Apologies for the mistake guys. The values have been corrected.
Damn conversions…
Final values are 2.07t of weight for Steel
6.71t for Alloy
@Gunjob
Can you ensure the post is corrected please.
1 Like
It’s now accurate :)
Imo belly plate should be around 1.7t
Hey guys.
Just an update on the TES / OES protection.
The two latest reports were reviewed by the developers:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/houncJDa4V5L
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/NGHyBBXdoToo
Regarding KE protection:
“STANAG 4569 level 5/6 directly states “frontal arc to centreline”.
If it provided protection during normal (direct) fire, then, just like for STANAG 4569 level 4, “azimuth 360 degree” would be indicated.
This is not a bug. At a heading angle of +/-30 degrees, ASPRO-HMT in game provides protection against PMB 090 from 500m”
Regarding CE protection:
"Currently, active protection on the Challenger 2 TES provides protection of more than 500mm from a cumulative jet. The discrepancy in resistance in DM and in X-ray will be corrected.
The report does not contain reliable information about the specific weapons against which protection is provided.“”
2 Likes
They misinterperted how to read STANAG. In that example it is shown 30 degre of a fron of a vehicle, yet we are talking about 30 degree of ASPRO BLOCK. Replace that vehicle with ASPRO block facing forward, here is what we need
Unfortunately thats not the case according to the standard itself. Level 5 is from the centreline of the vehicle.
Until we can confirm that the blocks are tested to STANAG 5 standard, rather than the entire array, the armor will be STANAG5, not ASPRO-HMT
@Gunjob heads up - here’s the actual weight of an ASPRO-HMT/MTAP block.
Source: Armor & Mobility, March 2010 by Tactical Defense Media - Issuu
page 8
7 Likes
Isnt that when dealing with factory armour on a vehicle, not when we maesure it on a block
1 Like
Based on what all the currently submitted sources state. Until it can be clearly proven otherwise.
Smin’s mentioned the xray will be adjusted to survive 500m CE
So 100CE “Buff” sort of.
This does actually now meet ASPRO-HMT’s spec sheets standard when seen this way. It ignores all the sources and context that it’s designed in 2008 to fight in conflicts where modern ATGMs and Tandem warheads are around, but ASPRO claims to defeat RPG. PG-7VL is 500MM CE so we do now defeat RPGs at least.
ASPRO Claims to defeat 0.3m AP, which the 30KE does technically do.
Until we can find sources explicitly stating the test methodology and the intended threats to defend against, this is accurate.
1 Like
As the first page stataes
It is for evaluation of armoured vechicles. That schematic
Was here only to show how it is measured, so STANAG 5 from the front and 30 degree to both sides
2 Likes
Rafael are advertising the armour itself not the armour and vehicle which means the armour itself has to meet the STANAG5 standard not the Armour and the vehicle.
3 Likes
I do wonder what the Level 1-4 is directing at. Is the Level 5, just the 30 degree cone? What is the 1-4 showing?
Wait a CE buff
It is all around the vechicle, so it provides STANAG 4 all around, and STANAG 5 from the front
The other sources in the report cite the same
Again, until there is clear evidence of a different method of calculation, this value is correct in game.
The back board stops the round as well, so the developers are saying this is part of the ASPRO-HMT package.