Maybe gaijin should consider remodeling or adjusting the model of the Abrams differently. There is a door and wall separating the driver and rest of the tank. There are a few dividers/separations in the Abrams that could be added to help with spalling.
Somehow this sloped sabot takes out the breach. Almost every shot to the hull takes out the gun breach or damages it. It seems the sabot sends shrapnel awkwardly throughout the tank as if the interior is all open space. I believe more detail could be added to the interior, similar to some other tanks already in game.
I’m open to ideas.
5 Likes
The door is like the rest of the turret basket, its just made of sheet metal and expended metal mesh. It provides no protection at all.
The door is being supported by air? It’s just floating?
2 Likes
The door is hinged on the TC’s .50 cal storage box. More sheet metal.
Anything helps, especially if it interferes with free spreading debris. Separation/dividers as I discussed, would help with open space spalling we see modeled. It’s not just an empty space.
In some cases, it could increase the spalling as it may add to the debris flying through the tank.
I believe in most circumstances it would help slow/reduce/block free spreading(open space) spall.
It seems some of the spalling penetrates through the top of the hull to hit the gun breach. I do not believe this is correct modeling.
Although, I’m not a demolition or tank expert. So I appreciate the discourse.
1 Like
Unfortunately it contributes to stuff flying around.
The M256 gun mount does extend below the turret ring and there is all the hydraulics and computer stuff tucked under it as well. So that is as accurate as with any other vehicle.
False. Sheet metal still helps catch spall. See Bravo 22 in OIF 05.
3 Likes
I wouldn’t say the other tanks are modeled the same. I’ve shot plenty of other tanks from the side or front with no damage to their breach.
I see folks taking about the breach and such, and not the fact that the turret ring does not properly seat onto the hull, it should be just a bit lower.
Sadly this has been a issue since it’s introduction but I dont think and improvements on the subject were made. Having a proper turret ring would greatly improve the situation with the existing shot trap in the neck of the tank.
Even looking up from below the angle of the vehicle, the turret ring is still far less visible than in WT.
6 Likes
Thank you. This is much needed insight. I agree it’s modeled incorrectly. Why hasn’t this been addressed?
Not enough evidence or enough outcry to remodel the entire series and apply volumetric armor to the model in that area.
1 Like
This could defiently take some looking into.
That door and sheet metal are actually part of the turret basket assembly. Whether they provide protection or not would be highly dependent on turret position.
1 Like
I’m kicking myself right now because I happened to pass the brand new M1A1 that was delivered to the USS Alabama museum and did not think at all to take pictures of the turret ring height to fix this.
This was a noted issue when the tank first arrived but folks did sorta just forget its a issue. At the same time the 2A4 and the Type 90 had similar issues, and I know there was a huge amount of talk about them. I’m thinking their discourse might have drowned out the M1 having the same issue and people just forgot it existed. That and the hate the M1 was getting at the time for doing well also probably had an effect.
1 Like
Also, I noticed the side turret armor is less the sep 1 vs sep 2? Is this correct?
The
sep 1 has 101mm rolled homogeneous armor on side turret
Sep v2 has 13mm of rolled homogeneous armor on side turret
Also, the turret ring looks to be sandwiched in between the hull armor and turret armor creating twice the MM in protection.
What is this in the photo?
I don’t believe you can see the turret ring from outside the tank.
Why is this in Machine Of War Discussion and not suggestion, or make a bug report.
