Is this the current protection?
1 Like
That’s the M1A2, I found the diagram on the WT wiki page
https://wiki.warthunder.com/M1A2_Abrams
I’m not sure if it’s up to date.
Oh gotcha, haha. Thank you. Sounds right the wiki would list it as that
Its hilarious the wiki has the old data from when the UFP wasnt nerfed and actually worked.
Damn, gg actually.
Although I still have a bad feeling about this.
Oh shit. Guess i missed the news
Oh shoot, you’re right!
The UFP should actually be green in some areas.
I guess that strengthens the argument somewhat… Xd
They know. Lol.
Artificial weakspots based on “statistics” and “balance”
Oh so its worse than it was even before :)
Lol. I thought it looked fishy
1 Like
Does anyone know if the hull front armor of the M1A1 HA/HC and M1A2 was improved compared to the M1A1? Because the CATTB’s hull armor protection was not increased compared to a unknown model of M1A1, most likely the M1A1 HA, the report was published on MAR 1989 which fits with the M1A1 HA development.
It can’t be the base M1A1, because the CATTB’s hull front armor is 30.34% heavier, (3,115 lbs for the M1A1) and (4,060 lbs for the CATTB).
well I wrote a email to general dynamics…they have not replied.
1 Like
I penned and OHK the BVM with M829 in the left of the breech. After all it’s still T-80B turret
Yeah but it’s inconsistent in-game. It’s one thing to go into the armor viewer and scroll around for pixel weak spots, but in game it’s not that easy. And even though there are some spots near the breach that are weak, there are just as many spots that are completely immune. Give the turret a little wiggle and the shot is likely to do nothing.
I misinterpreted what I was originally responding to, but my point remains.
Thanks
I had already known both acronyms, you’re here cherry picking non-issues on different topics.
Both of those links are images of the words “classified chart”… Quite informative!
Care to describe the differences between FMS and EAP, or no?
The point is that EAP is a type of armor that was given out to FMS countries. To say FMS armor is the same as “export” armor, though it doesn’t tell which generation of EAP it had been.
Did “Applicants are hereby notified that they are encouraged, to the greatest practicable extent, to purchase American-made equipment and products with funding provided under this program” cross you?
Okay. So here are the estimates I cited earlier. The book is simply titled “Tanks” by Michael E. Haskew. Published by Amber Books, First Edition printed in 2010.
As you can see, they say the 3rd gen DU packages provide 960mm on turret, and 650mm on the lower front hull. They say this is armor that went into the SEP variants on the data tile for the M1A2.
Not sure how to get this to who needs it, or which mod needs to be pinged.
I think this is a more than reasonable estimate for 3rd gen DU package Abrams, since we’re stuck with the nerfed M1A2 export variant values estimates from the Swedish trial.
12 Likes
Its likely DU. The HC uses DU Gen 2 while HA uses DU gen 1
This guy seems to know his Abrams
Maybe try pinging more than one and ask them?
1 Like
The hull of the CATTB is entirely different though. Its not a standard M1A1 hull, it was elongated and uparmored for the 3 person crew with the 140mm unmanned gun
The CATTB uses a modified M1A1 hull, it has some differences but it has the same length as the M1A1 hull, the turret is actually manned, i think you’re talking about the TTB.
CATTB Phase I used the basic M1 Abrams hull, while the Phase II used a modified M1A1.
CATTB Phase II hull:
1 Like
That green on the turret ring is misleading as half of it is non-pennable.