First, some musings; then, my question.
With the the relative paucity of hi-tech ATGMs and launching platforms like helis and fixed wing tac-air, MBTs that made it to 2000 would have a better chance of hanging around than they would have had prior to, and shortly after the TDM. ATGM (and aircraft) production would have pretty much stopped after late '97. I imagine that most of what was produced before then would have been used up by the Battle of Kalisz.
LAWs and RPGs (not including tandem warhead versions) are not as deadly to modern MBTs as ATGMs. Abrams and Challenger tanks in Iraq have both survived multiple RPG hits relatively unscathed. Unless you can hit a chink in the armor (literally), the most you can hope for is a mobility kill. With slatted armor and improvised supplemental armor (tank tracks, welded on armor plates, sandbacks, chains, etc.), the chances of surviving an RPG or LAW hit are even better. I figure than most reactive armor would have been used up by 2000. Really, the biggest threat to an MBT in 2000 would be AT mines, another MBT, or the rare AT gun.
Anyway, those are just a few of my thoughts. MBTs would be very rare by 2000, but, IMO, they would be a lot harder to kill then too.
Here's my related question. I'm trying to find some info about modern U.S. and Soviet/Russian tank transporters and I haven't come across much. My Google searches are turning up mostly info on WWII tank transporters. The modern ones I've found are mostly European made. I figure a few of you know something about this topic. I hear that road marches are hell on tracks and that, whenever and wherever possible, tanks are moved around on rolling stock and/or truck trailers to spare them wear and tear. It's odd that I'm having so much trouble finding info/pics on modern U.S. and Russian tank transporters. Help!
Thanks.