NationStates Jolt Archive

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/4094/czechalrussiant72mbtcolcx6.png
A newly refurbished T-72MERAK (Modernized Explosive Reactive Armor Kit)

Specifications

Weight: 48 Tonnes

Length: 6.9 Meters

Width: 3.8 Meters

Height: 2.3 Meters

Crew: 3(commander, gunner, driver)

Place of origin: Soviet Union/Czechalrus

Production Year: 2007

Current Operators: The Republic of Czechalrus, The Commonwealth of Germantly (with 120 mm Rheinmetall L55 smooth bore), The Holy Democracy of The Norlands, The Armed Republic of Krysaor, The United Socialist States of Cynapsia

Conflicts Involved: None

Armor

Type: Composite Armour with ERA

Thickness: 520mm (Turret Front), 600mm Hull Front

Armament

Primary: 125 mm 2A46M Rifle Gun, can also launch AT-11 "Svir" ATGM

Secondary: PKMT 7.62 mm coaxial machine gun, Kord 12.7mm Remote Operated HMG

Ammunition Stowage

Primary: 47 Rounds

Secondary: 2,000 7.62mm x 54R, 500 12.7mm

Powerplant

Engine: Nechnav 1,500 HP Turbo Diesel

Suspension: Torsion Bar

Range: 350 miles, 500 miles with extra tanks

Speed: 50 mph, 40 mph(Off-road)

Upgrades

Added new ERA armor for Protection HEAT Round either APFSDS Round, equipped new FCS Catherine camera computerized FCS. Power pack was equipped Nechnav TD1150 1,500hp diesel water cooled engine. Added Gunner Thermal image sight and Tank commander Thermal image sight. Added Tank driver Passive IR Sight viewer, added ballistic calculator, added internal navigation equipment. Added Kadok 12.7mm Remote Operated HMG to commanders copula.

Price: $2,000,000(For tank and kit, kit alone = $700,000)

Is that actual thickness, in regards to the thickness of the armor? I think that, instead of Galileo Avionica's FCS (which, from what I've heard, is not that great as compared to Indra's for Spain's Leopard 2Es), I would use the Catherine camera FCS which current Russian T-90s use (supposedly the best, right now).

Is that actual thickness, in regards to the thickness of the armor? I think that, instead of Galileo Avionica's FCS (which, from what I've heard, is not that great as compared to Indra's for Spain's Leopard 2Es), I would use the Catherine camera FCS which current Russian T-90s use (supposedly the best, right now).

Sounds good. No thats the thickness of the Armor with out the ER Tiles. Also the basic armor is improved on the T-72 because armor panels where welded to the turret and hull and then the ER Tiles where attached to improve the protection.

Well, the actual thickness of the armor on the turret of the M1A2 Abrams is ~300mm (actual thickness of the glacis plate [hull front] is ~30-40mm), so I think ~500mm is sort of excessive. The original production version of the T-72 had 500mm of steel equivalent[i], as opposed to actual thickness, against APFSDS - and the T-72B increased to 520mm. Unfortunately, Steven Zaloga really doesn't mention the actual thickness. According to James Warford in [i]The Secret Testing of Israeli M111 "Hetz"Ammunition, published in Armor Magazine, actual thickness of the T-72A was 200mm. Now, this is actual thickness. Which brings me to the contention - are your values actual thickness, or steel equivalent?

That said, according to Paul Lakowski in a PDF I could link you to if my server was working, it says that the T-72B was recently modernized and has an armor thickness of around 380mm of cast bulging plates, with a total thickness of 435mm. This is much higher than that of the Abrams, but I guess it makes sense - Soviet tanks tend to have higher armor thicknesses per volume given their small size. Nevertheless, if your rates are steel equivalent you may want to take into consideration the estimates Paul Lakowski gives. This armor includes K-5 ERA, and all of these versus KE.

Lower Hull: 240mm
Glacis: 670-71mm
Front 1/3 Side: 90-140mm
Front side turret: 420-640mm
Upper front turret: 350-390mm
Rear Turret: 110-140mm
Rear Hull: 60mm
Side Hull: 70-120mm
Mantlet: 560-590mm
Weakened Zone: 510-530mm
Front Turret Corners: 470mm
Side Turret: 260mm

In regards to the 'weakened zone', it should be similar to those of the T-80:

http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/9951/90805gd.gif

Well, the actual thickness of the armor on the turret of the M1A2 Abrams is ~300mm (actual thickness of the glacis plate [hull front] is ~30-40mm), so I think ~500mm is sort of excessive. The original production version of the T-72 had 500mm of steel equivalent[i], as opposed to actual thickness, against APFSDS - and the T-72B increased to 520mm. Unfortunately, Steven Zaloga really doesn't mention the actual thickness. According to James Warford in [i]The Secret Testing of Israeli M111 "Hetz"Ammunition, published in Armor Magazine, actual thickness of the T-72A was 200mm. Now, this is actual thickness. Which brings me to the contention - are your values actual thickness, or steel equivalent?

That said, according to Paul Lakowski in a PDF I could link you to if my server was working, it says that the T-72B was recently modernized and has an armor thickness of around 380mm of cast bulging plates, with a total thickness of 435mm. This is much higher than that of the Abrams, but I guess it makes sense - Soviet tanks tend to have higher armor thicknesses per volume given their small size. Nevertheless, if your rates are steel equivalent you may want to take into consideration the estimates Paul Lakowski gives. This armor includes K-5 ERA, and all of these versus KE.

Lower Hull: 240mm
Glacis: 670-71mm
Front 1/3 Side: 90-140mm
Front side turret: 420-640mm
Upper front turret: 350-390mm
Rear Turret: 110-140mm
Rear Hull: 60mm
Side Hull: 70-120mm
Mantlet: 560-590mm
Weakened Zone: 510-530mm
Front Turret Corners: 470mm
Side Turret: 260mm

In regards to the 'weakened zone', it should be similar to those of the T-80:

http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/9951/90805gd.gif

Those are some nice pictures. Now to answer your question, the thickness shown is the actual thickness of the armor with the plates attached, and with out the ER tiles attached.

OOC: Thanks for posting that I learned something! (: