Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

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.



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


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)?

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.

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





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.

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.

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.





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 









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.




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

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




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

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.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 Collimatrix
      At the behest of @Lord_James, this shall be the thread for general discussion of conventional passive metallic armor.  Whether it's steel, titanium, magnesium, exotic laminates of all three, this is the thread for it.
      In answer to your earlier question, Lord_James, relatively small amounts of boron, in steels that have the appropriate levels of carbon, form intergranular barriers that dramatically slow the diffusion of carbon out of the austenite crystals during quenching.  Long story short, this means that the depth of material that can be effectively hardened is much greater.
    • By Must Be Spoon Fed
      I'm interested in Soviet armor production and deployment. Especially of T-55 tank and its variants. Sadly, most sources touch this subject very generally while I would want to get a more detailed view. How much tanks were produced in which country and at what year. Were Soviets producing armor for themselves or for export. Any source which would go into bit more detail about it is appreciated. I would appreciate if someone could help me find information required about those tanks as so far I can rely only on quite general information. 
    • By SirFlamenco
      I want to calculate the weight required to make an armor that can resist 7.62 RUAG SWISS AP, also known as VPAM level 12. I needed a baseline so I took NIJ Level IV and then tried to find the difference of weight so I could get a percentage. The only plate that's still made for this threat is the TenCate CX-950 IC. This plate is 8.93 lbs for a sapi medium and is alumina in-conjonction with soft armor. I then needed to find a Level IV alumina IC, which I found on UARM's website. It's 7.6 lbs, so if we do 8.93/7.6 we get around 1.175, but I put 1.25 considering UARM's plates are often quite heavy. Now that we have 1.25, we can start applying it to silicon carbide and boron carbide. Denmark's group has a level IV silicon carbide plate at 5.95 lbs, so times 1.25 it gives 7.4375. Hesco's boron carbide IV plate is 5.1 lbs, so times 1.25 we get 6.375.
      Now, I wanted to know what was the weight for hardened steel. I took MARS 600, which is one of the best armor steel you can get. Using this page, I can easily calculate that you would need about 19mm to stop it. Using a calculator, we know that a full inch sapi medium plate would weight 33.9 lbs. 19mm/25.4mm = 0.748 inch so if we do 0.748*33.9 we get 25.3572 lbs. 
      The problem is obvious : How is boron carbide 4 times as light as steel? Silicon carbide is 3.4 times as light too? It doesn't make any sense, giving that they are both around 2.2 ME and hardened steel is 1.3 ME, so it should be around 1.7 times heavier for steel. What did I get wrong? 
    • 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
  • Create New...