Military Review

Javelin, Cornet and Spike

75

FGM-148 or Chevlin is the first American serial portable complex (ATGN) of the 3 generation. It is designed to destroy protected objects (bunkers, long-term fire points), flying low-speed air targets (unmanned reconnaissance aircraft and helicopters), but primarily armored vehicles. This ATGM was developed in the United States from 1986, the concern Javelin Joint Venture, FGM-148 was created to replace the M47 Dragon, which was in service with the US Army from the 1975 of the year. Was adopted by the US Army in 1996 year. Widely used during the fighting in Iraq.

Initially it was planned to put in the ground forces and the US Marine Corps about 74 thousands of these ATGMs over 6 years. But in the future, delivery volumes were more than doubled, and the delivery period was extended to 11 years. It was assumed that "Cevlin" will be exported in quantities of 40 - 70 thousand units. However, the cost of one rocket turned out to be about 80 thousand US dollars, which is a third higher than the price declared by the manufacturer when adopting the army.

The missiles of the FGM-148 complex are created on the principle of "shot and forgot." To this end, they are equipped with infrared homing heads. The missiles are made according to the classic aerodynamic design - with wings spreading. They are capable of attacking targets along a gentle and hinged trajectory, which in combination with a powerful tandem cumulative warhead allows them to hit all modern Tanks. The “soft start” system allows starting from the premises.

Javelin, Cornet and Spike

Combat deployment of the complex includes the following operations:

  1. Connection launcher and transport and launch container with a rocket.
  2. Removing the end cover of the transport and launch container.
  3. the inclusion of the complex and the cooling of the homing head.
  4. Make a "seize the target" and choose the type of attack.
  5. Press the "start" key.

This complex has the following advantages:

  1. It is possible to direct the missile in bad weather conditions, high smoke and terrain at night. This is a huge advantage over similar 2-generation complexes, which are not equipped with a thermal sight.
  2. Missile guidance is performed without active target illumination, which does not unmask the launch site of the rocket and does not provoke the activation of a smoke screen on armored vehicles.
  3. As a rule, a rocket hits armored vehicles in the least protected upper part. Because of this, the residual cumulative jet has a high damaging power even after piercing armor.
  4. The missile is absolutely insensitive to the active protection means that exist today, which do not control the upper part of the armored vehicles.
  5. The rocket does not react to the means of opto-electronic suppression, since the guidance system does not perceive the modulated signal, since it is directed at the infrared source of the far side of the spectrum (engine, exhaust system).

And disadvantages:

  1. ATGM can hit targets only in the line of sight. And this casts doubt on its combat capability over a distance of more than 1 kilometers.
  2. It is extremely irrational to use the complex for shooting at a distance of up to a kilometer of 0.5, because at such distances much cheaper and lighter hand-held grenade launchers have proven themselves well. However, with the amendment that hand grenade launchers can effectively destroy only targets with light armor.
  3. The shooter can not affect the flight of the rocket after launch. And when the target has a temperature slightly different from the temperature of the details of the relief, for example, in a desert area, the rocket may lose the target.
  4. High price. The cost of the launch device is approximately 125 thousand dollars, and the rocket around 80 thousand dollars.
  5. Before launching the rocket, it is necessary to cool the homing head, which, together with the time it takes to capture the target, is about 1 minutes.
  6. Specialists in weapons from different countries have noted the low efficiency of such systems, since a missile hit the turret of a tank, it is not ensured that it is 100% incapacitated.

"Cornet"

The anti-tank missile system 9K135 or Kornet (according to the NATO classification AT-14 Spriggan) is a development of the Tula Instrument Engineering Bureau. This is the 2 generation ATGM. It was created on the basis of the Reflex guided tank armament complex, and has basic solutions for its layout. It is intended for the destruction of tanks and other armored vehicles, including those with dynamic protection. There is a modification of "Cornet-D", which is capable of hitting air targets.

The Kornet-E ATGMs were seen fighting between the Israeli army and Hezbollah in the south of Libya in 2006.

Disadvantages of the complex:

  1. A significant weight of the launcher and missiles in TPK - about 50 kilograms.
  2. The ATGM is guided to the target by a laser beam, which unmasks the installation position.
  3. The installation calculation consists of two people.

Advantages:

  1. The relatively low cost of the rocket and launcher is about 30 thousand US dollars.
  2. It is possible to adjust the flight on the march.
  3. Confident defeat of targets at ranges up to 5.5 kilometers.
  4. High armor penetration - up to 1200 millimeters of homogeneous armor, which allows you to hit any of the currently existing tanks.

Spike

Anti-tank missile system 3 generation "Spike" - the development of the Israeli company "Rafael". It is intended for the destruction of tanks, fortifications and engineering structures, as well as any other purposes.

The thermal homing head of the rocket is located in the nose of the rocket, behind it is the electronics unit and the pre-cumulative charge, followed by the cruise engine. In the central part of the housing is a gyroscope and battery compartment. Behind the central compartment in which the folding wings of the rocket are located, there is a main shaped charge with cocking automation and fuse. Folding steering wheels and steering gears, starting motor and fiber-optic cable reel are located in the tail section of the hull.

A key feature of the Spike ATGM is the ability of fiber-optic data transmission to the launcher to the operator and the ability to control the flight of the rocket and the hijacking of the target by the homing head after launch. This greatly expands the range of its combat use.

Of the advantages of the complex should be noted:

  1. No need to cool the infrared homing head before starting.
  2.  There are four modifications of the rocket with a different range.
  3. The ability to change the target after the launch of the rocket, taking into account the changing priorities in battle.
  4. The possibility of obtaining intelligence in real time and the possibility of identifying the target.
  5. According to manufacturers, an extremely high degree of accuracy of hitting - you can choose not only the goal, but also a specific point on it.
  6. The possibility of capturing a target after launching a rocket from a closed position.
  7. The ability to self-destruct rocket if necessary.

Disadvantages:

  1. The high price of both the launcher and the rocket is about 250 thousand US dollars.
  2. Extremely complex production technology, which does not allow for mass production of systems.
  3. Complexity of complex management. Special operator training is required.

Comparison table TTX ATGM FGM-148 "Javelin", 9K135 "Cornet", "Spike"

 

FGM-148 Javelin

9K135 Cornet

Spike

Rocket caliber, mm

127

152

170

Warhead

tandem cumulative

tandem cumulative

tandem cumulative

Armor penetration behind ERA, mm

700

1000-1200 

700

Missile guidance system 

homing with the help of IR GOS

semi-automatic, by laser beam

Electro-optical

ATGM length, mm

1081

1200

not specified

Weight of guidance unit, kg

6.36

11

not specified

ATGM weight, kg

11.80

26

33

Mass of ATGM in TPK, kg

15.90

29

26

Warhead weight, kg

8.44

7

3

Combat weight, kg

37

50

26 – 33

Firing range, m

50 – 2500

100 – 5500

200 – 2.500

Maximum speed ATGM, m / s

290

not specified

180

Author:
75 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avdkrd
    avdkrd April 2 2012 08: 29
    +16
    the author is not quite right in the analysis (the rest is a selection of characteristics).
    ATGM is aimed at the target by a laser beam, which unmasks the installation position for a cornet, this is not a correct observation, the missile is not guided by the reflected beam (which unmasks and allows the use of boosting, but is oriented in the laser beam (that is, the laser beam directly hits the missile’s receiver and is a command beam). it is necessary to keep the sight on the target for capturing the seeker for 25-30 seconds, which would personally bother me (as an operator) and is not always possible in a real battle.
    1. Igor
      Igor April 2 2012 08: 46
      +5
      Quote: avdkrd
      that before starting it is necessary to keep the sight on the target for capturing the seeker -25-30 sec.


      Just yesterday it was said that 25-30 seconds. required to cool the seeker, not to capture the target.

      Quote: avdkrd
      In general, javelin is not correctly compared with Cornet - a different weight category.


      And with what to compare it? Maybe they have almost the same weight categories with AGS.
      1. snek
        snek April 2 2012 09: 46
        +2
        Interestingly, with almost half the mass of the complex, the mass of warhead javelin is almost XNUMX kilograms more than that of the cornet.
        1. Tyumen
          Tyumen April 2 2012 11: 03
          +4
          But armor penetration is less by 300-500mm.
          1. snek
            snek April 2 2012 11: 12
            0
            Quote: Tyumen 35
            But armor penetration is less by 300-500mm.

            Which is also strange. It is interesting what they consider under the warhead. Less armor penetration on a javelin is compensated by the fact that (quote from the article): a rocket hits armored vehicles in the least protected upper part. Due to this, the residual cumulative stream has a high striking power even after penetrating the armor.
            The missile is absolutely not sensitive to the existing active defense equipment that does not control the upper part of the armored vehicles.

            Its main drawback, in my opinion, is an unrealistic cost for this type of weapon. In the cornet, of course, it would be good to reduce weight. Yes, and laser guidance increases the likelihood of detection, and hence the death of the operator.
            1. Tyumen
              Tyumen April 2 2012 11: 34
              +2
              I’m thinking - missiles that strike from a dive can
              get into a moving tank? No matter how many videos I watched,
              always a standing target. Unlike those who beat
              frontally, side or forehead.
              1. Igor
                Igor April 2 2012 12: 07
                +3
                Quote: Tyumen 35
                I’m thinking - missiles that strike from a dive will be able to lip-fall into a moving tank?


                Javelin can launch rockets, like Cornet without peking.
                1. Tyumen
                  Tyumen April 2 2012 12: 22
                  +3
                  And without a dive, the Cornet is almost twice as powerful.
                  1. Igor
                    Igor April 2 2012 13: 00
                    +4
                    Quote: Tyumen 35
                    And without a dive, the Cornet is almost twice as powerful.


                    Javelin mass of the warhead, 8.44 kg.

                    Cornet-mass of the warhead 7 kg.


                    Maybe this is the weight of the entire Javelin rocket, but we have only BB?
                    1. Philip Staros
                      Philip Staros 14 July 2016 01: 18
                      0
                      "Whole" about 11 kg. Apparently everyone counted, except for the case :)
                2. viruskvartirus
                  viruskvartirus April 3 2012 01: 34
                  0
                  Then its effectiveness on the tank drops dramatically "Destruction of the target is achieved by the joint action of a short cumulative jet of large diameter, breaking through the obstacle in front of the target, and the action of powder gases from the main explosive charge and the main engine" all of its trump card is hitting from above ... and for sure ... then oh ....
              2. snek
                snek April 2 2012 12: 14
                +1
                Tyumen35
                So all the videos of firing any anti-tank missiles at a standing target. And I don’t see the reasons for the problems of hitting a moving target - the homing head is present. Maybe a light jeep on a wildly maneuvering could evade, but not a tank.
                1. Tyumen
                  Tyumen April 2 2012 12: 21
                  +2
                  snek, yes you what? I saw tank * dances *, no
                  jeeps do not keep up. What are just jumping from a stand.
                  1. snek
                    snek April 2 2012 12: 29
                    +5
                    I also saw those dances. Although I can't remember jumping. A tank can be fast, but it cannot change the direction of movement abruptly - inertia of several tens of tons is not a joke. Jeep - I brought this as a flight of fantasy in ideal conditions, when the driver knows that he needs to wildly maneuver, the car is as light as possible, etc. The rocket is adjusting its course until the last moment, so I do not believe that the tank will be able to "dodge".
              3. Professor
                Professor April 2 2012 12: 55
                +1
                No matter how many videos you watch, it’s always a standing target.

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_gHRP_u5uYw#t=44s
                1. Tyumen
                  Tyumen April 2 2012 13: 07
                  +1
                  Thank you, this is your element, I can’t see, I didn’t pay
                  on time the Internet, I believe in the word. I'll see later.
                  1. Tatars
                    Tatars April 2 2012 14: 29
                    +1
                    Most preferable Israeli, her range is much greater than in the article and exceeds the range of the cornet, I shot and forgot on the cornet there is none, but the main drawback is it is very expensive
                    1. viruskvartirus
                      viruskvartirus April 3 2012 01: 39
                      0
                      Yes, spike is an interesting thing ... I wouldn’t trust such a weapon to anyone .... and the weapon should be simple and trouble-free ...
            2. Anton Valerevich
              Anton Valerevich 13 July 2016 20: 50
              0
              Cornet does not irradiate the tank with a laser, therefore it is impossible to detect it by the source of the beam!
          2. GDP
            GDP 5 June 2014 12: 01
            0
            Range of defeat is not precisely specified:
            Cornet-D is not 5km, but up to 10km!
            4 times more than javelin or spike!
            1. Philip Staros
              Philip Staros 12 August 2017 00: 43
              0
              10 km is a land mine. Anti-tank, like, 8,5 km or even those same 5,5
        2. Old skeptic
          Old skeptic 31 May 2012 22: 49
          0
          But the armor penetration is higher, and the range .....
    2. Igorboss16
      Igorboss16 April 2 2012 14: 46
      +3
      Cornet steers good
    3. IAlex
      IAlex 30 January 2015 11: 57
      +1
      What kind of crap are you carrying, the laser beam is torn off from a moving target and gets into the missile guidance head :)))
      Neighing ... did you go to school? Imagine what is light reflection and what is the angle of reflection at the angle of incidence? And also think about the question of the surface of the technique and possible angles of reflection, as well as how to get the reflected beam of a laser from a moving surface with a different refraction of 10 cm into the guidance head of a moving rocket ... (although the cornet does not even have a receiving matrix);) )))
  2. Force 83
    Force 83 April 2 2012 08: 48
    0
    Judging by the movie - Spike steers
    1. Beetle-a
      Beetle-a April 2 2012 09: 58
      +3
      in the film, yes, but in life, the cornet d hits 8-10km, can shoot down helicopters and costs 5-7 times cheaper.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 2 2012 12: 57
        -2
        but in life, Cornet-d hits on 8-10km, can shoot down helicopters and costs 5-7 times cheaper.

        Spike hits even a greater distance, and the price difference is only 2 !!! times and this despite the fact that wages in Israel are more than 2 times higher than in Russia.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 2 2012 13: 12
          +2
          Payroll in such industries is not the main part of the cost.
          1. Professor
            Professor April 2 2012 16: 00
            -1
            Not basic, but very significant, as the whole assembly is manual, and the materials used are not expensive (there are practically no precious metals there).
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 2 2012 16: 21
              0
              umm materials are inexpensive ?????
              do you definitely work with mil?
              1. Professor
                Professor April 2 2012 16: 31
                -1
                100%
                here at hand mil-std 105. What to celebrate?
                1. leon-iv
                  leon-iv April 2 2012 16: 56
                  0
                  then give approximately your calculation at the cost of spike?
                  Very interesting!
                  1. Professor
                    Professor April 2 2012 17: 25
                    -1
                    For ease of calculation, let's assume that development was paid separately.
                    R&D - 0
                    Profit (profit) - 30%
                    Operation (operating expenses: city tax, water electricity ...) -10%
                    BOM (materials) - 30%
                    MP (salary) - 30%
                    1. leon-iv
                      leon-iv April 2 2012 17: 33
                      0
                      if not a secret then for what products?
        2. beard999
          beard999 April 2 2012 14: 46
          +3
          Quote: Professor
          Spike hits even a greater distance, and the price difference is only 2 !!!

          It is necessary to compare the comparable. ATGM "Spike" exists in 6 versions. An analogue of the portable Kornet-E / EM ATGM is the Spike-ER modification. This Israeli ATGM has a PU weight of 30 kg, an ATGM mass of TPK of 34 kg, a maximum launch range of 8000 m, armor penetration of about 1000 mm (Colombians called the figure 980 mm). The ATGM “Kornet-E / EM” has a weight of PU 26 kg, a mass of ATGMs in a TPK 29 kg / 33 kg, a maximum launch range of 5500 m / 10000 m, armor penetration up to 1200 mm / 1300 mm.
          This is not the first time you have been claiming "the difference in price is only 2 times." Where did they get it? Can you name the exact price of the Spike-ER modification rocket? Or do you know the exact price of Russian missiles? Share the links?
          1. Professor
            Professor April 2 2012 15: 54
            -1
            Don’t be offended if I repeat my comment?
            Regarding the cost of Spike, not so simple. In the USSR, usually the cost of the product did not include the costs of the NKR, the State Planning Commission planned, the ministry allocated money and the design bureau created the product. Further, the product went into production and the price is defined as materials and labor (roughly speaking). A couple of years ago I came across an article on the development of an RPG-7, I was very impressed with the number of research institutes and the people who worked to create this product. If you include all the costs of developing an RPG-7, then it would be worth its weight in gold. But this is history and today it doesn’t matter how much the development cost since there is an excellent result.
            In the West, the cost of NKR is included in the final cost of the product, the best example of this is the F-22. And so Spike, (Javelin costs about $ 80'000, Cornet $ 40'000) On January 10, 2007, Spain announced that it was buying 2600 Spike missiles and 260 PUs from Raphael for $ 424.5 million. If we assume that the launcher is worth like two missiles, then not taking into account simulators, training, etc. the cost of a shot will be about $ 130'000.
            India bought 321 launchers, 8356 missiles and 15 simulators for a billion dollars, which makes a shot cost about $ 100'000. Not a little, but Spike will be more advanced than Javelin in both firing range and homing system. In general, it is necessary to compare the cost of the ATGM with the cost of the tank, its maintenance and the cost of training the crew. And then $ 130'000 won't seem like much. In 2006 and 2008, the IDF used Spikes against the fortified positions of the "freedom fighters" and even managed to lose one in Lebanon (they simply forgot). The MO quickly requested a cheap alternative and received mini Spikes.


            Here is an authoritative published report:
            "March 2009: The deal is announced. Peru will reportedly buy 244 of Russia's laser-guided AT-14 / 9M133 Kornet anti-tank missiles for $ 25 million. Another 244 of RAFAEL's dual-mode wire-guided or IIR (Imaging Infrared) fire -and-forget Spike missiles will bought for $ 48 million. "
            (translation: March 2009 of the year: A deal was announced. Peru announces the purchase in Russia of 244 AT-14 / Cornet 9М133 laser-guided 25 million dollars. Other 244 dual-mode cable-guided or infrared seeker-launched missile rake-forget Spike will be purchased for 48 million dollars).

            Since the same number of missiles was purchased, the number of launchers should be approximately the same (information about 24 launchers of Spikes passed), which makes the price ratio of 1 to 2.
            Peru Orders Israeli, Russian Anti-Tank Missiles

            In the 2010 year, it was reported that Peru bought 288 Cornets for $ 23.7 million and 288 Spikes for $ 55.8 million (there were no reports on the number of launchers and simulators).
            Questions About Big Ticket Military Purchases

            There is also a continuation of Javelin: Cheap portable high-precision pocket infantry US infantry
            1. Kars
              Kars April 2 2012 16: 10
              +6
              Quote: Professor
              . In general, it is necessary to compare the cost of anti-tank systems with the cost of the tank, its contents and the cost of training the crew.


              Silent, silent, but I can’t get past this
              In the process of operation, the tank can perform a lot of tasks, release more than one hundred shells to suppress dozens of firing points in that comb and ATGM


              Missile ATGM can not destroy the tank completely and damage --- then its cost should be compared with the cost of repair?
              It can be reflected by the elements of dynamic protection --- then it must be compared with the block DZ
              The process of equipping the AZ tanks begins, with a real threat from the same Javelins, this will be done faster --- for example, the Korean one costs 600 000 dollars but it is REUSABLE--
              Detection of attacking ammunition - combined - using radar with thermal imaging correction

              So it’s not necessary to exaggerate this way, not talking about the price of spent ATGMs on exercises with which to compare them (the simulator is of course super but real is important)
              1. Kars
                Kars April 2 2012 16: 13
                0
                Painting K-APS active protection complex
                video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JV5HTdP_5Q&feature=player_embedded
              2. GDP
                GDP 5 June 2014 12: 06
                0
                you can compare the cost of javelin with the cost of a bullet for SVD lol
            2. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 2 2012 16: 59
              0
              here it may well be that with the cost of training spare parts and so on, but it doesn’t turn out very sour. + simulators, etc.
              You need to look at the specific text of the contract and it certainly will not say anything.
            3. beard999
              beard999 April 2 2012 17: 35
              0
              Quote: Professor
              Regarding the cost of Spike, not so simple.

              Firstly. It is completely pointless to rely solely on export prices. There is no single, unshakable and universal export price for all buyers. Spike and Cornet-E have been shipped abroad since 1999. What, during this period, have the prices not changed? In addition, export contracts can contain many hidden offset programs. What, and how much, to understand in such contracts is completely impossible.
              There is no doubt that the Spike complex is expensive. Under a 2003 contract for which about 400 million dollars were paid, the Poles receive 264 launchers and 2675 Spike-LRs (not even ERs). For that money, this is the cost of about 130 T-90S tanks.
              Secondly. It will not be possible to compare with Spain. The fact is that two types of ATGMs were acquired under this contract - Spike-LR and Spike-ER, with different amounts of anti-tank systems and ATGMs. There is no breakdown of this contract. To base the price on speculation, there is no sense whatsoever.
              Thirdly. Who says PU costs two missiles? Again the assumption. Spike ATGM has sophisticated on-board target recognition equipment (as part of the CLU), and its ATGM has GOS + HVAC. Whereas PU Kornet-E anti-tank missile system does not contain any elements of such complexity. Moreover, it is absolutely impossible to compare the price of the Kornet photodetector and the Spike gos.
              Fourth. The only, relatively correct comparison in price is possible if we compare domestic supplies. For example, Kornet missiles for Russian aircraft cost two times less than export modifications. http://www.kbptula.ru/rus/kbp/news/newsr66.htm.
              Quote: Professor
              In 2010, it was reported that Peru purchased

              The Peruvian deal, too, can not say anything. According to TsAMTO, two modifications of the Israeli Spike-MR / Spike-LR ATGM were purchased. A breakdown by quantity and price, again no. And, in addition, the direct analogue of the Kornet-E complex is Spike-ER, which is not present here at all.
              1. Professor
                Professor April 2 2012 17: 46
                -1
                Summing up everything that you have listed, we can say that the real value of Spike and Cornet is not known, and therefore the statements that Spike is more expensive than Cornet and all the more so are groundless in 5-7 times.

                The only, relatively correct comparison in price is possible if we compare domestic supplies.

                PS
                Including kickbacks? wink
                  1. beard999
                    beard999 April 2 2012 23: 58
                    0
                    Quote: Professor
                    The Poles claim that the complex cost them $ 100'000 apiece !!!

                    If I was correctly transferred, it turns out that it is about the fact that one Spike-LR shot costs $ 100000, not a complex. Then you can figure out - 2675 ATGMs cost $ 26750000 million. The total amount of the contract is 397 million. Subtract the price of all missiles from it and it turns out that 264 launchers cost $ 12950000 million or $ 490530 each ... Not bad.
                    1. Professor
                      Professor April 3 2012 00: 35
                      -1
                      Production technology transferred to Poland How much do you evaluate? And why do not you calculate the cost of Peruvian missiles in the same way?
                      1. beard999
                        beard999 April 3 2012 16: 06
                        0
                        Quote: Professor
                        Production technology transferred to Poland How much do you evaluate? And why do not you calculate the cost of Peruvian missiles in the same way?

                        Do you know the terms of this contract? Where can I read about the details? Open sources report that in Poland, 264 launchers and 2675 anti-tank missiles will be produced. All for the needs of the Armed Forces of Poland. Those. limited number of products, without the right to sell to third countries. And are you sure this is not a screwdriver assembly? In Poland and the GOS will themselves, from scratch, produce thermal imaging equipment of the CLU module?
                        And about Peruvian missiles, I already answered you above - there are two types of Spike-MR / Spike-LR ATGMs, without breakdown, but in Poland there is one. Actually, you yourself cited this example, and it definitely says only one thing - the cost of one ATGM is $ 100000 (at the same time, this missile has a maximum long-range launch - 4000 m, maximum armor-piercing. - 700 mm). At the price of PU in half a million dollars, I do not insist (although I do not exclude it). I just showed you all the charm of such a straightforward calculation.
                1. beard999
                  beard999 April 2 2012 23: 57
                  0
                  Quote: Professor
                  statements that Spike is more expensive than Cornet and all the more so 5-7 times are groundless.

                  Imagine, I agree, I believe that they are groundless. In such matters, it is necessary to rely on official sources. For example, in the words of Academician Shipunov. In an article “VP” 1/1999, he argues that the export modification of the Kornet-E ATGM missile is 3-3 times cheaper than the European ATGW-4 / LR missile. I believe that with the similarity of the guidance systems ATGW-3 / LR and "Spike-ER" this can be considered an adequate assessment.
                  Quote: Professor
                  Including kickbacks?

                  Is Rafael really indulging in these?
                  1. Professor
                    Professor April 3 2012 08: 50
                    -1
                    Let's decide, either we determine the cost by official sources or from the words of academics and professors. laughing

                    Is Rafael really indulging in these?

                    Maybe he indulges, but was not caught in the kickbacks.
                    1. beard999
                      beard999 April 3 2012 16: 08
                      0
                      Quote: Professor
                      Let's already decide, or we determine the cost by official sources or from the words of academicians and professors

                      Indeed, there is a “Professor” and an academician of the RAS Shipunov — the General Designer and the head (at that time) of the State Unitary Enterprise KBP. Do you think the first person in KBP is not an official source?
                      Quote: Professor
                      Maybe he indulges, but was not caught in the kickbacks.

                      Like KBP.
                  2. igor36
                    igor36 21 December 2012 14: 15
                    0
                    They do not have a rollback, they have a shot ... Rollback is in artillery firms ...
            4. The comment was deleted.
            5. IAlex
              IAlex 30 January 2015 12: 35
              0
              The case you are talking about was http://periscope2.ru/2010/04/21/2558/
              only everything was a little different and the versions are different ...
          2. Jaguar
            Jaguar April 2 2012 17: 02
            0
            Do not confuse the missile launcher with a thermobaric warhead and an ATGM ... with a tandem cumulative one. Kornet-EM has an ATGM mass in TPK of 31 kg and a maximum range of 8000 meters
        3. wasjasibirjac
          wasjasibirjac April 3 2012 19: 48
          0
          250t. dollars and 30 tons of dollars - the difference is 8 times, or somewhere a mistake came out
        4. IAlex
          IAlex 30 January 2015 12: 15
          0
          And where do you not breach? In fact, Spike is 3 times more expensive than Javelin, while Corent is three times cheaper than Javelin. Thus, the difference between the cornet and Spike is at least 6 times ... You rather confused the price in rubles and bucks ...
        5. Anton Valerevich
          Anton Valerevich 13 July 2016 20: 57
          0
          What "Spike"? Which weighs 70 kg and is hung on a helicopter? No, thanks! Let's compare things of equal value!
        6. Philip Staros
          Philip Staros 14 July 2016 01: 21
          0
          Rocket Cornet costs about 30 thousand dollars in the export price, as I recall. So not at two ...
          And adjusted for current courses, etc. - I don’t even know what the prices are.
          In general, Israeli military equipment looks much stronger than American and more real. But the difference in concept itself makes comparison difficult.
          For the same money, I personally would choose a Tiger with a dual-channel Cornet D complex with 8 missiles. It’ll come out for money like Spike ... One or one + spare rocket .. Something like that.
  3. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych April 2 2012 10: 00
    +21
    I recalled a joke about the fact that the United States is not afraid of China because it has anti-tank missiles that can hit any Chinese tank, and China is not afraid of the United States because any of their tanks costs at least half the price of American anti-tank missiles ...
    1. viruskvartirus
      viruskvartirus April 3 2012 01: 44
      0
      )))) joke yes ATGM against Chinese tanks can not be used ...)))
  4. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 2 2012 10: 26
    +5
    o5 damn how many copies we break now.
    A busy table.
    Judging by it, the javelin can get into the roof of the tank from 50 m.
    Even I lagged behind life. laughing
  5. zlibeni
    zlibeni April 2 2012 10: 48
    +1
    I especially liked that when it hits the tower it’s not a hundred percent that the tank is out of order))))))))))))))))))))
    1. Korvin
      Korvin April 3 2012 00: 27
      +3
      Unfortunately, if a tank has an ammunition in a loading carousel like ours, getting into a tower causes the bk to detonate in most cases, and the tower takes off like a sewer manhole cover, so the tank may not fail, but its crew and the tower very much.(((
  6. ZHORA
    ZHORA April 2 2012 11: 45
    +3
    In the case of the T-72/90 engine exhaust to the starboard side, these machines are very vulnerable to missiles with a thermal seeker.
    1. Mikhado
      Mikhado April 2 2012 12: 46
      +4
      What is the difference between kosher exhaust in the stern of garnished Ukrainian clones of T-64 ?? Direction? By the way, if the rocket is really EXACTLY for the exhaust, and even from above, then with both hands I am behind the onboard "Ural" - the maximum will be damaged undercarriage - shelf-caterpillar-roller, or even the soil near the tank LEFT - teach materiel, ZHORA wink

      Do not forget also about the Russian development on the "cape" theme, which is orders of magnitude cheaper than all these wonderful missiles. No one has canceled the shooting of heat traps, we must not forget about the "Curtain" - it just drives such toys crazy.
    2. Ziksura
      Ziksura April 2 2012 14: 26
      +4
      In opposition to ATGM, the T-90 has an advantage over all Western tanks. Having smaller dimensions, as well as the T-90, for the first time in the world, it is equipped with the Shtora-1 optical-electronic suppression system. This complex reliably protects the tank from guided and homing shells and missiles with laser or infrared guidance systems, such as "TOW", "Milan", "Dragon", "Djavelin", "Maverik", "Hellfire", "Copperhead" and others by creating active interference. During the tests of the Curtain, over 100 combat missiles of various types were fired at the tank, but none of them even hit the target. The sensors installed on the T-90 tank detect laser or infrared radiation from enemy sighting devices, within a few microseconds issue a command to shoot smoke grenades of the ZD17 type and after a few moments the tank hides in an aerosol cloud, and the tower turns towards danger.
  7. Professor
    Professor April 2 2012 12: 52
    +3
    Accept the amendments:
    [quote] The high price of both the launcher and the rocket is about 250 thousand US dollars . [quote]
    At least half as much

    [quote] Extremely complex production technology that does not allow for mass production of systems. [quote]
    Poland has already adjusted the issue, now India is doing it

    [quote] The complexity of managing the complex. Special operator training is required . [/ Quote]
    Quite the opposite. I saw the target, pointed it with the joystick and pressed the button
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi0_TId7r_w&feature=player_embedded


    0:30 minutes into the vid: footage as shown from the camera in the missile's warhead.
    0: 40 minutes into the vid: lock on
    0: 44 minutes into the vid: launch
    0:50 minutes into the vid: direct hit, two militants killed as a result
  8. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 April 2 2012 13: 06
    +7
    It's nice to see another Russian product in the forefront of weapons-grade counterparts.
    At one time he was shot and raided with RPG-7, then he was the commander of the calculation of LNG-9. Since then, I have a weakness for all hand-held rocket weapons.
  9. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 2 2012 13: 20
    0
    By the way, I wonder how much time it takes to prepare for launch?
  10. wown
    wown April 2 2012 18: 42
    0
    entertaining topic! interesting
  11. bazilio
    bazilio April 2 2012 19: 01
    +2
    On the question of efficiency, even if Jewelin has better performance characteristics (not a fact, of course) than a cornet, but at a cost of more than 2 times, the calculation with a cornet can, if it misses, shoot again and at the same time spend 10 thousand bucks less. And there is no need to talk about the spike. moreover, the control system used in it through wires (even if it is optical fiber) looks anachronistic. A similar control system was possessed by the Malyutka ATGM developed in 60 years. To summarize, the cornet is more preferable for defense or actions in open areas, while the Jewelin is more suitable for maneuvering combat at medium distances, and most likely at night.
    And here's another interesting thing, why tank builders, knowing the existence of ATGMs with thermal guidance, do not put heat traps on tanks, as is done in aviation ........
  12. Patos89
    Patos89 April 2 2012 23: 02
    0
    Cornet may be a good thing, but mass and shooting from a place, too, I think is not very effective.
    1. Philip Staros
      Philip Staros 14 July 2016 01: 32
      0
      In this case, there is a model based on the Tiger - 8 missiles, two guidance channels, a convenient control compartment in the car and the ability to move around the terrain within the line of sight of the rocket after launch.
      At the same time, this machine along with 8 missiles, etc. it costs about a couple of Javelin complexes :)
      Or cheaper ...

      Further - Javelin is easier, but RUNNING with him on his shoulder also somehow will not work. I think you can step aside from Cornet on the tripod, if it’s scary ... After the launch, the javelin will have a completely unmasking effect. Moreover, this same effect will be at a distance of 2,5 km. not 5-10. Those. Western ATGMs are forced to be within the range of all types of weapons of armored vehicles - from the KPVT to tank guns.
      And Cornet, in a successful scenario, being at a distance of 5,5 kilometers or more is UNREACHABLE for the enemy.
  13. Korvin
    Korvin April 3 2012 00: 30
    +2
    Javelin can be good and good, but the Americans will start the ground operation anyway when the aviation makes its use unnecessary lol
  14. 320423
    320423 April 3 2012 01: 39
    0
    Honestly, with all the patriotism, I really liked Spike, but for sabotage groups, it seems to me that the thing is not replaceable. and it also seems to me that the review of funds would not be complete without this toy http://oko-planet.su/politik/politikarm/80267-armiya-ssha-zakazala-bespilotnik-k
    amikadze.html http://texnomaniya.ru/voennaya-texnika/amerikanskijj-sjurpriz-samolet-podvodnik-
    kamikadze.html. This is certainly not a classic ATGM, but the tasks it solves are comparable, plus intelligence.
    1. viruskvartirus
      viruskvartirus April 7 2012 13: 25
      0
      There are certain difficulties in the management and transmission of data by such a drone .... water is not air .... the one that I doubt.
  15. viruskvartirus
    viruskvartirus April 3 2012 01: 49
    +1
    Somewhere I already saw these disputes))). Another aspect of the ATGM is possible, which means that the soldiers will be, not only in armored vehicles .... and in the case of a javelin, and even more so a spike, this is a little expensive ...
  16. Patos89
    Patos89 April 3 2012 11: 02
    +2
    The life of a soldier is priceless
  17. swat2238
    swat2238 April 3 2012 23: 29
    0
    In Western (and non-Western) editions, they are bashful, our technology is outdated, the system "fired and forgot" is the future, is it so? (Designed for dumb people to say the least)

    In normal, often non-Western publications, they compare real power and not what soft-bodied indicated. As was the case with the F-35, when it did not match what was said about it.

    There is no point in arguing, we must take and compare! What I can not do = (
  18. Professor
    Professor April 4 2012 10: 58
    -1
    Another interesting point. Spikes can be connected to a network with the exchange of information between themselves and from external sources (box above the control panel).


    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=77e_1200074741
    1. evening
      evening April 6 2012 22: 07
      0
      Spikes can be connected to a network with the exchange of information between themselves and from external sources
      And what type of connection?
    2. viruskvartirus
      viruskvartirus April 7 2012 13: 21
      0
      What for? What to say "Cool" and never use it again?
  19. Arkan
    Arkan April 4 2012 16: 00
    +2
    The information is already old (2010), and I can’t find the link, but to whom it is interesting - maybe the search engine itself is in the internet .-------------------------- ------------------------------------------------
    ------------------- During the test firing in Peru on April 16, the Israeli anti-tank missile Spike fell 50 meters from the test observer of the Peruvian Defense Minister Rafael Rey and other officials and crowds of journalists. The incident, during which the former head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the country seriously suffered, will not lead to the termination of the transaction concluded in 2009 for the acquisition of Israeli anti-tank systems, the Peruvian authorities assure. In this regard, newspapers recall the recent successful shooting of the Russian Cornets, which cost the Peruvian military almost half the price of Israeli products - and flew where necessary. Clause 2 reads the regional press with interest.

    The shooting, during which two Spike (MR / LR) missiles were launched by the Israeli company Rafael Advance Defense Systems, was carried out by the Armed Forces of the Armed Forces of Peru on April 16 at the Cruz del Weso training ground 45 km from the capital. In addition to the Minister of Defense and the military leadership, Congressional deputies and journalists observed the tests. Tests of Israeli military products in Peru were first held open to the press.

    The day launch was successful, and during the night the rocket flew only 100 m and fell near the observation platform - only 50 m from the guests. According to witnesses, in the dark, officials and journalists began randomly rushing to the cries of the military, "Lie down! All to the ground! ”, Which did little to help - in the turmoil, a deputy of the Congress and former head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the country Mercedes Cabanillas received serious damage, she needed an operation. The explosion did not happen.

    Rafael representatives apologized and explained the incident as a technical mistake. The company pledged to provide a detailed report of what happened a week later. “It was a technical malfunction, the reasons for which we are now figuring out,” said Israeli Ambassador to Peru, Yoav Bar-On. “Such things sometimes happen, and we are obliged to draw the necessary conclusions from this sad incident.” The diplomat expressed confidence that the incident would not lead to a delay in the execution of the contract.

    The Commander-in-Chief of the Peruvian Armed Forces, General Otto Guibovich, explained that “missiles of this type have on average one failure per 15 launches,” and this does not threaten the deal to buy missiles. Still - according to La Repblica, according to the terms of the deal, the Peruvian armed forces cannot terminate the contract with Rafael in case of missile problems, it only provides for the manufacturer to eliminate defects.

    According to the same newspaper, dated April 17, in 2009 the Peruvian Armed Forces purchased 288 Spike missiles and 24 launchers for them for $ 48 million. On April 21, La Repblica specified that a total of $ 55,8 million had already been transferred to the Israeli company. The Peruvian military transferred $ 23,7 million for the same number of Russian Cornets. Thus, La Repblica emphasizes, Russian ATGMs cost more than half the cost of Israel, while the Spike missile range is 4 km versus 5,5 km of the Cornet. “Cornet” successfully passed similar firing a week before the incident with the Israeli complex.

    Initially, the newspaper recalls, it was planned to purchase only complexes of Russian production, but in 2007 the then commander in chief of the Armed Forces of Peru, Edwin Donayre, insisted on acquiring both Russian and Israeli anti-tank systems.
  20. Sledgehammer
    Sledgehammer April 5 2014 00: 48
    0
    ATGM “Cornet-E”
    According to the report of the Israeli army, in this conflict, 46 Merkava tanks received various injuries from enemy fire (all types of impact). The RIAN agency, referring to the Hezbollah-owned radio station An-Nur, wrote that a certain "American report distributed in diplomatic missions in Lebanon claims that Israel’s officially reported data on losses in Lebanon are very underestimated," and Israel actually lost 164 tanks Merkava.
    TOTAL, during the conflict (according to the Israeli military), 45 tanks were hit by ATGMs and RPG grenades, in total 51 missiles hit the tanks. In 24 cases (47% of the number of hits), the cumulative jet pierced the armor of the tanks.
    In total, about 60 BTT units received combat damage, including 48-52 tanks. Killed 31 fighter of armored forces, including 30 tankers (there are sources with smaller numbers, up to 13). In addition, another 4 soldiers died from ATGM hits in the BTT - 3 in the D9 bulldozers and 1 in the heavy Puma armored personnel carrier. Tanks "Merkava", especially the latest MK.4, showed excellent resistance to combat defeats. On average, in each tank whose armor was broken, 1 tanker was killed, and the ammunition, apparently, detonated in only 3 of the 24 shots. In total, up to 400 Merkava tanks of various models were involved in the conflict. Not a single tank caught fire directly from the cumulative jet (but several completely burned out). Five tanks were deemed not repairable: two that were blown up on landmines, and three that were hit by ATGMs (one each Merkava-2, Merkava-3, and Merkava-4). According to various sources, from 100 to: about 500, and up to 1000 ATGMs and RPG grenades were issued for the entire conflict.
  21. My yo
    My yo 17 June 2015 00: 56
    0
    The Kornet-E ATGMs were seen fighting between the Israeli army and Hezbollah in the south of Libya in 2006.


    Israeli army fought in Libya?