You’ve got a right to your opinion, but as it stands it’s either they work with what we have available or we just sit and accept the fact that as it stands the Abrams, regardless of which variant, will see little to no improvement because there is a distinct lack of primary sources with hard numbers. That’s the problem with implementing modern hardware is that a lot of it is in fact going to be guess work due to things still being classified.
And Gaijin’s guesswork ain’t exactly the greatest considering the entire Stinger debacle, where they concluded a missile that is rated to catch a target maneuvering at 7Gs can’t do so because of the control surfaces looking mildly similar to the Igla.
Mostly due to some visible LoS thickness increases, but knowing our luck Gaijin’ll conclude NGAP has no DU and the increased LoS is to meet a similar effective thickness as DU armor. Because reasons.
I don’t personally have any issue with Gaijin’s reasoning around Stingers.
It’s a simple matter of them using whichever missile they have the most data about as a basis for understanding how things work. I don’t know what else you can ask from them if we want to keep things realisic. I can’t personally fault them for that approach, it’s about as grounded as you can get and minimises the speculation.
I agree they should acknowledge that Stinger and Mistral use PID and not bang-bang as it is called, although I’m not sure if that will give the missiles the G overload that many people expect.
They’ve not currently acknowledged sufficient evidence to accept that Mistral or Stinger are radically different from Igla.
That’s the crux. The “Red empire” fell and the blue empire didn’t, so we have information about one but not the other. Alea iacta est.
Thank you for being respectful, hopefully I’m having respectable opinions. I in turn respect the research and effort done. I looked into these matters myself because I am curious, I feel even a bit sad that I’ve not been able to find the conclusive evidence that many seek.
I understand your concern here. I don’t think Russian equipment would benefit very much as they have a lot more primary sources and this suggestion is for vehicles that don’t have them.
I agree that “experts” such as Clancy and some others shouldn’t be used. But I really don’t think reputable estimates combined with secondary sources would be so far from reality. I certainly believe it would be better than using the 20-30 year old sources that Gaijin currently uses.
Without a rework, the future of nato armor in warthunder is going to continue to be a series of outrages and drama for every country. Which is why I like the suggestion from Spanish so much. It has flaws but I haven’t seen a better alternative thus far.
No. Factually incorrect. If the interior metal is softer than the external ceramic and depleted uranium sandwhich, it helps act to stop a shell shattering when entering the crew compartment.
I see I’ll need to make yet another TikTok for everyone to grasp it.
Also like, just straight discipline to wear your flak, and the abrams is ACd unlike many other tanks, right?
The flak protects against impact, extra spall, emergency dismount etc. Other nations that dont use spall liners dont wear flaks.
Thats why the US military is good, because they have good order and discipline to get their guys to do uncomfortable things even when its not “necessary”. Weve all done “stupid” things in the military, but we only call it that because it makes you uncomfortable or its heavy, or my back hurts, or my feet hurt etc. Its all for a purpose, and it all enhances the warfighter
I think the Marines before they ditched tanks had some sort of liquid cooling vest system they were implementing on their M1A1s, but well I imagine that was a pain in the ass.
I bet it wouldve been like how PC liquid cooling works. The vest would have tubes, and youd wear that vest under your flak. The liquid would have a heat exchanger itd feed back to in the tank thatd recool it. Pretty smart tbh
Edit: although youd be “hooked in” so i bet itd really only be good for driver or when not gunning. Youd need some type of QD system in case of combat emergency and when not idle
Also your source is literally talking about a Model inside
Windows. Not an actual real life tank.
“GVSI is stored under the file name “GVSI.XLS”. Copy this file to your computer’s hard drive. Start Excel 5.0, and then load the spreadsheet. The top level worksheet is labeled GVSI-Top Level. If the model doesn’t display this worksheet after the workbook loads, switch to the worksheet by clicking on the appropriate tab at the bottom of the screen.”
“The user can document changes to system design by either saving the model to a different file or printing the spreadsheet out.”
"Although GVSI provides an integrated approach to systems design and analysis, there are many opportunities to improve this model. Recommendations for future enhancements include: "
“GVS| limits spall liner application to the crew compartment.”
"Since the Abrams tank does not use a spall liner, the decision to use a spall liner
decision to use a spall liner is a “Yes” or “No” question for the GVSI user”
The program model does not have a spall liner to give an opportunity to the user to choose which is more important. More weight or increase survivability by %50.
Your TikTok can say whatever it wants, but Gaijin will always trust a written document from a company that works on the Abrams more than a tank crewman. Especially when several have come forward and said the opposite of you.
I’m not arguing with a primary source, I’m pointing out that the primary source you’re using is faulty in your conclusions because Gaijin doesn’t use volumetric armor and integral spall liners. K thanks bye.
How could I have ever known that someone disrespectful and unwilling to discuss this would show up? Can I tell the future?
This is exactly what I didn’t want to happen. An emotional outburst without logic behind it.
Armor being used in a specific way to stop spall from being created is not what a Spall Liner is. A Spall Liner is a metal plate or fabric cover that is intended to stop spalling once it has been created. What you are talking about is not a Spall Liner.
