Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology
Soner 1980 (the guy who disclosed turkish and pakistani composite armour deal back in 2006) wrote on defencetalk forum.
Read more:
Pakistan to transfer composite armor technology to Turkey. - Page 2 - Defense Technology & Military Forum
What a bollocks, how funny is to read posts of people that do not have even smallest idea about subject they talk about.
There were no 3 phases of Burlington armor or Chobham as that guy calls it, not to mention that Chobham armor is someones invention, not a real codename. And Burlington armor is not used by USA from 1988 and by UK from 1990's, and was replaced by Heavy Armor Package in USA and Dorchester armor in UK.
There are so many mistakes, lies and other BS written by this guy, that I give up, it seems that collecting reliable knowledge is beyond some people capability.
Ok I will explain... again...
British (and later also with American cooperation), composite armors were developed within a secret program codenamed "Burlington", within this program several different armors were developed. During development some of the armor projects were abandoned as not promising enough, some were promising and their development was continued.
Now the important thing, we do not know which armor types were choosen, we only know, that general design of these armors, was a composite non energetic reactive armor array, this is all we know for certain, I also seen a mention of a second type which in such array, used also build in explosive reactive armor, but nothing more about it.
These different armor types did not had any codenames, in documents they were only reffered as for exampe "armor array no.4" or "buiscuit no.1" etc. No codenames. So technically these armors should be reffered only as special armors, without codenames.
But for simplicity they are called as "Burlington" armor.
"Chobham" armor is someones invention, nobody really knows from where it came, but it is not official codename for armor development program or any of these armors developed.
Also the US side, had it's own part in whole program, and their development had codename "Starflower" but it is still not a codename for armor itself, M1's armor prior 1988 should allways be reffered as "Special Armor" or "Burlington" and after 1988 it was replaced by "Heavy Armor Package" or HAP for short.
As for generations of armor. The "Burlington" armor had several different variations, only Americans have clearly distinguished two variants of this armor, early used on M1, and later used on M1IP and M1A1.
In 1988 USA fields M1A1HA with new type of armor, HAP, this was it's 1st generation, in 1990 2nd generation is fielded on later production of M1A1HA and new M1A1HC and in 1992 on M1A2. In 1999 3rd generation is fielded on M1A2SEP and in first decade of XXI century and in 2011-2014 period is also integrated with M1A1SA and M1A1FEP.
HAP will soon be replaced by new armor type developed for M1 tanks within ECP modernization.
I will not even mention bollocks this guy writes about Leopard 2 armor.
And what makes him certain that Al Khalid uses "Combination K"
, what, Pakistanis are still using obsolete alluminium insterts with some ceramic spheres?
Also what makes him think that they use Boron Carbide, one of the most expensive ceramics? A richer countries do not have money to use Boron Carbide on a large scale, and here we have guy that thinks that a relatively poorer Pakistan is capable to find a money to pay for a large batch of one of the most expensive ballistic ceramics... is this guy stupid or insanse, or perhaps both?
