we know that the DU increased the KE effectiveness of the armor and reduced its CE effectiveness by substituting NERA volume for the DU. This is true of the turret protection.
It doesnt have to grow in size when the mass efficiency increases.
Literally the T-72 has like 5 different armor arrays that all take up the same 205-220mm total thick hull front.
The 80-105-20 array. 60-105-50, 60-15-15-15-50, 60-10-10-20-20-50, and 60-60-50 arrays. EACH ONE is within the ~215mm thick footprint of the UFP. And the kinetic protection increased step by step substituting the textolite for more steel while the CE remained relatively the same after the transition to full steel composition.
And their mass efficiencies for KE threats gradually increased from 0.9, 1.07 (long rods), 1.2, 1.18, and ~1.17 (excluding podboi layer. in game it is 1.27 which is false).
Dude, read your source again! It says that shifting the weigh forward puts undue stress on the vehicle. What do you think adding DU, a metal 2,5 times as dense as Steel, to the front of the hull will do?
He is talking about the turret. The hull front armor is only ~25" thick, a protection level of 1000mm would mean a ~1,6 times more volume efficient armor protection than the original 1-1,2 while. If they could achieve that, why did, they extend the turret to achieve the same protection level?
I see then, I’m of the opinion that even the low end of this estimate would be a good change in game. Even if it doesn’t account for later DU armor additions, it would still be a significant improvement to the in game abrams.
It seems like a reasonable compromise, along with the fact that the turret ring remains a glaring weak spot for Abrams players. It’ll just mitigate the effectiveness of poorly aimed shots at the hull.
Have you read this whole thread? Numerous sources have already stated that the suspension was improved on the Abrams over the various models. Why are you even arguing about this? Who cares as it would not have any effect on gameplay anyways. I just think it’s funny that Gaijin made an official post claiming that the armor could not have been upgraded because of the suspension, and the community took no time in disproving that claim.
Yeah, you can ignore him. He’s just a troll trying to distract and make arguments that have already been disproven. The Abrams received improved suspensions during these upgrades. Anything else is just noise from him.
I have read the whole thread, and I am offended by the bad arguments made here. When they are improving the suspension it’s for the whole vehicle not just the front of it, they need to spread out the weight to carry those 70 tons.
Omg, after your lies about the Abrams suspension system, your arguments have no credibility whatsoever. You embarrassed yourself in front of the entire community. Now it’s even better to see how incompetent you are at evaluating the armor of modern vehicles. I want to thank all those people who found dozens of pages of material, you proved to many on the forum all the bias of the developers towards NATO and Chinese tanks. I’d rather spend my money on a drone, which not in the game, but in real life will once again prove that T series tanks are garbage.
Okay somebody explain to me how this is possible. The armor in the turret on the M1A1 is modeled with 800mm of NERA elements, the hull on the same tank has 360mm modeled. Yet you get the same line of sight effectiveness of the armor. Would not having more than double the NERA in the turret versus the hull increase the effectiveness? I would think it would be at least twice as effective, but it seems to be coded in a way that doesn’t make sense.
If you look at the M1 Abrams in game, it has 360mm of NERA in the hull and turret, but somehow the turret is less effective in line of sight protection.
Has anybody here ever head the quote from Archimedes; “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it and I shall move the world”? The lever is the hull, the fulcrum is the suspension. Adding DU to the hull breaks the tank significantly faster which is why only documents show only 5 were produced back in the 1980ties.
Maybe they changes structural array in armour itself, added DU insert doesn’t mean that whole array is DU monoblock. They could have change it’s array, add more plates that gives actual protection the same how Soviets changes they UFP armour array from the first 80/105/20 to array we have on B3 or T-90. Idk. Gaijin is blind and they even stated that M829A3 would have any effect on SEPv2 performance. If they wanna give up actual armour improvement they better model M829A3 and it’s anti ERA capabilities properly. They gave us 1 sec or realod faster but they know that first time you peek over the Hill with Abrams, your gunner and commander is instantly “unconscious”.
The irony of the “”“premoderated”“” comments all praising Gaijin for their transparency lmao.
Also I like how I didn’t comment on any post in weeks but somehow I’ve “reached my comment limit for the day”
Yeah nice transparency deleting everyone who calls you out
Joined 48 minutes ago? Another Gaijin employee attempting damage control? Why are you ignoring the proof already supplied that the suspension was upgraded?
