Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[p2prada]

Excellent. So, the Ukrainians want a piece of the action.

 

[mppglobal]

This good post is very interesting knowledge
Nice and very helpful information your marvelous posting!
Thanks for good info....

 

[Damian]

Also wasn't there a Leo as well with a 130mm or 140mm.

Two prototypes, more advanced German one, in some aspects similiar to the US modifications like that from photo of CATTB, and second less advanced from Swiss.

Both armed with 140mm.

Are there any latest western works on Obj 188A1 available?

I doubt, if You look at some more detailed informations better look around Russian language sources.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting proposal from Kharkiv, what is even more interesting look at proposed T-90S modernization, it's nothing more than many elements of T-84M Oplot installed on T-90S. I see Knife/Duplet ERA modules, PNK-6 commander panoramic viewer with KT-12,7 machine gun in it's RWS conncected to PNK-6. Very interesting is that thing looking like a bustle attached to turret rear... hmmm autoloader module from T-84-120 Yatagan (it can use standard 125mm two piece ammunition as well)?

 

[arya]

i like this thread good work all members

 

[p2prada]

Interesting proposal from Kharkiv, what is even more interesting look at proposed T-90S modernization, it's nothing more than many elements of T-84M Oplot installed on T-90S. I see Knife/Duplet ERA modules, PNK-6 commander panoramic viewer with KT-12,7 machine gun in it's RWS conncected to PNK-6. Very interesting is that thing looking like a bustle attached to turret rear... hmmm autoloader module from T-84-120 Yatagan (it can use standard 125mm two piece ammunition as well)?

Engine, I am not so sure, but the rest won't be found on our T-90 for sure. MoD does not allow a third party to upgrade the T-90. Only OEM can. Maybe engine won't be allowed either. Anyway, this may be an option for other countries who want the T-90 but with T-84 electronics and upgrades. Upgraded T-72s supposedly have foreign parts that Russia could not provide at the time, not so sure how that has progressed.

 

[Damian]

Well if KMDB would be very desperate to get that deal they might sign a deal in such way that OEM will have transfer of technology and could produce these elements from Oplot. Ukrainians might help with integration, very important thing especially if someone do not have experience with this. I remember that several years ago Czech T-72M4Cz had technical problems because someone screwed something up during components integration.

Everything should depend on tests and properly written deal documentation.

On the other hand both T-90MS and possible Ukrainian modernization are rather complex in some points.

Integration of new ERA modules, FCS and engine is simple, but for example T-90MS have completely new turret, same with Ukrainian proposal, installation of PNK-6 needs additional changes in turret so... all in all T-90MS production in India might be simpler and cheaper solution, modernization of older tanks also.

 

[p2prada]

Well if KMDB would be very desperate to get that deal they might sign a deal in such way that OEM will have transfer of technology and could produce these elements from Oplot. Ukrainians might help with integration, very important thing especially if someone do not have experience with this. I remember that several years ago Czech T-72M4Cz had technical problems because someone screwed something up during components integration.

Yeah. We already have around 1000 T-90s. Orders are for 248 Arjuns and a possibility for another 248. Another 700 T-90s are to be inducted. So, that would amount to at least 2200 tanks with new engines and other upgrades. Apart from that we have 2500 T-72s with the oldest being 32 years old. So, at least 1500 are up for upgrades. So, that's a potential business for 3000+ tanks.

If they find ways to circumvent MoDs rules, then the kind of business we offer, along with ammo, will be in Billions.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Enjoy posting and debating..

 

[Damian]

Yeah. We already have around 1000 T-90s. Orders are for 248 Arjuns and a possibility for another 248. Another 700 T-90s are to be inducted. So, that would amount to at least 2200 tanks with new engines and other upgrades. Apart from that we have 2500 T-72s with the oldest being 32 years old. So, at least 1500 are up for upgrades. So, that's a potential business for 3000+ tanks.

Let's think here a bit. 3,000+ tanks that need modernization, this means new ERA, engines, transmission blocks, possibly new main armament (120mm and 125mm smoothbore guns offered by Ukraine) ammunition, mechanical and electronic components... this would be incredible pile of money for Ukraine, nothing strange that they try to interest Indian MoD on DEFEXPO, and I think is is fair to admitt that their offer can be competetive with both Russian and Indian companys proposals.

 

[methos]

Replacing the T-72s would be a better choice.

 

[p2prada]

Replacing the T-72s would be a better choice.

The speed of inductions must surpass the speed of phasing out the tanks. T-72s were manufactured as far as in 2006(20 per year or so since 1998). Serial production ended only in 1998. So, a lot of the T-72s are less than 20 years old and we aren't making more than 200 tanks a year from next year, that's 150 T-90s and 50 Arjuns. If we are to replace 2500 T-72s,we are going to have to make a lot more than that. Old T-72s, which are more than 30 years old, are being replaced with T-90s.

According to the Army, the life of a tank is 32 years.

 

[Damian]

Life of a tank depends on many things.

For example in current active part of tank fleet of US Armed Forces, oldest tank have... 2 years, yes it is 2 years old. This is thanks to RESET and modernization programs. Tank is completely refurbished, it's like new tank comming out of factory but in reality it was for example manufactured in 1980's.

As for T-72's, if India would modernize them in complex way, this means deep modernization, their combat values can increase, but of course everything depends on modernization program.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Life of a tank depends on many things.

For example in current active part of tank fleet of US Armed Forces, oldest tank have... 2 years, yes it is 2 years old. This is thanks to RESET and modernization programs. Tank is completely refurbished, it's like new tank comming out of factory but in reality it was for example manufactured in 1980's.

As for T-72's, if India would modernize them in complex way, this means deep modernization, their combat values can increase, but of course everything depends on modernization program.

I agree, i have seen that complete refurbishment of American tanks on Discovery or something. However how much of that can be done on T-72 is a big question.

Can we do the same thing with the T-72 and upgrade them to the T-90 standards, how much of it will be common with the new T-90! I am not sure on the specs.

 

[Damian]

Everything can be done that way.

Even old T-72M1 can be upgraded to T-90 with welded turret standard.

Front composite armor of hull need to be replaced, new welded turret manufactured, all internal and external components replaced. What's left from old T-72M1 is some hull parts.

Same is done with modernized M1 Abrams tanks.

If tank is in M1 or M1IP variant, turret is replaced by new one (this is because M1 use Type I turret, M1IP Type II turret and M1A1/M1A2 use Type III turret) and hull is deeply modified (this means cutting and welding work also), if it is older M1A1 variant, then turret and hull is left as it is only armor and all interna/external components are replaced.

So everything depends on money, what we want achieve, and what our factories are capable to do. Tanks are very flexible vehicles, of course if tank is very old it is better to buy or design new vehicle.

 

[methos]

To upgrade/refurbish the T-72 is not a good idea. In the end you will need to make extensive modifications to the turret (i.e. replacing it with a new one if you want sufficient protection against 125 mm APFSDS) and the hull (where especially the armour is troublesome). Just sticking new ERA on the front does not help much due to the low protection level against KE and the low coverage. Changing the turret and hull front will very likely increase the armour protection, but firepower will be only increase by using a new FCS, while mobility gets worse until engine and probably also transmission are changed (assuming that the suspension won't have any trouble with the extra weight). The work required is enough to nearly make a new tank, but the product is probably not better (maybe even worse) than a normal T-90.
The price is the main point of interest - is it gonna be cheaper than a normal T-90? I doubt that. Even if it would be cheaper, the chassis will have a limited lifespan, replacement will then just be required at a later time.

 

[pmaitra]

Explosive Reactive Armor

A short video on Explosive Reactive Armour, how they came about, how they work and what might be the future.

 

[pmaitra]

Shaped Charge

This video shows how this explosive (P4 or C4 or cyclotrimethylene trinitramine) is basically useless if simply exploded on the surface of a metal, but is very lethal if the explosion can be directed in the right way and in the right direction.

 

[Damian]

These videos are typical for television, oversimplified.

Working mechanism of Explosive Reactive Armor as in all types of Dynamic Protection is far more complex and interesting than just "explosive filler with some steel plates reppeling projectile".

 

[pmaitra]

These videos are typical for television, oversimplified.

Working mechanism of Explosive Reactive Armor as in all types of Dynamic Protection is far more complex and interesting than just "explosive filler with some steel plates reppeling projectile".

You know what would be very helpful? Something that everyone can understand.

One the other hand, you have every opportunity to explain the finer details. For example, I was wondering about the difference between a spinning sabot and a non-spinning sabot. Perhaps you can help?

 

[Damian]

You know what would be very helpful? Something that everyone can understand.

ERA work primary to increase erosion of both shaped charge jet and kinetic energy penetrator. However, in case of KE penetrator additional mechanism of defeating projectile are yaw effect, undesirable internal vibrations and stress and similiar to brake, crush penetrator, for shaped charge jet of course, ERA have additional stand off effect and other working mechanisms.

Very misterious working mechanism of armor protection discovered by British inventor team working on "Burlington" R&D program, was so called "whistle" effect, nobody really knows how this working mechanism can be described.

For example, I was wondering about the difference between a spinning sabot and a non-spinning sabot. Perhaps you can help?

You mean APFSDS that do not spin against APDS that spin? We know that APFSDS are mostly more potent, even APFSDS designed in the same time period as some APDS were more potent in armor penetration, why? I suspect it have something to do with spin effect, because materials and penetrator lenght of such projectiles was very similiar.

As we know spin effect decrease penetration capabilities of shaped charge jet, why? It's very complex problem and I'm affraid that my knowledge here is still limited. Maybe Methos can answer better in this subject, my main interest is still armor protection.