If ariete proved to have spall liners then yea
Not thin air
Official source says they exist
U need just to estimate by logic where they are
They already have it in the game.
Washington document isn’t an official source for Israeli vehicles.
That document also doesn’t explicitly states that, so you basically have nothing.
So whats the problem?
Bruhhhhh
Its very much is
It does
Idk how ur mind twisted thos words but its clear
Their location ?
US document is perfect source for Israeli vehicles.
Seems legit.
You don’t know what explicitly means.
What you have there is a source that you should act upon only if you’re biased.
Make it accurate as possible
If u cant then estimate
Its not that hard
If im not mistaken gaijin used chines source about the python 3 so not us for merkava?
No its not
It says thos vehicle are in practice with spall liners there nothing to be confused about
If something its sound like u are anti bias
The Chinese bought Python 3s and even had them licensed
usa also tested the merkavas so either way its a valid source
You said it should be a thing of balancing, so it doesn’t really make sense why Ariete doesn’t have the full spall liner coverage, just like 2A7.
Nothing says Merkavas had them explicitly.
Neither the location of the liner is specified.
When did US procured the Merkava 4s ?
Balance with realisem ofc
im not saying u should make up things from nothing but if there is spall liner u can add on a weak mbt then u should add it
If ariete is missing spall liners and its realistic then gaijin should add them
Yes it does u twist their words in unreasonably way
If earlier merkavas were with spall liner so the best one is without it?
Cmon now
And even if this point is somwhat valid the earlier merkavas for sure needs to have spall liner
Ariete has them but not to an extent as a 2A7 for example. Why is that the case ?
Again, you don’t know what explicitly means.
Source needed.
If it doesnt have like 2a7 then its shouldnt and then its a br problem
[quote=“MotorolaCRO, post:818, topic:160727”]
No need for it to be explicit
Gaijin made full ships and tanks from scraps so they cant put a bit of spall liners?
If you want it to be a good source then it does need to be explicit.
Ships have different rules for addition as well.
Adding spall liners to Merkavas using such a vague source would simply be an argument starter about bias.
Spall liners iirc need more research too. Asked once about the TTD having spall liners (mentioned in its brochure) but more is needed. If I had to guess, it would be the same for Merkava 4s
1 Like
If there is another vehicle that known to have spall liners then it should get it too
Better to have inaccurate spall liners then none
Especially when its so necessary.
Hell, we even have photographical and video evidence of Challenger 2’s missing lower front plate spall liners and not even that is enough, apparently.
I just think this isn’t about evidence or truth anymore. At this point it feels like everything around spall liners is arbitrary, to be honest.
Otherwise, the lack of CR2 LFP spall liners can’t be justified. Or Leopard 2 PSO’s hull. Or Leopard 2PL, or ZTZ99A, etc. All “accepted and known issues” for years… yet nothing has been done.
No matter how much evidence is presented, it’s either never “enough”, or it spends the rest of its days on the “accepted, forwarded” limbo.
2 Likes