Tank "Abrams": the legend and reality
Vulnerability analysis tank M1A1 / A2 during use in Iraq in 2003
The Second Iraq War revealed the weaknesses of the American tanks МХNUMXА1 “Abrams” and finally dispelled the myth of its invulnerability, carefully planted during the last decade.
Frontal armor of the tower and corps "Abrams" still provide good protection against anti-tank weapons in service with the Iraqi army. However, side and stern projections remain vulnerable even to grenade launchers developed in the 60s of the last century.

There have also been cases of tanks being disabled by fire from the rear of both the 25 mm cannons of "their" Bradley IFVs and the 30 mm cannons of the BMP-2. It is no secret that, in order to meet the weight limitations, American designers were forced to sacrifice the armor of the hull sides, which provides protection from armor-piercing shells of a 30 mm cannon only at a course angle of +- 30 degrees, where 70 mm thick side screens are installed. The remaining sections of the side are made of 5 mm mild steel, followed by 30 mm of hull armor steel. Such an obstacle is damaged by 30 mm cannons of the BMP-2 from 2000 m (when using armor-piercing sub-caliber shells), when using conventional armor-piercing shells, this distance is slightly lower.
According to foreign experts, PG-7В rocket grenades with probability 55% strike Abrams in the side of the tower and the side of the hull above the rinks. C probability 70% - in the roof of the tower.
It also turned out that the “Abrams” in the field conditions “burn” more fuel than they are supposed to use at a normal rate. There were difficulties with the delivery of spare parts for the failed machines, as a result of which many damaged tanks could not be repaired and they were disassembled into spare parts to repair their more successful counterparts.
According to official sources, the following conclusions can be made about the vulnerability of the Abrams tank based on the actions of the US 3 Mechanized Division:
-Rockets Kornet not found in Iraq
- Top, sides, and rear armor are susceptible to damage.
- Registered cases where 30 mm armor-piercing shells pierced the tank from the rear.
-The left and right side of the side screens, breaks through the RPG.
-Cosmetic damage with the defeat of anti-personnel shots to the RPG.
-Not noted cases of tank damage by anti-tank mines (as opposed to 1991 of the year).
-The hatching panels on the tower were working normally, the registered cases of hitting the combat unit did not result in the death of the crew.
-The engine has demonstrated low reliability and extremely high fire risk.
- For a complete defeat of a tank, an 1 thermite grenade is enough (inwards), a Mayverik 2 missile, or a BPS shot (in the area of the battle pack)
-To deactivate a tank, one RPG shot on the sides of the hull is enough.
The anti-cumulative screens penetrated even the PG-7В grenades (this is one of the oldest types of RPG-7 grenades), and its cumulative jet were enough for screen punch and side armor. There were cases of irretrievable losses due to ignition of auxiliary power units (APU) and / or ignition of tanks with fuel and lubricant reserves, which fell into the engine compartment and thereby ignited the engine. So one Abrams burned (“because of the secondary effect”), which was fired at from an DShK 7-mm machine gun. The bullet hit the left rear of the tower, where the APU is located, pierced the box, disabled the installation, and burning fuel and oil rushed down from it into the logging procurement system. There was a fire of the power plant, which is completely burned out, the tank is not subject to recovery. By the way, about the APU tank "Abrams". Based on the materials of the US Armored Army Directorate (TACOM) and the US Ground Forces Experience Study Center (CALL) of the 12,7 Mechanized Division for 3, the day of the operation with enemy fire, or as a result of friendly fire, the entire 21 Abrams tank and the BMN M23 / MXNNXX tank were hit by the MXN tank and the M1 / M1 tank and the BMN tank "Bradley." Fifteen of them (including nine Abrams and six Bradley) were hit from the RPG-2. One tank of this division as a result of firing from small weapons and, as a result, the uncertain actions of the driver, fell from a bridge into the Tigris River, the crew died.
After the official end of Operation Freedom for Iraq, the losses of coalition armored vehicles not only did not diminish, but on the contrary increased. The main enemy for tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are now anti-tank grenade launchers and land mines, which are installed by Iraqi partisans, on patrol routes of American troops.
For example, 27. 10. 2003 in 40 km from Baghdad, northeast of the city of Ballad, the latest modification of the Abrams tank М1А2 SEP (System Enhanced Package) from the US 4 th division was undermined. The tank was blown up on a self-made bomb, which consisted of several artillery shells. As a result of the explosion, the tank tower flew off to 30 meters.
Also, the tank’s fuel tanks, located in the front of the tank on both sides of the driver, did not confirm their reliability. In both cases, contact with them resulted in the destruction of the tank. In addition to problems resulting from enemy fire, the tank M1A1 also showed low operational reliability and a very high fire hazard.
The presence of a large number of complex and failure-prone systems and subsystems has led to the fact that many machines simply were not able to perform their tasks. According to American experts, such systems include a fire control system, a radio station and other electronic systems, which should be regularly checked and checked after exposure to vibration and strong shocks during a battle.
Firepower
The firepower of the tank was more than enough to defeat outdated Soviet and Chinese tanks. BPS M829 pierced the frontal armor of Iraqi tanks at all distances of fire.
The cumulative M830A1 was used to bombard bunkers and armored vehicles.
The most effective weapon of the Abrams tank in a city battle was an 12,7-mm machine gun mounted on a turret. Usually, Iraqi resistance groups, disguised, allowed tanks and infantry fighting vehicles to a distance of less than 100 m, and then opened salvo fire from large-caliber machine guns and RPGs. In such situations, the 12,7-mm (50 caliber) machine gun mounted on the turret was most effective, hitting the enemy in any light-weight shelters. When the 120-mm tank gun was fired, it was mainly HEAT or MPAT-projectiles that were used. After reports were received regarding the effectiveness of the use of machine guns in close combat in urban environments, a second and sometimes a third machine gun of 7,62-mm caliber began to be installed on the towers.
Back in 2003, there was a case of an Abrams being hit by something not entirely clear. Bugry on bigler.ru came to the conclusion that it was a special bullet fired from an antitank rifle, possibly uranium and/or active-reactive. Well, it had to hit the right spot…
In preparing the data used by the federation of American scientists (www.fas.org) and other open sources.
Information