They aren’t.
Why lie like that when this can be proven wrong so easily?
T-80BVM:
Shell fully stopped by fuel tank. Never entered inside the tank proper.
M1A2SEP:
3 Likes
Using two different angles and the protection analysis is extremely bugged. And does not show what actually happens.
You’re arguing in bad faith. T-80BVM Fuel tanks create 0 spalls while all M1 and Leopard fuel tanks do. As said, that’s because Gaijin made the steel plate protecting the fuel tank inside NATO tanks spall like crazy. This has been proven time and time again through datamine and only the most dishonest of people still say otherwise.
Russian tanks are overperforming in survivability in War Thunder. This is a fact. Doesn’t matter if you agree with that or not, it’s still an easily verifiable truth so deal with it.
6 Likes
Provide the data mines then.
It’s not though. Look at Europe’s lack of preparation. Look at how the US conformed it’s doctrines towards LIC. Do you really think Stryker was designed with the Russians in mind? (It was designed to bring mobile firepower to remote areas like Afghanistan). BRAT, TUSK (tank urban survival kit)…
Highly classified round, that is “lethal and operational dependent on engagement conditions”. We don’t know to what extent. I’m sure it’s good, and I bet the hull of the BVM is likely more vulnerable overall, I still don’t know if the entirety of the UFP would be penetrable. I’m sure the turret is still too tough to penetrate reliably. With the capture of the T-90A, I’m sure this will change soon enough.
The main problem is balance. And I think, given the fact that most of these armor upgrades offer minimal additional KE protection, something like the M829A4 with (700mm-ish pen?) would be part of a future balancing. The newest round Russia would get would be the 3BM60M on the T-90M (T-90M and T-90M Obr. 2020 are in the game files) would only give it a likely extra 50mm of penetration. Giving Western tanks penetration, and Russian tanks protection as their respective advantages. Seems balanced to me.
I honestly can’t be bothered right now. The thread is somewhere on the older forum. This subject has been talked to death already. You said so yourself:
“All fuel tanks absorb shots. Literally all of them.”
This is true, but where Russia never up-armored their fuel tanks, NATO did. And the armor layer around the fuel tanks only ends up shotgunning the entire crew when it shouldn’t. The shotgun effect can be seen in protection analysis or simply by jumping into a match and firing at an Abrams.
1 Like
How convenient. The data mines prove it but you can’t provide them.
3 Likes
What path am I looking for? There is a lot here.
Yes, the Stryker was designed partly with the Russians in mind as part of the post cold war force XXI mentality. The idea was to have light brigades that are easy to airlift and capable of responding very quickly to situations arising in the world, including large-scale conflicts. Afghanistan or the war on terror wasn’t even a thing by the time the Stryker was designed, my man.
The only reason why the US didn’t bother spending more on peer to peer fighting between 2000 and 2010 was because there was no credible opponent. Russia with its GDP of Italy(or Texas) has not been a peer threat since the fall of the USSR outside of nukes. And they still aren’t today. Only the rise of China has pushed NATO(but mostly the US) to refocus on large scale conflict since around 2010.
2 Likes
Leopard 2 user? Probably not like what i said earlier Leopard2 upgrades mostly towards against tanks like longer gun improve hull frontal armor and arrowhead on turret apart from PSO that only version of Leopard 2 that made for urban and LIC
And Abrams DU insert hull noone ever know how strong it is maybe even stronger than Leopard 2 + MEXAS-H who know? Since abrams that US sold to other country got stripped out it DU replaced with other material maybe Australia still have DU? But it might be good reason why
Challenger 2 might not do well against tanks like M1 and Leo2 does since it still use rifle gun
Leclerc this one very hard to find the info
I’m not talking conspiracies.
If it’s less than 100%, my point is proven.
Nothing is perfect. Western tanks have serious flaws too. Also, the flaw is specific to the carousel, and I’d argue the transmission secondarily. Hence part of the reason for the T-14 having a remote turret.
True, and the counter point is they have stopped more, in some cases, than expected. For example, the T-72B3 that survived multiple Javelin and NLAW hits back in May of 2022, near Popasnya.
Therein lies the problem, the majority of these armor kits are classified and evidence in public forums is difficult to quantify. I know at least TUSK is intended to reduce RPG-7 with PG-7VR penetration to a point where the base hull can stop it. CR2 side ERA is said to be capable of stopping MILAN according to the manufacturer. Game balance is another problem entirely. If accuracy is to be prioritized then so be it, adjusted BRs will follow.
I consider yellow pen indicator / ERA reduces penetration so hull array can stop it “barely” stopped. Irrelevant of semantic choice, the intent behind many of these urban applique kits is to reduce PG-7VR warhead penetration to a level where base hull array is not penetrated. I know TUSK is at least intended to stop PG-7VR. Currently they have trouble stopping Milan 1 (530mm) and AT-6 (560mm) without tandem effect.
Well, yes. But the first step is definitely to at least fix the CE protection. Exploring unintentionally beneficial spall thresholds and volumetric oddness is also something that should be looked at.
2 Likes
Yeah, partly. It’s basically the core of the BCT. The MGS was all about Afghanistan though. BRAT and TUSK are both reactions to Urban conditions in Iraq.
Equally as much as the opponent they were facing was a non-conventional guerilla in LIC environments.
Russia has the 8th largest GDP (a flawed metric btw) as of 2022, and is on track to surpass Texas by next year, and has already experience a 4.9% growth rate YoY compared to this time last year.
Russia outpaces Europe and America combined in potential tank fleet as well as active tank fleet. Per Bundeswehr reports in July, Germany only had 21,000 155 howitzer shells in its inventory. About 3 days of restrained artillery usage at current Ukrainian expenditure levels. Let alone the fact that Russia is now producing over 2 million shells a year, and out produces the entirety of both Europe and the USA by 70%.
The SMO in Ukraine is the reason why Europe is attempting to reindustrialize. Just look at the new SEP v.3 and why it was introduced. Or look at the Army war college’s report that based on the current conflict, the US would lose about 3,800 soldiers a day and needs to return to the conscription model. These are all conclusions based on the SMO, not some hypothetical conflict with China (which would be even worse).
1 Like
Single stage ATGM, no?
Bingo.
Gotcha.
Agreed 100%.
I always think of it that we don’t know how good the armor on NATO tanks is because the Russian ones are the only ones showing up in scrap yards lmao
3 Likes
Since Gulf War 1 when the T-72 in particular was shown be a bit crap - the same tired old refrain gets trotted out.
‘Oh they were export models’
‘The crews didn’t use them properly’
‘Whatabout -insert random AFV here-’
‘Upgraded models are equal to NATO tanks’
I’ve heard and read the same excuses through every modern conflict in the 90s, 00s, 10s, and now 2022 onwards.
Face it chaps. They have put more Russian metal (turrets) into orbit than the actual USSR space program. I can think of no sane individual who; when given the choice; would opt being in T-series vehicle over a Western equivalent in an actual shooting war.
The fact that in WT they appear to have magical powers over time and space (and spalling) is beyond farcical. I’m not even mad (it is a game at the end of day) - it’s just a sad joke by this point.
Some will remain forever unconvinced and that is their prerogative. Typing furiously at them in this thread won’t change their mind…
2 Likes
How it changes the fact, that in Gulf war there were old export models… Its not an excuse, its a fact.
1 Like
Sure… the iraqui version is literally worse than the t72A form the russian TT