one of gaijins on mods already said there was D.U in the hull he even made a post about it, and why they haven’t added it was for the dumbest reason ever, that people went and made reddit posts about it.
1 Like
Proof
well ur gonna have to keep searching for that guy.
what?
That hull was penetrated by 3BM42 Mango, not DM53
1 Like
Considering that M1A2 turret with DU armour is rated minimum 600mm KE arc protection. We can find the composite armour effectivness. The weakest cheek flat on from an arc angle is 782mm LOS in thickness. This means the DU composite offers 0.767x KE relative to the LOS thickness.
If the M1A2 SEP V2 abrams hull also recieved the same DU armour as the turret, the Kinetic protection for the frontal hull would increase from 350mm KE to 535-540mm KE
Btw, T-72B without any kind of modern composite or DU armour has 1.15x composite effectiveness relative to its composite thickness in the game (cuz Russian bias) whilst Abrams with modern Composite and DU has 0.767x for its turret in real life.
Somehow T-72B hull in War Thunder without ERA offers same hull protection as M1A2 abrams hull with DU armour.
5 Likes
600mm? try 720mm minimum In desert storm Abrams friendly fire incident happened alot and the turret of the abrams regularly took M829A1 hits from other abrams and the rounds never penetrated the turret or the side armor of the turret
Abram side armour wouldnt be able to tank M829A1.
The arc protection is 600mm KE when you shoot the weskest cheek flat on but the cheeks being shot from the front are stronger than 600mm KE, they would stop M829A2 at PB if shot from the front
At current ranges in WT, 100 - 400 meters, 62 - 65 LOS, it pens.
Why 65 & not 68? Cause you’re physically looking down at 100 - 400 meters
And yeah, WT M1A2 turret offers ~740 & 680 depending on the side @Sombralix
I was referring to the Swedish trials
3 Likes
Reminder too that in the case of the Aussie AIM in particular, the export requirements per Australia was to have the M1A1 AIM’s hull armor be “Improved to the standard of the M1A2 series”.
Currently the M1A1 and M1A2 and M1A2 SEP all have identical hull armor, thus, it is quite curious that given the hull of the M1A1 was never supposedly equipped with DU armor that it would need to be improved in any way shape or form when being exported.
That is unless the M1A2 and onwards has improved hull armor, which it does, along with the M1A1 AIM in particular.
1 Like
Apparently its only the SEP V2 and later that recieved the upgraded hull, but V1 is still on the table for debate
1 Like
This is believable. I myself read a few citations of 2001 - 2003 when hull armor upgrade was performed.
I did find this document stating front and side armor upgrades were applied from 2001 and beyond. The side armor upgrade flies under the radar I never see anyone talk about it.
1 Like
And it’s clear we have a pre-upgrade SEP that has external additions of TUSK available to it.
Which isn’t improbable in IRL war games, especially when pre-armor upgrade SEPs were still in reserve.
Tho I suspect many find this at least slightly inconvenient.
To be fair, even non-SEP A2’s have had TUSK fitted.
1 Like
It is a universal package.
I secretly hope that Gaijin gives it to IPM1 even tho it was out of service long before TUSK was made.
Could be fitted, just wasn’t in service anymore.
This was the testing of an M1A1?
Where are you getting 600mm K.E protection from?
it isn’t up for debate, the U.S Army even put out information proving there was D.U in the hull.
This was literally on a U.S Military website, and all of it was approved for release. People made a bug report using this website. Gaijin knows the M1A2 Sep has A D.U Hull.
AN/VLQ-6 Anti Missile Counter Measures.
3 Likes