Drozd/ERA

[Ronin]

Ive been searching for rules for ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) and things like the Drozd system. Anyone got any sources or maybe house rules?

[pmulcahy11b]

Go to my site (www.pmulcahy.com) and look particularly under Russian Tanks. I think I did a decent job with systems like Drozd and Arena.

As for ERA, they're in the v2 and V2.2 rules, as well as in the V1 Soviet Vehicle Guide if you need a v1 version of ERA. You might also go to my site, look on the PDF downloads page, and (hope you have a high-speed connection) download Wapahani's (TR's) site. He had some good rules on more modern ERA systems.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Go to my site (www.pmulcahy.com) and look particularly under Russian Tanks. I think I did a decent job with systems like Drozd and Arena.

As for ERA, they're in the v2 and V2.2 rules, as well as in the V1 Soviet Vehicle Guide if you need a v1 version of ERA. You might also go to my site, look on the PDF downloads page, and (hope you have a high-speed connection) download Wapahani's (TR's) site. He had some good rules on more modern ERA systems.

Paul, did I fail to mention you've got one of the most useful info sites for the casual reader out on the Web other than Jane's? And we all know how damned pricey Jane's subscriptions can be...well, for me anyway at the moment.

I've always wondered a bit about ERA though. It seems that it can cause some unfortunate issues for infantry if they happen to be working in close proximity with tanks when those ERA panels blow off...

Also I read of one tactic that guerillas used in Chechnya to defeat tanks utilizing ERA: Have a team with two RPG gunners tasked to take out a vehicle with ERA. The first gunner uses his RPG to blow off one or two ERA panels, and the second RPG gunner uses his RPG to hit the same area where the ERA panels were. It takes some time and good coordination, not to mention skill, and getting within a fair distance of the vehicles (which unfortunatley isnt' hard in urban terrain) but unfortunately for the Russians, it seemed to work rather well.

[Ronin]

I have and use the 2.0 version. Couldnt find it. I dont suppose you have a page reference? Oh, and I will check out your site. Today is a long boring day here at work. Lots of time on my hands.

[Ronin]

Ok, I've poured through the main book (2.0) and my supplements (American, NATO,Soviet) I cant find any refference to ERA. Let alone Drozd. I've been told TNE Fusion and Steel, has the rules. But I'm not looking to buy a new book for another game (compatible or not). Can anyone point me in the correct direction?

[Legbreaker]

This from the V2.2 BYB page 216:

Reactive Armour Blocks: Reactive armour blocks are special explosive charges fitted to the outside of an AFV for additional amour protection. These blocks detonate when hit by a round larger than 35mm in diameter and the explosion is directed outwards interfering with HEAT type warheads on rockets, missiles and grenades. Reactive armour has no effect on kinetic energy penetrators (those rounds with AP).
Reactive armour blocks may be applied to the turret front and sides, and the hull front of any AFV which as the appropriate attachment lugs installed. Installing these lugs takes welding equipment and 1 manhour per unit of armour. Reactive armour adds 80 to the AV of the protected face. Some vehicles come with attachment lugs already installed (the vehicle card will say if this is the case).
Each unit covers one tenth of an armour face, and is destroyed when activated. The number of units destroyed on any given face is the D10 roll to hit an unprotected part of the armour face.

[Ronin]

Sweet. Big thanks Leg Breaker. I owe you now.

[ArmySGT.]

Active Protective Systems.

The first operational active protection system [APS], named Drozd, was developed by the Soviet Union between 1977 and 1982. This system was installed on some 250 naval infantry T-55As (redesigned T-55ADs) in the early 1980s, and was designed for protection from ATGMs and antitank grenades. It used primitive millimeter-wave radar sensors on each side of the turret to detect incoming rounds. A filter in the radar processor was intended to ensure that the system responded only to targets flying at speeds typical of ATGMs. These are engaged by one or more short-range rockets carrying fragmentation warheads (similar to mortar rounds), fired from four-round launchers (one on each side of the turret). Drozd provides maximum overlap and protection only to the forward 60� portion of the turret, leaving the sides and rear vulnerable. The tank crew can change the orientation of the system by rotating the turret.

Drozd suffered from several shortcomings. Its radar was unable to determine threat elevation levels adequately, and the self-defense rockets would almost certainly have caused unacceptably high levels of collateral damage � particularly to accompanying dismounted infantry.

Citation

[Ronin]

Nice article link. Im not a big fan of the soft kill systems. They do generally protect against the big boys of ATGM world. (TOW, HOT, MILAN, and etc.) But, any grunt with a straight rocket, still can mess you up. Which Russians learned in the Chechen Wars. Shtora failed miserably there. Mainly because they were faced with unguided munitions. This helped prompt the development of the Arena system. The Israelis were developing a similar hard kill active system (Iron Fist). But I believe have dropped the project. I personally think this is a mistake.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Ronin

Nice article link. Im not a big fan of the soft kill systems. They do generally protect against the big boys of ATGM world. (TOW, HOT, MILAN, and etc.) But, any grunt with a straight rocket, still can mess you up. Which Russians learned in the Chechen Wars. Shtora failed miserably there. Mainly because they were faced with unguided munitions. This helped prompt the development of the Arena system. The Israelis were developing a similar hard kill active system (Iron Fist). But I believe have dropped the project. I personally think this is a mistake.

Nope, the Israeli's have kept up with a hard kill system (can't recall the name whilst at work sadly) that has entered service, as well as passing the only tests that matters against both guided systems as well as RPGs.

[Vespers War]

I'm performing some thread necromancy because I've been reading up a bit on ERA and Hard Kill systems as part of looking at the Armata and wanted to both provide and solicit ideas.

ERA is relatively easy to model, since it adds to armor in particular situations. Early ERA adds only to HEAT, while more modern ERA also protects against KE. Here's what I've been able to find (stats are for v2). Most of the numbers come from manufacturers, so take them as best-case optimistic numbers.

Blazer (1982): An Israeli ERA used on Centurion, M48, M60, and T-55 tanks. Adds 40 to AV vs HEAT. Adds 1,000 kg to vehicle weight.

Kontakt-1 (1984): Early Soviet ERA, used on T-55, T-62, T-64, T-72, and T-80 tanks. Adds 80 to AV vs HEAT. Adds 1,200 kg to vehicle weight.

Kontakt-5 (1985): A heavy ERA, used on T-72, T-80, and T-90 tanks. Adds 100 to AV vs HEAT and 60 to AV vs KE. Adds 2,800 kg to vehicle weight.

Relikt (2006): Relikt is an upgraded heavy ERA used on the T-72, T-80, and T-90. Adds 200 to AV vs HEAT and 160 to AV vs KE. Weight unknown to me.

I don't have numbers for Super Blazer, and don't have good numbers for Malachit (the new ERA on the T-14).


Hard Kill systems:

Drozd (1978): Used by the Soviet Navy for their T-55 tanks. Uses a sensor array at the rear of the turret and a total of 8 107mm HE rockets to shoot down incoming rounds. Approximately 50% successful, but can only protect the 60-degree arc that the turret is facing. Cannot be used with ERA. Weighs approximately 1000 kilograms.

Arena (1992): Shown mounted on T-72 and T-80 tanks, it was developed after Chechen combatants used RPGs to destroy tanks equipped with the Shtora passive anti-missile system (which relied on jamming sensors the RPGs didn't have). The system has 26 projectiles and protects roughly a 300 degree arc everywhere except the rear of the turret. Approximately 55% successful, though success is defined as halving the penetrative capability of incoming HE or better. Cannot be used with ERA. Weighs 1100 kilograms.

Trophy HV (2010): An Israeli system used on Merkava 4 and Namer, and set to be installed on M1A2 SEP V2 Abrams. Used a pair of launchers, each with 3 rounds. Claimed to be nearly 100% successful in recent use. Weighs 850 kilograms. Newer versions are lighter, but I have little information on the MV and LV.

As with the ERA, I know there are other systems out there (Afghanit, Akkor, Quick Kill, etc), but don't have much information on them.

ERA is pretty easy to model, given the existing rules in the core book and simply modifying them based on the AV for the specific type of ERA in use. How have people integrated hard kill systems into their games?

[swaghauler]

Don't forget all the bolt-on/addon armors like TUSK.

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

Don't forget all the bolt-on/addon armors like TUSK.

It's hard to forget about things when I don't know about them in the first place. (Although I was vaguely aware of TUSK since I was lightly involved in one of the RWS proposals back in the day)

Looking up the TUSK, it appears there are two layers of ERA, a base layer of M19 blocks (ARAT-1) that can have a second layer of M32 blocks added (ARAT-2). I can't find estimates for the full system, but ARAT-1 would add AV 110 vs. HEAT only.

[pmulcahy11b]

Go to my PDF Download Page http://www.pmulcahy.com/PDFs/pdf_page.htm and downloads Wapahani's old site. He has pretty good rules for different types of ERA.

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Go to my PDF Download Page http://www.pmulcahy.com/PDFs/pdf_page.htm and downloads Wapahani's old site. He has pretty good rules for different types of ERA.

I had looked at that, since you mentioned it a few years back in this thread before I performed thread necromancy, and it was actually part of why I started digging into modern ERA. Because of the age of the site, the info Wapahani got from R/Peter had first and second generation ERA, so Blazer/Kontakt-1 and Kontakt-5, but not the more modern ARAT or Relikt (and information about the older systems has become a bit more available as they've become obsolescent). The newer systems wouldn't necessarily be useful for a by-the-book T2K, but in T2K13 or house timeline they might see use. And honestly, my numbers are pretty close to his - Kontakt-1 is 10 points off from the first generation ERA, and Kontakt-5 matches second generation for KE but I rate it 40 points better against HEAT since it's been discussed that it is effective against both but less so for KE.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

It's hard to forget about things when I don't know about them in the first place. (Although I was vaguely aware of TUSK since I was lightly involved in one of the RWS proposals back in the day)

Looking up the TUSK, it appears there are two layers of ERA, a base layer of M19 blocks (ARAT-1) that can have a second layer of M32 blocks added (ARAT-2). I can't find estimates for the full system, but ARAT-1 would add AV 110 vs. HEAT only.

The TUSK kits also include SLAT armor or BAE's newer LROD bolt-on armor that provides standoff protection for HEAT and Tandem Warhead rounds. The Polish have it in the KTO Rosamak system and the Israelis have this cool new version made of lengths of chain stood off from the vehicle hull 4" and held in place by a spring or flexible rod that runs horizontally through the chains near their ends to keep them from swinging freely. The Germans have that bolt-on armor that goes on the front of newer Leopard tanks (giving them that "angular" look). I'm not sure if the armored upgrade for the AAVP-7 is BAE's LROD or another armor type. I do know it's aluminum "angle iron" backed with foam to maintain buoyancy. The triangular "angle iron" being aligned horizontally along the hull in line with the vehicle's nose to promote water flow along the hull while "swimming."
The composite nature of bolt-on armors is carried through to US armored cars. If you look into a smaller Cash-In-Transit van you will see aluminum or mild steel plates welded or riveted to the standard outer car body. between these layers is either 2" of cork or foam. The combination of these THREE materials will stop ALL handgun rounds and, in some cases, even reach NIJ Level 3 (rifle) specifications. The van will still look "stock" and have almost the same interior space as well.

[ChalkLine]

Paul's site also has stats for the AAVP-7's applique armour

[Vespers War]

Coming back to this, allegedly Malachit is AV 200-220 against KE and 240-280 against HEAT.

Relikt is around the same mass as Kontakt-5 (5.8 kg per plate vs 5.7 kg per plate), somewhere in the 2850 kg range.

ERA systems I still don't have stats for:
Super Blazer
ARAT-2 (M-19 + M-32)
ERAWA-1
ERAWA-2

Hard kill systems I don't have complete (or complete enough) stats for:
Quick Kill
Iron Curtain
Afghanit
AMAP-ADS
GL5
Iron Fist
LEDS
Zaslon
Trophy

The hard kill and most of the ERA wouldn't be around in a v1 or v2 timeline, though Super Blazer would. In an alternate timeline, they could be around. Some of these are still in development, so they're unlikely to have solid information available for a while.

[rcaf_777]

Did the US Army not make a a version of this?

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Trophy HV (2010): An Israeli system used on Merkava 4 and Namer, and set to be installed on M1A2 SEP V2 Abrams. Used a pair of launchers, each with 3 rounds. Claimed to be nearly 100% successful in recent use. Weighs 850 kilograms. Newer versions are lighter, but I have little information on the MV and LV.

Update: Trophy MV has been replaced by/renamed to Trophy VPS, which is 480 kilograms but claimed to be equal to Trophy HV in performance, with the weight savings largely coming from replacing the 2007-2010 era electronics with more modern equipment. VPS is being tested on Stryker along with Rheinmetall/UBT's StrikeShield. Leonardo DRS has also apparently done testing of the system on an M113 (which makes me wonder why they haven't also tested it on an M2, because I know they have one).

Also, the overall system weight for HV is about 2.5x what I listed (it's described as "around 5,000 pounds" in an article about testing). I assume what I grabbed was the weight for each launcher, and there's some extra weight for sensor or processing or other gribblies, so the VPS should probably be multiplied by the same amount for overall system weight, so roughly 3,000 pounds. There's also mention of increased capacity with autoloading systems, but (reasonably if somewhat disappointingly) nothing that I could find giving the total capacity.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Leonardo DRS has also apparently done testing of the system on an M113 (which makes me wonder why they haven't also tested it on an M2, because I know they have one).

Current iterations of the Bradley (including the upcoming M2A4) have so much of a load on their electrical buses that mounting an APS and the associated electronics is impossible. There's another upcoming Bradley (beyond the M2A4 which is now considered an interim version), the M2A5, which has a beefed-up electrical system to handle an APS.

Here's a different question, though -- how long have systems like Drozd and Trophy been out? Even in prototype form? Do hard-kill APSs even exist in the T2K timeline?

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Here's a different question, though -- how long have systems like Drozd and Trophy been out? Even in prototype form? Do hard-kill APSs even exist in the T2K timeline?

Drozd was developed in the late 1970s, and operational during the Cold War (c.1981, according the linked article).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drozd

Apparently, it was combat tested in Afghanistan but the army rejected it as being too expensive. The Naval Infantry adopted it anyway, because it was still cheaper to fit Drozd to its existing T-55s than it was to replace the older tanks with T-72s (which were also too heavy for some of the Soviet's hovercraft landing vessels). I read somewhere else that there were some issues with the Drozd system being damaged by salt water exposure, which is one of the reasons it was eventually removed from said Naval Infantry T-55s and, IIRC, replaced with conventional reactive armor. The Naval Infantry ended up getting some T-72s as well, as bigger hovercraft to carry them entered service.

-

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Drozd was developed in the late 1970s, and operational during the Cold War (c.1981, according the linked article).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drozd

Apparently, it was combat tested in Afghanistan but the army rejected it as being too expensive. The Naval Infantry adopted it anyway, because it was still cheaper to fit Drozd to its existing T-55s than it was to replace the older tanks with T-72s (which were also too heavy for some of the Soviet's hovercraft landing vessels). I read somewhere else that there were some issues with the Drozd system being damaged by salt water exposure, which is one of the reasons it was eventually removed from said Naval Infantry T-55s and, IIRC, replaced with conventional reactive armor. The Naval Infantry ended up getting some T-72s as well, as bigger hovercraft to carry them entered service.

-

Drozd was replaced by Kontakt-1 on the Naval Infantry T-55s. Some T-55s later got Kontakt-5 (the T-55M5), but I'm not sure Naval Infantry ever got them. Kontakt-1 was a light ERA (1.2 tonnes, +80 AV vs. HEAT only), while Kontakt-5 is heavy (2.8 tonnes, +100 AV vs. Heat and +60 AV vs. KE).

To answer Paul's question, in the T2K timeline there would be Drozd and Arena for the active kill systems. Trophy's too new (early production was 2007, with acceptance in 2009 and first combat use in 2011), as are Afghanit, Iron Curtain, Iron Fist, and pretty much everything else other than Drozd and Arena.

On the ERA side, Blazer, Kontakt-1, and Kontakt-5 all entered service in the 1980s. For ones I haven't statted up, there's also Czechoslovakia's DYNA for the T-72M4Cz (I'm currently away from my books, but the manufacturer claims it increases effective armor thickness by 30% against KE and 120-170% against HEAT if anyone wants to run numbers). Other ERA systems (Relikt, Malachit, ARAT, ERAWA, ERAWA-2, CERAWA, Nozh, Duplets, SidePRO-CE, CLARA) are too new for the Twilight War.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

Drozd was replaced by Kontakt-1 on the Naval Infantry T-55s. Some T-55s later got Kontakt-5 (the T-55M5), but I'm not sure Naval Infantry ever got them. Kontakt-1 was a light ERA (1.2 tonnes, +80 AV vs. HEAT only), while Kontakt-5 is heavy (2.8 tonnes, +100 AV vs. Heat and +60 AV vs. KE).

To answer Paul's question, in the T2K timeline there would be Drozd and Arena for the active kill systems. Trophy's too new (early production was 2007, with acceptance in 2009 and first combat use in 2011), as are Afghanit, Iron Curtain, Iron Fist, and pretty much everything else other than Drozd and Arena.

On the ERA side, Blazer, Kontakt-1, and Kontakt-5 all entered service in the 1980s. For ones I haven't statted up, there's also Czechoslovakia's DYNA for the T-72M4Cz (I'm currently away from my books, but the manufacturer claims it increases effective armor thickness by 30% against KE and 120-170% against HEAT if anyone wants to run numbers). Other ERA systems (Relikt, Malachit, ARAT, ERAWA, ERAWA-2, CERAWA, Nozh, Duplets, SidePRO-CE, CLARA) are too new for the Twilight War.

All that gives the Russians a huge tactical advantage! I wonder how long it would take NATO to reverse-engineer some captured Drozd and Arena systems?

[Vespers War]

The active protection systems likely wouldn't be worth it. Drozd only protected a 60-degree arc to the front of the turret, had a roughly 50% chance of intercept (it had difficulty tracking the altitude of incoming projectiles, making it less useful against top-attack ATGMs like Tank Breaker/Javelin), and had just 8 rockets. Arena has a much better arc (around 300 degrees) and more counter-rockets (20-26 depending on hull), but still only around a 55% chance of intercepting an incoming rocket.

Reverse-engineering ERA might be more fruitful. From a game perspective, Kontakt-5 on a T-72B would make the front glacis immune to 120mm L/44 ammunition as long as the blocks lasted, with an armor value of 248 vs HEAT and 208 vs KE. The turret front would only be vulnerable to KE at short range and immune to HEAT. Sides and rear would still be vulnerable, but less so. It's much better than Blazer, but I'm not sure how Super Blazer compared.

[unipus]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

All that gives the Russians a huge tactical advantage! I wonder how long it would take NATO to reverse-engineer some captured Drozd and Arena systems?

I'm not sure it gives them a huge advantage so much as it somewhat re-balances the existing huge Western advantage in advanced composite armor (and sensors). The problem anyway is that these systems would be employed on some % of the latest and greatest tanks -- which is the same as saying "the ones that get sent into the meatgrinder first." It may extend their survivability by a few days or even a string of a few battles, but that's probably about it.

In the scope of T2K I find it implausible that more of these than you could count on your fingers would still be operational anywhere.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by unipus

The problem anyway is that these systems would be employed on some % of the latest and greatest tanks -- which is the same as saying "the ones that get sent into the meatgrinder first." It may extend their survivability by a few days or even a string of a few battles, but that's probably about it.

I wonder if those first couple of thousand of the USSR's latest and greatest tanks sporting reactive armor wouldn't soak up so many of NATO's latest and greatest ATGMs and HEAT rounds before being killed off, that the follow up waves of reactive armor-less T-72s, T-62s, and T-55 wouldn't then be able to overwhelm the NATO defenders who now find themselves running low on advanced tank-killing ammo...

-

[ChalkLine]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

(clip great stuff)

Other ERA systems (Relikt, Malachit, ARAT, ERAWA, ERAWA-2, CERAWA, Nozh, Duplets, SidePRO-CE, CLARA) are too new for the Twilight War.

Kaktus, the precursor to Relikt, had almost finished testing by 2000

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by ChalkLine

Kaktus, the precursor to Relikt, had almost finished testing by 2000

True, although its adoption would presumably depend on either Object 640 or the BMP-3 entering service, which is probably about as likely as the 140mm Abrams Thumper being part of the Twilight War. Kaktus presumably would have been somewhere between Kontakt-5 and Relikt in effectiveness. If it was halfway in-between, it'd be 150 AV vs HEAT and 110 vs KE, adding 2.5-3 tonnes to vehicle mass.

[ChalkLine]

Originally Posted by Vespers War

True, although its adoption would presumably depend on either Object 640 or the BMP-3 entering service, which is probably about as likely as the 140mm Abrams Thumper being part of the Twilight War. Kaktus presumably would have been somewhere between Kontakt-5 and Relikt in effectiveness. If it was halfway in-between, it'd be 150 AV vs HEAT and 110 vs KE, adding 2.5-3 tonnes to vehicle mass.

Definitely the BMP-3 in lesser numbers. The Objekt 640 was pretty much sorted but was spread over too many republics. I reckon it's a GM call.
The APC and terminator versions would never have been built so if you saw them both vehicles would be in the same unit, a scary proposition especially as they're both thermal equipped. Their survival rate would be tiny though.