Well I'm not entirely sure but the Russian T-72 has 12 inch thick frontal armour however the M1A1 Abrams uses composite materials equivalent to 24 inches. The thickness no longer matters on a tank there are equally strong materials such as that found on the M1A1 Abrams.
That varies with the type of tank, model, and the location. Frontal armor can be very thick (feet), side or rear armor is usually thinner (inches) because it is more likely to be hit in the front than the sides or rear. The armor is also angled to deflect rather than absorb the energy of the shells. "Reactive" armor also contains explosives that detonate when hit to reduce damage from shaped charge armor penetrating weapons.
Some examples:
As measured by its thickness from upper boundary to lower boundary in a downward direction, the mantle is the thickest layer of the Earth.
Thermosphere or the ionosphere is the thickest layer on earth. It reaches a height 400 kilometers.
The mantle is the thickest layer of the Earth.
The troposphere is thickest over the equator.
the thickest accumulation of sediment on the ocean floor is at the CONTINENTAL SLOPES AND RISES. :)
Depends on what tank you are referring to. The M1A2 Abrams tank has 120 mm (4.72 inches) of armour.
That information is classified.
Google it, or look in Jane's Armour and Artillery.
The unit that has the tank hunter rule has +1 to vehicle armour penetration and is immune to the tank shock rule.
The Challenger. Although the Abrams is one of the three best in the world, the Challenger has greater accuracy, greater offroad speed, superior armour and improved firepower. American tank armour is made by a British company and acted for the Challenger's armour's prototype. Challenger armour has been improvd twice since then.
A tank is traked armour combat vehicle design to engage eneimies head on; fire a large calibre shell, heavy armour to protect for RPGs, other armour vechicle, and support the infantry.
a tiger tank could definitely penetrate a shermans armour at the right range
It all depends on the type of bullet and type of armour. A 5.56 armour piecing round will penetrate light armour - like that found on Russian APC's but will just "ping" off of a tank. A normal soft point or hollow point will just deform on all armour.
There are many modern tanks in the world which outperform the Challenger 2 on specification. Though the question is very subjective and opinionated. People will perceive the tank to be great since it replaced the Challenger 1 (MBT) which has the longest tank-on-tank kill in the world. In Gulf war 1 where it successfully hit an Iraqi tank several miles away in the 1991 war.The Challenger 2 is equipped with the latest generation of Chobham armour, the Dorchester variant (Third generation), the latest in the series of the composite armour. It is reported that the armour uses several layers of ceramic materials wedged between layers of steel. The armour itself is considered successful since it is used in the latest generation of US-made M1 Abram tanks. Though all generations of Chobam armour are classified. There have additionally however been incidents where the armour has been penetrated by Russian made anti-tank weaponry and mines.There have been two incidents where the armour was reported to have been penetrated:For example in 2007 a Challenger 2 had been penetrated by an RPG-29 which defeated the tanks explosive re-active armour (ERA) which caused the driver of the tank to lose half of his foot.Other incidents include an improvised explosive device (IED) penetrating the tank causing the driver of the tank to lose both his legs.These incidents called on the UK's Ministry of Defence(MoD) to upgrade the Challenger 2's armour specification. The upgrade was called "Theatre Entry Standard" or TES which added bolt-on armour to protect the tracks, and frontal armour to protect the front-arc of the tank of where it had originally been penetrated. - Among other upgrades.However the first Challenger 2 to be destroyed in combat was in March 2003. It was a blue-on-blue incident where another Challenger 2 tank had hit its own friendly tanks hatch which then caused hot metals to flow into the stowed ammunition which then caused the tank to blow up internally.Though the tank has faced problems. The Challenger 2 has performed well as a BBC report said in one incident in Iraq that a Challenger 2 tank had been hit by 70 RPG's and a Milan anti-tank missile to which it returned to combat the next day since its optics had been disrupted.
well. the most effective tank was the su-85. but the hetzer had a very good gun with a decent penetration and armour. it was the lower glacis that whas the weakest part of armour. the name of hetzer came from the crew as they said it was a fabulous tank. so i would say the hetzer was the best.
Cables are the thickest wires.
I am the thickest girl in this world.