Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Dazzler]

ARDE new

 

[SilentKiller]

Is this a light Tank?

 

[Dazzler]

so what could be the reason for enhanced penetration.
i mean this is a govt organization and works under the umbrella of MOD and the manufacturer of naiza round aka POF works under them as well

We will see official photo's upgraded AL khalid I in july-august exercise.but still there wont be any chance to get into the autoloader and see whether it is modified or not

i have menhtioned this before and do it again, AZ autoloadr (it may look similar so i take it as a reference though my source said it is a vastly modified HIT design superficially similar to AZ type) in Ak has been modified since the tank came into service, it has 29 modifications to fit longer penetrators and other ammunition, then it was modified to fit Kombat ATGM again in 2005-06.

ARDE has been making many rounds not only those mentioned in the pdf. Pakistan got TOT for Type-2 penetrator from China in the 90s, janes has an article on it. Type-2M can penetrate more than 600mm armour at 2000 m, some say between 610-650mm at 2000m. AK-1 autoloader is again modified to fit longer rounds than Type-2M. Naiza-2 is rumoured to be able to penetrate 700mm at 2000 m. If true, this is awesome news for Pak armour

even Type-2M can pretty much make a mess of any MBT in sub-continent.

shell velocity plays a big part in penetration, the one we know of, usual POF APFSDS has 1760m/s at 2000 m. New rounds may be faster

 

[Damian]

You are over optimistic to expect that a country with lower capabilities, lower metallurgy level etc. Can achieve a 700mm RHA penetration with such short ammunition.

 

[Dazzler]

You are over optimistic to expect that a country with lower capabilities, lower metallurgy level etc. Can achieve a 700mm RHA penetration with such short ammunition.

you have no idea about metallurgical R&D that is going on in Pakistan, just because it is rarely published, does not mean it is not happening. Problem is they show a fraction of what they make. 100 firms under MoD and 50 private ones are working in this field

Will share info on this soon

 

[STGN]

shell velocity plays a big part in penetration, the one we know of, usual POF APFSDS has 1760m/s at 2000 m. New rounds may be faster

1760m/s at 2000m... sounds more like the muzzle velocity?
STGN

 

[Dazzler]

we achieved these gizmos 20 years ago...

http://www.sciencevision.org.pk/Bac...Vol7No1&2_4_Role_of_Materials_AnjumTauqir.pdf

 

[Dazzler]

 

[Dazzler]

old apfsds round back in 2001 was given as having a penetration of 460 mm @ 2500 m then pic removed from website

 

[farhan_9909]

You are over optimistic to expect that a country with lower capabilities, lower metallurgy level etc. Can achieve a 700mm RHA penetration with such short ammunition.

We don't have lower capabilities atleast in this regard

Because we have firms like POF and ARDE more than 60 years older now into this business.while POF alone export 100millions of arms per year..
Problem is due to over and over attacks on these institutes(Attack on POF last time killed dozen)..they don't allow any civilian to enter into POF.except highly reputed and military officials like rommel

now we have some private firm also in this business...

Pakistan in Tank field is now pretty much Good.and even better than many countries

 

[farhan_9909]

i have menhtioned this before and do it again, AZ autoloadr (it may look similar so i take it as a reference though my source said it is a vastly modified HIT design superficially similar to AZ type) in Ak has been modified since the tank came into service, it has 29 modifications to fit longer penetrators and other ammunition, then it was modified to fit Kombat ATGM again in 2005-06.

ARDE has been making many rounds not only those mentioned in the pdf. Pakistan got TOT for Type-2 penetrator from China in the 90s, janes has an article on it. Type-2M can penetrate more than 600mm armour at 2000 m, some say between 610-650mm at 2000m. AK-1 autoloader is again modified to fit longer rounds than Type-2M. Naiza-2 is rumoured to be able to penetrate 700mm at 2000 m. If true, this is awesome news for Pak armour

even Type-2M can pretty much make a mess of any MBT in sub-continent.

shell velocity plays a big part in penetration, the one we know of, usual POF APFSDS has 1760m/s at 2000 m. New rounds may be faster

well even if the new round penetration power stand at 600mm of rha at 2km.it can still disable any tank in south asia

 

[Damian]

Minister Skrzypczak precyzuje – Leopardy 2A4 lub A5 - DziennikZbrojny.pl

Viceminister of Ministry of Defense says that Poland will purchase 130 Leopard 2 tanks in Leopard 2A4 or Leopard 2A5 variants, if these will be Leopard 2A5's, then it will mean that modernization of 128 already aquired Leopard 2A4's, codenamed Leopard 2PL will be modernization brigning them to Leopard 2A5 standard and all these tanks will be then equiped with components manufactured in Poland.

After the purchase, Poland will have total 258 Leopard 2 tanks, which will significantly improve capabilities of our armor-mechanized forces and we will be capable to start withdrawing from service, obsolete T-72 tanks.

232 tanks will be in use by two Armor Cavalry Brigades, and 26 tanks will be used for training and as reserves.

 

[militarysta]

@UP

As I said erlyier in this topic They will be next batch Leo-2 for Polish Army. Good News - nex leo-2 all T-72 will be scrapped, and polish industry (whit foriegin partner) will developed smth to replace PT-91.

 

[Damian]

Yeah, hopefully they will end negotations soon and purchasing process will start. I hope to see first batch of new Leopard 2's next year.

 

[militarysta]

Rumors says that all tanks will be on circa 2A5+ standard when "+" means better FCS + BMS. Improved armour is not sure yet.

 

[Damian]

Good, but IMHO armor improvements will be a good idea to bring all tanks down to 2A5 standard. From this in future there is only one step to purchase Rh-120/L55 to replace L44's.

 

[STGN]

In the book "M1 Abrams vs T72 Ural" by Steven J. Zaloga it is claimed that alot of older M1A1 Abrams tanks were upgraded to HA standard protection.

...However, since there were not enough M1A1HAs Available, a retrofit program was begun to upgrade M1A1 tanks with the Heavy Armor package....

(M1 Abrams vs T72 Ural :56)
I have been looking through most of the government studies and reports sourced by Zaloga and so far have been unable to find a source for this.
I believe this to be wrong. While it is correct that early production M1A1 Abrams was upgraded it was not with the HA armor package. Instead the upgrade in therms of armor was much simpler. It consisted of welding on 1~1.5" steel plates to the front of the turret.
I was able to find this however:

The M1A1 tanks shipped from storage in Germany were not always the most modern. Birds team made several major modifications on the equipment, including the attachment of hardened steel to the turret near the gun tube for extra protection, installation of a heat shield in the engine compartment, upgrade of optical systems"¦

(Jayhawk: The Seven Corps in the Persian Gulf War: 94)
Heres a picture of the preparation of a M1A1 tank to receive additional armor US ARMY
It can be difficult to recognize whether a tank is an early M1A1 or a modified one as they look very similar.
These tanks where still in use during OIF and this photo illustrates nicely with the extra plate painted green "Barly Legal".
But here is how you recognize one:
From the front you look at the cut out for the loader at the front of the turret if the cutouts upper corner is at the center of the gun barrel then its a "ODS" M1A1 if its below its a regular M1A1 or M1A1HA/M1A2. off cause the relation between the height of the cut out and the height of the front turret is also different .
From the side you can see much less of the mantle.

Heres a gallery of one in USMC service in 2005 which have had its doghouse and smoke box replaced.
STGN

 

[Damian]

Maybe, or perhaps due to low quality of photos you see there a difference where it is not.

Besides this, actually replacing composite armor is as easy as welding additional plate.

And there is even easier way to know if tank received Heavy Armor Package or not, serial number on turret, if there is U or M letter added, it got HAP.

And you know what, similiar welds you claim to be proof of only adding additional steel plate, can be well visible also on M1A2SEP's for example. Probably similiar welds can be found on regular M1A1's from 1985 (not prototypes dubbed M1E1).

You can see on below photos the same thicker weld lines. You should also consider that Heavy Armor Package upgrade includes thicker faceplates, this is why weld lines might look thicker..



Oh BTW, in Iraq, there were many M1A1AIM's used, the M1A1AIM (sometimes there is added v1) did not have armor modifications, which means if M1A1AIM was M1A1 before AIM program, it had older armor package, if it was M1A1HA it had newer armor package.

Standarization of armor had been introduced with M1A1SA and M1A1FEP that both received the same armor package as M1A2SEP.

 

[STGN]

Maybe, or perhaps due to low quality of photos you see there a difference where it is not.

This is not just spur of the moment; I have checked a lot of photos. I could have used recent photos of M1A2 but then I would be accused of comparing apples to oranges.

Besides this, actually replacing composite armor is as easy as welding additional plate.

Perhaps but you have to produce ~900 armor arrays. also why add plates to the front of the M1A1 if you already put in HAP if you look at M1A1HA's they are all free of extra plates.

And there is even easier way to know if tank received Heavy Armor Package or not, serial number on turret, if there is U or M letter added, it got HAP.

Notice how there is no U or M on this one SVSM Gallery :: M1A1 Abrams USMC, Tamiya/Com 2005, by John Heck :: DSC08854

And you know what, similiar welds you claim to be proof of only adding additional steel plate, can be well visible also on M1A2SEP's for example. Probably similiar welds can be found on regular M1A1's from 1985 (not prototypes dubbed M1E1).

The welds are not the proof, all Abrams have weld marks. Its the location of the welds marks or rather the slightly altered shape of the turret.

actually scrap this link its seems its also a ODS modified tank SVSM Gallery :: M1A1 Abrams, Patton Museum, by Vladimir Yakubov :: P1150106
you are right the HA does have thicker front plate but turret length remains the same.
STGN

 

[Damian]

This is not just spur of the moment; I have checked a lot of photos. I could have used recent photos of M1A2 but then I would be accused of comparing apples to oranges.

So did I, there are M1A1HA's and M1A2SEP's with similiar weld lines you pointed out.

Perhaps but you have to produce ~900 armor arrays. also why add plates to the front of the M1A1 if you already put in HAP if you look at M1A1HA's they are all free of extra plates.

Manufacturing 900 armor packages is not a problem. Composite armors are semi modular, so armor arrays are manufactured just like spare parts. And you should consider that part of HAP is thicker faceplate.

Notice how there is no U or M on this one SVSM Gallery :: M1A1 Abrams USMC, Tamiya/Com 2005, by John Heck :: DSC08854

Because this is standard M1A1, I seen photos of some of them, used by USMC as training tanks several years ago, non of them are used in combat units AFAIK, if this one among many already did not ended in Sierra Army Depot or some other storage area... or was not upgraded.

The welds are not the proof, all Abrams have weld marks. Its the location of the welds marks or rather the slightly altered shape of the turret.

All tanks with Heavy Armor Package have slightly altered turret shape.

Of course I agree that there is significant problem because of several variants of turrets used on M1 tanks, as well as some modifications for hulls.

I can imagine that there were changes and improvements added with each production batch to the hull and turret structure.