Newsweek: Western tanks may be too heavy for Ukrainian bridges

The United States and Europe are accelerating more and more in their desire to stuff Ukraine weapons. Kyiv has already been promised heavy American and German Tanks Abrams and Leopard.

However, according to Newsweek, NATO tanks have an impressive weight of 60 tons or more, which can be a problem when operating in Ukraine. The infrastructure of Ukraine, including bridges, was not built for such heavy vehicles, the newspaper writes.

Accordingly, the tanks will have to perform certain maneuvers in order to reach their destination. This could be used by Russian military intelligence to benefit from the logistics solutions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the authors of Newsweek note.

According to the publication, all the latest models of tanks that the Western allies promise to supply to Kyiv are more modern than those that Kyiv has used so far, and they are much heavier. So, the Soviet T-72, which was used in the conflict on both sides, weighs about 45 tons, and, for example, American M1A1 Abrams tanks can weigh up to 70 tons.

Such a weight will not be able to pass through all the bridges in Ukraine, as they were built taking into account their time and place, the newspaper writes, citing military experts. In addition, the pontoon ferry vehicles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were also developed taking into account Soviet tanks, and certainly not for NATO heavy tanks, Newsweek concludes.

Comments

[Trapp1st]

They pulled up with these bridges, they hammer them with chimeras, they cannot break them ...

[Silver99]

Bridges are not the main thing, soon in the spring the mud will become an insurmountable obstacle for 60-70 ton armored vehicles, and fuel and ammunition supply vehicles.

[Trapp1st]

soon in the spring, mud will become an insurmountable obstacle for 60-70 ton armored vehicles, and fuel and ammunition supply vehicles.

The main thing is not the mass, but the specific load, if the memory does not fail, for the Abrams it is approximately the same as for t 90.

[Silver99]

So after all, I don’t compare the TTD of tanks, they are approximately the same in specific pressure, and the T-90 will not be sweet, which is why I think that in the spring, in the muddy ground, armored vehicles will fall out of the maneuverable offensive, plus the “brilliant green” will go, we need to solve tasks to the maximum now .

[Trapp1st]

I don’t compare the TTD of tanks, they are approximately the same in specific pressure, and the T-90 will not be sweet

in the spring, mud will become an insurmountable obstacle for 60-70 ton armored vehicles

You were talking about foreign samples, because. weight t90 around 50 tons

[vovochkarzhevsky]

The main thing is not the mass, but the specific load, if the memory does not fail, for the Abrams it is approximately the same as for t 90.

Not so simple. Let's leave alone bridges and crossings, where weight comes first.
But again, the specific pressure will be the main thing when moving on soils with uniform physical characteristics.
But if we take the usual conditions for the spring-autumn period, weak soil reinforced from above with a grass cover, a completely different picture emerges there.

[zloybond]

Our Russian aligarhi will help. Look how Lukoil from Bulgaria diligently helps.

[The black]

These are tanks. They shoot. And anyone they hit, such "heavy", "gluttonous", "frequently breaking", etc., is a corpse. So, at least thirty tanks, at least three, at least even one - this is the probable death of our soldiers in battles with these tanks ....

[Trapp1st]

So, at least thirty tanks, at least three, at least even one - this is the probable death of our soldiers in battles with these tanks ....

This is adequate, otherwise in a year this nonsense about the "meaningless" supply of weapons is already tired.

[Roman Efremov]

Chimeras are hammering huge bridges, the throughput of which is at a height in all respects. We are talking about small local bridges of a regional scale - and if the Abrams and Leopards plan to use them widely enough (and not just along the main routes), they cannot avoid such bridges.

[Trapp1st]

they cannot avoid such bridges.

With today's opportunities, this inconvenience is completely solvable, it is called making an elephant out of a fly.

[single-n]

That is, when several loaded KAMAZ trucks drive across the bridge, this is the norm. But under 1 tank, will it break and crumble into dust? Almost 100 years ago, the Germans somehow carried 60-ton "tigers". It can be seen that aliens built bridges. Show me at least one concrete bridge that will not withstand 60 tons of load. Brad dog.

[Viktor Sergeev]

Do you really think that a missile strike is worse than a load of 70 tons on a bridge that is designed for 60, and even that is 70 years old?

[rocket757]

Newsweek: Western tanks may be too heavy for Ukrainian bridges

Let them try to solve their problems. If you count how many things were listed and added to the list of their problems ... a lot, in general.
The question is, what additional problems can we have if they are given tanks anyway ???

[AAC]

Let the tower be filmed in Poland and go. I also found the problem

[saigon]

Here's the surprise!
How can tanks be sent and here they find out the bridges, not just that.
Although it is hard to believe that this nuance was not known for the early ones, however, there are no reports of bridgelayers, sapper and engineering units yet.
It's all weird and weird.

[Kuziming]

They are too heavy even for soils.
In defense, cheap engineering structures can be very effective.

[single-n]

Specific pressure t-90 - 0,97 kg/cm. Abrams has -1,07 kg / cm
The difference is outrageous. As much as 10%.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Single-n

Specific pressure t-90 - 0,97 kg/cm. Abrams has -1,07 kg / cm
The difference is outrageous. As much as 10%.

When this fool gets stuck in the mud, the difference between 45 tons and 60-70 will be noticeable.
What technique to pull it out of the mud?

[Uprun]

Campaign tactics of the Wehrmacht will be used, offensive along the roads with tank wedges. Those at the beginning of the war had mostly light / medium tanks exactly under our forty-five, and these mastodons are plowing, and after after the rains ....., well, yes, the canopy from the Scholz to help them.

[I dare to_notice_]

Newsweek: Western tanks may be too heavy for Ukrainian bridges
It was Newsweek who didn’t see what kind of trucks were rummaging around on Ukrainian roads.
There is an overload of just up to 60 tons.
They endure.
And roads and bridges...

[TermNachTer]

Yeah, and what kind of tracks from those trucks remain? Did not see? Go and see - the track is half a meter deep.

[rotmistr60]

Newsweek is either trying to justify the lack of haste in the supply of tanks, or is really worried about their survivability and patency. Probably NATO generals still calculated options with bridges and black soil in this territory. Or maybe that's why, as one of the factors, the United States is in no hurry to deliver, knowing something that they didn’t bring to Europe when they were forced to go for deliveries?

[APASUS]

How much more difficult will it be for logistics? Abrams eats fuel like an elephant, the maintenance of the same Abrams, Leopards and Leclercs is very different. Repair services should be carried out by professionals, but where are they?

[Romanenko]

So, the Soviet T-72, which was used in the conflict on both sides, weighs about 45 tons, and, for example, American M1A1 Abrams tanks can weigh up to 70 tons.

70-ton ones will not be brought to the NWO, the Abrashka version for underdeveloped partners (without "uranium" armor) weighs no more than 54 tons, which is quite suitable for the load rating characteristics of bridges in 404, the real condition of the bridges and of course kerosene for engines is another matter, and poor dust tolerance of these very engines can affect their general well-being.

[Normann]

The oldest basic version weighs over 54 tons

[Viktor Sergeev]

Yes sho you say, but we didn’t even know. The soil is more deadly for them, although the Leopard, in principle, is not so much heavier than the T90.

[Petr_Koldunov]

Why won't they survive? Or are we just reassuring ourselves?
Tigers weighed under 60 tons .. so what? They calmly wandered around Ukraine until our fighters learned how to burn them ...
And it will be the same here! Not the soil will stop these Panzerwafels, but the Russian soldiers!

[23424636]

Complete Russophobes usually work in Newsweek, if the editorial office of this publication in Russia was closed back in more or less warm times. Let me remind these amers. Railway easily copes with 60 tons of cargo transporting them on an open railway. platform.. In Ukraine and its left bank there are many access roads and places with overpasses for unloading heavy equipment. That is, in fact, they are easy to deliver almost to the places of combat coordination. Another question is why the Moscow Region spares the railway. bridges and tunnels from Europe to Ukraine., this is a sacred secret. Houses on the Moscow embankment.

[Normann]

The infrastructure of Ukraine, including bridges, was not built for such heavy vehicles.

Nature doesn't care at all

[drehows]

People, let's not suffer from hatred. A tank is a heavy weapon used to break through and suppress firing points, and in this role it is a deadly weapon, and carries a potential threat and death to our fighters. Will the bridges hold up? Part may collapse, but part will survive. Will the tanks cope with the mudslide - they will cope, and like ours. The only thing that can happen in my opinion is a series of thaws and frosts. In this case, if suddenly there is sufficient hindsight of the Ukrainian military formations, it is possible for tanks to freeze into the ground during a long stop/spend the night on a muddy road, but this is dangerous for our tanks in exactly the same way.
I'm not trying to scare anyone, leopards and even abrams are perfectly burned by both the good old cornet and the fresher bassoon, which Iraq has once again shown and proved. The only thing that matters now, in my opinion, is whether our troops will be equipped with a sufficient number of ATGMs, complete with fighters trained to shoot from them, as well as anti-tank mines, and how many units the aircraft will have time to destroy on their way.
And yes, it makes no sense to discuss who will emerge victorious from the battle, t90 or leopard2. In modern wars, tanks do NOT fight tanks, with rare exceptions.