It’s literally a non issue, appropriate disclosure statements and or relevant FOIA documentation are well known to them since it was turned up out of a UK manual acquired from a museum. and further was provided to a Techmod, I just don’t have it on hand to compile them into one image.
here’s another one for you, too.
And the bug report it was used in
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/BZtiBBaH7uwL
Sure, but that’s not specific to any particular Abrams’ and implies that there are few differences between the numerous potential array configurations let alone which implemented variant is equipt with what (e.g. XM-1(SAC),BRL-1, BRL-2, EAP, HAP-1,-2 , -3 etc.) and what they are composed of, let alone for either the Turret, or Hull array.
On a separate point the M1 KVT for example has a 105mm gun in place of the 120mm it should have. Which as a paper configuration probably has the wrong armor as well since its been adjusted
to be based on the ?A1? , not an A2 as it actually was.
Referenced above there are sources that claim that the liner is actually integrated into the NERA array itself in place of being a separately accountable internal item.
Further there is some evidence of the use of techniques that would reduce spall in comparison to RHA / HHA for the backplate, on top of the confirmed use of tessellating and repeating Ceramic, Rubber, Kevlar and Air based composite matrix layers that would reduce and assist with eliminating particular sizes of spalling, and so perform a similar role, and so the arrays themselves should probably be provided similar qualities in game to the stand alone Spall Lining.
Potentialy with some reduce ability against larger fragments, though its capacity to stop high velocity spall would be increased in comparison (energy imparted to a fragment depends on the share of mass of the system, thus light fragments travel faster, as the energy is conserved due to 1/2m*v^2)