Not having an effective protection listed means there’s nothing to base it on.
The original numbers aren’t made up.
The original numbers aren’t made up.
Okay even better then.
[ACTUAL numbers, from model without X] + [X improvement] = [Make a higher guesstimate, then, by an amount plausible for a government to bother spending money on a new variant and tooling etc, like +10% probably at least]
Only one guesstimation instead of two stacking, is better than I thought. Cool!
Sosna-U is was designed in Belarus but was produced in russia
Pure racism.
This is called FMS armour package. AUS M1 AIM got it, Saudi M1A2 got it and now polish M1A1 FEP got it and M1A2 SEP V3 will get it. Funny enough, polish M1A1 FEP with this FMS armour package have potentially better protection that M1A2 SEPv2 with "DU in turret " we have in game.
2 Likes
I believe m1a1 fep does, let alone the polish sepv3. Polska gurom rahh
1 Like
Same. I thought it was a bug, but I can see some people can still comment, so…
(?)
After reading all the crap in that dev article I can only say insert DreamyBull meme but like:
I’m boutta sleep aughhhhhhhhhhaaaaaahhhh
That was hilarious. The US military even used screen shots of WT
That is Irrelevant to my comment. Never less interesting however i wouldn’t say better.
I didn’t actually see any photo in the references that were from War Thunder. One looks like a model in blender and some pictures are just drawn art like the one of the M1A1 by Vincent Wai.
2 Likes
is anyone else kinda pissed that the reload “balance” requires over 1M silver lions AND GE to get the full benefit?
6 Likes
they closed that thing immediately, bud. Sorry
Almost like I mentioned that in my Tiktok, but I love seeing the hard data. Tango mike.
With respect, Torpitz, this was found to be a Photoshop. The turret doesn’t match the hull.
The closest one to a realtime Frankentank is the 4th Brigade’s T-72B1 turret on a T-72B3 hull with T-62 roadwheels.
Excuse me??? How is an OFFICAL MILITARY WEBSITE NOT ADEQUATE
Explain to me how this website is not “credible” due to errors.
8 Likes
I asked Bowie about this about a year ago and this is their official reasoning. It’s a 3rd party source hosted on .mil/gov and therefore not reliable.
I don’t agree with it but it’s what’s they said and I’m sure they use sources worse than this for some tanks.
1 Like
Odin is weird in that they tend to scrape a lot of things from random places.
I have on occasion stumbled across descriptions of weapons which were clearly lifted from Wikipedia and they didn’t even bother to scrub the now dead annotations.
And some of it has been removed but as mentioned they have on multiple occasions ripped bits from WT’s wiki for weapons.
Like if they don’t have something you can email them and request they add it.
To request equipment be added to the WEG, email the TRADOC G-2 OE & Threat Analysis Directorate WEG Analyst Richard Garcia at @@@@@
They also provide an incomplete list of sources used.
WEG Sources
The following is a sample list of the different sources used to create Worldwide Equipment Guided (WEG) sheets and is not a comprehensive list:
Air Power Australia (http://www.ausairpower.net/)
Armada Media (https://armadamedia.com/)
Army Guide (http://www.army-guide.com/)
Army Recognition (https://www.armyrecognition.com/)
Army Technology (https://www.army-technology.com/)
C4ISRNET (https://www.c4isrnet.com/)
Command: Modern Air Naval Operations (https://cmano-db.com/)
Defense Tech (https://www.defense-technology.com/)
Global Security (https://www.globalsecurity.org/)
Intelink (https://www.intelink.gov/my.policy)
Jane’s (https://www.janes.com/)
Military & Aerospace (https://www.militaryaerospace.com/)
Military Balance (The Military Balance 2024)
Military Equipment Guide (https://www.military.com/equipment)
Military Factory (https://www.militaryfactory.com/)
Military Periscope (https://www.militaryperiscope.com/)
Military Today (http://www.military-today.com/)
National Defense (https://www.defense.gov/)
Navy Recognition (https://www.navyrecognition.com/)
Naval Technology (https://www.naval-technology.com/)
Radar Tutorial (Radartutorial)
Rand Corporation (https://www.rand.org/)
Ritchie Specs (https://www.ritchiespecs.com/)
SDDCTEA Joint Equipment Characteristics Database (https://www.sddc.army.mil)
Shepard Media (https://www.shephardmedia.com/)
Sinodefense (https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/)
SpaceWar (https://www.spacewar.com/)
Strategic Bureau of Information on Defense Systems (Strategic Bureau of Information)
As much as I would love to use some of their stuff for bug reports I can’t say it’s not dissimilar to quoting wikipedja or actually guarantee that said data actually came from the government and wasn’t the result of an employee googling.
6 Likes