This is pretty good. But I would argue the slope on turret isn’t just 30 degrees because it’s sloped and pulled back which makes the shell travel through the same amount of material. A dart doesn’t care if it’s sloped on one axis or another. So when it’s sloped on two axis it’s much better, especially since the Nera arrays diffuse armor directionally.
I think steel beasts hull was counting the fuel tanks as protection, and that got rolled in into the Armor.
Gaijins numbers for the M1 is fine. It’s the numbers for the M1a1/2 that are not only wrong but an abomination.
They simply add Raw thickness to turret but don’t use the mk 2 or mark 3 / s2 or s3 armor overhauls at all.
This was a major leap forward in composite and material protection. It’s the same as Chobham to Dorchester or the Leo 2a4 to 2a5 increase of 20-25% using the same exact amount and arrangement.
The m1a1 uses high hardness steel UFP, hhs 6mm plates in the array faces and mode important ceramic tiles backing the outer skin. That’s why there’s a gap if you take off the upper front panel. It’s to slide in and out the Nera and tiles.
Also ts why every single m1a1 that takes fire requires a return to the US and certification, where as the m1 didn’t If it passed surface inspections.
It’s insane to me that the 2a5 was inspired by the M1 A1 upgrades. They even flew out engineers from general dynamics and united defense.
Ingame the 2a5 has 80mm steel and 550mm Nera with 800-1500 protection, while the M1a1 and 2 have 132mm and 800mm Nera and still have less protection…. Gaijin hates the US. It’s clear at this point.
Outside a few vehicles like the T 58 that are overpowered, and then get nerfed, the vehicle is that should be the best are meh to bad…. The most advanced nation ever on the face of the Earth that is obsessed with testing everything is often times artificially held back, meanwhile, the country that’s known for bad build quality, a low output of R&D and generally lies about its capabilities constantly, is the most advanced lol.
In a real game that really simulated life. The US would be two generations ahead of Russia if their criteria was equipment that had to work every time.
This wasn’t always true.
The T 64 was so game changing it took the US a long time to catch up in raw protection and fire power. But the T 90 is essentially a T 64 that’s been overhauled.
People can argue the Abrams is the same… but 1981 versus 1964 And the difference in budgets it’s not even comparable.
If Russian vehicles where is advanced as they claim. They wouldn’t be losing tanks and ground attackers and helicopters at record number to enemies a number 10 to one.