>>64252191
He's right about tanks though. Soviet tanks aimed for the lowest hull profile possible and as soon as practical switched to autoloaders, so they could remove the fourth crewman and field more tanks with the same number of people.
Basically when it comes to protection they bet a lot more on the don't be seen, don't be hit idea. Rather famously the carousel autoloader design they prefer means that ammunition isn't kept in 'wet' stowage, which is to say it's all sitting in the primary fighting compartment.
Western tank design is built more around survivability, because the assumption was generally that with a smaller but more professional force you want to make sure that you're replacing tanks more often than you're replacing crews.
A good example of this is the reason for the fourth crew member in most. The manual loader serves as an extra set of eyes, an additional person helping or posting security during repairs, so on. The other main advantage is that it makes 'wet stowage' easier. Primary ammo storage in a modern western tank is kept in an isolated compartment that's only opened when a round is actually needed. Rest of the time the door is closed. If a round penetrates the fighting compartment, a single unlucky piece of shrapnel won't be able to set off the magazine. If a round penetrates the magazine, it's isolated from the crew and in most cases also has a 'blowout panel', a deliberately weaker section designed to give out before anything else to relieve the pressure. Until relatively recently there wasn't really a reliable way to have an autoloader retrieve ammunition from wet stowage, they had enough reliability issues without needing to transport ammunition from a seperate compartment of the vehicle.

If you want to see these principles in action, take a look at Ukraine. AFU crews have been singing the praises of western light and heavy armour because even a total hull loss is less likely to mean a crew loss. Happier soldiers, less attrition.