Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Israeli Ground Arm:

    Share
    avatar
    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:35 pm

    Merkava IV received the Trophy active protection system
    17.08.2009

    After a series of successful tests of Israel Ministry of Defense reported that the weapons do the main battle tanks Merkava IV with the active protection Trophy. Agency UPI reported yesterday that the military leadership of Israel has decided to acquire the system, because 22 tank «Merkava» have been damaged by Russian anti-tank rockets «Cornet» during the war with «Hizbollah» summer of 2006. This sends defpro.com.

    Active Protection System developed jointly by Rafael Armament Development Authority and the Elta Group (a member of the Israel Aircraft Industries).

    The system includes a radar to detect around the podletayuschih PTUR and rocket-propelled grenades and a computer system that manages the launchers, emit a cloud of metal fragments. The Israeli military official told representatives of Jerusalem Post, that the Trophy at the trials last week, destroyed all the approaching missile.

    The Pentagon tested Trophy in March 2006. One of the testers said on NBC, that it «is without denial ... According to our test criteria for the system received 30 out of 30 points». Institute for Defense Studies United States compared 15 of the active protection against missiles and brought Trophy in the lead.

    The system weighs 1 ton and is about 340 thousand dollars, reports UPI. Can be used with fixed or moving tank and reflect multiple threats simultaneously.

    The system is currently installed at several tanks 401 th Armored Brigade, and fully equipped battalion would be ready in 2010. There will also be equipped with all the new Merkava IV, which soydut the conveyor at the end of the year.

    Several foreign military representatives were invited to the test last week, according to Jerusalem Post. Rafael is confident that the system has good export prospects.

    The U.S. Department of Defense issued a Raytheon contract to develop a similar system of active protection, known as the Quick Kill. The prototype is expected this year will be installed in armored vehicles. The U.S. Army has denied a proposal to conduct combat test Trophy system in Iraq in 2007.

    Права на данный материал принадлежат Военный паритет

    Stalingradcommando
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 35
    Points : 40
    Join date : 2010-04-14

    Merkava Mk4

    Post  Stalingradcommando on Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:17 am

    Well, from some days I`ve been having a discussing on the internet about the Merkava Mk4 tank and also our T90 tank. This guy is a close friend of mine but I am kinda sick of hearing always things like how good the Merkava really is or some other things like "Merkava`s front armor can not be penetrated by any existing AT weapon".
    I know for a fact that several Merkavas were destroyed or heavilly damaged by our AT weapons during the 2006 Lebbanon war. What I am asking now is the link of any reliable claiming this source or even some photos of Merkavas hit by
    AT-15`s or RPG29`s.
    I am also tying to find any structural problems with the Merkava. What I got until now is it`s engine which is placed in front of the crew compartiment. This may give it extra crew protection, but it can easily be knocked out in a tank to tank engagement or even by any sophisticated AT weapon. This guy continues claiming that the Merkava`s frontal armor is so thick that any weapon can not penetrate it. Is there any kind of way that I can prove him wrong (again) Question Question
    avatar
    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Look at this

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Fri Apr 16, 2010 1:52 am

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdF3_r2KKIY&feature=related
    The back door is a weaknes(even to old rpg stuf) that an anti-tank team can use.
    Modern anti-tank weapons can take out any tank.
    Is a heavy tank good only in desert areas.
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Israel Ground Forces

    Post  nightcrawler on Sat Mar 05, 2011 7:36 am

    http://idfspokesperson.com/2011/03/01/windbreaker-thwarts-missile-fired-at-idf-tank/


    The anti-tank missile that was fired towards the tank was thwarted by the Windbreaker active missile protection system, which was used for the first time during operational activity. The missile exploded at a safe distance from the tank, preventing damage, the army said. Two RPG's simultaneously:



    Now the Russian part:
    Wikipedia:
    On 12 November 2009, Ph.D. Vladimir Korenkov, who led Russian state unitary enterprise “Basalt” from 2000 to 2009, stated that “The Israeli system of active protection of tanks, “Trophy”, as any other similar systems, can be evaded”. One of the activities of this enterprise was to develop rocket-propelled grenades, designed to destroy modern armament. The rocket-propelled grenade RPG-30, according to Vladimir Korenkov, is designed to overcome these tank defense systems. "All the existing active protection systems in the world share the same idea. This is a radar homing at some distance, close or far, to destroy the target with a warhead that creates fragment stream and explosive field. These systems have common flaws. First of all, the duty cycle, i.e. the time interval of the system response to the threat. RPG-30 easily defeats such a protection system. There is a smaller diameter precursor round in addition to the main round. This precursor acts as a false target spoofing the APS into engaging it and allowing the main round (following the precursor after a slight delay) a clear path to the target, while the APS is stuck in the 0.2 - 0.4 second delay needed to start its next engagement. This time interval is sufficient for defeating the Israeli system", said Vladimir Korenkov.
    http://www.btvt.narod.ru/3/kaz_drozd.htm



    Awaiting your comments...
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:25 am

    Both interesting systems, DRODZ was effective enough in trials in Afghanistan in the 1980s, and this Israeli system seems to work too.

    Both would likely be effective against most of the currently deployed systems available and both will likely be defeated by new rockets designed to get by them in the near future.

    The first DRODZ protected the front 180 degrees whereever the turret was facing at the time. The DRODZ2 as you depict in the drawing above has 360 degrees coverage.

    Personally I liked Arena better than DRODZ because the munitions fired by ARENA were launched upwards and fired down on incoming targets... which had two many implications, the first being targets flying over the tank like Bofors BILL2 top attack missile could be engaged, and most importantly because the munition is fired downwards the danger area for unprotected infantry around the tank is only 30-40m.

    Neither the DRODZ or ARENA can deal with diving top attack weapons like Javelin, though nakidka should make targeting in the fire and forget mode difficult if not impossible.

    Would expect the companies that make each system are working on new models that protect against a wider range of threats.
    avatar
    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 494
    Points : 516
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:38 am

    If Trophy/Windbreaker is able to simultaneously engage 2 munitions at once, there may be a possibility that the RPG-30 will simply flop.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:43 am

    If Trophy/Windbreaker is able to simultaneously engage 2 munitions at
    once, there may be a possibility that the RPG-30 will simply flop.

    I don't know very much about the system or how it works but any system can be dealt with.

    In the late 1980s early 1990s the Bulgarians and Russians got together and developed jammer shells for 122mm artillery that could be fired into enemy lines and would jam radio communication over a specific range of frequencies for about 2km around where the shell landed for an hour or so.

    Wouldn't take much to develop a chaff shell or jammer shell to interfere with how the Trophy detects and tracks targets... and of course you can always just fire more rockets at it.
    avatar
    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 494
    Points : 516
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:58 am

    Jammer rounds has been in existence for a long time, hell, may as well try to upgrade it into EMP shells. But whens the last time you saw counter-Israeli forces using anything modern eh? But yeah, rocket spam should work.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 am

    But whens the last time you saw counter-Israeli forces using anything modern eh?

    I never see because I never look... not really interested to be honest...

    But have read lots of claims of the use of RPG-29s and Kornets from juice fanbois, so modern stuff does seem to get to the front line there occasionally.

    Obviously not just any jammer rounds would do, you would have to learn about the Trophy system and find out what frequency its detection systems operate at and all its important features and then base a jammer on that...
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Sun Mar 06, 2011 5:47 am

    Edge of Drozd over Trophy:
    The system cannot work against tandem warheads (rpg-29/30/32). The first "lighter" rocket has the signature and trajectory identical to the bigger one, thus fools these systems. Trophy detects the first rocket and fires a blast, destroying the target, but the blast is controlled in order to not cause collateral damages, and the rests do nothing against the second target, wich impacts. This cannot be solved. Drozd, in fact was better against these launchers because its "shotgun" did not care and destroyed everything.
    However on the other side Trophy can be reloaded as I posted earlier.
    @IronsightSniper
    Do you have any cost estimate of the Trophy system?
    avatar
    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 494
    Points : 516
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:23 am

    GarryB wrote:
    But whens the last time you saw counter-Israeli forces using anything modern eh?

    I never see because I never look... not really interested to be honest...

    But have read lots of claims of the use of RPG-29s and Kornets from juice fanbois, so modern stuff does seem to get to the front line there occasionally.

    Obviously not just any jammer rounds would do, you would have to learn about the Trophy system and find out what frequency its detection systems operate at and all its important features and then base a jammer on that...

    RPG-29s are powerful but outdated, cold war 80s stuff. Kornet's really the only new kid on the block for a long time. Doubt we'll see any "effective" counter-counter measure v.s. modern APS for maybe 10 years.

    According to here:

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/trophy.htm

    Trophy costs about $500,000 USD a unit.
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5668
    Points : 6317
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  Viktor on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:27 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Neither the DRODZ or ARENA can deal with diving top attack weapons like Javelin, though nakidka should make targeting in the fire and forget mode difficult if not impossible.

    Would expect the companies that make each system are working on new models that protect against a wider range of threats.

    Javelin has top dive angle of about 45° so I think it is possible for ARENA or Drozd to engage it.

    avatar
    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 494
    Points : 516
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:17 pm

    ARENA's max threat-engagement elevation is 15 degrees.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:58 am


    RPG-29s are powerful but outdated, cold war 80s stuff. Kornet's
    really the only new kid on the block for a long time. Doubt we'll see
    any "effective" counter-counter measure v.s. modern APS for maybe 10
    years.

    RPG-32 is new and pretty cool in its flexibility, but less powerful than RPG-28.

    Javelin has top dive angle of about 45° so I think it is possible for ARENA or Drozd to engage it.

    Javelin only has a dive angle of 45 degrees when it is in fire and forget mode and it can only be fired in the fire and forget mode if it has an IR signature to lock on to... with Nakidka it probably doesn't so it would follow a normal flight path of a standard ATGM.
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:17 am

    I have been told that Drozd never became operational & was scrapped in the 83s
    avatar
    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 494
    Points : 516
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  IronsightSniper on Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:31 am

    GarryB wrote:

    RPG-29s are powerful but outdated, cold war 80s stuff. Kornet's
    really the only new kid on the block for a long time. Doubt we'll see
    any "effective" counter-counter measure v.s. modern APS for maybe 10
    years.

    RPG-32 is new and pretty cool in its flexibility, but less powerful than RPG-28.

    Javelin has top dive angle of about 45° so I think it is possible for ARENA or Drozd to engage it.

    Javelin only has a dive angle of 45 degrees when it is in fire and forget mode and it can only be fired in the fire and forget mode if it has an IR signature to lock on to... with Nakidka it probably doesn't so it would follow a normal flight path of a standard ATGM.

    Nakidka doesn't actually reduce the signature too much. The seekers on a Javelin will have less time to lock on to the tank but for the most part, Nakidka's purpose is to reduce the reduce it takes for the IR on an enemy tank to see it.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:36 pm

    I have been told that Drozd never became operational & was scrapped in the 83s

    It did not enter service but was field tested in Afghanistan where it was reasonably successful, but not considered worth the cost.

    It was further developed into the Drodz 2 which offered wider coverage in competition with ARENA.

    With a fleet of 20,000 tanks it would be expensive to give every tank an APS like system.

    Now that they are dropping down to 6-8 thousand it might make more sense to protect the tanks you have better.
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Tue Mar 08, 2011 9:24 am

    Conclusions (VF)

    * RPG-29 proved to be by far the most potent weapon among those used. As powerful as heavy ATGM Kornet, it appeared to assure the frontal penetration of T-80U even for the squad-level firepower. Even though T-90 fared better, it is still not immune to it. Considering sufficient proliferation of this weapon and the fact that this is still a fairly light infantry weapon, it is the most dangerous adversary of modern Russian MBTs, and is a very disturbing development.
    * Original reports that ATGM Kornet performance is severely degraded by ERA due to its peculiar order of internal components proved true as the ATGM with at least 100mm higher penetrating potential was not superior to a much lighter RPG-29.
    * Report of Shtora-1 EOCMDAS trials is confusing. Being laser-guided, ATGM Kornet should not suffer any interference from Shtora as it only affects IR SACLOS ATGMs. Furthermore, ATGMs can only deviate to the left if the marker is set to the left of both emitters, which is hardly likely. It is possible, however unlikely, that it was caused by a sloppy work of removal the warhead which e.g. could cause a gyro cofusion.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20080129043924/http://russianarmor.info/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 09, 2011 3:02 am

    * Original reports that ATGM Kornet performance is severely degraded by ERA due to its peculiar order of internal components proved true as the ATGM with at least 100mm higher penetrating potential was not superior to a much lighter RPG-29.

    There were initial problems with the internal arrangement of components with the KORNET which led to its performance revised from 1.2m down to 1m. Improvements have since resulted in a 1.2m claimed penetration performance under ERA so it seems they solved the problems... note these trials are now 10 years old.
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed Mar 09, 2011 9:46 am

    Another question from my side.
    ATGM Kornet should not suffer any interference from Shtora as it only affects IR SACLOS ATGMs. Furthermore, ATGMs can only deviate to the left if the marker is set to the left of both emitters, which is hardly likely.

    Whynt Kornet is interfered provided both Kornet & SACLOS are 2nd generation ATGMs??
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 09, 2011 10:39 pm

    Most wire guided SACLOS missiles like TOW and AT-5 and HOT and Milan and METIS etc have a small flare in the tail of the missile... or newer versions have IR lamps there, and while the operator guides the missile simply by keeping the crosshair on the target the launcher has two optical ports... one a sight for the user to keep his crosshair on the target, and the other a gionometer which detects the flare or IR light from the tail of the missile to determine where the missile actually is so that its position in relation to the aim point can be calculated and control signals can be sent down the wires to command the missile to manoeuvre into the line of sight so it flys down the crosshair line to hit the target.

    The Kornet on the other hand is a laser beam rider, the launcher does not care where the missile is and has no gionometer to track it. The launcher has a coded laser beam of four colours and it is the missile that has a sensor looking back at the launcher that can see the laser beam. If the four colours are red, blue, green and yellow with say red in the top left, blue in the top right, green in the bottom left and yellow in the bottom right if the missile sees yellow it knows it is low and to the right so it manoeuvres itself up and to the left until it can see all four colours and then it knows it is in the centre of aim.

    When Shtora is operating it appears to be intensely bright in the IR frequencies so for the wire guided missiles the gionometer is trying to see the IR signal of the missile in the huge beams of the Shtora and it is like trying to see a candle in front of a search light... if the launcher can't see the missile then it can't guide it to the target... it doesn't know what course corrections to send.

    For the laser beam riding missile the missile is looking away from the target tank so Shtora can't interfere with its guidance... its only defence is smoke and by the time Kornet gets inside the smoke cloud it will be within about 200m of the target... so lets say it penetrates 50m into the smoke cloud before it loses sight of the laser beam it only has another 150m to the target... if the missile just carrys on straight it would have a fairly good chance of still hitting the target.

    An important factor of course is that because the sensor looks directly at the laser rather than looking forward at a laser beam reflecting off the target the laser used is 4 orders of magnitude less powerful and is not effected by the colour or reflectivity of the target. (4 orders of magnitude is 10,000 times less powerful... which means the laser sensor might mistake it for the reflections of a laser pointed at something nearby or the tanks own laser being used to get a range on a target.)
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Tue May 17, 2011 11:07 am

    I am impressed with the Israeli development. Anyone that can something similar from different countries...



    Israel’s thermal stealth innovator Eltics unveiled today a short video depicting the results of recent tests where large thermal panels installed on a Land Rover Defender vehicle managed to eliminate the vehicle’s signature, totally masking the vehicle from the thermal sight’s display.

    Following a recent investment refuelling the start-up company, Eltics embarked on the development and testing of a full scale prototype of the Black-Fox active – adaptive – multi-spectral stealth system, to be able to mask a complete vehicle (both sides, front and rear). The system employs a thermal camera that samples the background view and a system processor and controller that recreates the necessary effects on the panels, blending the protected object into the background.

    The company already raised 2.5 million in funding and plans to attract additional 5 million in the near future, enabling it to pursue the next stage – building and testing a full scale thermal suite in an operational test of the stealth technology. The compamy has embarked on a cooperative development with IMI, with the two companies joining forces in offering thermal adaptive signature management technology with IMI’s hybrid-reactive armor modules. The new combined module designated ‘Invisible Reactive Armor Protection’ (IRAP) will be designed to match a wide range of armored fighting vehicles.


    Eltics has modified a Land Rover Defender vehicle installing multiple Black Fox panels and the signature management system (modules are shown on the hood). The system can eliminate the entire vehicle from the view of thermal sensors, or be used to depict a fake image, 'converting' the tank to look like a Jeep, and vice versa. Photos: Noam Eshel, Defense Update

    By managing the heat distribution of the panels, the Black Fox system depicts a displayed across the panels, deceiving enemy sensors, therefore, making target identification, acquisition and tracking virtually impossible.
    According to Ronen Meir Eltics CEO, the current system is capable of supporting an area 80 square meters of panels. This area will be sufficient to cover a large vehicle, on all sides. This installation will also employ specially designed windows that also minimize noticeable changes in thermal emissions, caused by the cooler transparent areas. The current system covers the entire infrared range, addressing thermal sensors operating in the both 3-5 and 8-12 micron wavelengths.

    According to Meir, the company has also tested another function of the system – its ability to change pattern, depicting a different thermal silhouette. This function enables a ‘Black Fox’ equipped tank to ‘look like’ a truck, jeep or APC, or an air defense vehicle or missile launcher to look like an ordinary truck. These functions have significant implications in denying intelligence gathering by the enemy, by totally eliminating potential targets or misleading the enemy to regard such targets as ‘lower priority’ objects. In addition to denying enemy identification by thermal observation, Black Fox is also capable of deceiving or disrupting defending forces from being tracked or engaged by heat or Imaging Infra-red seekers.


    Israel’s thermal stealth innovator Eltics has demonstrated the ability of a large, multi-element Black Fox thermal, adaptive multi-spectral camouflage suite to 'eliminate' a Land Rover Defender vehicle from the view of thermal sights. Photos: Eltics

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15977
    Points : 16678
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 18, 2011 5:24 am

    Anyone that can something similar from different countries...

    Nakidka kits for Russian tanks and vehicles and cloaks for infantry reduce IR signature and radar and optical signatures all at once.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakidka


    My question is that with that big screen attached to the side of Israeli vehicles... how do they see to drive?

    Would be perfect against Javelin. Useless against everything else.
    avatar
    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 683
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  nightcrawler on Wed May 18, 2011 12:03 pm

    But Nakidka kits passive in nature & this an active counter-measure..besides deception feature of this device is good. Mean you can change tank to ICBM launchers. Also the efficiency of Nakidka is dubious against FLIRs

    My question is that with that big screen attached to the side of Israeli vehicles... how do they see to drive?

    If you see the second video the top mounter IR masking camera can deliver full 360 degree black/white visual coverage to inside crew
    avatar
    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3214
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  medo on Wed May 18, 2011 4:09 pm

    But Nakidka kits passive in nature & this an active counter-measure..besides deception feature of this device is good. Mean you can change tank to ICBM launchers. Also the efficiency of Nakidka is dubious against FLIRs

    Nakidka is passive and is effective against radar and FLIR to reduce the picture. This Israeli system is active, so it need additional energy to work. If energy generator in vehicle is not strong enough, there could be a problem in working of other systems.Also how is this system effective against image intensifiers and radars?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Israeli Ground Arm:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Mar 28, 2017 11:34 pm