As proven by ACTUAL test footage on Abrams and the effectiveness of blowout panels the recent patch notes now removing this on all tanks with blowout is just factually incorrect.
You can blatantly see at 2:10 in the video, ammo is clearly detonated (not caught on fire) and ammo is cooking off as a result of residual fire to surrounding ammo and the panels are 100% left intact
I would love to see gaijins reason AND sources claiming otherwise because this is ACTUAL test footage.
@Smin1080p_WT can we get clarification on this because you simply cannot get any better when it comes to proof on the effectiveness.
Irrelevant, video footage already mentions these ammo types being detonated in the ammo compartment, the only time blowout panels do not protect the crew is when dealing with damage/penetration to the panel door its self.
Go to 2:45, he literally mentions the order of events and SPECIFICALLY mentions HEAT rounds exploding. that is also PROVEN accurate in the later test footage at 5:00 and onwards when they estimate the pressure from detonation AND mention what ammo types are in the test when detonated:
That is the bustle was loaded with a full compliment of ammo which is 24 kinetic and 10 HEAT rounds.
The estimated “peak pressure was in the range of 2400 to 3000 PSI”
I’m sorry but unless gaijin have proof then this video footage simply discredits there evidence, all 10 HEAT rounds remained intact btw, to detonate HEAT charges requires a VERY SPECIFIC set of parameters because its inert prior to use
I’ve noticed that they removed it in the Tusk force update and they did not attach any Bug report link to it like they usually do, i guess they just did it because they wanted to, can’t argue with the Holy Snail.
i mean, you complaining about abrams blowout panels not working in game, since it is, especially if you are carrying only apfds
i agree with you this isnt realistic (is war thunder realistic to begin with?), just that i doubt they will change this bc it looks more of a balance mechanic
“balance” in what way, Abrams has one of the worst win rates at top tier and has since the introduction of detailed modules like turret mechanisms.
Regardless I agree its unrealistic especially if carrying only apfsds but they need to provide reasonings for this when evidence already exists proving otherwise.
ill not enter in the merit to discuss if abrams is good or not in warthunder, i just point a very real possibility of why is this way (in my opinion) .
dont forget that balance is very often disconnect between gaijin and its player base
I just tested this extensively with ArmorCrush (while loaded up with M830A1 HEAT-MP) and didn’t have it explode a single time.
The Test Drive Abrams explodes weirdly when ammoracked. Sometimes it does, other times it doesn’t. The playable Abrams (tested M1A2 SEP, M1A2, M1A1 HC) doesn’t seem to explode unless the doors are damaged during penetration.
Patch notes dont list M1A1/M1A2s as effected, this only applies to the IPM1/M1/2A4/Type90s
IPM1, M1, Leopard 2A4 (all variants), Type 90 (all variants) — a bug that caused ammunition rack detonations to not knock out all crew members has been fixed.
Can only tell you what I and others have experienced, blowout panels rn even when not penetrated still kill the crew, so unless they have some scuffed code (again) where its loading/using a HEAT shell for its internal “view” when in reality APFSDS is being loaded and its counting as HEAT being loaded and kills the crew then I dont know.
All I do know is, as proof from the testing footage even HEAT shells shouldnt be capable of detonating and killing the crew when blast doors are closed
When I was ammoracked in my Abrams during Testing, it would replace the shell I had loaded with my second shell (HEAT-MP).
Regardless, neither all my Abrams tested nor ArmorCrush’s entire Leopard lineup (including the Leopard 2A4) detonated from ammo cookoffs. We spent about an hour testing.
