Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan187
Numbers that I've read could be wrong, but this is what they are
Protection against CE, RHA equivalents:
M1-------->Turret & Glacis:700-800
M1A1----->Mantle: 990 Turret: 800 Glacis:510-800
Lower front hull: 570-790
M1A1HA-->Turret: 1080-1320 Glacis:510-800
Lower front hull:800-900
M1A2----->Turret: 1310-1620 Glacis:510-1050
Lower front hull:800-970
M1A2SEP->Turret: 1320-1620 Glacis:510-1050
Lower front hull:800-970
Kornet---> 1200 under ERA
I could have gotten bad numbers, and I have never sat in the turret of an Abrams as a Kornet hit, so I don't know first hand. But from those numbers, it seems reasonable to me, depending on the model and shot placement in the front, that a Kornet could penetrate and Abrams. Perhaps your first hand experience contadicts. If so, I'd like to hear more.
|
Those numbers are suspect besides being from a gaming site. 1- in Lebanon not one Kornet affected a penetration of the Merkava IV and it has thinner armor to the front 750-1340. 2- Russian tests reported by Vassily Fovanov on his site show that vs a T-90 showed the Kornet failed to achieve a turret penetration 580-1040. 3- Even when the US attacks an Abrams t destroy it in place they go for side shots and thats with Mavericks and Hellfires to ensure penetration, although I would not trust the Abrams armor vs either of them.
So while that site is a good starting point, its numbers for protection seem low.