Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 08, 2013 5:18 pm

    It is a Russian Naval observation system designed to be mounted up on a mast in clusters with the optics including long range zoom day and night optics along with laser target markers and ranging equipment.

    Replace the optics with a spherical IR sensor like this:



    Which is the hemispherical array associated with Morfei and is an IR array covering 360 degrees horizontally and 180 degrees vertically to give complete coverage of any IR signal immediately.

    The four faces of the AESA antenna array offer passive 360 degree continuous coverage and the opportunity for rapid 360 degree scanning using electronic scanning rather than mechanical scanning... resulting in coverage in micro seconds rather than seconds.

    The point is that they can do it, but few missiles have the performance to warrant the cost... Morfei with its lock after launch capability and Vityaz with ARH would be two missiles that would benefit.


    _________________
    “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

    coolieno99
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 136
    Points : 159
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  coolieno99 on Sun Jun 09, 2013 1:56 pm

    FSA attacks SAA armour vehicle with 9M113 Konkurs ATGM


    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Jun 09, 2013 3:01 pm

    coolieno99 wrote:FSA attacks SAA armour vehicle with 9M113 Konkurs ATGM



    Laughing Laughing Laughing


    coolieno99 do you have some other of those staged video ?

    I want to create a rich collection of those comical videos (all those with tanks filled with explosives up to the top of turret Razz ), with the opening one being the infamous video of FGM-148's "test".

    This one, in particular has been clearly recorded in two parts - do you know ,you need some time to bring explosive in the captured tank (ostendibly a very outdated specimen from some abandoned reserve stock) and not even any kind of missile has been shot against the tank before the....remote detonation trigger. Laughing Laughing

    Simply too funny Laughing .


    If any this video perfectly validate what said ,in some of the latest articles, on the impact of Syrian tanks on rebel operations and morale :


    http://vpk.name/news/85890_siriiskie_boeviki_v_uzhase_ot_nashih_tankov.html


    and how much important has become ,for them, to attempt to discourage theirs employment ,with literally any mean (even the most unsophisticated ones Razz )



    As Sa'iqa
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 416
    Points : 352
    Join date : 2013-06-02
    Age : 22
    Location : Western Poland

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  As Sa'iqa on Sun Jun 09, 2013 6:12 pm

    Whats wrong with this? It's not the first video of idle tank being hit (do you remember a T-72 hit in the rear?) and if you look closer, you will see that the missle hit exactly where the ammo is stored.

    I think it carried a lot of HE rounds. There is one ANNA movie which shows a T-72 hit by an RPG-29 and the result was exactly the same - instant explosion.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:13 pm

    Whats wrong with this? It's not the first video of idle tank being hit (do you remember a T-72 hit in the rear?) and if you look closer, you will see that the missle hit exactly where the ammo is stored.





    Wrong ?

    In this video is not that merely something is "wrong".....but all is RIDICULOUSLY inconsistent -staged- (and also ,if you allow me to say, in a very amateurish way Laughing ).

    Image that you, by now, have already realized that no missile is recorded in this video Rolling Eyes

    About the explosion all is comically out of line :

    The magnitude, the perfectly iso-radial propagation and the absolute instantaneousness of the detonation (for remain silent of the laughable attempt to add in a second instance the virtual "missile" on the video recording ,forgetting......the interaction with the dusty terrain Laughing Laughing ) are clear sign of a low level operation of staging.




    As Sa'iqa
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 416
    Points : 352
    Join date : 2013-06-02
    Age : 22
    Location : Western Poland

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  As Sa'iqa on Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:36 pm

    Ok so look at this:
    7:23 - instant explosion of a T-72. You can't even distinguish between a hit and ammo cook-off.

    Soviet/russian tanks do not have separate ammo compartment and blow-off panels, the ammo is stored at the bottom of the hull, it looks like this:

    Such a layout makes it hard to hit ammo storage in tank vs tank combat but if something hits it, then the crew has no chances to survive. If the tank carries a large numbe of HE or HEAT shells, then it gets even worse and a catastrophic explosion may occur.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Jun 10, 2013 2:47 am


    Ok so look at this:
    7:23 - instant explosion of a T-72. You can't even distinguish between a hit and ammo cook-off.



    Rolling Eyes I know very well this ,like dozen and dozen of other videos and photos (published and not) of SAA tanks in operation....and naturally in vast majority of them the rebel terrorists are wasted and SAA tanks survive to resume theirs work the day after Wink .


    There is NOTHING in this video being even only close to the ridiculously staged video previously proposed: the detonation is dozens of times less powerful and perfectly compatible with sympathetic detonation of ammo charge and fuel's ignition ; moreover is not possible to ascertain precisely times ,but ostensibly it come from a shot from a 25+ elevation degrees, as in vast majority of destroyed SAA tanks.



    Soviet/russian tanks do not have separate ammo compartment and blow-off panels, the ammo is stored at the bottom of the hull, it looks like this:

    You want to educate me on the placement of ammo in Soviet tanks ? Very Happy

    Overall ammo compartments (western type) actually increase, NOT reduce the vulnerable target area's projection for enemy fire in direct LOS engagements and it is a compromise design solution dictated mostly by the huge internal volume occupied by the human loader and ergonomic and practical requirement of accessibility of the ammo for such manual loader.

    The layout with ammo stored in the lowest and more recessed hull's sector (near center of mass and significantly lower of the line of maximum density of direct enemy fire) is incomparably more advantageous and less exposed for classical MBT's employment in tipical conventional war's CONOP.

    Blow-off panels ?

    Say to me, how much tanks employ blow-off panels ?







    This image appear strangely similar to those which a pair of funny guys (that already come here sometimes ago attempting to sold theirs fairy tales....with very, very scarce luck Laughing

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t1368p540-first-photos-of-t-95-and-t-90am

    who, like elementary school kids, love to fill , half way between the utter bias and the complete irrational, with red and other colors MBT-related images.


    I image that you know perfectly where is REALLY placed autoloader's carousel and its REAL frontal projection.

    Do you know, this childish red stain manage to annoy contemporaneously both the sight and the intelligence of the beholder.





    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Mon Jun 10, 2013 3:38 am

    At least blowoff panels actually give a chance for the crews to survive unlike hull ammo compartments. Does it matter how hard it is to hit the ammo compartment of a soviet tank that when a round hits it the whole soviet tank crew is vaporized?

    If blowoff panels are so uneccessary then why did the Russians put them on the Black eagle and T-72 bulat that were planned to enter service?

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-11
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Mon Jun 10, 2013 4:52 am

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Image that you, by now, have already realized that no missile is recorded in this video Rolling Eyes

    About the explosion all is comically out of line :

    The magnitude, the perfectly iso-radial propagation and the absolute instantaneousness of the detonation (for remain silent of the laughable attempt to add in a second instance the virtual "missile" on the video recording ,forgetting......the interaction with the dusty terrain Laughing Laughing ) are clear sign of a low level operation of staging.



    So how missile flies in real life? Don't look less virtual than


    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Jun 10, 2013 5:18 am

    At least blowoff panels actually give a chance for the crews to survive unlike hull ammo compartments. Does it matter how hard it is to hit the ammo compartment of a soviet tank that when a round hits it the whole soviet tank crew is vaporized?

    This is partially true ...but only if we talk of an asymmetrical war with a side hundreds of times stronger than the other.

    Now take into examination those factors (very often purposely avoided in debates on that subject) and try to respond to the following question ( :

    Image to having modified and "compromised" your MTB's design and ammo placement to include blow-off panel ( at ex: you cannot place ammo compartment in the lowest plane of the hull where PHit of enemy would be several times lower...) to "increase" crew survivability , OK ?


    Now ,instaed of the tipical operation against the usual defensless third world enemy, you confront instead a world level power( with several thousands or even dozens of thousands of MBTs, IFV, APC, self-propelled artillery, MLRS, BM, ATGM squads, field autocannons. etc...etc...); now one of your MBT is hit hard and let put that your blow-off panels have managed to "save" the entire crew, ok ?

    This crew instead of a burning tank in a solitary road in Iraq or Afghanistan, with support infantry and mechanized forces now searching for the elusive enemy responsible of the "attack" now is ,instead, in a motionless burning tanks at.... 1400 to 2200 m away from enemy first and second heavy defensive line of direct fire (if you was on the offensive) or motionless on the pact of the advancing front of enemy armoured and motorized divisions (if you was of the defense) all of that under heavy artillery barrage and medium caliber automatic weapon fire.


    Question : How much time this "surviving" MBT's crew (chose you the measure's unit : minutes , seconds...) will still continue to breath ?


    Respond to this question and after ,try to image what solution you would adopt ,if you would be a tank designer, wanting to select the most cost-effcient (which mean numerical overmatch on your enemy Wink ) design solution for ammo internal storage for a MBT designed for win a major conventional conflict against an advanced enemy ? Wink





    If blowoff panels are so uneccessary then why did the Russians put them on the Black eagle and T-72 bulat that were planned to enter service?

    Simple : A trend seeing reduced chances of a major conventional conflict against a world level power and ,instead, a substantial increase of regional low-intensity or COIN operations .




    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon Jun 10, 2013 3:37 pm


    [/quote]
    So how missile flies in real life? Don't look less virtual than

    [/quote]



    Regular you talk seriously ?

    Ok, look another time at the video and observe with attention the missile (....only the "supposed" missile).







    Noticed anything, now ?

    Well that is exactly what happen when someone, with very scarce technical means and proficiency, try to grossly "copy and paste" an 9M113 attempting to cover the original light-to-background contour Laughing Laughing.

    Not that, sincerely, i expected any better from those jiahdists Rolling Eyes

    Theirs comically imaginative claims and PR videos has become a sad routine by now.



    Rpg type 7v
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 420
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2011-05-02

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:37 am

    now imagine if you had advanced, western , top attack, fire and forget, AT missile ,you wouldnt need to be in a house aiming all the time ,exposed like a turkey... but shoot from the backyard out of line of sight ,and run while the missile is still on its way. And no tank has top armor to stop even rpg-7 ,while many tanks frontal armor can stop konkurs.
    and i dont understand you, yes missiles are getting expensive but so are tanks ,so it will be justified, whats the price of latest t-90 m,s ,versions?

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-11
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:25 pm

    Rpg type 7v wrote:now imagine if you had advanced, western , top attack, fire and forget, AT missile ,you wouldnt need to be in a house aiming all the time ,exposed like a turkey... but shoot from the backyard out of line of sight ,and run while the missile is still on its way. And no tank has top armor to stop even rpg-7 ,while many tanks frontal armor can stop konkurs.
    and i dont understand you, yes missiles are getting expensive but so are tanks ,so it will be justified, whats the price of latest t-90 m,s ,versions?
    I don't think that shooter exposed himself to fire because usually there are no one that can return it. Without proper support they can easily walk to the tank, open the hatch and hit tank commander in the face. Judging by older videos Syrian tanks are blind and usually they get no support from infantry that could pinpoint and suppress their positions. Look earlier ANNA videos and their modus operandi.
    Now we see improvement and less tanks they have the more they value them. Infantry is working with tanks, spotting targets, suppressing. We should see results of these improvements soon.
    But yeah, Spike family or even Belorussian Shershen ATGM could be perfect in the city.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-11
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Tue Jun 11, 2013 4:35 pm

    Mindstorm, sorry, I can't see clearly in the first video as I'm using my iPhone. It looks like usual travel path of ATGM. Can You post videos of real instances then?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jun 11, 2013 5:28 pm

    Blow off panels will save the crew from a propellent fire, but if the HE ammo sympathetically detonates then blow off panels make no difference.

    Blow off panels are weak spots that give burning material and exploding material a direction to go first that is usually directed away from the crew for their protection.

    Blow off panels DON'T have to be pointed up... there is no reason why blow off panels could not be fitted to the belly of the tank under the underfloor autoloader magazine on T series tanks.

    The T-80s autoloader was flawed as it had the propellent stubs in the crew compartment rather than under armour plate so any penetration set off a propellent explosion. The Black Eagle variant moved all the ammo to the external turret bustle and blow out panels were fitted to it because in that position an penetration could direct an explosion into the turret... blow out panels on top ensure the explosion is directed up and away from the crew.


    _________________
    “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

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:10 pm

    can we expect the armata having some blowoff protection on the bottom as mentioned?

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:32 am

    It looks like usual travel path of ATGM. Can You post videos of real instances then?




    Regular ,what has to do the "travel path" with what i've said ?

    It is the "supposed" missile's signature (with the usual grossly blurred and inflated light's radial contour , very tipical of similar low level attempts of video staging Very Happy ) the factor at which i was refering.


    About tank and COIN operations ,we must stress one more time that tank are NOT weapon systems conceived for "home to home" urban fighting , therefore them will NEVER excel in this role ,not today and neither in the future .


    MBTs ,instaed, occupy the CENTRAL and ,perhaps, most important position in ground offensive and defensive operations in large scale conventional conflicts.


    In those type of close range urban combat the most important features to obtain an efficient support vehicles, become

    1) Very wide angular coverage, lethality and sustainability of the fire
    2) Ductility and variety of fire (to cope with different kind and consistence of coverage of enemy defilated infantry)
    3) Optimized sensor suit with full panoramic coverage for commander and gunner
    4) Reduction to the minimum possible of the target area offered to enemy direct fire ,in particular in the vertical dimension.
    5) Increase of passive and dynamic protection ,in particular for incidence angles superior to 25 degrees (mostly enemy elevated fire positions from tall buildings).



    A vehicles like БМПТ respond perfectly to those operational requirements because purposely designed for the task; Syrian tanks instead suffer the usual penalities of any MBT in this specific role; moreover them are constuituted mostly by '80 years EXPORT specimens with vastly outdated sensor ,offensiveù and defensive suit (even export version of K1 ERA is often not present !).

    In spite of that and of the highly "penalizing" role of employment, Syrian T-72s thanks mostly to their cheapness (meaning very high number for the financiary resources allocated) reliability ,resilience to enemy fire and easiness of repair , represent the centerpiece of SAA operations and by far the most lethal and feared killer of the insurgents.






    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-07

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  TR1 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:12 am

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:can we expect the armata having some blowoff protection on the bottom as mentioned?

    In Armata, from what I have seen so far, the crew will be completely separated from the ammo.

    Hopefully this solution manages to not have highly vulnerable bustles though.
    Can you imagine if a turret bustle on say a Leo-2 or an Abrams is full of HE rounds, and gets penetrated (something not too hard to do)?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-07

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  TR1 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:18 am

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz_JMQRaSgo&feature=player_embedded

    Another video of Kornet hitting a T-72.

    For the record- I think the big detonation video we see is real. I don't see an issue with the shitty camera quality of the Konkurs, and legacy tanks are easy to penetrate from side angles.
    However, for me, it looks like a set up. The T-72's behavior, the fact that the video cuts, doesn't seem to me that it is Syrian army. What is it doing all alone, with no clear purpose, aimlessly driving with no support, then suddenly pausing right in front of rebels?
    The instant nature of the explosion, plus the size, seems suspicious. Probbaly they packed it with shells, big artillery HE ones.

    Mind you a turret flip is very possible - in Ossetia a Georgian T-72 was hit, and the explosion threw its turret off, which flew THROUGH the roof of a building on the way down. From the tank there was only a crater left- it was totally destroyed. But I think that only happened after ammunition cook off, not instant result of hit.

    Either way, it doesn't say much about T-72 that we did not know.
    However, Konkurs strong!!!

    The Army really needs to work on its flank protection if they want to win. They keep getting outmaneuvered by rebels with heavy weapons. Maybe it is a matter of manpower...

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Wed Jun 12, 2013 7:05 pm

    and i dont understand you, yes missiles are getting expensive but so are tanks ,so it will be justified, whats the price of latest t-90 m,s ,versions?

    Modern combat has shown that ATGMs rarely are actually fired at tanks... the exception has been with Israel, the problem with Javelin is that in its lock on after launch mode it flys up high and then tries to lock onto the target from above without input from the soldier that launched the missile. The flight speed over 2km is something like 120m/s which means you have a slow high flying missile that needs to be able to see a distinct IR signature right after launch to get a lock.

    The addition of Nakidka, or even a new APS that can engage top attack missiles could make it totally ineffective against tanks... which while its primary purpose would not make it obsolete as the vast majority of targets it will be used for include a wide range of targets many of which are not even armoured.

    If this is the case however it brings into question the huge cost of the missile and launcher for a system that will spend most of its time in SACLOS mode anyway.

    It is a neat idea, but just not practical.

    can we expect the armata having some blowoff protection on the bottom as mentioned?

    It may have blow off panels in the turret area to allow the gas from burning ammo to vent upwards away from the crew if the side of the vehicle is penetrated.


    _________________
    “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

    Rpg type 7v
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 420
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2011-05-02

    Modern ATGMs

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sat Nov 09, 2013 3:55 am

    so it seems russians have finally recognised their 1.flawed doctrine and 2.that their weapons are aging :
    so the result is=
    1.the top attack version ,
    2. and new 152mm calibre warhead at total system weight of 14,5kg ,and 2.500m range , hmm very good i say.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-11
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Sat Nov 09, 2013 6:44 am

    As I've mentioned before Russians where working with top attack ATGM for some time. It wasn't just rumours. I believe it will be more similar to Bofors Bill 2 rather than Javelin.


    Last edited by Regular on Sun Nov 10, 2013 6:38 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Spelling :D)

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  GarryB on Sat Nov 09, 2013 5:15 pm

    Sorry RPG but now you are just ignoring what is being posted...

    so it seems russians have finally recognised their 1.flawed doctrine and 2.that their weapons are aging :
    Did you even read that page?

    Top attack weapons have always been desirable, but not at the cost of being as pointless as Javelin.

    Pointless in the sense of being far to expensive to actually use or be widely deployed except in armed forces used to pssing away taxpayers money.


    so the result is=
    1.the top attack version ,
    2. and new 152mm calibre warhead at total system weight of 14,5kg ,and 2.500m range , hmm very good i say.


    for comparison rpg--7 with 105mm tandem warhead has 11,5kg weight and 200m effective range.
    Except it mentions two weapons... one being an ATGM that will likely coexist with the Metis-M1 simply because the latter is so cheap and simple and portable it is unlikely to be replaced quickly... it calls it a medium range ATGM, which I would suggest would fit quite nicely between the short range ATGM (Metis-M1) and the Kornet-EM long range system.

    The short range system uses two different types of warhead with the top attack version using a gyro stabiliser and thrust vector control to whip the warhead 90 degrees, presumably using a sensitive magnetic anomaly detector to sense the presence of the tank.

    The Russians have never had anything against the top attack flight profile, but the method of reliably achieving such an attack profile had to be cheap and simple but effective so that it can be widely deployed and use in numbers to make it effective.

    Javelin is an example of how not to do it... a thermal sight in the launcher is one thing... fitting it to every missile however means they are very expensive.

    The idea of making them able to be used in a dumb command to line of sight mode actually makes them worse because a much cheaper and simpler missile like Metis-M1 uses that mode of firing... as does Javelin when firing on targets with little or no IR signature.

    Fitting a thermal imager to Metis-M1 gives it all the all weather, day/night launch capability and target detection capacity of Javelin, but at less than $20K per missile it is much cheaper to use in numbers against a range of targets like MG nests and sniper positions than Javelin.

    Of course the troops in the field don't care how much it costs so they will use it against anything and everything... again its cost counts against it.


    _________________
    “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

    Rpg type 7v
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 420
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2011-05-02

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Sat Nov 09, 2013 9:03 pm

    Regular wrote:As I've mentioned before Russians where working with top attack ATGM for some time. It wasn't just rumours. I believe it will be more similar to Bofors Bikk 2 rather than Javelin.
    bofors atgm is awesome weapon and its principles of work are revolutionary.
    but i think the russians will go with lofted trajectory (like americans only 20yrs latter) instead of straight fight path with angled warhead. the increase lenght and weight of missile seem to suggest that ,and i have been correct in every prediction ive made on this forum.
    ------------------
    OK there should be a correction ,point blank range is given at- 350 meters ,which is still very good .
    I am having problems with weight while 1st version is ok for a soldier , the second is getting very heavy at nearly  20kg and going around with it and putting it on shoulder and aiming is for a very strong man. Analysys shows anything more then 15kg is taking much more energy to carry and handle for a human...
    As for penetration values i compared to kornet which has same warhead diameter (152mm) , but kornets warhead is heavier at 7kg compared to 5,2kg for this system so i would give it 10-15% less penetration value so if kornet is about 1.1-1,2m this shoud penetrate 1000mm od armour ,which is much better then 650mm for rpg.
    -------------------
    Tr1---- you dont need to foam , just mention your analysis and why mine is "flawed' Wink 
    Garry-- capability comes at a cost ,and jav is very capable Twisted Evil

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-11
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Regular on Sun Nov 10, 2013 6:51 am

    There is no doubt Javelin could be used effectively. It's not effectiveness of Javelin that gets all the criticism. It's the price. But hey You were comparing ATGM with RPG. If You served in the military You know that there is even tactical difference how they are employed.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian vs NATO/Western ATGMs

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 12:24 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:24 am