The single warhead on the Metis M1 just delivers a generic big boom,
what the 3BK-31 does is prepare the armor for the next penetration, and
then prepare it again for the final penetration, which instead of just
adding up each warhead's penetrations, just makes it easier to defeat
Advanced armor arrays.
So what you are trying to say is that the Metis M1 offers a powerful single stab with an initial jab to get rid of any ERA, while the 3BK-31 has an initial jab to remove ERA and then two powerful hits each one digging through a "trap" layer designed to reduce its performance.
What I am trying to say is that two separate 125mm shaped charge warheads should penetrate better than a single 125mm charge.
No, tactics are apart of the Tank. You're saying that Tanks don't need
obstacle clearance because that's what Engineers are for, but Engineers
are apart of the system.
Sorry, do you mean "a part" or "apart"? They mean the opposite.
Engineers are part of the system and will be called up when needed... building bridges, clearing minefields, blowing up obstructions etc etc.
If a T-90 and a Leopard come to an obstacle that the Leopard can climb over and the T-90 can't... the Leopard will go over and the T-90 will go around.
The way around might be mined so that is good news for the Leopard. The way over the obstacle might be lined up by an RPG team wanting to shoot the Leopard in the weak belly armour... bad news for the Leopard.
At the end of the day the crew will know what they can or cannot deal with and what they can they will and what they can't... well they will deal with that too.
From people who've been to Tank exhibitions and has touched the Arjun,
they can measure it's varying armor layouts, so we know how much armor
they get to work with.
Without taking a core sample you can only get an overall thickness which tells you little about the structure of the armour. The Indians have little history in developing composite armours so for all we know they might have made some basic errors in design that lead to the armour being effective against the ammo they have tested it against but not effective against western type ammo, or they might have corrected errors in western armour making standards and come up with an excellent armour structure that is 20 tons lighter than an Abrams but is just as well protected.
You can make educated guesses but educated guesses are most accurate when there is a track record, and this is a first for India so personally I wouldn't even bother speculating.
The Indian Army did want to know the secrets of T-90 armour, which the Russians declined to sell to them... which is perfectly understandable, but then if they really wanted to know a few core samples of worn out T-90s would give them an idea if they really wanted to know.
The fact that they wanted to buy the technology suggests it is good enough to be worth buying and it wasn't that they were just curious.
) Will T-90M has blow off panels ? Does Blow Off panels offer
significant level of protection to the crew of tanks and how does it
Explosives will generally take the line of least resistance. A gun works because it is easier for the burning gasses to expand down the barrel pushing the bullet ahead of it than to push the sides of the chamber or the bolt to the rear. Equally in Vietnam wearing sandals was preferred by some because if you stand on a small mine it will take off your toes whereas a shoe will take your foot off at the ankle and a boot your leg 3 quarters of the way up your shin. A very small mine however (called toe poppers) you were better protected by a heavy boot.
The point is that with an explosion giving it an outlet directs the main blast force out the outlet.
Think of it like 1,000 people in a dark movie theatre. If someone yells fire people will panic and everyone will rush to the exit. They might push against bare wall but when it doesn't give way they push towards the exit light instead.
The difference of course is that the blow out panels are designed to blow out and release pressure and energy.
A blow out panel on an ammo cache is like breaking a firecracker in half and then lighting the fuse.
A firecracker will explode with a loud bang because the hole the fuse burns through is tiny and the gas can't escape quickly enough out that hole to relieve the pressure of all the powder burning at once.
With it broken in half however there is plenty of space for the powder to burn without pressure building up so you get what we used to call here a fizzer with a hiss and spray of burning powder like a sky rocket but shorter burning.
What happens lets say if a ATGM manages to badly hit the tank but cannot penetrate it ,
The impact of a 152mm 43kg HE shell on a Tiger or Panther tank turret was devastating and even if it didn't penetrate the armour it often blew the turret off the tank.
A much lighter ATGM hitting a modern heavy tank... they would probably feel it but might not even know what it was till they got out later and saw the damage.
A 90% penetration can lead to spalling where flakes of metal on the opposite side of the impact point can be ripped from the armour and bounce around the inside of the tank at supersonic speed.
Most modern tanks have anti spall liners, and even the ones that don't spaced armour will prevent this being a problem most of the time anyway.
This is the basis for the HESH warhead where the main round is a big soft blob of HE and when it hits the target it flattens and then detonates. It doesn't penetrate the armour, it sends shockwaves through the armour and defeats the vehicle with spall damage.
HESH is a full calibre round that needs rifling and is the main reason the British army keeps rifled main tank guns.
Why dont ATGM designed to target the tracks , atleast a hit even from RPG-29 would make the tank immobile and a sitting duck ?
Because even an immobile tank is dangerous. When you come up against a tank you know you can't penetrate then you have to get creative and try for a side or rear shot.
Setting up a fake minefield... or even a real one will channel the enemies tank forces and you should position your anti tank forces to places where they can take side shots. Natural barriers and choke points can be used for this purpose... fords in otherwise deep rivers can be mined for example, and covered with AT rockets and machine guns and snipers so clearing those mines manually is costly to the enemy.
Is there any new ATGM under development that will replace the Kornet ,
logically it should be the Hermes but any thing besides that ?
Chrisantema is replacing ATAKA in the ground forces, and with a 1250mm penetration and 6km range in the ground launched model is certainly an improvement on both ATAKA and KORNET.
I would think that ground launched HERMES with a range of 20-100km and a near 30kg warhead and terminal guidance should be a good replacement... for tactical air power...
The tracks don't give off anything that can allow a seeker to home in on it. It's up to the gunner to aim for the tracks.
If the tank has been driving anywhere the tracks will be warm.