The Main Problems of the Western World's Main Battle Tanks

Russian tanks (T-72, T-80, T-90) are generally lighter than Western tanks. For example, the empty weight of Russian tanks is around 40-45 tons, while the empty weight of Western tanks is around 60 tons. When loaded with ammunition and other equipment, Western tanks can weigh up to 80-85 tons.

The weight of the newest Russian tank, the T-14 Armata tank (empty weight 50 tons) has increased slightly, but is still very light compared to Western tanks. Moreover, the weight of Western tanks is increasing day by day. This weight increase seems to be due to the concern to produce a tank that can combat the characteristics of competing tanks and survive against the increasing anti-tank threat. 

Problems Caused by Making Tanks Heavier

As each new feature added to the tanks increases the weight, new problems arise that are difficult to solve due to weight. For example, the current version of the M1 Abrams tank, which weighs around 80 tons, is packed with equipment that makes it one of the deadliest tanks in the world but adds more weight than support vehicles can handle. So adding new armor, sensors and heavier weapons to the Abrams has put it in a bind.

The tank is now too heavy for tow trucks and too heavy for most bridges to support. The constant increase in weight has created the need to replace the US Army's combat support vehicles. As an urgent solution to this problem, the US military had to start working on solutions such as purchasing new tractor vehicles capable of carrying the tank and upgrading existing tractor vehicles to increase their carrying capacity.

The problem of weight is not limited to this. The old tank rescuers were finding it difficult to tow and rescue the new tanks, which were becoming heavier. Therefore, the salvors had to be replaced or their capacities upgraded. On the other hand, the carrying capacity of the existing mobile bridges used to carry tanks across short spans has also become inadequate as the weight has increased. 

As the weight of the tanks increases, the engine capacity also becomes inadequate, necessitating the procurement of new engines or the capacity increase of existing engines. However, as engine power increases, fuel consumption also increases. Even if the existing engines are continued to be used, more weight results in the need for more fuel refueling and new tankers are needed for this purpose.

The problems caused by weight also negatively affect the mobility of the tank. For example, on wet ground, in plowed fields and wetlands, heavy tanks get stuck in the mud and sink into the ground. Because they are so heavy, it is very difficult to pull them out and rescue them when they sink. In other words, the tank can be out of combat before it even enters the battle.

Moreover, because of the frequent need for towing and recovery, troops are forced to concentrate more vehicles in one place, thus creating a larger target and easily inflicting casualties. These casualties are not only to the tanks, but also to the rescuers trying to tow them away. The recent destruction of three Abrams tanks and two recovery vehicles in Ukraine is a clear example of this.

These casualties are nothing new for Abrams. The Abrams, which were quite heavy then, though not as heavy as they are now, have also suffered casualties in Iraqi operations because they got stuck in the mud. For example, in the First Gulf War, two American tanks got stuck in the mud and were destroyed by their own crews to prevent them from falling into enemy hands (as recovery was difficult).

M1 Abrams

So far, we have used the example of American Abrams tanks, but many German Leopard and British Challenger tanks also got stuck in the mud and became ineffective in Ukraine. The towing and recovery of these tanks has also been a major problem.

Challenger

In Ukraine, though, not only Western tanks but also many Russian tanks got stuck in the mud or stuck in soft ground. However, because they are almost 20 tons lighter, proportionally fewer Russian tanks got stuck in the mud in terms of the total number of tanks, and they were easier to pull out.

T-90 Russian Tank

Perhaps the biggest problem created by the weight of Western tanks is the high cost per tank. As new systems have been added to the tanks, their prices have increased considerably, as have their weights. The prices of the tanks, according to figures quoted on the internet, can be as high as 8-10 million dollars. Despite these high prices, Western tanks can be destroyed even by cheap civilian drones that Russian fathers buy as gifts for their children at the end of the year because they bring high grades to their report cards.

UCAVs and kamikaze drones, which have recently been among the most common means of destroying tanks and armored vehicles, are also very cheap compared to tanks. According to information circulating on the internet, a Bayraktar UCAV is sold for five million dollars with one hundred ammunition. In other words, a UCAV can inflict up to a billion dollars worth of casualties on enemy tanks, but even if it is shot down, it does not constitute a huge economic burden as it is a very cheap vehicle. 

While the UCAV can do its job effectively at a cost of 50 thousand dollars per 10 million dollar tank, this cost is much lower for kamikaze drones. It has been reported in the press that the kamikaze drones used by Azerbaijan in Karabakh cost around 5000 dollars. 

On the other hand, it is seen that HAMAS has even hit some Merkava tanks with RPG shells produced in its own workshops. In other words, an anti-tank weapon that does not even cost 100 dollars can be used to neutralize a tank costing millions of dollars. This shows that large and expensive tanks are not very useful in terms of cost effectiveness.

Conclusion

Western tanks are constantly being upgraded with new armor technologies, electronic systems, surveillance systems and weapon systems in order to increase their survivability against rival tanks and, more recently, against rapidly increasing anti-tank firepower. However, each new feature added increases the weight and cost of tanks a little more.

Similarly, anti-tank weapons are also constantly evolving. Anti-tank weapons range from the simplest/primitive to the most complex/moderate. Moreover, the accuracy and range of the newly developed ones have increased considerably. Using all of these weapons together creates an asymmetrical effect on tanks. For this reason, the features added to the tanks are almost useless. 

On the contrary, each new feature brings new problems due to the increased weight. The most important of these problems is the constant increase in the cost per vehicle. Anti-tank weapons, on the other hand, are considerably cheaper than tanks. For this reason, a large number of anti-tank weapons are used without any restrictions. Thus, a large number of tanks are destroyed. Because tanks are so expensive, war has become a difficult act to finance. 

Looking at the tank casualties in recent wars, it is not possible for almost any state, except for economically rich states such as the USA, Russia, China, Japan, Germany, France and the UK, to finance a prolonged war economically (unless it receives foreign aid). This is because tanks have become too expensive and replacing lost tanks too costly. In order to get out of this dilemma, it seems likely that there will be a shift towards cheaper and smaller tanks instead of expensive and large main battle tanks.