According to Gaijin, even the CR.2’s L27a1 round can not pen a T80’s turret without ERA because they did “internal testing” and that’s what came forward. A round specifically designed to defeat a T80 with K5 cant do the job even when it doesn’t have K5 because their internal testing says so. So either their penetration calculation for L27a1 is wrong, or their armour for all the T80’s is.
When CR.2 cant even get its spawl liners in the hull that have been reported and evidence has been given to their existence, but they can formulate a non existent turret basket, it’s no surprise that the Abrams gets shafted as well.
They were even looking at adding a hydraulic line to the ammo compartment door to stop it from reloading if that pump was destroyed which was on the turret basket floor. Thank god they removed that.
(note this has been removed now)
I genuinely don’t understand why this is happening.
When this update drops, Russia will have recieved a post 2020 vehicle 7 updates in a row, and not one of the T series tanks have received their turret basket yet despite heavy evidence of its existence.
Unless the dev’s start to actually take into account that a lot of this information for NATO vehicles is not publicly available, they will keep asking for information we just cant provide ((as was done for the L27a1’s anti ERA capability report)) - Things have been added to Russia based on literally pamphlets and advertising materials ((such as the KH-38MT, and 2S38 being able to fire APFSDS)) meanwhile, for anything western you need to provide insane sources that some aren’t even available. It’s unfair, and it means that Russia have the benefit of having make believe stats. Texolite needs a full rework for example; its overperforming massively, however I don’t see that happening to the extent that they refuse to give the Abrams DU armour.
I mean even with ~500mm vs KE on the LFP it’s still an Abrams, so it’ll still easily be one of the best MBTs in game and easily slap the T-series around.
Combine this with the turret ring correction and BMPT accuracy nerf, I’m going to enjoy this (until I get smacked in return by the 5585 Mi-28NMs and 4305 Su-30SM2s that will be up).
That’s not the point. you cant add these things and then say “every other team gets to have realism except this one.” without it being biased towards the team that isn’t following suit.
Yeah, around 500mm would be fine.
Anything over that and you’ll start creeping up to the area of people asking: “Gaijin let UFP be strong enough to protect against DM53”.
Nah not really, when you are facing bmpts and russian vehicles keep getting buffed with no actual docs to back the reason of the buff, but when its any nato vehicle they gotta have a UN meeting to discuss what to buff and everything to nerf
Nothing is realistic in the top tier no side, no vehicle because there’s no information. Stop being daft and let’s discuss new game modes instead. Russia is rubbish it’s just that people don’t know how to play. Use the win rate as an argument it’s a weak one and carry on clinging to your beliefs. The only certainty is that the game won’t get any better this way.
This is where creep comes in, it starts plastically deforming the metal at lower forces and lower temperatures than a temporary high load would. A temporary high load causes microfractures that build over time that then ultimately make the bulk material snap once to many cracks form. Creep is (in this case) most likely caused by atomic diffusion within the grain boundaries or bulk material (depending on the temperatures and amounts of stress), the specific types of creep would likely be Coble creep - Wikipedia and Nabarro–Herring creep - Wikipedia .
If a metal is put under enough load under enough time the atoms will re-arrange slowly and it will permanently deform, eventually to the point of no longer performing it’s desired function.
I can’t really explain it in more detail than that without having to practically teach an entire engineering course or two x)
The Army tested the TROPHY Active Protection System (APS) installed on Abrams M1A2 System
Enhancement Package version 3 (SEPv3) tanks in FY22 to inform an urgent materiel release (UMR).
The TROPHY APS intercepted most of the incoming threats and the Abrams tank base armor
provided adequate force protection.
i believe that this confirms that the SEPv3 APS isnt a prototype
