War Thunder's M1 Abrams Controversy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 гру 2023
- Decal link: tinyurl.com/42thwzv3
The recently introduced M1A2 SEPv2 has created a bit of a stir in the WT community, with Gaijin yet again bungling public relations. Does the M1A2 have DU hull armor or spall liners? Who knows.
Check the channel "About" section for the link to the creator of my profile picture.
Songs used (in order from first to last):
Command and Conquer: Generals OST
Second channel: / @spookstoon
Patreon: / spookston
#warthunder #tanks #warthundergameplay
War Thunder's M1 Abrams Controversy - Ігри
Still extremely busy with the holidays but I managed to throw this together. Happy New Year!
Happy New Year, Spook
Can you play the M48 stock
Happy new year Spookston keep doing content and good luck for this year cya
Happy new years, wishing everyone a very good 2024
Happy new year, pookie spookie
A friendly reminder the April Fools event vehicles had a higher BR than their current in game counterparts
what april fools event vehicles
you mean like the ones from mobile infantry?
@skipslash7367 no, when modern tanks weren't even in the game yet and was just in a april fools event
@@skipslash7367 2017 april fool's T-90A and Leopard 2A5 were at 14.0BRs
Gaijin convinced their playerbase can't count to 12
@@KekusMagnus thanks, unlike the vague, slightly condescending response from the other guy
Loving Spook’s character arc from the HSTV-L Guy to the M1 Abrams guy
he grows so much
Yeah but how about he goes to being straight from being gay.
@@mr.waffentrager4400 How about you go from being cringe to based?
But in our hearts, he's still the CAS Magnet Guy.
Love how Gaijin confidently make up things for many vehicles without any hesitation and explanation in the game but super serious about the Abram and some specific vehicles and claimed “do not believe” and “do not know the value”. Gaijin logic is mind blowing for me.
Im starting to think they want to frustrate people enough for them to leak classified documents of NATO vehicles
Its russian logic I can't see any other explanation for why this has been done when it puts minor tech trees in major difficulty.
Edit: Maybe russian logic is being a bit too vague but having played 9.3 USA and France, I can definitely say that there is some major Bias going on to Soviet vehicles.
A real shame because these terrible winrates are not being addressed.
maybe the things you think that's made up is actually true from advisors that gaijin gets info from. and the things made in terms of balance isn't close to being needed for M1 abrams
they clearly dont want to have us vehicles do well cause propoganda or whatever, russian tanks can only do well in the video game world clearly
@@Sevastous Advisors? Like apparatchik whose job it is to ensure public figures represent Russia in the best possible light?
Should be noted that Abrams are noted to be spooky quiet for a tank in IRL so the noise decrease would definitely be a good and accurate buff
Spookston literally mentioned that in his last M1 Video about how it came to be. Its one of the main reasons the US army took the turbine engines over diesel was because it was quieter, more fuel efficient, and allowed for a universal fuel across the AF and Army.
The Abrams is really loud when you’re close to it, but once you get a few hundred metres away from it it goes silent because it’s a turbine, so the length of the sound waves become smaller very quickly the further you get away because of how high pitched it is
I can verify that Abram’s are super quiet, Bradley’s and 113s are far louder at distance
@@RRAAZZAAhigher frequency sound doesn't travel as far through the air or ground as lower frequencies. That's why the Abrams is louder on paper, but quieter in practice, and also why it's nicknamed The Whispering Death
@@skyraider87 I literally watched an ex Abrams commander talk about the Abrams and he said it’s really loud close up, but once you’re a kilometre away it’s dead silent
I was a 19Kilo. There was no visible spall liner in the turret on M1A2 SEP. We were however given "chicken vests" which is anti spall vest, and normally in Iraq the TC and loader wore plate armor if they were open hatch. The noise from the US turbine engine is a joke considering the Russian turbine engines are quiet. As for adding Armor to the Abrams and GJ saying it would break torsion bars..... every platoon had a mine plow tank. The breast plate and plow weighed a lot. It did not break control arms, or torsion bars. They just needed more track maintenance.
Usually the ARV/mine clearing vehicles weigh less as they usually dont have guns, ammo, FCS, and less armor.
@@russiants1668 revolutionary concept: slapping a mine plow on a regular tank without any other changes. MIND BLOWING!
Do you believe the turret armor to be incorrectly modeled for any DU armor in game?
From what i gather Abrams had a kevlar one.
And just because your a tanke doesnt mean you know eveyrthinf about it.
I worked with tankers who didnt know the details of everything outside thier area.
Mechancis would know other aspects better etc eyc.
@@ruska9773 no fucking shit sherlock, how'd ya figure this one out? Now google "abrams mine plow" and sit the fuck down.
You missed probably the most infuriating part of Gaijin's dev blog on the M1: They claimed the main reason the M1 cannot have a DU armour is because the suspension wouldn't be able to handle the weight. But they modeled the weight of the DU armour anyways, just without the armour....
if your talking about the m1a2 it had DU armor on the cheeks, protection analysis 3BM60 on the cheeks of the m1a1 vs the m1a2, the xray doesnt say DU nor does it say more mm of NERA protection but 3BM60 wont pen m1a2 cheek unlike the m1a1
If your talking about the hull DU armor then ignore this
@@paperthik9262 I'm talking about the fact that in their post to debunk the DU inserts for the hull, Gaijin's main argument was that even if the US made DU hull armour the M1's suspension would implode from the added weight.
But then also modeled that extra weight in the game. Like not the armour, the weight of the SEP2 was increased by the weight of the DU hull armour if it had been added. They added the drawback of the extra armour by making it heavier, but not the actual fucking armour.
@@hqwefg i though the higher weight was due to all the extra era that was ontop of the normal sepv1's era, or is that wrong
@@paperthik9262 Not unless those ERA plates are made of dark matter, it also just so happens to weigh the same amount that Gaijin gives as an example for the DU armour's weight and why the suspension cannot handle that specific weight.
The specific weight which is also modeled on the current SEP2 in the game. And is not present on the SEP1.
idk the way gaijin does the weight of vehicles is super weird, like the 122A is 64.5T but the 122B+ is 64.9T but the leo 2A7 is around 68T i think its just not consistant
What I don’t understand is gaijin using the “never used is service” excuse like dawg y’all had the MAUS and E-100 for sale at one point never used in service means nothing
Knowing Gaijin if anyone asked for the M10 Booker they'd say its too recent of a vehicle to accurately represent in the game... As they slowly push the Sprut and the 2s38 under the table
And the Ariete AMV, which came out last year
Where is my M8 Thunderbolt, goopchin?
Shoigu! Gerasimov! Why is all my shit locked behind scam paywall!!!
Its not really anything new@@Paronak
@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 im so mad too but i dont want to pay 500 gazillion gaijin bucks to get it
Don’t forget the challenger 3 which isn’t even in service yet
Attempt number 13 at getting Spookston to play any tank with a dozer blade, the catch is he has to dig in before he can engage. Movement around the map is allowed, but he has to dig in again before reengaging targets.
This would be funny af, just spookston panicking to engage the dozer and dig down 😂
this might be the best and funniest idea ever lmao
This is a great idea!
"oh a bad guy, better make myself a trench"
Get it done with strv 103.
More non gaming videos = Spookston is healthier.
Spookston's tactile contact with grass per square-inch has increased.
Agreed
This isn't even about there being DU in the hull, it's completely ignoring the improvements in the conventional composite array that happened from the M1A1 to the HC to the A2. So you have tanks running around in Mod.0 Abrams hulls. Maybe getting more chemical resistance and multistrike capability isn't all that "wow" in WT with all the APDSFS flying around, but still.
i love that gaijin excuse is that SEP V2 didn't have DU armor so it would be unrealistic cuz it was only on 5 models but at same time the AZUR kit was fitted on the Leclerc S2 in game despite it being only a one off demonstrator and it actually entered service on the SXX1 ............................................. zZz zZz
Happy new years anyways !
Not only that, you've got stuff like the Ho-Ri Production that doesn't exist, a lot of Russian tanks just outright have stuff they shouldn't have on them.
Them also ripping the stabilizer of the T25 because "it didn't have it" despite there are papers that say it did.
But Happy New Years
Japan, Italy, France and Israel didn't even get new top tier tanks and the leclerc SXXI and AZUR were just moved to rank 8 while S1 and S2 stayed at rank 7
Yeah those nations you mentioned in my opinion have it worse...I'm more familiar with Japan but all the Type 10s have going for them is that 4 sec reload....
blows my mind that they left the S1 and S2 at rank 7, why didnt they just give them stock darts so they werent the only 11.7 MBTs with stock heatfs
Well what MBT's can they add for top tier?
Get this now, in order to get rank 8 Leclers and that top tier SPAA you have to play lineup of first two Leclers and Roland which is 10.0. There is no other alternative to grinding top tier, there is no premium rank 7 either 😂😂.
Fr, Italy only got a premium tiger this update
The turbine should be quieter at distance but louder up close. There is a good video of an m1a2 and a Hellenic leo2a4 driving near eachother and from a bit of distance the leopard is much louder than the Abrams but up close the Abrams is more noticeable. This is because of the way the high pitch tones from the turbine not carrying as well as the sound from the traditional diesel piston motor in the leopard.
This is the most galling thing, it's intuitive, elementary-school science you learn organically in the real world.
But I was an M1 Abrams tanker (only for 4 years) but remained active duty in the Army for 15. Once you break line of sight and get beyond, 3,4,5 hundred meters or so, the loudest thing about the Abrams are the TRACKS not the ENGINE note. And to my recollection the Bradley has louder tracks, despite weighing far less, that struck me as counter-intuitive in my very first months in South Korea.
Curious if any veterans agree. I can't speak to Russian stuff in person to compare Russian-v-American, but the only time the Abrams engine PITCH is low is on start up. After that, it's consistently whiny; high.
The problem with the hull upgrades is that there are plenty of sources saying that there are multiple generations of these armor upgrade packages, and they usually add one with each sep iteration.
The tanks have been increasing in weight (gaijin themselves admit this) indicating at least a slight improvement in armor performance, yet the SEPV2 has the same armor stats as the M1A2 which predates it by over 30 years. To think that the most well-funded military in the world would simply sit on its laurels for that long without even modest increases in protection performance is just laughable. We're getting weight increases but with no actual advantage from getting them. We don't have actual concrete data about what these improvements do for the tank (Of course not, it's fucking classified because these vehicles are currently in service) but that's never stopped gaijin from adding features that make sense for the sake of balance.
Gaijin's argument about adding weight with armor to the torsion bar is just laughable. The tanks are already the correct weights, they just need to update the protection accordingly.
The weight increases can be atributed to new APU unit and technologies which weigh alot...
@@interpl6089 yes but also the composition of the armor matters as well and you aren't gonna sit here and tell me that modern armies keep the same composition of armor arrays in the turret not counting materials that are classified that we will never know that are in the hull and turret even with du inserts
@@interpl6089 Not as much as you'd like to think. Majority of the electronics have stayed relatively the same due to the fact that nothing completely mind boggling has been invented for it yet, and its not like they're completely devoid of any and all electronics before the addition. They tend to remove the unnecessary portions and replace them with the upgraded. If you know anything about old electronics they were extremely bulky and heavy.
The issue with the weight argument is just blatant disregard for the information on what's been happening in the tanks upgraded service life. Not to mention the spall liners which would be a big priority for the tank and has been installed in almost all editions of them. The reason why most people claim this even though its classified is because of the multiple other military vehicles that are severely overweight that have them. As an LAV commander we realistically shouldn't have them compared to say the M1A2 SEPv2, but low and behold we do. The best example would be the up armored HUMVEE its quite literally to underpowered for its already substantial weight but they have Kevlar liners on all of the doors and roof.
Mentioning electronics, I can't remember if it was SEP2 or SEP3 that ended up gutting the old wiring out in place of lighter weight stuff, like data cables being replaced by fiber optics. It ended up pretty drastically reducing weight of the tank on it's own.
Top tier premiums are kinda iffy for me. They offer a good way to grind but they make top tier awful to play due to one death leavers. Maybe put a level requirement on them or something? I have no idea how to even begin fixing this issue
Larger maps for top tier first, cause my lv 100, 5.7k hour ass is not gonna bother spawning in back if I die 2 seconds of moving from the spawn due to map design
@@AHappyCubfair point like sinai theres like 5 mbts spawncamping every game
@J.G.Wentworthnope. There is no way I'm grinding the AMX-32 agianst a whole team that gets x3 spawns in the Turms or 2S38.....
@J.G.Wentworth That would only make things worse. Giving noobs a bunch of respawns in tanks they don't know how to use will just end up with the enemies getting a huge number of free spawn points, which means after all the noobs are dead not only are the players that actually worked to get to that BR going to lose because half their team is gone, but they are going to get rolled hard since their enemies have so many spawn points now there is no hope of leveling the playing field. Also Gaijin also gave all premium tanks a bunch of back-ups for free and that didn't change anything, why would letting people respawn a third time for free have any further effect?
Honestly the only way to prevent the issue with high tier premiums is simply not to have them in the game, but it is too late for that.
@@AHappyCublarger doesn't mean better. Some of the best maps are smaller. Most are just horribly designed
My understanding is that TUSK is explicitly only to be used in urban combat because it's just dead weight in any other scenario.
So I totally see why gaijin decided that would be an appropriate capstone to the US.
but of course all the soviet tanks are taken exactly at face value ignoring any and all possible faults they actually had, lets just add an urban combat package to our fucking tank fighting game
You would be right, TUSK is an acronym for Tank Urban Survivability Kit after all. If Gaijin had the brains to make it an option on the SEP, it confuses me as to why they suddenly flip-flopped that on the SEP v2. Also, it's worth noting that there are other kit add-ons that it got that they could spend time on like the mine clearing blade and the multi-pronged dozer blade. Is it more important? No. But it would be nice to have.
Sep v2 also has a suite of electronic warfare capabilities. It jams signals within roughly 100m of the tank to prevent the control of drones, or the remote activation signal for an IED, it also jams enemy radio.
Consider that in warthunder. Drones stop working within 100m of the SEP, enemies can't radio for artillery within 100m. Its nothing huge. But it'd be something.
@@vanillaicecream2385On that same coin. The Abrams is taken at face value aswell, and that’s got everyone mad. Either they should, or shouldn’t do that. Make up your mind. I just want the game to be balanced, if they can meaningfully buff the Abrams I’m happy with it. If not, it’s a good tank, and just gotta wait for prem players to stop playing the team.
@@Error-5478 Pretty sure modern systems can overcome the jamming as they have jamming resistance...
I love how Gaijin outright put in vehicles that never saw production or will give vehicles ammo and features that were never used but then clutch their pearls at the idea of giving 1 tank UA. On top of this, instead of fixing inconsistent ammo performance, they wanna add a feature that would just make it worse. But nonetheless, im sure the Russia and Germany mains think all this is perfectly balanced.
It's not perfectly balanced...but that's top tier for you.
Yup its all balanced until german main or russian main complain about their “skill issues”
@@picksleet9268 You mean when they just tell you that you're bad at the game because their blatantly more powerful equipment that may or may not even exist is unkillable half the time.
They are anti American and deserve and investigation.
@@aiedenoldstien9751yes the classic "US mains are bad" or "just learn to aim lol". I honestly hope they are just trolling, since the whole conversation is about weakspots being too big. Meaning that they are telling us to learn to aim while not having to aim themselves.
Hot take:
You should only be allowed to purchase a top tier premium vehicle if you have at least a rank V tech tree vehicle in at least 1 nation.
As a certified racist I approve of this message
dude honestly yes please they need this
No. I buy top tier because I only have an interest in modern vehicles. I'm not spending months grinding through WW2 outdated crap before I get to the good, modern equipment.
Sounds great, just one problem though. That would cost them potential money. And at the end of the day they are a company.
Good for us, not for noobs and gaijin thus it wouldnt even be considered
Prototype M1A1HC with DU hull armor
Here are the calculations I have done to come up with an estimate for what kind of protection their hulls would possess.
M1 hull offers 380 mm eRHA vs KE, according to declassified CIA report from 1980s.
M1 hull armor composition:
1. 31.75 mm RHA
2. 360 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
Properly designed spaced armor or composite armor increase the efficiency of rear steel plate by 40%.
Long rod gain at 40°: 1.062
RHA contribution:
(31.75 + 1.4*101.6)/cos40°/1.062=213.9 mm
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
380-213.9=166.1 mm
BRL-1 NERA volumetric efficiency:
166.1*cos40°/360=0.3534
M1 turret armor composition:
1. 38.1 mm RHA
2. 360 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
Long rod gain at 30°: 1.033
RHA contribution:
(38.1 + 1.4*101.6)/cos30°/1.033=201.6 mm
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
0.3534*360/cos30°=146.9 mm
201.6 + 146.9 = 348.5 mm
M1 turret provides 348.5 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° front arc.
M1 IP / M1A1 turret armor composition:
1. 38.1 mm RHA
2. 800 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
146.9*800/360 = 326.4 mm
201.6 + 326.4 = 528 mm
M1 IP / M1A1 turret provides 528 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° frontal arc.
M1A2 turret provides >600 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° frontal arc, according to Swedish tank trials report.
Swedish tank trials reported M1A2 hull to be >350 mm.
600*380/350 = 651.4 mm
Therefore we can infer that >600 mm may mean that actual protection may be as high as 651.4 mm eRHA vs KE.
651.4 - 528 = 123.4 mm
600 - 528 = 72
(123.4 + 72)/2= 97.7 ≈ 100 mm
So the addition of DU (on tanks used by USA) or tungsten alloy (on export tanks) as part of HAP-2 / EAP-2 armor composition, increases protection by 72 to 123 mm in comparison to BRL-1 / EAP-1 armor composition.
From this we can infer that hull armor of 5 prototype M1A1HC tanks with DU inserts in their hulls, provides 452 to 503 mm eRHA vs KE.
And thats just open source data, im sure the reality is way better protection.
I remember seeing this comment on reddit and wishing it was compact enough to screenshot and show others how bullshit this game is. Was also thinking about it the whole time hoping spookston somehow stumbled on it. I hate echo chamber mentality and I can understand things not actually being the case but it's reflected as the case in the game without the change being delivered, and that's fucking infuriating.
@@maxinmaniac American players tend to buy a buttload of premiums and if this is how they're treated in kind, ppl better stop or they'll just become gaijin's wallet cucks
@@GoonyMclinux It's not just open source data, there's plenty of primary source documentation available on those older variants. Those values are highly accurate and I'm sorry to say, but coming to the conclusion that in reality the armour is much better based off of absolutely nothing, is pure Cope.
@@JamesVDBosch you know what's more of a cope? THE CAPABILITIES OF THE T90M
The end conclusion is that the Sep v3 needs added which actually adds armor upgrades of sorts
It's not of sorts, it's definite armor upgrades
The only thing its getting is a APU. Nothing else to add. The Army is basically skipping it to give to most bases and going straight to he Sep V 4
@@warbossbenny6877 the m1a2 sep v3 gets the NGAP which should make it lighter with similar protection with DU inserts or just go straight to the v4 so it can have improved gunner sights
Im pretty sure the sepv4 was canceled
@@warbossbenny6877the SEP V4 doesn't exist anymore, they are skipping it for the M1E3
Gaijin "Don't fuck up US Vehicles whilst buffing and modeling Paper Specs of Russian vehicles" challenge: Literally Impossible
No one:
Gajin: "This exist"
Playerbase: "Source?"
Gajin: "My source is I made it the fuck up."
@@aiedenoldstien9751 "It came to me in a dream"
Yeh, especially when you look at what happens in Ukraine, it becomes outright absurd (if extremely tragic of course). Soviet/Russian vehicles getting torn aport, blowing into pieces together with their crew half the time, while even the "poorly protected" Bradley manages to drive over mines and takes hits, but almost always protecting the crew. Or the rare reports (little public info) about MBTs like Leo2s taking multiple hits that wouldve wrecked soviet/russian tanks...
@@termitreter6545
Stop watching propaganda media too often. I hear it damage brain cells
@ukrainianwarfare44 dude literally said nothing about the Abrams. He mentioned the Bradley and Leo.
Also saying you've seen a bunch of footage. I have too. A lot of the Russian mbt destructions I've personally seen are ammo cookoffs.
Thing is, M1A2 SEP and SEP V2 DID get improved hulls, in 2002... just not DU. I'll have to have a hunt for the specific document since I'm planning on talking about this myself.
I agree on giving it either Trophy APS or just skipping to the SEP V3 (especially since SEP V1 can and should get the '02 hull upgrade anyway), gotta disagree on M829A3 not working against Relikt though - there are definitely places on the T-80BVM at least that A3 can punch through and A2 can't. T-90M has a bit better composite armor coverage on the hull that might make it more resilient, and the lower profile autoloader, but like you say; there's plenty of T-80Us and T-72B3s running around too.
I'd also disagree on giving the SEP V2 a DU hull anyway, but that's just me. There are plenty of historical inaccuracies, but I'd prefer we advocate for fixing THEM rather than adding another...
Give it the ability to remove TUSK II obviously (that should've been a no-brainer... good job Gaijin!), make blowout panels work if you have HEAT loaded (didn't even know that was an issue), improve the UFP ricochet issue... and I'd honestly be up for giving the Stryker MGS the "double spall-liner". Thing would be freaking insane, and there are always other vehicles that could come in its place at 9.0 - 9.7 if it went up.
Good luck adding M10 Booker before we even know how many rounds the thing can carry, unless that information has been released somewhere? I know the program specified at least 21 rounds, and we know the M10 carries MORE than that, but I haven't seen anything that'd lock down a reasonable number between say 28 to 40... who knows? I know everyone carries like 20 rounds maximum at top tier anyway, but still, Gaijin won't go for that. There's other options for US support vehicles sure, Thunderbolt or Griffin TD with the 120mm, Bradley COMVAT with the 45mm CTA cannon (if Gaijin can get penetration data, I haven't looked) or the 30mm Bushmaster, LAV-600, Sheridan with the TTS upgrade, Stingray maybe, etc... but M10 is probably a bust, at least for the foreseeable future.
M10 would be a bit shit anyway. For War Thunder purposes, it's a slower, heavier XM8 that MIGHT be able to withstand the 2S38's dart at range... ... and that "might" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there!
What about the allegedly built-in spall liner? Apparently, there's supposed to be either Kevlar or something similar in the armor itself, not like a rubber coating or anything like he mentioned in video. Someone i saw claimed that on penetraing shots, you can see the fiber from whatever it is in the hole. I've seen a lot of people say this, and i was hoping he'd address it in this video.
Ignoring whether or not it even has one, i don't think they should be in the game in the first place and i doubt they're anywhere near as effective irl as they are in war thunder.
@@phwink5754 Spall liners are are kinda like volumetric shells/armor - they WOULD be a good thing to have if Gaijin didn't half-arse and butcher their implementation... as always! At the very least, now that we DO have spall liners... ... CAN WE MAKE RUSSIAN AMMO RACKS F**KING EXPLODE AGAIN!!!
I've never seen anything concrete that suggests Abrams has a spall-liner, at least not a kevlar one, and I'd tend to trust Abrams crewmen and commanders more than the kinda sketchy info that suggests it does have one. What WOULD surprise me though is if a DU-armored tank didn't have ANYTHING to reduce/contain fragmentation. That sounds like a pretty pants situation for the crew. Depleted Uranium's self-sharpening and pyrophoric characteristics, coupled with the potential for blood poisoning... bad joojoo.
Abrams crewmen do have anti-spall body armor, especially the commander, which Gaijin could model I guess, but I'd be almost certain that the inner armor lining has something to contain DU fragments at the very least.
The Abrams has built in spall liners behind every composite insert. Its part of the composite arrays itself and is integrated whithin the armor.@@theScottishKoala
Yeah! Would enjoy seeing your take on this topic.
@@theScottishKoala Found some sources Sep Upgrade gave the side armor significant protection for little to no weight, I would love to see that 2002 source for upgraded hulls.
Give it M829A3, fix the turret ring, make the ERA optional, and call it a day.
Seriously, these are simple fixes that will vastly improve the Abrams.
Agreed, also they can give it a vest thing modification like the helis have.
And Trophy.
100% chance that gaijin scared to add the M829A3 since it can defeat ERA
what is the russian tanks biggest advantage
@@csorbalaszlo1920 They already said they are not modelling the anti ERA tip. It will just be a better M829A2
@@shadowguy1112 so basically going to be pointless
The “Germany suffers” statement just got a whole lot more ironic now because they never did
"Germany suffered" cuz they were ass at the game
@@CPTRailfan german players still complaining that gaijin hates germany whilst usa players on a daily get fucked over
@@CPTRailfannow is América time
Average suffer: **Drives at TOG's, Hellclaps, and Fem10 camping spawn corner**
**dies**
**respawn**
**repeat**
The one Tiger that shows up and knows how to angle: *bloody fields of dead TOG*
Everyone suffers against 2S38 and turms spam, and even if you clear the field enjoy premium KA-50s and SU-25k's spawn killing you from 10km out.
With the Turbine engine I would like to add that Yes turbine engines are very loud. But they are really only very loud if you're in the direction that the exhaust is pointed towards. In which case the Abrams is to the rear. Meaning if you're behind an Abrams you should have no problem hearing one. But coming from any other direction a Diesel engine is louder. This is one of the reasons why the Abrams was nicknamed "Whispering Death." I've been on large scale military training exercises and could see and feel an Abrams coming before I could hear it. And when I could start hearing the tank it was the clanking noises of the tracks and still not the engine. But boy was it loud when it finally went past. We all started joking that a jet just did a low flyby.
There's a bug report that got through recently that argued that the Abrams should have an "Integrated Spall Liner" which from my understanding is more like spall protection within the armor itself that reduces spalling internally rather than a physical "liner" like how it would be found in Russian tanks. There's a big ongoing debate in the forums about it - curious to see which direction that goes.
I can't be 100% certain on that information regarding the M1A2, but I can say we have them on the inside of our LAV-25s which doesn't add as much weight as people would assume.
The sepv2 has a spall liner around its ammo only, so I'd be interested how that goes too lol
@Tosicc567 that's the only visible spall liner, the rest is hidden behind the crew compartment 'casing'
@@specc_s1452 A bunch of US tankers that actually serve with them have confirmed it doesnt have one tho, thats as primary source as you can get
@Tosicc567 yes and another bunch of also currently serving tankers have confirmed it does aswell, i literally asked a guy a week ago
British Players who have been witnessing the atrociously inaccurate Challenger modelling for years now: "First time?"
Got my first nuke yesterday. I'm very proud of myself
Congrats bro
Congrats
W!
Well done!
Congrats
Spall liners definitely didn't need to be added at all, like even the LOSAT's missile barely does anything against the liners. At least it's not like in the dev server where you literally had to hit components directly to even consider damaging them
I like the idea of modelling internal elements like the turret basket. A lot of tanks like the Challenger have a LOT of stuff in there that would help. I'm sure other tanks do too.
I never any of this. I knew about the reload thing but not any of this.
From the way Gaijin has handled it, it seems like they wanted to save DU for the SEP 3 but did not want to confirm a timeline for when it would be added (as it will be added at some point)
more ERA tiles that don't really do that much other than add more dead weight, guess I'll call that the Challenger syndrom.
Friendly reminder that the Object 279 can UFP and LFP the Abrams (despite its stat card saying it lacks anywhere near the angled performance to do so.)
That's the Russian main "Skill issue" generator for you. The most op tank in all of Russia, but people who main the tank or Russia don't know anything about it or how it works. Whatever Gajin says about it is just true. Not the fact there is no physical documentation we can look at for the tank.
@@aiedenoldstien9751the main OP tank you cannot access to without selling a kidney. How many wheeled or basically anyhow interesting vehicles that nation see in the game? Slightly more than zero?
@worldoftancraft Russia has a lot of interesting vehicle concepts. The only issue is that most of them never work or have wildly unrealistic expectations.
Plus most of Russia's wheeled vehicles aren't active fighting vehicles. They may have a gun or two, but most are for transport in one way or another.
The actual turreted wheeled vehicles Russia use are going to be really hard to balance in the game. Because even the BTR they added still is in an awkward spot. (Surprised they didn't update it and give it a stabizer.)
@@aiedenoldstien9751 Ah! so that's why I have fifty shades of shooting above a LeoRat (since when I shoot on move I frequently stomp over a bump and the stabilizer cannot force the gun down enough due to «not that much problematic» depression of the gun).
@worldoftancraft That's because Russia is too happy has a nation to have sad tanks.
None of their tanks have that much. Plus adding too much of an angle to the turrets vertical drive makes glaring weakpoints.
I think all of your idea on the SEPv2 could be great, the M829A3 and APS would make it unique and they need to give it the option to delete the TUSK kit. the turret basket and blow up panel rework need to be implemented too.
PLS gaijin give the SEPv2 APS and removable TUSK
Turret ring fix too please
I think the snail should add in more interesting/funny vehicles to the game mainly for minor nations (Including the UK and former colonies) for example the British bishop tank or the tracked rapier missile system
*b o b s e m p l e*
@@abas656thegodemperor9 that thing would have a br of .3
@@keelled you mean 12.3?
@@pershing3346 that would be incredibly funny
@@keelled that thing would have a br of :3
Community- Here's all this open source info on why the M1 should be better than your letting it be.
Gaijin- sorry but no
Kremlin- Russian tank STRONG
Gaijin- your absolutely right!
If it was a Russian tank, it would be fixed already
Yeah like IS-7 oh wait!
I think adding armour to the crew itself is a great idea, I’ve never even thought of this but it makes perfect sense and would stop one shots as much
this is already implemented in the form of crew skills and vitality. I sincerely doubt they will change this.
ive seen so many crew just eat like a 75mm shot and be like light yellow they dont need armor they are the armor lol
@@Starwalker-dm4mgyou can also research flak jackets for many planes and some helicopters as well
@@Starwalker-dm4mg They have body armour as a researchable modification for some helicopters. Why not for ground vehicles?
@@xxfalconarasxx5659 Because I imagine Cas players may complain about the fact their 20mm through the roof of a tank doesn't kill the gunner when they hit the loader.
"it starved to death"
brother that goes for every war thunder player not only USA
Pretty interesting whats going on just hopefully it can all be resolved quickly but thanks Spookston for entertaining and educating us (and being able to make this video during busy holidays)
*Happy New Year And Holidays Everyone!*
Apparently I have wildly misunderstood the existence of spall liners, I thought various types were pretty much standard in tanks since late WW2
i've been inside an abrams when there were military exercises in Germany back in 2012 and it only had spall protection inside the ammo stowages
The abrams spall liner isn’t necessarily a visible one and that’s not what people are talking about, supposedly there’s a rubber layer within the tank adhered to the thin metal interior that prevents secondary spall by basically acting like a “glue” that keeps the thin metal from developing too much spall. It’s effectively “no armor best armor” kind of mentality
@@theliteralworst9416 i just said that i was in the that tank and all I saw was bare metal, no rubber, no polymer, no fancy space tech material, i can tell metal from rubber, i'm not mentally retarded
i think a big issue is that Gaijin has no Data to base the Effectiiveness of DU armor.
for the T90M they could just reuse the Armor of the T90A and beef it up a bit
there is also a ton of Data for Russian Tank Armor aviable, with Western Designs its a lot harder (please dont start leaking Documents again)
Actually it is pretty simple, just give the hull composite the same multiplier as the turret composite which in game already has DU, the hull would have about 500 mm of protection against APFSDS
@@Maverick966 would be too OP with the 5s reload
@@Maverick966 Prototype M1A1HC with DU hull armor
Here are the calculations I have done to come up with an estimate for what kind of protection their hulls would possess.
M1 hull offers 380 mm eRHA vs KE, according to declassified CIA report from 1980s.
M1 hull armor composition:
1. 31.75 mm RHA
2. 360 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
Properly designed spaced armor or composite armor increase the efficiency of rear steel plate by 40%.
Long rod gain at 40°: 1.062
RHA contribution:
(31.75 + 1.4*101.6)/cos40°/1.062=213.9 mm
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
380-213.9=166.1 mm
BRL-1 NERA volumetric efficiency:
166.1*cos40°/360=0.3534
M1 turret armor composition:
1. 38.1 mm RHA
2. 360 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
Long rod gain at 30°: 1.033
RHA contribution:
(38.1 + 1.4*101.6)/cos30°/1.033=201.6 mm
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
0.3534*360/cos30°=146.9 mm
201.6 + 146.9 = 348.5 mm
M1 turret provides 348.5 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° front arc.
M1 IP / M1A1 turret armor composition:
1. 38.1 mm RHA
2. 800 mm BRL-1 NERA
3. 101.6 mm RHA
BRL-1 NERA contribution:
146.9*800/360 = 326.4 mm
201.6 + 326.4 = 528 mm
M1 IP / M1A1 turret provides 528 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° frontal arc.
M1A2 turret provides >600 mm eRHA vs KE in 60° frontal arc, according to Swedish tank trials report.
Swedish tank trials reported M1A2 hull to be >350 mm.
600*380/350 = 651.4 mm
Therefore we can infer that >600 mm may mean that actual protection may be as high as 651.4 mm eRHA vs KE.
651.4 - 528 = 123.4 mm
600 - 528 = 72
(123.4 + 72)/2= 97.7 ≈ 100 mm
So the addition of DU (on tanks used by USA) or tungsten alloy (on export tanks) as part of HAP-2 / EAP-2 armor composition, increases protection by 72 to 123 mm in comparison to BRL-1 / EAP-1 armor composition.
From this we can infer that hull armor of 5 prototype M1A1HC tanks with DU inserts in their hulls, provides 452 to 503 mm eRHA vs KE.
@@haythemsandel8303it absolutely would not be. Have you ever actually looked at the weak spots of the Abrams series? The only tank in the game with worse weak spots is the Ariete series. Giving the LFP of the Abrams actual protection from some rounds isn't going to really do much but fuck over people who didnt aim center mass. The Abrams is literally just a point and click target and most of the time you either 1-shot it or cripple it entirely.
There are much bigger problems with the Abrams than the LFP and buffing it will honestly not change those issues at all. It will still be ungodly easy to kill and it will still be hot garbage.
The problem with it is the turret ring and the fact that it has the biggest breach weakspot of all MBTs in the game. The UFP isn't "armor" in any sense. 60% of the time when someone shoots it, it bounces the shot up and into your breach, often either crippling you or killing you outright. The whole upper hull basically aims for you.
Also another thing, that 5s reload doesn't mean much since it's not auto loaded. A tank like the Abrams would need an auto loader for that to matter. The second you are shot you will almost always lose half your crew (if not die outright). That 5s reload is only helpful if you play like a pussy with your engine off in a corner or get extremely lucky. Not to mention all forms of M829 currently do almost no post-pen damage just like the US 105mms; which has been made even worse with spall liners.
As of right now the Abrams has NOTHING going for it BUT the reload.
Just shoot the massive turret ring.@@haythemsandel8303
My son and I were watching your War Thunder vids all New Year’s Eve… I’m 50, he’s 13. We BOTH think you rock, sir. 😊 Happy New Year and thanks for making these videos for us!!
Nice video. A couple notes:
White inside of the turret is 100% just metal.
The SEPv2s could be given the CROWS-LP since many of them mounted it well before the SEPv3 was fully developed and entered service.
Trophy is not easily mounted to SEPv2s, I believe the pictures of the tanks with the counterweights on the turret were designed to simulate the weight of the new SEPv3 turret armor.
it loses 100mm of armour on the sides of the turret too! its insane that, they must have looked at all the weight added to the v2 package, and thought "well all that weight must be useless wiring, and the ERA... but if that's the case they must have removed armour somewhere." and removed 100mm from the turret sides. the SEP v1 has that 100mm of armour on the internal composite of the sides of the turret, and the v2 doesn't have it.
It didn't lose 100 mm of armor it's just missing in the X-ray but it's still there in the actual protection
@jameshodgson3656 No, you can do protection estimate against SEP and you will see it has less protection value.
I'm definitely skeptical about the reasons to not add the M829A3. On top of what you already said, I don't like how quick Gaijin is to assume that the most spectacular claims about Russian armor are true, while at the same time requiring a dissertation before accepting claims about Abrams. Here, it seems the effectiveness of the A3 round is being seriously discounted for no good reason. Their excuse comes across as something they quickly made up, rather than an actual sound reason to keep it out.
Yeah the excuse seems half hearted as best and it would have been better if they just shut up.
Although that being said it’s common for gaijin not to add the top round for tanks for gameplay reasons.
@@reentrysfs6317 Well, at this point the top round is the A4. I wouldn't blame them for not adding that, given how new it is. However, the A3 was introduced in 2003. That was 20 years ago.
I'm 99% sure they absolutely bungled M829A2 on top of everything
Not sure how accurate this is, but I also heard that the ARAT-1 and ARAT-2 ERA blocks are collectively underperforming in both CE and KE protection.
I hope everyone has a wonderful happy new year and I thank spook for all the videos
This is my 22nd attempt at asking spookston to play the Canadian leopard. Average day in this community. Also happy new year.
Waking up to a new spookston video is a great way to start my morning
Absolutely agree. Another thing you didnt mention: If you shoot BVM through fuel tank - zero spall, but when you shoot Abrams - a lot of spall because of those shields covering fuel tanks.
A big thing which could help the TUSK-equipped M1s would be to add electronic warfare to the game. TUSK includes a CREW system which jams out radio signals within a short radius (100m would work in game), except for frequencies specifically allowed. It's intended to block cell-phones and basic remotes (as an IED counter), but it stops drones from flying close and stops coms as well (I've seen US units jam their own radios because they forget to keep the fills synchronized). It's something which was standard on deployed US vehicles by the mid-2000s , and is part of the TUSK and BUSK packages for Abrams and Bradley.
Since drones are in the game now, EW should be too. In game terms, drones should go out of control when they enter the radius, and vehicles in the radius would lose the ability to send or receive any type of communications (including spotting, artillery, and map markers).
Thanks for different perspective. All I'd heard about about this before was just people mostly talking about the spall liner but as an American main it'd be nice to at least see some changes
Hey Spookston! First of all, happy new year :)
Second: I was on the opinion that the Abrams should've gotten the spall liner aswell, but you demontrated that this is no the case. However I found very interesting the proposal for the Trophy system, it would be a very good addition to US ground forces.
Anyway, great video dude, thanks for informing us
You should go back to your previous thoughts. The US has been claiming that the Abrams has been overweight since the very beginning, but guess what it keeps getting heavier and heavier. The issue at hand is how much heavier the M1A2 SEPv2 is compared to the Leo 2A7 almost 2 tons yet the turret, gun and area inside the turret is larger whilst being more cramped inside of it. Where is all of this weight going to if the crew has more room in a smaller turret then why does it seem to always get heavier with very little additions inside.
So no, the abrams doesnt have a kevlar spall liner, but my brother in maneuver, the M1A2 SEP V2 definitely has DU hull armor as well as the cheek plates.
If they bring back the "shatter" mechanic, Abrams tanks would instantly be the best tanks again... Just like it happened to few weeks where shattering was being 'tested'.
You mean shell shattering? Thats still in the game.
@@user-lq1tp4yw3e its been so severely reduced that APFSDS bounces more than it shatters.
Also, when was the last time you got the "shatter" notification in your hit screen?
@@LongTimeAgoNL not much for APFSDS but still frequent on medium cal APDS
You close this Year with another wonderful video like the ones you always do, you have done a great job, I wish you a nice 2024 and a Happy New Year!
Fact of the matter is that:
1. Everything at top tier is either nerfed or artificially compressed so every nation can have "top tier" vehicles that aren't explicitly better than Russian ones
2. Almost the entirety of the USA air and ground tree beyond 9.7 is given BR ranks that has these vehicles facing opponents 20 years newer than them--of course they'll get dumpstered
Adding Flak Jackets as a researchable option and increasing crew survivability with it researched sounds like it would help a lot.
Happy new year Spookston!
Hey Spookton, in my location it's 2024, just wanna say happy new year and give best wishes to you and all the viewers out there
I would really like too se a video on the Ariete, it's getting a modernization IRL, but Gaijin seems to have used it just as a glass cannon disregarding the proper armor, problem is they take out the CL round and now it's only glass, the Armor should be better than that, especially the WAR armor kit
The modernization is mostly fire control and thermal stuff, the added armor package is basically dead on arrival has it's the union of 2 armor packages that have been around since 2002 or something like that. The front hull for example still won't get any added armor.
Ariete C2 will just be an ariete with 3rd generation thermals and substandard survivability. Not much different from the rest of its family you can find in war thunder.
@@erdervv the Ariete have already way less armor than they have IRL the WAR kit especially, a 220mm composite screen doesn't get you only 20mm of KE protection, the overall armor protection should be between 2A4 and 2A5 levels in the turret, also the hull is getting some more composite as per said by Otomelara, all the new optics and targetting sistems taken from the B2 Centauro and the PSO should be new, also in game the base of the armor is bs the Ariete never has AIR in the front both turret and hull, the Ariete will get finally it's spall liner in the next update and they accepted the bug report made around 2 to 3 weeks ago on the armor
At this point, im hoping for someone to leak classified intel about the Ariete
@@Paronak as Italian I am not, but still there countless sources from Otomelara themselves stating that the armor is all composite, not only that but if you compare the leclerc S1 and the Ariete you have the same exact dimensions with the Ariete being a little smaller in height from the terrain and they were both build a projected at the same time so the materials should have the same protection but the Ariete has something like 200mm less armor in all of the frontal arc, turret and hull, not to mention that the WAR armor kit weighs 6 tonns, almost 7, Gaijin MF gave 2 6 tonn composite plates 20mm of KE protection
Again, great video and from somebody, who actually does the research.
I greatly appreciate your videos with historical and technical info blended in with Warthunder, its what makes your channel unique and worth watching.
We already have enough channels with high level gameplay, kill montages and funny content.
Wait gaijin saying they aren't going to add something because it wasn't production? That's like a third of the vehicles if u account for modules that weren't production 😂
Hey Spook, I highly recommend consulting Damian Ratka from the UA-cam channel “Broń Bancerna Świata” (he’s Polish but he speaks English) when it comes to any topics related to the M1. The guy is the most knowledgeable person about the Abrams’ armor and ammo stowage that I’m aware of-he’s done a ton of research into archival documents and he talks with General Dynamics reps regularly.
BTW iirc, his conclusion is that the composite armor in the hull has been upgraded basically as often as the one in the turret and the effectiveness of those composite armor inserts grew in tandem, so regardless of the DU issue, the LFP armor in War Thunder seems way too weak.
I was thinking about this, i doubt that they didn't upgrade the composite with newer more efficient stuff all these years, even once. DU is just one of many materials that can be used.
@@sagichnichtsowiesonicht7326 You are 100% correct, btw 😉
How could it be the same thickness if the weld line is the same on all M1 variants?
@@interpl6089 I might be misremembering so I need to rewatch Broń Pancerna Świata’s videos to verify. The point was that whenever the turret armor’s thickness was increased, the LFP armor got thicker as well, just like in the SEPv3 upgrade.
I edited my original comment, for now, to avoid the issue.
I served on M1s. Up to the M1A1Aims there is no DU armor in the hull except the front 2 left side skirts and 3 front right side skirts. The reload standard is 4.5 seconds for Sabot and I think 5.7 seconds for.heat . So the reload rate in the game is wrong..there is no modern tank round that can pen the front turret armor on a M1A1 with DU armor. The US super Sabot round can't pen it, which is the best armor penetrator on modern MBTs
Thanks for taking the time to actually go through the material on this one!
Oh and they still haven't modeled the challenger 2 correctly
Even if DU itself isn't present in the hull, I would imagine there's probably been *some* improvement since the 80s. I've seen some people stating it using BRL-2, which would be an improvement.
Still, it's just insulting that we get a literal copy paste with some useless dead weight added to it. Fixing the turret ring and UFP shatter would honestly be better than the hull armor improvement.
>Plus 10tons
Gobtron: "Where did it all go? Nobody knows. lmao. Give Russian MoD classified docs so we can slap you in the face and still say no."
We still need more spaa , the REAL t95 with composite armor and a hstvl rework
>T54E2
Also Spook i think your right about the needing more support vehicles.... they dont even have the M2 Variants of the Bradly series if IFV in game only its counter part the M3 series known as the Cavalry Fighting Vehicle.... while M2 series is the Infantry Fighting Vehicle, nor their upgrade to armor packages.
I like how you brought up experimental vehicles, like sure only 5 abrams had DU, but the M4/T26 with 90mm gun never saw combat yet it exists in the game. Why? Balance.
Than that will just justify gaijin to add the fucking t14 armata and blow its spec out of the water with a fucking 2sec reload spd, and impenetrable crew compartment☠️☠️☠️.
I always figured the 90mm M4s were nods to the Super Shermans from the Israelis before they decided to just slap the Israelis in for what its worth.
You should play the SAV 20.12.48. It came back for the New Year Quiz, and I've been having a blast with it.
Even Red Effect is skeptical about Gaijin's portrayal of M1A2 SEPV2.
Skeptical? He backed Gaijin up.
RedEffect’s video was extremely misinformed to say the least. He looked at only two sources about the Abrams’ DU bull armor that have already been debunked on the war Thunder forums over a week ago and ignored the fact spall liners can come in more forms than “draped like a carpet on a wall in the crew compartment.”
@@Iden_in_the_Rain Watch Cone's video yet? He and RedEffect basically said the same thing.
@@pilotmanpaul what video? I checked his channel and he hasn’t done a video on the Abrams at all (only the M60-2000)
also whats funny is that a tank in the game already has modeled depleted uranium its the t90m if you xray the ufp its says radioactive material
They should just add "M1A1 DU (P)" as a prototype/tech demonstrator thing. Objects are there, prototypes are there, tech demonstrators are there.
One thing that confuses me the most is how many nato tanks are still using gen 1 thermals in the game while Russia is on like gen 1 to gen 3 thermals. While I do understand that most nato nations are still keeping information classified wasn’t the whole point of the Abrams tank abilities was with its technology advantages over the opponents?
Most of the abrams tanks in game are decades older than the tanks russia is using in war thunder.
@@doobs5342 that’s understandable but doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be upgraded with more modern technology U.S. army been doing it to the abrams for years now wouldn’t the thermals be upgraded naturally?
@@wolfthegamerkingthe long-story-short answer for this is that the Abrams tanks have better thermal imager systems than their Russian counterparts in that the screens are bigger and have different resolutions, but gaijin has a specific way of modeling thermals that largely benefit Russian tanks. It has something to do with screen resolution vs the size of the screen or something like that. Also keep in mind the real thermal camera should look more like a box (from the gunners view) than the current “scope” like view as is currently modeled in WT. just one of the many gaijin moments *sigh*
@@brycewalker7797 stalinum is very strong with gaijin cus Russia is already on gen 2 or gen 3 thermals by now while nato still has gen 1 few gen 2 from what I seen in game so far
Another fix that would be good for the SEP V2 would make the ARAT II ERA do its job. Right now it's modeled as a single ERA piece instead of a two piece system designed to defeat tandem warheads.
I dont think i have seen a video on this topic i agree more with, good work my man :D
I think that even with improved armour gaijjn would either ignore it or just hope that the number they picked is close enough
It has internal spall lining like navy ships have. It’s wild they used better tech than hanging blankets and get punished for it
Basically Kevlar wallpaper/laminated drywall.
@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 very similar to how ballistic plates have an anti spall lining or coating right up against the metal/ceramic
So we need spall liners on all the M113 based vehicles, got it.
Happy new year spook and everyone
Dang. I love that im gonna have to deal with this in like 8 years when I finally get the M1
T90m is only killable from a few spots,especially considering terrain in game,compared to abrams which by t90m is a 1 shot from a lot of places frontally
Well Gaijin can't do a lot about the gigantic actual tank design the Abrams has, gotta settle that with general dynamics
"Few spots"
-Turret ring to destroy the breech and with -4km/h reverse speed, its basically dead.
-Driver port which spalls and kills everyond.
-Lower front plate which is a 110% autokill since it goes to the carousel.
Few spots my ass.
@@pilotmanpaul want to take a guess where you can aim on other tanks to one shot them? just about anywhere that isnt a turret cheek
@@pilotmanpaul
it has only 4 spots. abrams's are everywhere except cheeks.
Day 7 of asking for a Cromwell v rp3 video
Also m1 sep v2 is horrendous
gaijin on that "blurry line between history and balance"
looks at naval..
boi.... someday someone has to address the issues with current naval
not to mention that most of these things are classified, the Army isn't going to publish the specifics of armor packages to the public
The issues with the spall liner is that Gaijin modeled them completely wrong. Spall liners do next to nothing against APFSDS, they were designed to protect the crew from high explosive rounds like HESH or an artillery shell from fragmenting the internal armor on a close enough shell. The fragments from a penetrating round would be pieces of the dart itself that shears off as it perforates the armor plate and that little Kevlar lining ain't doing anything to even slow that down. There are photos of penetrated T-72s from Iraq that just show a small clean hole inside of the tank. The tell-tale signs though are of the scorching all over internally. Those shards of DU are under extreme pressure during the shearing and perforation process and are well above the material's combustion values. Once they hit the oxygenated internal compartment, they immediately combust and act much like solid white phosphorus mini bullets flying through the internals of the tank. Also, an MBT's internal NERA portions of the composite matrix already acts as a natural spall liner. The mixed density NERA absorbs and redirects energy throughout the tanks armor so there's little to no worry about spalling. There are M1s that have taken massive IEDs and mines and the crews survived. Any injuries or deaths that occurred weren't from spalling but of the massive energies of the tank being thrown about and the people inside pinballing around violently, slamming into things as they got tossed about. Even the report you used stated it was for shrapnel protection on thinly armored vehicles and referencing artillery or high explosives-based rockets and the like. Also, looking at photos of armored sections of the older M1 series tanks being taken off, the NERA sits directly against the interior hull. So you have this spongey/rubbery composite material sitting directly against the inner backing plate so there's a built in spall liner already for the Abrams so it doesn't need a tertiary one installed. Again, that's if a spall liner was modeled properly at all anyways.
As to the DU, the updated source actually corrects the quantity from 5 in storage to an undisclosed and unquantified number. This means that whoever made the original wasn't truly aware of the real number due to not being in the loop due to security reasons or purposely tried to use disinformation on an official document and it got caught and was corrected. The pushback from the community comes from every other nation's tanks having much better hull armor than the Abrams in game and it getting better and better each patch for literally no reason at all. The irony of this being that the US and UK were the pioneers of composite armor research on the NATO side of things yet the Germans who had to figure it out themselves and who admitted that it probably wasn't quite as good as what the UK/US was using was given an armor value in game almost twice that of what the Abram's effectivity was with thinner NERA and steel plates. So you had the Leopard 2A4 with twice the effectivity despite having modeled thinner steel armor and backing plates and a thinner NERA composite and it's been downhill since then.
This was more a case of the straw that broke the camels back rather than the big hope that DU would be the game changer. The spall liners given an absolutely massive buff versus what they do in real life is what's staggering. Russia pushed spall liners because they couldn't increase armor as they were limited by hull volume and had limited composite armor coverage. They knew there were areas where their tanks were vulnerable to artillery splash damage and that NATO favored specialized high explosives shells and big ass bombs.
Regarding support vehicles in the lineup, I think the M1 TTB would be pretty cool, but I never see anyone talk about it.
There’s a Wikipedia entry I read on it (I know, not a reliable source) but it’s basically an M1 with an unmanned turret with an auto loader (firing 10 RPM) and only weighed 44 tons. Would be a great light tank/tank destroyer.
And there was a single prototype, so Gaijin precedent dictates that it could be added if they really wanted to.
Yeah for the American Tech tree never, Gaijin will never add something so unique for the most played nation.
Coming back from watching a video from another UA-camr with an animal mascot, I’m very thankful that you put your sources directly in the video very frequently.
they should add spall liner as a module to research so it trades more speed for more protection
as I said on a different video elsewhere on YT I personally would have added the M1 thumper, afterall the armor from what I know was not much better then the M1A2 but with the 140mm cannon it would be an upgrade interms of firepower and it would be different compared to its cousins in actual service gameplay wise as it would easily have the most powerfull gun in the game but not much else of note and it would give the leopard 2 and its variants something to be really scared off which atm there really isnt anything taht can do that effectively outside of heli's and planes (which I dont count because fuck CAS with a flaming pole)
I hope the war thunder community takes this well.
@Spookston The Army upgrades its tank based on the expected peer threat and not their current Op as well as general programed upgrade for the tank.
And mind you the SEP v2 uses HAP 5 armor (army designation for DU armor) so were missing alot of armor oh btw if anybody wants an semi-accurate guestimate on the effectiveness of the DU armor: measure the weld line from the bare turret face to the composite armor face and × by 1.2 to 1.4 for KE and 1.6 to 1.8 for CE
I remember watching a tv show in 2010 and they had a US solider inside a tank saying they had a pretty good Kevlar spall liner and he even tapped on it. The show was talking about different shells and they were talking about HESH at the time.