Countering DU Rounds

[Chrom]

Just because they don't state it on their website? Come on, that doesn't mean that they don't have such numbers at all, but I'm pretty sure if you were a member of a MOD of some nation interested in these rounds, they would give you more exact numbers. [conspiracy-mode]Maybe they even hold back such numbers to not alarm Russian engineers and let them imagine to be safe with their Relic![/conspiracy-mode] No, just kidding.

Stating what new APFSDS round is unaffected by ERA, based on NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING more than your withsfull thinking - is indeed cospiracy. The same level of conspiracy suggest what designers of SU-27 knew about F-117 and found a way to detect it from 70km. And developers of Su-30MKI knew about F-22 and implemented a radar capable of tracking Raptor from 200km. And designers of russian APFSDS rounds knew about M1A2SEP and invented a round capable of penetrating it. Note - these developers didnt claimed that. Russian MOD didnt claimed that. NOONE with any credibilty claimed that. Just i with my wishfull thinking... same as you with YOUR wishfull thinking claim about magic M829A3 invulnerability against Relict. Again, based on NOTHING. The developers of DM-63 and M829A3 rounds didnt claimed it.

The developers of Relict ERA claim it work against APFSDS. Officially. They presented patents and basic explanation HOW it work. Every one can look at it - there is nothing impossible there. Whereas APFSDS round desingers should indeed make something impossible to render simply DM-63 round immune to Relict. Please, give me idea why Relict will not work against DM-63 and M829A3 if it work against M829A1 (or do you insist what NII Stali lie and Relict do not work even against such old rounds?).

That's just your guessing.
And just as I said, a KE arrow is NOT simply a piece of metal with a certain shape, weight and speed. It is not made out of mono-metal from tip to toe. There are different types of Metal in the tip of the round than in the center or in the end. And the outer layers are again a different type of metal than the inner core of the arrow. Each of these different components has very specialized characteristics and was choosen carefully for a special task. For example the first 15 cm of the round might be specially designed to beat Relic.
You talk as if it would be the easiest task of the world to create a APFSDS round and that every retarted "douchebag" could do that in passing in his lunchtime or so. Than I ask you why the developers of Rheinmetall needed about 30 years from the first 120mm KE round till the today's DM63? Because it was such an easy task?

It is not easy task to manufacture such round, especially given price limits. But simulating such round + - is quite easy. For example - powder and gun. It is a big challenge to produce a gun like L55 and suitable powder for it. But it is very simply to make a gun what will accelerate round to similar speed , if we are not constrained by weight, lenghts and accuracy of the gun. Even 3rd would country will manage it. The same situation is with rounds itself.

On the other hand you claim that Western engineers are unable to reproduce something like Relic, because the way Relic works is so incredibly new, secretive and unknown that it is a thing of sheer impossibility for Western engineers to know?

That argumentation skates on this ice, if you ask me.

Yes, i claim it. Exactly. Now, when Relict is fielded, West surery can reproduce it at least for testing purposes. But 1st, M829A3 was created before Relict, so no testing here. 2nd, aquiring Relict will not help much APFSDS round developers to defeat it - they would need to radically change APFSDS round design for that. Like proposed small precursor warhead similar to tandem HEAT warhead, or long (1+m) tip what will pre-initate ERA, or 2 APFSDS rounds closely behind each other striking the same place...

NOT just simply 15% increase in lenghts , 15% decrease in width, and 5% increase in hardness. That will not help against ERA - only against passive armor...

 

[DavidDCM]

Don't misunderstand me, I never said that the new Western rounds are not affected by ERA. I just oppose your statement that APFSDS-designers have no possibilities to counter the inventions of ERA-designers. I am not an engineer, so of course I can't tell you about the ways an KE-arrow can be improved against Relict, because I don't know. But from what I understood, you are not an engineer, too, so your knowledge about how to counter an incoming APFSDS should also be quite limited, too.
Both we can just guess. For example: The AFPSDS today are much longer than in earlier times, maybe they have a certain breaking-point somewhere in the front third, that is made out of a more brittle metal explicitely meant to break in the moment of an ERA-hit without destabilizing the rest of the arrow. The KE-designers roughly know how thick the passive armour of modern Russian tanks is, so they could have designed the KE in a way that even after being broken by the ERA at that certain point it's mainbody still has enough power and mass to punch through the passive armour.

You see, I can only guess with my limited knowledge about ballistics, metalurgy and whatever else is important. But nonetheless I'm sure there are ways for engineers to improve a KE-arrows performance even against Relict. Again, I never said that DM63 or M829A3 are immune to Relict, or any other ERA.

 

[Chrom]

Don't misunderstand me, I never said that the new Western rounds are not affected by ERA. I just oppose your statement that APFSDS-designers have no possibilities to counter the inventions of ERA-designers. I am not an engineer, so of course I can't tell you about the ways an KE-arrow can be improved against Relict, because I don't know. But from what I understood, you are not an engineer, too, so your knowledge about how to counter an incoming APFSDS should also be quite limited, too.

Sure, my understanding is limited. But lets compare our stances:
On your side is only religious "i dont belive it". On my side is word from official organization, public patents , logical and believiable explanation of ERA effect.

Both we can just guess. For example: The AFPSDS today are much longer than in earlier times, maybe they have a certain breaking-point somewhere in the front third, that is made out of a more brittle metal explicitely meant to break in the moment of an ERA-hit without destabilizing the rest of the arrow.

Will not work due to several factors. To name the few:
1. Dart is striking ERA under different angle each time. That will make impossible to determine such place.
2. Dart is striking ERA in different place of each tile - this again make it impossible to determing exact place.
3. Dart striking ERA under quite low angle - as such ERA affect quite long part of dart.
4. Read the patent and explanation how Relict work on NII Stali website. ERA have quite prolonged effect, striking APFSDS dart and HEAT stream in several places at different times. Cutting tips, pressuring middle, cutting backs, yawing round. As such, you'll need to place such inserts literally everywhere in the dart.
5. Placing such inserts will degrade APFSDS perfomance even without ERA. That alone make such inserts very unlikely.

The KE-designers roughly know how thick the passive armour of modern Russian tanks is, so they could have designed the KE in a way that even after being broken by the ERA at that certain point it's mainbody still has enough power and mass to punch through the passive armour.

This would imply the omnipotence of APFSDS designers 1st, and they knowledge of Relict armor at time of APFSDS development second. Both these propositions are false. DM-63 and M829A3 designers couldnt know about Relict - only about K-5.

I could also tell with same degree of credibility what russian desginers "know how thick the passive armour of modern USA tanks is, so they could have designed the KE in a way to break it". And note, they would have much better chances - after all, they havent faced with unpredicable new gen ERA induction.... Knowing something is not equal the abilty to defeat it.

You see, I can only guess with my limited knowledge about ballistics, metalurgy and whatever else is important. But nonetheless I'm sure there are ways for engineers to improve a KE-arrows performance even against Relict. Again, I never said that DM63 or M829A3 are immune to Relict, or any other ERA.

And you see, your guess was completely false even from my uneducated knowledge. Note, i dont have a doubt what developers can find a way to improve APFSDS perfomance against ERA. I'm quite ready to accept what ERA will affect DM-63 to lesser degree than M829A1 round. But the difference will be between advertisied 1.2-1.5 times. 1.5 times for "easy" short rounds. 1.2 times for specially hardened anti-ERA long rounds...

 

[DavidDCM]

Okay, from this point on I have no more arguments, hence you can be supposed to have convinced me.

I could also tell with same degree of credibility what russian desginers "know how thick the passive armour of modern USA tanks is, so they could have designed the KE in a way to break it".

I'm pretty sure newest Russian KE can defeat a Leopard 2's or Abrams' frontal armour at considerable distances.

 

[Chrom]

Okay, from this point on I have no more arguments, hence you can be supposed to have convinced me.



I'm pretty sure newest Russian KE can defeat a Leopard 2's or Abrams' frontal armour at considerable distances.

Wouldnt bet it can defeat M1A2SEP frontal armor... In fact, i'm resonable sure current russian KE cant do it in normal case - only in weakened zones...

 

[Grand Danois]

Hmm.. I have a question about reactive armour. Since I don't know what makes the tiles detonate (impulse?), I'll ask it generically:

Can a projectile fired from an autocannon, say, the Bushmaster III make a ERA tile detonate when it impacts?

If so - magnificent firework!

 

[kato]

Can a projectile fired from an autocannon, say, the Bushmaster III make a ERA tile detonate when it impacts?

Yes, and that's intentional.

Don't forget that a tank with exploding ERA is of course not just sitting there. And about anything armed only with a Bushmaster III is typically an easy target for the main gun.

 

[Grand Danois]

Yes, and that's intentional.

Don't forget that a tank with exploding ERA is of course not just sitting there. And about anything armed only with a Bushmaster III is typically an easy target for the main gun.

It was more of a physics question than a tactics question. But now we're at it: if such an engagement should occur, then wouldn't the tiles going off disrupt the aiming and laying of the tank gun - I.e. wouldn't it be better if the tiles weren't triggered by autocannon rounds?

 

[Wooki]

Hmm.. I have a question about reactive armour. Since I don't know what makes the tiles detonate (impulse?), I'll ask it generically:

Can a projectile fired from an autocannon, say, the Bushmaster III make a ERA tile detonate when it impacts?

If so - magnificent firework!

Actually, you can design ERA for specific KE cook off. In other words, if you really were that way inclined, you could make it "insensitive" enough to just react to say 105mm and up.

30 mike mike is alot of KE BTW. Its beyond STANAG lvl 5.

cheers

w

 

[Chrom]

Hmm.. I have a question about reactive armour. Since I don't know what makes the tiles detonate (impulse?), I'll ask it generically:

Can a projectile fired from an autocannon, say, the Bushmaster III make a ERA tile detonate when it impacts?

If so - magnificent firework!

It is up to particular ERA version. Some ERA's designed to detonate on anything biggger than 0.50, some do not denotate for anything smaller than 45mm. For Relict claimed no detonation for common 30mm rounds.

 

[Waylander]

What is a common 30mm? HE, AP, APFSDS?
In then end if you are sitting in an IFV which is encountering enemy armor you have some options.

1. You are lucky and fight from a defensive position meaning that you usually get the first shot and can show them your ATGMs. If pressure gets too big retreat to other position. No usage of cannon at all if no enemy IFVs (Or smaller vehicles) or infantry is in range.

2. You suddenly encounter enemy armor while being on the move but at longer range. There you might get an ATGM (hopefully fire and forget) on the way, fire smoke and retreat. Hope for the best so that no fast tank gunner lets you taste his main gun.

3. The same just at close range. Now it is time for the cannon (And sadly also usually time for the IFV to die...). Forget the ATGM. Aim for the optics and fire as many bursts as possible against them, fire smoke and retreat back as fast as possible. Your chances to actually really hit the enemy optics is slim but if successfull could save your ass. If you just aim for the center of the enemy MBT and hope for some ERA tiles to explode you just further reduce your chances of getting away alive.

I see no advantage in IFVs trying to attack the enemy ERA tiles. This shouldn't disrupt aiming of the gunner very much and is IMHO a bad choice compared to aiming at the optics.
I never heard of any IFV gunner that he would/should try to make ERA explode.

 

[Chrom]

What is a common 30mm? HE, AP, APFSDS?
In then end if you are sitting in an IFV which is encountering enemy armor you have some options.

I dont know. Ask NII Stali for specific. But i suspect none of above will detonate tank's ERA (allthought might damage it). IFV's ERA might be tuned differently.

I see no advantage in IFVs trying to attack the enemy ERA tiles. This shouldn't disrupt aiming of the gunner very much and is IMHO a bad choice compared to aiming at the optics.
I never heard of any IFV gunner that he would/should try to make ERA explode.

Agree.

 

[DavidDCM]

I guess, the ERA-engineers have thought about this issue, but if it would be possible to destroy ERA with autocannon fire, then it would leave some interesting options for tanks. Some earlier tanks had autocannons as coaxial gun instead of MGs. For example the AMX-30 or the Swiss Pz. 61 who both had a 20mm coax. If they could spray an enemy vehicle with their 20mm and cause some of the ERA-tiles to explode before sending in the "real" round, then the chances of a succesful penetration would be improved quite a bit. Of course this is highly theoretical, because no modern tank has a coax bigger than .50 cal anymore, and as chrom said, modern ERA is immune to such "small arms" fire.
Next to this, such a practice would consume a lot of time (identify enemy tank, aim, switch to coax, spray a proper amount of rounds on it's ERA, switch back to maingun, fire again). In this time the enemy has enough time to react.

It was just an idea.

 

[Chrom]

I guess, the ERA-engineers have thought about this issue, but if it would be possible to destroy ERA with autocannon fire, then it would leave some interesting options for tanks. Some earlier tanks had autocannons as coaxial gun instead of MGs. For example the AMX-30 or the Swiss Pz. 61 who both had a 20mm coax. If they could spray an enemy vehicle with their 20mm and cause some of the ERA-tiles to explode before sending in the "real" round, then the chances of a succesful penetration would be improved quite a bit. Of course this is highly theoretical, because no modern tank has a coax bigger than .50 cal anymore, and as chrom said, modern ERA is immune to such "small arms" fire.
Next to this, such a practice would consume a lot of time (identify enemy tank, aim, switch to coax, spray a proper amount of rounds on it's ERA, switch back to maingun, fire again). In this time the enemy has enough time to react.

It was just an idea.

Dont forget, composite armor is also quickly degraded under heavy AC fire. But AC's are pretty ineffective at 2+ km range, plus of course a lot of time will be lost stripping ERA. In such battles often there is no second chance.

 

[eckherl]

Actually, you can design ERA for specific KE cook off. In other words, if you really were that way inclined, you could make it "insensitive" enough to just react to say 105mm and up.

30 mike mike is alot of KE BTW. Its beyond STANAG lvl 5.

cheers

w

Agreed Wooki - doesn`t some of that controlled process work due to different thickness levels of the actual deflection plates used, Russia may have gone to three plates with the second and third plates designed to be the thickest, the way that it is angled also would assist. Makes one wonder what type of metals and ceramic materials are used for the deflection plates.

 

[Distiller]

Something tells me that battle tank vs battle tank engagements will be rare.

The more likely (sub)urban environment will be the scene of future battles, the more a tank has to worry about RPGs, ATGMs, LOSAT-type missiles, top attacks launched by artillery or ATACMS-type missiles or loitering cruise missiles or bombers or fighter bombers or helicopters. Encountering another MBT seems to be of lesser probability here.

Doesn't mean battle tank armor shouldn't be designed to counter dart ammo, but I guess the priority will be on tandem shaped charged and EFP warheads.

Then there is still the problem of consecutive hits on the same ERA plate.
Artillery shelling could also trigger ERA, leaving only the bare whatever-is-below (ceramics, nanomaterial, just steel, &c).

 

[Waylander]

Why should they be rare.
One should not assume that every war will be so onesided like US vs some developing country.

It is not said that the enemy has no AA support of various kinds (for example Tunguska, Thor, S-300, Fighters). Add to that a usefull counterfire capability and your air and artillery support is not available when you need it the most.
And suddenly your tanks are again the main AT-weapon.

That is the idea of combined arms.

For sure if one side has an overhelming superiority in the air as well as in other aspects of warfare the enemy tanks are rarely going to have to opportunity to goe toe on toe against other tanks.

As for the possibility of future conflicts taking place in nearly solely (sub)urban environments. No army which has the slightest chance of countering an enemy in the open is going to do this.
If you restrict yourself to the cities of your country you have already lost the conventional part of the war.
Your lines of supply are disrupted, your communication is disrupted, your airfields are captured and you can not maneuver any of your units.
The enemy is going to maneuver freely in the open around your cities which in the end leads to your forces being captured alive in the cities.
From now on you may hold the cities for some time but how do you want to supply your troops (And the civilians) with food, medicine, spare parts and ammo?

No, if you want to win a conventional war you have to control a frontline and not only some cities.

 

[eckherl]

Thats the bugger of it Waylander, everyone seems to think that we are heading into a era that all conflicts will be small scale operations only and the heavies are on their way out, but the trend seems to be that everyone is keeping what they have and improving/upgrading them.It will be just a matter of time before we see two sizable forces going at it and they will need their tanks.

 

[Wooki]

Agreed Wooki - doesn`t some of that controlled process work due to different thickness levels of the actual deflection plates used, Russia may have gone to three plates with the second and third plates designed to be the thickest, the way that it is angled also would assist. Makes one wonder what type of metals and ceramic materials are used for the deflection plates.

Yes, it does, doesn't it? AS always there are 101 ways to skin a Katski, but I would agree that increasing the relative thickness (depending on the aspect of the incoming threat) is one way to control reaction of the ERA tile.
Another way (as you alluded to) is to alter the chemical composition of the reactive material and that could be as simple as adding inert particles to a reactive mix.

Thats the bugger of it Waylander, everyone seems to think that we are heading into a era that all conflicts will be small scale operations only and the heavies are on their way out, but the trend seems to be that everyone is keeping what they have and improving/upgrading them.It will be just a matter of time before we see two sizable forces going at it and they will need their tanks.

I think we are going through a transition period, before the new super powers step onto the gaming board. If we do see a near future tank on tank battle, I hope we still have some A10's flying around.

cheers

w

 

[Distiller]

Valid points everything. I'm the last to speak against a well rounded-out force with combined weapons capability. And I always warn against over-reliance on airpower.

But two things in response:
# From a Western standpoint - why should a defender put his forces in harm's way in an open field battle against my hightech forces? Talking about the use of state-of-the-art equipment, the (Western) high-tech power will always be the invader (except if Mexico wants to re-incorporate Texas). Just let me come. I have to win, he just has to abide.
# Remember Hannibal. Victory after victory in the open field. Failed to assault the walls of Rome. Lost in the end. You can't keep out of cities in the end.

Besides Korean peninsula I can't come up with any potential tank battles (and the Chinese won't allow that, anyway). Or want to see Moscow from the hatch of your tank next year? Lots of conflict zones are in mountains, swamps and other tank-unfriendly areas.