Protecting Tanks against Missiles

File: aad00e5fea696e6df0d91761f92c235c.jpg (61KB, 736x414px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 736x414px

German Schürzen (Spaced) Armor

File: sandbagged-E8_zpsmjp5prjo (1).jpg (402KB, 1024x781px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 1024x781px

Sherman with sandbags

take your shit threads elsewhere please

File: RG33_MRAP_category_II_wire_cage_armour_mine_protected_armoured_vehicle_United_States_US_army_640.jpg (61KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x425px

Slat Armor

File: os005.jpg (193KB, 1024x632px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1024x632px

>>34215159

File: IMG_4184.jpg (244KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1024x683px

>>34215164

File: Pz4H-17 821.jpg (59KB, 537x355px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 537x355px

>>34215150

File: main-qimg-9c83a8c02683787d4ef938d976f34317-c.jpg (22KB, 602x383px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 602x383px

>>34215171

Interest bump

File: article-0-0F2FE99000000578-441_634x413.jpg (61KB, 634x413px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 634x413px

>>34215166

File: SGb7dCC.jpg (166KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1600x1200px

Spaced Armor on an M10

File: h3.jpg (50KB, 620x309px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 620x309px

Curved plates used as spaced armor on an M1 Abrams

File: download (1).jpg (149KB, 1440x810px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1440x810px

ERA

>>34215119.
>Which tank of the War would probably be most resistant to unguided missile fire?
IS-3 or M26

>>34215242
Thanks. Is it just because of the Heavy Armor, or does having sloped armor like the IS-3 or M26 also protect against missile fire?

Sandbags won't work against shaped charges. Slat armor is better because it cuts and damages the fuse. ERA is best. If they can make ERA there's no reason for them not to just use that.

>>34215252
The heavily-sloped frontal armour helps, but I say IS-3 because of its side armour which is thick and protected by spaced armour.

The M26 is probably less protected but is still somewhat comparable to the IS-3 and unlike its counterpart actually saw combat in WWII.

>>34215119
With 1940s era tanks there is honestly not much to be done against shaped charge weapons - they're just too good at cutting through metal. spaced/slat armor helps but isn't enough of a guarantee that I'd trust my life to it. Sloped armor could cause early HEAT munitions to deflect without detonating, so some reassurance there.
Honestly though, there's a reason why the first generation of postwar tanks emphasized mobility and firepower over armor. You're better off with a fast tank with great optics and a fuck-off gun that's just armored enough to shrug off 75-85mm shell and slat armor.

If you really want tanks to have a fair chance against shaped-charge rockets you'll need stuff like multiple layers of internal spaced armor or ERA.

Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't slat armor do nothing against shaped charges? I thought I read that Schürzen actually gave the cone more distance to form and made it more efficient and it was used to stop Russian 14.5mm AT rounds . And with slat armor I thought it basically either catches the rocket or causes it to be destroyed before it can detonate the charge.

File: 1475994158136.jpg (72KB, 473x414px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 473x414px

This is what they come up with in Syria to protect against RPGs and ATGMs.

>>34215508
Slat armor on top of spaced armor. Interesting.

>>34215508
>come up with
waht? it's ww2 german technology. they didn't came up with shit.

>>34215483
Slat armor is supposed to slice up the charge and damage the fuse, or cause it to detonate early.

>>34215508
It seems Syrians are fans of german tanks so they tried to turn their tank into tiger with all that square armor.

>>34215119

Only two things that you can ducktape on the field work against shaped charges.

First one is spaced armor, if spaced enough unlike the Berlin bed frame T-34 it will detonate the shaped charge at a far away enough distance to either dissipate or reduce the effectiveness of the blast on the armor. If not spaced enough like the Berlin bed frame T-34 it will actually improve the penetration by providing an optimal detonation distance.

Second one is concrete lining on the inside, which does nothing to stop the Shape Charge but it does reduce spaling by a significant amount though it does require the hatch to be open for it to truly work.

>>34215119

>Which tank of the War would probably be most resistant to unguided missile fire?
The Panzer 4 H with the shutzen but pretty much all WW2 tanks if shot from the front with a powerful enough shaped charge are fucked.

>>34215548
far enough? i seem to remember a video where armored windows were placed at 1 meter spaced and heat went right through without much problem several meters of them.

>>34215548
Why the open hatch. Is it for some air pressure thing or just to keep the crew ventilated.

>>34215560

>far enough?
That was the problem with the bed frames, they where just far away enough to actually give a boost to panzerfausts.
> 1 meter spaced and heat went right through without much problem several meters of them.
Depends on the type of heat warhead and the thickness of the steel, since that copper cone is still traveling at ludicrous speed. What the spaced armor does it give a chance for the warhead to be misaligned with the armor and reduce some of the blast, it won't fully neutralize it on it's own.

>>34215561
>it for some air pressure thing
Yup

>>34215508

>Hasam you see if you put spaced armor on top of spaced armor RPGs wont penetrate since 2 Spaced Armour > 1 HEAT charge

>>34215560
You know how modern HEAT shells have their fuse far away from the shell in a point? They look kinda like a thumbtack. The reason is the jet needs some distance to form properly. If your spaced armor is about that distance, then you only make the incoming HEAT round more effective.

File: 1415900370707.jpg (56KB, 600x335px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x335px

>>34215119
>RPG post apoc

Scrap metal spaced armor, chicken-wire/fencepost/chain-linked fence mesh, and overlapping ceramic roof shingles/glued floor tile sheets on rebar frames, if you're going for the scav look.

>>34215522
Of course they didn't come up with slat armour. They came up with putting it on a T-72 like that.

>>34216425
That sounds wholly ineffective

Slat armor is going to be useful against HEAT warheads with only one penetrator.

If you're dealing with tandem HEAT, it will become substantially less useful.

ERA works, but it also tends to gib nearby infantry.

>>34215508
>>34215518
>>34215676
im guessing this is the same idea behind layering ERA, a lot of warheads they'll be seeing are tandem and the doubling of slat and spaced armor helps protect against the tandem charge

>>34215119

Best single layer of defense would be slat armor.

Spaced armor (in the form of plates or sandbags, logs), or simple applique- additional plates welded on would be the most period-correct.

In some ways it depends upon how powerful the anti-tank munitions are. If you're talking about WW2 era, then applique and spaced armor would be fine.

However if you had WW2-era tanks facing up against even something as powerful as an RPG-7 it's more likely they'd do as the Soviets did and overwhelm an area with infantry armed to clear houses and invest resources in more heavily-armed vehicles (ala ISU-152 and IS-2) that could clear buildings (rather than rooms) from beyond the effective distance of return fire. In this case they'd probably accept more significant collateral damage as necessary to prevent casualties.

File: 1lQXspR.jpg (41KB, 500x304px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x304px

have tracks will carry

File: armour..jpg (145KB, 922x691px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 922x691px

There are pics of T.34 with primitive slat armour out there.
Basically you use this and hope for the best.

File: t34.jpg (107KB, 1002x684px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1002x684px

WWII.

>>34218580
>However if you had WW2-era tanks facing up against even something as powerful as an RPG-7 it's more likely they'd do as the Soviets did and overwhelm an area with infantry armed to clear houses and invest resources in more heavily-armed vehicles (ala ISU-152 and IS-2) that could clear buildings (rather than rooms) from beyond the effective distance of return fire. In this case they'd probably accept more significant collateral damage as necessary to prevent casualties.
That's perfect, that makes complete sense. Thanks

File: Verlinden soviet tank riders (3).jpg (42KB, 704x255px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 704x255px

Use infantry, komrade

>>34215208
>Curved plates used as spaced armor on an M1 Abrams
you mean ERA

Wood boards.

File: shiett XD.jpg (11KB, 228x221px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 228x221px

>>34215676

>>34215164
>>34215159
Tank noob here, slat armor seems relatively light and like it would be effective against shaped charges. But obviously its not perfect, because it'd be fielded everywhere if it was.

So whats the problem with it?

File: Sherman hit.jpg (224KB, 1280x1017px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1280x1017px

>>34220692
Wood armor huh.

File: Field_Modified_M4_Sherman_From_29th_Infantry_Division_747th_Tank_Bn_1945.jpg (264KB, 1600x1273px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1600x1273px

Also concrete armor.

File: DBgMHy-W0AEFLkb.jpg (74KB, 724x720px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 724x720px

have any boxes lying around?

File: T-55 enigma.jpg (73KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1024x681px

>>34221117
The idea behind the slats is to either A) detonate the warhead prematurly, thus mitigating damage by allowing the empty space between the slats and the actual armor to cool and deform the metal jet, or B) destroy the projectile entirely by force of impact.

Method B is viable, and is the foundation of essentially all active protection systems. The issue with slats is that modern shaped-charge warheads can penetrate an insane amount of homogeneous steel armor. As such, even with a foot or so of standoff distance between the point of detonation and the surface of the armor, you still have the potential for the shaped charge to penetrate the tank. Keep in mind that, while arguably less dangerous, any metallic jet that is hot and fast enough to punch through armor is going to do a lot of damage to whatever is on the other side, even if the jet only just barely makes it through.

Along with this, ERA is generally more effective at defeating shaped charges, and can be used to counter KEPs as well, where cage armor is useless.

In short; it's lighter, yes, but broadly less effective than ERA and composite armor. If you can mount the latter options you pretty much always should. Pic related

File: the solution to all our problems.png (257KB, 873x509px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 873x509px

Just start putting CIWS on the tanks

>>34215155
(You)

File: HAW 206.png (589KB, 1075x743px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 1075x743px

>>34221481
>20mm Vulcan
>barrels have a smaller diameter than the M2's

I get the joke, but this really got my autism flaring up.

On a related note:
>not using your tank's AI to hack enemy satellites and send their missiles back at them.

>>34221481
The best part is that the tank designers during the interwar period would probably have done that

>>34216425
>has no idea how spaced armor works

File: uSxlRai.jpg (444KB, 1600x1026px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 1600x1026px

>>34221117
>So whats the problem with it?

You don't see it on many tanks because

1) Despite it's ease of installation, it's a relatively new innovation. AFAIK it has only become widespread in the past 20 years (since GWOT).

2) It obviously adds a lot of bulk to the vehicle. Modern MBTs for instance simply don't gain enough in the frontal arcs to make it worth the addition vs. being larger more cumbersome vehicles than they already are. Slat armor isn't likely to defeat heavier modern warheads like vehicle-launched ATGMs, so instead more comprehensive systems are used, while slat armor is a more weight efficient defense for rear quarters against more primitive weapons like the RPG-7.

3) Most images you see of vehicles are taken on training grounds, where additional armor packages often aren't fitted because added weight accelerates wear on the suspension and drive train components. Slat armor is most certainly used on modern vehicles >>34215520 and pic related
However, it is both cost-effective and expedient.

>>34222896
>1) Despite it's ease of installation, it's a relatively new innovation. AFAIK it has only become widespread in the past 20 years (since GWOT).

Widespread maybe but its hardly new - its been around since WW2, used by the USSR and Germany. Its older than the concept of the MBTs.

>>34215159
>fighting for freedom inside cages
>'murilards will defend this

MPAPS