A Ukrainian tank crew says the US-supplied Abrams is still viable on the front lines, but the tank-on-tank battles where it excels have been few and far between.
Pentagon officials in late April told the Associated Press that Ukraine was pulling back its Abrams tanks from the heaviest areas of fighting because Russian drones were making them more difficult to defend
by JesusMcTurnip
20 comments
Bradleys for the win!
[deleted]
The last great tank battle that the world might ever
see again or at least for a very long time is the Siege of Chernihiv.
Also they’re simply aren’t the same frequency of massive enemy armor columns as there was to start the war, and by the time other huge armored assaults on places such as Vuhledar and Avdiivka happened, there was a trove of data indicating there more ways than ever to efficiently destroy tanks.
Plus its unofficial fighting partner in the M2 Bradley isn’t just an IFV it’s a pseudo tank destroyer too.
Not surprising when it seems like a $50 grenade can trash most Ruzzian tanks.
Far better to keep the Abrams for the breakthrough to the Ruzzian border.
Drones really are the future. Tanks will always have some purpose but will never have as strong as an importance as they have had in the past.
I understand this is the same reason the challenger isn’t excelling. The Ukrainians call it a tank sniper, but it isn’t amazing at lobbing HE into fortifications, which is the majority of the work.
Where are the damn Challengers !
Well duh, all russias tanks are getting destroyed
It is a great tank, but has to be used properly. I hope we can send Ukraine more of them.
Russians literally don’t want to fight it because they know for a fact it will body their tanks every day if the week.
This doesn’t surprise me as much of the best Russian armor has already been destroyed. Abrams are primarily designed for engaging large armored formations that could overwhelm lesser AT weapons. It can handily dispatch obsolete T-72s and BMPs, but those are vulnerable to any number of widely available AT weapons and get taken out well before any thought is given to calling for Abrams. Keeping them in reserve to punish any Russian attempts to advance with concentrated armored forces is the obvious usage. This will also limit their losses so they can be used in a hypothetical future offensive alongside other top-tier MBTs when conditions permit it.
There are not that many of them guys, less than 100 for a gigantic frontline. There a t90 all over but you dont get to use Abrams willy nilly.
More BRADLEYS
It makes sense. Russians know that they’re at a huge disadvantage against Abrahams tanks so if they know they’re there, they’re not going to engage.
I saw a pretty good video on the challengers a while ago and iirc the big summary on why we aren’t seeing tons of them opening up T90s etc is because the ruzzians know they’re out matched and the second they hear ones operating in the area they run away and don’t confront it (and the lack of sufficient numbers/spares/repair times etc related to the UK amongst other things).
Basically, they’re a great bit of a kit and do a kick-ass job but the opportunities for them to do what they do best are few-and-far between because the enemy won’t face them directly.
Probably the same for Abrams.
That’s because they’re hiding their tanks, or they just dont have any tanks left. this is where air support (F16, Mi-17 hind) comes into play with Bradley’s….
Yes the drones are detrimental to the war effort and they do a damn lot, however more firepower this way, keep the drones launching but start with the Infantry fighting tactics…
This is a damn good sign that Russia is running out of armour with enough support, supplies and suppression Bradley’s and Helo support with some good old Jdams will help shred through bunkered down russians. Soften them up with some Cluster Arty first.
Genuinely I can see Ukraine getting hold of this war mid summer.
Sadly alot of russians will die. Its sad because this from the start was a pointless war. Thinking of those that actually don’t want to be in the war.
However I hope Ukraine fucks them up over and over
SLAVA UKRAINE
Tanks have mostly been reduced to glorified short range artillery systems. Lighter cheaper vehicles with faster rate of fire, like the Bradley, are better for troop support and mobile defense. Tanks would be great for an actual offensive, but Ukraine got not anywhere near the quantity nor types of resources to conduct one.
Tank-on-golf carts maybe ?
Abrams is a 40 year old tank design, and it’s a big mofo. it runs hot and it’s a large target so it’s not difficult to find.
I’m not too surprised the drone wars have made life hard for the Abrams. Bradley is definitely a better fit for Ukraine’s real needs.
Frankly if this war proved one thing it’s that the heavy MBT is going the way of the battleship, and for roughly the same reason.
I wouldn’t be too surprised if the newest generation of armor developed more in the direction of the medium tank rather than the MBT. Higher focus on maneuverability and survivability rather than absolute forward gun firepower in other words.
Same with Challanger 2’s. They are both way too heavy and limited where they can go, making their movements more predictable. They are also not designed to protect against drone warfare, so both are actually bigger liabilities than benefits. Bradley’s and M113’s have proven to be indispensable though.