If you can jam the missiles guidance at a range that would prevent target destruction, the missile would become ineffective. That would reduce the anti tank threat down to LAW/RPG weapons. I was curious as to how far out from the target that would need to be.
The “Next Generation M1 Abrams” should be revealed 10-12 October at AUSA 2022.
I don’t know what the reveal will be…a scale mockup, a movie, a photo, or a working prototype…but hopefully we’ll see more of this tank in a better and clearer light.
Basically a new turret?
And two hatches in the hull, maybe an unmanned turret?
There is another photo too.
So this new photo seems to show a robotic engineering vehicle for mine clearance, a new Stryker with CROWS-Javelin (missile not mounted) and perhaps a higher hull, a Next-Generation M1 with possible 30mm and 12.7mm COAX roof turret, Trophy APS, two CITVs, and cameras in the hull…yes, seems like a remote unmanned turret…and a Stryker MSL with radar for detecting helicopters and drones.
Now the thing is that it’s all a fantasy because the U.S. Army has none of these and the Stryker MSL was not selected to the Stryker IM-SHORAD.
Would this create a better SBCT armored task force? Maybe…but unless the Stryker 8X8 has better armor than 14.5mm AP, would you team these GDLS vehicles to work together? And there is no Stryker IM-SHORAD in the photo = no real air defense. Would the new Stryker’s frontal glacis protect higher than 14.5mm AP since it seems thicker?
Another point is that I wonder if the Next-Gen M1 has Chobham/Burlington armor then. Negating Chobham from the turret would really lighten it. The U.S. Army wanted crew in the hull for a long time (Future Combat System,) so Chobham armor in the hull might be required.
Finally, these vehicles are getting so complex that any hit is bound to damage something. The cameras in the hull may be armored, but even bullets and shrapnel can damage sensitive cameras.
Hopefully, AUSA 2022 will shed more light on all of this.
Personally, I’m for all of it…IF the U.S. Army can afford them.
1 Like
And therein lies the onion, if the US Army can afford it… Then there is the performance of such a loaded chassis as seen here. And Peter, you’re dead right, a small hit to a camera and the crew is blind. APS will work against large calibre incoming, think peer to peer tank, but not an AK 74 mag.
But would make for a great model!! I’m all for it.
Just found this, M1A2SEPv4
1 Like
In those photos - what is that box forward of the smoke grenade case?
@loncray The M1A2SEPv4 will have laser warning receivers so I’m assuming those boxes on the front are them. No other M1 has laser warning receivers except the v4.
I’m seeing those boxes on the rear above the turret basket too.
@Newtonk These would make AWESOME models, prototype or not! 
But I do wonder if this is a private venture by GDLS or Request for Proposal by the U.S. Army. Remember that photo of the U.S. Army conference where some tank models were blurred out? (Image from Popular Mechanics, November 2020).
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a34588107/army-m1a2-abrams-tank-replacement-clues/
Are these those blurred out models designs?
I’ve been advocating for a new M1 turret as the new technology is getting too complex and integral to just be tacking on new systems to the M1A2SEPs and increasing their weight.
Further analysis based on the CAD images…
Next-Gen M1
- It remains to be seen if the three hull hatches are the only way to enter and exit the crew compartment because are there any roof hatches to exit a second way?
- Is there an autoloader? If not, does the loader sit in the turret?
- The 30mm will help against drones with airbursting munitions, but can it mount Stingers or APKWS rocket pods COAX?
- Notice that the smoke grenade launchers are semi-hidden.
- There is no Gunner’s Primary Sight (GPS), which means that the two CITVs will have to perform as well as the GPS. Can the CITVs rotate inside their housings to prevent shrapnel damage?
- There appears to be some sensors mounted on the 30mm rooftop gun…Anti-drone jammers or small radars?
- Can the frontal camera bar contain Anti-IED sensors too?
- It has the lightweight “Pepperpot” 120mm gun as on the GDLS’s “Griffin II.”
- Only one side of the turret glacis has sensors on the edge.
- It still retains a 7.62mm COAX.
- Can the machine gun ammo be reloaded inside, meaning can the crew in the hull access the turret?
Next-Gen Stryker
- No driver’s compartment, meaning an in-hull module for the crew, increasing protection, but how about increased frontal armor protection?
- Does it have a new engine and transmission?
- The front bow contains cameras.
- Despite all the prototypes and testing, I see no Active Protection Systems on this such as “Iron Curtain” or “Iron Fist.”
Robotic Engineering Vehicle
- Is that a MICLIC box launcher on top?
- It appears to be remote-controlled
- Not sure if it has a crane or boom arm on the other side of the roof box.
Stryker MSL Radar
- If built, then the U.S. Army can add the Avenger turret with Sidewinder and Hellfire missiles (see photo in my above post), providing a SAM with greater range than Stinger SHORADs. The MSL chassis needs to be acquired. Photos show up to three Sidewinders and four Hellfires can be mounted. The Sidewinder can engage ground targets too with the AIM-9X out to 26 miles, but being launched from the ground, the range is a lot shorter (but sure beats 3.1 miles (5 KM) for Stinger).
- This makes sense to cue “Iron Dome” and possible U.S. Army future Surface to Air Missiles.
- Will help with Project Convergence.
- Will help with Anti-Drone, M6 Linebacker, and IM-SHORAD and Patriot battery detection.
- Will help with counter-fire radar for artillery
- Can be forward-deployed and requires no time for radar breakdown and setup
- Adds a mobile radar that the U.S. Army lacks and this one rotates 360-degrees
- Most likely Gallium Nitride-made radar
Personally, I think before the U.S. Army bites on any of these GDLS offerings, it should buy the 20mm Phalanx Centurion C-RAM on HEMETT first. All the C-RAMs are currently trailer-towed and fixed-position.
1 Like
PM were visionaries as those where Marine tanks. 
@Tank_1812 If the “Next-Gen M1” is lighter than the M1A1 Abrams, I wonder if the USMC will reintroduce tanks into their inventory again.
One reason that the USMC divested of their tanks was that they were too far behind US Army upgrades and that the tanks were getting too heavy to transport via hovercraft (and the fuel consumption). Furthermore, the USMC figured that they can kill armor further away with missiles.
But exercises have proven than five MEU(SOC) M1A1 tanks did make a “breakthrough the stalemate” difference in training during African allied partner trainings.
I don’t think we will have heavy armor again. Those bodies have been used elsewhere, I don’t see them increase force size to get armor bodies.
I agree…if any future USMC tanks, most likely 105mm MPFs, but the USMC seems to do away with all tracked armor.
1 Like
The new generation tank from Nexter and KMW will include an autoloader and a 4th crewman in charge of the 30mm rws and the uav that will do the recce for the tank. Maybe the new abrams will have this layout as well.
GDLS has released a Press Release about the four AFVs.
https://www.gd.com/Articles/2022/10/04/general-dynamics-business-units-to-participate-in-ausa-2022
- The AbramsX has a hybrid-electric drive engine with 50% less fuel consumption than the M1A2.
- The StrykerX has 360-degree “See through” cameras and more space for the infantry squad
- The Stryker MSL is not a radar, but an Anti-drone microwave weapon
- The Robotic Engineering Vehicle is called the TRX Breacher
Analysis can be found here.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/next-generation-abramsx-tank-will-have-hybrid-powerplant
AbramsX, Captures from GD ground systems introduction video at AUSA.
You’d think after M1 theyd know it needs more of a bustle rack…
4 Likes
Hello to all,
There is a video on YouTube showing the M1X Technology Demonstrator that some may find interesting.
Respectfully,
Allen
Sorry, I missed Trisaw’s previous posting! 
1 Like