Jump to content

Trumpeter 1/35 T-72B3 Obr. 2016 with Cope Cage and 4S24 Soft Case ERA


Peter Browne

Recommended Posts

Future release from Trumpeter1/35 T-72B3 Obr. 2016 with Cope Cage and 4S24 Soft Case ERA.  An interesting and topical release.  There is some speculation on the Russian use of stand-off slat/bar protective measures ('cope cages') in the video below.

 

1416269-95338-11-pristine.jpg

 

 

https://www.scalemates.com/fr/kits/trumpeter-09610-t-72b3-with-4s24-soft-case-era-and-grating-armour--1416269 

 

 

 

Peter

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a short lived stupid mod, all being removed as it caused issues with comms - antenna touching the cage. Also a major issue when bailing out after NLAW rash. 

 

 

https://en.defence-ua.com/analysis/interview_with_russian_tank_operator_how_barbecue_grills_turned_tanks_into_iron_coffins_without_communication_and_what_tankmen_are_afraid_of-3060.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

Was it effective on the Warrior in Afghanistan?


Enemy combatants in Afghan didn’t use modern NATO top attack ATGW’s, such as NLAW and Javelin. Bar amour fitted to the warrior will defeat first generation RPG munitions but not any duel warhead top attack latest generation weapons. 
 

Bar armour was developed for a different threat entirely. This is now why the likes of Chally 3 will have an active defence system fitted - Trophy if my memory is correct? 
 

 

https://www.army.mod.uk/news-and-events/news/2021/06/pioneering-new-technology-for-challenger-3/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dads203 said:


Enemy combatants in Afghan didn’t use modern NATO top attack ATGW’s, such as NLAW and Javelin. Bar amour fitted to the warrior will defeat first generation RPG munitions but not any duel warhead top attack latest generation weapons. 
 

Bar armour was developed for a different threat entirely. This is now why the likes of Chally 3 will have an active defence system fitted - Arena or Trophy if my memory is correct? 

From the reports of the Ukrainians using them either the armour on the Russians tanks is effective or the modern NATO ATGMs are not all that effective.

 

Might be user error of course.

But anyone who has served knows to well its probably a mix of all 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said:

From the reports of the Ukrainians using them either the armour on the Russians tanks is effective or the modern NATO ATGMs are not all that effective.

 

Might be user error of course.

But anyone who has served knows to well its probably a mix of all 3


Not sure where you have read that, the Ukrainians are becoming very skilled in killing Ru tanks with modern NATO weapons and some of the older Soviet era stuff. The Ru losses that are published also reflect that Ukraine is doing something right plus the fact that Russia is now deploying the T-62M into Ukraine. Russia is running out of tanks.

 

Just checked todays stats and Russia has lost 1322 main battle tanks. 


 

There is a video of a Ukrainian BTR killing two T-72’s with a 30mm cannon going around which also proves that Ru armour technology is not as good as the western equivalent. 

 

I can see after all the fighting is over that Ukraine will probably train some western partners as they have rewritten the anti-tank rule book. 
 

The cope cages did not work at all and were more of a hinderance / danger for the crews, NLAW and Javelin has a duel warhead designed to defeat such modifications. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The principle of bar/cage/slat/net protection systems works against low-velocity projectiles like RPGs.  And that is principally what they were designed to defeat. There are stories of Mastiffs arriving back from missions in Afghanistan with several (16 in one case, so I heard) RPGs caught in the slats.  It they do detonate on the cage structure that is far enough from the hull to negate much of the blast jet effect.

 

These systems never had a scoobies of stopping a gun-fired projectile except at longer ranges simply because of the kinetic energy these carry.  Even their HEAT rounds travel very much faster than an RPG although they don't rely on velocity for effect.  One of the beauties of HEAT is that it has no effective range limit and will work at any range as long as the fuse initiates.  Unlike kinetic projectiles which lose energy and effect with range.

 

But weapons like Javelin and NLAW fit in between.  Faster and heavier than RPG but slower and lighter than tank rounds.  But they have warheads more equivalent in power to tank rounds than to RPGs.  So it is very likely that the various cage/net/slat systems will be less effective against them.  There are stories of Russian tanks being found with inert training ERA fitted and with inert training ammunition loaded.  But these may just be stories. 

 

Pictures have emerged of the contents of the 2S24 and it appears not to be ERA at all, despite what Trumpeter say.  When first seen in Syria the bags were thought to hold water containers, much like Sweden did with the S Tank way way back.  Daft as it may sound this would be quite effective against shaped charge munitions and is cheap and easily replaced.  2S24 appears to be a copy of the earliest form of "Chobham" armour, the plans for which have leaked - or been deliberately leaked (wink, wink) - onto the internet.  Basically boxes or open frames containing inner and outer slats of armour plate set at different angles to disrupt and deflect the path of the shaped charge blast.  For those of you old enough to remember louvred widows - all the rage in the 70's - think of those.  But also not unlike Venetian blinds when set partly open.  This was certainly what was in the armour boxes on Challenger 1s in 1990 in the 1st Gulf War: I've spoken with a guy from ROF Leeds who made them.  But things have moved on a bit since then.

 

That being said, even crude spaced armour boxes like those fitted to the Iraqi "Enigma" T-55s in the 1st Gulf War will have an effect against shaped charges.  Detonate the warhead early away from the main armoured envelope and soak up the blast energy destroying a cheap sacrificial box.

 

ERA systems will have little or no effect against kinetic projectiles which is why even smooth-bore gun users still have the option of APDS.  The explosive needs to be initiated by a supersonic shock wave as would be provided by a detonator.  Kinetic rounds don't give that.  And the metal content of ERA is very thin, giving little real kinetic protection.  Spaced armour and the type of armour array used in early Chobham and apparently in 2S24 will have a slowing and energy-absorbing effect against kinetic projectiles.  ERA also has very limited effect against heavy missiles with large warheads like Hellfire and its sibling Brimstone as the power of the warhead will simply overwhelm the ERA counter-blast.

 

One of the problems with all of these systems that rely on blocks of one sort or another is that once used there is a gap in protection until replaced.  And one of the reasons the Soviet Union changed the world of tank lethality in the mid-60's with the 115mm 2A20 smoothbore gun on T-62 was the realisation that shaped charges are very difficult to protect against as well as having much longer effective ranges and increased barrel life.  Even the 60's vintage HEAT rounds would penetrate 70cm+ of RHA.  Suddenly a solid metal tank was no longer viable and Chieftain's 58cm max turret armour not good enough, hence Stillbrew.  So they changed the world of survivability as a consequence.

 

The Holy Trinity of survivability is Don't Be Seen, Don't Be Hit, Don't Be Penetrated.  Advice for teenage daughters everywhere............   Don't Be Hit used to rely largely on mobility agility and hull-down positioning but stand-off protection systems fall squarely into that part of the Trinity.  The Shed Roof slat armour on Russian tanks also makes them very much taller and very much harder to hide: Don't Be Seen.

 

Sexy hard-kill defensive aids like Trophy are all well and good, but the sensors are vulnerable to small arms and fragments and the launchers need to be externally reloaded.  And unless the technology has changed dramatically they don't work very well, if at all, against high-velocity kinetic projectiles like APDS.

 

As for Russian tanks being destroyed by 2A72 or ZTM-1 30mm cannon, that is a big ask.  Those are powerful weapons with high rates of fire but immobilising damage is far more likely.  Which is what the videos seem to show.

Edited by Das Abteilung
Bad spelling!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dads203 said:


Not sure where you have read that, the Ukrainians are becoming very skilled in killing Ru tanks with modern NATO weapons and some of the older Soviet era stuff. The Ru losses that are published also reflect that Ukraine is doing something right plus the fact that Russia is now deploying the T-62M into Ukraine. Russia is running out of tanks.

 

Just checked todays stats and Russia has lost 1322 main battle tanks. 


 

There is a video of a Ukrainian BTR killing two T-72’s with a 30mm cannon going around which also proves that Ru armour technology is not as good as the western equivalent. 

 

I can see after all the fighting is over that Ukraine will probably train some western partners as they have rewritten the anti-tank rule book. 
 

The cope cages did not work at all and were more of a hinderance / danger for the crews, NLAW and Javelin has a duel warhead designed to defeat such modifications. 

7000 javelins from the US alone and the Ukrainians want more, along with all the other systems provided by other countries, you would expect a higher number of kills (who supplied the figure anyway?) will the US run out of javelins before the Russians run out of tanks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dads203 said:


Not sure where you have read that, the Ukrainians are becoming very skilled in killing Ru tanks with modern NATO weapons and some of the older Soviet era stuff. The Ru losses that are published also reflect that Ukraine is doing something right plus the fact that Russia is now deploying the T-62M into Ukraine. Russia is running out of tanks.

 

Just checked todays stats and Russia has lost 1322 main battle tanks. 


 

There is a video of a Ukrainian BTR killing two T-72’s with a 30mm cannon going around which also proves that Ru armour technology is not as good as the western equivalent. 

 

I can see after all the fighting is over that Ukraine will probably train some western partners as they have rewritten the anti-tank rule book. 
 

The cope cages did not work at all and were more of a hinderance / danger for the crews, NLAW and Javelin has a duel warhead designed to defeat such modifications. 

The Ukrainian soldiers using them. The reporting are they are not the wonder weapons the news would have you believe.

Thats not to say they are not extremely effective, they clearly are but they have their problems, which is maybe why they have been supplied with so many of them of different kinds.
Im not sure we will ever know the true rate of success, im sure its very high, but nowhere near the 100% success rate we hoped for.

 

The BTR scored a mobility kill, not knocked out, so the armour is better than your post makes out. However I would say the western armour is much better.

 

The slat armour isnt there to stop the dual charge weapons. Just like it wasnt there to protect the British Warriors. The Ukrainians dont just have ATGMs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said:

The Ukrainian soldiers using them. The reporting are they are not the wonder weapons the news would have you believe.

Thats not to say they are not extremely effective, they clearly are but they have their problems, which is maybe why they have been supplied with so many of them of different kinds.
Im not sure we will ever know the true rate of success, im sure its very high, but nowhere near the 100% success rate we hoped for.

 

The BTR scored a mobility kill, not knocked out, so the armour is better than your post makes out. However I would say the western armour is much better.

 

The slat armour isnt there to stop the dual charge weapons. Just like it wasnt there to protect the British Warriors. The Ukrainians dont just have ATGMs.


No weapon system used in combat is 100% effective, that’s a given. No matter what the weapon salesman says.

As far as I’m concerned especially in Ukraine an “M” kill is still a kill, the Russian REMEski are not as effective as their western counterparts and with Ru Tankers bailing and abandoning there tanks and running off if they survive the contact. 
 

As we have seen with the Ukraine special towing force (Tractor Brigade) they are removing intact and damaged tanks from the battle field to put them back into Ukrainian service so the “M” kill scenario works to Ukrainian advantage.

 

I would also imagine that the crews who were lucky to survive an M kill would be rather low on the old morale front which will ebb away the combat effectiveness of any fighting force in a very short period of time. 
 

Several T-72’s have been mauled by the Ukrainian BTR 30mm auto cannon, not just the one that has been referenced, one that was shot at very close range under the sponson sides during a Fibua engagement didn’t fair very well and probably brewed up shortly after. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Dads203 said:


No weapon system used in combat is 100% effective, that’s a given. No matter what the weapon salesman says.

As far as I’m concerned especially in Ukraine an “M” kill is still a kill, the Russian REMEski are not as effective as their western counterparts and with Ru Tankers bailing and abandoning there tanks and running off if they survive the contact. 
 

As we have seen with the Ukraine special towing force (Tractor Brigade) they are removing intact and damaged tanks from the battle field to put them back into Ukrainian service so the “M” kill scenario works to Ukrainian advantage.

 

I would also imagine that the crews who were lucky to survive an M kill would be rather low on the old morale front which will ebb away the combat effectiveness of any fighting force in a very short period of time. 
 

Several T-72’s have been mauled by the Ukrainian BTR 30mm auto cannon, not just the one that has been referenced, one that was shot at very close range under the sponson sides during a Fibua engagement didn’t fair very well and probably brewed up shortly after. 
 

 

A mobility kill is still a kill, but what happens next very much depends on where it is.

The Ukrainian farmers towing away damaged equipment is in areas where the fighting has passed to other places which is why they can go and recover them for the bounty the government is offering.

Have you seen any evidence they are actually able to repair them and put them into service? I cant find much of that but I would be interested to know.

 

From what Ive seen on the telegram posts they are all making the moral in such cases is much higher that you would believe because their tank armour protected them and they lived to fight another day. dead men have no moral.

 

What I did find interesting is there is no consensus as to what the cope cages are actually for. Its all wild guesses at the least. Those tanks fitted started to be seen about a year ago now. And all of them look "home made".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...