Centurion AVRE information

I’m trying to find information on the avre as it’s composite side skirts seem to be similar to all the other British composites and I would like to find information on it as well as the romor era. I can’t seem to find any books related to it specifically so I’m looking for recommendations on where to start my search. Or if the name of the side skirts was directly given, for example if it was chobum.

I thought it was paneled BLAZER ERA.

I wouldn’t know, I can’t find the name of the era used anywhere. In game it may be but I don’t know where they got it from.

It’s the “BLAZER” Passive ERA

Here is an advertisement of it

It’s been used by America, Sweden, and Israel as far as I remember (and Britain obviously), but can’t remember if there were any more. It’s not very talked about because it’s not a well known ERA type, it’s also not the best, I’m pretty sure Kontakt-1 is better than it, simply because of surface area.

1 Like

Do you know when this is dated? Would like to see the rpg equivalents of its day to see if the 300mm ce protection is correct. Could I also ask where this advertisement is from, I would like to check it out.

Although from the looks of it it’s all in reference to how well they perform against an m48 with the ERA on.

Sorry for the late response, I had to mow and trim my yard and replace the blades and oil in the mower. The company that produced it was the Israeli IMI industries, or Rafael industries, I believe it is dated to the late 70’s early 80’s.

Edit: Its first battle was in the invasion of Lebanon in 1982. There’s not a lot about it on the internet because of how old it is, and it’s non-use in modern combat, I’d try switching to the Hebrew language and using google translate to go from Hebrew to English and vice versa.

Thanks, you got any idea about the composite armour used on it? I’m thinking it’s going to be “chobum” but with the chally thread that could range from the original all the way to what’s in the challenger 2. Only thing we could figure out is one refers to internal composite while the other is for external. Maybe a comment in passing as to what it could effectively stop.

There are tons and tons of different types of “NERA” (Non-Explosive Reactive Armor) which varies by nations, Russia “pioneered” it with the T-54, which was a hollow steel plate with 1/4inch metal slats throughout it, with a filler material, similar with British Chobham, but most varieties are just categorized as the “Composite/NERA elements.” Don’t quote me on this, but, I believe the first British tank to use it was a prototype chieftain, I believe FV4411 or FV4211. Internal vs external would something like, say the Abram’s versus the Merkava, which have “add on modular composite structures” vs. the Abram’s built in armor. External panels actually hold their own pretty well against their internal counterparts, if not better, as once it gets hit too many times and needs to be replaced, it just gets slid off and another new one slid on.


Frontal of Merkava turret w/o its NERA for example.

Taking a look at it, it’s using the 4m19 matlyuka for testing, and can stop it from all angles, so I’d say it can stop anywhere from 370-400mm of HEAT jet pen.

Blazer was not passive. No ERA is “passive” because its EXPLOSIVE REACTIVE armor.

The AVRE skirts are not ERA. Probably some sort of “chobham” composition, which would have been passive.

You mean some of the Objects that lead up to the T-64 and T-72. But this is still wrong. Both of those tanks had composite armor arrays, but they were not “NERA” because they were solid and relied upon differences in armor layer density and hardness, but they did not “react” as in displace, to erode the penetrator.

I always forget how to spell it, chobham. But yeah basically British vehicles use the same external NERA. what I want to do is find out how well it performs comparatively to rha so we can find a bench mark for all British vehicles. My thinking was the best vehicle to look up stats for it was the avre as it is the least classified car and I could think of that uses it. By doing so we could then guesstimate the values for the nera on the chally 1 and 2 and as well as the warrior. As I highly doubt the composite only stops 30mm of ke when it’s 150mm thick. Although I’m not quite sure what NERA is specifically, is it simply composite or is it more of a magnet situation like what they put on the bradly to disrupt heat projectiles where it’s active but it doesn’t explode and detonate everywhere?

In ERA the moving fly plate that disrupts the penetrator is pushed outward by the explosives, in NERA the fly plate moves backwards and laterally under the force of the penetrator instead. Chobham is not NERA. It was extremely high hardness ceramic composites.

How does that reduce the effect of the penetrator? And then does that mean the nera in game is wrong as in some books or manuals it states it’s chobham used on challengers and the such?

It states that it can be passive or active

Yes, I understand that, but it was built on the T-54, as far as I remember.

Nyet. T-54,55,62 all had monolithic steel armor. Later upgrades saw them fitted with “horseshoe” composite modules on the turret fronts. That is probably what you are thinking of.

“Blazer” Is IMI’s trade name for their uparmoring kits that started with the ERA blocks but became generic for anything they make. But “passive ERA” is a contradictory statement like “wet dry”.

Then maybe it is a passive (NERA)/ERA, different types of it.