31 M-1A1s by itself isn’t a game changer in Ukraine, but with the UK sending 14 Challengers, Germany sending 14 Leopard 2’s, and Poland and several other European countries will almost certainly join in as well. There will probably be around 100 main battle tanks. These in combination with the several hundred IFV’s, APCs, and other mobile infantry support vehicles should be enough to punch a hole somewhere along the 1000km+ front and exploit. The trick is going to be rapidly concentrating all these mechanized forces.
The logistics need to be considered. German Leopard tanks are also used by other countries close to Ukraine. They have the facilities to mantain these tanks. The Abrams is not used by any European nation. It will take longer to put them into the fight, the infrastructure to mantain them doesn’t exist in Europe.
The Abrams does have some nice features, logistically, though. Such as its ability to run on absolutely any sort of fuel. Though I’m not sure whether any other modern tanks also do that.
I think the most important thing the the M1s provide is an excuse for Germany to start sending their Leopard 2s to Ukraine.
Germany can say “hey we said we wouldn’t promise ours until the U.S. promises theirs” and then go ahead with the transfer they were wanting to do anyway, all while saving face.
Heck, if the Leopards do well enough this summer, the Abramses might not be needed in 2024…
Ukrainian authorities say Russia’s biggest cities are bound to suffer attacks as a result of the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine. “Internal escalation of the war in Russia is inevitable,” said Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to the Ukrainian president. “Cities that are pampered, lazy, that thought they lived in a different reality, such as Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Yekaterinburg, will be subject to strikes,”
To elaborate, it was a freighter that’s been stuck at Kherson harbor for almost a year (it didn’t fall under the grain-ship agreement). Because it’s been stranded there, there was only a skeleton crew, and it appears nobody was injured or killed. Full (or full-er) story:
I just read that the Leopard 2 runs on diesel, which is easily available in Ukraine, but the Abrams on “jet fuel”, whatever that means. Is that not so?
The tank was built around this engine[112] and it is multifuel-capable, including diesel, gasoline, marine diesel and jet fuel[113] (such as JP-4 or JP-8). By 1989, the Army was transitioning solely to JP-8 for the M1 Abrams.[114] For logistical simplicity, JP-8 is the U.S. military’s universal fuel powering both aircraft and vehicle fleets. The Australian M1A1 AIM SA burns diesel fuel, since the use of JP-8 is less common in the Australian Army…
The gas turbine propulsion system has proven quite reliable in practice and combat, but its high fuel consumption is a serious logistic problem.[115] The engine burns more than 1.67 US gallons per mile (392 Liters/100 km) or (60 US gallons (230 L) per hour) when traveling cross-country and 10 US gallons (38 L) per hour when idle.
Multi-fuel engines are pretty common in military diesels, and the Leopard II apparently has one. My dad used to tell me that a deuce and a half could run on paint or avgas mixed with oil.
They could create great anguish and dismay amongst the enemy by being seen apparently pouring Stoli into their fuel tanks. Although, sometimes actions like that can have the opposite of the intended effect.
Iraq was pushed out of Kuwait by military forces going into Iraq. Which is not to say that’s the best approach here, just that it has been done that way in the past.
And to deter future Russian incursions. Even if an armistice is agreed upon between Ukraine and Russia, there will be a Korean style standoff at the borders for years or decades to come. This means a lot of western tanks sitting on that line (which is exactly what Putin’s casus belli was for invading in the first place.)
Which Ukrainian official would have the unenviable task of telling Ukrainian voters that while they are being targeted, their homes are being blown up, and the electricity is off more than it’s on that Russia’s repeated blows below the belt can be met only by Queensbury Rules punches?
No, I don’t want Russian civilians to be killed. But an attack on the electricity, broadcasting (propaganda!), or telecom infrastructure of St. Petersburg or Moscow would let the Russian citizenry know this ain’t a guns-and-butter over-there draft-only-peasants war that they can apathy or head-down their way through. Maybe more of them, enough of them, would remember they ARE citizens of a republic in 2023, not subjects of Czar Vladimir the Awful in the 18th Century.
And while it would be better for that to be accomplished by cyberattack or a team of saboteurs, I wouldn’t really begrudge Ukraine an old-school Doolittle raid with 21st Century weaponry.
The Abrams and some Bradleys could be a potent force to guard the roads from Belarus. Stop any new invasion force. The next counter offensive is expected from there.
Ukraine has a lot of forces in that role. They could be freed to fight elsewhere.
