Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[farhan_9909]

Al-Khalid II (Alkhalid 2) (MBT) unveiled for Pakistan - YouTube

well yes.right now i could not ffind the picture
but the picture from the front side of the side skirts of the AK1 is in this video

the same prototype but just the picture is from front.

 

[Damian]

Al-Khalid II (Alkhalid 2) (MBT) unveiled for Pakistan - YouTube

well yes.right now i could not ffind the picture
but the picture from the front side of the side skirts of the AK1 is in this video

the same prototype but just the picture is from front.

Does not show much, indeed looks thicker, but still with a good close up photo, can't say much about it. I have some doubts about the skirts design, still as I said, without a close up, I can't say much.

 

[farhan_9909]

And I will wait. It will be funny to see your theories in clear contradiction. ...

the western MBT are just over hyped


they cant even withstand to rgp 29 and weight 65 tonnes

 

[farhan_9909]

Does not show much, indeed looks thicker, but still with a good close up photo, can't say much about it. I have some doubts about the skirts design, still as I said, without a close up, I can't say much.

even yesterday i found that picture on Google image.searched for more than 30mins and could not find now

the picture size was large aswell.
I will post it as soon as i get it

 

[hest]

Damian, earlier you stated that Abrams frontal protection is about 800 mm against CE...

From where you got this figure ?

 

[militarysta]

Damian, earlier you stated that Abrams frontal protection is about 800 mm against CE...

From where you got this figure ?

It's for hull...
Turret front in M1A1HA was able to withstand AGM-114 Hellfire during ODS. So about 170mm diameter warhed shoud have (6 ratio) at least 1020mm RHA perforation. And this M1A1HA wasn't perforated after hit...

 

[Damian]

Damian, earlier you stated that Abrams frontal protection is about 800 mm against CE...

From where you got this figure ?

Where did I stated? I never staded such thing, if somewhere I sayd so it was sarcasm...

the western MBT are just over hyped

It is not truth, overhyped are Russian tanks, especially by Russian fanboys.

they cant even withstand to rgp 29 and weight 65 tonnes

There were at least two videos of M1A1/M1A2 attacked by RPG-29 at front, no effects, armor was no perforated.

Side armor in all tanks attacked at angle close to 90 degrees will not withstand such warhead.

Challenger 2 where it was hit, it is lower front hull plate, it is place where there is no composite armor placed.

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

Russian sources says that RPG-29 have penetration capability of 750mm RHA behind ERA. RPG-29 was fired at M1A1/M1A2's in Iraq, also their front armor. There was at least one single accident when RPG-29 hit front hull armor, and did not penetrate tank (I known man that have conctact with soldiers in Iraq, he asked if there were reports of frontal armor perforations, none, and I belive him, he is very reliable in his work to document all cases).

As we know front hull armor of M1 series is not covered by ERA, it means it have protection way over what RPG-29 can penetrate without ERA in it's path. Neither after hits in front armor, any additional protection was demanded, it means that protection is well above any silly Russian or Chinese estimations.

Besides this, none of western tanks weight in basic configuration 65 metric tones, this is just pure BS.

The heaviest M1 variants, M1A1SA, M1A1FEP and M1A2SEP weight is 63,1 metric tons.
Heaviest Leopard 2 variants weight is 62,5 metric tons.
Challenger 2 weight is 62,5 metric tons.
Leclerc SXXI/S3 weight is somewhere around 60 metric tons.

The only tank that weight is 65 metric tons in basic configuration is Israeli Merkava Mk4, and this is not western tank, simply because it does not follows wester design philosophy.

 

[militarysta]

Back to the Spike/Javelin and ERA on tank roof:
As I said: ERA effectivnes will be mucht lower for 60-80 degree. It can't be 90% as in this all stupid ads on btvt. It just must be lower value. And no matter if it will be 50 or 60% effectivnes for ERA on turret top for diving during attack top-attac ATGM whit angle bigger then 60 degree. HEAT warhed wit 700mm will be enought becouse minimum value to defedet turret roof is 150mm RHA to ignit ammo or kill crew + 40-70mm RHA turret roof which give us only 190-220mm RHA perforation value. So on ERA cassette HEAT in Spike can lost even 73% of perforation value And it's no way to achive so big ERA effectiveness for angles bigger then 60-70 degree. It's just impossible for known ERA able to place on turret roof.

ERA - no matter what ERA: Kontak-5, ERAWA-2, Relikt, Nóż, Dyna, have drastically less effective when angle of attack is bigger then 60 degree. Like for "diving" top=attack ATGMS.

 

[militarysta]

---

Russian sources says that RPG-29 have penetration capability of 750mm RHA behind ERA. RPG-29 was fired at M1A1/M1A2's in Iraq, also their front armor. There was at least one single accident when RPG-29 hit front hull armor, and did not penetrate tank (I known man that have conctact with soldiers in Iraq, he asked if there were reports of frontal armor perforations, none, and I belive him, he is very reliable in his work to document all cases).

As we know front hull armor of M1 series is not covered by ERA, it means it have protection way over what RPG-29 can penetrate without ERA in it's path. Neither after hits in front armor, any additional protection was demanded, it means that protection is well above any silly Russian or Chinese estimations.

Simmilar facts we have for more accidents:

1. M1A1HA hit in turret front by AGM-114 during ODS. No perforation.
2. CR hit by M829A1 (no perforation)
3. Test after DDR colapse when 3BM22 was not able to perforate Leopard-2A4 amour even from 400m (yes, know -no big deal)
4. Leopard-2A4 front armour able to windstand (in erly 1990.) LKE I on 2000m.
5. Leopard-2A6 turret windstand more then 18 shoot by CLM332 during testing for Greece (600-650mm RHA perforation for this APFSDS)
6. Iraq Freedom CR2 hit by Milan ATGM (again no big deal - 125mm warhed able to perforate only 600-700mm RHA) again -no perforation
and more...

 

[hest]

Where did I stated? I never staded such thing, if somewhere I sayd so it was sarcasm...

Here, in Guns and Ammunition thread, well, for front hull:

.. when it was unable to perforate front hull armor of M1 series, that is in most cases estimated as max 800mm RHAe vs CE

 

[hest]

Turret front in M1A1HA was able to withstand AGM-114 Hellfire during ODS. So about 170mm diameter warhed shoud have (6 ratio) at least 1020mm RHA perforation. And this M1A1HA wasn't perforated after hit.

Again with estimations ?? Not valid ratio for 80s missile...

Back to the Spike/Javelin and ERA on tank roof:
As I said: ERA effectivnes will be mucht lower for 60-80 degree. It can't be 90% as in this all stupid ads on btvt. It just must be lower value. And no matter if it will be 50 or 60% effectivnes for ERA on turret top for diving during attack top-attac ATGM whit angle bigger then 60 degree. HEAT warhed wit 700mm will be enought becouse minimum value to defedet turret roof is 150mm RHA to ignit ammo or kill crew + 40-70mm RHA turret roof which give us only 190-220mm RHA perforation value. So on ERA cassette HEAT in Spike can lost even 73% of perforation value And it's no way to achive so big ERA effectiveness for angles bigger then 60-70 degree. It's just impossible for known ERA able to place on turret roof.

ERA - no matter what ERA: Kontak-5, ERAWA-2, Relikt, Nóż, Dyna, have drastically less effective when angle of attack is bigger then 60 degree. Like for "diving" top=attack ATGMS.

Instead of replying now to this repeated incorrect statement I will wait for your detailed post and then will explain.

 

[Damian]

Here, in Guns and Ammunition thread, well, for front hull:

Ahhh, this one, there are some silly estimations on Collins site based on some other estimations. Interesting is this that they are close to the reality by fact that RPG-29 is uncapable to perforate front hull armor of M1A1/M1A2 series.

 

[militarysta]

Again with estimations ?? Not valid ratio for 80s missile...

In most sources perforation AGM-114 used durng ODS is given like 1200mm RHA or slighty more. In my opinnion it's overestimated and it will be around 1000-1050mm when we take ratio like for other SC warhed in those yers.

But fakt is that: M1A1HA was hit in frontal turret armour almoust perpendicular to the frontal turret surface. LOS in that case is about 800-880mm LOS thick. Warhed (HEAT) whit perforation at least 1000mm RHA (170mm diameter) was not able to perforate this armour.
So it's rather obvious that frontal turret have at lest slight better protection then warhed perforation.

Instead of replying now to this repeated incorrect statement I will wait for your detailed post and then will explain.

It's incorrect becouse of what? Relikt is out of the rules which operate on the other ERA? Soory now way. It's the same story and thin single ERA brick cant deal with SC warhed when angle is bigger then 60 degree. It's immposible and no producer never shown that posibilities. Relikt is no exception.

 

[hest]

It's incorrect becouse of what? Relikt is out of the rules which operate on the other ERA? Soory now way. It's the same story and thin single ERA brick cant deal with SC warhed when angle is bigger then 60 degree. It's immposible and no producer never shown that posibilities. Relikt is no exception.

It is in the same rules, you will understand later as I said.

 

[militarysta]

Video "how to not attack tank using RPG-29"
[video]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fcc_1304114951[/video]

[video]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea7_1230249000[/video]

 

[militarysta]

Quite intersting film with Bill-2:

 

[Damian]

Even on a very (in)famous video a side shot with RPG-29 had little effects, with some damage and one crew member killed (as per report with damaged vehicles hinted out). It is thanks to completely isolated ammunition, otherwise it could end worse.

 

[militarysta]

Precursor test on stack 50mm RHA plates 40mm diameter HEAT precursor and 240mm RHA perforation (ratio equal 6 diameter...) and precursor test on model "T-80" front protection armour. Propably T-80U -as two of them was tested in Sweden in 1994.
10mm + 10mm RHA plate + ERA "standard NATO" cassette + 5 x 50mm RHA plates. All with angle 30 degree what give us:
40mm RHA+ ERA on optimum angle + 500mm RHA.
Interesting...
This two 10mm RHA plates propably was added due to to weak in performace "standard NATO ERA cassette" as I remember it was not really better then Kontakt-1. So 40mm steel on front of it should help. What is suprised - front T-80U was estimatous by Swedish developer as only 500mm RHA...

 

[Damian]

If I remember correctly during trails in Sweden, Swedes with NATO startet to make something... illegal with T-80U that was send there by Russians, rumors were saying that they were opening armor cavities to see what is inside.

Well NATO had at least two more opprotunities to do this, first was Greeke Cyprus, and second South Korea + of course 4 T-84's (called T-80UD, but in reality they represent T-84 standard) sold to USA by Ukraine + 1 T-80U stolen by British intelligence from Russia.

All these T-84's and T-80U ended somewhere in Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG), among other prototypes and test vehicles.

What is however important APG had been some time ago completely closed for civilians (also US Ordnance Museum had been relocated because of this), also soldiers without proper clearence can't get inside APG. So this means probably there are some tests performed, M1A3 or any other new US Army AFV will be tested there also.

 

[bhramos]

[video=youtube_share;ak2iJQQVrT0]http://youtu.be/ak2iJQQVrT0[/video]