Another Urban Myth Shattered: American Abrams Tanks Are Easily Shot Down, Too

The Turkish army's massive destruction of Russian-made tanks and armored vehicles in Syria by UCAVs and artillery shells created curiosity and excitement among armies around the world. Because the tanks and armored vehicles were helpless against the UCAVs.  

However, before this incident, the popularity of tanks and armored vehicles was on the rise. Because Russia had occupied parts of Georgia in 2008 and Crimea in 2014 with armored troops in a short time. In other words, armored units had proven their importance on the battlefield. 

As a result, many countries, especially those in Eastern Europe, which were expecting a possible Russian threat, started to increase the number of tanks and armored vehicles. This increased the demand for tanks and armored vehicles and tank producing countries, which had closed most of their workshops, increased their capacity. 

However, things started to get complicated in Syria when armored troops were unable to escape extinction despite fleeing under bridges and in shops on the ground floors of apartment buildings out of fear. Because if tanks and armored vehicles were useless, there was no point in producing or buying them. 

This led to a dilemma about the importance of tanks and armored vehicles. Western military experts began to look for a way out of this dilemma. But instead of accepting the obvious reality, they tried to portray what was happening as an illusion. They continued on this path despite the mass destruction of tanks and armored vehicles in Syria, Libya and then Karabakh. 

Their main argument was that the destroyed tanks were Russian tanks. According to them, Russian tanks were technically weak and, more importantly, they were not used well. This was the reason for the casualties. Western tanks were technologically superior to Russian tanks and Western armies were better trained. Therefore, what happened to Russian-made tanks could not have happened to Western-made tanks. So, tanks and armored vehicles were still useful. So, we should continue to buy tanks and armored vehicles.

However, this was a complete lie, or at least false. Because even the Taliban, who had no proper anti-tank weapons, had managed to damage some Western tanks with IEDs. For example, a Leopard A-2 tank was damaged by IEDs on the roads of Afghanistan. Although the tank crew was not killed, the tank was out of service.

The casualties were not limited to this. The US military had also lost a large number of tanks in the First and Second Gulf Wars, despite the fact that they had air superiority, were facing old and poorly maintained Russian tanks, and that these tanks were misused by the Iraqi army. On the other hand, Israeli Merkava tanks were shot down by Hezbollah in Lebanon and German Leopard tanks by DAESH in al-Bab. In Yemen, American Abrams tanks in the inventory of the Saudi Arabian army were hit. 

However, since these regions are far from the eyes and hearts of the West, the issue has not received much attention. When a large number of Russian-made tanks and armored vehicles were destroyed in Ukraine, the West continued to tell the story that Russian tanks were bad, their soldiers were untrained, and that is why so many tanks and armored vehicles were shot down.

In fact, everyone knew that this was not the case. But it took more blatant examples for them to admit it. And this happened when the tanks given to Ukraine by the US and the Europeans were shot down one after another. After that, articles were written in almost every media analyzing the reasons for this. 

Now, in order to make a contribution to this issue, we will talk about what happened to the US-made Abrams tanks, one of the most ambitious Western tanks in the process mentioned above.  

Brief Information About the Abrams Tank:

Abrams is the main battle tank used by the US Army. It was designed in the 1980s to fight against other tanks. Therefore, it has some shortcomings/weaknesses in its design compared to today's combat conditions where unmanned aerial vehicles and drones are in the air. This tank also has some technical problems.

The most obvious problem with the Abrams is that it is very heavy. It is a really heavy tank and its weight has increased continuously since it was first built. In fact, the tank was originally designed to be 55 tons, but due to attempts to add more armor and additional features to the tank, it is estimated that the new M1A2 tanks will be around 73 tons.

Because the tank is so heavy, it is logistically problematic. For example, it requires more maintenance than lighter tanks. It is difficult to transport by rail because of its weight. It cannot be transported by every tow truck. Since the ground pressure is very high, it cannot move easily in muddy areas. It cannot cross some bridges due to weight limitations. It is difficult to be towed by other tanks. It can only be towed by a few rescue vehicles. 

Despite the additional 15-ton protective upgrade on the top, it does not provide complete protection against anti-tank weapons that hit the tank from the top. It is therefore vulnerable to drones, UCAVs and other weapons that target the top of the tank. Since it is already extremely heavy, it is difficult to add additional armor in the form of a cage on the top. Despite all this, the M1 is not a very bad tank. But it has disadvantages compared to some of its rivals. 

Casualties in the First and Second Iraq (Gulf) Wars:

In the First Iraq War, 10 American tanks were destroyed and 14 were damaged. Seven of the destroyed tanks were destroyed by friendly fire and two were destroyed by their own crews because they were stuck in the mud, preventing them from falling into enemy hands. One was wounded by enemy fire and destroyed by its own crew.

In the Second Iraq War, 17 Abrams tanks were destroyed and 63 were damaged. From March 20 to May 1, 2003, heavy armored vehicles and tanks were mainly used to secure the main roads from Kuwait to Baghdad and the international airport during the invasion operation. Casualties were therefore limited.

The invasion of Iraq was followed by the reconstruction phase, which officially ended in 2011, during which tanks were used to secure supply routes, establish checkpoints and support infantry in urban areas. Of these, tanks and armored vehicles suffered a high number of casualties, particularly in urban battles. 

As tanks are designed to fight against other tanks, insurgents and terrorists fired at the lightly armored upper and rear engine compartments of tanks that were vulnerable in urban areas. The tracks were destroyed by IEDs, which immobilized the tanks and allowed the Iraqis to attack with machine guns, RPGs and mortars. During the invasion, nine Abrams tanks were hit by RPGs alone, one of which was completely disabled.

In the two years after the invasion, more than 1,100 Abrams tanks were deployed to Iraq. Of these, 70% were hit by enemy fire and 80 of them were seriously wounded and sent to the US for repair. In the first three years, 530 tanks were sent to the US for refurbishment due to excessive wear and damage.

Casualties in Yemen:

When the Saudis intervened in Yemen in 2016, they also used American M1A2 tanks. But as soon as the operation began, they lost a large number of tanks. According to some claims, as many as 25 tanks were hit, and according to others, as many as 400. Which of these is true is not so important. What is important is that the Houthis, who are not even wearing boots, slippers or sandals, were able to quickly neutralize so many tanks with simple weapons. 

But for some reason, everyone ignored this. And those who talked about it tried to whitewash the tank instead of reflecting the reality. The first excuse they gave was that the tanks used by the Sudis were cheaper than the original and therefore had some significant disadvantages. The Abrams sold to the Saudis allegedly used an older generation of composite armor instead of depleted uranium net armor.

The second excuse was the same story that is told every time a Western tank is shot down. According to this story, a tank is only a good tank with a good crew. If an Abrams is operated by a poorly trained crew, it is likely to be blown up in the open by a guided anti-tank missile. When this crew moves the tank forward without infantry support, the result is disastrous.

Abrams Tanks Take Center Stage in the Ukrainian War: 

The US sent M1A1s to Ukraine, even though it now uses M1A2s, the advanced model of the Abrams. It is claimed that this was due to logistical problems. The M1A2 Abrams is technically much more advanced than the M1A1 and needs more logistical support.

Leopard 2s entered the Ukrainian battlefield first and were soon being shot at. This showed that Western tanks, even if better than their Russian counterparts, were not indestructible. The same was likely to happen to Abrams Tanks.  

The problem of damaged Leopard 2 tanks was relatively easy to solve. In fact, the wounded were sent to Poland to be repaired. Depending on the damage, after a while they would be repaired and returned to Ukrainian territory. Because many European countries used them, the logistics system, spare parts and repair knowledge were available.

A damaged Leopard tank

Abrams M1A1 Tank

The same cannot be said for Abrams. Almost no country in Europe uses Abrams tanks. Only Poland bought a number of Abrams tanks and would soon have the infrastructure to repair them. For this reason, it was deemed appropriate to use M1A1 tanks, which require less logistical support. 

Moreover, the M1A1s had previously proven their competence against Russian tanks. For example, during the Gulf Wars, the M1A1 tank was able to outmaneuver Iraq's Soviet-made tanks. So there was no problem for Ukraine to use the M1A1 until some logistics centers were built for the M1A2. 

The Abrams M1A1 tank is a tank with generally good armor protection. Against HEAT warheads, the frontal part of its hull can withstand a penetration of 2171 mm. Other parts of the frontal profile have an effective protection thickness from 775 mm to 1580 mm. Although there are a few nooks and crannies in the front that create weak points, most modern anti-tank guided missiles have problems (at least in theory) penetrating the turret or hull.

The M1 Abrams Myth Collapsed in the First Impact:

Ukraine launched a general counteroffensive in June, but the US did not send Abrams tanks in time and they were unable to participate. The US was able to send 32 M1A1 tanks only in September. The tanks were refurbished and upgraded to M1a2 specifications before being sent to Ukraine. 

Since then, these tanks have not participated in any conflict. This is because they were used for protection missions around Kiev, away from the main battle line.  But when the situation around the town of Avdiivka became critical, a small Abrams unit was sent to the area. However, this unit did not reach Avdiivka in time. When the town fell, it was organized around the village of Berdychi, where it fought its first battles. 

As can be seen from the footage posted on social media platforms, this tank unit lost three Abrams tanks and two M1150 armored engineering vehicles in the first battle in Berdychi. One of the tanks was hit by FPV drones, another by a Kornet anti-tank guided missile and the last one by a T-72 tank.

These images created a great shock. Because it dealt a major blow to the myth that Abrams tanks are better than Russian tanks. As mentioned above, the Western "rules-based world order" was centered on the myth of the invincibility of the West, especially America. Europeans, like Americans, believed in this myth with equal or even greater religious devotion. 

This belief persisted even though American weapons had been discredited on the battlefield for some time. This was because these developments were taking place in places like Yemen, where most Western viewers were not paying attention. Therefore, not many people were paying attention to the casualties. And those who did take notice persisted in their beliefs, making excuses instead of accepting the facts.

These excuses centered on the incompetence of Middle Eastern tank crews and the fact that casualties were caused by poor handling. Therefore, the losses could be ignored. Another excuse was that tanks were used independently, unprotected by infantry. However, no country yet has an infantry screen that can magically block a guided anti-tank missile fired from 6-8 kilometers away. 

The destruction of three Abrams tanks in Ukraine, one of which was hit with a single shot by a Russian T-72 tank, was enough to invalidate almost all of these excuses. For the Abrams were not being used by backward Middle Easterners, but by white soldiers trained by the Americans.

Moreover, it happened at night, which destroyed another myth of American invincibility, namely that the US military (and, by extension, the Abrams) has the best night-vision equipment and optics in the world. 

Those who fail to grasp the significance of this continue to evade reality by downplaying this event. Especially Westerners, who cannot accept this humiliation, are trying to trivialize it. Because if they accept the facts, they would be admitting that when American and Russian weapons face each other, the Russian weapon prevails.

This is why Western military commentators continue to say that the M1 Abrams tank is a perfectly good fighting machine. According to them, the Abrams is still unquestionably one of the best tanks in the world. Yes, some Abrams may have been shot down, but in Ukraine, not only them but all tanks are struggling to survive. 

New generation anti-tank weapons, including FPV drones and modern anti-tank guided missiles, are inflicting massive damage on tanks on both sides. It may be true that the performance of the Abrams has been disappointing, but these tanks are no worse than other tanks in terms of disappointment. There is nothing wrong with the Abrams itself. It is a good tank, one of the best, but it is still just a tank, not an invincible machine. 

Alongside these defensive approaches, of course, there are those who mock those who refuse to accept reality. As the figure below shows, there are even cartoons depicting Abrams tanks as radioactive coffins and mocking the fact that they can be destroyed with very cheap and simple weapons. This cartoon may seem funny to most people. In fact, it is not funny at all, it is the bitter truth.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is possible to say the following: While the anti-tank firepower has become much stronger after the Cold War with the contribution of new technologies, the same rate of development has not been experienced in tanks and armored vehicles, which is why tanks and armored vehicles have recently started to suffer heavy casualties in all the battles they have entered. 

This vulnerability is not unique to Russian tanks and armored vehicles. Western tanks and armored vehicles also suffer from the same problem. They too have sensitivities and vulnerabilities. They too can be easily shot down. They can even be hit by Russian tanks, which are allegedly worse. 

This shows that the claim that Abrams tanks (and other Western tanks and armored vehicles) are invincible and can be used in today's battles without heavy casualties is a myth. This myth has now definitively collapsed. 

References

Quora Digest (based on various posts on this platform)

https://tankmuseum.org/