Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Share

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Stealthflanker on Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:29 am

    Greetings.

    As the title said.. i wonder if Russian have any interest toward hypervelocity kinetic kill missile like US MGM-166 LOSAT, MRM-KE and recently under development HATM/CKEM.

    one advantage over conventional gun launched ATGM is reduced reaction time to enemy as those missile travels in exact same speed as conventional APFSDS. Thus reducing guidance time requirement where ATGM platform have to keep the missile at sight.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Oct 16, 2013 2:51 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:Greetings.

    As the title said.. i wonder if Russian have any interest toward hypervelocity kinetic kill missile like US MGM-166 LOSAT, MRM-KE and recently under development HATM/CKEM.

    one advantage over conventional gun launched ATGM is reduced reaction time to enemy as those missile travels in exact same speed as conventional APFSDS. Thus reducing guidance time requirement where ATGM platform have to keep the missile at sight.
    MRM-KE = cancelled.
    LOSAT and the CKEM are cancelled too.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3231
    Points : 3355
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Vann7 on Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:13 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:Greetings.

    As the title said.. i wonder if Russian have any interest toward hypervelocity kinetic kill missile like US MGM-166 LOSAT, MRM-KE and recently under development HATM/CKEM.

    one advantage over conventional gun launched ATGM is reduced reaction time to enemy as those missile travels in exact same speed as conventional APFSDS. Thus reducing guidance time requirement where ATGM platform have to keep the missile at sight.
    Look for Russian hermes missiles.. not far from hypersonic speeds.. Mach 4.0 (hypersonic 5.0)
    They will be used on Ka-52 hellicopter ,probably tanks ,and boats.. range from 20km to 100km.. it will be the competition
    of Hellfire but much better. not sure if they already in service..

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t339-the-missile-complex-hermes-will-replace-ataka



    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Zivo on Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:56 am

    Hermes may not be hypersonic, but it'll be one hell of an ATGM. The missile itself is more that twice as fast as Hellfire, and the warhead is 3x larger.


    Here's KBP's page.

    http://www.kbptula.ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=146&Itemid=414&lang=en

    On the top-right of the page under "System composition" there's a link that says "Containerized "Hermes" Guided missile."

    Hermes-A's max flight velocity is listed at 1000m/sec. Which is just a hair under Mach 3.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:55 am

    Hermes looks like Pantsir missile, prolly same booster too. As for future rounds, I would like to see laser beam riding APFSDS, with mini
    control surfaces to reduce drag and powerful booster around the penetrator. Scramjet seems ok, though it seems like a very expensive
    option with exotic materials etc., whats important is that the KE round doesnt cost as much as m829a4/5, so your guys can use a decent amount per target to ensure a kill since decent future armour would do away with ammo/fuel in the crew compartment. For HEAT rounds, they should just continue what they do with Hermes, hypervelocity sounds impressive but HEAT doesnt depend on velocity so they prolly
    shouldnt overdo the velocity department. What they should further develop would be anti-APS systems, the KE would rely on brute speed and mass while the HEAT rounds would rely on tricks to go past the defences, also top attack for both rounds would be nice.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:40 pm

    The Hermes uses the smaller rocket booster of the SA-19, which at 170mm calibre accelerates the missile to about 1km/s.

    The later SA-22 with its 210mm calibre heavier booster rocket accelerates to 1.3km/s, but that really isn't enough for a kinetic weapon... of course that is not to say they couldn't make one if they wanted to.

    Slimming down the HERMES and filling its core with a 2m long DU penetrator that weighs half the weight of the HE payload (15kgs vs 30kgs of the original HE payload) would greatly reduce size as DU is much denser than HE and therefore more compact.

    Add a scramjet sustainer but reduce the weight of the projected missile and using the heavier booster you should be able to get burnout speeds of 1.4-1.5 km/s with the scramjet accelerating the penetrator to say 1.8-2km/s over the next few seconds so that at 15km it is travelling at 2km/s with a 15kg DU penetrator 2m long... that would be a good penetrator with simple and proven beam riding guidance... already used on Russian helos in a weapon that will use a launch tube that looks like standard weapons...


    _________________
    “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

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:50 pm

    Sounds awesome... though a 2m long, 15kg DU penetrator would most likely snap at impact...

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Stealthflanker on Wed Oct 16, 2013 7:13 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    MRM-KE = cancelled.
    LOSAT and the CKEM are cancelled too.
    Yeah, as well as the FCS program planned to use them. Nonetheless the basic technology are sound and well demonstrated.. just somewhat lack of interest.

    which i found weird.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 17, 2013 9:58 am

    Sounds awesome... though a 2m long, 15kg DU penetrator would most likely snap at impact...
    Why would it snap on impact?

    If anything is going to snap on impact it would be a 7kg DU penetrator they currently use in MBT ammo because it is lighter and thinner.

    Like most APFSDS penetrators it hits end on, which concentrates the entire mass of the projectile onto the point of the projectile... the longer it is the higher the mass being concentrated on the point at impact = better penetration. The heavier the projectile the more mass concentrated on the point = better penetration.

    Yawing the penetrator before impact introduces a bending force that could make it break but a 15kg DU penetrator 2m long is rather less vulnerable to yaw than a lighter shorter penetrator...

    which i found weird.
    The size and weight of the rockets required means it is still rather more efficient to use a big gun.


    _________________
    “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

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Oct 17, 2013 7:31 pm

    It is so unnecessary even to consider Hermes-A to alter it into an APFSDS ATGM, it has a god damn 30kg Explosive WARHEAD, it can destroy almost everything and it won't make a big difference if it hits a civil car or a tank, it can destroy buildings,bridges and even bunkers will see devestating force.

    That is what it looks like by 16kg Explosion of conventional ANFO and military uses explosives with higher brisance than a fertilizer can achieve and the Hermes-A uses almost the double of the explosive...

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Zivo on Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:01 pm

    Werewolf wrote:It is so unnecessary even to consider Hermes-A to alter it into an APFSDS ATGM, it has a god damn 30kg Explosive WARHEAD, it can destroy almost everything and it won't make a big difference if it hits a civil car or a tank, it can destroy buildings,bridges and even bunkers will see devestating force.

    That is what it looks like by 16kg Explosion of conventional ANFO and military uses explosives with higher brisance than a fertilizer can achieve and the Hermes-A uses almost the double of the explosive...
    The fact that they managed to get 20km of range while using a 30kg warhead is an achievement. The launcher is even light enough to be deployed on most vehicles. The only ATGM with comparable range I can think of is Spike NLOS, and that missile doesn't even come close to Hermes-A's payload or velocity.

    How powerful is 30kg of explosives? Well, the Hellfire ATGM achieves its ability to "defeat all known armor" with 9kg of explosives.


    Last edited by Zivo on Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:14 am; edited 1 time in total

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1519
    Points : 1682
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  TheArmenian on Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:31 am

    Zivo wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:It is so unnecessary even to consider Hermes-A to alter it into an APFSDS ATGM, it has a god damn 30kg Explosive WARHEAD, it can destroy almost everything and it won't make a big difference if it hits a civil car or a tank, it can destroy buildings,bridges and even bunkers will see devestating force.

    That is what it looks like by 16kg Explosion of conventional ANFO and military uses explosives with higher brisance than a fertilizer can achieve and the Hermes-A uses almost the double of the explosive...
    The fact that they managed to get 20km of range while using a 30kg warhead is an achievement. The launcher is even light enough to be deployed on most vehicles. The only ATGM with comparable range I can think of is Spike LNOS, and that missile doesn't even come close to Hermes-A's payload or velocity.

    How powerful is 30kg of explosives? Well, the Hellfire ATGM achieves its ability to "defeat all known armor" with 9kg of explosives.
    A projectile that has 30 kg of explosive will disable any tank even if it is not an anti-tank projectile.
    It is similar to a 152 mm artillery shell smashing on a tank. Even if it hits the most heavily armored part of the tank and does not penetrate, the damage will be significant to eliminate the tank from the battlefield until it is repaired.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:20 am

    Haha, Hermes-A would demolish an M1A2 from the front and light up the ammo at the back. It would be even more awesome when even light vehicles can carry Hermes-A. Hell, just give it a more powerful motor, top attack capability and APHE warhead and it will destroy any vehicle with soft roof armor, not just small holes you get with HEAT and APFSDS.
    OTOH the APFSDS makers have a lot of work ahead of them, 130mm is not that far from 125mm, and whatever shape or form M1a3 will take its sure that it will require 1m+ penetration capabilities.


    Last edited by collegeboy16 on Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:34 am; edited 1 time in total

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:31 am

    The row force of the impact with 1.3km/s is enough to make significant damage and the explosion of 30kg high brisant explosive will not only kill the crew it will have enough power to displace the turret from the hull, the canon will be ripped apart, tracks with wheels will see an uncommon increase in their travel path in horizontal achse, the crew will just die like a goldfish in a barrel with water and an firecracker.
    30kg can destroy big massive buildings and bridges, for example bridges get blown off with only 10kg explosives, one Hermes-A that hits the middle of the bridge or the bridge piers and it is gone, a normal ATGM can't do so.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:28 am

    The 30kg HEAT warhead is multipurpose and will have armour penetration aspects and HE Frag aspects too to ensure whatever it hits it will do the max damage.

    The Vikhr has a switch that can be set at launch to determine whether it penetrates lots of armour or sends out lots of fragments and I suspect the Hermes will do the same.


    _________________
    “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

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 19, 2013 12:57 am

    GarryB wrote:The 30kg HEAT warhead is multipurpose and will have armour penetration aspects and HE Frag aspects too to ensure whatever it hits it will do the max damage.

    The Vikhr has a switch that can be set at launch to determine whether it penetrates lots of armour or sends out lots of fragments and I suspect the Hermes will do the same.
    Yes it must have the same configuration as the Vikhr since KPB tula states on their website that Hermes-A will have 1200mm RHAe penetration capability.
    And the AT or Air engagement mode you mean doesn't changes which warhead it will set off but what fuze it use, against Armor contact fuze and against air targets or infantry targets on the ground it sets the proximity fuze at 60 to 200cm radius to the target sets in the proximity fuze giving it an airburst like capability against infantry targets, both explosive charges will blow off regardless of armor or aircraft target.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:43 am

    Yes, what you are saying is essentially correct, there is only one HE charge, but there are multiple fuse positions and detonation options.

    A HEAT warhead needs a fuse at its extreme rear to be set off at the precisely correct time so the plasma beam is formed and stable by the time it reaches the armour. A fuse somewhere else within the explosive and the plasma beam will not even form and the HEAT liner simply become fragments.


    _________________
    “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

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Anti-tank weapons and possible Kinetic Energy missiles?

    Post  Mike E on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:21 am

    Well **** me I just lost a few hundred words of text.

    ANYWAY; Some of you may know that in the past the US had programs to develop an AT missile that used a KE penetrator instead of HEAT munitions. Sadly, they were all cancelled or just ran out of funding... I think they'd be a great alternative to the HEAT missiles of today because they bring with them a lot more penetration, effective pen to be exact (Modern armor has much more RHAe against heat than KE rounds, and certain composites basically render HEAT useless from what I've heard.). Basically that means they'll penetrate almost any MBT everywhere but the hardest pasts of the turret. I know the second Lockheed model had something like 1,000 mm of penetration @ a few KM's distance, which as it stands, is enough to go through the hull of any and every MBT. They also travel very fast at range (~2000 m/s) making them harder to intercept than your average subsonic HEAT missile of today. IMHO these practically render both KE tank rounds and HEAT missiles useless, but that's is just my opinion and might not be yours. 

    Next future-weapon-tech I'm excited about is something like Lockheed's new MHtK (Miniature Hit to Kill) missile that is like an alternative to a Pantsir or something of the like. They could counter artillery shells, mortars, drones etc and do it in number because they are both small and somewhat affordable. AFAIK current handheld AA missiles can't do the same. 

    I'd love to hear your thoughts on this kind of tech and anything else Tank/Anti-Tank related. 

     - Like... When is Russia's new KE round (for Armata, the T-90? and B3) coming out?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  TR1 on Sun Feb 01, 2015 5:51 am

    The new round for Armata will not be compatible with T-72 or T-90 IIRC.

    2A82 will have backwards compatibility with older shells though.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Mike E on Sun Feb 01, 2015 6:01 am

    TR1 wrote:The new round for Armata will not be compatible with T-72 or T-90 IIRC.

    2A82 will have backwards compatibility with older shells though.
    TBH the only reason I asked that was because I completely forgot... Embarassed

    I just wish we had more information. Maybe after the Armata's revealing we will. 

     - Has anybody seen the T-55 upgrade package that turns it into what is basically an older 80U? Russia might actually be able sell a few to the countries that still actively use the T-55.

    TR1, what do you think about these KE missiles? I'm bummed the US didn't put them into service, and yes that wouldn't be the best thing for a certain country that starts with R and has 5 other letters coming after that.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Feb 01, 2015 7:34 am

    I think that such KE-ATGM's are technically possible and plausible but i also think they are out of proportion between cost and effecience. KE rounds have 4 crucial points, if one of them sucks they become quite useless, since one effects all the rest of parameters, weight, velocity, angel to armor and hardness of tip, if one sucks the rest is worsten beyond a point which makes it good enough to penetrate even mediocre armor. With that parameters it needs a very powerfull boosting rocket with a following missile that controlls and adjusts the angle to the armor and sustains the hypervelocity that is necessary to make it effective. Speaking that this is supposed to be a KE (APFSDS) the design would quite interesting to have a tiny little spike as warhead with a wide body rocket that can bring it up to 2km/s.


    I personally think based on on the information of the BK-31M and its tripple HEAT layout that it still holds more potential than we can get for same money and resources spend on KE development.

    According to Fofanov's side (haven't researched much other sources), then the BK-31M with its tripple tandem HEAT warhead has the tip shaped charge to predetonate ERA, the 2nd charge that exploseds is the rear charge which is 2nd biggest and forms its penetrator through small opening of the middle charge and opens up some of passive armor of the tank for the main charge (middle charge) that has then an easy opening created by rear charge and therefor less armor to defeat.

    Since the Rounds for T-64/80 and T-72/90 are shorter due the autoloader then any foreign tank, means that the Armata rounds can be longer and therefore have higher charge capacity. Fofanov also believes based on the picture that the main charge uses some alloy, since it differs by color from the front and rear shaped charge. HEAT rounds are nothing else but Kinetic Penetrators that use explosive to accelerate this tiny piece of metal to insane velocity and form it to a needle to penetrate armor and this fact makes newer Alloys with similiar molecular structure that is hard to disrubt by twisting or bending similiar to copper and should make a very formidable penetrators.



    With longer rounds they indeed can or could fit longer or more shaped charges.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Feb 01, 2015 7:36 am

    Mike E wrote:
    TBH the only reason I asked that was because I completely forgot... Embarassed

    I just wish we had more information. Maybe after the Armata's revealing we will. 

     - Has anybody seen the T-55 upgrade package that turns it into what is basically an older 80U? Russia might actually be able sell a few to the countries that still actively use the T-55.

    TR1, what do you think about these KE missiles? I'm bummed the US didn't put them into service, and yes that wouldn't be the best thing for a certain country that starts with R and has 5 other letters coming after that.

    personally i also think KE rounds and missiles are cool, but facts on the ground state that most of the targets you are gonna be encountering are not heavily armored MBTs, so it would make rather more sense to have something that has more versatility. it would make sense if you are up against armata brigades tho.

    that being said, i doubt the new vacuum series of rounds(900mm penetrator length) being shot from 2a82 is anything but adequate for the near future, then there is the matter of just simply bypassing all that armor by firing top attack atgms.


    Last edited by collegeboy16 on Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:19 am; edited 2 times in total

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Feb 01, 2015 7:46 am

    Mike E wrote:

    Next future-weapon-tech I'm excited about is something like Lockheed's new MHtK (Miniature Hit to Kill) missile that is like an alternative to a Pantsir or something of the like. They could counter artillery shells, mortars, drones etc and do it in number because they are both small and somewhat affordable. AFAIK current handheld AA missiles can't do the same. 
    not really alternative to pantsir- esp. the newest model. artillery and mortar fire problem? It would send a hermes atgm from where those came from and kill the launchers themselves. drones could be engaged at a leisure with missils or even guns.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Mike E on Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:01 am

    Werewolf wrote:I think that such KE-ATGM's are technically possible and plausible but i also think they are out of proportion between cost and effecience. KE rounds have 4 crucial points, if one of them sucks they become quite useless, since one effects all the rest of parameters, weight, velocity, angel to armor and hardness of tip, if one sucks the rest is worsten beyond a point which makes it good enough to penetrate even mediocre armor. With that parameters it needs a very powerfull boosting rocket with a following missile that controlls and adjusts the angle to the armor and sustains the hypervelocity that is necessary to make it effective. Speaking that this is supposed to be a KE (APFSDS) the design would quite interesting to have a tiny little spike as warhead with a wide body rocket that can bring it up to 2km/s.

    I personally think based on on the information of the BK-31M and its tripple HEAT layout that it still holds more potential than we can get for same money and resources spend on KE development.

    According to Fofanov's side (haven't researched much other sources), then the BK-31M with its tripple tandem HEAT warhead has the tip shaped charge to predetonate ERA, the 2nd charge that exploseds is the rear charge which is 2nd biggest and forms its penetrator through small opening of the middle charge and opens up some of passive armor of the tank for the main charge (middle charge) that has then an easy opening created by rear charge and therefor less armor to defeat.

    Since the Rounds for T-64/80 and T-72/90 are shorter due the autoloader then any foreign tank, means that the Armata rounds can be longer and therefore have higher charge capacity. Fofanov also believes based on the picture that the main charge uses some alloy, since it differs by color from the front and rear shaped charge. HEAT rounds are nothing else but Kinetic Penetrators that use explosive to accelerate this tiny piece of metal to insane velocity and form it to a needle to penetrate armor and this fact makes newer Alloys with similiar molecular structure that is hard to disrubt by twisting or bending similiar to copper  and should make a very formidable penetrators.


    With longer rounds they indeed can or could fit longer or more shaped charges.
    They have shown to work well, very in fact and that's why I support the whole thing. Tests showed the newer Lockheed models could penetrate 1000 mm RHAe *at TEN KILOMETERS while flying at 2000 (!) m/s the WHOLE way*. Any KE round today would struggle to do the same.... At point blank range! Of course they will cost more, but they are missiles after all. They have the advantage of being controlled and supposedly able to change targets. If testing over a period of many years, using many different models shows the concept to work, then by all means it must work well... You can find the designs online though it is a big PITA. Because the projects were never actually put into real motion information is scarce. I've heard that LM did produce a few hundred examples though.

    Gotta remember that HEAT starts at a large disadvantage vs. KE when against modern-age armor. The M1A2's lower glacis should have more armor than the -31m's 800 mm of penetration based on info from the weaker-armored A1. This while the same lower plate will have 150 mm (or more) less RHAe vs. KE rods. Doesn't matter if it has 1 or 2 or heck even 4 charges if it can not penetrate. A lot of other Western MBT's have spaced armor as well, which as we all know affects HEAT in one way or another. 

    @collegeboy16

    Yes and no... You want to prepare for the worst of situations when it comes to just about anything. Assuming the enemy will be riding on horses isn't gonna do anybody much good now is it? It would be no less effective than an equivalent HEAT round or missile.

    Do you mean adequate or anything but? The latter would imply it wouldn't be...

    Top-attack ATGM's are great until they have to deal with APS systems. They are slow, and much easier to destroy than a faster flying missile. Much like AShM's I'd like to add.


    Last edited by Mike E on Mon Feb 02, 2015 8:44 am; edited 1 time in total

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Mike E on Sun Feb 01, 2015 8:05 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Mike E wrote:

    Next future-weapon-tech I'm excited about is something like Lockheed's new MHtK (Miniature Hit to Kill) missile that is like an alternative to a Pantsir or something of the like. They could counter artillery shells, mortars, drones etc and do it in number because they are both small and somewhat affordable. AFAIK current handheld AA missiles can't do the same. 
    not really alternative to pantsir- esp. the newest model. artillery and mortar fire problem? It would send a hermes atgm from where those came from and kill the launchers themselves. drones could be engaged at a leisure with missils or even guns.
    Maybe I should have said supplement. The only reason the US wants it is because they don't have a mission-specialized Pantsir-equivalent yet. The only thing they have is the CRAM for **** sake... 

    They are like the last level of defense. Almost got to think of it like a miniature ICBM defense systems. - You want as many layers as possible, and you want those layers to be able to supplement the other layers for the greatest efficiency..

    Sponsored content

    Re: Kinetic energy Anti-tank weapons

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:03 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:03 pm