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.
as opposed to bolting a 4.5 ton mine blade sitting about a metre ahead of the LFP I’m sure…
I know that, my response to their point still stands
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
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?
You do know that all the placets in this blog with the seperate weights are for the turret right?
The Ariete warkit give “improvement” to the Protection and we all know Is almost useless
This Is what i Fear the improvement Will be: Something minor and with no real impact in the game
Saying it sits 19 inches off the ground doesn’t change anything.
You are still ignoring that a mine plow is a temporary mission tool. Tanks do not drive around with them attached 24/7 because it does destroy the front suspension over time. They put them on, use them, and take them off.
An armor package is permanent. It stays on the tank for its entire 30-year life. Stona’s point was about the long-term service life of the torsion bars. Comparing a temporary plow to a permanent 24/7 weight is just bad logic.
Find me any evidence whatsoever suggesting the mine blade significantly affects the service life of the torsion bar suspension. I’ll wait.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Mark my words there is going to be ngap leak
I hope not
well I’m not going to stop you from expecting things and making posts about it, however I think there’ll be a lot less support here now.
If it gets 450-510mm vs KE LFP it will be in a decent spot where it’s both different enough from the other SEPs and still balanced.
No one is saying that, but straight up saying nothing changed and having the exact same hull from the original to the most modern version is also wrong. Thats like saying armor hasnt changed or advanced throughout the years. The leopard, chally, and abrams all should be able to stop 3BM42 more than half the time on their lower front plate
As I said earlier, if the problem is balance gaijin should say that. In my opinion, the problem is them lying to our faces because they want to believe they somehow know more than every western military.
Page 24 https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA476340.pdf
“More recent advances have further bolstered the Abrams’ protection. BRL, building on
special armor technology, developed a new side armor concept that significantly
increased protection with minimal weight impact.81 This was handed off to the
manufacturer, General Dynamics, and is in the latest Abrams model, the M1A2SEP.”
not because it didn’t had a significant weight increase doesn’t mean it didn’t had a greatly increased protection. We still haven’t get this side armor that greatly increases protection neither. But this is proof that little increase on weight==little armor added.
Find me any evidence Prove that the Abrams’ lower plate can sustain 650mm of KE provide me with some sources, and prove to me that there’s a Russian tank with armour thicker than 500mm on the lower plate or side plates without ERA kit.
I’m not the one who’s made that claim nor am I the one with any sources for it. Refer to somebody else.
I cannot prove that because I do not agree with the premise. Even the UFP without ERA cannot meet that.
Nobody knows anything even a tank crew member doesn’t know whether the tank will be able to hold the ammunition. For a soldier in a tank, the ideal situation is neither to fire nor to be fired upon, but anyway, there are so many soldiers on this forum
the manual explicitly defines “Static Set” or “Settling.” Torsion bars are steel rods that twist to absorb bumps. The manual notes that if a continuous, asymmetric, heavy load is placed on the front bars without relief, the steel undergoes plastic deformation
They have always skirted the line between balance and realism unless they were given undeniably hard numbers/values (and even then).
There is more than enough solid evidence that the LFP armor was changed/increased, but no values. So 600mm vs KE is as much as an assumption as 450-500mm vs KE.
