There is no mention of 3BM60 anywhere. And it is not an official document of the Russian MoD.
1 Like
the thuret is actually 1 meter inside the hull
It’s a source but not a particularly great one.
the sep v1 already had over 620 mm of armor protection on the Hull. The V3 is over ranges of 740mm of protection on the hull at combat ranges. The Hull of the V3 is considerably longer / thicker than other abrams variants.
No source, no truth. This is not evidenced anywhere with any anywhere near reliable sources.
That is a lot of any I realised.
3 Likes
I just hope we get both SEPv3 with Trophy, and WITHOUT Trophy too, as a separate vehicle on a folder.
It would be the only way to at least have two MBTs with functional hull armor.
1 Like
i never said it couldnt " fight " kinetic rounds
lmfao when russian mains find out that U.S Tanks are completely frontally immune to all your ammo and gaijin knows this we 're going to laugh you into the ground. The Standard D.U in the turret of the M1A2 increased the Protection of the turret by 260mm what makes you think it would be able to go through 3RD generation D.U on a SEP V3? LOL You russian mains are in-denial and this game has you gassed up on your own fumes.
GAIJN HAND HOLDS RUSSIAN VEHICLES none of you people seem to have the I.Q to figure out the U.S already has made your ammo inferior the moment you developed it.
M829A3 is IMMUNE TO ALL ERA L O L
1 Like
You act as though it can’t withstand any modern or semi-modern APFSDS at all, which is just wrong.
you lack sources i don’t all you need to do is math from the IPM1 TO THE m12 and note how much the D.U added to the turrets protection. this is simple math. D.U Added 260mm of protection to the M1A2 left side cheek alone and it added 215mm of protection to the right cheek. this is standard 1ST GENERATION D.U ARMOR from 1988
the SEP V1 has 3RD GENERATION D.U, the SEP V2 turret protection was then enhanced FURTHER THAN THE SEP V1s 3RD GEN D.U, and the SEP V3 has a entirely new better armor package than the last 3 tanks. The SEP V3 entire crew compartment was redesigned and improved with blast absorbing protection for the crew
when did i say that?
4 Likes
None of this is of any use. U want to get more armour? Provide valid sources. None of this is real to Gaijin without proof. 260mm? 215mm? BS, 1st gen 3rd gen? BS. This is the most useless stuff. U want fix? Provide sources. Where do 260mm and 215mm come from, how do u proof it is DU and not just extra composite armour.
3 Likes
It’s fun when Sartt and other goons false-report stuff lol
And I know they’ll report this cause I hurt their ego by proving him wrong with his own source.
7 Likes
That DU makes it out of America in the form of every Abrams in Poland. The ones that would benefit you should Russia ever truly be past the point of dumb and attempt something on one of you smaller less defended NATO border nations.
Quantity is its own quality, and is reality that has also stood the test of time.
Sure, and if you can produce relatively good equipment in high amounts (abrams, F-35, F-16, etc) then you can argue that, however there is a reason that the Eurofighter or other High Cost/Low Procurement weaponry is favoured by their operators over cheaper alternatives and that is the high amount of adaptability and Specialisation offered by more expensive platforms.
For example japan chooses to produce their own MBT rather than procure a cheaper Abrams deal so they have the ability to adapt it to their specialist needs, same applies to their F-2 fighters.
Poor choice on their behalf to procure M1a2 sep v3 when they couldve chosen more K2 or Leopard 2a8 with part synergy within their current fleet and without reliance on america for logistics
You say that like the F-2 isn’t practically just a License produced Agile Falcon F-16.
The U.S. cancelled the Agile Falcon program by deciding not to fund the program past the predevelopment phase. The predevelopment of the Derivative Aircraft Program (Agile Falcon) concludes in December 1989. Paper studies including wind tunnel test data of the proposed configuration will be delivered to the USAF. However, the Mid-Life 45 Update program will continue with 75% of the kits procured intended for the EPGs with delivery beginning in 1996. During Agile Falcon negotiations with EPGs, the U.S. turned down proposals from Korea, Turkey, and Israel to participate in the Agile Falcon codevelopment program (39:1). Defense News reported on 5 June 1989 that DOD is interested in bringing the Agile Falcon back to life sometime in the future under the Japanese/U.S. FSX codevelopment program. The two aircraft designs are .very similar with both incorporating a large wing. It is possible an Agile Falcon/FSX hybrid could become the Block 80 F-16 configuration.
yet more relevant Excerpts
Well it isn’t, it’s as close as you can get to a new airframe as possible, shares very few similarities with a US F-16C besides silhouette and possesses nearly entirely domestic japanese avionics and weaponry
And if youre going to bring up some obscure planned F-16 to justify being wrong then I can refer you to the F-2A and JASDF threads who would be more than happy to help
In what sense? If they wanted a unique airframe they would have started a clean sheet design, or go with the F-20 / F/A-18 to form the basis of a bespoke variant, which would have been cheaper than the shemozzle that going with LM (yet, again) ended up getting them stuck with.
Should I point out Fuel stowage locations, Engines, Bus Topology / Architecture, Human factors, maintenance and loading producers etc. are all practical commonalities between the contemporary F-16C variants and the F-2, due to said few similarities.
Oh wow they paid out the nose for a substandard product, what were they expecting It’s basically just a similar story to the F-104J all over again. They would have ended up with a better Aircraft had they bit the bullet gone with the slightly more expensive F/A-18 and then added the advanced features they wanted, resulting with a shorter timeline, a full technical data package and local production rights (not a license), better performance, larger fleet, and for less money considering all the issues the F-2 had in production.
If I wanted to bring up obscure aircraft I’d just claim:
The Su-75 / -57 is a knockoff F-16X / F-23 respectively.
The Su-27 is a NA-335
The MiG-25 is the F-108 / A-5
Su-24 is the Mirage G8 / F-111
There are others I’m sure.