Key Points – The M1 Abrams tank, a dominant force for over four decades, faces obsolescence by 2040 according to an Army Science Board report, citing its increasing weight and evolving threats from peer adversaries like China and Russia.
-While the upcoming M1A3 upgrade (based on the current M1A2SEPv3) incorporates improvements and potentially some AbramsX concept technologies like a hybrid engine, it’s viewed as only prolonging the life of an aging design, not restoring dominance.
-With other nations developing next-generation tanks like the Franco-German MGCS, a fundamentally new US main battle tank design is deemed essential for future battlefield relevance.
M1 Abrams Tank: Not So Dominant?
The U.S. Army has dominated the battlefield with the M1 Abrams tank for more than four decades. But the Abrams’ age is starting to show. It is still the top dog, but won’t be for much longer. The Army knows this.
The Army Science Board (ASB) authored a report that cited several reasons the Abrams is losing its status. The ASB concluded that the nearly 45-year-old Abrams is not cut out for the modern battlefield.
“Based on our findings, the M1 Abrams will not dominate the 2040 battlefield. All of the M1’s advantages in mobility, firepower, and protection are at risk. The M1A2 SEP V3&4 upgrades will improve effectiveness but will not restore dominance,” the report said.
By 2040, of course, the Abrams will be 60 years old.
The ASB recommended developing a fifth generation of armored vehicles. For now, the Army will continue to fund the M1 Abrams SEPv3 (System Enhancement Package Version 3) variant. This tank includes advanced technologies such as enhanced infrared detection and a powerful 120mm cannon. It will also include some of the features that had been slated for the scuttled SEPv4. It will be built with a modular design, which makes it easier to incorporate new technology into an older weapon system. Dragging down the tank is its heft—the SEPv3 weighs 72 tons, which is 10 tons more than the original M1 Abrams.
Once testing is complete, it will be named the M1A3 Abrams.
The ASB Didn’t Pull Any Punches on M1 Abrams
The Army Science Board, a sanctioned independent group of experts who advise the Secretary of the Army, was blunt in its report. The ASB also explained why the planned SEPv4 variant was inadequate for future warfare.
The study, which took several years to complete, concluded that the Abrams tank would not be usable in operations after 2040.
“Near transparency in all domains will significantly increase the lethality our forces will experience. China and Russia have studied our forces and doctrine and are fielding countermeasures. We will continue to have to fight outnumbered, exacerbated by a low MBT operational readiness rate and an aging fleet,” the Army Science Board report said.
The report added that “we will continue to be outnumbered, which is exacerbated by a low MBT operational readiness rate and an aging fleet.”
General Dynamics Working On The AbramsX
All the new technology attached to an already heavy tank is making it increasingly difficult to move. The planned SEPv4 upgrades had the Abrams weighing about 80 tons.
General Dynamics, which has built Abrams tanks for more than 40 years, is developing another tank in the Abrams family, the Abrams X, but currently there is no plan to produce it. Still, some of the designs could eventually be used for the M1A3, which is more lightly armored and weighs 59 tons.
The hybrid powertrain is one feature of the AbramsX that should be incorporated into the M1A3. General Dynamics says this would result in a whopping 50 percent fuel savings, which is an attractive option, because the Abrams is a notorious gas guzzler. This hybrid system would also allow the AbramsX to operate silently while sitting idle, and possibly even for short durations at low speed. Silence would provide a huge tactical advantage.
A new main gun and advanced munitions, such as maneuvering hypersonic and gun-launched anti-tank guided missiles, that are proposed for the AbramsX, should be considered.
The Poor Showing In Ukraine Was The Fault of Tactics
The first M1A1 Abrams tanks delivered to Ukraine took a beating. But this was not because of any shortcomings of the tank; it was due to tactics. The Ukrainians don’t really understand the way the Americans fight and use their armor.
The Abrams was designed to work within U.S. combined-arms doctrine, which dictates close cooperation among mechanized forces, infantry, artillery, and air power. Because Ukraine didn’t operate that way, Russian anti-tank missiles and drones took an unnecessary toll.
Due to manpower and equipment shortages, Ukrainian Abrams tanks often entered combat alone, without the support of infantry or other armor. Abrams tanks are easy pickings for Russian anti-tank crews in these disadvantageous conditions.
The Ukrainians didn’t take to the Abrams’ 120mm main gun, stating that it is not effective against buildings. Ukrainian tankers claimed they fired 17 rounds into a building without destroying it, but that dog just won’t hunt.
“That’s BS,” Lieutenant General (Ret.) Mark Hertling said to CNN last summer. “I know for a fact, having fired these vehicles and having been a tanker all my life, that this is a crew that is not either selecting the right weapon system or isn’t maintaining their tanks very well.”
The M1A3 Is Just Prolonging The Inevitable
The upgrades mentioned here for the M1A3 do not produce a new tank; they just prolong the life of an older design. But the M1 Abrams family of tanks is aging, and it is time for a new design. The Abrams will still be an outstanding tank for the next 10 years, but the Army needs to work on a new approach now.
France and Germany, for example, are collaborating to create the Main Ground Combat System, or MGCS. The Franco-German tank program will also incorporate a modular design, and it will include manned and unmanned options. However, its main gun may add other new technology, including electromagnetic weapon systems, laser weapons, and electronic warfare capabilities.
US Army M1 Abrams Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
M1 Abrams Tank. Image Credit: US Marine Corp.
U.S. Soldiers assigned to 1st Squadron, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, sit ready to engage targets in an M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank during Combined Resolve XV live fire exercise at Grafenwoehr Training Area, Germany, Feb. 9, 2021. Combined Resolve XV is a Headquarters Department of the Army directed Multinational exercise designed to build 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Divisions’s readiness and enhance interoperability with allied forces to fight and win against any adversary. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Randis Monroe)
U.S. Army Soldiers, assigned to 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, maneuver their M1A2 Abrams tank to avoid indirect fire during training at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Oct. 7, 2016.
“The technological breakthroughs are going to be brutal,” French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu has said.
The MGCS may take a decade or more to field. By then, the Abrams will be outmoded; it is time to prepare.
About the Author:
Steve Balestrieri is a 19FortyFive National Security Columnist. He served as a US Army Special Forces NCO and Warrant Officer. In addition to writing for 19FortyFive, he covers the NFL for PatsFans.com and is a member of the Pro Football Writers of America (PFWA). His work was regularly featured in many military publications.
