Hm. That assumes though that the US wants to simplify it’s systems. Which considering we’re talking about the (possible in the hulls) existence of DU, would make it weird and potentially dangerous? Also is it really impractical if there is already DU in the turrets? DU turrets already require a lot of work. But only hull-related limits changed classification status. So if they never intended to create/modify hulls with DU why would they bother changing a system that already works perfectly for the pre-existing DU turrets?
I mean… I guess. Prove me wrong but I think that although some prototype programs do require regulatory changes, they are most often than not tied with testing, expansion and applicability for the future and not dormant programs. Wouldn’t a permanent shift from a static, fixed limit to a classified quantity assume consistency with ongoing or anticipated use than a closed prototype effort?
Oh I know. And I honestly agree with this 100%. We have clear (as far as I can tell) proof that the armor between M1, IPM1, M1A1, A2 and SEP has changed. And I’ve seen people try and calculate the armor increase and whatnot based on the weight. And to be honest. Gaijin doing some guestimating wouldn’t be all bad considering some uh… Other additions we got in the game (-cough- KH-38MT -cough-). So yes. An armor upgrade is 100% needed. Whether it is DU or not doesn’t matter so long as it actually happens.
Not really, as long as the Army conduct tests to ensure that crew aren’t exposed to radiation above the limit it shouldn’t make any difference.
No, all the limits changed in one go, the DU limitations were grouped together in one line and when the limit was removed it was removed for all things in that line.
It would make sense, but is still an assumption/guess and not really proof of it actually happening. Especially since the limit and licence is for more than just hulls.
Yeah no I get it. I’m not trying to make definitive proof. I’m just trying to assist in the possibility of DU in the hulls. Which takes me to this:
Neither my nor your explanation establish whether DU is or isn’t in the hulls. So since neither argument can define the existence (or lack thereof) of DU in the hulls then realistically the matter is non-conclusive, no? And also
I know. And since both your and my assumptions sound correct and could very easily be correct then I think this also makes this an epistemically capped matter.
So where am I going with this? Well. The sources are ambiguous. And they allow for more than one interpretation. So why don’t we instead close the matter of DU and focus on just the rest of the armor components? Like P51ACE said there’s no way that the Abrams has had the same armor since the 80’s. And if I not mistaken there’s already lots of proof showing exactly that. So maybe focusing on this can lead to better results?
The problem is these reports sit on the bug report page and have yet to be implemented. A lot of people are more than happy to accept fixes to things they can change (bulkhead, turret ring, gun shield, etc), but there is still no action. And I would have thought since an Abrams of any kind came last update, that they would try to implement some of these fixes to line up with the last update, still no changes. So people circle back to this topic.
True. And to be honest I think bringing whatever we have here can help with hopefully having changes made. Still kinda baffles me how we got the same hull for like what? 10 different Abrams?
If I’m not mistaken there’s nothing that points to how much more effective the DU hulls could be. But we do have (in other topics, bug reports etc) that the armor has definitely changed and with some rough calculations how much. If I recall correctly there was a topic few months back of someone who calculated the armor increase in the hulls of the Abrams based on the weight increase per generation and weight of materials.
How is he patient? He just says no, because of his own, very specific interpretation that doesn’t follow the rules of interpretation of official/legal documents, where a single term has only 1 meaning. If document is listing improved composite hull, and in other case, heavy armor hull, it’s clear as day hull “heavy armor” has to be significantly different ftom “improved composite”.
And since “heavy armor” can be added to hull OR turret (since the document stated it’s been added to hull AND turret) it’s clear both received an armor upgrade based on similar technology and materials.
Truth is, Gaijin doesn’t want Abrams to be buffed, period. This whole talk is just cat having an argument with mouse. Cat can do whatever he wants, and will get applauded by “community” which is too scared to lift their heads anyway, and I’m fairly certain I’m heading for a ban right now. Cheers
It’s more so that they don’t want to do the work needed to actually fix the issues, which is why the reload buff (10 RPM > 12RPM) was implemented, in place of trying to address any of the existing reports that might fix things.
Further there isn’t anything available that really quantifies any such improvement in terms of the Array’s protective qualities, for the interim models between the Baseline M1 and Swedish export Hull(M1A2). And Gaijin refuses to estimate (or even interpolate) these things for arbitrary reasons.
All we can hope for is for more images of the captured M1A1SAs to be posted, specifically showing the armor arrays and their composition. Other than that, like you said, Gaijin is unwilling to do guesswork and they won’t accept guesswork from the community.
All we’ve got (for now)is the array from the M1150 Assault Breacher Vehicle from Ukraine which likely uses an export Amour package.
We don’t actually have a cross-section available for the turret for a direct comparison, but the Hull is somewhat similarly configured.
But you would think that with Gaijin’s access to Russia, it shouldn’t be that had to go see the Hulls on display and take some measurements. And it’s strange they have taken no such action.
I am not sure if that would go unnoticed, officially Gaijin tries to stay neutral, going to Russia and requesting access to see and measure destroyed western equipment would probably rise a few eyebrows. Besides, I don’t think visual confirmation is holding them back, maybe tech mod team side, but even if we had a 1000% confirmation of an M1A2 hull being more than just 360mm of 70s composite tech, it would still be up to Gaijin to decide if they want to implement it or not, so ultimately I think all of this debate is pointless.
Why not just admit that you’re following the Gaijin guidelines and doing everything possible to prevent the Abrams from getting stronger based on circumstantial evidence? The documents provided by the player clearly show that SEP and SEP V2 should have uranium armor in their hulls, but that’s not in Gaijin’s interest, so you’re trying to persuade the players that they’re mistaken, even though that’s not true.
