Yes you are correct !!
2 Likes
Yea, i missremembered it. I thought it is 200 with the backplate, not on top of it. My mistake
1 Like
As a addition I should say that that text passage is about the Warrior, but it’s talking about the same ERA so still be useful
1 Like
iirc they stated it being 40mm
I remember it was something like that. Might be misremembering
A back shot
someone can pixel it i cant do it
@Smin1080p @Gunjob
Curtosy of Warhead_beast, ASPRO-HMT defeats threats “such as the RPG-7”. The modern munition for this in terms of anti-tank warfare since 1988 (long before our 2008 TES) is the PG-7VR. A Tandem warhead missile.
Furthermore on the ASPRO brochure, it has this to say about the capabilities of the blocks:
“Anti Tank Rockets at 360 degrees”
Anti-Tank rockets in this case are mentioned explicitly instead of RPG. This is likely alluding to russian 9M113 Konkurs or 9M133 Kornet both of which were in active service prior to ASPRO-HMT and likely played a key part in their development.
9M113 as fired from BMP-2M is able to penetrate ASPRO-HMT in the current build of the game.
Are these two sources sufficient to alter the Chemical Protection on TES/OES?
9 Likes
That’s now 3 different sources stating the RPG-7 is ineffective and ASPRO-HMT is designed to stop anti-tank missiles too. Surely this satisfies the secondary source criteria?
9 Likes
Assumption are banned sorry
2 Likes
Finally found it: A CARRV without the ASPRO and with only the backing plate
now that is a quite chonky plate
two plates
and it looks to have the same mounting points as Chally 2s
2 Likes
“AMAP-B (ballistic) provides protection against kinetic energy penetrators like bullets, autocannon calibers like 20 mm or 30 mm and against APFSDS of tank guns like modern 120 mm or 125 mm rounds.”
Timestamp; 2:16 to 3:25
Ballistic testing of Rheinmetall AMAP-B (Advanced Modular Armour Protection - Ballistic) is demonstrated in the following video, in compliance with STANAG 4569, showing that testing is conducted on the armour piece alone and not mounted on the vehicle. In particular, testing is conducted perpendicular to the armour, meaning that “azimuth” in relation to STANAG 4569 testing means the azimuth of the armour plate, not the mobile platform.
5 Likes
After reading this all i can think of is jack black in school of rock… MATH MATH MATH MATH MAAAATHH XD
1 Like
Didn’t somebody ask how much the RCWS weighs?
Second source.
Timestamp; 0:0 to 1:00
In this video published by Paramount Group, we can see the testing of Matador, Maverick, and Marauder vehicle armour against small arms in compliance with STANAG 4569. The testing is conducted perpendicular to the armour system to prove the system up to STANAG 3 against ballistic attack.
Edit; sorry, this one may not apply as STANAG 3 KE is Azimuth 360°.
1 Like
So i’m just compiling what I can on the ASPRO-HMT system’s CE protection and have these sources:
ASPRO-HMT as described by the manufactuer can defend against Anti Tank Rockets.
The brochure explicitly states RPGs:
Tankograd mentions RPG-7 is ineffective.
Images of War states ASPRO-HMT is designed to defeat modern ATGMs:
Images of War goes on to say:
ASPRO-HMT is a mid 2000ish applique armor.
In 1988, RPG-7s main Anti-Tank round became PG-7VR. A two stage, tandem warhead Anti-Tank round to replace PG-7VL.
For ASPRO-HMT to defeat RPG-7 circa 2008+, it must have enough CE resistance to survive a tandem round. 1000/1200mm of CE.
This logic coincides with the Images of War source as 1000CE-1200CE would provide protection against Konkurs and Kornet launchers respectively. Modern ATGMs by 2008 standards.
ASPRO-HMT is also not just a singular block of ERA. Its Passive and Reactive in layers. This would generate multiple explosions as the jet penetrates a new layer, eventually stopping before going through the block.
This is the exact kind of multi-layering that would defeat tandem charges.
9 Likes
@Gunjob is the above, enough evidence to support ASPRO-HMT’s tandem warhead capability, and a CE buff respectively?
1 Like
i understand what the devs are saying but for an era manufacturer they cant do that. and they cant do that because they dont know where the era will be placed. if he customer decides to put the era in he front of the tank what then?
as stated by many ppl the manufacturer only shows the block, they dont manufacture the entire vehicle. they cant promisse something based on challenger values to an country that wants to slap era on the side of armored trucks.
4 Likes
To quote a bald guy from pornstars…best i can do is 200ce XD (Gaijin probably)
1 Like