The Abrams. Info on the Tank you all LUUV 2 H8

[sartt 1,460]

"Our Loader was an exceptional loader, and could load a round every 3 seconds."

 

M1A1 & M1A2 tank blow out panels on ammunition stowage

Oh yeah and for some of you all who think the Abrams 6 second reload is O.P... THAT ISN'T THE RELOAD SPEED its 3-4 seconds In COMBAT SITUATIONS!  Link at the Time Stamp 

 

This video there was some kind of problem with the gun breech 

Abrams Penetrated in Iraq 2003  https://file.wikileaks.org/file/m1-penetration-iraq-2008.pdf

https://www.armyrecognition.com/united_states_army_heavy_armoured_vehicles_tank_uk/m1a2_abrams_sep_v3_main_battle_tank_technical_data_sheet_specifications_pictures_video_11710154.html

 

SHARE

CREW

4 (driver, commander, gunner, loader)

MANUFACTURER

General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS)

OPERATORS

US Army, Saudi Arabian Army, Iraqi Army, Kuwait Army, Australian Army and Egyptian Army

LENGTH WITH GUN FORWARD

387in (9.8m)

Expand

Previous

Two M1A1 Abrams tanks driving along a dusty road on an exercise in the field.

The M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS)

 

The first M1 Abrams battle tanks were delivered to the US Army in 1980

For the M1A2 upgrade programme, more than 600 M1 Abrams tanks were upgraded to M1A2 configuration at the Lima Army tank plant

The main armament is the 120mm M256 smoothbore gun, developed by Rheinmetall Waffe Munition GmbH of Germany

The commander has a 12.7mm Browning M2 machine gun and the loader has a 7.62mm M240 machine gun

The M1A1 tank incorporates steel-encased depleted uranium armour

 

One L8A1 six-barrelled smoke grenade discharger is fitted on each side of the turret

Abrams M1A1 main battle tanks deployed in the Gulf.

Two Abrams M1A2s of the 315 exported to Saudi Arabia. These tanks have the export armour package.

The M1A2 firing its main armament, the 120mm smoothbore gun, US designation code M256, developed by Rheinmetall GmbH of Germany.

The gunner station in an Abrams M1A1.

M1A2, the upgraded version of M1-A1.

Two M1A1 Abrams tanks driving along a dusty road on an exercise in the field.

The M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS)

 

•  

M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). The first M1 tank was produced in 1978, the M1A1 in 1985 and the M1A2 in 1986

Edited November 18, 2019 by sartt

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

Huh, not surprised the already best tank ingame is in fact underperforming. 

[sartt 1,460]

2 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

Huh, not surprised the already best tank ingame is in fact underperforming. 

AND STILL... * they * will find a way to complain about it...

[Player_112233 1,269]

I'm always amazed when I see people jerk off to some historical numbers so much that they'd rather see a super broken game than an "unhistorical" reload even on a tank that already defines the high tier. Yeah let's give Abrams a buff guys, that's what high tiers need so even total bots can have a 10.0 tank with a slightly positive KDR.

[sartt 1,460]

Just now, Per_Saukko said:

I'm always amazed when I see people jerk off to some historical numbers so much that they'd rather see a super broken game than an "unhistorical" reload even on a tank that already defines the high tier. Yeah let's give Abrams a buff guys, that's what high tiers need so even total bots can have a 10.0 tank with a slightly positive KDR.

It need its HISTORICALLY accurate ammo reload... don't you want historical accuracy?

[Player_112233 1,269]

1 minute ago, sartt said:

It need its HISTORICALLY accurate ammo reload... don't you want historical accuracy?

 

No, it's a game and I'd prefer the high tiers to be playable without tanks that turn bots into winners.

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,154]

People won’t be happy until the Abrams is so nerfed it’s back to the typical point and click adventure they have with most US tanks.

[Necrons31467 14,236]

27 minutes ago, sartt said:

Oh yeah and for some of you all who think the Abrams 6 second reload is O.P... THAT ISN'T THE RELOAD SPEED its 3-4 seconds In COMBAT SITUATIONS!  Link at the Time Stamp

 

 

So,

• 3 second reload might be the initial loading speed, but it requires laploading and reaching for ammunition stowed in the ready rack, which we can ofcourse empty in War Thunder for increased survivability.
• The reload slows down as more ammunition has been spent, the loader is required to start reaching further out for ammunition.
• The reload rate is affected by the speed the vehicle is moving at, travelling at 50 km/h off-roads complicates things when manhandling large casings.
• Loaders are partially limited by the speed at which the blast doors open/close.

War Thunder models average rate of fire, not initial, stationary and ideal circumstances rate of fire, given all these factors involved, it's really not a bad middle ground to have a 5 second reload.

 

Besides, all top-tier tanks have an average load time modelled, it's not like this specifically harms the M1's, there's video's available of 3 sec reloads on a Leopard 2A4, but again, that's not achievable/sustainable in actual combat situations where the blast doors should be closed between reloads.

 

[Ghost_Rider12 4,501]

10 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

Besides, all top-tier tanks have an average load time modelled, it's not like this specifically harms the M1's, there's video's available of 3 sec reloads on a Leopard 2A4, but again, that's not achievable/sustainable in actual combat situations where the blast doors should be closed between reloads.

 

Even Challenger's 1 and 2 are capable of this as well as all the Chieftains. A skilled crew's party trick was to get three HESH rounds in the air at once

 

At any rate I don't think the M1's need a buff at this time.

[sartt 1,460]

23 hours ago, Per_Saukko said:

 

No, it's a game and I'd prefer the high tiers to be playable without tanks that turn bots into winners.

So what you are basically saying is... A bot is better than you? You going to let the Machines win?

[Necrons31467 14,236]

9 minutes ago, sartt said:

So what you are basically saying is... A bot is better than you? You going to let the Machines win?

 

What it seems to me he's saying, is that the M1 and M1IP are currently so incredibly easy-mode to play, that bots would do fine in them.

 

And yes, they are that powerful right now.

[Azinfriit 663]

Some people don't even try to hide that they just want a "I win" button. Pathetic.

[Bad_MoFo 1,047]

On 16/11/2018 at 09:01, Necrons31467 said:

 

What it seems to me he's saying, is that the M1 and M1IP are currently so incredibly easy-mode to play, that bots would do fine in them.

 

And yes, they are that powerful right now.

Hmm such a easy play mode huh .......... lol what you dont know is you been in a few of my games with your easy to play Abrams , shall I post the vids of what you call easy to play of you getting your rear pushed in playing the Abrams ? You have a obvious hatred for this tank ignoring all aspects of the broken CAS though you do post that CAS is broken , but your true colors shine away in every Abrams thread , 

[Hoods_CZ 78]

Players with soviet tanks are crying because they can't kill frontally M1 Abrams easily. They have to learn how to shoot into mantlet or turret ring.

[Mortiferum 17,061]

Stop fighting like school girls and focus on the discussion at hand. Hidden a bunch of personal attack posts, if you continue to go for each other's character rather than their arguments, I am going to start swinging the banhammer.

 

PS: I have strong suspicion on whether or not human loaders can do 3-4 seconds per round over a sustained period of time. Humans get tired.

[Alan_Tovarishch 860]

I would support higher ROF but if a mechanic simulating loaders stamina is introduced. Im thinking something ala Dark Souls stamina.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Alan_Tovarishch

[Ska_King_Felix 1,450]

On 15/11/2018 at 08:21, sartt said:

It need its HISTORICALLY accurate ammo reload... don't you want historical accuracy?

Well then.  Give our Leopard 2A4 its "historically accurate" C-tech armor and DM33 and our Type 90 its "historically accurate" 3 second reload.  Don't forget to change M774 to have the same flat penetration as the M735 shot, because of "historical accuracy".

[sartt 1,460]

On 23/11/2018 at 15:00, Ska_King_Felix said:

Well then.  Give our Leopard 2A4 its "historically accurate" C-tech armor and DM33 and our Type 90 its "historically accurate" 3 second reload.  Don't forget to change M774 to have the same flat penetration as the M735 shot, because of "historical accuracy".

SURE as long as the abrams gets its m900 D.U around its 3 sec reload, and the MBT 70 gets its historical reload, oh and all 105 caliber turrets get the m833 round

[OldMachineNazara 407]

Do not forget that the Abram's *initial* reload speed is 3-5 seconds in combat situations. The loader would get incredible tired after loading a few rounds, especially one piece ammunition. It's heavy and while faster to load initially than two piece ammunition, tires the loader out faster than two piece ammunition. You wouldn't get more than maybe 4 loads from the loader before he's choking on the turret basket, begging for water and air (just an exaggeration). Historically, after the first few loads, a well trained loader takes about 10 seconds to load the L7 on the Abrams. Same with the Leopard 2 which, while having a fast initial reload of 4-6 seconds, has a sustained rate of fire that tapers off to about 11 seconds. This is why autoloaders such as the T-64s carousel (which is slower than an Abrams initial reload at 7.4 seconds) is better for sustained combat, as it keeps it's RoF until it runs out of ammo.
Two piece ammunition, like that for the L11 or D-2-5Ts for example, takes longer initially to reload, at around 6-8 seconds. However, the loader will keep his initial reload speed much longer than if he were loading one-piece ammunition, at around maybe 10 rounds of sustained, initial fire. 
Basically, if you want this insane initial reload, you'd better be prepared to be punished if you don't make those first shots count. And that goes for all tanks that don't have an autoloader.

[Ska_King_Felix 1,450]

8 hours ago, sartt said:

SURE as long as the abrams gets its m900 D.U around its 3 sec reload, and the MBT 70 gets its historical reload, oh and all 105 caliber turrets get the m833 round

You do realize that this entails around 600mm of KE protection for the Leopard 2A4, right?  That means your M900 (which by the way, only penetrates 400mm flat) will do nothing to its turret.  I don't mind the MBT-70/Kpz-70.  Also, don't forget that your 3-second reload isn't sustained, and will vary wildly depending on whether or not you're moving and how many rounds the loader has loaded.  Also, DM33 would lolpen the Abrams, especially if it got fixed (it's currently underperforming massively on angles).

 

If you want to suffer more in the Abrams, I'm all for it.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Ska_King_Felix

[CodeNameColdWar 823]

Guys "historically" does not come with Balance all the time. Or else we would already have M1A1 fight with T-72s+T-80s. even M60A1 or Leopard 1 vs T-64A and etc things that call power creep.

[Loongsheep 5,339]

2 hours ago, Ska_King_Felix said:

You do realize that this entails around 600mm of KE protection for the Leopard 2A4, right?  That means your M900 (which by the way, only penetrates 400mm flat) will do nothing to its turret. 

Keep dreaming with your C-tech armor (never had 600mm KE anyway, about 500mm max), which only applied to a small number of 2A4 starting from the very end of Cold War. Which is about the time when M1A1HA with DU armor and M829 starts rolling down the factory.

 

The Leopard 2A4 we have in-game clearly has the B-tech sideskirts.

 

Quote

Also, DM33 would lolpen the Abrams, especially if it got fixed (it's currently underperforming massively on angles).

 

If you want to suffer more in the Abrams, I'm all for it.

It already does, the strength in Abrams is its survivability being very "meta".

In the small maps of Warthunder, baseline M1 will still beat C-tech Leo2 quite often.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Loongsheep

[Ska_King_Felix 1,450]

13 hours ago, Loongsheep said:

Keep dreaming with your C-tech armor (never had 600mm KE anyway, about 500mm max), which only applied to a small number of 2A4 starting from the very end of Cold War. Which is about the time when M1A1HA with DU armor and M829 starts rolling down the factory.

 

The Leopard 2A4 we have in-game clearly has the B-tech sideskirts.

 

It already does, the strength in Abrams is its survivability being very "meta".

In the small maps of Warthunder, baseline M1 will still beat C-tech Leo2 quite often.

My point is that historical accuracy =/= balance.

[OzzieBloke 10]

The reload is a whole other story when on the move, but reloads for all tanks are incorrect in that regard. Every tank in game has a an incorrect reload speed because gajin ignores documents or includes sighting and correction time to the reload. a sherman 76 should have a 5 second reload and a panther and tiger the same, they dont because of how gaijin has done it. a leo2a4 would have the same reload as an abrams and same with all 120mm's at top tier and 105mms.

The MBT has its historical reload, 10 seconds with an assisted loading mechanism.

[ThreeGorgesDam 3,269]

On 26/11/2018 at 21:11, Ska_King_Felix said:

You do realize that this entails around 600mm of KE protection for the Leopard 2A4, right?  That means your M900 (which by the way, only penetrates 400mm flat) will do nothing to its turret.  I don't mind the MBT-70/Kpz-70.  Also, don't forget that your 3-second reload isn't sustained, and will vary wildly depending on whether or not you're moving and how many rounds the loader has loaded.  Also, DM33 would lolpen the Abrams, especially if it got fixed (it's currently underperforming massively on angles).

Sources?

Every estimate I have found for M900 puts it at least on par with DM33. And I have never seen any 600mm figure for C-Technologie armor.

 

On 26/11/2018 at 21:11, Ska_King_Felix said:

If you want to suffer more in the Abrams, I'm all for it.

M1A2 > Leopard 2A4C. I'm sure it won't be the Abrams suffering.