this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
112 points (99.1% liked)

technology

23303 readers
363 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] buh@hexbear.net 52 points 5 months ago (1 children)

“Its armour is not sufficient for this moment,” said one crew member with the callsign Joker.

jokerfied

[–] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 42 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

Yes Ukraine is getting the export version of the Abrams with all the classified depleted uranium armour removed. This is a huge difference in armour protection levels. The difference between export and domestic models in tanks are stark, just look at how Iraqi T-72 export tanks faired in the Gulf war, vs domestic Eastern German T-72 tanks in tests against Western weapons after German reunification. Same thing is happening here. The export model Abrams has much less protection.

[–] nat_turner_overdrive@hexbear.net 46 points 5 months ago (2 children)

There's definitely that, but in another article that was posted recently a Ukrainian abrams crewman says the fucking things don't work well in fog and rain because condensation shorts out the electronics. I'm sure these aren't well maintained hardware but that's just a ridiculous design flaw that could only "work" if your tanks only ever spend time in the desert.

[–] TrashGoblin@hexbear.net 35 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Ukrainian crews say the fundamental problem is that the Abrams were built for advances aided by air power and artillery, which Ukraine lacks.

It seems to me like this might be the absolute biggest problem.

[–] nat_turner_overdrive@hexbear.net 36 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The entire NATO military doctrine mandates air superiority and despite all the wonderweapons, the US can only achieve air superiority against shpeherds

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 19 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

base your entire military doctrine around air superiority

fight the other former superpower that also knows this and therefore has world leading air defence

??????
all my tanks broke

There's gotta be like 100 US STRATCOM guys shitting, pissing, screaming about this exact scenario to no avail as they keep sending more equipment that gets owned by a by some late 70s soviet stockpile shit with an accountable value of "Wait, why do we still have this?"

[–] PaulSmackage@hexbear.net 10 points 5 months ago

"wait, why do we still have this?"

"Hey boss, found this in the back of the shed. Think it's useful?"

[–] Findom_DeLuise@hexbear.net 14 points 5 months ago

The subsonic Batman plane that can't fly in the rain will get there when it gets there, OK?

[–] Adkml@hexbear.net 22 points 5 months ago

All of Americas combat doctrine assumes you're doing strafing runs on rural farmers and have total air superiority.

We have no idea how to fight an actual peer.

[–] aaaaaaadjsf@hexbear.net 31 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The export models also have different electronics as well, as some of the lastest sights/night vision is also classified. So likely some contractor did a shoddy job changing out the electronics for the non classified stuff, so everything shorts out, or the tank wasn't designed for it in the first place. It's definitely a ridiculous design flaw if the entire tank shorts out when changing electronic systems out.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 33 points 5 months ago

They have also veen in service since 1980. Western countries have just been unloading all their shitty old inventory on Ukraine. I would be shocked if any of the tabks Ukraine received are less than 20 years old

[–] Staines@hexbear.net 35 points 5 months ago

The classified natoid armour was removed from frontal aspects that are designed to defeat APFSDS rounds in tank vs tank combat. Meanwhile, Russian drones are hitting spots that never had that armour in the first place by going for weakspots like the roof or the poorly protected ammo compartment at the back of the turret.

Even if these tanks were rolling around with their original armour, it wouldn't have saved any of the tanks that have been defeated so far. peltier-laugh

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 17 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I get that they bastardize the export models so the enemy can’t reverse engineer it, but man. If your customer is also your supposed close ally, and they’re in the middle of a brutal war, maybe it’s worth giving them advanced technology to win if you actually care lol

[–] Adkml@hexbear.net 24 points 5 months ago

To be America's enemy is dangerous, to be her ally is absolutely fatal.

There is literally no historical or material reason to believe that America gives a single shit about its allies other than whether or not the check clears and if not what industries they'll let us take over.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 20 points 5 months ago

If your customer is also your supposed close ally

debatable

[–] Meh@hexbear.net 13 points 5 months ago

Well I think you hit the nail on the head there. The US clearly doesn't care.

[–] TraschcanOfIdeology@hexbear.net 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I was about to ask this, because what little I know about the Abrams is that it is extremely heavy because it's so armored.

[–] Gucci_Minh@hexbear.net 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's also gigantic, with a focus on crew comfort and survivability. Compare the side profile vs the T-72

The chassis itself lends a lot of weight to the design. The armour on the frontal arc is guesstimated to be thicker in the later variants of the M1A2 vs say a T-90A, but the T-90 is also 20 tons lighter, can actually cross a bridge, and doesn't have the profile of a small house.

Either way none of this matters when a Shahed/Geran/PG-7V tied to a DJI quadcopter can kill any tank.

[–] bbnh69420@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Is this why they were sinking into the ground and annihilating highways year or two ago, or is that just because of mud in Eastern Europe? (I’ve seen plenty of Russian vids with APCs stuck in the muck)

[–] Gucci_Minh@hexbear.net 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The mud is next level and any afv will have trouble with rasputitsa. The mud yields very easily because it's saturated with water, and you would need significantly lower ground pressure to get by, hence the logs on the back of Soviet tanks; tie it to the tracks and have the tank dig itself out.

As for highways, it was probably a combination of the weight as well as poorly maintained/missing rubber track pads.