[Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

The standard autoloader on the T-72 and T-90 have armoured plates on top to prevent hot sparks and burning material from a turret penetration from falling onto propellant stubs and igniting them... it also separates the ammo in the autoloader from the crew.

The ammo is stored in an underfloor autoloader.

With the Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon turret the autoloader could be built right up to the turret ring as there are no crew positions.

I have not seen any designs showing how the ammo is arranged, or how it is loaded but with no crew there there is rather more space for ammunition... in fact you could keep the old T90 design and just go for a double layer with four layers... 2 of 22 rounds of ammo and 2 with 22 propellant stubs, so 44 rounds in total of ready to use ammo...

In fact with all that vertical space it offers a new design option where instead of having a flat circle of rounds where each round is pretty much limited in length because it can only fit from the outer edge of the turret ring to the centre of the turret... if instead you designed it as a helical spiral you could overlap the penetrators to be half as long again... which would be plenty of length.

It would require a part of the turret bustle to be used to raise and draw back the long penetrator round to then ram forward into the chamber to be followed by a propellant stub behind the round ready to fire...

And if the crew is no longer in the ammo compartment, would it make sense to put more armor there? Even something as simple as having armored plates around the autoloader?

The ammo would be protected by hull armour... the full frontal armour and crew compartment and rear crew compartment armour, from the sides by side armour and from the rear by rear armour and the engine... and of course afghan active protection system and NERA...

Having ammo in there will mean extra armour will be added to prevent any light round from setting off the ammo, but it wont be as heavily armoured as the front crew compartment.

Like most armoured vehicles it will be protected best from the front.... in terms of weight it is just not practical to give full 360 degree total protection... and even if you could it would still be vulnerable to mines and top attack munitions...

Could it be possible to make HE rounds to only be able to be detonated by microwaves, so that they're basically inert material when stored in a tank? That would automatically resolve the problem of turret popping in soviet tanks.

If a projectile or missile penetrates the turret so the ammunition explodes, the "popping" of the turret is seconday. The crew would be dead already.

Hole wrote:If a projectile or missile penetrates the turret so the ammunition explodes, the "popping" of the turret is seconday. The crew would be dead already.

What? Are we talking about the Armata or Legacy designs?

There are critical hits and there are hits.

Turret penetration can be tricky, it will result in all types of casualties and sometimes it would fluke out. Rolling into in an AFV is like rolling a dice.

Hole wrote:If a projectile or missile penetrates the turret so the ammunition explodes, the "popping" of the turret is seconday. The crew would be dead already.

I'm talking about making ammo stored(specifically HE warheads) in the crew compartment(NOT Autoloader) in for example the T-72B3 or T-80BV(although the autoloader there is also vulnerable)  to be made completely inert to sabot shrapnel, HEAT shrapnel, etc.


BTW, I've been wondering, when an APSFDS or HEAT shell penetrates armor, doesn't it spew fragments everywhere around the crew compartment 100% of the time? If this is true, why does garryB always hint that a  flechette can penetrate the other side of the armor and be intact? Are there any statistics on post penetration APSFDS behavior?

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Hole wrote:If a projectile or missile penetrates the turret so the ammunition explodes, the "popping" of the turret is seconday. The crew would be dead already.

What? Are we talking about the Armata or Legacy designs?

There are critical hits and there are hits.

Turret penetration can be tricky, it will result in all types of casualties and sometimes it would fluke out. Rolling into in an AFV is like rolling a dice.

No, not Armata. The old models.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:

Hole wrote:If a projectile or missile penetrates the turret so the ammunition explodes, the "popping" of the turret is seconday. The crew would be dead already.

I'm talking about making ammo stored(specifically HE warheads) in the crew compartment(NOT Autoloader) in for example the T-72B3 or T-80BV(although the autoloader there is also vulnerable)  to be made completely inert to sabot shrapnel, HEAT shrapnel, etc.


BTW, I've been wondering, when an APSFDS or HEAT shell penetrates armor, doesn't it spew fragments everywhere around the crew compartment 100% of the time? If this is true, why does garryB always hint that a  flechette can penetrate the other side of the armor and be intact? Are there any statistics on post penetration APSFDS behavior?

A flechette is an anti-personal weapon.
You are correct with the fragments. Plus a lot of heat. Most times the crew would be dead, before the munition in the turret or autoloader could explode. That´s why the Armata has an unmanned turret.
Statistics? Propably, but I don´t know a reliable source.

Could it be possible to make HE rounds to only be able to be detonated by microwaves, so that they're basically inert material when stored in a tank? That would automatically resolve the problem of turret popping in soviet tanks.

Well lets clarify... turret popping happens when ammo inside the hull explodes and blows the turret off.. often intact like a cork.

To be very clear if you keep ammo in the turret bustle then the cork popping doesn't happen when the ammo explodes... but even with the turret still attached to the hull the crew are all dead either way.

As such turret popping is not the issue... ammo detonation is the problem.

One way of reducing the risk of ammo detonation is to move it down from the turret into a better protected place inside the hull.

You cannot eliminate the problem.

If you make your ammo so that it can only be detonated by microwaves then the enemy will simply produce microwave weapons that set off your ammo...

BTW, I've been wondering, when an APSFDS or HEAT shell penetrates armor, doesn't it spew fragments everywhere around the crew compartment 100% of the time? If this is true, why does garryB always hint that a flechette can penetrate the other side of the armor and be intact? Are there any statistics on post penetration APSFDS behavior?

First of all you can't talk about APFSDS rounds and HEAT rounds as being the same... they are not, though there are similarities.

A solid penetrator... either full calibre or APFSDS punches through armour using kinetic force, so speed, mass, hardness. APFSDS is narrower and lighter so can go faster and concentrates mass on a smaller surface area so has a better chance of penetration. Full calibre penetrators can ricochet too... APFSDS rounds do not. The point is that when they punch through armour bits of the armour enter the vehicle can go with them along with superheated metal and other fragments all moving very very fast.

With HEAT rounds the velocity is rather higher but the hardness of the penetrator is lower, and is made of a plasma that is not in a solid state but still has plenty of mass (the metal liner of the HEAT warhead forms that mass). Because it is not solid as it enters the vehicle it can have material spread away from the central beam, plus armour material will also come through too.

Needless to say lung injury for crews is an issue with a penetration but there is a reason most tank crews wear body armour... if you do then spall can be stopped and protect you from serious injury... unless the penetrator or the HEAT beam hit you there is a good chance of survival as long as the main ammo load is not detonated or fuel set alight...

An APFSDS penetrator is like a really big nail with fins on it to stabilise it in flight... it is not designed to fragment or break up because it might break up or fragment while penetrating the target... which would reduce its penetration power and make it less useful.

For use against a tank then you have to go for maximum penetration to make sure you penetrate enough.... if the target is an IFV or APC or other light vehicle then an APHE round should have enough penetration to crack the shell and the HE charge inside the armour can be quite small and still devastating.

An explosion outside armour is reduced in effect by the armour... an explosion inside armour is magnified by armour as shockwaves bounce off armour plate and reflect back around the inside the vehicle... increasing the shockwave effect... let alone fragments bouncing and slicing around inside the vehicle.... yuk.

Talk about frog in a blender...

As such turret popping is not the issue... ammo detonation is the problem.

I just said that in my previous post, hence I'm asking if its possible to make the ammo impossible to detonate from projectiles that hit them.

Also, given that even a 5,56 bullet shatters after penetrating human skin, I'm kinda having a hard time believing that the APSFDS doesnt after penetrating much harder materials.

The penetrator will ricochet inside the turret, together with the splinters of the armor he penetrated.

Propellants that could only be ignited by microwaves or some form of liquids that are harmless when not mixed should be the way forward. On the other hand the Armata separates crew and ammo in the best possible way, so for that tank it isn´t a problem anymore.

I just said that in my previous post, hence I'm asking if its possible to make the ammo impossible to detonate from projectiles that hit them.

I know what you mean, but the problem is that a projectile with a HEAT warhead like most ATGMs and HEAT rounds from an enemy tank gun have penetrators that basically consist of a focused explosion.

You can't have an explosion resistant explosive... most high explosives need a low explosive to set them off... a high explosive like RDX need a detonator... a low explosive like nitro glyceryn or black powder can be set off with a good shake or a spark respectively.

I don't know of any explosive material that is so stable it won explode when hit by a plasma jet of super hot metal from a HEAT warhead.

Also, given that even a 5,56 bullet shatters after penetrating human skin, I'm kinda having a hard time believing that the APSFDS doesnt after penetrating much harder materials.

The 5.56 bullets you are talking about are little blobs of very soft lead in a jacket of copper or sometimes mild steel... and the human body is mostly water...which does not compress. Imagine slapping the water with your open hand... the harder you hit it the more it feels like concrete. Imagine slapping it at mach 3...

The 5.56 bullet only fragments as it tumbles and even then it must be moving above a certain velocity to have the bending force to snap it in half.

Also if you have a close look at a 5.56mm round it has dimples or indentations around its middle to weaken the jacket.

NATO claims that is so the neck of the cartridge case can be crimped into the bullet to stop it from being pushed into the case while in the magazine or when it is loaded into the chamber.

But in actual fact it is just a weakpoint to promote fragmentation and violates the Hague convention on small arms ammo.

An APFSDS penetrator on the other hand is usually solid hard metal... Uranium or Tungsten or various hardened types of steel alloys.

If you knock a nail in straight it wont bend or shatter...

The penetrator will ricochet inside the turret, together with the splinters of the armor he penetrated.

It could... or it might just go straight through.

Propellants that could only be ignited by microwaves or some form of liquids that are harmless when not mixed should be the way forward. On the other hand the Armata separates crew and ammo in the best possible way, so for that tank it isn´t a problem anymore.

Even when fully contained propellants will get up to high temperatures and pressures, but the real risk is explosives detonating. HE frag rounds, and HEAT rounds are the real danger... Binary propellants or propellants that are insensitive and need microwaves to ignite are a very good step forward because propellants are normally the most easily ignited item in a tank.

The free ammo in the crew compartment of a T series tank was generally the main villain in the turret popping problems... a penetration in the tank leading to even a glowing ember or spark touching the cardboard case of a propellant stub would start a rapid and hard to put out fire... of course it burns... that is what it is designed to do... burn completely and rapidly away leaving nothing but a small metal stub... in the gun chamber pressure builds up much higher so it burns faster and more efficiently, but it is still going to burn in the hull or turret.

that basically consist of a focused explosion.

Wasnt it just a really hot metal penetrator? And APSFDS isn't a focused explosion. Even making the HE shells immune to APSFDS would save countless lives.

You can't have an explosion resistant explosive... most high explosives need a low explosive to set them off... a high explosive like RDX need a detonator... a low explosive like nitro glyceryn or black powder can be set off with a good shake or a spark respectively.

Propellants and high explosives arent so different. At one point TNT was used as a propellant. A high explosive just burns faster and under lower pressure.

a penetration in the tank leading to even a glowing ember or spark touching the cardboard case of a propellant stub would start a rapid and hard to put out fire

But if the HE warheads themselves were immune to regular propellant fire(I think its possible, after all you said HE needs an explosion, not fire, to detonate), the turrets would never pop in the first place and crewmen could escape a burning tank without having to worry that it may explode under legs at any moment.

An APFSDS penetrator on the other hand is usually solid hard metal... Uranium or Tungsten or various hardened types of steel alloys.

A nail made of very brittle metal... Besides, werent DU penetrators made to be pyrophoric(shattering and burning up after penetration)?

The sabot is supposed to ricochet inside the turret.

Well, to be a tank man is a dangerous profession, the best thing you can hope for is to sit in a T-14 Armata.

Hole wrote:Well, to be a tank man is a dangerous profession, the best thing you can hope for is to sit in a T-14 Armata.

But apparently the Russian MoD decided that you only need to sit in a T-72B3 with worthless obsolete armor, not even a T-90AM...

The T-62M is from the end of the 70`s. It´s crew survived hits from TOW missiles in Syria. Do you really think the armor of the T-72B3, which is a Generation younger, is worse?

Wasnt it just a really hot metal penetrator? And APSFDS isn't a focused explosion. Even making the HE shells immune to APSFDS would save countless lives.

A heat warhead generates a superheated plasma beam... it is not liquid or a gas... it is a plasma... water can cut through steel when put under enough pressure... water does not compress and if it is moving fast enough it exerts a lot of force, yet is obviously a liquid and not a solid.

The vast majority of tank kills are from RPGs and ATGMs these days... not that many tank on tank engagements... so APFSDS hits probably do not account for that many kills as such.

Propellants and high explosives arent so different. At one point TNT was used as a propellant. A high explosive just burns faster and under lower pressure.

Say what?

Anything like a HE cannot be used as a propellant... it detonates... you can set fire to plastic explosive and it will burn but it would be useless as a propellent whether burning or exploding.

It does not burn fast enough to be useful as a propellant and it detonates too fast to be used as a propellant...

But if the HE warheads themselves were immune to regular propellant fire(I think its possible, after all you said HE needs an explosion, not fire, to detonate), the turrets would never pop in the first place and crewmen could escape a burning tank without having to worry that it may explode under legs at any moment.

If you are happy to reduce the rate of fire to one round a minute and attach the fuse to the HE FRAG rounds as they are loaded then yes, they would just burn, but the fuse for a HEAT round is at the rear of the warhead... not something you could fit just before firing... the newest 125mm HEAT rounds have three HEAT charges so that means three detonators... one to set off each charge so when that round burns it will get very hot which will set off the detonators which will cause an explosion which will set off all the other remaining HE rounds.

A nail made of very brittle metal... Besides, werent DU penetrators made to be pyrophoric(shattering and burning up after penetration)?

If they were brittle then they would shatter on impact and would not penetrate anything at all.

DU rounds are pyrophoric and react with steel, so if your armour is just steel plate as it penetrates the DU round actively softens the steel and the heat generated by the enormous impact speed and energy leads to steel and DU ablative material coming off on fire bouncing around the inside of the tank... but only a thin layer of the DU penetrator punching through the armour... the main body of the penetrator would still be fine and would continue.

There were cases where an Abram hit a T series Iraqi tank from the front and the DU penetrator penetrated the front armour... passed through the crew compartment and exited out the rear of the vehicle into the ground... if they just shattered then it would not exit the other side... imagine the penetration performance of a needle side on and in three pieces... it would not even break skin.... let alone penetrate rear armour.

The sabot is supposed to ricochet inside the turret.

Sabot goes around the APFSDS projectile to hold it in the barrel and to carry it down the barrel when the round is fired... at the muzzle it separates and leaves the APFSDS rod to continue down range towards the target on its own... the bits of the Sabot generally hit the ground a few hundred metres in front of the tank.

Well, to be a tank man is a dangerous profession, the best thing you can hope for is to sit in a T-14 Armata.

Actually the best thing you can hope for is to wait 10 years to when everything is remote control and you can sit safe behind your lines playing something like Steel Beasts controlling your tank with the best graphics ever...

But apparently the Russian MoD decided that you only need to sit in a T-72B3 with worthless obsolete armor, not even a T-90AM...

The MoD knows that no matter what vehicle you are sitting in you are not 100% safe... wars are not like that.

Even the remote controller guy will likely die of diabetes because he works at night when the corner shop is closed and the vending machines with junk food are always open...

I meant the penetrator, you...

A sabot round is a long relatively thin rod... it is not deflected by angled plate and will not ricochet at any angle... during penetration it might yaw a little, but what makes you think it will fragment on penetration?

They are pretty much designed not to fragment because that reduces their penetration performance to zero...

Imagine a nail you hit into wood with one powerful hit... any slight alignment problem and the enormous force applied wont be focussed along the nail to penetrate the wood in one hit... the shaft will fail and the nail will bend... the energy involved will easily bend metal like wire if it is not applied along its length... the nail would fold in half and there will be little or no penetration.

Fragmenting APFSDS rods will yaw and will go from high penetration dart to low penetration shrapnel... but when?

After it has penetrated the frontal armour... but is the frontal armour 50mm of an APC or 1,000mm of a tank turret front?

What if it hits a concrete wall before it hits the target?

The simple fact is that an APFSDS round is never designed to fragment on target... that is the opposite of its purpose.

The only examples I have ever heard of fragmented APFSDS rods is to counter ERA and NERA and APS systems... all (the Russian ones anyway) of which try to make the penetrator yaw... whether it is a solid rod penetrator or a plasma from a HEAT round... the intention is to reduce the effect of the HEAT plasma torch and to snap the APFSDS rod.

The segmented rod means the front section will be snapped off and the remaining segments will penetrate... haven't heard of them entering operational service... and would be suspicious that an APS system might not just make all the segments yaw making them all ineffective.

Nickname of APFSDS is Sabot (in Amiland).

As i said, it should penetrate the armor and than ricochet inside the turret to maximise the damage. That´s his purpose in life. Sometimes it want happen, but... What can you do?

In the end, it is not good if something penetrates the armor. If someone sits in the turret, he (or she) will get hurt.

Now let´s stop talking about penetrations. Someone could be offended by it. #Metoo.

Nickname of APFSDS is Sabot (in Amiland).

Yes, amusing they call it sabot... that word is french for shoe... and describes the material that supports the actual penetrator in the gun barrel during firing.

I know that because during the industrial revolution the french used to throw their shoes into the new machines to make them break down so they had to do things manually again... that is where the word sabotage comes from... french peasants resisting industrialisation...

in fact it is in the name... the last two letters mean discarding sabot... personally I think it would make more sense just to call it armour piercing... the gun is smoothbore so all the rounds are fin stabilised, but they have chosen to call it sabot...

As i said, it should penetrate the armor and than ricochet inside the turret to maximise the damage.

But that creates the problem of how... this round is used against all sorts of targets... how do you get it to penetrate fully and also stop penetrating and start bouncing around... ie stop penetrating and start ricocheting?

Quite frankly the solution is simple... forget it.

Make the APFSDS rounds maximum penetration rounds to penetrate the heaviest enemy tank armour and as it gets heavier to penetrate that as well.

For cases where you want ricochet then develop an APHE round that will penetrate lighter armour and then explode... for bunkers and light vehicles it would be devastating... the only target it would not be so effective against is a MBT, but if you want to kill that you could use an APFSDS round to stop it and make the crew bail and follow up with an HEAT round to make it burn.

Because the thing looses speed after going trough half a metre of armor. And i said it is "supposed" to do this, not that it always does it. Most DU rounds burn and turn partly into dust, after the hit something hard. That´s why parts of the Iraq are contanimated.