Western added armor

I’ve had this doubt for quite some time. The doubt is because Gaijin has been determined for years to make the added Western armor only serve mostly to add more weight to those vehicles, since in many cases they give marginal improvements in survival while you lose a lot of acceleration and mobility. Apart from that, it is clearly seen how Gaijin gives the added armor a completely invented protection factor.
As you can see in the two photos of the Challenger mk3, it has composite bricks with 30mm protection against kinetic and 400mm against chemicals.


Then in these two images we have a Challenger 2 OES, much more modern, with bricks twice as large, and mysteriously it has the same protection, something that would be impossible simply because it is more modern and larger, instead Gaijin decided to leave it with the same protection, simply impressive.


I have seen this in other vehicles, such as the Leopard 1 Mexas, which also has an excess of armor to give it marginal survivability.
In comparison, the added armor of Soviet origin has a better performance. Despite being smaller, they provide good protection, they are small and do not add much weight to the vehicles.As you can see in the images, the Kontak 1 offers low protection against kinetics, however, having 25mm more kinetic protection than the Western one does not save you anything, on the other hand it is equal in chemical protection, being smaller and weighing less.


Then we have the Kontakt 5 and Relict, which are clearly superior to anything western, both in protection, size and lightness.



Obviously, it is most likely that the protection provided by the Kontakt 1 and 5 is more or less realistic, since they are two armors widely used by many countries, even Western ones, however with the Relict I have serious doubts that it has such impressive effectiveness, and it seems that Gaijin only gave it the necessary protection to be able to stop modern APDS-FS.

On the other hand we have the Dynas armor of the Slovak T72, which provides reasonable defense while being somewhat thicker than the Kontakt 5.


I understand that much of the western armor is secret, and protection can only be given mainly by assumptions of what it could withstand, but it would be interesting if gaijin thought things through a little better. If the armor is more modern, heavier and thicker, it has to give better protection, not the same protection as the previous one.
PD:Seriously gaijin? Structural steel?

5 Likes

They always write up Russian tanks with whatever the propaganda says even though the quality it known to be subpar and they assume the worst for other nations

3 Likes

oh thats easy snail got given a manufacturers document stating protection against 30mm APFSDS and had a case of shit to the brain stating that it was 30mm of kinetic protection this one has been known for a while

2 Likes

Also russian era gets the HHA blast plates in it modeled for some reason, so the era gets extra added protection of the plates + the era’s rha equivalent which makes no sense…

It makes sense, those added Western armor should have around 90 to 140mm of protection against kinetics, with the advantage over the Soviet ones that being NERA it is not lost when receiving a shot, but with the disadvantage of having more weight.
For example, the medium Mexas armor of the Canadian C1A2 I believe had the capacity to stop 23mm ammunition, which indicates that it had protection of around 50mm against kinetics.

Reminder, the Challenger is NERA, Challenger 2 is ERA, they have nothing to do with each other, as NERA has protection values very much linked to thickness, not so much with ERA. Regarding the lightness of Russian ERA they are integrated into a sort of box, so their actual thickness is more like the Chinese ones, much thicker than in game, although that is just how Gaijing modelled them, but if you look from the side of T80BVM, there is a bit of space below the ERA.

Yes, I know that one is NERA and the other is ERA, but the thing is that being more modern, the ERA DL2 of the 2008 Challenger 2 gives the same protection as the NERA of the 1991 Challenger 1, and only a little more protection than the ROMOR ERA A.



I don’t know exactly what the exact protection would be, but I imagine that the Challenger’s NERA would have enough resistance to stop 30mm APDS, around 70mm against kinetic. On the other hand, the Challenger’s DL2 armor is STANAG 6, which means that at least gives it the resistance to stop 30mm APDS-FS at 500m, which means that it would stop around 90 to 100m of kinetic ammunition. On the other hand, all the added British armor has a resistance of 30mm against kinetic.On the other hand, the Challenger 2’s DL2 armor is ERA, but it is not as sensitive, meaning that it would not detonate when hit by 14.5 or 30mm bullets, maintaining protection for at least a few shots before detonating and being lost.

This is an old forum post where this topic was already discussed, where it is mentioned that the ERA of the Challenger 2 would be the same model or somewhat improved to the Israeli Armor Shield R, which is STANAG 6.

This page contains data on the resistance of ROMOR A.

1 Like

If you have all the sources needed, (a primary or secondary, with a few tertiary) then make a bug report, I was mainly saying the Russian ones are actually thicker but the model seen from the X-ray is not in line with the actual model.

Yes, yes, I know, the x-rays only show the explosive plates, when what is really inside are the plates, but even so, it is still a huge difference compared to the thickness of the Challenger 2 ERA

Ugh no, I’ve already made quite a few reports and only one was accepted, having to post several times before criticizing the game on the forum, arguing with a moderator so that he would accept the report, and after a few months it still hasn’t been corrected, that’s why I came to the conclusion that reporting is a waste of time. On the forum you get the same thing as reporting it, but at least you talk about it with more people.