Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Damian]

Good question. In theory You can do shaped charge warhead in home, however it's penetration capabilities also depends on quality, calliber, materials used etc.

In Iraq some EFP's were home made, I think that also Palestinians have their home made bastard child of RPG-7, with home made shaped charge warheads.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Methos is right. Do have a look at some diagrams posted by Damian and a video that I had posted long time back. Shaped charge is very effective.

LLOLLLZ ,when did i say methos is wrong ,infact he has good amount of knowledge regarding TANKS ,hmmm impressive,So do DAMIAN.:thumb:


But i wanna know is their any counter to CBU 105 SFW weapon for a tank ????

Can Active protection system like Trophy be effective against it??

 

[Damian]

Doubtfull that Trophy might be effective against such threats, mainly because it have limited + elevation levels.

More effective might be US Quick Kill APS or German AMAP-ADS... both IMHO are the best APS systems designed, however Quick Kill is still, more or less in R&D phase.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Doubtfull that Trophy might be effective against such threats, mainly because it have limited + elevation levels.

More effective might be US Quick Kill APS or German AMAP-ADS... both IMHO are the best APS systems designed, however Quick Kill is still, more or less in R&D phase.

correct me if i am not wrong German AMAP -ADS is also in testing phase but advanced than all it's counter parts.

 

[Damian]

correct me if i am not wrong German AMAP -ADS is also in testing phase but advanced than all it's counter parts.

No, I think it is in operational ready status, it is just that nobody ordered it, yet.

However this year AUSA 2012 confirmed that further upgrades for M1 tanks, will among new better armor, also includes active protection system, yet nobody knows what system will be used, however US Army is testing besides US made Quick Kill and Iron Curtain, several other systems.

 

[p2prada]

There is nothing on this earth that humans have made that can "melt" a huge mass of steel and armour in microseconds. Not even laser.

 

[Drsomnath999]

No, I think it is in operational ready status, it is just that nobody ordered it, yet.

However this year AUSA 2012 confirmed that further upgrades for M1 tanks, will among new better armor, also includes active protection system, yet nobody knows what system will be used, however US Army is testing besides US made Quick Kill and Iron Curtain, several other systems.

USA have also tested German AMAP -ADS system & they are also satisfied with it

http://www.ibd-deisenroth-engineeri...content-pdfs/Newsletter February 2011_002.pdf

 

[Godless-Kafir]

USA have also tested German AMAP -ADS system & they are also satisfied with it

IBD Deisenroth Engineering - IBD News

Dear Dr.Somnath for a person who is meant to save lives you sure have so much love for the art of killing!

This does not show that USA tested German nano armor?

 

[methos]

AMAP-ADS has been ordered by one Asian nation, but it was not disclosed by whom. Most probably it is Singapore, having invested quite a lot in IBD armour for their newer combat vehicles (Bionix, Leopard 2, etc.).

However this year AUSA 2012 confirmed that further upgrades for M1 tanks, will among new better armor, also includes active protection system, yet nobody knows what system will be used, however US Army is testing besides US made Quick Kill and Iron Curtain, several other systems.

Taking a look at history I doubt that the U.S. will accept a foreign APS.

 

[Damian]

Taking a look at history I doubt that the U.S. will accept a foreign APS.

Indeed. But Quick Kill itself, basing on VLS lancuhers concept, have many advantages over other types of APS, like high anti projectiles capacity, full 360 degrees protection, unlimited elevation, because VLS lanchers do not need it etc.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Dear Dr.Somnath for a person who is meant to save lives you sure have so much love for the art of killing!

well I am

hAAA.haaa:hippo:

This does not show that USA tested German nano armor?

oops ,i had also not seen that pdf ,i only saw it's source referred in wikipedia

 

[asianobserve]

I wonder if shaped charge can be made at home? Does it require C-4 or does cracker powder(silver nitrate) good enough!

(Out of topic) Reminds me of the shaped charge used to assassinate in 1989 the Chairman of Deutsche Bank Alfred Herrhausen. The shaped charge was planted at the side of the road and perfectly aimed to hit the rear passenger compartment of the armored Mercedes Benz Mr. Herrhausen. He did not stand a chance.

The bomb in this case was improvised although I don't know if the copper shaped charge was also improvised or home-made.

 

[Damian]

It was a HEAT or EFP warhead? Both are types of shaped charge ammunition.

 

[asianobserve]

I just found this article, it says it was not an EFP but a platter charge...

"xxx

Herrhausen was in a bullet-proof Mercedes limousine, the middle car of a three-vehicle convoy, with bodyguards ahead and behind. The RAF planned their attack well, planting their bomb in a satchel on a bicycle parked beside the route. The bomb was linked to an infrared beam, which terrorists posing as workmen had set up across the road.

The terrorists allowed the lead car through, and then activated the beam. When Herrhausen's car broke the beam, the bomb went off. It consisted of ten kilos of explosive and a two-kilo copper plate, aimed so that it would strike the passenger seat.

The metal pierced the armored limo and Herrhausen was wounded in the legs; he bled to death shortly afterwards, before medical assistance arrived.

The RAF device which killed Herrhausen is generally described as a platter charge, rather than an Iraq-style EFP. That's because the RAF are not thought to have had the skill to produce an EFP. By contrast, a platter charge is a much cruder form of improvised explosive device. An Army field manual describes:

The platter charge consists of a suitable container that is filled with uniformly packed explosive and placed behind a platter. The platter is metal (preferably round, but square is satisfactory) and weighs 1 to 3 kilograms. The explosive required is equal to the weight of the platter. The container may not be necessary if the explosive can be held firmly against the platter (tape can be used). The charge should be primed from the exact rear center, and the blasting cap should be completely covered with a small amount of C4 to ensure detonation.

The charge should be aimed at the direct center of the target. The effective range (primarily a matter of aim) is approximately 35 meters for a small target. With practice, experienced personnel can hit a 55-gallon drum (a relatively small target) at 25 meters with about 90 percent accuracy.

As the manual indicates, anyone can assemble a platter charge — and it requires no special materials.

An EFP is a little different. It's a form of shaped charge which employs a shallow metal dish called a liner. This usually made of copper, which is engineered to a very specific shape. The blast deforms this into an aerodynamic slug, with longer range but less penetrating power than a standard shaped charge. (Normal shaped charges fire a very narrow but high velocity jet of metal over a very short range with superior armor-piercing properties.)

xxx"

Superbomb Mystery: The Herrhausen Assassination | Danger Room | Wired.com

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Why does Global fire power web site put Indian land based weapons in number 2?? Are they talking of all the Vijayadanthas we have in reserve?

Total Land-Based Weapons by Country


we also have the most anti tank weapons???
http://www.globalfirepower.com/infantry-guided-antitank-systems-total.asp

 

[methos]

The website bases it's ranking on the numbers only. India has much soldiers and a lot of (mostly old) vehicles - this means that it gets a high rank. Take a look at other countries in the top ten... it's not based on quality, but on quantity.

The anti-tank weapons list displays nearly 0 weapons for most countries, 200 only for Germany... I think they base their list on incomplete data.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

The website bases it's ranking on the numbers only. India has much soldiers and a lot of (mostly old) vehicles - this means that it gets a high rank. Take a look at other countries in the top ten... it's not based on quality, but on quantity.

The anti-tank weapons list displays nearly 0 weapons for most countries, 200 only for Germany... I think they base their list on incomplete data.

Even then France or UK have only 410 MBTs while India has 1000 T-90s alone and many more Arjuns Mk-1s Mk-2s and upgrade of T-72 to modern specs are on. India has 5000 MBTs how is that comparable to 410 MBTs of France?

 

[blueblood]

The website bases it's ranking on the numbers only. India has much soldiers and a lot of (mostly old) vehicles - this means that it gets a high rank. Take a look at other countries in the top ten... it's not based on quality, but on quantity.

The anti-tank weapons list displays nearly 0 weapons for most countries, 200 only for Germany... I think they base their list on incomplete data.

Not sure about others but in a few things like ATGMs, SAMs and trucks, the ranking seems appropriate.

 

[methos]

You should not forget the technical aspect. Not all Indian tanks are T-90s or Arjuns (and even they aren't the best). Just a short time ago India has bought new ammunition for their T-72s and T-90s from Russia.
Current Russian export APFSDS has a total length below 60 cm (probably 57 cm) and a muzzle velocity of ~1,700 m/s... how do you compare this to modern ammunition from France, Germany and the U.S.?
Germany has APFSDS with a total length of 75 cm and a muzzle velocity of 1,750 m/s, French tanks use 69 cm long APFSDS with a muzzle velocity of 1,790 m/s and the U.S. Army has 89 cm long APFSDS with a muzzle velocity of only 1,555 m/s. The Arjun has an APFSDS with a length of only 48-49 cm and a muzzle velocity of only 1,650 m/s...
In WW2 better armour and ammunition were the reasons why some heavy tank units exceeded a 10:1 kill-death-ratio in Russia.

Do you think that the potency of the armies can easily be compared on sole number with already such huge differences in ammunition technology only?
India, Syria, Egypt, Turkey, Greece, North Korea etc. are on the top places, even though they only have a small number of up-to-date weapon systems (or sometimes even not a single one), but because they have much.

Indian anti-tank weapons include 84 mm and 106 mm recoilless weapons with single shaped charge warhead (penetration ~400 mm) and RPG-7s with single charge warhead (penetration ~300 mm)... is this comparable to the PzF-3IT (penetration ~900 mm + ERA) or the ERYX missile (penetration ~900 mm + ERA)? I doubt so.

 

[blueblood]

Indian anti-tank weapons include 84 mm and 106 mm recoilless weapons with single shaped charge warhead (penetration ~400 mm) and RPG-7s with single charge warhead (penetration ~300 mm)... is this comparable to the PzF-3IT (penetration ~900 mm + ERA) or the ERYX missile (penetration ~900 mm + ERA)? I doubt so.

RPG-7 is not used by Indian Army. Other anti tank armaments include some 30,000 MILAN, 15,000 konkurs and few more. In addition to this, $1 billion dollar tender is out there for the acquisition of more than 8,000 Spike or Javelin missiles. This will make India, the largest user of Spike or second largest user of Javelin. This is multiple times more than the combined European inventory of 3rd gen manportable ATGM.

Also, recently Indian Army ordered 25,000 Refleks GLATGM.