Armor Comparisons  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Cars, Buggies, Trucks, Tanks and more >> RC Tanks >> War Room >> Armor Comparisons
Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Armor Comparisons - 9/2/2008 6:49:07 PM   
heavyaslead



Posts: 850
Joined: 11/18/2002
From: Loganville, GA, USA
Status: offline 		Think the Maus had thick armor?

Here is an interesting list of relative protection based on effective armor protection (as if millimeters of hardened steel plate).

Protection:

M1- 400 vs KE 600 vs HEAT

M1A1- 450 vs KE 700 vs HEAT

M1A1HA- 600 vs KE 1150 vs HEAT

Leopard 2A4 - 700 vs KE 1000 vs HEAT

M1A2- 760 vs KE 1400 vs HEAT

Lacrec- 800 vs KE 1600 vs HEAT

M1A2SEP- 840 vs KE 1400 vs HEAT

Leopard 2A5- 870 vs KE 1500 vs HEAT

Challanger 2- 960 vs KE 1700 vs HEAT

Leo 2A6 may be as high as 1000mm vs KE.

T-72B - 530 vs KE 620 vs HEAT

T-72BV- 580 vs KE 1120 vs HEAT

T-80B- 550 vs KE 650 vs HEAT

T-80BV- 600 vs KE 1150 vs HEAT

T-72BM- 780 vs KE 1220 vs HEAT

T-80U- 820 vs KE 1350 vs HEAT

T-90- 1000 vs KE 1600 vs HEAT

Really amazing how much technology has improved protection and this is ONLY the passive portion!




_____________________________

Cheers
Eric Scott
       Post #: 1

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/2/2008 9:58:22 PM   
googlydoogly


 

Posts: 326
Joined: 4/1/2008
From: sandy, OR, USA
Status: offline 		I'm always leery when a book or a website post that kind of info...because those are supposed to be classified. Makes you wonder whether they're just guessing, or have someone on the inside. And I suspect some of those numbers are simply Russian and European arms contractor guesstimates, which tends to inflate numbers in order to wow potential buyers.

(in reply to heavyaslead)
       Post #: 2

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/3/2008 2:03:29 AM   
Chally2


 

Posts: 277
Joined: 7/13/2008
From: Stoke-on-Trent., UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		The tank is often used as a "bully" these days, the likelihood of tank on tank combat is less likely than it used to be. The non- technically equipped opponent is going to battle in a different, more urban fashion.

That will demand a different approach to how tanks are deployed in future. If they remain in the arsenal in the current format, on a large scale.






_____________________________

Regards,
Stan.

(in reply to googlydoogly)
       Post #: 3

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/3/2008 5:03:03 PM   
Panther F



Posts: 2131
Joined: 12/31/2005
From: Franklin, IN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chally2

The tank is often used as a "bully" these days, the likelihood of tank on tank combat is less likely than it used to be. The non- technically equipped opponent is going to battle in a different, more urban fashion.

That will demand a different approach to how tanks are deployed in future. If they remain in the arsenal in the current format, on a large scale.




I agree, but some countries need to be careful they're not taking a knife to gun fight. Imagine T-72's crossing the border only to find M1A1's and Challenger's to greet them.


_____________________________

HL StuG III, Tamiya: M4 Sherman, M4A1E8 Sherman, Sturmtiger, T-34/85 and an M26A1 Pershing

(in reply to Chally2)
       Post #: 4

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 2:04:50 AM   
Chally2


 

Posts: 277
Joined: 7/13/2008
From: Stoke-on-Trent., UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther F


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chally2

The tank is often used as a "bully" these days, the likelihood of tank on tank combat is less likely than it used to be. The non- technically equipped opponent is going to battle in a different, more urban fashion.

That will demand a different approach to how tanks are deployed in future. If they remain in the arsenal in the current format, on a large scale.




I agree, but some countries need to be careful they're not taking a knife to gun fight. Imagine T-72's crossing the border only to find M1A1's and Challenger's to greet them.




That's true but the T72 is still a very capable weapon if properly deployed and should never be underestimated. We still need to be on the ball and not rely on technology to protect us.

Armour protection should be likened to a goalkeeper, the last resort for a broken strategy. Many cases of tanks being disabled is down to improper use and deployment of infantry support (because commanders are scared of the political ramification of putting infantry soldiers in harms way). There are other causes of tank losses of course, some down to poor tactics in other areas.

I'm beginning to sound like a broken clock here, sorry about that mate. I should get out more often.

Or just shut up.



_____________________________

Regards,
Stan.

(in reply to Panther F)
       Post #: 5

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 8:54:49 AM   
fv432



Posts: 1707
Joined: 1/12/2007
From: swindon, UNITED KINGDOM
Status: offline 		problem is stan your right mate as they've witnessed in afghan and Iraq A lone "Terry" with an R.P.G can do a lot of trouble

as long as he get's it right

_____________________________

1/25panther/jagdpanther 1xhl Tiger 2xhl Bulldog 1xT34 wsn 2xhl pz111 3xm26pershing 1x1/16 tam sherman
1xm46 Tamiya kin

(in reply to Chally2)
       Post #: 6

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 1:09:24 PM   
heavyaslead



Posts: 850
Joined: 11/18/2002
From: Loganville, GA, USA
Status: offline 		It is a well known fact the M1A1/2 can be KO'd by 25mm rounds (in the rear), so yes deployment strategy is key. Tanks are vulnerable when not utilized properly.

A RPG can be every bit as dangerous as a MBT.


_____________________________

Cheers
Eric Scott

(in reply to fv432)
       Post #: 7

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 2:53:54 PM   
Panther F



Posts: 2131
Joined: 12/31/2005
From: Franklin, IN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyaslead

It is a well known fact the M1A1/2 can be KO'd by 25mm rounds (in the rear), so yes deployment strategy is key. Tanks are vulnerable when not utilized properly.

A RPG can be every bit as dangerous as a MBT.


It is a well known fact that all tanks are vulnerable (in the rear) by another tank or RPG. I was just using the M1A1 as an example against the much inferior T-72 as was proven once before.

_____________________________

HL StuG III, Tamiya: M4 Sherman, M4A1E8 Sherman, Sturmtiger, T-34/85 and an M26A1 Pershing

(in reply to heavyaslead)
       Post #: 8

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 6:12:40 PM   
heavyaslead



Posts: 850
Joined: 11/18/2002
From: Loganville, GA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther F


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyaslead

It is a well known fact the M1A1/2 can be KO'd by 25mm rounds (in the rear), so yes deployment strategy is key. Tanks are vulnerable when not utilized properly.

A RPG can be every bit as dangerous as a MBT.


It is a well known fact that all tanks are vulnerable (in the rear) by another tank or RPG. I was just using the M1A1 as an example against the much inferior T-72 as was proven once before.

Not with active defense, like Trophy, its all around protection.


_____________________________

Cheers
Eric Scott

(in reply to Panther F)
       Post #: 9

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 6:14:24 PM   
googlydoogly


 

Posts: 326
Joined: 4/1/2008
From: sandy, OR, USA
Status: offline 		If you guys want to know just how vulnerable Russian MBTs are, especially T-72s and T-80s, read how easy they got knocked out by Chechen infantry. Even the side turret armor is vulnerable to RPG hits. Especially during the numerous battles for Grozny, Russian armor were routinely destroyed by infantry not only because of poor tactics, but also just plain bad design.

Not enough machine guns, the main gun cannot elevate or depressed enough to engage Chechen fighters in buildings, or in basements, and thin side armor (even the side turret armor).

(in reply to Panther F)
       Post #: 10

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 6:34:04 PM   
Panther F



Posts: 2131
Joined: 12/31/2005
From: Franklin, IN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyaslead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther F


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyaslead

It is a well known fact the M1A1/2 can be KO'd by 25mm rounds (in the rear), so yes deployment strategy is key. Tanks are vulnerable when not utilized properly.

A RPG can be every bit as dangerous as a MBT.


It is a well known fact that all tanks are vulnerable (in the rear) by another tank or RPG. I was just using the M1A1 as an example against the much inferior T-72 as was proven once before.

Not with active defense, like Trophy, its all around protection.


Yeah, the Trophy Defense System works great against most weapons, but there is one problem including the fact that the system right now has no reloading capability. Once it fires, that side of the vehicle is vulnerable. Which brings up another shortcoming: the Trophy can only be mounted to protect one axis. This means officials would have to mount multiple missile systems on every vehicle.

So I remain correct that the fact all tanks are vulnerable (in the rear) by another tank or RPG.

_____________________________

HL StuG III, Tamiya: M4 Sherman, M4A1E8 Sherman, Sturmtiger, T-34/85 and an M26A1 Pershing

(in reply to heavyaslead)
       Post #: 11

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 6:54:56 PM   
heavyaslead



Posts: 850
Joined: 11/18/2002
From: Loganville, GA, USA
Status: offline 		Well, my interpretation, Panther F, is that if the initial attack can be thwarted, that at least gives you a chance to counter, thus considered protected I believe, if even once.

The Russian Thrush2 is multi-axis and has multiple firings.

We both agree tanks are vulnerable, however active defense can supress the 'surprise' element.


_____________________________

Cheers
Eric Scott

(in reply to Panther F)
       Post #: 12

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/4/2008 7:21:39 PM   
Panther F



Posts: 2131
Joined: 12/31/2005
From: Franklin, IN, USA
Status: offline 		Well heavyaslead, I've never heard of a single RPG attack on a tank before. But I guess it's possible.

My interpretation of all around protection is permanent protection. Not just one use.

_____________________________

HL StuG III, Tamiya: M4 Sherman, M4A1E8 Sherman, Sturmtiger, T-34/85 and an M26A1 Pershing

(in reply to heavyaslead)
       Post #: 13

RE: Armor Comparisons - 9/9/2008 3:06:52 PM   
EugeniRUS


 

Posts: 210
Joined: 6/16/2006
From: Pushkino, RUSSIA
Status: offline 		Why argueing? Tanks are not that important now as they were 65 years ago. Aircrafts rule! The one who owns the air has 50% of victory in his pocket. The end of WWII showed this very clearly when carpet bombings made it almost impossible for Germany to wage war.

(in reply to Panther F)