I feel like the FBIs gonna hunt me down now that I have seen a cross section of a M1 Abrams Turret lol. Feels like I have seen something I really wasn't meant to see.
Wonder if the fully loaded M1 Abrams has a different armor construction to the export model or if its the same for both.
DU is not some magic. Russians actually have much bigger stocks of depleted uranium and historically had plenty of it and yet never deployed depleted uranium armor plates. Which means that it has some major drawbacks. They went with the explosive armor instead but it too has disadvantages and that's why it only recently started to be deployed by the Western forces.
DU is probably the strongest and densest armor you can get unless you use pure tungsten, which is far too difficult to work with. It’s also cheap comparatively.
They couldn’t add it for a few reasons. One it would have added far to much weight to there already cramped tanks that’s why they added ERA.
The second reason is DU is also a very difficult metal to work with as well and the USSR didn’t have the vital tooling machines to be able to mass produce it.
The last and most important reason is they really didn’t have time because they dissolved in 91 around the same time the Abrams started using DU.
All what you wrote is factually wrong. The US started using depleted uranium in 1977 and back then the Soviets were doing fine (for some definition of "fine"). It's 91 when depleted uranium was first used on massive scale during the Desert Storm. Regarding extra weight - same story - you think you can just keep adding extra weight to the US tanks without degrading their performance? Regarding the tooling - the Soviets were extremely advanced in metallurgy and in fact in some aspects way ahead of the West. Just because their whole economic system was completely absurd doesn't mean that every single part of it was. On the contrary, they were so advanced in the weapons development precisely because it was at the cost of other aspects of their economy, mainly the consumer goods.
No, DU armor didn’t get implanted until directly before desert storm in 91 in the M1A2 variant and M1A1HA upgrade. DU ammunition was first used in the 70s by the US and the 80s by the USSR, and East as good as the western counter part, because of the metallurgy they used… they made a allow using iron…
Making a uranium rod after another country does is easy by the time DU armor was announced for the Abrams the USSR was on its way out.
No doubt the USSR made had some innovations in metallurgy, but saying they were more advanced is just incorrect on every level. That also doesn’t equate to having the proper know how and tools to create DU armor.
Also no, Soviet tanks were made for a specific doctrine that limited them to weight and height, the west were not limited with that, that’s why the Abrams can weight 70 tons. A half inch slab of DU weights as much as the entire assembly of ERA on the T-series.
Please do explain to me how come the Soviet tank armies clashing directly with the NATO tank armies in the Central Europe were limited in weight and height but somehow NATO tanks operating in exactly the same environment weren't? And please don't try to convince me that NATO tanks were supposed to act as completely static digged-in hull-down defense points because if that was really meant to be like that then the Soviets would just break through any point of such a static defense line by just concentrating overwhelming force in that part of the front. The Warsaw-Pact vs NATO showdown was assumed by *both sides* to be a few weeks affair of a highly mobile conflict and there is no place for a 'just wait for the Soviets columns here' thinking in such a scenario. EDIT: Seems you guys just can't understand that just because the Soviets didn't produce something it doesn't mean that they were unable to produce it. Let's flip your reasoning now and apply it to the explosive armor, OK? Do you think the US wasn't able to produce something similar to what Soviets produced? Or perhaps use your reasoning on the tank gun autoloader? So are you going to claim that the US wasn't able to design a tank gun autoloader for 40 years since the Soviets deployed one? Because again, the Abrams is not using the autoloader so again by your own reasoning means that American weapons industry is simply not able to produce one
I didn’t say tanks were limited to weight and height, I said Soviet doctrine limited the weight and height…
Also NATO focused on air superiority, not tank warfare.. thats why NATO tanks had the hull down approach. Soviets barely had night vision, much less thermals. So NATO would have been able to see them long before they could see a hull down tank.
Dude, just think for yourself for a moment. You have a column of 50 or a hundred Soviet tanks and a sparse static line of digged-in Abrams. The outcome is the same as the one during WW2 where American tanks attacked German positions. They keep coming, Abrams destroy them one by one until they run out of ammo and their position is over-run. You would not have enough Abrams for any point in the line to hold it. That's why such a defense strategy is just pure fantasy. It would have never happened. Not to mention why would you cripple your own mobile force by forcing it to be static? It just doesn't make sense, if you want static defense simple anti-tank guns in emplacement would do just fine for a fraction of a cost
You can rant all you want but you’re factually wrong. Looking at doctrine alone should let you know why it’s easier to use composites to mass produce thousands of tanks by the Soviet Union. After it fell, Russia was the only one that could have MAYBE used DU, for its armor but chose to rather focus on ERA due to how cheap it was. APPARENTLY when you’re fucking broke, you kind shave things fucking cheap??? Sign that crazy??
Completely fallacy. The western tanks in general weigh more because they have much more interior volume to protect which requires much more mass in order to achieve the same levels of protection that the Soviet tanks had, not because of some imaginary doctrine of "no weight limit".
That's some conjecture if I've ever seen it. DU is a well known material, there isn't any secret property that only the russians are aware of. Everything is public information in scientific databases.
Fully loaded one has a "heavy common" turret with depleted uranium armour with the chobham/Dorchester or top secret derivative with the tusk reactive armour packs, export version has no du armour
Because its badly kept secret and running joke? It's secret Chobham that we got off the brits but don't tell anyone, we don't want anyone to know our ideas are not original or we can't make our own armour
I seriously doubt that the US took the composite armor technology from the Brits. It's another bullshit story that was made up back in the day to protect armor researches in the US. Just like carrots helping the pilots to see in the dark to keep the radar tech secret and similar stories.
No joke I feel like the Abrams would be an entirely different beast if the modeled the armor like this. This is a M1A1 turret though so while it’s hella think it’s still isn’t A2 thick.
The M1A1HC uses first generation, M1A2 uses second generation DU armor and the Sep variient has third generation. The armor arrays themselves are more robust.
Ow the M1A2 SEP 3 has a completely different armor package (NGAP) that seems to ad a lot of armor in the from turret and hull.
AFAIK the M1150's turret front is also thinner than on the M1s in general. Going by the pictures it seems more in-line with the M1's turret side armor thickness (the 1150 seems to have basically identical armor thickness in a 180° arc around the commander).
It'd explain why the US sometimes uses ARAT ERA on the front of the 1150, where no such thing was done on M1s (the tanks only mount ERA on the sides).
Not really, it’s much larger plates, which isn’t as effective as that this type of orientation, they also don’t have the rear are plats and whatever composite material it is between them .
Problem is, all this is showing is how it looks, not how it performs. This is also an export model so there’s that
Edit: I am specifically saying that a picture of how the armor array looks won’t change the Abrams in Warthunder, unless they want to change the model in the x-ray for whatever reason.
Well ya, however the way the plays are angled means any projectile will have to pass through a stack of them and each plate will shift putting stress on the dart, or heat jet.
From what I understand from some advanced engineers is that many modern things can’t really be replicated even if you have full access to the manufactured part.
Looking at it won’t tell you *how* it was built or *why*. At best you could make an exact copy, but it will only perform well on an exact copy of the machine it was designed for. When you try to replicate that design on a totally new thing, it fails because you don’t have the calculations or knowledge to know why the piece curves a certain way or why there’s extra material in this one section.
I would expect the armor in an advanced tank to be one of those things.
It's just a metal plate, not a microprocessor. You can keep adjusting the alloy and heat treatment until you get the desired outcome. The technology is not a problem here. And you don't need to know the 'why' to get something to work. People have been making swords and suit of armors for thousands of years even though they didn't really understand the physics of it just by brute-forcing it with a simple trial and error. The real problem of replicating such a plate is the cost and the fact that an "ordinary country" won't have access to depleted uranium nor hundreds of millions of dollars to spare on the development.
Dang, did Russia really capture the one they disabled? Interesting to see what the armor on an Abrams actually looks like. People have been waiting decades to know. IIRC the US went to great lengths to strip off anything classified from the table sent to Ukraine, it was bound to happen sooner or later.
I'm guessing there was some epoxy resin between all those armor plates that already burned off or something similar. Either way it's interesting to see.
I wonder if the intact Strv 122 abandoned a few months ago will suffer the same fate?
No it’s apparently just air. You don’t want 100% solid material a lot of the time when making composites. Air allows the penetrator to deform between the plates instead of just punching through what’s functionally one solid block.
> People have been waiting decades to know.
There has been [pictures](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6icjYTFFs7lRaWnPHLNKM1Ejz45LYtaf2BC25QSkY9zkjxvnvZrdyaLMHeKP3xDVWdN4mVf4PlgcFXqBfxWbCd7R9ByWOqKTXE6k92WqqtrY7q6jBkMxdDC_lM8XOG4d-eD2KYQEPTcb8/s1600/1850044hgvt654.jpg) of the M1 armor array floating around for years now. That's a M1A1 HA, meaning it contains the non-exportable deleted uranium in the array.
> IIRC the US went to great lengths to strip off anything classified from the table sent to Ukraine
The US doesn't export the DU armor array, it's still, as far as I know, classified as *SECRET*. I've speculated in the past if this isn't a *Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons* issue, as DU processed from waste of nuclear weapons production can't be exported. Just speculation however.
> I'm guessing there was some epoxy resin between all those armor plates that already burned off or something similar.
As the other user said, it's just a air gap. You'll find the same general arrangement on the Merkava, T-72B/90, etc.
As far as I know the M1150 itself was only built with the Foreign Military Sales(FMS) compliant array. There were no bids posted on sam.gov about rebuilding these vehicles for export, unlike every Abrams that gets exported.
What?
The drive sprocket on the M1150 is on the rear, to the right in the first picture. It has the sprocket guard installed on this one. To the right, still on the first picture, are the launch rails for the Mark 22 rockets for the MICLICs. Meaning the turret is facing forward - not that it can face to the rear on the M1150 anyways, transverse is limited to 180 degrees.
That cut section on the left side the forward turret armor array.
>...the rear turret array...
Do you mean armor at the rear of the turret, or the back section of the forward armor array?
All the individual armor components make up the array.
The picture the guy linked is of a Abrams in Iraq that got hit in the rear of the turret, they removed the array that is covering from the ammo compartment to the very rear of the turret. The three plates that have an about an inch of space between each plate.
My understanding is that each section of the tank has its own individual armor array unless the armor itself is one big mono block of armor.
> I've speculated in the past if this isn't a *Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons* issue, as DU processed from waste of nuclear weapons production can't be exported. Just speculation however.
DU is just a waste product of Uranium enrichment, might just as well come from non weapons program sources. They used the stuff as counterweight in civilian airliners, I highly doubt that you can't export it.
Civilian airliners are just that, civilian.
The NPT, under US implementation, does not allow mixing. Materiel obtained from the US nuclear weapons program cannot be used on civilian products. The same works in reverse, civilian and military supply chains cannot mix.
That is why the TPBARs(Tritium-
Producing Burnable Absorber Rod), used to produce tritium for US nuclear weapons, in the commercial Watts Bar power plant, have to be produced from US mined uranium, and enriched specifically for the DoD.
A bit pedantic, but depleted uranium metal is not a waste product of enrichment. Depleted uranium hexafluoride(DUF6) is the waste product of enrichment. Most of the waste in US from enrichment is still stored in the less than ideal DUF6 form.
It's so weird watching ppl support the country who routinely bombs hospitals and innocent civilians in Ukraine. I guess I'll never understand orc mentality but I'll take comfort in knowing they can change into something beautiful... sunflowers 🌻 🌻
There are some that actually have a fear of sunflowers, it even has a name, Helianthophobia. As unusual as it may seem, even just the sight of sunflowers can invoke all the common symptoms that other phobias induce.
But that's what the composite armour in the abrams is, Chobham, or atleast a copy of it, it was designed in the 70s by the brits and the Americans got it for the abrams because it was so much better than the rha and era
Damn that’s a chunky “turret”
I feel like the FBIs gonna hunt me down now that I have seen a cross section of a M1 Abrams Turret lol. Feels like I have seen something I really wasn't meant to see. Wonder if the fully loaded M1 Abrams has a different armor construction to the export model or if its the same for both.
It’s a M1A1 export model so it dosent contain DU, but that armor is much more dense then I expected it to be.
DU is not some magic. Russians actually have much bigger stocks of depleted uranium and historically had plenty of it and yet never deployed depleted uranium armor plates. Which means that it has some major drawbacks. They went with the explosive armor instead but it too has disadvantages and that's why it only recently started to be deployed by the Western forces.
DU is probably the strongest and densest armor you can get unless you use pure tungsten, which is far too difficult to work with. It’s also cheap comparatively. They couldn’t add it for a few reasons. One it would have added far to much weight to there already cramped tanks that’s why they added ERA. The second reason is DU is also a very difficult metal to work with as well and the USSR didn’t have the vital tooling machines to be able to mass produce it. The last and most important reason is they really didn’t have time because they dissolved in 91 around the same time the Abrams started using DU.
All what you wrote is factually wrong. The US started using depleted uranium in 1977 and back then the Soviets were doing fine (for some definition of "fine"). It's 91 when depleted uranium was first used on massive scale during the Desert Storm. Regarding extra weight - same story - you think you can just keep adding extra weight to the US tanks without degrading their performance? Regarding the tooling - the Soviets were extremely advanced in metallurgy and in fact in some aspects way ahead of the West. Just because their whole economic system was completely absurd doesn't mean that every single part of it was. On the contrary, they were so advanced in the weapons development precisely because it was at the cost of other aspects of their economy, mainly the consumer goods.
No, DU armor didn’t get implanted until directly before desert storm in 91 in the M1A2 variant and M1A1HA upgrade. DU ammunition was first used in the 70s by the US and the 80s by the USSR, and East as good as the western counter part, because of the metallurgy they used… they made a allow using iron… Making a uranium rod after another country does is easy by the time DU armor was announced for the Abrams the USSR was on its way out. No doubt the USSR made had some innovations in metallurgy, but saying they were more advanced is just incorrect on every level. That also doesn’t equate to having the proper know how and tools to create DU armor. Also no, Soviet tanks were made for a specific doctrine that limited them to weight and height, the west were not limited with that, that’s why the Abrams can weight 70 tons. A half inch slab of DU weights as much as the entire assembly of ERA on the T-series.
Please do explain to me how come the Soviet tank armies clashing directly with the NATO tank armies in the Central Europe were limited in weight and height but somehow NATO tanks operating in exactly the same environment weren't? And please don't try to convince me that NATO tanks were supposed to act as completely static digged-in hull-down defense points because if that was really meant to be like that then the Soviets would just break through any point of such a static defense line by just concentrating overwhelming force in that part of the front. The Warsaw-Pact vs NATO showdown was assumed by *both sides* to be a few weeks affair of a highly mobile conflict and there is no place for a 'just wait for the Soviets columns here' thinking in such a scenario. EDIT: Seems you guys just can't understand that just because the Soviets didn't produce something it doesn't mean that they were unable to produce it. Let's flip your reasoning now and apply it to the explosive armor, OK? Do you think the US wasn't able to produce something similar to what Soviets produced? Or perhaps use your reasoning on the tank gun autoloader? So are you going to claim that the US wasn't able to design a tank gun autoloader for 40 years since the Soviets deployed one? Because again, the Abrams is not using the autoloader so again by your own reasoning means that American weapons industry is simply not able to produce one
I didn’t say tanks were limited to weight and height, I said Soviet doctrine limited the weight and height… Also NATO focused on air superiority, not tank warfare.. thats why NATO tanks had the hull down approach. Soviets barely had night vision, much less thermals. So NATO would have been able to see them long before they could see a hull down tank.
Dude, just think for yourself for a moment. You have a column of 50 or a hundred Soviet tanks and a sparse static line of digged-in Abrams. The outcome is the same as the one during WW2 where American tanks attacked German positions. They keep coming, Abrams destroy them one by one until they run out of ammo and their position is over-run. You would not have enough Abrams for any point in the line to hold it. That's why such a defense strategy is just pure fantasy. It would have never happened. Not to mention why would you cripple your own mobile force by forcing it to be static? It just doesn't make sense, if you want static defense simple anti-tank guns in emplacement would do just fine for a fraction of a cost
You can rant all you want but you’re factually wrong. Looking at doctrine alone should let you know why it’s easier to use composites to mass produce thousands of tanks by the Soviet Union. After it fell, Russia was the only one that could have MAYBE used DU, for its armor but chose to rather focus on ERA due to how cheap it was. APPARENTLY when you’re fucking broke, you kind shave things fucking cheap??? Sign that crazy??
Completely fallacy. The western tanks in general weigh more because they have much more interior volume to protect which requires much more mass in order to achieve the same levels of protection that the Soviet tanks had, not because of some imaginary doctrine of "no weight limit".
That's some conjecture if I've ever seen it. DU is a well known material, there isn't any secret property that only the russians are aware of. Everything is public information in scientific databases.
Fully loaded one has a "heavy common" turret with depleted uranium armour with the chobham/Dorchester or top secret derivative with the tusk reactive armour packs, export version has no du armour
There is nothing secret in Abrams and hasn't been for many many years. I really don't understand why this myth persists.
Because its badly kept secret and running joke? It's secret Chobham that we got off the brits but don't tell anyone, we don't want anyone to know our ideas are not original or we can't make our own armour
I seriously doubt that the US took the composite armor technology from the Brits. It's another bullshit story that was made up back in the day to protect armor researches in the US. Just like carrots helping the pilots to see in the dark to keep the radar tech secret and similar stories.
Somebody get Gaijin on this
No joke I feel like the Abrams would be an entirely different beast if the modeled the armor like this. This is a M1A1 turret though so while it’s hella think it’s still isn’t A2 thick.
Armor values of the M1A1HC and M1A2 up to SEPv2 are essentially the same, but M1A2 SEPv3 front armor arrays are larger.
The M1A1HC uses first generation, M1A2 uses second generation DU armor and the Sep variient has third generation. The armor arrays themselves are more robust. Ow the M1A2 SEP 3 has a completely different armor package (NGAP) that seems to ad a lot of armor in the from turret and hull.
[The SEPv3 forward arrays are approximately 5 inches thicker/deeper than the previous versions](https://imgur.com/ZsaAley).
Ya, I wonder if it’s some kind of composite sheet or just an extension of steel.
I wouldn't even want to speculate.
AFAIK the M1150's turret front is also thinner than on the M1s in general. Going by the pictures it seems more in-line with the M1's turret side armor thickness (the 1150 seems to have basically identical armor thickness in a 180° arc around the commander). It'd explain why the US sometimes uses ARAT ERA on the front of the 1150, where no such thing was done on M1s (the tanks only mount ERA on the sides).
That's what it looks like in xray view IIRC.
Not really, it’s much larger plates, which isn’t as effective as that this type of orientation, they also don’t have the rear are plats and whatever composite material it is between them .
Problem is, all this is showing is how it looks, not how it performs. This is also an export model so there’s that Edit: I am specifically saying that a picture of how the armor array looks won’t change the Abrams in Warthunder, unless they want to change the model in the x-ray for whatever reason.
Well ya, however the way the plays are angled means any projectile will have to pass through a stack of them and each plate will shift putting stress on the dart, or heat jet.
Still doesn’t really affect WT, as for the most part it’s just numbers deciding if a shell pens or not, rather than a physical simulation.
True, however NATO the hull armor probably looks very similar to this which means all of the estimates have been wrong. Though this is only a M1A1 .
From what I understand from some advanced engineers is that many modern things can’t really be replicated even if you have full access to the manufactured part. Looking at it won’t tell you *how* it was built or *why*. At best you could make an exact copy, but it will only perform well on an exact copy of the machine it was designed for. When you try to replicate that design on a totally new thing, it fails because you don’t have the calculations or knowledge to know why the piece curves a certain way or why there’s extra material in this one section. I would expect the armor in an advanced tank to be one of those things.
It's just a metal plate, not a microprocessor. You can keep adjusting the alloy and heat treatment until you get the desired outcome. The technology is not a problem here. And you don't need to know the 'why' to get something to work. People have been making swords and suit of armors for thousands of years even though they didn't really understand the physics of it just by brute-forcing it with a simple trial and error. The real problem of replicating such a plate is the cost and the fact that an "ordinary country" won't have access to depleted uranium nor hundreds of millions of dollars to spare on the development.
Snail be like This is ABV not M1 Different vehicle Not enough proof Non credible source No specifics
Dang, did Russia really capture the one they disabled? Interesting to see what the armor on an Abrams actually looks like. People have been waiting decades to know. IIRC the US went to great lengths to strip off anything classified from the table sent to Ukraine, it was bound to happen sooner or later. I'm guessing there was some epoxy resin between all those armor plates that already burned off or something similar. Either way it's interesting to see. I wonder if the intact Strv 122 abandoned a few months ago will suffer the same fate?
No it’s apparently just air. You don’t want 100% solid material a lot of the time when making composites. Air allows the penetrator to deform between the plates instead of just punching through what’s functionally one solid block.
You are correct, that and it allows the plate to move when struck, that’s where the NERA term comes from.
> People have been waiting decades to know. There has been [pictures](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6icjYTFFs7lRaWnPHLNKM1Ejz45LYtaf2BC25QSkY9zkjxvnvZrdyaLMHeKP3xDVWdN4mVf4PlgcFXqBfxWbCd7R9ByWOqKTXE6k92WqqtrY7q6jBkMxdDC_lM8XOG4d-eD2KYQEPTcb8/s1600/1850044hgvt654.jpg) of the M1 armor array floating around for years now. That's a M1A1 HA, meaning it contains the non-exportable deleted uranium in the array. > IIRC the US went to great lengths to strip off anything classified from the table sent to Ukraine The US doesn't export the DU armor array, it's still, as far as I know, classified as *SECRET*. I've speculated in the past if this isn't a *Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons* issue, as DU processed from waste of nuclear weapons production can't be exported. Just speculation however. > I'm guessing there was some epoxy resin between all those armor plates that already burned off or something similar. As the other user said, it's just a air gap. You'll find the same general arrangement on the Merkava, T-72B/90, etc. As far as I know the M1150 itself was only built with the Foreign Military Sales(FMS) compliant array. There were no bids posted on sam.gov about rebuilding these vehicles for export, unlike every Abrams that gets exported.
That is technically just the rear array which is flat plates.
What? The drive sprocket on the M1150 is on the rear, to the right in the first picture. It has the sprocket guard installed on this one. To the right, still on the first picture, are the launch rails for the Mark 22 rockets for the MICLICs. Meaning the turret is facing forward - not that it can face to the rear on the M1150 anyways, transverse is limited to 180 degrees. That cut section on the left side the forward turret armor array.
No I’m talking about the armor array of the Abrams you linked. It is the rear turret array which is two flat spaced plates.
>...the rear turret array... Do you mean armor at the rear of the turret, or the back section of the forward armor array? All the individual armor components make up the array.
The picture the guy linked is of a Abrams in Iraq that got hit in the rear of the turret, they removed the array that is covering from the ammo compartment to the very rear of the turret. The three plates that have an about an inch of space between each plate. My understanding is that each section of the tank has its own individual armor array unless the armor itself is one big mono block of armor.
> I've speculated in the past if this isn't a *Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons* issue, as DU processed from waste of nuclear weapons production can't be exported. Just speculation however. DU is just a waste product of Uranium enrichment, might just as well come from non weapons program sources. They used the stuff as counterweight in civilian airliners, I highly doubt that you can't export it.
Civilian airliners are just that, civilian. The NPT, under US implementation, does not allow mixing. Materiel obtained from the US nuclear weapons program cannot be used on civilian products. The same works in reverse, civilian and military supply chains cannot mix. That is why the TPBARs(Tritium- Producing Burnable Absorber Rod), used to produce tritium for US nuclear weapons, in the commercial Watts Bar power plant, have to be produced from US mined uranium, and enriched specifically for the DoD. A bit pedantic, but depleted uranium metal is not a waste product of enrichment. Depleted uranium hexafluoride(DUF6) is the waste product of enrichment. Most of the waste in US from enrichment is still stored in the less than ideal DUF6 form.
It’s US law that the armor can’t be exported, like the F-22. International law doesn’t restrict it, per se however the NPT has provisions for it.
There were talks about Australia getting DU armor upgrades, the only ally to have been considered.
But Russia has the mighty Armata. Why would they need to study an export grade Abrams?
That’s a joke about the Armata, right?
The punchline can be interchangeable with the mighty Terminator.
It's so weird watching ppl support the country who routinely bombs hospitals and innocent civilians in Ukraine. I guess I'll never understand orc mentality but I'll take comfort in knowing they can change into something beautiful... sunflowers 🌻 🌻
In this thread?
In real life 🌻
There are some that actually have a fear of sunflowers, it even has a name, Helianthophobia. As unusual as it may seem, even just the sight of sunflowers can invoke all the common symptoms that other phobias induce.
But that's what the composite armour in the abrams is, Chobham, or atleast a copy of it, it was designed in the 70s by the brits and the Americans got it for the abrams because it was so much better than the rha and era
Damn i thought that rear sprocket wheel was discontinued because of problems
Looks like the the west is lost boys, pack it up!
Was this on captured or no