I dont believe that having an extra 540mm of composite armor would only offer 60mm extra KE protection(CE protection maybe is overperforming). This is the case where either the document isnt entirely correct(low balling the performance) or maybe thats how it is(which i find unbelievable), given that composite armor improvement going from M1 to M1A1 was quite substaintial(better armor array, material and ~2.2x the composite) does not give ONLY 60mm KE(again, CE overperforming maybe is true ~800mm CE is more likely instead of 950/1000 on M1A1)
it could resist around 2s38 type round, over ofc not, but thats huge for an mbts to not get kill/disable frontally)
i believe that side turret armor of newer M1A2 would have sufficient protection against lower caliber APFSDS round(like 3ubm22, dm13) and yes CE protection would be substaintially increase(iirc about 200-250% more)
the thing is about the turret protection on M1A2 models, which im pretty sure is base on swedish trial M1A2 armor, they state that the export m1a2 they recieve has less protection than the actual domestic version of the US M1A2. Which mean that the current M1A2s has the “incorrect” armor protection(the actual number ofc idk, but it would definitely go around 700-800mm ke range, rather than just about 650mm ke
Alot of people use 2S38s in top tier as well, I don’t see an option to see the 2S38’s normal 10.3 to 11.3 spread KD ratio.
I didn’t say it performs bad, it’s just a problem vs Leopards specifically. I do think the option for the AAAC2 would be a great benefit for kill reliability though.
Guys keep it on topic, lets not mention the Abrams any further
ADMAG is the correct gun on the HSTV-L, and despite ADMAG not being able to fire the Delta 6 with 430+ mm pen, the current APFSDS is absolutely underperforming:
It should still achieve M774 level performance in both penetration and damage - the date from the HIMAG testing is 1979, when the HSTV-L was also made, 4 years before the 75 mm XM274 (in 1983) was created.
This is also confirmed by STGN, who reported the XM274->ADMAG name change. All it really does is remove the capability to fire Delta 6, but the current HSTV-L’s cannon still has massive underperformance for its APFSDS.
ADMAG had two different sabot rounds and one fuse round, the AAAC1, AAAC2 and an unnamed fuse round.
In game the AAAC1 more closely matches the current shell the HSTVL/RDFLT uses.
I’d like to advocate for the use of the AAAC2 shell which has a 3 lb penetrator instead of the 2 lb penetrator the AAAC1 uses as discussed in the DARPA to Ares letter.
There’s mention of the AAAC Fuse round in documents but I can’t find a name for it. There’s also a selection for the HE round in the HSTVL
They’re wrong, I was defending that until that bug report came out and I researched further. The XM247 was developed from the ADMAG ARES gun as a potential option to be used on a LAV chassis for the marines. That was the only instance when the gun was fitted to a vehicle that I know of. Here’s a picture of said vehicle
Note the shape difference right before the end of the telescoping cannon. It’s oval. XM274 is oval and ADMAG is rectangular.
Here is a pic of the HSTVL, you can clearly see the difference
If they would just add the AAAC-2 round, it would alleviate all penetration and post pen problems the HSTVL/RDFLT faces. The extra 1lb would help immensely with post pen damage
true, just a bit more pen would help alot when trying to deal with a leo, right now even if they are angled up you cant really reliably pen their lower front plate
I bought this vehicle in the sale despite any of its issues. At the end of the day - I can’t stand to see people bringing MBT after MBT. I love that there are quirky support vehicles out there ready to ruin (or try to ruin) their day. Saying that, the whole support vehicle thing seems to be different when you’re up against hoards of Leopard 2A6/7s, while being on USA teams. Have got my ass whooped the few games I’ve used it. Putting it away until I invest time in the USA tree to put an adequate lineup around it.
What has me curious is the 1463 m/s vs 1600 m/s only with a marginal increase in penetration.
Another curiosity is it claims 14 inches of inaccuracy for every 1000 meters, which is far less accurate than the in-game round we currently have.
