AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

VS debates involving other fictional universes than Star Trek or Star Wars go here, along with technical analysis, detailed discussion, crossover scenario descriptions, and similar related stuffs.
Post Reply
Enterprise E
Bridge Officer
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:30 pm
Location: UFP Earth

AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

Post by Enterprise E » Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:55 am

An AT-AT Walker takes on an M1A2 Abrams main battle tank. They start on an open plain 500 meters from each other.

Who wins?

Starship Captain
Posts: 1644
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Sol system, Earth,USA

Re: AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

Post by sonofccn » Tue Jul 03, 2018 4:34 pm

I think I'd have to give it to the AT-AT for this one. Yes its slow and lumbering and a big, fat target I don't think an Abrams could possibly miss but its greater height should give the AT-AT a greater range of fire for its chin guns and its "maximum firepower" blast should be enough to ruin an Abrams day while even if the tank's gun can pierce the walker's armor I'm not as certain it would be as critical.

But admittedly that's just my gut instinct on this and I could be wrong.

-Respectfully, Sonofccn

Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:51 am

Re: AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

Post by Picard578 » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:13 am

500 meters is well within the effective distance of both vehicles. If Abrams can penetrate walker's armour it may win - it should be able to penetrate cockpit armour at least, I think (we know a flaming speeder can). OTOH walker will easily ruin its tracks, and may be able to penetrate top armour even if front armour proves immune.

User avatar
Starship Captain
Posts: 1983
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm

Re: AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

Post by 2046 » Sun Jul 29, 2018 5:25 am

500 meters is basically a pistol duel at five paces; whoever shoots first wins.

Darth Spock
Bridge Officer
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: A Beta Quadrant far far away

Re: AT-AT Walker vs. M1A2 Abrams

Post by Darth Spock » Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:07 pm

I think it comes down to just how Imperial armor deals with kinetic weapons. Judging by the supersonic Kamino saberdart (by my ear at least, despite its lack of damage), the CIS defoliator launcher and possibly even the proton cannons it would appear that the concept of kinetic launchers has not been neglected to the point of being too underdeveloped. There are also the long standing references to the AT-TE's main gun being a mass driver, although that is hard to reconcile with on screen evidence. The point being that if kinetics offered any kind of significant tactical advantage, they'd likely be using them more often.

In terms of raw kinetic energy the Abrams' gun is still within an order of magnitude of the firepower of the heavy tanks and roughly equal to towed pieces of WW2. It's the specific attributes of the DU APFSDS rounds that make the difference, and how they would react to the unknown means by which the AT-AT defenses deal with kinetic impacts. The AT-AT has proven itself vulnerable enough, and the Abrams' M256 is potent enough I doubt the walker could just "tank" fire without consequence, but I do question how much damage a single round would do. If the highly specialized penetrator has a significant advantage over the AT-AT's armor, then it's a quick draw contest like 2046 said, but the Abrams still better make its first shots count, it can't spam like the walker.

On the other hand, if the Abrams' gun only manages to roughly equal the effectiveness of similar ordinance in the SW universe, then it'd need to precisely target a weak spot and/or hit the walker repeatedly in short order to cripple it. The tank just isn't in a position to do that, even if it were given an ambush advantage of starting beside or behind the walker, the tank just isn't fast enough to stay out of the walkers firing arc for long at that range. Unless the Abrams can kill the AT-AT quickly, the odds skew to the walker. Even using lower end estimates for blaster firepower, they would still easily rival modern HEAT weapons. With a rate of fire easily four times that of the Abrams, the AT-AT just needs to hold down the trigger until they land a solid hit, eventually crippling and destroying the tank.
That'd be my take on it anyway.

Post Reply