Your camera should be a bit higher, in fact the M1A2 has exactly the same 600mm RHAe @ 60º frontal arc vs KE as Swedish one.
False.
im tired of seeing you lie time after time after time.
3 Likes
Yea I have already been over this with others, 33°s for angle of attack is too low, likewise you showed the right turret cheek because you knew it would show what you wanted it to show i.e. higher values as the right turret cheek for the Abrams provides more protection for both KE and CE as the turret cheeks are not the same, as even shown in the Swedish M1 armour values:
This is why from certain angles the side with the 30° construction slope angle has better KE and CE performance (very noticeable front on). Hence this is why if you go to the other turret cheek you get the KE results that Sweden got, hence the in game M1’s are not “overperforming”:
A further diagram claims only 50% of the turret surface provides 600mm RHAe vs KE when viewed from 20° side view, in-game the M1A2 exceeds this number.
Yes because other parts exceed 600mm:
The in game M1s are practically 1 to 1 copies of the Swedish trial M1s.
False.
The only thing false is you misinterpreting what this is talking about, obviously you shouldn’t be angled above what you are trying to get a value for, likewise you shouldn’t aim up into the turret cheeks like you were doing.
31ish ° seems to be about the correct angle, which is why when you use said angle you get the values (very close) that Gaijin got from the Swedish trials i.e. the M1s are 100% based off of those values, so you getting values that are a decent bit higher then the +/-30° (60° frontal arc) that the Swedish trials showed should have indicated that you were doing something wrong:
That said the +/-20° values confuse me as that should not be that low for the right turret cheek, the left turret cheek however have those said values:
10 Likes
Its necrons, all he makes is arguments in bad faith.
You are correct though, the armor mirrors the swedish trials functionally identically.
10 Likes
How is this relevant?
You failed to list a single AP round that the M230 can fire. That’s all that I have asked for.
You’re joking, right?
What is there to disprove? You haven’t given a single AP shell that the M230 can fire.
Only Abrams/Leo 2 (which is can be blowed up with Russian style)/Chally 2 (ate Arty)/ Merkava (RPG scooped) “are not” exploded since no actual combat footage of it.
Russian tanks have done so poorly, many military experts have asked if the entire concept of a tank is a worthless deathtrap. Of course it isn’t, but Russian armor and how they’ve employed them has definitely shown everyone what tanks shouldn’t be and how not to use them.
6 Likes
Can i ask who ?
So you will let your infantry take the trenchs/position/fortification with only AFV, Armored Car or on their own ?
Can you provide sources, just personal interest.
You can DM if you need to.
And my advice, its pointless to argue with such people, they straight up think one side is trash and other is shining like no other, plus you can straight up see they are not even arguing but drowning in their statements. You state one thing and they start going completely off topic just because they cant actually prove themselves. Plus this isnt discussion about that but vehicles, IRL tanks fight ATGMs, mines, infantry, BMPs, but rarelt tanks, unlike the game.
1 Like
https://img-forum-wt-com.cdn.gaijin.net/original/3X/0/6/067a67f1e22e3cb4a31101850dc5ebe0baa094ed.jpeg
This is being pretty disingenuous no? i.e. I couldn’t find anything that stated these were hit with ATGMs? The only thing I found on this was that apparently both of the drivers were killed.
Regardless why did you have to go back some 25 - 30 years to find some tanks that weren’t destroyed when hit i.e. this is from the Battle of Grozny. That said if you want go back to the battle of Grozny here are some pictures showing Russian vehicles were the same back then as they are today:
Tanks in general could be called death traps now a days, but Russian tanks take it to the extreme by having their ammo located where it is as there is no way to protect the crew when ammo said ammo goes off, that is why Russian tanks have a “rapid unscheduled disassembly ” when their ammo is hit.
3 Likes
It says in plain English “ NATO standard 30mm ADEN/DEFA ammunition” Why would this not include AP rounds? They’re still the same caliber and case length and still have electric primers. The M230 also has a higher avg chamber pressure than the ADEN/DEFA (415 Mpa vs 315 Mpa) so the rounds aren’t too powerful for the M230s chamber.
I don’t know if any country actively uses ADEN/DEFA ammo over the standard US aluminum cased. But there’s zero indication that ADEN/DEFA AP rounds can’t be used.
8 Likes
Sure, whatever you say " Tovarisch"
5 Likes
Talking about the Leopard
1 Like
Ok im going type this in big words so yo all can see it better. EVERY SINGLE MODERN TANK HAS A SPALL LINER IN IT. THE M60 PATTONS EVEN HAVE SPALL LINERS IN THEM.
1 Like
they somehow think the Turret of Abrams and Leopards are penetrable by the russian ATGMs… Somehow i killed a leo 2A7 through its turret with the 9M123 last week.
So much b.s with nato tanks its sad
if you are even 5 degrees off the turret of a Leo 2A7 can be penetrate by ATGMs
Both documents directly state that they can use all ammunition that the ADEN and DEFA can chamber, so that would mean, I know its hard for foxo to understand, All ADEN and DEFA ammo.
30X113MM DEFA.pdf (generalequipment.info)
So it should be able to fire the MHEI and APHEI rounds modern DEFA cannons can use.
Even the DEFA ammo table outright states the M230E1 can feed these rounds.
10 Likes
The biggest problems with the Abrams is that after the M1A1 the whole line turns into copy and paste. Sep v2 is the biggest star of this, the damn dev blog can only come up with a remote control turret (something a damn 3.3 sherman can do) and dubious ERA. Hell, its arguably weaker thanks to the unremovable TUSK!
Why the hell would any player, who knows what the hell theyre doing in top tier, bother going after the top of the line Abrams that provides almost nothing but being heavier. Compare this to the German and Swedish trees, where the reward for reaching the end of the line are some of the best protected leapords in the game. Also, you get the best shell on top because why not.
Gaijin shouldve added spall liners and the DU hull to the SEP v2. Because itll at least be an actual upgrade for the Abrams tree.
9 Likes