How Ceramic Tank Armor Works 

Love your channel bro 😂

I actually checked the original file and it doesn’t have this error. This appears to be a problem on RU-vid’s side.

... They're referring to the fact that the last few seconds of this Short is a repeat of the first few seconds at the start. They're referring to... Presumably something went wrong in the duration of the video versus the duration of the expected loop time. I've confirmed this by watching it through a few times. At the end is found the start, and then (being a Short), it really starts again.

Lmao

Don't listen to the zoomers. They are addicted to short form content like tik Tok. They can't function without it

HESH hasnt been effective since laminate & spaced composite around became prevalent. The shockwave doesnt travel through multiple layers of materials of different densities very well and any air gap ruins the effect. The continued use of rifled guns is a legacy of when the current gun was chosen in the mid-70s being slighly before the adoption of APFSDS rounds. But even by that point it was mostly being decided by Kenetic Energy effectiveness.

Hesh became obsolete in the 60s. Idk why the Brits kept their rifles guns or the hesh round. A dedicated HE-Frag round is more effective in 90% of all use cases. NATO as a whole moved away from HE-Frag rounds for whatever reason.

@@Masterafro999 because till the mid-70s, the primary anti-tank round for most nations was APDS which does require spin stabilisation from a rifled gun. The current British gun is just an evolution of the L11 from the early-mid 60s. But when it came to trying to standardise NATO ammo in the 70s, the testing was hardly conclusively in favour of smoothbores (at that time) so our government, being allergic to spending money, decided not to change tank guns when we had a large stockpile of ammo for the ones we only bought 10-15 years previously. There was also resistance to adopting the German standard as it was felt that there had been some backroom deals between the US and Germany surrounding the NATO competitive trials, so kept the domestic option.

@@sergarlantyrell7847 now that's a good explanation. I wonder tho...why did they stick with the rifled gun on the very first challenger tank as that tank fired apfsds which did not require the rifling in the barrel. Is British apfsds finless? Doubt it. Are the sabots stabelised inside the barrel like the older french heat rounds?

@@Masterafro999 Are Armour-peircing FIN-stabilised discarding-sabot (nicknamed "fin") rounds fin-less? 😜 No, they have fins like everyone else's. The sabots did use slipping driving bands though. As for why they didn't change for Chally 1... I think it's important to remember that Chally (originally Shir 2) wasn't originally designed for the British army, it was an export tank for the middle east market & as such borrowed heavily from the Chieftain, they gun and fire control system were all very similar to the later Chieftain variants. The British army were supposed to get a much more capable tank (the program was called MBT 80) with even better armour, more powerful engine, new gun & fire control system etc. But the program didn't get very far before the Shir 2 order was cancelled and the British government bailed Vickers out buy buying the thing instead and cancelling MBT-80. It's not out of the relms of possibility that with a radically clean sheet design, they would have adopted the German smoothbore, though I think it's unlikely, there was just still a bunch of bad blood following the FMBT project that fell apart (or got sabotaged, depending on who you ask) that I think Britain rather resented the idea of buying a foreign design after they'd just been snubbed. Of course they could have designed their own smoothbore that would have been compatible with NATO standard ammo, but that would have been more expensive (Britain in the 70s and 80s was not exactly flushed with cash), at the time they had a tank fleet of over 1,000 so enough to sustain their own production. And performance-wise, the L11 and later L30 are fine. Penetration and accuracy were roughly on par with the German gun, really the round itself makes more of a difference. The major drawback was barrel life, but even that wasn't clear cut AT THE TIME and their developmental guns (like what lead to the L30) were intended to improve on that. Had they been able to see the future, they might have chosen to standardise... And continue with MBT-80. But since when have politicians been any good at forward thinking?

tungsten carbide is a ceramic, used to cut diamond. so yeah, people just think of tiles or plates.

In defense of that, we got amazing technologies like canned/bottled goods (because logistics), the Internet (to keep communications open in case of nuclear war), and even GPS (navigation and positional awareness).

@@ayuchanayuko internet wasnt made for that originally

@@burner33 DARPANET

​@@ayuchanayuko the internet was a system for scientists to transfer information faster iirc

@@burner33 darpanet

Social engineering

This is also the armor of the m1 Abrams. Not the a1 or a2 and the various other sep variants. Ceramic nera array armor is the type of armor package the export Abrams gets. Our own ones like the m1a2 SEPv3 has du nera. Some type of pressure transfer gel and other classified materials. That’s not adding on the other armor that can be added on modularity like era, TUSK, and active protection. You really can’t compare a m1 to a m1a2 sep v3 and 4

@@apricotcharms4126 depleted uranium non explosive reactive armor?

Only if the shock wave passes through to the back plate, which it doesn't on composite or spaced armor arrays because both incorporate air gaps between layers. And on top of that you can just install a small liner anyway

It simply can't compete with apfsds or heat shells

"If you can hit a good spot" aka practically nowhere but the roof and side behind fenders and tracks. With literally any other munitions you have the benefit of a chance being able to penetrate composite.

What? You don’t want little more freedom in your life?

Not letting Russia or China roll over and dominate the world is a value in itself, don't ya think?

you realize alot of innovations and technology we get in the civilian world comes from the military research right

So it took the Brits over half a century to realise that fact? Got it. 😂

@@Masterafro999HESH rounds are multi purpose and highly effective, just not against modern tanks... in recent years weve seen that most adversaries are still using comparatively ancient tanks and hesh rounds are still devistatingly effective *cough* iraq *cough* *cough*

@@adamambler5915 I mean sure...Iraq was barely a modern fighting force for the 90s. Those same tanks could have been taken out by HEAT-FS or apfsds. HE-Frag is just a much more effective round against soft targets.

no, chobum is non explosive reactive armour.

Yes, Chobham is a ceramic composite armour used on the first M1 Abrams.

Synthetic sapphire is actually one of the components that's been used in ceramic armor for decades. Also Silicon oxides.

though there are currently more popular comments on the wrecked loop, I think this is the best

It won't as he said, as it has a spall line basically negating the HESH effect

@yujinhikita5611 I understand about spall liners. However, since the ceramic armor works by transmitting the shock of the initial impact, I wonder if the shock caused by HESH would be enough to push spall through the spall liners?

@southronjr1570 it might work if there is only 1 plate. However, there are multiple plates with air in between that totally negate HESH.

​@@southronjr1570if it was just ceramic it would be super effective but as others said multiple layers of materials dispersing the energy.

Back in the 60s

No

Go cry

T-90M has composite all around; T-72 and T-80 only have cast turrets.

The famous T-72 which has such a weak turret and hull that it gets slapped around by M60s. Composites are necessary if you wish to survive being shot.

Yes. That's the downside of ceramic armors; very low multi-hit survivability. Might as well use ERA tiles in that case since they're far lighter and far cheaper

Still shrapnel

Id rather be in an Abrams than a T80

....ok? cope, i guess?

It's taken from his video on the m1 abrams.