I have the feeling that developers have no clue about what they are doing with armor values, i honestly refuse to believe they have proof that a t72b hull armor is stronger than a post 2000 abrams/merkava/insert any modern nato tank except leopard 2,
Now i think by examinating the thickness of armor this is just not possible, if in game t72b has around 450mm of armor against ap an abrams should have at least over 570+ and a merkava even if is a bit less thicker has a way greater slope and the composition is from 2004 so lets say just a bit more modern, protection? around 600 if not more, in game is 280… dm13 goes in from the front of a 2004 tank…
Not to mention t80bvm t90 with almost the same thickness exceeding 800mm on the hull
4 Likes
I can only really speak in the case of the merkava but the problem with it is that gaijin is modeling the composite armor in a way that is practically paper against any kinetic projectiles
3 Likes
this isn’t a live spreadsheet so it might be outdated but you can see the intended protection for vehicles here. Gaijin work backwards from these values, so the modifiers of N/ERA are adjusted as needed.
the NATO composite is like that while the russian one is waaay less thick but somehow 2 times stronger than nato one, like Froge said and as i researched for myself the merkava composite if considered as rubber fabric thats why even if is almost 600mm thick and even more in some points the turret gets lolpenned, same for the hull that doesn’t stop almost any ap round, meawhile the modifier of russian tanks is higher than 1 thats why 1mm of effective armor on them is equivalent to 1.5 or more i don’t remember correct value but is close, same with external armor package for nato, if you test the 95mm composite screen outside the merkava gets penned by 23mm ap zsu (37mm at 500 meters) so the modifier is around 0,3x
Just to show how t90 turret is in comparison to leopard and merkava
2 Likes
But why, the abrams clearly has less composite material in the hull its had the same armour till the SepV3
Most of the turret in soviet tanks in composite armour
Ill even use your own image
The composite on the leo is only a little thicker on the left side while the right side has more because the gunner sight
9 Likes
Gaijin has misrepresented Israeli composites for a while. The problem with fixing it is that the Israeli government is really good at keeping information shrouded. Some declassified vehicles have very little information about them on the internet for example the ra’am sagol was declassified a few years ago but the only things really known about it is how the aps worked and that’s it .
I should also add if you remove the ammo storage, power unit and crew storage containers from the equation the leopard and T-90s actual turret size is about the same
2 Likes
Now if you compare it to the merkava
You can see there is much more composite armor than the others
(My drawing is a bit off but it still shows it has thicker composites)
1 Like
So I’ll assume you’re referring to a T-72B '85 here, we don’t actually have that in-game but we do know it’s exact armour composition from a historical point of view, it is as follows:
Cyan = air gap.
White = steel.
60 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 20 - 10 - 20 - 10 - 50 @ 68°
This comprises of 170mm of steel, when sloped at 68° we already reach 453mm of effective thickness. The layered nature of this array increases it’s mass efficiency to around 1.2x. This results in around 544mm of effective thickness.
The in-game T-72B is a 1987 model and thus features an improved array with bulging plates. The exact effectiveness isn’t known but it can be surmised that it would at minimum be 540mm.
This matches the in-game model:
Why?
What’s your source for 570mm?
7 Likes
The merkavas composite array is extremely outdated its mostly just sandwiched RHA plates with some material inbetween probably something similar to the textolite in soviet early MBTs its good against CE but not against KE
What you are showing is the Mk3 I am referring to the mk4 who is more modern and with a different turret design.
The add on composites are different sizes and as you can see on the mk4 it has a space which doesn’t appear on the mk3
Also merkava 4 armor has some form of era as shown in the images
You are comparing a tank that was built in 1995 with a tank that was released 10 years later they do not have the same armor values because of the different times they were created
The merkava doesn’t have ERA theres literally never been a merkava with ERA outside of a single slurce that claims one had its roof armour improved with ERA which didnt go into service
The merkava 4 literally has the exact same composite array
You’re acting like 90s tanks didnt stagnate in armour development and increases because of the end of the cold war
3 Likes
I don’t know if you’re blind but it says נפיץ which means explosive so unless the idf is strapping random bombs to its tanks I’m pretty sure it’s some kind of era.
And what I’m saying is that the armor on vehicle have changed in 10 years
Have you not come to the conclusion that it could also very well just be Non Explosive Reactive Armour because making the entire hull out of blocks of ERA that massive is one of the most retarded things ive ever heard because the moment it gets hit the entire hull is detonating there’s a reason why K-5 and FY-4 are in smaller blocks the only other possible thing that could be is SLERA which isnt ERA its closer to being NERA or NxRA still
2 Likes
The picture I showed was of an armor module. I’m also 100% sure that the idf’s engineers know what they’re doing and know that it works if you want to deny it then you can continue but just know that you’re wrong
So you have no proof that its ERA thanks for your concession
2 Likes
Something something sekrit dokument, no bias is in war thunder, penetration is based on a formula hurr durr.
Top tier is a mess, the T64 lineage is not as good as war thunder portrays and Challenger, Abrams, Leopard, Leclerc and Merkava are portrayed significantly worse than what those tanks have proven to be capable of.
1 Like
It literally says exaplosive on it 😂😂
The NATO vehicles are all portrayed fine i mean the leopard 2A7 and strv122 is literally the best tank in game with the abrams at second
3 Likes
that is true. but their guns are weaker than in reality and so is their armour.