Armor Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
It's All About Layers And Accessorizing
   Next Article → LEADERSHIP: The Curse Of The Big One

December 13, 2008: Canada is buying $66 million worth of add-on armor for its fleet of 700 LAV III 8x8 wheeled armored vehicles. Over the last eight years, Canada has been replacing its 1980s era MOWAG vehicles with the locally built LAV III. This is a 17 ton vehicle mounting a 25mm autocannon, plus two machine-guns. It has a crew of three and can carry seven passengers. The LAV III design was the model for the American Stryker. Canada has exported LAV IIIs to New Zealand and Rumania. Although Canada is seeking more heavily protected trucks, for troops in Afghanistan threatened by roadside bombs, the LAV IIIs are still seen as suitable for most combat missions. Canada is not equipping all its LAV IIIs with add on armor, most of the kits will go to the vehicles serving in Afghanistan.  There, the LAVs are also getting additional electronics and several other minor tweaks.

Two years ago, The U.S. Army equipped 150 of its Stryker wheeled armored vehicles with ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor.) Invented by the Israelis in the 1970s, ERA consists of explosives packaged between layers of sheet metal. When the hot gas jet produced by a shaped charge (of an RPG or missile warhead) hits the ERA explosives, the gas jet is disrupted and rendered harmless by the ERA explosion. Many American M-2 and AAV-7 armored vehicles in Iraq are already protected by ERA kits (which cost over $100,000 each). The Stryker ERA cost nearly $300,000 per vehicle, and added 3.5 tons of weight (compared to 2.5 tons for the current slat armor it will replace.)

Next Article → LEADERSHIP: The Curse Of The Big One
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Batou    Re: ERA casualties..?   12/13/2008 5:59:19 PM
ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) has now been aroud for nearly 40 years - has anyone heard or seen any blue on blue casualties caused by this sort of protection.   
The Russians have Arena Active Protection System (APS) which evoleved from Drozd but all these systems seem to give scant regard to the poor old grunt who has been assigned to provide cover for the heavy equipment?
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Freudian slip   12/13/2008 6:05:34 PM
When I quickly scanned the title of this article I read:
 
It's all about lawyers and accessorizing.
 
Which would explain the huge costs involved in developing new tanks.
 
 
 

 
Quote    Reply

Gerry       12/13/2008 8:31:46 PM

ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) has now been aroud for nearly 40 years - has anyone heard or seen any blue on blue casualties caused by this sort of protection.   

The Russians have Arena Active Protection System (APS) which evoleved from Drozd but all these systems seem to give scant regard to the poor old grunt who has been assigned to provide cover for the heavy equipment?


The Russians claim to have many things, however some reports from the Georgia fiasco indicate that at least some of the  Russian reactive armor had no explosives. Perhaps a little contractor corruption?  The problem of the grunt being exposed to the backblast of reactive armor has been an issue talked about for awhile,  yet I have not yet heard of anyone actually being harmed by it.
 
Quote    Reply

Batou    Re: LOLOLOLOL   12/14/2008 12:43:13 AM
No bang in ma ERA.
Thxs Gerry for that.
Suppose half of a battle is pyschops. At least it's a bit easier to get a crew into a tank if they are told there SOME protection rather than none.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       12/14/2008 10:46:23 AM
The thing about ERA backblast is that it has to be greater than the detonation of the incoming HEAT round for it to be noticeable.
 
Quote    Reply