Gaijin’s logic of going about implimenting vehicles with classified information is pretty bad.
Especially when the classified parts make a big difference.
Gaijin Issue moderators shouldn’t be asking for details that cannot be attained, because they are classified.
Just saw the recent message get removed, hopfully it wasn’t from a mod xD. Refering to the chinese “friends” comment
I just made a comment about having our Chinese friends help us with some critique eruption since they have an abrams, and it seems like they always get it their way.
Guys no idea if it can help but:
2020abrams-m1a2 (1).zip (449.0 KB)
File regarding Sep V3, mentions upgrade over the sep V2 for “Survivability enhancements including Next Evolution Armor”
Can i get any feedback?
Hi, regarding this you can find more info here. Community Bug Reporting System
However, the NEA have been confirmed to exist, your source and other sources point it out
In that colossal bug report, what i sended is present?
If not a good person could add it in there! I personally cannot
Yes your source is already present in the bug report
Good, thank you for clarification
I am revising the report further… it’s simply UNDENIABLE.
If it still is rejected and they still remain hellbent on not addressing and solving this issue, we will definitely be needing to resort to different methods to grab their attention.
M1A2 SEPv3 must be fixed before getting to Live server.
Please do what you can, I’m trying to edit my responses to catter and hand this to the mods on a silver plate as well.
What 35% figure are you talking about??? The 2A7V is modelled off the swedish trials numbers, and even then it underperforms them.
I believe it’s in one of the reports; in the early 2000s, an upgraded hull armor package was proposed which it increased KE by 35% (I believe CE too).
Gaijin could just do as they did with the 2A7V and model it after those values.
Like 2A7V, it would probably underperform too, as it’s a 20+ year old package after all; BUT at least it would be closer to reality than the 1970s values…
35% KE and 25% CE. Better than nothing tbh, it will at least block 3bm42 and DM33
Exactly. The notion of U.S’ 2020s MBT’s composite armor being suppossedly vulnerable to 1980s ammo is simply absurd.
Gaijin really believes that the most powerful army on Earth didn’t think of not keeping their workhorse 2020s MBT vulnerable to literally phased out and obsolete ammunitions…
Specially when their latest upgrades are officially designed to “protect against EMERGING threats”…
So yeah, even the 35% figure would most certainly be underperforming. But at least not by that much…
In real life, it’s probably on the 580-ish range; enough to protect against 3BM60 and 3BM59, the “emerging threats”… but even the 500-540-ish would be welcome at this point.
Bro, look
DU plates under pic, only one i could find
Its the DARPA armor that was tested in the early 90s for potential m1a2 hull armor upgrade.
New source found! @SPANISH_AVENGER
08-02-army (1).zip (1.3 MB)
Page 31
Page 95
Both extremely clear mentions of DU inserts
Picture of DU inserts in abrams hull + source
https://btvt.narod.ru/4/burlington.htm
Thanks to @Hike_DK for confirmation and adding to bug report
A pleasure to help you all kind sirs!
please link the bug report so i can add same issue pls, ty for this lmao.
Something wrong with the portal
but
Have we refenced the GAO report? for SE Block II armor improvements?
NSIAD-90-57 Abrams Tank: Block II Modifications Not Ready to Enter Production
The Block II tank modification package is designed to meet the future Soviet tank threat of the mid-1990s. Definition of this threat is based on the expected fielding of the Soviet tank known as the “FST2.”
As per NATO sources FTS 2 was expected to beat 700mm RHA @Flame2512 Did you have the cover page for this document?
Can also see a reference to ?M1A1 Block 2? at 650mm, on the upper scale.
