ERA stoping APFSDS rounds ?

[[R-CON]77SiCaRiO77]

acording to an article i read in sinodefence :

Jane's International Defence Review 7/2007, pg. 15:

"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION

By Richard M. Ogorkiewicz

Claims by NATO testers in the 1990s that the armour of Soviet Cold War tanks was “effectively impenetrable” have been supported by comments made following similar tests in the US.

Speaking at a conference on “The Future of Armoured Warfare” in London on the 30th May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US Army tests involving firing trials on 25 T-72A1 and 12 T-72B1 tanks (each fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour [ERA]) had confirmed NATO tests done on other former Soviet tanks left behind in Germany after the end of the Cold War. The tests showed that the ERA and composite Armour of the T-72s was incredibly resilient to 1980s NATO anti-tank weapons.

In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles, anti-tank missiles, and anti-armour rotary cannons. Explosive reactive armour was valued by the Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1970s, and almost every tank in the eastern-European military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, including even the T-55 and T-62 tanks built forty to fifty years ago, but still used today by reserve units.

"During the tests we used only the weapons which existed with NATO armies during the last decade of the Cold War to determine how effective such weapons would have been against these examples of modern Soviet tank design. Our results were completely unexpected. When fitted to the T-72A1 and B1 the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU (Depleted Uranium) penetrators of the M829A2 APFSDS (used by the 120 mm guns of the Cold War era US M1 Abrams tanks), which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles. We also tested the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger (the gun of the A-10 Thunderbolt II Strike Plane), the 30mm M320 (the gun of the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter) and a range of standard NATO Anti Tank Guided Missiles – all with the same result of no penetration or effective destruction of the test vehicles. The combined protection of the standard armour and the ERA gives the Tanks a level of protection equal to our own. The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” – U.S. Army Spokesperson at the show.

Newer KE penetrators have been designed since the Cold War to defeat the Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well). As a response the Russian Army has produced a new type of ERA, “Relikt”, which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

Despite the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Tank industry has managed to maintain itself and its expertise in armour production, resulting in modern designs (such as the T-90, the T-95 and mysterious Black Eagle) to replace the, surprisingly, still effective Soviet era tanks. These tests will do much to discount the argument of the “Lion of Babylon” (the ineffective Iraqi version of the T-72M) and export quality tanks being compared to the more sophisticated and upgraded versions which existed in the Soviet military’s best Tank formations and continue to be developed in a resurgent Russian military industrial complex."

[[R-DEV]GeZe]

Interesting. I hadn't know about this before.

And before you guys start calling BS, this is from Jane's, an extremely respected publication. I would trust it 100%

[BloodBane611]

Yeah, when I started reading I went back to the top to check the source and instantly felt shut down.

the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour

The soviets always had a huge numerical armor advantage, and given these facts I would say that technologically it would have gone much worse than american planners thought. This is pretty nuts. The real question would be how many tanks could the russians afford to outfit with Kontakt-5 plates. I imagine they're pretty expensive, but it would be a bad nightmare to have ten thousand indestructible russian tanks running amok in Europe. Hopefully those kind of nightmares are off the map.

[Teek]

which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

For most of your posts praising Russian tank defences, I hold the following mantra:
If there is no evidence or results, its not true.

(similar in essence to 'Pics or it didn't happen')

[[R-CON]77SiCaRiO77]

i tried to find a good reference , like link to the complete article , but seems like that article is only avalible for pay users .

btw,and all my "praising" about russian tanks were only two : shtora and the AT-11 ATGM , but i will add the "Kontakt-5 can stop APFSDS rounds" too :P

[Teek]

Originally Posted by 77SiCaRiO77

i tried to find a good reference , like link to the complete article , but seems like that article is only avalible for pay users .

btw,and all my "praising" about russian tanks were only two : shtora and the AT-11 ATGM , but i will add the "Kontakt-5 can stop APFSDS rounds" too :P

they are claiming the “Relikt” Could stop APFDS rounds, not Kontakt-5 which is plausible but likely to not 100%.

In my book: claiming is close to propaganda. facts and evidence speak for them selfs.

[DeePsix]

Good read! Does this mean that the newer soviet armor is probably much more resistant to our modern weapons rather than weapons of the 1980's?

I always felt that soviet tanks were "swiss cheese" and their power lay in superior numbers to NATO forces. Yikes, another good reason to be thankful the cold war didn't turn hot...

[NYgurkha]

nha, i guess the article sums up that the western nations misjudged the soviet capabilities in armored warfare (but wasn't that the consensus until we made the M1 Abrams?) .

[fludblud]

Originally Posted by BloodBane611

but it would be a bad nightmare to have ten thousand indestructible russian tanks running amok in Europe. Hopefully those kind of nightmares are off the map.

dont count on it, putin's newly resurgent russia is once again racking up defence spending, who knows what they are equipping their tanks with now.

[M1126 Stryker]

One thing to consider is that Kontakt-5 was introduced rather late in the Cold War and for the most part was limited just to the T-80U. Still it came as a nasty surprise.

One thing the article got wrong is that the M829A1 was used in the testing. The M829A2 was developed quickly to counter Kontakt-5 and the M829A3 was designed to defeat that and newer heavy ERA. While heavy ERA has advanced APFSDS ammo continues to advance too.

Regarding the AT missiles tested I doubt a few dual charge designs such as the TOW-2A were tested.