Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[militarysta]

It's hard to name BDD NERA armour Rather reflecting plates armour I will say.
And those NERA on BRDM was developed after 2001...

More or less polish indistry had acess to armour tehnology from 1985 so based on circa 1980-1983

 

[Damian]

It's hard to name BDD NERA armour Rather reflecting plates armour I will say.

NERA is also based on "reflecting plates" principle.

And those NERA on BRDM was developed after 2001...

Thank you.

 

[Andrei_bt]

----CAWA-2 offered protection equivalent of approx ~500-550mm RHA against APFSDS ammunition

It is an area of fantasy, as PT-91E does not even has a 2-nd gen armour (in Soviet scale).

 

[hest]

Kontact and relict are outdated non workable waste and they are too ancient to discuss them.



it is a joke?
Look official info - http://niistali.ru/security/armor/relict?start=3
Relic
Повышение защиты: от БПС - в 1,3 раза
Kontakt5 ( http://niistali.ru/security/armor/builtincontakt?start=1)
Повышение защиты: от БПС в 1,2 раза.

1,2 and 1,3 ))))

It is increase for main armour, and effectiveness depends on it, for T-80B it is 30% increase, for semi-active design, BMPT it is 40%, for T-90 1.5 or 50%. Against modern APFSDS it is reduction of more than 200 mm RHA penetration. They could give stupid value of 90% if they took old rounds as Mango, but it would not be serious.

It also protects against tandem ATGM so it is hardly outdated.

On german developement trials suposedly DM53 (segmented) after interaction with double reactive armour (two flying plates in opposite direction, Relikt design) suffered loss in performance of 15-20%.

note: Kontakt-5 takes as reference M829 type round, Relikt does not, against that target, it would give about 5 times greater increase.

DM53 after heavy ERA have still circa 620-640mm RHA penetration. More or less it's go trought T-80U armour and penetrate 30mm RHA witness plate after main armour. Nacked late T-80U/UD armour can be estimatous as 500mm RHA for 550mm LOS, and circa 610-630mm RHA for 700mm LOS. Of course without Kontakt-5 ERA.

Problem is that there is no accurate representation of armour thickness, that drawing which you used was not meant to.

DM53 defeated composite armour and ERA belonging to 1985 year after more than decade, it also disproved the myth of defeating ERA without initiation. From this howewer it is not so clear how it should defeat more modern target as T-90A rather than 80s design.

 

[Damian]

----CAWA-2 offered protection equivalent of approx ~500-550mm RHA against APFSDS ammunition

It is an area of fantasy, as PT-91E does not even has a 2-nd gen armour (in Soviet scale).

PT-91 never had CAWA-2 armor installed Andrei.

CAWA-2 was considered for use and tested only in configuration of front hull armor, however due to costs and problems with turret (it was immposible to replace armor in cast turret, engineers advised to design new welded turret, but this again increased costs, decision was made to left T-72M1 armor and just install ERAWA-1 and later ERAWA-2 to improve protection. But ERAWA alone was just taken from the whole vehicle protection systems designed for PT-91. This system consisted of CAWA-2, ERAWA-1/2 and Obra defence system (similiar to older Bobrawa, both are something like Shtora or Varta but without IR dazzlers).

Am I right that you confused CAWA-2 with photos of PT-91 front hull plates before welding process? I mean this:

This is old Soviet Armor from T-72M1, not CAWA-2.

 

[militarysta]

----CAWA-2 offered protection equivalent of approx ~500-550mm RHA against APFSDS ammunition

It is an area of fantasy, as PT-91E does not even has a 2-nd gen armour (in Soviet scale).

Well - here You have values:

Those values are from using CAWA as add-on armour on T-72M1 hull and posible on turret.

Values for "nacked" CAWA-2 in T-72M1 hull and turret:

 

[farhan_9909]

Editing my post

 

[Andrei_bt]

PT-91 never had CAWA-2 armor installed Andrei.

I know! That is why I say it is fantasy, as it does not a new inserts at least.

 

[Damian]

I know! That is why I say it is fantasy, as it does not a new inserts at least.

It is not fantasy, what I was talking about were ballistic tests performed by WITU on armor itself, tests were successfull, but because of mentioned reasons, armor was never inducted in to service.

BTW I found an interesting photo:

Seems to look like very early prototype of PT-91, or even older proposed modernization T-72M1 "Wilk".

 

[farhan_9909]

Even if you have a lot of labs do not mean they can design something proper just yet. Sometimes it is better to import before own scientific base can come up with something that fullfill requirements.

And it is not something difficult why Chinese would not offer their product, reason is good... money.

yes i do admit that our Al khalid armour must not be of european or american standard.

AARDIC was established in 1986..composite armour lab at heavy industry taxila.
Zafar M has taken the tank armour development project in 2003.in the mean time between 1986 and 2003 we had manufactured many different chinese tanks like type 85 from scratch and they must had transferred us the armour blueprints back than.

so we already had a good experience with armour development before stepping into our own armour development project while taking help from ukraine and ofcourse china as well

Why do you think so? Any proof that "Kanchan" is worse than Chinese designs? There are no problems with TIS, or no inferior gun, especially that Chinese ZPT-98 is nothing special, just clone of 2A46M, which is older design than more modern 2A46M-4 or 2A46M-5

well we know that russia didnt allowed tot of armour to india for t-90.

they had throughly evaluated t-90 and arjun both over the past decade.if they are hell bent on choosing the t-90 than t-90 is indeed much better than arjun.otherwise one opt for better equipment always.

ZPT-98 was developed more than 2 decades before.and i doubt they still are using the same older gun

 

[Damian]

ZPT-98 was developed more than 2 decades before.and i doubt they still are using the same older gun

They might have improve some things, but I would not expect some miracles. 90% of Chinese claims are pure propaganda and lies.

 

[CCTV]

They might have improve some things, but I would not expect some miracles. 90% of Chinese claims are pure propaganda and lies.

Why not 100%?

 

[Andrei_bt]

It is not fantasy, what I was talking about were ballistic tests performed by WITU on armor itself, tests were successfull, but because of mentioned reasons, armor was never inducted in to service.

Why they don't place this CAWA-2 instaed of old armor inserts in hull if it is soo effective ?!

 

[Damian]

Why not 100%?

Because there is allways some truth in what your country official and unofficial sources say or show.

Why they don't place this CAWA-2 instaed of old armor inserts in hull if it is soo effective ?!

Costs, remember that this upgrade was developed between late 1980's and early 1990's during economic reforms, state and army had no money to perform such expensive modernization effort. So things needed to be prioritized. Not everything is however possible to find, and CAW (Central Military Archive) seems to not allow some documents to be avaiable for public.

I have some military magazines from the 1990's, but there also no details why armor was not inducted in to service.

Chief engineer that wrote a book about their armor developments, mentioned only that there were problems with costs and we know also about problems with turret.

 

[CCTV]

Because there is allways some truth in what your country official and unofficial sources say or show.

Ok, then how you come up the 90%?

 

[Damian]

Ok, then how you come up the 90%?

It is only my opinion. If I offended your nation then sorry, it was not my intention. I just do not believe socialist regimes, it is their nature to lie, also to own people.

 

[CCTV]

It is only my opinion. If I offended your nation then sorry, it was not my intention. I just do not believe socialist regimes, it is their nature to lie, also to own people.

So, Poland lied lot before 90'?

 

[farhan_9909]

They might have improve some things, but I would not expect some miracles. 90% of Chinese claims are pure propaganda and lies.

tank Gun is not something of rocket science.

interesting info regarding chinese 125mm smoothbore (from 2005)

*Chinese consider 2A46 as Garbage
*The new Gun on type 99 series has nothing to do with russian guns
*Can penetrate easily through russian t-80


again this info is very old and from 2005

高膛压火炮实际都存在炮膛烧蚀严重的问题，只是程度不同。我国的坦克炮的巨大威力决定了它的烧蚀问题很严重，说句不好听的，有点拿寿命换威力的意思。其实这也是没有办法的事情。我国的125实际发展了三代，目前装在99上的是第三代，其威力足以把这个星球上已经出现的和正在已知研制的坦克彻底打回老家，所以，我国并不急于把更大口径的家伙拿出来，但不是说没有。只是怕被人扣上"大规模杀伤性武器"çš„帽子。呵呵。
In fact ,high-pressure cannon can't avoid the serious ablation of its core completely,more or less. The terrible power of our (meaning Chinese) cannon is destined to cause a serious problem of ablation.frankly speaking, just enhance the power of cannon at expense of its lifespan. After all ,no other choice is available. We have developed three generations of 125 MM cannon and that fixed on ZTZ99 is the third one, the power of which can blow all kinds of tankers existing or under development on the earth into pieces. So, we(Chinese engineers) have no anxiety to show up more powerful cannon with bigger caliber ,which we have grasped long ago. we do so just to avoid the accusation of "WMD"

以下纯粹是鄙人信口开河，大家随便看看了事。
The following is just my blow, don't be too serious about it.


我国当年得到125样炮，也就是出口型2A46后的情况，我们当时想当然的认为2A46的威力比我们在研的120大，心存敬畏，没办法，被老毛子的装甲力量吓怕了。结果炮一响，眼镜掉了一地，这个东西根本就不是想象的那样。一分析，2A46的内外弹道性能都有问题，而且很多东西不是用出口型可以解释的。再加上性能低劣的出口型弹药，威力低是肯定的。这一炮打掉了中国人的畏惧。我国在2A46的基础上，对身管进行了一定的改进，威力就有不小的提高。这就是第一代125，但是没有装备部队。随后的进一步改进型号（其实这个时候的炮和2A46已经差别很大了），装备了部队，就是96上的炮。第三代就不说了，99的重锤就是它。这个时候的125已经和2A46没有什么关系了，其威力打T80个对穿都可以
when we(Chinese engineers) got the first 125MM cannon ,Russian model 2A46 for exportion , we certainly took it granted that it surely had more power than the 120MM cannon we were developing because all were awe of Russian bear, frankly speaking ,frightened by its armor force. But when we fired the Russian cannon in its power-test, all were surprised at its poor performce that was completely unexpected. After analysis, we (Chinese engineers) found that its poor performce cound't be simplely attributed to the fact that it was just a model for exportion, because there were some wrongs on its ballistic trajectory. In addition of inferior ammunition for exportion, Russian 2A46 cannon is really a gabage. So, the poor shot of Russian cannon in the test drove up all Chinese fear. On the basis of Russian 2A46 cannon, we made some betterment and mend on its "pipe" and improved its power by a considerable margin . That is the first generation of our 125 MM cannon for tanker but it has never been equipped with our troop. The following upgraded 125 MM cannon (which is quiet different from Russian one) enters into service and fixed on T96 MBT. The third generation of our 125MM cannon is the "big hammer" of ZTZ99 MBT, which has nothing to do with Russian 2A46 cannon and can easily break a hole through Russian T80 MBT from the face to the ass.

http://----------------------------/index.php?showtopic=51426

 

[militarysta]

Why they don't place this CAWA-2 instaed of old armor inserts in hull if it is soo effective ?!

Becouse most PT-91 was redy before CAWA-2 was ended, and placing CAWA-2 module inser armour (between plates) need rebuild whole armour - it was to expensive for polish army in 1990s., what was whorse - during test it's seems that it's almoust imposible to replace typical T-72M1 turret insert by CAWA-2 module case technology problem :-/

 

[Damian]

So, Poland lied lot before 90'?

Yes, socialist regime we had back then, just loved propaganda of success. I find interesting to watch video archives from these times, and grim reality, to be honest, despite all problems of today, I definetely preffer to live today than back then.

Besides this, there are also stories from family members that lived back then, and how they describe reality, this gives a lot of thinking when you look at propaganda videos.

tank Gun is not something of rocket science.

Oh really? Well design a tank gun then, and see if barrel will not blow up during firing because it can't withstand pressure of propelant charge initiation.

*Chinese consider 2A46 as Garbage
*The new Gun on type 99 series has nothing to do with russian guns
*Can penetrate easily through russian t-80

When I read translation of that Chinese text it is... it is pathethic propaganda, written probably by some idiot.