Russian Army ATGM Thread

Possibly a recent thing... perhaps they have seen it somewhere and have learned to respect its performance... and now that they are buying S-400s they are going to get punished economically and politically by the US and militarily in terms of what they will be allowed to buy now... and to be honest the US doesn't really have a decent ATGM in the heavy category... TOW is clearly over rated and under performing...

The modernized Cornet has become an effective weapon against terrorists

The Algerian army was the first of the foreign armed forces to adopt the Russian Cornet-EM self-propelled missile systems.

kimo dial@kmldial70

Algeria become the 1st country outside russia to receive KORNE-EM atgm system
with enhanced range of 10 kilmtrs
the system can launch 4 missiles against 2 different targets
the vehicule can carry 16 kornet atgm




213
1:58 AM - Mar 8, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Performed on the chassis of the armored vehicle VPK-233136 Tiger-M, they are now the most powerful ground anti-tank weapons in the ground forces of this state.
Algerian sources have praised the power of these ATGMs and their good mobility.
It is known that the maximum range reaches 10,000 meters, and armor penetration - 1,300 millimeters. In addition to cumulative, there are also options with HE and thermobaric warheads.

Available sighting equipment allows the use of weapons both day and night, and in addition to objects on the ground, also hit air targets.
Recall that two years ago in Syria in the Idlib region, a car was destroyed in which there were militants of one of the terrorist groups. It was reported that a missile launched by government forces and flying more than 7,000 m hit the vehicle. Military experts believe that this version of the Cornet was tested in real conditions.

https://rg.ru/2020/03/12/modernizirovannyj-kornet-stal-effektivnym-oruzhiem-protiv-terroristov.html

But I would argue the 152mm warhead (of various types) seems like overkill in most cases. The HEAT warhead has 1300mm penetration (1400mm if you count the precursor explosive), when fighting an insurgency your going against VBIED's with pathetic jalopy haphazard armor, which require no where near that level of penetration. The same applies to the thermobaric warhead, which a 152mm sized one would have insane destructive power. To put things in perspective the  92mm RPO-A flamethrower has greater destructive power than a 155 artillery shell. Kornet's thermobaric warhead would have destructive power north of a 203mm shell, which would be unnecessary in most cases against insurgents. 40 and 57mm HE-Frag autocannon shells are still really effective against infantry, so atgm's in the 40-57mm range should still be suffice, but the real question is if they could maintain the same max range; maybe instead to reduce the max speed in favor of slower longer lasting rocket fuel. I'm not arguing to remove the 152mm ATGM, just to add smaller warheads for smaller targets, with more available ammunition. 16 ATGM's is the standard Kornet-EM load out, but maybe instead you have 8 ATGM's, and the 8 replaced with '72' 57mm ATGM's/rockets (HEAT/HE-Frag/Thermobaric) for man power/VBIED's.

There is a missile like that. Its name is Bulat. Will be part of the armament of the new AIFV´s. A dedicated version like the Kornet-D will likely follow.

Hole wrote:There is a missile like that. Its name is Bulat. Will be part of the armament of the new AIFV´s. A dedicated version like the Kornet-D will likely follow.

But it wasn't made clear if it would be apart of the Kornet-EM complex. We saw the new Epoch module with Bulat missiles, but in a configuration we never seen with any version Kornet. Bulat could be it's own separate weapon system, and I'm talking about incorporating new smaller missiles in the existing Kornet-EM to give flexibility and persistence.

Would be logical to use the Kornet-D. Skip one Kornet for four Bulat = 16 missiles per mount, 32 for the whole vehicle. Like the supposed new light missile for the Pantsir system.

But I would argue the 152mm warhead (of various types) seems like overkill in most cases. The HEAT warhead has 1300mm penetration (1400mm if you count the precursor explosive), when fighting an insurgency your going against VBIED's with pathetic jalopy haphazard armor, which require no where near that level of penetration.

As mentioned this is the long range heavy ATGM and its primary purpose is to take out any MBT it might encounter on the modern battlefield, so the 1.3m penetration performance is required in its primary role.

What they are talking about here is a 10km range missile and that is the HE Frag equipped missile... the warhead is actually smaller and lighter than the HEAT anti armour warhead so effective range is extended from 8.5km for the anti armour warhead to 10km for a general purpose HE warhead.

Hitting targets in a COIN type situation often you wont need extreme penetration, but a big HE explosive is useful and in this case the extra range it gives you is also valuable too... especially against aircraft and point targets.

Arguing they should have a smaller lighter option... well as mentioned above... they do... the Bulat will likely be a 4-5km range missile with moderate penetration performance likely good enough for most bunkers and building strong points as well as medium armoured vehicles like BTRs and BMPs, but the cost of the smaller missile will be shorter range and reduced payload... its HE version might reach to 6km or so, but the significant size and weight reduction might allow rather more missiles to be carried.

The BRDM-3 had a five tube launcher that could be raised for launch and lowered below the roof of the vehicle and could carry a mix of AT-4 and AT-5 missiles. The main difference was that the AT-4 was effectively a 2.5km range lighter missile and the AT-5 was a 4km range heavier missile with better penetration.

By carrying a mix of missiles you could select a missile to better suit your target and optimise your loadout, but it was less successfully implemented because the two missiles were not hugely different in size or weight.

so atgm's in the 40-57mm range should still be suffice, but the real question is if they could maintain the same max range; maybe instead to reduce the max speed in favor of slower longer lasting rocket fuel.

The problem of making the missiles smaller is it will cost them range. The Pine missile has quite a long tube... about the size of the 40-50kg Ataka or Shturm missile but the missile is a two stage weapon of about 35kgs weight. Its range is 10km and its flight speed is much faster than any of the weapons mentioned... it gets to the target in about 12 seconds at 10km range...

I would think the best solution will be the adoption of guided rockets for aircraft... with a lofted trajectory from a ground based launcher it should be possible to maximise range and performance against unarmoured targets as long as the guidance and control systems can be kept simple and light and cheap... a 57mm rocket had a payload of about 800 grammes which is about 10 times the HE payload of a standard attacking hand grenade... the problem and reason they no longer use them is that their effective radius is not enormous so you had to get the rocket very close to the target to be effective... which meant you often fired them in enormous volumes to assure something got close enough to be effective.

With guidance then the 57mm rocket becomes effective again... you can direct one to the centre of a group of enemy troops and injure them all with one rocket.

It would still be too light for use against vehicles I suspect but an 80mm rocket with about 6-8kgs of HE would destroy most targets with direct hits and if that fails a 122mm rocket from an S-30 rocket pod with up to 32kgs of HE (often multiple warheads in the one rocket because the 122mm rocket is designed to blow a hole in a concrete aircraft shelter and then explode inside to damage aircraft), and if that is still not good enough then there are other heavier rockets you could mount guidance to like Grads etc or those little twelve tube launchers they tow behind light vehicles... guidance kits on those with a drone to target mark means you could hit groups of enemy precisely and easily and relatively cheaply...

There is a missile like that. Its name is Bulat. Will be part of the armament of the new AIFV´s. A dedicated version like the Kornet-D will likely follow.

Nice photo and it shows the 57mm grenade launchers grenade has a huge payload with likely a very heavy HE charge for its calibre.

We don't know its range yet but it could be 5-6km perhaps?

The shape would be low drag... for its weight...

But it wasn't made clear if it would be apart of the Kornet-EM complex. We saw the new Epoch module with Bulat missiles, but in a configuration we never seen with any version Kornet. Bulat could be it's own separate weapon system, and I'm talking about incorporating new smaller missiles in the existing Kornet-EM to give flexibility and persistence.

I don't know, but they have revealed the extended range Kornet and the medium range general purpose Bulat and the extended range cheap Metis (3km range) missiles.... the latter are man portable and it is possible they might have a man portable Bulat launcher too... the point is that the Metis and Kornet are intended for MBTs and other targets while the Bulat is aimed at lighter targets... it would not surprise me if they didn't come up with a vehicle that carried a mix of these three missiles to allow a range of targets to be engaged.

From memory the turret with Bulat also had four tubes for Kornet in two twin tube launchers on the sides of the turret for MBT engagement, while the Bulat is used for other IFV type targets while the main gun was a 57mm grenade launcher with good HE power for the majority of battlefield targets...

I would think in a COIN operation using more lighter cheaper missiles might make sense but for combat units the Kornet is there to deal with long range aircraft and MBT targets so I doubt they would replace all their missiles with smaller models..

Interesting to see them shooting at drones with these missiles.

It looked to me that the auto tracker loses its lock when the missile is launched, but they clearly reacquired the tracking lock quickly enough to guide it in for the kill.

Obviously it is easier to hit a hovering target than to hit a manouvering one, but it would still be a rather useful feature...

hi all, just a quick question, i read an article dated last year and it stated Russia purchased 100 units of AT-4 faggot, my impression was metis was the replacement for it, and only Konkurs, metis and Kornet were the only manpack ATGW being bought by Russia, i understand that AT-4 is still being used but buying new systems?

I suspect they might have been for BMP-1 and some BMP-2 formations that still use the AT-4/AT-5 launcher.

The AT-4 is lighter and smaller and cheaper than Konkurs so practising on the range at a target 2km away with the Faggot instead of the Konkurs gives you the same experience for lower cost.

The Metis-M is a much better missile with vastly better performance and is much lighter and more mobile than the AT-4... I don't think they would use newly produced AT-4s in place of them...

Unless they were using them in Africa or Syria in operations somewhere where such a weapon was better suited to local conditions or something...

When you say units do you mean launchers or missiles or both?

d_taddei2 wrote:hi all, just a quick question, i read an article dated last year and it stated Russia purchased 100 units of AT-4 faggot, my impression was metis was the replacement for it, and only Konkurs, metis and Kornet were the only manpack ATGW being bought by Russia, i understand that AT-4 is still being used but buying new systems?

Training maybe.

Or supplies to someone

It said received 100 systems Fagot anti-tank missile systems that have arrived for units and formations in the Altai and Omsk regions. So to me it reads new systems last August. I think it must have been cheapest option and limited budget perhaps. Would make sense to replace old systems such as faggot with Metis as that was what it was designed to replace. Yes konkurs is heavier still a good system and I suspect because kornet is kinda expensive in relation to konkurs is why konkurs is still used especially it taking out bunkers or anything other than high tech MBT.

https://tass.com/defense/1073578

Or supplies to someone

Hahaha... Syria or Eastern Ukraine?

Wait don't tell me... perhaps better if I don't know.

With the new 3km range version of Metis-M3 they were working on I would have hoped production of old model systems would be stopped and updated to newer better systems... not that Fagot wouldn't be a pain in the ass for any armoured vehicle ( see what I did there... )

It is hard to say... perhaps that is the hand me down system they have been using all this time and when needing resupply they got more as they were withdrawn from use in other places, and they needed a numbers top up and the choice was either replace all the models they have and the rounds they have in storage with thousands of Metis launchers and missiles, or just send 100 upgraded AT-4 launchers... probably with nice thermal sights added to make them night and all weather capable... and they chose the cheap option.

Have heard reports that new model older systems are lighter and cheaper... for instance the IR flare on the rear of the missiles has been replaced with a coded IR LED for the system to track the missiles, which is lighter and safer (ie LEDs are non flammable).

They might be using up stores of the older missiles in practise and training and keeping the newer missiles for any eventual real use down the track, so new launchers might have been needed to replace older worn out launchers as they work their way through old stocks of missiles...

Honestly don't know.

Metis and Metis-M are not used by the Russian Army.
Any current production of these missiles is for export customers.

The Russian Army does not want to replace the AT-4 Fagot with Metis.

The AT guided missiles in service of Russian Ground forces are: KORNET, FAGOT, KONKURS and KHRYSANTEMA.

TheArmenian wrote:Metis and Metis-M are not used by the Russian Army.
Any current production of these missiles is for export customers.

The Russian Army does not want to replace the AT-4 Fagot with Metis.

The AT guided missiles in service of Russian Ground forces are: KORNET, FAGOT, KONKURS and KHRYSANTEMA.

Metis m2 was designed to replace Metis in use with with VDV.

"By order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 9, 2015, as well as by the Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of March 2, 2016, the Metis-M1 anti-tank missile system was adopted by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."

http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/novosti/novosti-kbp/564-metis-m1-na-vooruzhenii

d_taddei2 wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:Metis and Metis-M are not used by the Russian Army.
Any current production of these missiles is for export customers.

The Russian Army does not want to replace the AT-4 Fagot with Metis.

The AT guided missiles in service of Russian Ground forces are: KORNET, FAGOT, KONKURS and KHRYSANTEMA.

Metis m2 was designed to replace Metis in use with with VDV.

"By order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 9, 2015, as well as by the Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of March 2, 2016, the Metis-M1 anti-tank missile system was adopted by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."

http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/novosti/novosti-kbp/564-metis-m1-na-vooruzhenii

That statement is from 2016.
Please go ahead and find me a picture of Metis or Metis-M in actual service with the Russian Armed forces.
Metis has been approved/accepted for service, but has not been ordered. They are happy with the Fagot/konkurs which are still in production in Tula Arms Factory.

By the way, from around the 23rd minute in the video posted above, both the Fagot and Metis are shown and discussed. The representative from KBP clearly mentions that Metis is not in service in Russia, but has been successfully exported.

The 9K115 Metis has been in service since 1979 to supplement Fagot and Konkurs. It was introduced to AT teams in motor rifle companies and is also widely used by VDV units do to its low weight.

If I was in charge of a country I would train all the police, army and other fighting units to use them in case of invasion. Then if it happens just quickly spread many of them to people and let them use them when they have the occasion against any light vehicle. This way enemy will lose plenty of vehicles of all sort making the invasion a real nightmare.

Destroying light vehicles is worst for the enemy occupying your country than destroying its tanks that can survive such missile hits. Light vehicles will be destroyed for sure and people inside won't surcive either the big blast of modern atgm.

IMO they are the new ak-47 of modern guerillas.

TheArmenian wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:Metis and Metis-M are not used by the Russian Army.
Any current production of these missiles is for export customers.

The Russian Army does not want to replace the AT-4 Fagot with Metis.

The AT guided missiles in service of Russian Ground forces are: KORNET, FAGOT, KONKURS and KHRYSANTEMA.

Metis m2 was designed to replace Metis in use with with VDV.

"By order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 9, 2015, as well as by the Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of March 2, 2016, the Metis-M1 anti-tank missile system was adopted by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation."

http://www.kbptula.ru/ru/novosti/novosti-kbp/564-metis-m1-na-vooruzhenii

That statement is from 2016.
Please go ahead and find me a picture of Metis  or Metis-M in actual service with the Russian Armed forces.
Metis has been approved/accepted for service, but has not been ordered. They are happy with the Fagot/konkurs which are still in production in Tula Arms Factory.

By the way, from around the 23rd minute in the video posted above, both the Fagot and Metis are shown and discussed. The representative from KBP clearly mentions that Metis is not in service in Russia, but has been successfully exported.

Fagot and konkurs are still in production yes because it's not just Russia that uses them. As also pointed out Metis is in service with VDV. It was deemed to be better due to weight. I can't see Russia not accepting for service despite defense minister saying so. Your point of it was back in 2016 ur point being what? You think that's too old an article? Russia didn't design metis just for export only. Russia it just about everything it builds for ground forces is intended for it's own use before going out to export. Do u expect another countries to adopt a system that the country producing it won't have itself it's not exactly a great advert is it.

But I get u know better than the Russian defense minister and Russian government I guess they must have been telling lies loooooool

I remember in the 1980s getting a magazine called Combat and Survival, which was effectively a magazine about military equipment and fitness and survival/bushcraft, but very military orientated. It was a British magazine... there was a French magazine called Raid that I liked but it was hard to get most of the time.

All through the 1980s this magazine was my main source of info about Soviet equipment and even in to the 1990s the Metis was never mentioned.

In the mid to late 1990s I bought a book on the very sad state of the Russian military and on the back cover it had two weapons I had never seen before... one was a Metis anti tank launcher, which was described as a Strela anti aircraft missile, but I could tell it clearly was not... and the other was an RPO-A rocket launcher... which had also not been mentioned.

In the mid 1990s I started getting a German magazine called Military Technology and I started finding articles where all sorts of Russian weapons were advertised for sale including Metis and RPO-A and lots of other weapons as well... as I said up until that point I had no idea Metis existed... and then later when it was mentioned it was described in the west as the cheap replacement for the Fagot and Konkurs, which I just assumed was true.

The nice sharp clear photos below are from advertising.... another set I have seen has troops with 9A-91 mini assault rifles in 9x39mm that were bought by special forces but were too expensive to be adopted by the Russian military at the time...

The representative from KBP clearly mentions that Metis is not in service in Russia, but has been successfully exported.

Interesting...

Fagot and konkurs are still in production yes because it's not just Russia that uses them. As also pointed out Metis is in service with VDV. It was deemed to be better due to weight. I can't see Russia not accepting for service despite defense minister saying so.

Accepting something for service and actually buying some are not the same thing... I have followed the Soviet and Russian military long enough to not really be surprised to be wrong before.

@Flaming Python... you were in service... I realise with the Navy, but do you know whether the Metis is in widespread ground service in Russia?

The HATO/ASCC codenames of AT-7 and AT-13 were for the original Metis and the upgraded Metis-M... the first had a 1.5km range and less armour penetration, while the latter increased to 2km range and 950mm armour penetration performance... from memory both were labelled Saxhorn.

The reduced weight of the Metis is not an enormous advantage because the Soviet troops were fully mechanised anyway... perhaps it might have been exclusively a VDV and Spetsnaz type weapon that is lighter to carry around but accurate and quite powerful... the M1 model with 2km range and 950mm armour penetration is quite a potent little weapon... attacking a Lance II short range ballistic missile.. a Metis-M1 to the body of the missile from 2km range would be a very easy way to get the job done. Two men with 5 missiles between them could do a lot of damage with a good chance of escape.

GarryB wrote:I remember in the 1980s getting a magazine called Combat and Survival, which was effectively a magazine about military equipment and fitness and survival/bushcraft, but very military orientated. It was a British magazine... there was a French magazine called Raid that I liked but it was hard to get most of the time.

All through the 1980s this magazine was my main source of info about Soviet equipment and even in to the 1990s the Metis was never mentioned.

In the mid to late 1990s I bought a book on the very sad state of the Russian military and on the back cover it had two weapons I had never seen before... one was a Metis anti tank launcher, which was described as a Strela anti aircraft missile, but I could tell it clearly was not... and the other was an RPO-A rocket launcher... which had also not been mentioned.

In the mid 1990s I started getting a German magazine called Military Technology and I started finding articles where all sorts of Russian weapons were advertised for sale including Metis and RPO-A and lots of other weapons as well... as I said up until that point I had no idea Metis existed... and then later when it was mentioned it was described in the west as the cheap replacement for the Fagot and Konkurs, which I just assumed was true.

The nice sharp clear photos below are from advertising.... another set I have seen has troops with 9A-91 mini assault rifles in 9x39mm that were bought by special forces but were too expensive to be adopted by the Russian military at the time...

The representative from KBP clearly mentions that Metis is not in service in Russia, but has been successfully exported.

Interesting...

Fagot and konkurs are still in production yes because it's not just Russia that uses them. As also pointed out Metis is in service with VDV. It was deemed to be better due to weight. I can't see Russia not accepting for service despite defense minister saying so.

Accepting something for service and actually buying some are not the same thing... I have followed the Soviet and Russian military long enough to not really be surprised to be wrong before.

@Flaming Python... you were in service... I realise with the Navy, but do you know whether the Metis is in widespread ground service in Russia?

The HATO/ASCC codenames of AT-7 and AT-13 were for the original Metis and the upgraded Metis-M... the first had a 1.5km range and less armour penetration, while the latter increased to 2km range and 950mm armour penetration performance... from memory both were labelled Saxhorn.

The reduced weight of the Metis is not an enormous advantage because the Soviet troops were fully mechanised anyway... perhaps it might have been exclusively a VDV and Spetsnaz type weapon that is lighter to carry around but accurate and quite powerful... the M1 model with 2km range and 950mm armour penetration is quite a potent little weapon... attacking a Lance II short range ballistic missile.. a Metis-M1 to the body of the missile from 2km range would be a very easy way to get the job done. Two men with 5 missiles between them could do a lot of damage with a good chance of escape.

I did weapon intelligence in the British army from 1998 And I was taught and briefed on NATO designation etc and Soviet and Russian systems it was Saxhorn, and we were told metis was in service with VDV and special forces. And it was intended to replace fagot as it was deemed to be outdated for current armour mainly MBT. But of course Russia wasn't in a great State Bank in mid 1990's so I would imagine procurement was slow, and combining that with huge Soviet stocks then this would also slow up procurement of new systems.

GarryB wrote:@Flaming Python... you were in service... I realise with the Navy, but do you know whether the Metis is in widespread ground service in Russia?

No idea; we didn't have any ATGMs or anything in our armouries, nor did I see anything like that on any other base I visited.

d_taddei2 wrote:...[/url]

I think those stills are from a promotional video for selling the Metis abroad. I seem to remember a vid that looked very similar

I did weapon intelligence in the British army from 1998 And I was taught and briefed on NATO designation etc and Soviet and Russian systems it was Saxhorn, and we were told metis was in service with VDV and special forces. And it was intended to replace fagot as it was deemed to be outdated for current armour mainly MBT. But of course Russia wasn't in a great State Bank in mid 1990's so I would imagine procurement was slow, and combining that with huge Soviet stocks then this would also slow up procurement of new systems.

The problem there is that western intel is not perfect and often they got things very very wrong simply because they always assumed the Soviets were basically the same as them.

They are not.

The original specs for the first Metis is a range of about 1,000m and an armour penetration of about 550mm which is pretty similar to Fagot in terms of penetration but half the range. The AT-13 is bigger and heavier and increases the penetration to about 800mm with the flight range increased to 1.5km... so really it was more a comparable model to Dragon than Fagot or Milan.

No idea; we didn't have any ATGMs or anything in our armouries, nor did I see anything like that on any other base I visited.

Thanks for the info... so you were in the Navy yes?

You weren't naval infantry were you?

Seems silly we have both been on this forum for so long and I never asked you before.