All the Facts You Need to Know: The AbramsX is a proposed next-generation main battle tank (MBT) that incorporates advanced technologies into the proven M1 Abrams platform. Key features include a hybrid electric-diesel engine for improved mobility and fuel efficiency, and reduced crew size with enhanced artificial intelligence support.

-However, critics like Brandon Weichert question its practicality, particularly the reliability of electric batteries in combat conditions. Comparisons are drawn to Russia's T-14 Armata, an expensive and underutilized MBT that remains largely sidelined due to cost and deployment concerns. Such an issue would be a big problem for the U.S. Army. 

-The Pentagon is cautiously evaluating the AbramsX program, considering its cost and utility, especially in the context of potential conflicts where heavy MBTs may not be a priority.

Is the AbramsX America's T-14 Armata? Examining the Future of MBTs

The futuristic AbramsX is under development as a Main Battle Tank that incorporates new technologies into a proven platform, the M1 Abrams.

But the AbramsX can be criticized for its cost and utility, much like the T-14 Armata, Russia’s new overpriced and underused MBT.

What is the AbramsX?

The AbramsX is not a done deal. The new tank is really just an idea. Whether the Department of Defense wants to fund the AbramsX is still unclear. 

The program “faces an uphill climb in the halls of the Pentagon,” The Washington Post reported. If the program is ever funded into existence, here’s what to expect. One, the AbramsX will feature a hybrid electric-diesel engine that promises to reduce the tank’s weight, and in effect, improve the tank’s mobility and fuel efficiency. Two, the AbramsX will operate with a smaller crew while relying on artificial intelligence to supplement the manned crew.

The AbramsX promises the incorporation of revolutionary technology in an existing MBT platform – but not everyone argues that is a good thing. Brandon Weichert suggests that the technical specifications for the Abrams X are “problematic,” especially the hybrid-electric propulsion system. Despite being more fuel-efficient, the “electric batteries might noy hold up very well under the stress of combat,” Weichert writes.  

The notion of an advanced MBT failing to provide a proper battlefield return on its sizeable investment is drawing comparisons to the Russian T-14 Armata.

Comparisons to the T-14 Armata Tank 

The T-14 Armata is Russia’s newest MBT. The program has been beleaguered. Each T-14 costs about $7 million, making the tank’s production difficult to sustain, and making Russian war planners wary of putting the tank in harm’s way. There’s irony there: When a weapon is so expensive or so valuable that it is withheld from the frontline service for which it was designed, why build the weapon in the first place? 

Weichert hypothesizes that Washington, if ever embroiled in a major conflict, would likely hold the AbramsX on the sideline, much as the Russians have with their T-14 Armata in Ukraine – defeating the purpose of having the tank at all. 

Fortunately, the Pentagon seems to be asking important questions about the cost and utility of the AbramsX on the front end, before sinking hundreds of millions into the program.

Giving the Pentagon further cause is the specter of conflict with China. An expensive MBT is not likely to be a priority item in any potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific theater.

About the Author: Harrison Kass 

Harrison Kass is a defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.

Image Credit: Creative Commons.