I hate to be “that guy” but I am fairly sure that Schürzen (German side skirts) were added to tanks to deflect AT rifle rounds that were being encountered in large numbers against the Soviets, not a measure against HEAT.
The Sherman sandbag protection has also long been a point of controversy. I believe the wartime tests showed that sandbags were somewhere between useless and of very limited use. I think this is accurate given that the spacing provided by a sandbag against HEAT would not provide much difference, and that modern external (external add ons being different than some internal designs) spaced armor is largely misunderstood by the layman in that it doesn’t usually rely on prematurely detonating but in catching the round and dismantling it or deflecting it.
I do apologize for being light on sources, as I am on the go at the moment which makes research tough and I don’t have physical resources at hand. I will look to try and come back and fill some in.
As a sort of most horrifying and most ludicrous means possible of population control of the operating force employing this tactic anywhere near frontlines, or in areas that do not have air defence suitable to stop drones or aircraft, yes.
As a means of stopping anything that would not otherwise be stopped by the vehicle’s armor, no.
Unless it turns out the vehicle is actually made of aluminum instead of steel. Then… maybe yes for 50 cal rounds coming from beyond about a kilometer, maybe less.
I hate to be “that guy” but I am fairly sure that Schürzen (German side skirts) were added to tanks to deflect AT rifle rounds that were being encountered in large numbers against the Soviets, not a measure against HEAT.
The Sherman sandbag protection has also long been a point of controversy. I believe the wartime tests showed that sandbags were somewhere between useless and of very limited use. I think this is accurate given that the spacing provided by a sandbag against HEAT would not provide much difference, and that modern external (external add ons being different than some internal designs) spaced armor is largely misunderstood by the layman in that it doesn’t usually rely on prematurely detonating but in catching the round and dismantling it or deflecting it.
I do apologize for being light on sources, as I am on the go at the moment which makes research tough and I don’t have physical resources at hand. I will look to try and come back and fill some in.
but the russian human defence could work?
further testing to commence in Spring
Nice.
I am skeptical.
Yes. Statistics indicate that 270000 Unexplosive Unreactive Armyguys provide a slight survivability chance to the t72.
Honestly, as defence against a weapon with a range of about 100m, a bunch of guys with guns and a higher vantage point would do the job.
As a sort of most horrifying and most ludicrous means possible of population control of the operating force employing this tactic anywhere near frontlines, or in areas that do not have air defence suitable to stop drones or aircraft, yes.
As a means of stopping anything that would not otherwise be stopped by the vehicle’s armor, no.
Unless it turns out the vehicle is actually made of aluminum instead of steel. Then… maybe yes for 50 cal rounds coming from beyond about a kilometer, maybe less.
nice