I was at an outdoor range the other day, and it had a earthen

>>31740238
>>31740238
if your vehicle is getting hit with thousands or hundreds of thousands of rounds, you're doing something wrong.

>>31740266
Or doing something very very right

>>31740238
I suppose you could put a bunch of sandbags on bits of the tank, maybe underneath those anti-RPG grilles that some of them have. I don't know much about military vehicles, you might get better answers from the treadheads.

>>31740238
It will be larger and heaver than steel/ceramic plates.
Although they do do this for barriers when they got time to set up.

>>31740238
Vehicles aren't meant to be enclosed and walled and

Trench is the word you're thinking of with infantry.

They're both outdated and negated by air support

File: BQWo4hF.jpg (91KB, 800x508px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x508px

>>31740238
>Some sort of earthen dirt-based armor that would simply absorb and hold incoming rounds - there's gotta be people looking into this, right?
You're not seriously advocating for a 5m wide earthen rampart attached to vehicles, are you?

File: 1476894170049.jpg (16KB, 196x229px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 196x229px

>>31740308
The magical air support that is always on station, can never be suppressed and will fly through IADS to support a small, close quarters engagement, firing danger close into a forest.

>>31740279
It would defeat the purpose of the rpg grilles (to catch the rocket without triggering the piezo-electric crush-switch in the nose)

I mean granted it would also disperse the shaped charge a lot but by then you are adding a shit load of weight for negligable redundancy.

It could work for redneck composite armor though. Like on one of these haji ork-tech style technicals you could have sand sandwiched in between two layers of steel as a sort of anti-spalling measure.

Wouldnt do jack shit against ATGM's or anything aircraft can carry though.

>>31740238
See "sandbags" or "HESCO"

>>31740317
Yeah, that air support that sends grown men running except they can't because they literally dug themselves into their own grave

>>31740311
Actually, thinking about it now, would it be feasible to have that be used during a coordinated advance? Multiple vehicles pushing some kind of simple armor piece in front of them? I don't want to go off on a lolrandumb ebin greentext tangent, but imagine.
>tank pushing something like a siege wall in front of it
>space between the wall and the tank filled by a couple of infantry
How much stronger would the engine on the vehicle have to be to be able to push a decent piece of armor in front? Or do we just put engines on the walls themselves?

>>31740317
Isn't American doctrine based around having air superiority?

>>31740344
god damnit, you say "we" as if all of us would do it.
no man, you are on your own on this one

File: 1449682132269.jpg (412KB, 1600x1142px) Image search: [Google]

412KB, 1600x1142px

>>31740355
Hey, you can't have just one tank pushing a wall in front of it. You have to do it with me or else I'll end up looking dumb.

>>31740349
I thought we sent the troops in first and THEN made bombing runs

>>31740349
Yes, which is why whenever air support isn't possible, US troops perform worse than their counterparts.

>>31740333
are those made from a different material than the stuff in the range backstop? It looks different.

>>31740380
Pretty sure it starts with surgical strikes on high value targets followed by ground troops who then call in bombing runs on anything that sneezes without permission

File: 1476883124589.jpg (147KB, 718x458px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 718x458px

>>31740344
And then the enemy calls in indirect fire support, or fires directly at your "siege wall", killing everyone behind it.

>>31740380
My point was, what do the ground forces do when it doesn't have air superiority? The US always owned the airspaces of the last few wars it fought in.

>>31740466
Sit tight, waiting for air support. God forbid they'd actually have to do a bit of real soldiering through fire and maneuver.

>>31740406
couldnt you just make it thicker? a 155mm shell wont penetrate 50+ meters of dirt

File: fig2-2.gif (3KB, 579x275px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 579x275px

>>31740480

>>31740344
>line of armor in siege formation
>anti-armor weapon's wet dream

Notice that "simple armor piece" would really only be useful against small arms, which the vehicle itself already defeats. It's worse than useless against HEAT.

>>31740480
Observe what explosives tend to do to dirt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3f9s2_cXog

>>31740324
>purpose of the rpg grilles (to catch the rocket without triggering the piezo-electric crush-switch in the nose)
The grills also detonate the rockets away from the armor so the shaped charge isn't focused correctly (usually precalculated to the rocket's tip). The blast dissipates into the gap instead of punching through the armor. The hull still gets "hit" over a greater area but generally stays intact.

>>31740344

Kudos for creative thinking, but wow do you fail at simple logic and reasoning.

>>31740383
WTF i hate america now

>>31740385
It's literally a hesco brand canvas like material filled with the futile efforts of privates.