Composite Armor of a M1150

Thought this looked cool. The Russians captured a M1150 assault breacher vehicle and posted up close photos of the vehicle itself. And someone caught a glimpse of the composite armor
Now apparently people are saying this is the non downgraded version of the armor, but it doesn't have the DU with it.
https://twitter.com/GarupanH/status/1783391370096558451/photo/1

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Full sized photo
    I don't know what knocked it out

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Solovyev Live... interesting

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That meme gave me a stroke to read

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think this may the same one? Before it was pulled out

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I don't know what knocked it out
      >wheels blown off
      Mines, duh.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Still spamming the same picture i see

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Mine clearing tank disabled by mine

      Was the crew drunk or something?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >infantry shot by gun
        >eod blown up by ied
        >air defense destroyed by missile
        >escort ship sunk by sub

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://archive.org/details/iswarnowimpossib00bloc

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    abrams haven't had DU in their arrays for a while now. Depleted uranium was used because they couldn't get the composites in the arrays at the time to match it's performance. Since then they've managed to overcome the limitations and don't use it anymore.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So is this just modern Abrams armor then?
      Like no Iraqi or Saudi version

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      depleted uranium should still be in the M1A2 SEP3
      its simply a material thats both hard and dense, which are good qualities to have in armor to protect against KE threats
      the M1A2 offered to taiwan were claimed to have hade slightly thicker armor to offset the lack of DU, which implies DU in existing tanks

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >abrams haven't had DU in their arrays for a while now
      Substantiate your claims.
      M1150 doesn't have Abrams turret, only chassis. Turret is custom.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He's just here to construct any rationale possible to reach, "Russia defeated America's most advanced armor concept." and "Russia can now study America's best armor concept, xaxaxa."

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      depleted uranium should still be in the M1A2 SEP3
      its simply a material thats both hard and dense, which are good qualities to have in armor to protect against KE threats
      the M1A2 offered to taiwan were claimed to have hade slightly thicker armor to offset the lack of DU, which implies DU in existing tanks

      I don't really understand how you would deploy a ceramic in this case. DU isn't hard it's quite soft, It has to be alloyed with titanium if you want to increase its tensile strength. Also, as far as I understand the DU package which isn't merely a solid block of DU is really there to "catch" anything that remains after going through the array.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >DU is really there to "catch" anything that remains after going through the array.
        it is believed the DU does most of the work to begin with along with the actual steel front and backplate

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That was more of a cope meant to explain away the burnt-out wrecks of saudi and iraqi abrams we saw a couple years ago. Which honestly had more to do with them jamming the ammo rack doors open and lap loading. The hits they took never engaged the frontal arrays anyway as they were general ambushed.

          As for the steel front and back plate I think that really plays into what I said as that is going to provide most of the shearing action to a rod penetrator, but you don't get that action without the other components of the array. The DU by that point(provided it isn't underneath an already hit piece of armor) should be dealing with a pretty fricked up penetrator. So I suppose in a way it depends on how you look at it what's doing the "most work".

          >don't really understand how you would deploy a ceramic in this case.
          Just DU alloy (same APFSDS use) plate in the place this array has steel backing plate.

          Not really sure what you're trying to say here DU heavy alloy at ~6% titanium isn't a ceramic.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >. So I suppose in a way it depends on how you look at it what's doing the "most work".
            in that a majority of the penetration power is reduced in an extremely thin section
            the DU was added specifically as KE protection and likely has the biggest contribution to protection especially in comparison to small the plate actually is

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >here DU heavy alloy at ~6% titanium isn't a ceramic.
            I am saying DU armor part is not a ceramic. It's a metal plate made from the DU based alloy.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >don't really understand how you would deploy a ceramic in this case.
        Just DU alloy (same APFSDS use) plate in the place this array has steel backing plate.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >DU isn't hard it's quite soft
        Uranium is extremely hard. It's alloyed with titanium for increased ductility to keep it from shattering on impact.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So, I thought this, too, and looked it up to BTFO the

          [...]
          I don't really understand how you would deploy a ceramic in this case. DU isn't hard it's quite soft, It has to be alloyed with titanium if you want to increase its tensile strength. Also, as far as I understand the DU package which isn't merely a solid block of DU is really there to "catch" anything that remains after going through the array.

          who said it was soft.

          Cast uranium, just 10HRC: https://www.matweb.com/search/datasheet.aspx?matguid=6311bc909b6a42c8b7a75173245309a4&ckck=1

          A bunch of heat treated uranium-titanium alloys, hardness range from 37 to 58HRC:
          https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6133316

          This paper and a bunch of other sources list Uranium as having a hardness of 6.0 Mohs, which an online Mohs-to-Rockwell calculator converts to 65HRC:
          G.V. Samsonov, ed. (1968). "Mechanical Properties of the Elements". Handbook of the physicochemical properties of the elements. New York, USA: IFI-Plenum. pp. 387–446. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-6066-7_7. ISBN 978-1-4684-6066-7. Archived from the original on 2015-04-02.

          ^Wolfram Alpha also states 6.0 Mohs is 64.9HRC, but some mineral site says 5.7 Mohs is 70HRC.

          So apparently cast uranium is basically jello, while wrought uranium is as hard as a file. U-Ti alloys fall in the middle tending towards the hard end.

          I put everything is in HRC because most of us kind of have a hardness reference in HRC because that's the scale used in knife steels.

          There's been a ton of research and documentation on the physical properties of uranium and uranium alloys and how to manipulate them. I'm not going to read all that. But basically you can evidently make a chunk of Uranium as functionality soft as a butter knife or harder than the hardes steel. A natural, wrought, or forged chunk of uranium without any heat treatment is generally pretty damn hard - harder than glass but not as hard as quartz. It's possible to make steel files which will cut it. Tungsten is significantly harder than uranium, and tungsten carbide is way fricking harder.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            there are also uranium carbides

            if you dig around, you can find a paper on the use of uranium carbide for machine tools

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            there are also uranium carbides

            if you dig around, you can find a paper on the use of uranium carbide for machine tools

            Do keep in mind that we're not just after hardness, the density of uranium and tungsten are also usually major selling points here, and their carbide aren't going to be anywhere near as dense as the metal.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I was only looking at the hardness question, but yes the density is what makes it great. Hardness just keeps that density from deforming out of the way.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      DU is not exported

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why?
        Why sell a country on the promise of the world's best tank and then sell them the half working models?
        I imagine a German leopard is as good as a finnish one

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes because Germans do not use materials in their armor array that they don't want to export

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Tungsten/other composite armour is currently better than DU, historically they were equivalent, but DU (for the US) is literal waste material, and therefore free, this is very good for budgets. For export tanks, there is less incentive to save costs on a massive production run, and the US's own nuclear export laws mean that nuclear material (including waste material), cannot be exported without congressional approval. The export abrams have the same or better protection as domestic abrams, the difference is the material and price per unit.
          The world's best tank is not the abrams, it never has been, and it never will be. The abrams is the best tank for the US, but ultimately its the best tank for the US for a certain price per unit and assuming a certain operating cost/logistical basis. The outright best tank is currently the Leopard2A7, and the leopards have been ahead of all other contenders since the 2A5.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Leopard fanboys are the most insufferable homosexuals in the military community. New Atheists of armor.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It is objectively the best modern tank.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            DU is used as a component of composite that works particularly well against kinetic penetrators. I have doubts that using DU in place of a composite array that would use HHA or Tungsten components is going to be worse by any notable metric considering the almost equivalent density and hardness.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >cannot be exported without congressional approval
            Midwit alert

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >The export abrams have the same or better protection as domestic abrams
            That's just not true. There's only two countries that have ever been offered the same armor package that the US uses, and one declined due to wanting to keep their armored industry and the other because politicians fell for the DU being evil meme.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Not all exports are equal, its true.
              The potential swedish export M1A2 was stated by the pentagon to have the same performance as the M1A2. Its not conclusive, but it suggests parity between domestic and export tanks, at least for the M1A2 and for more politically reliable export destinations. Further, Sweden rejected it on the basis of poor armour, so exporting tanks with even worse armour than a rejected tank would make little sense. I say this because Germany was willing to offer tailored+upgraded versions of the Leopard 2 for each buyer (plus competition from the Leclerc and later the CR2, which were also sold as standard). Furthermore a lot of Leopard 2s were readily avaliable after the cold war. The original M1A2 had relatively mediocre armour, the gen 2 DU package was not particularly good compared to the Leo2A5. The SEP V2's armour is an unknown quantity, but the weight is. DU and tungsten have similar densities and weights, and armour upgrades correspond with a significant weight increase.
              The Saudi's received M1A2S (an upgrade from the SEP), which now has a weight of 63 tonnes, the same as the SEP V2, which suggests a similar armour package.
              The M1A2K (kuwait) is also an upgrade from the SEP, i cannot find any details about it's weight though.
              The export M1A2s arent the same as the recent M1A2SEPV3 for sure, but theres no reason to suppose that they're worse than the V2.
              Poland and Australia are looking to buy the M1A2 SEPV3, not sure what the export package on those looks like yet, if any.

              The M1A1 has a dozen variants and these do vary massively. The M1A1 isnt the US's best tank, the most advanced M1A1 in terms of armour was the M1A1 HC, which was contemporary with the M1A2 and had 2nd gen armour. The export variants of the M1 such as the AIM, SA, and FEP, are all of a similar weight or heavier, and are more recent. Factoring in the export environment as well, its likely the armour is the same as, or better than the HC.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It also wasn't until a few years ago that they could even bring DU fitted tanks with them overseas (that's why they were onky fitted to the few in a training yard)

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      completely wrong. Every Abrams since the M1A1HA has had DU armor. The serial numbers on the turret all end in U denoting Uranium. The only version that doesn't end in U is the SEPV3 which ends in M but we don't know what that means yet or anything with the FMS armor package. SEPV3 are very new.

      >abrams haven't had DU in their arrays for a while now
      Substantiate your claims.
      M1150 doesn't have Abrams turret, only chassis. Turret is custom.

      >M1150 doesn't have Abrams turret, only chassis.
      Sauce me anon? Not that I don't believe you I just assumed it was an abrams turret

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The abrams have DU in their turret arrays currently, from the M1A1 HA to the M1A2SEPV3. The abrams have never had DU in their hulls until the SEPV3. Tank upgrades have been fairly limited since the end of the cold war up until now with the SEPV3. DU is not the best material for armour, but its free (for the US), and the budget for such a large tank fleet is a big concern.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        theres no abrams thats ever had DU in the hull outside of prototypes.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          We know up to the SEPv2 that there has been not a single shred of evidence of usage of DU in the hull, but the SEPv3 is a completely unknown quantity. It is known that the hull armor was upgraded in some way that made it heavier and thicker but whether DU was used in it or not is a mystery.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There MIGTH be some evidence that the NGAP package removed DU entirely, considering the turret serial number that denotes the armor package changed from U to M on most of the SEPV3s we've seen. All HAP equipped Abrams had U at the end of the serial number regardless of the generation of the DU alloy. No idea what M means, but breaking the establish precedent makes me wonder if they've moved on from it. The ending letter always denotes the armor even for subvariants sent to other nations. Australia has a unique code A and E is for export armor.

            There's speculation that there's two types of NGAP's already. Early SEPV3s did not feature the extended turrets while later ones did.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              I find it hard to believe that they would stop using DU considering that it's likely used in place of HHA in composite arrays to erode penetrators. I can't see a reason to switch back to steel or to tungsten for that purpose since they'd be a lot more expensive and materially not significantly different. Maybe they're using a specific kind of ceramic or exotic material but I can't imagine that would be worth the cost. I guess it's possible that they did stop using DU I just have a hard time imagining what would replace it in these arrays that would make sense cost wise

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                M = metamaterial kek. No but I agree, I doubt they stopped using DU and it's probably just army moronation with how the designate shit. Still thought it was an interesting change

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's definitely interesting, you'd think they'd focus more on the hull and side armor specifically and not the turret as much since as far as I know the turret cheeks have been shown to defeat RPG-29s and if I had to guess they probably are resistant to most modern APFSDS that isn't from 130mm+ guns. Seems weird to continue to increase the armor there instead of just modernizing the array inside with a totally updated one of similar mass for slightly upgraded protection while adding that extra mass allowance to the hull front and maybe top armor for top down defense like the Germans have on some of their Leo 2 armor packages.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A lot of the focus on the initial SEP was the new gen DU it was claimed to have. apparently the SEP received a "side armor" enhancement also.
                >https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA476340.pdf
                >More recent advances have further bolstered the Abrams’ protection. BRL, building on special armor technology, developed a new side armor concept that significantly increased protection with minimal weight impact. This was handed off to the manufacturer, General Dynamics, and is in the latest Abrams model, the M1A2SEP

                Side armor makes me think side turret but for all we know it was new skirts or something. Still if true would mean that the SEPV1/2 had a new gen DU and a side turret composite enhancement before the V3 received an entirely new package. I agree that they should focus other areas. My hope for the M1E3 is the upper front plate is increased in thickness and changed from RHA to a NERA plate to better deal with dropped munitions and bomblets and also some type of better roof protection is needed, like that odd porcupine shit the Germans use to deal with bomblets. 25mm RHA on a roof is very weak. Even at the expensive of side turret armor I think it's needed. The Abrams side turret arrays is extremely thick already (seriously from pics I've seen the Chinese ZTZ frontal composite array is only slightly thicker than the abrams side turret) and is basically nearly the same thickness completely through, where as something like the leopard begins to get thinner towards the back of the turret. An active defense system could justify slightly less side turret protection towards the bustle while still keeping the full thickness towards the cheeks to defeat shots coming in from weird angles.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Seems weird to continue to increase the armor there instead of just modernizing the array inside with a totally updated one of similar mass for slightly upgraded protection while adding that extra mass allowance to the hull front and maybe top armor for top down defense like the Germans have on some of their Leo 2 armor packages.
                most likely increased as a result of their own A4 which travels 100m/s faster than the A3, and weapons like the kornet which are stated to penetrate 1000+mm into steel
                the original M1 IP array was only designed around 80s ERA 125mm, and while additional DU armor meant the original array could stay competitive, you do eventually reach a hard limit of not enough raw thickness

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                i thought the thicker turret faces were free real estate as a result of needing to balance trophy adding like 1.5 tons to the back of the turret

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're correct, the tanks that received the trophy system in Europe had weights added to the frontal cheeks to balance out the increase of the trophy system on the turret. It's the same exact thing as when they stack the plates on the cheeks in pic rel only it's a slightly nicer more practical version of it.

                A lot of people got confused with this and the SEPV3 turret extension but AFAIK they are two different things.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    the kneejerk reactions to anything not positive of ukriane is very annoying. OP's rhetoric is clearly not shilly

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's so fricking unbearable. I made this thread because my girlfriend is terrified of this vehicle and when I saw it being posted I thought "while I share it with her I wonder what /k/ thinks about this composite armor"

      • 4 weeks ago
        Señor Mio con Dios

        This made me smile.
        This was good b8.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's not bait I'm just moronic like that
          For real she's terrified of this thing
          I don't know why.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Well since you replied without lashing out, I will tentatively believe you.
            Maybe she saw it with the deluxe mine plow & ground skids. It looks spider-like.

            Frankly I don't think there is a single good breaching vehicle on the planet right now. Somebody needs to either bring back American Christie drive & suspension, or fully develop the Soviet Object 279 double-double track drive.
            Because otherwise none of these things, whether NATO or Soviet, are really suited for eating mines and withdrawing intact.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >ouble-double track drive.
              imagine field repair of damaged inner track

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world.
                The method already in use is adaptable, if you work up a new mounting point or lever.
                Walk it through the old track, walk on the new track, ride the chain.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              So I did ask her and she said because of the mine clearing materials on it
              She didn't understand why it had to look so beefy
              And personally I like how it looks. It's cool
              It gives it a strong other worldy vibe to it

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This could be a case of someone saying they don't like a thing, but really, it's that something made a big impression that they weren't ready for. So maybe when time has passed they will calm down and just say something is impressive.
                In the States there are a surprising number of women who drive stupidly big trucks.
                And you probably know how crazy horse gjrls are.

                The ABV certainly is a big mound of metal. And like someone who wears a shirt with a big stripe across the chest, the gunless turret glacis (front) seems extra-wide as a flat surface. Yeah, it's mysterious too because you expect a gun there.

                UR-77 Meteorit carries one rocket charge, ABV carries two rocket charges.

                completely wrong. Every Abrams since the M1A1HA has had DU armor. The serial numbers on the turret all end in U denoting Uranium. The only version that doesn't end in U is the SEPV3 which ends in M but we don't know what that means yet or anything with the FMS armor package. SEPV3 are very new.

                [...]
                >M1150 doesn't have Abrams turret, only chassis.
                Sauce me anon? Not that I don't believe you I just assumed it was an abrams turret

                ABV turret is just like a little rounded triangle, not extending too much beyond the turret ring. It's deceptive. It's small but because the visual lines aren't broken up, it looks like all one huge thing.

                If I was to guess what got this ABV, it would be a Kornet strike to a rocket charge compartment, then being abandoned, then maybe an extra Kornet strike which hit kinda high on the hull. There is some rust around the fuel cells so those probably caught on fire.

                The Russians seemed to bring more Kornet systems to this area than other areas.

                The vehicle overall looks fairly intact... it's strange to see a roadwheel and arm toward the rear missing. The cutaway of the turret glacis, revealing the composite, looks like a purposeful cut.
                I'm extremely interested to know how the Ukrainians bumbled this moment of defense. They look very stretched.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      [...]
      I miss the days before domestic and forign intel agencies decided this board was a battlefield, also the larpers from reddit.

      Samhomosexualry

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        nah

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes
          >Verification not required.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Posted it again award

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I miss the days before domestic and forign intel agencies decided this board was a battlefield, also the larpers from reddit.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    so is having the same thread spammed day after day you turdie-ball-gargling homosexual

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Image from like 2 hours ago
      >Same thread everyday
      Huh??

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        it's a common NAFO shitposter tactic from what I've seen.
        >this embarrassing thing is from2 nanoseconds ago it's old get over it reeee

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        it's a common NAFO shitposter tactic from what I've seen.
        >this embarrassing thing is from2 nanoseconds ago it's old get over it reeee

        https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/61485514/#61485514
        You guys are Black folk

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Im just posting in my free time
          Why would I fricking know that thread

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Neat

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I see India's "Russia is winning" simulator is at full throttle. Why do these shill threads stay up?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why are you so emotionally invested in this war? The post was to spur discussion about interesting armor in the theater. Not a war trophy flex

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reactive armor,
    Reactive armor everywhere.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I AM NOT A SAMEgay I DID NOT OF KNOWING OF THAT THREAD SIR!!

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    looks just like a beefed up version of the side turret of an m1a1 from 20 years ago

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Would it be too hard to believe dep of defence is using this oportunity to dump its old hardware Uk front? Daddy GD gotta make some green ya know.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They've been doing that forever. Don't you remember the wreckage of the HARMs sent over? They were all AGM-88B's that had expiration dates in the late 80s.

        This latest thing isn't as huge of a deal as some people want to make it out to be. There's nothing particularly special about the breacher or it's armor package (russia has known about NERA arrays for decades and if they haven't figured out efficient layouts yet then they have bigger problems). It's like if a fully loaded Armata just appeared one day outside of the Aberdeen Proving Grounds, it's useful information but there's nothing ground breaking or revolutionary. Nobody is sending anything to Ukraine that the think would jeopardize their strategic position.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Its called nera.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yes. and? there was no implication otherwise

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what kind of arrangement is this?
      looks like it has 3 composite arrays each with different spacings and angles

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You can see the NERA bulging plates that are rubber-steel sandwich. The point of the different angles is to disrupt HEAT penetrators by breaking the jet up in a similar way to ERA or tipping penetrators and induce stresses at differing angles. They work on APFSDS too but not to the same degree.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        My assumption is that the first array is based on the older designs with wider air gaps to deal with shaped charges while still abrading and deforming penetrators. It matches earlier diagrams of the Abrams which at the time was much better against CE threats. The materials may have changed but idk for sure. The spaces between plates gives room for the penetrator to yaw. The second smaller array might be optimized for KE threats and further damaging them. After bypassing the first NERA array, the remains of the abraded penetrator would now have to pass through a second layer of plates. The angle is changed to further yaw the penetrator and hopefully further deform or outright snap it. One of the best ways to defeat KEPs is yaw and longitudinal stress.

        If anything survives the first two NERA arrays then the thicker back plates catch them. These are probably high hardness steel or RHA or even both layered. In DU equipped Abrams this is most likely where the DU is, the extreme density backplates catch the remains of the already damaged and degraded penetrator. There is a fair bit of assumption on my part particularly with the second NERA array but for sure the first array and backplates line up with known principles for composite armor

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I realized that there is three after typing all that. lel so the first one that's the three thinner plates I ignored and when I said first NERA array I was actually referring to the second chonky one in the middle.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You have no idea what you're saying. Tank armor isn't some magic that bends shit. It's tough layered materials that stop shit. This entire post is moronic

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Tank armor isn't some magic that bends shit
            that actually is the mechanism by which composite armor defeats long rods

            multiple plates with air between them provides more protection than a single thick plate of equal weight, the exact opposite of traditional bullet-shaped projectiles
            each time the long rod passes through a plate, its trajectory is slightly destabilized and its point is eroded

            the T-72s development shows this principle in action
            the very first one had a thick steel plate on top of a thick textolite plate, the "Simply put a lot of tough material in the path of the projectile" method
            but the imrpoved variant used two medium plates with the textolite in the middle, as they discovered that the backplate contributes more protection than the front as the projectile will hit the backplate already eroded and at a slightly different trajectory
            the last example being the T-80BV armor array being three thick steel plates with textolite between each, to maximize the destabilization effect as much as possible

            the M1s approach is likely similar
            the many small, thin, layers of armor cumulatively create a lot of chances to erode and destabilize a projectile

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >the T-72s development shows this principle in action
              T-72 development is another way: first of all they aimed to make anti HEAT armor. That was done via textolite. Thickness effeciency of initial T-64 and T-72 glacic is much less both against KE and SC. But mass effeciency is better vs SC. As time passed and appeared more and more powerful KE rounds Soviets increased ratio of steel on glacis to cope with that.
              SC in the end was countered by ERA.
              Mass effeciency of the glacis of the late T series is not much different form RHA.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                no, its exactly what they said
                protection against KE comes from inducing the projectile to yaw and deform after going through multiple thin plates of armor

                the original armor layout did use a single thick plate of armor, but it was changed to two moderately thick plates of armor because they found out that protection from KE came just as much from the backplate as it did the front plate

                >Tank armor isn't some magic that bends shit.
                is entirely the principle they were working with when they moved on to the 5 and 6-layer armor
                each time the projectile passes through a layer, it stresses the projectile and destabilizes its trajectory
                its the same working principle behind the M1 abrams armor, which is multiple thin plates to induce the same destabilization in long rods

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >the very first one had a thick steel plate on top of a thick textolite plate
              I just wanted an excuse to post this image because I think it's neat.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    rip, now it's useless

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is my understanding that DU replaced lead in the inner spall liner. The limited alpha emissions are blocked with paint.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      DU exclusively always cited as part of the armor package in the frontal turret. No idea where you got spall liners from but those would have zero effect defeating tank rounds.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        /shrug

        Tungsten/other composite armour is currently better than DU, historically they were equivalent, but DU (for the US) is literal waste material, and therefore free, this is very good for budgets. For export tanks, there is less incentive to save costs on a massive production run, and the US's own nuclear export laws mean that nuclear material (including waste material), cannot be exported without congressional approval. The export abrams have the same or better protection as domestic abrams, the difference is the material and price per unit.
        The world's best tank is not the abrams, it never has been, and it never will be. The abrams is the best tank for the US, but ultimately its the best tank for the US for a certain price per unit and assuming a certain operating cost/logistical basis. The outright best tank is currently the Leopard2A7, and the leopards have been ahead of all other contenders since the 2A5.

        If the US uses DU in armor because it is a waste byproduct of enriching uranium, why doesn't France use it in the leclerc? They've got a large number of reactors.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Imagine being leclerc crew, getting hit and then inhaling that uranium radioactive dust.
          Pre-existing condition bros.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            DU is only mildly radioactive
            it is toxic to inhale, but thats true of all heavy metals, the pulverized tungsten from the enemy projectile is probably worse

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            If you're hit and the armor is coming into the crew compartment, you have bigger concerns than inhaling metal particulates that are less radioactive than diesel.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Thats an excellent question tbqh. I suppose a possible reason would be concern with the effects of a successful penetration (DU particles), or the theoretical greater performance of tungsten alloys in armour.

          DU is used as a component of composite that works particularly well against kinetic penetrators. I have doubts that using DU in place of a composite array that would use HHA or Tungsten components is going to be worse by any notable metric considering the almost equivalent density and hardness.

          Yes they should probably be very similar, all other things being equal, but DU is pyrophoric, which is good for munitions but less good for armour. I'm not a materials scientist, so i'm sure its much more complicated.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Ukraine pulls US-provided Abrams tanks from the front lines
    Abrams story in Ukraine is over...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Or they just want the Russians to think this, and they actually start using them for what they can excel at in that environment.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We only gave them 31 of the things to start with and we know there's been some attrition in the months since. "Pulling Abrams from the frontline" is basically a synonym for "rotating a reinforced company out"

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    amazing how many times this one vehicle has been knocked out

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The nato shame museum is full.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Abramsbros?: https://www.twz.com/news-features/ukraine-situation-report-m1-abrams-tanks-withdrawn-from-the-fight-officials-say

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Spam

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *