So… You refuse to acknowledge any side but yours in a debate?
Is that what I’m getting from this?
Refer to:
He isn’t, he responded as to why he didn’t need a source to disprove what doesn’t exist, and you respond with…
Pretty clear you can’t read.
Even after he responds with:
…Your only response is
He has no reason to substantiate something without the burden of proof. If you want spall liners, prove there are spall liners.
Would you like to provide documentation saying that the Abrams didn’t mount a 25mm chain gun? If not, “don’t throw a hissy fit”.
There are more service members coming out directly and saying that there is no internal spall liner than people saying “but my friend who knows a tanker says there is!”
Why would the crew wear IBA/CVCs if there was a spall liner? Every other nation’s tanker kits include inflammable clothing with nomex… Everything they wear, from Britain, to Sweden, to Germany, and to Russia, include padded protection against bumps and bruises, not body armor for spall.
Because the US military equips it’s tank crews for combat both inside and outside the vehicle, why do you think the average US Army tank crew has enough hand held ordinance to equip a 6 man infantry squad including weapons to, breach doors, destroy light armor, engage aircraft, provide indirect fire, and suppress targets with squad automatic weapons.
To that same end the standard equipment of a US tanker is not at all designed to counter spall or penetrations in the vehicle, the standard vest you are going to find on every single US Army tanker is a cut down IOTV, the standard ballistic vest of every single US Army serviceman, the only difference is the lack of the crotch flap and shoulder protectors. The IOTV was not designed for tank crews, instead, it was designed to equip the entire US Army, which it currently does. To that same end the CVC is rated to the same level as every other NIJ IIIA helmet, like the ACH and ECH, that being to defeat, .357 and 9mm rounds. Yes the CVC was designed to interface with tank systems, however, it’s protection level, in US service, is identical to that of the standard service helmets of every other serviceman of the time of it’s introduction, it’s design was not made to deal with vehicle spall, much akin to the IOTV, it was made to allow the same level of protection the foot infantry had to the crews of US armor, both inside their vehicles and when dismounted.
It turns out that the US find standardizing personal body armor capabilities to be a mainstay within their branches and fields of operation. The US tanker, by equipment, is a infantryman first and a tanker second, if you outright removed the CVC of a US tanker and swapped it with a ACH, you would have your average Gulf War US Army rifleman.
That’s why we have a spall vest for inside the vehicle and IOTV with plates for outside the vehicle. The entire uniform we wear for both settings is entirely different, and we carry both on the tank at all times.
Spall vest for inside the vehicle - full kit for outside the vehicle.
just because the tech is being developed for a scrapped vehicle its doesnt mean the tech itself gets scrapped, most modern vehicles are built off dead programs
the integrated spall liner wouldnt be visible
why do you need a picture? you do realize thats ALOT to ask? there is already more than enough evidence of there being one. you’re literally asking about a picture of a vital surivivability measure of the CURRENTLY IN SERVICE tank of the most powerful nation of the planet. if thats not stupid i dont know what is
Nor would an integrated spall liner stop spalling caused by the 100mm thick steel plate between the array and the turret. Spalling gonna happen regardless without some kind of internal liner.
It’s rhetorical question more or less. I have served on them, there is no useful spall liner… certainly no internal one. The OP shows this quite well.
The hundreds of pictures, books, sources that show there is no spall liner on the interior of the tank are sufficient. Gaijin is aware it has no spall liner there… and so it will not get one. Period.
I’m MiG_23M. I play war thunder.
I did
you mean the very few publically available pictures of a classified piece of equoipment dont show said classified piece of equipment? how weird how bizarre how strange. use your brain for gods sake
If that’s what you think, feel free.
The devs / tech mods are very aware that there is no internal spall liner. Thanks for your input.
and why is that relevant in any way shape or form? those same devs/tech mods have shown to be extremely unreliable already.
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. M1,M1A1/HC/SA/AIM, M1A2/SEP/SEPv2 Missing Integrated Spall Liner // Gaijin.net // Issues
To be honest the fact that you have to wear PPE inside of the Abrams does not prove it does not have a form of spall mitigation built into the armor. As you know full PPE must be worn in any tactical vehicle for both dismounts and crew no matter what, stateside or deployed.
I’ve been in plenty of vehicles that had visible spall liners including the MRAP/MATV, AAV, HMMWV (some models) and LAV25. Yet I still had to wear full PPE as did the crews. On top of this there are plenty of photos of both Challenger and Leopard crews wearing full PPE in their tanks even though they are confirmed to have spall liners.
I agree the Abrams has no visible spall liner I’ve been inside plenty of M1A1 FEPs to see myself. But you as a crewman you do not know the composition of the interior layer. Could it be hardened steel ? Could it be a softer metal to mitigate spalling ? Is it a mix ? We don’t know.
Lastly I will say the Abrams in US service has been penetrated on multiple occasions in both Iraq and Kuwait. But in after action reports there are no complaints or mentions of spalling. This leads me to believe something in the armor package is minimizing it.
The Abrams does have kevlar in the armor array - that was proven via sources. What Gaijin wants to see is a spall liner on the interior of the tank. All the kevlar in the array does is help to prevent spalling from a non-penetrative round. The 100mm plate at the inside of the armor before entering the crew compartment is still going to come with spalling should a round make it into the compartment.
The fact that we have to wear PPE inside the Abrams does not prove that it has no internal spall liner - the endless number of pictures and videos showing that there is no internal spall liner is the proof.
I’m not claiming to know the internal array composition. That much is known from the myriad of sources available.
We do, there is literally pictures in the OP.
The only example where you can observe the aftermath shows spalling that went all the way across to the other side of the turret. There is also pictures from the friendly fire incident in 2020 where the loader bled all over the place in the turret and sustained shrapnel wounds from the damages caused by a round hitting the side of the CITV. (Internal spalling).
Devs on vacation, please wait. Best thing you’re going to see is some reduction in spalling applied to all tanks whether it is from the array or from spall vest protection. There will be no internal spall liner applied to the Abrams because it never had one.
The material in the photo’s- all the white composite- is the spall liner
Where’s the source to back up this statement?lmao he has none cause it was fucking made up 😂
You throwing a lil hissy fit too buddy?
Source?
OP covered it quite well. Did you even read?
