@@dpt300 The 10 minute requirement has existed for over a decade. Only recently did they bump it down to 8 minutes because everyone was putting filler in their videos to hit 10 minutes. Now though, it appears that youtube has taken on full control and just puts ads on videos however they want, giving creators no choice.
If I start a video, and it has a length of something like 10:01 I hit the X in the corner immediately. AI computer generated voice? Bail. Idiot shouting something at the video beginning like "WHATS UP GUYS" - Bail. Also, adblock.
I like that even under Closely Controlled Range Conditions with the engine off and no noise inside the turret that the TC still sergeant-screams. Totally useless, but regimental drill is hard to break. I'll bet he still yells at 157% max volume to just ask for bacon on the side.
Retired Canadian Tank CC here. It is still used for 2 reasons 1 coms die 2 Bellowing out your drills ensures an automatic response to a familiar command under stress. It freaks out some international exchanges. Particularly how we used IC {intercom} for everything else in the vehicle calmly and with clarity, up until the gunner or CC spots a target. It can be a bit jarring, and most of us are half deaf so I guess 3 reasons.
It's called a 'drill' for reason! You practice and practice until you get it 100% right. That moment when the commander gives a fire order? The whole crew act as one. Everything works as per training because it's 'drilled into you' you don't actually think... you react. After that initial call...SABOT TANK ON! you literally have seconds before the enemy shoots back. I could load 10 rounds of 120mm split ammo with my eyes shut because we practiced so much and the orders were screamed to motivate you above the noise of everything else. Driver full reverse! Sabot tank on. fuck me! Gunner see it? ON! right range? 1200m , driver left stick! fucking hell! When it all happens that crew work as a perfect honed instrument. They work in unison as a perfect unit. If you'd ever been a crewman you'd understand.
@@davepritchard283 Nowadays I bet the tanks could be made unmanned and 100% automatic. They take care of each others at the war field without any human lives lost. Or someone remote controls them just from home with HOTAS joystick.
LMAO, I was listening to Tool while this was running and only became aware of the soft, left ear narration after the song was over. Very polite of them not to ruin my listening experience while showing some cool shit
ok now this is odd, im on phone, and when i full screened it, it was basically muted with my bottom speaker and extremely muffled out of my top speaker
I quite like the fact I briefly lived in the village of Chobham and worked just up the road at Longcross Studios which used to be owned by the British Army. It was a military vehicle testing and development facility which was where alot of the work was done in the development of Chobham Armour. It closed in 2005 and was repurposed as a film studio. Slowly but surely its being redeveloped into a housing estate. The remaining buildings were very recently brought up by Netflix and they've poured money into it. So its life as a film studio has been extended for the foreseeable.
They filmed Superman on Chobham clump back in the late 70's. Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran, all in very thin outfits worn in very cold conditions. I was there the day were filimg the "town" getting blown up. They had to do a few retakes due to horseriding in the distance (they rode past some buildings in the distance, and that made them look like 20-30 foot giants! Amazing how they made it look like a summers day in the movie! (It was brass monkey weather!)
@@justandy333 ? were you even there? It was a cold October day when I was there watching the destroy the set. So much so that the film crew were all wrapped up, as were my brother and there was no sun at all on the day we were there. So tell me how heavy clouds and overcast weather that had drizzle in the air be made to look like a summers day then?
I developed armor for about 7 years and loved it. Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Lawrence Livermore Labs, DOE Idaho, U.S.Marine EOD,Camp Lejeune, Misnay-Schardin Devices, shaped charges ,mine tests, explosive suppression technologies, all of it was absolutely the best time of my life. We do have the blueprints for the Chobham Armor, and the subsequent follow-on advances. You can spend time in a nice Federal Hotel with free meals, and free gray uniforms if one were to talk about it. Loose lips kinda stuff.
Well the earliest variants of the armor package seem to have been at least partially declassified. Which is not surprising considering any foreign intelligence agency that can’t source the details of a 60+ year old armor package doesn’t deserve to be called an intelligence agency.
The original M1 Abrams armor could probably be declassified without posing any risk. Alot has changed in 45 years in Ceramic engineering, and material science as a whole. Idk tho, ask the DOD nicely enough, and maybe they will..
Judging on the after effects shown on the rear of the armor, the Chobham armor is specifically meant for and is very capable of defeating HEAT type impacts.
It probably varies projectile to projectile and whether it penetrates or not, but I've heard that tanks hit with shots that ricochet end up making the tank sound like a gigantic bell.
Now all we have to do is wait until the secret data from the testing ground is published on the pages of the intelligence organization Gaijin Entertainment
Nothing from this test is considered classified anymore. Burlington ("Chobham") style armor was already obsolete by the time the M1 Abrams came out (which uses the oh so original name of "Special armor" which was based on "Chobham" but not 100% the same). But even the OG armor of the M1 isn't classified anymore. Modern composite laminate armors, while they still use the same basic principles, use materials that are light years ahead of what was used in in the armor this test was based on.
Well, monty python never had the option to use CG. They used real explosives, and more often than not real explosives aren't nearly as cinematic as hollywood would have you believe
Strange to remember that in 1979 the nation was pretty much on its ar5e after a decade of seemingly endless industrial action but could still innovate and manufacture world leading products.
@@TheWarforgedyou say all this without realising how OP the challenger 2 and 3 is. The Chally 3 in war thunder can actually penetrate ANY glacis with its stock shells. Including it’s own, but nothing can pen it. It can pen the abrams, T-90. Doesn’t matter it’ll go through at any angle. They’re horrible to fight against in top tier to the point people actually avoid fighting it.
I remember when that stuff was being developed. I was attending the master gunner course at the weapons department at Fort Knox Kentucky. Those were the days for sure. 😢
I really hate this delay in comments section imposed by TH-cam. I was trying to say that anyone in the chobaum armor tank would be hearing bells for a while after the impact.
@1:05 - continues chatting and holds up the switch activation past "Zero." In that case being of Scottish parents I would have just as well recognized "Right then, off you go." as the signal.
I served with 4RTR in Suffield 1977 and was left aghast at the power of the Chieftain main gun.......reliability of the platform, however, was not good
All composite armor is layers of different materials: Steel + something very hard and dense + something softer, but much lighter. That's the basic concept. Additionally to absorb the shockwave and prevent spalling you have either a thin layer of something very soft in-between and/or an anti spalling liner on the inside under the paint. For the hard and dense layer, initially ceramics were used, later tungsten and depleted uranium. Rumors say it's not always a full layer but just a mesh to save weight, at least in some places. In key areas you also have NERA, "non explosive reactive armor", which is e.g. multiple layers of different materials that will deform/change shape under the stress of an impacting projectile. NERA is engineered in a way that this deformation will cause negative effects on the projectile, like causing it to slightly deflect and/or causing it to deform material in a way so that the projectile has to go through more armor than if it was just non reactive armor. The only thing I don't understand is why engineers of "western" tanks don't make use of both NERA and ERA. Maybe we'll see that on the next generation of MBTs, especially with the proliferations of drones and therefore the necessity of good HEAT protection all around, as ERA is the most effective against HEAT threats. The South Korean K2 could be unique in a way that is uses both ERA and NERA.
Brought to you by the Chobham Armour Marketing Board. Two questions: 1. Was all the shouting necessary when loading the shell? 2. Why didnt they just fire _from_ 1200m (rather than adjusting the charge) - were the worried they might miss?
At 1450m/second it’s virtually impossible to miss with Apds The apfsds is 1540m/second Hesh is 850m/second if my memory serves me right How do I know Well It’s not from watching TH-cam put it that way. The chemical energy rounds ie Hesh , smoke etc are usually kept for bunkers and other mbt targets They are very useful Especially shake and bake ie smoke, kinetic ie apfsds will just go straight through a line of t64 types and continue out the back No tank made will survive apfsds and given the muzzle velocity it’s effectively a 120mm sniper rifle. The round itself is inert. A DU dart At 1540 m/second Bye bye target
But tanks do not have this thickness of Chobham - it is carried thicker than the RHA otherwise used, but not the same weight/thickness. This has its own advantage in keeping overall weight down.
Remember, it blew right through the original plate. To stop HEAT, you might need double the thickness of RHA they used to protect from that HEAT, so the weight savings of composites do end up being significant. It's hard to tell the thickness of that plate, but it looks to be around 300-400mm.
the whole point is that composite armors are more weight efficient than steel. drivetrain and suspension components (and roads and bridges) can only carry so much weight.
@@ruzziasht349 There is more that goes into weight of armour than simply protection/kg for a test piece, he's right in that things like armour thickness/volume (and how the vehicle is armoured) absolutely have other effects on vehicle weight. Consider conventional MBT of the 60s like Chieftain, T-62, Leopard or Patton, whether it's cast or welded or a combination of the 2, the armour forms the structure of the tank, they're essentially monocoques made of relatively thin and well agled steel. Tanks, at least western tanks, protected by composites have their armour in removable packs which attach onto the outside of a hull. The armour itself isn't structural, so you pay a weight penalty for the hull plus armour packs. Incidentally, this is another reason why Soviet tanks are a lot lighter than western tanks, their composites are built into the hull, it makes the tank lighter but harder to repair or upgrade. The other thing about these thick, externally mounted composite packs is they require a lot of overlap to be effective as they don't like being hit on the side of the packs. You need to overlap steel armour too, but if the composites are 4x thicker you will require 4x the overlap that again, adds more weight. Soviet laminate hull armours do tend to be a bit thinner, requiring less overlap, but they require being heavily angled which creates volumetric problems for the tank, on top of them already being cramped machines. The more advanced composites like Chobham don't require such extreme angling but they also don't lend themselves to being made into structural components of the hull. Overall, you can make a better protected vehicle for the same weight, using composites, but the advantage isn't quite as much as a simple test panel on a range, as it is when you actually have to make a practical vehicle with a protected 3D volume inside.
Chobham was a truly revolutionary armour and was quickly purchased by the Americans for their new M1 Abrams. A year later it was used on Challenger 1 before improved "Dorchester" was used on Challenger 2. The Germans never adopted Chobham for their Leopard 2 instead using inferior spaced armour.
@@rael5469 Makes perfect sense, a German tank with British armor would hardly be a great selling point. As Leopard 2 is hyped as the best tank in the World!
@@Ccaraaa we don't have that one that one has add-on side armour and the in game one doesn't i'm pretty sure this is the Chieftain mk 11 and in game we have the mk 10
All British tanks have since the cold war. Even the Challenger 2. Its called 2 peice ammo and prevents cooks offs if theres a fire since the bag charge is placed in a wet stowage bin surrounded by water.
The bag disintegrates when fired and so actually improves the tanks rate of fire. The 105mm gun it replaced had a huge brass case that would be ejected into the turret. The 105mm gun could be loaded just as fast but eventually they'd have to stop shooting to clear the casings away from the gun. Usually this is after about 5 shots. The casings would either be placed back into the ammo racks or thrown overboard. On the Centurion and Leopard 1 tanks you can see a hatch on the left side of the turret, that's for the loader to toss spent shells out of. Because the bag in the 120mm gun disintegrates on firing, the loader doesn't have to clean up after shooting and so they can continue to fire full speed until there's nothing left to shoot at.
@@fyrep0w3r Interesting. I'm familiar somewhat with that system for the Iowa Class American battleships with the 16 inch guns. Same system, bags of powder charges and separate projectiles. I didn't expect that system could be useful on a smaller scale for a tank or fighting vehicle.
@@joshhanklonbut there was nothing new or on trial with the tank firing the shot, they were just testing the armor down range. Seems like inside the tank is likely the safest place to be for at least a kilometer or so around the site.
@@doonhamer252 That's fair enough, but this is not a test of a round, this is a test of the armor, you would shoot a safe, proven round. I get safety, but to me, this case of "safety first" is just silly.
Excellent content! However, there are 2 flaws, at least in modern battle field. 1. The 120mm used requires separate charger where a modern APFSDS is a single shell containing both a projectile and charger. Hence 120mm APFSDS is much longer thus heavier than the one used. Hence it will not end up with a simple bulge. 2. Not all but many ATGM or even some RPGs have a tandem warhead. This greatly enhances the penetration. This is probably the reason why DSTL developed next gen armour. Regardless of what it looks like, at the time when Chobam was first introduced, it was revolutionary indeed. If we exported and reinvested, we would have been miles ahead even now. Shame.
tandem warheads don't increase penetration, the initial warhead is very small as it's purpose is to set off ERA before the main warhead detonates. also this test was during a time when separate charges were the norm. and even after western tanks moved to complete rounds pact forces tanks still used separate charges in their autoloaders
And now in a modern conflict cheap tiny remote control drones simply hit the top of the tank and all this front armour is just dead weight. Crazy times.
Top attack Anti Tank Guided Missiles and aircraft using Air to Ground Missiles have existed for decades. Frontal armor is still needed for fighting infantry and other tanks. Just because some factors change doesn't mean every previous rulebook is thrown out; just that there's new rules.
Funny, even those times some expensive ballistic tests were not perfect. The sledge jumps up when hit by projectile. A real armored vehichle weighs e.g. 10x the sledge and plate. And won't practically use any projectile kinetic energy as kinetic energy of the target. The plate should definitely be rather fixed totally than jumping from hits. Fixed totally would be closer to the real life scenario. How much more energy there would be for the penetration, hard to guess from here. But could be 5-15% more, certainly changes the results a bit.
@@jameslynch7826 😆 Have you ever served in US Postal Service? If not then you know nothing about addresses and packages 🤣😂Why on earth did you post your zero comment? People understand basics of physics even without "serving in tank corps". Next time consider before hitting the Enter.
Mate there’s no use saying that to these computer games idiots who have never even spent a month on tanks They get their inaccurate opinions from pc games.
I have never loaded with any type of eardefenders The noise inside the turret is fine And hatches open for compression reasons Loading is a fast workout so you strip down And gloves are definitely not permitted They prevent you feeling the bag charge And or clearing stoppages
When I started my career it was with British armour, then I ended up in Canada and went over to the dark side with German armour. Everything else is North American.
No inporta el tanque qué sea más moderno o viejo, siempre hay formas de diesmar lo atacando las orugas arma principal vision, los alemanes eran maestros en la lucha lo demostraron al aparecer los tanques soviética más pesados.
Feels so weird not having 10 minutes build-up and gets straight to the point
And not hearing someone say “hit like and subscribe”
@@dpt300 The 10 minute requirement has existed for over a decade. Only recently did they bump it down to 8 minutes because everyone was putting filler in their videos to hit 10 minutes. Now though, it appears that youtube has taken on full control and just puts ads on videos however they want, giving creators no choice.
If I start a video, and it has a length of something like 10:01 I hit the X in the corner immediately.
AI computer generated voice? Bail.
Idiot shouting something at the video beginning like "WHATS UP GUYS" - Bail.
Also, adblock.
Yea this video was created before people realized you had to game the Algorithm for attention/profit 😂
@@Ablk84 And for that, I did subscribe..
any time they ask like an subscribe, I refuse to subscribe just out of spite.
I like that even under Closely Controlled Range Conditions with the engine off and no noise inside the turret that the TC still sergeant-screams. Totally useless, but regimental drill is hard to break. I'll bet he still yells at 157% max volume to just ask for bacon on the side.
Retired Canadian Tank CC here. It is still used for 2 reasons 1 coms die 2 Bellowing out your drills ensures an automatic response to a familiar command under stress. It freaks out some international exchanges. Particularly how we used IC {intercom} for everything else in the vehicle calmly and with clarity, up until the gunner or CC spots a target. It can be a bit jarring, and most of us are half deaf so I guess 3 reasons.
DishwashermannedandreadySAH!
DishwashersecuredSAH!
Iì
It's called a 'drill' for reason! You practice and practice until you get it 100% right. That moment when the commander gives a fire order? The whole crew act as one. Everything works as per training because it's 'drilled into you' you don't actually think... you react. After that initial call...SABOT TANK ON! you literally have seconds before the enemy shoots back. I could load 10 rounds of 120mm split ammo with my eyes shut because we practiced so much and the orders were screamed to motivate you above the noise of everything else. Driver full reverse! Sabot tank on. fuck me! Gunner see it? ON! right range? 1200m , driver left stick! fucking hell! When it all happens that crew work as a perfect honed instrument. They work in unison as a perfect unit. If you'd ever been a crewman you'd understand.
@@davepritchard283 Nowadays I bet the tanks could be made unmanned and 100% automatic. They take care of each others at the war field without any human lives lost. Or someone remote controls them just from home with HOTAS joystick.
my left ear enjoyed this
LMAO, I was listening to Tool while this was running and only became aware of the soft, left ear narration after the song was over. Very polite of them not to ruin my listening experience while showing some cool shit
Ah yea the comfy gunners seat!
ok now this is odd, im on phone, and when i full screened it, it was basically muted with my bottom speaker and extremely muffled out of my top speaker
Tell em twin tell em🗣️
🤣🤣🤣
Notice how they fill in the holes on the Chobham armour so we can’t see the inside structure. Top secret still to this day.
That was a layer of cobham armour under the surface layer of conventional steel there was no hole to fill no penertration
Allegedly composites of some type. The latest Dorchester armour is allegedly superior still....
It's not puss?
@@Brian-om2hhAT rounds keep improving too
It is a composite made up of several layers of pizza sandwiched between heat treated steel.
The sound of the test shot is just perfect, cut off after the shot, and the most dissapointing "plok" on impact
No actual explosive filler in the projectile of the APDS round. Just a big sharp hunk of metal going really fast.
@@MockinGlobes Yep, but still, that impact was very underwhelming. I made soft objects hit porcelan with a more impressive impact sound.
paraphrasing tim vine "not enough to sting, but enough to make you take notice"
I quite like the fact I briefly lived in the village of Chobham and worked just up the road at Longcross Studios which used to be owned by the British Army. It was a military vehicle testing and development facility which was where alot of the work was done in the development of Chobham Armour. It closed in 2005 and was repurposed as a film studio.
Slowly but surely its being redeveloped into a housing estate. The remaining buildings were very recently brought up by Netflix and they've poured money into it. So its life as a film studio has been extended for the foreseeable.
They filmed Superman on Chobham clump back in the late 70's. Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran, all in very thin outfits worn in very cold conditions. I was there the day were filimg the "town" getting blown up. They had to do a few retakes due to horseriding in the distance (they rode past some buildings in the distance, and that made them look like 20-30 foot giants!
Amazing how they made it look like a summers day in the movie! (It was brass monkey weather!)
You're saying you wouldn't keep this classified doc between your toilet and shower in your bathroom like at Mara Lago?
@@burtvhulberthyhbn7583 I'm sorry, what? Could you please rephrase.
@@Wabbit_Huntayou seriously don't want to know what we do to make it look overcast on a bright sunny day. Greta would be very unhappy!
@@justandy333 ? were you even there? It was a cold October day when I was there watching the destroy the set. So much so that the film crew were all wrapped up, as were my brother and there was no sun at all on the day we were there. So tell me how heavy clouds and overcast weather that had drizzle in the air be made to look like a summers day then?
I‘m geeking so hard right now. Awesome.
When I was in Bosnia in the 90's, we used to keep spare Chobham armour for the Warriors locked up in ISO containers. It was classified secret kit.
Over a century of motion pictures behind us and they still position the camera downwind so the smoke obscures the view.
They don’t want people to see the actual armour and so fill it in then reveal the damage.
Still could've had fans to blow the smoke away from the camera.
Guess the British state media propaganda just wasnt that smart.
@@Somerandofurrythat’s not filled in it’s part of the armor
@@Somerandofurry its to actually hide the fact from the stupid people into believing any of this crap
I love walking a good trail.
I developed armor for about 7 years and loved it.
Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Lawrence Livermore Labs, DOE Idaho, U.S.Marine EOD,Camp Lejeune, Misnay-Schardin Devices, shaped charges ,mine tests, explosive suppression technologies, all of it was absolutely the best time of my life.
We do have the blueprints for the Chobham Armor, and the subsequent follow-on advances.
You can spend time in a nice Federal Hotel with free meals, and free gray uniforms if one were to talk about it.
Loose lips kinda stuff.
Dont leak it on the warthunder forums
Well the earliest variants of the armor package seem to have been at least partially declassified. Which is not surprising considering any foreign intelligence agency that can’t source the details of a 60+ year old armor package doesn’t deserve to be called an intelligence agency.
Can u give me the blue print for educational use🙄and iam playing warthunder btw
The original M1 Abrams armor could probably be declassified without posing any risk. Alot has changed in 45 years in Ceramic engineering, and material science as a whole.
Idk tho, ask the DOD nicely enough, and maybe they will..
below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2017/01/early-m1-abrams-composite-armor.html
Don't let the Russians know it's actually silly putty layered with the toffee from curly-whirly bars.
It's very naughty of you to reveal the composition of this armour ...now we're going to have to change it for armour made from wagon wheels ....
Judging on the after effects shown on the rear of the armor, the Chobham armor is specifically meant for and is very capable of defeating HEAT type impacts.
Old crustie pie from a British army cook house would give a tank the same protection.
My late father worked for the MOD and was involved in the development of this💙💙
trying to image the sound a striking shell makes as heard from inside a tank
‼WHAT⁉ 🪖🙃
They should measure the decibels right behind the plate. That would be interesting to know.
It probably varies projectile to projectile and whether it penetrates or not, but I've heard that tanks hit with shots that ricochet end up making the tank sound like a gigantic bell.
@@I_Stole_A_BTR-80 I'm a blacksmith , mis-strikes and glancing blows are often worse than a direct hammer strike on the anvil.
You do know tank crew wear headsets that block loud sounds?
scary how powerful and effective those little shaped charges are on regular armor.
Now all we have to do is wait until the secret data from the testing ground is published on the pages of the intelligence organization Gaijin Entertainment
Nothing from this test is considered classified anymore. Burlington ("Chobham") style armor was already obsolete by the time the M1 Abrams came out (which uses the oh so original name of "Special armor" which was based on "Chobham" but not 100% the same). But even the OG armor of the M1 isn't classified anymore. Modern composite laminate armors, while they still use the same basic principles, use materials that are light years ahead of what was used in in the armor this test was based on.
The explosions look like something out of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, or The Goodies.
you watch too much Michael bay shit
Well, monty python never had the option to use CG. They used real explosives, and more often than not real explosives aren't nearly as cinematic as hollywood would have you believe
It wont withstand "the worlds most deadly joke" though...😂
The V-Joke
"My dog has no nose..."
Strange to remember that in 1979 the nation was pretty much on its ar5e after a decade of seemingly endless industrial action but could still innovate and manufacture world leading products.
0:30 as a British main in a tank video game I can confirm we do love our apds
apds in warthunder is pain, as a british main i wonder if playing britain is worth it if im just gonna get "shell shattered" at the worst times.
@@Dammy_ytuk in war thunder is very bad as gaijin hates it
Russians always hate the uk
@@TheWarforgedyou say all this without realising how OP the challenger 2 and 3 is.
The Chally 3 in war thunder can actually penetrate ANY glacis with its stock shells. Including it’s own, but nothing can pen it.
It can pen the abrams, T-90. Doesn’t matter it’ll go through at any angle. They’re horrible to fight against in top tier to the point people actually avoid fighting it.
I remember when that stuff was being developed. I was attending the master gunner course at the weapons department at Fort Knox Kentucky. Those were the days for sure. 😢
1979. I feel old.
"Firing trails"? Don't you mean "trials"?
I really hate this delay in comments section imposed by TH-cam.
I was trying to say that anyone in the chobaum armor tank would be hearing bells for a while after the impact.
have been watching the whole video about chaba mama. then read the title and realized that it was about chobham armor. english is amazing ))
I thought the narrator kept saying “chubby mama “😂
He was probably thinking it !
I wonder how many times they missed and had to re film this?
@1:05 - continues chatting and holds up the switch activation past "Zero." In that case being of Scottish parents I would have just as well recognized "Right then, off you go." as the signal.
Serious stuff, to be sure, but I keep waiting for a Monty Python moment...
some of the brain rot in these comments is astounding
Sounds like the same narrator voice as the 80s nuclear war film Threads
Multilayered hardened steel and ceramics to dissipate the kinetic energy. Similar to bullet proof multilayer glass but more hardcore.
Some sort of non-newtonian liquid in between sheets?
I wondered whether it was part of the armour, or expanding foam to obscure the layers. It seemed too smooth and not charred at all.
It's to hide the structure of the plate steel
Custard
I served with 4RTR in Suffield 1977 and was left aghast at the power of the Chieftain main gun.......reliability of the platform, however, was not good
Jolly good show chaps
Trials. Not trails.
If you rearrange the letters from Chobham armour it spells Expanding Foam, secret revealed!
You are closer than you think
TH-cam has been force recommending me this video for so long so i just came here to say fuck off TH-cam.
Here the Scotsman countdown!!
Aye, Laddie.
All composite armor is layers of different materials:
Steel + something very hard and dense + something softer, but much lighter.
That's the basic concept.
Additionally to absorb the shockwave and prevent spalling you have either a thin layer of something very soft in-between and/or an anti spalling liner on the inside under the paint.
For the hard and dense layer, initially ceramics were used, later tungsten and depleted uranium. Rumors say it's not always a full layer but just a mesh to save weight, at least in some places.
In key areas you also have NERA, "non explosive reactive armor", which is e.g. multiple layers of different materials that will deform/change shape under the stress of an impacting projectile. NERA is engineered in a way that this deformation will cause negative effects on the projectile, like causing it to slightly deflect and/or causing it to deform material in a way so that the projectile has to go through more armor than if it was just non reactive armor.
The only thing I don't understand is why engineers of "western" tanks don't make use of both NERA and ERA. Maybe we'll see that on the next generation of MBTs, especially with the proliferations of drones and therefore the necessity of good HEAT protection all around, as ERA is the most effective against HEAT threats.
The South Korean K2 could be unique in a way that is uses both ERA and NERA.
chubbahmama armour. Only British can name there armor like that.
Brought to you by the Chobham Armour Marketing Board.
Two questions:
1. Was all the shouting necessary when loading the shell?
2. Why didnt they just fire _from_ 1200m (rather than adjusting the charge) - were the worried they might miss?
At 1450m/second it’s virtually impossible to miss with Apds
The apfsds is 1540m/second
Hesh is 850m/second if my memory serves me right
How do I know
Well
It’s not from watching TH-cam put it that way.
The chemical energy rounds ie Hesh , smoke etc are usually kept for bunkers and other mbt targets
They are very useful
Especially shake and bake ie smoke, kinetic ie apfsds will just go straight through a line of t64 types and continue out the back
No tank made will survive apfsds and given the muzzle velocity it’s effectively a 120mm sniper rifle.
The round itself is inert.
A DU dart
At 1540 m/second
Bye bye target
1) That’s just their training
2) They want to make sure they hit it in a certain place like not on the edge or test stand
yes to both, why change what works
Regular armored plate to chobham armor: oh you’re no fun anymore!
(If you know you know)
"You never penetrate anymore!"
The narrator sounds like the same guy that did the Protect & Survive public information films.
Chobham armour test plates used to come to Sheffield Forgemasters for cutting into sections by oxy cutting with the shells still in the armour 1974
Why is the footage of these guys pressing the button on a detonator spliced together with the tank firing?
Probably triggering the shaped charge warheads which were used as well as the tank rounds?
Top secret and editing skills
the shape charges were placed not fired
My right ear left chat
Alright who replaced the steel plate with chocolate?
Charlie
“Shell shattered”
But tanks do not have this thickness of Chobham - it is carried thicker than the RHA otherwise used, but not the same weight/thickness. This has its own advantage in keeping overall weight down.
ah thats why the challenger 1 was so light!
Remember, it blew right through the original plate. To stop HEAT, you might need double the thickness of RHA they used to protect from that HEAT, so the weight savings of composites do end up being significant.
It's hard to tell the thickness of that plate, but it looks to be around 300-400mm.
the whole point is that composite armors are more weight efficient than steel. drivetrain and suspension components (and roads and bridges) can only carry so much weight.
You didn't watch the first minute of the video? or maybe you did, but just didn't listen.
@@ruzziasht349 There is more that goes into weight of armour than simply protection/kg for a test piece, he's right in that things like armour thickness/volume (and how the vehicle is armoured) absolutely have other effects on vehicle weight.
Consider conventional MBT of the 60s like Chieftain, T-62, Leopard or Patton, whether it's cast or welded or a combination of the 2, the armour forms the structure of the tank, they're essentially monocoques made of relatively thin and well agled steel.
Tanks, at least western tanks, protected by composites have their armour in removable packs which attach onto the outside of a hull. The armour itself isn't structural, so you pay a weight penalty for the hull plus armour packs. Incidentally, this is another reason why Soviet tanks are a lot lighter than western tanks, their composites are built into the hull, it makes the tank lighter but harder to repair or upgrade.
The other thing about these thick, externally mounted composite packs is they require a lot of overlap to be effective as they don't like being hit on the side of the packs. You need to overlap steel armour too, but if the composites are 4x thicker you will require 4x the overlap that again, adds more weight. Soviet laminate hull armours do tend to be a bit thinner, requiring less overlap, but they require being heavily angled which creates volumetric problems for the tank, on top of them already being cramped machines. The more advanced composites like Chobham don't require such extreme angling but they also don't lend themselves to being made into structural components of the hull.
Overall, you can make a better protected vehicle for the same weight, using composites, but the advantage isn't quite as much as a simple test panel on a range, as it is when you actually have to make a practical vehicle with a protected 3D volume inside.
Chobham was a truly revolutionary armour and was quickly purchased by the Americans for their new M1 Abrams. A year later it was used on Challenger 1 before improved "Dorchester" was used on Challenger 2. The Germans never adopted Chobham for their Leopard 2 instead using inferior spaced armour.
"The Germans never adopted Chobham for their Leopard 2 "
For God sake, why not?
@@rael5469 They would have had to buy it or produce it under license as the US did. Or maybe too proud to use British armour?
@@billballbuster7186 Still doesn't make sense. Too proud to survive on the front lines?????? That would be bizarre.
@@rael5469 Makes perfect sense, a German tank with British armor would hardly be a great selling point. As Leopard 2 is hyped as the best tank in the World!
@@billballbuster7186 It's madness to forego the best armor just for national Pride. We are all allies now.
Is it foam to hide structure or it is kinda semi/fluid stuff inside？
1st one probably
It is a chemical semi-fluid that absorbs fragments when hit at kinetic speeds. It fails under real-world conditions.
Hide. We don't want secrets getting out.
What is the tc shouting? I heard sabot but nothing besides that
What's the white stuff bulging up in the craters?
I believe its to stop you seeing what's inside.
Pus.
@@ColinWatters So they added that afterwards.... Ah. 😸
Mozarella
It's ballistic goo.
Are they calling it "troublemama"?
Brilliant tech. Does its job.
just remember this was 1979 imagine what is top secret today
man i wish we had that chieftain in War Thunder it looks cool with all that armour
We do
@@Ccaraaa But the one in warthunder looks nothing like the real one, junk model.
@@Ccaraaa we don't have that one that one has add-on side armour and the in game one doesn't i'm pretty sure this is the Chieftain mk 11 and in game we have the mk 10
I got very little sound. Cannot hear anything but a buzz of voices.
"trails"?! You mean "trials"?!
2 rapid shots at the same point renders it ineffective
They were still using APDS in 1979? I thought APFSDS replaced them in the early 60s.
America: "thank you very much for the special relationship"
Don’t they line the hull’s interiors with Kevlar or similar material to prevent splinters?
Trial!
I wonder why the chobam armor flamed out when the penetrator punctured it.
Interesting that the Chieftain canon used a separate bag charge instead of a self contained shell.
All British tanks have since the cold war. Even the Challenger 2. Its called 2 peice ammo and prevents cooks offs if theres a fire since the bag charge is placed in a wet stowage bin surrounded by water.
@@PaxBritannica34563 Aha nice!
The bag disintegrates when fired and so actually improves the tanks rate of fire. The 105mm gun it replaced had a huge brass case that would be ejected into the turret. The 105mm gun could be loaded just as fast but eventually they'd have to stop shooting to clear the casings away from the gun. Usually this is after about 5 shots. The casings would either be placed back into the ammo racks or thrown overboard. On the Centurion and Leopard 1 tanks you can see a hatch on the left side of the turret, that's for the loader to toss spent shells out of. Because the bag in the 120mm gun disintegrates on firing, the loader doesn't have to clean up after shooting and so they can continue to fire full speed until there's nothing left to shoot at.
@@fyrep0w3r Interesting. I'm familiar somewhat with that system for the Iowa Class American battleships with the 16 inch guns. Same system, bags of powder charges and separate projectiles. I didn't expect that system could be useful on a smaller scale for a tank or fighting vehicle.
been like that from day one @@Jazzman-bj9fq
As I always suspected, Chobham armor has foam rubber in it.
I like how they hotwire a tank to fire remotely, like, why, just have a damn tanker do it properly, the fuck?
Because its better to be safe then sorry, if you put a brand new pristine barrel on a tank it has to be remotely fired. Its just a precaution
@@joshhanklonbut there was nothing new or on trial with the tank firing the shot, they were just testing the armor down range. Seems like inside the tank is likely the safest place to be for at least a kilometer or so around the site.
@@wills.5762 eh i don’t know. Im honestly just guessing. It could be a rule that when a tank is involved in a test it has to be fired remotely. Idk
Because they had a catastrophic explosion in a turret while testing a development round at glen luce in late 60s early 70s..
@@doonhamer252
That's fair enough, but this is not a test of a round, this is a test of the armor, you would shoot a safe, proven round.
I get safety, but to me, this case of "safety first" is just silly.
Excellent content!
However, there are 2 flaws, at least in modern battle field.
1. The 120mm used requires separate charger where a modern APFSDS is a single shell containing both a projectile and charger. Hence 120mm APFSDS is much longer thus heavier than the one used. Hence it will not end up with a simple bulge.
2. Not all but many ATGM or even some RPGs have a tandem warhead. This greatly enhances the penetration.
This is probably the reason why DSTL developed next gen armour.
Regardless of what it looks like, at the time when Chobam was first introduced, it was revolutionary indeed. If we exported and reinvested, we would have been miles ahead even now. Shame.
The new epsom and farnham armour should be interesting to see once the chally 3 program gets finished
tandem warheads don't increase penetration, the initial warhead is very small as it's purpose is to set off ERA before the main warhead detonates. also this test was during a time when separate charges were the norm. and even after western tanks moved to complete rounds pact forces tanks still used separate charges in their autoloaders
And now in a modern conflict cheap tiny remote control drones simply hit the top of the tank and all this front armour is just dead weight. Crazy times.
Top attack Anti Tank Guided Missiles and aircraft using Air to Ground Missiles have existed for decades. Frontal armor is still needed for fighting infantry and other tanks.
Just because some factors change doesn't mean every previous rulebook is thrown out; just that there's new rules.
Funny, even those times some expensive ballistic tests were not perfect. The sledge jumps up when hit by projectile. A real armored vehichle weighs e.g. 10x the sledge and plate. And won't practically use any projectile kinetic energy as kinetic energy of the target.
The plate should definitely be rather fixed totally than jumping from hits. Fixed totally would be closer to the real life scenario. How much more energy there would be for the penetration, hard to guess from here. But could be 5-15% more, certainly changes the results a bit.
Have you ever actually served on a tank crew?
I think not
@@jameslynch7826 😆 Have you ever served in US Postal Service? If not then you know nothing about addresses and packages 🤣😂Why on earth did you post your zero comment?
People understand basics of physics even without "serving in tank corps". Next time consider before hitting the Enter.
Note the loader has no ear protection.
It's actually not that loud when you're in the turret.
WHAT?
Mate there’s no use saying that to these computer games idiots who have never even spent a month on tanks
They get their inaccurate opinions from pc games.
I have never loaded with any type of eardefenders
The noise inside the turret is fine
And hatches open for compression reasons
Loading is a fast workout so you strip down
And gloves are definitely not permitted
They prevent you feeling the bag charge
And or clearing stoppages
Looked again, that looks Like Anglesey race track.
Anyone inside the tank with the Cholb
When I started my career it was with British armour, then I ended up in Canada and went over to the dark side with German armour. Everything else is North American.
and what have you learned through all these transitions?
@@geronimo5537 how to be armourous?
@@geronimo5537armor makes things harder to penetrate
Started in the greys before amalgamation
Remember this the next time some Hollywood waffle-iron shows Godzilla soaking tank rounds.
If this was in Greece,the officers instead of fire they would just kick it.
The narrators voice is giving me ptsd from all the service training films I had to endure......
15 seconds to load that gun apparently..... according to war thunder
Utter bollox
I did it for six years
Stick to made up computer games
some one show this too Gaijin pls
“Under closely controlled range conditions.” In other words, don’t try this at home, children 😌
No they used underpowered, under weight "Demonstration" projectiles. It was a "Sales Pitch" Video.😮
Odd to think this wasn’t originally developed for the British Army, but for the Iranians before they revolted.
Would the Shockwave render the crew inept?
The men in the tank??? No....they're in a tank
@@Kelly-ju1kw- But the tank could be in ept... 😁
So what was it made of then 🤔
It's a secret material still kept as such today
Steel plates and rubber interlayer.
@@razorcola9833 Likely contains more than just 'slteel and rubber interlayer' lol.
@@aarongreen1654 exactly 😂😂😂 It's a full composite material all stacked in armour
We don’t know
Off memory a Chieftain had a 20 pounder gun
No it had the L11 120mm rifled gun the centurion used the 17 pounder then the 20 pounder (84mm) gun then the L7 105mm
@@jasont6287 ahh ok
And yet a Challenger tank can be disabled by something as innocuous as a retail purchased quad copter with an explosive…so the armour is moot
Damn that's accurate
ah yes my left ear
deaf in the right ear the real experience
If it's on your right then your audio is swapped.
Look around you. Just look around you.
Do you see it?
Ok…but John Wayne would have taken a chobbam armoured tank out with his pen knife.
They got Nigel mansil
Didn’t conventional armor go out of use in like the 50’s.
No inporta el tanque qué sea más moderno o viejo, siempre hay formas de diesmar lo atacando las orugas arma principal vision, los alemanes eran maestros en la lucha lo demostraron al aparecer los tanques soviética más pesados.
Somewhat dated now,Russian ATGM penetrating 1000mm ,1 Meter...Oh Crap🤬
I'm dead.
Ought to remain secret.