Man, you've forgot one important detail - ERA is being mounted on track cover panels, not on the hull itself. Here are ~30cm between ERA blocks and hull.
i remember the Soviet also experimented with ERA blocks on BMP - it did not go well for the BMP's armour for the exact reason stated in the video so that's how we got the precedent for NOT putting ERA on BMP or IFV edit: perhaps 1:52 was the test result
Yep yep, excerpt from "evolution of era for light-armoured fighting vehicles" 'As long ago as in 1988 Russia made first attempts to fit LAV with ERA kits (that had been by that time widely used for tank protection).Fig. 1 show the first ERA kits “Contact” with 4S20 ERA elements on Cobra-S (upgraded BMP-1) IFV. However, live tests of those kits revealed their complete non-applicability to LAV. When an ERA box and a grenade detonated together, with the total amount of explosives about 1.1-1.2kg, the thin main armor of the vehicle was simply broken through that disabled the vehicle (Fig. 2)'
@@unknowncommenter6698 Only tiny extra 20mm? On a plate that have whole 13mm? And what about the fact that this ERA bricks do not like to go off alone -> chain detonations on a flat surface like in case of the armored plates used in BMP was a common problem...
@@Bialy_1 well yeah, Kaktus (mostly meant for BMP-3) had additional 20mm plate between ERA and hull. For BMP-1 or 2 you'd have to add something else, like that rubber skirt on T-72s
Кактус можно взрывать на небронированных машинах, они сконструированы так, что энергия их взрыва имеет направленный характер, и соседние блоки так же остаются целыми.
Rule of thumb - Remember kids, if it's less then 50mm RHA, then it's NOT shell resistant armor. Context: 50mm is an easy to remember ballpark for antitank rifles, mines, mortar shells, 40mm HEDP, side armor of WWII medium tanks and I guess lowest point at which I'd risk putting simple ERA.
@@Bialy_1 I do. That's why Panther II was developed and why it's development stopped after germans introduced side skirts. Because PTRS is a thing. Same PTRS is also a reason why Pz.IV ended with increased to 50mm side armor and shields covering the turret all the way around, BUT at the same time kept only 50mm frontal armor on the turret despite increasing frontal hull armor to 80mm - because it was running out of weight reserve and because PTRS was a far more everpresent threat. How a pole doesn't know about existence of PTRS is a mystery to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Many light armored vehicles have specifically designed ERA and the Russians have even designed some (though I don’t think it’s in use due to its costs). The issue here is that K1 and K5 were never intended to be put on light skinned vehicles with K1 having a minimum safe plate thickness of I believe 30mm according to Soviet testing.
It won’t work for another reason. ERA does not completely stop projectiles, it degrades penetrative performance and the rest is relied upon the base armor to stop it. BMPs and light vehicles do not have sufficient base armor so they wouldn’t work at all.
This is why on some light skinned vehicles like the Puma and BMP3 you can see giant ERA blocks, the blocks are used to space the ERA away from the armor.
because the puma isnt light skinned, its relatively well armored, and the BMP-3 has special ERA developed for it, along with backing plates the physically space the ERA away from the hull to prevent spalling into the crew compartment
The BMP 3 / BMP 3M literally has an upgrade package that adds some extra armor to make ERA usable, at least it seems I think they also used lower power ERA. But the BMP 3 base armor is thicker than the BMP-1/2 though.
thatd be expensive and impractical as the bmp's weight will be increased significantly, and the enemy shell would most likely still go through because as you probably know, era only slows the projectile or a heat jet. adding applique armor would not only be cheaper but also more practical
@@hoshyrodeveloping something as en experiment or prototype doesn't mean it will get adopted, or even if it does, get implemented across an entire vehicle fleet.
composite armor is heavy and not very modular. since the most common threat armored vehicles face nowadays are chemical penetrators, it makes sense to prioritize era over thicker armor. armor-to-armor engagements are also extremely rare.
@lilium-orchid Chemical? Monroe/MS effect projectiles don't literally melt through armor or anything if that's what you're saying. It's ultimately just a kinetic projectile moving at an insane velocity.
"The protection was installed on a special substrate (thin steel and rubber), which ensures the detonation of the block at some distance from the armor. In the side projection, where the armor is much thinner, dynamic protection is installed on screens made of several layers, which are placed at a considerable distance from the armor." 2016.
@@Idkngga Right, because the illiterate that did this modification under some significant influence of vodka knows what he is doing?😅 The Russians stole the propellant from these bricks -> because it is a very expensive explosive... -> You can buy a lot of vodka with it...
@@unskilled822 without, being hit by a small copper jet is less likely than being hit by half a meter² large piece of steel with a bunch of shrapnel following it.
I wonder if an AK or even shrapnel from artillery can set these off, would be a massive oversight if so... Also- is Kontact really capable of saving an BMP from anything? It's armor is already only effective against small arms fire in the best of circumstances- I cant imagine kontact even if it didnt destroy the armor its slapped on- protecting it from any actual anti tank weaponry...
ERA blocks can only be set off by a high-speed concentrated metal jet, or in newer versions, a high-speed tungsten arrow but yea, kontakt ERA ain't be helping much with anything beyond the capability of the BMP's armour
With the KontaKt 1 blocks. All that is required is a Spaced plate to be ablative for the mounting of the blocks when they detonate. That way the main hull isn’t breached. You can clearly see this on even the Thumbnail image
I think the ERA in that photo has an air gap built in because it was designed specifically for use on thinly-armored IFVs. The simulation was testing Kontakt 1 which was designed for use on much more heavily-armored vehicles and thus mounts directly to the surface of the armor.
That's the ERA developed specifically for light skinned vehicles that they don't use. Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless. To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle. The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's why they are so thick.
Even if it didn't blow up the vehicle it would still probably fail given how thin the hull is. Even using extremely generous estimates for reductions in penetration basically anything would still penetrate the barely bulletproof hull plating of the BMP right through the ERA anyway. If we wanted to be extremely and unrealistically generous might be possible that at least some of these ERA bricks are inert and basically being used as readily available applique armor. Given that BMPs are vulnerable to even possibly stuff like AP battle rifle ammo at flat angles and short ranges the extra bit of steel built into the bricks could actually be useful.
figured that something like this would happen, i wonder what would happen if the same era are put on top of the upper front plate of an abrams as ive seen ukrainian abrams with that configuration
I believe Abrams has atleast 38mm of HHA steel making up its upper clacis. T72BV roof armor is 40mm of RHA fitted with K1 blocks, so Abrams can probably take it as well. 40mm RHA is pretty much the minimum backing required for ERA. Atleast for K1 and comparable armor packages.
During Turkish testing of Leopard 2A4 modernizations they were using Kontakt-1 like ERA. To prevent the ERA from damaging the vehicle they used back plates.
Maybe they mounted the blocks to a separate plate then welded that onto the hull rather than directly attaching the blocks to the vehicle skin? Or perhaps they figure that having the ERA explode will do less damage than if the projectile that detonated it had struck the armor without interruption and they hope that the spall liner will catch the back-blast? Not that either of those options would actually improve the surviveability of the vehicle, but maybe that's the thought process behind the practice? This seems like a pretty big oversight, even for Russia. I'm sure some crews have done it without any consideration, but if it's being added at the factory, I would hope that they've developed and deployed some system to mitigate this issue and it just isn't obvious from pictures of the vehicles in question. Either way, I wonder how effective this is from a design perspective as well. The point of ERA is to increase armor effectiveness without substantial weight increase, but as far as I know, it doesn't fully stop any of the rounds it is designed to counter, it just disrupts the incoming penetrator (be that a HEAT jet or an APFSDS rod) so that the armor can absorb the impact over a larger area and thus be less likely to fail. On a lighter vehicle I feel like even if the ERA itself isn't a threat to said vehicle, its detonation probably wouldn't disrupt any incoming projectile enough to allow the light vehicle's skin to resist the impact anyways.
Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless. To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle. The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:44 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°.
At 1:49 you can see on that BMP3 that there is a spacing between the ERA and the vehicle hull armour, both on the sides and front. BMP3 also has a fuel tank in the front as 'armour' so try modelling all of that...
That's the ERA developed specifically for light skinned vehicles that they don't use. Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless. To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle. The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's wht they are so thick.
This is a special armor kit specifically developed for IFVs and its not in service, thats why K1 and K5 are used on IFVs, since they dont have appropriate ERA.
For the sides and fore, they probably do have some BMPs with extra side and front plates just so it can absorb the impact of the ERA (Literally the image at 1:40)
Actually would be interesting to see comparison on damage with K-1 block in the way and without when BMP is hit by an RPG7 (something K-1 should almost completely negate)
@@maxwolf1982 es muy impredecible la velocidad a la que vuelan los fragmentos de artilleria pues depende del proyectil asi como lo que impacta, no estoy seguro de si estos pueden detonar los bloques de k1 pero es muy seguro que atraviesan la armadura de un bmp, he escuchado que los fragmentos a veces alcanzan una velocidad aterradora pero no lo he experimentado en carne y hueso como para decirlo con certeza desde la experiencia
@@unskilled822 Kontakt-1 like to chain-detonate...so only complete ignorant would say that he would prefer to be inside BMP-1 that is covered with Kontakt-1 on a battlefield... The only logical reason for me to use it is the fact that Russian soldiers were stealing RDX material from them and many got some polimer/ruber insert instead of RDX -> so the bricks then works more like cheap spaced armor not as ERA...
@@Bialy_1 if the entire set of bricks chain detonated when struck just once it would be useless these things need certain kinetic energy to detonate as they dont react to heat like most explosives, this thing has no armor and most rpg or tank rounds will destroy it in one-shot anyways... bmp is a thing of the past when talking about modern warfare but it fills the role as transport i guess
I think that they use ERA without explosives inside just for a little bit of more armor on BMP's and other lightly armored vehicles, i think they even would think of that putting explosives on lightly armored stuff is a bad idea.
What if make 5 -10 cm gap between armor and ERA? Why 13 mm? I thought it has 18 mm. What if make rubber band between ? Some crews use it from coal mines. What if add 300 grams of RDX from shaped charge? Does it affects and can the computer handle it? just questions, no offence
What protection did you put on our BMP? I used those funny shaped hesh shells that will turn the crew into tushonka whenever something hits it... wait was that the purpose?
They are beyond desperate at this point. Willing to try literally anything in hopes of somehow pulling a magic rabbit out of this topless hat. Kinda reminds me of a certain Reich about 80 years ago, only _that_ empire at least had actual geniuses cooking some legitimately cool stuff.
Chances are that if the projectile hiting the BMP is powerful enough to provoke the explosion of the ERA, the original armor of the BMP wouldn't have stopped it either. The question is what would have done the most damage anyway, the ERA's explosion provoking the fragmentation of the armor underneath or the projectile itself? But clearly, putting ERA on a very light armored vehicle is bad idea anyway.
You don't know if the ERA is tuned down or modified. For example the explosive between the 2 plates might be thinner or the whole sandwich might be NERA and not ERA. Do we have pictures of the ERA opening holes on BMPs in the battlefield? The big factory blocks are most likely designed for the use on the bmp.
Question is will the era still stop the heat charger coming in? And if so is the armor failure more lethal than said charge? Is this an acceptable failure?
the ERA here is acting like a small HESH warhead (0,26kg of RDX) on a 13mm thick steel plate, it would be doing more harm than good breaching the armour and sending all the spalling inside the cabin with a single metal jet from a HEAT warhead, perhaps only an unlucky grunt inside would be hit but the rest would be spared, so i suppose adding the ERA block would be a straight downgrade
ERA plates placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, are near to useless. To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle. The specifically developed lateral ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's why they are so thick.
Simulation Bros might just not be Engineer Bros if they think their colleagues abroad haven't figured this out. Either that or they're Delusional Bros.
I wonder if it would work you fitted it in a fence sort of configuration on the front? Also, I love the vids, but could you tone down the drama of the music and the AI voice intro please? A witness plate would also be really nice.
The images you've shown literally have spots where the ERA would be fine detonating on, they're literally almost 3-4x thicker than the 13mm plate It's the UFP, and hull roof where you shouldn't mount it on, and you even fucked up that there's a bit of spacing away from the plate to essentially prevent it from being hesh Yes, there's bmp's that are fucking up and putting it where it shouldn't, but the first images you've shown is where they'd be fine
How much does it take to set off ERA anyway? I'd assume any impact big enough to set it off would be so big the armor plates behind would not be able to do their part of the job anyway. But since it's an official factory upgrade I must assume they reinforced the inside to make it resist the blast or at least catch the spall.
@@matthelord7695 APFSDS also set it off, the question is how small can it go. Will a 7.62 set it off? Surely not, but where is the cutoff and will the armor behind have any chance against such impact?
@@-ragingpotato-937 no since ERA use plastic explosives you need some extrem concentrated pressure and a rifle round wont be enough, .50 cal maybe or a artillery fragment might work. And no the armour wont stop against anything that isnt a rifle round
i mean if you get hit by autocannons you're f$%& and every one of those blocks will detonate like machinegun fire, but i'd prefer to get hit by a tank in one of these cuz an ordinary BMP will have no chance against tank projectile/atgm/rpg
ERA on an IFV is Always a Stuipid Idea. Usually this Tanks should fight together with Infanterie. Putting Explosives right Next to them isn't such a great Idea.
yeah just listen to what he says... he said it was surprising there is a factory made bmp with k1 because they have era made specifically for light skin vehicles...
You westerners have no idea this is a secret upgrade to add a self destruct ability to glorious BMPs...
probably just fake ERA filled with rubber lol
@@user-fe7bo5mm1o or shovels
12 years old but already knows everything about wars
Beste wat ze deden😂
@@user-fe7bo5mm1o it's probably better if it was fake ERA in this case specifically
Can we have HESH?
"We have HESH on enemy."
HESH on enemy:
The British have found a HESH compe- oh wait he blew himself up
Man, you've forgot one important detail - ERA is being mounted on track cover panels, not on the hull itself. Here are ~30cm between ERA blocks and hull.
The the lower plate this is mounted on the upper sponsons
They did test and create ERA for light tanks called 4S24 karkas. Though they're rarely see as they're expensive to make.
Karkas ? I've never seen that name where did you find it ?
@@Sheldon_OSINTmaybe Cactus?
@@IvanBaturaChannel kaktus is a misnomer, it's actually called karkas, idk how kaktus got out there
@@IvanBaturaChannel он только на Объекте 640 был
@@gunko_vlad а ДЗ на БМП-3 по твоему что?
i remember the Soviet also experimented with ERA blocks on BMP - it did not go well for the BMP's armour for the exact reason stated in the video
so that's how we got the precedent for NOT putting ERA on BMP or IFV
edit: perhaps 1:52 was the test result
Yep yep, excerpt from "evolution of era for light-armoured fighting vehicles"
'As long ago as in 1988 Russia made first attempts to fit LAV with ERA kits (that had been by that time widely used for tank protection).Fig. 1 show the first ERA kits “Contact” with 4S20 ERA elements on Cobra-S (upgraded BMP-1) IFV. However, live tests of those kits revealed their complete non-applicability to LAV. When an ERA box and a grenade detonated together, with the total amount of explosives about 1.1-1.2kg, the
thin main armor of the vehicle was simply broken through that disabled the vehicle (Fig. 2)'
Actually, they invented Kaktus ERA, IIRC. Also about 20mm of additional plating behind K1 is enough to not get devastated by it
@@unknowncommenter6698 Only tiny extra 20mm? On a plate that have whole 13mm?
And what about the fact that this ERA bricks do not like to go off alone -> chain detonations on a flat surface like in case of the armored plates used in BMP was a common problem...
@@Bialy_1 well yeah, Kaktus (mostly meant for BMP-3) had additional 20mm plate between ERA and hull. For BMP-1 or 2 you'd have to add something else, like that rubber skirt on T-72s
Кактус можно взрывать на небронированных машинах, они сконструированы так, что энергия их взрыва имеет направленный характер, и соседние блоки так же остаются целыми.
from what I remember, the BMP-2 has a version with additional steel armor and the ERA cubes were mounted on it, not on the hull.
Yup, the bmp-2D
Rule of thumb - Remember kids, if it's less then 50mm RHA, then it's NOT shell resistant armor.
Context: 50mm is an easy to remember ballpark for antitank rifles, mines, mortar shells, 40mm HEDP, side armor of WWII medium tanks and I guess lowest point at which I'd risk putting simple ERA.
4S20 and 4S22 elements are on the 40 mm roof of the T-64, 72, 80, 90
The fact that you do not know that in WW2 40-45mm armored plates were used in medium tanks says a loot...
@@belgianfried Nope they are not flat and not in the thinnest places + there is no point to use them on the flat part of the "roof".
@@Bialy_1 I do. That's why Panther II was developed and why it's development stopped after germans introduced side skirts. Because PTRS is a thing. Same PTRS is also a reason why Pz.IV ended with increased to 50mm side armor and shields covering the turret all the way around, BUT at the same time kept only 50mm frontal armor on the turret despite increasing frontal hull armor to 80mm - because it was running out of weight reserve and because PTRS was a far more everpresent threat.
How a pole doesn't know about existence of PTRS is a mystery to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@Bialy_1 Did I mention flat or in the thinnest places? I just mentioned they were in fact used. And yes, this is confirmed, they are used there.
significant emotional event
Conclusion: don't put any ERA, except for 4S24, on any armored vehicle other than MBT.
Or one with an MBT chasis, like Namer
Object 781/782? @@jevinliu4658
And bradley and bmp3 basically you shouldnt put era on anything that isnt designed to survive the blast
based profile picture and name ✊
Many light armored vehicles have specifically designed ERA and the Russians have even designed some (though I don’t think it’s in use due to its costs). The issue here is that K1 and K5 were never intended to be put on light skinned vehicles with K1 having a minimum safe plate thickness of I believe 30mm according to Soviet testing.
It won’t work for another reason. ERA does not completely stop projectiles, it degrades penetrative performance and the rest is relied upon the base armor to stop it. BMPs and light vehicles do not have sufficient base armor so they wouldn’t work at all.
This is why on some light skinned vehicles like the Puma and BMP3 you can see giant ERA blocks, the blocks are used to space the ERA away from the armor.
because the puma isnt light skinned, its relatively well armored, and the BMP-3 has special ERA developed for it, along with backing plates the physically space the ERA away from the hull to prevent spalling into the crew compartment
The BMP 3 / BMP 3M literally has an upgrade package that adds some extra armor to make ERA usable, at least it seems I think they also used lower power ERA. But the BMP 3 base armor is thicker than the BMP-1/2 though.
Not to play the devil's advocate, but I'm fairly certain BMPs with K-1 have add-on backing plates specifically to not have this happen
thatd be expensive and impractical as the bmp's weight will be increased significantly, and the enemy shell would most likely still go through because as you probably know, era only slows the projectile or a heat jet. adding applique armor would not only be cheaper but also more practical
@@democracy_enjoyer BMP-2 already has existing applique armour kits... It has for decades
@@hoshyro and they arent using it
@@hoshyrodeveloping something as en experiment or prototype doesn't mean it will get adopted, or even if it does, get implemented across an entire vehicle fleet.
These Kontakt 1 blocks are not to save the crew. It's to prevent catastrophic cook-offs. So you replace the people and drive the damaged vehicle on.
There was ERA made specifically for BMPs, but it wasn't used much because it's not cost effective
When the Polish army wanted to modernize BMP-1s it came to: "It's not cost-effective to fill the fuel tank". 😆
unless bmp had added thick armor plate under era, why would you even put it on this thing ?
Makes them feel safer
Emotional support ERA, and I am not even kidding.
composite armor is heavy and not very modular. since the most common threat armored vehicles face nowadays are chemical penetrators, it makes sense to prioritize era over thicker armor.
armor-to-armor engagements are also extremely rare.
@lilium-orchid
Chemical?
Monroe/MS effect projectiles don't literally melt through armor or anything if that's what you're saying. It's ultimately just a kinetic projectile moving at an insane velocity.
@@lilium-orchid Even the most advanced ERA doesn't negate shaped charges by itself, it's a protection multiplier so to speak.
"The protection was installed on a special substrate (thin steel and rubber), which ensures the detonation of the block at some distance from the armor. In the side projection, where the armor is much thinner, dynamic protection is installed on screens made of several layers, which are placed at a considerable distance from the armor."
2016.
It denies the enemy the XP for killing you. If they set off explosives you yourself set, it counts as a suicide.
They've even put ERA blocks on trucks😂
Perhaps it's to shorten their suffering.
Self liking smartie somewhere in Britain already knows everything about this war
you get shot at by an rpg, choose one:
bmp with k1
bmp without k1
@@Idkngga Right, because the illiterate that did this modification under some significant influence of vodka knows what he is doing?😅
The Russians stole the propellant from these bricks -> because it is a very expensive explosive... -> You can buy a lot of vodka with it...
@@unskilled822 without, being hit by a small copper jet is less likely than being hit by half a meter² large piece of steel with a bunch of shrapnel following it.
@@democracy_enjoyerI mean both will explode into your face
I wonder if an AK or even shrapnel from artillery can set these off, would be a massive oversight if so...
Also- is Kontact really capable of saving an BMP from anything? It's armor is already only effective against small arms fire in the best of circumstances- I cant imagine kontact even if it didnt destroy the armor its slapped on- protecting it from any actual anti tank weaponry...
@@WelcomeToDERPLAND K1 only explodes from something like an RPG or APFSDS
@@WelcomeToDERPLAND But yea, the K1 ain't doing shit against an anti tank missile in this circumstance
"Emotional support armor"
ERA blocks can only be set off by a high-speed concentrated metal jet, or in newer versions, a high-speed tungsten arrow
but yea, kontakt ERA ain't be helping much with anything beyond the capability of the BMP's armour
It might work against shaped charge jets before killing the crew itself.
With the KontaKt 1 blocks. All that is required is a Spaced plate to be ablative for the mounting of the blocks when they detonate.
That way the main hull isn’t breached.
You can clearly see this on even the Thumbnail image
Такие ящики ставят даже на автомобиль Тигр, но там нет взрывчатки, а внутри комбинированая бронезащита из металла или резины.
ставят от того что ума нет и не знают как работает броня.
Ive seen BMP with Kaktus ERA,maybe this ERA can provide better protection.Air gap can also provide protection
the vehicle at 1:40 has era with an air gap between the armor and the ERA. this is unlike your tests which have the era directly up against the armor.
that's why they said it was ERA specifically for light skin vehicles
I think the ERA in that photo has an air gap built in because it was designed specifically for use on thinly-armored IFVs. The simulation was testing Kontakt 1 which was designed for use on much more heavily-armored vehicles and thus mounts directly to the surface of the armor.
That's the ERA developed specifically for light skinned vehicles that they don't use.
Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless.
To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle.
The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's why they are so thick.
ERA situation is crazy
Even if it didn't blow up the vehicle it would still probably fail given how thin the hull is. Even using extremely generous estimates for reductions in penetration basically anything would still penetrate the barely bulletproof hull plating of the BMP right through the ERA anyway.
If we wanted to be extremely and unrealistically generous might be possible that at least some of these ERA bricks are inert and basically being used as readily available applique armor. Given that BMPs are vulnerable to even possibly stuff like AP battle rifle ammo at flat angles and short ranges the extra bit of steel built into the bricks could actually be useful.
figured that something like this would happen, i wonder what would happen if the same era are put on top of the upper front plate of an abrams as ive seen ukrainian abrams with that configuration
The Abrams has, I think, 60mm of armor steel there, so probably nothing would happen.
I believe Abrams has atleast 38mm of HHA steel making up its upper clacis. T72BV roof armor is 40mm of RHA fitted with K1 blocks, so Abrams can probably take it as well. 40mm RHA is pretty much the minimum backing required for ERA. Atleast for K1 and comparable armor packages.
During Turkish testing of Leopard 2A4 modernizations they were using Kontakt-1 like ERA. To prevent the ERA from damaging the vehicle they used back plates.
Maybe they mounted the blocks to a separate plate then welded that onto the hull rather than directly attaching the blocks to the vehicle skin? Or perhaps they figure that having the ERA explode will do less damage than if the projectile that detonated it had struck the armor without interruption and they hope that the spall liner will catch the back-blast? Not that either of those options would actually improve the surviveability of the vehicle, but maybe that's the thought process behind the practice?
This seems like a pretty big oversight, even for Russia. I'm sure some crews have done it without any consideration, but if it's being added at the factory, I would hope that they've developed and deployed some system to mitigate this issue and it just isn't obvious from pictures of the vehicles in question. Either way, I wonder how effective this is from a design perspective as well. The point of ERA is to increase armor effectiveness without substantial weight increase, but as far as I know, it doesn't fully stop any of the rounds it is designed to counter, it just disrupts the incoming penetrator (be that a HEAT jet or an APFSDS rod) so that the armor can absorb the impact over a larger area and thus be less likely to fail. On a lighter vehicle I feel like even if the ERA itself isn't a threat to said vehicle, its detonation probably wouldn't disrupt any incoming projectile enough to allow the light vehicle's skin to resist the impact anyways.
Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless.
To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle.
The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:44 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°.
Self pwned
I suspect the blocks are empty / filled with non-explosive filler, serving as an extra layer of armor + a morale boost.
At 1:49 you can see on that BMP3 that there is a spacing between the ERA and the vehicle hull armour, both on the sides and front. BMP3 also has a fuel tank in the front as 'armour' so try modelling all of that...
That's the ERA developed specifically for light skinned vehicles that they don't use.
Also. ERA placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, is near to useless.
To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle.
The specifically developed ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's wht they are so thick.
At 1:45 we can see that ERA was mounted not upon the hull, but rather it's strapped to the spaced armour
This is a special armor kit specifically developed for IFVs and its not in service, thats why K1 and K5 are used on IFVs, since they dont have appropriate ERA.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
For the sides and fore, they probably do have some BMPs with extra side and front plates just so it can absorb the impact of the ERA
(Literally the image at 1:40)
Actually would be interesting to see comparison on damage with K-1 block in the way and without when BMP is hit by an RPG7 (something K-1 should almost completely negate)
В большинстве случаев на БМП в коробках от "Контакт 1" находит толстая резина для усиления защиты от осколков.
uno preferiria estar dentro de un bmp con contacto-1 a la hora de recibir un RPG, que dentro de un bmp sin ello... solo digo...
@@unskilled822 поражение осколками от артиллерийского огня происходит гораздо чаще чем РПГ
@@maxwolf1982 es muy impredecible la velocidad a la que vuelan los fragmentos de artilleria pues depende del proyectil asi como lo que impacta, no estoy seguro de si estos pueden detonar los bloques de k1 pero es muy seguro que atraviesan la armadura de un bmp, he escuchado que los fragmentos a veces alcanzan una velocidad aterradora pero no lo he experimentado en carne y hueso como para decirlo con certeza desde la experiencia
@@unskilled822 Kontakt-1 like to chain-detonate...so only complete ignorant would say that he would prefer to be inside BMP-1 that is covered with Kontakt-1 on a battlefield...
The only logical reason for me to use it is the fact that Russian soldiers were stealing RDX material from them and many got some polimer/ruber insert instead of RDX -> so the bricks then works more like cheap spaced armor not as ERA...
@@Bialy_1 if the entire set of bricks chain detonated when struck just once it would be useless these things need certain kinetic energy to detonate as they dont react to heat like most explosives, this thing has no armor and most rpg or tank rounds will destroy it in one-shot anyways... bmp is a thing of the past when talking about modern warfare but it fills the role as transport i guess
Обычно на БМП еще ставят дополнительные экраны, для того, что-бы такого не случалось.
can you do the same sim but with 10,20,30 and 40mm of wood between the ERA and armor?
I think this is the one time where the crew would be happy that their ERA was actually just cardboard or rubber
They’re could make a modification with spaced armor to hold the blast and ERA on it
There should also be linings or gaps between the ERA and the armor, As at 1:45.
There’s ERA specifically designed for lightly armored vehicles, but it’s rather rare
I think that they use ERA without explosives inside just for a little bit of more armor on BMP's and other lightly armored vehicles, i think they even would think of that putting explosives on lightly armored stuff is a bad idea.
really nice idea to simulate!
What if make 5 -10 cm gap between armor and ERA?
Why 13 mm? I thought it has 18 mm.
What if make rubber band between ? Some crews use it from coal mines.
What if add 300 grams of RDX from shaped charge? Does it affects and can the computer handle it?
just questions, no offence
What protection did you put on our BMP?
I used those funny shaped hesh shells that will turn the crew into tushonka whenever something hits it... wait was that the purpose?
They are beyond desperate at this point. Willing to try literally anything in hopes of somehow pulling a magic rabbit out of this topless hat. Kinda reminds me of a certain Reich about 80 years ago, only _that_ empire at least had actual geniuses cooking some legitimately cool stuff.
Can you test it on the bmp-2D the one with added armor?
Chances are that if the projectile hiting the BMP is powerful enough to provoke the explosion of the ERA, the original armor of the BMP wouldn't have stopped it either. The question is what would have done the most damage anyway, the ERA's explosion provoking the fragmentation of the armor underneath or the projectile itself? But clearly, putting ERA on a very light armored vehicle is bad idea anyway.
What if i were to place said ERA on spaced armor? Would that work like some sort of gill armor?
Tell that to the poor Russian Scooby Doo van drivers... who have been getting ERA put on them🤣
I guess the question for them was: What is worse? The damage caused by the ERA, or the damage caused by enemy Anti Tank weapons.
Nowadays, they put ERA on a bicycle
Seeing the kind of body armor the troops get, I bet those ERA blocks are just full of sand or something
that reactive armor show in bmp3 was specially made for it and it can defeat tandem warhead without dmg the tank.
You don't know if the ERA is tuned down or modified. For example the explosive between the 2 plates might be thinner or the whole sandwich might be NERA and not ERA.
Do we have pictures of the ERA opening holes on BMPs in the battlefield?
The big factory blocks are most likely designed for the use on the bmp.
Cover the ERA with ERA
Bet it will work just fine 👌
Who said they were actually functional eras?
No one да 😂
Bro, they add k-1 on cars like UAZ-452. Not officially, but soldiers themselves
What if simulate 4c24 era charges, which have 2 times less explosives?
Question is will the era still stop the heat charger coming in? And if so is the armor failure more lethal than said charge? Is this an acceptable failure?
Yeah fuck no era will only make the jet small enough for the rest like 80mm to stop it but this will do nothing
the ERA here is acting like a small HESH warhead (0,26kg of RDX) on a 13mm thick steel plate, it would be doing more harm than good breaching the armour and sending all the spalling inside the cabin
with a single metal jet from a HEAT warhead, perhaps only an unlucky grunt inside would be hit but the rest would be spared, so i suppose adding the ERA block would be a straight downgrade
@@tranquoccuong890-its-orge not hesh but like straight up HE
No, this is literally worse than getting hit by a HEAT jet.
ERA plates placed vertically on the side of the vehicles, as you see in the first pictures, are near to useless.
To disrupt the HEAT jet, the explosion of the ERA must hit it at an angle.
The specifically developed lateral ERA blocks you see at 1:49 infact contain multiple explosive plates placed at 45°. That's why they are so thick.
It's not like ERA gonna stop RPG going at it
"No armor best armor."
Simulation Bros might just not be Engineer Bros if they think their colleagues abroad haven't figured this out. Either that or they're Delusional Bros.
It costs less to install 70 mm composite screen anywhere💀
Try it where it is spaced 1 cm and 10 cm from the armour
Don't worry the explosives have been replaced with cheese.
enginner:*6 assist*
What if they were on top of a Larger mild steel backing plate?
Cant blow me up if i blow myself up first, damnit!
The "previous test" was in black and white lmao
Yeah?
WHAT IS MORE SURVIVABLE WITH IT OR WITH OUT IT
I mean it looks cool… I still wouldn’t be paid enough to get in one or ride on top of it.
And this is just the explosion of ERA, without energy from projectile which makes it detonate.
Just like the T-72, the russains again became the ammo
I wonder if it would work you fitted it in a fence sort of configuration on the front?
Also, I love the vids, but could you tone down the drama of the music and the AI voice intro please? A witness plate would also be really nice.
How about add the Addon Armors? BMP have that, Theres no way they going to put K1/K5 without Addon Armor.
What would the minimum thickness need to be for this to work realistically?
40mm is enough to support K-1 as seen on T-72 turret roof.
I mean, I'd prefer that over an atgm, but yeah..
The light era doesnt actualy do that
But its too expensive anyways
The images you've shown literally have spots where the ERA would be fine detonating on, they're literally almost 3-4x thicker than the 13mm plate
It's the UFP, and hull roof where you shouldn't mount it on, and you even fucked up that there's a bit of spacing away from the plate to essentially prevent it from being hesh
Yes, there's bmp's that are fucking up and putting it where it shouldn't, but the first images you've shown is where they'd be fine
Smartest Russians.
1:54 What part of bmp-1 is that ?
cage armor would be more effective than this. They could have put ERA onto of the cages.
I'm pretty sure they don't put the era directly on the armor
How much does it take to set off ERA anyway? I'd assume any impact big enough to set it off would be so big the armor plates behind would not be able to do their part of the job anyway. But since it's an official factory upgrade I must assume they reinforced the inside to make it resist the blast or at least catch the spall.
You need pressure such as a concentrated heat jet
@@matthelord7695 APFSDS also set it off, the question is how small can it go. Will a 7.62 set it off? Surely not, but where is the cutoff and will the armor behind have any chance against such impact?
@@-ragingpotato-937 no since ERA use plastic explosives you need some extrem concentrated pressure and a rifle round wont be enough, .50 cal maybe or a artillery fragment might work. And no the armour wont stop against anything that isnt a rifle round
Maybe they just use half of explosion?
i mean if you get hit by autocannons you're f$%& and every one of those blocks will detonate like machinegun fire, but i'd prefer to get hit by a tank in one of these cuz an ordinary BMP will have no chance against tank projectile/atgm/rpg
those blocks are empty
Bro is doing explode my pc any% speedrun with these simulations
The factory one is a different ERA
It took 80 years for someone to "invent" something more stupid than sandbag "armor"...
Помните, кто даст правильный ответ, тот получит 20 лет.
do K-1 on GAZ-66
ERA on an IFV is Always a Stuipid Idea.
Usually this Tanks should fight together with Infanterie.
Putting Explosives right Next to them isn't such a great Idea.
1:38 That ERA is specifically designed not to harm BMP.
yeah just listen to what he says... he said it was surprising there is a factory made bmp with k1 because they have era made specifically for light skin vehicles...
nonono actually put even more era on russian bmps
Oh cool née tanks for war thunder
Like a lot of Russian heavy equipment, it is a dangerous for the user as it is for the enemy.
1:45 factory upgrade?
I never see it
Cactus ERA, specifically designed to work without shattering the vehicles hull, hence the lager size of the ERA boxes
@@fernandomarques5166 he was talking about K-1
If he was talking about Cactus, its a question of "wtf", since that is the one for light vehicles...