Does the Abrams have a spall liner? No from what I could find

[ayeflyingcowboy]

@TheArcticFoxxo

You’re attempting to butt into conversations that you have no part in, and now you’re whining when I didn’t magically know to give you specifically all the pretext in the world?

I read your comments, literally no where did you state it was in Syria, which is likewise why someone then asked you for sources on those pictures.

TOWS? Do you really not know what ATGMs are being used in Syria? Do you want me to list it out for you, your highness?

You do realise there are multiple TOW variants right? And yes I do, please give me proof that this was a TOW-2A hit.

No? Your entire point is that the autoloader design itself should be done away with. If the T-14 has any operational success in this development, it would favor my side entirely.

Have you ever heard of that little ol French tank called the Leclerc? Go check where there ammo is located (has blowout panels) and how their autoloader works, the CATTB and Abrams X have a similar system whist keeping blowout panels, Russia’s autoloading system isn’t the only one that exists mate.

Edit: Also yes, Russia proved my point with the T-14 i.e. if they didn’t believe that tanks being destroyed by their ammo going off was an issue why does it seem like they are attempting to fix this issue by compartmentalising the ammo in the T-14, why not just have it like how all the other T-series tanks have it?

[MekboyVN_068]

@TheArcticFoxxo

You’re attempting to butt into conversations that you have no part in, and now you’re whining when I didn’t magically know to give you specifically all the pretext in the world?

No need to argue with him, he is the same type of this guy, his tanks and his allied tanks has no drawbacks, accept it.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Ammo in the hull cooked off but for them, this is still fine for the crew with his logic.

These are fake tanks, Leo not gonna blowed up because they not bother to store ammo in the hull.

[aDSD]

@Vietnam_guy068

Spoiler

If you look at tanks such way all current tanks are old and outdated.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

No need to argue with him, he is the same type of this guy, his tanks and his allied tanks has no drawbacks, accept it.

The M1s drawbacks are that it has become far too heavy (hence the M1E3), also prior to the SEPv3 the LFP may not have been enough but that is honestly less of an issue IRL as tank on tank encounters are quite rare which is the same for the turret ring, likewise TUSK I + II may not to protect the tank from tandem warheads (unknown though), this however was likely fixed with SEPv2/v3s receiving APS.

That said MIG-23M can correct me here on things I have missed or am wrong about.

I know more about the M1s then the following but here are some issues:

Leo 2 - has ammo in the hull i.e. these tanks are relying far too much on their frontal protection here, it also is getting on the heavier side nowadays.

Leclerc - The armour is overall unknown (afaik for later variants) but from trials was stated to be worse then the M1A2 and Leo 2, thus the protection is most likely not enough.

Challenger 2 - Doesn’t have blowout panels and was way too heavy, even the challenger 3 is worrisome if it is indeed 66 tonnes.

I accept the western tanks drawbacks.

T-series tanks - Rely far too much on ERA that already has quite a few counters to it, stores ammo in the hull that as has been shown is easily hit and when it is hit does not bode well for the crew.

Negative for all tanks - IEDs, artillery, top down munitions, drones.

Tell me where I am wrong?

[MekboyVN_068]

@ayeflyingcowboy

T-series tanks - Rely far too much on ERA that already has quite a few counters to it, stores ammo in the hull that as has been shown is easily hit and when it is hit does not bode well for the crew.

• In the mindset of Soviet/Russian, ERA usage is like Leo 2 add-on NERA and it still has headroom for near future, instead of replace the whole NERA, they can just slap ERA on it
  The countries who bought the tanks know what they need with their current situation:
• In the pass, K1 is good enough for non tanderm HEAT, then K5 get in and get countered, now RELIKT/K5 with 2S24, still good.

Spoiler

A disabled T-90M ate an rounds but ERA worked, no problemo

• The trend now to add more ERA to counter drone/FPV with cages since the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, guess what, K1 now better since it can slapped into the roof and anywhere, does NATO/USA has some real combat method for that ?. And since the roof of those tanks even thinner then T-series, 40mm greanade anti-armored can easily pen it then T-series, not even talking about the heavy equpiment on the roof.

@ayeflyingcowboy

stores ammo in the hull that as has been shown is easily hit and when it is hit does not bode well for the crew.

• A decesion for that autoloader is just like why the US can easily used autoloader on the turret like Lerclerc with 34 rounds and no draw back since 2000 but they don’t want to.

We also know what is good or bad about T-90M/80BVM/72B3, we wish T-90M can have 2A82, can have better reversed gears but no, the defence minister just don’t want to, even funnier, formered Russian Defence Minister once wanted to buy Leo 2 because back then all the big 3 of Russian tanks labs just suck with their own ego.

[arsenal119]

@Vietnam_guy068

In the pass, K1 is good enough for non tanderm HEAT, then K5 get in and get countered, now RELIKT/K5 with 2S24, still good.

I’m not sold on this. Just because people used to clame that it could stop javelins and we’ve seen that that was false, with all of the cope cages on the t series tanks that still does not stop javelins.

I think RELIKT/K5 proformance is over exaggerated.

[MekboyVN_068]

• No, the main purposes of the cages is again FPV/Drone, mainly drone drop grenades. Russian Defence Minister has not confirmed cages is to protect again Javelin.
• In any case, Javelin will punch through K5.
• When the first batch of T-72B3 got cages, we also confused, some “expert” from several mil forums in my country not even know what the heck was that, some of them even called it “tiger cages” as a meme. They might uses cages right after the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict / Syria combat experienced.

Spoiler

First image is from Jan 2022, second is the way we joke about the cage since it just share the same concept back then.

• The cages might got order for mass production but not fully designed, maybe they just ask for it then improved it from time to time, now more evidence show that cages is good, truly a sign of cope.

[Mytho-GR1]

@arsenal119

I think RELIKT/K5 proformance is over exaggerated

Guess whos ERA underperforms cough everyone else
Well ERA and NERA sandwich but gajin doesn’t think that exists

[Dinfire]

@TheArcticFoxxo

Because in the decade before NGAP, there were major leaps in projectile development? It went from 1980s subpenetrators barely scraping past 400mm to '90s darts pushing past 500-600mm. Now, from '10-'20, countries are making penetrators claiming 800mm of penetration.
You didn’t put ERA over the turret because there simply wasn’t the possibility of adding a bulky and heavy ERA package to a heavily armored area. Neither with weight, nor with practicality.

You misidentified a tungsten carbide slug that was in regular use with the Republican Guard, then go on to argue minutiae.

The U.S. Army didn’t put ERA on the front of the M1A2 SEPSv1 or v2 with the newer TUSK upgrades because they had plentiful protection already.

The BRL would know the approximate amount of damage kinetic rounds and chemical energy rounds could commit to an Abrams, and would have that armored accordingly, if not to surpass that threat and any future known threats, particularly with their established understanding that 65 percent of all rounds strike the turret.

At this point you’re a reductionist stonewaller. I’ll not spend days arguing terms with you, when the sum of it is that all say the same thing… the Abrams’ armor array and its turret ring are better than what is presented in game.

[Dinfire]

Also, just so we’re clear, when you said “M1A1 AIMS didn’t get HAP-2”, YES, they did.

Because I deployed in an M1A1 AIMS in OIF in 2004. And yes, we had DU armor. NOT the export package we sent the Aussies.

[arsenal119]

@Vietnam_guy068

No, the main purposes of the cages is again FPV/Drone, mainly drone drop grenades. Russian Defence Minister has not confirmed cages is to protect again Javelin.

The cages first showed up before the use of kamikaze drones in the beginning of the war not long after Ukraine was given javelins. You would also see them attaching polls to put buckets with fire hoping to confuse the the missiles in missing.

And the term cope cages was well before this conflict. It’s been used to describe the cages on strikers too.

[arsenal119]

I don’t know. I don’t think there is any ERA out there that can actually stop modern tandem missiles. Unless you are talking about an hard kill APS system them yes they can stop the munitions.

[MekboyVN_068]

@arsenal119

The cages first showed up before the use of kamikaze drones in the beginning of the war not long after Ukraine was given javelins. You would also see them attaching polls to put buckets with fire hoping to confuse the the missiles in missing.

The standard from factory is just pure cages, solidier with the fear of anti tank just improvises with what they have, many types, many version.
Now the cages is just for FPS/Drone mainly since no sign of NLAW/Javelin since last year.
In the future, many tanks gonna get it, Merkava, Type 10 currently using it, we gonna have a fashion show soon.

[Mytho-GR1]

@arsenal119

I don’t think there is any ERA out there that can actually stop modern tandem missiles

Modern im not sure but old tandem missiles yes their is its just not modelled in game correctly

[ayeflyingcowboy]

And the term cope cages was well before this conflict. It’s been used to describe the cages on strikers too.

You mean the Stryker’s slat armour? The point of that slat armour was to help against regular RPGs, and to that affect it apparently worked decently well i.e. it won’t fully protect the vehicle but it negates quite a lot of the impact and thus could save the crew:

The specific reason people were calling the Russian thing “cope cages” is because they were hastily made and of pretty “poor” make at that, so the thinking was it was made to stop Javelins, which it wouldn’t as like I said the Stryker’s slat armour couldn’t fully stop RPGs, thus if this is why Russia made them then they are useless i.e. cope cages.

However if the Russians learnt anything from their previous wars it was that an RPG in urban combat are extremely dangerous as they can be fired from above into the top of a tank, that cope cage may be effective in such a scenario.

This is likely why Merkava’s were seen with something similar recently.

[arsenal119]

I don’t disagree that the javelins have stopped being used and the cages serves a new purpose. But the original introduction was to try and defeat the Javelin that was defeating the ERA on the tanks.

Again my point is that RELIKT/K5 is not as good as it is clamed to be.

[arsenal119]

Cope cages is a term that was created by the soldiers. It has never been used in a official capacity.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

@arsenal119

I don’t disagree that the javelins have stopped being used and the cages serves a new purpose

Javelins are still being used i.e. there have been a number of tanks destroyed recently that Ukrainians claimed were caused by Javelin hits.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

https://twitter.com/GloOouD/status/1736846326057378198

[arsenal119]

Well i stand corrected.

I do believe that the kamikaze drones are the more popular weapon systems now tho.

The javelins are heavy and not the most ideal weapon systems for an offensive war. On top of that the kamikaze drones are way cheaper then a Javelin missiles.