/k/, how are modern armoured vehicles supposed to be resistant against top attack threats, such as TOW (forming an EFP) and Javeline (dual shaped charge) missiles?
Modern tank armour is capable of defeating all chemical energy weapons (HEAT & HESH) from the frontal arc, but the armour on the roof must be very limited due to the realities of having to allow the crew access up top, mustn't it?
How is this problem remedied?
Perhaps the slightly austistic idea of putting an exterior roof over the tank to act as spaced armour?
>>32234451
>How is this problem remedied?
active protection systems. they are basically lauching frag grenades at the incoming warhead.
>>32234476
i read some tow missiles fire dummy rounds first to get through the active protection and then the real round punches through the tank
Like >>32234476 said, active protection systems accomplish the task of defeating top attack threats or tandem shaped charge warheads.
That is the thing I do like about Russian tanks, is the emphasis placed on APS because their steel or composite armor lacks the quality (as far as we in the west know, but its safe to assume because Russia) that western steel or composite has.
Israel seems to have remedied this problem as well, with their Trophy APS.
I wasn't a tanker, so I don't know a whole lot about when and if the US will adopt an active protection system like Afghanit or Trophy.
The military industrial complex here doesn't seem to think that it is absolutely necessary because of the type of conflicts we've been fighting, but once the US shapes up for symmetrical warfare again, I'd be willing to bet we would see a rapid fielding of it on our tank fleet in no time at all.
>>32234467
slightly autistic. hey that fucking shed is moving, shoot the cunt
>>32234512
its called evolution, threats and countermeasures are constantly one-upping each other.
>>32234467
What the fuck is that? Where the fuck does it come from? Is this some old school RTS or something?
>>32238608
>APS fires dummy rounds in retaliation
>>32239696
>>32234451
Follow Zhukov's example
>>32234451
WTF..how the hell does a tank have 420mm armor?
>>32239823
tanks are big anon
>>32234451
APS and advanced ERA/NERA.
>>32239823
Well 420mm is roughly a foot and a quarter, which isn't unheard of for a tank.
>>32239823
"mm of RHA" is just a unit of measure. It's a rough way to express the protective quality of ceramic/DU armor by comparing it to steel.
>>32239823
>not noticing 860mm right beside the 480mm mantlet
Tanks have over a foot of armor at the front and fuck all at the rear.
>>32239696
>>32239712
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>>32239782
>>32239782
Infantry protection in that case probably wasn't referring to meat shields but rather combined arms tactics.
>>32240928
So, something that everyone did.
>>32239712
T-64?
>>32238676
>the atgm dummy rounds fire real rounds
>>32234467
Tarps like that are used to hide from UAVs by disguising the tank as a building. Won't provide any armor though.
>>32234467
I think warheads will easily develop to defeat this kind of 'tricky' spaced armour; see: those anti-infantry rounds that penetrate walls before detonating
>>32241850
Likely an Ukrainian improved T-72
>>32245265
t-64 'bulat'
>>32236423
>because their steel or composite armor lacks the quality that western steel or composite has.
Russia can make steel just as well as USA, UK or GER can. The problem is that with steel, DU etc. you need mass to defeat the threat. and Russia has refused to add that weight to their tanks so far. T-90s have the same quality armour as western tanks but less of it.
>>32248601
>>32248613
>>32248601
>>32234451
>resist
before you try to beef the armor up, you try to avoid the hit
usually by deploying a smokescreen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91g_rsqWpHk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsH-Z6LRv84
5 seconds later, you drive out of the smoke and blow that ATGM position away
it's probably a lot more cheaper and more reliable