.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

BCT Commander- Save $6.00
World Supremacy- Save $10.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT > TO&Es
Notices


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #24  
Old July 22nd, 2005, 07:20 PM
Backis's Avatar

Backis Backis is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Backis is on a distinguished road
Default Re: The Merkava 4 MBT

Quote:
JaM said:
Look at the shape of Merkava Mk1 turret.It is extremly sloped vertically and horizontally. It had good protection, but only from straight front. 30° front side hit will stand against much lower armor.Merkava turret is much smaller than M1 turret.Why? To make smallest target in hull down position. Tank primarilly used for attack will have armor much more resistant from 30° hits.Look at Soviet tanks, their turret had best protection at turret front corners, not in the center.It is simple, if you attack, you dont know from where fire come at you, so it is best to have more armor at front side of turet, to stop penetration, and give crew time to respond.(this was soviet lesson from ww2, where most destroyed tanks were penetrated in front side turret,becouse of german tankfire ambush tactics - best way to kill IS-2 with 75L48 was shoot at side turret armor). At the other side, if you are defending, you dont need strong front side armor, all fire will come at you from straight front.
Thank you.

I don't disagree with this, just that it shouldn't be interpreted as a "general" superiority in protection as you stated early on.

What you yourself here has stated is that the Abrams general turret armour layout (as opposed to difference induced by material) gives better coverage against emerging threats within a larger area of angle than the Merkava turret armour layout does, whose armour layout in its turn is optimised and better for a more narrow angle of frontal threat.

Both are choices and compromises superior as well as inferior to each other depending on the tactical situation.

Unfortunately the SP engine cannot handle this since the "arc" angles cannot be varied between models, forcing "compromised" values.

Comparing a situation which favour either design over another don't give a reasonable interpretation of capability.

This is why I opposed the "Merkavas are much better protected than Abrams" claim, which is true under some circumstances but not others.

Why didn't I just write that to begin with?

And I do apologize to you for repeatedly getting aggressive towards you JaM, I have no idea why I've gotten this way, but I'll work on stopping it...
__________________
"Med ett schysst järnrör slår man hela världen med häpnad!"
–Socker-Conny
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.