Only one which has real combat experience also.
Most likely
DU is good, but I don’t believe it’s as good as it’s hailed to be, as the US is the only to ever have a round of the type.
Hot take, really depends on the situation, though the MG3 on a mount is very accurate, the M2/HB is too, it really just depends on if you want to send them home in a bucket or a coffin. Both are a simple mechanical systems, and easy to deal with.
Russians use DU rounds and I think Brits had DU rounds at some point. Is bc USA and USSR big users of nuclear reactors so have lots of DU lying around. China could, but they have tons of tungsten, being main global producer of it. (part of why USA DU ammo is smarter choice)
M2 can deal with more targets than an MG-3 can. It’s far more effective against something like a helicopter that gets too close, or small fortification and light vehicles
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
yep
@USA_PilotsAreBad the KE in KE-W means Kinetic Energy, and the W means Tungsten (is atomic symbol for tungsten)
An interesting read if you’re interested in reading it.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221491471931089X
so abrams rounds have far better post pen damage and destructive ability?
From reports and studies it appears so.
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.
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.
Australia also only uses Tungsten for Environmental reasons.
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.
Like quartas said earlier, it’s a cheaper and more abundant resource in the US.