Tanks may eventually become obsolete the same way armored vehicles eliminated horse cavalry from modern battlefields, but that day has not come and the M1 Abrams will not be the Army’s last mechanized platform, according to Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley.
Milley said the Abrams is holding its own among existing tanks and that armored vehicles in general are still a potent force in warfare. However, he is avoiding the trap some of his predecessors did prior to World War I when they argued in favor of horse-mounted charges against machine guns.
“Are we, sort of, at that point where perhaps mechanized vehicles are going the way of horse cavalry?” Milley said July 27 during a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. “I don’t think so, but I am skeptical enough to continue to ask that.”
“We do need a new ground armored platform for our mechanized infantry and our tanks,” he added. “It is my belief, at least in the foreseeable future … there is a role to play in ground warfare for those type of formations.”
Milley said the existing M1 Abrams main battle tank is a “good, solid” vehicle that has undergone significant upgrades since its introduction in the 1980s.
“The tank that you see today visually looks exactly like the tank from 1980 when I was a 2nd lieutenant,” he said. “It is not exactly the same tank. The insides of that thing and the firing mechanisms, the engine compartment, the armor … that’s all been upgraded and modified over the years.”
But the Abrams, and the Bradley that fights alongside it in armored brigades, was fielded nearly 40 years ago, he added. They lack several emerging technologies that should be built into the base design of the next-generation combat vehicle.
The best chance the Army has of replacing those platforms rests with the Next-Generation Combat Vehicle, or NGCV, that is in its infancy.
“I have an entire group of people digging deep into just that,” he said, referring to NGCV. “It’s beyond a new tank. It’s a family of vehicles.”
The Army has established an NGCV “integrated concept development team” that is sorting out requirements for a new combat vehicle. By fiscal 2022, the Army expects to build two technology demonstrators – much in the vein of the current Future Vertical Lift effort to develop the next-generation rotorcraft – to evaluate.
Some technologies Milley wants to come standard on NGCV are already in the works as retrofits to Bradley and Abrams. Topping the list are active protection systems that protect vehicles from incoming enemy guided missiles without adding significant armor weight. He would also like the NGCV to have an automated turret, which would allow fewer crew members than the Abrams’ four.
The “Holy Grail of technologies” are new, lighter, stronger materials, Milley said.
“If we can discover a material that is significantly lighter in weight that gives you the same armor protection, that would be a real significant breakthrough,” he said.
The Army also is looking for “non-kinetic” technologies that will replace gunpowder-based weapons such as railguns and lasers.
“We’ve been using kinetic, powder-based munitions for five centuries,” Milley said.
Any new ground combat vehicle must also include robotic controls that allow for unmanned or optionally-manned operation, he said.
“We probably need to make sure it’s dual use so that the commander of the battle at the time has the option of having that vehicle manned or unmanned – they could flip a switch and it can be a robot,” he said.