Electronic and Explosive Reactive Armors - Research Paper Example

Explosive Reactive Amour Introduction Explosive Reactive Armour is a development made by the Israeli army in the late 1970s and successfully used in combat during the 1982 war. The amour was later adopted by the Russians in the 80s and consists of thin metal plates and an explosive sheath, which is designed to explode on sensing an explosive charge repelling the explosion impact away from the vehicle or a tanker (Zaloga S., 2011). In the recent past, there has been developed Non-Explosive Armours with some more enhanced capabilities than the Explosive Reactive Armour, such as the Electronic Reactive Armour. This paper is focused on explaining how the explosive reactive armour works, comparing it with how the electronic reactive armour works and highlighting the capabilities and limitations of both the amours. How the explosive reactive armour works The amour is fitted on tanks up to date as they are heavy and contains the energy required to sustain its weight. This is made with a layer of highly explosive material fixed between two thick steel plates to form an explosive sandwich. When attacked with a penetrating weapon, the explosive material is detonated, ripping the metal plates apart to destroy the penetrator. The metal plates sandwiching the explosive materials are very important as up on detonation they may destroy or deflect a rod penetrator (Hazell, P. J., 2002). Therefore, the plates are fitted to the tank on the sides, and front to enable the protection of the clue inside. The electronic reactive amour This is a new form of amour that is made of two or more plates that are separated with an insulating material to create a high power capacitor. It is normally charged by a high voltage source of power and during an attack. When an incoming body penetrates the metal plates, the circuit is closed. This follows the discharging of the capacitor where great energy is deposited to the penetrator. The energy might vaporise it or even turn it in to plasma. This form of amour is very new and has not yet been introduced for use in any field and many people wonder whether this type of innovation is even possible. Explosive reactive armour explodes instantly at the penetration of the steel plate by the foreign penetrator, as a result of pressure that detonates the explosives. This explosion results in to the force responsible for destruction and diversion of the penetrator, which is different with the electronic reactive armour that produces energy turning the penetrator in to plasma. As a result, the electronic reactive armour is safer to use so as to protect third parties. In comparison of how the two amours work, the electronic reactive amour is seen to be the most effective form of protection. This is mainly because the explosive reactive amour can simply be destroyed by multiple attacks on the same spot and hence weakening it. It is also usually destroyed with a double charged war head where one charge is used for the detonation of the amour and the other for penetration in to the tank. In this case, the electronic reactive amour is the most preferred to deal with such threats as it is made of non explosive components and are not consumed by being hit. The Explosive reactive armour works by exploding to damage the penetrator by pushing away the penetrator or damaging it. Consequently, it poses a danger to soldiers, who might not be in the tank, near by cars, civilians and low flying aeroplanes (Shin & Yoo, 2004). This is because, when an explosion happens, shrapnel and debris are thrown away from the tank and are capable of causing death to nearby individuals. On the contrary, the electronic reactive armour does not explode and therefore, reduces the threats making it usable in most circumstances The electronic reactive armours do not consume and hence provide a good protection even on being continuously hit. It is further projected that, in the future, this type of armour will have the capacity to use sensors for detecting the type, velocity, diameter and the location of a penetrator, so as to form an effect that will be tailored for specific penetrators. This is an effect not common in the explosive reactive armour as it reacts with an explosion to all kinds of penetrators. The explosive reactive armour is very heavy in weight as a result of being made from a sandwich of explosive materials and two thick steel plates and the threat of shrapnel effect, hence making it unsuitable for installation in the armoured vehicle. On the contrary, the electronic reactive armour is light and does not pose the shrapnel threat; hence it is suitable for the armoured vehicles. This is because it reacts as a result of closing the circuit by the penetrator, thus results in the capacitor discharge of energy to vaporise it. Explosive reactive armour is used by many countries since it was first discovered as a form of protection to the clue in the tank and armoured vehicles. The electronic reactive armour is a new technology form of armour that has not been released for use in the field by the military. However, it would be preferred to the explosive one since it can be used in any circumstance without endangering the parties outside the tanker (Knoelle, L., n.d). It is also a strong form of armour since it cannot be destroyed my frequent attacks on same spots. As a result, the future tanks and armoured vehicles using this technology will be more secure in the battle field. Capabilities and limitations of the explosive Amour and the electronic amour The Electronic Reactive armours have a multi-hit protection capability (BMT, 2010). This capability enables them not to be consumed after they are hit. This capability is an enhancement on the part of the Electronic Reactive Armour, which is clearly not available in the Explosive Reactive Armour. Consequently, there is no application of energetic components to the Electronic Reactive Armour, as it is the case with the Explosive Reactive Armour. While the electronic Reactive Armour has the capability of multi-hit protection, such a capability lacks in the Explosive Reactive Armour (Windsor, 2008). In addition, the Electronic Reactive Armours have the capability of being employed to lighter vehicles, which is not possible with the Explosive reactive Armour (BMT, 2010). The uniqueness of the loads that are applied to the Electronic Reactive Armour for vehicle structure is that, they are much reduced in size and weight so as to allow for their loading on lighter vehicles. This unique capability is found in all the Non-Explosive Reactive Armour in which the Electronic Reactive Armour is a part. This implies that in, terms of loading, the Electronic Reactive Armour has an advantage over the Explosive Reactive Armour, which cannot be loaded to a light vehicle. Moreover, the Electronic Reactive Armour has the capability of effectiveness against threats from CE (Windsor, 2008). This capability is enabled by the downside features of all the Non-Explosive Reactive Armours. It is, however, notable that the Electronic Reactive Armour is not sufficiently effective in KE threats engagements due to the same downside features. According to BMT (2010), the Electronic Reactive Armour has a capability to operate as a stand-alone system. Such a system can be launched in simplified ways to typical armoured fighting vehicle. On the contrary, due to the mechanisms involved in the reduction of penetration by the Explosive Reactive Armours, the system cannot be operated as a stand-alone system. This feature makes the Electronic Reactive Armours to be favoured in fighting vehicles instead of the Explosive Reactive Armour. Due to the prevailing incapability of the Electronic Reactive Armour’s effectiveness on KE threats, there are future prospects of enhancing it with the Momentum Transfer armour, intended to counteract the KE threats (Windsor, 2008). The technology is anticipated to be applied to the side and front protections, upon which there can be created sufficient space for the enhancement installation. After the enhancement, the Electronic Armour will be able to detect incoming projectiles as it launches a small steel bar in a perpendicular direction to the approaching threat flight path. Furthermore, the Electronic Reactive Armour is expected to be implemented with a concept of Smart Armour in the future. Since this enhancement will have microprocessors and integrated sensors attached to the Electronic Reactive Armour, the Armour will have capabilities of sensing information of incoming projectile including its diameter, velocity, location and most importantly, the projectile’s type. The Non-Explosive Reactors have the potential of advancement as evidenced by these anticipated developments. These enhancements will definitely enhance the Electronic Reactive Armours beyond the Explosive Reactive armours even the more than it currently is. The Explosive Reactive Armour has the capability of reducing the penetration of a projectile aimed to it (Partom, 2002). In order to reduce the penetration of the projectile, the moving plates apply the mechanisms of altering the effective velocity and the impact angle. The effective thickness of the plate is also increased as a mechanism of reducing the penetration depth of the projectiles. Besides, the Explosive Reactive Armour has a significantly large area of coverage than is possible with the Electronic Reactive Armour (Mayseless, 2011). As a notable fact in the ERA its protection against the shaped-charge ammunition including the grenade RPG-7 from rocket propellers has attributed to its expanse use in Russia and Europe even in the present age. The ERA offers protection against armour piercing ammunitions and blast IEDs and large EFPs bombs. Such capabilities are not available with the Electronic Explosive Armour, which has limited area of coverage. Therefore, even with the enhanced features of the Electronic Reactive Armour, the ERAs have continued to be favoured in the current Armoury technologies development. Another capability of the Explosive Reactive Armour is its ability to offer intermittent protection. The ERAs have different features that allow it to selectively offer protection to some targets. For instance, the fibre composites found in the reactive armour is capable excluding attacks to allies vehicle by shrapnel as well as attacks to civilians can be avoided. There are also the light reactive armours that can be launched in vehicles, and can retain the selective protection capability of explosive armours. Evidently, such capabilities are not available with the Electronic Reactive Armours as yet. Conclusion The explosive reactive armour has been without doubt a way of offering protection to the clue in the tank and armoured vehicles in the battle field. However, it has put the life of many at risk due to shrapnel from the explosion and the electronic reactive armour solves the problem by not exploding on attack. The capabilities of the Electronic Reactive Armour has been shown to be multi-hit protection, being employed to lighter vehicles, effectiveness against threats from CE, and operating as a stand-alone system. Similarly, the capabilities of Explosive Reactive Armour have been shown to be reducing the penetration of a projectile aimed to it, large area of coverage, and offering intermittent protection. References BMT, 2010, May 4, ‘Electric Armour for Armoured Vehicles (ELAV),’ BMT Defence Services, Retrieved October 23, 2011, from http://www.eda.europa.eu/Libraries/Documents/Electric_Armour_for_Armoured_Vehicl es_-_36745_-_Executive_Summary.sflb.ashx Hazell, P, J, 2002, ‘Numerical simulations of an explosive rear plate impacting a light weight armoured vehicle's hull’, journal of battlefield technology, 5(3), 1. Knoelle, L, n.d. ‘Protecting the war fighter-recent armour innovations. tech solutions, 4(4), 7- 19. Mayseless, M, 2011, 'Effectiveness of Explosive Reactive Armor', Journal Of Applied Mechanics-Transactions Of The Asme, 78, 5, Science Citation Index, EBSCOhost, viewed 23 October 2011. Partom, Y., Y., 2002, ‘Long-Rod Moving-Plate Interaction', AIP Conference Proceedings, 620, 1, p. 1283, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 23 October 2011. Shin & Yoo, 2004, ‘Protection capability of dual flying plates against obliquely impacting long-rod penetrators’, International Journal of Impact Engineering, 30, 55–68. doi:10.1016/S0734-743X(03)00064- Retrieved from http://ciar.org/shotmagnet/Armor%20and%20impactor%20studies/IJIE_Vol-30pp55.pdf Windsor, K, 2008, ‘Kalunga: A Global Warning’, New York, KALUNGA: A Global Warning, 2008. Zaloga, S, 2011, ‘Reactive Armour T-80B. In T-80 Standard Tank: The Soviet Army#s Last Armored Champion’, Botley, United Kingdom, Osprey Publishing. Read More