Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Share

    NickM
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 131
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  NickM on Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:35 pm

    The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  medo on Sat Apr 27, 2013 2:34 pm

    NickM wrote:The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    I disagree. Javelin fly high and slow in a kind of ballistic curve. Modern air defense escort could easily shot down Javelin or Spike kind of ATGMs. On the other hand Kornet and krizanthema fly low and fast and escorting air defense could not fire on them if they don't want to hit their own tanks and infantry in front of them. Not to say, that launching high flying missile is very easy to locate for artillery radars, what means you will be very quickly on the receiving end of artillery fire.




    Small rocket on RPG-30 is not meant for ERA penetration, but to fool active defense system as Arena or Iron Fist, that it fire on small rocket, but is unable to fire on main rocket behind it.

    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Apr 27, 2013 3:35 pm

    medo wrote:
    NickM wrote:The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    I disagree. Javelin fly high and slow in a kind of ballistic curve. Modern air defense escort could easily shot down Javelin or Spike kind of ATGMs. On the other hand Kornet and krizanthema fly low and fast and escorting air defense could not fire on them if they don't want to hit their own tanks and infantry in front of them. Not to say, that launching high flying missile is very easy to locate for artillery radars, what means you will be very quickly on the receiving end of artillery fire.

    On top of that, Jane's article of test in Germany, on Warsaw pact tanks back in the mid 90s, confirmed that javelin wasn't as effective as they thought, even the M829A1/2 APFSDS had problems according to not only the Jane's report but also more recent test concerning ERA penetration.

    M829A1/2 Test

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Zivo on Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:13 am

    The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    Whats interesting about your statement, is that of all the tanks in the world, the T-90 would have the highest chance of survival against the FGM 148 due to its multilayer approach to protection.

    I kind of hate vs arguments, but the pluses and minuses of systems are worth discussing. The FGM 148 is not a silver bullet, and can certainly be defended against. Why is the T-90 the best tank to be in when going against a javelin equipped force? I'll explain. First the T-90 is equipped with a laser warning system. Laser rangefinders are strong enough to trip them. So before the soldier even has a chance to lock onto the T-90, the T-90's systems are already alert and plotting a fire angle to the javelin launcher. The T-90 is by no means the only tank equipped with laser warning systems either. Second, the T-90 will automatically deploy a smoke screen when a laser is detected, since the javelin is optically guided, smoke screens are an effective countermeasure. Third, the T-90 has higher top aspect armor density due to its smaller body compared to other tanks. The T-90's magazine is also deep in the hull. In contrast tanks like the M1A1 and leopard 2, which have large flat roofs and bustle magazines.

    There's also a few projects that are developed but have not been deployed on the field yet due to cost, that would have a significant impact on the effectiveness of optically guided top attack ATGMs. One being Nakidka, which is an IR and radar absorbing camouflage kit. The other is directional infrared counter measures (DIRCM), which is basically an independently targeted IR dazzler.

    All that being said, the FGM-148 is still highly lethal against most other targets without laser warning systems.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  TR1 on Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:36 am

    NickM wrote:The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    Lmao. You are such a fanboy.
    SPike > Javelin.

    Also, what chance does Abrams have vs top attack missiles Wink

    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:02 am

    TR1 wrote:
    NickM wrote:The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    Lmao. You are such a fanboy.
    SPike > Javelin.

    Also, what chance does Abrams have vs top attack missiles Wink
    Good question TR1, the use of top attack missile on an Abram would undoubtedly be nothing less than the the complete and other destruction of the tank.

    The Abrams (turret) horizontal sections are not only the most thinly armored but also the most exposed area of the tank, not to mention huge.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Zivo on Sun Apr 28, 2013 3:12 am

    GarryB wrote:There is reportedly a new ATGM system called Baikal being developed, but the performance of Metis-M1 and Kornet-EM suggest the Russian military is not lacking in terms of tank killers.

    Of course Krisantema and Hermes in the air will also be very potent, and of course new models of Kh-25 would be available, while Kh-29 would be overkill.

    So, is Baikal supposed to replace Kornet? I've never heard about this project.

    Does any other country have an analogue to Hermes in the works? Russia currently seems to hold a monopoly on two-stage hypersonic missiles. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 28, 2013 12:02 pm

    What about Russian top attack AT weapon or RPG round that explodes above tank and projects it's force downwards? Sorry, lost track about them, but there were rumours couple years ago

    I don't know of any Soviet or Russian ATGM type weapons with top attack performance built in. Having said that most of their laser guided artillery shells like Krasnopol and Gran and Kitolov etc etc have a steep trajectory and would impact in a diving top attack flight profile.

    Due to its beam riding guidance and air launched Kornet-EM would also in effect attack from above if the launch platform continued to fly towards the target (say a high flying UCAV).

    The new RPGs I know of include the RPG-30 with the decoy rocket, the RPG-32... a sort of unified aiming system with a multi calibre modular design for HE and HEAT warheads in a range of calibres. There was also a rumour of a semi guided RPG system that had a ballistics computer and laser range finder that generated an aim point for the user that was rather more accurate than the standard static iron sights.

    The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is the FGM 148 Javelin .

    It is a very interesting and capable weapon... but has enormous flaws... it is very expensive and is only able to perform a diving top attack profile against an armoured vehicle with its engine running and a good IR signature to lock onto. In Afghanistan it has been used mostly in the manually guided role which makes it a very very expensive Metis-M1 equivalent, but with slightly longer range and less armour penetration performance. (Javelin penetrates 750mm while Metis-M1 penetrates over 950mm).

    The Metis-M1 is a slightly faster missile that is much much cheaper and comes in a standard thermobaric warhead model much more effective against things like civilian cars and trucks or bunkers.

    There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .

    Of course it can be stopped, most APS systems can defeat it including ARENA which was developed in the late 1980s as a replacement for DROZD. In the diving top attack mode it needs an IR signature to guide it and Nakidka means it wont get that IR signature. That means it would need to be manually guided to hit the tank, which means normal ATGM attack profile where ARENA is effective... and the frontal armour and ERA would probably stop it anyway.

    Small rocket on RPG-30 is not meant for ERA penetration, but to fool active defense system as Arena or Iron Fist, that it fire on small rocket, but is unable to fire on main rocket behind it.

    I believe the initial decoy rocket is designed to defeat ERA blocks, so if the APS system does not shoot it down it will direct multiple HEAT penetrators at the target tank to set off the ERA plates/boxes. It wont penetrate the armour but it does prematurely set off any ERA blocks so the following rocket can target the base armour directly. The second rocket is still designed to defeat ERA, so if the first rocket is shot down ERA will not necessarily defeat the second rocket. If both rockets get through then the second rocket will have a better chance of defeating the armour.

    So, is Baikal supposed to replace Kornet? I've never heard about this project.

    Can't remember which thread it is in but there was an article from a Russian magazine where they were talking about weapons development and they mentioned a new ATGM that was being developed, though they didn't mention any details about it.

    I suspect the Kornet-EM will serve for quite some time to come as it is a very capable and effective system. I suspect the Ataka will be replaced by the Krisantema, and the Hermes will also be introduced. The Metis-M1 is also a very good seller on the international market as a light portable guided missile for short range use.

    To be honest I suspect the Baikal might be an optically guided ATGM of medium range that might perhaps use a QWIP sensor for targeting.

    Of course it could easily be that it is a MMW radar guided heavy missile.

    Just speculation really.

    Does any other country have an analogue to Hermes in the works? Russia currently seems to hold a monopoly on two-stage hypersonic missiles. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

    In terms of SAMs the Soviets/Russians have often led the way simply because they have invested the time and effort and of course money into the problem of defending from enemy air power. Each branch has its own systems yet they still seem to cooperate in terms of commonality. This is being taken to an extreme with the new weapons like Vityaz, Morfei, S-500, Pantsir-S1 and a new MANPAD called Verba that might also use a QWIP seeker.

    Just looking at the performance stats released for the Kornet-EM its main weakness seems to me to be speed with it barely transsonic.

    It has excellent range, the guidance is practically fire and forget and seems to be very accurate, and its penetration figures are pretty good too. It can be used against air and ground targets out to 10km for the HE version and 8.5km for the anti armour model. With no trailing wires it can be fired from vehicles on the move including UCAVs... in fact it would be an ideal weapon for UCAVs because as the high flying UCAV flew closer to the target the laser beam would get steeper and steeper so the missile would be sliding at an angle rather than descending down a fixed glide slope.

    If you imagine a missile fired from 2km up and 2km horizontal range the beam should be a 45 degree angle, but after launch the UCAV would keep flying closer to the target and the beam angle would get steeper. Fired from 5km up and 5km range the beam would again be 45 degrees but as the UCAV got closer the beam would get steeper and steeper and by the time the missile hit the UCAV might only be 2km from the target and still 5km up so the laser beam would likely be very steep... perhaps 60-70 degrees... which would match the angle of most armour plates, so the HEAT warhead would be penetrating flat armour instead of angled armour plates... and of course with a tank like an Abrams with a huge crew compartment and turret area the armour itself will likely be very thin. By the time of impact the UCAV will only be 6-7km away from the target so accuracy should be very good.


    _________________
    “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: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm

    Nick, Javelin is not a benchmark. Rest of the world isn't so backwards as You Americans like to think. For example Spike is years ahead of Javelin.

    NickM
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 131
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  NickM on Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:11 pm

    Regular wrote:Nick, Javelin is not a benchmark. Rest of the world isn't so backwards as You Americans like to think. For example Spike is years ahead of Javelin.

    Accept it , reject it ..... the Anglo Saxon world is by far more advanced than your rest of the world . And compared to us they will always remain backwards .

    The Javelin's computer is so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with impunity . The tandem shaped warhead can very easily penetrate any ERA even those on the T 90 .

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Zivo on Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:58 pm

    Troll, you can at least try to refute some of our points. Laughing


    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  TR1 on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:12 pm

    Just ignore that little racist idiot.

    nemrod
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 806
    Points : 1309
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  nemrod on Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:50 pm

    At first thanks to all for your responses.

    Regular wrote:Did You mean Hook in russian?  
    Let's say simply RPG-30, Kriouk, Kreouk, seems to be a bad french translation.  Very Happy


    NickM wrote:
    The best top attack , anti tank , anti bunker missile is
    the FGM 148 Javelin . There is absolutely no way that it can be stopped
    and no other country has anything that is remotely close to the Javelin .
    Best or not the best anti-tank this is not a question, if you see results where of course a javelin burnt a T-72

    and here
    set of images about Abrams burnt, or destroyed, Merkava, in the better case disabled

    http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1170&bih=798&tbm=isch&tbnid=KBVwqkeEHggAMM:&imgrefurl=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2825070/posts&docid=_InpC-eWm61ouM&imgurl=http://latimesphoto.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/iraq_war_carolyn_cole091.jpg&w=970&h=615&ei=SIR9UY21Mo66hAez14G4Aw&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:20,s:0,i:156&iact=rc&dur=625&page=2&tbnh=175&tbnw=269&start=20&ndsp=18&tx=187&ty=119

    http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1170&bih=798&tbm=isch&tbnid=tnuKF7LCqfUmWM:&imgrefurl=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2825070/posts&docid=_InpC-eWm61ouM&imgurl=http://www.deviantart.com/download/206024199/destroyed_m1a2_abrams_iraq_by_billym12345-d3entaf.png&w=499&h=337&ei=SIR9UY21Mo66hAez14G4Aw&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:11,s:0,i:119&iact=rc&dur=1219&page=1&tbnh=168&tbnw=245&start=0&ndsp=20&tx=78&ty=92


    We realize that most all anti-tanks missiles, if they used by high skill persons could inflict a huge casualties.

    Here we talk about light weaponnery, as Rpg


    We noticed that this cheap weapon could cause serious concerns from US staffs, as a M1-Abrams is more expensive than a RPG-29.

    NickM wrote:
    Accept it , reject it ..... the Anglo Saxon world
    is by far more advanced than your rest of the world
    . And compared to
    us they will always remain backwards .
    Iam sorry no, this is what us, in western countries had to believe the infinite superiority of West, because of propaganda. The facts are there, either in aircrafts, either missiles, either in everywhere. We are supposed to admit that the others are far behind meanwhile in West, - so-called -Freedom, technology -huge rate in MIT are asiatic origins if I recalled 1/3, iam not sure- but the reality is far more different. See simply the results of US campaigns in Afghanistan, and Iraq. The balance is more catastrophic than Saigon's US embassies evacuation.

    Yes indeed, anglo-saxon -for now, because the changes are quickly arriving :  http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123338424  - countries had just a light advantage from others, they can afford to train their soldiers very well. Better than others. Because of dollar, they could spend whatever they want, the others countries should pay US deficit. This problem I often talked about it, and this subject about US economy is wide, we will see after. But now, with the crisis, this won't be the case. Moreover, USA, as UK are suffering from the Lance Amstrong's syndrom, we are obliged to believe they are the best, but once the truth appears, we realize that it's simply wind.




    NickM wrote:
    The Javelin's computer is
    so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with
    impunity . The tandem shaped warhead can very easily penetrate any ERA
    even those on the T 90 .

    Take care from their ultra-sophisticated hardwares, in Vietnam an old Mig 17, downed several times their state of the arts Phantom II, and F-105.


    The T90s do NOT stand a chance against the FGM 148 .

    If there is one point that I agree with you, is this. Yes you are right, with highly qualified soldiers, a Javelin could probably burnt, or disabled a T-90. Not because US hardware is more sophisticated, or more advanced than the others, but because simply, as I already said, the concept of Tank is dead. This is the end of the time for tank, the pictures that I posted you before is normally enough to realize that the blitz concept, that originated from first wold war, 1916, nearly one century is over.
    The future is in flying tank, like AH 64 Apache, Chinese Z10, European Tiger, Mil Mi 24, Mil Mi 28, Ka-50 etc...


    GarryB wrote:There is reportedly a new ATGM system called Baikal
    being developed, but the performance of Metis-M1 and Kornet-EM suggest
    the Russian military is not lacking in terms of tank killers.

    Of
    course Krisantema and Hermes in the air will also be very potent, and of
    course new models of Kh-25 would be available, while Kh-29 would be
    overkill.

    As I said, Russia does not need neither Metis-M, or Rpg, or Krisantema etc....
    Russia -like China- is a superpower, with its modern and state of arts fighters-bombers like Su-25, 27, 30, 32, 34, 35, Mig 29/35 cruise missiles, submarines, etc...
    Against tanks neutron bombs is enough, and Russia has hundreds, if not thousands. No use to tell more about nuclear arsenal.
    Remember the stupid criminal of Saakatchvili tried to assault Russia, Russian army responded by its fighters-bombers, and armored vehicules.
    Even the bastards of Cheney had nothing to say.
    Russia is not concerned by either S-300/400/500 or AT-14, AT-10, AT-8, it has enough hardware to deter anyone.

    Regards.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Mon Apr 29, 2013 11:55 am

    NickM wrote:
    Regular wrote:Nick, Javelin is not a benchmark. Rest of the world isn't so backwards as You Americans like to think. For example Spike is years ahead of Javelin.

    Accept it , reject it ..... the Anglo Saxon world is by far more advanced than your rest of the world . And compared to us they will always remain backwards .

    The Javelin's computer is so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with impunity . The tandem shaped warhead can very easily penetrate any ERA even those on the T 90 .

    What are You talking about? Look around, America doesn't develop top weapons, most of the time you recycle what You have from your allies. And talking about backwardness, not to be racists or something, but I now live in Britain because of my contract work and even in deep Lithuanian village I never seen such backwards and stupid people like I see them here in major UK cities. Not to mention that most of british I know are cowards and very plain people that need to be guided to do simple work as in Lithuania 18 year old part-timer could do it 10x better. No wonder they hire people from abroad and local population act as labour (at least in my company). IT companies especially, we have english women mopping floors. Never been to America, but if my british "friends" tell me stories about how stupid they are so it leaves me only to wonder.

    Now compare Javelin to Spike and tell me that You are not misguided. And believe me, Russians are aware of both javelin and spike and other ATGM.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:18 pm



    I truly don't understand this particular attention (a true kind of fetishism Laughing ) for a weapon like FM-148 "Javelin".


    The weapon in question occupy the same operational niche of the old M-47 "Dragon", therefore its impact in anti-tank operation in a conventional war ,against an advanced enemy, would be close to zero.




    At any extent FGM-148 leave its operators well within engagement range of practically almost any medium to heavy weapon present on enemy APC,IFV and MBT, no sane general would let FGM-148 operators attempt to confront advancing enemy armoured and mechanized infantry divisions in a conventional battlefield only to see any enemy medium caliber autocannons , automatic grenade launchers and HE-Frag rounds (even worse if paired with “Ainet “system ) play literally at target practice with Javelin operators without that them would get any chance of return the fire.

    To the contrary of TOW family (the TRUE field ATGM of US Forces Wink ) FGM-148 can be only employed in urban or mountainous choke-points ambushes and, also here, only from well covered/camouflaged firing positions.
    Naturally even in those tactical environments complying with FGM-148's CONOPs , "Javelin" represent a scarcely ductile and largely unaffordable solution.

    Direct operational experiences from NATO latest theatres of war have ,in facts, demonstrated that just in those environments (in particular urbanized ones) crushing majority of menaces is represented obviously by entrenched/defilated infantry positions.
    Here at cause of :

    1) Very high time of fire delivery (mostly at cause of CLU cooling's requirements)
    2) Scarce area of lethality
    3) Ridiculously disproportionate single ammunition costs

    FGM-148 represent, at best, a "make shift" solution totally inadequate to the task.

    Those are example of what just said:














    Naturally against an enemy totally unequipped and ,therefore, incapable to defend itself in any way the consequences are mostly not existent ; but what would happen if your enemy corresponding infantry units would be equipped even only with export version of weapons capable to engage you, your LAVs or even your helicopters/UAV from over 5 km (Kornet-E) or from up to 10 km (Kornet-EM) with optimized HE or thermobaric warheads from a close hill or a very far ruin ?.


    If someone ask to himself how would appear, instead, a mass produceable, low time of engagement and highly efficient weapon for those kind of close range engagements it should give a look to that:






    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:32 pm

    The Javelin's computer is so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with impunity .

    Not that much better than most palm top computers today.

    The Kornet-EM uses similar technology to achieve a lock on a target in the thermal and visible light spectrum... the technical term is an autotracker, though the Kornet can see in visible light as well as thermal, so it can lock onto targets that don't happen to be hot... unlike Javelin.

    The tandem shaped warhead can very easily penetrate any ERA even those on the T 90 .

    Only from a top attack flight profile, which means it needs a lock, which means a T-90 with its engine turned off is completely safe, and one fitted with Nakidka is also safe.

    To kill a T-90 fitted with Nakidka the Javelin would need to be manually guided, which means no top attack flight profile and trying to penetrate the frontal armour of the T-90 with a weapon rated at 750mm of RHA... well you would be dreaming.


    Best or not the best anti-tank this is not a question, if you see results where of course a javelin burnt a T-72

    That was a mockup filled with explosives... you could as easily say that is what it would do to an Abrams using the same footage... just as realistic.

    If the US Army had given the money they spent on the Javelin directly to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan they could have claimed victory and left both places better than when they went in... and all those American kids wouldn't have needed to die or get maimed/scarred.

    The future is in flying tank, like AH 64 Apache, Chinese Z10, European Tiger, Mil Mi 24, Mil Mi 28, Ka-50 etc...

    Kosovo showed that air power alone is impotent. It is ground power that takes and holds territory... there is no replacement for a tank.

    Remember the stupid criminal of Saakatchvili tried to assault Russia, Russian army responded by its fighters-bombers, and armored vehicules.

    All the air power in the world would not have stopped sakashvili... it was the ground forces that made his attack on South Ossetia fold.

    Air Power makes fighting easier, but it is a western myth that air power alone can get the job done... it was something they told themselves while they were murdering German women and children and old men with their strategic bombing, while the Soviet Army fought the German soldiers in the east.



    _________________
    “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: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:59 pm

    Shmel wouldn't be as good in those distances they were using. Kornet would do good as it has good AP missile. But using Javelin on insurgents is overkill, but maybe missile are reaching their shelf time? I don't know. Israel developed mini spike for that. Way cheaper than using 40k to kill insurgent. Anyways Javelin is not cost efficient system and now it was toppled by other even cheaper but more advanced systems.

    Baikal ATGM is under development and it's gonna be ready for 2020. Wonder how advanced it will be.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Mon Apr 29, 2013 1:02 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    The Javelin's computer is so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with impunity .

    Not that much better than most palm top computers today.
    Plus it actually has to get into lock. And it will be detected. Garry what You think about todays ATGM systems, Bill 2 or Spike, even Indian Nag?

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  flamming_python on Mon Apr 29, 2013 2:07 pm

    [quote="NickM"]
    Regular wrote:The Javelin's computer is so sophisticated that once locked on to a tank it can strike it with impunity . The tandem shaped warhead can very easily penetrate any ERA even those on the T 90 .

    From the top - yes
    But there are countermeasures being developed or already introduced such as the already mentioned Nakidka kit for tanks.

    NickM
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 184
    Points : 131
    Join date : 2012-11-09
    Location : NYC,USA / Essex,UK

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  NickM on Mon Apr 29, 2013 2:37 pm

    Regular wrote:
    What are You talking about?
    Common Sense

    Regular wrote:Look around, America doesn't develop top weapons, most of the time you recycle what You have from your allies.

    Unless you live in some cave or something you wouldn't be making such statements . The US exports the maximum arms anywhere in the world . The money that the US spends on defense R &D is the highest for any country . It's US allies that purchases from the US . But by your logic , from the F 16 to the F 22 and everything in between the US imports from aboard .

    Regular wrote: No wonder they hire people from abroad and local population act as labour (at least in my company). IT companies especially, we have english women mopping floors.

    We English NEVER hire people from abroad . The people that you are referring to are mostly illegal immigrants who have sneaked into UK from Asia and Africa and have therefore reduced the local population to a minority in cities like London , Birmingham and Manchester. That's the reason why you see such a lot of dark skinned people in the UK . Completely un productive , just staying there by force . This illegal immigration is happening not just in the UK , but across Europe , including Russia .

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2300366/Crackdown-education-tourists-targets-illegal-immigrant-children-Swedish-PM-slams-Camerons-attempts-curb-UKs-soft-touch-image.html

    Of late Russia has realized the huge problems posed by these Muslims , Indians, Chinese illegal immigrants and is now adopting corrective measures .

    http://en.rian.ru/russia/20121231/178515872.html

    Very soon your Lithuania will also be taken over by these illegals and then you and I would not be having this discussion .


    Regular wrote:Now compare Javelin to Spike and tell me that You are not misguided. And believe me, Russians are aware of both javelin and spike and other ATGM.

    Russians are aware of Spike & Javelin but have yet not been able to come up with a top attack ATGM . Inability ...? or sheer laziness ?

    Javelin can destroy fortified bunkers and can also hit any particular room in a building . It has a soft-launch, so it can be fired from inside an enclosed space (read bunker or building). The actual rocket motor ignites some twenty or so meters from the launch location. This moves the signature away from the troops firing the
    missile (an added benefit.) The Javelin homes using electro-optical recognition. It actually sees the target and homes on a video image. This means there is no active targetting source (such as a laser or radar) to stop. Javelin is a fire and forget rocket.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Apr 29, 2013 3:01 pm

    Shmel wouldn't be as good in those distances they were using.


    Regular please observe the typical range of engagement of FGM-148 in its real combat usage in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    In very wide majority of actual battlefield instances the engagement ranges are no more than few hundreds of meters and against stationary targets.
    In all those instances Shmel/Shmel-M would not only be ridiculously more cost-efficient (you can shot aboout 40 Shmel-M for the same cost of a single Javelin !!!) but also lethality effect on the target would be crushingly in favour of Shmel-M.


    FGM-148 is nothing more nothing less than an overexpensive successor of the M-47 Dragon and occupy its same tactical role.
    Even only think that modern IFVs and MBTs ,in a conventional war, would put FGM-148 among theirs major concerns would be simply deranged ; infantry and vehicle operated TOW would be Wink .

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Apr 29, 2013 3:50 pm


    It actually sees the target and homes on a video image. This means there is no active targetting source (such as a laser or radar) to stop. Javelin is a fire and forget rocket.

    In a conventional war against anyone except a typical third world enemy FGM-148 would be the classical example of "forget before fire" weapon Laughing ,with enemy Infantry squads (for not say IFV or MBT for which) throwing the dices in order to win the amusement to make target practice with the poor Javelin operators from well outside the range of theirs return-fire with:
    1) Kord machine gun
    2) 30 mm autocannons
    3) AGS-30 grenade launchers
    4) Kornet/Kornet-M
    5) Squad mortars

    and so on....

    Naturally the best way to employ FGM-148 is to do it.....against enemy totally incapable to defend themselves and organize, after, staged tests against mockup T-72s filled with explosive to promote its image......pathetic Razz Razz


    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  medo on Mon Apr 29, 2013 4:59 pm

    Russians are aware of Spike & Javelin but have yet not been able to come up with a top attack ATGM . Inability ...? or sheer laziness ?

    Igla MANPAD use top attack maneuver, when it engage its target. Do you think they could not do this also with ATGMs? It's about different ATGM concept or philosophy which doesn't mean it is worse. Russian designers decide to make missile fast and flying low with high penetration capabilities to engage frontal armor. Its advantage is longer range, shorter flying time, air defense escort could not engage them if not want to shot on their tanks and infantry in front of them and low flying profile is more difficult to detect with artillery radars. In case of need they could use ATGMs against helicopters and low flying planes (Kornet, Krizanthema).

    Spike and Javelin on contrary use top attack fly profile and they fly high and slower and have shorter range and longer flying time. Tanks have weaker top armor, but modern equipment like Arena or Iron Fist could easier engage such missile (radars have less problems with clutter) as well as other radars easier find and lock such missile than low profile flying ones. It's excellent against vintage army, but against modern it is highly problematic.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:15 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Shmel wouldn't be as good in those distances they were using.


    Regular please observe the typical range of engagement of FGM-148 in its real combat usage in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    In very wide majority of actual battlefield instances the engagement ranges are no more than few hundreds of meters and against stationary targets.
    In all those instances Shmel/Shmel-M would not only be ridiculously more cost-efficient (you can shot aboout 40 Shmel-M for the same cost of a single Javelin !!!) but also lethality effect on the target would be crushingly in favour of Shmel-M.


    FGM-148 is nothing more nothing less than an overexpensive successor of the M-47 Dragon and occupy its same tactical role.
    Even only think that modern IFVs and MBTs ,in a conventional war, would put FGM-148 among theirs major concerns would be simply deranged ; infantry and vehicle operated TOW would be Wink .
    Well You are right, looks like they are using Javelins only because they have to. Why You think they are using it place You have no enemy tanks in? But I've seen Americans using M72. M3 MAAWS would be enough in most cases and they are damn accurate.
    I have nothing against advanced fire and forget and top-attack weapons as they are cheaper than tank and You can employ them with deadly effect. For example Abrams are no more protected from above from top atack weapon than old T-72. But somehow You don't see tanks disappearing from scene and ATGM are ordered in rational numbers. We only have few Javelin missles and they are stored in secret places, like some kind ICBM Very Happy You can forget about live target practice.

    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

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

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Sujoy on Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:41 pm

    A major drawback of the Javelin system is the reliance on a thermal view to acquire targets , meaning until the refrigeration component has cooled the system the thermal views will not operate . This may take more than 2 minutes if you intend to use it in hot & humid conditions like Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Another major drawback is the system can fire only at targets in line of sight at a distance of approx 1 km and the operator cannot correct the flight path of the missile after it has been launched.

    Jammers like SHTORA can negate the Javelin as it has no back up tracking system.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:13 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:13 am