Global Conflict

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpmcmKwWzYo[/youtube]

Go to 1 minute 20 seconds

So battlefield decieved us.

There's a difference between active and reactive.

Bock wrote:There's a difference between active and reactive.

Indeed.

That's like calling CIWS or Goalkeeper "Reactive Naval Armour".

It's a hard kill point defense system.

Reactive Armour in BF works exactly the same way it does in real life. The chemical composition in the blocks is ignited by the shockwave from whatever is striking it. It explodes away from the tank to counter the incoming blastwave of explosive munitions, physical penetrators, and shaped charges, in whatever combination may be present.

From reddit

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUVnNk0aJBE[/youtube]

And yet, when C4 is hit with an rpg on your tank, you die!

Indeed. Id suggest you watch the entire episode, but if youre lazy simple jump to minute 41
[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=34UWsXDXBaA[/youtube]

TacticalVirus wrote:That's like calling CIWS or Goalkeeper "Reactive Naval Armour".

It's a hard kill point defense system.

Reactive Armour in BF works exactly the same way it does in real life. The chemical composition in the blocks is ignited by the shockwave from whatever is striking it. It explodes away from the tank to counter the incoming blastwave of explosive munitions, physical penetrators, and shaped charges, in whatever combination may be present.

Damn tac, that's pretty interesting, thanks for explaining ^^.
I had only heard of the point defense systems before, which are an incredible piece of maths on their own :p

PDSs on armour assets are a relatively new thing, the first deployment of such a system being done by the Israelis in the late 2000s. Atleast if you discount the Drozd system of the late 70s, which even the Russian army thought was too unreliable and caused too much collateral damage. The Russians have been working on it (again) ever since their armour was almost wiped out in Chechnya, but their deployment has been limited. To the best of my knowledge, no other NATO country is currently fielding a comparable system, though the TUSK upgrade program for the Abrams is supposed to incorporate it....sometime.

The problem with PDSs on armour is similar to the situation faced by the Brits' Goalkeepers in the Falklands (which I ended up going into on TS a while ago). Armour shouldn't be engaging infantry without infantry of their own. If you start throwing high explosives at other high explosives in an AO with friendly infantry supporting....that's a great way to end up with blue on blue. Israel atleast was/is working on tuning their detection system to fire/not fire depending on whether or not it detects friendly infantry too close to the blast radius. Arena (Russian system in the video) currently does not have that capability, and

On March 1, 2011, stationed near the Gaza border, a Merkava MK IV equipped with the trophy system foiled a missile attack aimed toward it and became the first operational success of the trophy active defense system.

As far as i remember at least one member of the tank crew was outside the tank when it happened and he wasn't hurt.

TacticalVirus wrote:PDSs on armour assets are a relatively new thing, the first deployment of such a system being done by the Israelis in the late 2000s. Atleast if you discount the Drozd system of the late 70s, which even the Russian army thought was too unreliable and caused too much collateral damage. The Russians have been working on it (again) ever since their armour was almost wiped out in Chechnya, but their deployment has been limited. To the best of my knowledge, no other NATO country is currently fielding a comparable system, though the TUSK upgrade program for the Abrams is supposed to incorporate it....sometime.

The problem with PDSs on armour is similar to the situation faced by the Brits' Goalkeepers in the Falklands (which I ended up going into on TS a while ago). Armour shouldn't be engaging infantry without infantry of their own. If you start throwing high explosives at other high explosives in an AO with friendly infantry supporting....that's a great way to end up with blue on blue. Israel atleast was/is working on tuning their detection system to fire/not fire depending on whether or not it detects friendly infantry too close to the blast radius. Arena (Russian system in the video) currently does not have that capability, and

Then again, if there is infantry that close to an armored vehicle, and a high expolosive hits it, wouldnt the infantry get hit anyway? Best option is to avoid getting shot at all together obviously

Well, take Arena for instances. Its kill radius is a 300* arc around the turret, out to 7 meters. If it engages something like an RPG-29, the explosion is 7m away from the tank, as opposed to right next to the tank. You have a casualty radius of roughly 5m/16ft from that much explosives. If the explosion occurs at 7m, there's a 2m/6.5ft "safe area" between it and the tank. If the explosion occurs at the tank, there's a 5m casualty arc immediately next to the tank (assuming ERA is present), and there's a safe area outside of that. So Infantry that are between 2m and 5m are fraked no matter what, but on either end of those distances, the use of the appropriate defensive system can reduce casualties.

It's just another consideration that hard kill systems need to take into account, especially in urban ops where your infantry will quite often be within that 7m danger zone. They're still good systems to have available, just so long as they're developed properly and don't have to be selectively turned on/off depending on the potential for Blue on Blue (See: Falklands & British Goalkeepers).