Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Dazzler]

a pic from IDEAS 2002 showing different 125mm penetrators, including practice ones in blue.

 

[Dazzler]

Naiza DU from ideas 2002...

 

[shiphone]

goodness i am so repetitive...


ok, three 125mm rounds are "known" to be produced...

1. POF P-12 (perhaps bm-42 based since dimension and penetration values are virtually same @ 460mm @ 2000m)

pix please

2. Naiza 125mm DU roound, 550mm @ 2000m.... source to Naiza DU round, Acig Report 2002 ( Highlights from IDEAS 2002 )

pix please

3. ARDE 125mm round, most likely based on Chinese Type-2M verion, has been modified for enhanced range (pic above).


Thats all that is known on internet.

pix please

4. and would you post the pix of so called Type-2 and Type-2M as well?

 

[Dazzler]

POF P-12

Type-IIM exported in 98-99 prior to Al khalid induction..

 

[shiphone]

so you do have some image info about these rounds but you didn't read it well and there were too much wrong and conflicting claims here and there ...

===========================

goodness i am so repetitive...

ok, three 125mm rounds are "known" to be produced...

1. POF P-12 (perhaps bm-42 based since dimension and penetration values are virtually same @ 460mm @ 2000m)
Dazzler ↑

I don't think this would relate to so called "perhaps bm-42 based" round, the apprearance were so different.your claim-"perhaps bm-42 based since dimension and penetration values are virtually same" is a far-fetched reason ,...it is the imported and TOT of NORINCON's 125mm Export shell as introduced by militarysta in post 7673...if we would 'name' it , "Type-I M" might be the proper codename...this might come with the Type85-IIAP tanks. this was the export varient of PLA-use '一期弹' (BLOCK I Round)--the Early model of Mass Production 125mm APFSDS of China. just like so called Type-II M(you posted in #7645, and "M" stands "Export varient", so I doubt the Existence of so called Type-II) is the export varient and based on PLA-use BLOCK II round.

introduced by militarysta in post 7673...460mm@2KM--220mm/61.5 °@2KM is a reasonbale parameter in consideration of the performance of the BLOCK I round in PLA army service...

and you post a compartion of this rounds with so called "bm-42 mango "

 

[shiphone]

2. Naiza 125mm DU roound, 550mm @ 2000m.... source to Naiza DU round, Acig Report 2002 ( Highlights from IDEAS 2002 )

I would say this round --Naiza was also close to and might be based on NORINCON's 125mm Export shell...some minor change or improvement could be spotted. I thought Pakistan could claim independent intellectual property rights for this shell , produce and market this shell freely avoiding some TOT agreement problem of NORINCON's 125mm Export shell mentioned above...

the so called 550mm @ 2000m claim was also an unreliable one made by the unreliable media ...the words in your link are

6). A new 125 mm anti-tank DU round called Naiza was being displayed (including some other DU rounds by other Pakistani companies) by Al-Technique. The Naiza is said to have a penetration of 550 mm in RHA. It has been made compatible with T-80UD tanks.

..again it was "said" only and it was in 2002........the official published '460mm of zero Obliquity' (see below )might be the real performance of Naiza which was just same as the NORINCON's 125mm Export shell....

the pakistan Research team might get some or a lot knowledge and tech from the NORINCON's 125mm Export shell' TOT project which formed foundation of brighter future projects...the example was right here:

I would say Pakistan Research team manage to use the Naiza's projectile tech to improve the Russian rounds came with T-80UD...pay attention to the three Projectiles at the distal end.

======================================

3. ARDE 125mm round, most likely based on Chinese Type-2M verion, has been modified for enhanced range (pic above).

if it is the so called ARDE 125mm round,I'm afaid that is just a clone of early russiuan round and has nothing to do with the new NORINCON's 125mm Export shell (2nd Gen or 2nd type)-- so called Type-II M(bellow) which has the penetration of aroud 550mm / 220mm/66.4 ° @2KM, this was offered with MBT2000

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Show me some Offical Russian docoments ..

Last time i went to Defexpo at Russian stall, 3BM42 marked as 550mm from 2000ms of 1980s stand ..

Including our own offical data, There is something really wrong with your work or done on purpose ?

I not convinced with your provided links which are more of a third party claims..

Outdatet value and wrong The truth is that 3Bm42 in best way can achive 460mm rha on 2000m for 90. plate.

 

[militarysta]

Show me some Offical Russian docoments ..

I gave You reprint from instruction 3Bm42 Mango psoted on otvaga 2000 forum, you can see whole discuss here:
Танковые боеприпасы-4

Table here:
Т-64/72/80/90 - БПС Бронебойные оперенные подкалиберные снаряды

220mm Нормативная пробиваемость на 2000 м, 60


An here for Vant 3Bm32 whit bigger penetration:

As I understand WITU sources are not enought for You? In all data from WITU there is circa 460mm

Last time i went to Defexpo at Russian stall, 3BM42 marked as 550mm from 2000ms of 1980s stand ..

So you are a marketing victim.
Sorry - imposible for 3BM42.

Including our own offical data, There is something really wrong with your work or done on purpose ?

No, just older ones data for 3Bm32 and 3Bm42 where overestimated a lot. Since last two yers they are avaible data for 3Bm32 Vant and 3BM42 Mango whit definetly other values - mucht lower then previous ones. What is not strange.
When we compare well known DM33A1 and 3BM42 we can see that penetratio "mango" can;t be better:

 

[Apollyon]

[PDF]http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/papers/symp_19/TB151159.pdf[/PDF]


Conclusion:

The protection level of a threat vehicle cannot be defined by one RHA-e value; it depends on several factors: penetrator material, penetrator geometry, target configuration, RHA penetration, and the method and RHA baseline used. It has been shown that the RHA-e for one medium caliber target evaluated with several projectiles can vary by more than 100%. Even for an RHA target evaluated with one penetrator, the RHA-e can also vary by more than 100%, depending on the method, the velocity, and the baseline used.

If only one value for the protection level is used, penetrators are designed to perforate the maximum amount of RHA. Most actual armor is not monolithic RHA and consists of many different materials and configurations. Therefore, the defeat mechanism is often drastically different to perforate this armor than the deformation process for RHA penetration. A penetrator designed to penetrate the maximum amount of RHA may not be the optimum design for more complex armor designs. The final use of the RHA-e should dictate which method is used to define the protection level. If the final use is the perforation range, the range at which the target is just perforated, the VL and the perforation baseline should be used. If a protection level and a desired lethality are being computed, then the PR method and the penetration baseline should probably be used. In this case, a baseline RHA-e must be established as a function of velocity to clearly show how the projectiles are affected at different levels of over- match. Finally, whenever possible, the actual range targets and standard behind-armor lethality methods should be used to accurately estimate the performance of a projectile against a threat vehicle. Obviously, this is too expensive and time consuming for most applica- tions. Therefore, all the points presented in this paper must be considered when RHA-e is used as the threat protection level when future armaments for medium caliber platforms are selected.

 

[militarysta]

@UP

Yes, I know about this. Thery are two problems (rather 3) in case given RHA mm values:

1) RHA mm value have nothing to penetration modern multilayerd armour protected by ERA. For example DM53 and DM63 can deal whit double reactive multilayerd ERA + multialyerd armour, and they "mm RHA" value is almoust the same for Dm53 and DM63. But DM63 is better.

2) There is big difrence in mm RHA penetration depend on HB scale for used plates. 220HB plates circa 250HB plates and over 300HB plates are used for testes. And of course results given for 220HB are worth nothing, there is small chance that all "old" data for APFSDS are for sucht "soft" HB.
Why this 220HB plates are uslles for other then pure marketing use?
Becouse [/b]soviet tanks cast steel turrets have HB minimum 270HB[/b], and modern western (and propably T-90A) turret welded plates have HB scale over 300, as in M1 case:

http://www.arcelormittalna.com/plat...flats/ProductBrochure/ARCELORMITTAL ARMOR.pdf
Tensile Strength (ksi): 477/534 HB
ArcelorMittal USA
Thickness (Max. in.) 2"
In fact in modern tanks is used HHS whit HB between 400-500HB, twice harder then "marketing" 220HB or even older cast 270HB steel.

3.) Difrence between NATO and WarPac norms.
NATO: 50% + 1 penetration is test group (so half + 1 round must penetrate some value)
WarPac: 75% rounds must penetrate sucht value.
How big is difrence?
for 50% and 75% norm it's circa 8%

For exmaple tested in Poland DM33A1 have 470mm RHA at 2000m in Warpac norm, for NATO norm it will be circa 500-510mm RHA. And this value is for circa 300HB steel, for more soft 220HB or 250HB it will be circa 540mm RHA for 2000m. So OK whit old (1990s) estimatous.

But using as point 220HB steel is pointles and one big fake, couse modern tank have TWICE HB scale in their armour HHS plates, and even older ones soviet tanks whit cast turrets have 270HB casts.

 

[Dazzler]

I would say this round --Naiza was also close to and might be based on NORINCON's 125mm Export shell...some minor change or improvement could be spotted. I thought Pakistan could claim independent intellectual property rights for this shell , produce and market this shell freely avoiding some TOT agreement problem of NORINCON's 125mm Export shell mentioned above...

the so called 550mm @ 2000m claim was also an unreliable one made by the unreliable media ...the words in your link are
..again it was "said" only and it was in 2002........the official published '460mm of zero Obliquity' (see below )might be the real performance of Naiza which was just same as the NORINCON's 125mm Export shell....



the pakistan Research team might get some or a lot knowledge and tech from the NORINCON's 125mm Export shell' TOT project which formed foundation of brighter future projects...the example was right here:



I would say Pakistan Research team manage to use the Naiza's projectile tech to improve the Russian rounds came with T-80UD...pay attention to the three Projectiles at the distal end.



======================================



if it is the so called ARDE 125mm round,I'm afaid that is just a clone of early russiuan round and has nothing to do with the new NORINCON's 125mm Export shell (2nd Gen or 2nd type)-- so called Type-II M(bellow) which has the penetration of aroud 550mm / 220mm/66.4 ° @2KM, this was offered with MBT2000

you seem to have understanding problems, my post was pretty explicit with no complexities,and china is not the only source of technology for pakistan. i am not talking in thin air and know what i am saying, before you jump the gun, pakistan also uswa bm-42mango and bm-32 vant as t-80ud ammo for almost 15 yeArs, there is much what we have made, achieve through these years. type-2m was supplied in 98, again, its type-2m not so called type-1m ( you came up with fake designation). Naiza Du is well known for 550mm penetration @ 2000m, you can stay in denial, no problem.

 

[militarysta]

Next example:

3BM32 Vant whit DU rod:

above we have declasifated data

As we can see those roundhave guaranteed 430mm RHA for 2000m. And this value is given for 75% rounds. The same value for NATO 50% + 1 will give us: 460mm RHA at 2000m.
We don't know what HB scale RHA plates is used for tests. In polish WITU tey are used plates whit circa 300HB scale -propably it's next think taken from "old times" and WarPac times.
So those NATO norm 460mm RHA for 2000m for 300HB scale can be circa 500mm RHA at 2000m for NATO norm and only 220HB scale.
Which is nothing close (sucht low HB scale) to modern HHS and SHS plates used in tanks armour...

 

[shiphone]

you seem to have understanding problems, my post was pretty explicit with no complexities,and china is not the only source of technology for pakistan. i am not talking in thin air and know what i am saying, before you jump the gun, pakistan also uswa bm-42mango and bm-32 vant as t-80ud ammo for almost 15 yeArs, there is much what we have made, achieve through these years. type-2m was supplied in 98, again, its type-2m not so called type-1m ( you came up with fake designation). Naiza Du is well known for 550mm penetration @ 2000m, you can stay in denial, no problem.

LOL...don't behave like some other Inxxxx members here which is very disappointing ...your wrong Identification and conflicting claim here and there was the key reason why I want some clarification...

Please...read carefully and have a look at your images Again...it's a pity that you can't ID the rounds from your own country and overstate something.. I'm waiting for your corrections about my recognition of those shell name and images(Post #7646 and 7647) since you didn't do that. and I never expect such funny and arrogant and far from the facts comment like this :

you seem to have understanding problems, my post was pretty explicit with no complexities,and china is not the only source of technology for pakistan. i am not talking in thin air and know what i am saying,

1. there are two NORINCON's 125mm Export shells , one is confirmed to be exported to Pakistan with Type85IIAP(so called type I M codename might not exist but I tried to tell you in this way to ID two kinds' NORINCON rounds here.)

if we would 'name' it , "Type-I M" might be the proper codename.

is there anything wrong with my subjunctive mood herer?

and you'd better show us the so called type IIM in PA service...you haven't show any real image here. and this is another question among us(I mean' a queston discussed on China's defence forums),if any available, it would be great and a puzzle could be solved ...thanks in advance...

2. the new Naiza based on II M round would have 550mm penetration @ 2000m. I or we have no doubts about it at all, and with the effort of Pakistan R&D team. I thougt Naiza could achieve more than that coz the the original design has the potential indeed or already.

 

[Dazzler]

LOL...don't behave like some other Inxxxx members here which is very disappointing ...your wrong Identification and conflicting claim here and there was the key reason why I want some clarification...

Please...read carefully and have a look at your images Again...it's a pity that you can't ID the rounds from your own country and overstate something.. I'm waiting for your corrections about my recognition of those shell name and images since you didn't do that. and I never expect such funny and arrogant and far from the facts comment like this :


1. there are two NORINCON's 125mm Export shells , one is confirmed to be exported to Pakistan with Type85IIAP(so called type I M codename might not exist but I tried to tell you in this way to ID two kinds' NORINCON rounds here.)


is there anything wrong with my subjunctive mood herer?

and you'd better show us the so called type IIM in PA service...you haven't show any real image here. and this is another question among us(I mean' a queston discussed on China's defence forums)

2. the new Naiza based on II M round would have 550mm penetration @ 2000m. I or we have no doubts about it at all, and with the effort of Pakistan R&D team. I thougt Naiza could achieve more than that coz the the original design has the potential indeed or already.

i will reply once u r done editing your posts

 

[Damian]

The problem with Chinese ammunition designations and overall recognition is that, there is very little informations avaiable about them, thus as Shiphone very rightfully pointed out, some designations might false and made up, further making proper recognition very difficult.

 

[Dazzler]

The problem with Chinese ammunition designations and overall recognition is that, there is very little informations avaiable about them, thus as Shiphone very rightfully pointed out, some designations might false and made up, further making proper recognition very difficult.

to some extent its true, designations are confusing but before MBT 2000 was inducted, a lot of newly made chinese type-2M apfsds were delivered. Even janes reported it. Designation Type-1, Type-2 and 2M are all reported by Chinese and taken by media.

However, i do know the factory designation of type-2M based round here in pakistan, they call it the "Kun Kata" or half cut ear, due to its sabot assembly which resembles half cut ear. This was also reported by Defense Analyst Usman Shabbir during his visit to Pakistan Ordnance Factories in 2006.

 

[militarysta]

More or less they are recognize 3 diffrent APFSDS used in 125mm Pakistani tank guns:

1) Chineese orgins "Type-I M" whit this 460mm@2KM--220mm/61.5 °@2KM:


and this is the same round as this what you had name as "POF P-12"

2) Naiza-1 POF 460mm RHA at 2000m


And this round can be local made clone of the ""Type-I M" round.


3) Third round:
Nazia-2 mentioned in Polish sources as DU rod and circa 550-560mm RHA at 2000m

 

[Dazzler]

LOL...don't behave like some other Inxxxx members here which is very disappointing ...your wrong Identification and conflicting claim here and there was the key reason why I want some clarification...

As a consultant, i know a bit more than an average fan boy, dont throw things in air unless i have seen them happening myself but lets leave it here

Which pic i wrongly identified please specify,

Please...read carefully and have a look at your images Again...it's a pity that you can't ID the rounds from your own country and overstate something.. I'm waiting for your corrections about my recognition of those shell name and images(Post #7646 and 7647) since you didn't do that. and I never expect such funny and arrogant and far from the facts comment like this :

1. there are two NORINCON's 125mm Export shells , one is confirmed to be exported to Pakistan with Type85IIAP(so called type I M codename might not exist but I tried to tell you in this way to ID two kinds' NORINCON rounds here.)

I said "perhaps based" not surely, you could be true with POF P12 being based on Type-1 delivered with type-85IIAP (improved type 1)

is there anything wrong with my subjunctive mood herer?

ypu should know better

and you'd better show us the so called type IIM in PA service...you haven't show any real image here. and this is another question among us(I mean' a queston discussed on China's defence forums),if any available, it would be great and a puzzle could be solved ...thanks in advance...

So a official poster for Type-2M being an export round bundled with MBT 2000 series is not enough for you, ok, here you go

2. the new Naiza based on II M round would have 550mm penetration @ 2000m. I or we have no doubts about it at all, and with the effort of Pakistan R&D team. I thougt Naiza could achieve more than that coz the the original design has the potential indeed or already.

Naiza-2 is seen by many including me, with slightly longer penetrator, report indicated it penetrated 620mm RHA armour plate but there is nothing on internet to confirm it so i leave it there.

Since 2010, they are improving the existing stock and making ARDE 125mm round

 

[Dazzler]

More or less they are recognize 3 diffrent APFSDS used in 125mm Pakistani tank guns:

1) Chineese orgins "Type-I M" whit this 460mm@2KM--220mm/61.5 °@2KM:


and this is the same round as this what you had name as "POF P-12"

i have acknowledged @shiphone and you may well be true, it may be based on that round, tungsten based

2) Naiza-1 POF 460mm RHA at 2000m


And this round can be local made clone of the ""Type-I M" round.

3) Third round:
Nazia-2 mentioned in Polish sources as DU rod and circa 550-560mm RHA at 2000m

1. for umteenth time man, the rounds above are all tungsten alloy core based, in Pakistan, term "Naiza" is reserved ONLY for Depleted Uranium apfsds penetrators.

2. The second round in your post is POF P-12 tungsten core, NOT Naiza-1, Naiza-1 is DU core

3. 3rd round you mentioned as Naiza-2 is actually Naiza-1, Naiza-2 is not known on internet, no image or details etc.

 

[Dazzler]

Next example:

3BM32 Vant whit DU rod:

above we have declasifated data

As we can see those roundhave guaranteed 430mm RHA for 2000m. And this value is given for 75% rounds. The same value for NATO 50% + 1 will give us: 460mm RHA at 2000m.
We don't know what HB scale RHA plates is used for tests. In polish WITU tey are used plates whit circa 300HB scale -propably it's next think taken from "old times" and WarPac times.
So those NATO norm 460mm RHA for 2000m for 300HB scale can be circa 500mm RHA at 2000m for NATO norm and only 220HB scale.
Which is nothing close (sucht low HB scale) to modern HHS and SHS plates used in tanks armour...

Fofanov quotes BM-32 Vant penetration as 500mm @ 0 deg @ 2000, i dont believe in predictive values as they are mostly estimates, rather certified values are of more concern to me.

Thanks