You do not even know what is Super DU is. Besides Lanz-Odermatt predictions originally for WA rods modified for DU generally suggest a penetrative power of ~800 mm RHAe, or lets say 850 mm on the high side. And what i don't get is that, in you post 1035:
True, but at least we know that it is at least DU, and as I've said before, you don't know what is used in Relikt.
you have already agreed to that the M829A3 is insufficient in penetrating the T90 with Realikt?
Besides, what value do this discussion on the M829A3 have to offer on the Type 99 and its distant cousin the T90? all we have proven is that they are capable tanks at a fraction of the cost of a western tank.
If you read the entire discussion, I pointed out that M829A3 from a L/44 can't kill a T-90's Glacis equipped with Relikt. I did point out however, that M829A3 was designed against Relikt, which is what this new discussion is about, whether or not Relikt can actually do it's job against A3. Now, if we can get back to this discussion, do you or do you not know what Relikt is composed of? Because you're shooting blanks and taking Nii Stali word's for it's Protective capabilities right now.
The value of discussing the M829A3 against a Type 99 is that, lets admit, Abrams are the dominant tank in the world right now, based on individual performance and collective numbers, they can defeat any tank force asides the entire world's combined. So, we can say that the Abrams is the current benchmark, so, it would be a fun thing to do, comparing something to the benchmark. Some guy earlier this thread claimed that Type 99 has Relikt, which is not proven, so I just went ahead and compared A3 with Relikt, which as I've stated before, A3 wins.
If I knew better, I'd think that Type 99's had K-5. K-5s are "outdated" but they are still widely used while Relikt and Kaktus aren't exactly on every ex-Soviet/Sino tank out there. So, if you really wanted to, I'd compare K-5 on a T-72 (Type 99's hull is based off the T-72) v.s. a M829A3. But, that's already been done for me at that forum I'm yamping about.
Based on open sources and calculations from the estimated lengths and diameters I come up with something like this as far as penetration goes.
From calculations using Lanz-Odermatt equation:
Round...........Length.....L/D.....MV.......Pen @ 2km (0deg-60deg)
M829...............441......17.3...1670........470-550mm
DM33..............503......20.1....1650.......480-560mm
M829A1...........684......31.7....1575.......600-690mm
DM53 L/44.......643......27.6....1675.......620-730mm
M829A2...........700......32.5....1680.......630-740mm
DM53 L/55.......643......27.6....1750.......650-760mm
M829A3...........859......39.3....1555.......710-830mm
The Russian rounds all come out with much lower penetration than claimed when I run them through the Odermatt equation. They tend to be shorter and fatter than their western counterparts.
From Vasiliy Fofanov's Modern Russian Armour Page:
Round...........Length.....MV.......Pen @ 2km (Certified-Maximum)
3BM-32...........380........1700......500-560.......equiv to M829 or DM33
3BM42............420........1700......450-500
3BM-42M........570........1750.......600-650.......equiv to M829A1
3BM-46..........546........1700.......600-650.......equiv to M829A1
All of the Russian rounds should probably penetrate the front of a Leopard 2A4 from around 2000m, the later ones from farther.
Given the shorter fatter rounds are likely to be less affected by the wedge armor on the Leopard 2A5/A6 I would say that the 3BM-42M and 3BM-46 might have a chance against it from under 2000m, the other rounds probably not from any range.
I don't buy into all the hype about Kontakt-5 making any tank indestructable. After all most of it comes from sources either tryong to sell it or get money to develop new rounds to defeat it. That said, I do think it adds greatly to the protection. Testing seems to indicate that a T-72 is vulnerable to an M829 class penetrator, but with K-5 is virtually immune.
My best guess:
Tank......................inneffective................marginal....................effective
Early T-72 no K-5.......................................DM13.....................all the rest
Late T-72 no K-5.....DM13...........................DM23.....................all the rest
Early T-72 + K-5.....DM13,DM23..............M829, DM33................all the rest
Late T-72 + K-5.....M829, DM13-33..............M829A1...................M829A2,A3, DM53
T-90 + K5.............M829,A1, DM13-33...M829A2, DM53(L44)........M829A3, DM53(L55)
Steve
Although I have also read that the Chinese have copy and pasted Relikt so that would throw numbers around. And I'd hate to throw the Chinese democracy card, but:
more info on this new tank model - poster note
Chinese Type 99A2 Arrives
August 27, 2007:
China is in the final stages of testing a new version of its Type 99 tank, the Type 99A2. There is improved reactive armor, as well as fixes to the engine, electronics and mechanical components. This is China's most powerful tank, and is based on the Russian T-80 (which is itself based on the T-72).
A lot of Chinese believe that, on paper, it's new Type 99 tank is a match for the American M-1. For protection, the Type 99 has 500-600mm or armor, plus two layers of reactive army, giving it the equivalent of 1,000-1,200mm of armor. China believes the maximum penetration of the M-1 120mm gun is 810mm. China believes that the protection on the M1 is 600-700mm, and states that the Type 99 main gun can penetrate 850mm (or 950mm with a new shell design.)
However, China has only produced about 200 Type 99s so far. There are several reasons for this. First, the cost (about $2 million per tank). This is more than twice as much as other Chinese built tanks cost. There are some practical considerations, as well. The Type 99 is too heavy for many Chinese bridges, not to mention railroad equipment. Most Chinese tanks are closer to 40 tons, while the Type 99 is closer to 60 tons.
The performance data on the Type 99 (also called the ZTZ-99) is not official. There is very little in the way of official weapons performance data coming out of the Chinese government. At the same time, the Chinese military leaks real, and inflated, data for PR purposes. While China is not a democracy, in this age of the Internet, public opinion can have an influence when the military budget is being put together each year.
So, to sum things up, I'd like to know what's inside Relikt ERA. Because at this point, we're just throwing Nii Stali's official RHAe of it's protective capability around while completely ignoring the fact that it's RHAe, e for a reason, which means that it's an estimate and that different materials do different things to each other so it's not wise to simply compare Penetration Estimates in RHA with Protective Estimates in RHA, is what I'm saying.
Now, I'm going to dinner :U
