Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Indigo

Perforated armor vs Spaced Armor

Recommended Posts

Hey y'all, long time no see. I Thought I understood the premise of perforated armor, but earlier today I realized I probably don't. I thought perforated armor was just supposed to damage/decelerate a projectile as it passed through, but then I realized that I thought that's what spaced armor is for, so what's the difference. I also realized I may not really know what perforated armor is at all. I realized that I simultaneously associate two fairly different images with perforated armor.

MTL_group_IMPAS_add-on_armour_at_AUSA_20

 

I imagine this as just breaking small projectiles as they hit it. But then there's this

UrdunMerkavaIVTurret.jpg.753b4ec131552b6

which appears to have slots all throughout it, which is more of what I think of when I think of something being perforated, but this doesn't look like it really serves the same purpose, nor do I have any idea what purpose this does serve now that I think about it. So what am I missing about perforated armor(and whatever one of these things is if not perforated armor)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not perforated armour, its a modesty bra for merkava N?RA.

 

Its a type of NERA, each line of slots presume an airgap between sandwiches. So 4 rows of slots indicate 5 NERA sandwiches. 

 

Good thing about Merkava iv, no other tanks visually exposes so much of whats underneath as a merkava iv.  Cant really tell whats in a forty year old abrams, but merkava is really unmodest.

 

Israels need to recycle tanks and crew if yom Kippur war re-occurred.  Merkava iv is optimised for field repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wow really? I've never seen NERA packed so closely like that. Then again I don't exactly get to see tons of actual photographs of NERA anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Wiedzmin said:

 

Spoiler

e0BBHGc1xZM.jpgtHbyjFqPURw.jpgP6ZuKN4LEB4.jpgbV3NxU3Z2Fg.jpg

 

Couple questions.

Is the perforated view on the start of this thread some kind of end plate and behind are the bare plates, like seen in the damaged Merkavas? 

Also, is the armor of the Merkava's especially fragile compared to other vehicles? This seems like a lot of damage to the armor for a single hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jackvony said:

Is the perforated view on the start of this thread some kind of end plate and behind are the bare plates, like seen in the damaged Merkavas? 

Yeah this is what I'm wondering now. I'd seen the exposed NERA before but I assumed the other image was something else entirely. I suppose an end plate or "courtesy bra" does make sense. I always thought it looked like steel with some slots dug through it and wondered how that didn't make the vehicle extremely heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jackvony said:

 

Also, is the armor of the Merkava's especially fragile compared to other vehicles? This seems like a lot of damage to the armor for a single hit.

BXIdZU8o5do.jpg

 

https://i.imgur.com/YXh0cXr.mp4

 

there was old vid of iraq M1A1 vs SPG/RPG where it lost side armour panel

 

as for Mk4 modules, like on any other tank heavy modules is only on front, sides doesn't have same level as on any other tank

 

if you don't have thick enough base, "modules" will be destroyed pretty quickly 

 

 

 

B9POse2RK3I.jpg

bPFlNJ9wH6U.jpg

WLZ2_rdnTnk.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is just with the Merkava's it seems to be a lot more common. Most of the times I've seen damaged M1's, the outer shell remains (unless of course they have been partially dissembled, even when hit by stuff with a massive HE content, like the AGM-65.

Spoiler

main-qimg-741ddf0110eef72b18b826f39fcca14a0f2608a015_sf_1.jpg92cc68331a73a9323f68eae0a7a9faff.jpgsolved1.jpg5c09e6b4e4181a536606752fbb5603765da60194main-qimg-c065a8ea2b13f8d911f6a9df216828z2DWLA1.jpg

 

Maybe it has to do with the thickness of the outer plate or how they are attached to the structure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 there is no Maveric's hit on this tank side turret, and i'm very doubt that turret front was hited by it either

 

7_0rGZwv6Lk.jpg

fGNzyUBvyN0.jpg

turret side was hited from another M1A1 with M830A1, and as you can see 19mm plate and 6mm weld is cracked, of course it's better than Merkava, but... all modern tanks have problems with multiply hits and stuctural durability

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The exposed mess underneath doesn't seem too surprising. I've only seen a handful of images like that though the same few show up alot alongside those famous images of a totally unzipped Abrams. I'm actually not sure how many images of that there are or whether it's the same tank from a few different angles. Either way though, it seems like that kind of damage is actually pretty common for those tanks that do see combat. Plenty of images with absolutely trashed T tanks. Then awhile back there were all those poor Leopard 2A4's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2020 at 1:00 AM, Jackvony said:

Also, is the armor of the Merkava's especially fragile compared to other vehicles? This seems like a lot of damage to the armor for a single hit.

 

Kinda, but plenty of those images are where other tanks have even less armour.

 

but for the turret, the sloped geometry allows Merkava to omit the buster plate (Challenger, Abrams) and use a thin N?RA instead.  It appears optimised for precursor/RPG 7 size, and when main charge goes off, it is trashed.

 

thing is, Merkava armour modules are field swappable,  same level of repair for Abrams/Leclerc would require the tank sent back to manufacturer in a different continent.  high cost in availability and time.

After about 4 years, an Abrams tank needs about $1m in field repairs in that year (and increasing each year), vs a reset is also about $1.2m.  they just expensive to maintain, it doesn't take much Abrams maintenance to fund new tanks from alternatives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Gripen287
      Do you like pontificating on the infantryman's load? Want to see how different gear choices affect said load?  If so, check out this spreadsheet including an itemized list of "best of breed" (IMHO) gear! Download it and customize to suit your own preferred equipment.  The "Configured Totals" section should auto-calculate weights and ammunition totals for your selected items, and you can copy and paste "Configured Totals" values into the light and heavy load sections for comparison. 
       
      I've tried to provide a fairly comprehensive list of gear for the rifle squad and machine gun teams.  A few items are notional, and those should be noted as such. I've also tried to balance both lightness and capability.  I, however, mostly intend this spreadsheet to serve as an outline and handy way to calculate total values for any items you choose to add or change.
       
      While I'm sure there are a more than a few errors, this spreadsheet is merely intended as a starting point for your own explorations, and I am NOT likely to maintain this particular version. Enjoy!
       
      Infantry Packlist Spreadsheet
    • By Militarysta
      http://www.witu.mil.pl/www/biuletyn/ptu_2020/151/97.pdf
       
      The reduction of the armour system mass was estimated to 32-37%due to the use of the innovative grade of steel.
       

    • By Proyas
      Hi guys,
       
      I recently read about upgrade packages to old tanks like the M-60 and T-55, but kept seeing comments from people saying they would still be obsolete. Is this because the M-60 and T-55 are made entirely of steel (and not composite) armor?  
       
      I have this theory that thick steel armor is probably totally obsolete, and is just dead weight in the age of lighter weight composite armor. You can bolt on upgrades to an M-60 or T-55, but you're still hamstrung by the fact that either tank will be carrying around tons of useless steel. Am I right? 
       
      Also, if we wanted to upgrade old tanks like that, wouldn't the best idea be to develop a new turret--with lighter, modern composite armor and better technology inside--and just drop it into the old tanks? The hulls would still be made of heavy steel, but that could be helped a bit by adding applique armor. 
       
      Here are some of the upgrades I read about: 
       
      https://youtu.be/NG89Zh9qQrQ
       
      http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1907.html
    • By Militarysta
      Well known APC Rosomak in Afgan. version armour:
       

       
      Orginally it was israeli but after that it was produced by polish company "Mikanit":
      http://www.mikanit.com.pl/produkty/oslony-balistyczne.html
       
      Now, we know patent draws and description:
       

       

       
       
      Composition:
      2 mm HHS + air + 6,7 mm HHS + 5 mm composite + 5 mm composite + 5 mm composite + 3,5 mm HHS + 35 mm air gap + 3,5 mm HHS + 5 mm composite + 5 mm composite + 3,5 mm HHS + 35 mm air gap  + 20 mm aluminium + 5 mm aluminium.
      There is possibility that layout could be 4+3 (composite) and single composite layer can have up to 6mm thick and single HHS layer can have  4mm thickness. Layers can be separate up to 45mm.
       
      Accoding to manufacurer this armour can protect against ATGM and RPG's up to 500mm RHA penetration.
       
      Whole armour is combat proven in Afganistan - there are known some "Rosomak" whit 3x RPG's hits diretly in to this armour - no penetration at all, no engine damage. 
       
       
       
       
       
×
×
  • Create New...