Yoshi_E Posted January 8 Report Share Posted January 8 On 12/27/2023 at 1:24 PM, SH_MM said: The hinge-mounted armor module next to the gun mantlet consists just of four steel plates and weld lines, just as described by Im not yet fully convinced that the lines are just simple weld lines. Thats why I initially brought this up. In the center the blocks are directly welded with a smooth finish. On the outside they are cut into the steel and then filled - non of the lines have any visible typical weld patterns (though could be covered by thick layer of paint). Butt joints like these also usually bulge out of the plate - instead being embedded. Why is the pattern irregular (but also identical on all tanks)? If they are strongly welded together, why would there be two additional bolts to strap all the four blocks together? That's why I wondered if these might be crumple zones to allow for some minimal shift of the blocks to feed more material against a penetrator. I wonder if that could work for thicker blocks like these, maybe someone could simulate it. Anyway lets leave it at this, discussing it further would be unnecessary. The blocks are around 360-370mm thick based on my current estimate. Each section including the joint lines is 100mm, with the last block being a bit thinner, around ~60-70mm. Gunner side is 542kg - Loaders side is 389kg (@ TWMSR) What makes you think that the gunshield is some aluminum alloy? Its definitely some sort of tempered metal. Here a short animation displaying the parts The model is based on a mix of 3D photogrammetry scans of the entire turret and schematics, but still needs some fine tuning. TWMSR and Serge 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshi_E Posted January 8 Report Share Posted January 8 On the topic of armor, there was this nice slide of the Perun Army in 2021 that was discussing the acquisition of older Leopard 2A4 tanks with apparently upgraded internal armor. 550-600mm arc protection on Leopard 2A4 - possible the drop-ins that were mentioned? The Mantlet would seemingly receive no improvement and stay at ~315mm RHAe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FORMATOSE Posted January 8 Report Share Posted January 8 2 hours ago, Yoshi_E said: On the topic of armor, there was this nice slide of the Perun Army in 2021 that was discussing the acquisition of older Leopard 2A4 tanks with apparently upgraded internal armor. 550-600mm arc protection on Leopard 2A4 - possible the drop-ins that were mentioned? The Mantlet would seemingly receive no improvement and stay at ~315mm RHAe. This illustration is based on this kind of drawing (made more than 10 years ago, by a Polish forum user, Jaroslaw "Militarysta" Wolski, IIRC) whose estimates are purely speculative. Leopard 2A4 either have B-tech or C-tech composite armour packages. The latter has been tested against 120 mm DM23 APFSDS and HOT-1 ATGM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojoisgood Posted January 8 Report Share Posted January 8 5 hours ago, Yoshi_E said: On the topic of armor, there was this nice slide of the Perun Army in 2021 that was discussing the acquisition of older Leopard 2A4 tanks with apparently upgraded internal armor. 550-600mm arc protection on Leopard 2A4 - possible the drop-ins that were mentioned? The Mantlet would seemingly receive no improvement and stay at ~315mm RHAe. I have a question about Dm63, i use the calculator to calculate penetration of APFSDS, for dm33 i use 28 diameter 500 long rod and 1530m/s i get 437mm,very close to 450mm. for dm63 i use 26 diameter, 685mm (according to wiki) and 1560m/s but i get only 570mm not close to 650mm. Is the length of dm63 longer than 685mm? Also i think rheinmetall show a picture of dm63 penetration at a infinite plate at 90° and get 605mm of penetration, but when i use the calculator ,the length need to be 745mm length and 1800m/s .really want to know how. And is the only difference between DM53 and DM63 just gunpowder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speziale Posted January 8 Report Share Posted January 8 6 hours ago, Yoshi_E said: On the topic of armor, there was this nice slide of the Perun Army in 2021 that was discussing the acquisition of older Leopard 2A4 tanks with apparently upgraded internal armor. 550-600mm arc protection on Leopard 2A4 - possible the drop-ins that were mentioned? The Mantlet would seemingly receive no improvement and stay at ~315mm RHAe. 550-600 mm protection value for the turret front is totally in line what the '5-coloured' chart in the swedish presentaion suggests for the C-tech armor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojoisgood Posted January 9 Report Share Posted January 9 17 hours ago, Yoshi_E said: On the topic of armor, there was this nice slide of the Perun Army in 2021 that was discussing the acquisition of older Leopard 2A4 tanks with apparently upgraded internal armor. 550-600mm arc protection on Leopard 2A4 - possible the drop-ins that were mentioned? The Mantlet would seemingly receive no improvement and stay at ~315mm RHAe. How? 420mm composite plus 240mm steel only 315mm of protection ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speziale Posted January 9 Report Share Posted January 9 13 hours ago, jojoisgood said: How? 420mm composite plus 240mm steel only 315mm of protection ? The 240mm part did not make from steel, but light metal according to @Militarysta.(he mentioned it is made from titan). In this case the 240mm part gives around 200mm protection. So, if you assume that gun mantlet has 30mm fore and backplate, this gives around 260mm protection from frontal arc, so you still have around 55mm "unexplained" protection. But i think the mantlet armor is a simple spaced armor, or maybe there are 2 bulging plates inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffield Posted January 9 Report Share Posted January 9 Not sure if this have been posted before, but Leopard 2A5s turret (empty & no add-on armour) is 18.25 metric tons, with add-on armour it's 19.8 metric tons; meaning the wedges + side armour account for 1.55 tons. Empty weight for the whole tank is 57.7 tons (likely without the add-on armour). Assuming both tanks lose 1.2 tons going from combat load - > empty, a Leopard 2A4C would weight 55.3 tons compared to 2A5s 57.7 tons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojoisgood Posted January 10 Report Share Posted January 10 On 1/8/2024 at 9:56 PM, FORMATOSE said: This illustration is based on this kind of drawing (made more than 10 years ago, by a Polish forum user, Jaroslaw "Militarysta" Wolski, IIRC) whose estimates are purely speculative. Leopard 2A4 either have B-tech or C-tech composite armour packages. The latter has been tested against 120 mm DM23 APFSDS and HOT-1 ATGM. So is this illustration true or false ? If dm63 have 730mm length of rod and have 720mm at 2km it will need 1810m/s muzzle velocity, which will have 2km 1710m/s velocity . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshi_E Posted January 10 Report Share Posted January 10 On 1/10/2024 at 3:05 AM, jojoisgood said: So is this illustration true or false ? If dm63 have 730mm length of rod and have 720mm at 2km it will need 1810m/s muzzle velocity, which will have 2km 1710m/s velocity . The illustration shows RHAe - not RHA values. RHA being just a block of steel - while RHAe is often a simulated target of special armor. Modern rounds are specifically designed to deal better with special armor - something that you cant just calculate. As @FORMATOSE pointed out, I dont know if those are the official KMW/RH figures - or their own speculation. Thanks to more recent pics we know the penetrator is a bit longer than we initially assumed: Here is a better example that talks specifically about a steel target: Quote With the currently most modern 120-mm APFSDS (DM63, effective length 745mm), penetration rates of 650-750mm are achieved in a steel target (tensile strength 800 MPa / 237 HB) - depending on the impact velocity (1500-1600 m/s at a distance of 3000 m) and the impact angle (0°-60° to the surface normal) 650mm@0° at 3km 750mm@60° at 3km On an old Bundeswehr slide from 2004 or so they lists DM53 as Quote reaches up to 1800 m/s and can perforate on a distance of 2000 meters up to 810mm tank steel If you now also take into account that DM53/63 can bypass ERA such as K5 (~250mm RHAe) by non-initiation - you will arrive at the requirement of LKE II to perforate 1000mm RHAe Pardus 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted January 11 Report Share Posted January 11 haven't noticed that before 2A6HEL doesn't have addon plates on loader side of roof LoooSeR and Laviduce 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scav Posted January 12 Report Share Posted January 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molota_477 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 On 2024/1/8 at PM9点01分, Yoshi_E said: @Molota_477 What makes you think that the gunshield is some aluminum alloy? Its definitely some sort of tempered metal. From drawing annoation. It's AlMg4.5MnW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 1 hour ago, Molota_477 said: From drawing annoation. It's AlMg4.5MnW depends on what you call a gun shield, + doubt in use any aluminum on frontal areas of a tank, as some interlayers and back it's possible, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molota_477 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 14 minutes ago, Wiedzmin said: depends on what you call a gun shield, + doubt in use any aluminum on frontal areas of a tank, as some interlayers and back it's possible, but... Yep,this refers specifically to the "Gun Shield" mentioned in this video, IIRC it should be called "Funktionsmodul". On 1/8/2024 at 9:01 PM, Yoshi_E said: Here a short animation displaying the parts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 1 hour ago, Molota_477 said: Yep,this refers specifically to the "Gun Shield" mentioned in this video, IIRC it should be called "Funktionsmodul". you mean sealing frame ? it's not thick AFAIK, where did you get aluminum for it ? it's must be a tarp + frame Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pardus Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 Just finished watching this: Interesting to note that the turret ring was moved back 20 cm facilitated by the swapping of the old MTU MB873 with the more compact MTU MB883 engine providing the same power output. Quick and neat way of saving a lot of space and weight, whilst also achieving a more central turret position. Will be interesting to see wether Rheinmetall will follow suit with their upgraded chassis for their KF51 project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted February 12 Report Share Posted February 12 singapore 2A4 Cleb 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojoisgood Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 https://iiil.io/6Y7N KNDS says leopard 2a7v have E tech,i don't know if that means main armor or something else, but 1080KE protection i think is not what D tech can perform Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted March 2 Report Share Posted March 2 No, KNDS does not say that: https://www.knds.de/en/systems-products/tracked-vehicles/main-battle-tank/leopard-2-a7/ Whoever faked that is retarded. BaronTibere 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted March 11 Report Share Posted March 11 hull front special armor pack destroyed somehow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zach9889 Posted March 12 Report Share Posted March 12 18 hours ago, Wiedzmin said: hull front special armor pack destroyed somehow Looks like it could be exploitation, if it's far enough behind lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted March 13 Report Share Posted March 13 14 hours ago, Zach9889 said: Looks like it could be exploitation, if it's far enough behind lines. It is not far from the frontline, Russian forces commercial drone (not long range) is literally above it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiedzmin Posted March 17 Report Share Posted March 17 L2A4 hited by either tank fired HEAT, HE or heavy ATGM, driver hatch removed LoooSeR and Laviduce 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SH_MM Posted April 6 Report Share Posted April 6 So the "Leopard 3" is moving along. This is not the MGCS or Panther, but a new program (or at the moment, just a study) as a back-up to the MGCS. According to Welt, the German government has a awarded an R&D contract to Rheinmetall, but Rheinmetall itself lists the project as a joint-venture (see above)... so likely KMW is also included. Little is publkicly known about the project, but Rheinmetall CEO Papperger believes that "many" Panther technologies such as the 130 mm L52 and autoloader will find its way into it. Laviduce 1 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.