"Captured Abrams is too heavy": Polish press draws attention to the evacuation of the tank by the Russian army

Russian troops have acquired another trophy a tank Abrams M1A1, which is not such an easy task to evacuate to the rear. The peculiarities of its towing were noted in the Polish press.

As indicated in the publication Defence24, this vehicle was abandoned by the Ukrainian crew in late October in the Pokrovsk direction. It is equipped with Kontakt-1 ERA blocks located on the hull and turret (some of them, as you can see, worked).

Apparently, the vehicle is only slightly damaged and, if enough effort is put in, it can be returned to service, but not for the Ukrainian army.

- the author writes.

He calls for taking into account the specifics of the evacuation by Russian soldiers of “too heavy” American equipment, for which BREM-1/1M were used:

Towing a vehicle of such a mass required two ARVs, as the Russian army does not have equipment suitable for towing modern Western tanks weighing around 60 tons. This should be a guideline for our [official] officials to purchase a sufficient number of support vehicles not only for the MBT, but also for the IFV and artillery.

According to him, the Russian Armed Forces similarly used two ARVs to evacuate a Leopard 2A6 and a Strv 122. But unlike the Polish military, the Russian troops do not operate Western tanks, so their towing is of an emergency nature.

Comments

[Lemon]

The discovery was made by Poles.) But before that, wasn't it too heavy?))

[blackGRAIL]

The point is that the American M88A3 Hercules BREMs were created for Abrams (for vehicles up to 80 tons), and we simply do not have such equipment. The BREM-1 is not designed for such a weight.

[Petr_Koldunov]

Quote from: blackGRAIL

and we simply don't have such equipment. The BREM-1 is not designed for such a weight.

Why not? BREM-1 is quite an outdated machine, although reliable.
But the BREM-80 has been in production for a long time now (though not in large quantities, but in series) - which is many times more powerful, and is capable of pulling out not only an Abrams, but also a Challenger, and not just one in a bunch.
The fact that our guys didn’t have the necessary equipment on hand in this area doesn’t mean that “the Russians simply don’t have it.”

[blackGRAIL]

It's hard for me to say 100% because I'm not an expert in towing, but here's a "couch" comparison:

The M88 had a crane lifting capacity of 21 tons and a winch pulling force of 40 tons and could not handle the M1 alone; two vehicles were required.
M88A2 and A3, modified for Abrams, have crane ratings of 32/36 tons and winch ratings of 63/72 tons
BREM-80U has the following characteristics: 18 ton crane (versus 30+ for the Yankees) and a 35-ton winch (direct) and 140 tons with a pulley block. That is, its direct indicators neither for the crane nor for the winch allow it to handle the Abrams (I look at the indicators required for this for the M88A2/A3 and M88, which could not). But whether it is possible to use a pulley block on a winch not only for (short-term) pulling out a vehicle, but also for towing it, I do not know 100%. But I suspect that it is impossible, otherwise it would be used constantly.
,

[Roma 92]

They stole one. The rest are just torn to pieces. The rest are needed. Well, maybe a couple more.

[realist]

The traction force is not equal to the weight of the towed object! These are slightly different parameters, a VAZ 2107 weighs just over a ton, I weigh 80 kg and I alone can push (pull) this car on asphalt or hard ground.

[kapitan92]

Quote: Peter_Koldunov

BREM-80 (even if not in large numbers, but in series) - which is many times more powerful and is capable of pulling out not only an Abrams, but also a Challenger, and not just one in a bundle.

It can pull out, the pulley force is up to 100 tons. Towing is problematic, because the weight is 46 tons.

[paul3390]

I wonder - how are they going to haul it themselves? Abrams under 70 tons + say ARV M88 under 50... And what kind of bridge will withstand all this? Except for main roads of course..

[realist]

All bridges were originally built for a single vehicle weight of 42 tons, how NATO was going to fight in Russia with 42-ton bridges is not known to me personally, either to strengthen them or build other bridges. Although KamAZ grain trucks and semi-trailers with soil travel with a weight of 60-80 tons or more, and nothing! Probably the bridges were not built correctly.

[evgen1221]

There are no front rollers, the abrasha died on a mine.

[Irek]

The Poles are licking their lips at how much scrap metal has passed them by.

[Graz]

I think this is one of the reasons why the Poles buy Korean tanks, they weigh less than the Abrams and Leopard, and their bridges and other infrastructure are rarely designed for the 60+ ton tank weight

[carpenter]

Quote: Graz

I think this is one of the reasons why the Poles are buying Korean tanks, they weigh less than the Abrams and Leopard, and they have bridges and other infrastructure

In the late 70s, the United States kindly allowed its Asian ally and protégé to create its own tank based on the modernization of the Abrams MBT. The new product was named "K-1" and was even initially armed, like the prototype, with a 105-mm cannon. It was still smaller in size, and its engine was traditional - a diesel instead of the American gas turbine. These strange similarities and differences led to the fact that American soldiers serving on the peninsula called it "Baby Abrams". The baby has very few of its own parental technical solutions: 80% of the components are purchased in other countries, mainly in the United States. The main thing in the tank is the cannon. The 120-mm cannon is a version of the German L55 Rheinmetall. It is 1,3 meters longer than the cannons of the Abrams tanks and older Leopard 2s. This gives the Korean cannon an advantage in the initial velocity of the projectile. The power pack is copied from the German diesel engine MTU-890 V12 with a capacity of 1500 horsepower. Among the original technical solutions of the new tank is its hydropneumatic suspension.

[blackGRAIL]

K2 became a departure from the American dependence on K1.

[carpenter]

Quote from: blackGRAIL

K2 became a departure from the American dependence on K1.

And what has changed in K2, by South Korea itself?

[blackGRAIL]

Actually, that's all. YK made maximum use of the tank-building experience of almost all leading Western tank powers, but by adopting the knowledge, it ends up producing almost everything itself and does not depend on American or other patents (which was the main task during the development of the K2).

Weapon system (and ammunition (here the UK is generally the absolute leader in the West with self-sharpening tungsten BOPS), fire control system, optics, TIUS, suspension, engine (since 2019, previously German), transmission (since 2022, previously German), passive and active armor.

[carpenter]

Quote from: blackGRAIL

Actually, that's all. The UK made maximum use of the tank-building experience of almost all leading Western tank powers,

Sorry, only what the Western powers allow them. Both tanks and planes and even air defense. You can't contradict the owner, it will hurt. Remember Vasya!

[blackGRAIL]

And what does this limited desire to share secrets, which is completely normal, have to do with the fact that the K2 is a purely Korean tank? UK also refused to share the technology of self-sharpening tungsten BOPS even with the USA and the desire of the "owner" did not help.

[KTM-5]

This evil American crap should be melted down!

[lukash66]

The conclusion is of course mind-blowing - let's make a Mouse and the Russians won't be able to steal it.))

[AVA77]

So, they dragged the Mouse to Kubinka and stole the Abrams somewhere.

[Metallurg_2]

There were two mice, both were blown up by the Boches during the retreat. Then our guys brought parts from two machines to Kubinka and assembled a running model there.

[Sergey Tankist]

Is it running? In my opinion, it's just one body...

[opposite28]

Russian troops have acquired another captured Abrams M1A1 tank, which is not such an easy task to evacuate to the rear.

And why is there another captured M1A1 in the rear?! Did someone decide to put together a collection?! It would have been easier to render many unusable and melt them down, bypassing the difficulties with the ARV. How much diesel fuel alone has been written off in vain, not to mention the engine hours of domestic ARVs and the time wasted by the evacuation teams of the repair unit, which probably has more than enough work plus a trailer.

[gsev]

Quote: oppozite28

And why is there another captured M1A1 in the rear?!

It is necessary to know all the qualities of the enemy tank well. From two damaged ones, one tank can be assembled on the move and its running characteristics can be tested. In addition, it is useful to familiarize the Chinese, Iranians, and North Koreans with peat tanks. If I had surplus vehicles, I would sell one captured Abrams and Leopard to China for components for drones.

[opposite28]

It is necessary to know all the qualities of the enemy tank well. From two damaged ones, one tank can be assembled on the move and its running characteristics can be tested. In addition, it is useful to familiarize the Chinese, Iranians, and North Koreans with peat tanks. If I had surplus vehicles, I would sell one captured Abrams and Leopard to China for components for drones.

It would be good for the Chinese and Iranians to first sort out what's what with their own national developments in the field of tank building and not spy on the enemy's designs without taking into account the mental and psychological characteristics of captured equipment from EU and US countries used in Ukraine as a kind of ransom, if a little on the topic.

[gsev]

Quote: oppozite28

and not to spy on the enemy's constructions

The Chinese need to know the enemy's design to develop anti-tank weapons. And we need to sell the information to our allies that we got at the cost of much blood.

[Sergey Tankist]

And we can also make comrade Kim happy...

[gsev]

Quote: Sergey Tankist

And we can also make comrade Kim happy...

In a situation where the DPRK supplies us with ammunition and artillery, Kim can be given some designs and developments if he organizes their serial production and delivery to Russia.

[certero]

How did the Russian army plan to evacuate the armata?

[ZAV69]

What do you mean by what? Armata. The Armata model range: tank, armored personnel carrier and Braham. This Braham will be used for evacuation

[certero]

Quote: ZAV69

What do you mean by what? Armata. The Armata model range: tank, armored personnel carrier and Braham. This Braham will be used for evacuation

It was assembled and reassembled. Bram is still not there, as are the armatas at the front.