lastdingo Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 Are any 'best guesses' or even official figures available about these EFPs? Seems like 50+ m distance is not unrealistic for these munitions. I have no real idea about the penetration. I'd believe anything ranging from 100 to 400mm. I'm interested in this because such munitions obviously detonate well outside of most modern APS's ranges. Such warheads might become relevant for mortar-launched AT munitions and ATGMs to counter APS without saturation or jamming.
Tomas Hoting Posted July 7, 2008 Posted July 7, 2008 Are any 'best guesses' or even official figures available about these EFPs?Seems like 50+ m distance is not unrealistic for these munitions. I have no real idea about the penetration. I'd believe anything ranging from 100 to 400mm. I'm interested in this because such munitions obviously detonate well outside of most modern APS's ranges. Such warheads might become relevant for mortar-launched AT munitions and ATGMs to counter APS without saturation or jamming. Here's an overview for various sensor-fuzed munitions. I had to copy it out of an older PDF document, sorry for that: NAMECOUNTRYCALIBER / DELIVERY SYSTEMTARGETING SENSORSEARCH ALTITUDEARMOR PENETRATIONTYPE WARHEADRANGESTATUS / PROLIFERATION BONUSFrance / Sweden155mm cannon2-color IR sensor with laser altimeter175m120-135mm at 150m slant rangeTantalum EFP27km (39-cal cannon) 35km (52-cal cannon)Full Production SMArtGermany155mm cannon94 Ghz MMW Sensor (Active and Passive), 3-5μ IR sensor150m135mm RHA penetration @ 100 metersTantalum liner, COMP-B fill with unique waveshaper25kmFull Production Indian Sensor Fuzed MunitionIndia120mm mortar, 155mm cannonMMW100m(est) 50-70mm RHA penetration @ 100 metersCopper penetrator7kmEIOC 2002-2003 Israeli Top-Attack Sensing SubmunitionIsrael227mm rocketKa-Band (Active and Passive)100m(est) 100-mm RHA penetration @ 100 metersCopper penetrator32kmDevelopmental MeteorPoland122mm rocket2 color IR sensor with laser diode altimeter150m80-100mm RHA penetration @ 100 metersCopper penetrator30kmEIOC 2003 Motiv-3MRussia300mm rocket2 color IR sensor100m(est) 70-mm RHA penetration @ 150 meters and 30°Copper penetrator, Ball slug90kmFull Production Universal SubmunitionRussia120mm mortar, 122mm, 220mm, and 300mm rocketsW-band MMW Sensor (Active and Passive), 1-2μ and 8-14μ IR sensor100m(est) 60-70-mm RHA penetration @ 100 meters and 30°Copper penetrator, Ball slug33km (122mm) 35km (220mm) 90km (300mm)Limited Production MCS-E1Russia152mm cannon35 Ghz MMW (Active), 3-5μ IR sensor100m (est) 90mm RHA penetrationCopper penetrator, Ball slug24kmEIOC 2003-2004 MCS-E2 152mmRussia152mm cannonW-band MMW Sensor (Active and Passive), 1-2μ and 8-14μ IR sensor150m(est) 80mm RHA penetration @ 125 meters and 30°Copper penetrator, Ball slug20kmDevelopmentalEIOC 2007-2008 MCS-E2 155mmRussia155mm cannonW-band MMW Sensor (Active and Passive),1-2μ and 8-14μ IR sensor150m(est) 80-mm RHA penetration @ 125 meters and 30°Copper penetrator, Ball slug25kmDevelopmentalEIOC 2007-2008 SADARMUS155mm cannon35 Ghz MMW Sensor (Active and Passive), 8-14μ IR sensor130m (est) 165m (est) P3I135mm RHA penetration @ 100 metersINA24kmLimited Production
lastdingo Posted July 7, 2008 Author Posted July 7, 2008 Thanks. 70-135 mm is really pretty bad for this calibre (with expensive Tantal being used on the better ones). Otherwise, that's on par with autocannon APFSDS. It's probably difficult to simply armour the top like a IFV's front.
Tomas Hoting Posted July 8, 2008 Posted July 8, 2008 Thanks. 70-135 mm is really pretty bad for this calibre (with expensive Tantal being used on the better ones). Otherwise, that's on par with autocannon APFSDS. It's probably difficult to simply armour the top like a IFV's front. The new "Kampfpanzer" book by Rolf Hilmes has some info on this as well. He writes that turret roof armour with a strength of 120-150mm of steel is impossible to implement due to weight reasons. Two alternatives were researched in the early 1980s. The first was a so-called "pill-box-armour" system with small cylinders of explosives embedded in a fibre glass matrix, whose explosion was designed to disturb the shaped charge jet of a HEAT bomblet. The problem, like with all ERA, was potential damage to optics etc. So they used passive combination armour. One has to remember that the hatches for the commander and loader on the Swedish Strv122 weigh over 100kg each, and one TankNet member commented that the turret hatch on the Merkava 4 looks like an ICBM silo cover. Whether or not that's really enough to protect from the most modern EFPs of the BONUS or SMArt rounds, I don't know.
lastdingo Posted July 9, 2008 Author Posted July 9, 2008 Plus he wrote about the rubber hedgehog armour that inteferes with bomblet cones, but that's just against bomblets. I've read that the MRAP will probably be hardened against EFPs. Considering the tolerable armour weight and areas I think that can only be achieved with some radical armour technology advances (can happen in wartime).If they really succeed in this, then it should be possible to protect MBT roofs sufficiently as well.
nigelfe Posted July 12, 2008 Posted July 12, 2008 Doesn't help the engine decking unless intake is going to be radically redesigned.
Sebastian Balos Posted July 15, 2008 Posted July 15, 2008 It seems that roofs of the latest tanks such as Leo 2A6 Strv122 and Merkava 4 is resistant to EFPs. The panels seem pretty thick. But, the absolute champion od roof armor is probably Black Eagle, which isn't in service and it probably won't be. All these tanks use some kind of composite armor which should cut the weight of the panels by a factor of at least 2-3, so, you won't have 150 mm roof armor, but it would be like perhaps 50 mm or less. This is where russian tank excells, it's roof is integral, while Leopard uses an add-on kit, over tha basic steel armor. merkava has a thinner steel turret shell, which is then equipped with modular armor panels. Keep in mind that there also the engine deck, which is still pretty thin, but if hit, the crew will still survive, but the tank is stopped. Well, this is probably the case with all except for Merkava.
lastdingo Posted July 16, 2008 Author Posted July 16, 2008 It seems that roofs of the latest tanks such as Leo 2A6 Strv122 and Merkava 4 is resistant to EFPs. The panels seem pretty thick. But, the absolute champion od roof armor is probably Black Eagle, which isn't in service and it probably won't be. All these tanks use some kind of composite armor which should cut the weight of the panels by a factor of at least 2-3, so, you won't have 150 mm roof armor, but it would be like perhaps 50 mm or less. This is where russian tank excells, it's roof is integral, while Leopard uses an add-on kit, over tha basic steel armor. merkava has a thinner steel turret shell, which is then equipped with modular armor panels. Keep in mind that there also the engine deck, which is still pretty thin, but if hit, the crew will still survive, but the tank is stopped. Well, this is probably the case with all except for Merkava. Even if the roofs are now better protected than before; that's more likely against small shaped charges (submunitions) with less than 100 mm RHAeq CE penetration than against the EFP hits which are more like KE penetration.It's harder to protect against the same thickness RHAeq KE, especially with so little depth. DPICM has been a major threat since the 80's, whereas EFP overhead attack is still a rather minor threat (the Russians had it long before us, though). Passive protection against overfly downwards HEAT is most likely impossible due to weight restrictions and the powerful warhads involved (big calibres).
Sebastian Balos Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Even if the roofs are now better protected than before; that's more likely against small shaped charges (submunitions) with less than 100 mm RHAeq CE penetration than against the EFP hits which are more like KE penetration.It's harder to protect against the same thickness RHAeq KE, especially with so little depth. DPICM has been a major threat since the 80's, whereas EFP overhead attack is still a rather minor threat (the Russians had it long before us, though). Passive protection against overfly downwards HEAT is most likely impossible due to weight restrictions and the powerful warhads involved (big calibres). Agreed about the difficulties vs KE attack, but note that these tank's roofs are pretty thick, thicket than those 100 mm, which might give us some clue about their armor equivalent.
gewing Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 Has anyone seen any estimates of the performance of the secondary EFP s around the perimeter of the main disc on the Product Improved Sensor Fused Weapon? As I understand it, they are intended to increase the likelihood of destruction of soft targets like trucks. I have guessed that they might have penetration somewhere between 7.62 and .50 AP rounds? Just a wild assed guess though
lastdingo Posted July 22, 2008 Author Posted July 22, 2008 I was looking through the brochures that I picked up on the Eurosatory. IBD claims this for its AMAP-R: Add-on roof armour vs. bomblet HEAT: 25kg/square meter in addition to unspecified base armour. Add-on roof armour vs. EFP: 120 kg/square meter in addition to the anti-bomblet and base armour(no information on the power of the EFP) The graphics in the brochures were symbolic. The anti-EFP layer is in between and depicted as about 4x as thick as the anti-bomblet layer. only info about material: "advanced materials and an intelligent structural design of bonded layers" conventional anti-EFP roof armour was said to weigh about 450 kg / square meter (unsure whether they included the base roof armour in this) ------------Btw, one of their brochures mentioned a protection technology AMAP-X with only info about it being "Confidential applications. Please contact us for more information."Their active protection system is AMAP-ADS, so AMAP-X does likely not mean an ADS.
Przezdzieblo Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 Question: what would be optimal armour against EFP threat? Some MRAPs are said to have good vs EFP protection - how it is achieved? I mean there were discussed already various protection methods against both KE and CE threats: spaced (with air or liquid; slats or even sleeping bags) and reactive armours (explosive or not explosive), armour with confined ceramic in it, heavy metal (DU or WHA) cylinders, balls or plates, etc. But how would look dedicated anti-EFP armour - would there be any significant difference between armour designed to deal with LRPs and HEATs?
Vasiliy Fofanov Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 Btw, one of their brochures mentioned a protection technology AMAP-X with only info about it being "Confidential applications. Please contact us for more information."Their active protection system is AMAP-ADS, so AMAP-X does likely not mean an ADS. I think "X" refers to X Files kinds of threats. The truth is out there.
Sebastian Balos Posted July 23, 2008 Posted July 23, 2008 I was looking through the brochures that I picked up on the Eurosatory. IBD claims this for its AMAP-R: Add-on roof armour vs. bomblet HEAT: 25kg/square meter in addition to unspecified base armour. Add-on roof armour vs. EFP: 120 kg/square meter in addition to the anti-bomblet and base armour(no information on the power of the EFP) The graphics in the brochures were symbolic. The anti-EFP layer is in between and depicted as about 4x as thick as the anti-bomblet layer. only info about material: "advanced materials and an intelligent structural design of bonded layers" conventional anti-EFP roof armour was said to weigh about 450 kg / square meter (unsure whether they included the base roof armour in this) ------------Btw, one of their brochures mentioned a protection technology AMAP-X with only info about it being "Confidential applications. Please contact us for more information."Their active protection system is AMAP-ADS, so AMAP-X does likely not mean an ADS. 450 kg/sq m means that the thickness of this steel add-on is 58 mm, which with the basic armor of e.g. 30 mm gives 88 mm - makes sense. 120 kg/sq m of the IBM gives Em of 3.75 - not bad. 120 kg/sq m is something like 15 mm additional steel.
Catalan Posted August 8, 2008 Posted August 8, 2008 Does anybody know how much (just a guess) thicker the roof armor of a Leopard 2E or Leopard 2S is as compared to a 'standard' Leopard 2A5/2A6?
Przezdzieblo Posted August 8, 2008 Posted August 8, 2008 See this pic:http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h90/REMO...pard2HEL_07.jpgor thishttp://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h90/REMO...pard2HEL_08.jpg(all you will find here --> http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?showt...0&p=432767)Does not it look like circa 10-12 cm of armour array?
Sebastian Balos Posted August 14, 2008 Posted August 14, 2008 See this pic:http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h90/REMO...pard2HEL_07.jpgor thishttp://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h90/REMO...pard2HEL_08.jpg(all you will find here --> http://63.99.108.76/forums/index.php?showt...0&p=432767)Does not it look like circa 10-12 cm of armour array? If the hatch has a diameter of 500 mm, the thickness of this roof "box" is 4 times less, so your figure of 120 mm is pretty close. But, take a look at this Swedish Strv-122: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/le...mages/leop4.jpg This arrangement seems different and thicker too. If it's more effective, I'm not sure... These more modern armor arrmangements tend to have thickness efficiency close to steel, but they tend to be lighter, so I'd expect that the add-on should add some 100-120 mm KE armor, plus the cover steel plate that comes on top of the "box" to the basic ~30 mm top armor, giving between 150 and 170mm of armor.
nigelfe Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Who gives a rat's about K kills? M kills (the engine) do the job, particularly if 155 or rkt delivered munitions are targeted at tanks well before they come into contact.
Chris Werb Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 It's a shame, but I think nigel will confirm that the British Army's 155mm EFP cargo shell either got put on indefinite hold or was canned along with most of the rest of the IFPA initiative.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now