Weight?
2 Likes
People think that Russian Engineering outsmarted the Americans which is hilarious.
6 Likes
Most advanced military in the world with the most advanced hardware and these folks think we didn’t figure out how to maximize spall liner integrations into the vehicle armor.
Some peak cope, I swear.
8 Likes
“Nuh…uh there’s no spall liners on the abrums”
8 Likes
I lost count of how many times I’ve sincerely wanted to whallop Gaijin collectively on the back of the head for the garbage they’ve pulled.
5 Likes
I can almost respect the insanity of American mains still trying to imply the Abrams had a spall liner (or “internal spall liners”, or “DU spall liners”) even when reality itself stands up against them.
Truly the unsurmountable pioneers.
1 Like
Insurmountable*
Again, it logically makes zero sense that the Abrams wouldn’t have one. Like, how do people honestly think otherwise? To me, it’s such a brain dead easy, and obvious conclusion to come to (that the Abrams does have a spall liner).
Wouldn’t make sense otherwise.
2 Likes
Unsurmountable*
I don’t know - I think it not having one is enough of a logical basis to say that it doesn’t.
Although… You did provide such strong evidence for it having a spall liner in this sentence… Now I’m not so sure…
If this logic ever worked M1 would be in CATTB Thumper configuration long by now.
Prototypes are known to be test beds and stages of what later can become a serial vehicle in exact or not configuration of a prototype.
I personally changed my look towards spall liners in the game, seeing how their performance was nerfed.
Now I am waiting for things like BTR-82A/AT and BMPT Terminator (even BMP3M Dragoon, or BMP-3M Manul, BTR-82U have them, though these are not serial and are prototypes, opposed to prementioned) even more, as for both of them having internal spall liners. Maybe even modeling “podboy” as a spall liner, as CIA’s and not only actual documents states them being somewhat effective at catching and stopping shrapnel.
Also a fairy tale about Abrooms crews having protection literally applies to most tank armies, even to updated russian tanker’s fit that was just modeled in game. Also some tanker’s suits are fireproof.
So if that said protection would be modeled on Abrooms theres zero reasons for anyone else to not recieve their own.
2 Likes
Reality doesn’t bend to what you or I personally find logical.
If you believe the Abrams featured spall liners, you’ll need proper documentation instead of: ‘‘I believe it had it, therefore it had it’’.
Here, watch me apply the same logic to a different aspect of the M1:
- ‘‘The M1 Abrams is produced by the country with the highest military spending, the L/55 120mm is superior to the M256 120mm and this upgrade was/is available. It makes ZERO sense that the M1 wouldn’t use the L/55 120mm gun. How does anyone think otherwise?!’’
6 Likes
remember these are the same people are have to build " turtle armor add-ons " to their already volatile volcano tanks. Im just waiting to see if the CCP wants to step up in the pacific, so we can show them why the autoloader carousel is a good addition to their space program
5 Likes
are you grabing hard to the spell check?
Spoiler
1 Like
I wont argue on grammar or usage of words but this reminds me of this
Good one lmao.
1 Like
The funny part is they did try that at one point. Got rejected for a mixture of reasons including apparently some stabilization issues and vibrational concerns if I recall correctly.
some sources here:
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA404787.pdf
As for the rest, not my wheelhouse. We know the spall liner was a requirement for the XM-1 due to lessons Observed from Yom Kippur, beyond that I somehow doubt the paperwork is actually available on what happened to it.
sourced: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA389781.pdf
7 Likes
What causes this psychosis where people write things that utterly ignore basic portions of the thing they’re replying to?
Literally first thing within that post is a 1 second search confirming that unsurmountable is grammatically correct - yet there’s like ~4 people that mention it. Three of which coming after the fact.
I would say that this isn’t related to the Abrams spall liners, but I feel like this level of reading comprehension and general lack of awareness must also relate as to why so many people like to believe that the Abrams has spall liners.
2 Likes
@Count_Trackula spent weeks detailing and bringing trusted and factual sources you can check them up if you go up, but damn these people still say otherwise, this forum is sad man.
1 Like
Oh I’m aware. I sort of roughly remember most of the sources there since I worked with him for a bit on the whole SEPv2 armor debacle. I still haven’t figured out what BMI Defense is referring to in regards to USMC M1A1 requirements on their spall liners, but neither here nor there.
It’s pretty entertaining occasionally poking my head in to check on this thread from time to time.
3 Likes
Oh no, now people that mostly main other nations and sit on their chairs daily typing nonsense get to say and think they better know than the people inside working on the Abrams.
1 Like
its always funny reading what sneed types guy is so far removed from reality I’m starting to think he has serious mental issues. He keeps repeating the same " Abrams has no spall liner " line over and over and has for the last few months even though he’s already been shown the bug report proving the Abrams has spall liners, then again I don’t think he would know what a spall liner is since he doesn’t know anything about American Tanks.
1 Like