Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Damian]

But let people know how would it work, claim will need more arguments.

Why should I repeat myself or other again and again?

Such disposition is not necesarily related with anti-tandem mechanism. Conception is erroneous.

I am not interested in your opinion.

You present this as example of anti-tandem protection ?

It is obvious that for side hull, external M32 ERA cassette + internal M19 ERA cassette with 3 reactive layers will have anti tandem properties, it is simple, and can be easy explained on simplified model, where M32 neutralize precursor charge and M19 neutralize main charge.

For the side turret it is a bit more complex, there are only M32 cassettes and composite armor behind them, but it is absolutely possible that such array can offer protection against tandem charges, again M32 neutralize precursor charge and composite armor is then only hit by main charge. Although obviously side turret composite armor will need some modernization to do so, but official sources are clear that side armor had been improved.

 

[Damian]

Ha Ha Ha...

You said it and I quote :



so you compare yourself to Russia and USA ... Is not it ?? Or you make tanks for them ??

Tank is dead .. long live the tank !!!

You are too damn stupid to even understand these words, do you grass hoper?

 

[hest]

Why should I repeat myself or other again and again?

It is accepted that there is good protection, howewer claim of armour of limited mass to protect against everything under all circumstances needs explanation, what characteristics, thickness, what angle, warhead model...

I am not interested in your opinion.

I have no opinion.

It is obvious that for side hull, external M32 ERA cassette + internal M19 ERA cassette with 3 reactive layers will have anti tandem properties, it is simple, and can be easy explained on simplified model, where M32 neutralize precursor charge and M19 neutralize main charge.

It is erroneous because it is not local effect, precursor leads to initiation of all elements, external plate transfers initiation even by itself.

And placement in turret obviously refutes such idea. As in turret is placed only single element, claim of double configuration effectiveness does not makes sense. For such simple element to affect tandem charge significantly is unlikely.

 

[Damian]

It is accepted that there is good protection, howewer claim of armour of limited mass to protect against everything under all circumstances needs explanation, what characteristics, thickness, what angle, warhead model...

Lower weight of armor is achieved by new technology solutions, like ceramics made with nanotechnology, that are lighter yet stronger than older types of ceramics. Same applies to steel and other materials. You should read more about progress in materials made in western countries, these that are used, and new materials with incredible potential, yet to be known.

It is erroneous because it is not local effect, precursor leads to initiation of all elements, external plate transfers initiation even by itself.

Not the shape of M32, it is like Scutum shield or something else, and is attached to the M19 on a very small surface. Most probably initiation of ERA elements is properly timed.

And placement in turret obviously refutes such idea. As in turret is placed only single element, claim of double configuration effectiveness does not makes sense. For such simple element to affect tandem charge significantly is unlikely.

Turret have composite armor on sides, contrary to hull, so there might be no nececity to inlude there M19 cassettes.

Important is that ARAT-2 had been added later, after initial contacts with RPG-29's in Iraq, so it is completely resonable to at least consider is as an answer to this new threat, however not perfect answer, it is obvious. Perfect ERA would be something like "Knife" or "Duplet" from Ukraine.

 

[Damian]

And one more thing, when you ask, how it is possible that armor made from less dense, or lighter materials, can provide significant protection, answer yourself, how it is possible, that a low density, low weight material like graphene, is 100 times stronger than steel of the same thickness as a specific graphene sheet?

Many materials have very interesting properties, some not fully understanded even, and sticking to rigid patterns and dogmats is erroneous, because dogmats and rigid patterns do not permitt any new solutions, that might be superior in all aspects to the old solutions. This is significant difference, that is important, also when we talk about armored fighting vehicles protection.

 

[hest]

Lower weight of armor is achieved by new technology solutions, like ceramics made with nanotechnology, that are lighter yet stronger than older types of ceramics. Same applies to steel and other materials. You should read more about progress in materials made in western countries, these that are used, and new materials with incredible potential, yet to be known.

Yes, howewer I'd want to see arguments about how Leopard 2 is supposed to be protected as claimed, both hull and turret side against heavy over caliber RPG rounds

Not the shape of M32, it is like Scutum shield or something else, and is attached to the M19 on a very small surface. Most probably initiation of ERA elements is properly timed.

It is not possible, effect is not isolated, it could be timed, but RPG models vary significantly, more advanced models having longer "gap", and also such explanation, 2 elements are needed to affect tandem charges would not make sense given different placement in hull and turret.

Turret have composite armor on sides, contrary to hull, so there might be no nececity to inlude there M19 cassettes.

So tell me how this single element is intended to affect main warhead stream (after it's detonation). About composite armour it is true, that is why there is difference in ERA placement, but this does not apply to tandem charges. Modernised or not, have in mind that rest of tanks, Leopard 2, Challenger also with such turret armour need thick additional modules to achieve protection against RPG, so with weak ERA effect it would not be possible for Abrams to be protected, apart from simple rounds.

 

[Damian]

Yes, howewer I'd want to see arguments about how Leopard 2 is supposed to be protected as claimed, both hull and turret side against heavy over caliber RPG rounds

I do not have access to classified informations, but there is no reason to not believe in such capabilities.

It is not possible, effect is not isolated, it could be timed, but RPG models vary significantly, more advanced models having longer "gap", and also such explanation, 2 elements are needed to affect tandem charges would not make sense given different placement in hull and turret.

This is only your opinion, that is irrelevant. There is potential fo such capability, no reason to not believe in extistance of such capability, basta.

So tell me how this single element is intended to affect main warhead stream (after it's detonation).

Where did I said it affects main charge?

About composite armour it is true, that is why there is difference in ERA placement, but this does not apply to tandem charges.

Your opinion, irrelevant because based on your biases towards non russian made weapon systems.

Modernised or not, have in mind that rest of tanks, Leopard 2, Challenger also with such turret armour need thick additional modules to achieve protection against RPG, so with weak ERA effect it would not be possible for Abrams to be protected, apart from simple rounds.

As above, and mind that there are different solutions. Germans choosen nanocomposites from IBD, Americans developed layered ERA, and British... oh who said to you that these modules on turret sides of Challenger 2 are composite armor? In fact nobody knows what are these, it might be a composite, or perhaps ERA, hull sides are protected by ERA placed on composite heavy skirt for example.

Do not make such easy claims, not having all informations.

 

[Damian]

And the fact that different countries use different up armor solutions, do not make one or other inferior or ineffective, simply because someone says so, and base his argument on his symphaty or antypathy ot these solutions.

 

[Bhadra]

You are too damn stupid to even understand these words, do you grass hoper?

I think you contribute well which I also value... that is why the moderators accept your smelly foul language and utter nonsense..


And I like being a grass hoper because the technology of grass hoper is better than your tanks.. I would like to ride a modern grass hoper (hellicopter) to win a battle rather than mount on a stupid tank in mountains.

But let it be known to you that India has good tanks and that is the end of it.. If we need something more we shall fall back to our Polish friends..

 

[Damian]

And I like being a grass hoper because the technology of grass hoper is better than your tanks.. I would like to ride a modern grass hoper (hellicopter) to win a battle rather than mount on a stupid tank in mountains.

Better read how many helicopters Soviets loose in Afghanistan, or about the famous Iraqi ambush on US helicopters in 2003. I definetely preffer a tank, at least it can protect me from enemy fire.

But let it be known to you that India has good tanks and that is the end of it..

And I never said otherwise... although most of you misunderstood my posts.

I think you contribute well which I also value... that is why the moderators accept your smelly foul language and utter nonsense..

This is the difference between us, I provide something usefull, you provide only some bollocks. As for smelly foul language, if someone is too delicate for it, what I can do.

If we need something more we shall fall back to our Polish friends..

You need a new assault rifles, although I heard rumors that Beretta allready paid sufficent amount of money, to ensire their design will win, rumors are non official, but source is more than credible.

 

[hest]

I do not have access to classified informations, but there is no reason to not believe in such capabilities.

This is only your opinion, that is irrelevant. There is potential fo such capability, no reason to not believe in extistance of such capability, basta.

It is hypocritical for person disliking opinions to present beliefs and refuse to have rational discussion.

Back to statements like this

"Well only few MBTs have abilities to windstand RPG-29 from sides... M1A2 TUSK with ARAT-2, Oplot-M, CR2 Street Fighter, meybe Leopard-2A4CAN, leopard-2A7, MBT Revolution whit IBD armour, and maeby Leclerc-AZUR. And this is all... "

What is the origin of such claims or how are they justified ? ) In fact it results that neither M1A2 nor Leopard... proved anything.

Where did I said it affects main charge?

If you did not assume it, then you agree that there is no such protection. Obviously your claim had poor base.

Your opinion, irrelevant because based on your biases towards non russian made weapon systems.

I gave no opinion. Questioning of empty statements and claim for arguments is essential for mature discussion.

As above, and mind that there are different solutions. Germans choosen nanocomposites from IBD, Americans developed layered ERA, and British... oh who said to you that these modules on turret sides of Challenger 2 are composite armor? In fact nobody knows what are these, it might be a composite, or perhaps ERA, hull sides are protected by ERA placed on composite heavy skirt for example.

There is no layered ERA in M1A2 turret, and you agree that element does not affect tandem charge so no additional protection from it. Yes, Leopard 2, Challenger 2, Type 10 with composite armour turret sides mount additional thick modules for SC protection, which does not have Abrams.

Do not make such easy claims, not having all informations.

I did not. Not having information, you accept that you do not know, but you make an assertion which members here are questioning, and do not present arguments.

 

[Damian]

It is not known if these addon armor modules are composite or ERA, however closer look, makes me think it is more likely ERA.

These "armor" modules are clearly just simple storage boxes, we can see hinges and cover plates that can be opened.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Nice detailed pictures @Damian

 

[Damian]

Nice detailed pictures @Damian

Yeah, and some informations about Challenger 2, unfortunetely for some reason TankNet forums are shut down, but guys from there, well informed former RAC tankers or people close to RAC said that Challenger 2 have different up armor kits, it is very difficult to say what specific armor is used in different kit. I also heard that for some reason, they are again issue old ROMOR-A ERA for the lower front hull plate in place of more modern Dorchester armor module.

I also find a very interesting that British concept of addon armor, well it is not addon armor, it just the wartime tank configuration, and the whole idea is rather old, from the times when Chieftain was designed if I remember correctly.

 

[hest]

With such weight increase (up 70 tons) it is probably not just ERA, there are also variants, howewer it shows that achievement of good RPG protection is not a trivial task, certainly more than just placement of single elements.

 

[Damian]

These ERA modules are big, and seems to be derived from American ARAT-1 ERA, or share same common ancestor, manufacturer of ARAT-1, BRAT and SRAT ERA, says that this ERA have additional passive protection, which can add some weight. Besides this weight increase comes also from additional passive armor screes behind ERA, additional hull belly protection, and slat armor, all of this weight a lot, basic Challenger 2 weights 62,5 tons, it is more than possible to have additional 7,5-11,5 tons when we combine weight of all of these.
@Kunal Biswas, I have a lot of good photos on my HD, if you have some requests, perhaps I will be able to find some good photos, or in books I have.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

In time ..

Thanks

@Kunal Biswas, I have a lot of good photos on my HD, if you have some requests, perhaps I will be able to find some good photos, or in books I have.

 

[Damian]

I made some calculation.

The belly addon armor in American TUSK kit weight 2,4 tons, so I will use it as a reference to the British armor kit for Challenger 2.

If we assume that the whole kit weights 7,5 tons - 2,4 for belly armor, this gives us 5,1 tons for side armor, this means 2,5 tons for each side. If we assume that whole armor kit weight's 11,5 tons, then - 2,4 for belly armor, gives us 9,1 for the sides, this gives us 4,5 tons for each vehicle side. Seems legit.

Don't know though how much TUSK kit weights besides belly armor, some sources said that tank weights 65 tons with TUSK, but I don't know, it does not look legit, it gives us 65 tons - 2,4 tons for belly armor = 62,6, this is less then M1A2SEP weights (63,1 tons). IMHO M1A1/A2 with TUSK kit also weights around 70 tons (metric!), then calculations makes some sense.

 

[hest]

----------------------------------------- Never happened ----------------------------------------

 

[methos]

That's not ERA. The Challenger 2 is fitted with RAP made by Rafael. Afaik RAP stands for "Rafael Applique Armour" or something like that. It would be a very stupid design if it was ERA (way too large area and way too much weight). The Challenger 2 with full armour package weighs 74.95 tonnes! If the mine plate weighs 2 tonnes (like in Leopard 2), then there are still 10.45 tonnes for armour and jamming equipment.

E: The chassis of a M1A1 Abrams after ASU or a newer M1A2 can handle 69 tonnes.