Of the many launches shown none seem to me to have the missile fly any great distance above the line of sight.
At 9:26 of the video that i had previously pointed out,you can clearly obserbe a fire sequence with a Kornet-E guided to a cruise line some meters above the LOS.
As you well know nobody need to point the laser beam of a beam rider weapon like Kornet several meters above its intended target ,at now even with the beam totally coinciding with the line of sight would be almost impossible to receive a warning from the target/guidance sequence ,therefore a laser beam pointed even only some dozen of cm out of the surface area of its target would render it totally untrackable by any LWR at today operative worldwide .
An APC, IFV, or MBT attacked by a Kornet-E ,as well proved in Lebanon in 2006, become usually aware (when it happen)to be under attack tracking the optronic/IR signature of the shooting sequence (or,at much closer range,tracking directly the inbound ATGM directly with the commander/gunner sight-observation system) and ,as you can easily guess, also in this istance,the parameter by far the most important for become aware to be under attack and ascertain the fire position of the enemy become the range from which you are attacked
A weapon is only as good as the tactics employed.
If the Javelin is useless because its range is only 2.5km then Metis-M1 is also useless because its range is 2km. The RPG... whether it is 7 or 29 or a disposable 27 or 28 is not useless either.
Very simply unless the battlefield is a flat open and empty desert there will always be opportunities to attack enemy forces in conventional and unconventional situations.
I agree ,but for completely different motivations (little note : the operational range of FGM-148 Javelin is 2000 m not 2500 m ,like well specified in its same field manual).
In the same line of reasoning you was using here is present the reason at the basis of my assertions : it is not a problem of tactics but of completely different CONOPS
connected to completely different class of weapons
An RPG-29 isn't ,in any way, an "inferior" weapon in respect to a Kornet it is simply a "different" weapon in a completely distinct class.
Physical parameters can aid to distinguish the boundary between a class of weapon and another without being strictly or exclusively linked ,in a bi-univocal way ,to one of the two.
I repeat ,the "mistake" ,if so we can say, is in the naive mind of someone attempting to compare FGM-148 Javelin (a weapon in the same class of M-47 Dragon or Metis-M1) with a Kornet (a weapon in the same class of BGM-71 TOW or Euromissile HOT).
What i have pointed out is that,in a large scale conflict, attempting to employ FGM-148 in the same operative roles planned, by the same US Army ,for a BGM-71 TOW-2 (a weapon designed,from its start, to confront Soviets forces in an immense scale multifront ground offensive in the Great European Plain and which remain,at today, the main anti-tank weapon of actual Brigade combat team's anti-tank segment of US Army) would lead to outcomes simply disastrous ; "tactics" have simply zero to do with that
Tactics,in fact, have a sense only within the extent of the specific weapon system's CONOPS
,anything outside that fall fatally in a pointless death-spiral of low level ,childish, "creative" dissertations.
Once the attacker has opened fire and revealed its position then it comes under attack, but in the case of Spike and Javelin they can leave as soon as they fire their weapons which minimises the risk they take.
Sure, but one more time,only if we talk of weapons in the same class of FGM-148 and in tactical situations and ranges where the employement of a missile in the class of "Javelin" offer any advantage against systems dozen of times cheapers and easy to carry around.
The "fire and forget" capability of FGM-148 is not only cited very often and out of turn in absurd comparations with systems in totally different class (an anti-tanks teams shooting from a fire point 2 - 2,5 km farther is in a tactical position dozen of times safer
than an ambush team shooting with a javelin from 1600-1800 m ,well within the engagement footprint of pratically any enemy infantry/mechanized/armoured brigade level weapon
) but also for tactical situations where would become immensely most efficient to employ different class of weapons .
If,as you've already brightly pointed out,return fire is not a problem and you occupy an ambush position, still not detected by your enemy, at very reduced ranges from the opposing forces ,the employement of a weapon like FGM-148 is,in the vast majority of the istances, simply a gold-plated option.
In fact,also if we restrict the field to all russian-built weapons, if the type of target, tactical situation and range involved allow the engagement of your intended targets with Metis-M1 or,even better,RPG-29 or Shmel-M (enjoying a natural "fire and forget" nature and total immunity to soft kill countermeasures),try to employ a Kornet is not only a solution totally wrong but even counterproductive.
The faster 9M133FM-3 is likely a dedicated surface to air version so the system would not be as dual use as say the Vikhr which has a switch to turn on a proximity fuse to allow use in an air to air role.
9M133FM-3 could engage pratically any target except maybe the most armoured (for which the 8 Km capable missile with shaped charge warhead and 1100-1300 mm RHA of penetrative power will be purposely employed).
That likely mean that 9М133FM missile will constitute a minority percentual of Kornet-EM's missile mix ,to use only against specific very strongly armoured targets
Agree. How is Shtora IR jammer effective against Javelin or Spike IIR homing heads? Could it blind them as IR locator in SACLOS ATGMs?
Against a Spike-MR / FGM-148 class threat , the defence offered by Shtora-1 is not linked to its TShU1-7 IR directional jammers ,but to the thermal opaque(0,37 - 14 micron)aerosol screens produced by 3D17 granades.
Good luck at home on a not-export T-90 (even not considering Nakidka !!) masked by a pair of thermal opaque aerosol screens like that at 4:47 of this video
TShU1-7 is employed against the flare collimators present in the guidance of BGM-71 TOW amd Euromissile HOT ATGM which ,like already explained ,represent the standard anti-tanks weapons of western ground forces.