Iranian Ground Forces | News and Equipment

[mohsen]

one thing about karrar that worry me is this

no actual armor there only that slate armor , hope it was only in the early prototype and in actual models they installed composite armor in that area

That's just the trunk, if there is a a capacity for extra weight, then strengthening the front armor is more important.

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

first praise that area of karrar , then i do that . and there is pages and pages of me praising Kowsar , or iranian made drones . go search them up

Have you even seen it in testing or got any data that that design is inadequate for the karrar? Youve literally looked at the picture and said the first negative thing you can see.

I don't believe you, i have been looking this forum for a few years before I joined last year, and I can't recall anything. You're not the only one, but here we are. You may have said one good thing once followed by 3 or 4 buts, but I can't see or remember them.

 

[TheImmortal]

Both Abrams and Merkava 4 use cage armour on rear turret.

T-14 uses no slate and is exposed (but crew is not located in turret area, but a separate area).

Uparmouring 360 degrees is too cost and design prohibitive. If a tank gets hit in the rear then that means the officer in charge of assault failed the tank crew in providing infantry coverage to the tank crew and adequately identifying enemy positions.

 

[Stryker1982]

I'm pretty sure an ATGM like the Javelin will destroy any tank including Abrams or the Leopard 2. Just look at how Turkish Leopard 2s were annihilated by ISIS in Syria. Or how Saudi Abrams were hunted down by the Houthis in Yemen. An APS can only do so much. There's always counter measures and then there's IEDs and mines which will destroy any tank.

With this logic, you might as well build nothing. Might as well build no missiles cause they have Arrow-3.

one thing about karrar that worry me is this

no actual armor there only that slate armor , hope it was only in the early prototype and in actual models they installed composite armor in that area

That's not a big deal being on the rear

 

[Hack-Hook]

That's just the trunk, if there is a a capacity for extra weight, then strengthening the front armor is more important.

the front armor is important and there is no doubt for it that must be strongest after that turret and lateral armor , its true that back armor have least of important but having no armor at all is too much trade of. by the way arn't the ammo in tanks based on t-72 stored around turret, won't it make a weak point if they build part of the turret weaker

View attachment 876702
View attachment 876703


Both Abrams and Merkava 4 use cage armour on rear turret.

T-14 uses no slate and is exposed (but crew is not located in turret area, but a separate area).

View attachment 876704


Uparmouring 360 degrees is too cost and design prohibitive. If a tank gets hit in the rear then that means the officer in charge of assault failed the tank crew in providing infantry coverage to the tank crew and adequately identifying enemy positions.e

merkava turret have nothing much . no flammable hydraulic system no stored ammo , its hard to explode it . and the body at the back is thicker than you think and have composite armor , yes not as thick as front a underside but have some protection
about firing from the back , in desert yes you are right but in urban area . many situation happen that they come from fire from all area.
inside Abram

the engine protect the crew from back , if i'm not wrong Russian tanks the crew are higher so the engine won't provide that protection.

wonder how much heavier the tank would have become if they added a layer of composite armor to the back of tank also you must not forget the flaw in the turret of t-72 that make it prone to explosion

 

[lydian fall]

the front armor is important and there is no doubt for it that must be strongest after that turret and lateral armor , its true that back armor have least of important but having no armor at all is too much trade of. by the way arn't the ammo in tanks based on t-72 stored around turret, won't it make a weak point if they build part of the turret weaker

merkava turret have nothing much . no flammable hydraulic system no stored ammo , its hard to explode it . and the body at the back is thicker than you think and have composite armor , yes not as thick as front a underside but have some protection
about firing from the back , in desert yes you are right but in urban area . many situation happen that they come from fire from all area.
inside Abram

the engine protect the crew from back , if i'm not wrong Russian tanks the crew are higher so the engine won't provide that protection.

wonder how much heavier the tank would have become if they added a layer of composite armor to the back of tank also you must not forget the flaw in the turret of t-72 that make it prone to explosion

Everything Iranians and Russians produce are extremely weak

You did your job you hasbara troll

Now go to sleep well easy u kundeh

 

[Hack-Hook]

Everything Iranians and Russians produce are extremely weak

You did your job you hasbara troll

Now go to sleep well easy u kundeh

somebody tell this troll why t-72 turret have a flaw that prone it to violently rip the tank apart

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

Ahvazie vatan foroush

Pire sage khereft maliati

Een ye liberal e kafaar hast. Hata mano ban bekonan az in forum, harfaye in mardo bayad be tor e koli rad kard va neshoon bedim. Vajeb ast!

 

[GrandBotBoi]

one thing about karrar that worry me is this

no actual armor there only that slate armor , hope it was only in the early prototype and in actual models they installed composite armor in that area

That's the rear of the turret, there's steel behind it. Like every modern tank is like that

 

[TheImmortal]

inside Abram

the engine protect the crew from back , if i'm not wrong Russian tanks the crew are higher so the engine won't provide that protection.

You are comparing T-72 that cost ~$1M to Abrams tank that cost $9M+

No logic in such a discussion. It’s quantity vs quality —the underlying theme of Soviet doctrine.

You should compare T-14 to Abrams in terms of design plus cost. That’s more appropriate comparison.

There is no amount of armour you can put on the back end turret to stop a tank shell that eats 300mm+ of armour or a Kornet with 1000+mm RHA after ERA. So putting a little bit of steel won’t do much in grand scheme of things.

wonder how much heavier the tank would have become if they added a layer of composite armor to the back of tank also you must not forget the flaw in the turret of t-72 that make it prone to explosion

Karrar doesn’t use T-72 turret it uses T-90 turret. Cook off is reduced in T-90 with use of blast panel and better separation of ammo from crew area.

Tanks can still cook off even with Abram....just harder, T-72 was more susceptible due to auto carousel underneath turret.

 

[jauk]

@Daylamite Warrior @Sardar330 please PLEASE keep decorum especially with fellow Iranians. I understand the frustration with @Hack-Hook and it’s clear he’s overly negative, cynical, and not cognizant of the achievements of his countrymen and unable to express it in a way that affords him warranted and occasional criticism. But given he’s Iranian we must afford him leeway regardless of his often tactlessness. So again, please step down and let him be. Feel free to criticize to your heart’s content with clean language. Many many thanks.

 

[Sineva]

constructive comment about the tank protection not negative comment .
can you more positively explain that part of the tank for me that for strange reason don't have any armore , onlu use some fuel drums and towing rope and a slated armor over them as protection ?

You also have the bustle mounted magazine containing the reserve ammo/top up rounds as well.

Ultimately theres a practical limit to how much armor you can put on a tank,and where you can put it.This is also just as true for the current late cold war era 60+ ton western tank platforms as well.
The next step of course would be going for a fully active hard kill protection system like the soviet Arena,or something similar,tho these come with their own set of disadvantages as well.

 

[lydian fall]

@Daylamite Warrior @Sardar330 please PLEASE keep decorum especially with fellow Iranians. I understand the frustration with @Hack-Hook and it’s clear he’s overly negative, cynical, and not cognizant of the achievements of his countrymen and unable to express it in a way that affords him warranted and occasional criticism. But given he’s Iranian we must afford him leeway regardless of his often tactlessness. So again, please step down and let him be. Feel free to criticize to your heart’s content with clean language. Many many thanks.

Bro you don't know but he made many Iranians to leave permanently as I said in the thread below because of his very low quality comments against Iranian capabilities: 24/7/365

Iran attempts to steal US Navy unmanned naval vessel, then departs after US response

Shall I just put hack on the ignore list? Because it seems he has to have the last say and it's just hard letting him get away with it every time just because of keeping things calm. That is your own choice bro Anyway @Hack-Hook must get permanently banned so other members won't leave...

defence.pk

 

[Daylamite Warrior]

@Daylamite Warrior @Sardar330 please PLEASE keep decorum especially with fellow Iranians. I understand the frustration with @Hack-Hook and it’s clear he’s overly negative, cynical, and not cognizant of the achievements of his countrymen and unable to express it in a way that affords him warranted and occasional criticism. But given he’s Iranian we must afford him leeway regardless of his often tactlessness. So again, please step down and let him be. Feel free to criticize to your heart’s content with clean language. Many many thanks.

I understand but I dont see how it's fair on us where he can reply to all our comments using circular reasoning but we have to "let him be". My language has been pretty clean, I just speak more directly than some of you guys here. I think there has to be a commitment on Hack-Hook as well to step down as well. I will try to tone it down but to let him just carry on without refutation is not gonna happen. Sorry.

 

[sanel1412]

the front armor is important and there is no doubt for it that must be strongest after that turret and lateral armor , its true that back armor have least of important but having no armor at all is too much trade of. by the way arn't the ammo in tanks based on t-72 stored around turret, won't it make a weak point if they build part of the turret weaker

merkava turret have nothing much . no flammable hydraulic system no stored ammo , its hard to explode it . and the body at the back is thicker than you think and have composite armor , yes not as thick as front a underside but have some protection
about firing from the back , in desert yes you are right but in urban area . many situation happen that they come from fire from all area.
inside Abram

the engine protect the crew from back , if i'm not wrong Russian tanks the crew are higher so the engine won't provide that protection.

wonder how much heavier the tank would have become if they added a layer of composite armor to the back of tank also you must not forget the flaw in the turret of t-72 that make it prone to explosion

Merkava 4 has engine in front, at the back it has doors