Ive linked the papers in question in my original awnsers to you, ive also told you where you can find them.
You even posted a screenshot of the download page
so from the 80s?
like really what is the source, and what information would they have?
ok, yeah I guess I really shouldnt take you seriously if you say 35 years is almost more than 50
I guess 30% is nothing
Can you guys keep it civil before you get the thread locked
And the topic is on armor we’ve gotten too off track about ammunition
Did you not read my response to you at all? Everything is linked above.
Swiss Ordnance Enterprise Corp, Allmendstrasse 86, 3602 Thun, Switzerland 2
Swiss Defence Procurement Agency, Feuerwerkerstrasse 39, 3602 Thun, Switzerland 3
French-German Research Institute of Saint-Louis (ISL), P.O.Box 34, F-68301 SAINTLOUIS-CEDEX (France)
3 seperate institues specifically related with both the goverment and military development.
1 Like
My goodness I would of never guessed it’s LO
Armor for abrams is solved.
-
No DU Armor even in turret
-
It’s based closely to Swedish trials
-
M1A2T and AIM armor is correct
-
US top tier should put Swedish flags on their tanks
Case closed this forum can close.
Did you make that in LO AI?
You cite one source, dismiss every flaw in it, refuse to apply the same test to LO let alone look at it and call others biased? Your lack of self-awareness should be measured and charted for future generations.
1 Like
Has to be an official credible source. Even Gajin has enough self respect with all their flaws. No third party, old guy got bored and made a website nonsense.
You went full LO never go full LO
You’re genuinely a lost cause. I have not seen a person like you in ages. Your case should be preserved for future generations so that they can avoid becoming like you.
1 Like
I was told a third party website is more credible than the united nations knowledge given to them by countries around the world.
People give sources with official credentials but LO still going strong.
I agree, we’ve made progress I hope this does get locked. Never forget LO is the only truth of credibility.
UN
1 page
credible
Lol. Grow some braincells, but they will starve anyways
It was a statement they made on the news back when they where buying the M1A1s… something like 22 years ago, I’ll have a look and see if I can find anything about it, but I would not hold my breath on it.
It’s also possible that they where over selling it to justify the cost of the tanks, had been over sold on it by either the army or the USA or just straight up had no idea what they where actually talking about, our government is not exactly filled with smart people.
What I do have on hand is a pen simulation comparing the Tungsten alloy to DU
as you can see they are basically identical, now these are blocks of a single type of metal, so it doesn’t really show how they would interact as part of a NERA array, as that is dependent on a “sandwich” of materials with different shockwave propagation speeds which causes them to warp when hit, increasing the amount of material the penetrator has to pass through, as well as causing darts to yaw and also break off mass. However due to the highly classified nature of Abrams armour, we have no idea what is in the NERA arrays or how those materials interact.
2 Likes
Gajin is not a credible source guess LO takes the L.
Can you humour me for a second?
- Go on this dev blog by gaijin
- Scroll down to “Lanz-Odermatt formula” and click it
- Then on the left side scroll down to “Papers” and click “Download”
- Then click " 2001 Kinetic Energy Projectiles: Development History, State of the Art, Trends 19th International Symposium on Ballistics, Interlaken (CH), 2001"
Please tell me what you find when you do all of those steps, and read the paper in the end.
1 Like
It is 100% more credible to Gajin as a primary source than a third party calculator.
Still coping?
1 Like