Tank Gun vs Armor: Tank Warfare Explained

[Music] nerado Pizarro had to stop Katina [ __ ] off welcome to Bing coughs headquarters battle between armor and tank guns has been going on for a century now where does current modern-day tank armor stand compared to the best anti-tank rounds out there designed to defeat it since World War two tank armor has progressed from simple slabs of steel to complex structures composed of several kinds of material equally so the gun rounds have evolved from simple bullets and explosive rounds to a variety of shells used for a wide range of purposes two round types have shown themselves as being useful against other tanks say veted kinetic penetrators and rounds with shaped charge warheads shaped charges led the way initially as their penetration ability did not depend on the velocity of the round they have an explosive charge that is placed around a metal liner upon detonating the explosive is focused to distort the liner into a thin jet of metal and push it forward at tremendous speed cutting through the armor the larger the round is the greater effect it has modern high-explosive anti-tank rounds and missiles can usually punch through steel as thick as 7 to 10 times their diameter but shaped charges fell out to favor through the Cold War the optics and gun stabilization improved various sensors and computer control enabled tanks to shoot from greater distances over time hitting a tank from 2 kilometers away became standard and heat rounds could not compete they were large and not very aerodynamic the slow and suffering from ever diminishing precision over such distances kinetic penetrators were preferred while they did lose penetration ability over distance their initial velocity meant they were quite precise modern-day kinetic penetrators are basically extremely durable arabs they are very thin and aerodynamic focusing their weight and velocity on the small point of their sharp nose as they punch into armor they're also say veted so the propellant has a larger area to push against that way the arrow is fired out of the gun at highest possible speed as it leaves the barrel disable is discarded so drag is minimized finally fins are required for stable and precise flight giving the round that arrow like shape against the stationary target the difference in precision isn't that great and heat rounds are quite a bit used against such targets but against a moving tank apfsds rounds are the norm heat round drops more over distance and is moved more by wind requiring greater Corrections in fire in the end it takes longer to reach a distant target against moving targets that usually means no head so how to both heat and kinetic rounds kill basically by damaging stuff inside tank and wounding or killing crew kinetic penetrator has no explosive and heat rounds explosive charge is detonated outside the target both rounds do damage by sending bits and pieces of themselves and more importantly bits of armour breaking off into the tank all those pieces fly around the vehicle Rikka shutting and causing damage the British had used a round design not to penetrate yet sent shrapnel around the interior of the tank it was effective against simpler Armour sending shockwave through it and making the inner walls break off newer composite armors propagate those shockwaves much less so today the rounds use is generally relegated to structured emulation modern tanks have their interior walls lined with soft protective material diminishing the effect and coverage often coming fragments still a penetrated tank is going to have a lot of fragments flying into it besides direct damage fragments make it stored propellant for gun rounds if such a round is stored inside a crew compartment it may lead to an explosion even without such an event penetration will often cause some over sure in during the crew sometimes it's strong enough to force open hatches from inside on an armored vehicle the weaker the armor is less the formation of the armor-piercing round will occur leading to less information of the armor itself and less fragments flying around that is called / penetration it is the reason why heat rounds are still preferred at times over kinetic penetrators against medium armored vehicles heat rounds jet disperses to a greater degree when punching through such armor it may do more damage when it comes to heavily armored targets kinetic penetrators shear more upon breaking through and cause damage roughly similar to what the heat round would do heat rounds can actually cause less damage upon a penetration if the armor made some of the jet dissipate so only a fraction of it actually entered inside of a tent when one takes into account the fact kinetic penetrators are faster and thus more precise and that Armour can be made more effective against heat warheads it is clear why apfsds rounds of choice for tank battles and said armor composition against heat can be more easily tailored against so in reality heat rounds have to punch through armor of even greater equivalent of thickness ways around the issue of lesser precision were sought Soviets in particular relied on guided missiles fired from the main gun over time such missiles got larger and better today's top Russian missile is reflects when fired a sustained a rocket motor is engaged getting the missile to its maximum effective range the firing platform pains the target with a laser beam the missile upon being fired corrects its flight so it always stays within the beam even if the firing platform moves it so it can better track a moving target the system provides high precision as simple gun rounds could hardly hit anything beyond four kilometers at five kilometers even a stationary target would be seldom hit with the trajectory drop win gun barrel and round imperfections still against frontal tank armor such missiles will not the kilt most of the time but flanking attacks or attacks against other targets can be devastating from such distances said missile is also useful against slow helicopters US uses an unguided general-purpose round against helicopters though it cannot compete with the guided missile still any sort of head to the outside of the tank can be dangerous gun barrel sights and other sensors may get damaged degrading tanks ability to fight back even tracks may get broken and immobilize the tank furthermore to hit something one has to see it moving object will be spotted much more easily moving object will have a greater heat signature but at the same time moving object will be harder to hit protection comes in two varieties active not getting hit and passive surviving ahead active protection can be anything from tactics using the surroundings to hide oneself from view or shield oneself from ahead certain parts of the tank those close to the ground are less likely to get hit because tank commanders will try to get in hull down positions if surroundings allow it hiding their lower halves behind natural cover moving towards enemy however makes seeking cover very hard tanks will use smoke screens and flares to obstruct enemy's aim previously Russian tanks used infrared jammers basically emitters that would blind enemy's sights more modern sights are immune to that the newest Russian tanks dispensed with such jammers another last line of active defense are active protection systems the use radar sensors to detect incoming threats then the tank fires projectiles into that threat Israel is the most prolific user of such systems today the tiny number of their systems is used on us Abrams tanks Russian army is also testing their systems downside of such ABS was inability to deal with high-speed kinetic penetrators today they're geared against anti-tank missiles and rockets but developmental systems such as 80s and have shown some capability even against kinetic penetrators when it comes to tank armor the bottom line is that everything can be equally armored otherwise tanks would weigh over hundred tonnes usually millimeters of protection equivalent of steel are used for measuring armors effectiveness in reality there are too many variables to make a precise measurement system all the figures publicly available for tanks made with complex armors including ones in been cuffs videos are just estimates one kinetic penetrator may do better against one Armour but worse against other even a former has more armor thickness equivalent just because the latter was tailor-made to defeat that specific penetrator as a general rule of thumb most frontal surfaces are heavily armored enough to stop most threats other surfaces are much less protected it could be noticed that the crew will get most protection a hit to the engine compartment is not something that is worth protecting against that's because the tank will never be alone if one stops moving the rest of the army will Diwan fighting and the crew can simply get out it all comes down to doctrine and planned use tanks are designed with idea that they will be able to present their frontal side to the enemy today demands that the urban warfare also made the sides well protected though that protection is usually reserved against shape charges and is often an add-on for its extra weight would be a burden in tank on tank battles modern top attack missiles have also made roof protection more important Israeli Merkava 4 is a good example of an all-around armored tank at some expense of frontal protection all stemming from Israeli needs and perceived threats and on armor plate started appearing in numbers in 1980s it is not a coincidence that first ones to use it were Israel and Soviet Union they were both faced with a prospect of countless guided anti-tank missiles with shaped charges a team of soldiers could more easily hide and engage a passing tank from the side or a helicopter with more easily engaged tanks flanking them anti-tank missiles with shaped charge warheads were so much more numerous in numbers that they became the highest threat and so the tank armor was enlarged Bart devised to deal against them those armors were explosive reactive Armour and they were really good against shaped charges armored against such rounds tends to be voluminous but not as heavy as armored against kinetic penetrators still thanks can hardly be 5 metres wide and remain practical so side Armour is still pretty flimsy in comparison to the frontal Armour tiles are placed over the tank they contain armor plates an explosive sandwiched between them is crucial the details are positioned at an angle to the most likely threat direction when a projectile hits the tile the explosive pushes the armor plates away in this example front plate is pushed against the incoming penetrator or shaped-charge penetration jet at the same time the plate is pushing upwards at tremendous speed not only is it continuously feeding more armor into projectiles path but it is also causing dissipation of shaped charges jet greatly reducing its focus and dust penetration ability back plate is doing the same only downwards as it moves away from the projectile but early er a tiles were fairly light and not useful against kinetic penetrators later variants use multiple heavier plates they cause the kinetic penetrator arrows to either change course or even break apart in a response us rounds became thicker and heavier to withstand those forces and punched through after latest Russian reactive armors us switch to breakable penetrators instead of breaking without control and transferring force to the rest of the projectile the frontal part breaks off along a pre-designed point as reactive armor tile spend leaving a sharp remainder of the projectile soviets had a literal two-part penetrator where first penetrator with shattered initial are without passing under stressed on to the second penetrator perhaps a more famous multiple penetrator usage is found in tandem warhead shaped charges the initial smaller charge activates the reactive armour and the larger charge can then deal with the armour behind it more and more layers in modern armor have led to development of three stage shaped charges where possible and result of reactive armor tiles is fairly low weight of armor for a lot of protection equivalent but once the tile is activated that area is without any real added protection so several shots onto Russian ta tier t-90s front may lead to one of them hitting an area with a spence tile if that happens basic armor remaining is likely going to be defeated important to note most tanks today have reactive armor of a sword even if it doesn't have explosives it's not as good against penetrators as explosive armor but it can withstand multiple heads better basically multiple plates of armor are placed at a certain angle and rubber-like material is placed between them when plates are hit the material compresses and then has nowhere to go but expand the plates then move in similar fashion as with explosive armor only the movement is much less pronounced and as such armor is not as effective weight wise still most tanks use it in some form Western tanks use voluminous armor more placing layers of reactive armor empty gaps perforated steel armor and various composites silica based glass like armor was especially popular with Soviet tanks as our comic plates with Western tanks pockets filled with silica are good against shaped charges Quranic blades are not only extremely hard deforming the penetrator which is good against kinetic grounds butter brittle as they break their leftover jagged surfaces help dissipate the shaped-charge jet stream and unfocus it very dense and strong materials such as depleted uranium have also been used as armor plating intense but perhaps they're more known use is for kinetic penetrators most countries today make their penetrators from either tungsten or depleted uranium the latter is sometimes preferred as it has other better properties compared to tungsten it deforms less rather it sheers upon impact leaving a sharpened tip as it progresses through Armour lastly the gun itself is important piece of the puzzle to give as much velocity to the round as possible the propellant case should be as big as possible large caliber is usually better though so far neither West nor East had went for really large calibers too cumbersome large shells would require tanks to be even bigger and carry even less rounds in them German leopard 2 tanks used tungsten based penetrators to make up for the material their guns used longer barrels greater pressure is higher muzzle velocities for their rounds the battle between gun and armor or better said advanced gun rounds and complex defense solutions has been going on for decades and will continue neither of the two seems to be winning right now leaving training and other aspects of tank battles equally important in deciding the outcome thanks for watching if you liked my video subscribe to my channel and if you really like my videos you can even support my work by a patreon also check out my website for paul's video suggestions and my store offering some cool t-shirts mugs and other stuff and remember bin cough may talk about hypothetical Wars but only real peace can bring us all together [Music]

Channel: Binkov's Battlegrounds

Views: 214,547

Rating: 4.9221792 out of 5

Keywords: Tank armor, tank gun, T-72, T-80, T-90, Abrams, M1A2, Leopard 2, Leclerc, Merkava, Ceramic armor, Chobham armor, ERA armor, Explosive reactive armor, APFSDS, HEAT, Tank tactics

Id: WPoAK8BWoLc

Length: 17min 13sec (1033 seconds)

Published: Fri Jun 08 2018

Reddit Comments

[u/EmmetJD]

Love me some Commissar Binkov

[u/ShadowEntity]

When was the last time a real tank battle happened?

Meaning multiple equally modern tanks on each side, either used by different modern nations, or provided by them.