Cant always be Sunny and shiny so its normal.
Thats why i said your claim doesnt represent the whole truth, sure on some maps or in specific locations Gun depression can come in quite handy but also it can be the other way.
Have you seen the amount of energy and destructive power a 120mm APFSDS has? The West hasn’t been able to make ERA that good, and Russia has never been able to show proof theirs is that good, but we just believe them?
It can’t? It’s just the spall liner means you actually have to aim now rather than just pointing and clicking with 3BM60.
1 Like
But saying that “gun depression” doesnt matter is even less represents it. Diminishing its significance is kinda wrong (it is like saying 0.5 sec of reload doesnt matter or 5-10 degrees turret traverse speed less isnt so noticeable).
Because it doesnt matter if you’re fighting on CQC maps most of the time, personally i never struggled in my russian tanks because of gun depression cause i know where to use them effectively.
Because the West hasnt been following this route? Like, different engineering schools, design philosphy and etc?
It surely cant irl. But not ingame (actually any tank suffers from this, but anyway), where volumetric and other flaws affects penetration and damage. And no, it is not spall liners (specially cause it happened even before spall liners were a thing). And when Type 10 received 3bm60?(jk)
its funny how people say the object 292 is not hard to kill when they have never fought it before in any western tank with a br of 9.0 to 10.0, damn even my chinese teammates couldnt kill it
1 Like
You pretty much ignored my point in favor of your paper only in argument which doesn’t apply to combat the way it applies on paper. What did i tell you about the elevation differences in maps? Paper arguments don’t apply to vehicles that visit matches instead of fightning on a 0 elevation area that doesn’t exist. Much of the time your armor won’t ricochet the shells.
1 Like
I don’t have an XM-1 and I prefer the Churchill mk.7 for track and barrel torture…
The importance of vertical traverse really depends on the map. I don’t have the tank but playing against them, I haven’t noticed them being any slower to get a shot off than the usual T-72s etc.
Well, I can only say from the handful of times I’ve tried shooting at them in matches so far plus playing around with the protection analysis tool.
The breech is HUGE, so shots that would usually frag the gunner and/or commander often don’t. Yeah, they’re disabled, but that’s definitely an advantage over one of the other T series tanks being disabled AND losing 1 crew from the same shot (since you don’t always get a quick 2nd shot).
in battle where it shoots back ,can’t hurt it from the front and most of it’s side . it can kill any of my 10,0 10.3 10.7 11.0 in USA line up with 1 shot anyware on my tanks giving me .oo1 chance of winning a incounter . its not the first time . remember the is6 ,2s38 ,t55am1, t72 turms and know the 292 .are u kidding me . how large of a advantage do the Russian line up need? if you are honest that tank should be 1.3 at the least but a argument could be made for 11.7 …almost 700 mm of pin , armor my 11.0 *USA tanks cant pin .if it wasn’t so outof balance at 10.0 it would be laughable .so your list of negatives don,t even come into play ,because the enemy is dead
Damn, didnt know that Murica suffers that hard, since even leo A1A1 has frontally shot me in 292.
Somehow this penning problem is sounding on some other Issue…
I agree that those vehicles are very quick, but they’re still not quite on the level of an M1 Abrams.
- An M1 Abrams takes 4:53 sec to reach 35 km/h, a T-80U takes 4:77 sec.
- An M1 Abrams takes 7:08 sec to traverse 360° in forward gear, T-80U takes 6:81 sec.
- M1 Abrams takes 8:27 sec to traverse 360° in backwards gear, T-80U takes 11:90 sec.
- M1 Abrams has neutral steering, T-80U doesn’t.
- M1 Abrams reverses at 38 km/h, T-80U at -11 km/h.
They all have the same turret traverse rate, except the M1 has VASTLY better gun depression.
I’m afraid it does not.
It does.
1 Like
T80U takes 3.5 seconds to reach same speed.
BVM has same turret traverse plus better vertical speed.
Neutreal steering only becomes viable when in staionary position.
Good old Soviet player excuse aka M1’s reverse speed.
All of them has better vertical speed then Abrams, another clueless person.
Then you’re testing the T-80U on different terrain than I am.
I’m testing on flat, grass terrain using identical starting positions. The M1 is slightly faster in acceleration.
You’re correct in saying they have the same turret traverse, but there’s no practical difference between them in vertical traverse, the M1’s vertical traverse rate is quick enough to be near instantaneous, there isn’t anything to be gained in practical terms from having more than 24°/sec.
Meanwhile, the M1 has literally double the gun depression of a T-80BVM.
Obviously.
Not sure what you mean by ‘‘excuse’’.
You claimed the M1 isn’t superior in terms of mobility, but it clearly is when going by such metrics (including but not limited to reverse speed).
4 Likes
Disagree. Horizontal targeting speed is more important as it’s relied on more often, but if your crosshair is below/above a target, having extra vertical targeting speed is a noticeable help.
1 Like
And what is the difference?
Nice cherrypicking, 16 degree makes a huge difference between life and death when it comes aiming and shooting.
And its not, according to you M1 has slightly better acceleration then T80U and only has 2km more in top speed which none of them gives huge advantage against T80U on the other hand you claimed 16 degree vertical targeting speed doesnt make difference while in practise it makes a lot.
İ was expecting something better instead of cherrypicking tbh.
2 Likes
That question doesn’t make sense.
You’re going to have to reiterate on that.
I get the feeling you’re confused on what the term ‘‘Cherrypicking’’ means.
Cherrypicking is selectively using a small data-set instead of the entire data-set to serve an agenda. We’re talking about gun handling characteristics here and you’re the one that believes gun depression shouldn’t be counted. That’s cherry-picking.
Regardless, I provided you with a video showcasing that the 24°/sec vertical traverse results in practically instantaneous gun laying, there’s no practical difference between 24°/sec and 40°/sec as both are virtually instantaneous.
If you believe otherwise, feel free to show me examples where 24°/sec wasn’t sufficient and resulted in your defeat. If you cannot show me such examples I’ll just assume you’re fabricating a false argument.
The M1 is at the very least equal to a T-80U in some aspects (acceleration, top speed), and massively superior in others (neutral steering, backwards pivot, reverse speed).
That means the M1’s overall mobility is superior.
İt absolutely make sense, i asked a simple question.
What is the time difference between my claim and your test results? Shouldnt be too hard to explain.
Ah Yes cause 16 degree doesnt make any difference in terms required time in order to aim and shoot right? At least try harder please.
By using that Logic i can basically say reverse speed difference between M1 and T80U doesnt make any difference(which is simply not true).
İ dont need to Show anything cause results are showing themselves.
Calculate this if you can, in M1 Abrams how many seconds do you need to rotate your cannon vertically and how many seconds do you need in your BVM? İn ground rb even 0.5 seconds makes difference between life and death and if you think this is not true then simply you’re lying.
According to you its better in acceleration although i never saw the documents or hard hard evidence from you its also better then T80U in terms of top speed (72km vs 70km) tho none of those aspect doesnt effects significantly.
Nah by using your Logic on Vertical targeting speed those aspects shouldnt effect that much.
“Overall”, nice cherrypicking again. Next time be more clear when it comes to explaining something or dont even bother.
1 Like
Correct.
That’s why I asked you to provide me evidence that shows the vertical traverse to be a deciding factor in engagements, you haven’t done that.
Your argument assumes you’re permanetly driving around with the gun at maximum elevation, and every time you encounter an enemy you need to fully depress the gun to the lowest possible level. This makes no sense at all.
In practicality, the M1 will level it’s gun with that target instantaneously. I’ve also shown that in the video linked above.
You can just ask me for it though.
Here it is:
Now I’d also like you to provide a video showing the T-80U reaching 35 km/h in 3:50 seconds as you claimed.
Not to get into meme-posting, but this is extremely applicable:
1 Like
Solid evidence is here, in M1Abrams it takes roughly 1.66 seconds to elevate 40 degree while in Bvm it only takes 1 seconds, now Show me how 0.66 seconds doesnt make any difference in practise please(you cant).
İts not up to you whether im using my gun as fully elevated or not but what matter is how many seconds does it take to fully elevate.
Your efforts for derailing the obvious truth is funny.
İn practice there is 0.66 seconds, stop lying please.
Cherrypicked information again, your evidence lacks crew levels and their qualifications, i can use basic crew on T80U while aced on M1 and can make a huge difference and before you posting screenshot in here let me tell you: after publishing that video any additional screenshot will be meaningless cause you can simply change your crew level and their qualification before taking screenshot.
İt fits quite well to your empty efforts, thanks for sharing buddy.
1 Like