Type 10 and Failed Armour Model

Seriously… other nations can’t even have a functional realistic armour meanwhile Russian armour isn’t just functional, it down right overperforms.

In this post I will mostly rant about the Turret composite, specifically the mantlet area for the Type 10 but let’s talk a bit about its hull.

It was revealed the hull composite is the wrong way round and another issue is that the all steel frame (not hollow) holding the composite module is modelled as an empty vacuum space which acts as major weakspot when in fact should offer strong protection.

Then there’s the mantlet area… despite the mantlet module having few mm gaps between it and the turret cheek module, the composite doesn’t cover the module block area to the width it should, leaving not milimeters but inches wide armour holes on each side of the mantlet. The gun breech is longer on one side and shorter on the other side with another armour gap due to being too short and the 300mm thick trunnion mantlet is acting like 20mm of steel.

Why can’t the composite be modelled as good on the Type 10 as it is on Type 16, in a sense there are no armour holes and the mantlet design is very similar?

Gaijin, you really need to learn to model modern battle tank mantlet armour better…

Here’s K2’s mantlet armour in very high detail