Laviduce Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 The barrel length of the L44 is given at 5280 , which works out with the rest of the drawings. Yet, there is a problem. The length of the gun assembly (muzzle to breech block mechanism end) is given at 5593. In my scaled drawings that length is about 5550 mm. Also, the ~300-350 mm RHAe against KE estimate includes the trunnion block. Using the approximate thickness efficiency of the turret faces i got an actual mantlet KE resistance range of around 180-220 mm RHAe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 still don't understand where you can find 400+ but ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 Dr. Ronald Meixner, ADS’ Pre-Sales Engineer has shared with MONch recent developments regarding the firm’s ADS-Gen.3 Active Vehicle Self Protection System (AVSPS) which is now in service with the LEOPARD 2 main battle tanks (MBT) of an undisclosed nation. Serge and SH_MM 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karamazov Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Ramlaen said: Dr. Ronald Meixner, ADS’ Pre-Sales Engineer has shared with MONch recent developments regarding the firm’s ADS-Gen.3 Active Vehicle Self Protection System (AVSPS) which is now in service with the LEOPARD 2 main battle tanks (MBT) of an undisclosed nation. I hope, soon we will see the photos Leopard 2 mbt with ADS AVSPS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 To me 350mm RHAe equivalent seems likely considering the 420mm mantlet + 240mm solid titanium block behind it. If the engineers at KM didnt want the mantlet to be a weakspot there's also every reason to believe that they put thicker NERA blocks in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted June 9, 2018 Report Share Posted June 9, 2018 2 hours ago, Ramlaen said: Dr. Ronald Meixner, ADS’ Pre-Sales Engineer has shared with MONch recent developments regarding the firm’s ADS-Gen.3 Active Vehicle Self Protection System (AVSPS) which is now in service with the LEOPARD 2 main battle tanks (MBT) of an undisclosed nation. An undisclosed Asian country ordered ADS in 2011, when it wasn't ready for service. Maybe that's Singapore. On the other hand Turkey has been requesting the system since 2016... 47 minutes ago, Karamazov said: I hope, soon we will see the photos Leopard 2 mbt with ADS AVSPS You mean like this? Karamazov 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laviduce Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 14 hours ago, Pardus said: To me 350mm RHAe equivalent seems likely considering the 420mm mantlet + 240mm solid titanium block behind it. If the engineers at KM didnt want the mantlet to be a weakspot there's also every reason to believe that they put thicker NERA blocks in there. To clarify myself, as far as i know the overall mantlet/trunnion KE resistance of the Leopard 2 (B-tech level) is between 250 and 350 mm . That does not mean the mantlet/trunnion has a KE resistance of 350 mm overall necessarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karamazov Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 15 hours ago, SH_MM said: You mean like this? Yep, but i mean bundeswehr tanks. Not a "showtank". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 7 hours ago, Laviduce said: To clarify myself, as far as i know the overall mantlet/trunnion KE resistance of the Leopard 2 (B-tech level) is between 250 and 350 mm . That does not mean the mantlet/trunnion has a KE resistance of 350 mm overall necessarily. I'd expect atleast 350mm RHAe in the center if we're talking 420mm composite + 240mm solid titanium (660mm LOS). The edges of the mantlet area could present as high a value as 400mm RHAe considering the 240-280mm RHA turret armour behind the 420mm mantlet: PS: Went and sat in a Leopard 2A5DK today and had the opportunity to eyeball the thickness of the add on armour on the upper hull. These blocks of armour looked atleast 5cm thick, probably more. So the upper hull on the newer leopards is very strong. Also had a good 5 min in the gunners position, and I must say the gunners optics are excellent, extremely crisp (no LCD screen for the gunner in the tank I sat in though). Also noted a small joystick to the right of the gunners control handle, not sure what that was for? Laviduce 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 On 6/7/2018 at 10:39 PM, Laviduce said: Thank you for the feedback! What do you mean by this statement? It does not seem that i removed that much from my previous model. I just balanced the greater KE resistance to the other turret face given what we currently know , more or less. You marked the left turret front as "380 to 400 mm" KE, but if it offered less than 400 mm protection, the portion of the tank's surface with "400 mm or more" KE protection would be far below the ~19.75% shown in the leaked graph. 1 hour ago, Pardus said: Went and sat in a Leopard 2A5DK today and had the opportunity to eyeball the thickness of the add on armour on the upper hull. These blocks of armour looked atleast 5cm thick, probably more It is 40 mm thick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laviduce Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 1 hour ago, SH_MM said: You marked the left turret front as "380 to 400 mm" KE, but if it offered less than 400 mm protection, the portion of the tank's surface with "400 mm or more" KE protection would be far below the ~19.75% shown in the leaked graph. It is 40 mm thick. I suggested that the average RHAe KE resistance could be around 380-400 mm including 400 mm. It is an after all an estimate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 10, 2018 Report Share Posted June 10, 2018 1 hour ago, SH_MM said: It is 40 mm thick. Yeah the base upper front hull is just 40mm, but those blocks of armour they added on looked like they were ~50mm thick. But if you measured them at 40mm I'm ofcourse gonna have to bow to that as I only eyeballed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 Latest armor upgrade offer from IBD Deisenroth Engineering (the company behind AMAP and the Leopard 2 Evolution): IMO a combination of AMAP and ADS (maybe as a "less active" protection system, which operates similar to ERA, as it only detects the projectile on impact). Edit: Article on Jane's: http://www.janes.com/article/80769/smart-solution-against-tandem-warheads-es18d1 Quote IBD Deisenroth Engineering (Hall 6, Stand K567) is demonstrating its new SMART PROTech solution against tandem shaped charge warheads which, the German company says, avoids the deficiencies of today’s explosive reactive armour (ERA) and active protection systems (APS). Modern anti-tank weapons can penetrate from about 300mm to 1,400mm of rolled homogeneous armour (RHA). These high levels make it impossible to protect medium fighting platforms with passive armour against this kind of threat. Even main battle tanks (MBTs) are difficult to protect in the upper range. Since MBTs must also be protected against large calibre kinetic energy (KE) 120/125mm ammunition, the design of a polyvalent technology integrating efficient protection against both threat types at an acceptable weight has reached a limit. IBD Deisenroth says SMART PROTech is different. Its basic element is a module, which includes a sensor and one or two countermeasures depending on the size, position and orientation of the module on the platform. When the threat hits the surface of the module, the sensor sends a trigger pulse to the corresponding countermeasure. The orientation of the countermeasure is such that the energy beam is directed towards the main warhead to destroy it before the shaped charge jet is generated. The modules will not be activated by small arms fire. Most tracked platforms are equipped with a technology that has both KE and shaped charge protection integrated in the add-on kits. This new kit can be designed such that the main part of the add-on modules will be equipped with the technology optimised for the defeat of long rod penetrators. SMART PROTech modules mounted on the outside of the passive kit will deal with anti-tank weapons. This new configuration is said to be much more efficient: the weight of the kit will be less, while the required space will stay within the same range. Laviduce 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rohrkrepierer Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 Hey guys. Does anyone have any primary sources that reference the perforation performance of German 120mm DM23 APFSDS-T ammunition? Best regards, Rohrkrepierer o7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty_Zuk Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Rohrkrepierer said: Hey guys. Does anyone have any primary sources that reference the perforation performance of German 120mm DM23 APFSDS-T ammunition? Best regards, Rohrkrepierer o7 War thunder, eh? Well according to my dude, the DM23 has a penetration of 480mm RHA. However, my dude gives this value for 60° so it's a few milimeters lower for 0°. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 11 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said: War thunder, eh? Well according to my dude, the DM23 has a penetration of 480mm RHA. However, my dude gives this value for 60° so it's a few milimeters lower for 0°. But those figures are based on Russian estimates, which if we look at the numbers for the DM53 don't look particularly realistic. Infact AFAIK the true penetration performance of the DM13 and DM23 (let alone DM33, 43 and 53/63) is still not known. A current Leopard 2 tanker mentioned 1,000+ mm RHAe LOS penetration for the DM63 through the L/55. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_James Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 7 hours ago, Rohrkrepierer said: Hey guys. Does anyone have any primary sources that reference the perforation performance of German 120mm DM23 APFSDS-T ammunition? Best regards, Rohrkrepierer o7 Welcome to SH, Rohr 5 hours ago, Pardus said: 1,000+ mm RHAe LOS penetration for the DM63 through the L/55. That's impossible considering the rod isn't 1m long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 48 minutes ago, Lord_James said: That's impossible considering the rod isn't 1m long. Well that's assuming Lanz Odermatt's equation is 100% applicable to the most recent penetrator designs. I mean we have plenty of figures showing penetration past the length of the rod, so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laviduce Posted June 11, 2018 Report Share Posted June 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Lord_James said: Welcome to SH, Rohr That's impossible considering the rod isn't 1m long. 28 minutes ago, Pardus said: Well that's assuming Lanz Odermatt's equation is 100% applicable to the most recent penetrator designs. I mean we have plenty of figures showing penetration past the length of the rod, so... According to Rolf Hilmes the aim of the LKE2/DM53 program was to create a KE shell that had the ability to pierce about 1000 mm of RHA using the L55. Rumor has i that it can penetrate over 900 mm RHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2805662 Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 (edited) 🐅 Edited June 12, 2018 by 2805662 Wrong leopard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 8 hours ago, Laviduce said: According to Rolf Hilmes the aim of the LKE2/DM53 program was to create a KE shell that had the ability to pierce about 1000 mm of RHA using the L55. Rumor has i that it can penetrate over 900 mm RHA. That is not what Hilmes wrote. According to him the aim was to defeat armor array providing protection equivalent to 1,000 mm RHA (depending on range). That is a big difference. There is a graph in a classified document, which shows how the armor protection of future enemy tanks was expected to increase, it would have reached 1,000 mm by 2010. The area covered by the graph is divided into three colors: one is representing reactive armor, one is representing ceramic armor and one is representing steel armor. The DM53 and DM63 are believed to be segmeneted penetrators, which would fit well to such an "armor array", as Rheinmetall's patents specifically mention that they've improved the segmented penetrator design to work better against ceramic armor. It is worth mentioning that the company has said on multiple times that they do not want to measure penetration into RHA anymore, because modern MBTs use special armor and RHA does not reflect the protection properties of such armor (IMO implying that Rheinmetall's ammunition does relatively worse against RHA than special armor targets). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rohrkrepierer Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 22 hours ago, Pardus said: Infact AFAIK the true penetration performance of the DM13 and DM23 (let alone DM33, 43 and 53/63) is still not known. Well I got a hold of a Polish ministry of defence research paper that test fired DM33, which came out with 470mm of LOS pen @2km. 16 hours ago, Lord_James said: Welcome to SH, Rohr Thank you. Heard a lot of good about SH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 The article from Jane's daily. Same text, but a better illustration of the working principle. On 6/11/2018 at 4:51 PM, Rohrkrepierer said: Does anyone have any primary sources that reference the perforation performance of German 120mm DM23 APFSDS-T ammunition? No primary sources, but it is not going to be very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rohrkrepierer Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 1 minute ago, SH_MM said: No primary sources, but it is not going to be very much. At this point I'd take anything to be honest. I have a russian book that mentions DM23 in a table (It's the one that's on Google pictures), and a snipet of the Polish ministry of defense report that mentions DM23 too, but that one sadly doesn't list the penetration in a table, only in a graph which is not useable in my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted June 12, 2018 Report Share Posted June 12, 2018 5 hours ago, Rohrkrepierer said: Well I got a hold of a Polish ministry of defence research paper that test fired DM33, which came out with 470mm of LOS pen @2km. Ok, would you be able to share it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.