Composite Armor: increasing protection, with less weight 

I just came to write this and thought, surely someone needs to know this too :). So - if the ceramic is not contained, the bullet spreads it at impact - there is almost no resistance. If not contained, you are only testing the impact resistance which is minimal while the ceramic real residence is the fact that if you cant spread it away - it is very abrasive - even if it is shattered. It is the same principle as the bulletproof glass - it has a film attached to the glass so the glass is not leaving the impact area. You could redo the experiment and attach a film to the ceramic plates - even this small improvement I think will produce a huge difference in results.

Yeah, but it would shatter anyway. The main power of that is the thermal resistance

@@grantavakjan9488 You dont understand physics lol. It doesn't matter if it shatters and there is no reason to mention "thermal resistance" because that's not what is stopping the bullet lol. Go read a fkn book 😂

I think if he paints the ceramic tile or coats with acrylic or neoprene will be contained , one study on steel armor in WWI found that varnished steel was more effective armor than crude steel, of course Ceramics pulverize and decrease speed and heat transfer

​@@grantavakjan9488its harder than the enemy projectile the enemy projectile shatters as well, and it shatters faster, so after it went through the ceramic, there isnt much projectile left

if they can't get close your tank will live -ussr

It also bears mentioning that the side skirts on Panzers were originally to help protect against AT rifles & HMGs. Even the Panther had a few spots on the lower hull that a PTRD or PTRS could punch through. The skirts destabilized the bullet, limiting its penetrating power.

Rama Davy The Russian method of protection is actually the most effective😂 Most of the panzerfausts produced were the panzerfaust 60, which had a max range of 200 meters, and had to be fired in the open due to the back blast. The Infantry would dismount and screen the tank, making it impossible for infantry to sneak up and ambush it. Meanwhile, the Schutzen and sandbags have been proven to do nothing to disrupt shaped charge warheads, as the schurtzen are not far enough away from the tank for the molten jet to loose power, and the sandbags have the same problem.

@@thecanadiankiwibirb4512 I don't know if you are talking about another variant of the panzerfaust or something but, panzerfausts' don't have a backblast, as they don't have an opening in the back of the chasis of the launcher, unlike their big brother the panzershrek. Also the panzerfaust are recoil-less, they were made that way, which is another reason why they were so deadly on the battlefield either against tanks or ground-troops.

well, add that the t-34 till the 85mm gun were blind as a bat and the commander hatch open in front of him, those eyes did help a lot

metric & imperial, ...I wonder if he's Canadian then ??

@@razor1uk610 Maybe he is. Maybe he just keeps in mind the audience is from all over the world

Honestly looks like he just forget what ratio to put it all in... it's verticallly squished, but the black bars are still there.

I deducted points for being tainted by Satan's metric system . Rather than the God given proper system.

@@martinkominek6712 You mean from all over the world, Liberia, Myanmar or country which put man on the moon using metric system after their own system failed.

But wait, there’s more

Nah,to me he talk like the propaganda MC in those ww2 to late Cold War era informational videos

buy our composite products now!

Glass is very hard so the round has to shatter the entire plate to penetrate hence its effectiveness.

Glass is heavily used in composite armor manufacturing, also thanks to its effectiveness against the molten jet of HEAT charges, for example the Russians used a certain type of glass in the armor of the T-64 (or T-72 one of those, can’t remember exactly).

@@vale.44peru Yes and first leclerc generation use it too, a very dense one. Just note that ceramic used in tank armor is a very high density one, with many heat absorbant, more like the space shuttle ceramic was and is mainly effective against Heat round.

@@AceDan-gc9po effective body armour can be made from fibre glass too

True, not just for holding the ceramic in place while being penetrated, but also for compression. It's a fact that ceramics increase in effectiveness as armor under compression, and is used in the latest versions of tank armor

That might allow the ceramic plate to better sustain a second shot, but due to the brittle nature of ceramic, cracs will still form inside the plate. At this point you should look at the advantages and disadvantages that a “surrounding tape” has, for example cost and (maybe even) weight.

What if we use adhesive rubbers to hold the ceramic instead of duct tape

@@satheeshnarayanan701 With rubber the bullets can bounce back towards the enemy.

@@vale.44peru eventually not just duct tape but put those tiles in the enclosed box. One point is that this way ceramic particles have nowhere to escape and the bullet must trully force its way through. But moreover he is talking about HEAT while using bullets - which is strange. It is said that one job of the ceramics is to create particles that fly into the heat jet and disrupt it.

4 months late but yeah, funny how glass is used in composite. the best example I can think of is the T-64

Indeed. Glass was used in T64

Little late here as well but glass is somewhat elastic so it was to contract back into its original shape so more energy is expended. Works really well against heat rounds

Come to America, we can own pretty much any rifle. The general public is armed well

@@ihatecandy02 That's how it should be! And not like right now when I can't obtain the AK made in my country, but can only see it exported to the US???

@@matovicmmilan AKs can't be exported directly from Russia to the USA. Also, how many crimes with guns happen in Russia yearly and how many in Russia?

@@Tankliker Yeah, that ban was introduced in 2014 as part of sanctions. I'm not from Russia, I live in Serbia. I'm not sure about the rate of crimes involving firearms tbh?

@@matovicmmilan Yeah, the worldwide crime rate in countrys with gun regulations is as whole lower then crimes related with guns in the USA. More guns doesn´t automatically mean more safety, more guns mean more people that could kill others. For example, in 2016 Brazil had the highest deathrate of all countrys, followed from the USA. The funny thing is, Brazil has a big crime problem and neighbouring countries also have high crime rates, you can easily see how the gun deaths are caused. THe USA on the other side is maybe the largest world economy right now, is mostly stable and also has no crime problems in the sizes of middle and south america, but still claims secound place at the list. The whole "good guy with gun, bad guy with gun" logic is completetly bullshit. Jsut imagen "no guy with gun" for example, the possibility that somebody could potenially shot somebody is zero. Also the argument that the counter shoter jsut has to react fast enought and stay calm is only possibly if the perosn knows what she´s doing, a policeman or soldier for example is trained to stay calm in such situation and can mostly react fast enougth. People that don´t have such role as the ploiceman or soldier mostly don´t have the reaction time or the experince to stay calm, even if they have a weapon. THe changes are even high that they maybe shot others. Next thing would be that the shoter maybe cannot be identified because if everybody has a gun and you couldn´t identify the shoter from the start then maybe everybody that has a gun can potenionally become the murderer.

Armor grade steel works in that manner. The hardest, most brittle steel is on the outside surface and the further into the armor plate you go, the more ductile you get. The high hardness surface is to shatter or deform the geometry of the penetrator, the softer material is structural to absorb the energy

That's impressive! Your cartridge is much more powerful than the round in the test. If we were betting I would have bet against it stopping that round. Well done.

Your English is good enough.

The Soviet byus is real

That one was actually a meme made for a history meme forum I think, I had to laugh do hard when I saw it here

The power of motherland russia

Isnt that just modern body armor though

@@lpflore The infantry on top was meant to spot an neutralize ambush soldiers with a rocket launcher as they range was limited. They also used improvised bed frames and fences as mesh screens to entangle or prematurely detonate the heat.

its soviet union

People body are less expensive than tanks....

It's hard to shoot panzerfaust at a tank when its got people on top shooting back at you.

The only problem was the Panzer Faust and Panzer Schrek were extremely successful against the Russian Tanks. One small SS unit in the last days of Berlin, destroyed over 150 russian tanks over just a few days.

And they still lost the war, so I guess it didn't matter how good it was.

That takes body armor to another level.......

Space armor* :)

Germany: armor screns US: sand bags USSR: body armor

@@guyfrompoland1358 More like worlds first Active Protection System

The Russians sometimes employed a tactic where they had infantry riding tanks in to battle, they were not suposed to be seen as armour rather than extra protection against enemy infantry untill they hit the final point where the infantry is jumping off the tank and proceed to fight along side it. This gave the tank some extra defences against enemy anti tank infantry since you had muliple guns and eyes firing in more directions than the tank alone could, and it allso enabled the infantry to get to the main asault quicker. Outside of combat infantry often rode tanks as transports in to battle. If an enemy tank fired on those infantrymen their bodies would do bugg all as protection to the tank realy seing as human bodies are not realy that effectiv at stoping fast moving tankshells so that was not why they were there.

I’m no expert but hardened plates are more brittle and that implies that the armor would’ve degraded far took quicker if it as all hardened

@@miguelgameiro8063 If you are not stupid about it, then it will not shatter. German tanks had armor shatter due to luck of proper composition towards end of the war - due to simply running out of stuff.

@@tomk3732 with tick plates if I’m not mistaken you can make them Harvey or cemented where in the same thick plate the face is extremely hardened but the rest of the thickness is far softer to avoid the plate from cracking

I'll try that. Thanks!

@@jackalmountain6523 Have look on product called CT1 , probably nearest thing to Polymer used in Chobham NERA

@@komradearti9935 I think it cod -names represent different solutions, and generations of those solutions. I read about it in some Polish source researching advanced amour program in UK. Autor mention Chobcham in regard of NERA , and Burlington utilizing Ceramic under compression.

@@komradearti9935 I would love to read full document with was obtained under freedom of information act ,(one containing cutaway of armor), as this is probably primary source. Any links out there?

@@komradearti9935 Yes , you absolutely right. just found that: below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2016/03/chobham-armor-facts-and-fiction-1.html So Burlington was cod -name for of NERA system with was given to Americns.

Thanks for the feed back! Apparently using a rubber layer behind the ceramic is common in tanks, I'd imagine it would be like an air gap to best expand the surface area of teh shattering ceramic. On my channel theres a similar test of sloped armor I did last year.

Rubber is indeed as useful layering material. Another option for holding materials together as a coating is polyurea truck bed liner. It can be sprayed on to glass or ceramic inserts for example or even the metal layers too.

SvenTviking was gonna write this myself lol

Kobam

More Ch-Ob-Em, bit of a meh place though :P Most of Surrey is full of rich assholes though, lovely countryside!

Hell i thought it was a sandwich.

Funnily enough the British invented it, that is why it is called chobham armour, as it was invented in chobham.

@@pliat The British invented Chobham armour, which was our (yes I'm British) version of something the Americans tested in some prototype tanks first (apologies I am unsure of the the date of the American tests), and the Soviets used in the T64 soon afterwards in the early sixties called "Combination K" by "the West". The Soviet Union were knocking these out by the thousands by the time "Report No. P.C. 59 FEASIBLITY STUDY OF BURLINGTON FITTED TO CHIEFTAIN" (Burlington was the codename for the armour that was invented in Chobham) was written on 14th May 1969. It is in the National Archives if you wish to read it. Unfortunately, we cannot take this one buddy.

@@DeDyson chobham was the first, but the soviets were the first to put it into use on the T-64, textolite and RHA for the hull, and combination K for the turret, unless it was a model installed with the ultra porcelain balls inside the turret armour. I think the American tests were after btw.

@@pliat This is the third attempt at posting this as it keeps on getting removed. I have removed the links to see if YT will keep the post here this time. I can always find another way to get the links to you if you are struggling to find the documents online:- Chobham armour is a type of composite armour, from Chobham Lane, which had the codename "Burlington". The American efforts for composite armour were in 1958 [LINK REMOVED]. The Soviets putting it on tanks in 1964 when it appeared in mass production, so their date is some point before then (by years). The UK were investigating it in 1969 [LINK REMOVED]. I can’t see how we were first? Perhaps there is a document I am missing that is dated before then that you can find? I am open to evidence of the contrary.

@@DeDyson the first tank with composite armour was the Object 430, and we had created chobham before that. The American T95 tests were unsuccessful so i dont really count them.

Ceramic better up close imo space the steel layers

That stuff is great at stopping bullets too. The Russians used a version on their first composite tanks called texolite. It has better multi hit resistance than ceramics but idk if the protection vs weigh is as good

@@alexdunphy3716 I couldn´t find what textolite is. Do you know anything more specific?

@@edi9892 I probably didn't remember the name correctly. I'll see if I can find a link

@@edi9892 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination_K The laminate glass reinforced plastic is sometimes called textolite

@@alexdunphy3716 thank you!

@@komradearti9935 Oh my goodness that's more information about the t-72 then a guy could have in a lifetime! Thank you very much for sending me that. 👍👍👍👍

And hopefully not be made of clay floortiles. :)

"good enough" Rifle shot as a simulation of shaped charge? Are you kiding me? heh

Ryae on we do use AP rounds today, the APFSDS. It pretty much looks like a giant metal arrow, but against that they mostly use spaced armor to make the round lose it course (: look at the front of the Leo2a5 tank turret, theres only air in there, but there is enough space in there to make the round lose its course which makes it also lose alot of its penetration (: hope this helps!

@@sanderpanderpei yeah.. but my guess that in the future.. we will use AP type shell.. but with bigger round size maybe 5-10 ton or more weight. and shoot it from across the continent to other continent with orbital fall or something. (i think i watch a video that the shell become liquid if they travel that fast because to hot.) can you intercept something that fast and heavy. and straight from orbit?

Ryae on well theres no point to develop that, we already have missiles that do that and do way more damage already, so no i highly doubt a tank will shoot a 5-10 ton round. If that does happen then yeah we might have stuff to intercept that yeah

@@sanderpanderpei well if missiles still use computer chip or something as component it can still be reroute or premature explode maybe with new technology. (drone with scrambling signal or something near missile trajectory) because who didnt want to know how to intercept missile without using another missile? less money is win. because the one who cant be reroute or something is kinetic gun. maybe railgun?

Zlaapy Typico Leopards armor is simple to counter. All you need is a longer penetrator and it won't turn.

Why don't you try legally obtaining a HEAT/HEAT-FS round at a reasonable time and price? Maybe you would like to fund him?

@@Jason-tp5cb you can make them with existing materials, but the problem is indeed legality. BATF will take everything you own for something like that, done wrong.

I never meant for him to go all out crazy. I just wanted to make the point that armor piercing is not the same as HEAT. Maybe a cutting torch with a custom tip could replicate the effect on his lighter, miniature representations.

@@johnkleptz6261 not the way that heat works, heat is the actual kinetic force of that superheated jet that does the penetration. The fact that it's very hot is secondary

The infantry was less there to eat rockets as it was to look around, pop targets and then dismount for the final assault. Desantniki were a pretty good idea and used by pretty much everyone in somewhat different ways. The Americans even installed a .50 cal on the back of the turrets of their tanks for infantry riding desant to use. Albeit, unlike the Russians, I don't think the US ever trained specific units with the intent to fight that way - that was simply a marriage of convenience.

Rasist as fuck

Well for some reason spaced armour and sand bags can't provide covering fire

Ah, I see you discuss some of these things later in the video. Serves me right for not watching all the way through ;-)