Why the U.S. army needs M1A1 Abraham tanks if could use multiple missiles launch tanks?

Question

I know they coud be useful, but in differet jobs, I mean. what is the M1A1 specific job? Why The Multiple Missiles Launch Tank isn´t useful in the same situation?

Yeah, you can say me: "the missile you speak of do you mean the MLRS artillery or anti tank missiles both are no replacement for the M1"... but I want to say whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, the reaaaaaaaaasooooooooon... grrrrrrrrrrr :(

I want yo know why.... the reason!!!!

Answer 1

Let a tanker answer this one. An MLRS is great if you want to rain death on someone from 50 miles out, but it also has a minimum range, and is actually not heavily armored enough to survive most knock down, drag-out fights an Abrams is likely to find itself in. In an up close and personal situation, the MLRS is basically useless. The Abrams on the other hand, can kill just about anything from point blank range out to over two miles. Even if the enemy gets close enough to render the main gun ineffective, a tank still has three machine guns to blow their asses away. At close range, any tank is better than any artillery piece. Period.

Answer 2

the M1A1 is the best tool to kill other tanks, take ground, and support the infantry.

the missile you speak of do you mean the MLRS artillery or anti tank missiles both are no replacement for the M1

Answer 3

The Multiple Launch Rocket System is a versatile weapon system that supplements traditional cannon artillery fires by delivering large volumes of firepower in a short time against critical, time-sensitive targets. These targets often include enemy artillery, air defense systems, mechanized units, and personnel. MLRS units can use their system's "shoot and scoot" capability to survive while providing fire support for attacking manuever elements. MLRS is not intended to replace cannon artillery, but has been designed to complement it.

Answer 4

This is just a guess but perhaps the Abrams has more mobility and armor which may give it an advantage in a heavy battle situation, and of course maybe it's just that the Abrams costs less than the multiple launch tank

Answer 5

A multiple launch tank cannot be used on a lot of missions whereas the M1A1 and M1A2 can accomadate infantry operations where it's main gun is an asset for urban warfare.

Answer 6

Unknown U - Did you just say that Abraham tanks are of Jewish interest? What the heck are you talking about?

It's the Abrams tank, not Abraham, and has nothing to do with Jewish interests. It's named after a famous US general, Creighton Abrams.

Jeez, some of you people need to think before you post.

Answer 7

There is one sad truth to war... any war. No matter what you do, who/how many you kill, you don't control land unless you put someone there who is willing to bleed and shed blood. That person must be able to stand there and kill to gain or maintain/deny others the control of land.

Air strikes, missiles, artillery, mortars, are all good to help gain and control ground. Without the Infantry and the Armor, you can't hold land. Tactically war is, in part, about holding and controlling resources. resources are in or on land (generally).

Answer 8

M1A1 job.... kill enemy tanks, protect troops
when it fires a round it has someones name on it

MLRS job... kill everything in a 1 mil-grid square
when MLRS fires off a volley they are to who ever it may concern

Answer 9

The MLRS is a long-range death dealer. The Abrams is an up-close and personal way to kill those freakin' morons.

Answer 10

They need both. That way they can have the right tool for the right job.

That is like saying why does a construction worker need a framing hammer when he can have a 12 pound sledge hammer.