RedDwarfIV wrote:I refer you to the fact that one Challenger 2 survived 70 RPG hits. Another survived fourteen hits plus a MILAN anti-tank missile. The only one to ever have been destroyed in combat was killed by another Challenger. This is because the British armed forces favour armour over mobility in their tanks, hence why it's much tougher - but slower - than the Abrams. As for mines, I thought I'd read somewhere that an Abrams attempted to drive along a road that had numerous IEDs and was destroyed, while a Challenger made it over fine, However, since I can't find where I read it, you can take that with a grain of salt. In any case, in all the times a Challenger's armour has been penetrated by IEDs, it resulted in at most the loss of a leg for one of the crew. The Streetfighter upgrades should see to that, as they will be putting armour on the underside where the tank is weakest.Zakharra wrote:RedDwarfIV wrote:-snip-
It wouldn't even come close. Anti-tank mines would still kill the tanks. Incoming missiles/RPGs and shells would still hit and incapacitate/kill the tank. The shield mentioned in the article might work for one incoming projectile, but not for all (where would the system get the energy? Unless this SCAR shield can physically -stop- projectiles in mid-air (doubtful since velocity alone is going to be a stone bitch to overcome) and defeat the shaped charges going off, all the SCAR is is expensive useless junk. And if a SCAR is up, wouldn't that both interfere with radio communications and send up a huge 'I AM HERE!' sign for radar and electromagnetic sensors? It would also be able to be beaten down with enough hits. No shield is imperious to everything.
On SCAR:Researchers at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), which is the research and development arm of the Ministry of Defence, claim it is possible to incorporate material known as supercapacitors into armour of a vehicle to turn it into a kind of giant battery.
When a threat from incoming fire is detected by the vehicle, the energy stored in the supercapacitor can be rapidly dumped onto the metal plating on the outside of the vehicle, producing a strong electromagnetic field.
Scientists behind the project claim this would produce a momentary "force field" capable of repelling the incoming rounds and projectiles.
Although it would last for only a fraction of a second, if timed correctly it could prevent rocket propelled grenades, which detonate on impact, from reaching their target. The supercapacitor could then be rapidly recharged ready for another attack.(Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/n ... tists.html)"The supercapacitor material can be charged up and then discharged in one powerful event to repel incoming fire.
"You would think this would require huge amounts of energy, but we have found it can be done with surprisingly small amounts of electrical power.
"Conventional armour is just a lump of metal but an RPG round can punch through more than a foot of steel. Carrying around enough armour to protect against that is extremely heavy.
"The real advantage to the electric armour is how light it can be by comparison."
Sophisticated tracking systems will also need to be developed to work in conjunction with the new armour so that incoming threats can be identified and the electrical discharge timed correctly to repel the rocket.
It is unlikely that such a system would be used against fire from small arms as the outer skin can be made to be bullet proof.
Since it's momentary, it's not going to interfere with communications. Besides, you know what else interferes with communications? Being dead. As for the 'I AM HERE' thing, I'll point out that we don't exactly build tanks for stealth.
I looked at the article and it was effective against current model RPGs. RPG rounds can and will get better. As will shoulder fired missiles. If a Challenger drives over a mine and it blows off the tread, the tank just becomes a pillbox. That's one of the flaws of a tank, you -can't- armor the treads on the ground, and your forcefield would be worthless against mines (which would be improving as well). It is always a race between weapons and armor. Nothing is ever static for long and the SCAR shield would be overcome sooner than later.
As for the claim of stopping incoming projectiles like missiles or the rounds of say.. an A-10 Warthog, I seriously doubt any SCAR shield could stop that. That's a hell of a lot of momentum and mass to stop, if the electromagnetic shield can effect a high velocity 30mm cannon fire to begin with. Not to mention, the mines. There's absolutely no way this shield could detect and stop a mine from going off (and there's no way it could protect the treads from a mine underneath them). While a SCAR might be useful against distant shots it can detect incoming, what of close range shots? Or the railgun if the US military gets that working for tanks? I can see the SCAR having some use for the smaller rounds and such, but it's not a panacea against everything up to nuclear weapons.
The Super Bainite armor looks interesting though.