the aussie V3’s armor is unique among v3’s with its bespoke package making it an even bigger guess than the US NEA package.
thanks to the aussies we know that the v3 atleast has DU in the turret and hull package
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
Well yea because the Leopard is the only tank in the game that has structural steel trunnions instead of actual armor
14 Likes
i think i just has stroke reading this lmao
1 Like
I think i also has stroke reading when this
3 Likes
No Abrams offers 1000m of KE hull armor protection not even the cheeks do. In IRL I would assume around 600 to 650mm. based on added plates.
Dude when you write things lilke this, first tell me the materials that armor is made up of list all the composite materials then provide a formula for calculating the thickness of those materials then try and calculate SABOT rounds piericing it.
1 Like
They just ignored this thread, like they did before.
1 Like
i don’t expect it to be more than 530 as i think the devs still want the Russian top round to pen it, id be shocked if it even got more than 50mm more armor.
2 Likes
Could be around that in game, we will see very soon.
yeah and that corelates with some of the secondary sources from the polish, and Korean or japanese test on the Abrams that say roughly like 600-680 mm ke hull and like 1000 mm turret on the m1a2’s
2 Likes
i cant even figure out what he’s meaning cause when translated it sounds like he claiming the hull never increase in weight which is completely unconfirmed right now but is heavily leaning towards it did, so that ge can reason that the hull never got denser or thinker armour?
is that the point hes trying to make??
Gaijin officials have always been adept at selective restoration.
5 Likes
Because it’s the weekend
I believe from the comment your responding to you might be a bit confused he’s aware they have a different armour package seen in his following comment.
he just saying that because of the improvement to the export v3 hull (even if its not the same hull upgrade material) for Australia it can be used to infer that it was done so it could match the “new/improved” hull strength of the sepv3’s new NEA, even if slightly worse do to the lack of DU.
Hence why he said it was a bigger guess on the protection cause we don’t know how much worse than the sepv3 DU composite it is.
Either way his main point was just that due to Australia getting an improved hull to match up/come close to presumably the sepv3 standards of the US variant, it implies that the US had obviously increased the hull or upgraded the composite composition since the m1a1’s were originally exported so could be used as gaijin did in this blog, to provide evidence that the hull of the m1a2sepv3 at least faced some sort of upgrade or change in comp requiring further upgrades/ changes in the exported v3’s. instead of just a turret change like the old export m1a1’s
1 Like
ah i was missing context, that’s on me.
1 Like
I see alot of T80U-E1 players on 13.0
2 Likes
so you guys have ENOUGH info for every inches to make op BMPT, T-90M etc. etc. but nato vehicles, is there no sEkRiT documents for nato vehicles? you don’t have to share us(like you did on mighty russia vehicles) just apply it
T-90M is far from OP
3 Likes