@@MattsterFelix the tank has been in development much longer than the Ukrainian conflict for sure. Likely all new tanks from here on out will have some compatibility with drones
I hope they keep the fourth man as the drone/ISR operator. Another capability they didn’t mention is the automated cannon using AI to down top attack drones. Also the Trophy like anti ATGM system that is also being incorporated. They really took the time to eliminate as many new threats as possible all while the crew sits in a armored capsule with system redundancies.
I was thinking that an electric motor powered UGV like the Ripsaw would be a great organic unmanned combat vehicle for a platoon of tanks, they can be configured with scouting sensors and light cannons, MG's, and/or grenade launchers and scout for the tank platoon or sweep for anti-tank infantry forces, or you could fit one with something like the THOR missile system (4x starstreak missiles) that are effective against helicopters, low flying planes, as well as soft skinned ground vehicles. The tank could even be fitted with a charging station to charge the UGV and given the ability to tow the smaller UGV behind when it's not in use.
The KF51 incorporates a four man crew with the drone operator. Thats one reason why it has a manned turret instead of the armored capsule in the hull, because fitting 4 men inside a cramped hull might not be the best thing to do. So I´d say, that you have 2 choices regarding crew size and protection (comparing those 2 platforms): 1. 4 men crew with a dedicated drone operator and a drone stored inside the tank, significantly increasing situational awarness, but therefore a manned turret is needed increasing the overall weight and size if you want the "same" amount of protection 2. 3 men crew without the drone operator, but a unmanned turret and a heavily armored hull decrasing weight and increasing crew protection. Normally I would also add, that the crew in the turret can solve possible jams of the autoloader, but GDLS seems to have found a possible workaround (if they can reach the cannon breech) Overall I´d probably go with the armored capsule, because of the lower silhouette, smaller crew and increased crew protection
This machine is a technology demonstrator. It is not possible to produce this car in reality, since the training of the crew will take exactly 5 years. The final price tag will be simply astronomical And a guided projectile from a 150mm howitzer at a cost of 10-15 thousand dollars can destroy this miracle of technology
@@user-xl4xp5bx8m Apparently you haven’t researched the topic much, so let me enlighten you. It’s a technology demonstrator of technology that ALREADY exist. Technology they can field today if they wanted to. It’s a tank they can start mass production on tomm if military wanted to start funding it. Once in mass production the price would eventually go down. As for training, it would not be difficult to start if they really wanted. In reality, the tank will likely take years to test and gather data in the field. It really isn’t needed immediately as the SEP3/4 are more than capable at the moment.
I understand that, I probably just choose my words wrong. Currently active duty. Last rail head from ntc/as well as talking to the combat arms guy in BLC. I just noticed there were many IFVs, LMTVs,HUMMV etc. The guys also mostly worked with Bradleys. I don't see to many updates about the Stryker although one of the best documentaries I watched called Push to Baghdad back when the military channel was on t.v showed alot ans I really liked it. It's cool to see the upgrades coming for it honestly.
We should all remember that the Abrams X is not the next Abrams, just a technology demonstrator to show off what "could" go on the next gen Abrams. Just like how concept cars show off various features but not all make it to the production model. This is compounded by the fact the hull of the Abrams X seems to be the reused 2013 MTU hull. So don't get too excited over everything you see on it. Some may or may not make it. That being said it's still pretty badass looking.
Dont get me wrong but i think that was a very weak Display. Rheinmetall has a functional next Gen Tank ready to be produced in the coming 5 years with similar technology capabilities, like the AbramsX. General Dynamics should step Up their game
@@SlugsnetGames well Abrams X is just a stop gap between the current Abrams and the Abrams replacement. So GD wasn't trying to build an entirely new tank. Just beef up the existing one
Love the sleek/stealth look to it. With the addition of drones/drones operation I can only think of C&C Generals with the Repair/Scout/Hellfire Drone upgrades you purchase with the USA vehicles.
Many years ago I have the pleasure of being a vendor representative the company I worked for back then. I remember all of the really cool “future” technology including the very first tactical drones on display for the Marines and Navy. It was awesome to see what all of these vendors were promoting, many of which I see in operation today. In a later part of my career (retired now) I was innocently asked by one of a company colleague from a non-US country “why is it the US always seems to have more advanced and far thinking battle technology than so many other countries in the world?” I couldn’t give him a straight answer except to say we’ve always been prepared since 1812 to take on an enemy and defeat them (then had to explain the “skirmish” between the US and Britain). Now as I look at videos like this I can say that one of our strengths is that no one strategy or dictate defines what our war-making capability. We have a very large and capable civilian industry backing up our military. Some will say “that’s bad” but I say 77 years without resorting to the nuclear end game show that our (me included) investment in the best of class pays off and protects our country. Go ahead and start with the slings and arrows at my comment. History is on our side. My $0.02, keep or discard.
The US also has an absolutely gigantic R&D base that few countries can match. So much money and talent flowing around means the US can be on the cutting edge, from aerospace to marine propulsion to rocketry.
@@dasbubba841 Plus, the USA has the largest cultural impact on the world! Like music, animations, video games, the clothing you wear (t-shirt, jeans), social media (youtube, facebook) and.... etc.
As a car guy i loved hearing about how THE MILITARY DONT USE NO ELECTRIC CAR HRU DUR Theyre literally figuring it out as we speak, having a large combat vehicle be able to creep say in an urban environment 1,2 5, 10KM is nuts and game changing in terms of range for the vehicle when its using a hybrid drive. Bring the fight further, better, and harder than ever before boys!
The literal point of a tank, and its biggest strength is gun range. Well out of audible distance. And it is a tanks worst nightmare to be in an urban environment. But I 100% agree that a Bradley could only benefit from being made a hybrid.
It's not that different from deisel electric submarines. He described similar use on the StrykerX. The tech is small enough to use in AFV sizes is all.
@@peterhilligoss5697 it's everyone's worst nightmare to be in an urban environment, but that doesn't change the fact crap ends up there. In the battle of Fallujah, tanks were very important for allowing troops to advance. What you want doesn't always end up being what you get. I can see this being useful for a tank, especially since the Abrams has a jet engine in it that people can hear from a mile away
@@moonasha idk the infantry cats in my battalion seem to love urban drills. I suppose you're right though, at some point they'll end up there. But you are wrong on how loud the Abrams turbine is. Right next to it the tank might seem louder than its contemporaries, but with the engine being high pitched the noise drops off MUCH quicker than other engine types. You will actually hear the tracks long before you hear the whine of the engine.
also decreasing fuel logistics could be an advantage if electric could allow less of it to be needed or maybe even none at all. Could refill batteries off of solar or some sort of portable generator and not even need gas at some point which could come with even longer ranges and ability to extend further from supply lines
M230 is an area weapon, which not used for accuracy. They are really good for anti-light armor. Based on magazine size, it maybe holds about 100-150 rounds.
Most of the information about the tank is classified. And this is essentially a mark 1 variant. While the versions we saw before AUSA 2022 are prototypes. An example of a prototype is the blue one from 2 days ago. The mark 2 variant or announcement of cancellation depends on what the military wants or doesn't want from the tank.
Probably that opposed piston diesel architecture Cummins and Achetes power was contracted by the army to work on a couple years ago. That would be very interesting.
@@herosjourney8725 The Honeywell engine gives the Abrams very high power to weight ratio so its curious to see if the new power pack can do the same or if that performance comes at a cost
@@jinmo2821 If I remember correctly the Cavalry program (or whatever that is) that kick-started the Abrams and Leopard 2 program was started on 1960s and it like 30 years for both to come out so yeah. West loves to take their time polishing their assets before churning them out of production.
Glad to see they at least got the ball rolling on the next generation of vehicles and equipment. I've seen first hand the army using platforms and vehicles that came into service during the 80s cold war area and just through new upgrades onto them over the years. it will be interesting to see where these ideas go in the next decade.
There’s already a slurry of next gen vehicles which are coming out in 2023 for the US that have been talked about and designed as far back as 2014. Ex: B-21 raider (stealth bomber replacing the b-2 spirit)
@@noobsbiking the French and Japanese use autoloaders, Germany and the US have experimented with them. When combined with blowout panels and compartmentalized storage they are as safe as manual loading. The Russians just don't do that to save space
The new Abrams is boss and the Leonidas is cool also. Since they are retiring the Striker Gun Systems, they should send them to Ukraine as they have experience repairing autoloaders, they should be able to maintain them well.
When I was a crew commander, I just tapped my driver on the head for directions. It’s so noisy as well as it’s so much quicker than talking on a “mic”. 🇨🇦 Veteran
a reduced crew for AbramsX certainly has advantages, however, I am thinking that from a crew fatigue standpoint, it's much easier to pull security with a 4-man crew over 3-man, as you are not always in the tank...
Tanks have tracks, they are always going to produce considerable noise. APCs and IFVs can be wheeled and thus more silent, but the tires aren't typically optimised for smooth, quiet running like Tesla tires. They are primarily designed to maximum offroad capability.
The fact that they have both people sitting side by side along with an accessible unmanned turret and a lower profile with new optical dazzler technologies and infrared technologies pretty much justifies the cost of the new tank cuz the only problem with the old Abrams is it was loud it was big it was heavy most other components on it excluding the auto loader were loved by the military but now you can wait silently with battery power packs and with the new heads up displays feeding you information this should be a badass machine
T14 Armata fans: "our tanks have fully automatic turret, and all three crews sit in front side by side, operating the tank with joystick and big screen." Abrams fans: "Autoloading is gay, manual load is more reliable and efficient because less moving part to jam, and big screen is gay too." Also Abram tank:
I think they did that to make it look more "futuristic" and match the whole modern theme of the vehicle, I could only imagine that it might alter the sound given off by the tracks when running or alter the way dust and dirt get kicked up whilst moving.
Chieftain talked about this on his podcast. The Abrams X is basically a technology demonstrator for all the systems that could potentially be put on a next gen tank or integrated ala carte into a SepV4/V5 tank. There are no plans to build the X model.
Ok? That first guy said a 30 cal "cannon" He really should stay in his office. So according to him they are replacing the .50 cal with a 7.62mm "cannon" 🤣
I like the Abrams, not knowing the details of the power pack, and if any armor layout has changed, it looks promising. 30mm is very interesting, assuming it has programmable munitions. The other vehicles though, MeH. The stryker looks like the Musk Mobile, not sure what they were going for.
from what I understood, the stryker can switch from diesel to electric to move troops in quietly. I don't know, seems like a good idea to me, but that's a lot of weight in batteries.
The fact that modern day tech(at its best extent ie prototypes or cases where budget wasn't limited) around the world heavily outperforms most sci-fi works keeps boggling my mind. Tell someone in Star Wars or Halo that we have capability to arm tank, SPG or helicopter with a drone/loitering ATGM with 50-70 kilometers range, pinpoint accuracy and (in case of 152-155mm caliber) carry a nuclear warhead. And that said vehicle can carry several dozens of them.
You can absolutely discuss of the AbramsX or the KF51 Panther is a better and more modern design, but i miss something like the Skyranger 30 or Skyranger 35. Microwaves are cool, but only when you are fully set up and facing drones that can be disrupted by them. A 30 or 35mm chaingun with airburst ammo, essentially a giant shotgun, will not care who you are or about your frequency or electronics. Shotgun go boom. Drone go down. Especially if you can integrate lasers and Stinger or similar missiles.
Then the enemy can just use strength in numbers, cannon rounds are big, and the box can only fit so many. If the enemy uses drone swarm tactics then you’re a little fucked. Infinite magazine is the real attractive quality here
@@jamesmcgee1566 Yeah I understood that part, I just thought it was kind of funny that he said it was "lightweight." Though obviously lighter compared to bigger cannons.
I love the side by side crew in the hull but if you lose a track and one of your crew members gets injured fixing it the tank might become combat ineffective.
@@phillipperez4616 young people are becoming more disillusioned with the military. They don’t want to die for no reason, especially when the job market currently needs a lot of jobs to be filled If the military wants more people to join, pay better. Give them a reason to join
@@podomuss There hasn't been a good reason for war in 80 years but that's because nato and the United States are the strongest military force in history. I think what's lost in modern society since world war I is the honor, pride and duty citizens had for their country. As war became more deadly and the reality of it became available in pictures and film the allure faded. Gone are thousands of men singing on the way to the front but on the other hand Ukraine's morale is extremely high and that is a deadly battle space to say the least.
@@MajorBorris Not to mention, no one wants to go some middle eastern country for no damn reason. People got riled up after 9/11 only 20 years ago because they attacked our own soil, but after a certain point, even those personally effected by it don’t want to waste their time there If Russia or China did something like that, I’m sure there would be people lining up to fight. Hell, there’s a lot of Americans who want to fight China and Russia now and that’s with nothing. But the majority of people don’t want to fight for no reason
AbramsX needs to have a drone that can be recoverable, to conduct recon. Not a switchblade suicide drone. South Korea has a 120mm round that can be laser guided to hit targets in defiled. That would be the best way to go if the drone could spot rounds for the tank. Leonidas, the EW Stryker seems like a one trick pony. If it’s microwave can also take out cruse missiles, and low flying aircraft then it would be worth it. StrykerX looks great. Though I thought future Stryker platoons was supposed to have two with a CROWS-J and two with the 30mm cannon. They need to keep that proposed MTOE
@@kinggooseman5373 Yeah, I think the interior would need too much of a redesign to install a typical carousal loader, so I wonder if the turret itself contains the mechanism.
@@jaggedskar3890 that turret looks so small for a carousel loader and it has a very low turret who knows maybe. Why I have this stupid idea that what if they had an auto loader with a revolver system.😅
Basc took a lot of stuff from the T-14... 3 man crew in the front of the hull, side by side, in prob an armored cabin. Unmanned turret, with auto-loader etc. Nevertheless then this looks REALLY GOOD, damn feel like everyone stepped the game up after Russia announced T-14. However, USA and Germany are making their new tanks even better. Plus they will actually enter service XDDDD. But anyway enough with that. Again this looks very nice and good, very badass!
No offense bro but did you even watch the video he literally says it's the the Abram but with all new technologies it looks nothing like T14 i aggre with the dude above me 👆
@@everthingoutdoors8181 ik i watched the whole vid. I did not say the design itself, but example the 3 man crew side by side in prob an armoured cabin ul front in the hull, the unmanned turret etc. are prob inspired by T-14??? Just my opinion and something i thought of. But anyway it’s a great design, will be a freaking deadly force when this tank enter service, which tbh i think will be no later than 2030 at max, cuz of all the testing etc. takes at least 5 years until everything is completed etc.
I don't really see how you came to the conclusion that they took it from the T-14. I mean, there's only really 2 places for crew members to go. If they aren't in the turret, they're going to be in the hull and they're probably going to be side-by-side. There just aren't a lot of options for anyone to go with when it comes to the vehicle layout.
So they're basically making the new Abrams the same as Armata. Minus the firepower since the Abrams will be a bit weaker in that department. Cool! Hope you catch up! :)
We don't know what 120mm cannon is going into this, it could be some wizardry with a plasma ignition system for the propellant that hits well above its weight. The US has been experimenting with ETC guns for quite awhile now, the generalities are public knowledge.
@@SamuraiPie8111 Like anyone, even Russia, Germany, France, Turkey... Your industrial base is already 2nd, as well as the reputation of that failed country. Where an old asshole rules, with a drug addict son... Hopefully it's not another fiasco like the F 35. And its 800 failures. Nice white for a $500 Suicide Drone
Good, they moved the driver on the stryker so the front left suspension spring doesn't shoot the driver like a hot rod through butter when it gets blown up.
The Square boxes at the top by the machine gun must be an after thought. It looks so "home made" and will turn the tank into an easy target . The rest of the tank is sleak and well designed but above the turret seem just like a quick add on's.
I know that's demonstrating technology but damn that really does look a hell of a lot smaller than the current Abrams configuration. Could be them just being tall and huge though.
Stryker leo should ditch the rear turret and just have AESA panels on the top, rear, and sides. AESA scans at the speed of electricity so it can change direction instantly. It would also mean you could engage targets in every direction at once. Abrams X is badass. I love it.
Interesting to see if the 3 man crew stays or not, the loader is such an important part of the crew besides loading the gun, When you're a loader you're also the radio man, another set of eyes to guide the tank and allow the commander to focus on other tasks, another person to engage targets with the loaders 240 and also some one else to hop out and check things. I like the 30mm but having a .50 or a 240 along with that would be really useful, being able to have volume of fire is important when you encounter things like massed infantry.
The fact that they move all crew to hull and then don't up hull armour is insain, but the demonstrator is more for the weapons and systems so what ever.
AUSA 2022 is basically asking what Microsoft would do if they were asked to design tanks and weaponry lol. I really like how the implemented alot of these things. You see such a clear difference in design between some russian shitbox and these. Especially looking at the sensor suite and other factors, it seemed like these tanks were genuinely designed by proffesionals. Russias T14 looks like something designed by Highschool students with basic knowledge of Arduino.
Ngl the new AbramsX looks like an M60 Patton with a T-80 or T-60 vibe to it. It feels and looks like a cold war tank but the technologies are obviously not cold war era. I think the reason why the army wants a 3 man crew instead of 4 is that they're not getting many recruits with their Emily and two moms recruitment ad.
Interesting that it uses an auto loader. I wonder what they changed about the system that will prevent turret tossing like we’ve been seeing in Ukraine.
The autoloader is in the turret bustle like the Leclerc, K2, Type 10. The Soviet/Russian/Chinese designs have their autoloaders mounted in the hull below the turret hence why they're turret tossers.
@@solowingborders3239 The thing is, is that the Leclerc is the only one that you mention that has or is seeing combat (Yemen). Every tank has its flaws. But unfortunately, combat is pretty much the only time to find out what these flaws are.
the k51 panther from rheinmetall already has loytering ammo build in and a bigger gun with an autoreloader so i think the abrams upgrade is a nice thing, but they should incorperate the 130mm and desing the turret around that gun not the 120mm. the microwave system needs better range and to kill faster or be lighter, smoller and more flexible in terms of positenoing and operating. cuz swarm drones could experience a bigg leep in tecnolegy and thus get faster more agile and resistance towards that microwave systhem
América debería de comprar miles de tanques Abrams x, el nuevo tanque se ve una bestia, los Americanos sí que saben hacer las cosas bien y tienen mucha tecnología, espero que compartan tecnología con el nuevo leopard KF51, se parece un poco al leopard 🇩🇪🇪🇺🤝🇺🇲💪
I may just be old and behind the times, but I still believe that the commander and gunner should be in the turret so they can be all the way on top of the tank for max spatial awareness when not under direct fire (99% of the time). Cameras still can't replace the mk1 eyeball in accurate depth perception or the ability to peak over the side to see if there is an obstruction or something you shouldn't run over.
That Abrams looms sexy, but I have a question: If there would something went wrong in the turret, can you solve it on the field? Russian T-14 has a serious problem with it's unmanned turret. If something goes wrong, basicaly the entire turret must be dissasembeld, which is super inpractical...
