Armour protection has substantially improved in the recent years. Tanks, earlier made of steel plates, are now protected by more complex composite armour, a sandwich of various alloys and ceramics. Composite and hybrid armour systems have been adopted for tanks by improving their protection against kinetic and shaped-charge threats.

Sagger anti-tank missile system of Soviet origin was used by the Egyptian armed forces against Israeli armoured forces during the Yom Kippur War of October 1973, and caused massive destruction to their tanks. There seemed to be no protection against Sagger as it could penetrate any existing armour. Armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs) have been destroyed by infantry with weapons like the M1 Bazooka of the US during Second World War but the destruction was never achieved at such a large scale as during the Yom Kippur War where about 840 Israeli tanks were destroyed in 20 days. The anti-tank gun and missile systems became more and more lethal but there were not many changes in the AFV material. However, with advancements in technology, many new materials and sensors have emerged to provide better protection to AFVs on the battlefield.

Armour protection has substantially improved in the recent years. Tanks, earlier made of steel plates, are now protected by more complex composite armour, a sandwich of various alloys and ceramics. Composite and hybrid armour systems have been adopted for tanks by improving their protection against kinetic and shaped-charge threats. Passive and active protection has evolved over a period of time.

Non–Explosive Reactive Armour: A new type of non-explosive reactive armour, known as NxRA has evolved. This uses “energetic” but non-detonating rubber-like materials. Sandwiched between hard plates, they discharge a rapidly expanding gas to absorb energy from a warhead. The gas pushes out the external layer of armour so that it strikes the spike at an angle which deflects or reduces the energy of the impact. Non-explosive reactive armour typically provide less stopping power, but they have an advantage in countering “tandem charge” munitions from systems like the US shoulder-launched Javelin and aircraft-launched Hellfire missiles. Once a brick of explosive armour detonates, that spot becomes more vulnerable to a second charge carried towards the tail end of the same munition and detonates about 500 microseconds later. In contrast, rubbery non-explosive armour often remains partially intact. Cage armour can provide additional protection against tandem charge. To counter Russia’s RPG - 29, some European Union countries are developing electric armour but it is still in a very early stage of development. Some new materials like hard ceramic composites have been developed made from rubber and epoxy resins. A ceramic armour called Dorchester Level 2, used on British Challenger 2 tanks, reportedly provides three times more resistance to some strikes as the same weight of steel. SJH Projects, a small british company, has developed a so-called “stone sponge” material which is fixed to a vehicle’s undercarriage and partially absorbs the blast off an improvised explosive device.

There is continuous competition between developments in AFV protection technology and AFV destruction technology. According to Dynamit Nobel Defence, Panzerfaust 3 shoulder-fired anti-tank guided missile strikes its target with a velocity of more than 720 kmph, its exploding warhead then shoots out a spike of copper at more than 7 km a second (25,200 kmph) with enough energy to blast through a metre of steel, or any other current AFV.