Tank vs ATGM duel

[Serenity]

It's a top-attack warhead. It fires an explosively formed penetrator down through the roof of the tank.

Eskimo said it right, that's some voodoo magic to make that thing work...

[Zimme83]

Modern MBT:s have so strong frontal armor that an ATGM would need to be ridiculously big to be able to punch trough, top attack warheads solve the problem and allows for the missile to be small enough to be carried by infantry and even shoulder launched.

[Gman]

These self forging warheads make top down ATGMs deadly vs anything, including M1s, Leopards, Challengers, and all the Russian and Chinese tanks too.  Stopping 15,000 feet per second just isn't happening even with reactive and high tech composite armor combined.  The real show stoppers IMO are the sensor fuzed multi round bombs, 32 sub munitions per bomb with some of them, or more, and each forging a 10,000fps+ projectile going straight down on the weakest part of most tanks and APCs.  A single F16 4 or even 2 ship can deliver enough in one bomb drop to wipe a brigade off the map now.  The Javelin would be an awful weapon to face as a tanker IMO.  There could be dozens of them in front of you, you'd never see them in time, and due to their flight profile are very hard to defend against, the Russian tank defense systems are good against wire guided missiles, but the Javelin with that almost vertical attack...not so much I think.

A ton of footage of ATGMs in Syria and Yemen now, there is one video of tank vs tank that I've found with a couple T72s fighting at close range, say 500 yards.  That's it.  Almost all of the tanks being destroyed on video are from infantry fired ATGMs.  I wouldn't feel all that safe in a tank of any nation these days, imagine going up against swarms of well trained combat veteran troops as opposed to guerillas using them now to great effect. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmFwPyfEAWo

https://defencyclopedia.com/2015/06/12/cbu-105-sensor-fuzed-weapon-usafs-ultimate-tank-buster/

[save]

Even the big ATGM uses only HEAT afaik, ie a different size melting copper cone, but if the missile dont send explosive inside the tank, it should not insta-explode.

Looks to me like the export version of the T72 took over the Ronson title from the M4.

The only thing that saves modern tanks are the new developed anti-tankmissile defenses, they are however unsafe for own troops in close vincinity.

[GScholz]

There's already plenty of explosives in most tanks. A HEAT warhead does not just send a jet of molten copper into the target, but also a lot of pressure. If that pressure is great enough it will kill the crew and set of ammunition.

Here's a Saudi M1 Abrams getting hit:

[GScholz]

M60 Patton insta-killed:

[Vulcan]

I used to be pretty handy with ATGMs in Arma/DayZ 

[Zimme83]

M60 Patton insta-killed:

And still you see at least one crew member running away

Even the big ATGM uses only HEAT afaik, ie a different size melting copper cone, but if the missile dont send explosive inside the tank, it should not insta-explode.

Looks to me like the export version of the T72 took over the Ronson title from the M4.

The only thing that saves modern tanks are the new developed anti-tankmissile defenses, they are however unsafe for own troops in close vincinity.

T-72 has an auto loader and thus always ammo exposed in the turret. The effect inside a vehicle from a HEAT depends on a lot of things but if there is a hatch open and there is no direct hit in any ammo the crew have a chance of surviving. But its really nothing new, it was the same during WW2, difference is that both the armor and Anti tank weapons have been a lot stronger.

One of few T-90:s being hit, direct hit in the turret, no explosion. hard to tell if the missile penetrated the armor or not.

[GScholz]

And still you see at least one crew member running away

I didn't notice that at first. Lucky SOB. Still... three bodies left in the tank.

[Zimme83]

The reason the S-tank looked the way it did was the conclusion that most tanks are killed by hits in the turret and turret ring. Having crew and ammo mixed inside was and is a great danger to the crew so the solution was to remove the turret and place the gun and ammo in a compartment separated from the crew.

Also having the engines in front of the crew also greatly increased survivability, even if the front armor was penetrated it would kill the engine and not the crew. Tank might be lost but the crew can get out.

Modern tanks have the blow off panels so the blast from exploding ammo is directed up and not into the crew compartment (if you have the door closed...) so there would be a lot less instant cooking of the crew. (again, if they keep the door to the ammo storage closed..)

[GScholz]

Didn't look like anyone got out of that Abrams despite its blow out panels. The Leo 2 also has blow out panels for the turret magazine, but nothing for the hull magazine. So a penetration into the fighting compartment is likely to set that ammo off.

[Zimme83]

If the door to the ammo storage is closed is the key here...

[10thmd]

I shot a car with a Javelin 

[GScholz]

Cool! Practice shot or real world?

[MiloMorai]

I shot a Javelin but it was many years ago.