Exactly, this composite armor sits flush with the piece circled in red. The piece circled in red is not modeled
4 Likes
For reference, I added how everything bolts together, the bolts on the nera pack are on either side and it secures to the backing that’s not modeled
5 Likes
Thankfully another member came up with some photos showing the piece in question. Gaijin did not model this and the Abrams does indeed have way more armor in the gunshield area
4 Likes
@Gunjob it is enough to make it pass through hell to actually get to Devs and make them considered to model it ? If it’s indeed solid piece it’s around 150mm+ of solid metal in most part that’s missing
5 Likes
There it is! XD
1 Like
Not exactly the same issue, but I did report this a while ago:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/q4numP2dL20K
3 Likes
Hums happy war thunder music!
I think once Gaijin redesigns the correct Trunnion, they could easily just model that solid piece into place once they figure out the distance between the back of the exterior gun shield pack and the new trunnion. I could model it myself if they need a hand. (I design and manufacture automotive parts)
4 Likes
Question is … what is it made of ? is it a solid cast of steel, Hollow with Nera filler, or hollow with composite plates, lets be honest … its not going to be just air.
Good question. If I had to guess, I’d say that the backside that mounts to the rotor is solid. The inside could be filled with Nera since there is a weld line right above where the barrel sits. I doubt that we can find declassified info on that. Personally I’d take the average between homogeneous and nera’s protection and average it out for the density of that part. That’s up to gaijin to guesstimate though. If I was a betting man, I’d say that the whole assembly is on par with the turret cheeks because that would make sense.
1 Like
Where’d all the technical mods go?
10 Likes
The Abrams turret might actually be able to survive 1980s USSR tank threats? Who would have guessed!?
2 Likes
Very unlikely.
The mantlet of the M1 Abrams was only rated to protect against 115mm APFSDS at 800 metres distance.
3BM-26 is plausible at significant range, 3BM-32 is virtually guaranteed to penetrate at any range, same for 3BM-42.
Pictured: 3BM22 entered service in 1976 able to pen through the part that is currently modeled as empty space and kill crew on a tank (M1A1 HC) that entered service in 1990. You’d think that surplus soviet ammunition would be on the list of penetrators the tank crew should survive on a turret hit while in a hull down position. Because that’s the threat the US was fighting in the middle east.
You previously said ‘‘Abrams turret’’, now you’re talking about the mantlet/gun shield of an M1A1 HC instead.
You need to be a bit more specific with what you’re referencing.
I already linked to a bug report that I made concerning the mantlet, it is currently underperforming but it is not known to precisely what degree.
1 Like
I’ll let that one slide but you know what I meant when I said turret. It’s rather pedantic to jump on someone for not knowing the jargon for each esoteric named zone when it is on the turret itself.
A large amount I believe. Gaijin believes the whole underside of the mantlet modeled like it’s sheet metal with a 25.4mm flat rate. It’s really like 6" thick at the smallest point but I don’t have “proof”
It should be something like this all around the lower mantlet except for where the gun itself is
Crazy times we’re living in.
Yeah, I thought you meant the… Turret.
Things have names for a reason, and the name of the part you were looking for is in the very title of this thread :P
Guess they don’t want anything to do with this thread
2 Likes