Though sources on Relikt are widely avilable, even on this very thread. No source of higher authority or legitimacy overriding the data presented in the former has ever been put forward. If you have anything to substantiate your claims, please do share.
3 Likes
Whereas we have data and proof for NERA efficacy and they are not implemented.
K5 is already overperforming (Gaijin ignoring NATO anti era ammo)
And Relikt…well we probably have hours of footage
Of real Relikt, failing to stop an FPV drone or an ATGM, the 25mm apds from a Bradley…
While it likely is an improvement over K5 in game it’s not realistic and is overperforming as a catch all.
If anything its certain APFSDS that are underperforming vs ERA in general but thats a separate issue.
And just so you know in order to avoid strawman arguments: any ERA needs a minimum angle of impact in order to work. If an FPV strikes an ERA tile at near perfect perpendicular (90º), then it won´t provide any extra protection. However this is irrelevant ingame since we don´t have FPVs.
On the other hand, since K5 Soviet/RU designed ERA is meant to be incensitive vs medium caliber autocannon fire, then it only acts as extra steel when impacted be these. There is no evidence of a Relikt tile being “defeated” (and the base armor underneath) by medium caliber fire. Unless an IFV happens to have a lucky shot at a tank´s known weakspots, but that isn´t related to Relikt performance at all.
So no, none of these anecdotal comments (=/= sources) provide any basis to change Relikt performance ingame.
3 Likes
“Vacuum-1 APFSDS aprox 950mm of Pen,” yeah 2000mm pen no?:D
Its doable given the fragmentary info we have on the round. Safer estimations yield about 850mm of penetration.
We saw an M2 disable a T-90M covered in Relikt, We saw the turret controls were damage and the crew had to bail out.
If it cant stop an ATGM or FPV drone at 90 degrees why is it stopping ATGMS and darts in game at 90 degrees?
It’s not straw manning it’s a desire for balance and equality in game, currently logs offer more kinetic protection than add on NERA blocks. Sources have been provided and are flat out denied.
But sure Russian T-14 will have Bismark level armour because what Russian sources say it has.
3 Likes
What you saw in that incident (never known to have been repeated since) is 3 things:
-
Bradley destroyed T-90M optics and blinded the tank, already producing a firepower/mission kill. Such thing as disabled optics is not a mechanic ingame but IMO it should be.
-
Bradley hit and detonated some of the T-90M smoke grenades. Already ingame.
-
One or several shots slipped through the turret ring weakspot, damaging the turret controls.
This is already possible ingame
Even if this weakspot was covered by Relikt (which would get in the way of the turret rotating), the ERA wouldn´t detonate because its not meant to go off with this kind of ammunition. Hence it would only act as about 20-30mm of extra steel, hardly making any difference.
So no, nothing about this incident reveals anything that we didn´t know before nor disproves anything.
11 Likes
Spoiler
Pretty sure that incident prove the contrary. That Bradley gun its useless against T-90M… Yea it took it optics and this its one of the main concern with tank like Armata. But Only the crew of tank know what happens with the turret. That T-90 was hit by 3 FPV drone. The turret spinning was argue to be the dmg of the First FPV not the two Bradley fire… If the Bradley would have dmg the turret ring it would be stuck not spinning like it did… The 3 crew walking away of the tank after the second FPV hit the Engine bay, so that pretty much confirm that the M2 autocannon was ineffective at penetrating the T-90. Because as Western said the inside of Russian tank are really cramped. There is not way it would have penetrate the tank and don’t fatally injure the crew.
Also Relikt its difference to k5. Usually every plate of K-5 has more stopping power than one of Relikt. But Relikt can be sandwich…
2 Likes
What does this have to do with the Armata?
We were disussing armour and how Russia gets peferential treatment with the efficacy of its armour systems.
It’a frustrating but thats how it is.
Isn’t that from the weird bmp T-14 thing?
probably, but they did give it a serial number.
It was a mock-up for an amusement park, definitely not functional
1 Like
Definitely
ngl bad moment to take a look into the T-14 thread, ill leave yall with whatever this is
1 Like
It’s cursed is what it is.
+1, people are just apprehensive because of years of BVM and B3 domination but now the situation isn’t the same, even though Russia still has best CAS+SPAA combo.
It’s the logical next step when gaijin decides to add unmanned turret mbts.
The M1 TTB is a way better first step since it still has the base M1 hull armour.