What is the Secret of Russian armor on modern tanks?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 чер 2018
- In this video we will take a look on what hides behind the armor of modern Russian tanks.
From the T-72 all up to the modern T-90, we will cut them open and take a look at the secret components.
Patreon: / redeffect
I no longer own the discord server. There is another one I made for Patreon supporters, if you want you can check it out.
Sources:
btvt.info/1inservice/t-72B.htm
btvt.info/1inservice/t-80ud/t-...
btvt.info/3attackdefensemobili...
btvt.info/1inservice/t-80.htm
btvt.info/1inservice/t-80u.htm
btvt.info/1inservice/t-90vsabr...
btvt.info/1inservice/t-90_v_st...
btvt.info/3attackdefensemobili...
btvt.narod.ru/4/armor.htm
below-the-turret-ring.blogspo...
btvt.narod.ru/4/t-90a/t-90A.htm
"T-80 Standard Tank: The Soviet Army's Last Armored Champion" by Steven J. Zaloga - Авто та транспорт
Hint: PUTINIUM ALLOY
Omegador Bullshittium.
No its rolled STALINIUM PLATING
Russia is running low on stalinium unfortunately, that's why they're planning on making use of the new putinium material
Stalinium neh dude
@@SvenTviking still better than US "Freedomium"
Sukkanium and blyatinium
Together, they form *STALINIUM*
Red effect plays war thunder, confirmed
Of course he does, War Thunder is his sponsor.
Warthunder is his sponsor
So ?
Yeah that just means Gaijin pays to advertise, not that he plays it
Stalinium armour with Putinolium era blocks for good defense against capitalist pigs.
Is good
There is a vid of a T-90 gets hit by a TOW missile in Syria and survive ,also no T-90 was destroyed so far but that’s not so important...if that tank could survive a TOW then it’s a good tank.
in soviet Russia tanks are good enough
One T90 has destroy by ISIS
It was a single warhead TOW 2A, and Kontact 5 did his job... but the crew panicked. Against a tandem warhead TOW 2B or a top attack ATGM it might had not survived.
Wonder if it would survive a javelin? What do you think?
@@bobclapp125 No. Shora wont protect they from a Javelin. And being top attack is dubious reactive armor could prevent a kill, because reactive armor just lessens the penetration of passive armor and no tank has enough passive armor on top of the turret and engine compartment to prevent a penetration . Only active armor system like Afganit, Trophy and Iron Courtain will protect you from Javelin but even so, they are not designed to fully cover top attack weapons. Javelin and Spike are game changers.
No matter what, the side will always be a weak spot for any tank
yes and especialy the back
That's why infantry is to always accompany tanks
Tank armor in a nutshell;
Front: Protect crew (head on)
Side: When you get flanked
Rear: If youre French :P
Bottom: Landmines and IEDs
Turret: The whole point of a tank is to shoot stuff...
Especially under the gun and turret meet
Ben Denis Yes, if I was to design a newer MBT, I would have a lot thicker armour on the bottom and probably some chemical armour, because a lot of tank warfare nowadays is done in close-quarters and in urban terrain, not the open rolling plains of the Cold War.
Wow, not a bad video. Not a propaganda piece like most of these. Well done.
Thanks :D
RedEffect tends to deliver well informed no bullshit videos about tanks which makes his vids great, I also really like his accent :D
@Urban Student Prepper You can take your shitty opinions and fuck off.
Also the one who needs to grow up is you judging by your attitude.
@Urban Student Prepper "K i d"
@Urban Student Prepper Oh wow, it took you whole 4 months to come up with that very unspectacular comeback.
Not to mention the amount of irony is through the roof with you x)
0:34 R.I.P headphone users lol.
Eardrums are overrated, anyways
What did it say? I cant hear anything anymore all I remember is the USSR
says that the T-90M front armour can stop most APFSDS projectiles *STALIN's SOUL ROARS IN THE DISTANCE*
the armor is possibility a Stalinium or a mixed of Tsar Nicholas II, Vladimir Lenin, and Joseph Stalin's soul
The composite armor includes strands of hair of Stalin's glorious moustache
=Borschtanium Composite
EARRAPE ALERT!
Thank you, my savior..
yah got airaped up!!
WHAAT? I CAN'T HEAR S**T!
Stalinium stronk
Karl Anthony Adonis Thank you for saving my eardrums.
I think you forgot that their cost are nearly half of other modern tanks out there. So, Russia's tactic to make thanks with an exceptional gun and cheap cost is still up
See Ivan, if enemy boolits cost into more than our complete tonks. Enemy will of be of bankrupt soon)))))
Actually 4 times cheaper
@Nikola Stalin would be proud of those crews who sacrificed themselves to let other t90 shoot Abrams
No robot voice? inaccurate!
Everyone knows the robot voice makes these videos trustworthy.
Very nice RedEffect!
Hi heard somewhere that the US is developing a new type of round for the M1A2 SEP V3 called the Armor Piercing Freedom Stabilizing Disregard Stalinium (nickname "Wham from Uncle Sam"). I'm no tank expert so I want you guys' opinions on this matter.
I'm watching this video freedonium
Michael Lambo lol
The most dangerous weapon invented by the american pindostan bliadium army is the so called cocksuckium. American "soldiers" aply it to the enemy immediately every time they feel a sort of tread.
DON"T ARGUE WITH GODS, HUMAN. WHAT I HAVE SAID IS THE FOCKING HOLY TRUTH FOR YOU AND YOU MUST LEARN IT BY HEART AND REPEAT IT LIKE A MANTRA.
-> Loader, load APFSDS!
-> The sabot one?
-> No, the one in the back shaped like George Washington's head, which radiates with freedom and democracy and fills you with sudden urge to throw boxes of tea into the sea.
The secret to Russian armor is keeping them out of combat. Otherwise it’s a turret tossing contest.
I was disappointed by Binkhov's T-90MS vs M1A3 SEP v.3, now I get satisfied
The secret is to keep the armor thin so the enemies' rounds pass right through it so to force the enemy to waste money on expensive antitank rounds that detonate outside the tank thus protecting the tank crew.
no armour is best armour
-Phlipy Floppy
That intro was absolutely glorious :DDD
Stalinium 50%
STALINIUM 50%
The T-80BVM has an advantage on all other russian tanks though, *style!*
Aesthetically it's just mesmerizing, shame about it's technical characteristics, though...
I suppose, but I am disappointed that they didn't choose to upgrade T80Us with Relikt, as that would be highly effective and extremely good looking.
@@jafon9 Yeah but T-80 as a base platform is highly inefficient and was so from the start. The idea was solid but the execution was piss poor compared to the legendary T-72 which is still capable and upgradeable to this day. I have a feeling they will just phase out T-80 platform entirely and just go straight to T-90 for regular army (as it is a direct successor of T-72) which is far more reliable, and T-14 for more elite/specialized operations with all it's bells and whistles. That's what happens when you get another company/manufacturer involved in the wrong time. T-80 was needlessly expensive for what it was and totally not worth the cost. The manufacturer wanted to get some quick Roubles and gave subpar product in return.
The T-80BVM isn't too bad but coming from someone who loves Russian tanks and sees them as overall being more effective than other similar tanks/designs it honestly is lacking in armour protection it's turret for one is the same as the the T-80B/T80BV could it take a hit and protect the crew? Maybe but modern rounds are likely to go through and the turret is the most likely thing to be hit in modern combat which is a HUGE weakness for the tank nevermind the hull.
-"What is the Secret of Russian armor on modern tanks?"
a Russian Admin.
I like the design of the T14-Armata! its a big improvement and will save the crew itself, even in a firefight and when the T14 Armata gets a new Version, upgrades, and weaknesses gets balanced out. I will see the Russian Armee in a save place
Still waiting for the first units in the russian army.
@big ian My comrade Ian, Rejoice! They will get more T-14s and comes with a new 152 variant as well! Not so much for the Su-57 though.
This did not age well
3 years later,there's still only a handful,if that
Oh if only you knew
I really enjoyed this video. It is well researched and well put together. I hope you will make more on other tanks and other vehicles in general!
I appreciate your channel man. I've watched you for YEARS, and realized I never said this, so I came back to one of my favorite videos from you.
You do a good job showing the research you have done.
There is also the chance that armor of russian tanks is not as good as the russians say
None of his numbers were wrong, modern weapons just penetrate more armor than what most of these tanks have.
Good information. Subscribed.
Well I wasn't expecting this kind of intro from this channel.
I love this content. Would like to see more. Very informative and interesting.
The new T-14 have the new Putinium Alloy sandwich between 2 Stalium Reactive armor making it only immune to all projectiles including lasers and plasma !! :)
Nice. I liked the video of the internal autoloader functioning. Good info on the armor setups. Thanks.
Good video, subscribed hoping to see more videos like this for the future.
Thanks, I will try not to dissapoint you :)
0:28 good job, comrad. Don't tell them truth about our armor, keep secrets of Mother Russia
Nice, I was looking for info on the armor of some of the newer t72 and t90 models and was having trouble finding anything until this, good video
Hey mate, allways very interesting listening to your content and explanatory way you do it , cheers
Thanks for these awesome material!!
Really liked the video
Nice! Excellent work.
Nice presentation, good info on armor design etc. one of your best videos so far 🎖🎖🎖🎖
Thanks :)
The intro alone was worth the video!
sekrit dokumentz. my WarThunder nickname
pradeep kumar . whoo ? ur dad?
Tsar Nicholas . rephrase
Husen Faour classic comeback
Well done
pradeep kumar . ok. go now gulag
On pc?
0:30 when it's 1:30 AM and your UA-cam sound bar is turned up to 100% because the previous video was kinda quiet.
#myearsarebleedingandthekidsareawake
"Is it steel, stalinium, or soul of stalin himself" I am fuckin dying laughing haha. Anyway Red I recently discovered your channel and I am really enjoying your content. I mostly research and focus on pre 1945 period history but tanks were always my favorite subject. I have been wanting to learn more about modern tanks, especially the Russian side of things since I have a soft spot for Soviet and Russian post war vehicles. I like how you present your facts equally with an unbiased viewpoint that focuses on the technical aspects and how these vehicles might compare in the real world, not just parading them or comparing them in a non realistic way. Thanks for your work and keep it up man.
There are ERA tiles on top of the turret of T-14 armata.
The Armata is a interesting concept. And heavy departure for a Russian tank. It seems more like a defensive shoot and scoot tank, were you can risk the light armored turret but save the crew and tank to fight another day.
@@ricardosoto5770 i think its not a project anymore
@Deus Vult Its un low numbers preproduction... mainly to keep the plant open. The umanned concept its interesting but it means F 35 levels of technology Russia can barely afford alone. The German Puma IFV has also a umanned turret but it has a complex of minicameras and radars giving it 360s degrees view of the battlefield with virtual reality googles in the commander helmet a la F 35. That tech its not cheap. I have read that one of the problems the F 35 has was exactly that feature. It was very constly to develop.
@Deus Vult it's not actually a trap. That's just a thin cover over the actual turret.
@Deus Vult which shells could easily penetrate it?
good video! thanks
I really like your approach to the subject matter, you provide a fair analysis of different nations equipment without filling it with slanted bias. This feels like a breath of fresh air as all to often it seems bias is allowed to overide fact. Keep up the great work and you earned a sub. from me.
Thanks a lot
Slanted bias is placed on Russian tanks alongside with the stalinium to make the plates
Oh UA-cam... Idk how I missed this (it did not give me notification). Great Video as always. :)
Edit: I actually like the Dazzlers (I did not know they were called that btw). They make it seem like the Tank has scary almost beast like red eyes that makes the enemy tank think "Oh god, that's a Monster!" xD
Wow! What a fantastic video. I learned an incredible amount. But I have a question. As the spaced armor appears slanted on the frontal armor, what if it gets hit at an angle and not head on. There seems to be some weaknesses with that approach but I understand why they do it in order to maximize armor thickness on the frontal arc.
All of that was new to me and I thought I knew a lot about tank armor. So wow....amazing info. I have a whole new level of respect for Russian armor designers.
Also I would add that the T-14 Armata's perceived weakness of not having much armor on the turret is I think one that in actual combat would be rectified with reactive armor around the turret. Even without it, the turret is likely capable of being quickly pulled out and replaced while the old one is repaired. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the ammo storage area have blow-out panels? I believe it does but I'm not certain. This would minimize damage to the rest of the turret from a direct hit to the ammo rack especially if key components are covered in asbestos or similar material. The APS system, like all APS systems are not 100% effective but that is indeed a massive advantage it has if it can truly shoot down tank rounds as well as ATGM's and rockets.
All wrong, the secret of the armor is solid Vodka. JK, excellent video! It would be cool if you could do a video on the Challengers or maybe some less-talked-about tanks like the C1 Ariete or Arjun.
Jack Vony
Dude, arjun tank is just another Leopard 2AV with some Indian masala. 😂😂😜😜
@@murtazamir8706 ita a indian frankestein monster of leopard 2s and t 72s
Hey you're the Quora guy
Jokes on you
Liquid armor is a thing ;p
HOLY SHIT THAT'S THE HEAVIEST EARRAPE I'VE EVER HEARD.
Oh my God fantastic intro dude Bravo 10 out of 10
Legend has it that the armour is not actually metal, it's just stalin's mustache hair woven so tightly that it has the effect of looking like one solid block of metal.
Very good video my camarade! But can you fo a video please on the french leclerc tank , one of the most expensive tank today !
T-90 and T-80 are just based off of wide Putin walking down a hallway
Great video, thanks! Love to see the modern Russian armour!
haha best intro, love you bro :)
great video as always RE. It seems to me that the Achilles heel of any tank is its tracks and drive wheels. Sure, the crew may be safe from most projectiles while inside the tank. But if a HE round hits the drive wheels or the tracks, they are out of the battle. I think that battle tanks are mostly obsolete unless and until the weaknesses of the propulsion mechanisms are hardened. Lets just hope that we never need these machines in the first place.
Textolite layers between keramik layers where rly outstanding at t80b/u and the low Profile round shaped turret made it rly strong against other mbts to penetrate. but no protection at lower glacis at all at t80u shure hard to hit
Thanks for blowing out my speakers.
Try to get your hands on the hunnicut books. I've got the one on the m-60 and it's an eye opener
Very good. At least you know what you are talking about.
Really good video, can you do the same for some european tank like challenger series (and chieftain) leopard leclerc etc..?
5:29 I believe the steel, and rubber combination is some form of non-explosive reactive armour.
Anyways, very good detail on armour composition for video. GJ m8 ;)
It's NERA xD
Still seems weak to me. How does it work with so little composite material?
In warthunder, M1 Abrams uses stalinium for the chabhom armour as well
Its a good video. What do ya think of the T14 Armata?
The secret is that they explode on first contact with the enemy, throwing the tank's turret 100 metres into the air. And the enemy doesn't expect that. A number of Ukrainians have already fallen when a Russian tank turret fell on their heads.
Ukraine is only alive because of the billions of dollars Western Powers gave to them so don't get mad bro. I'm not responding because your gonna turn this into chernobyl.
Chernobylium plate mixed with Cheekilite-Breeklium alloy and Cykablyatium insert.
Hey, guys, do you think there is like a small chance of the APFSDS penetrator going somewhere between those reflected plates when it's coming from the side? Even minimal?
In conclusion, tank before Armata has no side and back armor in the turret and with Armata the life of the crew and its value for experience and training is at least considered as important and valuable, good thing to appreciate if you run the tank.
Armata means that the Russian Federation unlike the Soviet Union is starting to care abour the life of their soldiers.
Didn't think you'd be one to deliver a hot meme
35 seconds in water spilled im laughing and now i have to explain what memes are to my parents cuz it scared the CRAP outta me
good most informative yes morehis tec needs more promotion show west there is quality out there
would love a video on relikt and malachite, although only the first is probably know
0:36 i had earphones on 100% 💀💀💀
Wow a video on Russian tanks that isn’t either “Russian tanks are utter garbage” or “literally indestructible”
well T80bvm is going to be in the arctic facing what tanks with apfds?
The secret: Stalinium
If the t14 armada had a ammo cookoff would that blow up the crew then or is there some kinda blowout panel ?
If the ammo explodes the crew will not die, there is in fact a plate
It should be noted that things are unfortunately not as easy as an armour being equivalent to Xmm RHA or ERA giving a smple 20% reduction in penetration, that's only really true for the round that was tested against it and under the conditions of the test (eg angle to target). Things like the effect of ERA on kenetic rounds often have multiple modes in which they effect, and the relative effect of these different factor can change so the result is non-linear (eg the shattering vs deflection effects).
Rounds designed for resistance to ERA also don't nessasarily have much greater penetration in terms of RHA equivalent, but if an ERA degrades 1 round by 40%, it might degrade the improved round by only 20%... But the round might have actually lost some theoretical RHA equivalent penetration on paper.
Vs 1 type of APFSDS a particular base armour might only have 480mm RHA equivalent effectiveness, but against another type of APFSDS it might be 550mm.
I know RHA equivalence is a nice easy way to think about it, but you have so many variables in play with non-homogenous armours, active armours and the penetrators themselves that its unfortunately not that simple.
The value of lest say 480mm is like the midle ground of all the values, or the extact valur agaist the bullet they tested. The overall effectiveness will remain around 480mm for any bullet. It just might behave differently
Incredible how the t14 armor is rated for 1000mm for APFSDS but a whopping 1500mm for HEAT, that's 20 inches of more penetration, shows why tanks use pure kinetic energy penetrators over explosive options.
**STALINIUM!!!!!!!**
***with a little bit of Stalin's soul***
)))), so would they upgrade the t 14 turret armor in the future?
How much will these new active protection systems discourage infantry from supporting tank as they will be kill when it goes off
Wow this is oversimplified It is very and I shall repeat myself VERY important when talking about tank armor effectiveness to mention which section of the armor has that protection value for example the T-90As turret armor effectiveness varies greatly the section closest to the gun is only 350-400mm RHA.
Also I do believe it would be rather helpful if you clarified what types of steel (yes difforent alloys and hardnesses actually exist)
And also specify wheather or not you are using the Russian or US standards for armor penetration meausurment (Russian tests are against harder steel and require better consistancy)
You don't have to give exact numbers but for Gods sake don't go comparing the stats from Russian tests to thoes of US test as if they are the same.
Going into exact detail would be too much for an average viewer who barely knows this stuff, giving a general idea was my goal when making this video.
I did clarify each time RHA, Cast, HHS or Welded steel was used, going more into detail is useless, since the difference is minimal.
All armor trials I used in the video are from Russia or USSR, I gave no values from US trials.
You may not have given values from US trials but it is still important to clirify that if the Russians deem something to be capable of penatrating x amount at 2km and the Americans claim the same of thier round the Russian round will in practice have the greater penetration.
Or basically Russian standards are higher and this must ALWAYS be taken into consideration.
This only takes 2-3 minutes to explain and should be understandable by most people. Not including this information is essentailly missinforming the viewer.
RedEffect What is the point of T14 than, and why is it superior tank, if it can be put out of service by a single turret hit? In real battles, tanks take most of the armor piercing hits around lower area of turret. Isn't this new reactive armor on T14 meant do shift armor penetrator from its trajectory, and create bad incoming angle, thereby decreasing its normal impulse vector component?
If I was talking about projectiles I would understand your point. But I am talking about the armor rated against modern threats, for T-72B I even specify which projectile was used in testing.
Miki Kiki
T-14 can only be put out of combat by another tank. And only if the tank is lucky enough to hit the area around the gun. And if it does penetrate, the only thing that gets destroyed is the gun. T-14 can then retreat and repair and get ready for another battle, nothing is lost, tank is still there. Where for any other tank, a hit to the area around the gun would be catastrophic.
T-14 does have APS designed to intercept KE penetrators, but once intercepted they can still penetrate some portion of armor, or damage some modules, on hull that is not an issue because there is ERA that will stop whatever is left from that projectile, but turret does not have any type of ERA so it is very questionable if it could sustain such hit
1:18 didn't get the name. Texlite? Texalite? And which source in the description mentions that?
Textolite
Comrades, stalinium is the strongest type of metal.
It's Armor is like any other modern Tanks from other nations that is made of RHA, Composite Armor and Depleted Uranium. But they were in their own unique way.
I hear issues with turret production on Armata. No good if it can't be deployed in numbers or repaired easily
i really question the continuation of the t80 program. since it was so problematic with the motor and because it is so much a step away from the tried and true "style" of tank. the t80 was a big step away from the t64 base model tank. the t80 is a killer tank, but in a military that is more conducive to the t90 t72 and so on, will be hard pressed to change their doctrine as well as all their repair stock and fuel stores. and so on.
Putting shells in a carousel under the turret ring makes best armor)))) the crew will be comforted by the strong shell casing+gunpowder composite armor))))
That is the ONLY thing about T 64, T 72, T 80 and T 90 tanks I really do not like at all. I like the looks, the cost efectiveness, the low profile, the ingeniuous use of both composite armor and ERA to keep weight downw while having decent protection.... yet, on a side penetration.... losing the whole crew in miliseconds is a real posibility.
If you squint, red effect’s channel picture looks like a red muppet eating a sausage.
The intro fucking killed me I was laughing way too hard it
That said armor is valid on the front and up to a certain degree upwards .
Almost, if not all tanks will be penetrated by a shell coming from the sides or rear. A real possibility in urban combat.
i was using headphones with pretty high volume and HOLY SHIT that was loud
Interesting. Btw what is the book title by zaloga?
Oh, I forgot to put it in description, the name is "T-80 Standard Tank: The Soviet Army's Last Armored Champion".
Sorry for a late reply
Have to get that one. Keep up the research and the great video work.
So T-72 has a stronger hull then the T-80, the T-80 has a stronger turret, and the T-90 has the same hull as the T-72 and has a better turret then the T-80
Basically.
Great Video !
of course now I nit pick..
The real question is right now, how effective is Relikt era against contemporary ammo. Developed in the 1990s it wasn't purchased by the Russian army for some time. Was it lack of cash or because it didn't offer enough improvements? Were more improvements incorporated into the design? The patents suggest the improvements were what could be expected based on knowledge of K5 shortcomings.
K5 was not really all that efficient against rounds developed in the second half of the 1980s. The reasons it was developed were rather straight forward. The capture of the 105mm M111 was a shock to them not just because because it could pen the hull of the tanks, but because it was far better then the BM-22/26 at dealing with the multi layer complex armor arrays. The Bm-22 can under certain conditions move through almost 480mm of steel but was not able to overpass these arrays while rather small short and slow M111 was. K5 was developed in a bit of a panic and haste, the USSR was not stupid, they knew what the potential of the 120mm guns was
The Russians figured out rather quickly in their own tests that K5 had a rather narrow window of parameters where it could offer peak efficiency (20% reduction vs APFSDS). Fortunately this is where the vast vast vast majority of KE ammo existed up until 1988. Relikt was developed to expand that window and offer protection against the countermeasures against K5 that the Russians themselves had confirmed. Same with Kaktus....Both have more sensitive explosives, steel with better ballistic properties, and movement of two plates.. Relikt being more optimized for use on tanks
Strange the M829A2 gets no mention...
Nii Stali was very public about its ability to protect the T-90 with Relikt against the M829A2 at over 1km. This is actually very good performance.. The M829A2 seems to be the overlooked and forgotten (not just by you) 120mm KE round. It was long thought that it was a faster M829A1 with some other minor improvements. What seems to be leaking out now was that it was a very effective round developed with ERA and heavy composite arrays in mind. Higher velocity, advanced tip design to negate ERA, and much improved DU alloy. The new alloy designed to shear better but also have more yield strength and ductility so when it encounters heavy armor arrays designed to help break apart the round, it offers more resistance. The USA in the late 1980s and early 1990s had some very nasty heavy armor packages vs KE long rods. No doubt applying the lessons to their follow up to the M829A1.
Initial K5 - Highly resisitant-M829 M833 Dm33 Bm42 M900 (iirc remains Dm-33 in tests was imbedded in the back plate of the -80U array)
Effective but not reliable M829A1-DM43 BM42M Charm-3 (German tests confirmed that Dm-43 could pen T-80U but not at long range or anything close to the reliability to justify the purchase)
Near worthless- M829A2 DM-53 Snvits1/2
This is from safe maneuvering angles. The turret of Russian tanks covered in K5 from 30 deg or more will be killed by most of the 120mm ammo made from 1988 on. On the flip side the turret of the Challenger 1, Leo-2A4 M1, M1A1 and M1A1 were all probably not as safe a people suspect from the 125mm bm-42 under such conditions. Certainly not the Bm-46 in 1990... M1A1HA turret was resistant to just about everything developed in the 1980s.
This is where things get strange..
Relikt- Resistant M829A2 Maybe Dm-53/63.. Here I am going to say that it offers very good protection against the US round. Germans claim Dm-53 was designed with the follow up to K5 in mind, it is a much more complex round then the M829A2. The Germans were very open about the Dm-53s capabilities. Targets protected with next gen ERA followed with passive heavy composite armor behind it, with a protection level of equal to 1000mm RHA. They are also very honest about their thoughts about its ability to defeat the front hull of the T-14...That it will not...
Relikt probably only has a minor effective against M829A3- I think we know enough now about the designs of each systems, their development history and the to suggest that the M829A3 was designed with Relikt/ and heavy passive armor packages at the intended target.
Relikt was not developed to counter the M829A3. I have seen no evidence of this an the patents suggest that the improvements as said before, expand the performance envelope and damage the LRP more effectively. There were tradeoffs to give it better anti tandem perofromance. I don't see anything that says it can deal with segmented LRPs like the Dm-53 or M829A3.
Anyhow patents of Relikt and Kaktus...
btvtinfo.blogspot.com/2018/03/blog-post_13.html
btvtinfo.blogspot.com/2018/03/blog-post_46.html
M829A4 vs Malakhit or Malachite or what ever the name is.. to little info known..
Great video
Thumbs UP!
*Nii Stali was very public about its ability to protect the T-90 with Relikt against the M829A2 at over 1km. This is actually very good performance..*
-Well, that information is kinda old, I think it predates the actual application of Relikt on Russian tanks that are actually in service. Keep in mind that they could really test that, they could not have obtained M829A2. On top of that, they claimed that for T-90, which has the same base armor as T-72B, which is the armor from 1984, if you look at it, it wouldnt really be surprising that T-90 (T-72B) equipped with Relikt could provide such levels of protection. But you also have to take in mind that both Russia and US tend to overestimate each others equipment. Russians thought that when M1 came out that they had nothing that could penetrate it, even when M1A1 came out they also thought their firepower is unsatisfying. If you go to NII Stali's website right now, you can see that they NOW state that Relikt offers protection for high standard APFSDS including M829A2 and M829A3: www.niistali.ru/products/nauka/dynamic+protection/relikt/
Here they dont mention T-80, and for a reason, the only T-80 equipped with Relikt is T-80BVM, which has very bad base armor for modern standards, even they are not to claim something that outrageous as T-80BVM surviving a hit from M829A3.
Dont get me wrong, I am pretty sure M829A2 can penetrate T-90 (T-72B) and T-80U equipped with Kontakt-5, no doubt, but basing the performance of Relikt by those old tanks is not very fair.
M829A3 could not have been developed to counter Relikt since it entered service way before Relikt was made public, Relikt entered development in 1990s, but it says nowhere it was really developed then, it could have had some changes since then, as stuff tends to change during development. What I think is more realistic is that M829A3 was developed with Russians developing better base armor in mind, which is the case with new T-80UD turret and then new welded turret for T-90A, to minimize the effect of Kontakt-5 and increase after ERA performance. It is no surprise that once Relikt started to be applied on Russian tanks, new M829E4 (now M829A4) entered development.
Well 30 degrees protection on the turret might be true for older designs, but the new welded turret of T-90A sorta fixed that problem, ofcourse the protection is still best at the 0deg, but the shape of the turret still offers satisfying protection for 30deg.
And I really doubt a projectile developed at the time of DM-53 could have 1000mm RHA penetration, that is a bit absurd never the less, I dont know much about performance of German projectiles, but a good friend of mine does, and from what he told me, DM-53 is somewhere between M829A2 and M829A3. Would need to ask him about that, but I dont believe that Germans ever claimed that penetrating power, if they ever did, it is too absurd.
Good to hear back from you..
"Russians thought that when M1 came out that they had nothing that could penetrate it"
Well they didn't have anything that could "reliably". The steel body tungsten cored rounds were a bit of a roll of the dice as far as multi layer composites went. That changed by 1985 with BM-32 which certainly could kill it from expected battle ranges. What is known about the M833 suggests it could have killed M1s, T-72A, T-80B Leo-2s. BM-42 could probably work well against the M1A1 from anything that wasn't head on, and Bm-46 would probably do fine from expected battle ranges against everything except the M1A1HA and Leo-2A4 with the 1990-91 armor upgrade.
The entire myth of early 1980s NATO armor being impenetrable had much more to do with the USSR not being able to make decent APFSDS, then the armor being fantastic against KE. Then again the doctrine of the USSR never relied on long range one shot kills of NATO tanks in hull down.
"M829A3 could not have been developed to counter Relikt since it entered
service way before Relikt was made public, Relikt entered development in
1990s, but it says nowhere it was really developed then, it could have
had some changes since then, as stuff tends to change during
development."
Oh I agree it wasn't developed with a specific system in mind, rather the suspected evolution from K5. The patent is posted in my last reply to go over. If there were more improvements I would be interested in knowing about them. The M829A3 is certainly designed with heavy composites in mind. The thicker stronger round no doubt was tested against some very heavy armor arrays. I suppose it comes down to will the Anti-ERA design elements work as advertised? Perhaps, what is thought to be the patent for the M829E3 available. Will the tip punch a hole in relikt and break away if needed, or will relikt defeat this mechanism. I suspect there are cases it will and cases it will not.
Seems like we are in agreement though. M829A3 and Relikt seem to work "well enough" against each other for manufacturers to make vague claims about performance.
Same with "M829A4 and Malakhit" developed concurrently, so with out more knowledge it seems to be a toss up.
"And I really doubt a projectile developed at the time of DM-53 could have 1000mm RHA penetration,"
So do I.
It will never defeat that much RHA. The 1000mm number refers to statements about armor packages that are designed to offer that much protection "equivalent" with ERA incorporated into it. So something like 250mm of ERA protection and 750mm of protection from the composite arrays.
However this is probably referring to a specific armor array. Change the array and the round could fail.
Well the problem with M1A1HA and Leopard 2A4, in my opinion, is that they did not put much focus on hull protection, but rather only turret cheeks, which are indeed most likely to get hit, but that doesnt mean you should disregard hull protection, which is very important, especially for Leopard 2 since it has unprotected ammo stowage next to the driver.
M829A4 could be able to beat Malachit, but if the things that are available about it are true, there is no way it could penetrate the base armor of T-14, so the ability to beat Malachit sorta appears to be useless.
I know what you meant when you said 1000mm RHAe, but it is still too much, 750mm base RHA penetration is something you would deem realistic for DM53/63, but that is if we disregard ERA, put ERA into everything and you will, no doubt, have penetration reduction. Only if it was able to completely beat Heavy ERA with no effect on the actual projectile, which is unrealistic. Not to mention that the projectile entered service before T-90 with welded turret was put into service, so it also increases suspicion regarding that much penetrating power.
"Well the problem with M1A1HA and Leopard 2A4, in my opinion, is that they did not put much focus on hull protection"
Yes and no. The hull of the M1A1HA is vulnerable to contemporary Russian ammo only in lower hull front of the driver under head on conditions. The fuel tanks are designed to be incorporated into the armor The glacis is will not be penetrated, (watch?v=ok_Z8fddJ4g) heat warheads won't fuse and impact in such a way that the copper liner will be deformed and useless.
The idea was that this is a small enough target that getting an aimed shot in, and having it enter the crew compartment was not likely. The USA felt that ATGM teams from concealed positions were a greater threat.
The ammo placement on the LEO-2 did make it vulnerable.
As for DM-53 and M829A3/4 vs composit armor. It is more complex.
The armor of the Russian T-90A works like a system with integrated components acting in sequence. A T-90A gets hit with a M829A1. The K5 shears off the tip and introduces fractures, that the NERA arrays then started to break apart, to the point where by the time it impacts the heavy RHA back plate it is bent, fractured with the multiple fractured pieces being misaligned. The round more then likely impacts and shatters. Boom you have defeated a 700mm KE round.
The DM-53 according to the Germans was designed to defeat armor packages with these structures in mind. The idea is that by creating design to negate points in the armor system would cause it to fail. The tip design and multiple segments are designed with stress tolerances in mind. The thinking goes..same target T-90A, the tip of the Dm-53 doesn't initiate the K5 and stepped design punches a hole and passes through into the NERA array, the break away components of the round impact the NERA elements, break away and create a hole for the rest of the round to pass through. The important issue is that the DM-53 isn't having significant stress fractures introduced, and the angle of impact isn't altered significantly. So after the front of the round negates the ERA and NERA, you have a 400mm long surviving bit of tungsten traveling at significant velocity impacting that angled back plate. You need to break the round apart and change its angle to induce massive failure. If this process is incomplete or large elements of it bypassed then the round will probably enter the crew compartment.
"Not to mention that the projectile entered service before T-90 with
welded turret was put into service, so it also increases suspicion
regarding that much penetrating power."
Well the Germans were unhappy with the DM-43 against targets designed to represent what was in the pipeline with Russian armor. The Ukrainians were rather happy to pass along just about everything they had to the west. The T-84 with the welded turret, and several ERA designs being among them.
This event and testing on their own armor arrays, is almost certainly pushed the development of the Dm-53 and M829A3 and IMI M338.
That said, these types of segmented rounds are massively expensive and complex to manufacture. If done wrong it can make the performance of the round much worse.
what is the song in the end
Recycled Stalinum. [End of video]
I have one word for you: ARTICLES!!!!!