Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
antaress73

AT-13 vs M1A2 side turret armor

Recommended Posts

I used to get partial penetrations against the side turret armor with the tandem-warhead AT-13 when hitting the single ERA tiles before 1.03. Now it's never. Are those single ERA blocks supposed to be LESS effective against tandem warheads with V1.03 ? I can understand the double blocks on the Hull defeating less powerful tandem warheads but the single ERA on the side turret ? Because of the way its installed, could it be that there is a SPACED armor effect because of the distance the blocks are from the main armor ? How resistant is the side turret armor on the M1A2 so it could protect against a 900-950mm HEAT tandem warhead missile ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

antaress73,

 

I'm confused by your post. You used to get partial penetrations of the side armor before 1.03, but now you never do. That part makes sense. What throws me is the question following. Did you perhaps mean to say "Aren't those single ERA blocks supposed to be LESS effective against tandem warheads with V1.03?"  As written, what you said seems self-contradicting, since I take it you are arguing that BFC was supposed to reduce the prior protection level of the single ERA block because tandem warheads are specifically designed to defeat such threats, right?

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Antaress its bad luck. Ive killed several Abrams with both side hull and turret penetrations with the 13 recently. Also my favorite a top turret on a downslope headed abrams :D

I HAVE noticed that barrel launched ATGMs like refleks and cobra seem to be insanely accurate. someone would have to run tests to prove it as mt evidence is anecdotal but ive had four wild misses in that past four days in pbems

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Antaress its bad luck. Ive killed several Abrams with both side hull and turret penetrations with the 13 recently. Also my favorite a top turret on a downslope headed abrams :D

I HAVE noticed that barrel launched ATGMs like refleks and cobra seem to be insanely accurate. someone would have to run tests to prove it as mt evidence is anecdotal but ive had four wild misses in that past four days in pbems

Okay then ! Like Napoleon once said: "I know he's a great officer, but is he lucky ? "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Abrams side turret armor is set too high, IMO. It will resist PG-7VR even without the ERA. It has been reported as a bug and will hopefully be adjusted in the next patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Abrams side turret armor is set too high, IMO. It will resist PG-7VR even without the ERA. It has been reported as a bug and will hopefully be adjusted in the next patch.

It will stop the AT-13 (900mm +) on the side turret where there's no ERA coverage ! More than once in my case !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be some bizarre modelling of the whole bustle-rack thing absorbing the hits, without the appropriate inferno-like reaction or actual ammo cookoff and reduction?  Or are the penetrations being 100% stopped, which is absolutely inauthentic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% stopped on the bustle area.. 2-3 times...

and in a test I did ... this happened on a regular basis: 3 AT-13s stopped on the turret side with reactive armor hit text. Not the first time. In fact, in 5 tests and many hits, didnt see the side turret penetrated at all by an AT-13;

CM-Black-Sea-2015-08-27-22-30-46-90_zpsl

ALso notice the penetration decal on side hull with an empty ERA box, the tank wasnt penetrated by that hit. It wasnt even penetrated on the second hit at almost the same area despite ERA being blown away by the previous hit. No wonder M1s are hard to kill in the game !

Edited by antaress73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some real life flavor to this thread (Yemen, a vintage AT-4 vs 2 different Saudi M1A2SA, side penetrations and catastrophic kills at what appears to be ~1.5km; not graphic unless you count imagination):

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some real life flavor to this thread (Yemen, a vintage AT-4 vs 2 different Saudi M1A2SA, side penetrations and catastrophic kills at what appears to be ~1.5km; not graphic unless you count imagination):

 

Believe it or not, those arent catastrophic as it would seem.  I was amazed, but thats what its meant to look like when the blast-door setup does its job :P  I'd figured it was more of an ERA-tile thing, but instead its a huge inferno on the tank that leaves the crew compartment untouched.

 

 

 

There's a vid showing what happens internally.

 

Most of what you see falling all over is debris and residue/leftovers from the ammo cooking.  There's a big discussion on Tank-net about it, and the lack of fire from certain areas you'd see from a full-on internal fire.  Plus the fact it burns out pretty fast comparatively, rather than a continuous fire you'd see coming from the crew compartment hatches and all.

 

Not trying to defend the oddness in penetrations of course, as none of those hits in Antaress' pics seem likely to have left the crew unharmed realistically.  Definitely an oddity there.

Edited by Nerdwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i cant argue with tests... but my at13s still work fine :( sorry for your troubles antaress. oddly in the game i got a few at13 kills on monday night one was abrams side turret and caused a catastrophic explosion that left the abrams leaning into a crater

antaress if you.re really interested i can dig up the save game files one at least (out of like 80) should be easy to find its agaknst a human and the kill was in the last turn or two before surrender. id still try n get someone at bfc to officially check it out though.

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nerdwing stole my thunder, but yeah ammo cookoffs are funtime events with lots of fire and doom.  That looks like the ammo went up but the brevity of the fire and lack of continued pronounced burning seems to indicate the ammo going off and not much else.  

Ammo blowing up is no joke, it's why Russian tanks murder their crews and throw their turrets into low orbit.  It's going to look violent either way with lots of fire.  It just happens that the violence on Abrams is a huge pillar of fire without the turret riding on it, and the crew is defiling their coveralls instead of being reduced to their base elements.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i cant argue with tests... but my at13s still work fine :( sorry for your troubles antaress. oddly in the game i got a few at13 kills on monday night one was abrams side turret and caused a catastrophic explosion that left the abrams leaning into a crater

antaress if you.re really interested i can dig up the save game files one at least (out of like 80) should be easy to find its agaknst a human and the kill was in the last turn or two before surrender. id still try n get someone at bfc to officially check it out though.

 

Thanks sublime ! I'd like to see that LOL I'll send you my email by private message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% stopped on the bustle area.. 2-3 times...

and in a test I did ... this happened on a regular basis: 3 AT-13s stopped on the turret side with reactive armor hit text. Not the first time. In fact, in 5 tests and many hits, didnt see the side turret penetrated at all by an AT-13;

CM-Black-Sea-2015-08-27-22-30-46-90_zpsl

ALso notice the penetration decal on side hull with an empty ERA box, the tank wasnt penetrated by that hit. It wasnt even penetrated on the second hit at almost the same area despite ERA being blown away by the previous hit. No wonder M1s are hard to kill in the game !

 

Somehow I think this needs looking at. Im going to hazard that the threat of ammunition cookoff is not modelled at all on the M1 ingame where as it effects opposition tanks. An ammunition cookoff in an abrams will save the crew but would render the vehicle combat ineffective. It would lose the majority of its ammunition load, and I would hazard a guess at the crew wanting to remove themselves and their platform from combat pretty sharpish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i sent antaress some turns. one is definitely an at13 getting an catastrophoc abrams kill but i misremembered it was upper side hull not turret. i have other saves but i get 7-10 min load times on bigger battles which i usually play which makes me hesistant... to check hundreds of saved games. i hope antaress posts some screens of the turns i sent him( or anyone else who wants em) and as i stated previously i still hope bfc looks into this because regardless of my total of about 10 at13 abrams kills in various games its still anecdotal not tested and as we all know anecdotal experience is just one grunts eyes of the battlefield

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

id just like to sayy references to my.luck and skill at killing us armor ismt bragging tho i could see it being construed as suchm rather its a response to a large contingent who thnk russ equipment in game is nerfed. its not. the playwers usijg it wrong or just isnt good. yes certain systems may meed tweaking but even as is victory if used possible is quite achievable.

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...