Leopard 2 even have it beat in beauty contest.
The Obroms just take so many Ls
You think the only reasoning possible here is that the round isnt that good? Why would the strongest military in the world pick to use them then?
they are good, and we have a ton of DU (refined from reactor waste)
also, though tungsten projectiles are also quite effective, China is the largest producer by a LOT. you can see the advantages of making your bullets out of something you have a ton of vs something your enemy is the main world producer of
iirc KE-W is just a M829 type round but they replaced the DU with tungsten
1 Like
yep
@USA_PilotsAreBad the KE in KE-W means Kinetic Energy, and the W means Tungsten (is atomic symbol for tungsten)
2 Likes
An interesting read if you’re interested in reading it.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221491471931089X
2 Likes
so abrams rounds have far better post pen damage and destructive ability?
From reports and studies it appears so.
1 Like
could try making a bug report on it but i got a feeling studies wont be accepted for some bs reason
Unless it is from an primary or secondary source. They are useless.
1 Like
unfortunate, considering ive heard of multiple studies on this with similar results, youd think they would accept scientific papers about DU having generally better performance
It is what it is.
Not entirely correct.
Countries that have developed or trialed DU MBT munitions :
USA (M1- M829 A3/A4/E1? Not sure on E1)
UK (Challenger 2- Charm 1 & 3 )
Russia (T90, T14- 3BM32 “Vant”, 3BM42M “Lekalo”?)
China (T99- DTP-125?)
India (Arjun- Not sure on model name)
Pakistan (Al-Khalid- Naiza APFSDS)
Countries that have access to DU MBT Munitions :
France (Access and trialed, no report on use)
Israel (Access, no report on use)
Countries that rely on tungsten due to environmental ethical reasons :
Germany
Japan
South Korea
EDIT : In terms of tanks : Freebrams takes the cake, combat tested and good looking. Leo coming in for a REAL close second.
For realism. I think the Abrams does a great job and suits better logistically in the hands of the United states and the Leopard for Germany.
These ‘battles in a vacuum’ are nothing but for people to stroke their egos.
In game: Leopard 2.
Because the turret is better.
The weakspots on the Abrams in game are so glaringly large and artificially induced that even full-caliber rounds can sneak through it’s turret ring. Unironically, if you gave the original Abrams the 120 with the M829A2 and kept the tank light. Most players would pick it just from the sheer maneuverability alone.
1 Like
Australia also only uses Tungsten for Environmental reasons.
1 Like
Interesting, I did not know this. I know some Scandinavian countries also avoid it but I am not sure enough to mention who and who’s’nt.
Yeah too many countries to keep track of who does and who doesn’t.
1 Like
Like quartas said earlier, it’s a cheaper and more abundant resource in the US.
I’m sure it’s Norway and Sweden, possibly Finland, but I have doubts for Finland.
1 Like
voted both cause in game the lepord is better but irl they are both pretty evenly matched
1 Like