This is true, but also from friendly fire, where the radioactive materials were highly agitated or heated by DU ammo if im not mistaken
Yes. That was just an image of a single spall liner I selected so the tankie didn’t hurt itself in its confusion. You can see the spall liner behind the bench in this image.:
That lower wall behind the bench just doesn’t happen to be the single large sliding panel that was supposed to be obvious for demonstration purposes. Notice the other panel in place. when positioned and locked in place, they cover the entire side of the troop compartment.
4 Likes
You can’t disprove spall liners
Worded that wrong?
You cannot prove the Abrams has an internal spall liner, this is because it doesn’t have one. Burden of “proof” lies on the people claiming otherwise but this discussion has been hashed out multiple times in great detail already in this thread…
I’m not sure how you intended to use this insult but if it was in reference to me… you’re agreeing with me. As funny as that is - it’s also not really relevant to the thread except to showcase what a real internal spall liner looks like.
We’re at a point where they’re disagreeing over the spall liner and what internal is.
Spall liners and spall mitigation is to the front armor entirely, and to the sides of the turret.
The rest is a softer hardened steel alloy with possible composite lattice infrastructure in several key regions.
Meanwhile, I’ll be needing to work up spall hits from HEAT rounds.
The win rate of the U.S. is sub-40 percent at this rate and only 23,000 battles being fought daily, to 60,000 battles of USSR at 54% WR, and the Germans at 48,000 battles with over 60% WR.
US isn’t being played nearly as often in top tier, even with the Clickbait new folks. And they’re still losing terribly. There is enough aggregate evidence to say that US top tier isn’t being given enough of a boost, even with a 5-second real-life reload rate.
7 Likes
No, was directed at Sneed.
But your profile picture, name, and worship of Soviet mediocrity is cringe.
3 Likes
Thunderskill does not currently have the new vehicles listed.
That means there could very well be more people playing the M1A1 Click-Bait than the M1A2, M1A2 SEP and M1A2 SEP v2 combined, yet we wouldn’t know about it.
You can thanks click bait for that and Gaijin that refuse to give DU hull insert for sep
4 Likes
Can you show any sources which claim the M1A2 SEP or SEP v2 historically used DU inserts for the hull composites?
there a sht tons of it that people give it to gaijin you can find on the forum or bug report are you ignore those?
2 Likes
Kinda a offshoot of my digging regarding DU things, not making a statement one way or another as I am not good enough at reading for that, just dropping them because people might find them interesting or useful and I am not the person to dissect large studies.
This is more focused on DU particulates but a 4-5 year long 600 page study, Capstone DU Aerosol Study, had researchers replicate the frinedly fire hits that happened to Abrams and Bradleys with DU shells at a special test range alongside firing both DU and tungsten rounds through the DU cheeks.
Particulate and fragmentation kinda come hand in hand so might be worth someone not dyslexic to rummage through.
Additionally and probably more improtantly BRL’s computer simulation of spalling from a shot to the side of the M1A1 repeated a thousand times to see the effect of behind armor debris is unclassified and available in full
4 Likes
First source contradicts itself, it illustrates that the turret cheeks are the only location of DU armour.
Second source makes no claims of the M1A2, SEP or SEP v2 utilizing DU hull armour.
Third source makes no claims that the hull armour of the M1A2, SEP or SEP v2 utilize DU armour.
Fourth source refers to the M1A1 SA, we do not have this model in-game and thus is not relevant to the M1A2 SEP v2.
Fifth source makes no claims of DU hull armour, also pre-dates the SEP v2 and M1A1 SA.
Sixth source references the M1A1 SA again, not relevant to War Thunder and not relevant to the M1A2 SEP.
Seventh source is not a primary source, and it doesn’t seem to list it’s own source for the claims it makes, nor does it outright claim that the M1A2 SEP v2 utilizes DU armour in it’s hull composition.
The first source doesn’t contradict itself. Some people can get by just fine without pictures.
2nd Source was literally pulled from the license that Gaijin cited to claim there could be only 5 hulls. It was talking about the FONSI finding and decision to go ahead with the SEP upgrades…which included the armor upgrades described in the MUH 5 HULLS document…which was obsolete by amendment in Aug 2006.
3rd sources is…again the same license that Gaijin tried to cite…but here it is again. It is explicitly about using DU armor in hulls and turrets. XD Notice to how it goes from mentioning 5 hulls separately in the line item on the 1999 document, then in the 2006 amendment it removes all limits on hulls for DU use.:
Remember, license SUB-1536 was what Gaijin said was irrefutable proof that DU was in turrets because it never limited the quantity of turrets for DU inserts, but that could only have meant 5 hulls ever…despite being amended to allow unlimited DU use in hulls as well. If Gaijin wants to say that “as needed” means it’s in turrets, when hulls are granted “as needed” DU use, it must mean it is hulls as well. By Gaijin’s own logic and admission.
…and yes, the other sources are still about DU. DOE=Department of Energy. Frontal armor includes the hull, the only time they make an exception to a specific part of the tank is when mentioning that only the turret received a side armor upgrade.
If you bothered reading the 7th source, it said it includes all of the upgrades of the SA and SEP platform in V2. The entire point of the SA Abrams was to bring M1A1s up to the SEP protection levels. IE 3rd generation DU. Which includes the hull, per the FONSI statement findings and decisions of the obsolete MUH 5 HULLS version of SUB-1536.
You can deny all you want, but colored images with arrows have no bearing on the VA’s statement that DU has been in the hulls as well. Nor the FONSI tied to amended SUB-1536 license document that authorizes unlimited use of DU in turrets AND hulls. Your denial does nothing to refute the budget forms indicating that Department of Energy armor packages were installed for frontal coverage. No exclusions, unlike the side armor upgrade specifically limited to the turret.
6 Likes
So which is it, SUB-1536 means DU is in turrets because they were authorized “as needed,” or DU can’t be in hulls because hulls are also authorized “as needed?”
2 Likes
Okay, I’m starting to get a good idea of how people come to the conclusion that the M1A2 SEP v2 has DU hull armour.
They’ll just dismiss anything in the sources that’s contrary to their pre-established beliefs on the subject.
At the end of the day, Gaijin isn’t going to implement DU hull inserts for the M1A2/SEP/SEPv2 because the sources provided thus far do not prove it’s was ever done historically.
Projection, pure and simple.
So why is it that SUB-1536 was obviously good enough to say it’s in turrets when it explicitly listed a 5 hull limit, but when that limit is removed, and turrets and hulls have the same “as needed” status, it means it isn’t in hulls?
Remember, SUB-1536 is the reason Gaijin says that DU is in turrets. When the same license is amended to give the same status to hulls as it did turrets, that must mean its in hulls as well. Along with statements from the VA saying as much, budget forms, congressional reports, and other sources…
…but yes, we are the ones refusing to believe the evidence…I’m sorry more of these documents don’t have more pictures and colors to help you understand them.
12 Likes
Me: Here’s the VA saying that DU has been in turrets and hulls as armor components since 1998.
You: THAT’S NOT WHAT THE DRAWINGS WITH ARROWS POINTING TO COLORS SHOWS!!!
Me:…that doesn’t change the fact that the VA explicitly stated that DU has been in hulls since 1998.
You: You only want to believe what you already believed!!!
16 Likes
Maybe because gaijin only care about realistic when it benefits Russian tanks to meet demand of low skill russian main.
9 Likes
Is this the same Necrons aka (James vd Bosch) from the old forum and Reddit?
5 Likes