Pershing and Patton Family of MBT (M26, M46, M47, M48, M60, and M103)

[ysi_maniac]

^^^^^
I absolutely agree with both. Just a good idea
vvvvv

I say it's a great start, Chris - the whole thing looks pretty interesting I have to admit - the turret gives it a much more modern look as well.  Might just give the front a little more sharp of an angle to go with the rest, as a suggestion.

[dy031101]

Top: M48 with Russian-style turret ERA (Kontakt-5?) array and glacis applique armour.

Bottom: Turret armours of Super M48...... contrary to what I've been inclined to believe, the new armours seem to cover only the frontal hemisphere.

[dy031101]

Another Viz-mod, this time as a T-72.

http://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Image:RedDawnT72SnowCamoA.jpg

[Logan Hartke]

Sorry, I was the guy that was mean enough to post that one on another forum in the "Name that Tank" thread.  It is not an M48.  Look at the lower hull.  The M48 is rounded because it's cast.  It looks like a boat.  This one doesn't.  Why?  It's not an M48.

It's part of the M8 Tractor family (M8, M8E1, M8E2, M8A1, M8A2).

See?



It's actually a variant of the M24 and M41 family.

More pics.

In it's natural habitat.

Profile shot.

Do It Yourself Kit!

Model kit, showing you the details of suspension.

This guy's pointing and laughing at you for thinking it's an M48...



I'm just giving you a hard time.  It's a rare, rare vehicle and it's not too well-known.

Cheers,

Logan

[dy031101]

Fair enough.

But then I should also have realized that the M48 have three or five track return roller but never four, and that the sprocket should be at the rear.  

So I guess the previous two posts should be moved to the M41 thread then?

[dy031101]

Found another two shots of the Jordanian M60 Phoenix upgrade......

The fact that the ROC has sold quite a number of T86 and T91 carbines to Jordan made me wonder if the ROCA would have made a what-if operator of the upgraded tank......

[dy031101]

Although very much applicable to any other tank, this question is brought forth by my plan to model both up-armoured M47 and M48 hulls with the Red Dawn vismod-M1 turret and a 105mm gun in 3D- therefore I might as well ask it here.

Can composite armour be made and placed in small blocks like ERA is?  Just wondering if it without being made into one big applique plate would become deficient......

[rickshaw]

Although very much applicable to any other tank, this question is brought forth by my plan to model both up-armoured M47 and M48 hulls with the Red Dawn vismod-M1 turret and a 105mm gun in 3D- therefore I might as well ask it here.

Can composite armour be made and placed in small blocks like ERA is?  Just wondering if it without being made into one big applique plate would become deficient......

Basically, no, it can't.  The Soviets tried that in their first attempts at composite armour but found that the physics worked against them.   Basically composites, particularly of the Chobham variety, work on spreading the impact and crushing in a controlled manner (rather like a modern car does to decrease the impact of a collision).  The smaller the block, the less volume to crush.   This is why various efforts to upgrade older tanks with composite armours tend to have large blocks of armour, covering whole sections of turret/hull.  This invariably is also why most modern western MBTs end up rather "blocky" in shape.

[dy031101]

Is there any tank that actually employed non-explosive reactive armours?  A picture of it would be greatly appreciated, too.

The armours used by Iraqi T-55 Enigma seems to fit the description given by Wikipedia in terms of appearance, but I'm not sure if it really is NxRA.

[apophenia]

Rickshaw is right. The US firm Foster-Miller also tried it on with LAST (Light-appliqué Armor Systems Technology) of individual hexagonal tiles attached with velcro. The tiles were ceramic (silicon carbide or boron carbide) over layers of Kevlar/resin laminate sheeting.

The rationale was that damaged tiles would be easily replaced in the field. One problem was that, once stuck on, the LAST tiles were covered with a PVC sheet (which turned to tatters). The Canadian Forces used LAST tiles on deployed AVGPs and hated it.

The Foster-Miller website still adverterise LAST as needing "no cutting or drilling". True but the CF found it easier to just weld studs onto LAVs and bolt on IBD's MEXAS or AMAP panels when deploying. Rafael's Advanced Armor Package works the same way.

Qinetic NA seems to be losing interest in F-M's LAST for vehicles. I guess the stick-on Aztik 100 springs from a similar application concept but it uses much larger sheets.

[BTW: LAST was originally designed to armour aircraft (eg: C-5 Galaxy) which may explain Foster-Miller's rather unique approach to appliqué armour.] [Image deleted to space Upload Folder]

[GTX]

non-explosive reactive armours?  

Err, isn't that an oxymoron or are you proposing another way for the armour element to react - say electrical replusion?


Regards,

Greg

[dy031101]

Err, isn't that an oxymoron or are you proposing another way for the armour element to react - say electrical replusion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour#Non-explosive_and_non-energetic_reactive_armour

[Sauragnmon]

I would think the closest you might find to what you're thinking with regards to composite applique, would be the Enigma package the Iraqis used for an upgrade on some of their T-55's - they were similar to larger ERA bricks, but were basically a replacable passive armor upgrade - they consisted of a number of plates spaced inside the containing housing, which would provide significant protection against chemical energy, as well as reducing kinetic force owing to the spaces between the plates.  I would imagine similarly that composite systems are what are applied to the Type 99 and Leopard 2A5/6 turrets, as an expansion over the original turret buildwork - if I recall, the Leopard's turret was built over in the later models with the new face we see, and there is the outline of the original turret profile on the Type 99's turret around the large blocks on the turret face.

I would imagine it would be in some ways possible to apply it over the original armor in some applique form, but size would limit effectiveness, as would be the strength of the mounting of said application.  They'd likely need to have more in size in order to have proper effectiveness in dispersing the energy and resisting the strike, or releasing the energy of an explosive charge.

Just a couple of pennies there.

[dy031101]

I'm looking for the possibility of NxRA bricks of a uniform size suitable for placement on the glacis' of both M26/46/47 and M48.  

Then T-55 Enigma it is for a visual reference.  

[dy031101]

Continuing from Reply #51 (M48 with Kontakt-5 armours), if I want to add a Russian gun to the package, could I have gotten away with mounting a 125mm gun into the mantlet?  Or would I be stuck with a 100mm one firing ATGM (might not have sounded all that bad if the tank was previously armed with a 90mm weapon)?

(Granted, from a logistic point of view there's always China for 105mm guns, but I'd like to rule that one out for now.)