Technician1002 wrote:That little square of sheetmetal in the first video with a hole in it was impressive. I'm referring to the one with some yellow paint on it.
I think when it's a couple of inches thick it becomes "plate", not sheet
When you consider what it was up against:
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
nahh I was thinking more in terms of HE shells or even fuel air explosives... that's mostly becasue of APS systems and stuff
I wonder what would happen if something the size of an RPO rocket exploded a few meters from the tank
Is the overpressure really that deadly for the optical equipment and such
POLAND_SPUD wrote:Is the overpressure really that deadly for the optical equipment and such
Since most tanks these days tend to have full NBC protection, I don't know how that effective would be against modern armour in terms of harming the crew and disabling the tank.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
POLAND_SPUD wrote:rendering their observation systems useless? at least that's what the russians claim
It depends really, what do they mean by rendering them useless? Does the overpressure knock sights and rangefinders out of alignment? does it crack the protective glass? It would seem like a relatively easy fix to harden such systems against blast.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
Well I can't find any test results as far as FAEs are concerned... Just some very general statments such as 'it's effective against armoured vehicles and what I wrote in the previous post
The Soviets claimed that 122-mm and 120-mm mortars and
152-mm artillery rounds achieved very high levels of damage
against tanks and armored personnel carriers.
(...)
Other possibilities offered were that the database for US models was incorrect or not used properly.
Further research revealed the Soviets had a large database
developed by an extensive live-fire test program.
I do recall that some sources claim that an RPO has more less equivalent power to 152mm shells so that at least seems to support the idea
It's a fact that tanks can be disabled by blast mines that have no penetrating effect, but it takes a big charge.
What I got from that article is that fragmentation is one of the primary damaging mechanisms. An artillery fragment from a HE shell can be travelling much faster than a bullet from an anti-material rifle, (seriously) over 9000 fps, and can be much heavier too, so it's conceivable that it would cause serious damage to even a heavily armoured vehicle, even if it doesn't actually penetrate the armour plate.
This effect is something thermobaric warheads don't offer at all.
On another note, this explains the FPSRussia drone hype:
[youtube][/youtube]
For those interested in a more academic variation of "Damn Technology, you scary!", here's an interesting lecture by P.W. Singer:
[youtube][/youtube]
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
This was on the radio here a few years ago; the radio hosts give an answer and someone rings up and has to give a question for that answer to win:
[youtube][/youtube]
breaks my heart
