Israeli AFVs

[SH_MM]

 

Supposedly shows the impact of a tandem warhead RPG (Yasin 105). Seemingly the impact occured at a rather steep angle - through the side armor, the bottom of the turret armor module and the top of the turret armor module (in front of the radar panel) - unless the damage was caused by multiple impacts.

[SH_MM]

Forgot to add this.

[watch_your_fire]

On 5/21/2024 at 8:12 AM, SH_MM said:

Forgot to add this.

The steel is bent up at the impact point, does that imply there's ERA in the turret?

[SH_MM]

13 minutes ago, watch_your_fire said:

The steel is bent up at the impact point, does that imply there's ERA in the turret?

 

Yes. Earlier in this thread are photos from the detached armor modules - they have a safety warning (something like "Danger explosives!" but in Hewbrew) on their back side.

[alanch90]

On 5/22/2024 at 7:06 PM, watch_your_fire said:

The steel is bent up at the impact point, does that imply there's ERA in the turret?

 

On 5/22/2024 at 7:20 PM, SH_MM said:

 

Yes. Earlier in this thread are photos from the detached armor modules - they have a safety warning (something like "Danger explosives!" but in Hewbrew) on their back side.

 

 

Well its not really traditional ERA as reported through various sources pretty much since the tank entered service.

[Stimpy75]

 

UGV

 

 

[Kal]

On 5/23/2024 at 8:06 AM, watch_your_fire said:

The steel is bent up at the impact point, does that imply there's ERA in the turret?

relevant patent, https://patents.google.com/patent/US7360479B2/en 

 

 "The energetic material layer in SLERA has the potential of being classified as a passive material (NATO specification). SLERA can provide good multiple-hit capability in modular configuration. Thus, while the energetic material used in SLERA is not as effective as fully detonable explosives,"

 

translation, it could be technically classified as passive material (NATO definition) despite being a catalysed,  sodium nitrate / silicone product

 

 

[alanch90]

On 6/2/2024 at 9:51 AM, Kal said:

relevant patent, https://patents.google.com/patent/US7360479B2/en 

 

 "The energetic material layer in SLERA has the potential of being classified as a passive material (NATO specification). SLERA can provide good multiple-hit capability in modular configuration. Thus, while the energetic material used in SLERA is not as effective as fully detonable explosives,"

 

translation, it could be technically classified as passive material (NATO definition) despite being a catalysed,  sodium nitrate / silicone product

 

 

Still described as "closest to ERA" in terms of threat defeat capability per mass/volume among all the other types of reactive armor discussed in the patent.

[Xoon]

On 6/2/2024 at 2:51 PM, Kal said:

relevant patent, https://patents.google.com/patent/US7360479B2/en 

 

 "The energetic material layer in SLERA has the potential of being classified as a passive material (NATO specification). SLERA can provide good multiple-hit capability in modular configuration. Thus, while the energetic material used in SLERA is not as effective as fully detonable explosives,"

 

translation, it could be technically classified as passive material (NATO definition) despite being a catalysed,  sodium nitrate / silicone product

 

 

Wow, that patent is pretty genius. 
Essentially instead of using explosives, you use rocket fuel to propel the plates (not necessarily sent flying, just moving). 

I wonder how they define multi-hit capability, weather it is being able to take hits in the same extract spot, or more generally in the area.  I am guessing they are probability either compartmentalizing the modules in a way to isolates the reactions from each other, or using the immense energy from the shaped charge jet to power the reaction? 

I guess I should start reading more military patents. 

[Kal]

On 6/4/2024 at 9:47 PM, Xoon said:

Wow, that patent is pretty genius. 
Essentially instead of using explosives, you use rocket fuel to propel the plates (not necessarily sent flying, just moving). 

I wonder how they define multi-hit capability, weather it is being able to take hits in the same extract spot, or more generally in the area.  I am guessing they are probability either compartmentalizing the modules in a way to isolates the reactions from each other, or using the immense energy from the shaped charge jet to power the reaction? 

I guess I should start reading more military patents. 

no they are not compartmentalizing the explosives for isolation,  the armour modules are large and are for rapid field replacement

sodium nitrate is also an ingredient in various lower power mining blasting agents, which are still classified as explosives,

upon reflection, we can surmise the Israeli implementation

may initiate via detonation, but cannot sustain detonation (supersonic combustion) at the confined thickness used.

and also cannot sustain deflagration either (subsonic combustion)

thus it is Self Limiting Explosive Reactive Armour

[Kal]

The Iranians would have a pretty good idea what the Israelis use, and choose not to use it for their tanks.

 

Merkava's armour seems bloaty.  Which is not particularly compatible with either max protection per unit volume, or max protection per unit cost.

 

 

 

[watch_your_fire]

On 6/11/2024 at 5:39 PM, Kal said:

The Iranians would have a pretty good idea what the Israelis use, and choose not to use it for their tanks.

Moreso they aren't capable of copying it

On 6/11/2024 at 5:39 PM, Kal said:

Merkava's armour seems bloaty.  Which is not particularly compatible with either max protection per unit volume, or max protection per unit cost.

The intent is for maximum crew survivability, which tracks with it's combat record.