Path:
spln!rex!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!nf3.bellglobal.com!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!wesley.videotron.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!gemini.tycho.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Approved:
sci-military-moderated@retro.com
Return-Path: news@google.com
Delivery-Date: Fri Feb 22 21:48:11 2002
Delivery-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:48:11 -0800
for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:48:10 -0800 (PST)
for ;
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:30:17 -0800 (PST)
for ;
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:30:16 -0800
for ;
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:30:15 -0800
for sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:30:13 -0800
To: sci-military-moderated@moderators.isc.org
From: psl@interchange.ubc.ca (Paul Lakowski)
Newsgroups: sci.military.moderated
Subject: Re: Effectiveness of HESH against modern armor
Date: 22 Feb 2002 21:30:10 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID:
References:
<3c672d5.0202201603.64165060@posting.google.com>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.23.94.69
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
X-NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Feb 2002 05:30:12 GMT
Content-Length: 2926
Lines: 59
NNTP-Posting-Host: 96d17025.newsreader.tycho.net
X-Trace: 1014447110 gemini.tycho.net 79557 205.179.181.194
X-Complaints-To: abuse@tycho.net
Xref: spln sci.military.moderated:43021
Colin Campbell wrote in message
news:...
> On 22 Feb 2002 09:37:10 -0800, Psl@interchange.ubc.ca (Paul Lakowski)
> wrote:
>
>
> >Whats the URL to view this discussion group.....I must say that claims
> >about the M-1A2 armor being the best or most ,are usually flag waving
> >contest!
>
> Just remember that nobody knows the truth for certain. Every country
> that uses composite armor keeps the recipe a tightly guarded secret -
> and do not even tell their allies. 'Export' versions of these tanks
> will have an armor package that is different from the domestic
> version. (Not necessarily a less effective package, but different
> enough that weapons optimized to penetrate the 'export' armor will not
> have the same effectiveness on the domestic version.)
>
> All this aside (gotta wave the flag myself) the armor on the US M1
> series is the only version proven to stop enemy penetrators in combat.
Yes no one knows for sure ....but:-)
I have scores of open source research papers from APG, Rafeal
[israel], DERA [chobham facility], EMI and many more locations
[Including China and Korea and Russia] that all study long rod impact
of modern armor .....And guess what , the're modern armor is all the
same, and all the projectiles are the same...so unless theres some
massive multi cultural conspiricy going on around the world , I
suggest these are the real thing. This is even more likely ,when one
realizes that each of these many many test shot cost $10,000 dollars
and a single data point cost > $100,000 to generate. Again if these
are not 'real targets' then alot of governments around the world are
wasting millions upon billions of reseach dollars on a cleverly
concocked conspiricy.
I doubt the M-1 or LEO-2 front turret contains any spaced
plates...more likely there sandwich construction.Infact LEO-2 front
turret cavity has been photoed and has no spacers at all [normally
associated with spaced armor].
Turret of M-1 is 23 tons and the internal volume is 5.5m^3, while the
LEO-2 turret weights 19.4 tons and has a volume of 4.5m^3 ...thus to a
first approximation the LE0-2 turret has slightly more armor mass than
M-1A1 turret.
This advantage is multiplied by the fact that LEO-2 front turret
occupies a smaller profile than M-1A1 front turret [~1.67mē for LEO-2
compared to ~2.5mē M-1A1].Thus the LEO-2 front turret has ~ 50% more
armor mass than M-1A1 and the estiamted armor values are 60cm KE for
LEO-2 and 46cm KE for M-1A1.In addition the LEO-2 front turret
thickness is ~ 83cm LOS thickness with ~ 80% insert, while M-1A1
turret is ~ 75cm LOS thickness with ~ 75% insert thickness.
Its true that M-1A2 front turret is ~ 80cm KE resistance [from 30°
offangle] which is ~ 90cm, from straight on...but the LEO-2A5/6 front
turret armor with the wedge armor is estimated to be ~ 100-110cm KE
resistance from straight on.