Just a few other observations:
Attacking, or trying to attack the moving logistics convoys that supply the armored spearheads is a concept that dates back to WW2. It can be done, and during the Cold War both sides trained for it with CAS aircraft and artillery strikes, and now there is an increasing emphasis on drones. However a lot of that still hinges on who controls or is actively contesting the airspace with aircraft and AD assets, and while drones are becoming more prevalent, the technology to disable and shoot them down is also proliferating as well, such is the nature of conflicts.
While the Abrams has of course the 120mm cannon, as
@Husky_Khan noted the Abrams typically carries
at least 3 machineguns. The main gun's coaxial M240 7.62mm machinegun, the other M240 mounted at the loader's hatch position (along with a gunshield on more recent models) that he can optionally use if he's not busy loading, and also act as an extra set of eyes for the crew if needed, and the M2 .50 cal at the commander's station. In more recent models including M1's equipped with TUSK, the M2 .50 is mounted in a CROWS or similar remote-operated turret system above the commander, sometimes with several smoke grenade launchers attached. I've also heard of another option being considered for the commander's station for a remote system consisting of a twin mount, one M2 .50 cal. and an MK-19 40mm grenade launcher, though I don't know if or when it's been implemented yet. In addition, some modern M1's are now mounting an additional remote fired M2 .50 cal. machine gun coaxial with the main gun, in addition to the coaxial M240, presumably to use against light vehicles and structures (including humans).
Basically, the M1 Abrams carries a lot of machine guns, which are bad for enemy infantry and light vehicles. If an enemy sapper get to close to or on one, a jargon used by some American tankers is "delousing" where they'll spray their buddies tank with 7.62mm machine gun fire to kill said sappers.
I don't know what the personal arms loadout would be for Ukrainian tankers, but while it's common for US Army tankers to at least carry pistols and several rifles for defense, sometimes the equipment loadout can get crazy. "The Chieftain", a former US Army tanker over on Youtube related a story about their personal weapons loadout during the Iraq war:
"Sign for each of your 9mm pistols. Good, now also sign for your grenades. Now, sign for two M4 carbines, and two M16A2's, one with the 40mm M203 grenade launcher. Sign also for your M249 SAW machine gun. Also, sign for your 12-gauge shotgun (Note: Probably a pump-action Mossberg or Remington from the sound of it). Oh, and sign for your bayonets."
The loadout was for a reason though:
If you have to abandon your tank due to code out or mission kill, be ready to fight your way out. I spoke to a couple other tankers who had similar stories. Which leads to one other thing:
While hitting and potentially blowing up the ammo boxes (which are armored, btw) can code out or mission kill an Abrams, the secondary explosions will still vent out and away as mentioned, and most likely the blast door will still be in place. This allows the crew to escape, and the tank can be hauled back for repairs. Below is a video of a test on an Abrams utilizing the blowout panels and blast door.
Again, it needs to be emphasized, the crew will likely survive and their morale will be better thus so, and the tank can be repaired. This is hugely important, as compared to most Russian made tanks that seem to double as both fiery coffins and cosmonaut vehicles when hit.