Rejoice, I suppose? The M60 120S got 2nd gen FLIR:
not sure if it’s here to stay or not though…
Nope, they’re nerfing that as soon as the update comes, the femboy on the english stream said so
This vehicle is the epitome of Gaijin’s hypocrisy and the way the treat Russian vehicles (Yak-141 with fictional missiles, radar, IRST and HMD) and this POS (750 HP instead of 1200 HP, trash transmission and soon to be nerfed thermals).
3 Likes
Was so excited for this to have actual mobility and for the ZBD04A, only to see that both have nerfed engine HP and vastly lower mobility…US also isn’t getting any SPAA while Germany gets yet another fkn SPAA that they surely needed. Disappointment of a patch. Hopefully the Fox car is fun to play.
Absolute fact
They put the wrong engine,the wrong FLIR,the wrong ammo, everything in this tank is out of pocket even tho we have enough proof to not screw up
Even the ammo storage: NO DATA of this vehicle states that it had ammo in the hull,every information you gather states the same exact ammo as the M1A1,and guess what?no Abrams variant had their ammo located on the sides of the driver.
And i’m not gonna talk about how for some reason said fake ammo racks are filled before the 2nd rack of the turret,makes absolutely no sense
Either Gaijin is straight up lying and deserves to be treated as such,or they somehow leaked classified info themselves (this tank was a private venture,so according to US laws the private company that created it is not forced to even talk about the project),and if that’s the case i’ll be eager to send an email to the GDLS Legal team saying that
2 Likes
Don’t let me start about US SPAA
“B-but the USSR had a gap between 8.3 and 🤓☝🏻”
USA has an entire rank of a gap
“B-but USA has a strong aircraft option 🤓☝🏻”
Not all US players have both planes and tanks and you can’t force a decision by only listening to one part of them,so even this point is weak
I’m so tired of this nonsense
IR is switching to gen 1 for release, thus not wrong.
Ammo is correct.
Engine is correct.
Hull ammo is a non-issue, just load 7 less rounds of ammo.
Abrams hull isn’t an M60 hull. M60 has empty space there, and it’s entirely possible to put ammo there and I don’t see proof countering the extra ammo…
Enjoy wasting GDLS’s time and being put on their no-contact list.
No?the only DU APFSDS Turkey (which was the main interest at the time)has ever bought (not even used) were the M774 and the M833. There is no info regarding the sale of M829-series of APFSDS on Turkey.
I’m so tired of saying the same exact thing all over again,at this point i’m starting to believe that a good majority of WT players have a type of brainrot that blocks them of understanding a common sentence.
The prototype variant,so the variant that it was supposedly been created between December 2000 and the first half of 2001 had the 750hp engine,but the version that was presented during IDEF 2001 clearly has only the 1200hp engine and the Allison transmission.
Brainrot even here.You’re failing to understand that,as of the current dev server,the hull ammo rack is filled BEFORE the 2nd turret rack.
I love how you’re ignoring that all the sources online that cite the ammo capacity of the 120S states that it’s the same of any 120-mm Abrams,and their source is LITERALLY JANE’S
Keep licking that boot pal
1 Like
It’s not a Turkish tank, it’s American. It’s an American prototype with no buyers.
Ammo bug is reported and acknowledged already. It’ll be fixed.
Exactly the same = up to 42 rounds.
Or 40 rounds.
Which means 6 or 8 in the hull since it has an M1A1 turret.
Turkey was the main interest of GDLS for this tank,Egypt soon followed as another interested country. Both of them don’t have,in their lifespan,120-mm US DU ammo
Those 6-8 stands under the commander in an armoured box,so even here you fail to acknowledge how things work don’t you?
It doesn’t matter who’s interested or not.
M60 120S was produced by General Dynamics itself.
M60 AMBT was R&D’d by a Turkish company.
And Israel’s Sabra is… Israeli with a Turkish purchaser.
Which is why AMBT has KE-W instead.
Ah yes,just like the M1A1 AIM?
A normal M1A1, produced by GDLS, that was requested by the Australian Government,all without DU armor or ammo because of the Non Proliferation Treaty
See,your rhetoric is falling pal
1 Like
The M60A3 SLEP (missnamed AMBT as the AMBT never existed) that is already at 10.0 in the US tree has gen 2 thermals as well and a 1200 hp engine.
Both the A3 SLEP and 120s tried to capture the Turkish market in their own time frame, with the SLEP being leased to a domestic sales team in an attempt to get it sold to Turkey (Standartbio, which is now a defunct shell company as it’s only purpose was to weasel into Turkish arms deals).
As it stands right now there is no reason as to why the 120S does not get it’s production metrics when the SLEP was only produced IRL with a 750 HP engine and a gen 1 TWS package and no 25mm cannon.
I see no reason as to why the 120S should not be held to the same standard as the M60A3 SLEP which already exists with KE-W at the same exact BR.
2 Likes
Thought I should toss this out here as well given this is the gunner’s sight found on the 120S.
Gunner’s Primary Thermal Tank Sight (GPTTS) (archive.org)
If the 120S is given a gen 1 sight by gaijin, this means the K1, K1A1 and K1A2 will also be forced to have a gen 1 sight when they should be gen 2 unless they are of the 400 ish first production K1s.
As shown here in the brochure, Raytheon states that the sight is currently being developed as a Generation 2 sight.
The first production run of the GPTTS ended in 1991 with the GPTTS being upgraded and subsequently replaced in Korean service by 1998, and the 120S only came to be in 2001, so there is no reason the only existing prototype of the 120S should be fielding a dated export sight first produced in 1986, and removed from production in 1991.
2 Likes
I’m pretty sure that M60 120S uses a standard M1A1 turret, which uses its standard optics.
So I’m hesitant to believe that they upgraded the optics for the prototype.
You still haven’t answered to my claim lmao, meanwhile Lolman used logic (something i don’t think you’re fully aware of) to further prove that you’re defending a straight up lie
Silence is not an admission of anything.
It’s a refusal to speak for secretive reasons.
It is not polite to cause strife.
The M1A1 or any M1 prior to the M1A2SEP lacked an eye safe LRF.
All marketing of the 120S / M60-2000 states that the tank as an eye safe LRF, something a pre-SEP Abrams cannot have as the first M1 LRF was a Nd:YAG laser, same as the first generaiton of the Leopard 2. The K1 series and by further measure any tank with the GPTTS uses a C02 laser, which is eye safe compared to a Nd:YAG laser. The SEP transitioned to a C02 laser for it’s LRF.
So by this measure the 120S / M60-2000 either has the upgraded sight of the SEP (it does not) or it must use the GPTTS made by the same company that is trying to sell the 120S / M60-2000, a sight system that was only gen 1 until 1991, 10 years before the 120S / M60-2000 was created.
Of course this entire issue is moot as well given we have the outright brochure of the vehicle posted here, which states the 120S uses a 240x4 gen 2 thermal system, which happens to line exactly up with the focal length of the GPTTS system after it’s upgrade.
4 Likes
well as i’ve been telling people gaijin has done everything in their power to nerf the abrams, you hit a abrams anywhere and it creates a shotgun like spall effect that one hits the entire tank.
1 Like
I should also add to this incredible response of yours that it literally can’t be that the engine on exhibition was the 750hp version
First of all,we have the shape of the engine compartment: it was clearly redesigned entirely,leaving only the air filters intact.
If you take any industrial class,you’ll soon learn that industries spend money on anything only if they are forced to make a change,and aesthetics rarely is a reason. As an industry,the less you pay foe something,the more profit you can make off of it. Therefore,if the compartment has changed,it clearly means that it was done so to accomodate a bigger engine (like the 1200hp one) and a bigger transmission (like the Abrams one)
Second reason is that GDLS knew of the Sabra III program: you don’t go into an exhibition with the knowledge of having a competitor that can outrun you
The Sabra III had a 1000hp engine,more powerful transmission,ERA,120mm cannon and CITV, among other things
It would’ve been suicidal for GDLS to bring a tank that had the same exact firepower of its competitor but with a worse mobility.
In fact,the decision of Turkey to choose the Sabra III upgrade came only years after the IDEF 2001,simply because the Sabra was more affordable and quick to produce,not because it was better than the M60-120S
Your affirmation and the lack of proof they cause are almost making one
2 Likes
Thank you for answering my concerns in a decisive manner.
I appreciate your post.