In your personal opinion which is the most effective tank in Steel Beasts Pro PE

[[]_--__[]KITT]

And what makes You think that outer and back plates made from steel are also not part of composite armor?

I never said that. You assuming again hehe

Soviets decreased thickness of the frontal armor package in T-64A with 2nd generation Combination K compared to T-64 with 1st generation Combination K, this is a fact.

Both are composite armor? I never heard US is deploying or using 2nd generation Cobham armor hence I was under the impression it's the same protection.

Also You should notice that what actually You read in open sources about Burlington vel Chobham or composite armors in general is merely disinformation, as I said earlier, most descriptions of such type of armor are far from what we could see on photos.

Now...now now....no spy game in discussion. If anything no one can corroborate that. So it is put in the realm of rumors and gossips.

I allready said. Americans altered design of Burlington (and remember that this is a more proper codename than media created Chobham) several times, why they could not completely replace it with something newer and more efficent in the second half of 80's and in the 1990's? Not to mention that M1A2 use older generation armor than M1A2SEP.

Yeah this time you're right they did replace it with newer RHA. I never knew this because the designation of the tank remained the same.....

You are making conclusions based on a computer program that not nececary, despite it's creators best efforts, is best to simulate how composite armor working mechanism looks in real life?

Well I(and most of us here) don't have Russian friends sending us classified photos so you'll have to excuse us.

We know today that Burlington and it's "bastard childs" are more closer in design to NERA, thus they are reactive type of armor, and I think even Ssnake mentioned that SB do not simulate ERA, so how can You be sure it can properly simulate NERA type armor?

Do You even know what happens with APFSDS penetrator when it hits such type of armor? It is not that such armor just stops projectile, but start to bend it, yaw it, break it in to pieces.

I know they are meant to slow KE at the amor expense while steel only armor is meant to either defeat or pass the KE projectile. The game doesn't need such simulations of physics that would demand a supercomputer. It only needs to simulate the translated/derived equivalent protection levels.

Do You take in to account that how DU is placed in armor is unknown? Do You take in to consideration that nobody knows even in what type of steel it is encased? We do not know how DU is cooperating with other materials, how many layers of DU is in armor, how rest of armor looks like and how it works. There is so many unknowns, SB might not even properly simulate this. Making conclusions about vehicle protection based on computer program is rather... frivolous.

Well I think I did type'nothing serious'.

But again the question that I should be asking DO YOU?

Do You even know how angled is lower front hull plate in M1 series? Definetly less than in T-xx series, but is more bulkier, can hold more composite armor that probably have characeristics described by me above.

Not to mention that M1 series have probably the best designed front hull in terms of vehicle protection. Some upgrades and redesign could be usefull yet still, it is in my opinion the best one in classic tank design... as good or better probably have only Object 187.

Meh I just don't like how they made the lower hull...it's not angled enough understandably because a driver needs to sit there. Again my impression came from the game in which too many times I have been one shotted by a hit there in the lower hull.

You are British?

Unfortunately I am not

As for Challenger 2, it is very overestimated tank as I seen on SB Wiki. In fact compared to other tanks it should be rather less protected, or at least comparable in that due to it's partially outdated protection.

From photos I had seen, the backplate of Dorchester armor on turret front is made by using cast plates. As I said Russians sources are providing such informations. Cast steel armor of the same thickness and hardness as it's rolled analog will be from 5 to 15 % less protective. Challenger 2 front turret backplates are cast, and there is no reason why Dorchester should be better than composite armor developed by other nations. And unless it is some special design from Hogwart, then there is no real reason to assume it is better.

Hmm interesting but again no one can corroborate that claim. Generally speaking most armor experts and enthusiast hold Challenger 2 protection in utmost regard. Judging by not a single one ever destroyed or even disabled and not even one crew killed(only losing some toes), including one tank withstanding RPGs attack and MILAN ATGM....I don't know it seems like a well protected tank.

Try to think twice.

That could be wise, thank you. I will.

Again can I ask what is Your actuall knowledge on vehicles protection? There are different types of Explosive Reactive Armor. Light ERA optimized against HEAT and Heavy or Universal ERA that can protect against KE threats. Very interesting example here is for example Ukrainian "Knife" and it's layered version "Duplet". Such ERA is not based on explosive filler between two steel plates, but is based on shaped charges. While ERA like 4S22 Kontakt-5 was designed to break, bend, yaw penetrator, "Knife" and "Duplet" literally cut penetrator or shaped charge jet from HEAT projectile in to pieces.

But I'd still think KE protection is secondary to HEAT. Just how effective would these protect from KE....but you're right I was never aware ERA could offer somewhat effective protection from KE.

Why You place here Merkava? Merkava series are preatty weak protected vehicles from the front due to very thin, mostly steel only front hull armor. Merkava Mk1 and Mk2 didn't even had advanced composite armor (which was a reason why General Tal choose design with engine at front, to create sort of simple spaced armor).

You saying Merkava tanks suck? Interesting...How do you know the front hull is not protected with composite armor starting from Mk 3 onwards?

As for Challenger 1 and Challenger 2, as I said, CR2 in SB seems to be overestimated, while it's protection in reality is not very high. Also these tanks have serious and actually huge weak zone in lower front hull. Accident with RPG-29 shown it perfectly, and that British ROMOR-A ERA was not efficent against such threat, while lower front hull is just simple steel armor plate, probably not thicker than ~100mm.

Hmm interesting alternative insight

Of course because in Your world improving armor by using different composition of materials can't improve protection.

Now you're assuming again.

It is interesting to see such claims from a person that do not have good knowledge about vehicles protection and base it's opinion on external apperance of discussed design.

Which claims again? You are being condascending again. You know I could also lie about my Langley sources. I'm not saying you're lying Im saying that to us, your words or some of them cannot be corroborated and actually go against the general consensus. And this is a tank game forum not the FSB intranet discussion forum. Lay people discuss these.

[[]_--__[]KITT]

Good point :-)

This whole thread swings between tanks IRL and tanks in SB. Which is not exactly helpfull. So I see it only the fun of it ;-)

What does cost effective in SB mean anyway?

What ever type of tank, it costs only 3 mouseclicks to put a platoon of it on the map :-D

Really? Then the whole world must be very amusing, especially good sources about veicles protection are definetly very amusing.

Im not even sure what you mean.....so I guess no comment.

Feel free to use arguments backed up by good sources and knowledge to counter my arguments.

Feel free to show us your photos....and sources. Ypu see you're applying double standard?

Trying to be realistic does not mean it is realistic, there is a difference.

Of course but at the very least it will be reasonably realistic and that's a big difference to saying wholly unrealistic.

Poland.

Interesting.

There are many different types of ERA. Also remember that composite armor such as Burlington are NERA type armor, so it works very similiar to ERA but without use of explosives and have multi hit capabilities.

If I remember correct designers in our country with preatty limited funds were able to design NERA package for BRDM-2, that have at least 1,5 more efficency than steel armor. I do not remember exact data, need to find it.

Well I know how composite armor defeats a projectile more or less. That it does so at the expense of the armor much like ERA.

[Ssnake]

KITT, if you want to be argumentative for the sake of it, you'll quickly be making it on the moderators' troll watchlist. Damian, I think you made your points. I suggest that we all take a break from this thread for a few days.

BTW, Continuing this debate in a separate thread is not going to earn you bonus points, so think twice.