Explosive Reaction Armor

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

The argument goes something like "A large HEAT such as found on a Maverick ATGM attacks a tank with Reactive Armor. The Reactive Armor activates but only partly disrupts the penetrating jet of ultra-fast liquid metal and pentration of the tank's armor occurs anyway."

"If you model Reactive Armor simply as negating the (10) armor divisor the result would be no penetration. This fails the Reality Check. Reactive armor will not defeat all HEAT attacks regardless of size. Some very large ones will penetrate anyway"

"If you model Reactive Armor as simply providing _some_ extra DR it will model both the effects of small HEAT and large HEAT."

Ok, now I get it. But how much DR? DR250 multiplied by 10, for HEAT attacks is not too much?

And, thanks for the teaching.

[SuedodeuS]

Originally Posted by General Lee

Ok, now I get it. But how much DR? DR250 multiplied by 10, for HEAT attacks is not too much?

And, thanks for the teaching.

The way to determine this would basically be to decide what the largest threat it can deal with is and mark it appropriately. I have no idea how large of a warhead typical ERA can handle, so I basically just took the largest one in HT and scaled to that to get the DR 250.

... of course, I now have no idea how I got 3610, as 6dx11(10) gets an average penetration of 2310. An extra 1300 creeped in from somewhere, but I've no idea where. With this in mind, an MBT only needs another 1200 DR to survive an average hit to its most-armored section. Thus, DR 120 is more appropriate.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

The way to determine this would basically be to decide what the largest threat it can deal with is and mark it appropriately. I have no idea how large of a warhead typical ERA can handle, so I basically just took the largest one in HT and scaled to that to get the DR 250.

... of course, I now have no idea how I got 3610, as 6dx11(10) gets an average penetration of 2310. An extra 1300 creeped in from somewhere, but I've no idea where. With this in mind, an MBT only needs another 1200 DR to survive an average hit to its most-armored section. Thus, DR 120 is more appropriate.

A good figure for me. It adds DR120 for all attacks but HEAT, that's multiplied by 10.
Sounds pretty fine.

[General Lee]

Hey guys!

I was reading about ERA in wiki and there's different types of reactive armor!

I thought that until now, and I have guilt in that sense, we discussed only one type of reactive armor, the infamous ERA.

But I read that there is SLERA, NERA, NxRA...

How to modeling those?

I thouht that NERA and NxRA must have lesser DR.

[lexington]

Is this the technological predecessor to the electromagnetic armor in UT?

[SuedodeuS]

The alternative reactive armors have lower DR and may have less of an effect against shaped charges. I think SLERA is basically a down-graded version of ERA that can handle multiple hits, while the others are non-explosive and simply rely on physical properties to function.

[Joseph Paul]

Originally Posted by lexington

Is this the technological predecessor to the electromagnetic armor in UT?

Hmm. Sort of. It definitely is an armor that doesn't rely on the toughness of the material to defeat AP rounds. Other than that there is no relation. EMA, as being developed today, disrupts the metal jet that a HEAT warhead forms and disiapates it in a radial pattern perpendicular to the direction of travel.

It does this by using a set of spaced plates with one grounded and one holding a very large charge of electricity. When the metal jet penetrates the outer plate and then touches the inner the charge on the inner plate is released and it blows the jet. It may not not even need to make contact - the charge held on the inner plate may arc.

Once the jet isn't focused on a tiny spot and it's speed has been brought down or even stopped it is no longer a threat.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by lexington

Is this the technological predecessor to the electromagnetic armor in UT?

I suposed so... no platform currently rely on EMA of some sort, it's now lab tech (TL 9, hahahaha).

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by Joseph Paul

Hmm. Sort of. It definitely is an armor that doesn't rely on the toughness of the material to defeat AP rounds. Other than that there is no relation. EMA, as being developed today, disrupts the metal jet that a HEAT warhead forms and disiapates it in a radial pattern perpendicular to the direction of travel.

It does this by using a set of spaced plates with one grounded and one holding a very large charge of electricity. When the metal jet penetrates the outer plate and then touches the inner the charge on the inner plate is released and it blows the jet. It may not not even need to make contact - the charge held on the inner plate may arc.

Once the jet isn't focused on a tiny spot and it's speed has been brought down or even stopped it is no longer a threat.

That's how reactive armor function today...with explosives, or non-energetic, or non-explosives forms. There's no eletric or eletromagnetic in use on any vehicle, just in labs.

[Joseph Paul]

Originally Posted by General Lee

That's how reactive armor function today...with explosives, or non-energetic, or non-explosives forms. There's no eletric or eletromagnetic in use on any vehicle, just in labs.

While it is true that there is no deployed units with this it has been fitted to vehicles and tested with RPGs set for optimal strikes against the armor. To me that means that it is pretty much ready to come out of the lab as soon as some one is willing to pay for it.