its specialy about changes between the v2 to the v3.
At no point did i state any opinion on the general implementation of the abrams besides that.
there is reason i put that into air quotes
About the weight, modern ERA is very weight efficient to be fair, it’s always been the main advantage of ERA
we both on the same boat but we know deep that it will be something like 50mm
Almost like its not even SEP v3. Not even M1A2
What?
These are SEP3s mounting the same blade on the left and a dozer on the right.
17 Likes
Is this yet another “We know what you want, we don’t care” article? Because you admited the the hull was modified and you keep It the same nevertheless? You Always act like all the top br Vehicle aren’t made by guessworks at best. Please do your job a balance this game. Even if isn’t a russian vehicle
3 Likes
that’s like 2tons not even close to 10
Well, we don’t even know to which extent they will actually model said improvements.
They stated that “because there was no significant weight/volume increase, improvements could not possibly be tangible”… so they will probably add a bunch of CE protection and maybe a few mm of extra KE protection that will lead nowhere.
1 Like
The Abrams MCBS is 4.5 tons, well in excess of any proposed armour modification.
4 Likes
What, this?
Yeas, read again, indeed.
5 Likes
Yes, the person I’m replying to thinks there is going to be no change at all
You are completely ignoring weight distribution and leverage. The MCBS frame distributes its weight differently across mounting points and sits on the ground when clearing. Bolting a solid, dense 4.5-ton slab of armor directly onto the lower plate nose is a completely different physical stress on the front torsion bars. You can’t just compare random numbers without looking at the actual physics of the load.
A CE change is no change at all.
The discussion was always in regards to KE protection, which is… well, the one type of ammunition used in tank-to-tank combat and even more so ingame.
3 Likes
I see some people were seriously expecting a 600mm vs KE lfp lmao.
1 Like
I missed It in the article. I still don’t trust them that much
It’s on the front of the hull. Your argument is absurd.
The MCBS is attached directly to the LFP, an armour upgrade would be PART of the LFP. An armour upgrade would therefore have less leverage and more robust mounting.
And when not clearing, it does not.
Note the weight of 3400kg is the mine blade alone, not counting mountings.
as opposed to bolting a 4.5 ton mine blade sitting about a metre ahead of the LFP I’m sure…
8 Likes
I know that, my response to their point still stands
There is going to be an improvement, CE or KE, still an improvement
So even Gajin recognizes that armor is put there but then proceeds to deny armor is increased or changed.
26.9 tons for the M1A2 and 31.5 tons for the SEPV3 hull is minimal… Ok thats like packing 5 more elephants into the turret but all we get is 150mm of composite armor. Also where are they getting the total weight of the hull? Are they basing it off the turret weight solely? Not only that they say weight is the issue but armor has significantly changed in the years with most steel being replaced with lighter ceramics which weigh significantly less.
But hey lets just continue to make up values for a certain country and call it BALANCE
Edit: also I forgot they dumped most of the hydraulics in the hull for an electric turret drive. That probably saved a ton of weight not to mention all the old stuff they tore out of the bad boi
16 Likes
A 35% improvement (480 over 355, 540 over 400 (angle dependant)) was achieved and documented in the 1990s, over 30 years ago.
Sources from the early 2000s point towards having reached up to 650mm KE levels in a proposed package.
Of course we expected at least 600mm KE from the heaviest and most advanced 2020s iteration of the tank which uses an even more advanced composition than either of those proposed packages of the past, yes. And?
32 Likes