Die erworbenen Namen wrote:Alright now that we answered that question (still a cool tank, imo), we can answer the second one:
So I know that APFSDS and HEAT have recently been getting the same penetration values or so, and I know HEAT is as good as you chan chuck it, and so is HESH. What are the advantages over each other? The disadvantages?
HEAT warheads get the same penetration value regardless of target distance because they aren't reliant on velocity to achieve penetration. They are also capable of very deep penetration, roughly 7 times their diameter when their liner is made of copper and 10 times their diameter when their liner is made of Depleted Uranium.
Because of their effectiveness regardless of impact velocity, they can be made very portable. A single infantryman can't throw an APFSDS at a tank and penetrate it, but it can launch a HEAT warhead through the front of an ERA equipped Challenger 2 or turn a T-72 into a torch.
HEAT warheads however are far simpler to defend against than APFSDS rounds however. You can use relatively simple and lightweight armor to counter them, and they are vulnerable to APS'. Iraqi tanks got torn apart by coalition APFSDS shells in the Gulf War, but they often shrugged off MILAN anti-tank missiles by using thin rubber and metal sandwiches.
APFSDS shells need to be heavy and really fast to penetrate armor. This requires a powerful gun weighing as much as a family saloon car. Not exactly easily portable.
However, APFSDS are far more difficult to stop. To do so you require very heavy Depleted Uranium bar armor or perforated steel armor. For this reason an MBT can't be made as well protected against APFSDS as it can be made against HEAT. In many cases only the frontal turret armor can withstand an APFSDS round.
HESH is quite good against light AFV's and structures, and it can be fired much further than the other types of shells. But it is not very effective against modern Special/Reactive armor like the kind found on MBT's.
