Military Ground Vehicles of Your Nation [NO MECHS] Type 6

[Yes Im Biop]

I figured everything worked better sloped

Hard, brittle materials work worse when sloped.
IIRC.

Really? That seems strange, But logical I guess.

[Mozria]

Apart from composite schemes.

Yeah, their strength is in breaking to absorb and redirect projectiles and shaped charge jets. In order to do so most effectively, they need to have the greatest volume possible.

[Mozria]

I figured everything worked better sloped

Hard, brittle materials work worse when sloped.
IIRC.

You could go the way of the Leo 2 and use Medium, hard and soft layers, in that order. Apparently works well versus high velocity projectiles.

[The Kievan People]

I would think that it would, as the effective thickness of each plate would be increased.

What if I told you these two figures have the same area?

Sloping does not increase the thickness of the armor.

[Yes Im Biop]

I would think that it would, as the effective thickness of each plate would be increased.

What if I told you these two figures have the same area?

Sloping does not increase the thickness of the armor.

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

[Macedonian Grand Empire]

As the thickness that the shell needs to penetrate is higher.

[Imperializt Russia]

I would think that it would, as the effective thickness of each plate would be increased.

What if I told you these two figures have the same area?

Sloping does not increase the thickness of the armor.

Same area in cross-section.
The sloped plate is clearly a much longer plate though it occupies the same space as a slab. You've also angled the slope at 45 degrees, IIRC isn't "effective" sloping achieved at 30 degree angles?
Even so, it achieves an approximate thickness, of 50 units, compared to an actual thickness of about 35 units.

The areal density of each plate has been reduced if no materials savings have been made.

[The Kievan People]

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

Deflection.

[Yes Im Biop]

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

Deflection.

So bouncy as compared to all out stopping.

[Oaledonia]

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

It disperses energy better then a flat surface.

[Fordorsia]

(Image)

What if I told you these two figures have the same area?

Sloping does not increase the thickness of the armor.

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

By sloping the armour, it is made thicker without increasing weight.

Only downside I can think of right now is that it makes the interior of the tank more cramped, especially in WWII tanks.

[The Kievan People]

Same area in cross-section.
The sloped plate is clearly a much longer plate though it occupies the same space as a slab. You've also angled the slope at 45 degrees, IIRC isn't "effective" sloping achieved at 30 degree angles?
Even so, it achieves an approximate thickness, of 50 units, compared to an actual thickness of about 35 units.

The areal density of each plate has been reduced if no materials savings have been made.

1. Angle is irrelevant in this case, the relationship holds.
2. Total surface area of the tank is not an important or meaningful metric. For all practical purposes a tank is a box. If your tanks glacis is half a meter high and two meters wide and you want to protect it with 300mm of steel, you need 2455kgs of metal. Sloping has no effect on this.

[Mitheldalond]

Same area in cross-section.
The sloped plate is clearly a much longer plate though it occupies the same space as a slab. You've also angled the slope at 45 degrees, IIRC isn't "effective" sloping achieved at 30 degree angles?
Even so, it achieves an approximate thickness, of 50 units, compared to an actual thickness of about 35 units.

The areal density of each plate has been reduced if no materials savings have been made.

1. Angle is irrelevant in this case, the relationship holds.
2. Total surface area of the tank is not an important or meaningful metric. For all practical purposes a tank is a box. If your tanks glacis is half a meter high and two meters wide and you want to protect it with 300mm of steel, you need 2455kgs of metal. Sloping has no effect on this.

Except that if you angle that plate of armor at 60 degrees from the vertical, you now effectively have about 600mm of armor instead of 300mm for the same weight. (I think it's 60 degrees where the thickness is basically doubled)

EDIT: though obviously you have a smaller tank now, but a more rounded shape can enclose a greater volume for less surface area.

[Registug]

(Image)

Quaker Armoured Howitzer; for when you want to make sure that trench is empty. Equipped with a 12-pounder mountain howitzer with a crew of four again; driver, loader, gunner, commander. No radio, because at the ranges the Quaker works, you can shout to the infantry.

I really like everything you're doing with this thing

[San-Silvacian]

Name: Vehicule de Combat Chenilles 70 VCC-70
Type: Main Battle Tank
Place of Origin: The Greater French Republic

Service History-
In Service: 2006-present
Used By: The Greater French Republic
Wars:

Production History-
Designer: Nexter
Manufacturer: Nexter
Unit Cost: 27,500,000 Francs
Designed: 1998-2006
Number Built:
Variants: VCC-70, VCC-70 Mk II

Specifications- (VCC-70 Mk II)
Weight: 59.5 tonnes
Length: 9.9 meters (6.9 meters w/o gun)
Width: 3.8 meters
Height: 2.6 meters
Crew: 3 (Commander, gunner, driver)
Armament-

GIAT CN128-26/52 128mm smoothbore tank gun
x37 rounds of ammunition (1 ready, 36 stored in 2 18-round re-loadable drums in turret bustle)

x2 Nexter M812 25mm autocannons on a low-profile RWS mount for commander
x200 rounds of ammunition w/ 5 cocking charges each

MAC-93 12.7mm machine gun coaxial
x800 rounds of ammunition

General Performance-
Engine: 8-cylinder diesel (1,100 kW, 1,500 hp)
Power/Weight: 18.5 Kw/tonne, 25.2 hp/tonnes
Suspension: Hydropneumatic
Fuel Capacity: 1,400 l (1,700 l w/ fuel drums)
Operational Range: 550 km (650 km w/ external fuel)
Speed: 70 km/

Protection-
Passive Protection System: The armor of the VCC-70 Mk II is a mixture of titanium, tungsten, various composites with layers of semi-reactive armor with a final layer of non-explosive reactive armor. The rear 1/3 of the VCC has a final layer of slat armor to reduce weight without compromising exposure to shaped charged munitions. The front of the VCC-70 is rated to take most known 120mm HEAT and APFSDS rounds from combat distances (2,000 meters +). The sides differ in protection, the first 1/3 of the tank is protected against most 105mm rounds and certain120-125mm HEAT and some APFSDS rounds, while the rear of the tank moves away from kinetic rods to shaped charge protection, at max able to protect against 57-76mm HV threats.

The rear of the tank is protected against 40-57mm caliber projectiles with slat armor for protection against shaped charge munitions. The turret roof is protected against 35mm AP rounds commonly used by CAS aircraft and attack helicopters. As standard on most tanks, the VCC-70 is equipped with a Kevlar spall liner to protect crew from splinter effects if a round would penetrate or near penetrate the armor. The turret bustle has two blow-out panels were the ammunition is stored, this allows for faster reloading in the field, and increased crew safety.

Active Protection System: The VCC-70 Mk. II uses a Nexter-produced variant of the Iron Fist Active Protection System.

NBC: M772 NBC protection system

updated VCC-70 to make it more cool and modern.

[The Kievan People]

Except that if you angle that plate of armor at 60 degrees from the vertical, you now effectively have about 600mm of armor instead of 300mm for the same weight. (I think it's 60 degrees where the thickness is basically doubled)

EDIT: though obviously you have a smaller tank now, but a more rounded shape can enclose a greater volume for less surface area.

No. You. Don't.

Seriously. You (and several other people) are just deeply confused about sloped armor. It absolutely, positively, does not increase the effective thickness of armor! IT WOULD WEIGH EXACTLY THE SAME AS A 600 MILLIMETER THICK SLAB COVERING THE SAME AREA. If you reduce the size of the areas protected of course it weighs less SLOPE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

[Registug]

Aha, I just got what you're trying to say.

[Istevia]

Just some random T-62 improvement thing based on the Chonma-Ho:

IST-62IMV

Type: Main battle tank
Place of origin: Istevia
Production history
Designer: Raikven Armor Design Bureau
Designed: 1983
Manufacturer: Raikven Machine Plant
Produced: 1984-2007
Number built: 1,700 T-62's converted to IST-62IMV, 3,000 built
Specifications
Weight: 40 tons
Length: Hull length: 6.63 m (21.8 ft)
Width: 3.52 m (11.5 ft)
Height: 2.4 m (7.9 ft)
Crew: 4
Armor: Cast turret, spaced armor, explosive reactive armour
Main armament: 125mm 2A46 Smoothbore Gun
Secondary armament: KPV 14.5 mm heavy machine gun, 7.62 mm machine gun in coaxial mount
Engine: Diesel, 850 hp (560 kW)
Suspension: torsion-bar
Operational range: 450km
Speed: 55 km/h

Background:
During the 1980's, the newly rebuilt Istevian army noticed that its T-62's were now obsolete. As a result, the Army began to purchase and produce the T-72M. However, Liatz Raikven, owner of Istevia's second largest military machine plant, instead proposed to upgrade the T-62 instead of buying the T-72M. A year later, Raikven submitted the new upgrade for the T-62 as the IStevian T-62 Improved and Modernized Variant. After evaluating both the T-72M and the IST-62IMV, the army eventually decided to produce the T-72M, and have Raikven modernize any and all remaining T-62's to IST-62IMV's. During the Faterian-Istevian conflict however, around a thousand IST-62IMV's were produced during the war, and another two thousand have been made until 2007. Most have been scrapped, however, a few still remain in service to this day.

Yeah, it isn't anything creative, I just wanted to make my own modernized T-62 variant.

[Rich and Corporations]

Stupid question, Why is sloped armor more effective?

By sloping the armour, it is made thicker without increasing weight.

Only downside I can think of right now is that it makes the interior of the tank more cramped, especially in WWII tanks.

Early projectiles would slip against highly sloped armor.
Also, it's easier to harden and use thinner plate.

[Anemos Major]

San-Silvacian - for the record, Nexter wasn't formed until the latter half of the 2000s (if you're going with a French timeline). If your tank was designed and produced in the 1998 and in the following years (respectively), it'd have been GIAT.

[Anemos Major]

If you're using slopes in modern protective suites, surely they're only really effectively used in conjunction with (as opposed to 'in lieu of') a primary, vertical slab of armour? AFAICR most of the utility derived from using slopes in current tank armour revolves around their ability to yaw the incoming rounds somewhat to negate the effect they have against your primary protective plates behind the sloped armour. Or something like that.

[New Vihenia]

If you're using slopes in modern protective suites, surely they're only really effectively used in conjunction with (as opposed to 'in lieu of') a primary, vertical slab of armour? AFAICR most of the utility derived from using slopes in current tank armour revolves around their ability to yaw the incoming rounds somewhat to negate the effect they have against your primary protective plates behind the sloped armour. Or something like that.

So the critical yaw angle of expected enemy projectile is the paramount when one designing sloped armor ?

[Anemos Major]

So the critical yaw angle of expected enemy projectile is the paramount when one designing sloped armor ?

Not paramount - just adding yaw on its own is questionably effective against modern KEPs. But using it as applique in conjunction with primary protective arrays is one way of increasing protection without necessarily having to add another slab of composite in front of the one you already have.

[Eahland]

If you're using slopes in modern protective suites, surely they're only really effectively used in conjunction with (as opposed to 'in lieu of') a primary, vertical slab of armour? AFAICR most of the utility derived from using slopes in current tank armour revolves around their ability to yaw the incoming rounds somewhat to negate the effect they have against your primary protective plates behind the sloped armour. Or something like that.

My tank has very highly sloped armor on the turret face. The reasoning behind that was twofold: Firstly, Eahland is very hilly, so those tanks will be fighting from hull-down positions a lot, with only the turret face and gun mantle exposed, and against an enemy at maximum gun depression, the effective slope will be increased to the point that even KEPs might deflect rather than digging in. (Fire from a target at maximum gun depression will be striking the turret face at more than 77 degrees from perpendicular.)

Secondly, there's a space between the turret face and the next layer of armor, which is not angled as steeply, so a KEP that digs in and pitches downward, towards normal with the turret face, will strike the next layer of armor, dig into that, and pitch upward again to normalize relative to the inner layer, before fully clearing the outer layer, which will put shear stress on the penetrator and hopefully snap it.

[Yes Im Biop]

For sloped armor it's always up and down. But what if you made it a vertical..Horizontal slope, Like the plow of a boat as opposed to a ramp