This matters little since modern sabots do not ricochet. Also note that the areas painted in red are not protected by chobham, with perhaps the exception of upper hull area that has 900mm RHA resistance against HEAT but only 190mm against KE.Originally Posted by M21Sniper
I never mentioned autocannons. Any Russian sabot 1976> can penetrate the red areas(in fact even some older rounds, but they have large chance of deflecting. Although if they deflect from hull they can hit the turret gap/gun mantle)It is EXTREMELY unlikely that any autocannon used by anyone could penetrate any of those frontal areas highlighted in red.
You have seen actual battle reports that specifically said turret ring/upper hull/gun mantlet were hit? One thing I didn't mention in previous post that red areas are weak against KE penetrators, not HEAT. Green areas however are very well protected, as 2 Mavericks and M829A2 sabot couldn't penetrate them. Also the sabots Iraqis had were mostly old steel penetrators that have really poor penetration values and ricochet at far greater angles.Because of the sloping the same is true for RPG type weapons.Many M-1A1HAs were hit in those areas with 125mm fire and RPGs during ODS1, and failed to penetrate. In fact, i can't remember ever reading of any frontal penetration of an M-1A1HA in either of the last two wars in Iraq.
That may very well be the case but being US Army field grade officer does not make one expert of enemy armor values. I fail to see how he can say "I am convinced that the published/known armor values for Russian tanks are significantly mis-stated" after he said the rounds penetrated known weak areas such as turret ring and side hull, unless of course that report was cut from a larger one that included reported penetrations on other, more protected areas.PS...the 'author' of that link is a US Army field grade officer that was responsible for writing AARs for the US Army after ODS. It is a safe bet that he knows more about tanks than the rest of us put together.