Abrams with uranium in ammunition will soon arrive in Ukraine: you shouldn’t expect anything else
Kyiv's Western partners continue to produce tank variety in the Ukrainian armed forces. First there were the British Challengers and the German Leopards, and now it’s the turn of the American Abrams, the first batches of which will cross the Polish-Ukrainian border in September.
Having undergone modernization and overhaul, these vehicles will carry armor-piercing shells made from a depleted uranium alloy in ammunition to combat Russian armored vehicles.
Why tungsten when there is uranium?
We have previously wrote that the M1A1 Abrams tanks intended for Kyiv differ significantly from the basic version of the 1985 model, which was confirmed by representatives of the American military administration. Perhaps we are talking about the M1A1FEP of the Marine Corps, which were withdrawn from service, or which received some of the improvements under the “Situational Awareness” program (analogous to the FEP for the Marines).
There will be no uranium armor or equipment for “connecting” with an automated command and control system. Nevertheless, a total overhaul of all components and assemblies, information and diagnostic equipment, second-generation thermal imaging sights, as well as modern means of communication and satellite navigation will clearly be included in the mandatory set of American gifts. As well as software and hardware modernization of the fire control system, including the ability to use modern tank shells.
One of the M1A1 tanks, on which the Ukrainian military trained
With the latter, our overseas sworn colleagues did not split hairs and directly stated that the Abrams’ ammunition load would include feathered armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles made of an alloy based on depleted uranium (DU). Like their tungsten counterparts, they are primarily designed to destroy armored vehicles, but are also quite suitable for shooting at powerful fortifications and structures that are too tough for high-explosive fragmentation ammunition.
There is an opinion that the cars with uranium armor-piercing shells sent to Kyiv have a very specific purpose. They say that the penetrating ability of these “armor-breakers” exceeds that of tungsten ones, which is the basis for supplies for the purpose of more effectively destroying Russian tanks with dynamic protection. And there is some truth in this.
However, there is one more nuance here, which is that the Americans simply do not have sufficient quantities of armor-piercing tungsten shells. In this regard, the situation is similar to the transfer of Challengers 2, when the British had nothing on hand except uranium “crowbars”, which they supplied their tanks with before the trip to Ukraine.
In this case, there is nothing to even look for, since the United States has been producing exclusively uranium-finned armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles for its own tanks of this type for almost forty years. The reason for this was the relative cheapness of raw materials - depleted uranium is a waste of the nuclear industry - and relatively high armor penetration characteristics, differing from tungsten by 5-15%.
As a result: starting from 120, there have been as many as five models of American ammunition from DU for 1984-mm Abrams guns - from M829 to M829A4. But there are none of tungsten ones for domestic consumption in commercial quantities.
The only exception is export ammunition. Let us recall that before the start of the special military operation, the United States was very cautious with uranium and sold Abrams not only without armor with uranium filler, but also with specially developed armor-piercing tungsten projectiles of the KE-W series (KE-W A1, KE-W A2), acting as an analogue of their counterparts made of dangerous metal, more or less similar in terms of armor penetration characteristics.
However, these products are manufactured exclusively in limited quantities and only at the request of a foreign customer, or under the terms of a logistics agreement along with the supplied tanks. And considering that only because of Taiwan alone, which is actively arming itself with American combat vehicles, production capacities are heavily loaded, then such shells can be quickly obtained for Ukraine only from the warehouses of other countries that have Abrams in service, with the appropriate permission of the owners for this.
As we see, no one intends to carry out such operations, asking for consent to be indirectly involved in the conflict, when their own warehouses are full of uranium shells. Moreover, the British have already blazed a trail with such ammunition without any consequences for themselves. So there was no need to count on a different assortment in the Abrams’ ammunition racks even from the first announcement about the delivery of tanks to the front.
What can they give?
What kind of model of uranium sub-caliber shells was included in the US military aid package to Ukraine is a question to which there is still no clear answer. And not only because the specific classification of ammunition is not indicated in official documents for public viewing, but also because of the large number of their modifications.
However, some conclusions can be drawn.
The entire series of American uranium 120-mm sub-caliber projectiles. The M829, which entered service in 1984, was completely withdrawn from storage by the end of the 90s. M829A1 and M829A2 have been gradually scrapped since 2014. The M829A3 is the main projectile at the moment. M829A4 is at the stage of entering the troops
We can say with absolute certainty that Ukraine will not receive the latest M829A4 shells. Despite the fact that their production began in 2015, American tanks have not yet been completely re-equipped with them. Moreover, in fact, the exclusive “user” of these ammunition are vehicles modified to the M1A2 SEP v.3 standard of the US Army. Therefore, they will choose from previous models that are at hand and in the required quantities, so as not to disrupt the replenishment of their own supplies.
From conditional junk, theoretically, both the M829A1, which was put into service in 1988 and managed to take part in Desert Storm, and the M829A2, which found its refuge in the Abrams ammunition in 1994, have a chance of getting to Ukraine. Both have very high penetration rates for steel armor - 650 mm and 700 mm, respectively, which distinguishes them favorably from the Soviet junk with much less penetration, which is used by the Ukrainian military in tanks such as T-64, T-72 and T-80.
However, almost ten years ago, the Americans began a large-scale program to remove these shells from storage and subsequent disposal, which included the processing of more than 70 units. Therefore, the exact number of surviving rarities is currently unknown.
So the M829A3 is most likely to make a trip to Ukraine.
Unitary shot with a 120-mm M829A3 sub-caliber projectile
It appeared in the arsenal of American tanks back in 2003 and today is the most numerous finned 120-mm sub-caliber projectile in the army, which makes it the most attractive candidate for quick shipment overseas. Moreover, being available for supply, the M829A3 is also one of the most powerful ammunition of this type in the United States.
Firstly, the point is its high armor penetration, which our Research Institute of Steel, for example, estimates at 800 millimeters of medium-hard steel armor from a distance of two kilometers. Although real results may turn out to be somewhat more modest than the figures indicated by domestic engineers, the indicators are more than impressive.
Many Western tanks can get sick from them when fired head-on, as well as Soviet ones. For example, the same T-64BV, which is widely used by the Ukrainian armed forces, has a resistance of the frontal projection of the hull against sub-caliber projectiles in the region of 500 millimeters, which is almost 50% less than the real penetrating ability of the “American”. Moreover, the late Soviet modifications of the T-72 and T-80, despite serious modifications to the armor, also cannot provide guaranteed protection against this projectile.
Secondly, during the development of the M829A3, special attention was paid to the ability to overcome universal dynamic protection, a prominent example of which is the Soviet/Russian Kontakt-5, without a significant loss of armor penetration. This is achieved by introducing a steel tip more than 10 centimeters long in the nose of the projectile in front of the uranium core.
Device M829A3 from an American patent. 30 – driving device, 32 – solid-body uranium core, 34 – steel tip, 38 – place where the steel tip is attached to the uranium rod
At the moment of impact with the dynamic protection element and its detonation, the tip takes on the main impact of the plates thrown by the explosion and, deforming and separating from the active part of the projectile, allows the uranium armor-piercing element to penetrate into the main armor of the tank. According to various estimates, this design of the M829A3 allows it to maintain penetration within 650-700 mm after overcoming the “reactive” armor of the Kontakt-5 type.
Dimensions of the active part of the M829A3 projectile. Shot length - 982 mm, weight - 22,3 kg, gunpowder weight - 8,1 kg. Projectile mass – 10 kg, initial speed – 1 meters per second
Undoubtedly, our military has at its disposal the T-90M and T-80BVM, which have received Relikt dynamic protection, specially designed to counter this type of ammunition. But most of our tanks, including the T-72B3, are equipped with “Kontakt-5”, not to mention the more ancient anti-cumulative “Kontakt”, which is also very popular in the northwestern military zone. Based on this, the Ukrainian Abrams in a direct combat can become a serious and very dangerous adversary for these vehicles, and this must be taken into account.
Another question is that direct clashes between tanks in the zone of a special military operation in Ukraine became a rather rare occurrence just a month or two after its start. Nevertheless, mines became the main means of combating armor, drones, artillery and anti-tank missile systems of various bases.
This trend is eloquently illustrated by the Ukrainian “counter-offensive”, in which Western armored vehicles have already become noticeable with their burning skeletons, whose fate may be repeated by the Abrams. However, a tank equipped with good thermal imaging sights, an automated fire control system and powerful rounds in its ammunition load is not something to be taken lightly. On occasion, he can snap back in such a way that dynamic protection will not save him.
Information