inb4 a Russia main unironically assumes it’s factual and uses it in a genuine argument and didn’t know this was a shitpost
5 Likes
Idk they have this weird obsession with making top tier sweden ground really good for some reason.
2 Likes
because Sweden is not a NATO country Lol.
Sweden isn’t a NATO country…YET!
4 Likes
You misunderstood, I when I said M1A1 production had nearly completed I meant including Heavy Armor Versions. Which as we have just learned sacrificed CE protection for KE protection.
You need to be more specific with what you are talking about, the M1A1 HA was the first M1 with DU armour, it entered service in 1988, then there was the M1A1 HC which entered service late 1990 i.e. the HC entered service after the new armour package had entered service, then there is also the M1A1 HA+ and M1A1D, FYI the M1A1D was the digitalised M1A1.
The AIM/SA program on the other hand was basically a complete resetting of the M1A1s i.e. complete refurbishment, the original AIM had the same armour as the HC / M1A2, as did the original SEP, however in 2002 they all started to receive the improved armour.
The British designed a new Chobham for M1A2 but only 62 were build
Incorrect again, the source you are talking about is this:
The Block 2 was the M1A2:
Regardless as can be seen today neither of the things in the first source came to fruition as there are way more then 62 M1A2s and the M1 Abram production didn’t stop in 1990. The M1A2s incorporated the improved turret armour, they didn’t incorporate the improved hull at the time due to weight constraints, they however were going to add it later on, which I believe most likely occurred in the M1A2 SEP via a non-DU armour upgrade as it weighs less then DU, which is why with the weight reduction program that was implemented the M1A2 SEPs weight didn’t increase much even with completely new armour.
The US had apparently tested the improved DU armour in 1989:
However from preliminary testing the US wasn’t entirely happy with the armour, this then corroborates what Flame added, as the improved CE armour was tested in December 1989:
Meaning HAP-2 (2nd gen DU armour) was most likely this armour package + multi-hit capability.
The 2002 armour package was a completely new armour, as it did not exist in 1989/90 as it did not get ballistic testing done until 2000, the M1A2 SEP’s likewise incorporated that armour, what my post was talking about for the M1A1, was the M1A1 being upgraded via a mod, that M1A1 most likely became a SEP, AIMv2/SA or FEP, because that is how US upgrade programs work:
Thus, the armour from 2002 was a completely new armour package.
15 Likes
BRL-1 armor composition.
We all know that BRL-1 was used in M1 and M1IP, it have 350mm with APFSDS and 750mm with HEAT, which is what we have in the game. and the way its composite armor is arranged is like this.
BRL-2 armor composition.
The BRL-2 is something that is still classified, in terms of the arrangement of the NERA panels, but all I know is that it protects better than the BRL-1 against 25% HEAT and 35% against APFSDS. But I wonder if it was used on the M1A1 or just the first M1A2 got it.
That would take the current Hull protection of around 380-400mm to 500-540mm against APFSDS. That included with the thicker armor above the fuel tanks on the UFP would make the M1A2 much more competitive at top tier if implemented.
9 Likes
What’s strange is that Gaijin thinks the US only upgraded their armor with DU in the turret but didn’t upgrade the composite armor in the hull, right ? 540mm is not OP, it can still be penetrated easily by L27A1 and 3BM60.
8 Likes
What’s even funnier, the obsolete since amended document that they cite for “MUH 5 HULLS” actually tells Gaijin which tanks were to get the DU hulls, and was signed late 2001.
Considering that the little graphic showing the location of the armor indicates the original of the “MUH 5 HULLS” were M1A1 hulls, it could be argued that an M1A1 HA (late or +) should very well have it. The Abrams from the AIM programs, including FEP. …and of course, as listed in the document…M1A2 SEP V1!
20 Likes
The full page of the British document that I posted would suggest that 1st gen DU armour had the poor CE protection and 2nd gen DU armour was the stuff Britain helped develop to fix that flaw.
5 Likes
Completely agree, both what you shared coupled with the US documents I gave seems to indicate this as being the case, that armour was then accepted in June 1990 and subsequently used by the M1A1 HCs and then M1A2s, etc.
I’ll have to keep looking, but I swear I had seen a document that explicitly stated which M1s had the DU hulls.
Russia literally tried to pull a ukraine on Helsinki in ww2 and had a Duchary in Finland for 100 years becore independence was gained in 1917. And sweden and russia both come from the same vikings roughly. They likely see it as part of russian culture or something
No, you need to learn more about the history of the Abrams before you start speaking about this, so you can actually participate in a conversation and not become an encyclopedia reading.
I already said 1990 so why do you come at med with all these other things? Like you don’t even understand things such as lead time on production, it’s no guarantee that just because a technology had been developed that the tank rolling of the production line the next day automatically has it.
Why do you say I am incorrect, then prove that I was right and then say “Regardless”?
Then you say m1 production didn’t stop in 1990, when I specifically was talking about the M1A1 being close to done?
When you say “Completely new” what does that mean to you?
M1A1HA+ is probably in practice M1A1HC
4 Likes
- Dude, I just said it was a renewal, what are you even on about? No.9 still says it was based on 22-02-2006 (ML060590665.pdf) which was a renewal the thing that was amended on the license was the time period, look at all the subsequent amendments.
And since you missed it:
So, there you have it from the horse’s mouth only 5 DU hulls until at least 2016. The US army restricted itself to 5 DU hulls.
- Right and the layout of the Abrams haven’t changed a lot…
Pretty much yep, the M1A1 HC was basically just the USMC version of the HA however with the upgraded DU armour, although it also had an improved slip ring and a deep water fording kit, the M1A1 HA+ (common) was pretty much the Army’s variant of the HC which is where all the “common” naming comes from, so yea, the only real difference afaik was the fording kit for the USMC.
1 Like
5 Likes
Those are 2 different projectiles.
It was a joke posted on Reddit, it also had “Dont look at left tabs” to it. Its just a joke by someone on Reddit. It has the intention of using such weaponry to build the joke.
2 Likes
Went right over my head lol😆
Or maybe the sarcasm wasn’t expressed all the way lol Regardless- it’s funny