Composite Metal Foam

[Brainburn]

Probably posted but search didn't pull it up.

Getting closer to reality.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/04/09/new-foam-armor-for-tanks-can-pulverize-enemies.html

Sorry if it has been posted before...


Brainburn

[ANS Kamas P81]

Impressive stuff, if it holds up.  Endo-Steel, anyone?

[mbear]

Just came to Off topic to post about this. Here's another article from Popular Mechanics.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a19622400/americas-next-tank-could-be-protected-by-steel-foam/

[Lazarus Jaguar]

Any uses beyond military armor?

[ANS Kamas P81]

Name anything that uses thick steel structures that could use heat resistance.  Frankly I do wonder how resistant that stuff is to vibration, for use in the cores of anti-quake structural elements for buildings.

"Here’s a practical example: A future vehicle could theoretically be kitted out with just 4 tons of CMF, rather than 12 tons of the traditional armor.  This means approximately the same protection, but with armor that is 8 tons lighter."

Or it means three times the armor for the same weight, an idea which makes me giggle like a lunatic.  The Abrams is already a fortress on tracks, let's just make it that much worse because we can.

[marauder648]

Looking at that first article, does anyone else find the term 'war fighters' irritating. Its soldiers.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

Looking at that first article, does anyone else find the term 'war fighters' irritating. Its soldiers.

Well, soldier can be an exclusive term.. as in excluding certain kinds of war fighters like marines, sailors, airmen, etc...

[snewsom2997]

So how fast could an Abrams go with 20-30 tons less weight. I assume it would need a different transmission.

[guardiandashi]

So how fast could an Abrams go with 20-30 tons less weight. I assume it would need a different transmission.

depends on the numbers you know/believe.

I have heard that officially its top speed is ~40-44mph I have also heard that its tracks physically come apart and fail at around 120mph but that's with all the governors disabled and that it can only reach those speeds on the equivalent of an interstate highway, or autobahn.

[RunandFindOut]

I have personally been in an early model M-1 (before they switched to the Rheinmetal 120) over hard flat desert at 72 miles an hour.  There is a red lever among the drivers controls that allows you to disengage the governors.  Disabled you can go much, much faster.  I've heard of people topping 80mph on good straight roads.  But the ride is atrocious at those speeds.  I know that after that stint I had blood in my pee on and off for the next couple days from being slammed so hard over every bump.  Certainly better on a road than over a desert path but still not going to be a pleasant ride.  Also you have to be very careful about changing speed and turning once you disable the governors and start pulling a "red wuns go fasta."  At those speeds it's very easy to throw a track, or to snap track pins or tear off the rubber cleats.  You also damage roads like nothing else.  Even going slow MBTs tear up roads, most bases have signs limiting tracked AFVs to about 20mph on base roads to reduce damage and you'll still see the track marks carved deep into all the roads they use regularly.  Once you start going fast you don't just leave marks, you tear big gouged ruts straight through the asphalt and fling chunks of it all over the place.

[ColBosch]

There is a red lever among the drivers controls that allows you to disengage the governors.

First I've heard of that, but then I trained on modern M1A1 and -A2 models. Also, to be fair, last time I was in an Abrams was during OSUT, and they might not have wanted the rookie DATs mucking with things they shouldn't.

I've driven at 35-40 mph through what BattleTech would call "light forest." I was comfy, but I suspect the poor loader was having a bad time of things. The tank commander/trainer kept clogging the intercom with laughter, so I assume I was doing a good job. :D

[ANS Kamas P81]

During the 2003 invasion of Iraq there were a few instances of newsies embedded with the armor in their own vehicles mentioning that they've been having to floor it at 60-70mph just to keep up with the tanks.  One of those little things that the OPSEC guys cringe at...and who knows, maybe it's all exaggerated anyway, wink wink nudge nudge.

Either way, the Abrams is a monster when it comes to getting from one place to another, and I'd say the designers learned a lot from the strategic concept of blitzkrieg...as well as Patton's famous charge to the relief of Bastogne.  Or for that matter, whatever you (probably quite rightly) think of the man Forrest's words are extremely applicable as well.  "I always make it a rule to get there first with the most men."

[ColBosch]

The real question here isn't just weight but also volume. If three times the armor strength means three or more times the armor volume, then it might not actually be a viable solution. Chobham II (as used on the Abrams, along with other NATO tanks) is not only very strong, it's also relatively thin, minimizing the profile of already-huge vehicles.

[RunandFindOut]

First I've heard of that, but then I trained on modern M1A1 and -A2 models. Also, to be fair, last time I was in an Abrams was during OSUT, and they might not have wanted the rookie DATs mucking with things they shouldn't.

So they took out the "red handle"? Not sure I believe it.

[Lazarus Jaguar]

The real question here isn't just weight but also volume. If three times the armor strength means three or more times the armor volume, then it might not actually be a viable solution. Chobham II (as used on the Abrams, along with other NATO tanks) is not only very strong, it's also relatively thin, minimizing the profile of already-huge vehicles.

Yeah, this stuff very well may take up too many internal space slots :p

[Cannonshop]

The real question here isn't just weight but also volume. If three times the armor strength means three or more times the armor volume, then it might not actually be a viable solution. Chobham II (as used on the Abrams, along with other NATO tanks) is not only very strong, it's also relatively thin, minimizing the profile of already-huge vehicles.

I don't see it as a viable armor.  Foamed nylon vs. solid nylon, guess which one collapses?  y'see, foam is BRITTLE, and part of the superb protection of Chobham is density for the volume  Foaming makes things LESS DENSE.

that said, against thermal effects the stuff should be pretty good.

[ColBosch]

I don't see it as a viable armor.  Foamed nylon vs. solid nylon, guess which one collapses?  y'see, foam is BRITTLE, and part of the superb protection of Chobham is density for the volume  Foaming makes things LESS DENSE.

that said, against thermal effects the stuff should be pretty good.

Sure, if you could mount a few feet of the stuff, it might work great against projectiles. But then again, a few feet of dirt or concrete is pretty much impervious to projectiles, too.

[Maingunnery]

I wonder if it would be a maintenance nightmare?
If so, would it be restricted to the mid or inner armor layers?

[glitterboy2098]

I don't see it as a viable armor.  Foamed nylon vs. solid nylon, guess which one collapses?  y'see, foam is BRITTLE, and part of the superb protection of Chobham is density for the volume  Foaming makes things LESS DENSE.

that said, against thermal effects the stuff should be pretty good.

depends on what you are defending from. it would suck against APFSDS. but use it instead of the solid steel layers in Composite armor like chobam, and the protection from HEAT rounds would go up. since the foam aspect would serve to absorb and deflect the plasma jet said warheads use to punch through the armor. combined with the layers of rubber or plastic already in most composite armors meant to do the same thing, protection from those should go way up.
as for Chobam, protection from APFSDS is, as i've it, a mix of the DU layer and a layer of rods inside the plastic HEAT-diffusion layer meant to make kinetic projectiles shatter. though since the exact details are classified, this might just be someone's speculation. would make sense though.

[mbear]

I was wondering if maybe they could fill the bubble spaces with something else to make the foam more effective against types of warheads. For example, that paint used on the Apollo missions that expanded under re-entry heat to form a shield for the pod might be useful for countering HEAT rounds. Bubbles full of boron carbide or similar materials might break up APDS rounds.

Probably not, but what the heck. It never hurts to speculate about this type of thing.

[HobbesHurlbut]

I was wondering if maybe they could fill the bubble spaces with something else to make the foam more effective against types of warheads. For example, that paint used on the Apollo missions that expanded under re-entry heat to form a shield for the pod might be useful for countering HEAT rounds. Bubbles full of boron carbide or similar materials might break up APDS rounds.

Probably not, but what the heck. It never hurts to speculate about this type of thing.

Well, if I understand right, the metal foam is made under heat, air or such forced through the metal while it was still molten. If you had something for gas that could withstand that kind of heat or could be transformed into something better by it...

[cray]

I don't see it as a viable armor.  Foamed nylon vs. solid nylon, guess which one collapses?  y'see, foam is BRITTLE, and part of the superb protection of Chobham is density for the volume  Foaming makes things LESS DENSE.

As I understand it, ze Germans (in the original Leopard 2) use perforated steel armor in lieu of Chobham-type laminated armor. Such armor puts multiple impact surfaces in the path of a penetrator to shear it apart. Foamed metal - assuming you're talking about foamed steel or foamed tungsten - would offer a similar effect on high velocity projectiles.
http://industeel.arcelormittal.com/products/protection-steels/ultra-high-hard-armor-300p/

[Daryk]

I love the fact that site has a link titled "Naval Grades"...  :thumbsup:

[pheonixstorm]

Time to bring back the battleship with foot thick foam armor plates lol

I do wonder how quickly the navy might jump on this. Considering the weight saving or the doubles of armor protection it could provide... It is possible this new tech could find its ways into the last 2 scheduled Gerald R. Ford super carriers. As it stands they currently have a weight of 100,000 tons (same as the older Nimitz class)

[Daryk]

Anti-ship missiles are whole other universe from anti-tank rounds...