who can kill a modern Main Battle Tank (MBT)?

[Waylander]

Haven't we talked about this incident just recently in one thread?
I just can't remember where...

The lower frontal part of the Challi 2 hull is indeed not on of the strongest points and exactly because of that they decided to give it additional protection by adding ERA tiles.
As you said it is now the question if the ERA has malfunctioned or was defeated by the tandem warhead of the RPG-29.
After this incident the brits began to test additional passive armor on this part which would replace the ERA tiles.

Nowadays infantry has better AT weapons available. Modern ATGMs give them some good long range fire power which was something infantry in WWII totally lacked. Modern weapons like RPG-29 or PzFst 3 IT-600 also give them impressive short range AT firepower.
Modern AT-mines like the DM-12 PARM 1also give some interesting additional capabilities to the infantry

But it is right that tanks also have become more maneuverable. During WWII the big beasts were often enough less mobile while the mobile ones were easier to penetrate. These days the heavy armored MBTs are nearly the most mobile vehicles on the battlefield.

In the end the infantry of today can realy much more on their integrated portable AT systems which negates the need for such direct attacks on tanks to some degree while in the other hand they lost even more ground to the armored forces when it comes to mobility.

 

[ROCK45]

Unguided Rockets

Back to my question a few posts back are unguided launched rockets effective against main battle tanks. I don't know if there designed the same way as RPGs, do they have enough push or brute strength to damage a modern designed main battle tank? Do helicopters need a true anti-tank missile type like an Hellfire to destroy a modern battle tank?

Thanks

 

[eckherl]

It didn't kill him, he lost one of his feet (as can be read here). According to the article, the ERA somehow failed, but it remains unclear whether it simply didn't work or wasn't effective enough. Perhaps one of the pros here knows more about the incident. Eckherl?

Its amazing what circulates on the internet.

It was indeed a RPG 29 that managed to penetrate the front hull, the full report is a classified document but I will state that the ROMOR ERA package was designed with a pretty good performance level of protection against shaped and tandem style warheads, there is a pretty good chance that there was indeed a defect in the ERA package at the penetration point. There will be a upgrade to the primary armor protection level in this area, something that may of been neglected during the initial design phase of Challenger 1 and 2. Also they have gone to a newer generation ERA package that is currently getting fielded that should offer even better protection levels on the sides of the vehicle.

Something that the rest of you should take into consideration is the difficult task of actually placing any type of a ERA package on the lower front slope of a tank hull due to what that vehicle will experience hitting trees, rocks, structures and other different types of battlefield debris that gets in its way.

Hope that this may help shed some light Falstaff and ROCK45

 

[eckherl]

Do unguided rockets such as S-8 types have much effect on main battle type? I assume not against the front armor but could a volley from the side or top do damage?

Thanks


The S-8 system is the main caliber weapon in the class of unguided aircraft rockets and can solve a variety of aircraft missions.

The following types of S-8 rockets are operational today:

* S-8KOM with HEAT fragmentation warhead;
* S-8BM with concrete-piercing (penetrating) warhead;
* S-8DM with fuel-air explosive warhead;
* S-8-OM with illuminating warhead;
* S-8PM with chaff warhead.

http://www.rbs.ru/vttv/99/firms/applphys/e-s8.htm

Well - the article clearly states that the S8- ROM is intended for the use of armor, if you attack a tank from the rear and punch at the turret top or rear, or go for the engine deck then you could in fact stand a pretty good chance of a penetration, due to armor thickness. You have to compensate some where on tanks due to weight issues.

 

[playman43]

To Kill A Mbt You Need To Be Very Close Or Be Air Born ,rpgs Will Kill Anything With Just Armor Plate But Are Pretty Usless Against Chohbam This Was Proved Not To Long Ago When A Challenger Became Stuck And Came Under Sustained Rpg And Small Arms Fire No Crew Casualties And The Tank Was Recovered Intact

[Mod Edit] First, welcome to the forum.

To make your posts more readable, & encourage others to pay attention to them, might I suggest that you not begin every word with a capital letter?

BTW, reading the forum rules is always recommended for new members - http://defencetalk.com/forums/rules.php

pji
[/Mod edit]

 

[eckherl]

Here is a couple of photos showing the latest upgrade to the front hull armor on Challenger 2, problem resolved.

 

[Waylander]

One thing I always wondered when seying these photos. What are these warning signs for?

Are they just because of the test or do they want to protect something I just don't see?

 

[eckherl]

One thing I always wondered when seying these photos. What are these warning signs for?

Are they just because of the test or do they want to protect something I just don't see?

If your making reference to the red and yellow placards I think that they use them for visibility purposes for passing automobiles.

 

[Waylander]

Jup, I mean the yeelow/red ones.

For cars?
Are they part of the normal outfit when Challis do a roadmarch. I thought these pics are from testing sites.

 

[eckherl]

Jup, I mean the yeelow/red ones.

For cars?
Are they part of the normal outfit when Challis do a roadmarch. I thought these pics are from testing sites.

I really do not know if it is a standard practice, one photo shows them on a vehicle driving on a road while the other photo shows what looks like the same road a upgraded Challie is driving without them.

 

[Waylander]

Ok, we have enough brits here. Somebody has to know it.

ANSWER!!!!

 

[eckherl]

@waylander

Did you see this, RWS with either 7.62 or 12.7, they will most likely go with one of these systems for Challie.

 

[Waylander]

IIRC they already have a 12.7mm RWS in service with the Challis asigned to the Army of the Rhine since some time.

I really admire the British ability to quickly adopt new technologies and react to new situations with their Challi fleet.

They seem to be fast when it comes to introducing new upgrade packages for their tank fleet.

 

[eckherl]

IIRC they already have a 12.7mm RWS in service with the Challis asigned to the Army of the Rhine since some time.

I really admire the British ability to quickly adopt new technologies and react to new situations with their Challi fleet.

They seem to be fast when it comes to introducing new upgrade packages for their tank fleet.

I guess that they are quick, maybe the U.S could learn something from them. How long has the 12.7 version been on the tanks in Germany.

 

[Awang se]

I guess that they are quick, maybe the U.S could learn something from them

US already have TUSK if i'm not mistaken, and it come with RWS.

 

[lobbie111]

Can someone tell me how the new LAW MBT (NLAW?) Rates in terms of tank busting ability looks a pretty good package, its basically a BILL 2 with a simple guidance mechansim. The way the guidance mechanisim works is by foucsing on the target with an aimpoint for three seconds and it plots a predicted line (PLOS) so as to get moving targets although if the tanks stops youve wasted a missile (it fires on that predicted path of the tank)...Thoughts?

 

[ranComdr]

as said else where it depends

I heard a tank being disabled with an old heavy rpg.

....

also firing two light missles can do the job as one sets of the explosive armour, and the second comes in for the kill

or so I heard

 

[Feanor]

Nuke it


Ok smilies aside, seriously. If it's a major armored spearhead that's heading for you, nuking it is the simplest and most efficient solution.

 

[Waylander]

That applies to a lot of military problems one might encounter...

 

[Feanor]

Surprisingly enough you're right (EDIT: no offense meant). It's the simplest way of dealing with most large (and I mean in physical land coverage ) problems. A powerful first world army isn't any better then third world child soldiers, if nukes are dropping like snowflakes during a blizzard.