Why can’t they use this as a source of credibility regarding all Abrams’ armor?
2 Likes
Same as other vehicles in-game, most informations are secret, and Gaijin is working with generic informations. Using the Challenger 3 TD, how such advanced vehicle would be introduced in the game without any public official information? None.
1 Like
Because the site links a non-credible source for the data on the abrooms armour? Did you even read the web page?
1 Like
thank you for interesting source !
1 Like
of course i read the page, and most if not all protection of it comes from this link:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090427092019/http://members.tripod.com/collinsj/protect.htm
which seems to be russian approximates on the armor, im confused of why they can’t really use this and maybe implement some approximations themselves? especially when they introduce russian tanks or any other in this regard while we don’t know which sources they use as credibility
i mean true, but it being added as a prototype in the game shows how little they know about it, especially if they decided to give it the same armor at the Chally 2(?), i may be wrong about that, but still
might as well be something, who knows?
i remember not seeing it in any reports regarding the Abrams’ armor
why gaijin won’t accept abrams source documents
4 Likes
Wut. It comes from a variety of sources. Stephen Zaloga’s books aren’t exactly credible, neither are Hilmes’ or Hunnicutt’s. Decent enough for the history, but for specific engineering values? No, not at all.
Hell, one of them is literally just a forum. No further sources from said forum provided.
Besides, if this source were to be credible, each and every armour value would have to have a source provided for it. There isn’t. An easy way to tell that it’s not credible is that the M1A1 and M1A1HA have different hull strengths, despite the hull not receiving any known upgrades in that time. This, as the webpage itself asserts many times, is just a resource for wargamers with VERY fuzzy values.
3 Likes
i see, well this is just a discussion after all and thank you for proving to me that these aren’t accurate
Its for the same reason gaijin won’t be adding stealth fighters for quite a few years. There is simply too much information classified on things and not enough to go off of. Sure, they could always take what the community wants, but then you turn an already good tank like the abrams into, by far, the best tank in the game.
Guys, I’m new to this forum, so I don’t know much, but won’t this site be suitable as evidence?
Do they need the thickness of each piece to be clearly written?
because gaijin is russian, and when dealing with russians, they will do their upmost to make u.s tanks weaker than their own. Stating such fantasy rambles as " we dont believe the U.S ever upgraded the hull armor of their MBTs since before the soviet union fell, or after it.
2 Likes
no, they wont u.s a russian source to prove the abrams armor, but they will use a indian source to nerf all nato 120mm HEAT-FS rounds
2 Likes
we already have information on stealth fighters. we know their RCS we know what radar they have, we know how the cockpit works, we know enough to add them into the game, which is why DCS is adding the F-35
i wouldn’t say it’s that good, gaijin still needs to do something about that turret ring, moving the hydraulic pump at the engine as it was supposed to be and put the reservoir in that place and fix the spalling on the 19mm rha plates between the driver and fuel tanks… those things produce such spall it’s unbelievable, and honestly it doesn’t even makes sense for them to
i believe someone made a comparison when the leo or t90-t80 is shot in the front sprocket in comparison to the abrams which is knocked out after a shell there, but the others aren’t
2 Likes
Yet, they used a private report as a source to adjust the flight performance and weight of the R-DARTER.
if gaijin says no, it’s no unfortunately
nothing will change unless someone gets classified information, and those only for them to acknowledge they’re wrong, but still not implement any
Even logic, a basic comprehension of armour, a decent reading level and common sense doesn’t change their mind.
They seriously think the NERA on the ch2 should be measured from 90 degrees I.e. from looking at the vehicle straight on and that the protection figures include the backing plate.
This is clearly absurd. No one measures armour like that and the backing plate is part of the tank, not the additional protection package which can be fitted to many different vehicles so how the gibbering hell can the figures for the protection package include the tanks armour?
It makes no sense and is completely illogical but will they admit they’re wrong and fix it? Will they hell as like.
2 Likes