Military Review

The US press appreciated the future relevance of the Abrams tanks against the backdrop of the new MPF program

59

In the United States, the question has been raised about how long the Abrams tank will remain relevant for American troops.


NI columnist Chris Osborne writes that the Abrams tank has undergone so many changes that “it can already be called a completely new combat vehicle, which has little in common with a tank 1980s ".

From Osborne's article:

There is an important reason why these tanks continue to be and will remain relevant to the US. The reason is the need for heavy armor. It makes the Abrams main battle tank topical.

But the "highlight" is that the United States is trying to develop the concept of light armored platforms (for tanks and infantry fighting vehicles), which would be easier to transport and drop from the air. One of the links in the new US concept is the MPF (Mobile Protected Firepower) light tank under development. It is the armored vehicles of the MPF program, despite the different concept, that can compete with the current Abrams in the army and other power structures of the United States that use armored vehicles. It is added that it is on the effective landing of armored vehicles that the emphasis is placed in the implementation of the MPF project.

However, according to the author of the US press, in the near future, the ability to create a suitable lightweight composite armor may be limited. This is what will allow Abrams to withstand the competition, despite its problems with speed and maneuverability.

The American author emphasizes that while light composite armor has no chances to effectively resist, for example, a shot from an anti-tank grenade launcher, but heavy armor can provide some protection for the crew.

The statement of the American General Joseph Martin is given. According to him, in the future there will be a need for a light tank-type platform, "but there is still no consensus on what it should be." That is why tanks "Abrams" are predicted to be of further relevance in the American troops.

59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Thrifty
    Thrifty 25 October 2020 08: 18
    +5
    Good abrams - burnt abrams! And therefore, the experience of burning the verse of armored sheds from the Houthis - to the masses! !! wassat
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 25 October 2020 08: 47
      +2

      Thrifty
      Today, 08: 18
      NEW
      +1
      Good abrams - burnt abrams!
      good good good Very true!
  2. Asad
    Asad 25 October 2020 08: 22
    +5
    A naive question for specialists, why is active protection not visible?
    1. Lord_Bran
      Lord_Bran 25 October 2020 08: 46
      +2
      Because they have paws laughing
    2. Graz
      Graz 25 October 2020 08: 48
      +2
      well, they seem to have put several hundred pieces from the Israelis KAZ, where info about this took place, so it's not so simple
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 26 October 2020 17: 21
        0
        Well, yes, I bought several hundred ... but this is a very expensive pleasure ... most likely they will buy, or they will demand production from themselves ... but this is already next year ..
    3. Terenin
      Terenin 25 October 2020 08: 53
      +4
      Quote: ASAD
      A naive question for specialists, why is active protection not visible?

      Are you hinting that someone would dare to attack the Americans themselves? belay
    4. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 25 October 2020 13: 02
      +2
      Quote: ASAD
      .... why not see active protection?
      The tanks did not undergo modernization, but for study they did. But they took everything else that was possible with them. See how much trash is on his tower:[Center]
  3. barin
    barin 25 October 2020 08: 23
    20
    We have already heard about sending tanks to the dustbin of history. But they still do not want to go there.
    1. Pereira
      Pereira 25 October 2020 08: 27
      +6
      After shots from Azerbaijan, talk about the landfill will flare up with renewed vigor.
      1. Ded_Mazay
        Ded_Mazay 25 October 2020 09: 02
        +4
        Still, they would not flare up. These disputants, however, do not care that the effectiveness of the NKR air defense fluctuates between zero and nothing. The picture from drones with burning tanks is more important to them.
    2. bk0010
      bk0010 25 October 2020 14: 47
      -1
      What instead of tanks? Deep break on armored personnel carriers? Or to roll a cannon-colonel across the battlefield again with your hands?
    3. slowpokemonkey
      slowpokemonkey 26 October 2020 17: 07
      0
      Quote: barin
      We have already heard about sending tanks to the dustbin of history. But they still do not want to go there.

      Since 16, tanks have been buried several times a day)
  4. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 25 October 2020 08: 26
    +2
    In the first shots, the topics of the shooting are very high, there are not two black loaders for advertising there by chance? And this is a serious machine, and many of them have been stamped. Natural utilization from the database is difficult. hi
    1. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 25 October 2020 18: 05
      +1
      Quote: tralflot1832
      In the first shots of the shooting topics, it is very high, there are not two black loaders for advertising there by chance?

      what for? this is the video. have you heard about editing? "Harry, let's do the editing. repeat "the man from the boulevard of the capuchins (s)
  5. Mytholog
    Mytholog 25 October 2020 08: 31
    -1
    Considering the experience of using drones in Karabakh, the dispute about heavy and light armor becomes secondary.
    We'll have to revise the approaches to the use of armored vehicles altogether.
    But the main combatants have more chances to survive than the lungs, all other things being equal.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 25 October 2020 12: 55
      +4
      Quote: Mytholog
      We'll have to revise the approaches to the use of armored vehicles altogether.

      And what is there to revise? Equipment, both in columns and in positions, should always be covered by air defense, since it practically does not have its own means of confronting this threat. We saved on air defense - that's the result.
    2. Boris Chernikov
      Boris Chernikov 26 October 2020 17: 23
      0
      either to provide anti-aircraft protection ... either to put a complex on the tank itself, or to place a short-range air defense complex behind the tank, our Laser Complex Rat showed for a reason
  6. Lord_Bran
    Lord_Bran 25 October 2020 08: 45
    +2
    Do not forget about the complex repair and maintenance of Abrams. Even if America drags them to the theater of operations, then rem. the basis for them will be very essential. Plus with specialists and equipment.
    1. Alex_You
      Alex_You 25 October 2020 09: 31
      +4
      That did not prevent the Americans from repairing them, and sometimes even restoring them at the remanufacturing facilities in Iraq.
      1. Lord_Bran
        Lord_Bran 25 October 2020 16: 11
        +2
        Subject to total air superiority and the impossibility of the defeated Iraqi troops to conduct art. shelling at US and Allied bases.
  7. aszzz888
    aszzz888 25 October 2020 08: 46
    +3
    This is what will allow Abrams to withstand the competition, despite its problems with speed and maneuverability.
    And also on his WEIGHT! bully
  8. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 25 October 2020 08: 50
    +1
    For the Abrams, they bought protection from the Israelis, a new body kit would be adjusted, the gun would be modernized, the engine would be accelerated, you see, the old men would still creak, oh, they would creak. They will spoil many more people with blood. It's early to say goodbye to them.
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 25 October 2020 09: 17
      +3
      Sasha hi hi I knew you were naive, but not to the same degree !!!
  9. Terenin
    Terenin 25 October 2020 08: 55
    +5
    [quote = Terenin] [quote = ASAD] A naive question for specialists, why can't you see active protection? [/ quote]
    From the video, it is felt that instead of an automatic loader, he has a black man who is throwing shots into the breech.
  10. Crimean partisan 1974
    Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 09: 01
    +8
    That is why the Abrams tanks are predicted to be of further relevance in the American troops ........ Abra has three unsolvable problems
    - this is a mass that devours not only a bunch of fuel but also the load on the ground more than one
    -the tower niche where the ammunition load is still vulnerable to large rifle and RPGs, not to mention portable anti-tank systems
    -and now the main thing ... there is no powerful high-explosive ammunition and there will not be until the crew has a loader, the unitary HE of the abra set has already exceeded 36 kg, the projectile itself accounts for only 12 kg compared to the T-72 set with the OF-36 round with a mass of 23 Kg

    well, if they need abra so much, then let it be so ... just the prospects for abra in military superiority are exhausted
  11. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 25 October 2020 09: 42
    +3
    tanks "Abrams" are predicted to be of further relevance in the US troops.
    That's just the problem with European bridges and roads, and off the road and in the mud it is heavy and fraught with it. And directly on the territory of the United States to use, so only for long-term storage, not to fight with Mexico.
  12. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 October 2020 10: 06
    +2
    Composite armor is only a third lighter than steel sandwich.
    To provide armor protection equivalent to steel, the suspended composite must be at least 150 mm thick.
    A light but protected tank does not work out according to these calculations.
    Either lightweight or protected.
    The only solution is a good KAZ with radars.
    1. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 11: 47
      +2
      The only solution is a good KAZ with radars ......... well, for example, the OF-36 does not have to hit the tank directly. 15 is enough from the target and the entire KAZ will be blown away ... the question ... what to do next when grenade launcher shots fall from all sides ... the survival of a tank in the current combat conditions is the ability to maneuver and serious fire ammunition ... .abra does not pull on the wrong not on the other. .. even though KAZ doesn’t pull at all
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 October 2020 12: 23
        +2
        "the ability to maneuver and serious fire ammunition ..... abra does not pull the wrong thing or the other" ///
        ---
        Abrams you have estimated incorrectly.
        He has excellent maneuverability. In high-speed jerks from a standstill, it surpasses all tanks except the T-80. And its firepower is very high. At night he shoots, as in the daytime - it hits in the dark from 2000 m.
        Abrams's weakness is different: 1) he has weak armor of the sides of the hull. They make their way out of the RPG. 2) getting into the stern basket immediately leaves it without ammunition, although it does not completely disable it. 3) he is not able to make long multi-hundred-kilometer marches.
        1. Crimean partisan 1974
          Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 12: 51
          +1
          And its firepower is very high. At night, it shoots as in the daytime - it hits in the dark from 2000 m ... ... the firepower in tanks is not assessed as a purely anti-tank bias. but as an effective firing mobile point for breaking through the defense or to strengthen the defense by means of a rather powerful not only anti-tank shells, but also PF and esessno SD, and here it is worth noting that the abra is already at the limit
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 25 October 2020 14: 29
            +1
            Here we can say that all guns are 125 / 120m. "on the limit".
            At night, it shoots as in the daytime - it hits in the dark from 2000 m ... the firepower in tanks is not assessed as a purely anti-tank bias

            These capabilities raise fighting qualities in general. You can shoot both fortifications and groups of infantry that will NOT be able to pass under cover of night. A good control system and a thermal imager, coupled with a remote detonation projectile, make it possible to do without an SD. After all, the firing range of the HE shell is more than 3 km.
            1. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 16: 34
              +2
              You can shoot both at fortifications and at groups of infantry, ..... the only question is how to shoot at groups of infantry ...... there is no effective unitary PF shot to a 120 mm tank gun, NATO is not and will not be, but smack at the infantry from a sub-caliber and cumulative waste
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 25 October 2020 17: 28
                +1
                “There will be no result” ... I don’t like categoricalness, and what is it based on?
                The fire control system has been improved - it includes equipment for firing two types of projectiles: the multipurpose XM1147 AMP with a programmable fuse

                https://rg.ru/amp/2020/06/01/armiia-ssha-nachala-poluchat-modernizirovannye-tanki-abrams.html
                And they wrote on the bmpd blog about this shell back in 2015:
                https://bmpd.livejournal.com/1422491.html
                1. Crimean partisan 1974
                  Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 20: 30
                  +2
                  And they wrote on the bmpd blog about this shell back in 2015: .... you are in prostration along the way, read my comment more carefully, the power of the HE for a tank 120 mm gun has been exhausted .... along the way it's all ..... for example the new mod of the tank 125 mm gun of the A series is already capable of shmalting with a projectile of up to 52 kg ... so if the one-year-old Abra approached its limit, then the T-72 will still serve
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 25 October 2020 20: 48
                    0
                    120 and 125 practically do not differ in diameter. But the longer (with greater power) HE ammunition and Abrams can easily be used (without altering the automatic loader).
                    With an increase in caliber, there are no particular problems: the German 130mm gun and the French 140mm.
                    But for now, 120mm is enough and the XM1147 AMP projectile.
                    effective unitary HE shot to 120 mm NATO tank gun no and never will, and smack on the infantry from subcaliber and cumulativea waste

                    Perhaps you went into a little prostration and forgot what you yourself wrote.
                    1. Crimean partisan 1974
                      Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 20: 51
                      +2
                      PF ammunition in Abrams can be easily used (without altering the automatic loader) .......... or you can learn more about the automatic loader on the Abrams ...... I will be delighted
                      1. 3danimal
                        3danimal 25 October 2020 20: 53
                        0
                        and you can learn more about the automatic loader on the abrah ...... I will be delighted

                        It does not exist, unlike our tanks. The loader is "more flexible" in this regard, increasing the maximum length will increase the recharge time.
                      2. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 25 October 2020 21: 00
                        +3
                        He is not, ..... Duc, no and never will be. and the Negro-loader has limits of endurance ..... a question for filling. how many 50 kilogram bags you can throw into the "snake" .... and even on the go, .... so stop talking about long-nosed nonsense .... even the UR LHAT is not included in the abra's shelf, you have to keep it under your feet ... and you ... in the T-72, at least fill the entire 22 trays with Invars and OF-36
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 25 October 2020 22: 24
                        0
                        T-72 at least all 22 trays fill with Invars and OF-36

                        Once again: you can fill all the free space of the T-72 with shells, but in order to fire them, they must be in the automatic loader. Which has a limit on the maximum LENGTH of the shells. (It was especially relevant for BOPS).
                        how many 50 kilogram bags you can throw

                        The 120 mm M830A1 round with a multi-purpose projectile weighs 23 kg.
                        My answer is that I throw 25 kg a lot more than 50 kg. The rate of fire with a trained loader is initially even higher than that of the T-72, and noticeably higher if it is necessary to "switch" to a different type of projectile. There are many videos with the loader working (by the way, in all that I saw, it was white or Latinos). Which (+1 person) will be very useful when repairing a tank / wounding a shooter or driver.
                        and on the move

                        Much depends on the suspension, the surface under the tracks and the speed of the tank. But the rate of fire will decrease of course. By the way, AZ also has limitations in this regard.
                      4. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 26 October 2020 08: 26
                        -2
                        (It was especially relevant for BOPSs) ...... BOPSs are not a panacea in the current conditions of battles, as the practice of using tanks in local conflicts of PF and SD has shown the most important value than BOPS and cumulative ... what is for this purpose to NATO 120 mm ....
                        The 120 mm M830A1 round with a multipurpose projectile weighs 23 kg .... I repeat. of which the projectile itself is 12 kg, of which 5 kg are for the cumulative part and 7 kg for the land mine .... this is ridiculous against the background of that the RPG-7 high-explosive grenade has the same weight .... the age of loaders has long come to an end ... from the western countries, the paddling pools understood this first
                        By the way, AZ also has limitations in this regard ... yes, there were limitations, but on the T-72A and T-72-B mods .. on slopes from 15 degrees, AZ refused, in the T-72B3 fashion there are no restrictions .. ...
                        here it should be noted why the NATO countries do not introduce AZ or MZ ... but because all tactical issues are decided by aviation and tanks are second-tier equipment. so only, punitive measures and methods of intimidation. in fact, full line
                        since the days of Vietnam, the striped ones did not have a more serious opponent. that's why tanks are like that
                      5. 3danimal
                        3danimal 26 October 2020 08: 57
                        +1
                        The 120 mm M830A1 round with a multipurpose projectile weighs 23 kg .... I repeat. of which the projectile itself is 12 kg, of which 5 kg are for the cumulative part and 7 kg for the land mine .... this is ridiculous against the background of that the RPG-7 high-explosive grenade has the same weight

                        M830 is just an example that a unitary projectile does not weigh 50kg.
                        We are talking about the XM1147 AMP, with remote detonation. And this projectile is serially supplied to the troops. (Our analogues in the series?)
                        there are no restrictions on the T-72B3 ...

                        They are always there, just increased the maximum angle
                        why nato countries do not introduce AZ or MZ

                        France is a NATO country, as far as I know. Leclerc has AZ with a BC in the tower niche, which is very smart, by the way.
                        and tanks are second-echelon vehicles. so only, punitive measures and methods of intimidation

                        Superficial inferences, what are they based on? If we had the same budget and the number of aircraft, aviation would also have a higher priority. (And now not always on the sidelines)
                        since the days of Vietnam, the striped ones did not have a more serious opponent.

                        Ok, it was Iraq 1991, 2003, regular army.
                        Have we met similar opponents from the 2nd half of the 20th century? No. Mujahideen in Afghanistan and separatists in Chechnya, militants in Syria.
                      6. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 26 October 2020 09: 37
                        -1
                        The M830 is just an example, that a unitary projectile weighs by no means 50kg ..... that is why it is so low-power that it equals an RPG shot in terms of power .... clearly not equal opportunities. a partisan with an RPG, which after a shot will dissolve and a 65 ton colossus that is visible
                        France is a NATO country, as far as I know. Leclerc has AZ with a BC in the tower niche, very smart ... you're not attentive. I printed above that the paddling pool was the first to understand that something needs to be done with loading ... and even then, the tower niche is covered with only 40 mm of armor, ..... that is, the ancient PTRD 14.5 will take it without problems
                        If we had the same budget and the number of aircraft, aviation would also have a higher priority. .... I don't argue with that
                        Ok, there was Iraq in 1991, 2003, a regular army ....... well, I would not say that Saddam had strength. there are several components
                        1 Iraqi Armed Forces were quite dead after 10th bloodletting
                        2 purchased funds of air defense systems in france and nato countries did not work at all
                        3 corruption in all ranks of the Iraqi armed forces that served as food for the special services of the coalition
                        4.states weren't alone in attack
                        thus, to call the beating of the patient as a serious adversary does not turn his tongue
                        but at the expense of the partisan, it's you in vain .... the partisan is motivated and does not refer to any instructions and regulations ...
                      7. 3danimal
                        3danimal 26 October 2020 11: 52
                        +1
                        the niche of the tower is covered with only 40 mm of armor, ..... that is, the ancient 14.5 anti-tank gun will take it without problems

                        The tank will lose its ammo and go for repairs with a LIVING crew.
                        You saw the picture of what happens when the ammunition fires / detonates inside the T-72 (behind the main armor!). The crew is doomed at such a time.
                        1 Iraqi Armed Forces were quite dead after 10th bloodletting

                        In 1991 (before the Desert Storm) there was not much bloodletting.
                        4.states weren't alone in attack
                        thus, to call the beating of the patient as a serious adversary does not turn his tongue

                        And again, we are talking primarily about 1991, as well as 1999 (the defeat of the air defense).
                        partisanship is motivated and does not refer to any instructions and regulations

                        Guerrilla warfare does not have tank formations (Saddam had them, and some were even motivated), in principle, there is no echeloned air defense (and the basis of Saddam's was precisely the Soviet air defense systems of the 60-70s).
                        Partisanship (as a method of struggle) is always from the weakness of one's own strength. The Taliban tried to fight using combined arms methods in the early 00s, but they quickly understood everything.
                      8. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 26 October 2020 12: 15
                        -1
                        The tank will lose its ammunition and will go for repairs with a LIVING crew .... something I did not notice in Iraq when they fired at them with cornet and bassoon, but I noticed how the T-72 reliably holds TOW shots
                        Guerrilla warfare (as a method of struggle) - always from the weakness of one's own forces .... also did not notice, because the Afghan from the poppy turns into a red color even from satellites you can see the vast fields of poppy, therefore there are two reasons, or the guerrilla is so strong or occupational the authorities support this process, but the horseradish radish is not sweeter
                      9. 3danimal
                        3danimal 26 October 2020 16: 21
                        +1
                        but noticed how the T-72 reliably holds the TOW shots

                        What shot? Available in 130 and 152mm calibers, with means of overcoming JV or not.
                        something I did not notice in Iraq when they were bombarded with cornet and bassoon

                        Leclercov or Abrams? (And we're talking about tanks with ammo in the turret niche).
                        https://youtu.be/jfbHsitonqc
                        Here about the T-72 and T-90.
                      10. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 26 October 2020 16: 29
                        -1
                        What shot? Available in calibers 130 and 152mm ... the question is not clear ... it is the train of thought that needs clarification ...
                        (And we're talking about tanks with ammo in the tower niche) ...... that's exactly what we're talking about, isn't it enough for you to see videos from the same YouTube when "niche" tanks burn like candles. and by the way, on these videos, I never saw that someone from the crews left the tank ...
                        Well, so tanks in local wars are more likely a mobile firing point than a means of breaking through the enemy's defenses ... therefore, the PF is a necessary tool in the tank, and if an Invar-E type missile is added, this is a hundred times higher than its effectiveness in these conflicts
                      11. 3danimal
                        3danimal 26 October 2020 17: 18
                        0
                        the question is not clear ... it is the train of thought that requires clarification ...

                        The point is that TOW shots are different.
                        are you not enough of a video from the same YouTube when "niche" tanks burn like candles

                        The situation with the detonation of ammunition after being hit by an RPG / ATGM was considered.
                        There are statistics on the disabled Abrams tanks in the 2003 Iraqi campaign. There are only a few episodes with the death of the crew, one fell from the bridge into the river, under the second 1000 kg of explosives were detonated, etc.
                  2. 3danimal
                    3danimal 26 October 2020 16: 22
                    0
                    the occupation authorities support this process

                    They just don't interfere. As a result, part of the proceeds from the sale of opiates goes to support the Taliban.
  • Sanichsan
    Sanichsan 25 October 2020 18: 16
    +2
    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
    there is no effective unitary HE shot to the 120 mm NATO tank gun and will not be

    given the program of creating a single high-explosive-cumulative projectile, it will be even worse request
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 25 October 2020 20: 51
      -1
      Here's the link again:
      https://rg.ru/amp/2020/06/01/armiia-ssha-nachala-poluchat-modernizirovannye-tanki-abrams.html
      The shell is already entering the troops.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Crimean partisan 1974
        Crimean partisan 1974 26 October 2020 15: 20
        0
        The projectile is already entering the troops ....... you didn’t learn to read along the way, ... I typed it in Russian for you ... this projectile has only 7 kg for a high-explosive fragmentation unit and cannot be anymore, for example , remember, OF-36 kg for a 125mm 24-kg cannon, which is almost three times more, and, according to the developers, OF-36 from a 125mm cannon can spit 10000 meters .... how ... impressive ??
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 26 October 2020 16: 42
          0
          For a 125mm cannon, the shot weight is 33 kg, the projectile is 23 kg. And only with a contact fuse.
          The XM1147 shot has a weight of 21kg, the projectile - 11kg (where did 7 come from? Why not 5?). But quality can trump rough weight:

          "In fact, AMR is a high-explosive fragmentation projectile with a programmable fuse with a choice of at least three modes of detonation (contact with deceleration, contact instant, programmable air detonation), the mode is set through the fire control system of the M1A2 tank .."
  • APASUS
    APASUS 25 October 2020 10: 13
    +2
    The statement of the American General Joseph Martin is given. According to him, in the future there will be a need for a light tank-type platform, "but there is still no consensus on what it should be." That is why tanks "Abrams" are predicted to be of further relevance in the American troops.

    They can't come to a common opinion, that's why it remains relevant. The decision is made not on the basis of an analysis of losses, technical and operational problems, but because they could not agree. That is why they do not advertise their losses in conflicts.
  • Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 25 October 2020 10: 15
    +3
    there will be a need for a light tank-type platform, “but there is no consensus yet on what it should be
    therefore there is no consensus that there are many different options for combat use. And the conditions in these options are very different. Therefore, you cannot imagine a universal wunderwafe for all occasions.
    In each case, you have to choose a balance between protection and mobility.
    It is clear that a heavy tank-fortress is better than a light one that is easily killed. But he will not get through everywhere. And in such cases, a light tank goraaazdo is better than none.
    Therefore, the "cardboard" BMD is not a competitor to the "armata" at all, for it can easily end up where armata can never be.
    Accordingly, the fate of Abrams does not depend in any way on the progress of the MPF topic. They will not intersect on the battlefield, they are for different fields. Well, unless there will be a technological leap and someone will come up with light, but indestructible armor.
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 25 October 2020 10: 27
    +2
    When a light or medium tank hits with 122 or 152 mm, only rollers will remain. Not one KAZ will not help. At the beginning of the war in Karabakh, the Armenians fired from cannons, two or even one shot and there is no armored target. The towers will fly twice. . In Tigers 152 mm turrets flew off without penetration.
  • Phoenix
    Phoenix 25 October 2020 13: 40
    +2
    MPF is normally equipped with KAZ, this is in the military's assignment. The prototype that was recently shown has mounts for KAZ. The author (of the original), as usual, opened Wikipedia and on this he considered his journalistic duty fulfilled ... However, one should not be surprised (c)
  • spech
    spech 25 October 2020 15: 35
    0
    Quote: Alex_You
    That did not prevent the Americans from repairing them, and sometimes even restoring them at the remanufacturing facilities in Iraq.

    Taking into account how long they sit in Iraq, it was already possible to establish the production of "abrash" there.
  • Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 25 October 2020 20: 23
    0
    Mega shed for intimidating the Papuans, so it's good))