The complex maintenance and logistical support of American Abrams tanks make these vehicles unsuitable for foreign armies, including Ukraine. These conclusions were reached by military experts, interviewees Financial Times newspaper.
One of Abrams’ main problems is the extremely bizarre and “gluttonous” gas turbine engine.
“Too much air was going through the engine, we were afraid it would constantly suck up sand and stall. “We spent a lot of time and effort constantly shaking the sand out of the air filters,” said Jonah Nagle, professor of the US Army War College who commanded Abrams tank units during the Gulf and Iraq wars.
At the same time, the military expert does not deny the combat qualities of Abrams, but emphasizes that its use in combat requires a virtual logistics network that covers the entire world.
According to the FT, Nagle’s experience is not unique: US Army armored units have complained for decades of the “long logistics queue” required to keep Abrams tanks on the alert. The newspaper notes that Kiev needs “just a well-functioning weapon” and that Abrams is not well-suited for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
The FT writes that Abrams’ complex logistics and maintenance situation is an example of how the American defense supply system works. The Pentagon is constantly overloading its military platforms with modern technology, which greatly complicates the operation of equipment.
As an example, the publication cites the construction of a fleet of American Zumwalt-class destroyers in 1998. Initially, the US Navy planned to purchase 32 ships for $1 billion each. However, naval procurement officials added so many experimental and simply untested systems to the requirements that 20 years later the US Navy only received three destroyers at $7.5 billion each.
According to Josh Kirshner, director of consulting firm Beacon Global Strategies, the Pentagon tends to buy the most advanced defense systems, while other armies only need reliable working equipment.
“Countries like Ukraine do not need Cadillacs from the defense industry. They just need good enough and reliable products,” said the expert.
The issue of technologically overly sophisticated weapons and their associated cost overruns was recently brought to the attention of the US Accounting Chamber. The oversight body scolded the Pentagon for purchasing weapons systems that were too expensive and too difficult to deploy and operate.
Going back to the tanks, the newspaper notes that the Abrams gas turbine engine resembles a jet engine. And the diesel engine of German Leopard tanks is more like a conventional truck engine. The authors of the article say that their maintenance requires completely different equipment, repair teams must undergo special training, including learning how to work with unique high-tech tools.
“Knowing how to fix a Volkswagen Beetle doesn’t mean you can fix an F1 race car,” said Stephen Biddle, Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations.
According to him, Abrams engines allow you to achieve very high acceleration compared to the same Leopard. However, they consume a lot of fuel and are often “meticulous”.
In addition to meticulous maintenance, American tanks also require a constant supply of large volumes of spare parts. And since the supply network is located in the United States, it will be much more difficult for Ukraine to obtain the necessary components and assemblies than for Leopard.
Also, according to the newspaper, if German tanks are already in service and generally available in a significant number of European countries, the US will only need to build Abrams for Kyiv. Their manufacturer, General Dynamics of Ohio, produces about 12 tanks per month. However, it is not known whether the company will give priority to the vehicles it plans to send to Ukraine.
Kirchner of Beacon Global Strategies concluded by saying that Abrams put the Ukrainian military at greater risk than the use of German Leopards alone by the APU.