Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Dejawolf]

And if it has 500 mm penetration?

then it is not so simple, but the principle remains.

 

[militarysta]

 

[farhan_9909]

interior of the type 99

世界军事论坛 - 官方曝光国产重型ZTZ99主战坦克炮塔内部秘照 zt

 

[SilentKiller]

Pakistan has many research lab related to metallurgical engineering.I really doubt why will Pakistan want to import chinese armour.and much harder to digest why will china export us there armour blueprint.

the best they can do us is to help us in our own armour development project.as H khan said i dont know why they dont want to give official name to pakistani armour like chobham or indian kanchan.

Because china major threat is from arjun and t-90..both are seriously inferior to type 99 series..

T-90 is almost comparable but we all know the one exported to india has inferior kanchan armour not russian,Problems with Thermal imagers,Inferior Gun,or in short a downgraded tank.
While arjun still only is used for training purpose and in very very slow rate production despite the design flaws and development flaws it has.

So against the threat the chinese has there existing tanks are more of an over kill.

you really lives in dreamland.
Either u like to be foolish or u really are one.
u comes up with self made stuff to amuse people which i really appreciate.

 

[militarysta]

Agian my job.
Well - poor performance western APFSDS vs T-72B model 1989 and T-80U/UD looks a little scary in end of 80s.
From the oter hand -after DOI 3BM32 quite safe where only Leopard-2 since 1986 so less then 600 tanks, and more powerfull sowiet munition (future 3BM46 and BM42M) forced serious armour improvmend + NERA additional armour. I don/'t include other then German and Soviets tanks cause Leopard-2 are well-known for me, and soviet tank are known or I had good sources (factory draw, and others).
From thre other hand - M1A1HA shoud be better armoured vs APFSDS then late Leo-2A4 so situation in case M1A1HA was quite comfortable in end of the 1980s.

BTW: No idea how put Oplot-M and T-84 main armour -Andriej -any idea?

 

[methos]

I am not sure about your armour values. The Leopard 2A5 weighs ~4 tonnes more than the late Leopard 2A4, but the protection increase is the same as from Leopard 2A3 to Leopard 2A4 or from Leopard 2A0 to Leopard 2A3 (where the weight didn't increase). The CIA estimate puts the T-72A in terms of armour protection above the T-64B, which is rather consistent with what I have heard about their armour (essentially that the T-72A and T-64B have roughly the same thickness, but the T-72A has thicker cast steel walls, while the T-64B has a larger composite armour cavity).

 

[Andrei_bt]

As for this table - it is a bit and not to say much simplified, not going inmto details.

 

[Andrei_bt]

The CIA estimate puts the T-72A in terms of armour protection above the T-64B, which is rather consistent with what I have heard about their armour (essentially that the T-72A and T-64B have roughly the same thickness, but the T-72A has thicker cast steel walls, while the T-64B has a larger composite armour cavity

very funny

 

[Damian]

"Superior" front hull protection of the Merkava Mk4 and Namer.

For a Main Battle Tank engine at front configuration is definetely undesirable, for HAPC/HIFV and such platforms, it is something unaviodable unfortunetely, perhaps in future with a new types of engines (hybrid or fully electric) it will be possible to avoid such weakness.

This is only relatively thin homogeneus steel armor with fuel tanks behind acting as additional armor, and even then, such fuel tanks should be relatively big to add significant protection Deeper we have transmission block and engine (powerpack). So nothing special, such protection is worse than protection of former Soviet and now Russian and Ukrainian design, NATO designs, and other conventional designs with solid frontal composite armor.

 

[The Last Stand]

"Superior" front hull protection of the Merkava Mk4 and Namer.

For a Main Battle Tank engine at front configuration is definetely undesirable, for HAPC/HIFV and such platforms, it is something unaviodable unfortunetely, perhaps in future with a new types of engines (hybrid or fully electric) it will be possible to avoid such weakness.

This is only relatively thin homogeneus steel armor with fuel tanks behind acting as additional armor, and even then, such fuel tanks should be relatively big to add significant protection Deeper we have transmission block and engine (powerpack). So nothing special, such protection is worse than protection of former Soviet and now Russian and Ukrainian design, NATO designs, and other conventional designs with solid frontal composite armor.

Merkava and Namer don't have thick composites for the frontal aspect?

 

[Damian]

Merkava and Namer don't have thick composites for the frontal aspect?

Not on front hull.

There is sort of composite armor creating glacis plate/engine cover plate but it is thinner than composite armor cavities on other tanks front hull.

This is a price for having engine at front and greater modularity of hull design allowing to easier build on Merkava hull not only MBT but also HAPC/HIFV and SPH or other possible applications.

Better solution is allways having MBT with engine at rear, and if you want to have other vehicles unified with tank on components level, to use it's hull design and just place engine at front, so using it's hull you can build on it IFV, APC, SPH, SPAAG etc.

 

[Dejawolf]

Better solution is allways having MBT with engine at rear, and if you want to have other vehicles unified with tank on components level, to use it's hull design and just place engine at front, so using it's hull you can build on it IFV, APC, SPH, SPAAG etc.

i dunno. there's ~2.5m of powerpack in the front there. assuming an average TE of 0.1 for the powerpack, you'd get at least 250mm of protection from it. that's not taking into consideration gearboxes are usually a near solid block of steel. if average TE is 0.2, you get a protection of nearly 500mm for the powerpack alone.
of course, the major disadvantage to this configuration is that a hit to the front hull means your tank is immobilized.
but i dunno, immobilized is better than dead.

 

[militarysta]

As for this table - it is a bit and not to say much simplified, not going inmto details.

Well this table give only generall idea -values are given for:
a) main armour without ERA/NERA
b) only for turret front from 0. to 30. from longitiudal axis - so not for hull, turret sides, etc
Of course many many things must be simplified in sucht table. But...find better in internet in that thema. The same about my APFSDS table
All synthesis have the same problems...

 

[Damian]

i dunno. there's ~2.5m of powerpack in the front there. assuming an average TE of 0.1 for the powerpack, you'd get at least 250mm of protection from it. that's not taking into consideration gearboxes are usually a near solid block of steel. if average TE is 0.2, you get a protection of nearly 500mm for the powerpack alone.
of course, the major disadvantage to this configuration is that a hit to the front hull means your tank is immobilized.
but i dunno, immobilized is better than dead.

I preffer to have solid armor in front over powerpack.

Besides this we should remember that general Israel Tal choose such design configuration, because Israel at that time did not had composite armor technology, so to overcome APDS/APFSDS and HEAT they needed sort of spaced armor with as much of material between projectile and crew as possible... not because engine at front is such great idea.

 

[jedigman]

Question about belly characteristics of tanks/tracked vehicle in development stages in Turkey.

Otokar as some of you may know is developing Altay MBT, now from what I've seen from images posted online, MBT does not use traditional V belly for blast deflection but something along the line of /¯¯\. I haven't figured out why such a design was chosen, but it's also clearly visible on Otokar Tulpar IFV aswell. Any ideas?

I would have posted an image for more clarity, but need to be more active before I get link posting privileges

 

[Damian]

V shaped belly means reduced mobility in case of tracked vehicles, it can be somewhat solved by use of hydrogas suspension with regulated height, however without such suspension, making base belly plate V shaped do not make much sense, better idea is to design an addon belly armor that is V shaped and that can be added when nececasary, or eventualy some alternative that is a compromise between a desired V shaped belly that deflects blast and traditional flat belly that do not make problems with mobilyt and also internal space which can be compromised by a V shaped belly, in case of tracked vehicles.

 

[bhramos]

[video=youtube_share;zHN_zaMJz0Y]http://youtu.be/zHN_zaMJz0Y[/video]

 

[313230]

"accidentally"
"accidentally" he said exactly about protection '
"accidentally" media microphones capture that
"accidentally" madia was to close
C'mon by "accidentally" you can get women pregnant not talking on open space about tank armour protection where media are near. This whole "accidentally leaked" protection level for T-90MS is one big bullshit made as promo new UVZ modernisation.

And ERA abilities to defeted APFSDS and SC warhed are very diffrent. In case old monoblock rounds like M829A1, M829A2, DM43, M332, OLF F1, 3BM42, 3BM42M,etc those ERA can be effective and maybe it have sucht frontal protection. But when APFSDS is quite modern and whiot abilities to overcome ERA -like DM53, DM63, M338, M829A3, etc then efectivness sucht ERA can be catastrophly low. This what is important is base armour protection.
Based in many diffrent sources I can estimatous T-90A base armour as circa 650mm RHA vs KE for 840mm LOS and circa 500mm RHA for 650mm LOS. And w can added some protection for ERA.

Promoting or not, what is wrong with it? Only losers don't know how to promote their goods then complain about stupid customers.
Grow up, accidentally or not, it is far reliable than some internet claims, Putin isn't an account on internet discussion board.

If that rumor is true, the only problem I see with it is that 1200mm RHA vs HEAT is too low for a newest tank. Some guys here provided some mm of NERA provides very large shaped charge protection. I don't want to discredit you guys, but it seems reality is different to imagination. Or other explanation:
1/ Russian doesn't know about those NERA and papers. Only internet guys knew those 20 year old papers and Russian intelligence agency is full of blind guys
2/ Or Russian knew them but doesn't know English to read them. Maybe this is the reality
3/ Or Russian read them but didn't believe them. They thought that it is a Western trap to fool them. Russian doesn't have scientists, engineers and equipment and funds to test those concepts. Oh no, they are actually in the business with many successful sales
4/ Oh no, they knew that it is work but it is too hard to implement, lol, some layers of steel and rubber are too hard to implement.

Or maybe they knew something chatters don't know?

Joking aside, 1200mm seems really low for a 2012 tank with ERA. And segmented penetretor is not magic. Speed of penetrator is several time bigger than speed of ERA, i.e 1500m/s vs 300m/s@60 degree means 260m/s vertical, 150m/s horizontal, ten times larger. So several segments may still meet ERA flying plate while traveling through it.

Most of you guys here are followers, you don't understand how hard to achieve something from concept to actual produce. Make it work, and works reliably, and in mass number, quite different than concepts and papers. How many times you guys read about new battery techs and then disappeared in vaccum? Some concepts are brilliant in paper but in reality, they are waste. Because most of you guys don't work with industry, you used imagination too much, without responsibility because you don't have experience of having responsibility, like running a company, eh? Some guys like Damian discredited 90% of Chinese claims without evidence, LMAO. If I were Chinese general, I would welcomed those attitudes.

 

[Damian]

I do not underestimate China as a capable fighting force that needs to be recongnized, neither I overestimate them and start to be excited reading their incredible and ridiculous claims, about how they are far ahead of the rest of the world by some magic means.

If you are not capable to understand this, and see the difference, you are not a partner to any kind of discussion.

 

[The Last Stand]

Some guys like Damian discredited 90% of Chinese claims without evidence, LMAO.

Ahem Ahem. Read the whole thread. We have discredited Chinese claims with research based evidence several times in every thread connected with Chinese armoured vehicles.