Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Share

    Cyrus the great
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 241
    Points : 251
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Sep 18, 2015 9:56 am


    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    Nobody asked me or anybody around if I want to go to NATO. You know how is in democracies "free" media can justify every wrongdoing as progress, safety and will of Nation

    Yeah, that would definitely suck to have your Nation ranged against your brothers.


    GunshipDemocracy wrote:Zionists = Syjoniści

    US policy makers? Kagan, Wolfowitz, Libby, Perle, nuland to name few

    Well now I am speculating but can you imagine all Slavs united in kida Union? almost 300mln people with scientific and industrial potential...none of western elites will let such an geopolitical foe appear.
    But hey will not prevail. Panslavic identity - is the great idea but you need resources ot propagate this...pindostan will fall will come right time to start officially.

    The Zionists completely control the United States and have pushed it engage in more and more wars. There can only be regional blocks in the future. Singular countries will be disregarded and treated with contempt. The Wall street-Washington consensus only respects power and so I would love to see Russia and other Slavic countries strengthen themselves individually and collectively.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 18, 2015 12:40 pm

    Do you think the Russians will ever use gas turbine engines with electric drives in tanks and IFVs? The Russians have previously stated that they would not use gas turbine engines in their MBT fleet, but if these engines could be made to be efficient, than Russia may incorporate them into the Armata series.

    The critical thing is electric drive... once they have that then having a gas turbine on board to generate power only with no drive train and they will use them.

    Very simply if you fix an electric motor to a gas turbine engine you have an electricity generator. With no actual load on the GT you don't need to vary the revs... just keep it at a fuel efficient level all the time.

    They already use small gas turbine generators in the command versions of their tanks to power all the radios and systems when the main tank engine is shut down.

    Even in idle the main engine uses a lot of fuel so keeping a tiny GT engine running to power everything makes a lot of sense and saves an enormous amount of fuel.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1518
    Points : 1560
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:37 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    They already use small gas turbine generators in the command versions of their tanks to power all the radios and systems when the main tank engine is shut down.

    Even in idle the main engine uses a lot of fuel so keeping a tiny GT engine running to power everything makes a lot of sense and saves an enormous amount of fuel.


    AFAIK thermal efficiency  of diesel and gas turbine (not in max power output) is comparable. thye why to use turbine and not diesel to power electric motors? What about output heat generation (IR signature)? Sand, dust...


    Cyrus the great wrote:
    I would love to see Russia and other Slavic countries strengthen themselves individually and collectively.

    Me to - are you Slav? then Sława Słowiańskiej Braci ! if not then respect

    BTW it is not common knowledge that there were periods when Polish banner was in3 Pan-Slavic colors Smile
    Maybe not the best period to recall but best example -because it was peasant´s not nobles colors really ...


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 19, 2015 8:31 am

    AFAIK thermal efficiency of diesel and gas turbine (not in max power output) is comparable. thye why to use turbine and not diesel to power electric motors? What about output heat generation (IR signature)? Sand, dust...

    Because a 2,000hp gas turbine is small compact and relatively simple to make and maintain in normal conditions and can be run on variety of fuels that include but are not limited to diesel, kerosene, fuel oil etc etc etc.

    The bigger you go the easier it is to make the GT compared with the diesel.

    That is not to say you can't have very powerful diesels... most large ships operate better with large diesels than with large gas turbines, but just look at aircraft... very small aircraft use diesels, but larger aircraft use GT because for the same power output they are smaller and lighter than diesels.

    On ships size and weight is not so important so efficient big diesels are used, but for land vehicles GTs are becoming more competitive and where low down power is not important because the vehicle is now electric drive the GT becomes a better option because it is much cheaper and simpler, lighter and more compact.

    For a tank the only detail is dust and dirt in the air intake.... but vacuum technology can deal with that these days... besides diesel engines don't really like dust and dirt much either.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Cyrus the great
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 241
    Points : 251
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Cyrus the great on Mon Sep 21, 2015 4:39 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Do you think the Russians will ever use gas turbine engines with electric drives in tanks and IFVs? The Russians have previously stated that they would not use gas turbine engines in their MBT fleet, but if these engines could be made to be efficient, than Russia may incorporate them into the Armata series.

    The critical thing is electric drive... once they have that then having a gas turbine on board to generate power only with no drive train and they will use them.

    Very simply if you fix an electric motor to a gas turbine engine you have an electricity generator. With no actual load on the GT you don't need to vary the revs... just keep it at a fuel efficient level all the time.

    They already use small gas turbine generators in the command versions of their tanks to power all the radios and systems when the main tank engine is shut down.

    Even in idle the main engine uses a lot of fuel so keeping a tiny GT engine running to power everything makes a lot of sense and saves an enormous amount of fuel.

    I read an article in which the Russians apparently wanted to create a 2400 shp engine for a battle tank. In terms of mobility it would be incomparable if they do get an engine with that kind of power and all the versatility that a gas turbine engine offer.

    Cyrus the great
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 241
    Points : 251
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Cyrus the great on Mon Sep 21, 2015 4:50 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:

    Me to - are you Slav? then Sława Słowiańskiej Braci ! if not then respect

    BTW it is not common knowledge that there were periods when Polish banner was in3 Pan-Slavic colors Smile
    Maybe not the best period to recall but best example -because it was peasant´s not nobles colors really ...

    I'm not a Slav but I do respect them, especially the Russians and I recognise that Russia is the true indispensable Nation for a multi-polar world. This is going to sound stupid, but I really gained respect for Russia after I watched 'Enemy at the Gates'; I then looked into Russia's war effort and I was astounded. It confronted something like 80% of the Nazi war machine and defeated its most capable Generals and units on the eastern front. It lost more than 27 million people to defeat fascism. They make America's war effort look derisory, which is funny because Americans constantly go on about how they apparently freed Europe from the Nazis and that if it wasn't for them the Europeans would all be speaking German right now. LOL!

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GarryB on Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:18 am

    I read an article in which the Russians apparently wanted to create a 2400 shp engine for a battle tank. In terms of mobility it would be incomparable if they do get an engine with that kind of power and all the versatility that a gas turbine engine offer.

    The 2,400hp engine is for the Armata family of vehicles and is the upper power limit they anticipate achieving later on.

    Remember the Soviets had a gas turbine powered MBT well before the US... the T-80 entered service before the 1980s.

    Of course in the near future with potentially electric armour (ie enormous electric charge on inner and outer plates so any penetrator will close the circuit as it penetrates and be vapourised by the enormous jolt of current when the circuit is complete) and of course EM main weapons will also use enormous amounts of electrical energy.... capacitors can be used to store this energy when needed but like batteries it is heavy, so being able to build up power rapidly with a large powerful engine make a lot of sense... only a matter of time before the tank commander transfers energy from the cloaking system and transfers that energy to guns to fire at the enemy and then once the shot is fired the power is transferred to propulsion and shields...



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Cyrus the great
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 241
    Points : 251
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Cyrus the great on Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:20 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I read an article in which the Russians apparently wanted to create a 2400 shp engine for a battle tank. In terms of mobility it would be incomparable if they do get an engine with that kind of power and all the versatility that a gas turbine engine offer.

    The 2,400hp engine is for the Armata family of vehicles and is the upper power limit they anticipate achieving later on.

    Remember the Soviets had a gas turbine powered MBT well before the US... the T-80 entered service before the 1980s.

    Of course in the near future with potentially electric armour (ie enormous electric charge on inner and outer plates so any penetrator will close the circuit as it penetrates and be vapourised by the enormous jolt of current when the circuit is complete) and of course EM main weapons will also use enormous amounts of electrical energy.... capacitors can be used to store this energy when needed but like batteries it is heavy, so being able to build up power rapidly with a large powerful engine make a lot of sense... only a matter of time before the tank commander transfers energy from the cloaking system and transfers that energy to guns to fire at the enemy and then once the shot is fired the power is transferred to propulsion and shields...


    With all the information you presented, I feel like a child in a candy store. Electric armour seems really futuristic and if the Russians do manage to get a 2400hp engine it's certainly possible. How far away do you think we are from getting electric armour? I'm pretty sure that the Russians would want to incorporate all these features in the Armata and achieve a true generational leap on all tanks.

    Thanks a million, Garry.

    Cyrus the great
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 241
    Points : 251
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Cyrus the great on Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:22 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    I read an article in which the Russians apparently wanted to create a 2400 shp engine for a battle tank. In terms of mobility it would be incomparable if they do get an engine with that kind of power and all the versatility that a gas turbine engine offer.

    The 2,400hp engine is for the Armata family of vehicles and is the upper power limit they anticipate achieving later on.

    Remember the Soviets had a gas turbine powered MBT well before the US... the T-80 entered service before the 1980s.

    Of course in the near future with potentially electric armour (ie enormous electric charge on inner and outer plates so any penetrator will close the circuit as it penetrates and be vapourised by the enormous jolt of current when the circuit is complete) and of course EM main weapons will also use enormous amounts of electrical energy.... capacitors can be used to store this energy when needed but like batteries it is heavy, so being able to build up power rapidly with a large powerful engine make a lot of sense... only a matter of time before the tank commander transfers energy from the cloaking system and transfers that energy to guns to fire at the enemy and then once the shot is fired the power is transferred to propulsion and shields...


    With all the information you presented, I feel like a child in a candy store. Electric armour seems really futuristic and if the Russians do manage to get a 2400hp engine it's certainly possible. How far away do you think we are from getting electric armour? I'm pretty sure that the Russians would want to incorporate all these features in the Armata and achieve a true generational leap on all tanks.

    Thanks a million, Garry.

    franco
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1779
    Points : 1819
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  franco on Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:55 pm

    New Kornet ATGM;
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftopwar.ru%2F&sandbox=1

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1528
    Points : 1691
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  TheArmenian on Wed Dec 02, 2015 6:49 pm

    A new episode in the series Voennaya Priomka will be shown in a few days.
    This time it will be about the Khrisantema ATGM.

    Here is the trailer:


    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4883
    Points : 4930
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Militarov on Sat Dec 05, 2015 6:58 pm



    9M123 Khrizantema-S

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1518
    Points : 1560
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Dec 05, 2015 8:35 pm

    Militarov wrote:

    9M123 Khrizantema-S

    no selfdefense MG on AGTM carrier?

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4883
    Points : 4930
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Militarov on Sat Dec 05, 2015 8:45 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    Militarov wrote:

    9M123 Khrizantema-S

    no selfdefense MG on AGTM carrier?

    Depends on platform and customer request i suppose.




    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9457
    Points : 9949
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  George1 on Sun Dec 06, 2015 2:08 pm

    Khrizantema-S: Why Russia's Ultimate Tank Killer Cannot Be Defeated

    With a floristic name (translated as "golden daisy") that belies its deadly nature, Russia’s Khrizantema-S supersonic anti-tank missile was designed to destroy current and future main battle tanks, including those protected with explosive reactive armor, small-displacement surface vessels, low-flying aerial targets and field fortifications.

    The Khrizantema’s 9M123 missile travels at an average speed of 400 m/s and has a range of between 400 and 6000 meters.

    The system is also unique among Russian anti-tank guided missiles in that, depending on the variant, its missile can either be guided by laser or radar.

    Each missile carries a tandem high explosive anti-tank warhead with a reported penetration of 1.2 m homogeneous armor behind explosive reactive armor – an absolute record.

    By contrast, America’s much-touted Javelin anti-tank missile which the Ukrainians are so eager to get, boasts maximum penetration capacity of just 70 centimeters.

    Israel’s Spike-MR/LR missile does a bit better cutting through 1 m of armor but is still no match for its Russian analogue.

    The 9M123 missile together with its associated guidance system forms the 9K123 missile system. It is currently only launched from the 9P157-2

    Khrizantema-S tank destroyer, based on the BMP-3 chassis. Its dual guidance system ensures protection against electronic countermeasures and operation in all climatic conditions, day or night.

    The system entered service with the Russian armed forces in 2005.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151206/1031319158/russia-missile-features.html#ixzz3tXtXcM3C


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  max steel on Sun Dec 06, 2015 2:44 pm

    George1 wrote:Khrizantema-S: Why Russia's Ultimate Tank Killer Cannot Be Defeated

    With a floristic name (translated as "golden daisy") that belies its deadly nature, Russia’s Khrizantema-S supersonic anti-tank missile was designed to destroy current and future main battle tanks, including those protected with explosive reactive armor, small-displacement surface vessels, low-flying aerial targets and field fortifications.

    The Khrizantema’s 9M123 missile travels at an average speed of 400 m/s and has a range of between 400 and 6000 meters.

    The system is also unique among Russian anti-tank guided missiles in that, depending on the variant, its missile can either be guided by laser or radar.

    Each missile carries a tandem high explosive anti-tank warhead with a reported penetration of 1.2 m homogeneous armor behind explosive reactive armor – an absolute record.

    By contrast, America’s much-touted Javelin anti-tank missile which the Ukrainians are so eager to get, boasts maximum penetration capacity of just 70 centimeters.

    Israel’s Spike-MR/LR missile does a bit better cutting through 1 m of armor but is still no match for its Russian analogue.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151206/1031319158/russia-missile-features.html#ixzz3tXtXcM3C
    But isn't 70cm penetration enough to basically destroy any MBT?

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4883
    Points : 4930
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Militarov on Sun Dec 06, 2015 3:05 pm

    max steel wrote:
    George1 wrote:Khrizantema-S: Why Russia's Ultimate Tank Killer Cannot Be Defeated

    With a floristic name (translated as "golden daisy") that belies its deadly nature, Russia’s Khrizantema-S supersonic anti-tank missile was designed to destroy current and future main battle tanks, including those protected with explosive reactive armor, small-displacement surface vessels, low-flying aerial targets and field fortifications.

    The Khrizantema’s 9M123 missile travels at an average speed of 400 m/s and has a range of between 400 and 6000 meters.

    The system is also unique among Russian anti-tank guided missiles in that, depending on the variant, its missile can either be guided by laser or radar.

    Each missile carries a tandem high explosive anti-tank warhead with a reported penetration of 1.2 m homogeneous armor behind explosive reactive armor – an absolute record.

    By contrast, America’s much-touted Javelin anti-tank missile which the Ukrainians are so eager to get, boasts maximum penetration capacity of just 70 centimeters.

    Israel’s Spike-MR/LR missile does a bit better cutting through 1 m of armor but is still no match for its Russian analogue.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151206/1031319158/russia-missile-features.html#ixzz3tXtXcM3C
    But isn't 70cm penetration enough to basically destroy any MBT?

    Depends. Where you hit, angle, does target has reactive armor... Take in mind that most of the tanks in field are equiped wih composite armors whos RHA value is very high, 700mm RHA wont be good enough for many of them especially if we talk about frontal lobe and turret armor.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Dec 06, 2015 3:31 pm

    Not from front or angle.

    KoTeMoRe
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3599
    Points : 3634
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sun Dec 06, 2015 4:56 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    max steel wrote:
    George1 wrote:Khrizantema-S: Why Russia's Ultimate Tank Killer Cannot Be Defeated

    With a floristic name (translated as "golden daisy") that belies its deadly nature, Russia’s Khrizantema-S supersonic anti-tank missile was designed to destroy current and future main battle tanks, including those protected with explosive reactive armor, small-displacement surface vessels, low-flying aerial targets and field fortifications.

    The Khrizantema’s 9M123 missile travels at an average speed of 400 m/s and has a range of between 400 and 6000 meters.

    The system is also unique among Russian anti-tank guided missiles in that, depending on the variant, its missile can either be guided by laser or radar.

    Each missile carries a tandem high explosive anti-tank warhead with a reported penetration of 1.2 m homogeneous armor behind explosive reactive armor – an absolute record.

    By contrast, America’s much-touted Javelin anti-tank missile which the Ukrainians are so eager to get, boasts maximum penetration capacity of just 70 centimeters.

    Israel’s Spike-MR/LR missile does a bit better cutting through 1 m of armor but is still no match for its Russian analogue.


    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/russia/20151206/1031319158/russia-missile-features.html#ixzz3tXtXcM3C
    But isn't 70cm penetration enough to basically destroy any MBT?

    Depends. Where you hit, angle, does target has reactive armor... Take in mind that most of the tanks in field are equiped wih composite armors whos RHA value is very high, 700mm RHA wont be good enough for many of them especially if we talk about frontal lobe and turret armor.

    We actually don't know about what's real or not. We were said a lot of crap during the post GW1 & 2 era.

    Now we see Abrams taking potshots by Konkurs and brewing. War is SNAFU on a supersize. Khrizantema's superiority is the range, and as i analyzed with the JAN video on that Nujaba position, that range allows it to pick what it wants in the formation. If your axis of penetration with MBT's is less that 5km large, then you're toast, your tanks will get hit on the side, your AFV's on from every angle.

    One has to understand the Kriz for what it is, a standoff weapon, same for Tamuz in the IDF. It allows a BVR engagement of armour in total blind mode. You track the threat and hit it from 10/15 km on the money. I'd take my chances defending with a Soviet/Russian ATGM company vs a mechanized US company any day NOW. I wouldn't have said this two years from now.




    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Dec 06, 2015 7:13 pm

    Well there are a lot of nonsense that appeared right after US so migthy and godlike knightly crusade for democracy.

    The constant re-phrased myth no abrams was ever destroyed, but somehow over 80 Abrams have been unable to be repaired with dozens over dozens canabalized. The funny assumption blow off panels actually work under all circumstances and magically ignore physics. They have been showen to have no purpose as soon as HE rounds are loaded or HEAT rounds penetrate the armor along with the backside of the crew compartment isolating metal sheet that is very thin and not armored at all. The result was the M1A2S beeing cooked along with its crew. The most ridiculous and annoying is the video game RHAe values thrown around along with the HEAT being "inferior" to KE while KE is inferior in after armor penetration aswell is limited to tank guns only while HEAT can be found on every plattform that has any intention of being used against armor with penetration capabilities that are beyond any APFSDS in existence.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 6087
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Austin on Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:32 am

    Great interview

    the deputy managing editor of the "Independent Military Review" Oleg Odnokolenko told representatives of divisions engaged in the development of anti-tank weapons, Mikhail Andreev and Sergei MAST.

    "Cornet-AM" - ATRA without complexes


    Precision weapons production JSC "Instrument Design Bureau named. Academician AG Shipunova" able to hit any target on the battlefield

    http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2016-03-18/10_kornet.html

    d_taddei2
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 748
    Points : 908
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    reply

    Post  d_taddei2 on Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:10 am

    hi i wonder if anyone can shed some light, about 6 weeks ago i saw a source (but can't find it now) stating that the AT-3 sagger D/2M faster speed and a improved warhead 4.2 kg tandem HEAT warhead 1,000 mm penetration RHA, improved capability against ERA and entered service mid 1990's, and that it was still in service with some Russian units, is this true i thought they were all replaced with AT-4 and AT-5.

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4883
    Points : 4930
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Militarov on Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:30 am

    d_taddei2 wrote:hi i wonder if anyone can shed some light, about 6 weeks ago i saw a source (but can't find it now) stating that the AT-3 sagger D/2M faster speed and a improved warhead 4.2 kg tandem HEAT warhead 1,000 mm penetration RHA, improved capability against ERA and entered service mid 1990's, and that it was still in service with some Russian units, is this true i thought they were all replaced with AT-4 and AT-5.

    9M14-2M and 9M14-2F, yes, however i am not sure how many ever saw service in Russia. But if they did those were probably delivered to units that still operated BRDM-2 variant dubbed 9P122 "Malyutka" and BMP-1s that had launcher above main gun.

    Best Malytka variant to my knowledge is however Serbian 9M14-2T which has 4,4kg tandem HEAT warhead.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  max steel on Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:19 am

    Do Kornets really have a range of 10 km?

    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4883
    Points : 4930
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Militarov on Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:22 am

    max steel wrote:Do Kornets really have a range of 10 km?

    Kornet-M/D does, but only with thermobaric 9M133F-1 missile.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Army ATGM Thread

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:11 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:11 am