Why do people say the Halo Scorpion Tank is lightly armored?

According to Halo Wars this is the armor thickness for the Wolverine (125 mm) and Rhino (250 mm) both of which are less armored than the Scorpion.



To put this into perspective the Ukrainian M1A1 Abrams side armor is 250 mm thick and frontal 480 mm.

If you compare the Scorpion thickness to the Rhino


It's definitely thicker/wider by a considerable margin, add the fact that it's using Titanium and it's a stronger than IRL Titanium it should be comparable to IRL Abram's in durability.

Scooby Doo said:

According to Halo Wars this is the armor thickness for the Wolverine (125 mm) and Rhino (250 mm) both of which are less armored than the Scorpion.

To put this into perspective the Ukrainian M1A1 Abrams side armor is 250 mm thick and frontal 480 mm.

If you compare the Scorpion thickness to the Rhino

It's definitely thicker/wider by a considerable margin, add the fact that it's using Titanium and it's a stronger than IRL Titanium it should be comparable to IRL Abram's in durability.

Click to expand...

Open cockpit canopy from Halo CE. Could snipe them with a pistol. Good times!

Husky_Khan said:

Open cockpit canopy from Halo CE. Could snipe them with a pistol. Good times!

Click to expand...

Would you mind highlighting the open cockpit? I genuinely don't remember there being one just a hatch people open up then get inside of.

Scooby Doo said:

Would you mind highlighting the open cockpit? I genuinely don't remember there being one just a hatch people open up then get inside of.

Click to expand...

Absolutely not.

In the first Halo CE game the canopy was like some metal grating. In deathmatch you could snipe the driver of the Scorpion tank with any weapon in the game basically. The canopy provided like no protection. I think it was solved in later games by just making the canopy metal, but the stigma remains.

Oh actually... maybe you can see it in artwork still.

Husky_Khan said:

Absolutely not.

In the first Halo CE game the canopy was like some metal grating. In deathmatch you could snipe the driver of the Scorpion tank with any weapon in the game basically. The canopy provided like no protection. I think it was solved in later games by just making the canopy metal, but the stigma remains.

Oh actually... maybe you can see it in artwork still.

Click to expand...

Ah I see what you mean lol. I'd have chalked it up to artistic license since it wouldn't make sense for that to be exposed and still be effective in universe plus they have a different design in Halo Wars so it was definitely retconned

With that aside I'd imagine the main vulnerability would still be the neck area between the body and the main gun turret and even if the canopy has a metal covering, it still looks far more vulnerable than a traditional tank turret or casemate, all other things being equal.

Husky_Khan said:

With that aside I'd imagine the main vulnerability would still be the neck area between the body and the main gun turret and even if the canopy has a metal covering, it still looks far more vulnerable than a traditional tank turret or casemate, all other things being equal.

Click to expand...

I guess that makes sense but imo it's just targeting a vulnerable part of a tank it'd be no different than someone targeted the barrel of an Abrams and blowing the barrel off. The Scorpion designs that neck area to be less armored in exchange for better angles and maneuverability for its barrel, which would make it faster at shooting things in different angles or more mobile targets.

So technically less thick but you always sacrifice something in return, considering that the Scorpion is supposed to be cheap and mass produced it probably relies more on shooting/targeting first instead of trying to win a slug out (Which is what the Grizzly is for)

Edit: I still don't see it less durable than an Abrams if you're not aiming for the thinnest areas (Scorpion Neck vs Abrams Barrel), cause even if you shoot the neck off the driver should still survive as long as it doesn't explode.

Scooby Doo said:

I guess that makes sense but imo it's just targeting a vulnerable part of a tank it'd be no different than someone targeted the barrel of an Abrams and blowing the barrel off. The Scorpion designs that neck area to be less armored in exchange for better angles and maneuverability for its barrel, which would make it faster at shooting things in different angles or more mobile targets.

So technically less thick but you always sacrifice something in return, considering that the Scorpion is supposed to be cheap and mass produced it probably relies more on shooting/targeting first instead of trying to win a slug out (Which is what the Grizzly is for)

Edit: I still don't see it less durable than an Abrams if you're not aiming for the thinnest areas (Scorpion Neck vs Abrams Barrel), cause even if you shoot the neck off the driver should still survive as long as it doesn't explode.

Click to expand...

I think it'd be more comparable to compare an Abrams barrel to a Scorpion barrel honestly. And the Scorpion barrel seems to stand out more.

A known weak spot on an Abrams (I am not an expert) IIRC is the rear top area covering the engine. The only Abrams lost during America's thunder runs through Baghdad in 2003 was struck by an RPG there and it caused a fire that couldn't be extinguished which meant the tank had to be abandoned. There were no injuries or deaths and the fire didn't seem like it would even cause a catastrophic ammo detonation anytime soon either but it was combat ineffective nonetheless.

If someone penetrates the neck of a Scorpion comparatively, it might impair or render the main gun inoperable as well as potentially kill the operator under his canopy depending on where it hits which seems like it'd be a more serious strike.

No idea where the ammo is stored in a Scorpion either but if its holding any ammunition in the neck that'd be likely be unhealthy as well. The Abrams is known for being more survivable due to its safer ammunition storage.

Generally I think there's a reason why main battle tanks look the way they do after all which can be seen as a flaw of many scifi/fictional tank designs.

The Scorpions highly elevation gun makes it a bigger target but as you say, it's meant for fire and maneuver, not slugging it out. Maybe the design is more maneuverable thanks to the four independent treads as well. And the giant gun on the top might actually make it more survivable from enemy air dropped munitions or high angle artillery or something.

Plus having one crewmember instead of four is a big bonus in general.

Because in the first game that tank with the silly detached threads and the miniature turret looked very flimsy?

There was one very interesting video where some mad lad decided to use a hydraulic press to play with bits of titanium, WWII tank armor and some modern high carbon armor.

The fight with the armor did not go well, for the press.

Here, I found it.



Notice how this chews through titanium...
I just love the sparks and the cracking sound, and the ending with the huge ball of steel, priceless.


However, this is all a moot point, since Titanium A/50 is not normal titanium.
tl, Dr all the Halo vehicles look flimsy compared to modern trch.

Can the Scorpion operate with a disabled tread? Or like two perhaps, one on opposite corners perhaps?

I could maybe see the treads helping with mines and some low angles of incoming attacks just by existing.

Agent23 said:

Because in the first game that tank with the silly detached threads and the miniature turret looked very flimsy?

There was one very interesting video where some mad lad decided to use a hydraulic press to play with bits of titanium, WWII tank armor and some modern high carbon armor.

The fight with the armor did not go well, for the press.

Here, I found it.



Notice how this chews through titanium...
I just love the sparks and the cracking sound, and the ending with the huge ball of steel, priceless.

Click to expand...

Eh I think the video is a poor comparison because they used a bunch of thin Titanium plates versus the others being a singular large block. I'd still put Titanium armor on par or slightly better than RHA.

Agent23 said:

However, this is all a moot point, since Titanium A/50 is not normal titanium.
tl, Dr all the Halo vehicles look flimsy compared to modern trch.

Click to expand...

The design looks weird but it shouldn't be flimsy.

For example the Grizzly is definitely are more armored than any vehicle IRL and would easily slaughter entire Abram Tank groups with ease

Titanium A is noted to provide excellent protection against hypervelocity impacts which is like 3-4 km/s which is pretty impressive material wise.


But I digress,.I don't think a Scorpion Tank is lightly armored It's just not as survivable as it COULD be.


But the Scorpion design and function is meant for mass production and used in large numbers, it's a doctrine thing.

A true slugging it out tank would be the Grizzly which would stomp the Abrams.

A Scorpion might lose to an Abrams most of the time but Scorpions tend to be fielded in larger numbers so an accurate fight would be like 4 Scorpions vs 1 Abrams.

Husky_Khan said:

Can the Scorpion operate with a disabled tread? Or like two perhaps, one on opposite corners perhaps?

I could maybe see the treads helping with mines and some low angles of incoming attacks just by existing.

Click to expand...

In gameplay damage animations we can see the Scorpion operate with damaged treads in Halo Wars and Halo 3, it looks like the other undamaged treads are able to pick up the slack/extra weight the damaged tread can't.

Scooby Doo said:

Eh I think the video is a poor comparison because they used a bunch of thin Titanium plates versus the others being a singular large block. I'd still put Titanium armor on par or slightly better than RHA.

Click to expand...

Probably hard to get a single, thick lump of titanium.

Scooby Doo said:

The design looks weird but it shouldn't be flimsy.

Click to expand...

It totally does.

Scooby Doo said:

For example the Grizzly is definitely are more armored than any vehicle IRL and would easily slaughter entire Abram Tank groups with ease

Titanium A is noted to provide excellent protection against hypervelocity impacts which is like 3-4 km/s which is pretty impressive material wise.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I am agreeing with you on this one, and as I pointed out on a few occasions Halo titanium should be stronger than regular titanium on account of it being made with technobabel and used for the hulls of ships that can withstand getting hit by a MAC round or equivalent.

Scooby Doo said:

But I digress,.I don't think a Scorpion Tank is lightly armored It's just not as survivable as it COULD be.


But the Scorpion design and function is meant for mass production and used in large numbers, it's a doctrine thing.

A true slugging it out tank would be the Grizzly which would stomp the Abrams.

A Scorpion might lose to an Abrams most of the time but Scorpions tend to be fielded in larger numbers so an accurate fight would be like 4 Scorpions vs 1 Abrams.

Click to expand...

Don't you think that a modern kevlar vest would look flimsy compared to a medieval suit of armor?

The designs in Halo 1 and 2 looked just plain silly and flimsy.

What I am saying is that even a flimsy looking design can be much stronger, since the titanium if Halo should be orders of magnitude stornger than that A500 armor.

I don't see anyone really saying this. Halo is pretty infamous for its Titanium-A armor plating

IndyFront said:

I don't see anyone really saying this. Halo is pretty infamous for its Titanium-A armor plating

Click to expand...

It might still be more lightly armored compared to an Abrams with uhhh Neosteel armor plating though.

The tank looked flimsy at first in CE and got beefed up in Halo 2. Then it got turned into an absolute BEAST in Halo 5. Halo Infinite seems to have downgraded it some, but it's still a tough nut to crack.

Spartan303 said:

The tank looked flimsy at first in CE and got beefed up in Halo 2. Then it got turned into an absolute BEAST in Halo 5. Halo Infinite seems to have downgraded it some, but it's still a tough nut to crack.

Click to expand...

What do you think the armor thickness of the Halo Scorpion might be in canon? I feel like it should be above the Rhino so at least +250 mm.

For all we know it could be 100mm thick but due to the nature of Titanium A Battleplate it could be a dozen times more durable. We just don't know.

Spartan303 said:

For all we know it could be 100mm thick but due to the nature of Titanium A Battleplate it could be a dozen times more durable. We just don't know.

Click to expand...

Don't you think the Halo Wars concept art specs for armor thickness could give an idea or is it a Shakey argument?

Cause they do mention armor thickness for the Rhino to be 250mm and it's visibly less armored than a Scorpion as well as a Prototype.

Sorry, too tired to find the template and put in HALO.