Issue is the phrasing, upgraded 3rd generation DU armour was a replacement to the armour in the M1A2, which we know did not have DU in the hull, therefore it is not a DU armour upgrade, it’s a replacement.
The source claims the DU changes are specific to that array (the Hull amour) though, the changes made to Turret and Applique armor changes are addressed in the next line(s) as separate items.
People have already tried using government websites for reports. Gaijin don’t considered them reliable sources.
The M1A2 armor is accurate to the Swedish export package. Where has it been shown to be accurate to the US spec M1A2?
1 Like
Which spec? 1992 when introduced? 1999 for SEP? 2001 for SEP V1 re-armor 1?
The base M1A2. The M1A2 SEP has upgraded armor but still offers the same protection as the base M1A2.
1 Like
We’ve only seen they upgraded the armor in 2001/2002.
I don’t think anyone has provided a citation of upgraded armor in 1999 when SEP was introduced.
1 Like
Even if that was the case, the base M1A2 we have is the Swedish export package, not the US M1A2.
2 Likes
They absolutely do. M829A3/A4 is on par with L/49 M322, L/55A1 DM73, and 3BM59.
3BM59 is equivalent to M829A1.
DM73 is ~A3.
M322 is equivalent to OFL 120 F1 & 3BM60.
1 Like
M829A2 is already on par with 3BM60, and 3BM59 only puts the bar of muzzle energy higher over M829A2. With higher chamber pressure it easily outdoes both that and A1.
M322 is by no means equivalent to 3BM60 and OF F1, as it’s almost twice the shot weight of F1 alone. In a high pressure L/49 it’s capable of 600mm+ of pen and it already weighs 5.6kg.
Sir, L27A1, OFL 120 F1, KE-W, and 3BM60 are all similar to each other.
DM53 & M829A2 are vastly superior rounds to those three.
M829A2 has 682mm of pen at 2km vs 616mm of 3BM60.
M322 has 626mm of pen at 2km BTW.
All at 60 degrees since that matters more than flat.
To compare CHARM to KE-W is laughable to begin with, let alone putting 3BM60 (a WHA monobloc shot) against OFL 120 F1 (WHA capped and 9cm shorter to begin with).
3BM60 and M829A2 are on-par already. 3BM60 is more accurate with an 11.8MilR rating, while M829A2 from an L/44 has a 13MilR rating, and everything from weight and penetration equal out quite will with what isn’t even a 50mm difference in pen.
682-616 is 66mm difference at 2km.
That is more of a difference than the 6mm between KE-W and 3BM60.
Or the 10mm difference between 322 & 3BM60.
And as said, the difference is negligible when you take into account the various other differences of the shots, such as projectile weight and muzzle energy.
Did it cross your mind that one of those weighs over a kilogram more than the other?
Again, half kilogram difference there.
1 Like
What? OFL F1 is a monobloc APFSDS. Both of those projectiles have ballistic caps/windshields.
The total projectile length is shorter yes (but not by 90mm, more like 55mm; BM-60 was measured at 735mm total length, OFL F1/DM43 was measured at 680mm total length), however their penetrators are overall comparable (especially if we account for velocity):
640x22mm vs 585x22mm.
BM-60 weights too much in the game anyways, should be about ~4.25kg compared to F1s 4kg and A2s ~4.8kg’s.
OFL F1 is made up of 2 bodies and a cap (much like DM33 and DM13), so… Unless we’re talking about a uniform material…
Is DM43 not 650mm long? A capless 3BM60 is also 650mm… Pretty much the same in that regard.
There is no direct figure as to the weight of the shot, with the only information coming from 3BM59… Which is well over 6kg without sabot. 3BM60 is mostly a guesstimate based off of material changes.
Prove it.
Is DM43 not 650mm long? A capless 3BM60 is also 650mm… Pretty much the same in that regard.
735mm total for BM-60, 680mm total for OFL F1/DM43
640x22mm penetrator BM-60, 585x22mm for OFL F1/DM43
There is no direct figure as to the weight of the shot, with the only information coming from 3BM59… Which is well over 6kg without sabot. 3BM60 is mostly a guesstimate based off of material changes.
That is incorrect? Tula table straight up says BM-59 is 4.35kg and BM-60 is 4.25kg (which matches with the 640x22mm penetrator).
Prove it? It’s like saying a car has wheels, look at it for yourself.
PrOvE iT
3BM60’s penetrator is 650x21. There’s little to no contention on this figure, nor its 735x21 total length.
My issue is finding any concrete information on DM43 / F1.
Tula hasn’t stated anything, with Karpenko even stating that nothing has been released to-date about 3BM60 or 3BM59, and all allegations of knowledge on it are by direct evaluation… Such as captured 3BM59 that people have speculated on.