The M1 Abrams is the bedrock of state-of-the-art armored warfare, with deployment and upgrading in troves after its entry in the late 1980s. First delivered to the U.S. Army in 1988, the M1A1 variant has spread across the globe to Australia, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Poland, and Romania integrating these formidable tanks into their arsenals. Notably, Saudi Arabia has more than 600 Abrams tanks, while Poland replaced its T-72s with the more advanced M1A2s.
Even export variants of the Abrams lack the specialized upgraded armor and depleted uranium ammunition carried on U.S. variants. This reflects the better protection and firepower of Abrams tanks operated by the U.S. Indeed, the only ammunition that has regularly been able to destroy an upgraded U.S. M1 Abrams is that fired from another Abrams tank. Of the nine Abrams tanks destroyed by tank gunfire in Iraq, eight were due to friendly fire incidents.
The battlefield performance of earlier M1 models has exposed their weakness, particularly in Syria, Iraq, and Ukraine. Casualties do occur, mostly due to upgraded anti-tank missiles and improved Russian DU armor-piercing rounds, usually against the side and rear armor. However, the frontal armor of the Abrams remains impervious to any known battlefield weapon.
Due to ongoing developments, the Abrams is due for yet another upgrade in 2026 or 2028 as it approaches its 50th year as a design and over 40 years as an operational weapon system. Meanwhile, design efforts are also underway to create its eventual replacement to keep the U.S. at the edge in armored warfare.
In sharp contrast, the Russian armored fighting vehicle families T-64, T-72, T-80, and T-90 -reflect very different challenges and design philosophies. Mission systems on Russian tanks are generally less modern, with less modern sights and fire control computers. The import of thermal imagers from Thales before 2014 and subsequently domestic production have improved night fighting, but the fire control system remains less advanced than in the West.
The tank designs of Russia are strangely cramped, normally carrying three men, with a feature tracing back to the introduction of the automatic ammunition handling system or carousel loader. While it does reduce the overall height and weight of the tank, it creates huge risks, too. Underneath the turret is the carousel loader with 22 rounds of ammunition. In case of penetration either the side or roof armor, then ammunition can “cook off” creating catastrophic explosions that might lead to the potential deaths of the whole crew.
These weaknesses were compensated for by mounting ERA on Russian and Ukrainian tanks. ERA is quite effective with weapons like RPG-7s but also comes with its drawbacks, particularly when ERA is mounted on armored vehicle sides. Even with such measures, passive protection against sophisticated anti-tank weapons remains quite problematic.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated some of the strong and weak points of armored vehicles. Reports come out that T-72s can survive multiple strikes by RPGs and missiles without blowing up in catastrophic explosions, something that has been learned again and again from Grozny onward.
In other words, while the M1 Abrams is undeniably at the top in battlefields, its age demands constant modernization and, ultimately, replacement. On the other hand, armored fighting vehicles in Russia face huge challenges related to design factors, although survivability is a relentless effort. The developments of these main battle tanks reflect the ever-changing visage of armored combat and the incessant march toward technological superiority.