Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

On 5/15/2021 at 10:00 PM, SH_MM said:

EFP vs APFSDS

 

 

Funnily enough there us no info on Afghanit APS, no data or even official claums that Afghanit uses EFPs. System is still in development. During first testing stage recently they managed to destroy launcher unit, heh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bronezhilet said:

Yep! It's so, so easy to cheat results. It's not that difficult to get the simulation to show whatever you want to show.

One thing that I think it could be useful for is to conduct comparative experiments.

 

For instance: I'd like to see an experiment where a simulated HEAT jet or APFSDS projectile is shot at a semi-infinite target with an ERA array in front of it.

You'd test once against the target, once against the reference array and then against experimental arrays with different materials (HHA, aluminium, titanium, composites etc.).

 

So long as the targets have the same composition and dynamics, and the relevant factors (density, yield strength, modulus of elasticity, hardness) are correctly reproduced, you should be able to draw useful inferences about relative ME and TE of different array designs from a materials standpoint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another good one: Abrams upper glacis test.

 

 

Dejmian XYZ
I wanted to present plans for the future, but I will present plans for the next simulations. I would like to simulate the armor of the Abrams again, as I read somewhere that the thickness of the glacis was increased in later versions, but now I'm not sure. So if anyone has good source it would be helpful. If not, I will do it for 38mm, but with a side angle, so that the total inclination is 83-84 degrees. I would also like to do one simulation at low projectile speed to test the ricochet. One of the slower APFSDS is the OFL-90-F1 (1275m / s).
 

Also it looks like hes looking for info for another Abrams test. AFAIK the upper glacis thickness was never changed from the original 38mm plate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TWMSR said:

 

It is not good simulation. BM15 is cored projectile, with tungsten carbide penetrator inside, not steel-only like BM12 or BM17.

None of these are very good "simulations". There is so much that is unknown about ballistic science, armor construction, and projectile construction that these are mainly to show how a projectile armor interaction maybe, might, possibly, perhaps, somewhat, workout in perfect circumstances. These videos are pretty much for entertainment purposes only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 8 months later...

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...