They want values but someone posted russian docs with values
This one
1 Like
What’s even better is that this is same license, but updated. They went from a strict limit on hulls to granting the same status to turrets and hulls. No limit on either. That change was dated on 24 Aug 2006, from the original 5 hulls mentioned in 22 Feb 2006. They upped the limit. This means those 5 named in Feb 2006 were the test for improved armor implemented in SEP hulls as the program matured. They didn’t get rid of the DU hulls, otherwise they would have only stuck with permission for the turrets. They acquired permission to install DU in hulls at the same rate as they did for turrets. This lines up with SEP having improved protection, DU in the hull like all Common Abrams Upgrade variants. This includes M1A1 SA, AIM v.2, FEP, and SEP V2. SEP V2 wasn’t rolled out until 2007/FY2008, but the license for unlimited DU hulls predates this as of August 2006.
You will see that at the bottom of this document, it is stamped as AUG 24 2006. It carries the same license number as the document that listed only 5 DU hulls allowed, but now has hulls given the same unlimited status as the turrets.:
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0624/ML062410022.pdf
"In accordance with letter dated
February 22, 2006 (with enclosed application)
-
License number SUB-1536 is renewed in
its entirety to read as follows:
A. Uranium (depleted in U-235) A. Metal encased in stainless steel
A. As needed -
Authorized Use:
A. and B. For use (excluding repair or maintenance) and storage of tank turrets and hulls as
Depleted Uranium armor components of Abrams M1 series tanks. "
That 5 hull limit was removed, hulls given same permission as turrets.
9 Likes
Can you all stop replying on the bug report? It adds nothing useful to the report which have more than enough source and it just create confusion and possibly cause delay, just lets wait for technical moderators to do their job.
8 Likes
Correct me if I’m wrong isn’t Sepv1 and Sepv2s in game armor values based off the Swedish export base line m1a2 armor that didn’t even have DU in it?
Im not sure, i do not have access to the that values right now.
I already did that, you can see it here: M1A2 SEP ( v1, v2 ) missing hull armor // Gaijin.net // Issues
2 Likes
Excellent. Please continue.
Yep that’s it those are the armor values they use in game. Its crazy how sepv1 and sepv2 are using some export non-DU armor package that was made before sepv1 and sepv2 even existed.
11 Likes
AFAIK the FMS armor that was sent to Sweden did not provide the same level of protection as HAP-2, only the Improved FMS package offered to Greece and Turkey was just as good. The USA also tested some version of the Improved FMS in Sweden, but it was most likely an early version because the Swedes still complained about the lack of DU armor.
6 Likes
I see! I thought showing support verbally was a good thing, but you are right- so I deleted my comment!
I would like to encourage others to delete their comments too, as to leave the report as clean and clear as possible as stated above.
Hope it goes through. That would make my abrams quite nice.
The Abrams needs alot of work.
That’s what I ve talked about. “Trust me bro” is enough for T-tanks to make a suggestion to Devs in 3 hours with a source being only link to YouTube video but 300 response thread, 10 bug reports and effort of many people with hard data and proofs is not enough to give Abrams additional 150mm of protection on the hull. Now it seems they are just ignoring it. @Smin1080p @TrickZZter @Stona_WT What the actual f guys
9 Likes
Video of the T-90MS used to buff T-90M. Nice
5 Likes
If i am not mistaken was there not a big drama in the Chinese community some time back about a certain moderator doing the exact same thing like here and rejecting good documentation sources which caused same kind of heated discussions and led to some change?
2 Likes
@NoreZi @Fwostylicious @Mackerel33295
That’s photographic evidence. That’s nothing to do with “trust me bro”.
That’s the same level of evidence used to bug report Challengers and Chieftains that were acknowledged.
All you’re doing is showing that Gaijin is consistent & fair.
Armor amount isn’t a spall liner, those are separate things.
Hey Fwosty… I guess they have British bias according to you… this screenshot is from 2 days ago BTW.
Getting mad over Gaijin being fair & consistent is the worst take you’ve done.
1 Like
It’s not even the same model of tank. Besides, how many photos of official documents have they rejected at this point?
2 Likes
They just went about their business as usual. haha
1 Like
T-90MS is an export T-90M. It’s literally the same tank just exported.