So we need SEP-V2 with the Trophy system.
“We” don’t need anything. You’re the one that’s double negative in half of the Abrams model while struggling to stay above 1.0 in the others.
1 Like
Real-World Context
• The M1147 Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP) 120 mm round consolidates four legacy Abrams munitions (M830 HEAT, M830A1 MPAT, M1028 canister, M908 obstacle-reduction) into one programmable shell.
• Programmable fuze modes (point-detonate, point-detonate delay, airburst) are set via the tank’s fire-control system and data link—no manual fuze change needed.
• Entered low-rate initial production in December 2020, with full-rate production approved December 20, 2024 under JPEO A&A.
⸻
Comparable In-Game Ammunition
• 120 mm APFSDS – pure anti-tank, limited vs. infantry and soft targets
• 120 mm HE – good vs. fortifications and soft targets, poor armor penetration
• 120 mm Canister – devastating at close range, useless beyond 300 m
• No “programmable” options – you pick one ammo type before battle and stick with it
| Mode | Penetration | Radius | Reload Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| PD | 480 mm RHA | 0 m | +1 s |
| PD-Delay | 400 mm RHA | 2 m (spread) | +1 s |
| AB | 200 mm RHA | 15 m | +1 s |
Sources & Further Reading
• Army.mil Press Release: Full-rate production approval & fuze modes → M1147 120mm Advanced Multi-Purpose round enters full rate production | Article | The United States Army
• Wikipedia – M1147 AMP: Overview, specs, development history → https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1147_Advanced_Multi-Purpose_Round
• DOT&E FY2020 Report: Live-fire testing data & fuze performance → https://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2020/pdf/dot-e-army-2020.pdf
(Also the round is really cool so why not add it? It would not be to op)
1 Like
I am still waiting for the M1A2T for the Taiwanese Tech tree. (Upgraded version of the Sep V2).
3 Likes
Oh boy! So… Now instead of only carrying 12 830A1 I can carry 12 M1147 with the same mediocre filler amount (that’s still yet to be massively nerfed) that… Is insensitive to flash fires? Big whoop?
You’d have a better argument to make to me if you were simply talking about its armor and that beyond sexy turret cheek contour.
Are you okay?… sir
Honestly what is your problem you out here hating on everyone writing anything. You seem to look at everything like it is a sack of rotten tomatoes
1 Like
Yeah?
Because it doesn’t add anything of substance. AMP is nothing but a rehashed MPAT that serves immense logistical purpose, but we aren’t here trying to kill insurgents through 2 layers of concrete while fixing the issue of ammo diversity.
Then tell me what you want, i want it because i think it’s cool but you seem to don’t want anything
What round do you want to the abrams except m829A3/4
1 Like
I hope that in the next update Gaijin will still lead something new for the US on the ground forces.
6 Likes
Armor? Have you not read the thread?
They are never gonna fix the armor cause gajin hates use and always says ”there is no proof”
2 Likes
What would be “fixed” about the armor? It’s an entirely new package, it isn’t in the game to begin with.
I promise you they will just use the same armour or guess
NGAP and HAP-3 are nowhere near the same armor… Are you lost?
I was saying that they will just guess the armor values
Anyway ill just admit defeat as you know way more than me
A guesstimate would be the only route at the moment, and even now that’s basing it on a generalized statement founded by percentages, not solid numbers sadly.
2 Likes
I think adding Abrams X would be better as TD
So based on weight gain, sourced protection values (up to M1A2) and time of introduction, I managed to statistically forecast KE armor values for HAP-3 (SEPv-1/2) and NEA (SEPv-3). Anyone who knows about statistics acknowledges that having only 4 reference samples doesn´t give high confidence in the estimation, but this is really all we have for the moment. The key here is the ratio (or nexus) between protection/armor and weight, whats listed as AWR, that is calculated as KE protection (taken from sources) divided by weight. This AWR has proggresed as time has passed since engineers constantly improve the weight efficiency of tank armor. Hence, unknown AWR can be forecasted to a certain degree. The last step is to multiply AWR by the weight of SEP/SEPv3 turrets (those weights are also well known publicly), yielding an estimate for actual armor rating. I applied this method to other modern tanks. Perhaps one day I´ll share other stuff, after refining it as much as possible. While not near scientific as the L-O formula, this at least is more objective than anyone (including Gaijin) rating armor based on gutt feeling and/or bias.
For the moment, its statistically likely that based on weight gain and DOI, SEPv3 front turret armor reaches a whopping 965mm KE while HAP-3 equipped tanks may be reaching 705mm KE.
Note: the “turret weight” is assuming all weight gain from past models has indeed gone to new turret armor. To approximate the result as much as possible I deducted from SEPv3 and SEP additional elements -such as RCWS-that add weight without adding protection. Likewise, I added weight to SEP and SEPv3 based on structural weight savings made since M1A2 and assuming those weight savings were reinvested in armor protection.
6 Likes
What is the CE protection?
I don´t have enough data to estimate it. In most sources I´m using, Abrams protection is only mentioned in KE terms.
1 Like