You literally proved mine. Your arguing over the fact that the turret ring is too thin in this game and it’s already been acknowledged. AGAIN. Your input was unnecessary to begin with.
ANYWAY…
Argue for fixes within maps and models in game, or just see yourself out.
For the last time, the spall liners are integrated into the lining of the armor package to stop composite and RHA from spalling.
I’ve already gone over this.
If they want to fix the Abrams on that score, give the crew ballistic flak vests.
It’s, not too thin…
So are we secretly on the same side and I just can’t figure that out?
The abrams turret ring is modeled incorrectly. I for one do NOT want an invincible Abrams. I want a FAIR Abrams. Like I said in OP, I don’t think it needs a spall liner. The whole lower mantlet is modeled wrong. It should be at least 300mm thick on all sides except for the turret breach and it sits flush with the hull. A hull shot through upper front plate should damage the turret ring, not the lower mantlet.
What ileave said.
It’s (the turret) floating, right?
Not to mention, it would still be killed by a shot from even 3BM25.
ok, I’ll apologize and explain. If the turret ring were modeled correctly, DM13 Gepard rounds and APDS from BMPs wouldn’t penetrate and kill the turret crew of the Abrams.
exept for the most tiny spot a 125 and 120 apfds would fit without a problem in teh turret ring.Looks like a giant design flaw of the M1, you got a bullet trap there.
Cool. Thx for graphicly showing it. Gajin is right.
Gaijin already acknowledged that the turret ring is mismodeled.
I worked this out on cad so you guys get an IDEA of how silly those shots are. Realistically anything within the sketched area should penetrate. Everything else should not (except for the breach)
Dude, the difference in length would be at most 2-5%, so it’s negligible.
250mm+*
It’s to show the front and side simultaneously, but ok.
I’m not saying every source listed in the bug report is reputable, only that the reputable stuff on the bug report got it acknowledged.
That people aim to single-millimeter accuracy? Even with mouse aim, that’s just not feasible - not consistently, at least.
The rods are about 30mm-45mm in diameter, but yeah, you get the idea.
And again, ileave, this is about the precision of computer games versus real life. Gaijin wants what WOT has, and lots of WOT players moving over just want city brawls where snap shots and twitch reflexes matter.
It’s why they aim down the cannon barrel, not the gunner sight.
Sim mode is closer though, and shows the massive offset in the boresighting (which you can’t do in here).
If the leets really want to challenge themselves, drop in Sim and see whether your skills are as good as you think.
It’d be more realistic to go through the whole hull of the abrams to pen there than to aim for the lower mantlet. It should be almost impenetrable between the thickness and even more so with the angle. If anything apdfs should shatter there
Sadly APFSDS shattering was removed because people complained alot. Same as HEAT rounds ricocheting.
There’s some evidence that 3BM60 and anything north of 1990s ammo would pen the upper front plate armor of the Abrams in any incarnation short of M1A2SEPv3, but again, simcade vs real life.
By no means is this right but just to give everyone an idea. If we take the radius from the first photo. It’s roughly 750mm. We take 750mm and scale that to the second photo, we can get an idea of just how thick the lower mantlet is which is around 275mm
Correction, that 750mm is half that. The turret shape is sloped inwards there.
Largest is actually behind the drivers viewports, but, okay.
I’m not arguing that, Zy. But again, twitch shooters hit that easy. It’s the curse we live with.
