Estimates indicate that by 2030 the country will have 366 U.S. Abrams, 360 K2s, 235 Leopards, and 150 PT-91 Twardys, while it is also working with the U.S. to establish production capabilities for Abrams spare parts.
This force could smash russia to pieces, especially given how degraded the russian military is at this point. Russia can produce 1000 tanks fairly quickly but their tanks are critically flawed and there is no cohesive institutional attempt to actually keep tank crews alive and upskill them continually in the russian military… whereas for Poland each of those ~1000 tank crews are and will be highly trained and treated as valuable, skilled professionals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jtkg2DEpalg
A good rundown of the Sepv3 Abrams, it is definitely a biased perspective but it is very thorough and conveys well why russian design lineage tanks are categorically outclassed by these in technology, doctrine and crew protection.
The Abrams uses a turbine engine like a jet aircraft, which inherently has higher fuel costs and takes more maintenance but the flipside is that a turbine engine can deliver intense bursts of power in the way a diesel/traditional engine can’t and this is what gives the Abrams its tactical maneuverability and agility despite its immense weight. It is very easy to see if you watch footage of an Abrams maneuvering aggressively how it doesn’t move like other tanks Note: this is why I would classify russian turtle tanks as true “heavy tanks” and the Abrams as a Main Battle Tank even though the Abrams may be heavier on paper, it is the inability to manuever that makes Heavy Tanks a failed concept.
As far as I am aware elite russian tank units preferred the turbine engine T-80 over other russian tank designs for the same reason, it allows the authority to move quickly when it matters the most, too bad for russians the T-80 is now extinct lol…
longer thought
The thing though that really separates the Abrams from the K2 and Leopard is the long tail incremental improvements in stabilization, optics, auxillary weapon systems, targetting and other systems that help the tank work as a cohesive and aware system (The CROWS system being a prime example). This has only become radically more important with drones which re-emphasize the focus on Abrams development after the Cold War on better optics and better auxillary weapons to retain situational awareness and quickly engage guerilla forces… which has lead naturally into a platform well suited to detecting drones as well as mounting kinetic antidrone systems like the Bullfrog.
Further a surveillance and loitering drone launcher has already been tested and integrated into the Abrams in a prexisting turret location replacing the turret loaders sponson box.
The reason the US military has jumped ship on developing the SepV3 into the Sepv4 Abrams and moved to create the M1E3 is that the next big leap in tanks are turning tanks into massive batteries with electric drivetrains that can lower heat emissions to reduce detectability and buckets of electrical power that can be shunted into engine torque or into counter drone laser systems… but even in that future the Sepv3 still compares far more favorably to the M1E3 than pretty much all other contemporary tanks because again traditional fossil fuel engines simply cannot create the bursts of torque that electric engines can.
It is wise that Poland is not putting all of their eggs in one basket especially given US politics, I don’t mean to minimize that angle of concern at all but it is worth recognizing what it is that makes the Abrams so dominant in order to understand the geopolitical picture better… most people do not understand the Abrams at all or what it is meant to do.
Can’t the Abram’s engine also accept multiple fuel types, meaning logistics are simpler?
Yeah but here is the thing about tanks, they are incredibly expensive, they guzzle fuel, they are a massive pain in the ass and are absolutely useless and almost incomprehensible to people in peacetime… so if you are going to go through the huge amount of work to bring them to bear at the most critical point of a war you are probably going to put good fuel in them because it is an easy way to eliminate risks of problems and after all that if the engine stalls than it was all for nothing… but yes presumably you can run them on a wide range of fuels I just don’t know if in practice that is done as anything but testing an “emergency” feature.
The point of these isn’t to use them all the time though, they aren’t meant to singlehandedly blow everything up and traverse the entire battlefield while doing it, they are for applying an industrial amount of force at the most intense and critical point of a land war. They are for entering a space nothing else can survive and smashing a path through or responding to and preventing the enemy from doing so.