Hull Armor of the M1 Abrams

[Osseon]

This document only lists that the Block II armor weighed extra and it says not all armor was to be added. The extra weight doesn’t correlate to increased resistance to KE or Chemical rounds. This extra weight could be explained by increased protection against repeat hits, or more durability to specific round type but not another.

This document doesn’t give you any indication that the hull should be improved.

-This would be Gaijin’s logic and response.

I’m not kidding that you need a smoking gun and the devs will still ask to see the footage of the bullet being fired. Gaijin will not accept any suggestions based on conjecture. You and I might hate it but this is the rules they play by.

[eqS729gYidXuT2BN]

I thought you asked for the sources though

[ayeflyingcowboy]

For the SA with DU hull, I just thought you had something new that’s all.

[Daniel8599]

Pretty much this.
Short of a signed letter from the US Government stating there is DU in the hull and giving you a protection estimate, Gaijin is going to continue clinging to the Swedish trials much to our ever wonderful headache.

[Osseon]

SA having DU hull argument is based on the HA or HA+ having DU hull. The SA is just the next iteration in the upgrade chain and gets all the previous updates of HA.

If HA can be proved to have DU hull than essentially M1A1 HC, M1A1 AIM, M1A2 and SEP/SEP2 would be updated.

[Osseon]

Agreed, I’m doing some light trolling here because I think people need to understand this conjecture will never stack up against hard data. The only hard data we have is from those trials. The test data is skewed because the DU was specifically removed for those trials. Without alternative values attached to a specific production model nothing will work.

We need a document that says “M1A1 HC has depleted uranium in the front hull plate and offers protection of 590mm protection.” We might be able to get away with “M1A1 HC has DU in the lower hull plate” and another document saying "DU armor in the hull plate provides 590mm protection, but chances are slim.

Seeing docs say “Increased survivability” paired with no production variant or generalized description of “Frontal armor was increased” will never work. Its been tried 20x times at this point.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

This document only lists that the Block II armor weighed extra and it says not all armor was to be added. The extra weight doesn’t correlate to increased resistance to KE or Chemical rounds. This extra weight could be explained by increased protection against repeat hits, or more durability to specific round type but not another.

All of this is completely irrelevant to what me and neatspartan were talking about.

Regardless the increased weight doesn’t explain the increased protection against repeat hits, the M1A2 already received that improvement which is why it has an improved DU armour package to the M1A1 HA… It also wasn’t due to an improvement in CE protection as the Brits helped the US with that in 1989/1990 and the M1A1 HC/HA+ and M1A2 likewise received that armour.

Edit: Even tech mods will tell you the M1s from 1990 received multi-hit capable armour.

This document doesn’t give you any indication that the hull should be improved.

Explain the extra 3.6 short tons.

This document doesn’t give you any indication that the hull should be improved.

-This would be Gaijin’s logic and response.

Gaijin has already acknowledged there were 5 M1s DU hulls, these hulls were most likely tested in the M1A1 Block II which why with all of the armour it weighed 3.6 short tons more then the M1A2s do, remember the non-DU to DU turret armour increased the M1A1s weight by “only” 2.6 short tons.

This would be my response.

[Osseon]

In the post this thread is attached too they literally said:

If we consider other projections, possible changes to the armor of the Abrams over its various modifications may not have directly resulted in an increase in the actual protection of the armor itself. These changes could rather have been aimed at increasing the armor filler’s survivability upon impact (which is an element not currently modeled in the game). Because of this, without hard numbers and solid facts confirming a tangible increase in protection, we can’t alter the protection currently offered by the armor on the M1 series.

You might think I’m being obtuse but this is verbatim what they said. They don’t accept “increased survivability” as a term.

[ayeflyingcowboy]

@Osseon

You might think I’m being obtuse but this is verbatim what they said. They don’t accept “increased survivability” as a term.

Yes I know, which is why I know the SEPv3 will be another SEP… i.e. no M1s will ever receive an armour upgrade, even though:

Armour increase SEPv2 (top) vs SEPv3 turret:

Also is this the same Gaijin who stated this:

Additionally, a significant weight increase from such an armor package would lead to overloading the first pair of torsion bars, which already are under an increased load on the M1 series due to the placement of the frontal armor being positioned significantly far towards the front of the hull, as well as the large armored fuel tanks either side of the driver.

And then proceeded to contradict this by adding TUSK I and TUSK II which would do just that… This means the US had already upgraded the M1s suspension so that it could handle all of that extra weight, Gaijin failing to understand this is strange to me.

They then state:

The Army’s Future Combat Systems Program and Alternatives

Only the use of third-generation uranium armor is mentioned, but there’s no confirmation that this armor was located in the body of the M1A2 SEP, and what exactly the “third generation” consisted of.

and

If we consider other projections, possible changes to the armor of the Abrams over its various modifications may not have directly resulted in an increase in the actual protection of the armor itself.

Even though prior to this I had already given them proof in a bug report that the M1A2 SEPs had an armour change specifically with the Improved Turret Side Armour package:

Also that Improved Turret Side Armour was incorporated with a Frontal Armour Improvement from 2002 onwards:

Regardless, whether Gaijin meant to or not, their response to this issue was less than fair, there are quite a few errors/areas overlooked with the logic they have given.

Regardless as I already stated the HC/HA+ and M1A2 already had that improvement, what’s funny is they likewise acknowledge the M1A2 SEPs had HAP-3, meaning they completely forgot the M1A1 HA was HAP-1 and the M1A2/M1A1 HC/HA+ had HAP-2… HAP-2 had the multi-hit and CE improvements.

Also, can you figure out where all that Improved turret side armour weight went? Because apparently it didn’t affect the SEPs weight practically at all… and as noted above, the Improved Turret Side Armour may have had DU in it.

[SPANISH_AVENGER]

Here’s what M1A2 SEPv2 would look like without TUSK! One of the main reasons why I don’t feel like grinding this tank is the unability to take off TUSK. This package was made to fight terrorists with RPGs, not Main Battle Tanks! Gameplay wise, it’s just 3.5ton of extra dead weight for the most part.

Honestly, if TUSK was removable from SEPv2, I would grind this tank even just for the looks (and because it would no longer be the literal downgrade it currently is compared to SEP).

[MokaMoki]

Still a bit baffled that they’ve not come back to this despite the backlash. Especially when you add in the whole MANPAD deal too. No further explanation, no course correction, nothing really?

The CMs and forum mods are just done? What exactly being passed on to the developers from the past 1000 comments? I’m genuinely curious to know. If there’s nothing else for them to say on it, why not just lock the thread since clearly the responses and feedback are effectively mute and pointless.

[SchwerPanzer]

I’d assume the majority of the staff are on holiday still.

[Flame2512]

Late December to mid-January is always a pretty dead time for War Thunder development.

First you have the western team off for Christmas and New Year, then just as they get back to work the Russian side of the company are off for Orthodox Christmas. So I wouldn’t expect to hear much for a week or two.

[NoreZi]

With that type of comment Stona banned me for 4 days 😂

It’s unknown for us what being passed but for me they just cut off of this thread and are very unwilling to bring Abrams with more armour actually. We will see, maybe US top tier win rate will drop down to the floor and they will be forced to do something.

[kurehu]

They will ban anyone who posts something that is depressing to them. I was also banned a week ago when I requested a bombing. Remember. This is Germany in the 1940s or the Soviet Union in the 1930s.

[Zannafrancy12]

Honestly? I feel the same

[kurehu]

The Gestapo or KGB are on their way to you now. Get out of the way!

[GrumpyWumpy]

@NoreZi

win rate will drop down to the floor

Its already there

[Zannafrancy12]

dont forget not to expose your head outside, might catch a stray t90 turret

[GNDM_Panzer]

Lol. Lmfao.