Oh wow you won on a technicality. The leopard still pens more, your point is nullified and you’re grasping at straws.
Notice how that source doesn’t only state TURRET armor. It says frontal.
The gun of the Leopard 2A6+ performs better, the round M829A2 performs better.
There was never a technicality, I was exclusively talking about the rounds.
You made it about the gun; extended the goalpost.
And in those statements there is no mention of DU outside the turret.
Which was proven by countless people on the forums.
SEP2 and below use conventional composite for the hull, which is why the mass increase from M1A2 to SEP2 is at most a ton. Vs the increased turret armor of M1A1 to M1A1 HC being 4.X tons.
SEP2 allegedly has a different arrangement for improved hull protection, but that has not been proven, only ever claimed.
I would address only some point
This is what i alway complain about modification research. It should sit fairly across the board
To put it bluntly it just Gaijin way to make you spent money to ease your pain from grinding.
As Gaijin rely on declassified infomation. which in turn has its problem as infomation they need would still be “classified”. Thus we’re stuck to what we had which is sweden source which “could” be export M1A2 armor for all we know.
And as many people point out before. Sweden did request Abrams with DU armor from US. But Arms and export control act restricting Sweden from getting the DU
Gaijin didn’t add M829A3 along with SepV2 saying it wouldn’t be any different from M829A2 (even though most know that M829A3 has proper Anti ERA tech unlike M829A2)
People already made Bug report. Suggest Gaijin should model them as volumetric protection
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hn6WHPVB7r3K
Most people agree to give First Abrams M833 since M774 was overperfrom and should be fix. Not to mention M735 still remain nerf.
1 Like
m829a2 also has anti era. its was designed to beat Kontact 5 the russians even admit this is possible.
m1 abrams should get M900 at this point theres no point even when theres a russia ntank with a round that lol pens just about every tank in the game. near its B.R
3 Likes
Yes, the best the US was willing to export. Which is worse than the DU armor fielded on domestic tanks.
This is an estimation, not based on actual data.
This one shows that the information in that table is not official, and is just from a Armed Forces Journal International issue in February 1989. It also says:
"Judging from my experience with the U.S. Army, many commissioned and noncommissioned officers today do not know enough about what their antiarmor weapons can do, or what they cannot do. (This should not be surprising because U.S. weapon performance and armor protection levels are not openly disclosed.)…
In response to the need for more awareness of the subject, Training Circular 90-16, Antiarmor Operations on the Integrated Battlefield, was written to provide a single, classified source of information on the effects of recent advances in U.S. and Soviet weaponry and armor protection. While TC is directed toward commanders and staffs at battalion level and higher, it is the company commanders and platoon leaders who much also understand their weapons’ capabilities and supervise the training, deployment, and employment or their antiarmor systems…
TC 90-16 is a more precise source of data for planning training exercises against armored vehicles."
In addition to that, it also implies that the data that the higher ups give their lower-level commanders/platoon leaders vastly understate the effectiveness of the US vehicles and/or vastly overstate the effectiveness of Soviet vehicles:
"The way you and your unit fight the first battle of the next war will set the tempo for the way it fights the remainder of the war. In the worst case scenario, if threat vehicles move into your engagement area, and you engage them with little or no success, two things will happen. First, the enemy will gain confidence in his equipment and his ability to defeat you. Second, your confidence in your weapon systems, and you ability to defeat the threat, will decrease.
If, on the other hand, the threat vehicles move into your engagement area and your soldiers engage them with devastating success, the threat’s second echelon, observing the destruction, will lose confidence in their equipment and their leaders."
So in short, the table shows unofficial numbers that are not precise and likely vastly underestimate the capabilities of US tanks.
First, second, or third generation DU ring a bell? The terms are so numerous I thought you’d know about it.
You mean ricochets all APFSDS into the overly exposed turret ring to oneshot the M1?
4 Likes
The main reason is the BR system, so all vehicles are matched against “near peers”, and not historical opponents.
So if something was historically dominant, then WT puts it at a higher BR than those opponents - same reason why WW2 heavy tanks don’t perform as they did “historically”
You’re looking at tests done by myself.
It clearly shows the UFP is resistant to even the absolute best APFSDS in the entire game, let alone the average APFSDS round at 10.3.
Because we know HAP-3 was implemented, which improves multi-hit durability.
But since armour fatigue isn’t modelled in War Thunder, it’s not relevant to the game.
Please read the sources correctly and don’t take stuff out of context as a low quality ‘Gotcha’ attempt.
Full qoutes are as follows: ‘‘This program upgrades M1/M1A1 tanks to the M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP) configuration. Therefore, for each M1A2 SEP produced, there will be a corresponding decrease in the Army’s M1/M1A1 inventory. […] The M1A2 SEP has improved frontal and side armor for enhanced crew survivability.’’
Armour improvements are relative to the M1/M1A1 vehicles.
No kidding.
All M1’s from the M1A1 HA onwards feature DU armour, and as I’ve already stated this is also represented in-game.
4 Likes
The Abrams line is underwhelming in WT because Gaijin makes it so.
They overcode Russian armor effectiveness while undercoding everyone else no matter how much information you provide to them.
This has been going on for years and will continue until someone else shows up with a tank game that actually treats all the vehicles with proper respect.
10 Likes
Yep i have heard that M829A2 was able to penetrate T-90A with Kontact 5 . But from what i have read about M829A2 . I’m not sure if M829A2 was build with Anti-ERA into it.
But in M829A3 case it was clear that it has Anti-ERA tip.
According to Gaijin M900 would certainly mean BR increase for M1 Abrams.
I would suggest Gaijin to implement a system where certain Modification are tied to vehicles BR
For example
M1 Abrams with M900 loaded > BR increase
M1 Abrams without M900 loaded > BR decrease
M900 is not necessary but the M1 should have had M833 since release. The RISE P and TTS should also get M833.
6 Likes
Probably because you’ve only played the Abrams.
1 Like
95% of M1 complaints come from US mains who have never played anything else and believe the grass is always greener on the other side.
Often it’s also people who’ve bought one or more premium M1’s on top of that.
6 Likes
I haven’t seen any indication that the armour package that was tested in the U.S. and it’s evaluation sent to Sweden is drastically worse than a domestic M1A2’s armour package.
Please feel free to share sources that show my sources are wildly off the mark, and what the true values should be.
This reeks of significant levels of Cope.
You want/need it to be true, therefore you believe it to be true, regardless of the fact that there is no underlying evidence to support that position.
In fact, there’s multiple sources which heavily hint to a contrary position.
You’re also giving me the strong impression that you overvalue the importance of armour protection based on gameplay in video games.
IRL other aspects such as the ability to spot a target first & hit a target first are of much greater importance than raw armour, many of the elements which make the M1A2 such a good tank IRL aren’t simply relevant in War Thunder, whether that be Battle Management systems, GPS, FCS, the VCSU, general visibility, crew comfort, intuitive layout/controls, etc…
Refer to my previous comment.
This has to do with multi-hit durability, and armour fatigue is not modelled in War Thunder, thus moot point.
Tell me you didn’t watch the clip without telling me you didn’t watch the clip.
The most powerful APFSDS round in the entire game cannot consistently penetrate the M1’s UFP at point blank range.
2 Likes
Contradiction.
Turret only, even though this source doesn’t say “improved turret front armor”
1 Like
Fuck your clip, you very clearly shot at the most angled part of the armor as some kind of point. However, you still even penetrated sometimes. Had you shot ANY HIGHER on that plate you’d have penetrated quite literally every time.
3 Likes
You have zero indication they were drastically similar either, and going off of the fact the US has literally never exported their DU armor I can be confident in saying it is much better.
Please explain sources that show you are actually correct.
TC 90-16 is classified and only reserved for higher-level officers → to set the pace of the next war, make sure to set up scenarios where you win with devastating success → make sure the information they are given puts your soldiers in the most likely scenario to win → massively overestimate the enemy’s capabilities and underestimate your own so that the only scenarios you get into are massively in your favor → the data shown in the table (while also being unofficial and likely based on non-DU export numbers) massively underestimates the armor and penetration of US vehicles.
It’s not that hard to follow.
And source to prove the armor solely provides such benefits?
You got unlucky with spalling and also aimed at the most angled part of the UFP, am I supposed to view this as a counterargument?
5 Likes
also, not on level ground
1 Like
There is a little bit of clue that they did upgrade export armor package after they lost the competition and Sweden choose Leopard 2.
It said that “The newarmor, Developed by the army, offers the same level of protection as depleted uranium armor used by US forces, but without using the controversial material.”
“The new armor is a much better package than provided in Sweden because we and the Army are smarter than we were then,” McVey said. “We have learned how to use materials and geometry to improve the armor protection from previous generations without having to get into the DU [depleted uranium] material.”
Doesn’t the obj 292 have the best mbt round in game?
2 Likes