Is composite armor a big lie?

I'm sure the King Tiger could have easily survived those Bradley 25mm shots from any angle or side.

It seems the T-90 is worse than WW2 german tanks.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    according to the ukrainians with beadley, they didn't pen it, just shot at it to blind the commander and the driver
    the three vatniks then just snapped and abandon the tank

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      oof, entire legend ruined; 1000s of minds blown

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They still won and the tank still died. Just blasting the living shit out of all the optics they can and continuing to blast the tank in any weak point you can think of until the crew's morale shatters or you get through is a viable tactic. Imagine being inside that thing and hearing the rounds impacting while you're able to do frick all but hope nothing ignites the boosters, the driver can still see, and the tracks aren't fricked.

        The funniest part of the interview was the guy crediting playing lots of video games for teaching him where to aim lol.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >M242 == bucket of paint
          sad times for bradley bros

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You may think you're making fun of the Bradley, but you're really making fun of the T-90 that decisively lost engagement.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The fact that 25mm HE from a 1981 IFV was enough to make the crew of a literal top of the line 2020 MBT abandon their vehicle is funny. It's the kind of shit you would call unrealistic if it happened in a movie

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >2020 MBT
              Not sure is a 50-year old MBT with a body kit qualifies one.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The rest of the world's top of the line is America 50 years ago.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              The crew abandoned the vehicle after it was hit by a FPV drone

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      why did the turret do the spinny thing then

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Later footage did show the crew survived. However taking a hail of fire that knocks out all the sensors, with no idea where its coming from, whether any of it is getting through, whether you can even still retreat and if you're doing so in the right direction is a hell of a pants-shitting moment. Crew were probably panicking or stunned by the impacts.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They still won and the tank still died. Just blasting the living shit out of all the optics they can and continuing to blast the tank in any weak point you can think of until the crew's morale shatters or you get through is a viable tactic. Imagine being inside that thing and hearing the rounds impacting while you're able to do frick all but hope nothing ignites the boosters, the driver can still see, and the tracks aren't fricked.

      The funniest part of the interview was the guy crediting playing lots of video games for teaching him where to aim lol.

      Didn't they have to swap to HE early in the engagement? That being said, the Relikt hanging off the sides of the tank along with the base side armor does pose a major challenge to 25 mm darts

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      then what happened to the turret drive?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Russian put it up his ass

        There’s no reason why autocannon fire can’t strip the optics off a tank and effectively mission-kill it. What’s SUPPOSED to happen is another nearby tank blasts the attacking IFV, ie, basic tank platoon tactics, but tanks aren’t used in units in this war for some reason. Russians appear to use them as piecemeal solo fire support gun so a lone tank can get caught out by M2s and get mission-killed.

        the biggest mistake the Russians made here during actual combat and not before, was he missed his first shot

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah. Only chance they really had of penetrating it would be flat side on shots where it isn't protected by composite.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        [...]

        They must have been so scared and impotent feelings, lucky the tank took pity

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i said it so many times
      by how the turret is spinning one of the gyroscopes is fricked
      i'm not going to even mention the potential damage from shrapnel to optics

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    homie you straight moronic.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If any, the areas most likely penetrated were the turret ring and the thin armour between the road wheels.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    T-72 pattern tanks only have 80 mm of steel side armor, thinning down to 20 mm starting more or less below the roadwheel axels, turret sides and rear on welded turrets are also thin IIRC, but I don't remember the exact figure. Relikt adds a few extra 20 mm plates on the sides in the path making it harder for the 25 mm to go through though.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Modern MBTs are generally unprotected against solid projectiles.
    Most weapons encountered on the field are man-portable HEAT weapons which use different countermeasures to conventional AP projectiles.

    As such, an Abrams could quite easily be penetrated by a King Tiger from WW2. However, the advancements in optics mean that a King Tiger would be deleted before even so much as being aware there was an Abram aiming at it.

    During the cold war a lot of tanks switched to using HEAT projectiles as advances in optics mean that heavy solid rounds would have to be fired at a very steep arc, or with excessive amounts of propellant. ATGMs use chemical warheads rather than solid shot and these became extremely common during the cold war too. Solid shots fell out of favour and so the chance of encountering them dropped significantly, thus the need to protect against them did too.

    The big change was with APDS and 'Dart' rounds. Realistically, you can't make armour thick enough to prevent a penetration from these, and modern tank design doesn't really try as the weight would make any vehicle unsuitable for mobile combat.

    Current development is focusing on NERA to counter the threat of darts, but realistically the days of tank vs tank combat where the vehicle are trading and bouncing shots is very much over.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Modern MBTs are generally unprotected against solid projectiles
      moron

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Now that's a load of horseshit. An 88 mm shell would frick up the armor array but it would stop the shell. Kinetic protection of modern armor just hasn't caught up to the power of current darts for an acceptable mass cost, but even recently we saw a Leo 2 take a dart to the turret and live. Granted it was probably the usual mango but this post just reeks of moronation since darts were outpaced by armor in their early years and APDS was pretty effectively countered.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, did you forget about the existence of sabot rounds?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If you’re going to write a wall of text don’t open it with a moronic statement that will get the rest of it ignored.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't even know where to start with this post kek. Your knowledge of NERA is extremely limited.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >an Abrams could quite easily be penetrated by a King Tiger from WW2
      You are a moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        from the sides maybe, but this is true of most tanks which are usually only designed to resist attacks from the side up to a certain threshold instead of the whole way for weight reasons

        but definitely not true from the front, since it was designed to resist 115mm sub-caliber, 100mm full caliber, and RPG-7s from the front

        and here is a simulation of a 128mm long gun on the jagdtiger failing to fully penetrate the M1s lower hull
        the NERA isnt specifically meant to stop full-caliber rounds but it does successfully catch one of the strongest WW2 guns on the backing playe

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The KT couldn't survive against a late war HEAT from any angle.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    No, the crew bailed because for some fricking reason Russia sends like 1 tank forward and if you're a solo tank getting pinned down by Bradleys that just turns you into a sitting duck waiting to get your turret popped by a javelin and so the crew opted to bail and surrender rather than enrolling in the T-90 COSMONAUT programme.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    just came into this thread to say that the pic kinda looks like sideboob.
    that is all, return to your regularly scheduled posting.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      thanks

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Composite armor trades endurance for peak strength. It's really good against one or two big hits but less effective against lots of smaller hits.

    However, in that particular case the T-90 was completely blind. HE completely trashed the T-90's optics and the crew figured ATGMs were on the way. A good crew would pop smoke and displace but I'm guessing this was a bunch of conscripts with a week worth of training. From what I hear they panicked and bailed out.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There’s no reason why autocannon fire can’t strip the optics off a tank and effectively mission-kill it. What’s SUPPOSED to happen is another nearby tank blasts the attacking IFV, ie, basic tank platoon tactics, but tanks aren’t used in units in this war for some reason. Russians appear to use them as piecemeal solo fire support gun so a lone tank can get caught out by M2s and get mission-killed.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I really don't understand why they're doing this.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >We MEANT to abandon the tank and have the crew picked off by drones!

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    25mm cant pen frontal t90 plate
    Tank also put itself at 45 degrees towards cannon fire further increasing effective thickness
    They didnt kill it, just shot it a bit
    You are fools and children

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      they blinded the crew, mission killed the optics, and forced a dismount
      just surviving counts as a success imo and they went beyond that

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    It's almost like the expectations of the "World's second most powerful military" are slightly higher than "Bumfrick nowhere country in Eastern Europe".

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That’s always the cope for the double standards, sure.
      It’s no secret that the overwhelming majority of posters here are overly invested in a Ukrainian victory out of this war. Recent Russian gains in Avdiivka are removed/not posted because they make people feel bad in their tummy I guess. The whole Ukraine’s winning so hard shit is really fricking dull. If they were winning so hard and the Russians were all incompetent buffoons we wouldn’t be forced to endure the constant barrage of “WE NEED TO BE SENDING MORE ;_;” from every fricking supporter as if they didn’t just proudly LARP about how completely ineffective Russia is and how easy it is to beat them.

      If this war was such a complete and utter own on Russia the jannies wouldn’t need to constantly ban anyone with a dissenting opinion.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Recent Russian gains in Avdiivka
        How many feet for how many vehicles and lives? "Recent Russian gains" shouldn't even be a thing by this point because on paper they should have won in the first year.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]
    It's almost like the expectations of the "World's second most powerful military" are slightly higher than "Bumfrick nowhere country in Eastern Europe".

    it didn't survive, they dropped a drone grenade down the hatch
    Ukraine losing a tank to a mission kill on the treads in a minefield is unambiguously a loss, but it has the silver lining of preserving the crew, who will absolutely be back in the field
    What does Russia do with tank crews who get their tank destroyed and are forced to retreat? I would imagine it's butt rape and sent directly to the trenches to commit frontal assault

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    The Russian crew didn’t survive after dismount anon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      oh did they not survive? good

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    No one is dunking this particular T-90M for being lost, its HOW it was lost
    >ambushed by older vehicles despite superior FCS and thermals
    >miss every shot
    >operating alone with minimal support
    >crew bailed and was still killed
    even in an unexpected meeting engagement this was moronation on Russia's part and they deserved to be shit on for it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's kind of impressive these moronic engagements are still happening. Drones were supposed to revolutionise war, the ability to detect assets on the battlefield has never been more accessible, yet an IFV still got into spitting distance of an MBT and rocked it's shit. I'd ask how but I guess the answer is "Russians".

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Overconfidence I think. If there was thought prior to the attack and they knew there was enemy M2s inside Stepove it would have been that the T-90M is immune to frontal 25mm hits and it takes 6 seconds for the TOW to raise so all they needed to do was bum rush and plug each IFV with the 125. Also I'm pretty sure Ukrainian EW is getting better and making it harder on them. Idk I've stopped trying to rationalize their mech assaults.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Overconfidence I think
          In the engineering & tech worlds at least there is a lot of hard won wisdom around the danger of invisible metrics, ie, things that are very important but are hard to measure and thus get completely ignored. It's a hard problem genuinely since how do we know and avoid pure speculation? But at this point in the war I think we have to consider all sorts of pure human factors in the current Russian army and population it's drawn from. Everything from rampant corruption to rampant alcoholism and drugs which has been going on for generations and what alcohol does to babies in the womb is well known, we sort of joke about it and it's impossible for us to truly measure it, but I think it does add up.

          The Russian soldiers are simply inferior for whatever combo of reasons, as soldiers and as men. There are lots of them, and they're still capable enough of basics and direction to be dangerous. It doesn't take a lot of brains/skill to just hurt people and things a bit before you're killed. But they just under perform so fricking often to such a wild degree. And it can't just be chalked up to "poor training" because we're now well into the war. Looking back in history across decades, centuries or even millennia there are plenty of examples of societies starting wars in very incompetent ways and suffering huge problems, but even if they lose in the end the normal thing is to see some learning happening in order to win. Russia doesn't change though in any major way. There is some fundamental structural defect. That's unusual.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Also, my own pet theory is that some of this is the corrosive, under appreciated effect of nuclear weapons. Historically war is the final, true great motivator for even the most rotten governments, because it's the ultimate application of reality, the "scientific method" applied to human societies. All rhetoric and propaganda gets put to the test by an enemy who by definition is under none of it and if you lose you die and that's it. Fear is a core motivator for change.

            But Russia doesn't ACTUALLY fear invasion and military destruction of their country. They don't think NATO will actually risk it. They think they can just play around in Ukraine, however utterly monstrously, and nobody is going to just strike at Moscow with a serious military force. In history if there was such a rotten shitty state rich in resources and pissing everyone off and with such a ludicrous power difference between itself and its neighbors, it'd have been invaded and crushed long since. But in the cushy fixed border modern nuclear era that check isn't there, so they can get even lazier and rot ever further and nobody will intervene, preferring to kick the can down the road instead.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              > In history if there was such a rotten shitty state rich in resources and pissing everyone off and with such a ludicrous power difference between itself and its neighbors, it'd have been invaded and crushed long since.

              I know, right? Imagine if Russia existed before nuclear weapons existed. They would've been crushed!

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Is composite armor a big lie
    the NERA arrays on the T-72B turret had a mass efficiency of 1.2x against KE weapons, meaning the same protection using pure steel would weight 20% more
    and this was a turret that was not specifically designed to resist KE threats and was retrofitted with NERA
    contemporary NATO armor on the M1 and challenger 2 was estimated to have a mass efficiency of between 2x and 3x due to being designed to use composite armor from the ground up

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine a heavy tank like Object 770 being up armored with composite armor and a better engine and modern thermals.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I'm sure the King Tiger could have easily survived those Bradley 25mm shots from any angle or side.
    Yeah unless it got hit anywhere near the ports and started sending Shockwaves into the crew compartment. No tank is going to handle being sprayed down by an HE autocannon extremely well, but anything made in WW2 is definitely going to struggle when their already limited vision is almost completely removed in seconds. I honestly think any tank is going to have this problem.

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