Wait, are you serious? This is basic physics here, you are suggesting there is some quick cheap hack to defeat what… HEAT rounds? Or Armor Piercing sabot kinetic energy rounds? It isn’t even clear which you are responding to. You clearly don’t know what you are talking about, stop spreading misinformation.

Do you realize that at a basic level you are saying “wow look at this magic armor that makes this metal box impervious to anti-tank rounds or tank shells by exploding them BEFORE they hit the armor!” but you have to strap that armor onto your armor…. Even if the basic physics made sense here in your argument that this kind of armor would be effective, which they don’t, there is a basic philosophical hilarity to just saying the perfect defense for a box is a bigger weaker box that surrounds the stronger inner box. If this kind of logic works… I mean… isn’t it obvious it would fall apart comically quickly? Why not just keep iterating that logic out if it worked?

You really aren’t understanding this, a tank shell hitting armor is like a freight train hitting a tank, the details of how the collision happen can’t be gamed out by clever smart AI technology with some magic hack to nullify the basic exchange of kinetic energy happening here. Explosive/Reactive Armor can attempt to disturb the formation of a HEAT molten jet, but again modern main battle tanks like the Abrams and Leopard would likely fire a kinetic armor piercing sabot round at a pathetic excuse for a tank like this.

Cannons and walls and the details of how they interact are things very smart people have been arguing about for as long as gunpowder has existed, what it is with techbro AI brainrot that has got people to think they are suddenly the first people to ever think about shit?

None of this matters anyways because the counter to heavy, slow, concentrated armored force in modern combined arms combat is ARTILLERY not tanks or drones, and these absurdly ungainly massive hulking “drone fortresses” demonstrate a basic lack of understanding of how combined arms combat works. You are falling for complete and utter nonsense and russian cope.

I guess in the english speaking world this is partially a byproduct of how much the US military has relied on airpower dominance instead of artillery… but historically Russia has been known for having a large land army that understood intimately the power of overwhelming artillery force to make any degree of hardened limited-mobility defense moot, which makes this kind of decay of basic rationality to Russia’s strategy all the more mystifying and revealing of their desperation.

edit if there is an evolution of high intensity armored land warfare here, it will be in tightly integrating direct-fire main battle tanks with high volume vertical launch indirect-fire capable ATGM launcher armored vehicles to leverage the advantages of both types of weapon while mimizing their weaknesses (along with tight integration with UGV and UAV support), but I don’t see that even on the radar for Russia, their plan seems to be to admit that their tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are so shitty that they are only useful as remote control simplistic “drive it at the enemy and shoot” frontal assault vehicles that experience such a high loss rate that it is too costly to put human beings in the tanks anymore because they keep dying at too high of a rate to retain any institutional knowledge and tactical fitness as an armored fighting force.