that’s still 4 distorting plates and having the round “guillotined” twice which would negate tipped APFSDS and that’s not even accounting for the fact that those “slats” overlap each other. And structural steel and rubber absolutely affect APFSDS, composite armour and NERA especially is ENTIRLY based off that fact. It’s not that they offer a significant level of protection on their own, but that when paired with other materials their different shockwave propagation speeds causes distortions in the materials that break up the penetrator.
Where is this asymmetric Plate? There is no second flyer plate only a pair of offset (9 degrees) 4S20 / -22 tiles.
K-1
K-5
And the M1’s Composite side screen is made up of DU. and yet barely does anything considering that 65mm of composite somehow barely adds 30mm(29.4mm) RHAe (87-(30+27.6)) of protection. even though it incudes multiple DU elements & a 20-25mm RHA strikeface.
4 Likes
What says that it is DU? Special Armour =/= DU
Try actually reading what I typed
Source? and even if it is, DU offers the same single hit protection as tungsten alloy but we are not talking about the Abrams in anyway, what ever the Abrams side skirts are made of is not related to how Kontact or Relekt work
First time I’ve heard of asymmetric explosive being used in the 4SXX series, or in any type of heavy ERA. It seems to me that inducing rotation in the flyer plates could improve effectiveness at certain impact points, but at others it might significantly reduce it. Depending on the impact angle and the direction of rotation, the projectile could actually encounter less material along its path and it would be even more problematic with a 4S23 sandwich.
I can’t find exact details for it, just that one side of the explosive was a little thicker than the other to produce more rotation in the flyer plate, so I’m not making any claims it was some type of magic, just that they did account for and improve it’s ability to deal with less that optimal impact angles
Special Armor in the context of the report denotes;
“Special Armor referred to in this document consists of the specific Tri-plate installed in the first generation Abrams Tanks and its associated threat mechanisms”.
Theoretically nothing, but it’d be pretty hard to weld plastic, as the guide instructs for repair.
I guess it could just be a alternating Plastic-Steel-Plastic panel similar to Chobham as it would make sense in terms of a “Tri-Plate” (Three element). But it differs as there is no space for bolts of any kind and directly mounting Plastics to Metal without encapsulation if difficult and Glues or Epoxies probably wouldn’t have the service life in the environment considering the vibrations involved in the life cycle of a vehicle, or be easy to repair since de-bonding plastics is exceedingly difficult to do non-destructively.
Let alone how else the skirt + side armor would meet requirements for 350mm against a KE threat at +/- 25 degrees, when it’s only got ~57-75mm of RHA otherwise.
Are they somehow not a motive element that would work to bend a penetrator out of alignment? They do seem to be hinged and it’s not like none of the energy from a penetration would be imparted to the skirt. and with the spacing between the hull being about 400mm a reasonably long penetrator would form multiple points of contact simultaneously with the skirt and side armor. So may segment the penetrator.
Possibly, it doesn’t take much yaw to be imparted to the penetrator to begin to have a significant negative effect on it’s ability to penetrate the armour, I think its something like if the tail of the rod is 2 degrees out of alignment with the tip it will lose about 6% of its penetration.
also looking at the picture of it you have a RHA plate backed by NERA, so A HEAT or APFSDS would strike the RHA then as it penetrates the strike face the NERA would distort to try and break apart the tip of the HEAT jet or rod (I don’t now if it would be enough to break the tip of an APFSDS) which causes extreme degradation to the penetration ability, HEAT will lose about 30% of it’s pen and and APFSDS about 20%.
Also sorry for the slow response, it was nearly 2am here so I needed to sleep.
Where is that Abrams armour document page from?
Something that is unfortunately restricted
Are you sure for certain? Or just because it says secret
Pretty certain, its what stona posted on that abrams post the other day and deleted, or well the document he posted
the same document i called out for being classified for with Rickards e mail
Wasnt what Stona posted an image from the Swedish tank trials? Or is that image also from them
that image is also from it
on the uncropped image you can see the swedish armed forces logo but im not sure its on that page specifically
Afaik not everything from the Swedish tank trials is classified
You could be right though, I’m surprised if thats the case that its’ been up here since Feb
not everything no but the actual armour protection part is
Gaijin also only found out in april the same time i did as i told someone high up about it
1 Like
UK has same issue. Look at the Challenger 2 technical data thread. We are all posting official and factual MOD documents stating that the L27A1 can penetrate the T80 armour with Kontact-5 ERA, however because it couldnt be don’t in an in-game test that apparently means the IRL MOD tests are incorrect. I’m saying this, Gaijin are admitting that the T-80 armour/ERA is over performing or the L27A1 is under performing or BOTH.
They state that an MOD factual document for the L27A1 is not sufficient information and that their in game tests are sufficient information.
There are many documents, such as the SRL 4026 British documents which also say “secret” but we know for sure they are declassified
And you have proof of this?
Your post got removed should be the indicator now.