US Tanks In Europe Get Invisible Futuristic Missile Shield To Counter Russian Threat

Back in March, we detailed how the United States Army M1 Abrams tank, an American third-generation main battle tank, was in the process of being upgraded with an invisible missile shield that will destroy all chemical energy anti-tank threats and other threats before reaching the vehicle. We even said, “that Washington is preparing their main battle tank for the next evolution of hybrid wars.”

Known as Trophy, this is the world’s first and only fully operational Active Protection System and Hostile Fire Detection System for armored vehicles. This cutting-edge technology will provide M1 Abrams tanks with 360-degree security from all threats, as advanced algorithms are continually detecting, locating, and neutralizing anti-tank threats on the battlefield.

We even noted that the Trophy system was tested thoroughly on select M1A2 tanks in Europe and the Middle East. With much of the testing classified, there were still several unanswered questions surrounding what region(s) of the world the upgrades would go.

However, in a new report on Thursday, the United States Army has decided to deploy the missile shields for M1 Abrams tanks to Europe “as part of a sweeping effort to better arm its Armored Brigade Combat Teams and counter Russian threats in the region,” said Warrior Maven, as quoted by Fox News. 

“Not only will we be fielding one set of Trophy on Abrams tanks to Europe, but also three other brigades,” Maj. Gen. John Ferrari, Director, Program Analysis and Evaluation, G-8, told Warrior Maven in an interview.

“The weapons plus-up for Europe-bound Active Protection System is woven into the 2019 budget request,” he added.

The Trophy system employs advanced algorithms that use radar to provide continuous 360-degree protection. The bolt on kit includes four antennas and two rotating launchers mounted on the turret of each tank (see below).

Once the threat is discovered, the algorithm classifies the threat, and if a direct hit is calculated, the countermeasure systems are automatically activated, and a tight pattern of explosively shaped penetrators launches at the warhead to neutralize the threat (as shown below).

Rafael Advanced Defense Systems says the Trophy system has been thoroughly tested, qualified, and is already in production for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The system debuted in 2009 and had proven to work exceptionally well in the Gaza Strip and other hot spots around Israel.

Warrior Maven points out that the immediate deployment of Trophy systems for American tanks in Europe is to counter new high-tech Russian technology, which has been deployed to the European Russia border.

“Trophy is the kind of armored vehicle ground-war weapon of particular value in the event of a major land combat engagement against a fortified, well-armed adversary such as Russia. Systems of this kind have been in development for many years, however the rapid technological progress of enemy tank rounds, missiles and RPGs is leading the Army to more rapidly deploy Active Protection System for its fleet of Abrams tanks deploying to Europe.”

Warrior Maven also describes the Pentagon’s biggest fear:

“APS on Abrams tanks, quite naturally, is the kind of protective technology which could help US Army tanks in tank-on-tank mechanized warfare against near-peer adversary tanks, such as a high-tech Russian T-14 Armata tank.

The 48-ton modern T-14 tank is widely reported to be able to reach speeds of 90-kilometers per hour; it is built with an unmanned turret, without a “fume extractor” and is designed for a 3-man crew surrounded by an armored capsule

While much has been made of the T-14 Armata’s cutting-edge technology, including its active protection, 12-round per minute firing range and 125mm smoothbore cannon in numerous public reports and assessments, it is not at all clear that the T-14 in any way fully outmatches current and future variants of the Abrams tank.

Army Abrams modernization efforts are without question being designed to meet and exceed any dangers posed by rival nation tanks, including the T-14. Concerns about the threat posed by the T-14 Armata are, without question, informing US tank and weapons developers.”

Essentially, Washington’s much-needed modernization efforts of invisible force fields, are to protect M1 Abrams from Russian anti-tank weapons and its new high-tech T-14 Armata, all evidence suggests — a major conflict could soon be on the horizon.  


fx ted41776 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:38 Permalink

A nonsensical military spending. Since the Russians have zero desire or intention to drive into Europe, you will never need a tank opposing the Armata. And if - what is the actual goal - USA/NATO think they could invade Russia with legions of these abrams tanks, Russia will have no option but tu strike USA/NATO countries full blown nuclear in self-defense.

And they will do, before NATO can overrun them. The thought of fighting a "limited conventional war with russia" is totally ridiculous. It will not happen outside Russia, since Russia won't attack anyone. It will not happen on Russian soil (or will be totally irrelevant if it did) for the reason stated.

But thank god, the zionists and armament producers can leech the taxpayers for many more billions in "defense spending".

In reply to by ted41776

Adolph.H. fx Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:47 Permalink

The Abrams is a piece of shit powered by a turbine that fucks up regularly in Sandy and dusty environments. Try applying lipstick on a pig and you would get the same effect as this modernization. 

Why would anyone with 2 cents of common sense develop a turbine based tank for this kind of environment evades me, maybe this was the grand final test before starting to work on the F-35... The U.S. MIC has its mysterious ways. 

It is not about making U.S. tanks better than their Russian counterparts. It has more to do with sending more money to the Jewish state for an innovation they made thanks to U.S. money. 

Whatever you can think of it, it looks like Americans are the most gullible people on the planet. They get racketeered by the Jews who in turn sell them what they developed with the money they stole in the first place. Double dipping I believe they call it, and they wouldn't mind triple dipping or even more. Look at the hollowcost (tm) legend for examples of 100 dipping or more. 

And then there's this point about Americans winning wars that I don't get. Must be some kind of joke, go figure...

But at least now they've got a sitting duck with some protection against first impacts. The great U.S. soldiers will survive a bit longer before cooking. 


It's okay not to be a Jew.


In reply to by fx

JohninMK Siberian Mon, 04/16/2018 - 05:43 Permalink

If it actually works, as opposed to the sales puff above, it will probably do OK against its current adversaries, that is the single ATGM team firing across open fields or desert.

But that is not a war in Europe. In that scenario the ATGM team is in an armoured vehicle (fitted with a gun) along with other teams in other vehicles and helicopters plus tanks firing shells. This means that a target tank, and this applies to the T-14 as well as an Abrams, is likely to face being raked by 30-100mm shells who's objective is disabling any sensors and vision systems along with near simultaneous attack 120mm AP shells and missiles from different directions. Plus of course, in the case of Russia especially, artillery shells or rocket sub-munitions coming down almost vertically in top attack mode.

Whilst a great idea its biggest achievement is likely to be lining the pockets, sorry adding campaign contributions, of the politicians in the decision cycle and boosting the post military careers of some individuals.

This is a good old fashioned pork barrel with the added irony of being Israeli pork, if that isn't a contradiction.

In reply to by Siberian

Stackers RafterManFMJ Mon, 04/16/2018 - 08:05 Permalink

What are these morons talking about "The first and only active protection system" ? These system have been deployed and in use for years by Russia and Europeans. They developed these systems instead of trying to deploy heavy armor 60ton tanks like M1 because unlike the the US army everyone else figured out trying to move around a tank that weighs 130,000+ lbs is insanely hard to do.

In reply to by RafterManFMJ

M.A.Meddybemps JohninMK Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:06 Permalink

I am sorry but you seem to think there is going to be thousnds of combat arms teams with running around one or two per tank in the field. It doesn't work that way.  Multiple ATM teams firing multiple missiles at a tank is a way to quickly become nothing more then light infantry, if you survive the response. Firing 30 Mike Mike at a tank hoping to hit its sensors is just asking to be on the receiving end of a HEAT round. 

Trophy uses 2 different systems together.  The "antenna"(They are not antenna) system  is for locating the enemy immediately after it has fired. Th system can isolate particular sound signatures that identify type of threat and position of the enemy even in a chaotic loud battlefield.   This type of system has been around for a while, updated, and test.  The original system was used to locate snipers. The radar portion works with a multi directional device that detects incoming RPGs / ATMs, fires a explosive round set to explode a certain distance from the vehicle to pre detonate and diffuse the explosive device used. It has a quick auto loader to be ready for the next detected threat.

All this is being done without the main weapon system being needed as a resource to combat incoming threats leaving the main weapon systems of the tank free to engage the enemy.

None of this is really a secret and most of the major countries that have significant armored forces are working on something similar.

You were correct on the top of the turret being vulnerable but that has been beefed up in recent generations for the M1.

The Armata is the latest Russian wonder tank that is to be the new armored boogie man. No matter what they do, the propellant charges for the ammunition are vulnerable and if penetrated the turret tends to end up 30 feet away. Crew will be vaporized per usual and the only person with a slim chance of survival is the tank commander who is lucky to be blown up through the TC hatch and clear of the destroyed vehicle.  Other then that, you were spot on.

In reply to by JohninMK

Fiscal.Enema fx Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:06 Permalink

If you spray contact rubber cement on the optics of any tank they become blinded. You can't get that stuff off and the tank can't shoot straight. As far as Trophy, it's a shotgun shell fired at close range to destroy/disable a fragile missile. That's it. If you have a kinetic penetrator, that's a different story. If you fire a cannon ball at a tank, the cannon ball shatters the ceramic armor and the tank becomes vulnerable. Then its easy pick'n for sabots.

In reply to by fx

Cloud9.5 fx Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:08 Permalink

So, some armored vehicles are protected by a force field.  It must be able to pre detonate shoulder fired missiles rendering them useless.  This does nothing for kinetic weapons shooting tungsten carbide and depleted uranium projectiles.  Knock the tracks off and that third generation tank becomes a pill box.   It also would have limited effect on IED’s and the time honored solution of Molotov cocktails.

Take out the fuel supplies and the whole column becomes a long line of paperweights. What one man can contrive, another man can dismantle.


In reply to by fx

Richard640 Adolph.H. Mon, 04/16/2018 - 07:56 Permalink









In reply to by Adolph.H.

rtb61 Adolph.H. Mon, 04/16/2018 - 08:20 Permalink

What they are not telling you and why it is a lie. Here is a fact, you never deploy tanks without infantry support, otherwise they become extremely vulnerable to tanks with infantry support, it's called combined arms.

Firing radar at infantry at close ranges is really quite bad for them. So being a grunt on the ground means your genes are being fried and you just got killed by a cancer machine.

Sucks to be a grunt, when your own side will actively kill you to protect it's machines, they are worth more than you, you are a member of the 99% cannon fodder brigade. With friends like that, it's safer to be the enemy. The closer you are to ionising radiation, the worse off you are.

PS much easier to protect a missile from specific radiation that you in the battle, yeah, your toast cooked from the inside out. Also they might consider reading quora a ballistic trajectory. Not to mention, dirty tanks on dirty and dusty battlefields and what it does to fussy equipment that needs to be spotlessly clean, even during the heat of battle.

Don't go to war and you don't have a problem and on yeah, what about enemy tanks with radar detection equipment, you just lit yourself up for everyone to see, like duhh.

In reply to by Adolph.H.

you_are_cleared_hot Adolph.H. Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:30 Permalink

Adolph, I assume you never spent any time inside an M1? well then please excuse the virtual dope slap. There are 3 major reasons why the Army wanted a Gas Turbine in the M1 at the time. 1) With a turbine you have multi-fuel options (auto gas, jet fuel, other kerosene variants etc.); 2) Re-engine (maintenance) of the tank. It takes only 4 bolts (that are super easy to get to to remove the gas-turbine and swap it out for a is designed to to be plug-and-play; 3) Thermal efficiency - the gas turbine has a much higher torque band than any other tank (yes, the M1 is SUPER heavy at 65 Tons, which is why you need a powerful ) to get you up to speed much faster.

That dumb-ass, is why there are Gas-Turbines in M1 tanks.

In reply to by Adolph.H.

M.A.Meddybemps MedTechEntrepreneur Mon, 04/16/2018 - 16:19 Permalink

Of course it was the CIA. It had nothing to do with Russian separatist known as Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) attacking the Donetsk Aiport.

GO Play the "CIA made us do it  bullshite" with someone who doesn't know better.  It is, and always was, about the resources in the Ukraine that Mother Russia wants to get back since direct access was lost when the Soviet Union went tits up. 

I do not think any other country can match the level of paranoid and delusion that flows out of Mother Russia and it's apologists.  It is her greatest export.   


In reply to by MedTechEntrepreneur

ATM ted41776 Mon, 04/16/2018 - 09:52 Permalink

The real economic implications are far more dire than the small profits made by treating cancer.

The 10,000 lb gorilla in the room is longer life expectancy. We need people to die early so that they don't consume medicare, SSI and other government funded programs.

Your civic duty is to die sooner! Never forget it.

In reply to by ted41776

OutaTime43 khnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 04:30 Permalink

It's already been basically cured.

So has heart disease but the treatment will never see the light of day because of its cost and nobody can make it profitable.  Sad, but true.  ETC216 , now MDCO216. Didn't fail trials but the company decided that it wasn't cost effective. 

Sad right?

In reply to by khnum

kaboomnomic khnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 06:35 Permalink

Tyler. You should broaden your mind Tyler.


" Known as Trophy, this is the world’s first and only fully operational Active Protection System and Hostile Fire Detection System for armored vehicles... "


Introducing... Drozd,

That's created in 77-78.


Also.. introducing... Shtora.

That's created in 1988.


Wants to see Shtora in actions in Syria?? Here. Shtora against US TOW.


The terrorists fired 2 (TWO) US TOW missiles to Syrian Tanks.


- - -


Next Tyler?? Introducing... Arena APS.

That is created in 1993.


Here, the video of Arena test using REAL RPG's!!


All T-90 Armata tanks comes with Shtora & Arena APS.


- - -


For Helicopter or small aircraft? Introducing... President-S

Here, the test of President-S IR Jammer system.


That is a REAL Helo's with a REAL Manpads (Igla-S MANPADS)


And here's the NEW Rhychag ECM system (still under govt test)


- - -


You should broaden your mind Tyler...


In reply to by khnum

tmosley khnum Mon, 04/16/2018 - 08:09 Permalink

You can cure most cancers by going on an ultra-low carb diet. Most cancers require glucose for their metabolism. If your blood glucose drops to zero, the cancer cells die.

Also, get rid of the FDA and the patent system and I can have you an injectable cancer cure in a few months. Using molecular targeting with a catalytic payload that oxidizes the targeted cells and nothing else.

In reply to by khnum

Delicieuxz Mon, 04/16/2018 - 02:52 Permalink

It is confirmed that the US government's claim that all its missiles hit their targets in Syria is a propaganda lie, meant for consumption by Western audiences, and that Russia's claim of intercepting 71 of 103 or 105 missiles is either very accurate, or entirely accurate.

We know that the US claim is false right off the bat, because video proof shows one of the US' missiles being knocked out of the sky above Damascus:


And there is additional video footage of other of the US, UK, and France's missiles being successfully intercepted here:…

The same link reports that the US government is in confusion over how so many of its missiles were intercepted by Syria's old Soviet defences, and is launching a probe. South Front suggests that new Russian electronic warfare equipment could have a role in Syria's surprise defence.


Further new footage of the US / UK / France strike on Syria shows the US' "smart" Tomahawk missiles being lit up like popcorn in the sky.



So, we know that the US' claim of all its missiles hitting their targets is false. But exactly how false? And, conversely, how accurate is Syria and Russia's own claim about the number of missiles intercepted by old Soviet-era anti-missile systems?

Well, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based anti-Assad human rights organization which is regularly quoted by US and UK mainstream news media, observed the US attack on Syria, and reported they witnessed in-excess of 65 of the US' missiles that Trump bragged about being successfully intercepted:


And Syrian MP also cheered the overwhelming failure of the US' newest "smart" missile on Twitter:


Also, Assad has praised the performance of their old Soviet-era anti-missile systems by saying:

“Yesterday we were faced with an American aggression. And we were able to repel it with Soviet missiles from the 1970s. Since the 1990s, the American films presented the Russian weapons as lagging. And now we see who really lags behind.”


Another sign that Russia's claim of 71 US missiles being intercepted is that Syria has just agreed to purchase a bunch more Russian anti-missiles after witnessing the performance of the ones they already have in action against the US' best. Why would Syria be eager to buy more if the ones they had were ineffectual?


All in all, I think it looks like the US government is extremely humiliated by the overwhelming failure of its newest "smart" missiles, and is trying to cover up its extreme embarrassment. And the motivation for the US government to lie is obvious (though entirely unjustified):

The US government wants to protect its pride after a mostly-failed attack using its bragged-about newest "smart" missiles. It would be an absolute PR nightmare for the US if it was revealed that its best missiles were no match for Soviet ancient anti-missile systems (which Russia is selling much newer versions of).

The US' largely-failed attack is a huge threat to US arms sales, and to the appearance and assumption of US power, control, and domination.

And at the same time, the US likely wants to deny Russia the highly positive PR and marketing win for its anti-missile systems that the US / UK / France attack failure has created (hence Syria is now buying a bunch more anti-missile systems from Russia).

But the blatant propaganda lies that the US is now seemingly spreading are not justified by that.

OverTheHedge Delicieuxz Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:04 Permalink

Didn't Saddam Hussein have the same russian 30 year old kit? Didn't do him much good ( actually, it was nearly 30 years ago now that the first major air attack happened - he probably had what was now 60 year old kit).

I'm just wondering how many upgrades this ancient stuff has been given - not to take anything away from the result.

In reply to by Delicieuxz

socalbeach Delicieuxz Mon, 04/16/2018 - 03:16 Permalink

This analysis takes a different approach to refuting the Pentagon's claims.  Since all the missiles were shot down approaching several of the targets such as Syrian airfields, the US said that there were only 3 targets, and that 76 of the 105 thousand pound warheads were used to destroy 3 buildings at the so-called chemical weapons research facility objective. Sure I believe that.…

In reply to by Delicieuxz