Armour distribution was: Traveller + SG2/DS2/?

-----Original Message-----
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 02:43:30 +0200
> Subject: Re: Traveller + SG2/DS2/?
> > 1. Modern MBTs, accoring to OO the mighty, have about 10:2:1 (front,
> > sides, back) (or something like that if I got the side number wrong)
> > for armour. They are not even close to equally armoured. There is
> > currently no way to build such a vehicle.
> > 
> 
> That's close enough to correct for a rule-of-thumb.
> 12:3:1 may be closer, and it varies a lot.
> Most hits on the side armour from high-calibre artillery fire will be
> at angles of about 70 degrees or greater obliquity, so the effective
> thickness on the side is about the same as for a 0 degree attack on
> the glacis.
> That's the theory, anyway.

And the optimum certainly depends on what kind of environment the tanks
are fighting in. The M1 has proven more than adequately armoured for
tank warfare. However, its side and rear armour is being improved after
urban fighting experience in Iraq. Various other improvements are also
being added:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-03-29-abrams-tank-a_x.htm

Wargamers might appreciate the comment at the end of 
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-03-29-tank-inside_x.htm :
"those cities have a pesky way of just popping up in the landscape"

Greetings
Karl Heinz