By Jim Morris, Warrior Vice President, News
It’s been called the tank of the future – a joint project between France and Germany to build a next-generation armored vehicle that will use drones, artificial intelligence and lasers to change the shape of the battlefield.
But the project, announced in 2017, has been hit by disagreements and delays. In April, the two countries finally agreed on how to split up the work. But it’s likely to be a long time before the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) is deployed.
In the meantime, the companies involved in the project are upgrading their current tanks. Both Rheinmetall and KNDS rolled out their latest versions Monday at the Eurosatory arms show in Paris.
The prototype of Rheinmetall’s KF51-U tank is an unmanned turret . With the Concept Uncrewed Turret, the three-man crew would sit side-by-side in the protected hull, while an automatic loader would provide 25 rounds for the 130mm main gun.
The tank’s commander would use a remotely controlled combat module, which includes an RMG762 machine gun. The weapon has three barrels which rotate to guard against overheating. Rheinmetall says there would also be small onboard drones which could be used for reconnaissance.
The original KF51 was unveiled two years ago. The main gun was designed for the MGCS program.
Former Commanding General, Army Futures Command, Ret. Gen. John Murray
Meanwhile, Rheinmetall’s rival (and collaborator on MGCS), KNDS showed off a new version of its popular Leopard 2 tank, which will have its own uncrewed turret. Customers could choose to equip the tank with a 140mm main gun instead of smaller versions. KNDS says the automatic loading system would allow it to fire three rounds in just ten seconds.
Plus, there will be a remote weapon station with a 30mm gun for engaging drones.
Once the tank is deployed, it’s expected to be lighter than the current Leopard 2. It will only require three crew members instead of four, since the new turret design does away with the need for a dedicated loader.
KNDS also displayed a new variant of the French Leclerc tank. The new version has a crewed turret and is equipped with an Ascalon 120mm main gun. The company says the Ascalon’s barrel caliber can be changed from 120mm to 140 mm in less than an hour. It also uses telescoped ammunition that KNDS says allows for armor-piercing long-rod penetrators of “unparalleled length.”
All this happening as tanks have faced some surprising problems in the fighting in Ukraine. A new generation of drones – some costing as little as $500 – has proven to be a reliable tank killer. Several of the M-1 Abrams tanks that Ukraine has gotten from the US have been destroyed. Critics point out that in many cases, Ukraine doesn’t have adequate anti-aircraft weapons to protect the vehicles.
Still, in April, a New York Times headline asked the question, “Do Tanks Have a Place in 21st-Century Warfare?”
In the last year, the US Army answered that – yes, but it won’t look the same.
When the M1 Abrams tank was introduced in the 1980s, it weighed about 60 tons and had a 105mm main gun. The current version – known as the M1A2 SEP v3 – has a 120mm gun and a lot more armor, weighing in at 74 tons.
The next iteration of the Abrams was going to be even heavier. But the war in Ukraine changed that. The US Army observed what happened to the 30 or so older M-1s that had been donated to Ukraine – they would get bogged down in soft ground while having to fight Russian drone attacks.
So last fall, the Army scrapped the M1A2 SEP v4. In its place will be the M1E3, weighing in at just 60 tons with three crewmembers instead of four. The Army, like the German defense firms, may go with an unmanned turret. Meanwhile, heavier passive armor will be replaced by small radar-guided rockets that are fired off to intercept enemy fire.
“The Abrams tank can no longer grow its capabilities without adding weight, and we need to reduce its logistical footprint,” said Major General Glenn Dean, the program executive officer for ground combat systems. “The war in Ukraine has highlighted a critical need for integrated protections for soldiers, built from within instead of adding on.”
