the death of a tank

[dejawolf]

Depleted uranium penetrators have density two and a half times greater than steel and provide high penetration characteristics, and a "pyrophoric" effect. When the DU penetrator hits a tank's armor, both the penetrator and armor partially liquefy under the tremendous pressure. Once the armour has been perforated, that part of the penetrator which has not melted, together with the molten armour and fragments that break away from the interior, ricochet inside the vehicle. This usually causes a fire, and if it reaches stored ammunition inside the tank, leads to catastrophic explosions.

i can only imagine how it would be inside of a tank when that happends..

[Nikatori]

like an egg smashed by a hammer

[9erRed]

Just a follow up note , also keep in mind that most tanks in a battle situation will be in "closed hatch's" operating mode. This also includes the overpressurizing of the crew interior and tank systems, which effectivelly seals the turret ring and provides NBCD capabilities. (if the seals are all in good condition, not the normal on most vehicles)
If the armour is breached there would also be an explosive decompression through the entrance hole [now we're talking about multipul compression waves, (the penetrator) on the way in and (the over pressure) ,now really overpressure trying to get out]
Overall not something you would wish on anything that's living.
Now for the Good New's
Last I heard , the Swed's Leo was now unpenetrable by any current tank round(front armour), also hear it's the same for the latest Merkava. And the "Black Eagle" is running with an improved "Heavy Kontakt" ERA, also proving to be APFSDS and HEAT proof.
So it's not all that bad to be in the Armoured Corps, survivallibility still rest's on not being seen till it's too late, and your ability to identify,engage and effectivelly netralize any threat.
Ok enough rambling's... at 5 in the morning, somebody remind me ..Not To Check For E-mail.. while doing a zero dark hour ... P ...

All for now..... 9erRed......out

[Skip]

The overpressurization, while enough to keep the outside air (and whatever else is floating there) from getting into the tank, doesn't come anywhere close to enough pressure to be a factor. Hatches can be opened/closed and the tank entered/exited while the overpressure system is operating.

[Wolfman]

The overpressurization, while enough to keep the outside air (and whatever else is floating there) from getting into the tank, doesn't come anywhere close to enough pressure to be a factor. Hatches can be opened/closed and the tank entered/exited while the overpressure system is operating.

I think he meant to say that when the overpressure system is used, hatches would be closed. Which means that the penetrator will overpressurize the turret, and then everything will be pushed out the hole through which the penetrator entered. Thats how I understand what 9erRed said.

[Ssnake]

The overpressurization, while enough to keep the outside air (and whatever else is floating there) from getting into the tank, doesn't come anywhere close to enough pressure to be a factor. Hatches can be opened/closed and the tank entered/exited while the overpressure system is operating.

I think he meant to say that when the overpressure system is used, hatches would be closed. Which means that the penetrator will overpressurize the turret, and then everything will be pushed out the hole through which the penetrator entered. Thats how I understand what 9erRed said. It's a correct summary of the statement, but the statement itself is nonsense. The crew does not get "sucked through the exit hole" as some tanker halloween stories tell. It doesn't take this to kill the crew, but that's a different story.

[9erRed]

Greetings
Please forgive my 5am rambling's, as after i read it the next day it didn't appear to make much sense. The point I was trying to make was the explosive compression wave would do as much damage to the turret crew as to make the vehicle neutralized in the battle. Even if the crew was not struck by flying spalding or by the DU penatrator pieces.

Thank's for trying to assist "wolfman"

All for now......9erRed ..out

[ChazFarote]

Wow! Reading this thread makes me glad I decided to become a Tanker... :(

Shoulda stayed an Air Force supply guy..... NOT! :D

Tanks rule!

[dejawolf]

the sabot round doesn't have to penetrate the armour, a non-penetrating hit can still cause spall to fly around inside.

wonder what happends when a sabot goes through an apc..

[Ssnake]

Oh, the overpressure itself can indeed kill or severely injure the crew - just like the sheer blast wave of artillery barrage can cause rupture of organs and blood vessels, even without the fragments. There's no doubt about that. But the most common fate for tankers who don't make it is burning to death. :o

Of course it's oftten a combination of spall, overpressure, and fire.

[9erRed]

wonder what happends when a sabot goes through an apc..


I don't think the APC would notice the round strike since Sabot doesn't react the same on soft material's, mostly very light material (Alumin.)and unless the engine or drive system's were struck it wouldn't stop the veh. Now the driver and CC would certenly notice the additional ventalitation, And if they were still able to react i'm sure that veh. would be making a full advance to the rear.
Similarly the SB1 in game, if you strike a bmp or btr with sabot it may not stop or kill it, you'll need to use HEAT.
I'm sure there's doc.'s out there on effects of sabot and other munitions on soft tgt's.

9erRed.....out

[Ssnake]

The APC crew will most certainly notice a sabot passing through, but the sabot may not create enough spall to kill the vehicle (e.g. it might pass through the squad compartment, injuring a few mounted soldier there, but leave the vehicle intact otherwise). Sobots DO kill APC, they just don't do it reliably.

[Kingtiger]

Think about the soldiers in the rear of the APC..... mounted combat and get hit by a APFDS.... and if the gunner aimed in the center of the APC..... the soldiers standing in the way must be cut in two peices.... :o

But if U have the hatches closed and the APFDS hit the ammo U dont ned to wory about cleaning the tank... hi preusure water will do... ;)

hmm.. Now i wonder wy I'min the mechanized forces.... LOL!!! :D

[Wahrborg]

Thinking of the facts that the BMP´s (and most russian apc´s) have the fule tank standing between the seats, running from the middle to the back doors. the sabot vill most certanly penetrate that and cause a big fire. If not, it will probably hit the fule tanks
in the back doors, or the rpg´s on the floor, or the extra ammo in the sidecompartments, or the mines under the seat, or the atgm´s right of the ammo karusell...etc. So, it have to be a extreamly lycky (or unlucky) shot if the apc not blow up....in my opinion=).

[Sergei]

The APC crew will most certainly notice a sabot passing through, but the sabot may not create enough spall to kill the vehicle (e.g. it might pass through the squad compartment, injuring a few mounted soldier there, but leave the vehicle intact otherwise). Sobots DO kill APC, they just don't do it reliably.

That is why soldiers in Chechnya prefer not to put on themselves armoured waistcoat - better if heavy bullet penetrate body then it'll ricochet inside of if it - it was said by my cousin, who was with the dog in Chechnya for 3 monthes, he has a photo before T-72 with ERA-1

[Mechinf]

Most modern western MBT's got the ammo stored behind the turret whit hatches that makes the explosive force exit the roof of the turret and saving the crew. As for riccochets, the same most tanks got a liner who prevent sharpels from riccochet inside the vehicle...

The reason why riflesquads travell on top of their APC/IFV is mine threat, if there was a chance that the vehicle could be hit by a APFSDS or HEAT then there would be a chance that smallarms fire could come the same way. Mines create a pressure inside the vehicle that compromise the crew and squad, if you sit on top you get thrown of not a meter shorter... Happy new year everyone..

[Cpt_Grogg]

Most modern western MBT's got the ammo stored behind the turret whit hatches that makes the explosive force exit the roof of the turret and saving the crew.

The turret ammo-storage in the Leopard2 has this protection. But if the crew is unlucky and it explodes when the loader has opened the ammo-hatch to grab new ammo I don’t think it would help much. :(

btw, is all this simulated in the SB-damage model?

[dejawolf]

the leopard also has hull stored ammunition, on the left side of the driver.
if hit, it's bye bye turret.

you'd have to be very lucky to kill a tank
while the ammo door is open,
as the time a round is in the air equals to the time the ammo door is open........

[Dreadnaught]

Has anyone ever seen the video where they blew the M1 ammo compartment and put sensors in the turret?
The turret temp went up only a few degrees and the noise was not much more than normal operating level, the only thing if your ammo goes don't try to evacuate the tank because the hatches fold over the blow-off panels which vent the cook-offs up and down. The ammo doors buckled slightly on the vehicle but when the fire was out(I don't know how long that took) and the vehicle cooled they did an MRS update and hit targets with it.

[Floydii]

The storing of Ammo in the turret bustle works so well that (don't quote me) the 'black eagle' model of the t80 has it incorporated into it's design. It's a hell of a lot better than the belt of propellant and ammo surrounding the turret floor on the T72.

BTW, would that be the reason for the 'flying turret' syndrome?

[Ssnake]

Yes. The carousel loader is the main problem for all T-xx tanks, even if the ammo is located at the lowest spot of the tank which makes direct hits less likely. Still, spall and burning hydraulic fluid can cause the ammo to go off.

[Reaper115a]

Also older autoloading profiles had propellant charges which are separate from the projectiles, stored on top in the carousel. Which as everyone has stated isn't cool when liquid hot magma is dropping on it from a terminally violated turret.

[JamesT73J]

I found this at www.iacenter.org/depleted/fahey.htm

"The unit (part of the 24th Infantry Division) had gone on, leaving this tank to wait for a recovery vehicle. Three T-72's appeared and attacked. The first fired from under 1,000 meters, scoring a hit with a shaped-charge (high explosive) round on the M1A1's frontal armor. The hit did no damage. The M1A1 fired a 120mm armor-piercing (DU) round that penetrated the T-72 turret, causing an explosion that blew the turret into the air. The second T-72 fired another shaped-charge round, hit the frontal armor, and did no damage. The T-72 turned to run, and took a 120mm round in the engine compartment (which) blew the engine into the air. The last T-72 fired a solid shot (sabot) round from 400 meters. This left a groove in the M1A1's frontal armor and bounced off. The T-72 then backed up behind a sand berm and was completely concealed from view. The M1A1 depressed its gun and put a (DU) sabot round through the berm, into the T-72, causing an explosion."

Pretty frightening, isn't it?