M1A2 vs T-80U

[Bill]

Lurker, the composition of Chobham is classified cuz.....even for you.

Paul is a armor engineer, and relates only UNclassified data on warships1.

If you are under the illusion that he is telling you anything more than general characteristics, you are seriously mistaken cuz.

[Bill]

"... but US tried to correct this disadvantage situation to their side and create the first versions with Chobham armor M1s -- M1P1 and M1A1"

ALL production M-1's have Chobham armor.

The A1HA and newer also have stainless steel encapsulated DU238 armor.

LOL, comparing the armor protection of the M-1 to the T-64/72 is LAUGHABLE!!!! :-(

".... I never believe that briefs....cuz' it's for the stupid laymans and press ..."

More likely because it intrudes on your sense of skewed reality...

"As I've already told --- that's bullsh*t! ANd don't bring me such fairy tales again ... no scientific data ... no any true numbers ... and finally THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO HIT TARGET THROUGH THE SHELT !!! Because you should shoot from under the ground!!!! "

True story. It happened. That is a WIDELY documented historical FACT.

There is one other major thing you nitwits are totally overlooking....a rating of for instance 1000mm V HEAT DOES NOT include the sloping of the armor.
With a 60 degree slope, the actual rating would be 50% higher....or 1500mm.

BTW, i like the various 'data' on the armor packages.....they are all in conflict with one another. Probably because practicly no one even knows what the shit is made of.

[Bill]

"Was there even such a thing as the M1P1? Amazingly enough, FAS has nothing on the M1P1. There's another hole in your response."

No such animal.

"... oh yeah ... and I see, that you even don't know anything about US armor .... or maybe you want to rewrite the history?"

Wrong again cuz.....it's called the IM-1.

[Homer]

Homer & Stinher

... you are the global relations dweebs ... eee...one shot -- two kills .....aaahahahahahshs :D :D

I might be a dweeb, but that is much better than being YOU! When you grow up, can you be more like Lurker? When he disagrees with something here, he presents his opposing viewpoint in an orderly and coherent manner. I read his posts with much more interests and consideration than I do with the psycho-babble you spew forth. Get a clue and you might actually get somewhere one day.

[ChrisF202]

So....
Your nice Highway Patrol Officer is sitting on an approach late one night. His radar beeps.... 70...70...70...70. And it's a 45 zone. He doesn't recognize the headlight configuration, but that doesn't matter, this guys gonna get a ticket...



"OK, Officer Jensen (Sargent speaking), How is it that a speeder CRUSHED your cruiser to FOUR INCHES THICK???? And you didn't even get a license number!"

rofl :D

[Homer]

Poor Russian Army.....

Russian Armour: Today and Tomorrow

The today of Russian Armoured Forces, as well as that of the entire Russian Army, is dark. The financing that is allocated is not even enough to keep the existing equipment in good shape. There are definitely not enough funds to maintain a technological edge AND equip the forces with up-to-date military hardware.

Russian Armoured Forces have currently over 25,000 MBTs. However, relatively up-to-date MBTs based on the T-80 and T-90 models account for only 30 percent of these. Even these tanks require constant upgrades to incorporate modern weapon, protection and electronics systems.

Acquisition of new military materiel is also at a critically low level. As few as 50 new tanks have been fielded by the Russian army during 1995 and 1996. According to the Chief of Materiel Gen.-Col. A.Sitnov, in the last 7-8 years the weapons pool of the Russian Army was updated by the pathetic 1.5 percent. According to Sitnov the Russian Army needs at least 350 MBTs, 400-450 APCs, 550 self-propelled and 400 towed artillery pieces annually in order to maintain normal weapons pool upgrading. As it stands, less than 10 percent of these is fielded. For example, in 1999 the Russian Army obtained as little as 30 new T-90 MBTs, 24 SPAs and 100 BTR-80A APCs. The state order for FY2000 will again requisition 30 T-90s and 100 BTR-80As, and it is unclear if the FY1999 plan was fulfilled. In other words, the new materiel is sipping into the Army at a rate of less than one MBT battalion a year.

In view of this, a new state program of armament development has been approved until the year 2005. Due to the lack of the required funding, the program envisages only the creation of prototypes of the newest weapons.

Unfortunately, even this modest goal is not always fulfilled. For example, a new conceptual MBT that was scheduled to appear in 1994 is still on N.Tagil testing grounds due to the lack of funding.

In the future, when (and if... ) the financial situation in the country improves little by little, the switch to large-scale upgrading of the army with the newest weapon system prototypes created will be possible in a short period of time.

If the ideas embedded into the state program are implemented, Russia will be able to replenish its armed forces with 350 new tanks and 400 APCs annually following the year 2005.

In the meanwhile, a number of tank-building plants will be provided with minimum state orders calling for production of modern weapon systems to maintain the required technological potential.

Oh yeah... I found that here: http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/intro.html

[Praxus]

About the Arena, it only works against ATGM. Anything above 650 m/s or something to that effect it can supposidly take down. This means it can't take down APFSDS rounds, HEAT rounds, LOSAT, Mid-Range Munition(for Future Combat System), or any other similar munition.

In other words it is useless in a tank on tank battle.

[bigross86]

Anything above 650m/s or below 650m/s?

[Mayh3M]

LOL, comparing the armor protection of the M-1 to the T-64/72 is LAUGHABLE!!!!

.... nothing funny here ... you don't know anything about Russian armor ... the armor volume of abrams is 21m3, when as T-64/T-72/T80 has the same, while their main volume is lees in 2 scales!

... have you read the link I've brought?

a rating of for instance 1000mm V HEAT DOES NOT include the sloping of the armor.
With a 60 degree slope, the actual rating would be 50% higher....or 1500mm....

is I'd said it in Russian? .... probably NO:

50mm RHA + 230 mm of UO-87 + 40 mm RHA under the 35 degrees angle ...

This means it can't take down APFSDS rounds, HEAT rounds ...

... no need to hit the HEAT rounds of M1, because its rifled main gun is not specified to shoot the HEAT shells ... M830 have only about 300 meters/s speed and coudn't give any damage even to T-55m and T-62M... :roll:

[bigross86]

I thought we told you already that only the M1 has a 105mm rifled cannon. The M1A1 has a 120mm non-rifled cannon...

[Bill]

This kid is a fucking idiot.

The M-1A1 and later have the Rhienmetal 120mm smoothbore gun....and YES, they use HEAT.

LOL, clown.

[Praxus]

.... nothing funny here ... you don't know anything about Russian armor ... the armor volume of abrams is 21m3, when as T-64/T-72/T80 has the same, while their main volume is lees in 2 scales!

... have you read the link I've brought?

Have you ever even looked at the RHA ratings of the T-72/T-80/T-90 armor?

For the T-90(upgraded T-72) they have 740mm RHA for Frontal Armor against APFSDS, and around 1000mm RHA against HEAT rounds.

The baseline T-55 has 200mm RHA, even with Kontak(sp?) ERA it still will only have around 900mm RHA.

The M1 on the Frontal Armor has in excess of 1500mm RHA against HEAT rounds and 1000 RHA against APFSDS. This is what I found on an unclassified source, God knows what it really is.

[Bill]

That's also without ERA. It's a little known fact, but the M-1 is fully certified for use with ERA.

The chemical rating with ERA fitted is well above 2000mm.

[Mayh3M]

For the T-90(upgraded T-72) they have 740mm RHA for Frontal Armor against APFSDS, and around 1000mm RHA against HEAT rounds.

The baseline T-55 has 200mm RHA, even with Kontak(sp?) ERA it still will only have around 900mm RHA.

The M1 on the Frontal Armor has in excess of 1500mm RHA against HEAT rounds and 1000 RHA against APFSDS. This is what I found on an unclassified source, God knows what it really is.

.... as you see on the scheme the armor of M1A1HA is about 600 mm of RHA against AP and about 1000 against HEAT .... (it come in arms 5 years later, than T-80U and T-72B(M) and weights on 30% more, than Ts)

and you haven't attentevly read the article ... the maximum value of frontal of the clasic and turret of T-72BM/T-90 is about 1200-1300 mm against HEAT and about 700-800 against AP... this value could reach only M1A2 in 1993 and M1A2SEP ...

Praxus, you use the wrong Paul Lakowski's data ... it is wrong!!! M1A2 has (as I told already) only 1300 against HEAT and 770 against AP ... and this value for the vvery old shells, like 3BM16 and RPG-7 (even not RPG-7V) ...

[bigross86]

That's also without ERA. It's a little known fact, but the M-1 is fully certified for use with ERA.

The chemical rating with ERA fitted is well above 2000mm.

Yeah, but how effective is the ERA against APSFDS? The sabot rounds goes faster than the circuits in the ERA. By the time the ERA activates, the sabot is already past it...