I misread it, its at a 25 and 45 degree arc, as long as were getting 750mm CE and 480mm KE at a 25 degree (which we actually arent)
Since you get side front penned at that and less from the front side angled attack. Even at a 10 degree ive been side penned in the abrams, which should be significantly higher protection wise than even 25 which is already very high, 380KE at a 45 degree arc is impressive too
And this is all non-DU
I posted the source already. It was the British evaluation.
Considering the addition of DU armour was the defining feature of the M1A1 HA version, I didn’t think it’s controversial to say that the base M1A1 version doesn’t have DU armour.
Even if the M1A1 did have DU armour it’s safe to say that the British know how it performed, because they helped America design the DU armour (after America’s initial attempt failed to provide adequate CE protection):
https://img-forum-wt-com.cdn.gaijin.net/original/3X/4/8/48a4b117226fa7a10e20ae68524bb9aa80697246.jpeg
That document is still useless in determining the efficiency of the Abrams armor without its Heavy Armor. Regardless of what the document states the British would never be able to duplicate correct figures without actually know the classified armor.
Go back and read my original comment:
The British evaluated the M1A1 to determine whether it would be a suitable tank for the British Army (they concluded it was not suitable, and that M1A2 would be required at a minimum). As part of this evaluation the Americans provided information on the armoured protection of the M1A1 and M1A2. And in one of the British reports they list the hull as having 350 mm KE / 750 mm CE protection over the frontal arc.
As I explained in my last comment the M1A1 did not have DU in the hull. The Swedish also evaluated the M1A2 without DU armour and came to the same conclusion that the hull had 350 mm KE / 750 mm CE protection of the frontal arc.
It can therefore be said fairly safely that the non-DU hull armour on the Abrams provides 350 mm KE protection over the frontal arc.
I’m out of likes today but I agree 100%
Thank you for sharing this document!
It’s interesting how this Chobham “2.0” was only implemented after M1A1 production had almost completed, this might explain what the “frontal armor upgrade and side turret upgrade” for M1A1 AIM tanks was. It was not magic weight less DU but a new more effective version of Chobham that restored the good CE protection of non-DU tanks.
İm back from basement guys, so any News about on hull armor situation that we can put some pressure on Gaijin?
Hes right for the most part
They can make the LFP has 1 meter in KE protection. It will not change the winrates at all. It’s obvious how top tier works at this point. Most games are usa matched with germany, and either the germans carry (with that extra burden) or you lose. Soviet teams are full of brainless bots that don’t even know what a capture point is. Skillwise 2nd worst average playerbase, usa being number one
The guy has been wrong pretty much the entire thread. Since when were all LFPs the same, and since when did Gaijin throw aside historical accuracy and relying on documents to create a specific meta layout of tanks for balance at a very specific BR?
The clown hasn’t been right yet.
As far as German mains go, I can’t count the number of times they pull in front of all the friendlies, blocking their allies lines of fire, only to take fire since they drove into the open like an imbecile, and then pop smoke, preventing any chance that the team might be able to accurate engage the threat that is going to kill them because they’re in the same spot when they popped smoke.
There is a reason the German M48 was at a lower BR than US M48s, despite them also have smoke grenade launchers.
But Wehraboos won’t think twice about blinding their entire team with smoke after making boneheaded maneuvers.
Since they also dropped the no top tier/high tier premiums. They ignore a lot of possible fixes on many vehicles.
The stereotypical german main is found at 6.7 and bellow, not top tier. Germany also doesn’t have top tier premiums (not many use the 2pl). And most importantly the fact that they spawn more than 2 times AND they spawn in MBTs not cas or a helicopter they can’t even use to begin with (ka50 at top tier)
Usa skill on ground wasn’t this bad before. Go figure what happened. Handheld premiums? Who knows. Now they are officially on average the worse both on air and ground.
All in game M1s with DU armour are based on the Swedish tank trials info:
Meaning the in game M1s don’t even have du in their turrets…
Best guess is that the 350 - 380mm comes from the issue that is stated in the Note part.
Regardless it isn’t possible for the M1 hull to only be 350mm total mainly due to the fuel tanks, which by the way are already underperforming as the bulkheads are meant to be thicker as noted by Uknown_Memory#1
The IPM1 and M60s used M900A1 in Desert Storm.
I have no doubt wallet warriors who have no business being in top tier are miserable US mains to team up with.
But Gaijin has never done meta modeling with a cookie cutter template of weakspots for all tanks at specific BR ranges. Gaijin’s modeling has been based off of official documents and publicly available information…when they actually choose to follow their own rules and guidelines. But it seems they are trying to hold the hands of some nations more than others now.
Whats the difference all I can find is wikipedia saying itd be better but im not 100%
So at 25° the hull of the test trail version should be equivalent to 350 mm of RHA against an 125mm APFSDS traveling at 1450 M/Sec. the lowest angle I can look at the protection map is 36° with 360mm of RHA protection. so given that information the KE protection is either the same or possibly less.
The British only helped design the chobham armor design. The Americans added the DU
I believe the DU armor is more universal protection. they only tested KE rounds and got comparable results.
I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of how armor is calculated here.
350/750@25 is 380/830@0, given that the front hull armor didn’t increase in length I would not be surprised if its actually more like 380/700 and the 830 comes from the fuel tanks covering most of the front giving an over 50% of the front protection of 830+.
When the front turret says 600/900@30 it means that the protection at 0 is 690/1040 to get the protection values of the individual cheeks you have to divide by the construction angle ~@27 for the right and ~@37 for the left. So right side is ~615/925 and left side is ~555/830
Nope, I know what the values state.
750 CE - This figure is what the M1 has in game i.e. 750 - 800mm, the area around the fuel tank is 870 - 900mm , it does not have 830mm in either the Swedish trials or in game, I don’t know where you are getting that figure from.
When the front turret says 600/900@30 it means that the protection at 0 is 690/1040
It means the armour protection at 30°s is 600mm for KE and 900mm for CE (for both turret cheeks), whereas the 680 (KE) /1010 (CE) figures are for the armour at 0°s i.e. front on, both of these figures are what Gaijin has given the M1s with DU armour:
Using M829A2:
Like I said Gaijin got these figures from here:
