What's new

PA TANKS comparison with contempory tanks

Layered composite armour not penetrated by APFSDS 125 mm shell...





YfiP785.png


3yh7onn.png



ENpYcIc.png
 
T-80ud composite armour is truely a mystery for me till today :O .....


A wellknown member has this to say about it...

Whey, T-80U armour structure is as I describe here, but T-80UD armour structure in new welded turret is diffrent -mucht more modern. Ukrainian guys don't even want to hear and talk about thos armour... More or less I know only that newest armour fot T-80UD consist:
a) external cast steel turret and welded cavities in younger then 1994 tanks
b) some kind of NERA
c) eacht side (left and right) T-80UD turret consist some kind of the 3 modules place one next to the other- eacht build from tree layers propably RHA + ceramis + HHS plate. Those modules are separated by thin RHA plate
d) afther that we have ceramisc again
e) thick (80mm?) HHS plate whit hight HB
f) and cast turret backplate, or backplate formed by welded cavity.

I have no idea if this descripsion is prooper or this is disinformation.
 
LOL :D

little correction, Cast or welded are turrets, not armour :) Both tanks have welded turrets

I am talking about the composite armour stored within cavities inside the turret at the front, sides sometimes as in Western tanks ala Leo, M1.

AK has thick dense composite armour with multiple layers, making AP penetration more difficult. Can you share T-90s composite armour? ERA here is not included.

ERA is added as an additional armour layer or last ditch effort. If you are willing to listen, Turret angle is ONLY advantageous when you can see your enemy, not when enemy is 2 kms away from you, it makes a BG difference lad. Thats why they made sophisticated FCS and Night visions to kill it before it kills you, way before :)

T-90 turret amour...

t72bbazakolorki.jpg


t90seraonfrontalaspect.jpg

THIS IS THE OLD T-72B turret with much low amount of composites,old t-80 of soviet army had composites than this,the t-90 india uses has redesigned welded turret man.At least know what ur talking about.Fofanov's analysis is also of the t-72bm old turret one.
The welded armour has much more composites,infact in indian t-90 compoiste armour used is kanchan and also welded armour has 30-50% greater armour value rating.This drawing is of 1980s t-72b turret ,not current t-90.
Modern t-90 has frontal armour around 700-900mm.750 mm is around general,though armour thickness will depend somewhat on the angle and place of impact.To that ERA.
As for quantity of composite armour-


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Compare the 2 turrets ,the one on the right is chinese type turret,which despite size has very less composite armour[the black shaded area] and spread out,while t-90 turret concentrates all its composite armout in front and has much more.

As for the pic depicting vulnerable area in the underneath of hull,same applies to khalid as well,the sloping underbelly of hull is vulnerable for both.
 
notice the round below with enhance penetration and longer lod...


JOFPOBS.jpg

I don't see much enhanced penetration or long rod here,seems like the same class short stubby monoblock round.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
This is a long penetrator round,the one u depicted is similar to the short one in this pic on the extreme left ,partially visisble.
 
THIS IS THE OLD T-72B turret with much low amount of composites,old t-80 of soviet army had composites than this,the t-90 india uses has redesigned welded turret man.At least know what ur talking about.Fofanov's analysis is also of the t-72bm old turret one.
The welded armour has much more composites,infact in indian t-90 compoiste armour used is kanchan and also welded armour has 30-50% greater armour value rating.This drawing is of 1980s t-72b turret ,not current t-90.
Modern t-90 has frontal armour around 700-900mm.750 mm is around general,though armour thickness will depend somewhat on the angle and place of impact.To that ERA.
As for quantity of composite armour-


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Compare the 2 turrets ,the one on the right is chinese type turret,which despite size has very less composite armour[the black shaded area] and spread out,while t-90 turret concentrates all its composite armout in front and has much more.

As for the pic depicting vulnerable area in the underneath of hull,same applies to khalid as well,the sloping underbelly of hull is vulnerable for both.

i am not talking about chinese turret, rather al khalid turret, shown you pics of tests above, can you show me some of T-90S's?

Notice the armour coverage area in above T-90S with red and green, it is the IA version. Some modification must have taken place since then no argument in it. T-90 does not have 900 mm thickness, it never had and never will.

Please think of the consequences of such thickness on the vehicle, its movement, power to weight ratio, mobility and poor crew? Think before boasting nonsense.

I don't see much enhanced penetration or long rod here,seems like the same class short stubby monoblock round.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
This is a long penetrator round,the one u depicted is similar to the short one in this pic on the extreme left ,partially visisble.

thats because you do not know that a APFSDS round can be improved in multiple ways, such as weight reduction, improved metallurgy for penetrator etc. despite keeping similar dimensions. Polish did it with their Pronits, we did it too. Penetration can be increased as much as by 20-30%

Al khalid has multiple kevlar sheets and anti spall blankets throughout the vehicle, floor armour is 12-15 cm thick.
 
in simple words, the carousel is made in HIT with increased width that fits the tank hull (700 mm) to make it work, they needed weight reduction so electric system was seeked. This combination provides dual advantage

1. longer rounds can be loaded in a smooth hassle free way, no more limb chopping or relay switching and

2. ginner has the ease of a faster, more digitized autoloader that can be operated with ease of maintenance

It is already known that Pakistan uses indigeneous autoloader for al khalid for quite some time now,yet so far u have given no proof or link of this niaza 2 that is operational and its great armour penetration.U posted the pic of an old stubby short penetratorround and tried to pas it off as 'enhanced penetrator' round.Just compare the type of round u posted to a real enhanced penetrator round i posted.Anyone can see what u posted is no new round with much increased penetration,its mango type round.
 
It is already known that Pakistan uses indigeneous autoloader for al khalid for quite some time now,yet so far u have given no proof or link of this niaza 2 that is operational and its great armour penetration.U posted the pic of an old stubby short penetratorround and tried to pas it off as 'enhanced penetrator' round.Just compare the type of round u posted to a real enhanced penetrator round i posted.Anyone can see what u posted is no new round with much increased penetration,its mango type round.

so it comes down to this, you cant argue so deny my sources :D Good job!

official link is not reliable for you and where is your mighty AMK-340 improved link?? :P


for your info, AK has been tested with T-80ud during trials multiple times, speaks something about the vehicle. BUT, its of no use arguing with ignorant.

The armour penetration pic above, is from a 125 mm APFSDS shell fired from Type-85III :)

naiza 1... 550mm @ 5km


new-125mm-anti-tank-du-round-called-naiza-was-being-displayed-by-al-technique-the-naiza-is-said-to-have-a-penetration-of-550mm-in-rha-it-has-been-made-compatible-with-pakistani-t-80ud.jpg


Type-IIM improved with longer tungsten rod @ 620-650 mm @ 2 km


20l1o5z.jpg
 
i am not talking about chinese turret, rather al khalid turret, shown you pics of tests above, can you show me some of T-90S's?

Notice the armour coverage area in above T-90S with red and green, it is the IA version. Some modification must have taken place since then no argument in it. T-90 does not have 900 mm thickness, it never had and never will.

Please think of the consequences of such thickness on the vehicle, its movement, power to weight ratio, mobility and poor crew? Think before boasting nonsense.



thats because you do not know that a APFSDS round can be improved in multiple ways, such as weight reduction, improved metallurgy for penetrator etc. despite keeping similar dimensions. Polish did it with their Pronits, we did it too. Penetration can be increased as much as by 20-30%

Al khalid has multiple kevlar sheets and anti spall blankets throughout the vehicle, floor armour is 12-15 cm thick.


always want to see dreams and like to live in dreams.. who told you pak crews are best in the world and indian crews are poor.

just wake up and see reality.. That's all
 
regarding kevlar and anti spall protection :D

In development, the Al-Khalid was powered by an MTU-396 diesel engine with a German LSG-3000 transmission. Germany placed an embargo on these items in the mid-1990s due to their stance on development of indigenous nuclear weapons, and this led to the Pakistanis fitting the Al-Khalid with a license-produced Ukrainian KMDB 6TD-2 1200-horsepower engine and a French SESM ESM-500 fully-automatic transmission. This engine had the virtue of being smaller than the German engine, yet provided the same 1200 horsepower. The Al-Khalid can carry auxiliary fuel tanks at the rear a la Russian/Chinese tanks, though in practice they are little used except in long road marches.

Armor protection is modular, allowing for quick battle damage repairs and improvement as more advanced armor becomes available or heavier armor is desired. Frontal armor is composite and of Pakistani design, with side armor being spaced; it is of a more modern design than that on the Al-Zarrar and lighter in weight. The turret front, turret sides, glacis, and hull sides have lugs for ERA. Attention was paid to land mine damage in the form of thickened floor armor. The ammunition is carried in armored bins, and virtually the entire vehicle has thick Kevlar anti-spalling blankets.

The engine also has a thick bulkhead separating it from the crew compartment. An automatic explosion and fire suppression system is provided, and the crew has an NBC overpressure system; the engine compartment and ammunition bins have their own systems of the same sort. The Al-Khalid has a laser detection system that can automatically trigger smoke grenades to block the laser, and a radar warning system that can give the crew a chance to take evasive action.

one more :D


SfA99YX.jpg
 
i am not talking about chinese turret, rather al khalid turret, shown you pics of tests above, can you show me some of T-90S's?

T-80U and T-90 Trials 20.10.99
On tests,remember thsi was t-90 1999 original welded turret.
Indian t-90m is modified with different turret,kanchan composites,much heavier weight due to more armour.
Al khalid's armour design is based on chinese inferior armourphilosophy and uses mbt 2000 as base,that analysis makes comparison between type 99 and t-90 composite armour distribution,now if u think PLA let pak use superior al khalid while itself chossing in type-99 then thats for u to believe.Al khalid turret in all probability provides inferior protection than type-99.

Notice the armour coverage area in above T-90S with red and green, it is the IA version. Some modification must have taken place since then no argument in it. T-90 does not have 900 mm thickness, it never had and never will.

The red areas[downside of hull] are equally vulnerable in al khalid and just about any tank so its a moot point.As i said 700-900mm.In tanknet argument they generally agreed on around 750 mm without ERA in general for t-90 and 1000mm+ for abrams.
The 900 mm is only for the instance where shell hits at an angle where it has to travel maximum distance through composite armour.So yeah its not realistic.


Please think of the consequences of such thickness on the vehicle, its movement, power to weight ratio, mobility and poor crew? Think before boasting nonsense.

I am boasting nothing,the t-72B weighed around 42tonnes.The indian t-90m bhisma weighs 50 tonnes,where do u think that weight went to?Armour.Mobility is still excellent,as proven by its excellent performance in mobility trials in malaysian jungles where it outperformed all competitors.
As for power to weight ratio indian t-90 has upgraded engines for better PW ratio than base t-90.Also french electronics and as for crew comfort it has air conditioner.So we do think about our poor crew.


thats because you do not know that a APFSDS round can be improved in multiple ways, such as weight reduction, improved metallurgy for penetrator etc. despite keeping similar dimensions. Polish did it with their Pronits, we did it too. Penetration can be increased as much as by 20-30%

Al khalid has multiple kevlar sheets and anti spall blankets throughout the vehicle, floor armour is 12-15 cm thick.

And what u think other modern MBts don't have kevlar shets and anti spall layers.Plz.
As for round,it is still a short stubby monoblock round that u posted and that type of round is not a long rod penetartor with 'enhanced protection' no matter how much u want to sell it.
 
And what u think other modern MBts don't have kevlar shets and anti spall layers.Plz.
As for round,it is still a short stubby monoblock round that u posted and that type of round is not a long rod penetartor with 'enhanced protection' no matter how much u want to sell it.

just show me the revolutionary AMK340 improved and T-90S turret armour test pics thats it :D


Do you even know what is called a long rod penetrator??

Every round that has an APFSDS-T is classified as a long rod, its only a matter of what its maker calls it. For Russians, Mango and Svinets and Lekalo are long rods, for Yanks, 823-A2 and 3 are long rods and for Chinese, Type-IIs are long rods.

Gosh !
 
regarding kevlar and anti spall protection :D



one more :D


SfA99YX.jpg

You own pic says clearly max chinese penetrators have rod length around 560-580 mm.Also i doubt PA would have access to latest chinese round might even if they do,thats nothing awe inspiring.The rest of the pic states how lengthy projectiles can be fitted,not current length of operational APFSDS rounds.

Now onto armoured bins,even arjun/t-90 has that.Armoured bins,while a limited development on the previous horrible situation with soviet and chiense style mbts where ammo used to lie on the floor are not the same as seperate ammo compartment which abrams has.Even leopard doesn't have totally seperate ammo compartment like abrams.
 
You own pic says clearly max chinese penetrators have rod length around 560-580 mm.Also i doubt PA would have access to latest chinese round might even if they do,thats nothing awe inspiring.The rest of the pic states how lengthy projectiles can be fitted,not current length of operational APFSDS rounds.

Now onto armoured bins,even arjun/t-90 has that.Armoured bins,while a limited development on the previous horrible situation with soviet and chiense style mbts where ammo used to lie on the floor are not the same as seperate ammo compartment which abrams has.Even leopard doesn't have totally seperate ammo compartment like abrams.

oh man you are so..... i will get back to you soon

on a side note: 580 mm rod (length of rod alone) can penetrate 600-630 mm armour easily if traveling at 1700 m/s or more.

I didnt say anything about armour bins though they are improved in most mbts incuding Russkies. Ammo is less likely to catch fire than it used to before. Only M-1 has a truely seperate ammo compartment. Rest has a mix of both.

Agreed.

Still waiting for those pics :D
 
just show me the revolutionary AMK340 improved and T-90S turret armour test pics thats it :D


Do you even know what is called a long rod penetrator??

Every round that has an APFSDS-T is classified as a long rod, its only a matter of what its maker calls it. For Russians, Mango and Svinets and Lekalo are long rods, for Yanks, 823-A2 and 3 are long rods and for Chinese, Type-IIs are long rods.

Gosh !

Yes different countries have different standards i was talking along western standards for long rod.
As for ur upgraded niaza 2 that is operational vs my new DRDO round,it has come down to your word vs mine.U posted fake pic of short stubby upgraded 'enhanced pentrator' as supposed.Also there was no statement on its armour penetration or more importantly on whether its operational.
T-80U and T-90 Trials 20.10.99
Here results of trials of t-90s armour.Scroll down page,t-90 pic shows areas where it was hit but not penetrated.Stood up against everything from kornet to rpg-29 pretty well.And this wasn't even the turret we use in bhisma.
As for indian tests on basis of which we chose t-90.
'' Semi-active baffle plates and ceramic layers with high tensile proprieties are employed in T-90 base Armour. Even more advanced Armour composition was implemented in the welded turrets of domestic T-90 and on export T-90 Bhishma for India. In several tests conducted in front of Indian delegation using latest foreign ammunitions (APFSDS) of the M829A2/KEW-A2 type conducted from 250 meters against T-90S devoid of the normal built-in explosive reactive armor (ERA) Kontakt-5 (K-5) resulted in the turret being completely impenetrable. This absolute resiliency to enemy fire resulted at the end, as one of the most crucial selling point for T-90 Bhishma MBT to India''
 
Back
Top Bottom