That is one thing I can’t contest. The System Engancement Package ERA is severely underperforming, especially against Chem, and a good amount to Kinetic.
This is due to the fact gaijin isn’t implementing DU armor. These are the real equivalents to the non-DU turret armor modules.
This is still a large fight on the forum. I used to think it 100% was accurate. Now I believe its armor is indeed lacking, but it can easily still be penetrated by a modern round.
The gun shield of an M1 does not incorporate DU, regardless of what variant.
DU has nothing to do with this issue as DU wasn’t even mounted on the IPM1 at all.
Depleted Uranium (DU) Armor: Starting with the M1A1HA (Heavy Armor) variant in 1988, later versions of the Abrams (like the M1A1 and M1A2 series) incorporate depleted uranium (DU) mesh or plates encased in steel within the armor matrix, particularly in the frontal arc of the turret and hull. This material significantly increases the tank’s protection against kinetic energy penetrators.
Protection Levels: The armor is exceptionally effective. Estimates (often given as an equivalent thickness of Rolled Homogeneous Armor, or RHAe) for the frontal protection of the M1A1 with DU armor are around:
600 mm RHAe (or more) against KE rounds.
1,300 mm RHAe (or more) against HEAT rounds.
Ammunition Storage: A key design element for crew safety is the separation of the ammunition from the crew compartment. Most main gun rounds are stored in a heavily armored compartment in the turret bustle with blow-off panels. If the ammunition is struck and ignites, the resulting blast is directed upwards and outwards, away from the crew.
Take the ai slop since i dont wanna type
And btw,the blow up panels i saw, dont even work properly,it kills crew regardless
“Not going to be added as Gaijin has said before because of its classified nature.”
Gaijin in the forum article you literally just cited: “The M1A2 Abrams in War Thunder has uranium armor in the turret cheeks.”
Classified protection characteristics literally has nothing to do with this conversation at all. There are a LOT of vehicles in the game that have classified armor protection that is simulated in game as an educated guess. It is a matter of the existence of the additional armor being technically unknown on the variants in game. There is lots of classified information surrounding vehicles in game that has never stopped them from being added, including the T-90M, Leopard 2A7, all of the M1A2 SEPs, Typhoon, Rafale, etc.
I’d also like to just point out the invalidity of that community post that Gaijin posted to begin with… specifically about the torsion beams. Not only has the community proved that the front torsion beams have since been strengthened, but there are plenty of Abrams operating mine plows that weigh more than the total added weight of the hull armor in the SEPV3…
The picture you showed does in fact include the turret ring shield… the lighting just does not flatter the slope angle change. I have plenty of photographs of Abrams in various stages of assembly that show that the visual model of the Abrams in game is currently correct, but it is the armor module design which does not match Gaijin’s laser-scanned visual model.
Fuel cell bulkheads are currently proved to be improperly modeled. Upper front plate thickness on all Abrams models is currently incorrect in game on each side of the driver, LFP will also receive an additional 25mm of protection on each side of the driver.
This is even with the DU argument put aside, the Abrams is lacking a LOT of frontal protection.
