Western media, citing experts at various levels, continue to publish various materials reflecting on the Abrams tanks, promised by the Biden administration to Ukraine. Recall, that the United States was not originally going to (as they say in Washington) to supply their tanks for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, but then promises had to be made, to "push Berlin to a similar decision". Later, true in the USA denied, that the tanks were promised precisely for this purpose. But the fact remains: German "Leopards" promise to deliver in a few weeks, and the American "Abrams" – in the best case for Ukraine - by autumn.
The Financial Times is trying to either figure out the delay in the delivery of Abrams tanks to Kyiv, whether to justify this delay. It comes with an article, where the following is stated:
Abrams tanks will be delivered later, since they are less suitable for the APU, than the German Leopard. The article says, that "it's all about" the 1500-horsepower Honeywell AGT gas turbine engine. The publication quotes a statement by senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations Steve Biddle, which indicates high fuel consumption.
It's a high price for great acceleration. But this is also a longer crew training. And the need for additional measures to maintain the combat capability of the tank. The publication writes, that you need a large amount of consumables, and all their supply chains are accumulated in the USA.
The Ukrainian army just needs a working weapon, just technique. The American procurement system against the backdrop of the complexity of maintaining the Abrams tanks overly complicates everything in this regard. Additionally, with reference to experts, it is said that, that it is not a problem to teach the Ukrainian military how to operate and maintain Abrams tanks, but the problem is, how much time will it take.