T-90M side armor

Machinery of War Discussion
1

The side armor and side ERA on the T-90M seems to overperform.
200 mm of kinetic and 600 mm of chemical is diabolical for a 20 mm block at beast.

unknown_2025.12.17-18.10_1
unknown_2025.12.17-18.10_11920×1080 228 KB

I have shot the T-90M’s side under many angles and a lot of the time, the ERA was able to either eat the whole round or redirect it under an angle, reducing it’s penetration.


Most recently, I have shot the T-90M for an angle that would otherwise penetrate and damage any other MBT.
The KE-W APFSDS round wasn’t effected much by the ERA yet, when entering the crew compartment, the spall liner made the whole APFSDS and subsequently all the created spall dissapear.

unknown_2025.12.17-18.21-Trim-ezgif.com-video-to-gif-converter

This isn’t a very rare scenario, I was just fed up at the moment, I had to post it somewhere.


In the very unlikely case that the T-90M has actuall 200 mm of kinetic side protection, the ERA blocks should be modelled with more depth and accounted for this depth when calculating it's protection at any given time.
4 Likes
2

200 isn’t 90 degree value but angled.
In cases like this it’s best to not rely on misleading flat figure but instead use penetration simulation.

Otherwise Relikt is the best protection in the world and working as intended. This is the whole point of ERA

3 Likes
3

Either one or another the game’s miscalculated the penetration behavior or the projectile degradation is a feature which I highly doubt. Explosive reactive armor being highly sensitive to minor explosions exposes how basic seems to work and need major overhaul for a more realistic asset.

4

AHAHAHAAH.

Spoiler

image

4 Likes
5

There is no 200mm kinetic protection on T-90M side armor.
It’s 54mm from the ERA, 70mm from the steel itself.
And it ends up around 130 - 140mm of side protection when hitting ERA.

Use protection analysis, not statcards.

6

1 Like
7

Don’t confuse reality with the balance value in the game.

9