Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Share

    Poll

    Are soviet cold war ATGMs equal?

    [ 10 ]
    71% [71%] 
    [ 4 ]
    29% [29%] 

    Total Votes: 14

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 986
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Tue May 28, 2013 1:29 pm

    I've read that the konkurs, shturm, and all other non tank launched soviet ATGMs of the late 80s never exceeded penetration of above 650mm while the widely used TOW 2s, HOT 2s, MILAN F2s  had at least 800mm pen after ERA and thus NATO was almost completely superior in infantry, helicopter and  vehicle launched ATGMs throughout the late cold war.

    I found these claims highly suspect, but even Russian sources  confirm these  low numbers. Are the penetration numbers of soviet missiles too pessimistic or are  capabilities of  NATO ATGMs exaggerated?

    Another problem is that soviet tank destroyers and helicopters carried too little ATGMs. For example the MTLB shturm had only 12 missiles while the AMX10 HOT had 18 and all Mi-24s never had more than 4 ATGMs while  the AH-1s and AH-64s had 8.

    Did soviet ATGMs have any other advantage other than high speed?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  TR1 on Wed May 29, 2013 1:09 am

    Hmm, of the late 80s?

    Shturm and Konkurs are not weapons of the late 80s. By that time Kornet, Metis-M, Attaka and others were around the corner, and they had far higher penetrations. Wich makes sense since NATO armor improvements in the 80s rendered existing AT weapons inadequate.
    If you look @ the date of the weapon, the diameter size, generally HEAT weapons from East and West have similar penetrations. No magic involved with HEAT penetration, it is a simple mechanic.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 986
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Wed May 29, 2013 5:53 am

    TR1 wrote:Hmm, of the late 80s?

    Shturm and Konkurs are not weapons of the late 80s. By that time Kornet, Metis-M, Attaka and others were around the corner, and they had far higher penetrations. Wich makes sense since NATO armor improvements in the 80s rendered existing AT weapons inadequate.
    If you look @ the date of the weapon, the diameter size, generally HEAT weapons from East and West have similar penetrations. No magic involved with HEAT penetration, it is a simple mechanic.
    Weren't the metis-M and kornet 90s weapons? And on what helicopters was the Ataka-V used on? As far as I know it was specifically designed for the Mi-28 which didn't enter production until 2006.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Regular on Wed May 29, 2013 11:52 am

    NATO was almost completely superior in infantry, helicopter and vehicle launched ATGMs throughout the late cold war.
    Maybe it has something to with Soviet Union downfall when military was effected.

    And about TOW penetration - even upgraded warhead really penetrates 630mm.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  GarryB on Wed May 29, 2013 1:19 pm

    As TR-1 points out the figures for the Soviet missiles were sufficient for the time they entered service.

    Also figures for western weapons were greatly exaggerated... look at the inability of Hellfire against Abrams tanks as an example.

    It is also important to keep in mind deployment... the best feature of the AT-3 was that it was very widely deployed in enormous numbers.

    Tactics would often be used to maximise their effect... for example set up a minefield to create choke points and to force enemy armoured units to skirt around minefields exposes their sides to long range ATGM attack.

    Equally in the late 1980s the new top attack sensor fused munitions entered Soviet service on Smerch rockets and later in cluster bombs. In the 1990s these were upgraded to add an IR sensor in addition to the MMW radar sensor to distinguish an operational tank from a flat sided rock or a burning tank.

    BTW all the model 2 western missiles were not widely deployed in the 1980s either.

    The vast majority of such weapons spent more time hitting point targets at long range like the Milan in the Falklands or the Shturm and Ataka in Afghanistan. For this role all were pretty effective.

    Another problem is that soviet tank destroyers and helicopters carried too little ATGMs. For example the MTLB shturm had only 12 missiles while the AMX10 HOT had 18 and all Mi-24s never had more than 4 ATGMs while the AH-1s and AH-64s had 8.

    The difference you will find is that every Soviet IFV also had ATGMs, and portable ATGMs were also very widely deployed. The Soviets also tended to deploy more launch platforms, and the Hind could carry 8 missiles and two rocket pods when required with the outer wing pylons wired for two missiles each.

    The most important difference was that the Hind was designed to launch its missiles in forward flight where its missiles were command guided and did not trail wires. Western helicopters in comparison tended to launch missiles in the hover which makes them terribly vulnerable to return fire... stationary targets are vastly more vulnerable than moving targets to ground fire.

    Did soviet ATGMs have any other advantage other than high speed?

    Numbers. Both in deployed systems and also in support weapons like RPG-7.

    Weren't the metis-M and kornet 90s weapons?

    Metis was a late 1970s weapon... Metis-M1 came later.

    And on what helicopters was the Ataka-V used on? As far as I know it was specifically designed for the Mi-28 which didn't enter production until 2006.

    ATAKA was displayed with Mi-28A aircraft in the late 1980s... Vikhr was also developed in the late 1980s, though the Ka-50 was kept secret for a few extra years till about 92 or so.


    _________________
    “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

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Sujoy on Wed May 29, 2013 7:53 pm

    What the Konkur does is that it gives a tremendous bang for your buck .

    While an argument can be made that it is a legacy system when compared to the Kornet , fact remains that there are hardly any ATGMs at such affordable price that can ensure a penetration of 800 mm .

    The Konkur is a huge favorite with the Indian Army and recently a deal was signed with Russia to purchase 10,000 Konkurs .

    I 'll wager though that from a distance of 600 meters the Konkurs penetration would be around 650mm RHA compared to the >850mm RHA penetration of the Kornet

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 30, 2013 3:03 am

    Another important factor with guided weapons is that instead of hitting the heaviest armour on a tank... the turret front, that the operator can generally aim for the hull of the vehicle which is often much less well protected.


    _________________
    “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

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 734
    Points : 917
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu May 30, 2013 10:58 am

    I've read that the konkurs, shturm, and all other non tank launched soviet ATGMs of the late 80s never exceeded penetration of above 650mm while the widely used TOW 2s, HOT 2s, MILAN F2s had at least 800mm pen after ERA and thus NATO


    Overall is correct to assert that NATO dismounted infantry ATGMs was ,in general, more sophisticated than theirs Soviet counterpart in Cold War.

    The reason is that infantry operated ATGMs was considered by NATO analysts almost the only credible weapon (mostly in ambush operations) capable to produce a significant attrition and slow down the advance of Warsaw Pact's armored divisions.

    The bulk of NATO armored and mechanized divisions in facts was heavily overmatched, both quantitatively and qualitatively, by Soviet MBTs and IFVs how ,by now, appear very clearly from the same de-classified NATO's dossier of those years ( please read this document entirely , it will provide a clear picture on how the things were ,at the time, behind the open lies and deep "mist" copiously spread in public accessible media in those years Wink )


    http://216.12.139.91/docs/DOC_0001066239/DOC_0001066239.pdf


    Moreover the combination of the Warsaw Pact's superb and mobile IAD and Frontal Aviation covering them and the selective attacks to NATO airfields (obviously lacking even only the shadow of a similar huge and complex IAD) was considered capable to render conventional aviation component almost irrelevant within 30 hours from beginning of hostilities.

    Infantry operated ATGMs (in particular short range ones , one of the few weapon systems where NATO outproduced URSS) ,easily dispersible and exceling in defensive "hit and run" ambush operations, was therefore the only credible and relatively survivable anti-armored asset in NATO arsenal of the time.

    URSS, on its side, placed instead more emphasis on long range ATGMs, in particular those that was possible to employ also by vehicles, because them was capable to engage NATO infantry hardened positions and ATGM squads fire points from outside theirs maximum engagement range (TOW-2 included) and had a secondary role in downing NATO low flying aircraft or, eventually, helicopters popping out from behind hills.



    NATO was almost completely superior in infantry, helicopter and vehicle launched ATGMs throughout the late cold war.


    At any extension ,in the Reality (that of the documents kept, for obvious reasons, out of public opinions' sight....) of those years, was true practically the exact opposite of that ! Laughing




    Last edited by Mindstorm on Thu May 30, 2013 11:09 am; edited 1 time in total

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 734
    Points : 917
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu May 30, 2013 11:05 am


    Indian Army and recently a deal was signed with Russia to purchase 10,000 Konkurs .

    Yes ,for the precision Konkurs-M.


    .....from a distance of 600 meters the Konkurs penetration would be around 650mm RHA

    Penetration value of CE cumulative charge weapons is obviously independent form range of engagement Wink

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 30, 2013 12:56 pm

    When put in context there were long range and short range ATGMs... the former often heavy and vehicle based, while the latter were lighter and more portable.

    HOT and TOW were the heavies in the west and Milan and Dragon were the lighter shorter range systems.

    The Soviet equivalents were Konkurs and Shturm as the heavies and Fagot and Metis.

    In terms of performance there was not really that much to choose between them.

    Fagot entered service in 1970... its penetration wasn't anything special, but it was easier to use than Sagger... and TOW and Improved TOW weren't that wonderful either...

    Early claims for TOW were in the 600mm range for TOW and 700-800mm for improved TOW but declassified CIA info suggests figures were actually 430mm for the basic TOW and 630mm for Improved TOW.

    Konkurs had penetration in the same range and had greater flight range and similar speed.

    Dragon was a bit of a dog and was inferior to Metis in many ways including penetration, with Metis-M1 being superior to Javelin in terms of penetration.

    HOTs penetration is no better than ATAKA at 800mms, and HOT II increases that to 900mm which is worse than METIS-M1 and no better than Konkurs-M which is much smaller in calibre. HOT III, which didn't enter service till 1998 has better penetration, but also a 150mm calibre warhead.

    Claims of 800mm penetration After ERA are amusing when figures for TOW are so low against RHA without ERA.

    Do you think HOT had some magical warhead that could penetrate double what TOW could penetrate... or were they just whistling Dixie?


    _________________
    “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

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 914
    Points : 1082
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Sujoy on Thu May 30, 2013 1:04 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:Penetration value of CE cumulative charge weapons is obviously independent form range of engagement Wink

    The point I was making is the Konkur M has a firing range of 75 meters - 4000 meters .

    So upto 600 meters the Konkur M can guarantee a penetration of 800 mm RHA . However, beyond 600 meter the penetration level drops .

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  GarryB on Thu May 30, 2013 1:39 pm

    The point I was making is the Konkur M has a firing range of 75 meters - 4000 meters .

    So upto 600 meters the Konkur M can guarantee a penetration of 800 mm RHA . However, beyond 600 meter the penetration level drops .

    And the point Mindstorm was making was that the penetration of a HEAT charge is not dependent on range or flight speed of the missile and remains the same at pretty much any range.

    If the warhead of the Konkurs-M penetrates 800mm of armour at 600m then it will penetrate 800mm of armour at 4,000m too.

    That is what made HEAT rounds so appealing to the Soviets as it retained its penetration value at any range you could hit the target... unlike APFSDS rounds which lost penetration performance as they slowed down.


    _________________
    “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

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Regular on Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:58 pm

    Milan vs Javelin

    Nuff said

    Sponsored content

    Re: Konkurs-M, Shturm-S, Metis-M vs Milan-2, TOW-2, HOT-2

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:53 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 4:53 am