Armoured vehicles V Anti Armour weapons.

[womble]

Hi all
HPT, the failure of armour designers to learn from history never ceases to amaze me, nor does the fact that, for all the advances in ATGW design, the humble RPG is still a force to be reckoned with. Does anyone practise personal anti-armour warfare in the DF? Outside of using Javelins or MILAN?
regards
GttC

Do we still use Milan? Or is that opsec?

Oh and will the side armour of a Mowag stop an RPG anyway?

[ODIN]

Oh and will the side armour of a Mowag stop an RPG anyway?

Probly not

[FMolloy]

Problem straight way...Look at the HEAT trap under the gunmantlet and under where the turret sides slope inward towards the turret mounting

The roof of the Mowag doesn't slope as much as that of the Centauro, so the HEAT trap mightn't be as pronounced when fitted to the Irish vehicles.

30 mm cannon should really be fitted as standard with a 50 cal on top as well.

Why?

So if you have to get out to load is that not defeating its pupose. Is the idea of this weapon to keep the operaters inside and out of harms way??

The RWS they chose is in service with the Yanks, the Aussies, the Canadians, the Finnish and the Swiss. The Yanks & Australians are using them in Iraq while the Canadians have them in Afghanistan, I wouldn't write their utility off just yet.

[California Tanker]

Problem straight way...Look at the HEAT trap under the gunmantlet and under where the turret sides slope inward toward the turret mounting..perfect aiming pooint for an RPG....well back to the drawing board and start again....no point in putting a nice 25mm gun in a death trap

You really think that having the armour go straight down would stop an RPG from penetrating?

Besides, strongly sloped armour has its benefits.

Next you'll be telling me that this is a shot trap, and the Germans don't know what they're on about.

(Yes, I know that this is an Strv-122)

NTM

[apod]

Milan is in the process of being replaced by javelin.Info in the public domain.

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi all
When DF personnel get trained to use anti-tank weapons, are they taught anything about tanks and other armoured vehicles, such as location of potential weak points, location of fuel tanks, location of shell stowage, location of hatchs and access points,etc? I always figured that simply learning how to pull a trigger without knowing what to aim for was a shade pointless.
regards
GttC

[hptmurphy]

difference between an APC and an MBT..armour would be completely different. I know you have far more expierience in this field so I'll bow to your greater knowledge.

The turret iwas commenting on is designed to fit on an APC and would have none of the ballistic capabilities of those say on an MBT. If a round were to be diverted because of striking armor plate it would be forced into the crew compartmnet..and as we all know heat rounds only need to find the smallest weakness..its not a balst effect..but rather what happens after armour has been penetrated.

[Goldie fish]

Those M1 yokes have more armour in their turrets than we have in our engine block..

[Barry]

It also runs off an engine designed for a helicopter, so you can't really compare the two.....

[California Tanker]

The picture was a German (Swedish) Leopard, diesel, not that it matters much. If you must look at an M1, the 'shot trap' under the main gun bounces straight down to armour which is all of about two inches thick. Nothing, by tank standards. Modern AP ammo just doesn't work the same way that WWII ammo did. Particularly RPGs don't like bouncing around: If the impact is shallow enough to 'bounce' the round instead of detonating it, it's also going to deform the round so that it loses its effect. If it's obtuse enough to set off the fuse, then angle is irrelevant except for its increasing effective thickness, as plasma jets aren't going to be deflected.

NTM

[apod]

Hi all
When DF personnel get trained to use anti-tank weapons, are they taught anything about tanks and other armoured vehicles, such as location of potential weak points, location of fuel tanks, location of shell stowage, location of hatchs and access points,etc? I always figured that simply learning how to pull a trigger without knowing what to aim for was a shade pointless.
regards
GttC

Cant speak for the rdf ,but in the pdf yes.

[hptmurphy]

The origianl refernce was made in relation to a relatively lightly armouerd vehicle..not an MBT

[California Tanker]

The origianl refernce was made in relation to a relatively lightly armouerd vehicle..not an MBT

Yes, but the physics of the angles remain the same. It's only an issue of how much punch is required to break through the armour.

NTM

[hptmurphy]

Standard CG84mm heat round and rocket assisted heat round are well capable of penetrating APC armour.and older type MBTS

moving up a grade...more modern APC are more vunerable to the likes of hellfire and oter hellicopter mounted missiles.

The current generation of shoulder mounted or portable Anti Tank weapons are certainly a considerable fear to MBT crews but greater speed and mobility..reactive armour and design are still on the side of the MBT crew.

Good training with such weapons and their proper deployment is something that would keep the avaerage tanker on his toes..but when deployed against APCs..no contest.

The fire and run weapons such as the AT4 are really weapons to harrass rather than being able to stop MBTS

its always a case of what the percieved threat is een to be..how that is reacted too...in realation to actual threat.

Bit like a sniper being able to pin down a company..because of the percieved threat ..and not the actual fire power.

[ZULU]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBvcYckNOTA&feature=player_embedded

Found this. Looks interesting. Nice concept