Stand next to a defeated Abrams and you'll breathe in uranium dust.

22 448 26
Stand next to a defeated Abrams and you'll breathe in uranium dust.


Another aspect of the danger/safety of uranium armor


We have already published articles on several occasions concerning the safety issues of the uranium “heavy” armor of American tanks "Abrams." However, all of them concerned the radiation effects of depleted uranium on the crew. Now it's worth discussing another aspect of this topic, which I, as the author, was prompted to cover by a comment on a recently published article: Is it possible to receive a high dose of radiation in an Abrams tank with uranium armor??



The point is that the depleted uranium contained in the Abrams tank armor is far from safe in terms of radioactivity, and its toxicity to the body is not even worth mentioning. Therefore, as long as it remains inside the intact armor packages, there's no need to worry too much. Well, it emits a little radiation, doesn't particularly bother the tankers, and doesn't shorten their lives, so that's fine.

It's a different matter if the armor package was breached by an enemy shell. In that case, the tank crew, lacking respiratory protection, could be seriously ill and inhale uranium dust—nothing to speak of. And what about those in the immediate vicinity of the tank at the time? Dust and shrapnel fly not only inside the vehicle but also outward.

Popular rumor in this matter does not stand out for its pluralism of opinions and clearly states that everyone is dancing, everyone will breathe it in, and of course, everyone will die. Or they'll suffer serious health damage—it's a matter of luck. But is this true?

There are no complete and detailed reports on this topic.


Americans can hardly be called irresponsible fools in tank design, guided by the "chance" principle. When incorporating such a controversial material as depleted uranium into their tank armor, they meticulously assessed all the obvious and "indirect" risks of its combat use. This included situations such as friendly units being struck by a cloud of uranium dust from a penetrated Abrams tank.

Let's be clear: there are simply no full and detailed reports on this case publicly available. However, there is one interesting document that has surfaced briefly online, titled "Radiological Contamination Resulting from Penetration of Abrams Heavy Armor from Aberdeen Proving Ground," dated December 1989.

As part of the experiments described in this document, an M1A1 tank (apparently Heavy Armor - a modification with first-generation uranium armor) was fired at with a wide variety of projectiles, including anti-tank missiles and even mines. All of this, of course, was classified, since no country would simply share this data.


However, given the secrecy, the general conclusions of this report, without any reference to specific munitions, were nevertheless published on a website dedicated to the Persian Gulf War and officially supported by the US government (gulflink.fhpr.osd.mil). This may have been due to pressure from military personnel who fought in Iraq, or perhaps due to the passage of time.

Some results of the shelling


What are these conclusions?

The main and most obvious one is that, yes, the Abrams' uranium armor can generously shower the area around the tank with depleted uranium. To assess the extent of the dispersion, the tank was fired upon on a concrete pad, to avoid digging around in the soil later, searching for pieces of the dangerous armor component. This firing revealed that the maximum concentration of deposited armor components was observed at a distance of 5-7 meters from the tank. Individual fragments were projected as far as 76 meters from the vehicle.

The situation is certainly not entirely clear-cut. On the one hand, we see that it's best to stay away from the tank under any circumstances. On the other hand, it's completely unclear what concentration of uranium dust a person near the tank could potentially inhale or ingest when a shell hits it.


These points can be clarified by the results of tests in which, before firing, special air samplers were installed at different distances from the tank to measure the concentration of dust.

For example, at a distance of 200 meters from the target, the sampler, caught in the dust cloud from the penetrated armor for a few seconds, recorded the maximum amount of depleted uranium—0,82 micrograms—that a person could potentially inhale. This is literally a trace amount. At that time, the uranium inhalation limits for civilians in the United States were 190 micrograms per day for soluble uranium, which is absorbed into the blood, and 3,8 micrograms for insoluble uranium, which remains in the body for many years.

At distances of 10 to 100 meters from the tank, but outside the uranium dust cloud, uranium concentrations in the air were also assessed as negligible. That is, they also did not exceed the maximum exposure limits for the US population and therefore posed no threat, even in the long term.

The maximum dose of depleted uranium that could have been inhaled by a person standing within 10 meters of a tank in the dust cloud's trajectory (if they were unlucky and the wind was blowing toward them) was 280 micrograms of a mixture of soluble and insoluble uranium armor particles. Given the limits of inhalable uranium for the general population and the results of previous tests, this dose may seem significant. However, it can be characterized as "high, but not lethal."

Such quantities of depleted uranium cannot have any obvious toxic effects on the body. The risk of developing cancer from radioactivity (primarily alpha radiation) at such doses is also low. Essentially, the most one can do is undergo medical examinations at regular intervals to be on the safe side.

Research was also conducted on the possible resuspension of uranium dust after shells had struck tank armor. In other words, the experimenters tested whether dust particles that had already settled on the ground and tank surfaces could be re-aired by wind and other factors at concentrations dangerous to those nearby. The tests showed that there was no overall danger—there would be resuspension, but the uranium concentrations were safe.

The Dangers of Armor for Welders


And, of course, we can't help but at least briefly touch on the dangers of depleted uranium for welders. These specialists, while repairing tanks and welding patches to cover holes in the Abrams' armor, could theoretically also be exposed to uranium. It's best to simply quote the conclusions from the summary of that document (machine translation via ChatGPT):

Test data from a typical "combat" welding operation—welding a steel patch over a hole in heavy armor—showed that the operation lasted approximately 20 minutes. The surface was not decontaminated. Contamination levels exceeded the "unrestricted access" limit (3 × 10⁻¹² microcuries/mL uranium), but never exceeded the "restricted area" limit (7 × 10⁻¹¹ microcuries/mL).

No local exhaust ventilation was used during welding. The report notes: "Even if DU levels in the air during welding had exceeded the restricted area limit, the welder would likely still not have received an overdose: exposure is calculated based on the actual working time. Typical patch installation takes approximately 20 minutes." However, the welder should still use a respirator in accordance with the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle and take precautions against other welding hazards, such as iron oxide fumes.

Conclusions


Naturally, all the information presented in this material applies to the Abrams with first-generation uranium armor. The situation may have changed somewhat with the advent of updated armor packages. However, there is no clear basis for believing that the latest M1A2 modifications have become local "mini-Chernobyls."

However, even if the uranium dust concentration doubles in all the cases considered, it won't be a death sentence for the soldiers who happened to be near the tank when its armor was penetrated. Statistically, the likelihood of contracting some kind of disease may increase, but in any case, it will remain at the level of "there is a risk, but it's moderate or negligible."

So, it's safe to say that American Abrams tanks with uranium armor are relatively safe for those on the outside. It's relatively safe because, theoretically, someone could actually get sick from ingesting the same uranium dust, but the likelihood is extremely low. While there are some recommendations to cordon off the area around a damaged tank and handle it wearing personal protective equipment, this is akin to "better safe than sorry."

The source of information:
Fliszar, Richard W., Edward F. Wilsey, and Ernest W. Bloore, Radiological Contamination from Impacted Abrams Heavy Armor, Technical Report BRL-TR-3068, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Ballistic Research Laboratory, December 1989.
26 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    25 November 2025 04: 16
    Dress the welder in a spacesuit as if working with titanium in a vacuum.😁😁😁😁!
    1. +2
      25 November 2025 04: 46
      And don't hang around near the damaged Abrash stop
      1. 0
        26 November 2025 09: 49
        No, we just need to pass a global law – Abrams missiles can't be shot down! No one. Under threat of the strictest sanctions. In the name of environmental protection...
    2. 0
      30 November 2025 17: 03
      Titanium is not welded in a vacuum, but in special chambers filled with pure argon. 😁
      1. 0
        1 December 2025 12: 22
        The Atmosphere chamber in the Ts22 TAPOiCh, welding chassis parts into a single unit. The welder appears to be wearing a spacesuit.
  2. -2
    25 November 2025 05: 47
    What is the concentration of uranium dust that a person near the tank could potentially inhale or swallow? at the moment when the shell hit him.

    Fine uranium powder is pyrophoric—it ignites spontaneously in air; it ignites at a temperature of 150–175 °C, forming U3O8.
    (Wikipedia)

    Something's not quite right with the temperature.
  3. BAI
    +5
    25 November 2025 06: 20
    Americans can hardly be called irresponsible fools in tank design, guided by the "chance" principle. When incorporating such a controversial material as depleted uranium into their tank armor, they meticulously assessed all the obvious and "indirect" risks of its combat use. This included situations such as friendly units being struck by a cloud of uranium dust from a penetrated Abrams tank.

    In 2023 there was the following information:

    The Pentagon is currently locked in court due to numerous lawsuits from tank crews who contracted cancer during the Iraq campaign.
    1. +3
      25 November 2025 08: 26
      Quote: BAI
      The Pentagon is currently locked in court due to numerous lawsuits from tank crews who contracted cancer during the Iraq campaign.

      This was a statement by a certain Yuri Krutov. He's a "military expert" who made his career in the media after 2022. How he knows this apparently secret information (since such information is impossible to find in open sources, and he doesn't cite anything) about such lawsuits is unclear. Generally speaking, it's common practice in the States for certain groups to regularly sue the Pentagon; the States love to sue everyone.
      In general, the general consensus regarding uranium armor and shells in open sources is that they don't pose any particular harm, and the cancer rates in Serbia or Iraq aren't incredibly high. War zones, during and after battles, are often plagued by many more dangerous substances—spilled chemicals, fuel, unexploded ordnance, and so on.
      1. BAI
        +3
        25 November 2025 08: 42
        There is not only Knutov:
        Several thousand US and British soldiers who used these weapons were found to have liver and kidney problems, as well as low blood pressure. It turned out that when a depleted uranium warhead hits, it creates a toxic cloud of fine dust and trace elements that settles wherever it can.

        In Iraqi territories heavily contaminated with uranium, the incidence of premature births, spontaneous abortions, birth defects, leukemia, and other cancers increased three- to fourfold. Congenital defects—absence of eyes, ears, fused fingers and blood vessels, etc.—were found in more than 60% of children born to American Gulf War veterans.
        1. +1
          25 November 2025 22: 52
          Quote: BAI
          Several thousand US and British soldiersThose who used this weapon were found to have liver and kidney problems, as well as low blood pressure. It turned out that what if it hits A depleted uranium warhead produces a toxic cloud of fine dust and trace elements that settles wherever it falls.

          I don't get it now. Were the Iraqis firing uranium-tipped shells at them? laughing
      2. 0
        25 November 2025 10: 10
        In a combat zone, during and after battles, there are many more other dangerous things - spilled chemicals, fuel, unexploded ordnance, etc.

        And tons of spent shells with depleted uranium...
        The question is how contaminated the area where the destroyed tank is. The tank will be torn away, but the contamination there will remain. Incidentally, the tank itself is ultimately unfit even for remelting.
        1. 0
          25 November 2025 11: 06
          Well, it seems the article states that when a tank is hit, the concentration in the most dangerous place is lower than what we encounter when living in a normal city.
          Reports of some wild cancer surge in Serbia or Iraq also contradict research. The possibility of Abrams being reinstated after a defeat is laughable and unfounded; they were reinstated in 1991, 2003, and later. Is there any data from actual studies, not from the "hooray-clickbait" media?
      3. 0
        25 November 2025 11: 40
        there is a general opinion that they do not cause any particular harm,


        They do, but no more so than other heavy metal dust. For example, lead, when inhaled, is oh so harmful. War is generally harmful to health.

        In terms of dust, depleted uranium shells are much more dangerous. As they pass through armor, the depleted uranium gradually wears away, creating the dust they create.
  4. -1
    25 November 2025 07: 20
    Thinking about the damage done to uranium armor and the amount of uranium dust inhaled while the Abrams is under fire is probably the last thing the crew will do.
    Another attempt to stretch an owl onto a globe; it's strange that there's no research on the prohibition of licking and gnawing uranium armor and using it as a grill for cooking.
  5. +1
    25 November 2025 08: 38
    Oh, I remember how many spears were broken because of the photo in the header in the comments. ) Not on VO, but in general.
    Unlucky Cojone EH which was filmed from different angles and presented as a multitude of destroyed Abrams.
  6. +3
    25 November 2025 08: 53
    This is 280 micrograms of a mixture of soluble and insoluble uranium armor particles. Given the limits for inhalable uranium for the general population and the results of previous tests, this dose may seem significant. However, it can be characterized as "high, but not lethal."
    Such quantities of depleted uranium cannot have any clearly expressed toxic effects on the body.

    In the comments to the previous article, I was told horror stories about almost a single breath of radon, and now here it is, I don’t want to breathe... laughing
    Although I wouldn’t trust American research so much, why would they need the truth if it’s bad for their image?
    1. +2
      25 November 2025 09: 25
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Although I wouldn’t trust the Americans’ research so much,

      Let them continue to use it to their heart's content; that's their business. If this armor isn't used, then the question of its safety is purely academic.
    2. +1
      25 November 2025 22: 56
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Although I wouldn't trust the Americans' research so much.

      And that's right! Believe it! their "researchers" laughing
  7. +3
    25 November 2025 09: 05
    Well, it produces a little noise, doesn't bother the tankers too much, doesn't shorten their lives, and that's fine.
    It seems like it doesn't shorten the time. The idea of ​​using depleted uranium in both shells and armor is a very poor, harmful, and dangerous one. But from an economic standpoint, it's justified: where to put the waste?
    1. 0
      25 November 2025 19: 04
      Quote: Alexander Odintsov
      But from an economic point of view it is justified: where to put the waste?

      It's an electrically conductive metal. It's certainly possible to make useful and safe things out of it, including industrial applications, such as microwave waveguides, busbars, capacitors, magnetic cores, and heat and energy recuperators. Copper, for example, is being replaced by aluminum in electrical machine windings due to its cost.
  8. +2
    25 November 2025 09: 17
    the welder probably wouldn't have received an overdose anyway:

    A welder plays a lab mouse, like Mickey 17, in South Korean director Bong Joon Ho's film.
  9. 0
    25 November 2025 11: 36
    Depleted uranium is not radioactive.
    In no form whatsoever.
    But its dust is carcinogenic. It can cause cancer.
    That's it.

    For the same reason, asbestos was banned at the time.
    1. +4
      25 November 2025 16: 31
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For the same reason, asbestos was banned at the time.

      Not all asbestos is the same. The carcinogenicity of some asbestos was merely a pretext for banning all types, and the reason, as always, was money.

      The navy has turned into a complete circus. A company is hired, "experts" take samples (a very limited number), find traces of asbestos in some gasket, and compile a report. The crew dons chemical suits and heroically replaces and disposes of the unfortunate gasket in a special bag. A photo report is compiled, and the ship receives an "Asbestos-Free" certificate.

      It's about the same with freons, only from the side view.
    2. 0
      1 January 2026 18: 58
      Depleted uranium is uranium with an increased content of 238U. 238U is a weakly radioactive, but still radioactive, isotope that decays through alternating alpha and beta decays to 206Pb. Its half-life is 4,5 x 10^9 years.
  10. +1
    25 November 2025 18: 51
    On the other hand, it is completely unclear what concentration of uranium dust could potentially be inhaled or swallowed by a person standing near a tank at the moment a shell hit it.
    He won't care anymore. And if he's far enough away that a shell hitting a tank won't affect him, he won't care either, but in a good way.
  11. 0
    3 February 2026 08: 34
    And aren't Bradley-class armor-piercing shells made of depleted uranium? If so, then the entire Donbas is contaminated with American carcinogens.