the USA: The possibility of replacing the Abrams tank with something equally heavy is not yet being considered

17

The US Army is considering a strategy to create the armored vehicles of the future. Fox News has released material highlighting the main focus of the new strategy. It aims to create relatively light armored platforms with a high degree of automation.


As noted by American journalists, part of the strategy for the design of light armored vehicles is associated with the use of active protection systems (KAZ), increasing speed, maneuverability, and "survivability."

From the material:

The idea for such armored vehicles is to detect the enemy before he detects you. This will allow him to be destroyed, preventing them from hitting.

The United States notes that the Pentagon currently has no plans to create a new generation of heavy armored vehicles:

They are not yet considering the possibility of replacing the Abrams tank with something in the future - to replace it with something equally heavy. Today "Abrams" provides high "survivability", but it lacks speed so as not to have problems against lightweight, progressive armored vehicles with effective means of destruction. Also Tanks Abrams cannot reach a number of points in the terrain as they are too heavy. For example, overcoming conventional bridges becomes a serious test for the crews of the Abrams tanks. The bridges may simply not be able to support the weight of this tank, so it is often necessary to adjust the route.


The new strategy involves the creation of new materials that would be lighter than modern armor and at least not inferior to it in terms of strength and protective functions. Several US research laboratories are working on the creation of such materials.

The Next-Generation Combat Vehicle (NGCV) with a 50-mm automatic cannon and an engine with a capacity of about 1 hp is cited as an example of activities within the framework of this strategy. Such work is considered aimed at the production of armored vehicles to replace the Bradley armored vehicles.
17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Victor_B
    Victor_B 4 August 2020 07: 33 New
    -3
    As far as I understand, they will continue to finish Abram.
    Abram is a very relevant tank today.
    They screwed the Trophy, again, and began to use dynamic protection.
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 4 August 2020 07: 43 New
      +3
      The opposite is true. is not relevant from the word at all, therefore there will be no replacement for it. Dead-end branch of development. repeat
      The US Army is considering a strategy to create the armored vehicles of the future. It aims to create relatively light armored platforms with a high degree of automation.
      And it will stand while it will, when the requirements for their LGBT (light tracked battle tanks) are still born repeat for cavalry regiments crying .
  2. Hydrography Bay Golden Horn
    Hydrography Bay Golden Horn 4 August 2020 07: 41 New
    -9
    What for? Good tank
    1. BDRM 667
      BDRM 667 4 August 2020 08: 44 New
      +1
      Quote: Hydrography Bay Golden Horn
      What for? Good tank

      Indeed, why change, and even modernize? request And so it will come down yes

      After all, this can still save money, and not small yes that will be needed to compensate American blacks (sorry - African Americans) ...
  3. Livonetc
    Livonetc 4 August 2020 07: 45 New
    0
    In the wake of black life, the metters decided to get rid of the charging negro.
    And then how racial unrest will break out on board.
    And the new, lighter technique can be used to disperse the armed protesters.
  4. unhappy
    unhappy 4 August 2020 07: 56 New
    -5
    After Tsushima, our admirals and designers created a Sevastopol-class dreadnought. Much later, a definition was assigned to it - "project of the frightened". Don't care about armor, more speed and more guns.
    History repeats itself, looking at the "carts" of the Barmaleevs, the mobility of gangs "experts" draw conclusions fool
  5. Crabong
    Crabong 4 August 2020 07: 58 New
    -1
    Normal tank. Demagoguery is being bred, but they strive to drink babyshka.
  6. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 4 August 2020 08: 06 New
    +2
    The US Army is considering a strategy to create the armored vehicles of the future. Fox News has released material highlighting the main focus of the new strategy. It aims to creation of relatively light armored platforms with a high degree of automation.
    Yes, the same thing was written in military journals of the last third of the last century! Oh, it's not in vain that they say: "New ... it's well forgotten old!"
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 4 August 2020 09: 40 New
      -2
      They launch similar programs every 5-10 years. Progress does not stand still, perhaps there are technologies that are head and shoulders above the current ones. Based on the results, a decision is made to either modernize or change.
    2. 5-9
      5-9 4 August 2020 11: 41 New
      +1
      Megaraspil on FCS haunts .. I really, really want to repeat.
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 4 August 2020 08: 21 New
    +1
    Abrams cannot reach a number of points in the terrain as they are too heavy.
    Yes, problems arose even on European roads, but what can we say about the roads on which they have been planning to drive for many years.
    "Abrams" provides high "survivability"
    Tanks from other countries, the most advanced in tank building, also provide high survivability. Therefore, this is not a merit, but at least a necessary characteristic laid down when creating a tank.
  8. Maks1995
    Maks1995 4 August 2020 08: 55 New
    -1
    Ha. The division into realists in the comments is clearly visible. (they say, a heavy tank, it can be upgraded for a long time, it will withstand), and hurray-optimists. (dead-end branch and guano).

    In fact, a bunch of countries are busy recreating light tanks. It is expensive to chase single bormalees with heavy ones
    1. Grazdanin
      Grazdanin 4 August 2020 09: 46 New
      -1
      Quote: Max1995
      in fact, a bunch of countries are busy recreating light tanks.

      Well, medium is more likely, 30-35 tons is not light weight. But yes, the trend is clearly visible. MBT is very expensive and there is a lot of fuss with it, and most importantly, there are no goals for it in the vast majority of modern wars. Modern medium tanks have mine protection at the MBT level, there is a KAZ from ATGM, a cannon is sufficient to penetrate tanks of the 60s ~ 80s, observation and detection means allow the first to fire.
      1. Maks1995
        Maks1995 4 August 2020 15: 39 New
        0
        Right. Average. But there are also lightweight, wheel-based, simpler.
    2. 5-9
      5-9 4 August 2020 11: 45 New
      +1
      You can also chase the barmaley on BMPs or even armored personnel carriers. The meaning of a "tank" that does not hold shots to RPGs or ATGMs younger than 1980-85? For the sake of fluff (most often about 105 mm) with cheap OFS?
  9. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 4 August 2020 10: 08 New
    -1
    I see no way to design lightweight, but
    reliably protected tank.
    Only in an uninhabited version, when you can save
    in place for the crew.
    Bundle: leader with crew - wingman without crew.
  10. 5-9
    5-9 4 August 2020 11: 39 New
    0
    Those. they do not need tanks, but Abrams, fattened up to 65 tons (with TASK and Veterok go and more).
    KAZ is very expensive, and the one capable of intercepting the OBPS is very, very expensive ... and what will happen when meeting with the MBT of such a light tank, which MBT from one OBPS to death, and the MBT tank with a godfather is often needed to protect it ... and KAZ (intercepting ATGM) on MBT is already a reality.
    Replacement MBT is not yet expected