Russian media have credited the destruction of an M1A1 Abrams tank to a pair of FPV operators using cheap kamikaze drones assembled by volunteers.
The loss of the U.S.-supplied tank was previously noted after Russian video of it being tracked by a Russian drone were posted on social media followed by images of the tank in flames. Forbes suggested at the time that a drone was the most likely cause, but it may be surprising that the Abrams was taken out by small racing drones rather than the bigger, long-range Lancet. Russian propaganda tends to play up their big high-tech weapons, even when these are not so effective – like the supposedly hypersonic, supposedly unstoppable Kinzhal missile which turns out to be neither – so it is interesting that FPVs, which Russian commanders have tended to resist as ‘toys’, are getting the credit.
The kill may also tell us something about the current state and future of tank warfare.
‘Bull’ and ‘Dawn Warrior’
The operators were pictured on Russian miliary Telegram Channel Rybar, which has more than a million followers.
“These are FPV operators from the Central Military District, ‘Bull’ and ‘Dawn Warrior’ . It was they who destroyed the first Abrams, which tried to drive around the Russian land,” states Rybar.
The post notes that these two have destroyed many other vehicles previously, including a Bradley personnel carrier. Rybar started out as an amateur project in 2018 but when it became successful the founders turned pro. It is now a leading news source for the Ukraine war – and appears to be under the control of the Russian FSB security service. They do not publish anything critical of the war effort, but their output is focused on factual if slanted analysis rather than outright propaganda.
“It is doubly pleasant that the main armament of the guys is the people’s kamikaze drone ‘Ghoul’, and the guys themselves were trained at the ‘Turned at War’ facility, where the ‘Ghouls’ are assembled,” Rybar adds.
This is pleasing to Rybar because Ghoul production is funded by donations from supporters like their readers, rather than by the Russian state.
Ghoul History
The Ghoul FPV first appeared in a TASS story in May 2023, built by an anonymous group operating out of Sverdlovsk region. The makers say they carried out the entire development and production process with the support of donors, mainly from Telegram channels, without any government assistance. Like other FPVs on both sides, the Ghoul is a small, fast quadcopter able to carry an RPG warhead, secured with a plastic 3D-printed harness.
Last July, the team announced they had developed a repeater drone called Udlintel – literally, “Extension Cord” or “Extender” — for the Ghoul. Because the radio link is essentially line of sight, dropping behind hills or ridges is a big problem. The Extender acts as a very tall antenna and increases the effective range of the Ghoul from roughly 5-8 kilometers (3 to 5 miles) to around 10-16 kilometres (6-10 miles) or more – we looked at in in detail here. Flying repeaters allow FPV operators to hit targets far behind the front lines and from out of sight. The Abrams crew may have had no idea they were in danger until the first drone hit.
Hunter Killers
As we have seen, the Abrams was tracked by a Russian ZALA reconnaissance drone before the attack. Normally these drones act as spotters for Lancet kamikaze drones, which are more resistant to jamming and which carry a heavier warhead than an FPV like the Ghoul.
However, Russia only produces a few hundred Lancets per month, and there may have been none available even for an extremely high-value target like the Abrams. But FPV drone production is now running at more than 1,000 a day, with some sources claiming Russia produces a staggering 300,000 FPVs per month. So operators like Bull and Dawn Warrior have enough to attack anything they see.
The Abrams is one of the best-armored tanks in the world. Its frontal armor can easily shrug off a hit from the type of RPG warhead carried by a Ghoul. But drone operators have learned to attack a tank’s weakest spot. In the case of Russian tanks, an FPV strike on the thin armor at the turret rear will detonate stored ammunition and destroy it instantly. The Abrams does not have any such vulnerability – the ammunition is stored in a separate armored compartment with a blow-out panel – but the armor on the sides, rear and tops is much thinner than across the frontal arc.
Death Of A Thousand Cuts
Given that two operators are credited with the kill, we can assume that multiple FPV strikes were involved. This is fairly typical for FPV attacks. While a single hit in the right place may be enough, it often one or more strikes to immobilize a tank, typically by damaging the engine, followed by more to finish it off.
Engagements can range from the relatively elegant action in which a Russian T-90M was first blinded by one FPV, left abandoned and destroyed by a second to cruder operations like this one in which a Russian T-72B3 is simply hit again and again by at least six FPVs until it finally catches fire and explodes.
But at around $400 per drone — the Ghoul originally cost 50,000 rubles or $548, costs are said to have come down with large-scale production — operators can afford to use a lot of them against a multi-million-dollar tank. Abrams cost around $10m each. In fact they are cheap enough to use on any target; Russian FPV operators frequently target individual footsoldiers.
It seems that enough FPVs can destroy anything. Russia’s latest T-90Ms are far more robust than previous generations but are still taking heavy losses to FPVs. Western tanks including German Leopards, British Challengers and now the U.S Abrams are better at protecting their crew and allowing them escape alive, but even better overhead protection cannot ultimately save tanks.
When anti-tank guided missiles were introduced, tanks changed tactics. Suppressive fire prevented missile operators hitting, and tankers learned to use smoke dischargers or get behind cover fast when they were targeted. None of these tactics work against FPVs, and the sheer volume of kamikaze drones will make them a tough challenge. Further, they are evolving fast and next year’s drones will be far more lethal than the early versions currently fielded.
We cannot write tanks off just yet. But the loss of an Abrams suggest the clock may be ticking.
Read the full article here