you all know @Conraire already talked about this stuff years ago on old forums right? Necrons already knows this stuff. he’s anti u.s and will repeat the same garbage over and over and over he’ll just circle jerk himself over the Swedish test trials which was already proven to him to now be U.S Army standard tanks or protected. He doesn’t care what you show him, who shows it to him. We could bring someone from general dynamics to this website, and they could tll him the abrams has a D.U Hull and he would cry scream and rage saying that guy is a lie and pull out the swedish test trials junk again and say that stuff is the true protection of all the abrams.
I did not know it was already discussed. I didn’t play WT for many years until now.
I don’t want to get into it again with Necrons, but I’ll say this. ALL export models of the Abrams do not leave the US with DU armor
All M1A1 Aims would not have DU armor but all domestic M1s would
2 Likes
Yeah once I realized it, I was fine with it. Just annoying for those of us that don’t like air so much. It was a pain grinding the few bits I did until I unlocked the jets I started wanting. Not to mention a pain for my wallet.
It’s probably a lot of the same people as me. They’re not a huge fan of air and don’t want to grind it to make their lineup balanced.
That said, it’s also not really balanced(it is and it isn’t) because the SP value to spawn your CAP for AA is just too large comparatively.
I still don’t use CAS, only CAP.
Maybe I should though, might help our win rates
he knows this, its been told to him over 50 times. its best just to block necrons and most of the other russians on this website.
1 Like
I think y’all are too harsh on him, agree or disagree I think he’s reasonable as far as his arguments go. Wrong opinion or not, I enjoy reading his posts, it’s a lot of the other detractors that make me want to claw my eyes out.
I’m not sure he’s Russian, or worth going as far to block
1 Like
@ileaveuptiers just to show you how long we’ve been dealing with gaijins and their devs, b.s M1A2 Abrams incoming! - Page 6 - General & Upcoming - War Thunder - Official Forum
1 Like
There are more secondary sources than stuff like militaryhistory or whatever websites, yes.
From prior threads:
Budget Justifications (the specific year doesn’t really matter for this image, since it just shows the diction), the main website for them is this: Army Financial Management & Comptroller > Budget Materials
M1A1 SA having hull DU: https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/defbudget/fy2013/fy2013_Weapons.pdf
M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, Owners’ Workshop Manual - Says the M1A1 SA featured hull DU and that the SEPv2 featured all of what the M1A1 SA and SEPv1 had, and that hull DU was a part of the Abrams-family-wide Common Abrams modifications.
Cross-Sections: The M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank - Hull DU
(Can’t find the original image source) - Hull armor improvements
It’s obviously DU. There was testing with DU hulls on M1A1 from at least 1997-2006, then in 2006 the M1A2 SEP retrofits (and production vehicles) got a new armor package the exact same year the DU hull limit was removed.
3 Likes
Damn, I feel like I wasted a whole bunch of my time now lol
Your sources back up my sources.
3 Likes
Abrams Du Hull Missing - General & Upcoming - War Thunder - Official Forum gaijin already know the abrams have D.U Hulls people have given them documentation, and gaijin somehow wants these people to tell them the protection DOWN TO THE MILLIMETER. They then deleted the bug report.
2 Likes
This does seem pretty definitive of what it should have then.
shrugs
oh well, let’s go play the game anyways lol
2 Likes
When I made the Abrams bug report gaijin ended up wanting actual protection values on armor that is classified lol. Makes me wonder how they will model sepv3 since there is literally no data on the new armor package. All we know is that its in hull and turret and that it was a direct response to the t14. Gaijin also holds the Abrams to such a strict standard when it comes to armor buffs and other bug fixes compared to other tanks were they literally made up the values for better or worse. I mean we cant event get the turret ring fixed. Meanwhile the leo2a7 gets its ufp armor fixed and the type99 gets frontal armor model reworked. Gaijin priorities are completely screwed or they choose intentionally not to fix the Abrams with the many bug reports waiting to be implemented.
6 Likes
The same way they have modeled the armor on anything newer than 2000 or the flight models of pretty much all jets (borderline making it up fully)
2 Likes
why not both at different br
1 Like
They’ll probably just put the Swedish Trials non-DU armor on the hull and call it a day, tbh.
3 Likes
You do realize none of these actually say DU in the hull, right? They all just say that DU and chobham are used in the tank. Nobody is debating that part. The debate is over whether or not DU is present in the hull. Thus far, there’s no evidence to support that. Seriously. Numerous credible sources explicitly say ‘DU in turret cheeks’. None explicitly say ‘DU in hull front’.
Pulled directly from the documents. All M1A1s on the front lines use DU. Anything with DU is considered upgraded Chobham and Chobham is used in both the turret and hull.
Also this
-Estimated Numbers from A Russian Magazine. Also confirming same armor values in both the hull and turret(Translated)
“The exceptions are zones “B” and “K”, located in the sector zone ±30 ° and having an anti-projectile resistance of about 700 mm and an anti-cumulative resistance of 850 mm. Anti-projectile resistance of any fragment of protection equal to 700 mm means that if an armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile has an armor penetration of 700 mm, then this fragment is not penetrated by this projectile”
https://step-into-the-future.ru/news/download/TiV%201998%20№07.pdf (PAGE 2)
3 Likes
You cant fix gaijin’s bias
1 Like
You can’t fix the anti-us player’s bias either, even with proof with de-classified documents
2 Likes
You are drawing conclusions from unrelated documents and unsourced claims. Notice the document that claims ‘This improved Chobham armor uses depleted uranium’ cites sources for many of its statements but not the one on which forms the crux of your argument. It also claims m1a1s have DU in them, which is patently false unless they are referring to M1A1 HCs.
Also this
-Estimated Numbers from A Russian Magazine. Also confirming same armor values in both the hull and turret(Translated)
The ultimate credibility for western weapon systems; an unsourced magazine from 1990s Russia.
1 Like
If you’re referring to Necrons; he’s probably got more games, and higher k/ds in the Abrams than most Abrams fanboys.
He just doesn’t tolerate circlejerking bullshit with unsourcable info.
1 Like