This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
And how are you so sure?
because the hull HAS D.U IN IT
this is the m1a1, not the M1A1HA, and this pictures has been debunked already since gaijin can’t accurately read the document 1536 was from 1992 when the m1a1 H.A was already getting the D.U hulls
The Hulls are all D.U and every Abrams tank made after 1998 was made with D.U.
You are not reading your own source. It says in unambiguous terms that the authorization is for installation of DU armor elements on as many M1 turrets “As needed” and “5 tank hulls total”. Hence, its related to the same sources I shared above that yet again insist that only 5 Abrams got DU elements in their front hull armors.
Besides, this kind of authorization has to be renewed, in other words, if DU was ever mounted on tanks serially (and not just the limited 5 mentioned above), there must be a Materials Licence released by the Nuclear Regulatory Commision authorizing that explicitly. I couldn´t find one.
Here from 2014: only authorization for use in turrets
(full doc: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1433/ML14337A199.pdf)
And again, as late as June 2024: only turrets
(full doc https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2434/ML24348A001.pdf)
So, these sources are pretty definitive in regards where in Abrams DU armor elements were installed and its not the hulls.
6 Likes
You don’t understand how the u.s military words their documents the 5 tanks hulls were only talking about the 5 tanks hulls at the school the as needed is for all the tanks frontal armor. This is why the M1A1 HA was made .
Another thing that you all keep doing withoutnoticing is posting that same picture, saying its from 2006, when the document i posted is from 1992. and it literally says B. TO BE USED AS A COMPONENT IN M1A1 TANK HULLS
lol
You can´t crop a source just when it suits you. It is explicit and unambiguous regarding the amount of hulls to be equipped with DU armor elements: only 5. If you find another Material Licence source saying explicitly that the authorization is for mounting DU armor on an undisclosed amount of hulls or reading “as needed” then that would indicate that hulls starting X year were equipped with DU armor of the current generation. However I insist, these hulls are not receiving the latest generation of armor since the later Material Licence source only mention turrets.
7 Likes
do you know what " as needed " means? why do you think theres a A. and a B.
“A” refers to tank turrets. “B” refers to the 5 hulls in question. In other words: the Nuclear Commision authorized the use of DU for as many Abrams turrets “as needed” and also 5 Abrams hulls in “total”.
7 Likes
You’re meaningless to teach US Main. They want to believe what they think and think all other as russian propaganda. Already developers know such sources and conclude no reinforced hull until SEP v3. Don’t need to argue brainless boys.
10 Likes
100%
We just need to wait for Gaijin to add the SEP V3 and… Oh wait… They’ll still complain about it.
Your tanks are as good as it can be. Stop crying about it. If you want to buff American tanks you can start by Nerfing Russian ones.
Well I don’t think wise choice as there are actually nothing important nerf left for them, and even when Russian tanks nerfed, there are Strv 122 and Leopard 2a7V/HU left. And there are upgraded version for those tanks awaited in future, and USSR also has bunch of tanks that still not ingame that are better than current ingame.
Just there are no hope for US Army in this game. They just don’t fit PVP game style, fit into reality only.
unreleastic 360 degrees weakspot? nerfed shells? Completely nerfed Tusk Packages?
1 Like
not really russia has nothing besides the t80bvm obr2023 and the t90m with arena that could be competitive.
if they actually fix the problems with abrams it would be competitive, and sepv3 would be really strong.
they do, their best afvs are just nerfed for no reason(see hstvl, abrams, adats and bradley)
thats more than enough to add it to m1a1HA ingame
1 Like
You may forgot about Object 187 and 90s 152 mm prototypes. Indeed their informations are quite known and others can be filled with speculation at the same level Gaijin does on western tanks.
if we were counting those than all the 130 and 140mm western tanks would be valid too. and imo we shouldnt add those anytime soon as theyre incredibly strong, also im pretty sure object 187 had a 125mm
not come near but I think current 12.0 tanks were not so underperforming compared to them. Except for soviet 152 mms their armor and gun sight is inferior to current top dogs of their own nation. Beasts like Strv 122 or 2A7V/HU would still have their place on those age.
For 187 yes 125 mm but better mobility and protection than current soviet tree MBTs.