United States Army Reveals Key Changes to New M1E3 Abrams: Unmanned Turret, Diesel Engine, and Significantly Reduced Weight

The next-generation M1E3 Abrams tank will feature an unmanned turret, a diesel engine, and will be significantly lighter than existing versions. However, it is still at the technology demonstrator stage, rather than a prototype, as previously thought.

This was revealed in an interview with The Chieftain, a channel specializing in the history of tank building, by Colonel Ryan Howell, Director of Integration for the US Army’s Office of Program Capabilities (Ground Systems).

Despite initial assumptions, the new M1E3 Abrams is still not a prototype of the future tank, but a demonstrator redesigned using new technologies and taking into account new threats.

“No, this is not the final product. This is an early prototype demonstrator of M1E3 technologies. The focus is on the crew. And the fundamental question that needs to be answered is: how do you fight with this vehicle with a reduced crew, using digital tools that were not previously available in the modern environment? This is what this vehicle will help determine when we actually start building prototypes,” explained Colonel Howell.

The colonel cited the inability to overcome the fundamental problems of the existing tank as the reason for abandoning further modernization of the M1A2 to the Sep V4 level and switching to the M1E3. In particular, its heavy weight, the need for protection against drones, and the integration of new digital tools.

For example, the promising tank should weigh up to 60 tons, while the existing M1A2 SEP V3 weighs 66.8 tons. In addition, considerable attention is being paid to improving software and simplifying the work of operators.

“For example, we paid a lot of attention to what the software should do and how realistic it is to switch to open source or commercial standards — that’s the key… Then the workplaces are focused on how to give an 18-year-old today, who plays War Thunder, Halo, Call of Duty, a rich user experience so that he can transfer that experience to the platform — and fight with that philosophy in the future,” said Colonel Howell.

Another radical innovation will be the reduction of the tank crew to three people. The new tank will have an unmanned turret with an automatic loading system, and all crew members will be located in the front of the tank. At the same time, any of the workstations of any crew member will be able to duplicate the functions of another station.

In order to accommodate the crew in the front of the tank, the fuel tanks were removed and the upper and lower front parts were additionally reinforced to ensure reliable protection.

At the same time, there are no plans to replace the gun, as the experience of using American tanks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces has shown that “its lethality is more than sufficient for the needs of the Army.”

The US Army wants to abandon the gas turbine engine in future tanks, installing a modified commercial diesel engine from Caterpillar instead. Judging by the published photos, this is likely to be a military version of the C13D engine with a power output of 1,000 hp.

At the same time, the traditional torsion bar suspension system is also being replaced with a modified hydro-pneumatic suspension. It is claimed that it will take up less space and be lighter. The tracks have also been replaced with a new optimized design, which will “save” a ton of weight.

As the colonel noted, despite all the changes, the new tank will continue to have the M1 index, since the requirements for the tank and the basic design remain “the same,” just implemented using modern technologies.

“The hull is the same. The gun is the same. The ammunition is the same. Most of the protection scheme is the same. It’s just a different technical implementation of what General Starry formulated in the 1970s. Back then, the requirements were correctly identified. And at the end of the day, a tank is still a tank: it needs armor, mobility, lethality, and protection. These fundamentals do not change, regardless of the technical implementation. So do we have new requirements as such? No,” he explained.