When are the Abrams tanks, M1A1 and later getting there armor rework?
Soon? Maybe never? Nobody knows as Gaijin has not said anything about it yet. All they have announced is that they will probably discuss it in a seperate blog, however it might not lead to anything substantial in game. Hopefully that blog will be sometime this week, otherwise we will have to wait until after christmas and newyear most likely…
But they have time to make a Decal Update… Really shows where their priorities are.
For now sepv1 and sepv2 will get du armor in hull. Others i don’t know if will get anything
Where did you hear this from?
Hopefully soon, currently SepV1 and Sepv2 are the most disrespectful addition to us tech tree in a while. Their armor is so weak that even 85mm round from T34-85 can pen your from the front with ease. Drivers port and UFP bounce into the turret. A round of 140mm pen from WW2 can go through the front of modern MBT. Missing DU inserts. Using rounds that were phased out of service by the time the tank package entered service, (M829A1/2 should be stock and A3 should be T4 upgrade) Laughable weight increase without armor or any substantial survivability gain, just slower. Joke of ERA inserts that are effective only vs tier tier 5 ATGMs. A 5KG round hits your MG and the entire tanks blows up… (NERFED side turret armor from V1 to V2. Like really? a upgraded tank with more weight magically loses 100mm from side turret? Modernised for urban combat?) Logically this makes no sense. Currently sitting at a 33% win rate with it.
I feel all that. atleast you’re doing better with it than me, im at a 20% win rate while the T90M / BVM, Strv 122, and Leo 2A7V are around 60-80%
M1A1 already has its correct armor.
Smin just said just now, we will find outthis week!
do you have a link
Here you are king
not quite right. Smin edited his post to “We hope” , meaning it isnt garanteed this week
Ah. Thats a bummer.
This are public sources about Abrams armor:
In M1 Abrams vs T-72 Ural (2009), he uses Soviet estimates of 470 mm (19 in) vs APFSDS and 650 mm (26 in) vs HEAT for the base model Abrams. He also gives the Soviet estimates for the M1A1, 600 mm (24 in) vs APFSDS, and 700 mm (28 in) vs HEAT.
Armor protection was improved by implementing a new special armor incorporating depleted uranium and other undisclosed materials and layouts. This was introduced into the M1A1 production starting October 1988. This new armor increased effective armor particularly against [kinetic energy rounds] but at the expense of adding considerable weight to the tank, as depleted uranium is 1.7 times denser than lead.
The first M1A1 tanks to receive this upgrade were tanks stationed in Germany. US-based tank battalions participating in Operation Desert Storm received an emergency program to upgrade their tanks with depleted uranium armor immediately before the onset of the campaign. M1A2 tanks uniformly incorporate depleted uranium armor, and all M1A1 tanks in active service have been upgraded to this standard as well. This variant was designated as the M1A1HA (HA for Heavy Armor).
The M1A1 AIM, M1A2 SEP and all subsequent Abrams models feature depleted uranium in both the hull and turret armor. Each Abrams variant after the M1A1 have been equipped with depleted uranium armor of different generations. The M1A1HA uses first generation armor, while the M1A2 and M1A1HC use second generation depleted uranium. The M1A2 SEP variants have been equipped with third generation depleted uranium armor combined with a graphite coating. The M1A2C also features increased physical line-of-sight turret armor.
For the M1A1HA, Zaloga gives a frontal armor estimate of 600 mm (24 in) vs APFSDS and 1,300 mm (51 in) vs HEAT in M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank 1982–1992, nearly double the original protection of the Abrams. In M1 Abrams vs T-72 Ural, he uses different estimates of 600 mm (24 in) vs APFSDS and 700 mm (28 in) vs HEAT for the front hull and 800 mm (31 in) vs APFSDS and 1,300 mm (51 in) vs HEAT for the front of the turret.The protection of M1A2 SEP is a frontal turret armor estimate of 940–960 mm (37–38 in) vs APFSDS and 1,320–1,6201,320–1,620 mm (52–64 in) vs HEAT, glacis estimate of 560–590 mm (22–23 in) vs APFSDS and 510–1,050 mm (20–41 in) vs HEAT, and lower front hull estimate of 580–650 mm (23–26 in) vs APFSDS and 800–970 mm (31–38 in) vs HEAT. The M1A2 SEPV3 increased the LOS thickness of the turret and hull front armor; total armor protection from this increase is not known.
But hey, Gaijin says armor buffs on that specific areas are not going to change anything. Hence they are not going to do it. (Probably they should review/rework the abrams armor layout). Their reasoning as to why there has been an increase in its weight is due to stronger structural upgrades and im guessin over 6 tons worth of electronics (idk where they are packing some many). They also “believe” that the US Army R&D is incapable of modernizing the front torsion bars and suspensions to accommodate the weight increase. Which is funny because public reports and records of research and funding dictate a specific amount of money towards maintenance. And even further “due to increased frontal weight, the first 2 roller wheels as well as their suspension and bars needs constant replacements due to wear”.
bro’s, russia just needs a buff. when russia armor improvement? era seems to be lacking.
This is what they are currently using as their armor values of the Abram’s. Keep in mind a few things, this could, or could not, have been an export version in an effort to sell it.
(Green means Non-Penentration)
That is just the turret armor, I will find the Hull and post it.
Assuming you’re talking about the Swedish Trials, then yes it was 10000% an export version. The US has never exported its DU armor, ever.
Exactly, the DU armor was not an option for export
Not only that, there are only 6 of them equipped with it, all of them are tank school vehicles. So also, yet again, it’s still not been “used in combat” and there aren’t more than six vehicles, that is if that’s true.