Beyond ADL, nothing about M829A4 is proven to be effective against Relikt. The only footage I’ve ever seen of 829A4’s testing was a static fire that hadn’t shown any difference in flight profile to 829A3, as opposed to what many claim about its capabilities.
Nothing has been proven “effective” against Relikt because WW3 hasn´t started and US hasn´t declassified any trials on T-90M. And won´t happen soon. But M920A4 was developed speciffically to deal with “3rd generation ERA”, which is undoubtedly Relikt.
What we know objectively about the round is that the penetrator is similar to A3 (690x25mm) but its fired at a faster velocity (1650 m/s) and for some reason it needs to be programmed.
1 Like
Turkey has no relevance in this conversation, nor has it made any ammunition advertised to work against 3rd generation ERA.
m829a3 should be added now. Clearly gaijin doesn’t give a f about balance when adding the kh38mt, why shouldn’t US get historically accurate and actually real ammo
‘‘T-14 Armata/Object 477A should be added now. Clearly Gaijin doesn’t care about balance when adding Leopard 2A7V, why shouldn’t Russia get T-14 Armata/Object 477A?’’
Surely you can see the problem with that line of reasoning? It’s an invitation to constant power creep.
Even with the Leo 2A7’s/Strv 122’s being dominant, top-tier is now in a relatively decent spot, especially 11.3 - 11.7 is pretty enjoyable.
So how about we don’t ruin that by power creeping plenty of other nations via unnecessary ammo buffs?
And quite frankly: If you’re unable to get decent results with a 623mm penetration round fired every 5.3 seconds, then that’s a skill issue that M829A3 won’t solve either.
5 Likes
Characteristics of the M1A2 SEP v3 from ATP 3-20.15 Tank Platoon manual, dated June 2025, Approved for Public Release.
3 Likes
Apparently gaijin doesn’t, lets launch 6 agms at mach 2 that can still hit it’s target through smoke with enough explosive to one shot anything.
No response to the KH38MT. Okay.
- They did it with the m1a1 aims, plus why would they want to have a different version of NGAP anyway the only reason I can of think of is the issue with DU.
- The hull is upgraded; we know that for a fact at least with the ones for the US army. It is possible that exported versions of Sepv3 don’t include the hull upgrades, but there is no evidence to support that.
Thats the only explanation I need.
I was familiar with that source. Right now I don´t doubt SEPv3 has a revamped front hull armor. Statistically likely to be around 600-660mm without the hull getting any heavier than past models.
3 Likes
I see your point though, with them not removing DU from DU hull if they are removing it from the turret even though we know it has upgraded hull armor. Export stuff gets weird
2 Likes
Exactly
Could you remind me what the source was for that again?
What’s the LoS thickness of the hull array?
Approaching a 1.0 mass efficiency makes me slightly skeptical. They also did not extend the hull array like they planned to in the '90s.
i pray for this, and for them to add TUSK selectable instead of dinky mine protection on SEPv2, the ability to turn off TUSK is just kinda funny. but christ this area is a warzone
Its unchanged. Both mass and volume efficiency improve over time. While it can be statistically forecasted (which is my method but not mentioning extra steps) that SEPv3 turret is around 950mm+ KE, that yields a very high LOS/mass efficiency, which if applied to the hull yields 650-660mm KE effective.
1 Like
Replaces the loaders M240
7 Likes
Slowly getting closer to the COD tank.
2 Likes
Late to this party, I know but this is a false assumption.
See below for the DOT&E FY2023 Report of Trophy and Abrams:
https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2023/army/2023abrams-m1a2.pdf?ver=0uca2RTrQQIDKV-SLrSqow%3D%3D
“The test scope focused on verifying the performance envelope and capability demonstrated with Abrams SEPv3 tanks equipped with APS. Testing included live fire flight tests with inert and live threats fired against a fully functional Abrams SEPv3 tank.”
It has been live fire tested on the SEPv3 variant as of two years ago. Trophy APS is a kit, it’s not equipped unless a vehicle is in an operational environment that requires it. There are no public photos of it on a SEPv3 because units equipped with the SEPv3 have not been sent to an operational environment that requires it and the small unit operational testing of Trophy that occurred in Europe back in like 2020 occurred before SEPv3’s were in operationally forward units.
Abrams X shall be added on the next-gen MBT although Japan already receive their 4th Gen MBT… the Type-10
No, it’s a quite clear statement that I am yet to see a single SEPv3 with Trophy.
Ok… So. Let me put this very clearly for you, since it’s obvious you can’t read the room.
I have had 6 different people respond to me with images trying to refute my ideation that there is no openly-displayed SEPv3 currently fielding Trophy.
Every single one of them has posted images of SEPv2 demonstrators.
Guess what you’ve just done.
Like… Brother. Literally 2 seconds of basic backgrounding into this would have saved you the embarrassment of being #7.
I couldn’t care less what the article says, I still have not seen a single SEPv3 with Trophy.
Your statement clearly said because you haven’t seen a photo, you think it doesn’t exist yet, hasn’t been implement on a SEPv3, and that it’s still something coming based on your interpretation of the budget.
Only thing embarrassing is your tone. I am very well aware of what other people have written saying SEPv2 photos are SEPv3 as I have read the entire thread before posting. I am also very aware that the image in the banner on the DOT&E is a SEPv2. I am very well aware of what a SEPv3 is. I made the original suggestion on the old forums 5 years ago.
Just because you have not seen a photo, doesn’t mean that it has not been mounted on a SEPv3. You should care what the “article” says because it’s not an article, it’s the biannual report from the DoD Director, Operational Test and Evaluation. This is a primary source which says a fully operational SEPv3 with Trophy has been live fired tested, which is just as good as a picture.
Trophy APS for the SEPv2 and SEPv3 is a forward installed kit. The A and B Kit can be installed at the unit level with the help of contracted LARs. Any SEPv3 in the inventory can have it mounted. This is no different from other force protection kit items like ARAT. You could have also said I don’t think the SEPv3 can mount ARAT because I haven’t seen a picture up until early this year, when the 278th ACR became the first unit equipped with the SEPv3 to rotate to CENTCOM and thus equipped their SEPv3s with ARAT mounting boards in-theatre.
For the viewpoint of the game, there is a primary source saying Trophy was installed and live-fire tested on the SEPv3. Photograph that your eyes are allowed to see or not.
2 Likes