+62

Scorpius

lancelot

hoom

JohninMK

dino00

d_taddei2

George1

0nillie0

KiloGolf

miketheterrible

Ives

SeigSoloyvov

Interlinked

The-thing-next-door

VladimirSahin

sepheronx

PapaDragon

wilhelm

Cyrus the great

x_54_u43

KoTeMoRe

Elbows

Isos

Ranxerox71

Walther von Oldenburg

LaVictoireEstLaVie

OminousSpudd

par far

Vann7

max steel

Cyberspec

Mike E

jhelb

cracker

TR1

higurashihougi

kvs

Zivo

magnumcromagnon

macedonian

Regular

collegeboy16

Werewolf

RTN

Viktor

SWAT Pointman

flamming_python

Sujoy

KomissarBojanchev

Russian Patriot

militarysta

Damian

Mindstorm

Stealthflanker

runaway

freemanist

medo

ahmedfire

Austin

GarryB

Admin

IronsightSniper

66 posters

Go to page :

1 ... 14 ... 23, 24, 25

Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

ALAMO

ALAMO: Posts : 4737
Points : 4739
Join date : 2014-11-25

Post n°601

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

ALAMO Sun Apr 23, 2023 10:55 am

But to be honest all these "super tanks" will enter this battlefield with a huge disadvantage against Russian anti-armour weapons.

And that is the thing you are watching now bro.
Applies to every single Ukro structure.
They are being decimated at a fraction of the Russian cost.
And objectively it is scary.

GarryB, Hole, Mir, Broski and Belisarius like this post

lyle6

lyle6: Posts : 1747
Points : 1743
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines

Post n°602

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

lyle6 Sun Apr 23, 2023 6:49 pm

ALAMO wrote:
That depends on what you consider "the latest models".
Different NERA panels structure was introduced quite fast, as only they figured that a brand new tank is actually behind the Soviet competitors decade older.
Still it was not a Wunderwaffe, just implementing some non metallic layers, and finally dense DU made net/rods.
Nothing fancy if we keep in mind "combination K" or "kvarz" or "korund" fillers used by the evil backward Soviets since the 60s

The Aybraps would not receive a heavy metal layer to its hull armor until the SEPv3. A full 30 years after the Mango has ripened. Razz

It should 't come as a surprise, the Swedish leaks have long confirmed just how pathetic the Aybraps lower glacis really is:
Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour - Page 25 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSttofxnU-wHIoQXD22X7YfzoY9E6VnWgB5tw&usqp=CAU

Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour - Page 25 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSttofxnU-wHIoQXD22X7YfzoY9E6VnWgB5tw&usqp=CAU

GarryB likes this post

ALAMO

ALAMO: Posts : 4737
Points : 4739
Join date : 2014-11-25

Post n°603

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

ALAMO Mon Apr 24, 2023 12:25 pm

The Aybraps would not receive a heavy metal layer to its hull armor until the SEPv3. A full 30 years after the Mango has ripened. Razz
It should 't come as a surprise, the Swedish leaks have long confirmed just how pathetic the Aybraps lower glacis really is:

SEPv2 is a model with DU elements in frontal hull armor, and I am sure about that - but that's a detail.
Anyway, only by inspecting the data you have provided, we can conclude that there were some changes to the front hull package.
Original M1 has quite a low CE factor, and that is perfectly understandable knowing how the armor package was constructed. Steel sheets with rubber shock absorbers and empty space are not much effective against a cumulative charge.
But we know from the history records, that ceramic elements for NERA structures started to be applied by the Germans with L2A4.
So here we are in our perfectly mid-80s.

As - again I will remind that - a whole project was common, technical solutions were common, and used patents were common for all the NATO tanks of a generation, there is no point in arguing that this improvements does not apply to M1.

That is why you can see a sharp increase of CE protection equivalent, it is perfectly adequate for using ceramic layers.
Was there a change in frontal hull armor composition for IP-HA-A2?
I am not sure.
But none of those retained the vanilla M1 layout, and that is sure.

GarryB and Mir like this post

The-thing-next-door

The-thing-next-door: Posts : 1170
Points : 1228
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus

Post n°604

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

The-thing-next-door Mon Apr 24, 2023 2:54 pm

As far as I am aware western tanks use light NERA, which is good against CE, but not very volume efficient against KE, so you can expect to subtract 100-200mm effective KE resistance from western tanks when comparing their arrays to the more volume efficient Russian ones.

GarryB likes this post

Isos

Isos: Posts : 10818
Points : 10804
Join date : 2015-11-06

Post n°605

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

Isos Mon Apr 24, 2023 3:20 pm

Last german, uk and US tank weight alomst 100t. They will run out fuel way before they reach the front.

With the analyzis of the ukro war they will uparmor them even more.

Their design is really bad.

GarryB likes this post

lyle6

lyle6: Posts : 1747
Points : 1743
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines

Post n°606

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

lyle6 Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:15 pm

ALAMO wrote:
SEPv2 is a model with DU elements in frontal hull armor, and I am sure about that - but that's a detail.

Anyway, only by inspecting the data you have provided, we can conclude that there were some changes to the front hull package.
Original M1 has quite a low CE factor, and that is perfectly understandable knowing how the armor package was constructed. Steel sheets with rubber shock absorbers and empty space are not much effective against a cumulative charge.
But we know from the history records, that ceramic elements for NERA structures started to be applied by the Germans with L2A4.
So here we are in our perfectly mid-80s.

As - again I will remind that - a whole project was common, technical solutions were common, and used patents were common for all the NATO tanks of a generation, there is no point in arguing that this improvements does not apply to M1.

That is why you can see a sharp increase of CE protection equivalent, it is perfectly adequate for using ceramic layers.
Was there a change in frontal hull armor composition for IP-HA-A2?
I am not sure.
But none of those retained the vanilla M1 layout, and that is sure.

You misunderstood - the Swedish leaks configuration is the one with the upgraded hull armor. Yeah...

The SEPv3 is the only one with DU. The weight increase between SEPs is simply too small to account for the DU layer for the hull, and can be better explained away by known additions like APU, RWS and such. Only the SEPv3 has the extra mass budget for a reinforcement of the hull armor with a heavy DU armor.

The-thing-next-door wrote:
As far as I am aware western tanks use light NERA, which is good against CE, but not very volume efficient against KE, so you can expect to subtract 100-200mm effective KE resistance from western tanks when comparing their arrays to the more volume efficient Russian ones.

Russian armor can afford to be much denser compared to Western analogues because the turret design removes the need for side armor. Most of the armor weight can thus be distributed to the massive turret cheeks.

GarryB, The-thing-next-door, Hole and Broski like this post

ALAMO

ALAMO: Posts : 4737
Points : 4739
Join date : 2014-11-25

Post n°607

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

ALAMO Mon Apr 24, 2023 5:53 pm

Yes, I know that, as it represented the Murican struggle to compete with Strv122 Laughing

Highly unlikely Laughing

But you can keep my word for SEPv2, I have those in a backyard Laughing

The point is I guess that the mass parameters are highly doubtful.
There is a "short tone" vs. metric tone, while the first one is 907 kg.
A lot of Anglosaxon made materials refer to the short one, as it is calculated from the pound both share.
SEPv2 weighs 71 short tones, which equals <65 metric.
SEPv3 weighs 73 short/66 metric.
There is a quite impressive, about 3t weight increase in all the milestone generations, that is M1/M1A1HA/M1A2.
And the latest was tested with additional weight balance welded on the turret front, so expect another weight increase as they will hit 70 metric shortly.

Russian armor can afford to be much denser compared to Western analogues because the turret design removes the need for side armor. Most of the armor weight can thus be distributed to the massive turret cheeks.

There is much less area to be covered first of all, and that is because of superb engineering rather than compromising ergonomy.

GarryB likes this post

lyle6

lyle6: Posts : 1747
Points : 1743
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines

Post n°608

Re: Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

lyle6 Mon Apr 24, 2023 8:07 pm

The trick is to subtract a tenth to get the metric.

Doesn't help that apparently there are several mods on the SEPv2 and we're probably talking about different versions of a version of the tank...

But anyway, point still remains: the Aybraps front hull is a very vulnerable target for any anti-weapon that is even remotely considered modern. And they used the same design for their possible next gen MBTs....