Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Dazzler]

@ Dazzler what has been Pakistan experience using T-80 Tanks and is it staffed by elite units only?

AK and UDs are regarded highly by armoured corps, performance of UD is very good in the desert and plane region. Recently, UDs have been upgraded with IBMS, FCS and thermal imagers similar to AKs. Both are operated by elite units.

 

[Andrei_bt]

continued....

Thanks, can you give a link to a video?

 

[Andrei_bt]

this electronic warfare equipment looks like laser shoting imitator (Miles)

 

[Dazzler]

this electronic warfare equipment looks like laser shoting imitator (Miles)

can you explain whats the difference between a laser shot imitator and Varta/ shtora aps?



link to the video


COAS Witnesses Training Exercises In Muzaffargarh Ranges (24-04-2012) - Pakistan Army - YouTube

 

[Dazzler]

m-1a1 vs HE-AT round

 

[militarysta]

m-1a1 vs HE-AT round

EFP

This photos was posted here more pages ago in this topic. it's first
Second - would You be so kind and stop posting random shit in this topic? Placing many pictures don't make this topic interesting or valuable...

 

[Dazzler]

EFP

This photos was posted here more pages ago in this topic. it's first
Second - would You be so kind and stop posting random shit in this topic? Placing many pictures don't make this topic interesting or valuable...

asked u a question few posts ago, look above.

 

[militarysta]

Im not sure -this on T-80UD can be some kind of jammer to countr IED or some mutation of Warta system, but IMHO rather somthng conected whit electronic warfare.

 

[Dazzler]

Im not sure -this on T-80UD can be some kind of jammer to countr IED or some mutation of Warta system, but IMHO rather somthng conected whit electronic warfare.

i have been scratching me head over this devlopment, the description in video says its a newly developed laser bsed EW so i thought it maybe similar to varta but its not, seems to cover 360deg hemisphere in a circular arrangement, could be a prototype.

 

[contra 101]

Im not sure -this on T-80UD can be some kind of jammer to countr IED or some mutation of Warta system, but IMHO rather somthng conected whit electronic warfare.

it is made by institute of optronics and is classified as a laser jammer with 360deg coverage, it functions with other sensors, a UAV and other sensors, it seems to be a whole networked jammer instead of a stand alone varta like system.

 

[313230]

It seems the offensive tech currently overwhelms defensive tech, that round fired from tank gun will penetrate each other from long range (3km) so heavy armor is useless now?

DM63 will penetrate Leo2A6, 2A7, M1A2, Chally2,.. from 3km
M829A3 will penetrate all those tanks from 3km
Dont know what most modern Russian round is but the result maybe the same. Chinese may catch up very soon if it sees the interest in tank warfare.

Not to mention 140mm was prepared from 90s but not used as not necessary. And Russia or Chinese 152mm. What is the future of armor? Too heavy for strategic mobility but still too lightly armored for duel?

 

[contra 101]

It seems the offensive tech currently overwhelms defensive tech, that round fired from tank gun will penetrate each other from long range (3km) so heavy armor is useless now?

DM63 will penetrate Leo2A6, 2A7, M1A2, Chally2,.. from 3km
M829A3 will penetrate all those tanks from 3km
Dont know what most modern Russian round is but the result maybe the same. Chinese may catch up very soon if it sees the interest in tank warfare.

Not to mention 140mm was prepared from 90s but not used as not necessary. And Russia or Chinese 152mm. What is the future of armor? Too heavy for strategic mobility but still too lightly armored for duel?

Making a 140mm gun is no big deal, soviets and westerners, well, were testing it back in 60s, the issue is the huge recoil and the need for such a gun which can only be accommodated after a complete vehicle re-design, hence plenty of r&d and cost.

Today we exist in 2014, still majority is satisfied from 125 mm and 120mm guns with metallurgical improvements mated with efficiently engineered shells that usually give desired results.

As good as M829A2-A3 and DM-53-63 are in penetrating frontal armor upto 700-800 mm, there may well be even more resilient composite, ERA, NxRA or CLARA materials in the making.

 

[methos]

It seems the offensive tech currently overwhelms defensive tech, that round fired from tank gun will penetrate each other from long range (3km) so heavy armor is useless now?

Who told you that? What is the source for such a kind of statement? The Leopard 2 was during Cold War designed to resist 125 mm APFSDS from 1,500 m. I know that the LKE 1 (which finished qualification and evalutation in 1996) was not able to penetrate the late Leopard 2A4 (1987/1988) armour from 2,000 m distance.

 

[contra 101]

Who told you that? What is the source for such a kind of statement? The Leopard 2 was during Cold War designed to resist 125 mm APFSDS from 1,500 m. I know that the LKE 1 (which finished qualification and evalutation in 1996) was not able to penetrate the late Leopard 2A4 (1987/1988) armour from 2,000 m distance.

is this still the case? more info would be appreciated

 

[militarysta]

M829A3 will penetrate all those tanks from 3km

I will not be so sure. M829A3 seems to be less powerfull then most "sources" said.
And what is even more important - modern armour have nothing common whit stupid stack of the RHA plates.

 

[militarysta]

is this still the case? more info would be appreciated

Methos have right. What is more important - the armour have some "seafty margin" - I will say -quite big.

More or less - DM-43 was unable to perforate Leo-2A4 test station armour model. To perforate whole model lack circa 90mm of RHA plates and two strange layers (cermaisc?) 100 mm thick (2x 50mm). DM43 penetration is quite known:
DM43 have circa 570-600mm RHA on 2000m (Lanz formula for 270 and 230HB)
so we can assume whole model - it was circa 710mm RHA for 840mm LOS, becouse front Leo-2A4/A5 LOS is 840 (0.) -740 (30. degree) -660mm (turret sides) so we have circa 710-620mm-560mm vs KE
In Leopard-2A5 we have additionally NERA "wedges" so whole protection can overpass 750mm RHA vs KE.
It's quite big value.

 

[313230]

Who told you that? What is the source for such a kind of statement? The Leopard 2 was during Cold War designed to resist 125 mm APFSDS from 1,500 m. I know that the LKE 1 (which finished qualification and evalutation in 1996) was not able to penetrate the late Leopard 2A4 (1987/1988) armour from 2,000 m distance.

For example DM63 brochure is quite confident: defeat all type of armor at all ranges of engagement
All type of armor means Leo2, M1, whatever
All ranges of engagement means extra long range, as you can shot it you can penetrate it. And I quite believe in German honesty
http://www.defmunintl.com/Brochures/120mm KE DM63-DM53A1_DMI.pdf

This makes it possible to defeat all known types of tank
armour, including multi-layer and composite arrays and reactive
armour systems at all ranges of engagement. Impressive proof
of this came during the qualification programme for German and
foreign users, when the new ammunition was fired at
advanced armour targets. Fired from L44 and L55 tank barrels, the
ammunition is extremely accurate. Its unique propellant system
is temperature-independent.

M829A3 penetrator seems even longer then DM63 with higher density (DU alloy vs WHA)

 

[Damian]

For example DM63 brochure is quite confident: defeat all type of armor at all ranges of engagement
All type of armor means Leo2, M1, whatever
All ranges of engagement means extra long range, as you can shot it you can penetrate it. And I quite believe in German honesty
http://www.defmunintl.com/Brochures/120mm KE DM63-DM53A1_DMI.pdf

M829A3 penetrator seems even longer then DM63 with higher density (DU alloy vs WHA)

No, You just don't understand that text "defeat all type of armor at all ranges of engagement" is just marketing. This is nothing else. Simply because manufacturers of ammunition also do not have capability to test their ammunition against all types of protection, because many types of protection are manufactured by other companies or even state owned manufacturing centers, and that armor capabilities are mostly classified.

This means that in most cases, ammunition manufacturers needs to test most of their products against simple RHA plates.

For example, in USA APFSDS ammunition is manufactured by private companies under goverment supervision, however armor packages for M1 tanks, are manufactured by goverment agency and is strictly classified. What's more, private manufacturers are most likely not even allowed to test on their own both ammunition and armor, this is done by ARL (Army Research Laboratory) and data from these tests is classified.

And then again, if for example penetration capabilities data is classified, then manufacturer can only use advertisement of kind similiar to "defeat all type of armor at all ranges of engagement". But only naive people tends to bite the catch.

 

[Broccoli]

Type-99A2(?) without ERA.

 

[contra 101]

Type-99A2(?) without ERA.

This needs a disection

The front armour module looks slopped but thickness seesms to be same as before, perhaps slightly more.

i thought the layer at the end of the armour module should have multiple plates and atleast one NERA layer? If so, it would be a goof protection?

Just my assumptions based on the pic