US media says the upgraded Abrams is ready for the next era, but it has become a joke in front of China's new tank
The US journal "National Security Journal" gave a lengthy introduction to the Army's main new type of tank M1A2 SEPv3, calling it a bridge to war in 2040, and emphasized the modernization upgrades in fire control system, communication capabilities, and survivability of this model.
However, the real situation of this tank is far from as bright as the promotion.
After experiencing the lessons learned from the battlefield in Ukraine, the actual combat capability of the M1 series has been widely questioned.
At the same time, China's new generation of medium tank made its debut in the parade rehearsal, demonstrating a high level of intelligence, unmanned operations, and multi-functional coordination, directly contrasting with the so-called future tank of the US military, which appears bulky and outdated, becoming a joke.
From the technical configuration perspective, the M1A2 SEPv3 still continues the tank design logic at the end of the Cold War - high weight, high armor, heavy firepower, aiming to suppress the enemy's main battle equipment.
However, this approach has been completely refuted in reality.
The M1A1 tanks obtained by Ukraine were almost all destroyed or abandoned under the attacks of drones and long-range firepower, showing that this heavy platform cannot survive without air domain control and information superiority.
Even though the SEPv3 claims to have introduced active protection systems and battlefield interconnection communication capabilities, it has almost no means to deal with low-altitude penetration, low-cost, and clustered FPV drones.
Meanwhile, China's new tank centers on lightweight turret, unmanned operation modules, omnidirectional radar, and anti-drone systems, completely breaking away from the traditional tank's survival logic of relying on thick armor.
While one side is piling up armor and emphasizing firepower, the other is already thinking about perception distribution, network nodes, and multi-domain coordination. It is obvious who is living in the past.
More realistically, the US military emphasizes that the SEPv3 is a transitional platform to AbramsX, while AbramsX is still in the concept verification and prototype stage, and is far from practical deployment.
The so-called 2040 tank blueprint is more like an excuse for current product shortcomings.
In contrast, China's new tank is not a future imagination on paper, but a real force that is being actually compiled and entering the tactical system.
This tank not only emphasizes anti-drone and network warfare adaptability, but also introduces artificial intelligence assistance in fire control, driving, and target recognition, making it have stronger survival and combat coordination capabilities in complex environments.
China's approach realizes the transformation from the tank as an independent fire platform to the tank as a battlefield node, which is exactly the leap that the US military has not yet completed.
What is called preparing for the next generation of war should not just be budget rhetoric from the military-industrial complex.
The real future war is already underway; it is not happening in 2040, but now.
The system thinking and practical orientation shown by China's new tank indicate that its designers have deeply understood the change in the nature of war. While the US is still clinging to modifying tank platforms from several decades ago. The SEPv3 can't be the bridge to 2040, but rather a last bus to the obsolete battlefield.
Original text: www.toutiao.com/article/1841862084644876/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.