Why No Military Wants to Mess With America's M1 Abrams Super Tank

March 11, 2017 Topic: Security Region: Americas Blog Brand: The Buzz Tags: TechnologyMilitaryTankstankU.S. ArmyArmyM1 Abrams

Why No Military Wants to Mess With America's M1 Abrams Super Tank

At almost 40 years old, this revolutionary tank has always stayed one step ahead of the competition.

Meanwhile the service wanted a 1,500-horsepower engine , double the power of the M60’s engine. It tried two diesel engines, the Daimler-Benz diesel that powered the Leopard 2 and a homegrown diesel built by Teledyne Continental, but the third engine, a gas turbine adapted from aircraft use, unexpectedly gained favor. The gas turbine allowed for quicker startups, faster acceleration, ran without producing smoke, and most importantly was smaller and three tons lighter than its competitors, saving valuable weight. Although the gas turbine would require the Army to stock vast quantities of gasoline (in addition to diesel fuel) on the battlefield, the advantages of the turbine eventually won out.

The development of the M1 Abrams is a classic study into how competing requirements can collide with one another. The trifecta of tank power, firepower, protection and mobility all required some level of compromise. The Army was willing to bend some requirements, particularly with regards to weight, to get a good tank instead of being unbending in a vain search for the perfect tank. The result is the most battle-tested main battle tank today, a tank that, with periodic upgrades, has stood the test of time.

Kyle Mizokami is a defense and national-security writer based in San Francisco who has appeared in the Diplomat, Foreign Policy , War is Boring and the Daily Beast . In 2009, he cofounded the defense and security blog Japan Security Watch . You can follow him on Twitter: @KyleMizokami.

Image: M1A1 Abrams in Australian service. Wikimedia Commons/Public domain