Modern armor internal arrays & what defeated them or might

[Damian90]

Hmmm, it seems that scales are good, but we will work on better armor lines drawings.

BTW, everything is based on photos of real vehicles. However M1 and Leo2 are based also on photos of vehicles at factory plants and interior pics.

But everything seems more or less proper.

[konev]

I got it!

Thanks for you-all.

[Magpie_Oz]

M829A2 could be a bit faster, M829A3 is slower. Kontakt-5 will be ignited only at certain velocities. My theory is that, M829A2 was designed in such way that it can survive Kontakt-5 ignition, while M829A3 was designed in such way that it will not only survive possible ignition, but also it will not ignite K-5.

The A3 has a lower MV purely because it is a heavier projectile. The A2 is quoted at 1680m/s and the A3 Estimated at 1500 or so. I cannot see how the ERA could possibly detect the velocity difference of only 180m/s. If it was that precise it would be child's play to defeat the A3 round as all you have to do is keep dialling down the reaction velocity so that your enemy will have to reduce the round's velocity, until you get to the point where the round will not penetrate at all.

As we are talking muzzle velocity that would mean that any high velocity round would the round would fail to ignite the ERA at longer range as the velocity drops off.

A more logical answer is that the A3 round is simply a further refinement of the earlier A2 and able to better survive the detonation of the Kontakt.

[Damian90]

Maybe, it is still pure speculation. Because we actually don't have any reliabale infos about M829A3 performance, we still don't know how exactly Kontakt-5 works. And going further, if M829A3 is very effective against targets protected by Kontakt-5, why Russians claim that Relikt is morre effective against M829A3.

That true that there were some upgrades made in Relikt, but what is the nature these upgrades? Nobody knows.

It can be however possible that Relikt is only slightly effective against M829A3 compared to Kontakt-5. But this actually means that capabilities of classic heavy ERA to be upgraded are ended. So this gives us two different contenders for better heavy dynamic protection for future. Kaktus that is rather dead as Object-640 is, however design seems to be interesting. And Ukrainian Knife that have completely different design than classic plate ERA's.

[militarysta]

CR2:

based on very god draws, and turret phtos - interior and external.

[Magpie_Oz]

What are the diagrams for guys ?

[militarysta]

it's only LOS thickness, but in takns world - bigger LOS is beter LOS, becouse there is more space to breake jet (HEAT) or sabot (AFSDS) - you know - NERA, NRxA, hevy ERA, Burlinghton, Dorhester, etc.

[Damian90]

Yes these are only LOS - Line Of Sight thickness.

However LOS is not everything, there are several LOS thickness, the vertical one when plate is not angled, the LOS when plate is angled will be different than real thickness of specific plate.

There are different thikcnesses at 0 degrees from turret or hull center line, and different at 30 degrees for example.

These are geometry tricks to make armor better without making it heavier.

But there is also so called special armor. Modern armor reacts differently, more dynamic than classic steel armor.

Dynamic Armor or Dynamic Protection can be divided on to:

Multilayer Laminate Armor (Kombinacja-K/Combination-K, Burlington, Dorchester and similiar),

Explosive Reactive Armor (in it's light and heavy forms),

Non Energetic Reactive Armor,

Non Explosive Reactive Armor,

Self Limiting Explosive Reactive Armor, and other.

Such armor is more effective with less weight, this is why modern tanks have so absurdaly thick armor.

As for Merkava, actually the most realistic armor thickness where projectile will hit is somewhere near A2, B2 and C2 places. This is because of it's design. Realistically if we would place Merkava Mk4 armor vertically, and for example Leopard 2 or M1A1/A2 armor vertically, both M1 and Leo2 armors are thicker.

[Damian90]

One more interesting observation.

It seems that US, Russians and Ukrainians preffer thinner outerplate and thicker backplate of special armor cavity, while UK designers preffer thicker outer plate and think backplate. Germans seems to preffer solution similiar to US designers.

Don't know how it was made by French designers in Leclerc. While Italian Ariete seems to have thicker outerplate like in Challenger 2.

Israelis have different approach, special armor module is made from thin plates while the turret itself is made from rather thick steel plates. So all in all it looks similiar like on US, Russian, Ukrainian and German tanks.

[militarysta]

and polish NERA armour:

[militarysta]

I forgot about "citadele" in Merkava Mk.IV (inner armour - about 50-60mm RHA plate).

Proper values:

[militarysta]

Some form polish 10TkBde:

polish inscription means: "Distance to penetration (frontwards in the thickest armour area on turret)

This is polish clon instruction from germany, which was made in 1983r. It's important, becouse these estimates are for leopard2A1 ( since 1979 till november 1984; 380 (I batch) + 450 (II batch) + 300 (III batch)

Of course for Leo2A3 and Leo2A4 this values will be completely different.

[militarysta]

[Damian90]

One note, in M1 series, weak zone at right side of main sight "chimney" is very small and placed high, near turret roof, while lower thickness is same as on other parts of side turret armor. I posted photos of turret interior in this thread so everyone can search and see how it looks.

[Damian90]

Meanwhile:

Object-195.

Seems to be Object-195 old turret test bed prototype.

[Damian90]

How possibly can be looking another project of new, more classic design of new MBT for Russian Army, codename "Armata".

[Erwin]

Looks vaguely like the Israeli Merkava. Is the engine in front? Any access or room in back?

[Damian90]

First version have engine at front, second at rear. I highly doubt that this design have rear compartment for ammo storage because ammo is still in mechanical loading system under turret.

Besides this is only a speculation how new tank developed under "Armata" project can look like.

[Damian90]

We got another interesting info's, this time about M1 series front hull protection.

Armor thickness of front hull is around 650mm.

But the glacis plate is most interesting. It seems that above drivers position it is ~50mm thick while at it's sides thikcness will be around ~80-100mm + fuel cells under it.

Because glacis is angled around 82 degress + how the front armor is designed, front hull have great protection.

It is very smart design, optimized for survivability, very similiar philosophy have British designers in case of Challenger 1 and 2 hulls.

[Erwin]

I thought that the M1 driver was isolated. But, it appears there is a hatch connecting to the turret.

[Damian90]

Well driver is partially isolated.

It can get in to turret but only when turret is at proper positions and turret basket wire mesh coverplates are opened.

Situation is actually more or less similiar in all modern tanks.

[Jim Warford]

Here is Major Warford's Master's Thesis "The Threat of the Premium Tank." A first rate research paper when written, it is most useful in capturing the state of Russian armor technology for that period, as well as putting those developments into an ongoing developmental context.

http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA255552

Regards,

John Kettler

John; I just stumbled on to this site...thanks for the "plug" and the kind words about my thesis. I wrote it while I was enrolled in the US Army Command and General Staff College. Those were the days... This is an interesting thread...especially the brief mention of the FST; one of my favorite topics. Drop me a line when you get a minute.

[Damian90]

How Ojbect-477 Molot could look, and how autoloading system could look.

[Magpie_Oz]

Isn't it a bit dangerous to have the ammo stored in the middle of the tank like that?

[Damian90]

It is, but seriously, in SU nobody really had any issue with crew safety and survivability, best example? T-xx series from T-64 to T-90... earlier T-xx series also.