Electronics, obviously. /s
Sorry dude but talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.
The LFP is LEGIT larger. Where is the UPF or front side armor said to be upgraded or changed from previous variants?
I forgot they just started putting free weight and squat racks in there. You know to maintain soldier readiness and lethality.
1 Like
They just state “hull front”, and we know (from the report too), “Survivability against multiple threats by incorporating NEA, a new underbody IED kit and other vulnerability reduction measures to reduce the tank’s vulnerability to IEDs.”"
So most of that weight could be from the IED kit or CE protection, the NEA could be to the UFP specifically
Can we not get personal? Again I’m not trying to say what did or didn’t happen, I’m trying to understand what you are saying. If you can’t do that, then don’t talk to me please.
Couldn’t that also be due to the IED Kit / improvements? /srs
They’re storing 1 gallon sodas on the Abrams hull rack, hence the hull weight increase. :P
Seriously though, the skepticism around the hull protection improvement holds on really thin threads.
Also to add to this, take a look at developmental photos. Where were they testing the simulation weights? The LFP. This isn’t some pie in the sky idea.
2 Likes
I mean that same IED protection kit is still an increase in hull protection
The crew’s outfits and equipment got 2 tons heavier therefore the additional weight can’t be armour…
Must have been a new track design that all of the missing weight went too…
What they mean by hull weight, is actually 2 tons of paint for the V3’s hull…
Ah, was that mentioned in the report? I guess I missed it.
And I’m not saying it is. Don’t put words in my mouth please.
So in short you didn’t fully read the report before commenting?
Did not mean to be rude to you but every time we prove you wrong you move on to another argument, kinda like whataboutism by other means.
If it was an IED protection upgrade then there would be an addon plate to the floor, which is nowhere to be seen. What other kinds of improvements could there be? The driver weighing 1 ton more than the average?
3 Likes
Missed =/= didn’t read
Read again. Either be civil or don’t talk to me at all.
And that would still be an indirect hull protection upgrade
Frankly I’m beyond the idea of this specific bug report. I haven’t read the whole report myself. The point I’m making is gaijin is being needlessly obtuse about this whole situation, and this isn’t even something WE as the community should have to be doing. Again returning to my original point, their current methods and expectations are unrealistic to what is actually possible and need to change. Also as an aside, do you yourself think IRL the Abrams never received any form of upgraded LFP armor?
5 Likes
I’m not trying to “whataboutism”, I’m trying to understand separate points from you. All of what I’m saying is just trying to find reasoning for why Gaijin might reject it. All of my points extend from the same one, “do we know where weight went” or “where it came from”. As far as the estimations go, as I understand it, it just states “this is the weight increase of the hull” then assumes it is all LFP DU (or substituted w/ RHA)
Also I haven’t once denied any of your points directly. I never said you are wrong, I’ve conceded to certain points (LFP being tested w/ weights, no increase in underbody for IED prot., etc.)
I assume it did lol, doesn’t mean I’m going to say it did when I don’t know if it did, and I’m not going to say it didn’t when I don’t know if it didn’t.
2 Likes
Reading implies comprehension. if someone reads something and managed to miss important information, sounds more like skimming then actual reading.
4 Likes
Just found this where NEA is denoted into armor improvements and the IED kit https://blastinjuryresearch.health.mil/assets/docs/injury_prevention/fy16/vehicles/Enhanced_Underbody_Crew_Protection.pdf
Rej. Ground 1 is all about the dummy plates, but I can’t access one of the links and I don’t think it specified the LFP in the report. It is possible to read something and miss it though, and I admit that. If it is there and I missed it, fine I made a mistake and thats my bad.
1 Like
I can’t be bothered to write a bug report myself but here’s some more stuff for y’all:
Details of Polish FMS purchase stating armor is removable subassemblies (so not just more RHA somewhere)
And also, M1A2 turret weight is 26.9 US tons or 24.40 tons:
Subtract 24.40 tons from total weight of 62.05 tons (from here) and you get a hull weight of 37.65 tons
M1A2 SEPv3 turret weighs 31.5 tons US tons or 28.57 tons:
Subtract 28.57 tons from total weight of 66.77 tons (from here) and you get a hull weight of 38.2 tons. That gives you 38.2 tons - 37.65 tons for 0.55 tons in increase hull weight. Now, factor in the APU at 0.19 tons weight gain(from here) and then the titanium NBC door at 0.04 weight savings), you get 400kgs of difference in hull weight that is due to armor.
and that’s likely a large underestimation. The APU is not just purely added weight as the space it sits was not empty before. Some the og M1A2’s and early SEPs had the UAAPU there and on later SEPs and SEPv2’s, that space was filled with Hawker batteries. The M1A2 ingame model at the 62 ton weight actually has the UAAPU modeled and the UAAPU weighed 0.23 metric tons, more than the SEPv3 APU! (from here). So in actuality, the total increase in weight due to armor is 630 kgs.
((38.2 + 0.04 (titanium weight savings) + (0.23-0.19) (old vs new APU weights)) - 37.65 = 0.63 tons
The other elephant in the room is claiming the NEA or the weight is underbelly or IED protection. Again, not the case. See here:
In addition to armor protection upgrades to the Abrams Tank, the Next Evolution Armor (NEA) development effort also addressed both weight reduction and crew protection improvements for under-body blast (UBB).
So clearly armor protection upgrades under NEA are not the same as UBB and, most importantly, the UBB changes resulted in weight reduction, not gain! So again, the estimate of between 400-630 kgs being added to hull armor is likely an underestimation.
Of note, I did not include things like CROWs, radios, etc in this weight comparison as those are components of the turret and not the hull. Subtracting the turret weights out (based on their data plates) accounts for all that. And when it comes to the hull, the differences are far more minimal. If anything, updated wiring and LRUs reduces weight due to modern wiring rather than increase it. And the vast majority of wiring and LRUs are in the turret as opposed to the hull.
So if anyone wants to make a report be my guest. IDK what else to say.
For titanium weight reductions:
Spoiler
32 Likes