By Kris Osborn, Warrior The introduction of Abrams tanks into the war in Ukraine was heralded as a potential turning point in the war, yet like many tanks on both sides of the current war, the platform has been heavily damaged by enemy drones and achieved limited success. The Abrams tanks have also had maintenance problems in Ukraine, a fact further compounding problems associated with its performance. However, the issue of tanks in Ukraine is more ambiguous than it may appear at first glance, as they have arguably been instrumental in enabling Ukrainian forces to accomplish some of their gains in the war. The Kyiv Post newspaper [https://www.kyivpost.com/post/38879] published an essay in 2024 which stated that Abrams tanks were vulnerable to top-down attacks, much like Russian tanks have been throughout the war. The essay further explains that Abrams tanks have also proven vulnerable to top-down aerial attacks from drones as well. Does this mean tanks themselves are becoming obsolete? Or rather does it suggest that new upgrades and concepts of operation need to be woven into approaches to tank warfare as a way to adapt to a changing warfare environment? Countless media reports continue to emphasize this well-known vulnerability of tanks, something which has in part helped generate new concepts of operation. The US Marine Corps Force Design 2030, which specifically cites lessons learned from the Ukraine war, calls for a massive reduction in the service’s force of tanks. The Corps subsequently decided to divest its force of tanks in favor of a lighter, faster, and more expeditionary lethal force using an increased number of drones and anti-armor weapons for high-speed multi-domain attacks. However, the circumstances are quite different for the Army, which has consistently upgraded its fleet of Abrams tanks [https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-abrams-tank-problem-going-to-get-worse-trump-administration-2025-3]and made tactical adjustments to ensure their continued relevance. There do appear to be many key variables that many of the reports about tank destruction in Ukraine appear to miss to a certain extent. There appear to be many reasons why the tank is here to stay, particularly if upgraded. Modern applications of what could be identified as traditional Combined Arms Maneuver [https://amzn.to/4gGPk54] using heavier platforms such as tanks continues to show great combat effectiveness, particularly when paired with reconnaissance and targeting units, advanced ISR and a new generation of networking and command and control technology. New Combined Arms Maneuver Mechanized assault, [https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2024/10/23/donated-aussie-abrams-tanks-to-receive-baptism-of-fire-in-ukraine/] something aligned with the Army Wide Area Maneuver concept of operation, not only continues to occupy a key place in modern warfare but will arguably take on even more tactical relevance in coming years as emerging technologies in the areas of unmanned systems, AI-enabled computing, sensor image fidelity, target-data transmission contribute to more survivable attack formations and the successful application of longer-range precision weaponry. Army Research Laboratory scientists, for example, talked to Warrior a few years ago about breakthrough progress with AI-empowered technology able to autonomously land a drone on a moving tank using advanced sensing and machine learning. What this amounts to is that emerging technologies and tactics continue to make the tank more [https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2025/01/10/ukraine-blew-up-one-of-its-own-m-1-abrams-tanks/]effective and indispensable in modern land war. Recently, tanks and heavier armored vehicles were instrumental in generating the initial success of Ukraine’s Kursk offensive by using forward reconnaissance units likely in position to identify weak points in the Russian perimeter. The effective employment of ISR and neThroughout much of the region along the border areas of operating Russian troops, there continue to be extremely lethal layered defenses, mines, barbed wire and ditches making it difficult for tanks to break through or even operate. This is especially true given the widespread use of attack drones and anti-armor weapons which have had a devastating impact [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/17/ukraine-war-briefing-australia-to-send-49-abrams-tanks-to-kyiv] upon heavy armor in the Ukraine-Russia war. However, when combined with advanced reconnaissance, networking and improved command and control, tanks seem to have proven to be uniquely valuable in Ukraine’s Kursk offensive. An essay in the BBC cited sources indicating that Britain’s Challenger 2 tank was successfully employed during the Kursk offensive, and it appears maneuvering tanks were likely able to use ISR to find weaker, more penetrable parts of Russia’s defenses. This enabled Ukrainian armored units to use an element of surprise and attack areas less fortified by barbed wire, attack drone swarms, anti-armor weapons and mines. New Tank Technologies What this demonstrates is that the firepower and pure mechanized attack “force” of a modern upgraded main battle tank, can perform critical, unique, much needed functions if used properly in a modern threat environment.tworked command and control likely enabled mechanized units to blast and maneuver through Russian defenses. In this respect, massively upgraded traditional tank platforms can use modern technologies, upgraded sensing and longer-range weapons to adapt tactics and remain extremely effective in a modern threat environment. Certainly the Abrams heavier weight can restrict mobility and the effective use of anti-armor weapons are changing tactics and concepts of operation for how best to employ tanks in combat, there is a distinct combat value offered by tanks which is nearly impossible to replicate. The US Army seems to understand this, which is why it is both developing lighter-weight and unmanned armored attack vehicles while also deploying upgraded Abrams tanks as well. The prevailing US Army consensus seems to be that both approaches are greatly needed, and they can be greatly optimized by reinforcing and utilizing one another. Kris Osborn [https://warriormaven.com/author/krisosborn] is President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University
