You’re “source” is using a model based off the Abrams your source cannot disprove spall liners in Abrams do you understand what I’m trying to tell you? That source is nothing but a computer program made to model next generation armored vehicles for the military
2 Likes
This is incorrect, the SEPv3 baseline weighs as much as the Challenger 3 i.e. metric 65 / 66 tons. The 70.6 metric tons you are talking about is its weight with APS installed.
Bro, Sep v3 did not start until fy 2020.
M1s started being upgraded to SEPv3s in 2018.
If you actually cared for evidence, you would have noticed that a Spall Liner would require nearly three additional tons on top of its current weight.
Spall liner weight for the SEPv3 is most likely irrelevant, as it most likely has Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) in said armour package, that plus other things like advanced ultra-high-strength steels (UHSS) is probably why they called it the Next Generation / Next Evolution Armor (NEA) package.
1 Like
“ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE This report documents the Ground Vehicle System Integration (GVSI) and Design Optimization Model. GVSI is a top-level analysis tool designed to support engineering tradeoff studies and vehicle design optimization efforts. The model uses simplified functional and parametric relationships to evaluate system performance issues. GVSI’s primary function is to illustrate the dependence of various system and subsystem functions; the goal is to provide a better understanding how a change in the performance of one subsystem affects the rest of the vehicle.”
This model based of the Abrams tank does not have a spall liner. This doesn’t mean all Abrams tanks do not have spall liners only the specific model in the program.
1 Like
Calling that gaslighting is incorrect. Calling you Disrespectful is not Gaslighting you.
Being Disrespectful is saying that my source is bad without showing that it’s bad. It’s then replying “k thanks bye” because you don’t want to be constructive.
It’s berating me and saying you’ll need to make another “tiktok” for people to “grasp it” as if that’s not insulting them.
You’ve been nothing but disrespectful. Stop resulting to insults and converse like everyone else.
It quite literally means that the tank would need the addition of an Internal Kevlar Spall Liner. It’s been debunked over and over. A Kevlar Spall Liner inside the armor would not make sense and is not visible on any trustworthy sources. The Military did the math and found that it would take 4800 pounds or almost 2.5 tons of extra weight to give the Abrams a Spall Liner, and seeing as how they were weight conscious, it was not done in favor of Flak Vests.
In the document, it flat out states that the Abrams does not use a Spall Liner. Stop nitpicking.
That is not what the Document made for the US Army states. You do not know more than the people working on the vehicle.
The Military is weight conscious of the Abrams. Seeing how the V4 was cancelled partially because of just that. Without a Spall Liner, the V3 already clocks in at nearly 70 tons. What you’re doing isn’t using evidence. It’s making assumptions based on technology and budget. Almost every, if not every, reliable source, especially primary source, has shown that the Abrams does not use a Spall Liner due to the weight needed to reinforce it.
FYI putting a bunch of carpets inside of your tanks isnt the only way to reduce spall from a penetrating hit, it has already been discussed in a machinery of war thread
2 Likes
so far ive seen only 1 source outright stating the abrams doesnt ahve a spall liner, do you happen to have the other sources on hand?
Seem like Gaijin is gonna have a rough time to choose which is the “suitable” way for the V3 in the future:
- T-72B3/BVM method which is using Sep V2 model 2/3 as a baseline then got the V3 package (which is fully equipe with mine roller, trophy and counter weight
- Or slap the V3 like they done with the V2 and perhaps made the trophy and mine roller as “upgrade option”
US uses short ton so fully equip SepV3 gonna has 82.5 tons weight for standard “tons”.
1 Like
No offense or anything but im gonna believe what the person who SERVED in the vehicle says over this.
1 Like
They’ll just copy the SEPv2 in terms of armor and slap a V3 behind it lmao.
People will ask them about it and they’ll respond “well we have no actual values so we don’t believe the actual effectiveness of the armor was increased, now piss off”.
I do not, but they have been shared around.
While true that there are other ways of reducing spall, the primary two Spall Liner types are metal linings on the interior of the turret and fabric linings on the interior of the Turret.
Two examples of this are the Leopards with metal linings and the T-90M with a fabric lining.
Fabric linings tend to be lighter but are also weaker. The tradeoff is that they also fit over equipment easier.
Metal linings are heavier and take up much more space, but they eat significantly more spall.
1 Like
And many others who served claim otherwise. Being in the Military doesn’t make your right. There are many who claim things that simply aren’t true.
Luckily, my friend is joining the US military as a Tanker, so I’ll probably have some more hands on information soon.
okay i’ve looked at that document further.
-
its not a primary source, its a private company putting forth a computer model for engineers to use as a preliminary assessment of performance change in the event of a new feature implementation.
-
its just that, a computer model. no real world info can come from this looking forward.
-
its from 1996. even if the information in there is correct, its outdated.
-
the calculations they have used for spall liners make absolutely no sense. they have used a previous estimation of a “Future Armored Resupply Vehicle” (i.e a truck) using x amount of weight for spall liner, then for some reason divided that by number of crew (??). then taken that per crew weight and made a guess that the same is true for all other vehicles and made it x 4 for the Abrams. that makes no sense since A LOT of the liner protects several crew at the same time in an Abrams.
-
what they have calculated for spall liner is for use in the computer simulation(and apparently involved guesswork), not actual real life Abrams numbers. what the added weight for Abrams would be we can’t at all tell from that document.
-
even if the “Since the Abrams tank does not use a spall liner” information is correct, that goes for pre 1996 tanks. so any M1A2 SEP variant comes after that.
-
page 10 outlines the limitations of the computer model:
“The desire to keep GVSI an unclassified model limited survivability
characterizations to representative threats and an unclassified survivability
database developed by the US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity
(AMSAA).” -
the newest source they themselves have used for their research is from 1994, while most of the sources used are from the 1980’s. making the data even more outdated.
-
since they had to use external sources i’m starting to believe that this report even is a third party source and not even a secondary source (but this is just a personal feeling more than fact).
i’m doubting that paper more and more and i don’t think it would be an acceptable source in almost any situation.
10 Likes
Oh, is that so?
73.6 short tons = 66.7 metric tons.
77.9 short tons = 70.6 metric tons
The Military is weight conscious of the Abrams. Seeing how the V4 was cancelled partially because of just that. Without a Spall Liner, the V3 already clocks in at nearly 70 tons. What you’re doing isn’t using evidence. It’s making assumptions based on technology and budget.
No, what I am doing is looking at what the military has been doing since 2014/2015 i.e. the US had already developed an advanced UHMWPE by said time:
Interestingly at the same time the SEPv3s new NGAP/NEA armour was further being tested:
UHMWPE is known to help negate spalling i.e. it is a spall liner built into the actual tank armour that would replace the old material used by the M1s. The M1A2 SEPv3s armour being renamed to the Next Generation Armour Package / Next Evolution armour wasn’t an accident, it uses next generation armour.
The problem with the M1 is they really needed to actually change what should have been changed years ago i.e. they could have reduced weight if they wanted to by incorporating the XM360, this alone would reduce the M1s weight by 1 metric ton, they also should have incorporated the hybrid power pack which likewise reduces weight as less fuel is needed, etc etc.
TRADOC even knew back in 2014 that if they fully incorporated what they knew about armour materials they could reduce the M1s armour weight by 31.7% (armour weight from 40.7 down to 27.8) whilst keeping the SEPs protection levels the same. It now being 9 years after this means they likely can get this weight down even more.
This is why the SEPv4 was cancelled and the M1E3 is being developed.
10 Likes
I just want this game to stay relatively impartial instead of becoming a credibledefence tier meme like “Command: Modern Operations”
It seems reasonable, but to be honest Gaijin already uses estimates, they just aren’t estimates popular with NATO players.
I say the future of the game will be much more interesting once we expand into prototype territory, CATTB and so on. I think that’s the solution, instead of praying for M1E3 or whatever to turn up and be implemented as a dream car.
At least personally I would prefer this game become more like WoT. Keep the realistic WT mechanics, make them more realistic, but allow feasible napkin vehicles. I think this would allow everyone to have many interesting vehicles and allow for tech trees to be properly filled out. I don’t support a move away from realistic damage models or mechanics, if Gaijin can wave their magic wand and turn M247 into a functional vehicle, or fit the proper turret on Radkampfwagen 90, I don’t know why we can’t realise napkin vehicles.
Completely flawed conclusions based on erroneous assumptions and estimates using export variants confirmed to have different armor compositions than the model Gaijin claims to represent.*
Fixed that for you. Also, Russian armor is overperforming, and have artificially buffed mantlets.
9 Likes
Which battles proved that Nato tanks superior then Russian (Formerly Soviet) in the same segment face the same segment, or you just want T-72M face M1A2 like the US did with Iraq ?
- Currently, T-80BVM, T-90M, T-72B3, Leo 2A6, Challenger 2 (which is have not seen since 5 of them smoked out and Britain don’t want it get to the frontline anymore) and Merkava Mk4 with Trophy, most of them knocked out by FPV (top attacks) and Arty, but you saw some of it lost and claim that it’s bad show how copes you are with your glorious M1, now i still waiting for Abrams (which is detonated by some good old RPG-7 since Iraq) to show what it can peform since Leo 2A6 far better then M1A2 (every models BTW).
- Then what, now everyone just want cope cages and anti drone/FPV system, which is Russian still has the most experience with it since the conflict and their tank still has better base platform (which is heavy ERA with thich roof armor on it), the barebone still got room for upgrade, unlike Abrams, sides too thin, roof too thin, btw show me which NATO tanks currently has >30mm of roof with anti-FPV/Drone system that get into service (and since when Trophy design to stop FPV)
- Also, thousand of tanks (no sources) destroyed in Syria, yeah, i can say that Turkish Leo 2A4 still happy with your claim though, and yeah, RPG-29/30 and all other Russian cheapo anti tank weapon waiting for Abrams.
1 Like
No, in 2018 it was till going through trials. Gdls was not awarded the contract till late 2020.
Abrams have survived hits from RPG-29s lol.
…and yeah, thousands of tanks were lost in the Syrian civil war, lol.:
You can find every destroyed Abrams ever documented…even counting the recoverable losses, and over the entire service of the Abrams, the total was less than 100 “destroyed.” Going off the old LostArmour site before they took down other conflicts. Guess the contrast was a little too embarrassing for the Russian armor. XD
3 Likes
kek
9 Likes
Russian deathtrap enjoyers big mad. XD
8 Likes