The Japanese wiki has proven its reliability in my past comparisons with other sources. The information it provides closely aligns with my findings.
Consider this: must we wait for an actual war to recognize the significance of spall liners? Picture Japan facing a sudden attack; waiting until then to develop and upgrade all their armored fighting vehicles with spall liners would be too late. It only makes sense for them to have already developed and pre-installed this technology on their tanks, doesn’t it?
Moreover, examining the Komatsu LAV reveals what seems to be spall liners installed all around the vehicle, particularly behind its doors, strategically serving as shields during potential attacks.
Claiming that Japan lacks knowledge about spall liners simply because they haven’t experienced an active warzone seems nonsensical to me.
its like that time a lot of people started to complain that the armor of the type 10 dosent make sense since its lighter than the type 90 and they have never been to a war etc etc basically excuses to say the type 10 shouldnt have as much armor
Pretty sure the French have also employed lightweight composites similar to nanometric steel, Germany too, though for Germany most of that armor is on APC/IFVs.
I doubt its THAT effective, signitficantly better than RHA yes but that much i doubt. There was a study about it from ~13 years ago. Its called “Ballistic performance of nanocrystalline and nanotwinned ultrafine crystal steel”
Here is one thing, not sure how effective it would be.
“While conducting shooting tests to improve and stabilize bullet resistance, large-sized shooting test boards necessary for equipment were prototyped. After comprehensive real-size testing, the grain-refined bulletproof steel plates were adopted for the Type 10 tank and the subsequently developed Type 16 maneuver combat vehicle.”
