M1 Abrams Developments and News

Has anyone come across a good visual size comparison between the XM291's 140mm shells and those of the Rheinmetall 130mm? Including the 140mm ASCALON in that mix would be good too.

All of this has me wondering what the US Army is up (if anything) regarding new tank guns. Only recent development I can think of is the XM360 which is just a lightweight 120mm and not exactly "new".

I'll admit that given recent events one can make a strong argument we don't need anything larger than the 120mm. Though the French and Germans seem to think otherwise.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Has anyone come across a good visual size comparison between the XM291's 140mm shells and those of the Rheinmetall 130mm? Including the 140mm ASCALON in that mix would be good too.

All of this has me wondering what the US Army is up (if anything) regarding new tank guns. Only recent development I can think of is the XM360 which is just a lightweight 120mm and not exactly "new".

I'll admit that given recent events one can make a strong argument we don't need anything larger than the 120mm. Though the French and Germans seem to think otherwise.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more, and think/thought Army was on the same page.
Moving up to 130/140mm is just not necessary! (XM360 more than just light 120mm, ETC ignition is more efficient/burns charge more completely allowing for higher pressures of ~17-20 bar, which = more range/speed/pen/etc.)
Unmanned turret housing XM360 and Autoloader, with 3-man crew in better armored hull.
Keep the weight to ~50-55 tons MAX in full up-armored combat-mode.
The passive armor of the hull should be capable of stopping 30mm AP and RPG's and anything with more penetrating capability will be stopped with APS with multiple reloads...!
 
Is the Abrams still in production with completly newly build tanks and will the polish be of bespoke method.
 
Anybody know if they're building new or if they're just adding new bells and whistles?
 
Sferrin said:
It will make self-defense much more important, that's for sure. But I'd think if you could shoot down ATGMs and KE penetrators, a drone would be a piece of cake.
Click to expand...
The billion drone military looks like where this is all heading. Not enough situation awareness buttoned up, too many exposed gadgets easily damaged by small explosives.

I hate drones.

Robert Scales predicted in the 90s a battlefield of persistent surveillance making movement almost impossible. His solution of Air Mech was crap but he did predict the frozen battlefield.
 
Bruno Anthony said:
The billion drone military looks like where this is all heading. Not enough situation awareness buttoned up, too many exposed gadgets easily damaged by small explosives.

I hate drones.

Robert Scales predicted in the 90s a battlefield of persistent surveillance making movement almost impossible. His solution of Air Mech was crap but he did predict the frozen battlefield.
Click to expand...
Azerbaijan-Armenia showed that MALE drones are the "future".
Less than a year later they were "obsolete".

The modern battlefield is anything but frozen.
And persistent surveillance is neither a universal reality nor becoming one.
 
Big_Zukini said:
Azerbaijan-Armenia showed that MALE drones are the "future".
Less than a year later they were "obsolete".

The modern battlefield is anything but frozen.
And persistent surveillance is neither a universal reality nor becoming one.
Click to expand...
Yeah lots of movement in Ukr.

“Manned vehicles prepared to make huge comeback!”
 
Big_Zukini said:
Azerbaijan-Armenia showed that MALE drones are the "future".
Less than a year later they were "obsolete".

The modern battlefield is anything but frozen.
And persistent surveillance is neither a universal reality nor becoming one.
Click to expand...
The rise, demise, obsolescence and resurgence of many things have been predicted over the last century in a military context, only a fraction came true.

What I always find weird is how people imply that drones make tanks obsolete when drones are just genuinely worse ATGMs in practice. Cheaper for sure, but also less effective. For every footage of a hit you see out there, you don't see the several misses, malfunctions and just genuinely nothing happening. And as with ATGMs, slow flying drones are just something which will see a countermeasure developed overtime. Currently that's makeshift stuff like roof installations or jammers, eventually it will be genuine close in weapons systems which will actively and autonomously engage incoming drones and most likely rounds as well. So slowly but surely you expand the existing layers of survivability. From layout to composite armor to ERA to APS to electronic countermeasures and CIWS.

So the US army would be wise to not neuter their tank force, even though it would be less relevant against an adversary as China, it would be naive to think that's the only possibility for any future war the US will engage in.

Tanks are rather resilient pieces of kit, even these days.
 
Josh_TN said:
Arguing that Ukraine is the future of all armored combat is kinda like saying “if you liked the movie ‘Twisters’, you will love ‘Gone With The Wind’!”
Click to expand...
Lmk who the USArmy is apparently agreeing with more. How’s the M10 doing?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom