You heavily implied that KE protection was the only thing that was important which is intellectually dishonest.
Like… mass and mobility? Kinda like… SEPv3, which weighs 67.5 tons and lost significant acceleration because of it? Or like Leopard 2A7V, which weighs 66.5 tons and lost 10 km/h worth of top speed? Or like the upcoming Challenger 3, which weighs 66 tons (without counting the planned additional external armor modules)?
1 Like
In War Thunder, which is what we are talking about? Yes, it’s nearly the only important thing.
Those 5 tons are 1. not entirely armor upgrades and 2. not nearly enough to protect against modern armor piercing ammo.
1 Like
The SEPV3 is definitely not in war thunder so we’re not just talking about that. But it’s also definitely not the only important thing, CE protection is also extremely important
So it is enough to protect against modern armor piercing ammo in Leopard 2A7V’s case, but, somehow, not in M1A2 SEPv3’s case or Challenger 3’s.
Only Germany can make good armor against KE, apparently.
I can tell you really don’t WANT to be honest in this conversation. THE DU TURRET COMPOSITE of the abrams is meant to protect against KE munitions, like 3BM70 (what you mentioned)
No matter how many times you quote this, you’re still acting mentally handicapped. IF A TANK’S ARMOR IS BEING PHASED OUT, THE ARMOR IS BEING REMOVED.
If something is phased out, it’s being removed in favor of something else.
The M60A3 was phased out, and gradually replaced with the Abrams.
The M16A4 was phased out, and gradually replaced with the M4A1, ETC.
If armor is being PHASED OUT, you should be able to give me an example of a tank having its armor removed in favor of an APS.
1 Like
When did I do that?
Specifically in the context of IRL, and not in war thunder, where it very obviously is the only important factor of protection. IN WAR THUNDER.
1 Like
II
3 Likes
THE DU TURRET COMPOSITE of the abrams is meant to protect against KE munitions, like 3BM70 (what you mentioned)
okay, true. but it’s not going to successfully defeat 3BM70 frontally via the hull.
If armor is being PHASED OUT,
I see your intellectual breakdown now. The armor it’s self is not being researched in the same capacity as other methods to protect the vehicle. Let me break that down further. Armor… not priority anymore… we still use armor yes, but funding, research, development go to new shiny. New shiny is APS. We want APS because it will be more effective than armor in the long run. The plan eventually is to rely more heavily on APS than armor. Do we understand now?
2 Likes
You brought up stuff not in the game, you were responded to with stuff not in the game. You opened the door.
1 Like
1 Like
This post wasn’t even in response to you, why are you trying to create a discourse here? If you talk about items not in war thunder, don’t be surprised when someone responds with stuff also not in war thunder.
1 Like
We are talking about an item not in War Thunder in regards to how it would perform in War Thunder.
I don’t give two fs if the thing can be killed by an FPV frone hitting its engine bay, that’s besides the point because those things are not in War Thunder and because, even if they were, EVERY tank on the planet would be vulnerable to those and that needs not to be specified; it is obvious we are discussing the potential addition when it comes to ingame threats and performance.
1 Like
Bring evidence, or you’re arguing based off of speculation you have 0 evidence of.
Or it could be because the US is confident in the armor protection and wants to focus on something else now?
APS SUPPLEMENTS armor, not replaces it.
You quoted me, so i responded.
I don’t get it. The SEPV3 is not in the game. General Dynamics is not in the game. That document you referenced is not in the game. So why is there a disconnect when I bring up threats not in the game and say “hey this is straight up false, the vehicle is most definitely vulnerable from the front” when pointing out the logical fallacy of the document stating it will be protected against all things frontally? it’s just straight up lying.
Do you think FPV drones will never be in the game? cruise missiles? 3BM70? if you’re going to start discussing things not in the game but potentially will be you have to take into consideration a lot of different ideas.
Or it could be because the US is confident in the armor protection and wants to focus on something else now?
No. It’s because the US understands that armor will always be outmatched by the munition.
APS SUPPLEMENTS armor, not replaces it.
Destroying the munition negates the need to rely on your armor and pray you don’t get penetrated and die.
1 Like
makes claim
shows proof
you are wrong
Either way, the ufp can be penned, and can’t be penned depending on the scenario the tank is on, and it’s position in relation to the other tank. It wont pen when tank below it shoots at it, but any tank with a heigh advantage will go through it.
And you know this how?
Armor isn’t developed to be a 50/50 chance. It’s made to protect.
Also, armor and APS focus on defending different munitions. Defending against a Javelin and 3BM70 are two different things. Your APS won’t defend you from that sabot round, nor will your DU turret defend against that Javelin. This is why APS and armor SUPPLEMENT each other, and won’t REPLACE each other.