Are the Abrams tanks being readied for trump's parade outdated weaponry?

[brush]

It was reported last night on MSNBC that all the Abrams tanks deployed by Ukraine in the war with Russia have been destroyed by drones or other systems similar to our Himars.

With drones and other technological advancements like Ukraine used to destroy Russian planes deep inside Russian, and also to badly damage the Crimea Bridge, are our aircraft carriers also outdated weapons, just as battleships became before them?

Discuss.

[lapfog_1]

1. AI drones and hypersonic missiles are the weapons of future wars

aircraft carriers are not really needed. nor are tanks... artillery is still useful, but only with smart shells and the ability to shoot and scoot.

mobility is the key... some logistics as always.

Anti missile tech needs to be much better. I expect smaller more powerful laser systems to shoot down or blind drones and missiles to be developed. AI will play even larger role than currently.

In a word, Terminator war is coming. At least the weapons of the Terminator War. Ukraine has been the proving ground for the modern asymmetric wars of the future.

[brush]

2. Great post with much info...such as the Ukraine war has become the testing ground...

future warfare systems, much like the Germans used the Spanish civil war to test their new weapons...that violated the WWl Armistice treaty.

[lapfog_1]

8. after the attack on Pearl Harbor

only 2 new Iowa class battleships were ordered... one is canceled and the other one was completed and launched but was never commissioned into the US Navy.

The age of battleships had come to abrupt halt.

You cannot fight the next war with the military of the previous war

[Happy Hoosier]

5. Disagree with this to an extent.

Any reasonable analysis of the war in Ukraine shows that tanks still have their uses. The Abrams tanks in Ukraine are older models (last produced in 1992, so 33 years old at the newest), and less capable that modern variants. And it's important to not theat neither Russia nor Ukraine have the sophisticated capabilities of US forces. I work in this field and can say that will a high level of confidence.

Tanks will require sophisticated air defense systems, including anti-drone capabilities to be effective.

In short, integrated capabilities and combined arms will rule the day, as usual.

AI is nowhere near "terminator" capabilities today.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

7. Agreed

Decades old export models are not comparable to current US models. Also, aircraft carriers are not obsolete. Those are still going to be need for power projection. Drones are useless if they can't get to the battlefield, and those low tech FPV drones aren't making thousand mile journeys.

Much of the issues with russian tanks being destroyed, besides being inferior compared to US models, is the tactics the Russians are using. Tanks are giant targets on a modern battlefield without infantry support. This has been known for decades. Modern combined arms tactics require tanks to work in tandem with infantry and air and artillery support. The russians suck at this. The Ukrainians sucked at this as well early in the war, though they have improved.

[brush]

9. Do our tanks, which cost millions, have anti-drone systems now?

Drones cost a few hundred or thousands.

[Happy Hoosier]

12. The anti-drone capabilities are usually embedded within units

But there are active projects now to develop active drone defenses on armored vehicles.

Drone defenses consist of a combination of electronic warfare, active defenses, and passive defenses. All three are exist to an extent, and all three have active development underway.

While Ukraine is absolutely instructive, it is not a direct analogue for U.S. Forces. We need to learn from what we’re seeing there, but not come to unwarranted conclusions.

For example, neither side has been able to achieve air dominance. This is largely due to neither side being able to mount an integrated air campaign. Anyone think the US would be in the same position? Not a chance.

[Aviation Pro]

3. No, the M1A3 has upgrades that seamlessly integrate into our next battlefield

Such as being able to talk to artillery and having a variety of munitions with longer ranges. It’s also lighter that the old 70-ton behemoth, which increases its mobility.

These are the lessons learned from the lab that is Ukraine.

[Melon]

4. Aircraft carriers project power with their AirPower.

But enough missiles or drones get through and that’s a massive casualty that takes 10 years to replace.
Destroyers are now becoming outdated because the 5 inch gun shells can be intercepted mid air. They fly in a very calculated arch to the target and can be intercepted.

No other country comes close to projecting power globally like the US. Our navy projects that power.

[patphil]

6. Traditional battlefield tanks are sitting ducks for 21st century weapons.

So are aircraft carriers and the large battle groups they require to support and defend them.
We have seen how easy planes on a runway can be targeted. Virtually any standing weapon is vulnerable to attack.
Actually, the whole concept of large scale traditional warfare is rapidly becoming obsolete.
The wars of the future will need to rely on stealth and wide distribution of resources to protect the ability to make war.
Now if we can only find a way to make war itself obsolete.
Yeah, I know, but it's a thought.

[brush]

11. All in on your last thought.

[Kaleva]

10. The US sent the outdated M1A1 tanks to Ukraine

Production of that variant stopped in 1992

Also, the US operates multiple layers of interconnected systems of which tanks and aircraft carriers are part of. The US is very experienced in combined arms warfare of which other nations, such as Russia, struggle with.