In honor to Austin's tradition of posting nifty PDFs and scans for us to read and enjoy, an 82 page, 3 mb book about the RPG:
Overall, the Leopard 2 has better obstacle clearance and there's really nothing too bad about that.
To find air-gaps, one only needs to clank his hand on the armor array and if it echos, there's an air gap.
There's a lot of ways to do this.
I don't like India. Sorry Austin. :v
You really don't need a wall of text to reanswer the question, "Why not make a Track-seeking warhead?".
I would like to ask, how is progressing equipping tanks, IFVs, APCs, etc
with data links to be integrated into C4ISR, or it is still only to the
level of brigade commander CP or battalion commander CP?
The article said, that army will get Khrizantema-S ATGM this year in
units. What about Kornet-S ATGM, based on BMP-3 chassis? Will army use
both or only Khrizantema? Any ino if VDV will get this yar any new
AFAIK, the Russian Army isn't going to use the Kornet en masse, so I
don't think that BMP-3-Kornets are going to run around. Besides,
Khrizantema provides better target acquisition and prosecution systems.
GarryB wrote:To find air-gaps, one only needs to clank his hand on the armor array and if it echos, there's an air gap.
The performance of a real air gap would be minimal... surely it would make more sense to fill air gaps in spaced armour with material that further reduces penetration? Even if it is filled with sand it will effectively defeat a HESH warhead by dispersing the shock wave sideways. A compressible fluid would also do the trick too.
Austin wrote:Did K6 or Kaktus doubled the performance figures of K5 or Kontact ? Do we have some basic performance figures for both ?
Where does NERA stand in the over all picture along with ERA ? Do Russians have any development happening on NERA , read its effective against Tandem warhead.
Can they place two tiles over each other like NERA + ERA ? The first one takes care of Tandem Warhead while the ERA takes care of KE and HEAT type ?
Austin wrote:The Russian Book on T-90 vs T-80 I had put up some time back , in one of the subjects it posts in chechnia on an average each tank suffered a RPG hit to a ratio of 8:1 for RPG vs Tank
Many didnt have ERA and some didnt have explosive in the ERA.
IronsightSniper wrote:I looked through some pages of your posts but was unable to find it, would you be so kind to repost it?
Go from there and make new unmanned little tanks to put in battlefield.
Cheap project for Russian tank maker to keep Engineers thinking new.
The Russian Book on T-90 vs T-80 I had put up some time back , in one of
the subjects it posts in chechnia on an average each tank suffered a
RPG hit to a ratio of 8:1 for RPG vs Tank
A steel–aluminum–steel arrangement offers a resistance 7 times the LOS thickness of the plates.
Since the jet has little strength, it too is disrupted and the plate will offer a resistance 2—3 times the LOS thickness.
Where does NERA stand in the over all picture along with ERA ? Do
Russians have any development happening on NERA , read its effective
against Tandem warhead.
It is logical, that khrizantema-S will replace Sturm-S ATGM, but
Kornet-SP on BMP-3 could be a replacement for Konkurs-S ATGM placed on
BRDM-2 vehicle. Khrizantema and Kornet could work in different levels of
For one Shotra is provided on frontal side of the gun , which means its
jamming capability is complete on the frontal arc but tanks are
vulnerable on the back and side ways , that does not make sense to me ,
because it leaves a big area vulnerable.
Second is for a system that uses passive systems and uses F&F
missile that uses MMW/IIR seeker , Shotra will not be aware of the
missile approaching it , which makes me believe Shotra-1 has to be ON
all the time , which is not ideal and defeats the purpose.
Shtora is on all the time anyways, because if you're not expecting an Ambush, then you should prepare for it all the time.
GarryB wrote:A steel–aluminum–steel arrangement offers a resistance 7 times the LOS thickness of the plates.Since the jet has little strength, it too is disrupted and the plate will offer a resistance 2—3 times the LOS thickness.
So empty air is 2-3 times less effective than a steel al steel arrangement. I am not saying an empty space has no effect, I am saying that there are materials that you can put in that space to make it more disruptive to the incoming penetrator. You have a limited overall thickness of armour and within that thickness you use layers to disrupt or disperse the penetrator. Putting a 5cm air gap might increase protection by 100mm equivalent armour against HEAT rounds and make HESH rounds ineffectual, but filling some of that air gap with rubber and kevlar and nomex might result in a 300mm equivalent of armour against HEAT rounds and a 150mm equivalent against APFSDS rounds... just a totally made up example but do you understand what I mean?
Of course, air is both free and light.
Garry how about a Top Attack missile like Indian Nag ,US Javelin, Europe
PARS they all have top attack capability and attacks the most
vulnerable position of the armour which is the center top , isnt that a
sure kill ?