Why is the Leclerc's armor modeled to only protect 500mm RHA?

Why is a modern NATO tank not modeled to defend against standard NATO rounds?

2 Likes

Because getting 500mm KE protection vs apfsds at 0 degrees isn’t an easy feat to achieve.

Challenger 1 which used chobham armour had a total weight of 62,000kg

Despite the fact most of the armour was heavily focused at the turret, it’s turret offered 480mm KE protection vs apfsds

Also the designs are to defeat Russian ammunition

I would believe that if it could defeat a NATO round it could defeat a Russian round.

480mm KE turret is enough to stop 120mm DM33

If it stops DM33 it stops the weaker 3BM42 no problem.

You forget something:
grafik

Leclercs composite is similar to Chobham but a lot better at defeating APFSDS

How much KE protection and how much composite LOS thickness

Sweden also trialed Leclercs together with Leo 2s (later STRV 122) and it passed the 400mm penetration test ( on the whole frontal arc not the smallest plate in the array)

Unknown. Would be a pretty high risk to have it publically known wouldn’t it?

Pretty sure there were some measurements for hull composite thickness for Leclerc

There are some takes at it from a demilitarised Leclerc in Saumur museum but that’s mostly it. The only actual measurements are at Nexter which made the tank. Otherwise we somewhat know how it’s layered and mostly what materials they used

The LOS will suffice


For example. I’m somewhat worried that Gaijin just took the fuel tanks layout (which is in the front left hand side looking at it) and just took the shape and modeled armor around it while also getting things like the angle of the hull wrong. (Just like AMX 50s overall size)


This shape of the fueltank and very likely wrong dimensions

620mm LOS huh…
If it has equally composite as M1A2 turret

It would offer 485mm KE vs apfsds

It has better composite I think

wouldn’t surprise me with how expensive it is

Not only that but also extensive testing (They even tried stuff like different kinds of stone for composite) but also 1. being stated to be as good against CE as Chobham but better against KE, 2. none of the proposed kits (Turkey, Sweden, AZUR, 2015 Modernisation) had hull armor upgrades.

quick question why does the gunners armor portion provide so little protection while being 840mm thick

Which exactly?

s21