Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

The armour sceme i came up with:

 

10mm RHA, 150mm cavity with NERA-light at 14° from horizontal, 30mm RHA, 205mm cavity with NERA-light at 10° from horizontal, 30mm RHA, 25mm HHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 25mmHHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 25mm HHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 30mmRHA

 

Against ATGM 360mm precurser and 960mm main charge

 

First RHA layer Pres = 360 -10 =350

First NERA light layer Pres = 350/2.5 - 1.5*74 = 29

Second RHA Pres = 29 -30 = -1 precurser defeated

Second NERA light Pres = 960/3.3 -1.5*103 = 137

Third RHA Pres = 137 - 30 = 107

First HHA Pres = 107 -50 = 57

Second HHA Pres 57 - 50 = 7

Third HHA Pres = 7 -50 = -43 Main charge stopped

Fourth RHA not even scratched

 

Against 500mm KE

 

First RHA layer Pres = 500 -10 = 490

First NERA light layer Pres = 490/1.07 - 1.5*74 = 347

Second RHA Pres = 347 - 30 = 317

Second NERA light Pres = 317/1.11 -1.5*103 = 162

Third RHA Pres = 162 - 30 = 132

First HHA Pres = 132 -50 = 82

Second HHA Pres 82 - 50 = 32

Third HHA Pres = 23 -50 = -27 KE penetrator stopped

Fourth RHA not even scratched

 

Im getting about 4.2 tons to cover 1m^2

 

Everything is inert so no problems with that. all special armour is in cavities and can be replaced easily. Armour array is only 445mm deep. Can easily be upgraded with additional armour.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 542
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Restricted: for Operating Thetan Eyes Only By order of Her Gracious and Serene Majesty Queen Diane Feinstein the VIII The Dianetic People’s Republic of California Anno Domini 2250

Comrades! The time of your waiting is over! I introduce to you the Sierra Nevada VagonZavod AFV-50 Gun Tank   Frontal Dimensions Frontal Armor Turret Cheek Armor Array (n

Report from Lt. Col. [REDACTED] People's Auditory Forces Directorate of Political-Moral Reliability, Auditory and Political Officer for SNVZ and Military-Industry Liaison Officer for RFP "New Battle T

1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

Pressing can laminate different metals together,

All that is required in the end laminate is intimate contact.  The softer, tougher plate behind is to protect the hard front plate from bending stress.  The hard plate has high harness but low toughness.  The two plates do not need to be metallurgicaly joined although that is relatively easy if we are talking two steel plates.  It does require high pressures and time as a substitute for heat - heat would make it fast and easy but there go the properties of the hard plate.  Bonding processes provide very nearly the same performance but I am not sure if we have the requisite vacuum epoxy technologies?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DIADES said:

All that is required in the end laminate is intimate contact.  The softer, tougher plate behind is to protect the hard front plate from bending stress.  The hard plate has high harness but low toughness.  The two plates do not need to be metallurgicaly joined although that is relatively easy if we are talking two steel plates.  It does require high pressures and time as a substitute for heat - heat would make it fast and easy but there go the properties of the hard plate.  Bonding processes provide very nearly the same performance but I am not sure if we have the requisite vacuum epoxy technologies?

 

My books on armor technology explicitly say the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, holoween said:

The armour sceme i came up with:

 

10mm RHA, 150mm cavity with NERA-light at 14° from horizontal, 30mm RHA, 205mm cavity with NERA-light at 10° from horizontal, 30mm RHA, 25mm HHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 25mmHHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 25mm HHA (5mm airgap for mounting), 30mmRHA

 

Against ATGM 360mm precurser and 960mm main charge

 

First RHA layer Pres = 360 -10 =350

First NERA light layer Pres = 350/2.5 - 1.5*74 = 29

Second RHA Pres = 29 -30 = -1 precurser defeated

Second NERA light Pres = 960/3.3 -1.5*103 = 137

Third RHA Pres = 137 - 30 = 107

First HHA Pres = 107 -50 = 57

Second HHA Pres 57 - 50 = 7

Third HHA Pres = 7 -50 = -43 Main charge stopped

Fourth RHA not even scratched

 

Against 500mm KE

 

First RHA layer Pres = 500 -10 = 490

First NERA light layer Pres = 490/1.07 - 1.5*74 = 347

Second RHA Pres = 347 - 30 = 317

Second NERA light Pres = 317/1.11 -1.5*103 = 162

Third RHA Pres = 162 - 30 = 132

First HHA Pres = 132 -50 = 82

Second HHA Pres 82 - 50 = 32

Third HHA Pres = 23 -50 = -27 KE penetrator stopped

Fourth RHA not even scratched

 

Im getting about 4.2 tons to cover 1m^2

 

Everything is inert so no problems with that. all special armour is in cavities and can be replaced easily. Armour array is only 445mm deep. Can easily be upgraded with additional armour.

 

 

 

~~The package we’re using is better.~~

 

Edit: RIP my math skills, I was wrong.

Edited by A. T. Mahan
Math error
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think holoween and Toxn have basically the right idea.  If you have an array of reactive elements, the reduction is going to be of the form K1^N where K1 is your coefficient from the curve and N is the number of reactive elements.  And if I remember anything from those finance courses that I never actually took, it's that compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe, and you get a lot more mileage from ABX by making X bigger than you do from worrying about A or B.

 

At least if you aren't concerned overmuch about thickness.  Toxn's array of 10 light NERA at 64 degrees is going to be like, 850mm thick, which is doable for turret front protection, but maybe a bit much for the sides.

Maybe figuring out a workable frontal protection scheme is actually the easy part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

My books on armor technolog

Quick check at my end - I am guessing yous ref something like "Metallurgical Factors Affecting the Behavior of Steel Targets" 1972 ?  That is still referenced and absolutely supports your comment.  That work reports on roll bonding from the 1960s (deeply appropriate!).  More recently explosive bonding has been used, much, much better results.  Also isostatic hot press but explosive is better/easier.  I am still digging for my bonding ref - pretty sure it was in the context of dissimilar metals.

 

But, we can use explosive bonding....

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DIADES said:

Publication dates?  Steels definitely can be easily metallurgicaly joined.

 

 

It's from 2016.  Different steel hardnesses can definitely be joined by explosive welding or by roll bonding, and dissimilar metals can be joined with explosive welding.  Not all combinations of dissimilar metals work, but a lot do.

 

No, what I'm objecting to is the idea that putting a high hardness plate up against an RHA plate without welding them along the face where they contact will work.  That very explicitly does not work well.  The synergistic effect would be quite small.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, A. T. Mahan said:

 

I’ve gotten better protection at substantially lower areal density. 

 

its not that hard really.

if i just take my array and remove the first and last RHA plates and switch my first NERA layer to ERA ill save quite some weight. i could also space my HHA plates more for better effect against KE

But it would reduce the uparmouring potential and increase the armours bulk by quite a bit

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

I think holoween and Toxn have basically the right idea.  If you have an array of reactive elements, the reduction is going to be of the form K1^N where K1 is your coefficient from the curve and N is the number of reactive elements.  And if I remember anything from those finance courses that I never actually took, it's that compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe, and you get a lot more mileage from ABX by making X bigger than you do from worrying about A or B.

 

At least if you aren't concerned overmuch about thickness.  Toxn's array of 10 light NERA at 64 degrees is going to be like, 850mm thick, which is doable for turret front protection, but maybe a bit much for the sides.

Maybe figuring out a workable frontal protection scheme is actually the easy part.

 

 I think the side armor is fairly reasonable if you have the right idea, and design a large enough vehicle to support thick side armor

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to optimize for weight a single NERA light at 10°from horizontal followed by a single NERA heavy at 10° from horizontal will easily stopp all threats and for 1m^2 it weighs around 3 tons. you will need a build depth of a meter to reach good coverage though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, DIADES said:

Cimpoeru?

 

 

Hazell 2016 and Crouch 2017.

 

They note that laminated steel armor that's assembled by explosive welding actually works better than roll bonded because the bond between the two plates is more robust (though there are caveats WRT residual stress).

 

Unless N-L-M says otherwise explicitly, I don't think you can use laminated steel structures.  Hand-wave it as the Californians not having sufficient industrial capacity to mass-produce such materials or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Collimatrix said:

I don't think you can use laminated steel structures.  Hand-wave it as the Californians not having sufficient industrial capacity to mass-produce such materials or something.

Agreed.  I don't intend using it - I am watching the adults discuss solutions and will adopt something from the resulting menu.  Basic config will drive the answer as much as amour drives config.

 

Explosive forming/bonding in one operation is actually pretty low tech.  Tank of water, stuff to go bang, two plates (to be formed/bonded) massive mould (concrete backed)  Could make nice curved modules.  But, I ain't going there.

 

Crouch, Ian?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, holoween said:

If you want to optimize for weight a single NERA light at 10°from horizontal followed by a single NERA heavy at 10° from horizontal will easily stopp all threats and for 1m^2 it weighs around 3 tons. you will need a build depth of a meter to reach good coverage though.

 

I'm... not following.

 

The 60mm/160mm tandem ATGM has 360mm penetration primary.  Light NERA at 10 degrees is about 3.5 K1 coefficient, so that drops to 102mm penetration.  K2 is 18*1.5/cos(10 degrees), or about 27.4mm, so there is 75mm residual pen after the first light NERA casette.

 

Also, I think you'd get murdered on the above-line-of-sight requirement because the missile would hit the top of the array and bypass the first reactive armor casette entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DIADES said:

Agreed.  I don't intend using it - I am watching the adults discuss solutions and will adopt something from the resulting menu.  Basic config will drive the answer as much as amour drives config.

 

Explosive forming/bonding in one operation is actually pretty low tech.  Tank of water, stuff to go bang, two plates (to be formed/bonded) massive mould (concrete backed)  Could make nice curved modules.  But, I ain't going there.

 

Crouch, Ian?

 

Indeed, Ian G. Crouch.

 

I remember looking into explosion welding and being surprised how simple it is.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DIADES said:

Probably save some time and brain pain if we just go by the scenario detail provided.  Armour materials are detailed.

 

I just want to give the tank crews fire-protective clothing and body armor. It's nothing to do with the tank armor itself, but with keeping the crew from burning to death or getting killed when some Mormon shoots them in the chest while they're turned out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, A. T. Mahan said:

 

I just want to give the tank crews fire-protective clothing and body armor. It's nothing to do with the tank armor itself, but with keeping the crew from burning to death or getting killed when some Mormon shoots them in the chest while they're turned out.

Fair enough but good luck getting tank crews to wear armour.  Too restrictive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience with AFV interiors is that they are too tight for ease of movement even if one was stark naked and fully greased up..........

 

Your body needs to conform to all the snags, lumps, protrusions and shit, your gear constantly gets caught.  WHEN a vehicle brews up, you need out.  Every gram and every millimeter of cloth/gear is a hindrance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • N-L-M unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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 Monochromelody
      70 years ago, January the 2nd, 1951. To the North of Seoul, in the mountains and hills near Go-yang-tong(高阳洞), British 1RUR dug in and fought against advancing PVA forces. 1RUR got a task force called Cooperforce to support, this is a tank unit from Royal Tank Regiment and Royal Artillery, equipped with Cromwell tanks. 
      When Matthrew Ridgeway assigned the order of withdraw in this afternoon, the US force covering British force's left flank quickly escaped from their sector, leaving the British were completed unawared and uncovered. 
      When the night falls, was cold and dark in the valley. 1RUR had to withdraw in the darkness. All of a sudden, a US spotter aircraft flew over the valley, drop some illumination flares upon the retreating convoy. 
      Fierce battle broke out when flares fall down, PVA firing from all directions, the cold valley became deadly kill zone. Some PVA soldiers put away their rifles, assaulting with hand grenades, satchel charges and Bangalore torpedoes. They even set up mortars on the hill, laying shells with direct fire. 
      200 British soldiers and artillerymen were killed or captured in one night. 1RUR's Battalion Commander Tony Blake was believed KIA. Cooperforce was completely knocked out, all 12 tanks were destroyed or captured by light infantry. Leader Ashley Cooper were also killed. 


    • By Toxn
      This is the competition entry thread.
       
      Please submit your complete entries here (all entries will be judged complete when judging begins in the first week of November) and keep the other competition thread for discussion and chatter.
       
      Once judging is complete I will make a post here to discuss the entries and announce a winner.
       
      Best of luck!
       
      Update: final submissions should be in hand by the 22nd of November 2020.
    • By SH_MM
      Found a few higher resolution photographs from the recent North Korean military parade. We didn't have a topic for BEST KOREAN armored fighting vehicles, so here it is.
       
      New main battle tank, Abrams-Armata clone based on Ch'ŏnma turret design (welded, box-shaped turret) and Sŏn'gun hull design (i.e. centerline driver's position). The bolts of the armor on the hull front is finally visible given the increased resolution. It might not be ERA given the lack of lines inbetween. Maybe is a NERA module akin to the MEXAS hull add-on armor for the Leopard 2A5?
       
      Other details include an APS with four radar panels (the side-mounted radar panels look a lot different - and a lot more real - than the ones mounted at the turret corners) and twelve countermeasures in four banks (two banks à three launchers each at the turret front, two banks à three launchers on the left and right side of the turret). Thermal imagers for gunner and commander, meteorological mast, two laser warning receivers, 115 mm smoothbore gun without thermal sleeve but with muzze reference system, 30 mm grenade launcher on the turret, six smoke grenade dischargers (three at each turret rear corner)
       


       
      IMO the layout of the roof-mounted ERA is really odd. Either the armor array covering the left turret cheek is significantly thinner than the armor on the right turret cheek or the roof-mounted ERA overlaps with the armor.
       


      The first ERA/armor element of the skirt is connected by hinges and can probably swivel to allow better access to the track. There is a cut-out in the slat armor for the engine exhaust. Also note the actual turret ring - very small diameter compared to the outer dimensions of the turret.
       
      Stryker MGS copy with D-30 field gun clone and mid engine:

      Note there are four crew hatches. Driver (on the left front of the vehicle), commander (on the right front of the vehicle, seat is placed a bit further back), gunner (left side of the gun's overhead mount, next to the gunner's sight) and unknown crew member (right side of gun's overhead mount with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher mounted at the hatch). The vehicle also has a thermal imager and laser rangefinder (gunner's sight is identical to the new tank), but no independent optic for the commander. It also has the same meteorological mast and laser warner receivers as the new MBT.
       
      What is the purpose of the fourth crew member? He cannot realistically load the gun...
       
      The vehicle has a small trim vane for swimming, the side armor is made of very thin spaced steel that is bend on multiple spots, so it clearly is not ceramic armor as fitted to the actual Stryker.

       
      The tank destroyer variant of the same Stryker MGS copy fitted with a Bulsae-3 ATGM launcher.
       

      Note that there is again a third hatch with 30 mm automatic grenade launcher behind the commander's position. Laser warning receivers and trime vane are again stand-out features. The sighting complex for the Bulsae-3 ATGMs is different with a large circular optic (fitted with cover) probably being a thermal imager and two smaller lenses visible on the very right (as seen from the vehicle's point of view) probably containing a day sight and parts of the guidance system.
       

      Non line-of-sight ATGM carrier based on the 6x6 local variant of the BTR, again fitted with laser warning receivers and a trim vane. There are only two hatches and two windows, but there is a three men crew inside.
       
       
      There are a lot more photos here, but most of them are infantry of missile system (MLRS' and ICBMs).
    • By Toxn
      You are an engineer at an Italian locomotive and tractor-making company in early 1943. The writing is on the wall for the Italian army in North Africa, with a lot of equipment having been lost and the enemy on the brink of kicking the axis out of Tunisia and then heading across the Mediterranean. In short, things are looking more than a little desperate. 
       
      However, all is not lost. Il Duce himself has stepped in and, with the assistance of the Germans, procured both some of their finest captured vehicles for use in the upcoming defense of the homeland. Since many of these vehicles have been... gently used, and the existing firms like Ansaldo are flooded with orders, your firm has been asked to work on them in order to bring them up to the standards demanded by modern warfare. 
       
      In addition to these vehicles, the Germans have also graciously agreed to sell weapons from their existing stock of captured equipment, as well as providing production licenses for some of their more modern equipment. You have also been given permission to work with local weapons manufacturers in order to modify existing artillery to suit your needs. Italian automotive and engine manufacturers are similarly available to help. Finally; your firm's experience in locomotives and tractors means that you can modify hulls and put together turrets and turret rings. You can also produce castings (although not very large ones) and weld armour plates.
       
      Your job, which you have no choice but to accept, is to choose a vehicle from among the captured stock being offered for sale, and propose a series of plausible fixes in order to give it a fighting chance against the American and British equipment currently in the field (specifically light tanks and light anti-tank weapons).
       
      It is not foreseen that any of these vehicles will be able to plausibly take on modern medium or heavy designs head-on. Instead, what is wanted are general, implementable improvements to the characteristics of the chosen vehicle. These improvements should be aimed at making these vehicles more useful in the initial battles which are foreseen taking place against airborne and landing forces, in general cooperation with infantry, and as scouts.
       
      The submission should include one or more drawings or blueprints (at least a side view of the vehicle, but preferably a 3-point view and isometric view), a description of the modified vehicle, a description of how the modifications would be accomplished and a description of how the modifications would improve the design overall. The text of the submission should short and descriptive rather than long and exhaustive, and should not exceed 1000 words in total. Images may be photoshopped using existing pictures.
       
      Judging will be done on the basis of plausibility and effectiveness, with innovative solutions being encouraged in order to get the most bang for buck out of the base vehicle. Beyond implementation, the fixes should prioritise combat effectiveness while also improving reliability, crew ergonomics, communication, mobility and protection as much as possible.
       
      The foreign vehicles available for modification are:
      Renault R35 (already in service) Hotchkiss H35/39 Somua S35 (already in use for training purposes) T-26 BT-5 T-28 (only available in very small numbers, so need to be extremely effective) Panzer II Ausf.C  
      The foreign weapons immediately available for purchase are:
      15mm ZB-60 25mm Puteaux and Hotchkiss 3.7cm KPÚV vz. 34/Pak 34 (t) 3.7cm ÚV vz. 38/KwK 38(t)
      3.7cm Pak 36 4.0 cm Pak 192 (e) 45mm M1937 (53-K) 4.7cm KPÚV vz. 38/Pak 38 (t) 47mm APX 7.5cm Pak 97/38 7.62 cm F.K.297(r) and  7.62 cm PaK 39(r) 8.8cm Raketenwerfer 43  
      Licenses are also available for the manufacture of foreign engines (Maybach HL62 TRM, Maybach HL120 TRM and Praga Typ TNHPS/II), periscopes, sights, radios, cupolas and automotive subassemblies. All foreign vehicle weapons, subassemblies and components are available for reverse engineering and manufacture.
       
      IMPORTANT NOTE: This competition hasn't been finalised, and is waiting on your input! Vote to participate by giving this topic a 'controversial' (grapefruit-induced tears being the only currency of value), and if we get enough participants we'll pull the trigger. Ask any questions you want below, and when/if the competition goes forwards I will make a new thread for entries.
       
      Edit: thanks to excellent feedback, the competition proposal has been somewhat edited. If you want an idea of what my mindset is here, read up on the battle of Gela (bearing in mind that the wikipedia entry is shite) and ask how much better the counter-attack could have gone if the Italian vehicles had been equipped with radios and had the ability to move faster than jogging speed.
       
      Edit 2: since I failed to mention this above - this is not a one-man, one-entry sort of competition (although I'm not keen on the ten-men, one entry approach either).
      If you have two good ideas then you can submit twice. The only rules are not to test my patience and to keep it within the bounds of good taste.

×
×
  • Create New...