Can we please increase it to 20mm? With the structural steel armour modifier that’s still only 5mm equivalent to RHA. If you won’t increase it can you at least let us just take it off so we can play it like the Khalid?
Is there a source that its wrong currently?
No, it’s an incredibly obscure vehicle. So unless someone wants to go to The Tank Museum with a ultrasound gauge we’ll likely never know.
Weight increase is one ton. So I doubt it’s 4mm thick. A13 for example only increased 0.7 tons with a 14mm RHA increase all around the turret and front hull.
as far as we’ve found there are no sources for the thickness of this simulated add on
because it was largely just a vismod as real Chobham was never fitted
4mm plates can be bent by hand, and the Welds suggest something thicker
This is a weld on a 5mm plate from a professional welder, and says that’s about as large a weld as you’d ever want to do
but on Chieftain 900
although precise comparison is difficult, its obvious its larger than 1/4 or 1/5th of a penny’s diameter
Taking a real good look at it and estimating, the Chieftain 900 Plates are likely around 15-20mm thick
I did try to get this rectified based on common sense, but it failed (in addition at the time i did not have access to these two images above)
For 1 ton, all it takes is 120,000cm^3
1x1 meters with 12cm of thickness is that amount.
if more armor then make it 9.3 leave the 9.0 / 8.0 alone
Wow, 20mm of structural steel (5mm of RHA) better get that thing uptiered.
20mm of Armour? Thats more than the Challenger 2s. So 11.7 instantly :P
I think 5-10 mm would be believable, the 4 mm is really a slap in the face.
“Here’s your Chieftain Mk 5, with the LRF and APFSDS it would receive later anyway. On and it’s got a tinfoil wrapper on.”
There are a multitude of inaccuracies with the Chieftains including L15A3 having the penetrative properties of L15A1, L15A5 simply not existing, both early Chieftains having the gun mis-labelled, Mk 5 having either a missing LRF or the wrong gunner’s daysight entirely, and every L60 engine having the wrong hp, but I leave it to those more knowledgeable.
I really question who is researching the vehicles!
At 9.3 there’s the Khalid that when the update drops will have 400 hp more than the Chieftain 900.
Some vehicles get things that they were planned to have (Metal plate for M6A2E1, IRST and HMS for Yak-141) but others dont (chobham for this thing). Another inconsistency to the list.
Maybe some of us didn’t want the Yak-141 as well as non-existent composite armour? Why is it always [my nation] that should get favourable treatment?
Calm down man, i just said its inconsistent. I would also prefer to have only things that were installed. But if gaijin adds planned components, everybody should get them. Everybody or nobody.
Full Chobham… I dont necessarily mind. The Mk900 looks like its gunna be a really fun 9.0 tank, and I dont think it would be as fun at even 9.3. Let alone 9.7 or 10.0 that full Chobham would give.
But the mockup armour should probably be thicker than the current thickness, if nothing else, it would provide a layer of protection against HEAT
But there are plenty of other examples of inconsistant implementation. Like CR2s still missing most spall liners
I don’t mind the Chieftain 900 not getting chobham. After all we don’t actually know what the array would even look like. If someone can find some TD’s then they can make a suggestion like the Vickers MBT with German 105.
Ok now make a comparison with a t 55 9.0 and say how this is 9.0 when fithing each other
Okay, cool. I will.
I know and so? 9.0 is already dredful and the chiftain would be a betther t62am 9.0 to because this tier i omega compressed im sugestin only to consider the fact that an all aspect is going to be 1 of the betther 9.0
It’s literally a Mk 5 with a better engine and some structural steel.
